Wednesday, July 15th | 1 Av 5786

Subscribe

Hakeem Jeffries Announces He Will Not House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) has come out against a bid to cut off US military aid to Israel, while calling for a “major reset” of Washington’s relationship with the Jewish state. In a “Dear Colleague” letter to fellow Democrats on Tuesday, Jeffries said he would vote against an amendment led by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), and co-sponsored by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), that would strip roughly $3.3 billion in annual military financing for Israel — while preserving $500 million for missile-defense programs such as Iron Dome — from the fiscal 2027 National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act. The House could vote on the measure as early as this week. Aligning himself with the ranking Democrats on the Appropriations and Foreign Affairs committees, Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) and Gregory Meeks (D-NY), as well as the advocacy group J Street, Jeffries called the proposal too sweeping. “As written, it is overly broad in that it prohibits or would limit the use of funds for longstanding initiatives related to humanitarian aid, refugee resettlement, peace-building and US Embassy operations,” he wrote, adding that the “so-called Massie amendment” would restrict US efforts to confront Hamas, Hezbollah “and other terrorist organizations in the region who are sworn enemies of both the United States and Israel.” Citing deep divisions within the party over Israel, Jeffries said leadership would not pressure members to follow his lead. “There are good faith reasons that will result in Members voting in a variety of different ways with respect to the amendment,” he wrote, noting that the caucus was not whipping the vote. At the same time, Jeffries argued that US policy toward the region “must change,” tying his call for a “major reset” to criticism of what he termed the “far-right Netanyahu government.” He wrote that America’s commitment to “Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish and democratic state and homeland for the Jewish people must remain ironclad,” while urging strong US support for the creation of an independent Palestinian state. Israeli governments have long rejected the establishment of a Palestinian state along Israel’s borders, warning that it would pose an existential security threat and leave major population centers exposed to attack. Jeffries also said Gaza must undergo “complete reconstruction and modernization” and that “Hamas must be disarmed and removed from power.” Jeffries further signaled that the next US-Israel aid agreement should require Israel to cover more of its own defense costs. The current 10-year memorandum of understanding, signed under President Barack Obama in 2016, provides Israel about $3.8 billion annually — $3.3 billion in military financing and $500 million for missile defense — and expires in 2028. “Israel has an advanced economy and is capable of paying for its own sophisticated weapons, as the Prime Minister recently acknowledged,” Jeffries wrote, adding that any future arrangement should mirror US defense agreements with other Western allies and “strictly adhere to our human rights laws and values.” His stance placed him between the two poles of a party increasingly split over Israel. Hours after his letter circulated, the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX), sent a competing letter urging Democrats to back the Massie amendment, and progressives including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said they would vote to cut the aid. Support for Israel among Democratic voters has fallen sharply during the war in Gaza. An Associated Press-NORC poll conducted in June found that 52 percent of Democrats say Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians, while a Pew Research Center survey found that roughly 80 percent of Democrats hold a negative view of Israel. In April, a majority of Senate Democrats — 40 of the caucus’s 47 members — voted for at least one of two resolutions to block certain arms sales to Israel, though the measures failed. Supporters of continued assistance say it preserves Israel’s qualitative military edge and bolsters a key US partner against Iran-backed groups, while critics want aid conditioned on Israeli policy changes, particularly over the conduct of the war in Gaza. The upcoming vote is expected to underscore the widening gap between the party’s pro-Israel wing and its growing bloc of aid critics. for Amendment to Strip Israel Aid

February 18, 2015 1:57 am

Words Matter: Why Obama Wants to Suppress the Truth on Terrorism and Iran

×

Error: Contact form not found.

avatar by Laura Fein

Opinion

President Barack Obama is under fire for failing to mention antisemitism when describing the Paris kosher supermarket attack during his interview with Vox magazine. Photo: White House.

With electrifying passion and fury, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls vehemently denounced anti-Semitism before the French National Assembly recently, offering a blistering reproach to his countrymen for showing insufficient “outrage” at the “unacceptable,” “intolerable,”and “shameful” targeting of Jews.

“History has taught us that the awakening of anti-Semitism is the symptom of a crisis for democracy and of a crisis for the Republic,” he exhorted. “There is a historical anti-Semitism that goes back centuries, but there is also a new anti-Semitism …against the backdrop of the loathing of the State of Israel, and which advocates hatred of the Jews and all the Jews. It has to be spelled out, the right words must be used to fight this unacceptable anti-Semitism.”

Spelling out the problem. Using the right words. Recognizing that loathing the State of Israel leads to violence against Jews and a crisis for democracy. When will we see such clarity from our own leaders?

