American Aid to Israel: Is It Good For The Jews?

The Texas Mercury ^

[RCW2001]

American Aid to Israel:

Is It Good for the Jews?

 

by Derek Copold

Some years ago a Jewish friend of mine met a man who worked for AIPAC, a political action committee that lobbies on behalf of the State of Israel. Judging by my friend’s reaction to him, I gathered that he was quite the salesman. The AIPAC worker had talked my friend into contributing, and that same friend, knowing my father was Jewish, thought I too might be interested. I wasn’t.

My friend was a bit put out when I declined the oppoturnity, and I felt bad at the time, having brought him down a bit. But the fact of the matter was that I didn’t, and still don’t, care for the idea of Americans lobbying our government for the purpose of sending tax money to a foreign power, even an ostensibly friendly one like Israel.

This is not to imply that my friend bore within him the seeds of disloyalty. Quite the opposite. A Vietnam veteran, he proudly served 12 years in the armed forces. Even if I disagree with his political choice, it doesn’t change the fact that he loves his country through and through.

His evident discomfort, though, raised a question. Are AIPAC and other Israel-boosting organizations in the United States doing any good when they help procure billions and billions of dollars of free aid for the Jewish State? And I ask this, not so much in relation to the United States, but rather to Israel itself, and to Jews in general.

Before answering this question, allow me to also note a twist in this situation. Most of Israel’s supporters in America hail from the political Right. Ironically, many of the people who denounce government money as a corrupting influence will, in almost the same breath, demand that Israel continue to receive her cut. So which is it? Are government subsidies bad, as is claimed for welfare recipients, charities and corporations, or are they good, as is argued for Israel?

The evidence suggests the former. Before the late 1960s, Israel was for the most part a self-sufficient country. Despite being surrounded by hostile forces, she was able to take care of herself without relying on any other power for direct aid. This status changed once she began to accept American aid. As a result of this ‘free’ money’, the Jewish State has become an American dependency. The once proud Zionist nation has been reduced to relying on the charity of Washington.

The number of visits Israel’s Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, has made to Washington in the last year alone attests to Israel’s servile status. Many of Israel’s boosters proudly point to Ariel Sharon’s four White House visits as a sign of favor, an accomplishment. But how can any supposedly independent country take heart in the fact that their leader has been forced to show up at another nation’s doorstep, hat in hand, humbly asking permission to do what it believes it must do to survive?  Far from securing Israel's independence, America's aid has effectively destroyed it.

So much for helping Israel. But what about the Jews in general and American Jews in particular? Is America’s aid to Israel good for the Jews?

Again, the answer is not encouraging. American aid to Israel has been cited as a factor that led to the 9/11 massacre. For the moment, set aside the question of whether this allegation is true or not; simply note that it is there. Note also, that most Jews, understandably, take severe umbrage with it, and have gone to extraordinary lengths to rebut it. Now whether or not they are correct, their efforts, including the often inaccurate cries of anti-Semitism, have raised questions (most of which remain unspoken) amongst their non-Jewish compatriots about whose interests the Jews are really serving.

To be sure, these Jews believe completely and sincerely that the United States’ interests coincide with Israel’s, and though I question their logic, I don’t doubt their loyalty. 

Yet the question is out there, and having that question of ‘dual loyalty’, which is inseparably tied to Israel's American aid, remain out there is deleterious to the Jews. If Israel had never accepted American largesse and remained self-sufficient, no one could have raised this question. Either there would be no terrorism directed against America, as Israel’s critics believe would happen, or if it did, there would be no aid for those critics to blame.

So if this aid is as harmful as I claim it to be, why do Israel and her friends insist on continuing it? For the same reason a heroine addict keeps looking for smack, even after he realizes that it’s killing him. Like that addict, Israel will do everything and anything to maintain a steady supply, and just like any junkie, she will never truly control her own destiny as long as she allows herself to be injected with billions of dollars of American aid.

Unfortunately, her American friends, particularly those on the Right, have suspended their better judgment, and they refuse to address this problem in any kind of an honest manner, preferring instead to revel in alternating emotions of triumphalism and self-pity. Meanwhile, the object of their affections becomes more and more enervated by their 'help.'

[SJackson]

I personally endorse cutting all aid to Israel and redirecting it to the Palestinians as repatriation for the Jewish atrocities of the last 37 years...

Write your Congressman and Senator with those ideas. I'm sure they'll listen. Your opinion is important. The foreign aid appropriation usually passes only by a small margin, 7-1, 8-1. It's AIPAC, lobbying for aid to Egypt that does it.

[SJackson]

So you endorse giving billions of dollars of American taxpayer money to a "people" (the Palestinians) who celebrated the fact that thousands of Americans citizens died horrible deaths on 9/11.

He writes for the Mercury (just kidding), it's satire. If not, it's pretty ugly, in view of his "anti-foreign aid" stance, hypocritical or, by his standards anti_American would also be accurate.

