president: " Harry S. Truman, recognized Israel in 1948 against the advice of his state department.. because in his words....'I am sorry, gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism. I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents.' "
- posted by Editor @ 11:27 AM

Foreign Policy In Focus | Global Affairs Commentary | Where Is The Outrage? by Conn Hallinan July 29, 2002

Let's suppose you knew someone trying to get a leg up in life by getting his young family out of the mean streets of someplace like Detroit, East Los Angeles, or Philadelphia. Not only was the school his three daughters attended substandard, it was contaminated with asbestos and the city itself was strewn with garbage. But when he tried to move into a tree-lined suburb with manicured lawns, he couldn't because he was (take your pick) black, brown, Asian, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, disabled, whatever.

Would you say something? Would you tell the people in the suburb that discrimination on the basis of race or religion went out with 'Bull' Conners and George Wallace? Or would you remain quiet, endorsing bigotry by your silence? The U.S. Congress and the White House have chosen the latter course.
...
On July 7 Sharon's cabinet voted 17-2 to endorse a bill sponsored by Rabbi Haim Druckman of the right-wing National Religious Party to allow the Jewish Agency, in the words of a scathing editorial in Ha'aretz, "to prevent non-Jewish citizens of the state from living in certain places, in violation of fundamental civil rights."
...
Why has the U.S. Congress been silent on this matter when many Israelis have not? Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres called the Druckman proposal "racist," and Yossi Sarid of the Meretz Party said it would turn "Israel into a racist state, perhaps the most racist in the family of democratic nations." Where is the U.S. State Department on this issue?
...
The same day the Sharon cabinet was considering this piece of bigotry, President Bush endorsed Israel's seizure of Palestinian cities, but never mentioned the matter of Adal Kaadan. Congress has done no better. It passed a resolution supporting Sharon's military incursions 446-23, and Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is leading the charge to keep Yassar Arafat out of the U.S. and to curb Palestinian authority operations in Washington.

- posted by Editor @ 12:01 PM

Excite News | Democrats Rip Bush on Terror War, Economy | Sep 9, 10:25 PM (ET) | By RON FOURNIER

BALTIMORE (AP) - Sen. Joe Lieberman accused Howard Dean in campaign debate Tuesday night of turning his back on Israel, and the Democratic presidential front-runner shot back that he and former President Bill Clinton held the same view on the issue."
...
...and Lieberman thought he saw an opening on an issue of particular concern to Jewish voters whose support - and campaign contributions - are prized by all candidates.

The 2000 Democratic vice presidential candidate, Lieberman said comments Dean made last week about the Middle East "break a 50-year record in which presidents, Republicans and Democrats, members of Congress of both parties have supported our relationship with Israel."

The Jewish senator added that Dean "has said he would not take sides" in the Middle East, "but then he has said Israel ought to get out of the West Bank and an enormous number of settlements" should be demolished.

"I'm disappointed in Joe," Dean said. "My position on Israel is exactly the same as Bill Clinton's," he said.

"I think America needs to be an honest broker. We desperately need peace in the Middle East."

Dean said last week, "it's not our place to take sides" in the Middle East conflict, saying the United States must help facilitate an agreement.

In 1993, Clinton sought to broker a peace between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, bringing Israeli President Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat together at the White House for talks and a memorable handshake.
- posted by Editor @ 9:14 AM

NY Times | Some House Democrats Fault Dean on Mideast By MICHAEL JANOFSKY

WASHINGTON, Sept. 10 -- Criticism of Howard Dean for his assertion that the United States should not take sides in the Middle East conflict moved beyond presidential debating today when a group of Democratic House members rebuked him in a letter.
...
... "I suspect many of them chose to sign the letter to help whatever candidate they're for. This is a way of piling on."

The remark that brought on the letter occurred last week. Asked then about the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, Dr. Dean deplored violence but said that continued terrorism should not be a ground for refusing to negotiate and that "it's not our place to take sides.""
- posted by Editor @ 6:49 AM

FORWARD : News : "Lieberman Comes Out Swinging at President, Liberal Democrats" By E.J KESSLER FORWARD STAFF

In his strongest criticism of President Bush's Israel policies to date during the campaign, Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman is blasting Bush for threatening Israel over its security fence.

In an e-mail message sent Tuesday night to Jewish supporters, Lieberman wrote that he was 'stunned' to learn of Bush's threats to withdraw loan guarantees if Israel does not stop construction of the fence, which Israel says it needs to stop terrorism. Lieberman also suggested that Bush is not a true friend of Israel, and compared Bush to his father, whose stances toward Israel were often highly unpopular in the Jewish community."
...
"We all thought this kind of heavy-handed pressure tactic went out the window when the first President Bush left the White House," Lieberman wrote....
- posted by Editor @ 8:37 AM

Sharon is saved from the threat of peace By Aluf Benn Ha'aretz - Article Thursday, September 04, 2003

It used to be said about Yitzhak Shamir that he wanted to wake up in the morning and see newspaper headlines saying, 'The threat of peace has been lifted.' All the signs now point to Ariel Sharon approaching the accomplishment that the former Likud premier dreamt of. The 'window of opportunity' for renewing the peace process, opened after the war in Iraq, has been slammed shut. The efforts for a political deal have once again given way to the routine of managing the conflict, with Israel controlling the territories, and all the settlements in place.

