Well, the appointment of Charles “Chas” Freeman as head of the National Intelligence Council is now official. That a longtime shill for the Saudis and virulent hater of Israel would be put in such a post is an amazing and troubling development.
This piece by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency gives some of the background on him. But as many others have written during the last week as Freeman’s appointment was mooted, he is more than just your standard Saudi-financed Israel-basher. This is a guy who has promoted the purchase of Saudi-financed textbooks about Islam for American public schools. Freeman is also a big-time fan of the Mearsheimer/Walt “Israel Lobby” smear. And he was also an apologist for the Chinese government’s massacre of dissidents in Beijing. I guess this is Obama’s idea of what hope means.
But what I found really interesting about this lamentable dust-up is the way the Jewish left in this country, even those who like to call themselves Zionists, reacted to Freeman. The Israel Policy Forum’s MJ Rosenberg spent the week cheerleading for Freeman at the HuffPost site as well as on his own blog.
It’s now gotten to the point that the people who identify themselves as “pro-peace” are willing to support anything, even the appointment of a truly vile creature, if it is perceived as anti-Israel. It’s understandable that the people who are open anti-Zionists would celebrate Freeman, but I fail to see how someone who considers himself “pro-Israel” (as people like Rosenberg and his friends at J Street never tire of describing themselves) would feel the same.
For these leftists, it’s no longer enough to bash Israeli right-wingers or to support the Israeli left in its efforts. Whether I agree with them or not, that’s a legitimate position for an American Jew to take, but when Rosenberg and his ilk start backing Chas Freeman and apologizing for Walt and Mearsheimer that’s something very different. Their argument these days seems to be that the best way to be “pro-Israel” is to back anyone — and I do mean anyone — who will attack Israel.
Though unhappy about Freeman, some Jews are saying today that Freeman’s appointment isn’t significant because of all the other pro-Israel figures in the Obama administration. But if you believe there is a moral equivalence between having someone in government who supports Israel and someone who doesn’t, that’s quite a step down from the assurances we were getting all last year from Jewish Democrats about Obama’s reliability on Israeli security. With Hillary Clinton turning on Israel in regard to Gaza, and with the appointment of Freeman, that is a position that is unraveling fast.
Give them back Palestine.
We call it “smart power.”
“what should we expect if he meets with, say, the Russian president during war time”
Giving away eastern Europe, perhaps. The man wants to be like FDR, no?
Its not that 0bama thinks that Britain is just another country- its that he thinks he is emperor of the world. He does not see it as american-british relations, but as 0bama holding court with his subjects.
At least they would (hopefully) get the spelling right this time…
YOu guys missed the point about the DVD set. Obama was trying to “stimulate” the economy…
You think this wasn’t deliberate? The leftist foreign policy is all about betraying our allies and empowering our enemies.
You think he’s sending a billion dollars to Hamas to help Israel?
“Great Britain is the mother country of the United States of America. School children know it. ”
A-ha, that’s why the Obamanites don’t like the Brits. They don’t appreciate the outcome, that’s why they want to “change” America so badly…
PS-
I liked the gifts Brown gave Obama (Churchill’s biography and a “pen holder made from the wood of a warship that helped stamp out the slave trade”)
Now just imagine what a stir a conservative British PM could have caused had him/her given Obama a biography of William Wilberforce. It would be nice to remind us every once in a while how these “religious fanatics” , centuries ago, helped shape our society (and many of the good values that we take for granted)
I’d rather be friends with a political opposite in Britain than *anyone else* in the world.
They *are* our oldest allies. And unless Obama wants to go back to some antebellum policy of no entangling alliances, we need them most of all.
I mean, how stupid are these guys? Do they think the reason why France & Germany didn’t join us in Iraq is because we weren’t nice to them– or that Britain joined us because we *were* nice to them?
Countries– nations– have interests. Some transient, but many enduring. The U.S. and Britain have enduring interests together.
Amateur hour.
Number One will undoubtedly feel perkier when he travels to Cuba and Venezuela to seek the blessings of the wise leaders of those important countries.
