HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Hagel, Israel, "Apar...

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 05:56 PM


Hagel, Israel, "Apartheid"

Today, Goodman reports on another Hagel speech, also at Rutgers, in April 2010. The source is a "pro-Israel activist" named Kenneth Wagner who literally tattled on Hagel, in real time, by emailing "a contact at AIPAC."

“I am sitting in a lecture by Chuck Hagel at Rutgers,” Wagner wrote in the email. “He basically said that Israel has violated every UN resolution since 1967, that Israel has violated its agreements with the quartet, that it was risking becoming an apartheid state if it didn’t allow the Palestinians to form a state. He said that the settlements were getting close to the point where a contiguous Palestinian state would be impossible.”

The headline, here and at Jennifer Rubin's Right Turn, is the "Apartheid" bit. "Does this fundamentally shift the playing field?" asks Rubin. "Requests for comment from Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) were not answered." You simply can't use "apartheid" and "Israel" in the same sentence. Unfortunately for the nominee, I've obtained a quote from Hagel saying this in February 2010:

As long as in this territory west of the Jordan river there is only one political entity called Israel it is going to be either non-Jewish, or non-democratic. If this bloc of millions of ­Palestinians cannot vote, that will be an apartheid state.

My mistake! That wasn't Hagel. That was Ehud Barak, speaking in his capacity as Israel's defense minister. If we accept the text of the email, Hagel didn't accuse Israel of being or becoming an apartheid state. Wagner has Hagel saying that Israel risk[ed] becoming an apartheid state if it didn’t allow the Palestinians to form a state, and saying that two months after Israel's former PM and contemporary defense minister had said it.



3 replies, 718 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 3 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hagel, Israel, "Apartheid" (Original post)
Purveyor Feb 2013 OP
TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #1
R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2013 #2
TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #3

Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:22 PM

1. AIPAC moles spying on Hagel in 2010?--doesn't surprise me, since Kristol was afraid that Hagel

was going to be Obama's SecDef after the 2008 election. Apparently if Hagel says anything less than glowing about Israel, it's OUTRAGEOUS!! HE MUST BE STOPPED!! Why AIPAC would want to be associated with this sort of ridiculousness is beyond me--let alone any Senators.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:36 PM

2. Washington posts runs with the hatchet piece.



Now new and improved with updates on the dastardly Hagel.

UPDATE: The first call from a pro-Israel group to pull the Hagel nomination is Christians United for Israel. Its executive director, David Brog, tells me, “Enough is enough. The administration can no longer claim ignorance of this nominee’s disdain for Israel and blindness towards Iran. For the sake of our nation President Obama must pull this nomination.” It remains to be seen if other groups that have begun losing patience with Hagel and the White House will follow suit.

UPDATE II: Now House Foreign Committee chairman Rep.. Ed Royce (R-Calif.) tells me he’s had enough of Hagel: “The long list of policy concerns that have arisen makes it impossible for me to see how Senator Hagel is the right pick for one of the most important and demanding positions at this very challenging time.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to R. Daneel Olivaw (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:53 PM

3. Rubin is the link between Kristol/neocon propaganda and an actual newspaper. WaPo runs with the

insinuations and non-confirmed not-quotes, but they call it a blog instead of a column. Very handy way to try to keep your journalism creds and still post agenda-related drivel. Then the GOP Senate takes it from there, saying it's an actual article from the Washington Post and being the butt-holes of Jennifer's puppet hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread