“An anti-Semite used to mean a man who hated Jews.
Now it means a man who is hated by Jews.”– Joe Sobran
In
his novel 1984 George Orwell invented the expression
“newspeak” to describe the ambiguous or deliberately misleading use of language
to make political propaganda and narrow the “thought options” of those who are
on the receiving end. In the context of today’s political discourse, or what
passes for the same, it would be interesting to know what George would think of
the saturation use of “anti-Semitism” as something like a tactical discussion
stopper, employed to end all dispute while also condemning those accused of the
crime as somehow outside the pale, monsters who are consigned forever to
derision and obscurity.
The
Israelis and, to be sure, many diaspora Jews know exactly how the expression
has been weaponized. Former Israeli Minister Shulamit Aloni explained how it is done“Anti-Semitic”…”its
a trick, we always use it.”
If
one were to read the U.S. mainstream media, reflective as it nearly always is
of a certain institutional Jewish viewpoint, one would think that there has
been a dramatic increase in
anti-Semitism worldwide, but that claim is incorrect. What has been taking
place is not hatred of Jews but rather a confluence of two factors. First is
the undeniable fact that Israel has been behaving particularly badly, even by
its admittedly low standards. Its slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza has been
unusually observable in spite of media attempts to avoid mentioning it, plus
its support of terrorists in Syria and attacks on that country have also raised
questions about the intentions of the kleptocratic regime in Tel Aviv, which is
currently pushing for an attack on Iran. That all means that the perception of
Israel, which boasts that it is the exclusively Jewish state, inevitably raises
questions about the international Jewish community that provides much of its
support. But the shift in perception is driven by Israeli behavior, not by Jews
as an ethnicity or a religion.
Second,
the alleged increase in anti-Semitic incidents is largely fueled by how those
incidents are defined. Israel and its friends have worked hard to broaden the
parameters of the discussion, making any criticism of Israel or its activities
either a hate crime or ipso facto an anti-Semitic incident. The U.S. State
Department’s working definition of
anti-Semitism includes “…the targeting of the state of Israel” and it warns
that anti-Semitism is a criminal offense. Recent legislation in Washington and
also in Europe has criminalized hitherto legal and non-violent efforts to
pressure Israel regarding its inhumanity vis-à-vis the Palestinians. Legitimate
criticism of Israel thereby becomes both anti-Semitism and criminal, increasing
the count of so-called anti-Semitic incidents. That means that the numbers
inevitably go up, providing fodder to validate a repressive response.
One
might add that Hollywood, the mainstream media and academia have contributed to
the allegations regarding surging anti-Semitism, relentlessly unleashing a
torrent of material rooting out alleged anti-Semites and so-called holocaust
deniers, while simultaneously heaping praise on Israel and its achievements.
Professor of Holocaust Studies Deborah Lipstadt has written a book Anti-Semitism: Here and Now about
what she regards as the new anti-Semitism, supporting her belief that
it is getting markedly worse in both Europe and the U.S. There is also a movie
about her confrontation with holocaust critic David Irving called Denial.
All of the media exposure of so-called anti-Semitism has a political objective,
whether intended or not, which is to insulate Israel itself from any criticism
and to create for all Jews the status of perpetual victimhood which permits
many in the diaspora to unflinchingly support a foreign country against the
interests of the nations where they were born, raised and made their fortunes.
That is called dual loyalty and, in spite of frequent denials from
Israel-apologists, it clearly exists for many American Jews who are passionate
about the Jewish state, including members of the Trump Administration Jason
Greenblatt, David Friedman and Jared Kushner.
