Jews must choose whether to defend Obama or Israel.
By Ted Belman
I just finished reading a book, Don’t Tread on Me, by Carol Gould, a U.S. ex pat who has lived her adult life in the U.K. Gould is a self declared conservative, at least in certain matters, and must be counted among the British intelligentsia.
Over the last few years we have exchanged emails and she send me a complementary copy of her new book, Don’t Tread On Me. It was a very quick read. It concerns itself with British anti-Americanism. When it comes to recognizing the the extend and significance of anti-Americanism, antisemitism and anti-Zionism, I am far from a babe in the manger. But Carol’s description of the visceral hatred the Brits have for Americans and America, going back decades, left me in shock. Her book is full of horrendous examples. While she was at it, she had time to defend Israel and expose antisemitism. Like many of us Jews, she comes from liberal/socialist Jewish stock and though she has turned to the right she still is a liberal at heart.
While defending Israel she acknowledged Israel had what to be ashamed of in the various wars she fought and in particularly in Sabra and Shatilla. I felt had she known the facts better she would not have conceded what she conceded. But that is not the purpose of my drawing attention to her and her book.
Just today I noticed that she waded into the Dershowitz/Phillips fisticuffs with her article in Pyjamas Media sub-titled, Jewish Fury Incarnate in which she put “the cat among the pigeons” by saying “I think Dersho is right-on.” I am not surprised. Both she and Dershowitz are defenders of Israel and Zionism, no question about it, but their liberalism creeps out. She summarizes his argument
Dershowitz argues that he, like Israeli intellectuals Amos Oz, Aharon Barak, and others, has been critical of Israel’s settler policies. He feels that expansion of the settlements will make it harder to implement the two-state solution. Later, however, he repudiates Rahm Emanuel’s “disturbing linkage” between Jewish settlements and tackling the Iranian nuke program. He concludes “you can be a strong supporter of Israel and yet oppose the settlements and favor a two-state solution.”
As she correctly points out the major difference between their positions is that Dershowitz believes a two state solution is possible and Phillips doesn’t. Obviously Zionists can believe in either position but which is more credible. To my mind reality supports the right and wishful thinking underlies the support for the two state solution otherwise known as the Saudi Plan. I submit that they are blinded by their liberalism.
But then it comes out,
-
Now on to the second issue of Obama himself. This is where I part company with my esteemed colleague Melanie Phillips. She has been a stern critic of the new president but does not grasp the significance of his rise to prominence. In 2004, when I was still a staunch Bushite, I saw Obama speak in Philadelphia and was moved to tears. He related the story of campaign workers tirelessly distributing buttons; as he watched them canvass, a local man told him they had been Klansmen in their youth but were now staunch liberals. This story stirred me as I stood in the square where my late mother had worked so hard for recognition of African-American rights seventy years before. In the preface to my play, A Room at Camp Pickett, at the London Africa Centre in 2004, I mentioned Barack Obama as “the one.” So that puts me in the Dershowitz camp.
And why?
-
Here’s why: Many British and European friends have been berating me about the stupidity of American Jewry in their overwhelming support for the Obama-Biden ticket in 2008. Otherwise enlightened and informed individuals tell me Obama is a “fifth columnist,” “the Manchurian candidate,” and “an agent of Ahmadinejad.” Like Dershowitz I am prepared to give the president the benefit of the doubt and defend the deeply held liberal beliefs of my parents and grandparents if those beliefs help America keep the cornucopia of ideas and freedoms harvested by the Founding Fathers. Yes, many Jewish anti-apartheid fighters in South Africa like Ronnie Kasrils have ended up being haters of Israel, but Dershowitz, like me, feels Obama’s core beliefs match and reflect those of the very best in American aspirations.
So that is another major difference.
Just what are those deeply held liberal beliefs that Obama shares? Gould writes
-
She [Phillips] points out that Dershowitz would likely abandon Israel if it did not support stem cell research, gay rights, and abortion, and observes that “such support is shallow, meretricious, and narcissistic.”
I think Phillips rightly pointed out that Jews embraced Obama for his domestic views and not his views on Israel. Effectively they are saying that they like his domestic policies so they go along with him on his Israel policies. Then again many on the left or liberals believe that to force Israel to give in is in her best interests. So Obama has their support too.
Not me. Totally aside from shared values, Obama’s means are not shared by true liberals including Jews. Jews must evaluate what Obama’s plans for Israel are separate from his domestic policies. Then they must choose whether to defend Obama or Israel.
