For several decades, our country has managed to get itself dragged into war after war of questionable justification, either practically or morally.
In my lifetime alone, I’ve seen us lose 50,000 American lives and who knows how many native lives in the horror that was the Vietnam War. I saw us get ourselves lied into a disastrous and probably illegal occupation of Iraq, thanks to the duplicity of a cabal of neo-cons led by would-be president Dick Cheney, with the connivance and enabling of all too many Democrats in Congress.
All of these wars were avoidable. In every case wiser heads strove to gain our attention, to make the case against that war, to lead us out of our jingoistic and interventionist temptation.
But to no avail.
Those who betrayed their liberal and progressive allies, by joining forces with the war hyenas, were ultimately punished by them. LBJ lapdog Hubert Humphrey and George W. Bush apologist and enabler Hillary Clinton both saw their presidential hopes dashed, largely because they chose, at the moment in history when it really mattered, to be a profile in cowardice.
But maybe, just maybe, we can avoid making the same mistake yet again.
I’m a 63-year-old progressive activist. I’ve been involved in political campaigns since 1967, when I joined the Clean for Gene brigade on behalf of Minnesota Senator Eugene McCarthy, as he sought to extricate us from the human and moral hell of the Vietnam War.
Over the past 15 years or so, I’ve been conducting semi-monthly Democratic presidential nomination surveys of my fellow activists. Whenever I find myself at an occasion where several of them are present, I have those surveys ready to hand out and collect.
For the past 18 months, since the end of November 2016, I’ve been tracking closely the thinking of fellow NYC grassroots Democratic volunteers. Up until today, while I have, and have always had, strong opinions, pro and con, on the issues of the day, I have always striven to maintain a certain minimum level of objectivity where these potential candidates were concerned. That means that, while I certainly have preferences for some potential candidates over others, I have generally kept my personal commentary on the matter to a minimum.
Until today.
Over the past month, it has become apparent to me that one of those potential Democratic presidential candidates is showing significant signs of increasing strength. I am greatly concerned about this development; so I’ve decided to break my silence on the matter.
The battle between hawks and doves is a never-ending one. There are always those, like President Obama, who stress diplomacy over military action, and who view the latter as a last resort. Then there are always those who never let go of the military hammer in their thinking, and are always ready to find the next nail on which to wield it. It is the latter group who helped buffalo and bamboozle us into the war in Iraq. It is the latter group who sought to derail and destroy the Iran Deal, even as President Obama strove mightily, together with several other very powerful nations, for a successful conclusion to those negotiations.
And I am very sad to say that, both with the Iraq War and the Iran Deal, there were members of my Democratic party who took up the military hammer and chose to fight on the wrong side of history.
We dare not blind our eyes to their presence in our party. We dare not ignore their malign intent. We dare not deny their presence in our midst. And we cannot afford to stand by silent as one of their number threatens to become an ever-more-likely presidential nominee.
I speak of Cory Booker.
The simple truth is that Booker has always hewed to the AIPAC line when it came to matters of war and peace in the Middle East. Never mind that the majority of American Jews supported President Obama and supported the Iran Deal (which Booker finally, and reluctantly, supported, after considerable pressure from Senate Minority Leader Reid and other party leaders). Never mind that J Street is now a powerful, potent and progressive force on Middle East foreign policy among American Jews, providing a telling and persuasive rhetorical counterweight to AIPAC poison. Never mind that Israel’s own intelligence forces supported the Iran Deal, correctly seeing it as a potentially successful attempt to stuff the Persian nuclear genie back into the bottle. No, the only thing that mattered to people like Booker was the fact that AIPAC was opposed to this pro-diplomacy pro-peace effort. AIPAC purports to speak on behalf of Israel’s interests. In fact, it does nothing of the sort. Instead, it is a thinly disguised mouthpiece for right-wing neo-con elements, both in Israel and in the U.S. And politicians like Booker, who either willfully or ignorantly blind their eyes to that fact, continually threaten us with future quagmires in the Middle East when they parrot the AIPAC line.
