[mpen-dayton4] FW: "Ohio Labor Rally to stop RTW " & "Obama's Letter to the Editor" & "Thank Ruth Bader Ginsburg!" & "Lieberman's back" and more
FYI. Best, Munsup
P.S. Please reply back to me with 'unsubscribe' added on the subject line if you no longer want to receive
my e-Newsletters. The convenient link to unsubscribe is no longer available due to security reasons.
P.P.S. "He who dares not offend cannot be honest" - Thomas Paine
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
· (Aug. 20 in Dayton) FW: Food Co-op Meeting Invitation
· (Aug. 22 in Dayton) FW: 2015 Dayton African American Cultural Festival
· FW: Psychologist (Larry James at WSU) opposed interrogation ban
· FW: Ohio Labor Rally to stop RTW on Fri. Aug. 21
· FW: Obama's Letter to the Editor
· FW: Interesting article "Divine inspiration or pure politics: What's behind Charles Schumer's opposition to Obama's Iran deal"
· FW: 60daystostopawar.com. Seen it yet?
· FW: Outliers & Guess who I won't be voting for
· FW: Detroit Free Press: Donald Trump suggests a sneering plan to cut auto pay
· FW: Planned Parenthood shuttered? (graphic)
· FW: On a stage with no vaginas, there were a lot of opinions about vaginas
· FW: Thank Ruth Bader Ginsburg!
· FW: Lieberman's back
· FW: Veterans News Now: "Netanyahu and His Marionettes" by David Bromwich
· FW: The Allies' knowing failure to save Europe's Jews from slaughter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Erica Bruton
Subject: Food Co-op Meeting Invitation
How would you like to be a part of developing a new grocery store right in your community?
Well, amazing things are possible when friends and neighbors work together, and we are glad to say that there is already momentum to address an important problem in our community.
Over the past few months some of your neighbors have already been gathering resources and ideas on how we can bring a grocery store to our neighborhood. This community owned store would provide reasonably priced, healthy food while also helping to reinforce the community.
We'd like to hear your voice as we work to bring a unique grocery store to Salem Ave.
You are invited to attend a community meeting hosted by the Greater Dayton Union Food Co-op (GDUFC). The mission of GDUFC is to fill the nutritional gap in underserved neighborhoods by providing access to healthy food options, employment opportunities and dietary education. It is our hope that the Salem Ave. grocery store will be the first of several food co-ops serving the Dayton and Trotwood areas.
This initial meeting with be informational, detailing how the co-op will work, and gauging the community's interest in supporting a store. We will also be discussing the development of a full-service consumer and worker owned grocery store in our neighborhood, which has been too long neglected. The meeting details are below.
Date: Thursday, August 20th
Location: Omega Baptist Church, 1821 Emerson Ave.
Time: 6:00 pm
We need people like you to provide insight and support. This store will be created for the people, by the people. The success of this full endeavor will be driven by your ideas, as a member of this community. We hope that you are able to join us.
Please send all questions to Erica Bruton erica@ohorganizing.org or call (937)269-7738.
From: Cheryl Scroggins
Subject: 2015 Dayton African American Cultural Festival
Please share with family & friends!
IN THE HEALTH PAVILION – Free screenings and Health Talks with:
1:00 – 2:00, Dayton Gastroenterology (health information about pancreas, liver, colon, gastrointestinal health)
2:00 – 4:00, Health Talk with Dr. Neravetla, Cardiac Surgeon and book author of Salt: Black American's Silent Killer. Join the SALT book club; get a free book.
Get a Free health screenings, Noon until 5:00 p.m. Also, complete the 2015 Community Health Needs Assessment and draw for a chance to win a prize!
From: Donald Nguyen
Subject: Psychologist (Larry James at WSU) opposed interrogation ban
Psychologist opposed interrogation ban
Official transitions into new role in military affairs at Wright State.
By Lance Lambert, Staff Writer
The American Psychological Association last week banned psychologists from participating in national security interrogations — a move that comes after years of criticism of psychologists aiding interrogations at the Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp.
Of the 165 votes, Wright State University psychologist Larry James cast the sole no vote.
That vote comes as James, dean of WSU's School of Professional Psychology, moves to a new role today as the associate vice president for military affairs at WSU.
James, who declined an interview request from this newspaper, was the leader of a team of psychologist assigned to interrogators at Guantanamo Bay, with deployments in 2003 and 2007. He joined WSU after retiring from the Army in 2008.
Those deployments led to controversy, including in 2007, when 350 members of the APA signed a letter asking the group's leaders to investigate James and other members who served at Guantanamo Bay.
The organization's ban comes a month after an internal report found that some of its members colluded with the military to allow psychologists to play roles in interrogations. Several staff members left after the report was published. Meanwhile, four members, including James, emailed a response criticizing the report for "bias" and "grandstanding rhetoric."