Carol Gould is the Philadelphia-born author of Don’t Tread on Me: Anti-Americanism Abroad, Spitfire Girls, and A Room at Camp Pickett, a play about her mother’s experiences as a WAC in World War II; she has just completed films about black GIs and GI babies. Carol has been a panelist on BBC’s Any Questions?, hosted by Jonathan Dimbleby, and is a commentator on Sky News, Press TV, the BBC World Service, and Five Live.
[...] Just today I noticed that she waded into the Dershowitz/Phillips fisticuffs with her article in Pyjamas Media sub-titled, Jewish Fury Incarnate in which she put “the cat among the pigeons” by saying “I think Dersho is right-on.” I am not surprRead more at http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=16719 [...]
Pingback by Darrell Issa conservatives are civil at their “own” town hall meetings | Gadget Look — September 3, 2009 @ 9:51 pm
I fail to find anything conservative about her. Unless you consider anyone not anti-American and anti-Israel to be “conservative”. If that’s the case then liberalism has certainly fallen deeply into disrepute.
Comment by Laura — September 3, 2009 @ 10:23 pm
Meet Carol Gould
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk0CJStLZh4
Comment by yamit82 — September 3, 2009 @ 11:19 pm
[...] here: Jews must choose whether to defend Obama or Israel. Presidency News Recommends: Related articles:Obama pushes Jews into Republican armsBarack [...]
Pingback by Jews must choose whether to defend Obama or Israel. | Presidency News - News, articles and blog posts about The Presidency — September 4, 2009 @ 12:51 am
If you are a modern liberal, you either promote violent anti-Semitism or tolerate it from your allies.
The most frequent visitor to the Obama White House has been Al Sharpton, whose anti-Semitic rabble-rousing led directly to multiple Jewish homicides.
Is there one liberal in America…Jew or Gentile…who objects?
Attaching the label “disrepute” to liberalism is excessively kind.
Comment by ayn reagan — September 4, 2009 @ 1:20 am
ted, the “babe in the manger” analogy is, shall we say, not you!
thanks for the piece. one of the most insidious things about osama is his way of pulling heart strings re the civil rights movement. he isn’t a ‘master orator’ but he is a master deceiver. the l.s.os. wouldn’t know a truth if it slapped him.
Comment by bugsy — September 4, 2009 @ 3:05 am
Making Peace
“When G-d your Lord brings you to the land you are entering, so that you can occupy it, He will uproot many nations before you… When G-d your Lord places them at your disposal and you defeat them, you must utterly destroy them, not making any treaty with them or giving them any consideration.”
Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 7:1-2
“Do not make a treaty with these nations… Do not allow them to reside in your land, since they may then make you sin to Me.”
Shemot (Exodus) 23:32-33
The biblical commentators are explicit about the above verses:
“And you shall drive out the inhabitants and then you shall inherit it, you will be able to exist in it. And if you do not, you will not be able to exist in it.” Rashi
“When you shall eliminate the inhabitants of the land, then you shall be privileged to inherit the land and pass it down to your children. But if you do not eliminate them, even though you will conquer the land you will not be privileged to hand it down to your children.” Sforno
“The verse speaks of others aside from the seven Canaanite nations… Not only will they hold that part of the land that you did not posses, but even concerning that part which you did posses and settle in, they will distress you and say: Rise and get out…” Ohr Ha’Chayim
“Do not cringe before these nations. G-d your Lord is with you, a great and awesome G-d. G-d will uproot these nations before you little by little… G-d will place these nations in your power…”
Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 7:21-24
“If you carefully safeguard and keep this entire mandate that I prescribe to you today, and if you love G-d, walk in all His ways, and cling to Him, then G-d will drive out all these nations before you. You will expel nations that are greater and stronger than you are.”
Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 11:22-23
I think Dershowitz, Phillips and Gould and most Jewish readers and commenter’s here should check their Jewish sources and if need be go back to Hebrew school but this time with real Jewish teachers.
Comment by yamit82 — September 4, 2009 @ 1:49 pm
The left that Dershowitz and it is apparent Gould supports:
During the War of Independence in 1948-49, Jewish military units had the ability of liberating Jerusalem. Forces led by Menahem Begin were planning Jerusalem’s liberation, but they were betrayed by David Ben-Gurion, and his government.
During the Six Day War in 1967, orders were given to the army by the ruling government to avoid entering the Old City of Jerusalem, and only protect the “Western” part of the city. Luckily for all of us these ridiculous orders were ignored, and Jerusalem was liberated.
