quote:

---

A new survey of American Jewish opinion, released by the American Jewish Committee, demonstrates several important propositions: (1) right-wing neocons (the Bill Kristol/Commentary/ AIPAC/Marty Peretz faction) who relentlessly claim to speak for Israel and for Jews generally hold views that are shared only by a small minority of American Jews; (2) viewpoints that are routinely demonized as reflective of animus towards Israel or even anti-Semitism are ones that are held by large majorities of American Jews; and (3) most American Jews oppose U.S. military action in the Middle East -- including both in Iraq and against Iran.

---

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/12/12/ajc_poll/index.html

[ 12 December 2007: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]

I'd be interested in learning more about the survey's methodology and who exactly were the respondents. Of people who identify as "Jewish" in North America, most view that adjective as rather peripheral to their identity and see it as a heritage akin to someone considering themselves "Italian" because their grandparents came from Italy originally. They may ahve a general appreciation for Italian culture, enjoy Italian food and cheer for Italy when the World Cup rolls around just like most Jews may enjoy Jewish culture and celebrate certain holidays in a nod to their heritage but otherwise are not particularly connected to Judaism and not very different from other groups within the larger society. (Interestingly, I'd tend to put people like Kristol, etc. in this category).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indiana Jones:
It would be interesting to see the poll's cross-tabs based on Jewish affiliation. I'd be pretty confident in seeing huge disparities between "ethnic" and "religious" Jews and would imagine that the more religious a person is, the greater they deviate from "mainstream" Jewish opinion.

---

There is plenty of evidence that shows that orthodox Jews are the only subset of the Jewish population in the US that vote Republican in significant numbers. The more religious Jews are, the more likely they are to be conservative. The same is true in Canada - the Jewish Conservative vote is generally very low, with the exception of some orthodox enclaves.

Another interesting breakdown would be age. I don't have a lot of data to back it up but my feeling is that younger Jews - under 40 let's say - tend to be much less reflexively pro-Israel than their parents. At the same time those who strongly identify as "Zionists" are probably more hardcore in their pro-Israel views, judging by the type of people who are Hillel activists on university campuses these days. What they may lack in numbers (most Jewish students these days want nothing to do with Hillel types), they make up for in fervent ideological commitment.

Of course this survey also demonstrates that one can be a good, mainstream "Zionist" and oppose the Iraq war and the neocon desire to attack Iran. This point seems lost on these young Hillel types though - at York for instance (and likely elsewhere) they were big supporters of the Iraq war because they thought it would be "good for Israel." Not true, of course, and quite morally depraved as criteria for whether the war was a good idea or not.

[ 13 December 2007: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lord Palmerston:

There is plenty of evidence that shows that orthodox Jews are the only subset of the Jewish population in the US that vote Republican in significant numbers. The more religious Jews are, the more likely they are to be conservative.

---

quote:

---

An examination of past AJC surveys as well as a number of other polls of American Jews demonstrates that Jews have remained remarkably faithful to the values of liberal humanism. These views, however, have been obscured in our political discourse by an unholy alliance between conservative-dominated professional Jewish organizations and neoconservative Jewish pundits, aided by pliant and frequently clueless mainstream media that empower these right-wingers to speak for a people with values diametrically opposed to theirs.

Take a look at the agendas of some of the most influential Jewish organizations, like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the Anti-Defamation League, the Zionist Organization of America and the American Jewish Committee itself; each has historically associated itself with the hawkish side of the debate--and some have done so even when Israel took the more dovish side (the Jewish equivalent of being holier than the Pope). Forget for a moment the argument over whether what some call "the Lobby" is good or bad for America. My point is that it's bad for the Jews.

In large part the trouble lies with the antidemocratic structures of these organizations and the apathy of most Jews with regard to organized Jewish life. Major Jewish groups respond to the demands of their top funders and best-organized constituencies. Most American Jews, however, have little or nothing to do with these groups. According to the AJC survey, while 90 percent of Jews say being Jewish is either "very important" (61 percent) or "fairly important" (29 percent) in their lives, exactly half say they belong to a synagogue or temple. A fraction of this number belong to Jewish political organizations, and the number of major funders is but a tiny percentage of that. As with so much of American life, the far-right minority is better funded and better disciplined than the liberal majority.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lord Palmerston:
I'd think people like Bill Kristol and David Frum (or Bernie Farber for that matter) would be more disappointed than Max.

---

AJC and CJC are not related in any way shape or form.

That being said Canadians in general have moved more to the right over the last 20 years. Jews have moved to the right as well. Maybe not the far right yet. But they have moved to the blue-libeal view on many issues.

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnpauljones:
Unionist if you look up in the sky you will see the alert that is issued when CJC is once again brought into a thread that by its opening post has nothing to do with Canada let alone CJC.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ohara:
LP this is a riot. Ezra Levant, Jonathan Kay, Colby Cosh and other Jewish neo-Cons slam Farber for being too left wing while you and others slam him for being too right wing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Ohara, just a technical question: What software do you use to set up that "alert" for yourself every time Farber's name is mentioned here?

---

Remember the days before the Wizard.

Wait it is a conspiracy. It is an Ozian conspiracy.

Because I have restraint.

yes,...I do.

[ 04 March 2008: Message edited by: oldgoat ]

quote:

---

That being said Canadians in general have moved more to the right over the last 20 years.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnpauljones:
Maybe not the far right yet.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Petsy:
Farber as that "man behind the curtain"? What next, Farber also the wicked witch of the west? If there is an obsession about cjc I say again its a Babble obsession not restricted to one or two.

---

Hey come on, I clearly had Farber cast as Dorothy. The CJC's use of straw men also suggests a role for the Scarecrow. But who is Cowardly Lion I ask?

