With "Friends" Like Israel...

“Israel has the right to defend itself against rock-throwing Palestinian punks using any means necessary.” - Some douchebag American pundit.

The American response to Israel’s deadly commando raid on the “freedom flotilla” in international waters has been predictably uniform. Words of approbation can be found everywhere from the business press, to Fox News and MSNBC, to Congress, and to the American public in general. Although none of this is surprising, the blind allegiance that many Americans pledge to Israel never ceases to amaze me. No government—including America’s own—receives as many apologias as Israel’s from Americans.

Of course, the United States has a pretty effective propaganda system for precluding and stifling substantive debate on critical issues. Foreign policy debates generally focus on whether a policy is “worth it” from a cost-benefit perspective. Questions regarding the rightness of the policy are rendered unnecessary by the media’s unsaid assumption that whatever we do is right from a moral standpoint. News broadcasts and opinion pieces reflect this practice. During the run up to the Iraq war, Americans who were not so enthusiastic about waging an unjust and foolish war were the targets of derisive attacks in the media. The Neoconservative bastion Fox News set the tone for the war coverage, with its partisan pundits launching into fascistic tirades against the anti-war Left, calling them “un-American” and “traitors.” Bill O’Reilly declared that while he respected the people’s right to free speech, once the war started he expected everyone “to shut up” and fall in line. On O’Reilly’s own network, token liberal Alan Colmes did just that.

A similar scene plays out with respect to Israeli actions in the international arena, but the spectrum of debate is even narrower than discussions on U.S. foreign policy. Last week’s flotilla raid provides an instructive example. The flotilla was carrying humanitarian aid with the stated objective of defying the Israeli-Egyptian naval blockade of Gaza. As most Americans do not know, the blockade has been condemned throughout the world, by the United Nations, by human rights groups, by the European Union, and scores of others for contributing to a humanitarian crisis in which nearly three-quarters of Gazans live on less than $1 a day. As the Jewish international jurist Richard Goldstone said in the famed Goldstone Report on Israel’s 2008-2009 siege on Gaza,

“Israeli acts that deprive Palestinians in the Gaza Strip of their means of subsistence, employment, housing and water, that deny their freedom of movement and their right to leave and enter their own country, that limit their rights to access a court of law and an effective remedy, could lead a competent court to find that the crime of persecution, a crime against humanity, has been committed.”

Goldstone’s report was overwhelming condemned by the U.S. Congress, owing to our elected officials’ compulsive need to support Israel always no matter what.

Take Senator Scott Brown (R – Massachusetts). This guy’s been in Washington for just a few months and already he’s got the standard position on Israel down pat. Here are some selected remarks from Brown’s speech to dinner sponsored by the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) as quoted by the Boston Globe:

“I don’t need polling or political strategists to help define a nuanced stance on Israel,” Brown said, according to a copy of his prepared remarks. “We are engaged in a worldwide struggle against radical, violent jihad. It is the defining issue of our time. Our best friends and the strongest allies in this fight are in the State of Israel.”

“Let’s remember—Israel is our ally. Israel is a democracy,” Brown added. “Hamas is a terrorist group with clear and genuine intentions of destroying Israel’s way of life.”

[…]

“[T]he story of Israel made a distinct impression on me at a young age.”

[…]

“Their ability to maintain their identity and culture against enormous obstacles mirrors America’s own struggle for independence.”

[…]

“Now I know I am still the new guy on the block, with a little more than 100 days in the Senate under my belt, but I have placed U.S.—Israeli security as one of the most significant and highest priorities on my agenda.

[…]

“A safe, secure Israel, standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the United States and its allies is essential to the continued liberty of our nations,” Brown said. “Our fates have never been more intertwined. May God continue to bless Israel and the United States of America.”

What a pandering jackoff. Israeli security is one of your highest priorities, Senator Brown? Great. That’s what we need. Another U.S. Senator who puts Israel ahead of America. I think Joe Lieberman is doing enough of that for the other 99 Senators combined, so you don’t have to worry too much about it.

Brown also stated that the U.S. should commit itself to “unwavering support” of Israel. Vice President Joe Biden made similar comments when he visited Israel a couple of months ago, despite the fact that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu totally showed him up when the government announced the construction of 1,600 settlement units in disputed East Jerusalem while he was there.