Ever since that date, all leftist led Israeli governments have been trying to get rid of “Eastern” Jerusalem, which is part of Judea and Samaria, the “West Bank”. As Moshe Dayan used to say: “We don’t want these lands, we are just waiting for a phone call from King Hussein of Jordan, to give these lands to him in exchange of a peace treaty.”
Now as I see it not all who contend that they support Israel should be given a pass. Those that only support a certain kind of Israel be it religious or secular should be vetted before we allow them to speak in our names. The Israel that Dershowitz supports is one that I and at least half of all Jewish Israels reject as an anathema a Hilul HaShem
Comment by yamit82 — September 4, 2009 @ 2:28 pm
Yamit, again I am not a student of Israeli history, having said that why would anyone not wnat complete control over all of Jerusalem?
It doesn’t make good sense. How about if the U.S. would parcel part of San Diego, California to Mexico (maybe it is already).??
Comment by rongrand — September 4, 2009 @ 7:17 pm
Ron, are you serious? The situation is not like the US giving up California. It’s more like giving up Vietnam, Cambodia, Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan. Would you like the US to be forever burdened with having to govern people who want us out of their countries? The Arabs living in the lands won in 1967 hate the Jews, plain and simple. People like Moshe Dayan realized this, and did not want to be saddled with them. Dayan and others simply wanted Israeli Jews (and Arabs who wanted to be part of Israel) to be able to live in peace with their neighbors. There is nothing irrational with those sentiments.
There was a time, when I welcomed the Jewish occupation of Jerusalem. I thought this would provide an opportunity for Jews from around the world to return to their historical homeland, to rebuild the Temple and offer daily sacrifices in thanks to God. Now that I’ve seen what pig-headed, divided bigots religious Jews really are, though, I’m actually glad that the Jews of the world have not taken advantage of this opportunity.
Over four decades have elapsed since then, and it is well past time to try to find some accomodation with the Arabs in the occupied areas (occupied by Arabs or Jews, take your pick). A “two state solution” has never been aviable proposal, and I can’t see any practical solution other than settling Arabs who don’t want to live under a Jewish majority to be settled in other countries. If the king of Jordan doesn’t want them (and I can understand why he wouldn’t), then other countries must step up and take them in. At the moment, nobody seems to want to see this happen; so a continued “emergency” is the only alternative.
Comment by BlandOatmeal — September 4, 2009 @ 11:52 pm
Oat I am not sure you understand my comment. I agree with Yamit. All of Jerusalem belongs to Israel along with Judea and Samaria. Israel is the land from the River Jordan to the Medeterranean.
Comment by rongrand — September 5, 2009 @ 4:11 am
G-d’s time and your time don’t seem to be in sync, you arrogant stupid fool. It will be when it will be and it will be!
Now why should a goy like you care whether we build a temple and perform daily sacrifices?
Sour grapes oat because they rejected you as a super nut case and threw you out of their synagogues like they did with your idol on a stick 2 thousand years ago. Do you identify his rejection with your own?
There is some sense and truth in that statement: we don’t need another 4-5 million liberal progressives with no sense of Jewish self or Judaism except Bagels, cream cheese and Lox! Certainly not your stylized perception of what Jews ought to be.
I agree but we have learned to live with their periodic annoyances and we lose far more jew in trafficacidents than in all our combined conflicts with the Arabs. We can live like this for another 500 years if necessary.
Comment by yamit82 — September 5, 2009 @ 11:00 am
Yamit, how is it Oats seems to be out in left field.
I believe I said it before, the Secular Progressives are active throughout the world.
Yamit, please don’t drag Him into the conversation. I know you don’t believe in Him, however, why gamble.
If you are right, no problem, you didn’t harm or ofend anyone however, if in fact your greeted by Him in the next life He will thank and praise you for your tolerence.
You know we can both be right. We do have a common denominator - G-d/God.
Moreover there are a number of us out there who seek His help for the Israelis.
Comment by rongrand — September 5, 2009 @ 1:59 pm
Yamit, if anything, uniting world Jews would be a goal, especially in the homeland. Thats how much I know.
I always believed all Jews were in fact religious Jews.
If not a religious a Jew then what is the significance of the Temple, Jerusalem and Israel?
Comment by rongrand — September 6, 2009 @ 1:07 am
Yamit, you still haven’t replied to my comment # 14
Isn’t the Temple, Jersualem and of course the Torah the corner stone of Israel?
Comment by rongrand — September 6, 2009 @ 6:44 pm
Ron most Jews here and abroad are not considered observant Jews. That said in many ways Israeli atheists are more religious than many who are considered religious especially in the diaspora.
