fbpx

January 5, 2016

Homeless in Koreatown

You can’t knock on a tent, so I had to yell. I wanted to meet the people inside the blue tent and hear their story. I had seen several sidewalk tents on my way to the Jewish Journal offices in Koreatown, and the rain storm had made me especially curious about how the homeless were faring.

I told the man who answered that I worked at a newspaper and wanted to hear his story. The man, Gary Ellison, age 42, from Chicago, was lean and balding with brownish skin and strong features. His eyes were warm and friendly. He was definitely happy to see me.

Gary tried as best he could to untangle the entrance flaps to the tent. As I crouched awkwardly to enter, he put an old grey jacket on a sitting area so I’d be more comfortable. Behind another flap was a dark-haired woman sitting cross-legged on the ground, hugging a blanket. Her name was Cierra Bartholomew, age 23, also from Chicago. Cierra had large brown eyes, olive skin and a gentle demeanor. She had laid out Christmas lights on a little rug in front of her, which created an amber glow inside the tent. Behind her was her boyfriend, Rick Rock, who was sleeping.

The sound of rain falling became like background music to our conversation.

Gary was eager to talk. He was raised by his mother in Lemont, a suburb of Chicago. He didn’t know his Dad, meeting him for the first time when he was 12. “He never respected me as his son,” Gary said. The same was true for his younger brother, who only met the Dad when he was on his deathbed.

But Gary’s mother loved him dearly. He still speaks with her whenever he can. He pulled out a few old pictures of her and proudly showed them to me.

Gary is good with his hands. In his 20s, he made a decent living working on barges at Illinois Marine Towing, before a bar fight put his life on hold. A knife stabbing had severed his main artery and he underwent open heart surgery that incapacitated him for over a year.

He moved to Las Vegas in his 30s and worked as a mechanic. One night, at a 7-11, he met Karlina, a single mother of two. They fell in love and got married.

He made enough money to get an apartment and support his new wife and her kids. But he says “she ran around” on him. “I would wake up in the middle of the night and she was gone,” he said. “She broke my heart.”

With his heart broken, he left Vegas for Los Angeles about three years ago. Unable to find work, he entered a homeless shelter in Costa Mesa but had to leave because he says people would steal his things. “There’s bad stuff going on in shelters,” he told me. “I prefer the streets.”

But not all streets are created equal. Before moving to Koreatown about three months ago, he had pitched his tent at MacArthur Park, which he says wasn’t very safe. Thankfully, though, MacCarthur Park is where he met his future best friend, Cierra.

“We’re both from Chicago,” he said. “We understand each other.”

They consider their new location on New Hampshire Ave in Koreatown a blessing. “The Korean Consulate is right there,” Cierra said. “That keeps us safe.”

As far as the police goes, “If we respect them, they respect us,” she said. In fact, officers have come by occasionally to give them information about shelters and other places that might help them find more permanent housing.

For now, they’re banking on their old tent to protect them from the rain and the elements. It does a decent enough job. I got a little wet, but that’s because I was close to the entrance. Cierra, who was inside and bundled up, seemed reasonably cozy.

I asked them if they had any plans for the future. Cierra said she’d love to open a “dispensary” where she can lawfully sell medical marijuana. Gary would love to do carpentry or any other handy work. He dreams of building a house. He told me he has a Facebook page that he hopes will help him make connections so he can get back on his feet.

Cierra is reluctant to get into a shelter because she doesn’t want to be separated from Rick and Gary. Apparently, the three have built a strong friendship.

Before I left, Gary sang me a song he wrote, called “Homeless Man.” It’s about a homeless man looking for work, who's always dressed in a suit and tie.

Homeless in Koreatown Read More »

About

A change in perspective can shift the focus of our day – and even our lives.  We have an opportunity to harness a “moment in time,” allowing our souls to be both grounded and lifted.  This blog shows how the simplest of daily experiences can become the most meaningful of life’s blessings.  All it takes is a moment in time.

Rabbi Zach Shapiro is the Spiritual Leader of Temple Akiba, Culver City, CA.

About Read More »

Can Israel save itself?

