The ludicrous Ilhan Omar firestorm used to stifle honest debate about Israel is very deja vu Howard Dean for me, from back when he was a presidential candidate in the 2003 election season. But back then it wasn’t “allegiance” or “Benjamins” that were the “wrong words” that caused a similar avalanche of Congressional Dem and media disapproval. Unlike in the case of Ilhan, Dean’s Israel words couldn’t be assigned an anti-Semitic trope. But where there’s a will (to stifle honest debate about Israel), there’s a way! Dean’s words were portrayed as an attack against Israel, against the beyond-reproach-beyond-questioning US+Israel special bond, the blind loyalty and knee jerk complete support that was and is demanded. His words even meant — gasp — a threat to our security and that of Israel!
Ready for it? Here’s one of his dastardly words:
“evenhanded”
I note, Bernie actually used “evenhanded” about how the US should deal with the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict in his message of support for Ilhan, and I have yet to see any blowback. Progress? I wonder what Dean is thinking right about now…
Here’s what he said back then:
Dean Defends Middle East Remarks
'Perhaps I could have used a different euphemism'
Dean also said he would "strongly speak out against violence of any kind in the Middle East. That's what I mean by being even-handed." (More on violence)
"You must condemn all civilian killings, including any terrorist attacks," he said.
However, in retrospect, Dean said he should not have used the term "even-handed."
"I've since learned that that is a very sensitive word to use in certain communities, so perhaps I could have used a different euphemism," he said. "But the fact of the matter is, at the negotiating table, we have to have the trust of both sides."
Many people, like me, do not agree that Ilhan's words were anti-Semitic, but even if her words did warrant correction, in a sane world it would not arrive on a wave of public blow back from her so-called progressive, enlightened, fair-minded peers and our so-called “truth-seeking” media. But Omar’s words were twisted beyond recognition to obscure the truth, to SILENCE the critical discussion that everyone keeps saying needs to be had, but instead becomes one about criticizing the critics. Dean’s words were completely sans anti-Semitic tropes or vulnerability to such trope accusations, but they were used toward the same end: End the discussion. Isn’t that the goal here?
Silence. Status quo unchanged. Mission Accomplished.
Back in 2003 Michelle Goldberg (now of the NY Times) wrote a an article in Salon titled Howard Dean's Israel Problem. I read it at the time. I’ve reread it at this time. In some ways, it feels like time has stood still.
Dean's Israel troubles began at a Sept. 3 campaign event in Santa Fe, N.M. When it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, he said that day, "It's not our place to take sides." Then, on Sept. 9, he told the Washington Post that America should be "evenhanded" in its approach to the region.
The media and the Democratic establishment reacted as if Dean had called Yasser Arafat a man of peace. On Sept. 10, 34 Democratic members of Congress, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, wrote Dean an open letter. "American foreign policy has been -- and must continue to be -- based on unequivocal support for Israel's right to exist and to be free from terror ..." they wrote. "It is unacceptable for the U.S. to be 'evenhanded' on these fundamental issues ... This is not a time to be sending mixed messages; on the contrary, in these difficult times we must reaffirm our unyielding commitment to Israel's survival and raise our voices against all forms of terrorism and incitement."
The Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz reported that Dean had badly damaged his own campaign. "Sources in the Jewish community say that Dean has wrecked his chances of getting significant contributions from Jews ..." the paper wrote. "Many believe Dean's statement will drive more Jews toward Lieberman and Kerry, enabling Kerry to take the lead again."
Besides evenhanded, Dean also said “enormous settlements” should be dismantled. (Well, yes. I mean, excuse me for talking about what we keep saying we should talk about, but... Settlements! Settlements are illegal. They are illegal because they are stolen Palestinian land, now inhabited by approximately 625,000 Israeli settlers, aka the the recipients of the stolen property.) Dean said you could still negotiate despite terrorist attacks. (If it helps stop the attacks and makes everyone better off, why not? Has this not ever been done before?) Dean also called Hamas “soldiers” in the context of war. Of course he meant enemy soldiers, but still, it was, of course, just AWFUL! (Well… when your land is taken and you fight for it, maybe the soldier boot fits? You don’t have to like these soldiers/fighters/terrorists, but we called Nazis soldiers — and they were actually the ones taking land and killing a lot of people, including a whole lot of Jews — So maybe you shouldn’t throw a fit, take your toys and go home, when this word is attached to Hamas. And then, Israel propped Hamas up initially as a counterweight to the PLO — so is it ok to say “soldiers” when they were fighting who Israel was fighting?)
Dean’s perfectly rational words (from someone who appears to be trying to be an honest broker) so outraged Minority Leader Pelosi and dozens of Dems that they went nuclear on Dean in a much publicized letter of rebuke. (Deja Vu!) Likewise, the very pro war media, which was largely aligned against anti-war-Dean, piled on like crazy. (Deja Vu!) And I’ll mention then-candidate Kerry’s role in this nasty drama: he acted like a huge ass, jumping into the fray to smear Dean with nonsense, running around tooting his horn to show how he was THE MOST PRO ISRAEL DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE EVER!!! (Also pro Iraq War!) which is reminiscent of certain members of Congress today, both sides, in the current spectacle on display on twitter and Capitol Hill (Deja Vu!)
Flowing right into my deja vu theme here, two days ago none other than Michelle Goldberg was on MSNBC’s Ali Velshi - the very same author of Howard Dean’s Israel Problem, now on TV to talk about Ilhan Omar's Israel Problem. What Goldberg had to say was that, yes, certainly, critical discussion about Israel and US policy is needed, but Ilhan's negative tropes got in the way. Her conversation with Ali Velshi was all about how to speak better, more sensitively, in order to have that much-needed critical discussion about Israel. They agreed on an example of how we do this in other instances, e.g., do not say “articulate” about a black person. (True confession, this is something I reject. I will keep on attaching that very nice word to whomever I think merits it — and it isn’t such a large group of recipients, so please take it with joy, and thank God, your mother, and the Academy!)
