Opposition to Iran deal shouldn’t raise spectre of disloyalty — National Post View

The call was sponsored by the State Association of Jewish Federations, the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League. Two separate trips – one for Democrats and one for Republicans – are now under way.


An American journalist from a Jewish, pro-Israel newspaper was granted a visa to Iran this summer, and published his first report from the country on Tuesday – one month before the US congress is set to vote on the Iran nuclear deal.

But he said he was troubled by Iran’s continuing “heinous acts” in funding terrorism, and feared one of the results of the deal would be to pour even more money into such groups as Hamas and Hizbullah after economic sanctions against Iran are lifted. Grace Meng, Elliot Engel, Nita Lowey and Steve Israel, as well as Ted Deutch of Florida and Brad Sherman of California. Sen. He loved Israel and he had a bias in favor of Jewish politicians because he felt a kinship with them. It has struck an agreement with Iran that, at best, merely postpones the moment when the Islamist regime will get a nuclear bomb while granting its nuclear program worldwide approval. Such a delay, he argued, “would hinder our ability to determine precisely what was being done at that site”. Cohler-Esses’ story has something of the feel of the articles produced in the past by those who visit tyrannical states in the hope of producing favorable coverage intended to blunt the revulsions of the democratic world.

But long-standing concerns among the pro-Israel establishment raised by the generation gap in Jewish-American attitudes to Israel will have been amplified by the community’s split over the Iran deal, and by the willingness of Obama – the president elected by the millennials – to publicly castigate both Israel’s government and AIPAC for their efforts to reverse U.S. diplomacy.

“It’s not going to happen”, he insisted.

Other opponents have suggested that a military airstrike could sufficiently derail Iran’s nuclear program. We might as well ask why “our” government has brought hundreds of thousands of Muslims into the US and given them special rights, while declaring Christians, veterans, and gun owners to be potential “extremists”.

Something unsafe is lacing political discourse in the U.S. This would require them to have full transparency in terms of their funding and it would also tell the American people that the organizations themselves are not necessarily benign and acting on behalf of U.S. Interests, which is the subterfuge that they now engage in. Yet in the 1930s, Jewish organizations and their national leaders were at loggerheads over the best strategy to combat the rise of Hitler and to manage the case to defend and protect European Jewry.

At an event in Melbourne co-hosted by the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC), Emunah, the Jewish Community Council of Victoria and the United Israel Appeal, Leibler condemned the West’s agreement with Iran over nukes. In 1985, Undersecretary of State George W. Ball declared that, “On Middle East policy, Congress behaves like a bunch of trained poodles, jumping through the hoop held by Israel’s lobby”.

The Conservative movement’s Rabbinical Assembly took no position, issuing a statement calling on Congress to carefully review the agreement to “ensure that Iran will be prevented from obtaining a nuclear weapon”. For others, whom we might identify as “Jewish Americans”, their political framework and identity are constructed around their Zionist passions.

Regarding the agreement, Qaderi said that he “thinks it will be implemented”.

“It is as frightening and disgraceful as the deafening silence of Jewish leaders during the ’30s and ’40s”, he added, referring to the Holocaust. “Certainly, we will want to preserve his life”, Hezi Levy said. Each of these countries has its own nuclear experts with the expertise to determine whether it is a good or bad deal. “We are doing this in a thoughtful and deliberative fashion and as expeditiously as possible“.

We shouldn’t be surprised that a lot of Iranians are willing to say things that contradict at least some of what their government puts out.

Greenblatt said also that he found “very problematic” the rhetoric directed at Schumer from progressives since he announced his opposition to the deal last Thursday evening.

The video was released online and is being pushed via social media.

“Nothing in this deal is based on trust”, Kerry said.


In studying the tenor of this debate, we are likely to experience various forms of anti-Semitic/anti-Israel fallout, as well as an internal Jewish backlash, as the rhetoric accelerates and intensifies in connection with the forthcoming congressional vote.

CJ Waleed Elgadi