Ugliness: Iran deal supporters call Schumer a greedy, disloyal Jew
Ever since the White House leaked Thursday night that Sen. Chuck Schumer would be coming out against the Iran deal, the progressive movement has foamed at the mouth with vitriol directed Schumer’s way.What 29 top US scientists don’t know
Much of it is just the plain old progressive vitriol of the MoveOn.org, Daily Kos and netroots types. Schumer is a warmonger, wants war, loves war, and so on.
Obama set up that argument when he claimed that Republicans were making common cause with hardline Iranians — even though Obama clinched the deal with hardline Iranians who are laughing all the way to the bank and an internationally-authorized nuclear enrichment program.
Obama set up the disloyalty argument, and it’s no surprise that it’s being used against Democrats who don’t support the deal, particularly Jewish Democrats like Schumer.
That dual loyalty charge — often expressed in terms of being an “Israel firster” — is an old anti-Semitic line of attack, as we explored in detail in a prior post, GreenStar boycott group trainer hurls “Israel-firster” slur at Schumer.
The dual loyalty charge is almost exclusively made against Jewish supporters of Israel. You rarely hear it used against American Christians who support Israel.
As The Tablet magazine reports, given the various dog whistles put out by the Obama administration, it’s no wonder these type of accusations are resurfacing.
Schumer long has been a target of that charge by the anti-Israel boycott movement and anti-Zionist progressive websites.
Now it is on overdrive. (h/t fizziks)
The recent letter of support sent to President Obama for his Iran deal secured last month – signed by 29 scientists, including Nobel laureates – was obviously well-timed to lend firmer scientific backing to what many regard as a severely flawed nuclear deal. This is an impressive group of individuals, with achievements that speak for themselves, and their opinions obviously matter. Yet, the very fact of their scientific achievements does not mean that their assessments of the deal are correct. Indeed, their collective judgment of the Iran deal must be assessed on its merits. And in this regard, unfortunately, more than anything else, the contents of the letter echo the well-known talking points of the Obama administration, and suffer from some of the same deficiencies.Indonesia grants Israeli athlete visa, ending standoff
If this highly respected group of scientists is not aware, for example, that the 24-day cap on Iran’s ability to delay an investigation into a facility suspected of supporting clandestine activities could actually be much longer than that, why would we attribute any more authority to this letter than to other sources making similar arguments to support the deal? If the group had scrutinized paragraphs 75-76 in the Access section – that are not about science, but rather politics – they would have seen that Iran’s ability to play for time regarding inspections of suspicious military facilities begins when the IAEA first submits its concerns, and waits for Iran’s clarification. The 24-day count begins only after that, if and when the IAEA makes a request for access; but the preliminary phase has no time limit.
And there are additional dangerous ambiguities in the deal. There are holes and loopholes and flaws that Iran can abuse for its purposes. So when one assesses the deal, the scientific aspects are certainly important, but that is not where the assessment ends. Rather, there is a need to consider the history of dealing with Iran, and the experience gained thereby. Iran has shown its determination not only to hold on to its vast nuclear infrastructure and breakout capability, but continues its highly aggressive attitude toward the US and the Middle East. Moreover, Iran has over the years perfected tactics of playing for time, and has made it very clear that it will not tolerate inspections at its military sites where suspicions are that it has worked on a military nuclear capability. If pressed on inspections in the coming years, Iran will most likely continue to evade and play for time, and the deal dangerously provides ample room for Iran to do so.
Indonesia granted an Israeli badminton player a visa to enter the country and compete in the world championships in Jakarta after a months-long standoff, Israel’s national Olympic committee said Monday.
The Olympic Committee of Israel said Misha Zilberman, 26, had been cleared to enter Indonesia — the world’s most populous Muslim country — after being repeatedly denied a visa because he is Israeli.
OCI secretary general Gili Lustig said Zilberman had been waiting in Singapore for two weeks after making an initial visa application six months ago. He said the Badminton World Federation intervened to ensure Zilberman could secure a visa.
Zilberman was scheduled to fly from Singapore to Jakarta on Monday accompanied by his mother, also a badminton player, as well as the CEO of the Badminton World Federation, Lustig said. Zilberman is set to compete on Tuesday.
Lustig said the visa delay had prevented Zilberman from properly training for the championships.
“But for us it’s a big victory that he will be there,” Lustig said. “Now he’s an ambassador for Israeli sport.”
