« Lee's Letter to Lord Acton | Main | Oh Those Catholics! »

28 June 2015


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.



The two bulls in question had a brief heated exchange on CNN GPS on Friday.



Colonel, TTG, SOS,

It appears that Oren thinks of the American Jewish Community little more than worker ants for/on behalf of his Israeli State. They are to march in line with 'gratitude' continually towards the Israeli state, never mind that the Israeli state sold every American (Jews and Non-Jews) down the river with their Pollard secrets to the Former Soviet Union that worked to negate U.S. defenses against a Soviet Nuclear attack. Israel sold all Americans including U.S. Jews down the river, and Oren expects American Jews to be grateful for it.

Remember Oren (Broenstein)'s use of the term 'grateful to the Israeli state'.

Welcome back Sidney good to see your posts again.


robt willmann

All this link to CNN seems to show is 1 minute and 25 seconds of the debate, if the link will work. It will be surprising if CNN puts the entire discussion between the two on its website--



Reminded me of the Ali Liston fight in Lewiston in 65


Hanging out with a bunch of professional Intelligence guys has the effect of bringing out the cynical in one. That may be why I cannot take this incident at face value. Has Indyk really "found Jesus" and on the road to some higher office he's experienced a sudden epiphany that he had Sinned by placing his obedience to Yahweh above his loyalty to the United States? For penance he is exposing the abominable acts of his former colleagues? Not until earth stops in its tracks.

So why this seeming reversal? It could be personal or it could have been order by "The Commission." In either case, let's speculate as to reasons. One is that Oren has crossed certain lines that make Israel and the Israel lobby vulnerable - and that he did so in violation of instructions. Hence, he had to be rubbed out. If this were the old Mafia, they would have placed a stone in his mouth, he had spoken rashly and to the wrong people. Or, if this was more personal, perhaps Oren had been trying to muscle Indyk out of the territory that had been assigned to him. Like Joe Colombo challenging Vito Geneveso on the Manhattan docks. Colombo earned a bullet in he back of the head. Did Indyk get prior approval from The Commission? We don't know. Or, it could have reflected a bitter fight over policy within the organization. Or, the Indyk faction might be engaged in a convoluted ploy to strengthen their credentials in Washington as American patriots by publicly sacrificing some one whose extreme views make him an even more dubious commodity than Indyk in the eyes of a growing number of skeptics. Following this scenario, was Oren in on it and was forced to play the role of sacrificial lamb? My guess: No - no more than Litvinov was in 1938.

The big question, exactly what were Oren's actions that provoked his public take-down? As to the standing of Indyk and Oren in the organization, we'll soon find out - since some sort of retaliation is in order were Oren not under total interdiction. The sign might be a veiled line of attack on some position with which Indyk is closely associated. Stay tuned.



I have always thought the professional deformation of my brethren had a certain charm. All of what you say is possible, but it was fun. Will this display and Oren's book have any effect in Jewish America? pl


No much; only insofar as the confrontation is framed in policy terms and if there is a follow-up to this story. The salient contest is between the Netanyahu obedient Israel Lobby and their opponents. The latter, as we know, are pretty weak in terms of organization and political clout, e.g. they don't control campaign donations. But in the long-run I think that is less important than general sentiment within the Jewish community. That is less monolithic than generally assumed and at the subconscious level is shifting away from the hardline outlook. I don't think that the Israel Lobby types understand this and took a big risk in supporting the Netanyahu outrages back in March. But neither did Obama and his advisers - so an historic opportunity was lost to play the patriotism card and catalyze sentiment that remains largely below the surface.


I'm puzzled, why did he change his name (Bornstein to Oren)?

Looks like there is 'fallout' all over the place regarding Oren









full clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqFEsAawUEc


Here is a bit more,



Bronstein was Trotsky's actual name. Maybe the resemblance was too much for an Israeli Tea Partier. Or maybe he secretly admired those guys who assume noms de guerre: Stalin, Molotov, et al. I have no idea what if any associations OREN has in Hebrew. I harbor hopes that its ancient (as yet undiscovered) meaning is Weasel

Babak Makkinejad

Ambassador Indyk is telling Ambassador Oren to pipe down lest any failure of this Democratic President's initiative and any subsequent events to that failure be blamed on Israel and Jews.

In a long discussing with LeAnder and others in 2012 I stated that any war between Iran and US will be blamed on Israel and Jews. I think Ambassador Indyk understands that.