The letter that James signed cautioned members against voting for the resolution.
"I think psychologists and Americans never want torture to be used," said Irene Ozbeck, a psychologist representing Tennessee at the APA.
She voted yes on the ban. "None of us want there to be torture, that includes the one no vote. She says James was concerned about the resolution causing "unintended consequences." In James' book "Fixing Hell," he said he was sent by the Army "to clean up the abuses" at Gitmo.
However, a Toledo psychologist filed a complaint with the psychological board in Ohio against James, claiming that "torture and abuse of detainees never stopped at Guantanamo."
The board declined to investigate.
Critics point to an incident that occurred when James was the chief psychologist at Gitmo: A 16-year-old Canadian detainee claimed he was cuffed in painful positions for hours, dragged through his own urine, and threatened to be sent to Egypt so he would be raped.
James claims he was never involved in the teen's interrogation.
Ret. Col. Larry C. James served as the Joint Task Force Guantanamo's
chief psychologist in 2003 and as Abu Ghraib's chief psychologist in 2004.
Contact this reporter at 937-225-2352 or email Lance.Lam bert@coxinc.com
From: Logan Martinez & Andrew Tierman
Subject: Ohio Labor Rally to stop RTW on Fri. Aug. 21
Subject: FW: OH rally to stop RTW (Forwarded by Andrew Tierman)
Our brothers and sisters in Ohio need our help. The billionaire Koch brothers are trying to pass a "Right to Work" law in Ohio -- just like the one they rammed through in Lansing.
To fight back, the Ohio AFL-CIO is planning a big rally in Columbus next Friday outside of the Koch brothers' national summit in Columbus.
Can you join us as we stand in solidarity against "Right to Work"?
WHAT: Rally to fight RTW and the Koch Brothers in Ohio
WHEN: Friday, August 21. Meet at 9am, rally from 10am-12pm.
WHERE: McFerson Commons, John McConnell Blvd and Nationwide Blvd, Columbus, OH, 43215
TOLEDO BUS INFO: Departing 6:30AM from Teamsters Local 20, 435 S. Hawley St, Toledo. Contact Northwest CLC for more information.
RSVP if you can help us fight RTW in Ohio.
Ron Bieber; President, Michigan AFL-CIO
From: albert baca
Subject: FW: Obama's Letter to the Editor
It was over 50 years ago as LBJ signed the voting rights act that he uttered, I just lost the south for a generation. Keep that in mind as you read Obama's letter to the editor.
Voter fraud? My aunt Fanny. Maybe people riding in the Clown Car believe that there is a whole lot of voter fraud but I sure don't. Just another smoke screen to help the Oligarchs. Anything to keep the Democrats from voting for what is best for the country. Here I am talking about the sane Democrats not the sheep. Vote Democrat.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/magazine/president-obamas-letter-to-the-editor.html?_r=1
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S LETTER TO THE EDITOR
AUG. 12, 2015
For the cover story of our Aug. 2 issue, Jim Rutenberg wrote about efforts over the last 50 years to dismantle the protections in the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the landmark piece of legislation that cleared barriers between black voters and the ballot. The story surveyed a broad sweep of history and characters, from United States Chief Justice John Roberts to ordinary citizens like 94-year-old Rosanell Eaton, a plaintiff in the current North Carolina case arguing to repeal voting restrictions enacted in 2013. The magazine received an unusual volume of responses to this article, most notably from President Barack Obama.
I was inspired to read about unsung American heroes like Rosanell Eaton in Jim Rutenberg's ''A Dream Undone: Inside the 50-year campaign to roll back the Voting Rights Act.''
''We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union. ...'' It's a cruel irony that the words that set our democracy in motion were used as part of the so-called literacy test designed to deny Rosanell and so many other African-Americans the right to vote. Yet more than 70 years ago, as she defiantly delivered the Preamble to our Constitution, Rosanell also reaffirmed its fundamental truth. What makes our country great is not that we are perfect, but that with time, courage and effort, we can become more perfect. What makes America special is our capacity to change.
Nearly three decades after Rosanell testified to her unbroken faith in this country, that faith was vindicated. The Voting Rights Act put an end to literacy tests and other forms of discrimination, helping to close the gap between our promise that all of us are created equal and our long history of denying some of us the right to vote. The impact was immediate, and profound — the percentage of African-Americans registered to vote skyrocketed in the years after the Voting Rights Act was passed.
But as Rutenberg chronicles, from the moment the ink was dry on the Voting Rights Act, there has been a concentrated effort to undermine this historic law and turn back the clock on its progress. His article puts the recent push to restrict Americans' voting rights in its proper context. These efforts are not a sign that we have moved past the shameful history that led to the Voting Rights Act. Too often, they are rooted in that history. They remind us that progress does not come easy, but that it must be vigorously defended and built upon for ourselves and future generations.
I am where I am today only because men and women like Rosanell Eaton refused to accept anything less than a full measure of equality. Their efforts made our country a better place. It is now up to us to continue those efforts. Congress must restore the Voting Rights Act. Our state leaders and legislatures must make it easier — not harder — for more Americans to have their voices heard. Above all, we must exercise our right as citizens to vote, for the truth is that too often we disenfranchise ourselves.
Rosanell is now 94 years old. She has not given up. She's still marching. She's still fighting to make real the promise of America. She still believes that We the People have the awesome power to make our union more perfect. And if we join her, we, too, can reaffirm the fundamental truth of the words Rosanell recited.
President Barack Obama, Washington
A version of this article appears in print on August 16, 2015, on page MM10 of the Sunday Magazine.
From: Judy Burnette
Subject: FW: Interesting article "Divine inspiration or pure politics: What's behind Charles Schumer's opposition to Obama's Iran deal"
http://www.salon.com/2015/08/11/a_shomer_of_israel_in_the_senate_sen_schumer_divine_responsibility_the_iran_nuclear_deal/?source=newsletter
TUESDAY, AUG 11, 2015 11:58 AM UTC
Divine inspiration or pure politics: What's behind
Charles Schumer's opposition to Obama's Iran deal
SANDY TOLAN
Throughout history, kings, sultans, popes and commanders in chief have claimed to hear the voice of God in matters of war and peace.
From Pope Urban II's cry of "Deus vult!" (God wills it!) in launching the Crusades in 1095, to George W. Bush's alleged claim, in 2003, that God told him, "George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq," history is replete with leaders who acted because they believed God spoke to them directly and told them what to do.
Is a sense of divine responsibility at work in Sen. Charles Schumer's opposition to the Iran deal? Is the senior senator from New York breaking with the Obama administration, risking his rise to the leadership of the Senate Democrats, in part because he believes God speaks through him?
Sen. Schumer, of course, said nothing of the kind in his nearly 1,700-word statement opposing the Iran deal, released Thursday evening. Rather, he emphasized, his reasoning was grounded in "carefully studying the Joint Plan of Action."
https://medium.com/@SenSchumer/my-position-on-the-iran-deal-e976b2f13478
Yet in a revealing radio interview in 2010, the United States senator indicated he believed God had chosen him to be a guardian of Israel. "[M]y name, as you know, comes from a Hebrew word," Schumer said to Nachum Segal, founder of "the Jewish world's premier English-language internet radio network." The Hebrew word, Schumer said, is "shomer, which means guardian. My ancestors were guardians of the ghetto wall in Chortkov [in the Ukraine] and I believe Hashem [God], actually, gave me that name, as one of my roles that is very important in the United States Senate [is] to be a shomer for Israel. And I will continue to be that with every bone in my body."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0410/Schumer_Obamas_Counterproductive_Israel_policy_has_to_stop.html?showall
On its face, despite some theological differences, this statement is similar to the claims of certain evangelicals who say their call to leadership came directly from God. In 2007, Mike Huckabee said the (momentary) surge in his presidential run came from "the same power that helped a little boy with two fish and five loaves feed a crowd of five thousand people." Two decades earlier, Pat Robertson said he believed "God had called me to win" in the Republican primaries against George H.W. Bush.
Citing divine guidance for action in defense of the nation – in Schumer's case, a foreign nation – is enough to unsettle defenders of the separation of church and state. "We do think that the media … would probably flip out if Palin said God had a special plan for her in government," wrote Dan Amira in a New York magazine post, "Is Chuck Schumer on a Mission from God to Protect Israel?"
Schumer's 2010 remarks were grounded in his criticism of the Obama administration's public pressure on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government to cease Jewish settlement construction in East Jerusalem. On a visit to Israel, Vice President Biden had pledged America's "absolute, total, unvarnished commitment to Israel's security," only to be humiliated hours later by the announcement, from Netanyahu's office, of the construction of 1,600 new housing units in the would-be future capital of a Palestinian state. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the timing "insulting," which in turn insulted Sen. Schumer. "I called up the White House and I said, 'If you don't retract that statement you are going to hear me publicly blast you on this,'" Schumer said.
Schumer's 2010 threat to "blast" the Obama White House, driven in large part by his self-assigned role as "a shomer for Israel," raised a few eyebrows at the time. One commentator suggested his threat to the administration "gets to the edge of sounding as if he is more a Senator working in the Knesset than working in the United States Senate."