The Temple is a religious/national institution and symbol, it essentially housed the government and the judicial court, the Sanhedrin. Every Jew had to pay a half shekel tithe in support of the Temple and the priesthood. The half shekel was paid by every Jew in the world and was symbolic of Jewish unity. The principle and amt. is dictated in the Torah.
http://www.templeinstitute.org/main.htm
The commandment to pay the half shekel to the Temple is in the weekly Torah portion of Ki Tisa (Exodus 30:11-16):
And the L-rd spoke to Moshe, saying: When you take the sum of the children of Yisrael after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul to the L-rd, when you count them; that there be no plague among them, when you put a number to them. This they shall give, every one that passes among them that are to be counted, half a shekel after the shekel of the sanctuary, (a shekel is twenty gera), a half shekel shall be the offering for the L-rd. Every one that passes among them that are counted, from twenty years old and above, shall give the offering of the L-rd. The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less than half a shekel, when they give the offering of the Lord, to make atonement for your souls. And you shall take the atonement money of the children of Yisrael, and shall designate it for the service of the Tent of Meeting; that it may be a memorial to the children of Yisrael before the L-rd, to make atonement for your souls.
The annual half shekel head-tax was later donated in shekels and half shekels from the Tyre mint where they were struck from the year 125 BCE until the outbreak of the Great Revolt in 66 CE. At the time of the uprising, the tax was paid using Jerusalem shekalim, which were specifically struck for this purpose. In the rabbinic sources, the Tosefta (Ketubot 13:20) states: “Silver mentioned in the Five Books of Moses is always Tyrian silver: What is Tyrian silver? It is Jerusalemite.” Many have interpreted this to mean that only Tyrian shekels could be used to pay the half shekel head-tax at the Jerusalem temple.
Comment by yamit82 — September 6, 2009 @ 11:16 pm
The Maharal responds that the land of Israel is central to the mitzvot of the Torah. Bereishit and the beginning of Shemot demonstrate that the land of Israel belongs to the people of Israel by right, and not by theft. The Jewish people’s rightful connection to the land of Israel and the mitzvot they are commanded to observe are interdependent.
What the Maharal says has two components:
First, that the majority of the mitzvot depend directly on the land of Israel. Of course, this is true of those agricultural mitzvot that can be fulfilled only in Eretz Israel, such as separating part of the produce for terumah (a small portion given to the Kohanim) and ma’aserot (tithes, given to the Levi’im and the poor), and Shemittah (the seventh year, when the land lies fallow).
Moreover, many other mitzvot need the land of Israel as a prerequisite. The Beit Hamikdash( THE TEMPLE) can be built only in Israel; therefore, all mitzvot which derive from the Temple, including its construction, the appointment of Kohanim(PRIESTS) and Levi’im and the offering of sacrifices, require the land. The functioning of the Sanhedrin and of the monarchy, which account for many mitzvot, also can occur only in Eretz Israel.
Most significant in this connection is the Sanhedrin’s(HIGH COURT) fixing of the calendar, “the first commandment that Israel was commanded,” in Rashi’s words. Even now, our fixed calendar, based on calculations, derives its legitimacy from the Jews’ connection to the land of Israel, as the Rambam writes in his Sefer HaMitzvot (Positive Commandment 153):
Let us suppose, for example, that there would be no Jews living in the land of Israel - G-d forbid that He should do such a thing, for He has promised not to destroy the remnant of the nation completely. . . . Our calculations would not help us at all. . . . For out of Tzion the Torah will go forth (Yesha’yah 2:3).
Thus, all the mitzvot(COMMANDMENTS) of the festivals derive, ultimately, from the land of Israel.
Without Eretz(THE LAND) of Israel, the Torah would indeed be sparse.
Comment by yamit82 — September 6, 2009 @ 11:42 pm
Yamit, I know less now then before. Very complicated for an old man to obsorb. Your an educated Jew who is well versed in your faith.
Just maybe the average Jew out there who has not been educated in the faith would be as confused as I am in what you just stated. If that’s the case then those are no doubt JINO.
This reinforces what you stated several times. Jewish education is more important now then ever before.
Listen don’t feel bad we have our share of uninformed Catholics. We have the Lilys and the Poinsettias the show up for Mass on Easter and Christmas. Then of course the Cafateria Catholics, they pick and choose those articles of faith they like and can live by and pass over the rest.
Comment by rongrand — September 7, 2009 @ 2:10 am