Powered by WebAds

Thursday, March 12, 2009

WaPo rips Freeman

The Chas Freeman controversy isn't going away, it's just refocusing. A Washington Post editorial rips Freeman for a 'grotesque libel' against Israel's supporters in the statement he issued after withdrawing from consideration as chairman of the National Intelligence Council (Hat Tip: Memeorandum).
But let's consider the ambassador's broader charge: He describes "an inability of the American public to discuss, or the government to consider, any option for U.S. policies in the Middle East opposed by the ruling faction in Israeli politics." That will certainly be news to Israel's "ruling faction," which in the past few years alone has seen the U.S. government promote a Palestinian election that it opposed; refuse it weapons it might have used for an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities; and adopt a policy of direct negotiations with a regime that denies the Holocaust and that promises to wipe Israel off the map. Two Israeli governments have been forced from office since the early 1990s after open clashes with Washington over matters such as settlement construction in the occupied territories.

What's striking about the charges by Mr. Freeman and like-minded conspiracy theorists is their blatant disregard for such established facts. Mr. Freeman darkly claims that "it is not permitted for anyone in the United States" to describe Israel's nefarious influence. But several of his allies have made themselves famous (and advanced their careers) by making such charges -- and no doubt Mr. Freeman himself will now win plenty of admiring attention. Crackpot tirades such as his have always had an eager audience here and around the world. The real question is why an administration that says it aims to depoliticize U.S. intelligence estimates would have chosen such a man to oversee them.
I can answer that one. To this administration all of the United States' intelligence estimates coincided with Israel's interest. That actually makes sense given that the United States and Israel are allies. This administration wants to undermine that alliance and towards that end it wishes to make American intelligence estimates oppose Israel's interests.

I know that may sound harsh to some of you, but that's the only conclusion I can draw by looking at the string of associations President Obama has maintained, the 'advisers' he has chosen and the appointments he has made going back to the early days of the campaign and even earlier. And yes, those are things I warned about going back two years ago.


At 6:22 PM, Blogger CJE said...

Let's not give Dennis Blair a free pass here - he picked Freeman and recently contradicted Israeli intel with respect to Iran.

At 4:20 PM, Blogger Carl in Jerusalem said...



But Freeman would not have been nominated without Obama's approval.


Post a Comment

<< Home