Recent weeks have witnessed an intense debate surrounding the Israeli human rights group “Breaking the Silence” (BTS). Much of this is related to the Israeli government’s proposed legislation to require nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to display in demonstrable and public form the support they received from foreign governments, in sharp distinction from the free pass that the government gives to right-wing groups that receive a great deal of money from foreign, private sources. BTS, which receives part of its budget from the European Union, has been cast as the chief culprit, owing to its policy of reporting on abuses by Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers in the occupied territories. Both President Reuven Rivlin and opposition leader Tzipi Livni went out of their way to criticize BTS at the New Israel Fund/HaaretzQ conference in New York in mid-December. Far more gravely, the right-wing Israeli organization Im Tirtzu produced a provocative video that depicted a leading member of BTS as a sinister foreign agent who endangered the security of the State of Israel.  

In the eyes of its opponents, the chief sins of BTS are two-fold: first, that it dares to criticize the most and perhaps only sacred institution remaining in Israel, the IDF; and second, that it does so not only at home, in Israel, but abroad, in Europe and the United States. Such reports abroad, it is argued, only strengthen the hand of Israel’s enemies at a particularly vulnerable point in time.  

This concern cannot be dismissed out of hand. There clearly is an uptick in anti-Israeli agitation in the West, especially through the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which may well shift its tactic from attacking Israel’s occupation of the West Bank to advocating an academic and cultural boycott of Israel (and thereby questioning the legitimacy of Israel’s right to exist). This kind of agitation is often confused with, but nonetheless is distinct from, the decision by the European Union (EU) in November to label products coming from Israeli settlements. The EU’s policy is in fact an affirmation of Israel’s right to exist. Along with much of the world, it regards Israeli settlements beyond the Green Line as illegal according to the Fourth Geneva Convention.  But it recognizes Israel’s right to live in peace and security within the Green Line. By issuing a kind of censure on settlement products, it is seeking to push Israel away from a dangerous cliff: If the country continues to entrench itself in West Bank settlements, there will be no Palestinian state. In addition to denying Palestinians their legitimate right to self-determination, continued occupation will likely also spell the end of Israel as a Jewish state, given the demographic trends in the land between the Jordan and Mediterranean. 

The EU, therefore, is attempting to shake up the current geopolitical stasis, a state that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seems intent on preserving. In parallel, BTS is attempting to call attention to abuses that result from Israel’s occupation. Its decision to air accounts of Israeli soldiers’ transgressions is discomfiting, to be sure. It taps into a deep-rooted fear in Jewish tradition that regards entreaties to gentiles as the height of disloyalty. Medieval Jews regarded with unrestrained animosity fellow Jews (known as mosrim) who informed on others to the gentile state.  Similarly, it was considered a severe breach of protocol to seek to adjudicate legal matters between Jews in a gentile jurisdiction (arka`ot shel goyim).  

We live in a different world now. There is a self-standing and powerful Jewish state. But it is not unblemished. The logic of groups such as Breaking the Silence is that self-scrutiny by Israel alone is not always sufficient. The IDF, professional and well trained as it may be, is not the best vehicle to monitor or pass judgment on allegations of abuses within it. Nor is Israel’s current right-wing government, whose leaders sometimes seem less interested in upholding the country’s increasingly fragile democratic foundation than the army or security services. 

Can Israel save itself at this point? As the country marks the ignominious 50th year of the occupation in 2017, this is an ever more urgent question. There is no evidence to suggest that Netanyahu can or wants to take the difficult steps necessary to preserve Israel’s delicate democratic balance and realize the promise laid out in its founding Declaration of Independence from May 14, 1948. In light of that, one can either accept the current anti-democratic drift, with its potential to make a bad situation in Israel/Palestine much worse, or one can appeal, as BTS has done, to external audiences who are interested in peace and justice in this troubled land. 

Undeniably, this is a risky proposition.  There are actors out there in the world who desire nothing more than to condemn Israel to extinction.  But there are also actors out there, such as the European Union, which distinguish clearly between Israel’s right to exist and the illegality of its occupation. Distinguishing between the two kinds of audiences is tricky, and Breaking the Silence must be mindful of this.  But it is not impossible. Above all, it is necessary, since the policy of keeping Israel’s woes in-house has simply not worked.