Five years later, in the wake of Schumer's pledge to vote against the Iran deal, the senator from New York is again drawing suggestions that he is motivated more by loyalty to Israel than to U.S. interests. This prompted Tablet, an online magazine, to declare: "Accusing Senator Schumer of loyalty to a foreign government is bigotry, pure and simple … a direct attempt to play the dual-loyalty card."
Such accusations often serve as cudgels to silence legitimate questions about whose interests are being served. At a June speech in Washington, two months before he rejected the deal, Schumer took on the question directly. "I have to do what's right for the United States first of all, and Eretz Yisrael [the land of Israel] second," he told the audience at the Orthodox Union. Yet he added that a theoretical agreement with Iran that had a 95 percent chance of success would likely be opposed by Israelis and "many Americans Jews," because of the potential "existential threat to Israel." This, and Schumer's self-regard as a shomer chosen by God, raise legitimate questions about his motivations in rejecting the Iran deal.
Perhaps no one but Charles Schumer can say if he truly believes he was chosen to be one of God's guardians. Divine inspiration aside, other reasons may lie at the heart of his decision. Supporters say he was simply acting on his conscience and in response to concerned constituents. Yet his alliance with the pro-Israel lobby, in particular AIPAC, cannot be ignored. Both AIPAC (despite its revisionist history) and Schumer advocated for the war in Iraq, and both now oppose the Iran deal, which AIPAC is spending tens of millions of dollars to scuttle. The lobbying group sent dozens of activists to Schumer's office in an effort to influence him.
Now both Schumer and AIPAC face uncertain consequences from an emboldened Obama administration no longer so cautious regarding the politics of Israel or its American lobby. At his recent speech at American University, the president said that "many of the same people who argued for the war in Iraq are now making the case against the Iran nuclear deal" – presidential comments that would have been hard to imagine even a year ago. Obama may be bolstered by several (though not all) polls showing that most American Jews support the Iran deal.
As for Sen. Schumer, he is now linked by many Democrats to the Republican critics of the agreement, whom Obama criticized as "making common cause with hard-liners in Iran." Moveon.org, the advocate of progressive Democratic causes, has announced a "donor's strike" to withhold up to $10 million in contributions to Schumer's 2016 Senate campaign. More important, current and former White House aides now openly question whether Schumer is fit to replace the retiring Harry Reid as Democratic leader of the Senate in the coming year. In that fight, if it comes, AIPAC, Israel and even God may not be able to help.
Sandy Tolan, author of "The Lemon Tree," is associate professor at the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism at USC. His new book is "Children of the Stone: The Power of Music in a Hard Land," about the building of a music school in the occupied West Bank.
--
R. J. Crane
Topple Bush
http://www.topplebush.com
Visit topplebush.com - the creator of the original, funny, and clever George W. Bush Worst President Ever commemorative coin. You will also find: Intelligent, well-written, progressive articles and commentary, our large Bush resume, a huge collection of Bush-bashing and progressive humor, free anti-Bush anti-war mp3 downloads, a bookstore with CDs and DVDs, and our own Topple Bush Store with t-shirts, bumper stickers, and other unique items. We will continue to donate money from the sale of our products to promote a progressive agenda. We are one of the premier and most popular anti-Bush sites on the internet!
From: Jo Comerford, MoveOn.org Civic Action
Subject: 60daystostopawar.com. Seen it yet?
Sources:
1. "60 National Security Leaders Support the Iran Deal," The Iran Project, July 20, 2015
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=306057&id=128791-1195276-q3buxXx&t=9
2. "Letter to the President from over 100 former American Ambassadors on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on Iran's Nuclear Program.," The Iran Project, July 16, 2015
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=306054&id=128791-1195276-q3buxXx&t=10
3. "Americans Strongly In Favor of Iran Deal," Public Policy Polling, July 27, 2015
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=306058&id=128791-1195276-q3buxXx&t=11
4. "The consequences of a bad deal with Iran," Los Angeles Times, July 26, 2015
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=306055&id=128791-1195276-q3buxXx&t=12
5. "Special Editorial: Kill the Deal," The Weekly Standard, April 4, 2015
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=306056&id=128791-1195276-q3buxXx&t=13
6. "Big money and ads clash over Iran nuclear deal," USA Today, July 22, 2015
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=305639&id=128791-1195276-q3buxXx&t=14
From: Sang Kang & Eric Kramer
Subject: Outliers & Guess who I won't be voting for
From: Andrew Tierman
Subject: Fwd: Detroit Free Press: Donald Trump suggests a sneering plan to cut auto pay
A straightforward point of view on the irony of voting against one's class in contemporary America.
Perhaps an analogous truth: the faulty over-self-estimation of academic ability by those with poor understanding or skills.
