Dean, meeting with Jewish leaders, promises strong backing for Israel

Before his first major meeting with American Jewish communal leaders, presidential hopeful Howard Dean ducked into a Manhattan sukkah to shake hands with local children and admire the homemade rings of construction paper they had draped across the outdoor hut.
Later Friday afternoon, however, at a meeting at the Lincoln Square Synagogue, it took more than a photo-op and some handshaking to placate 26 representatives of Jewish groups.

A former Vermont governor, Dean had vexed many members of the Jewish community last month when he recommended that the United States take a more “evenhanded” approach to brokering Israeli-Palestinian peace — a phrase generally taken to mean that the United States should not take Israel’s side.

Dean backers say the comment was distorted by his opponents.

Asked about his remarks during the closed-door meeting, Dean “covered his face with his two hands and shook his face as if to say ‘Oy, what a mistake that was,’ ” said David Harris, executive director of the American Jewish Committee.

According to Harris, Dean said, “Israel is not just an ally, but a beacon of hope for people who were abandoned 2,000 years ago and who are afraid of being abandoned again. I will not abandon Israel, ever.”

cut

http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=13346&intcategoryid=3

==================

It appears Howard Dean has righted himself. He was wise enough to know support for Israel is needed for the Democratic nomination.

..."wronged himself" at some point. Another attempt to create a "flip-flop" where one does not exist. One can support the existence of the state of Israel without turning a blind eye to the need for an "honest broker" in seeking peace.

"Asked about his remarks during the closed-door meeting, Dean “covered his face with his two hands and shook his face as if to say ‘Oy, what a mistake that was,’ ” said David Harris, executive director of the American Jewish Committee."

He has corrected his mistake. I commend him.

"...the former Vermont governor declared that, while the United States should become more engaged, he did not have any fundamental objections with President George W. Bush’s policies...

When asked by the Jewish newspaper Forward late last year as to whether he supported APN’s perspective, Governor Dean replied "No, my view is closer to AIPAC's view."..

He also rejects calls by APN and other liberal Zionist groups that Israel’s requested $12 billion loan guarantee be linked to an Israeli freeze on constructing additional illegal settlements on confiscated Palestinian land, arguing that such aid should instead be unconditional...

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0226-04.htm

some respectable country, maybe Finland, or Belgium, or Venezuela or even some nearby nation with lots of health care and snow.

I have not been able to develop a preference among the current candidates, since only one of them has even mentioned the hostages currently being tortured in Guantanamo, and none has pledged to return them, and all other disappeared individuals, US citizens and otherwise, to their families within 15 minutes of taking the oath of office.

Enemy combatants
Opposes Guantanamo detainment, secret military tribunals

War in Iraq
Opposed U.S.-led war from the outset

Iraqi reconstruction
Turn over control of Iraq rebuilding effort to the U.N.

Pre-emption policy
Rejects President Bush's "first strike" doctrine

Afghanistan
Opposed war in Afghanistan

Middle East
Emphasizes Palestinians right to self-determination


http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/president/issues/index.kucinich.html (You can check out the other candidates positions there also)


we did not authorize the invasion of Iraq.

We did not authorize the invasion of Iran.
We did not authorize the invasion of North Korea.
We did not authorize the bombing of civilians in Afghanistan.
We did not authorize permanent detainees in Guantanamo Bay.
We did not authorize the withdrawal from the Geneva Convention.
We did not authorize military tribunals suspending due process and habeas corpus.
We did not authorize assassination squads.
We did not authorize the resurrection of COINTELPRO.
We did not authorize the repeal of the Bill of Rights.
We did not authorize the revocation of the Constitution.
We did not authorize national identity cards.
We did not authorize the eye of Big Brother to peer from cameras throughout our cities.
We did not authorize an eye for an eye.
Nor did we ask that the blood of innocent people, who perished on September 11, be avenged with the blood of innocent villagers in Afghanistan.
We did not authorize the administration to wage war anytime, anywhere, anyhow it pleases.
We did not authorize war without end.
We did not authorize a permanent war economy.

http://www.sumeria.net/kucinichprayer.html

...interprets Dean's gesticulations as "Oy, what a mistake that was"?

a) what mistake?

b) what correction?

Or, said differently, "Asked about his remarks during the closed-door meeting, Dean 'covered his face with his two hands (would he cover them with someone else's two hands, or maybe his feet???) and shook his face (face, not the head???) as if to say, 'Good golly, why the heck do you keep asking me about this, I've stated my position clearly, is it just an attempt to shame, or to act as if you've corrected a mistake?'"

What credentials does this David Harris possess that allow him to interpret hand gesticulations as yiddish pronouncements of remorse? I recall your posts when this non-issue issue first tried finding its way into the news cycle. And coincidentally enough, now we find yet another attempt to spin it into the cycle, as a "mistake corrected", right on the heels of news stories of Dean getting standing ovations speaking before Arab Americans...

Gee, if only I could so clearly discern statements from electronic gesticulations...

Just wondering.... :shrug:

he did.

If only Dean would seize upon the issue and propose a real solution to the I/P conflict... I was ready to donate to him before he backed down, in support of evenhandedness.

But if I was in his postion, this is not an argument
I would willingly take up now.

but I'd keep my position more vague, to seize upon later...

I DO think it's an issue that will draw many Clark voters to him. And it will show his defiance for the DLC establishment that he's been fighting even more so.