In
the past week, a newly elected member of congress has been derided, shunned and
then forced to both recant and apologize for having said something that is
manifestly true: that Jewish money corrupts the American political system to
favor Israel. The controversy erupted after House minority leader Republican
Kevin McCarthy said he would initiate investigations of two Muslim
congresswomen, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, over
their criticisms of Israel. McCarthy called for the two to be denounced by the
Democratic Party as anti-Semites after Tlaib had said that
the sponsors of recent legislation intended to benefit Israel by limiting free
speech “…forgot what country they represent. This is the U.S. where boycotting
is a right and part of our historical fight for freedom and equality. Maybe a
refresher on our U.S. Constitution is in order, then get back to opening up our
government instead of taking our rights away.”
Indeed,
Tlaib had a point as the Congressional Israel boosters have long since
forgotten that they are supposed to uphold the Constitution of the United
States while also promoting the interests of their constituents, not those of a
country seven thousand miles away. Glenn Greenwald of the Intercept responded to
the news of the McCarthy threat with a tweet “It’s stunning how much time US
political leaders spend defending a foreign nation even if it means attacking
free speech rights of Americans.” Ilhan Omar then tweeted her own pithy
rejoinder to Greenwald on Sunday February 10th:
“It’s all about the Benjamins, baby!” which was in reference to the Founder
Benjamin Franklin’s portrait on hundred-dollar bills. Her comment was almost
immediately interpreted as meaning that she was accusing McCarthy of being
bought by Jews. She followed up on a question about who was doing the buying
she tweeted “AIPAC,” an elaboration that unleashed something like an
anti-Semitism shit storm in her direction.
It
was manufactured outrage, with political leaders from both parties latching on
to a media frenzy to score points against each other. Even though it is
perfectly legitimate for a Congresswoman on the Foreign Affairs Committee to
challenge what AIPAC does and where its money comes from, Speaker of the House
Nancy Pelosi complained that Omar’s “use of anti-Semitic tropes and prejudicial
accusations about Israel’s supporters” was “deeply offensive.” Chelsea
Clinton accused Omar of
“trafficking in anti-Semitism.” President Donald Trump, who has admitted that
his Mideast policy is intended to serve Israeli rather than U.S. interests,
also jumped in, saying “I think she should either resign from congress or she
should certainly resign from the House Foreign Affairs Committee.”
Ilhan
Omar quickly understood that she had touched a live wire, surrendered, and
recanted. She apologized by
Monday afternoon, 18 hours after her original tweet, saying “Anti-Semitism is
real and I am grateful for Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating me on
the painful history of anti-Semitic tropes. My intention is never to offend my
constituents or Jewish Americans as a whole. We have to always be willing to
step back and think through criticism, just as I expect people to hear me when
others attack me for my identity. This is why I unequivocally apologize.” But
she also bravely wrote “At the same time, I reaffirm the problematic role of
lobbyists in our politics, whether it be AIPAC, the NRA or the fossil fuel
industry. It’s gone on too long and we must be willing to address it.”
Pelosi
approved of the apology. Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat from Minnesota who
is running for president in 2020, chimed in to make sure that everyone knew how
much she loves Israel, saying “I’m glad she apologized. That was the right
thing to do. There is just no room for those kinds of words. I think Israel is
our beacon of democracy. I’ve been a strong supporter of Israel and that will
never change.”
Two
days later, a motion sponsored
by Congressman Lee Zeldin of New York passed by a 424 to 0 vote. It was
specifically intended to serve as a rebuke to Omar. It stated that “it
is in the national security interest of the United States to combat
anti-Semitism around the world because…there has been a significant amount of
anti-Semitic and anti-Israel hatred that must be most strongly condemned.”
Congressional
votes professing love for Israel notwithstanding, the fact is that there is
a massive,
generously funded effort to corrupt America’s government in favor of Israel. It
is euphemistically called the Israel Lobby even though it is overwhelmingly
Jewish and it boasts fairly openly of its power when talking with its closest
friends about how its money influences the
decisions made on Capitol Hill and in the White House. Its combined budget
exceeds one billion dollars per year and it includes lobbying powerhouses like
the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) which alone had $229 million in income in
2017, supporting more than 200 employees. It exists only to promote Israeli
interests on Capitol Hill and throughout the United States with an army of
lobbyists and its activities include using questionably legal all expenses paid
“orientation” trips to Israel for all new congressmen and spouses.
