make a donation












Why Donate to FLAME?

By supporting FLAME, you help fund our ads in national media, like U.S. News and World Report, The New York Times, The Nation, The National Review, The American Spectator, The Washington Times National Weekly, and others. You help publish our messages in Jewish publications, both in the U.S. and in Israel, among them The International Edition of the Jerusalem Post. Finally, your donation helps us publish our messages monthly in over fifty small-town newspapers, all across the United States and Canada.


Facts and Logic About
the Middle East
P.O. Box 590359
San Francisco, CA 94159
(415) 356-7801

March 17, 2009

Yes!

Efforts by FLAME and others succeed in rousting Charles Freemanóbut now he condemns the “pro-Israel lobby” for undue influence

Dear Friend of FLAME:

Congratulations to all FLAME supporters who responded to our last FLAME Hotline, in which we encouraged you to write to President Obama about his misguided attempt to appoint Charles (Chas) Freeman as head of the National Intelligence Council (NIC).  We were successful in ousting him!

The NIC, you recall, produces international intelligence reports, on which the president and other government agencies make decisions about diplomatic and security issues.  Freeman, as we noted, has a long history of anti-Israel statements and financial connections to the Saudi Arabian government, and he gave notorious support to the Chinese government's repressive response to the Tiananmen Square uprisings.

Thankfully, overwhelming pressure on Obama and congressional representatives from a range of political quarters---not just pro-Israel forces---caused Freeman to withdraw from consideration for the NIC post.

Yet, as this week's Hotline article---"Chas Freeman: It's not over yet"---outlines, Freeman is using his defeat to lash out at the "pro-Israel lobby." Interestingly, the largest pro-Israel lobbying organization, AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee), didn't publicly oppose Freeman and didn't lobby against him. 

Yet Freeman is now trying to cast aspersions on those who defeated him, asserting that pro-Israel groups are unduly influencing American policy.  And what is wrong with an interest group trying to influence the government's policy, we might ask?  Is it a crime to express our preference for public officials who represent our interests?  Do we hear of defeated appointees bitterly complaining about the trucking lobby or the physicians lobby for unfairly influencing government policy?  Since when is it a crime to exercise our right to speak truth to power?

Is it only when many of the lobbyists are Jews?

Please read the exclusive article below by Dr. Lawrence White, a prominent and indefatigable pro-Israel activist from the San Francisco Bay area.  His analysis further exposes the chilling tendency of anti-Israel voices to veer into anti-Semitism.

Best regards,

Jim Sinkinson
Director, FLAME

P.S.

Despite the efforts of people like Chas Freeman, Jimmy Carter, Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer to intimidate and stifle the voice of those who support Israel, we at FLAME will not be moved.  We'll continue to speak out in the interests of Israel and expose those who would defeat her.  For important information about another enemy of Israel, please take a look at an article recently posted on our website about Amnesty International, which is attempting to impose an arms embargo on Israel for its defensive actions against rocket attacks by Hamas terrorists. It's called "No pardon for Amnesty"  and ran as an editorial a few weeks ago in the Jerusalem Post.  Please review it and other "Outstanding Articles on the Middle East" posted on our website.  Above all, if you agree that FLAME's outspoken brand of public relations on Israel's behalf is critical, I urge you to support us. Remember: FLAME's ability to influence public opinion---to stand up against anti-Israel forces, like Chas Freeman, as well as Islamist terror---comes from Israel's supporters like you, one by one. I hope you'll consider giving a donation now, as you're able---with $500, $250, $100, or even $18. (Remember, your donation to FLAME is tax deductible.) To donate online, just go to http://www.factsandlogic.org/make_a_donation.html. Now more than ever we need your support to ensure that Israel gets the support it needs---from the U.S. Congress, from President Obama, and from the American people.


Chas Freeman: It's not over yet
By Lawrence W. White, FLAME Hotline, March 11, 2009

Charles Freeman, a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, is the diplomat chosen several weeks ago by the administration to chair the National Intelligence Council.

Problems immediately arose. Freeman was in the paid service of Saudi Arabia, had repeatedly blasted Israel, had defended China including its actions in the Tiananmen Square massacre, and had numerous conflicts of interest. Prior to the appointment he had not been fully vetted, and any examination of his finances had not occurred. As a result, the selection became controversial as soon as Freeman's name became public.

As a result of these issues, opposition to his nomination arose among several members of Congress, as well as parts of the media and ordinary citizens. This led to his withdrawing his nomination after several weeks of controversy. Whether he withdrew or was pushed is not clear at this time.

Opposition to Freeman was initially attributed to his many statements blaming Israel for the current crisis and absence of peace in the Middle East. However, what led to his demise were not primarily considerations related to Israel but rather the exposure of Freeman's many statements apologizing for Saudi and Chinese behavior as well as a whole panoply of foreign policy conflicts.

These included his 12-year chairmanship of the Middle East Policy Council which was a Saudi-funded front group, and his chairmanship of Projects International, a group that represented U.S. business interests in Saudi Arabia and China. Freeman fully supported the repressive government of China. He criticized a Tibet protest against China as a "race riot", and stated that China should have intervened earlier in the Tiananmen Square protests. But the major feature of his support for China was his paid role on the board of a Chinese government-owned oil company that had dealings in Iran. This same Chinese oil company also purchased oil from Sudan while its leaders were overseeing genocide in Darfur. There were no objections from Freeman about any of this

Following the withdrawal, a collective sigh of relief was uttered by those who opposed him. However, it is not yet time to uncork the champagne. For those of us in opposition, we should not expect this problem to disappear. The fact that a group of citizens along with members of Congress mobilized to put pressure on the administration to halt the nomination clearly represents an age-old use of the democratic right to petition government. However, it also opens the door to new charges of pressure from the Israel lobby.