David N. Myers is the Sady and Ludwig Kahn Professor of Jewish History at UCLA.

Can Israel save itself? Read More »

One father loves Israel, the other hates it. Guess which one is Arab?

I was struck by the contrasting reactions of the fathers of two accused terrorists, both Israelis. One son shot up a Tel Aviv pub, murdering two and wounding seven, while the other firebombed a house killing an infant boy and his parents and severely injuring his 4-year-old brother. Both sons have records for hate crimes.

One father quickly alerted police when he suspected his son's involvement, and publicly expressed deep regrets over the incident, offering condolences to the victims and their families.  He declared his “loyalty” and “love” for Israel.

The other father insisted his son was innocent and that his confession was tortured out of him.  He denounced the State of Israel and declared his hatred for it.  He called the country's president “the fuhrer.”

The father who called on his son to surrender is an Israeli Arab who has been a volunteer with the Israeli police for more than 30 years. 

The other father, who called Israel the “most anti-Semitic country in the world,” is the ultra-Orthodox rabbi of the West Bank settlement of Karmel Zur.     

The Arab suspect in the shooting on Dizengoff Street, Nishat Milhem, 31, is still at large as of this writing. Early Tuesday, his father, who has called on his son to surrender, and five other relatives and family friends were arrested as possible accessories, but some reports suggest they were being used as bait to get Nishat to turn himself in. 

The Jew, Amiram Ben-Uliel, 21, was indicted last week for the July 31 fatal firebombing of the Dawabsha family home in the village of Duma while they slept. 

A third father sought to take political advantage of the tragedies. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, noting that his sons were about the same age as the pub shooting victims, tried to spread the blame over all Israeli Arabs and exploit the tragedy for political gain.  

Six months earlier he condemned the Duma arson as “Jewish terrorism” but dismissed the killers as “extreme and marginal, and [they] certainly don't represent religious Zionism.” 

But on Dizengoff Street this weekend the Israeli leader played his customary race card with a verbal assault on Israel's Arab citizens. 

He blamed the killings on “wild incitement of radical Islam,” and lectured one fifth of the nation's population about its responsibilities as citizens. He demanded all Arab Knesset members, “without exception…condemn the murder clearly and unequivocally.” There was no such demand of Jewish MK's after the Duma murders.

Netanyahu cemented his position as Israel's inciter-in-chief with his wholesale indictment of Israel's Arabs and dismissal of Jewish terrorists as an almost irrelevant fringe group.

In terror attacks when he was out of power, Netanyahu was quick to blame the sitting prime minister for lax security. But now that Bibi's in charge, it's always someone else's fault.

Netanyahu has that Trumpian penchant for taking credit for what works and blaming others for what goes wrong.  

Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai said the PM smeared all Israeli Arabs because of his own inability to provide security.  

One father loves Israel, the other hates it. Guess which one is Arab? Read More »

Jewish leaders endorse, critique Obama’s actions to curb gun violence

President Barack Obama’s announcement Tuesday of a series of executive actions to curb gun violence, including expanding background checks for people purchasing firearms on the private market, prompted an array of responses from leaders in the Los Angeles Jewish community.

Rabbi Hillel Cohn, rabbi emeritus of Congregation Emanu El in San Redlands, a synagogue located near the recent mass shooting at the San Bernardino Inland Regional Center, said he welcomed the remarks by the president today.

“I applaud the president,” he said in a phone interview. “The mourning and the shock of what happened in San Bernardino will ultimately subside, but the danger of guns and the destructibility of weapons will continue and we need to have much greater control over [it].”

Rabbi Aryeh Cohen, a professor at American Jewish University and rabbi-in-residence at the progressive Bend the Arc: A Jewish Partnership for Justice, offered an enthusiastic, if pragmatic response to Obama’s remarks, saying more needs to be done than was articulated by Obama earlier today.

“I thought it was a beginning of a good cultural shift, [although] the reforms he is bringing are minimal… I thought it was an important moment,” he said in a phone interview, shortly after Obama delivered his approximately 40-minute remarks on Tuesday morning from the White House. “The problem is Republicans who get elected with a stroke of a pen can undo those executive orders, but I think culturally it was an important shift.”

However, Doris Wise Montrose, president of Jews Can Shoot, a program of Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors, denounced the remarks delivered by Obama on Tuesday, saying the steps he announced to expand background checks will not curb gun violence.

“Nothing he dealt with today is going to affect criminals, because they are criminals,” Montrose, a gun owner, said in a phone interview. “Everything is to restrict law abiding citizens from exercising second amendment rights.”

Obama said the executive actions he is using to direct federal agencies, the most he can do without the participation of Congress, include expanding the background check system so that anyone selling guns will be required to obtain a license and to conduct a background check of the person purchasing the weapon; improving the mental health care system and working on gun safety technology.

He also said that just as people have the right to own a gun, as stated in the second amendment, so to do people have a right to worship – citing mass shootings at a church in Charleston, S.C., this past June; at a Kansas Jewish community center in 2014 which resulted in the death of three non-Jews; at a condominium complex in Chapel Hill that resulted in the deaths of Muslims and at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin in 2012.

“Our right to worship freely and safely, that right was denied to Christians in Charleston, South Carolina, that was denied Jews in Kansas City, that was denied Muslims in Chapel Hill and Sikhs in Oak Creek,” he said. “They have rights, too.”

In attendance at the speech was Jewish former Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot point blank by a gunman during a rally in Tucson in 2011.

Whether or not Obama’s executive actions can reduce gun violence, Cohen, for his part, referred to deaths in the U.S. by gun violence as an “astounding mind-boggling phenomenon.” According to whitehouse.gov, “more than 30,000 Americans die from gun violence every year.”

“I think it clearly should be a priority for the American body politic,” Cohen said of curbing gun violence. “It clearly should be a priority for the Jewish community in terms of pikuah nefesh,” referring to the Jewish obligation to save a life in jeopardy.

Jewish leaders endorse, critique Obama’s actions to curb gun violence Read More »

When candidates cry

On the presidential campaign trail this month, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina and Chris Christie shed real tears and moved millions speaking personally about loved ones  who have struggled with drug addiction. Former Florida Gov. Bush spoke about how he never expected to see his beautiful daughter in jail.  Fiorina spoke of living with the enduring pain of her daughter’s death by overdose at age 34.   And Christie’s video story about his close friend’s death from a prescription drug overdose overwhelmed him, and the millions who watched it virally.

“When I sat there as the governor of New Jersey at his funeral, and looked across the pew at [my friend’s] three daughters, sobbing because their dad is gone—there but for the grace of God go I,” Christie said. “It can happen to anyone. And so we need to start treating people in this country, not jailing them.”

The candidates said the answer to drugs is treatment, not jail. 

Which, you’ll recall, is very, very different from what most Republicans and many Democrats have been saying for years.   Despite evidence that treatment works far better, despite repeated calls for a saner drug policy, lawmakers have long held firm to their misguided, moralistic beliefs that addicts belonged behind bars. 

What changed are not the facts. For years there has been plenty of evidence that our drug laws weren’t working.  What changed, it seems, is this: The abstract became personal.

Before that, they resisted pushing for more effective policies either because it was too politically risky, or because they simply lacked the imagination that would enable them to see the suffering around them and say, “What if that were me?”  

It is a shame, if not a tragedy, that it took the flat back hand of direct experience to slap these men and women across the face before they could hear what so many others had been trying to say, before they stopped reciting “Just Say No” and started saying, “Hey, what actually works?” Reality flipped their empathy switch.  

So my question is this: Why won’t they turn on the same empathy when it comes to gun control?

This week, President Barack Obama announced a series of executive actions he is taking in hopes of reducing the scourge of gun violence in this country. These are sober and sensible measures, the most he could do without Congressional cooperation, which, because of the gun lobby, isn’t going to happen any time soon.

Obama cried, too, as he spoke at a public forum announcing his actions, where he was introduced by Mark Barden, whose son Daniel was killed in the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.  

“Every time I think about those kids, it gets me mad,” Obama said, pausing to wipe away tears.

I don’t know whether Obama has lost anyone close to him due to gun violence, but as president, he has met with and spoken to hundreds of victims of the mass shootings that have taken place during his time in office.  It can’t not get to you.

Unless, of course, you don’t let it.

Republicans condemned Obama’s executive actions even before they were announced.  Jeb Bush said Obama’s “first impulse is always to take rights away from law abiding citizens.”  And Gov.Christie, speaking two days before on “Fox News Sunday,” dismissed the coming orders as “illegal,” calling Obama a “petulant child.”

The two candidates are wrong on the facts. Nothing in what Obama proposed does more than strengthen existing laws, which are designed to keep guns away from criminals and improve mental health treatment, something Republicans have said should be done to limit gun violence.  These are good things, but what really needs to be done are universal background checks, mandatory gun training such as is required in Israel and, I believe, a law that demands gun owners to get liability insurance, as is required of people who drive cars.  Put insurance companies on the hook for damages and you will see guns get safer faster than you can say AR-15.

Those very modest measures, which do not in any way take away the lawful right to bear arms – which I support — require an act of Congress. That means at least some Republicans must support them. That means Republican leaders, like the men and women running for president, must be able to empathize with the current and future victims of guns. 

After all, the numbers of people affected each year by dugs and guns aren’t very far apart.  According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 40,393 people died of drug-induced causes in 2010, the latest year for which data are available.  That same year, 31,000 died from gun injuries, through suicides, homicides and accidents. In  2013, firearms caused 33,000 deaths– and 84,000 injuries.

So Bush needs to imagine himself as personally affected by gun violence as he is by drugs. Christie should think how’d he feel if someone he loved lost a child to a gun accident. Fiorina ought to meditate for a second on whether she’d feel any differently if her beloved daughter had died of a gun-inflicted suicide instead of an overdose.   

In short, I would ask the candidates to apply the same minimal level of empathy they now have for drug addicts to victims of gun violence.  

And I have to wonder: Is that asking too much?


Rob Eshman is publisher and editor-in-chief of the Jewish Journal.  Follow him on Instagram and Twitter @foodaism. To support sensible gun control, go to everytown.org.

When candidates cry Read More »

Jewish groups back Obama on gun control initiatives

Jewish groups praised new executive actions by President Barack Obama to reduce gun violence.

On Tuesday, in an emotional White House address accompanied by victims of gun violence, Obama announced a series of measures that include broadening the definition of a business under existing gun control laws, addressing loopholes that allow some gun sellers to skirt background check requirements; making gun sellers more accountable for guns that are lost or stolen while in their possession; increasing support for the development of gun safety technology, and increasing funds for mental health.

“Today, background checks are required at gun stores — if a father wants to teach his daughter how to hunt, he can walk into a gun store, get a background check, purchase his weapon safely and responsibly,” Obama said. “The problem is some gun sellers have been operating under a different set of rules. A violent felon can buy the exact same weapon over the Internet with no background check, no questions asked.”

Representatives of the National Council of Jewish Women, Jewish Women International and the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, the umbrella body for Jewish public policy groups, were present at the announcement of the initiatives. They were among an array of groups including the Reform movement’s Religious Action Center and its Central Conference of American Rabbis that praised the actions.

With his executive actions, Obama is directing federal agencies to take the steps he proposed.

“These proposals are a step forward,” said Jared Feldman, the JCPA’s Washington director. “They are clearly insufficient to the magnitude of the problem. We’re going to need Congress to engage — and engage substantively — on these issues.”

Obama has failed to advance gun-control legislation through the Republican-led Congress. Republican leaders suggested in statements Tuesday that his actions were unconstitutional, and several of the party’s presidential candidates said they would roll back the actions as soon as they were elected.

The president wiped away tears as he recalled the 2012 massacre of first-graders in Newtown, Connecticut, by a lone gunman.

“Every time I think about those kids it gets me madder,” Obama said.

Among those on hand for the announcement was Gabrielle Giffords, the former Jewish Arizona congresswoman who survived a shooting attack in a Tucson suburb in 2011. Since then, the Jewish lawmaker has led advocacy for gun control.

The National Council of Jewish Women, which has been advocating for gun control since 1969, would continue to work on the state level, said its CEO, Nancy Kaufman.

“We still hold out hope the Congress will understand they need to do something,” she said, but added that the most effective route now seemed to be to advance background checks and gun trafficking on the state level.

Jewish groups back Obama on gun control initiatives Read More »

Rubio slams Obama’s spying of Israel in new TV ad

Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio on Tuesday slammed the Obama administration for the NSA’s spying of Israel in a new TV commercial released on Tuesday. 

“Barack Obama released terrorists from Guantanamo, and now they are plotting to attack us. Instead of fighting to fund our troops .. he spies on Israel, and cut a deal with Iran,” Rubio says in the direct-to-camera spot.

In an Op-Ed for the National Journal on Tuesday, Rubio suggested that not only has the nuclear deal with Iran failed to stop their pursuit for a nuclear wepaon in the future, but they have already stretched the terms of Obama’s deal. “Iran is now trying to claim that a U.S. law aimed at protecting Americans from terrorists trying to come to the United States is an American violation of the agreement. This is a blatant attempt to pressure the Obama administration not to seek or enforce any new sanctions whatsoever, even those targeting human-rights abuses and support for terrorism, which are allowed under the deal,” RUbio wrote. 

The Republican presidential hopeful promised, “I will pressure Iran on all fronts across the Middle East. I will increase support to our allies in the region that are on the frontline of Iran’s nefarious activities. The mullahs will no longer have an American president to push around.”

Rubio slams Obama’s spying of Israel in new TV ad Read More »

390,000 views on WeSaidGoTravel @YouTube

Thank you to everyone who has subscribed to my ” target=”_blank”>Los Angeles and all over our planet! Here are a few of the videos I created about my journeys.

Feb 2015: ” target=”_blank”>Guinness Storehouse brought me to Dublin and I was in the St. Patrick's Day Parade! I wrote about it for ” target=”_blank”>Santa Barbara, stayed at ” target=”_blank”>the Outpost.

May 2015: I ” target=”_blank”>ten videos with strolling on the San Andres fault, amazing meals and great entertainment!

July 2015: The first ever restaurant week in ” target=”_blank”>USA Today article.

August 2015: I returned to the beautiful Colombia for my first visit to Bogota. ” target=”_blank”>Street Art article for USA Today. Thank you to Jason Will & Scott Eddy for taking me on part of their ” target=”_blank”>NYC called my name in September to be on national television as a travel expert and talk about the ” target=”_blank”>Dallas, Florida and ” target=”_blank”>27 videos to share what we saw!

December 2015: Viking Cruises invited me to sail on the Romantic Danube to explore the Christmas Markets during Chanukah. I will share this videos soon! Thank you for your support! More videos, articles and photos coming soon!

Find more of “>YouTube and 390,000 views on WeSaidGoTravel @YouTube Read More »

How Jewish groups got spied on by Obama

At first blush, it appears like a bombshell: The United States listened in on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s phone calls.

But on closer examination, the revelations reported Dec. 29 by The Wall Street Journal might not be so far reaching. Spying on allies is both routine and legal in the United States, though perhaps not very politic.

Here’s what the controversy is all about and what may happen next.

What exactly did the Obama administration do?

According to the Journal, the National Security Agency eavesdropped on Netanyahu and other Israeli officials, in part to assess whether Israel planned to strike Iran and to track the prime minister’s efforts to scuttle the emerging nuclear deal with Iran. In the process, conversations between Israelis and American lawmakers and Jewish organizations were swept up by NSA surveillance. The Obama administration did not directly order those conversations be monitored, but neither did it prevent the listening-in.

“We didn’t say, ‘Do it,’” a senior U.S. official told the Journal. “We didn’t say, ‘Don’t do it.’”

Isn’t spying on foreign leaders routine?

Yes and no. The Journal reported that the NSA asks presidents whether they want information on foreign leaders, allied or not. Obama, apparently like virtually all his predecessors, gave the nod.