The facts regarding Booker’s relationship with AIPAC, in particular, (an organization that repeatedly has joined together and made common cause with such noxious and unsavory elements as neo-cons and hard-line pro-war Christian fundamentalists) are spelled out in several in-depth and sobering articles from various serious publications. Here’s a representative quote from Truth-Out’s hard-hitting expose of the senator, written by Zaid Jilani, and published in January of 2104:
“Long before Booker made his 2013 run for the U.S. Senate, he was courting this lobby, letting them know that he was a reliable ally. In late October of 2008, Booker spoke at the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Nation Summit in Chicago...[I]t was a signal that Booker had adopted its narrative: Israel is under siege and in constant threat of annihilation, and the United States must have complete policy alignment with its government to prevent the deaths of Jews…
“Booker's hardline support for Israeli policy isn't explained just by his past few years of pandering to crowds at AIPAC conventions. Before Booker spoke that day in Chicago, he was introduced by his long-time friend and mentor, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach...Boteach, enraged at what he perceived to be President Obama's weak support for Israel's government, ran for Congress as a Republican...Israel was never far from the campaign, as he made one of the cornerstones of his attack on his Democratic opponent, Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-NJ), the fact that he signed a letter protesting the humanitarian impact of Israel's embargo on Gaza…
“[L]iberal Zionist writer Peter Beinart...reflecting on Booker's close relationship to Boteach,...concluded:
“’Booker is no longer just a spiritual seeker looking for community in unusual places. He’s on his way to being one of the most important politicians in the country. He says he supports a Palestinian state but when he speaks on the Middle East he generally recites the standard AIPAC half-truths. Indeed, although he reminds audiences that the word “Israel” means “struggle,” he doesn’t appear to have struggled with Israel’s treatment of Palestinians at all.’..
“Booker [i]s a hardline ally of anti-Iran lobbyists. His fundraising may help explain why. Although AIPAC often brings together influential donors and activists, it has no fundraising PAC of its own. That's where, in Booker's case, NORPAC comes in. A New Jersey-based PAC that bills itself as supporting candidates who “demonstrate a genuine commitment to the strength, security, and survival of Israel,” it has been a big fundraiser for Menendez and other Senate hawks. NORPACs president raised at least $100,000 for Booker, and told New Jersey Jewish News that during the private event then Mayor Booker spoke to “our key concern, Iran.” Alex Kane notes that Booker also was backed by a Super PAC called the Mobilization Fund that received hundreds of thousands of dollars from hedge funders who also funded Israel lobby causes.
“Put together, Booker's courting of the influential Israel lobby, which is powerful in his state of New Jersey, his long friendship with a hardliner like Boteach, and the fundraising dollars from NORPAC and others results in the Booker Paradox: a [progressive] Senator...who sides with Iran war hawks.”
There are plenty of other articles which discuss Booker’s unsavory foreign policy influences. They have appeared in such mainstream publications as The New Republic and The Daily Beast. (I’ve added the links both for these articles and for the TruthOut piece at the bottom of this diary.)
The bottom line: At this point in our nation’s history, when the war hyenas are again circling, and again trying to foment war, against North Korea, against Iran, against Syria, we dare not allow the Democratic party, which should stand in opposition to those evil forces, to be co-opted and detoured by a smooth-talking wolf in sheep’s clothing who sings the song of progressive ideals but hides an agenda of war and conquest.
Don’t let this happen. There are others who can lead our party, who have demonstrated a willingness to speak truth to power where foreign policy is concerned. For example, no fewer than four Democratic senators, all of whom are considering presidential runs, Senators Brown, Merkley, Sanders and Warren, signed a letter recently calling on Israel to rectify the humanitarian outrages in Gaza brought about by the Israelis’ inhumane blockade there. They are showing our party the way; they are showing moral and political leadership. Let us heed their call and reject the snake oil that all too often has derailed and defaced our nation.
Finally, here are those links I promised you:
www.truth-out.org/…
newrepublic.com/…
www.thedailybeast.com/…