[ 04 March 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

This is not necessarily a bad thing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ohara:
Dorothy works as Farber and for you AKAMycroft, perhaps the tinman or Toto?

---

Meir Weinstein of the JDL alternates between being Farber's lapdog and biting his ankles so I think he's suitable for the role of Toto. (He also can't make up his mind whether he backs Ezra Levant on the Human Rights Commission or the CJC, every day he has a different position - I guess a lack of brain is to be expected from a knuckle dragging henchman who tries to be a leader).

[ 04 March 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

quote:

---

On the advocacy front, Ms. Cohen's accusations and insinuations are simply wrong. CJC has played a lead role in seeking funding for Jewish day schools in partnership with other faith-based groups. CJC has loudly sounded the alarm about the threat posed by Iran. Even with her "cursory glance" at our website, Ms. Cohen should have seen our op-ed defending Ezra Levant. That same op-ed took human rights commissions to task for such frivolous exercises as the investigation into Mr. Levant's magazine's publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed.

---

In other words, they're essentially saying, "no, no, no, look at how rightwing we actually are. We support hate speech laws but not against neocon hate speech like that from Levant. We want Canada to be involved in a US-led attack on Iran", etc., etc.

http://tinyurl.com/2jx9be

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
20 years ago, Canadians were busy electing back to back ultra Conservative majority governments. Today the Conservatives can barely get above 30% in the polls.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnpauljones:
That being said Canadians in general have moved more to the right over the last 20 years. Jews have moved to the right as well. Maybe not the far right yet. But they have moved to the blue-libeal view on many issues.

---

Well there's certainly evidence that so-called Jewish leaders have moved to the right, well to the right of Jews generally.

Max is correct. It seems the CJC et. al. seems much more concerned about being outflanked on the right.

[ 05 March 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]

quote:

---

Twenty years ago the NDP got over 20% of the popular vote and won 43 seats out of 295. They can only dream of that kind of support today.

---

It wouldn't be much of a leap at all for the NDP to go from 17.5% in 2006 to 20% in the next election. In fact, I think it is likely - and 20% means a lot more in a four-way (even five way if we count the so-called greens) than in a pure three party race like in 1988.

You and I can cherry-pick past election results and opinion polls to prove whatever we want.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Max Bialystock:
Speaking of Farber he is a big proponent of attacking Iran. But I guess he's still a "progressive" eh ohara?

---

[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: Petsy ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Max Bialystock:

In other words, they're essentially saying, "no, no, no, look at how rightwing we actually are. We support hate speech laws but not against neocon hate speech like that from Levant. We want Canada to be involved in a US-led attack on Iran", etc., etc.

http://tinyurl.com/2jx9be

.

---

Am I too understand that from this sentence you extrapalate that cjc advocates an attck on Iran? Max your exagerrations prove how benign and silly your arguments are.

quote:

---

CJC has loudly sounded the alarm about the threat posed by Iran.

---

[ 06 March 2008: Message edited by: Petsy ]

[ 08 March 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]

quote:

---

ohara: we would all hope for not a continued fanatic religious theocracy with a certifiable President, but rather a government that represents the people with democratic progressive ideals.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ohara:
Democracy isnt always perfect...in the end progressive democracy wins out...Im sure you wouldnt describe Hamas as either progressive or democratic

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ohara:
LP I heard a speech given by Rabbi Reuven Bulka the co-President of CJC where he advocated for a peaceful revolution by the Iranian people for change. Hmmm I wonder if that's what CJC could mean? do ya think????

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ohara:
Democracy isnt always perfect...in the end progressive democracy wins out...Im sure you wouldnt describe Hamas as either progressive or democratic

---

No but the point is they were democratically elected and if you are a democrat then you have to respect that even if you don't like them.

Surely you aren't suggesting that to be a democracy one must exclude parties that are not "progressive" or democratic? Perhaps then Israel should ban Likud, the National Union and the religious parties or at least ban them from participating in government?

Also, why do you assume that a progressive and democratic Arab party would not also be adamantly opposed to Israel or more opposed to Israel than the undemocratic governments of Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia?

[ 08 March 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

quote:

---

If Barack Obama has a problem among Jewish voters, then Sen. Joseph Lieberman is in monumental trouble.

Among the most high-profile Jews in Congress, Lieberman is viewed far more unfavorably than the presumptive Democratic nominee, according to a new poll. Only 37 percent of Jews view the Connecticut Independent in a favorable light compared to 48 percent who have a negative perception. As for Obama, 60 percent of Jews view him favorably while 34 percent view him unfavorably.

---

and...

quote:

---

Not that there is tremendous significance to these developments or numbers. Lieberman has eagerly taken to his role of McCain attack dog, in the process alienating large portions of the Democrats that make up both the Jewish community and his Connecticut constituency. Not to mention the relatively common misconception that Jews naturally are aligned with Lieberman's hard-line tilt on foreign affairs. According to J Street, 38 percent of respondents had a positive view of the conservative leaning AIPAC, compared to 44 percent who viewed the liberal MoveOn.org in a favorable light.

---

From the Globe and Mail obituary:

Mr. Nathan first came to the world's attention when he flew his ancient biplane, "Shalom One", to Port Said, against Israeli rules, in 1966, in an attempt to meet with Gamal Abdel Nasser. "Someone has to do something," he said. "We are getting nowhere with the politicians."

Jailed in later years for his continuing peace efforts, his pirate radio station, "The Voice of Peace", offered news and music to both Israel and the Arab world in the 1970s and 80s. He met with Yasser Arafat on more than one occasion, again breaking the law.

On a prison hunger strike, learning that Menachem Begin had said the government could not do more toward making peace, he bought a cemetery plot and requested that the tombstone say simply, "Nissiti". ("I tried.")

He was celebrated by many of the Israeli establishment in his time, as a moral force.