From Detroit Free Press
Donald Trump suggests a sneering plan to cut auto pay
http://on.freep.com/1NtspWg
From: JinJa CALES
Subject: FW: On a stage with no vaginas, there were a lot of opinions about vaginas
Helen Philpot posted: "Margaret, let's be clear. I am obviously using the term vagina in the narrowest sense of the word as defined by the Republican Party: a noun referring to women. And it was pretty clear at the debate that vaginas have no value unless a baby needs to pass through one on its way to church or its minimum wage job."
On a stage with no vaginas, there were a lot of opinions about vaginas
by Helen Philpot
Margaret, let's be clear. I am obviously using the term vagina in the narrowest sense of the word as defined by the Republican Party: a noun referring to women. And it was pretty clear at the debate that vaginas have no value unless a baby needs to pass through one on its way to church or its minimum wage job. Of course, if that baby is black or brown, then the intended destination changes to either prison or Mexico respectively.
I don't pretend to think that any of the presidential candidates will ever read what I write, but if they did I hope they will remember this:
Millions of women have been going to Planned Parenthood for nearly 100 years. We all remember the exceptional care and the quality of the information we received from the staff at those clinics. We remember when Planned Parenthood staff held our hands and comforted us during some of our scariest moments. We remember the relief we felt when they provided us with medically accurate information that we so desperately needed. And women of my age also remember what it was like when safe, legal abortions were not available.
Contrary to what Republican men think, none of us ever went into a Planned Parenthood for a well woman exam, cancer screening or birth control and mistakenly had an abortion instead. We know what Planned Parenthood is and that is why we love and support its mission.
And in 100 years, millions of women have trusted and supported Planned Paenthood much the same way Republicans blindly trust and support the NRA. So to the Republican Presidential Candidates I say in the only words they seem to understand: You can close Planned Parenthood when you pry it from our cold, dead hands. I mean it. Really.
Helen Philpot | August 7, 2015 at 2:32 PM | Tags: Abortion, Planned Parenthood, presidential candidates, Republican debates | URL: http://wp.me/p5xSC-17N
From: Fight the Right! (PFAW)
Subject: Planned Parenthood shuttered? (graphic)
In last week's GOP presidential debate...
What do you think this is all leading up to
when Congress returns from recess?
Please chip in to help PFAW stand up against these right-wing attacks on Planned Parenthood, women's health, and the right to choose!
We're working to expose their lies and organize a grassroots backlash to these attacks, but we need your help.
--PFAW
From: JinJa CALES
Subject: Thank Ruth Bader Ginsburg!
Thanks for signing our card thanking Ruth Bader Ginsburg for calling to overturn Citizens United.
Will you help us keep up our momentum by forwarding this and asking three friends to add their names too?
http://act.endcitizensunited.org/Thank-Justice-Ginsburg
| |
|
From: Jo, Bobby, Erica, Stephen, and the rest of the team, MoveOn.org Political Action
Subject: Lieberman's back
Our pressure is working. In a backlash that has sent shock waves through Washington, D.C., more than 20,000 of us have pledged to withhold more than $11 million from Democrats who would lead us towards war with Iran.
Senator Chuck Schumer—would-be Democratic Leader in the Senate, and the only Democratic senator to publicly oppose the Iran deal so far—is feeling the heat. Politico reports that "with liberal groups furious over his opposition to the Iran nuclear deal, Sen. Chuck Schumer has been quietly reaching out to dozens of his colleagues to explain his decision" and assure them he won't lobby them to join his side.1
And in recognition that Schumer is against the ropes politically, a group backed by hawkish billionaires—and headed by none other than the pro-war former senator Joe Lieberman—has bought a video billboard in Times Square to support him.
Every undecided Democrat, from Senator Cory Booker to Representative Jerry Nadler, is watching what happens to Schumer. They're trying to figure out whether there's more political risk in supporting the deal—or opposing it. So this is the moment for us to double down.
Can you chip in to help buy an opposing billboard in Times Square calling out Schumer—and pointing out that the war hawks who took us to Iraq now want war with Iran?
Because you've saved your payment information with MoveOn, your donation will go straight through.
Express Donate: $10 Express Donate: $40 Express Donate: $150
Donate another amount
There's an amazing story about the group that bought the pro-Schumer billboard, a story that tells you everything you need to know about this fight.
The organization, United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), used to be chaired by Gary Samore, a nuclear expert who runs a security program at Harvard. During negotiations with Iran, he was skeptical. But according to an article in today's New York Times, after the Iran deal was finalized, Samore took a hard look at the text—and wound up supporting it.2 If you want to keep Iran nuclear-free, supporting the deal is the best path to do it.
But that put him on the wrong side of the group he chaired, which was funded in no small part by ultra-right-wing pro-war billionaire Sheldon Adelson. So Samore stepped down. And into his chair slid Joe Lieberman, the Iraq War's #1 Democratic cheerleader—and the target of a MoveOn-supported primary campaign in 2006 that cost him the Democratic nomination for his Senate seat.