Instead, as the worldwide incidence and incendiary power of threats to Jews rises, the see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, say-no-evil White House and State Department have descended into dissembling, obfuscation, and outright lies.

Why? Because, as anyone who can read a headline knows, the rise in anti-Semitism and terror is intimately connected with the spread of radical Islam in all its forms: ISIS, Al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, and the Ayatollahs of Iran. And for reasons only guessed at by others, the President affirmatively refuses to acknowledge this plain truth.

The Obama Administration has long suppressed all references to Islam in the context of terror or jihad. FBI, CIA, DHS, and DOD manuals have been rewritten, wiped of terminology deemed anathema to the President’s revisionist views of Islam’s role in inspiring terrorism. The result has been the absence of a coherent policy to stop these threats, and a surreal misuse of language, such as when the Fort Hood terror attack was mislabeled an instance of “workplace violence.”

The absurdity of this policy has become ever more obvious in recent months. In his creepily low-key reaction to video of an ally’s captive being burned alive in a cage, Obama would not identify the perpetrators as radical Islamists, referring to “whatever ideology they’re operating off of,” as though it has no name. Then last week, Obama created a media firestorm by referring to the Jewish Hypercacher victims as “a bunch of folks in a deli” shot at “randomly,” erasing both identity of the murdered and motive of the murderer.

He might have dialed back when so many in the media questioned his choice of words, but instead he doubled down, sending both the White House and State Department spokespersons into press briefings where they insulted our intelligence with their dishonest and illogical attempts to explain that no, it was not Jews who were targeted. “They were not all victims of one background or one nationality,” said Jen Psaki, as though the deceased’s shared Jewish heritage was irrelevant. Asked if this was anti-Jewish violence, she deferred to the French authorities, knowing that the French had long since recognized the Jew-hatred that motivated the attack. (Perhaps if she had seen the “Je Suis Juif” signs at the Paris march and across the media, she might have realized.)

Josh Earnest was no better, stating “There were people other than just Jews who were in that deli,” as if that held any relevance to the attacker’s ambition. As more Jews perish in targeted jihadi-fueled terror, including last weekend in Copenhagen, we can expect more fatuous squirming to pursue the impossible: explain events without identifying the role of radical Islam or Islamic anti-Semitism.

These deliberate attempts to mislead, mislabel, and mischaracterize events apply equally to the Administration’s treatment of Netanyahu’s planned address to Congress.  The White House’s nonsense objections on issues of protocol and timing (for example its claim to have been blindsided was revealed to be false) were calculated to divert attention from the core issue: the current U.S. courtship of Iran.

And what a courtship it has been. Promising little and doing less, Iran has managed to transform its nuclear program from internationally outlawed to legally recognized in a few short years, thanks to our President’s unwavering advocacy. With sanctions partially lifted, the goals of negotiations have drifted from broad elimination of Iran’s nuclear capability to narrow details of containment and breakout period. In his meticulous article in Mosaic, Michael Doran identifies Obama’s obscuring of his intent and evasion of “an honest debate [that] would force him to come clean with the American people” on his ideological commitment to detente with Iran.

The decision to invite Netanyahu is a belated effort by Congress to forcefully challenge the President’s spurious strategy, “whose grim results,” writes Doran, “are multiplying by the day.” Netanyahu’s voice will bring what Obama’s words lack: honesty, clarity, and an unshakeable commitment to the original goal of ending Iran’s military nuclear program. Netanyahu understands the existential threat a nuclear armed Iran poses not only to Israel but to all free nations, and he won’t hesitate to say so.

It is the content of that speech that the world needs to hear, and that the President so desperately wants to suppress.

Let us not fall for the specious, often risible attacks on Netanyahu’s intentions (such as the Congressional Black Caucus attempting to frame this as a race issue). Let us recognize the value Netanyahu brings to achieving the goal Israel shares with Congress and the American people of all parties. And let us not allow the silencing of this critical speech on why and how Iran must be stopped. As P.M. Valls reminded us all, what cannot be said will not be done.

Laura Fein is the Executive Director of ZOA-NJ.  Her work has appeared in The Algemeiner, the Times of Israel blog, JNS (Jewish News Service) and elsewhere. She welcomes your feedback at ZOANJ@zoa.org.

The opinions presented by Algemeiner bloggers are solely theirs and do not represent those of The Algemeiner, its publishers or editors. If you would like to share your views with a blog post on The Algemeiner, please be in touch through our Contact page.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner

Algemeiner.com

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Email a copy of to a friend
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.