#10
Perhaps Obama’s considering Chavez’s invitation to “follow the path of socialism” …
Michael, I wish schoolchildren were still getting the education you got as a child. Have you looked at a textbook lately ?
As for Gordon Brown, I think we are learning that we elected a president of Kenya and that was the last shot fired in the Mau Mau rebellion. The Europeans wished for this and now that they have it, I hope they are pleased with the result.
Excellent post, Michael Totten.
Obama’s main priority is the destruction of American exceptionalism. That explains his snubbing of Brown and provides an economical explanation for his entire program and attitude: all those domestic and international principles and commitments that set America apart as a “beacon,” or “city on a hall,” are to be undermined. Such exceptionalism is the source of evil–that’s the basic conviction of the Left, and all the standard attacks on Bush (unilateral, Texan, cowboy, etc.) fit that template as well.
The White House has full time staff dedicated to protocol and gift giving to foreign leaders. They seem to be about as smart and effective as Geithner is with the economy.
Isn’t it interesting how much something as trivial as an inappropriate gift reveals? Most people cannot make sense of the complex things that government does, but everyone can understand an exchange of gifts. If an administration cannot get the simple things right, why should we expect them to get the big stuff right?
Obama was not tired. Obama deliberately snubbed the British so that Obama could show he is different from former President GW Bush. See y’all Obama’s the new sheriff in town and things ain’t the way they were.
So take Obama’s actions for what they were: Obama does not want a cozy, cooperative relationship with Britain.
Obama is a disgrace.
As I always say, when a liberal says something the exact opposite is true.
Here we have another example: Obama was elected so that the world will “like us” again. Many world leaders may have grumbled during the Bush years but he was reliable. Obama has given the message to the eastern euros that he’d willingly abandon them , as his letter to the Russians showed. Hillary’s Clinton’s stupid ‘re-set’ button was a direct slap at Bush — something ill mannered Democrats don’t get is dangerous. Moreover, you don’t give a symbol of nuclear war –a RED BUTTON — to the russians, especially with the wrongly translated word. Dumb, silly..whatever at this point.
This administration, as exhibited by the shoddy gift to Gordon Brown is low class. I am truly embarrassed to be represented by a president that doesn’t understand that a serious gift is required to our greatest friend, Great Britain, as well as a full out, Rose Garden press conference.
Low class approaching no class.
I bet Raul Castro gets a blu-ray player on top of all those dvd box sets…the “Friends” box set ended up in my daughter’s christmas stocking this year…need to make sure to tell her she made out better than Mr. Brown!!
I guess gift exchanging is only for the bourgeois. It’s not something the leader of the proletariat should engage in.
Remember when Pres. Bush was running for office in 2000, and the press in unison declared that he didn’t have “gravitas?” I knew that by virtue of having grown up in a diplomatic household, and having been around the presidency under Reagan and his father, that Bush would at least know the protocols of the office to a far larger degree than the average person. Pres. Bush has made all the hosting look easy….and now we have Obama the arrogant buffoon and political predator, and narcissist that can’t be bothered with showing appreciation to our allies. Don’t worry, Mr Brown. Obama’s just not that into us, taxpayers, either.
What’s next? Dumping a bucket of dead fish on the Prime Minister of Japan and calling it a practical joke?
I guess after the Tea Parties we’ll have to start having Rallies for the Allies, to show that Obama’s sophomoric exhaustion isn’t representative of the broader American sentiment. If a State Department official really told the Telegraph that Great Britain is just one of 190 miscellaneous nations to us — well, to start with, he’s lying through his teeth! How do these self-anointed DOS policymakers keep their heads in such a weird Otherworld?
And how did they get to the fore so fast anyway? You’d think that regardless of how much like a hung-over frat boy Obama himself acts, the protocol and PR wizes at State would at least set him up properly.
So, let me get this straight. While Hillary & Co sing outside Medvedev’s window, promising him the moon and the stars if he’ll assemble for a photo op with us and Ahmadinejad, Obama is too tired from his intensive schedule of making stuff up about the economy to show a little pro forma respect to our most consistently reliable ally, like, ever?
