Tom Friedman, the New York Times columnist, crossed a line in his recent op-ed, "Newt, Mitt, Bibi and Vladimir."
Shockingly, he wrote: "I sure hope that Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, understands that the standing ovation he got in Congress this year was not for his politics. That ovation was bought and paid for by the Israel lobby."
We submitted a letter-to-the-editor to the Times the very same day.
The good news is the paper published an AJC letter, the only one about Friedman's column, as it surprisingly turned out.
The bad news is they cut out the heart of it.
Here's what we wrote:
"Tom Friedman is entitled to his opinion about the pro-Israel statements of Republican presidential candidates. But his assertion that the standing ovation Congress gave Prime Minister Netanyahu a few months ago was 'bought and paid for by the Israel lobby' is both inaccurate and shockingly insidious. Public opinion polls consistently show a high level of American (and, yes, American Jewish) support for and identification with Israel. This indicates that the people's elected representatives are fully reflecting the will of the voters. Friedman's identification of a rich and powerful 'Israel lobby' conjures up the ugliest anti-Semitic stereotypes. Does he identify with those who traffic in such rhetoric, notably Professors Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, who coauthored a book by that name? One surely hopes not."
Compare it to what was actually published:
"Thomas L. Friedman is entitled to his opinion about the pro-Israel statements of Republican presidential candidates. But we strongly object to his assertion that the standing ovation that Congress gave Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a few months ago 'was bought and paid for by the Israel lobby.' Public opinion polls consistently show a high level of American (and, yes, American Jewish) support for and identification with Israel. This indicates that the people's elected representatives are fully reflecting the will of the people."
In other words, the paper sanitized the letter, preventing any discussion of the toxicity of Friedman's actual comment.
Predictably, it didn't take long for Walt -- of the Walt-Mearsheimer tag team cited in our original text -- to laud Friedman. If that's the company Friedman seeks on Israel-related issues, he's now gotten it. Of course, this is the very same Walt, who, together with Mearsheimer, launched an Israel-bashing industry that has reaped huge media opportunities for them, in large part -- ironically -- because they insistently claim that their very right to speak up has been prevented by the so-called "Israel lobby."
But let's return to Friedman's "bought and paid for" assertion.
First, if I were a Member of Congress, I'd be outraged. After all, a noted columnist in a widely-read newspaper has questioned the integrity of all senators and congressmen who show support for Israel, suggesting that they vote against their true convictions in return for money.
Indeed, here's New Jersey Democratic Congressman Steve Rothman on the subject:
Thomas Friedman's defamation against the vast majority of Americans who support the Jewish State of Israel, in his New York Times opinion piece today, is scurrilous and harmful to Israel and her advocates in the U.S. Mr. Friedman is not only wrong, but he's aiding and abetting a dangerous narrative about the U.S.-Israel relationship and its American supporters. I gave Prime Minister Netanyahu a standing ovation, not because of any nefarious lobby, but because it is in America's vital national security interests to support the Jewish State of Israel and it is right for Congress to give a warm welcome to the leader of such a dear and essential ally. Mr. Friedman owes us all an apology.
Incidentally, if Congress were "for sale" on the Middle East, the Arabs would win hands down. Saudi Arabia alone could arrange to bankroll the purchase of all 535 voting members of the Senate and House, not to mention the other well-oiled Arab nations and their friends in the energy industry and elsewhere here in the U.S. It's not that they haven't tried, but they've discovered that on some issues, including the U.S.-Israel link, principle does trump profit.
Second, Friedman, like Walt and Mearsheimer, doesn't seem able to accept the fact that, on this issue, he is in the minority. But rather than acknowledge that most Americans, and their elected officials, support the U.S.-Israel relationship and stand, literally and figuratively, with a friend, he pretends otherwise, summoning conspiratorial theories of an "all-powerful" Israel lobby that's somehow pulling the strings.
In reality, there's no big secret about American, including Congressional, support for Israel. Sure, there are other "lobbies" actively working against that relationship, but they haven't succeeded -- and not for lack of effort or funds.
