Is Debbie Wasserman Schultz a Self-Hating Jew? (Part Deux!)

DWS2.jpg
Debbie Wasserman Schultz
(Note: This is the second part of a blog post, and I'm picking up en media res. If you haven't read the first bit, you probably won't understand what follows. Read the first part here.)

Despite the ominous tone of Matt Brooks' letter, J Street isn't some kind of Arabic think-tank devoted to reestablishing the caliphate, and "Gaza 54" and the Goldstone Report are not its newsletters. J Street is an organization made up largely of Jews with deep Israeli roots who are trying to bring about a two-state solution in Palestine with an Israeli capitol safely and permanently at home in Jerusalem. The "Gaza 54" letter was a plea to President Obama to ensure that food and clean water made their way to civilians in the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the Hamas takeover and subsequent crackdown. The Goldstone Report came from a U.N. commission investigating human rights abuses in Gaza under Israeli occupation -- it was, in retrospect, a flawed study, but Brooks isn't accusing a Democratic congressman of writing it. He's backhandedly condemning the fellow for merely failing to denounce it, which the congressman in question had no reason to do.

I don't want to get too tangential. The point is: Matt Brooks is doing a very weird thing in his open letter to Debbie Wasserman Schultz. He is taking Wasserman Schultz's and her colleagues' very mainstream, very moderate views on Israel and reframing them as extremist, anti-Israel, and anti-Jewish. What's worse, he's pretending as though these designations are obvious, as though this is the way it's always been. Trying to get water to Palestinian civilians is necessarily anti-Israel! How could you think otherwise?! You want a two-state solution? You're a terrorist enabler!

This kind of historical smudging, issue-eliding, and subtle dissembling is common in partisan politics, but what's most disconcerting is how the razzle-dazzle Brooks is working on Wasserman Schultz is similar to the one many Republicans -- and Allen West in particular -- are now working upon the president for last week suggesting that a two-state solution ought to be pursued using Israel's 1967 borders as a template, modified with "mutually agreed" land swaps. Just like Brooks, with the help of the "conservative" media, is trying to reframe Wasserman Schultz's plea for bipartisanship as hyperpartisan brinksmanship and the efforts of liberals to create a peaceful solution to the Palestinian problem as attacks on the security of Israel, there's a significant campaign afoot to reframe Obama's statement as "the beginning of the end as we know it for the Jewish state," as West put it.

Yes, he really wrote those words -- even though Barack Obama's proposal was fundamentally identical to the one offered to Fatah by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in 2008. Ehud Olmert was indisputably a guy with problems, but surely Matt Brooks, Allen West, et al. don't think an excess of anti-Israeli sentiment was among them.

If I may hazard a guess: It's no secret that voters have short memories. A small group of people who despise the idea of a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict perceive the inking of the Hamas-Fatah deal, the ascension of Netanyahu's Likud Party in Israel, and American suspicion about Barack Obama's Muslim ancestry as a kind of perfect storm. They hope this is the time to make a one-state solution the new old wisdom; to make the desertion of the two-state solution seem like mere common sense -- something we'd have done decades ago, if only our brains hadn't been befoggled by terrorist-loving liberal peaceniks. Unfortunately, nobody's gotten around to explaining how a one-state solution is a solution at all.
Follow The Pulp on Facebook and on Twitter: @ThePulpBPB.
My Voice Nation Help
14 comments
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Joseph
Joseph

J-Street pro-Israel? Are you for real? Supporting Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish people (yeah, right). Will East-Jerusalem, the Temple, the Kotel, Simon the Righteous' Tomb, Samuel the Prophet's, Rachel's etc. etc. be part of this Jewish capital? No if you ask J-Street. Supporting Israel... Daniel Levy, one of the founders of this infamous organization, stated publicly that the creation of Israel was wrong. I wonder, how can one support Israel when one thinks it shouldn't have been there in the first place?The Goldstone report... this is a classic anti-Semitic fabrication of History, delivered, like many times before, by a Jew, to make everything Kosher. This report, invited by anti-Semites, is one of the newest versions of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and no one can claim neutrality about it. Any Politician playing with the idea that he/she can stand aside and not say anything about this ugly attack on Israel is actually supporting it.Gaza 54... a bunch of Mother Theresas... only wanted to make sure the poor Palestinians have enough water. Here's an alternative idea - how about writing the president and demanding him to do whatever he can, as Commander in Chief, to kick Hamas down and free the Palestinians? There is a reason for this reality. The local Al-Qaeda group is in control. How can anyone who calls herself pro-Israel endorse someone who purposely looking the wrong way?I don't think Ms. Wasserman-Shcultz is anti-Israel, not at all! I do think, however, that she is in a very uncomfortable position, having to back this hostile administration's relations with Israel. The fact is that she and her friends can change it from within. Doing so will make them the champions of Israel, and will make Ms. WS a modern version of Esther to the Jews. Failing to do anything will put them in another place. The time is for action. Put some substance behind your declarations of support for Israel. 