As far as I’m concerned, there’s been too little attention paid to the obvious failings of Obama’s high school in Hawaii, and his undergraduate and graduate “educations.” On the other hand, the failings of the American voter should perhaps be more urgently analyzed.
I believe that President Obama also insulted Great Britain by giving back the bust of Winston Churchill that had been given by previous Prime Minister to President Bush.
Maybe BHO thought he was showing appreciation for Brown’s Scottish heritage – the ones I know are notorious skinflints and proud of it.
Don’t anyone ever claim that I’m incapable of saying anything positive about the President!
After the total clampldown of Britannistan I don’t see why the Brits deserve anything more than the visiting head of state of Burundi. Britan was a close ally. But now the UK is more and more a threat to western society and values as should be treated as such.
You have a ton of material waiting to be written up on Iraq, Lebanon, and.. where was the third one?
And you’re writing Page 8 gossip like this instead?
I can’t remember saying this before about your work, but this is insultingly trivial. Our relationship with Britain survived the Suez crisis, the Falklands War, the EU, the Kyoto disconnect, and George Bush’s personal torpedo to Tony Blair’s career. I think it will survive something as motherfu*king pathetic as an low-quality Prime Minister Gift Exchange.
You want to write about damaging the US-UK relationship, how about how we found out a week or two ago that the Bush admin threatened to cut off all intelligence cooperation with Britain if Britain published secret information that showed a terror suspect had been tortured.
http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/index.cfm/page/article/id/12289
That’s some motherfuc*ing relationship-damaging hardball. Not this piffle. But that wouldn’t suit your audience’s ideological biases, would it? Or yours?
#27
Of course, “The Guardian” is the last word for a person with your own ideological biases. Why not read today’s take on it from the Telegraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/4958394/Binyam-Mohamed-torture-claims-Calls-for-judicial-inquiry.html
This is probably more important than anything else around, according to your thinking.
You can tell a lot about a person by the friends he chooses. Obama’s new friends: Hamas, Syria, Cuba. Old friends Obama has kicked under the bus: England, Israel, Poland.
Watch both lists grow.
And these people called George Bush stupid all these years. No I understand why.
Britain tortured Obama’s Grandfather.
With that in consideration I believe Obama treated them better than they deserved to expect.
Sounds good
The UK tortured Obama’s grandpappy. With that in consideration I think his response to the UK was most restrained.
It’s not like he declared war on the UK like his predecessor did on a country who had tried to hurt his father. The UK actually DID hurt Obama’s Grandfather. There is more justification than for Obama to go to war with Britain than there ever was for Bush to go to war with Iraq.
Reminds me of an old Girl Scout Song that this administration should heed (but won’t obviously):
Make new friends but keep the old
one is silver, but the other’s gold
Dissing the Brits actually started before PM Brown’s visit when the WH declined the offer to extend the gift of a famous bust of Winston Churchill. I saw a satirical cartoon of MO screaming that BHO had to get the bust of that dead white guy out of her living room. Since on even days BHO thinks he is FDR I am surprised that he did that b/c FDR and Churchill were not only strong allies but also personally close.
I am paraphrasing here but Churchill said that as long as England joined her fate with America’s all would be right. Even Winnie couldn’t foresee the train wreck of BHO that we have become.
Pointless bable from yet another talking head. This fabricated “incident” will be forgotten in a fortnight and everything will be all patched up with a single phone call from Obama to Brown. I got to hand it to the conservatives for putting so much effort in a non-issue. Just shows what Obama will need to be prepared for in the future.
Perhaps the administration has figured out, although the author hasn’t, that Gordon Brown enjoys the support of two people in Britain: Gordon Brown and Gordon Brown’s driver. If a snub was proferred, it was purposeful and politically astute. Do any of you people actually follow British politics, or are you, as is so often assumed abroad, happy neocon know-nothings, still certain that “American exceptionalism” means never having to say you’re well-informed.
It gets worse. As reported in the Telegraph ( http://tinyurl.com/cgzt96 ), it turns out the DVDs were formatted for the U.S. (Region One, NTSC) and not the UK (Region Two, PAL). Brown couldn’t even watch them.
test
ggg