Excuse me, but what the fuck? Why should the U.S. promise any country its unwavering support? The truth is “unwavering support” is code for “Do whatever you want.” That’s what “unwavering support” means, and this is why the U.S. can never act as a serious impartial arbiter of the Israel-Palestine conflict: because the referee has big money one on of the teams. Sure, presidents going back decades have said all kinds of wonderful things about the Palestinian right to self-determination, but they don’t mean it because they give Israel the nudge-nudge, wink-wink treatment: “What’s that? You’re adding even more illegal settlements? Well, we don’t like it, but here’s more military aid anyway. And we will definitely not let the U.N. Security Council pass any resolutions condemning you.” The whole thing is a charade and a farce.

The American media is happy to adopt the framework established by the American and Israel governments, which translates into blind support for Israel among the general population. What was the framework of debate in the press after the Israeli raid on the humanitarian convoy? Was there discussion about the legality of Israel’s attack on unarmed vessels in international waters? No. Was there discussion about the legality and human consequences of Israel’s blockade of Gaza? No. Was there discussion about how Gaza is a de facto Bantustan where poverty and malnourishment are rampant? No.

The central question that concerned the American media was whether or not the activists on the ship on which nine people were killed attacked the Israeli soldiers or not. Thankfully, the Israeli government released its own edited footage of the raid that appeared to show some of the activists resisting the commandos who were dropping in on their ship from helicopters in international waters. Footage shot by journalists and activists aboard the ships was confiscated by Israel and therefore unavailable for media review, but this did not prevent the predictable conclusions from being drawn. Perhaps if Somali pirates shot footage of their hijackings in the Indian Ocean, we would see similar scenes in which crews attempt to fend off the unwelcome intruders.

Interestingly, this all comes in the run up to the 43^rd anniversary of Israeli attack on the USS Liberty. During the Six-Day War between Israel and its Arab neighbors, on June 8^th 1967 a U.S. intelligence gathering ship was the target of an Israeli onslaught for about 90 minutes in broad daylight with the American flag flying high in international waters. Furthermore, the Israelis flew at least eight reconnaissance flights overhead and never once asked the ship to identify itself over radio before the attack. Thirty-four people were killed, with 171 wounded. Crewmen on the Liberty maintain to this day that the attack was deliberate due to the nature of the attack. Former CIA officer Ray McGovern agrees, suggesting the attack was carried out to prevent the Liberty from intercepting Israel communications revealing that it wanted to seize the Golan Heights from Syria, which it did the next day. If the information were obtained and reported back to Washington, the Johnson administration likely would have attempted to put the kibosh on the plan.

Or what about Israel spying on the U.S.? Spying on a friend is no way to treat an “unwavering” ally. Several times the Israel government and even AIPAC have been caught actively engaged in espionage activities against America:

Israel's spying on the U.S., however, is a matter of public record, and neither conspiracy nor theory is needed to present the evidence. When the FBI produces its annual report to Congress concerning "Foreign Economic Collection and Industrial Espionage," Israel and its intelligence services often feature prominently as a threat second only to China. In 2005 the FBI noted, for example, that Israel maintains "an active program to gather proprietary information within the United States." A key Israeli method, said the FBI report, is computer intrusion. In 1996, the Defense Intelligence Service, a branch of the Pentagon, issued a warning that "the collection of scientific intelligence in the United States [is] the third highest priority of Israeli Intelligence after information on its Arab neighbors and information on secret U.S. policies or decisions relating to Israel." In 1979, the Central Intelligence Agency produced a scathing survey of Israeli intelligence activities that targeted the U.S. government. Like any worthy spy service, Israeli intelligence early on employed wiretaps as an effective tool, according to the CIA report. In 1954, the U.S. Ambassador in Tel Aviv discovered in his office a hidden microphone "planted by the Israelis," and two years later telephone taps were found in the residence of the U.S. military attaché. In a telegram to Washington, the ambassador at the time cabled a warning: "Department must assume that all conversations [in] my office are known to the Israelis." The former ambassador to Qatar, Andrew Killgore, who also served as a foreign officer in Jerusalem and Beirut, told me Israeli taps of U.S. missions and embassies in the Middle East were part of a "standard operating procedure."

I’m so glad Scott Brown and the rest of the U.S. Congress—both Republicans and Democrats—regard Israel as a staunch ally. At least one of the sides in this “special relationship” thinks so.

I will leave you with this exchange from MSNBC between host (and disgraced former New York governor) Eltiot Spitzer and journalist Glenn Greenwald. While I think the word 'destroy' is used far too often to describe such debates, Greenwald totally wrecks Spitzer's shit. Good stuff. Too bad Greenwald will never be invited back to talk about this subject.

- Max