Helen Thomas Withdraws from Move On AIPAC Conference

Jim Abourezk at Counterpunch [here] says that she was pressured to withdraw.

The reaction of anti-conservative zionist, liberal-zionist Mondoweis:

I'm fence sitting on this. In an earlier post I said it was a tactical mistake to invite Thomas because it would alienate the center and Jewish groups. Though yes I essentially agree with her view of the Jewish importance in the establishment, I find it crude.

My friend Gail Miller takes me to task:

It's a disappointment to me that you have contributed to this. I'm surprised that you think making nice to centrists and the Jewish community is the way to make progress on these issues; it's dirty work that leaves behind a pile that smells bad. You kind of try to backtrack in the body of the post but I think the damage done by her withdrawal because of concerns from within MoveOverAIPAC will be, at the end of the day, damaging to our movement.

Fair enough. Gail has a lot more political experience than I do. Though I'd (typically) seek to extract good news: in the rallying of Arab-Americans and left wingers around Thomas, I see a solidification of the movement behind the awareness that conservative Jewish influence must be addressed -- the lobby, which is coextensive with the Jewish leadership-- and therefore the importance for Jews of reconstructing Jewish identity before Zionism eats the media completely.

Source

P.S. LMAO: You meant "before conservative zionism eats the media completely" don't you Mondo? I'm sure Move On is kosher with you. It's led and dominated by "anti-conservative zionist, liberal zionists". So much so that one could think that it's a clone of that J-Street organization... except for the friendly goyim members.

What we need is a softer, kinder zionism, right? So kind that we even remove the label of zionism, just as we've removed it from ourselves. You know, the Norman Finkelstein zionism. Have it without declaring it; be zionists without declaring it. Declaring it, naming it, has negative connotations. Of course, jews must always have their place at the head of the table, and Israel has a right to exist. That's understood. That's without question. We have enough goyim on board with that. We can be jewish without declaring jewish exceptionalism. It's understood. Let's be nicer to the goyim now. They're all on board for the most part. There is no real anti-semitism except for a few goofballs. But we don't have to get all excited and bent out of shape about a few detractors. Lets just assume our jewish exceptionalism nicely without making a big stink about it. The goyim are onboard with it. Finkelstein knows. We all know.

No dammit! I'm sorry. You're right. Forget zionism! We don't want to be filthy, stinking zionists! Let's replace zionism completely with something nicer and more inclusive of our goyim, er... gentile friends. Hmmmm... I know! Lets be JIDs!... Jewish Inclusive Democrats. No. Still too exclusive sounding. Hmmm... perhaps Friends For Jewish Magnanimity... FFJM.... FFJM'ers. Not too catchy. Oh well, we'll have to work on it. The point is, we're beyond zionism now. Jewish exceptionalism is understood. We don't have to declare it. Declaring it and flaunting it is... well it's crude frankly.