Rather, it's because a majority of Americans consistently get the central point. They identify with Israel's narrative, past and present. They understand there are no easy answers to Israel's quest for a two-state accord and lasting peace. They recognize the nature of Israel's unenviable neighborhood. And they value Israel as a stable, steadfast ally of the United States in an increasingly turbulent and, for now, Islamist region, even as Friedman waxed rhapsodic -- surely a bit too breathlessly -- about the future from Tahrir Square earlier this year in "Postcard From a Free Egypt."
Lastly, Friedman should understand the historical resonance evoked by the very words he used.
No doubt, as an experienced journalist, he does. That makes his willingness to do so all the more troubling.
He insists he is fearful of the direction Israel -- joined by its supporters here -- has taken. If so, as a skilled wordsmith, there are other ways for him to express his concern. Meanwhile, I'm fearful of the direction he's taken.
STOP PRESS: Friedman has half-heartedly amended himself:
“In retrospect I probably should have used a more precise term like ‘engineered’ by the Israel lobby — a term that does not suggest grand conspiracy theories that I don’t subscribe to,” Friedman said.
See http://blog.camera.org/archives/2011/12/ohh_friedmen_meant_to_say_engi.html
Oh, I see, the Israel didn't actually "pay" the entire US Congress to applaud Netanyahu, they
"engineered" it.
Well, at least he's no longer claiming there is a "grand conspiracy", merely "engineering".
Thomas Friedman just can't accept that the US Congress applauded Netanyahu over and over again because they agree with what he said.
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/12/anti_semitism_charge_backfires_on_ex_aipac_flack/
So much for conspiracy theories being just that.
What??
Wrong Guy??
Oh smack, I thought it was that Goldstone guy for a second at the receiving end of what-ever-anti-whatchumahcallitt is that the lobby attacks you with for not towing the line.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reconsidering-the-goldstone-report-on-israel-and-war-crimes/2011/04/01/AFg111JC_story.html
Maybe you should listen to the lobby a little more often.
>> NO, Americans have been lied and kept in the dark by the pro-Israeli media. If Americans knew what has been going on for the past 62 years then things would be different.
They understand there are no easy answers to Israel's quest for a two-state accord and lasting peace.
>> NO, Israel has undermined the peace process for a while now. It is bribing and threatening countries when Abbas went to the UN for recognition. Israel punished Palestinians for getting UNESCO approval. Israel punished the Palestinians for voting for Hamas.
They recognize the nature of Israel's unenviable neighborhood.
>That much is true.
And they value Israel as a stable, steadfast ally of the United States
>>> Although no formal treaties have been signed between both these countries.
in an increasingly turbulent and, for now, Islamist region,
>>Mainly due to the UK/US infleunce in the region and putting in monarchs and tyrants for OIL.
even as Friedman waxed rhapsodic -- surely a bit too breathlessly -- about the future from Tahrir Square earlier this year in "Postcard From a Free Egypt."
>> Israel whom was cheering on Mumbarak to stay in power.
Sad to see that this sickness and myopia has infected Friedman as well.
Reminds me of the old trope about the only honest politician being the one who STAYS bought.
No one has ever said it was "easy" for the Israeli lobby to obtain the unquestioning supplication of the members of congress. It has taken dacades of hard work to reach this point. Again, the key power of the Israeli lobby groups is not their ability to 'purchase' the favor of specific congress members -- as you know, those lobbies are not the best funded in he US. Instead, the power lies in their threat to pull campaign donations, and more powerfully, to focus contributions to the opponents of those representatives.
For example, see the recent result in New York's 9th District for the blueprint of how the pro-Israel lobbies can leverage their power, and thereby rule politicians through fear.
On the other hand, "the Arabs" that you refer to are a vastly diverse constituency from dozens of countries with diverse and often conflicting interests. While the lobbies for Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and other countries are well funded, they are focussed on issues central tho their interests -- oil policy, suppression of democracy in their own countries, avoiding US taxes on profits made in the US, etc. Moreover, there are multiple countries that have populations that are ethnically Arab, yet have no oil resources, and thus, no significant lobby.
This allows the members of congress to suck up to both Israel and the KSA at the same time.
http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=249724
I guess the 'Paper of Record' didn't get the memo that AIPAC owns the press.