But, of course, there was no discussion by Michelle Goldberg about Israel or Palestine. Nor about our government’s Israel policy. Nor about the harm Israel does to the Palestinians. Again, as happened in 2003, as happens again and again to present, it seems the only criticism to be had on the topic of Israel is that which is aimed at the critic of Israel.
So, long story short, we’re in the midst of being taught a lesson about harmful anti-Semitism that we shouldnt be taught. I mean, shouldnt the context be actual, harmful anti Semitism? This misplaced lesson was deemed necessary to allegedly sensitize and enlighten Ilhan and all of us, so we can use the right words to stop intentionally, or unintentionally, practicing anti Semitism. It is said that if we get this right, we can, at long last, have that critical discussion about the US and Israel and Palestine, the one we keep hearing it is just fine to have.
The problem of Ilhan’s words is not “all about the Benjamins” or allegiance - it’s not about anti-Semitism. Just like Dean’s “Israel Problem” 16 years ago, was not about the harm he caused with the words “evenhanded” or “enormous settlements” or any of the rest of it. The lesson for Ilhan, for Dean, and for ALL of us, is NOT about using the right words to arrive at a critical, meaningful discussion that leads to a fair solution. Rather, the lesson is to use no words of criticism about Israel’s wrongs, to have no meaningful, honest discussion, and to find no solution. Make no change. Or, to be crude about it: You’d best shut your damned mouth or else!
What we learn is that criticism of Israel (that could lead to policy changes) is TABOO.
So what to do with a taboo like this?
Break it.
I’m thinking those who are willing to engage in this critical discussion (like hopefully still Ilhan Omar), should take a different tack. Be relentless about putting out the facts that the opposition wants to bury: Facts about settlements; bombing shelters, hospitals, schools; the extreme deprivation - checkpoints (checkpoints human toll), the myriad of examples of what Israel does that is wrong, illegal, inhumane, e.g., demolishes dozens of West Bank schools (Bullies with bulldozers — the more you look, the crazier it gets.) How the US excuses it, turns a blind eye, and funds it. AIPAC’s role in funneling those Benjamins and stoking FEAR, and keeping the FEARFUL IN LINE. And call out the ones who are kept in line, keeping the untenable status quo. Talk about The Occupation. (Yes, AOC, that word you used is accurate and just fine to use.) Contrast UN resolutions and US votes with those of other nations. Use Jewish sources. Israeli sources — like the excellent B’tselem. Hold up evidentiary pictures. Display blow-ups of evidentiary texts and statistics on the House floor. Just keep stating the facts. Bring on the allies to support and assist and help make awareness, outrage, and supporters grow.
The End of Zionism
Israel must shed its illusions and choose between racist oppression and democracy
It is very comfortable to be a Zionist in West Bank settlements such as Beit El and Ofra. The biblical landscape is charming. You can gaze through the geraniums and bougainvilleas and not see the occupation. Travelling on the fast highway that skirts barely a half-mile west of the Palestinian roadblocks, it's hard to comprehend the humiliating experience of the despised Arab who must creep for hours along the pocked, blockaded roads assigned to him. One road for the occupier, one road for the occupied.
This cannot work. Even if the Arabs lower their heads and swallow their shame and anger for ever, it won't work. A structure built on human callousness will inevitably collapse in on itself. Note this moment well: Zionism's superstructure is already collapsing like a cheap Jerusalem wedding hall. Only madmen continue dancing on the top floor while the pillars below are collapsing.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[My Note: Who is the writer of this piece? A Muslim? A Palestinian? Rashida Tlaib? Maybe an anti-Semite? Wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong again. It is Avraham Berg. Not just a Jew, not just an Israeli, but also the former Speaker of the Knesset! Read this stunning, revelatory column in full, another nugget from 2003. And then ask: Where are we now, 16 years later?]
[My Note, again: Take note, AOC, Ilhan, Rashida, et al — Do your homework and then use your knowledge well, to the benefit of your arguments, your aims.]
Of course, it should go without saying, denounce anti-Semitism where it rears its ugly head. Listen, be respectful, be sensitive. But it is not insensitive to roll out these facts. And keep rolling them out. It is insensitive to ignore them. Debate, but don’t get dragged into the mud and start flinging it back. Passion is needed but righteous screaming “You’re Evil!!!” is less respected and effective than being vocal in a way that is resolute, strong, knowledgeable. Fight fire with facts. Stop waiting for permission. apologize if needed, but instead of apologizing over straw men, reveal them. Refrain from flipping off endless what-about-isms in lieu of a real discussion (my ism, your ism, our isms — your tweet, Trump’s tweet, etc. — be inclusive, think humans). Stop limiting it to clapping back at GOPpers or Dem Israel Firsters. Stop the useless, frenzied chase around the meta cul-de-sac, and start talking critically and factually about Our Israel Problem, as we would about any other area of concern where honest debate is not choked off by this Albatross.
And when opponents cry “anti-Semitism” and “bad tropes” (Omar) or “security risks” (Dean), or use whatever other red herring is available (as they surely will), let them cry all they like, and carry on in the face of it. The unwavering truth — when aired, sunlit, supported and not abandoned due to fear, money, whatever-— has the power to refute and rise above our predictable diversionary din.
We’ve been dared to tell the truth for decades now and too many of us have shrunk back from meeting this challenge. We lose the dare and the losses add up. Well, this is not Truth or Dare. It’s both. It’s time to take the dare and tell the truth.