AlterPolitics New Post

WATCH: ADL’s Abe Foxman Exposed In Television Interview

by on Friday, October 29, 2010 at 12:58 pm EDT in Middle East, Politics, World

Ha’aretz writer David Sheen interviews the Anti-Defamation League’s Abe Foxman in this 53 minute video clip (h/t Max Blumenthal), and Foxman literally flips his wig over what would seem to be softball questions.

Sheen asks the ADL’s National Director about many topics, including: his bestowing Rupert Murdoch with the ADL Award, his denunciation of PETA, his condemnation of the proposed Islamic community center in downtown Manhattan, his recent blacklisting of human rights groups (proclaiming them to be anti-Israel), his position on Breaking the Silence (a group of Israeli soldiers who came forward and admitted to needlessly destroying homes, firing white phosphorous into populated areas in Gaza, amongst other war crimes); on why Israel Defense Minister Ehud Barak is allowed to compare Israel to an Apartheid state, yet ADL proclaims others who make the comparison to be anti-semitic, his position on the BDS movement, and many more.

Sheen poses each of his questions in a very conscientious, non-combative way giving Foxman the full floor to explain (if not clarify) himself to viewers who perhaps can’t comprehend ADL’s inconsistent, often incoherent, positions.  But Foxman — obviously unable to logically defend them himself — goes nuts, cutting the interviewer off repeatedly, accusing him of being selective in his questioning, and of trying to do a hit-job on him.  An ironic accusation, coming from Abe Foxman.

At one point, Sheen asked Foxman how he and ADL’s board formulates its positions, and Foxman quips, “That’s not your business! … It’s not your business how we do this.”

Considering how Abe Foxman has made a highly rewarding career for himself by tarnishing the reputations of honorable, peace-loving, human-rights activists, I’d say it is everyone’s business how ADL formulates its positions.

Meanwhile, Abe Foxman’s vitriolic screeds continue to get top placement at the Huffington Post.  Here is his latest post — released just yesterday — lashing out at Jimmy Carter, once again;  this time for calling Gaza a ‘prison’.  Why Arianna continues to give this uber-neo-con a platform to demagogue honorable Progressives who sympathize with the plight of the Palestinian people is beyond me.  Perhaps even the Left needs its own ‘Glenn Beck’ equivalent to help fuel the traffic…

Here’s the David Sheen interview.



Ha’aretz: E.U. Presidency Document Calls For Division Of Jerusalem & Return To 1967 Borders

by on Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 5:34 pm EDT in Middle East, World

The pressure continues to mount on the far-right Likudnik government in Israel.  Ha’aretz has just obtained a copy of a document, drafted by the European Union Presidency, which effectively backs a unilateral Palestinian declaration of statehood, based on the 1967 borders.  The document follows:



The world is clearly getting sick and tired of Netanyahu’s refusal to abandon his expansionist/ethnic cleansing policies.  Just last week U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.S. Special Envoy George J. Mitchell simultaneously responded to Netanyahu’s claim that he had suspended new settlements in Judea and Sumeria, by conveying it was not enough, and then evoking the 1967 lines as the legal borders:

They did not bless the Israeli non-freeze, explaining it fell short and that they expected more, and that “America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. […]”

But the new language came in Secretary Clinton’s description of what American expects the outcome of negotiations to be – for an “independent and viable [Palestinian] state based on the 1967 lines”. Senator Mitchell quoted Clinton in repeating the call for a Palestinian state “based on the 67 lines.”

Every conflict and every situation has its own lingua franca. In the Israeli-Palestinian context, a state based on the 67 lines is the dog-whistle for what constitutes a real, no-B.S. two-state outcome. It is also language that the US has conspicuously avoided using – avoided that is until today.

I have to wonder if these calls — first by the U.S. and then by the E.U. — for two independent states along the 1967 borders (with East Jerusalem as a Palestinian capital), wasn’t coordinated so that it would be received by the Netanyahu government as a subtle threat that the tide is turning against his Zionist vision of a greater Israel.  Let’s hope the pressure continues …

Ha’aretz Journalist, Gideon Levy: “Israel Is Addicted To The Occupation”

by on Monday, November 16, 2009 at 1:59 pm EDT in Middle East, Politics, World

Israel’s most prominent journalist, Gideon Levy, follows up on his recent column — one where he blasted the U.S. for continuing to ‘suck up to Israel’ — with an interview on The Real News Network.  Here he describes Israel as a country “addicted to the occupation.”

He pleads with the U.S. to be a friend of Israel’s and save it from itself.  He considers the relationship between U.S. and Israel as “twisted and unprecedented” in the world.  “There is no country in the world that acts like Israel vis a vis the United States — vis a vis dependence on the United States.”

Israel is addicted to the occupation, because it benefits a lot from the occupation — economically, and politically, and above all, because it doesn’t pay any price for the occupation.  Israelis are living wonderfully, especially in the last years.  They are having a wonderful life, even quite secure life most of the times.  There’s no reason to change the status quo from the point of view of Israel.  It is very convenient.  There’s a total separation between Israel and its occupation.  Most of the Israelis have no idea what’s going on there, don’t also care about what’s going on there, have never been there — most of the Israelis.  And so why should they bother?  The occupation will continue…

Levy believes the U.S. Presidents “who were called friendly to Israel were the worst for Israel.”  He singles out George W. Bush as the very worst, “because in his spirit, Israel really had the full liberty to do whatever it wants — settlements, two wars, assassinations …”

Levy comments on the emergence of J Street — the new, left-leaning pro-Israel lobbying group (hoped by many to offer an alternative to the hard-right, extremely powerful AIPAC):

I know there is a change in the Jewish community in the United States, but it is too little, and too late.  Still the conservative Jewish establishment is so powerful, and I don’t see signs that it is losing its power.  J Street is a wonderful initiative, very promising, but still the power of AIPAC, of the Anti-Defamation League, and other organizations is still very very strong.  And I don’t think it’s a question of months or years that this will change dramatically.

Israel is so much not willing to make peace that someone has to push Israel, and the only actor who can push Israel is the United States.  This can only happen with American pressure.  It will never come from inside Israel — no way.  Most Israelis are passive, couldn’t care less, …

The interview is over seven minutes long — definitely worth viewing:



The second part of the interview with Gideon Levy was just released by The Real News Network.

Levy says:

There is no peace process.  It’s a joke.  There is no peace process, there is some games going on — masquerades — but not a real peace process, because no one has the intention of talking to implement major steps.  Israel wants negotiations, because when negotiations are on the pressure on Israel is much smaller, and something is going on, and they are meeting once in two weeks, and then there is a big peace conference, without paying any price.  Why not?  You only gain.  For Israel the negotiations are a win-win situation, because no one intends to implement anything, and we saw it now for 16 years — ever since Oslo.  […]

This is the time to put an end to all negotiations, because there is no room for negotiations, because the solution is very clear to everybody.  This is the terrible mistake that the Obama Administration did — or they fell into this trap.  […]

The alternative to the two-state solution is the one-state solution — which is not a good solution for the Palestinians — mainly for the Palestinians — because there is a big gap between the two societies.  And there will not be equality, and not be justice, and therefore at least in the first stage the Palestinians deserve their own state.  But I agree to what the PA officials say, that maybe we missed the train, maybe it is too late with almost half a million settlers in E. Jerusalem and the West Bank.  […]

Here’s the full second part of the interview: