- Details
- Written by AUPHR AUPHR
- Published: 19 April 2008 19 April 2008
- Hits: 3745 3745
{josquote}Jeff has disappointed me as few others have or could. He has seen first hand the unconscionable results of the Occupation. Yet he comes out on the side of the oppressor. Gordon Smith, for all of his faults, never saw Israeli oppression first hand. Jeff has. As between these two supporters of Zionism, who is the greater enemy of “peace”? - Tom {/josquote}
This document was obtained at the April 14th candidates forum held at the Mittleman Jewish Community Center in Portland, Oregon. Democratic Candidates for U.S. Senate for the State of Oregon Jeff Merkley and Steve Novick both presented at the event. Jeff Merkley's staff made this document available.
We were surprised at Merkley's document and his statements on April 14th since he has had close contact with the community of American Arabs and Muslims and peace activists and had solicited their contributions for his campaign. During his talk he mentioned and re-iterated the old anti-Palestinian canard that there is "no partner for peace." This time around, Jeff said it is because "Hamas is a terrorist organization and Abbas is too weak to negotiate." This of course gives Israel a free ticket to continue its 40 years of occupation and create an Apartheid system in Palestine-Israel. It is so unfortunate that Jeff has decided to shut his eyes and drink the AIPAC flavored cool-aid.
The document is not currently on Jeff Merkley's campaign web site, but AUPHR has posted it here .
A note from Peter Miller:
A large number of issues are raised by this Merkley Israel position paper, including:
This
document is an important foreign policy statement by Merkley's
campaign. It is significantly more detailed than most items found on
his web site. Unfortunately, it is intended only for the Oregon Jewish
community and not all Oregonians. It doesn't even represent the views
of all Jewish Americans. Aren't all Oregonians entitled to an open
discussion of these issues? Aren't we all entitled to see what his
views (and those of all candidates) really are? How can a document of
this nature NOT be found on Merkley's (or any politicians) web site?
Who
are his political advisors and what kind of pressures are they putting
on him to toe the pro-Israel line? Where do these people come from,
what are their principles, positions and allegiances? I suspect these
advisors have an impact on the candidate's position far in excess of
their transparency and visibility.
Why is he consulting with
only one side of such an important issue of the day? He had the
opportunity to consult with members of the local Palestinian community
who were attempting to contact him before this document came out and he
chose not to. Is this what a progressive should do? Is this a way to
end divisiveness in politics?
How can a candidate court a group
like Arabs and Muslims, who are under surveillance by the FBI and
politically powerless, who have political issues that the rest of the
country refuses to discuss, and then go support the opposite side in
such a manner?
Merkley, obviously, is not the first politician to support AIPAC and align themselves with Israel's policies. For example, Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski stated in a 2006 AIPAC "community dinner" in portland that "Even in these partisan times, support for AIPAC is an article of faith for both political parties." (see http://governor.oregon.gov/Gov/speech/speech_043006.shtml)
Peter Miller
A note from AUPHR co-founder Tom Nelson:
Jeff has disappointed me as few others have or could. He has seen first hand the unconscionable results of the Occupation. Yet he comes out on the side of the oppressor.
Gordon Smith, for all of his faults, never saw Israeli oppression first hand. Jeff has. As between these two supporters of Zionism, who is the greater enemy of “peace”?
Tom