Lieberman, predictably, opposes the Iran deal. And under Lieberman's leadership, UANI wasted no time in coming to the aid of Sen. Schumer, who was facing a wall of criticism from progressives, just as Lieberman had a decade ago.
The fallout from Schumer's decision will shape the future of the Democratic Party, the country, and the Middle East. Everyone's watching. That's why we have to lean in to this fight—and respond to the pro-war billboard in a way that can't be missed.
If we can raise the funds this week, we can buy an anti-war billboard in Times Square, and buy online ads to make sure that swing voters across America see our message. Can you chip in?
Because you've saved your payment information with MoveOn, your donation will go straight through.
Express Donate: $10 Express Donate: $40 Express Donate: $150
Donate another amount
We didn't stop the last war. We'll all have to live with that—those of us who didn't lose our lives to it. But we can stop this one.
Sources:
1. "Chuck Schumer working the phones on Iran," Politico, August 11, 2015 http://www.moveon.org/r/?r=305987&id=128538-1195276-LyuhsFx&t=1
2. "Head of Group Opposing Iran Accord Quits Post, Saying He Backs Deal," The New York Times, August 12, 2015 http://www.moveon.org/r/?r=305988&id=128538-1195276-LyuhsFx&t=2
Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 8 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Start a monthly donation here or chip in a one-time donation here.
PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.
From: Judy Burnette
Subject: Veterans News Now: "Netanyahu and His Marionettes" by David Bromwich
veteransnewsnow.comhttp://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2015/08/11/520866netanyahu-and-his-marionettes/
Netanyahu and His Marionettes
By David Bromwich HUFFPOST
A gesture of more abject servility cannot be imagined.
Benjamin Netanyahu is laying siege to the Congress of the United States, not for the first time. He has thrown his voice and channeled his influence into the arena of American legislative politics, to abort the P5+1 nuclear settlement with Iran, which was signed on July 14 by the US, Britain, France, Germany, China, and Russia. The Israeli strong man's latest intervention is in keeping with the rest of his political career. Netanyahu owes all his importance and his success to actions that have been purely destructive.
He was first elected in 1996 on the wave of Israeli settler chauvinism that followed the signing of the Oslo Accords. His rise occurred in the wake of the assassination of his opponent, a courageous defender of the accords, Yitzhak Rabin.
A public memorandum detailing the strategy for Netanyahu as leader of Israel was written by the neoconservative war propagandist Richard Perle, along with a small committee of others. The strategy document, "A Clean Break," called for Israel to free itself from the tedious demands of diplomacy once and for all, curtail its efforts to negotiate with Palestinians toward the creation of a state, and give up the idea of joining a neighborhood of nations in the Middle East. With American help, instead, Israel could stand alone as the dominant power, a position it should never compromise by bargaining for peace. To achieve this end, three countries had to be undermined, subdivided, or destroyed: Iraq, Syria, and Iran.
Paul Wolfowitz, William Kristol, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Scooter Libby, John Bolton, Michael Ledeen. Zionist authors of 'A clean break'.
So far, things have gone roughly according to plan. Iraq and Syria are out of the picture — the latter with considerable satisfaction to the people around Netanyahu. But Iran has continued to pose a stumbling block; and as early as 2008, Barack Obama's interest in lowering the terrorist threat to the US by calming the violence of the region was perceived by Netanyahu as a threat to his plan for dominance.
From their first meeting in 2009, Netanyahu made it plain that Obama was an obstacle to be overcome by any means necessary — political assaults from the rear and flanks; concocted international incidents; speeches to Congress and the United Nations and AIPAC and Congress again. Obama was to be treated as an enemy in all but name. The story was to be circulated that Obama, possibly from motives of racial resentment, was profoundly unfriendly to the state of Israel. In the six years that followed their first meeting in May 2009, a continuous strand of Netanyahu's foreign policy has been devoted to weakening the Obama presidency.
John McCain, Charles Schumer, Bob Corker, Lindsey Graham and Israel's PM, Netanyahu
Over the same period, the Republican party set itself as a primary goal the nullification of everything Obama proposed. It was natural therefore that its alliance with Netanyahu would grow increasingly public.
Only self-respect in the Republicans and a sense of decency in Netanyahu could have prevented it.
But one should not underrate the element of racism in Netanyahu's resolve. On the day of the last Israeli election, in March 2015, which ended by returning him to office with a far-right, settler-based coalition, Netanyahu sent a panic Facebook message to his followers. "The right-wing government is in danger," he wrote. "Arab voters are coming out in droves to the polls. Left-wing organizations are busing them out." His followers had a particular duty to vote in order to offset the droves of Arabs.