But after documents released in 2013 by Edward Snowden showed the NSA had been eavesdropping on the cellphone of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Obama suspended the practice for much of the NATO alliance. Kept on the list: Netanyahu and Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish president.

Netanyahu stayed in part because of concerns he would strike against Iran without warning the Americans — a move that would have had far-reaching consequences for U.S. interests — and because he was actively rallying Congress, Jewish community leaders and others against the emerging Iran nuclear deal.

How did Jewish groups wind up getting snooped on?

The NSA is prohibited by law from monitoring Americans without a warrant. But when U.S. citizens in contact with foreigners are spied on incidentally, the information doesn’t have to be trashed as long as their identities are obscured — a process known as minimization. That’s how the Obama administration wound up with reports on meetings between Israeli officials and members of Congress and Jewish organizational leaders.

Several Jewish groups — including the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League and the Zionist Organization of America — were troubled by the revelation, even if they weren’t entirely surprised by it.

“It’s obviously deeply disturbing and highly problematic, but frankly not entirely surprising,” said David Harris, the American Jewish Committee’s executive director. “We have always assumed it’s what various governments, for a variety of reasons, tend to do.”

Jewish groups weren’t likely to be shocked because they’ve been caught up in government surveillance before: The case against two former staffers for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, launched in 2004 and scrapped in 2009, arose because the staffers were swept up in U.S. government tracking of Israeli diplomats.

For this article, AIPAC declined to comment and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Organizations did not return a request for comment.

What about lawmakers caught up in the sweep?

Reactions among members of Congress, predictably, divided along partisan lines. Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y., the sole Jewish Republican in Congress, called for an investigation, saying the Journal report suggested “laws were broken.” House Republican leaders wrote the NSA demanding paperwork that would show the rules of minimization were observed. GOP presidential candidates Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and Ben Carson all said the matter deserved greater scrutiny.

“Instead of focusing on deterring the Iran nuclear threat and fighting against the mullahs who chant ‘Death to America,’ President Obama has treated Israel, our staunch, democratic ally in the Middle East, as his real enemy,” Carson said.

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told the Journal that in general “we haven’t had a problem with how incidental collection has been handled concerning lawmakers.” Schiff, who like others on the committee would likely have seen some form of the NSA reports, could not be reached for comment.

Doesn’t Israel also spy on the United States?

Israel ostensibly swore off spying on the United States in the wake of the arrest of Navy civilian analyst Jonathan Pollard. Yisrael Katz, Israel’s intelligence minister, said Wednesday that Israel does not spy on the United States and expects the same from Washington.

But if the Journal report is accurate, that isn’t quite true. According to the Journal, soon after Obama assumed office, Unit 8200, the Israeli military’s eavesdropping unit, gave the NSA hacking software that the agency later discovered allowed 8200 to “poke around U.S. networks.”

Will there be political fallout?

On Capitol Hill, not likely. For all the Republican calls for an investigation, curbing spying — even on an ally — runs the risk of being cast as soft on national security in an election season now increasingly focused on the threat of terrorism. As CNN has noted, the GOP congressional leadership has been muted about the affair.

But the revelations are certain to complicate recent efforts by Obama and Netanyahu to smooth over their differences exacerbated by the Iran deal fight and the failed bid by Secretary of State John Kerry to restart the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

So who gets to say ‘I told you so’?

AIPAC.

For years, the prominent pro-Israel lobby’s leaders have repeatedly advised the Israelis to allow the group to lead advocacy on the Iran issue. The fact that the Israelis were aggressively advocating on their own appears to have handed the U.S. security apparatus a legal path to monitor efforts to derail the deal — and perhaps to preempt them. Had AIPAC led the effort, that wouldn’t have been possible, since the deliberations would have been legally out of bounds for U.S. eavesdroppers.

“I would bet that AIPAC’s leaders recognize, consciously or unconsciously, that Israel’s engagement in this way was inappropriate,” said Steven Aftergood, who directs the Federation of American Scientists project on government secrecy. “And because it was inappropriate, it was likely to be counterproductive.”

How Jewish groups got spied on by Obama Read More »