[Lent]

I personally endorse cutting all aid to Israel and redirecting it to the Palestinians as repatriation for the Jewish atrocities of the last 37 years...

Your palestinian heroes love the U.S.:

Palestinians love Bin Laden

A Compendium Of Palestinian Authority Hatred Of America: 1997 And 2001

Itamar Marcus and Ruthie Blum September 14, 2001

Palestinian Media Watch Special Bulletin

Introduction

For years, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has actively promoted hatred of the United States among its people. The recurring theme: the US is an imperialist, colonialist usurper of land and human rights, enemy of the Arab world, killer of Arab children, and supporter of Israel. Yasser Arafat has repeatedly referred to Saddam Hussein as his "brother" and has linked an Iraq victory over the US to a Palestinian victory over Israel. During a period of US-Iraq tension, the editor of the PA official daily wrote that America would pay for its war against Iraq with "45,000 bodies of American soldiers [who] will return to the US like airmail .The Arab mothers will not be the only ones crying..." The PA Mufti has called for Allah [god] to destroy America and "paint the White House black." [See compendium below for full quotes and sources.]

This active antipathy to the US espoused and preached by the PA leadership has created a Palestinian society imbued with hatred toward America. It is in this atmosphere that Palestinians took to the streets in spontaneous celebration of the horrific terrorist attacks in New York and Washington.

Quickly realizing that there could be nothing more odious to television viewers in democracies than the sight of Palestinian festivities over the deaths of Americans, the PA took two measures. First, PA Minister of Information Yasser Abed Rabbo demanded of foreign bureau chiefs that they cease broadcasting the celebrations, and threatened the lives of their staff. Second, they orchestrated public displays of sympathy for America. Photos of Arafat donating blood appeared in the press, alongside photos of Palestinian children carrying signs (in English) expressing solidarity with "fellow" victims of terrorism.

During the weeks prior to the attacks, PMW noticed an increase in the anti-American vitriol and incitement appearing in the PA press, including calls to attack the US.

The following selections are from 1997 - when PMW first began monitoring the Palestinian media on this topic - and from 2001, prior to the attack. This compilation demonstrates the consistency of Palestinian ideology.

Part 1: 1997

1. PA Mufti calls for destruction of America

Arafat appointed Mufti of Palestine has called on Allah (God) to destroy America, which is controlled by Zionist Jews "Oh, Allah, destroy America as it is controlled by Zionist Jews...Allah will avenge, in the name of his Prophet, the colonialist settlers who are the descendents of monkeys and pigs... "

Ikrima Sabri, the Mufti of the Palestinian Authority, (from weekly sermon in the Al-Aksa Mosque in Jerusalem). Voice of Palestine, July 11, 1997.

2. The U.S. and Israel are the source of terrorism in the world. Palestinian rejection of the US list of terrorist organizations, which included Islamic and Palestinian organizations..

"We reject the definition of Palestinian and Islamic organizations as terrorist organizations [by the U.S.]. The U.S. and Israel are the source of terrorism in the world. "

Sheik Hamed Al-Bitawi, Head of the Palestine Association of Religious Scholars [and the PA's appointed Manager of the Nablus Municipal Religious Courts] Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, 10.11.97

3. The US, bloodsuckers and barbaric culture will disappear from history. History will forget the United States, but will remember Iraq and Palestine.

"...History does not remember the United States, but it remembers Iraq, the cradle of civilization, and Palestine, the cradle of religions. History remembers every piece of Arab land, because it is the bosom of human civilization. On the other hand, the murderers of humanity, the creators of the barbaric culture and the bloodsuckers of nations, are doomed to death and destined to shrink to a microscopic size, like Micronesia. " [Hafez Al-Barghuthi, editor, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 15, 1997]

MORE HATRED BY PALESTINIANS

[SJackson]

It's pretty ugly......and as you mentioned, monstrously hypocritical.

Go with ugly. Look at his response to GrampaDave in 15, Fume and fuss about how vile I am. The Goebbelsque lies about Jewish victim hood have turned a lot of people against your country and religion. I don’t know GrampaDave, I haven’t seen him on Israel threads, and that’s what RCW does, I don’t think he’d deny it. Suddenly, Goebbelesque?

Ugly works as a polite description. side2, side3, whatever.

[GROUCHOTWO]

I am still waiting for veronica to answer me regarding the US favoring Ireland versus Israel.

There are no F-16s being sent to Ireland; there have been no monies allotted by Congress for museums dedicated to the Irish famine and there are no Irish Political Action Committees devoted to influencing city or state elections.

When are the Zionists going to start minding their own business and stop trying to screw up the US?

[rmlew]

When are the Zionists going to start minding their own business and stop trying to screw up the US?

Who are these "Zionists"?

In case you don't get it, leftists are anti-Zionist and cause more damage to Israel than to the US.

[Phil V.]

Principled, Catspaw . . . In this thread you asked . . .

by Catspaw . . . 