Now, "droves" is a word normally applied to cattle, just as "swarm" is applied to insects and "hordes" to murderous barbarians. The chairmen of White Citizens' Councils in the American South in the 1950s used to warn their faithful against the "hordes of n—–s" that would vote them out of office unless white people came out and voted.
For Netanyahu, President Obama has always been one of the "droves."
He has treated Obama with a degree of disrespect approaching and often crossing into contempt,
without parallel in the previous relations of American leaders and our professed allies.
Senator Diane Feinstein on Senate floor
The black caucus noticed this when they boycotted Netanyahu's speech to Congress in March; and among Jewish lawmakers, Dianne Feinstein has spoken with well-earned disgust of Netanyahu's "arrogant" presumption that he speaks for all Jews.
Reactions of this sort are likely to intensify among those (including the present writer) who feel the disgrace of a foreign leader singling us out in a speech carried in US media, which was addressed peculiarly to Jewish Americans and implicitly separated our interests from those of other Americans. The gesture embodied by such a speech bears a family resemblance to incitement to treason.
Imagine a leader of India puffing himself up to deliver a special address to Americans of Indian descent, asking them to subvert the authority of the president who signed a trade deal the Indian prime minister judges to be disadvantageous. And yet, the relations today of Netanyahu to many of the biggest American Jewish donors, and of the same donors to the Republican Party — these linkages are so extended and tangled that lesser actors can barely account for their actions. But they feel no responsibility to render an account. They only know that their arms and legs move obediently to execute a pilgrimage to Jerusalem or Las Vegas. And then they vote and then comes the money.
Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu(R) during a photo-op
The defection to the Republican side by Chuck Schumer was predictable, but the terms in which he cast his decision tell us much about the man and the situation. It has been said that one can judge a politician's intent not only by the things he says but by the things he crucially omits. In Schumer's written defense of his vote with the war party, in a text of some 1,700 words apparently drafted by the senator himself, a word that never appears is "Israel." (The exception is the almost anonymous appearance of the country in a catalogue with five other countries said to have been direct or indirect victims of Iran). But depend on it, Israel was on Schumer's mind.
He has often said, with an artless self-love, that his name in Hebrew, "shomer," means "guardian"; and he takes pride in the fact because he thinks of himself as the appointed guardian of Israel's interests in the US. How bizarre and again how unprecedented this is! Think of any other nation in the world. Imagine an Italian-American named Frank Consiglieri assuring his listeners that his name means "advocate" in Italian and he is supremely vigilant for the interests of Italy as a lawmaker in the US.
Schumer voted for the Iraq war on a rationale similar to the one he now urges as the path of reason and good sense with Iran. He may or may not recognize that he is only assisting the Likud and the neoconservatives with part three of the Middle East "clean break" strategy: Iraq, Syria, Iran. Their calculation is simple. When the work of destruction is complete, one country in the region will stand upright and intact amid the surrounding rubble.
How many Americans know that the Iran deal is supported by the vast majority of Israel's defense and security establishment? The opinions of the security officials within Netanyahu's government are impossible to discern because they have been placed under gag order; but the suffrage of qualified judges in Israel, as also in Europe, Russia, China, and the IAEA, forms a strange contrast with the current alignments in America.
"As unanimous as the politicians are in backing the prime minister," J.J. Goldberg recently wrote in Forward, "the generals and spymasters are nearly as unanimous in questioning him. Generals publicly backing Netanyahu can be counted on — well — one finger." Equally strange is the fact that security support for the deal is an open secret in the Israeli press, and in an American Jewish paper likeForward, but the evidence is subordinated to a point of near invisibility in the New York Times and other mainstream outlets.
In defending the deal, in the most sober, straightforward, unapologetically argumentative and honest speech of his career, President Obama spelled out the reasons why its acceptance would surrender no opportunity while rejection would squander a chance that will not return.
If, in a worst-case scenario, Iran violates the deal, the same options that are available to me today will be available to any U.S. president in the future. And I have no doubt that 10 or 15 years from now, the person who holds this office will be in a far stronger position with Iran further away from a weapon and with the inspections and transparency that allow us to monitor the Iranian program.
Politicians and propagandists who oppose the deal have spoken of fifteen years as if it were the blink of an eye; but fifteen years is a long time in the history of a nation; and Americans should know it. Fifteen years ago George W. Bush had not yet won the presidency and delivered to the world his vision of a new Middle East. Destruction makes faster work than rebuilding or reform, but much that is good can happen in fifteen years.
Obama delivered this speech at American University — recalling President Kennedy's speech in support of the Test Ban Treaty at the same institution 52 years ago — and with full awareness of the parallel he said:
"Does anyone really doubt that the same voices now raised against this deal will be demanding that whoever is President bomb those nuclear facilities?"
