Charles Freeman was nominated by Obama to be chairman of the National Intelligence Council, but withdrew his nomination in the face of a vicious and ugly campaign against him. His crime? He refused to toe the line on the absolutist pro-Israel position, and where any valid criticism of Israel — encompassing war crimes, collective punishment, the use of chemical weapon, expansion of the settlements etc — is immediately dubbed “anti-semitic” as if the actions of a powerful middle eastern state were somehow synonymous with a whole religion. His detractors were a sorry bipartisan lot including the usual suspects at the New Republic, National Review, Weekly Standard, as well as Chuck Schumer, Joe Lieberman and Rahm Emmanuel.
Glenn Greenwald puts it best:
“In the U.S., you can advocate torture, illegal spying, and completely optional though murderous wars and be appointed to the highest positions. But you can’t, apparently, criticize Israeli actions too much or question whether America’s blind support for Israel should be re-examined.”
Daniel Larison is annoyed:
“For all of the pleasant ideas about a changing political landscape and the rise of alternative voices in the debate over U.S. policy in the Near East, all it took to sink a non-confirmable intelligence appointment who had the full confidence of the Director of National Intelligence was a couple of weeks of public whining by a band of petulant, ill-informed hacks.”
And Andrew Sullivan sounds a tone of introspection:
“My concern remains that many of the same people that led us into the groupthink that gave us the worst intelligence blunder in American history are now dictating who gets to review intelligence for the next historic analysis: on Iran. I realized my mistake and have tried to adjust to allow for it. Others have dug in more deeply.”
And here:
“Having the kind of debate in America that they have in Israel, let alone Europe, on the way ahead in the Middle East is simply forbidden. Even if a president wants to have differing sources of advice on many questions, the Congress will prevent any actual, genuinely open debate on Israel.”
Greenwald notes that polls show Americans desire an even-handed approach to the Israel-Palestinian conflict and yet the political class is scared stiff of offending the most extreme elements in Israeli politics, including those elements whose statements are every bit as offensive as Hamas. Shame on Obama for this cowardice.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In