Freeman left no doubt about where he places blame in a written statement after his withdrawal.
"The libels on me and their easily traceable email trails show conclusively that there is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East," he wrote.
"The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth...a Lobby intent on enforcing the will and interests of a foreign government."
- - -
...But Jewish and pro-Israel organizations largely decided not to make the fight against Freeman a public crusade, though they were the first, and fiercest, Freeman opponents and made their views known privately.
"The vast majority of the Jewish community [were] very careful not to make this a Jewish community issue," said a top official at one major pro-Israel organization.
So, one can't question an appointment of someone who was not qualified for the job if you are Jewish and/or pro-Israel?
1 comment:
He is very much qualified for a job. On what ground are you accusing him of not being qualified?
"His statements against Israel were way over the top and severely out of step with the administration," said Senator Chuck Schumer in a statement. "I repeatedly urged the White House to reject him, and I am glad they did the right thing."
And what Schumer says is "over the top" is simply this
"In particular, Freeman has described "Israeli violence against Palestinians" as a key barrier to Mideast peace...
This is a shame.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19856.html
Post a Comment