Virgil Starkwell
Virgil Starkwell

The Goldstone report was not "flawed" until Judge Goldstone was "terrorized" by the Jewish community in South Africa for 2 years. It got so bad that they threatened to prohibit him from attending his grandson's bar mitzvah.

Peddle your propaganda somewhere else.

The Goldstone report stands as an accurate historical record of the war crimes committed by both the Palestinians and the IDF in Operation Cast lead. Your allegations of anti- semitism fall on deaf ears.

Have you ever read, "The Boy who cried Wolf"? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Sarah
Sarah

No, it's not. If you call it an accurate historical record, you're the one spewing poisonous propaganda. Mr. Godstone, quite arrogantly, wanted to be fooled by his colleagues, and wanted to show how easy it is to break a solution to a  conflict. For that he payed with Israel's security. Shame on him!

derickwrite
derickwrite

Dear, Dear Sarah.  Sometimes the truth is extremely uncomfortable. Goldstone is, above all, an outstanding Judge of the Supreme Court. He never allowed the undercurrents in South Africa to take him off course. What a pity that the man is slandered just for telling the truth as he saw it.

Patti Lynn
Patti Lynn

Those citations regarding failing to denounce an unknown report are like a political  campaign of many, many years ago when the candidate was scathingly denounced as "...a practicing heterosexual."

Derickwrite
Derickwrite

They probably tried to say that he was just a fucker-around

nanook5
nanook5

shadow boxing bull****. we're supposed to believe these are "enemies of israel" when they refuse to allow palestine to unilaterally declare statehood?the occupation is going down and any israelis and americans that stand by it are going down with it.

SMDrPepper
SMDrPepper

To the right wingers out there I give you the words of Phillip J Fry," STOP BEING STUPID!"Look, we know you have this delusion about the return of JC, an that those Palestinians are just messing up your whole plan.  But you kids REALLY need to put down the D&D and get back with the real world.At this point, its ONLY the extreme right wing that refuse this, an your in the minority.  Israelis for the most part want this as well.  Because NOT doing it adds more fuel to the fire since that means they ARE an occupying force that refuse everything to the Palestinians.  Even food and water.  Pretty sure that will add even MORE hatred into the mix.But its only a matter of time before the right wing gets up in arms about gay marriage or rock and roll or whatever their election time rigamarole will be.  Anything to get the voters minds off how they are stripping the common mans of rights and money.Damn I wish this country was smarter.  

Derickwrite
Derickwrite

You sound like a 16 year old that has just finished a joint of grass. Go study history; not the propaganda; History. That may just jolt to to wake up. This is a real world that Israelis live in, not some Holywood movie.

SMDrPepper
SMDrPepper

Funny thing is I DO know the history.  Did you know it was the Israelis who first were terrorists?  As for the real world, they WANT this to be done, with the exception of the extreme right wing.  Really, you should actually understand something before you start randomly commenting upon it.  Otherwise you just look silly.

Derickwrite
Derickwrite

In modern time, Yes. However, their Father (Abram)(Abraham) had a Friend by name of Enlil who bombed and destroyed an area known as Sodom and Gamorah. That was the first recorded act of terrorising humans.At present the state of Israel is a fact. Thus the best solution will be a two state situation, possibly within a federal or confederate setup.

Derickwrite
Derickwrite

Anybody with a bit of sense will realize that a two state solution is the only practical solution. South Africa was on its way to a very successfull two sate solution within a confederacy, but the liberal haters of law and order (CIA of USA) murdered the archtect (Hendrik Verwoerd). The rest is history. Now the minority is systematically murdered by the majority and the world does not even bat an eye.

Now Trending

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

Loading...