Well, there you go again! Ronald Reagan To Jimmy Carter Presidential Debate, October 28 1980
There is good news and bad news. First the good news; on his Media Matters blog MJ Rosenberg has promised he will no longer use the term "Israel firster" The bad news is he defended his use of the term and launched into his usual hateful prose directed toward Israel and the Jewish Americans.
But I will do so without using the term "Israel Firster." The term was coined in 1960 by the late Abram Leon Sachar, founding President of Brandeis University, and a renowned Jewish historian (his son Howard Morley Sachar remains the greatest historian of contemporary Jewry) and was first used by the elder Sachar in a speech he delivered that year to a Zionist organization.
This is a typical MJ Rosenberg half-truth. He is correct when he says Sachar used the term Israel-firster, but he didn’t use it the same way MJ and his MMFA buddies throw around the term. For Sacher the term represented the tension between the American Jewish Community and Israeli Jewish Community in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Sacher's Israel-firsters were Jews who felt the Jewish people could never have a fulfilling religious life outside of Israel It was never used by Sacher to impugn Jewish Americans as being some how less than loyal to America.
It [Israel-firster] has proven to be a distraction, allowing the pro-war lobby to focus on my choice of words rather than the substance of my arguments. I will not be using it again, for many reasons including the fact that some good people were genuinely offended by it. That was not my intention. My intention is to focus like the proverbial laser on the threat posed by war with Iran and the 45 year occupation.Rosenberg ignores his other anti-Semitic smears, American Jews control the media, American Jews control foreign policy (and caused the rebellion in Egypt) as he claimed in this post a year ago.
I am often accused of harping on the lobby's baleful influence. I plead guilty. But it's my obligation because (1) I know from personal experience — 15 years on Capitol Hill and four at AIPAC — how it operates, (2) I know how little it really cares about Israel, and (3) I am free to tell the truth about it. If I worked in the mainstream media or in the U.S. government, I wouldn't be.Rosenberg doesn't renounce calling Binyamin Netanyahu is a terrorist (modern day blood libel), or his claim that AIPAC is disloyal to America.
This first tweet was made during Netanyahu's 2011 speech to AIPAC:
It was followed up with:
Another Rosenberg slander is; those war-mongering Jews pushed the United States into the Iraq war at the behest of Ariel Sharon (even though Sharon warned Bush not to invade Iraq). A recent Huffington Post article talking about Israeli plans to attack Iran was titled: After Iraq Success, Neocons Push Iran War. Just like Pat Buchanan, Rosenberg uses the term neocon as a polite way to say Jews.
The Media Matters Senior Fellow doubled-down on the Iraq war lie in today’s post:
But then there is Iran. Watching the AIPAC conference, I was horrified to see an ostensibly pro-Israel organization promoting a war that presents an existential threat to Israel's survival. I vehemently oppose the very idea of war with Iran and am appalled by the right-wing Israeli government but, even more, by its supporters here at home who are trying to push the president to either bomb or support the bombing of Iran.
.... Many of the same people who pushed us into Iraq are doing the same thing with Iran. They are pressuring Congress to prevent the president of the United States from negotiating with the Iranian government. They are banning diplomatic contacts. They are (as they have for a decade) hyping the Iranian threat, in part because they want a war and, in part, because they want to use President Obama's reluctance to jeopardize lives as a tool to defeat him In November. And they are demanding that should Iran develop a nuclear bomb, we must not contain the threat (as we did with the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Pakistan, etc.) but should immediately go to war.
Rosenberg claims that he didn’t mean Jews in the above, he even points out that a non Jewish Newt Gingrich spoke at AIPAC. But look at the way he sets it up, blaming an ostensibly pro-Israel organization promoting a war that presents an existential threat to Israel's survival, and following up with Many of the same people who pushed us into Iraq are doing the same thing with Iran. If Rosenberg wasn’t talking about AIPAC he is an awful writer, since that is the impression he leaves the reader.
Rosenberg also uses this blog post to reinforce some of his other common lies:
One monumental thing has changed in 43 years. In 1969, neither any Arab country nor the Palestinians accepted Israel's right to exist. Since then, Israel, Jordan and Egypt have signed bilateral peace agreements, and remain committed to their terms. The PLO recognizes Israel's right to exist securely within the '67 lines. The entire Arab League (every single Arab state) is offering Israel peace, normalization and security in exchange for ending the occupation. As Shimon Peres says, Israel now has "partners for peace."
As far as the PLO both Fatah, the party of Prime Minister Abbas and Hamas the terrorist thugs running Gaza have refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish State (that is what the UN created in 1947 via resolution 181). The reason for their refusal they intend to flood Israel with the great grandchildren, cousins etc., of the original refugees so Israel become just another Muslim country.
MJ neglects to mention three Israeli Prime Ministers, Barak, Olmert and most recently Netanyahu offered deals which give the Palestinians 98% of what they supposedly want, all three offers were refused.
As for the Arab League, it’s hard to understand where he gets that claim. The Palestinians aren't a partner for peace, neither is the new al Qaeda-controlled Libya, Hezbollah controls Lebanon, the Muslim Brotherhood-controlled Egypt is threatening to void the peace agreement, and Syria's present government has no intention of making peace. Even the supposedly moderate Saudi Arabia refused to be in the same room as Israeli negotiators during the Annapolis discussions at the end of the Bush presidency.
Despite his renunciation of the term Israel firster its the same old Jew-hating MJ Rosenberg, reinterpreting history, portraying both Israel and American Jews as war-mongers, and still believing Jews control the media and government. He simply stopped using one term; it is obvious he has not changed his ways.
Update: A different version of this post appeared on Big Journalism and apparently "Little Mikey's" feelings were hurt. As he tweeted:
"Some Guy?" MJ has been reading my posts and tweets ever since I started exposing his hatred six years ago. He has even commented on my posts before. Always with something snarky, never trying to refute the facts--because he know them true. I must have really hurt him this time because he tweeted about me four times yesterday.
What he is talking about is the term "Yid" is used by non-Jews as a pejorative term. Which is one of the reasons I chose "Yid With Lid" as my nickname. Its my way of saying call me what you will, but my Lid is smarter than those of Jew-Haters such as MJ Rosenberg.
And notice he doesn't dispute the facts, just says I was mean. Poor little Mikey, his "wittle" feelings were hurt. Makes me so sad I may cry..NAH!