We have heard this before, from Jimmy Carter, Stephen Walt, and John Mearsheimer, from the likes of such hateful demagogues as Norman Finkelstein, and even from Jewish groups such as J Street, who falsely label themselves as pro-Israel. This time, joining the cries of criticism of the so-called "Israel lobby" are many new and surprising names, including Andrew Sullivan, and M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum.

Certain historical events become symbols.  The USS Liberty tragic friendly fire incident in 1967 became the casus belli for the anti-Israel zealots and has been so for over 40 years. Now the Freeman case is about to become the poster child for those who preach against the "Israel lobby".

Freeman himself has initiated the process. In a note to Foreign Policy, ABC News has reported that Freeman attacked the Israel lobby, claiming that the destruction of his career "will be seen by many to raise serious questions about whether the Obama administration will be able to make its own decisions about the Middle East and related issues."

Here are Freeman's words:

"The libels on me and their easily traceable email trails show conclusively that there is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East. The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth. The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views, the substitution of political correctness for analysis, and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those that it favors."

The inability of the American public to discuss, or the government to consider, any option for US policies in the Middle East opposed by the ruling faction in Israeli politics has allowed that faction to adopt and sustain policies that ultimately threaten the existence of the state of Israel. It is not permitted for anyone in the United States to say so. This is not just a tragedy for Israelis and their neighbors in the Middle East; it is doing widening damage to the national security of the United States."

Now what is going on here? Congress, the media, good government organizations, and various special interest groups, have always evaluated candidates for high government office with great scrutiny. In this case as in others, the candidates own words were examined in full context. But as Jake Tapper of ABC News has pointed out, "only in Freeman's case does the nominee make an allegation that a foreign power was lurking nefariously somehow behind it all."

For Freeman, this represents a different and more lucrative kind of career move than the one he had originally expected. He is now following in the footsteps of Jimmy Carter, Ramsey Clark, Charles Lindbergh, and others who have made a profitable  career out of travelling the lecture circuit  blaming Jews and peddling tales of conspiracy. This is what Richard Hofstadter labeled "the paranoid style in American politics", and it has great appeal for angry minds.

Most Jewish and pro-Israel organizations took no public stance on the nomination, and there was apparently little lobbying of Congress. Nonetheless, Freeman's son, Charles Freeman Jr., a former assistant U.S. Trade Representative for China Affairs., referred to his father's critics as "Israel first-ers" and stated that his father's "appointment is being challenged these days by a small cabal of folks that believe first and foremost in the importance of allegiance to Israel as a core U.S. priority."

An irony in all this is that according to several members of Congress, the concerns about his anti-Israel positions did not and would not stop his official appointment to chair the NIC. Rather, it was Freeman's comments on China and Tibet, and his connections to the Chinese oil company, that finally did him in.

None of Freeman's critics claimed that he was not entitled to hold these opinions on Israel, China and the Middle East.  Rather, they claimed he was not entitled to hold these judgments and allegiances and at the same time make official analyses and reach conclusions for the US government on critical intelligence matters.

This raises an age-old question for American Jews. Is it useful to try to prevent this sort of appointment, or will it, as M.J. Rosenberg claims, be dangerous in that it feeds resentment of Jews in official circles? We had a different experience during World War II, when the Roosevelt administration was supported by most of the Jewish community. Opposition to Roosevelt's policies regarding restrictions on intake of the doomed European Jews was virtually non-existent. At that time, the roles of Jimmy Carter, Stephen Walt, and John Mearsheimer, were taken by Charles Lindberg, Henry Ford, and Father Coughlin.

In the 1930s and 1940s Jews were primarily motivated by the fear of creating an anti-Semitic backlash. The prevailing view of the Jewish community was to maintain a low profile and do nothing that might annoy the powers in Washington, (This is the position of M.J. Rosenberg today).

At present, the Jewish community can see the results of a more aggressive posture. We now know the benefits of publicly speaking out, of lobbying, and using our rights as citizens. All indications are that this is a far healthier stance. However, this behavior is about to be tested.

PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION
If you'd like a printer-friendly, text version of this newsletter click the button below.
text

DONATE
How many times have you heard someone lament that Israel doesn't have good public relations? By supporting FLAME, you help one of the world's most powerful information efforts to spread the truth about Israel and the Middle East conflict. Please note that because FLAME is a non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation, your donation is tax-deductible.
donate

FORWARD TO A FRIEND
If you know of a friend or colleague who would appreciate learning more Facts and Logic About the Middle East, please forward this issue of the FLAME HOTLINE to them using the link below.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE FLAME HOTLINE
If you have received this issue of the FLAME HOTLINE from a friend or colleague and you'd like to subscribe, please use the link below.


Our Ads and Positions | Donate | Our Letters to Editors | Our Acquisition Letters
FLAME's Purpose | Subscribe to Hotline Alerts | Home

©2009 FLAME. All rights reserved. | Site Credits | Contact Us

You are receiving this email because you have requested news, facts and analysis about Israel and the Mideast conflict.
1