re Helen Thomas: Pavlov's Dog Didn't Bark June 7 2010

June 7 2010
Question of the morning on Wash Journ was, Should Helen Thomas be asked to resign from the White House press pool because of her response to an anonymous blogger's question about Jews in Israel.

C Span pivoted from a statement by Lani Davis that Thomas was an anti-Jewish bigot. In other words, C Span focused on whether Thomas could continue as an impartial reporter from the White House because she made a statement that was not supportive of Jews.

I think the question about Helen Thomas's capacity to report from the White House should be whether she is mindful of American interests, rather than Jewish or Israel's interests.

I further think that the Question and reaction of the blogger who asked the question is an essential part of the story. After Ms. Thomas made her first statement, that Jews should leave Palestine because they were occupying land stolen from Palestinians, the blogger said, "Whoa...." He did not anticipate that response. In other words, his was not a question to elicit an authentic opinion, it was the lab technician checking on whether Pavlov's dog was still trained. He rang the bell, Helen Thomas did not bark.

That non-bark, that failure of the 63 years of Jewish sensitivity training of the American people is the silence heard round the country.

C Span moderator was out of his depth as a journalist; his listeners and callers were far better informed than he is. For example, the Moderator tried several times to beat back the caller who stated that a member of AIPAC spies on the US. The caller said, "I read it in the Washington Post; don't you know about that?" He said, "It's Steve Weissman" [actually Keith Weissman]." Which is correct.

The Moderator terminated the call at that point.

The question is, can C Span be educated?
If not C Span, then WHO can guide the United States through an honest and vigorous discussion of the US relationship with Israel, with AIPAC, with Jews in the United States, with zionism?

To stifle that conversation is precisely the approach that will result in more, not less, harm to Jews in America. Most people will automatically point to Germany as an example of a situation where "antisemitism got out of hand and resulted in the Holocaust of 6 million Jews." That would be inaccurate. That response would be the Pavlovian response.

Hitler's first major piece of writing was an exploration of "principled antisemitism." Renan's was much the same. Why were the German people resentful of Jews? Both Renan and Hitler concluded that the old, religious issues, that "Jews killed Christ," were bogus. The complaints of the German people involved economic and financial issues, matters of Jewish dominance of German institutions and media. Hitler tried to defuse the anger of the people.

AISH, Rabbi Ken Spiro.... "Jews expect to be persecuted again."

US must do things differently. We must not allow the United States to be led by zionists down the same path that Germany was led by zionists. We must call to account Israel and the Jews in the US who have suborned the interests of the United STates in preference for the interests of Israel.

I suggest several action to take:
1. A truth and reconciliation commission.
2. Seize the assets of zionist billionaires who support activities that work against the interests of the US -- Schusterman, Adelson, Haim Saban,
3. Dismantle the US Treasury office of antiterrorism. US Treasury should be focusing on US economy, not attempting to destroy Iran's economy for the benefit of Israel.
4. Close the Holocaust Museum
5. Demand that lobbyists for Israel register as foreign agents.
6. Include Israel and Israel lobbyists in the Campaign reform rules of _____ .
7.



The question is,