McCarthy
and the other stooges in Congress deliberately sought to frame the argument in
terms of Ilhan Omar having claimed that he personally was receiving money from
pro-Israel sources and that money influenced his voting. Well, the fact is that
such activity does take place and was documented three years ago by the
respected Foreign Policy Journal,
which published a piece entitled “The Best Congress AIPAC can Buy” as well as
more recently in an al-Jazeera investigative expose using a concealed
camera.
And
Kevin McCarthy does indeed receive money from Israel PACs – $33,200 in 2018.
The amount individual congressmen receive is dependent on their actual or
potential value to Israel. Completely corrupt and enthusiastically pro-Israel
Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey received $548,507 in 2018.
In the House, Beto O’Rourke of Texas received $226,690. The numbers do not include
individual contributions of under $200, which are encouraged by AIPAC and can
be considerable. In general, congressmen currently receive over $23,000 on averagefrom
the major pro-Israel organizations while Senators get $77,000.
But,
of course, direct donations of money are not the whole story. If a congressman
is unfriendly to Israel, money moves in the other direction, towards funding an
opponent when re-election is coming up. Former Rep. Brian Bard has observed that “Any
member of Congress knows that AIPAC is associated indirectly with significant
amounts of campaign spending if you’re with them, and significant amounts
against you if you’re not with them.” Lara Friedman, who has worked on the Hill
for 15 years on Israel/Palestine, notes how congressmen
and staffs of “both parties told me over and over that they agreed with me but
didn’t dare say so publicly for fear of repercussions from AIPAC.”
A good example of
how it all worked involves one honest congressman, Walter Jones of North
Carolina, who recently passed away. In 2014, “Wall Street billionaires,
financial industry lobbyists, and neoconservative hawks” tried to unseat Jones
by bankrolling his primary
opponent. The “dark money” intended to defeat him came from a
PAC called “The Emergency Committee for Israel,” headed by leading
neoconservative Bill Kristol. Jones’ war views, including avoiding a war with
Iran, were clearly perceived as anti-Israel.
And
one should also consider contributions directly to the political parties.
Israeli/U.S. dual nationals Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban are the largest
single donors to the GOP and to the Democrats, having contributed $82 million and $8,780,000respectively
in the 2016 presidential campaign. Both have indicated openly that Israel is
their top priority.
If
they have demonstrated fealty to Israel while in office, many Congressmen also
find that loyalty pays off after retirement from government with richly
remunerated second careers in Jewish dominated industries, like financial
services or the media. And there are hundreds of Jewish organizations that
contribute to Israel as charities, even though the money frequently goes to
fund illegal activity, including the settlements. Money also is used to buy
newspapers and media outlets which then adhere to a pro-Israel line, or, where
that does not work, to buy advertising that is conditional on being friendly to
Israel. So the bottom line is indeed “the Benjamins” and the corruption that
they buy.
Karen
Pollock of the Holocaust Education Trust said in
January that “One person questioning the truth of the Holocaust is one too
many.” That is nonsense. Any, and all, historical events should be questioned
regularly, a principle that is particular true regarding developments that
carry a lot of emotional baggage. The Israel Lobby would have all Americans
believe that any criticism of Israel is motivated by historic hatred of Jews
and is therefore anti-Semitism. Don’t believe it. When the AIPAC crowd screams
that linking Jews and money is a classic anti-Semitic trope respond by pointing
out that Jews and money are very much in play in the corruption of congress and
the media over Israel. Terrible things are being done in the Middle East in the
name of Jews and of Israel and it all comes down to those Benjamins and the
silence they buy by accusing all critics of anti-Semitism. Just recall what the Israeli minister
admitted, “It’s a trick, we always use it.”