Please define "skinhead" in the context you've used it. 

Please define your acronym "IFC."

by Principled . . . 

BTW what is IFC? And what's with the questions about the title of an article?

Clues to the answesr to your questions are to be found in THIS thread.

Yo, Lent! What do you make of Cheney's upcoming trip to schmooze th' Saudis?

[Lent]

Yo, Lent! What do you make of Cheney's upcoming trip to schmooze th' Saudis?

When has the West not been schmoozing the Saudis? Of course Sharon has been talking about a chit chat with the Saudis and their peace plan. Who knows, maybe something there.

[Catspaw]

Please define "skinhead" in the context you've used it.

Please define your acronym "IFC."

No, Phil V., I want YOU to define these terms, and with great specificity.

I await your answer with bated breath.

[Phil V.]

Yoo hoo, Phil V.--you may want to revise that ping list. You're pinging at least two banned Freepers.

Inasmuch as you are current on who's "in" and who's "out" there is virtually zero chance that you truly are ignorant of the meaning of the acronym, IFC. Further, your detailed knowledge of the "disappeared" strongly implies that you have contextual familiarity with the posting activities of those who disappear and those who dance gleefully every time effective debate is silenced.

Your questions are posed not to enlighten but, rather, to bate, to lure, to coax ME onto a path that leads to oblivion. Piss off.

[Catspaw]

Your questions are posed not to enlighten but, rather, to bate, to lure, to coax ME onto a path that leads to oblivion. Piss off.

But Phil V., you never did define the term "skinhead" when used in the context of the supporters of Israel, now have you?

Cowardice does not become you, nor does a foul mouth.

[veronica]

What do you make of Cheney's upcoming trip to schmooze th' Saudis?

I'm for it, since it's all being done to make sure they keep their traps shut while we plan the attack on Iraq. (-:

[veronica]

I am still waiting for veronica to answer me regarding the US favoring Ireland versus Israel.

What are you, an Ireland Firster? You don't like it here move there.

[veronica]

Have turned a lot of people against your country and religion....

Anti-Semitism and Jewhating was around long before there was an Israel. Israel is just the excuse du jour for the sickies.

[GROUCHOTWO]

Hoho!
Veronica says I should move to Ireland!
It would be just my luck to find that Israel was also busy over there dunning their taxpayers for museum monies,etc. or funding PACs to influence elections.

[Phil V.]

But Phil V., you never did define the term "skinhead" when used in the context of the supporters of Israel, now have you?

True, I have not defined the term "skinhead" when used in the context of the supporters of Israel.

And if I WERE to define "skinhead" it most definitely WOULD NOT be in the context of the supporters of Israel.

If I were to list the names of the FreeRepublic posters who might be fairly accused of using "skinhead" tactics to silence BOTH SIDES of Middle East debate I might include Veronica, Lent, BenF, dennisw. But I'd be risking my own FreeperLife if I were to call any fellow Freeper a "skinhead" for running around like a pack of "skinheads" "assassinating" other Freepers. So I will not to that.

But let me be absolutely clear. Energetic support of Israel IS NOT a "skinhead" activity.

Squelching honest debate is. Stinking up certain threads with border-line hate speech IS a "skinhead" tactic - decent people leave the room. Character assassination is a "skinhead" activity. It is a sad but simple FACT that many of FreeRepublic's most avid supporters of Israel use "skinhead" tactics to poison reasoned Middle East conversations. They reflect poorly of FreeRepublic. They reflect poorly on Israel. They are a simple "cyber reality". Sad.

So, please, stop stamping your foot and demanding that I define "skinhead". I will not.

[UbIwerks]

Squelching honest debate is. Stinking up certain threads with border-line hate speech IS a "skinhead" tactic - decent people leave the room. Character assassination is a "skinhead" activity. It is a sad but simple FACT that many of FreeRepublic's most avid supporters of Israel use "skinhead" tactics to poison reasoned Middle East conversations. They reflect poorly of FreeRepublic. They reflect poorly on Israel. They are a simple "cyber reality". Sad. So, please, stop stamping your foot and demanding that I define "skinhead". I will not.

Phil's tactic of relating supporters of Israel to Nazi skinheads (while he despises the Jewish state), is a tactic out of Saul Alinsky where you impute to your opponents the odious things that you're doing.

For anti-Semites to apply the term skinhead to defenders of justice and the Jewish state is the height of arrogance, Alinsky style.

[Phil V.]

Phil's tactic of relating supporters of Israel to Nazi skinheads (while he despises the Jewish state . . . For anti-Semites to apply . . .

Supporters of Israel ARE NOT skinheads.

I support Israel . . . even to the extent of being willing to absorb the "skinhead" tactic of slanderous, inflammatory and false characterizations such as "anti-Semite" for the worthy activity of saying, "Israel, my friend, you are wrong".

Intolerance for criticism IS one of the markers of a skinhead.