U.S. President George Bush has returned to the White House from his Texas vacation a much weakened leader, struggling to save his job.
...
To win the elections, Bush needs the money, energy and organizational capabilities of his friends in the Christian right and the Jewish community, strongholds of support for Israel. And to win in Iraq he needs help from his Arab friends. Only the Arab states can grant legitimacy and economic encouragement to the puppet regime that is going up in Baghdad. ... As far as the administration is concerned, the results of that accounting will be keeping a safe distance from the Israeli-Palestinian crisis and de facto shelving of the road map, even if they continue paying lip service to it.

A weakened Bush will find it difficult to pressure the Jews and Arabs, whose support he needs.
...
As far as Sharon is concerned, it is difficult to think of better news. The prime minister may have spoken of a Palestinian state and an end to the occupation ... In practice, Sharon has done everything possible to rebuff political dialogue, repeatedly toughening his conditions for opening the talks while deepening Israel's grip on the territories. ... Sharon understood that he shouldn't clash with Washington, and a polite no is better than a determined one. That's how he managed to rebuff "the threat of peace" and even win praise from the Americans.
- posted by Editor @ 1:18 PM

Sharon beats Abbas in battle for Bush
Analysis: Sharon beats Abbas in battle for Bush By Akiva Eldar, Haaretz - Article Wednesday, July 30, 2003

The clear impression from the White House press conference held by George Bush and Ariel Sharon on Tuesday is that the U.S. president accepted the Israeli prime minister's argument that the primary issue is the dismantling of armed groups by the Palestinian Authority.

In other words, Bush did not accept the argument put forward by Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud (Abu Mazen), at their meeting last Friday, that he cannot move against groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad, because this would precipitate a civil war.

This is a A recent poll showed his approval rating to be at its lowest since Sept. 11.
...
Sharon succeeded in tying Bush into the terror agenda, whereas Abu Mazen had tried to tie him into an agenda of occupation, but failed. ...

Bush also did not mention the dismantling of illegal outposts in the West Bank. ... Bush said the fence was a
"sensitive" issue, but he did not call it a "wall" or "a problem," like he did in his press conference with Abu Mazen.

The bottom line coming out of the press conference is that the onus is on the Palestinians, and any gains Abu Mazen thinks he might have made in his meeting with Bush, have not held up even for a week. "
- posted by Editor @ 8:57 AM

Boston Globe Online / Editorials | Opinions / US 'tough love' needed toward Israel By Edmund R. Hanauer, 1/20/2003

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. Bush's double standard on the cycle of Palestinian and Israeli violence and terror is clear: He says that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is a ''man of peace,'' while Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat should be replaced by a ''Palestinian leadership not compromised by terror.''

Bush's stance has strengthened extremists on both sides, undercut moderates, and given Sharon a blank check to continue Israeli violence and settlement expansion. This makes it harder for Arafat to condemn, let alone prevent, Palestinian violence without appearing to be a collaborator with the Israeli occupation - especially since Sharon is unwilling to make the concessions Arafat needs to curb violence without bringing on civil war among Palestinians.

While Bush denounces Palestinian terrorism and Saddam Hussein for violating the rights of Iraqis, his silence on Israeli violations of Palestinian rights is deafening. "
...
Because US governmental support of $3 billion yearly enables Israel to commit these crimes in violation of international law and scores of UN resolutions, the United States is complicit in those crimes and violations. The sooner the United States ties aid to Israel to Israel's respect for human rights, the sooner Israel will withdraw from all the occupied Palestinian lands and allow Palestinians to have a viable independent state alongside Israel.

If the Bush administration opposes all, not some, terrorism, supports human rights, a strengthened UN, and international law, seeks to undermine, not increase, the appeal of anti-American terrorists, and wants to save Israeli lives by reconciling Israel with her Arab neighbors, then it is time the United States practiced ''tough love'' with Israel.

[Edmund R. Hanauer is an American Jewish human-rights activist and director of Search for Justice and Equality in Palestine/Israel,a Boston-based human rights group].

This story ran on page A15 of the Boston Globe on 1/20/2003.
© Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.

[ Send this story to a friend | Easy-print version | Search archives ]
- posted by Editor @ 3:29 PM

Monday October 28, 2002 ... "there is little doubt that, last spring, when President Bush dithered and dallied over his Middle East policy before finally coming down on Israel's side, he was influenced not by the overrated Jewish vote, but by the opinion of Christian 'religious conservatives' - the self-description of between 15 and 18% of the electorate. When the president demanded that Israel withdraw its tanks from the West Bank in April, the White House allegedly received 100,000 angry emails from Christian conservatives. "
- posted by Editor @ 5:55 PM

Ha'aretz - Article: "At the same time, the Muslim proportion of the population, many of them of Arab descent, is rising. In fact, there is a continuing debate over whether the Arab-Americans already outnumber U.S. Jews.

This situation has yet to have had a significant influence on the make-up of the U.S. Congress, but has already been felt in local politics in certain cities. According to demographic estimates, by the year 2050, there will be four times as many Arabs as Jews in the United States. An awareness of the possible demographic repercussions has begun to penetrate the consciousness of the Jewish community. "
- posted by Editor @ 8:36 AM