Then again, I'm no politician. I can't lie convincingly, and I'm generally unwilling to compromise. It could hurt him politically in terms of the Democratic establishment, but if he really wants to tap "the Democratic wing of the Democratic party", it would be a smart move. A progressive foreign policy would help alleviate many peoples' worries over his more moderate economic policy.

Howard Dean is committed to achieving a negotiated, comprehensive, and just peace between Palestinians and Israelis and remains optimistic about the chances for peace. The greatest asset in that effort is that majorities of both Palestinians and Israelis accept a two-state solution which would guarantee security, sovereignty, and dignity.

Recent developments in the region have created a new sense of opportunity. Any steps that lead away from violence and toward peace need to be encouraged and assisted. Continuing this progress will require the full engagement of the United States at the highest level. U.S. disengagement from the process during much of the Bush Administration has been unacceptable. No other country but the United States has the credibility necessary to facilitate negotiations and to mediate between the parties. Yet, in the end, only the Palestinians and the Israelis themselves can make and keep the peace and work out the specifics of a lasting agreement. Peace cannot be imposed by outside parties.

The basic framework for peace between the Israelis and Palestinians is a two state solution -- a Jewish state of Israel living side by side in peace and security with an independent, demilitarized Palestinian state. The best approach to achieving lasting peace is a comprehensive one, providing for fully normalized relations, peace, and security as part of an overall negotiated settlement between Israel and the Arab states.

To get there, the Palestinian Authority will have to fight terrorism and violence on a consistent basis to create the conditions necessary for a viable peace process. The Israeli government will have to work to improve the living conditions of the Palestinian people and ultimately will have to remove a number of existing settlements. These issues and others will all be elements of a final agreement negotiated by the parties.

Through it all, the United States will maintain its historic special relationship with the state of Israel, providing a guarantee of its long-term defense and security. And the United States will have to take responsibility with its international partners for helping the Palestinians establish a middle-class democratic society in which women fully participate in economic and political decision-making. The international community must support these economic reconstruction efforts which are essential to the long-term success of any agreement between the parties.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_foreign_mideast

This waffles all the key issues and throws a dose of feel good cliches.

Dean is fooling them all
once elected President
Down comes the apartheid wall!

I am liking Dennis Kucinich more and more each day...

If he sells out of his ideas as easily as he seems to, I think I'll go with another candidate.

Of course, I have no real choice but to vote for somebody with a bias for Israel probably. However, I would like to see which candidate is more firm in his ideas, even against political pressure.

and I wouldn't trust their version of anything!

Great article! Makes one think twice...

Many more Arabs die than Jews but we never hear about them.Wish Dean would not do this.

n/t

For any reason, ever, in the Dem Party.

Even "impartiality" is heresy.

That said, I am supporting the Dem candidate anyway---especially Dean, since he is being forced into this by assholes.

Asked about his remarks during the closed-door meeting, Dean “covered his face with his two hands and shook his face as if to say ‘Oy, what a mistake that was,’ ” said David Harris, executive director of the American Jewish Committee.

What kind of subjectivity is this: Dean “covered his face with his two hands and shook his face as if to say ‘Oy, what a mistake that was,’

Was the reporter and/or David Harris able to read Dean's mind? Of course not. They are projecting their own bigotry and ideology into the events. They are no more reliable than Pat Robertson saying that the gay agenda was responsible for 9/11.

a more “evenhanded” approach to brokering Israeli-Palestinian peace — a phrase generally taken to mean that the United States should not take Israel’s side.

Israel's side? What is Israel's side? The rightwing sees Israel's side as being the one that keeps all of the land taken in 1967, with wall-to-wall settlements extending all the way to the Jordanian border, and beyond.

Why are we buying the language of the rightwing? In the context of this story, "Israel's side" is the equivalent of saying "support the troops or else you are against America."!

We must retake control of language, as sci-fi author Philip K. Dick said:

"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words."

.

and hope he doesn't think that means he must give unconditional support to whatever Sharon wants to do. Perhaps I will return the birthday card (with a small donation) and use the personal note section to let him know that not being in lockstep with AIPAC will not scare Jewish voters away.

was his appeal and bipartisan selling point.

I don't think that his supporters are doing him any favors by attempting to say that he did not mean what he has been very clear about.

On the contrary, I would think that they would be shouting it from the housetops, and I am confident that they will be, and that the race for the nomination will become largely a race to see who can express more enthusiasm for both the sharon Policy of Starvation and its companion, the World's Largest Prison Camp, as well as the wider Crusade of the bush regime.

The voting classes of the US may consist of only about half of the top 25% income tier, but they are nevertheless the sector from which support comes, financial and otherwise, and that sector is very strong in their support of both bush and sharon regimes.

given some of the other positions you have taken on this forum.

please put me in the U file for Unpredictable.
Actually, my position has been pretty consistant. Perhaps you have been reading things into what I've said that I didn't actually say.

"According to Harris, Dean said, “Israel is not just an ally, but a beacon of hope for people who were abandoned 2,000 years ago and who are afraid of being abandoned again. I will not abandon Israel, ever.”


This is exactly why Howard Dean is a fraud. What a completely mindless comment.

Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate who talks about serious things, who really believes what he says.

That's why he isn't taken seriously.

as you can tell by my avatar.