Kennedy at a press conference on August 20, 1963 faced a similar pretense of scientific skepticism founded on destructive intent, and had to answer questions about the opposition of Dr. Edward Teller, a fierce advocate of atmospheric nuclear testing.
Asked whether he had curtailed a recent series of tests for political reasons, Kennedy replied:
Obviously, we don't like to test in the atmosphere unless the test is essential. Every test in the atmosphere produces fallout and we would, it seems to me, be remiss in not attempting to keep the number of tests to the minimum, consistent with our national security. … So we kept a careful eye, and we in fact did more tests, several more tests than we had originally planned six months before. … I think that they were an impressive series. But it would be very difficult, I think, to satisfy Dr. Teller in this field.
Schumer is following the Dr. Tellers of our age, but they have invented nothing, improved nothing, are good at nothing except starting wars.
They are, however, trained and seasoned by experience in the art of spreading fear. By joining their ranks again in 2015, as he did in 2003, Chuck Schumer has made much harder the fight against the chief hope today for lowering the risk of nuclear proliferation. He has done it for reasons no more compelling than those that drove the feverish opposition to Kennedy in 1963.
Sheldon Adelson is a Republican and Haim Sabbah is a Democrat.
Meanwhile, 58 members of the US Congress have landed in Jerusalem, on a visit set to last from August 4 to August 10. Their trip was bought and paid for by the charitable arm of AIPAC. The lawmakers obeyed the command of Prime Minister Netanyahu to visit him instead of their own constituents in early August if they want support in the future by prominent Jewish donors.
A gesture of more abject servility cannot be imagined. By agreeing to take the trip at this time — so easy to decline if only for the perception of the thing — these captive representatives have in effect declared their confidence in Netanyahu and their dependence on his favor. He will come back for more.
Very likely we can expect to hear something from the same representatives concerning the "flaws" in the Iran deal which Schumer says prompted his early declaration of a negative vote.
"Even more troubling [than the 24-day delay on inspections]," said Schumer," is the fact that the US cannot demand inspections unilaterally." The demand for immediate inspections, any time, any place, is not an initiative of Schumer's at all but a late-found and richly publicized Netanyahu obstruction, like his demand that Iran recognize Israel as "the Jewish state." It is tantamount to setting a precondition of total and round-the-clock American surveillance of Iranian sites. The only government that would submit to such a regimen is a client government; and the objection could only be satisfied in the aftermath of regime change.
The most puzzling detail in Schumer's defense of his negative vote is the reversal on which it closes. He admits that the heart of the nuclear deal works against the development of nuclear weapons quite effectively. "When it comes to the nuclear aspects of the agreement within ten years, we might be slightly better off with it. However, when it comes to the nuclear aspects after ten years and the non-nuclear aspects, we would be better off without it." There, for all his elaborate show of scruple, he gives the game away. The "nuclear aspects" are the substance of the agreement.
That is why they call it the nuclear deal. But no, for Netanyahu and Schumer what offends is the prospect of Iran's re-entry into the global community as a trading partner and a non-nuclear regional power of some resourcefulness. This emergence can only curb Israel's wish to dominate for another half century as it has done for the past half century. That, and not anything resembling an "existential threat," is the real transition at issue.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y, to oppose president Obama and the P5+1 nuclear deal with Iran.
In conclusion, Schumer tells his Democratic listeners that he does not want a war with Iran; but this is a hollow pretense. The preponderance of influential persons who side with him, as they did on Iraq in 2003, do indeed want a war, and they say they do. They say that war is inevitable, and that the sooner we get over delusions of compromise, the better for Israel and America. Even if he were in earnest, what could the peaceable Senator Chuck Schumer do? A shomer, after all, a guardian and not a buccaneer — how could he prevail against the many who are made of sterner stuff?
Scott Walker Pledges to Kill Any US Iran Deal if Elected President
The Republican candidate now ranked third in the polls, Scott Walker, has said he would bomb Iran on his first day as president.
Also see:
Republican Hypocrisy on Iran
Chuck Schumer Suddenly Not Worthy of Leading Democrats
The Liberation of US Foreign Policy
Related Posts:
· The Liberation of US Foreign Policy
· Peter Beinart's Fantasy – Raimondo
· House Members In Israel for Obama-Bashing
The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VNN, VNN authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. Notices
Posted by VNN on August 11, 2015, With 234 Reads, Filed under Middle East. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry.
From: Andrew Tierman
Subject: The Allies' knowing failure to save Europe's Jews from slaughter
The Riegner Cable, and the Knowing Failure of the West To Act During the Shoah
When and how did authentic information about the Holocaust first become known?
By Walter Laqueur
See http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/192421/riegner-cable-shoah
End of MPEN e-Newsletter
posted by lucas at 8:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home