It's fascinating, Michael, if I may, to what extend people are fixed on the change of names. But you answered my question, if I had asked it. ;)

I once translated an early still in German reform document for an American Jewish scholar. I wasn't aware or didn't completely reflect my question before asking him after: had he Jewish German roots? His name suggested he may have had.

He answered me that his father in fact adopted the name when he emigrated to the US. With this and other things back on my mind, I questioned Phil Weiss' wisdom occasionally in looking for Jews in media or influential places based on names only. After all his own name is a regular German name, but no doubt also gained prominence with one specific opponent of: Goebbels.


"any war between Iran and US will be blamed on Israel and Jews. I think Ambassador Indyk understands that."

I don't know whether Indyk believes that, doubt it somehow, but I think your observation is correct.

With folks like Adelson not at all subtly but with brute force try to push US politics towards being pro-Israel, or else, they play into anti-semitic stereotypes.

In addition to that, Adelson's sheer pettiness isn't going to win him any friends, that's for sure, given that he aims on blacklisting BDS activists to make them unemployable. That's pro-Israel McCarthyism all right.


So we are speaking of people, because Adelson isn't doing this by himself, who do nasty things like intimidation, coercion, character assassination and the like to the people who dare to voice dissent with their preferred policies. Oren is also in that camp.

That said, given how Indyk, known from the Clinton days as 'Israel's lawyer', has excposed himself in the debate about Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, he IMO not so much has seen the light, but belongs to an older, more centrist brand of zionist, which doesn't matter much in Israel today, if election results are any indication. He still does matter in the US though.

I also think that between Indyk and Oren it's at least to some point also the old neocon vs neolib bickering - the former think themselves smart, the latter smarter.

William R. Cumming

IMO Israel and its friends have ended hope for an Iran/US deal on nukes. Hoping not but reality enters.

Hoping the President enjoyed his week in the SUNLIGHT!

David Habakkuk

CP, Babak Makkinejad, Michael Brenner,

CP on Indyk: 'he IMO not so much has seen the light, but belongs to an older, more centrist brand of zionist, which doesn't matter much in Israel today, if election results are any indication. He still does matter in the US though.'

But if the 'liberal Zionists' do not 'matter much' in Israel today, then they can only 'matter in the US' because the heads of the ostriches are still firmly in the sand. It is not possible to have 'liberal Zionism' in the United States unless you have some prospect of a 'liberal Zion' in Israel. Quite patently, there isn't any.

As to what Oren had to say in the interview, if any British Zionist was foolish enough to take this line around a dinner table – including, and perhaps in particular, one populated by people like myself and my wife, whose whole culture is Anglo-Jewish – he or she would be in grave danger of being simply laughed at. So Oren tells us:

'My mantra, if you will, to the administration from the – from day one was that Israelis respond to feeling secure. They do not respond to threats. They do not respond to pressure. It – I always would say try love, try love. If you embrace us, make us feel secure, we will go that extra mile.'

The response of a lot of people here would be – been there, done that – we swallowed the line that what a traumatised people needed was reassurance, and where did it get us: we were played for suckers.

Putting the matter another way, over the past few years Netanyahu has been busy smirking away what BM has, quite aptly, called the 'secular cult of the Shoah'. Insofar as people are concerned about the label 'anti-Semite' here, it has increasingly become a matter of concrete fears about prospects and position: the moral force of the charge has been largely destroyed.

It may indeed be that, as CP suggests, both figures like Oren and figures like Indyk are convinced that they are 'smart'. But the actual truth is that American Zionists are almost completely devoid of strategic sense.

Between them, these two groups have boxed Israel into what is likely to be an unsustainable strategic position, and created the conditions for some kind of revival of anti-Semitism worldwide.


"Between them, these two groups have boxed Israel into what is likely to be an unsustainable strategic position, and created the conditions for some kind of revival of anti-Semitism worldwide."

I agree.

The perpetual assertion of anti-semitism to deflect criticism for the habtitually excessive and heavy handed conduct by Israel and their partisans in the US is essentially a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Bibi's response to this will be predictable also. He and his likeminded will be utterly oblivious to their own contribution though deed and word. He will say: "Did I not always tell you to not be fooled - the Gentiles will always hate us? Was I not right?"

Babak Makkinejad

Very many Israelis changed their surnames and created new ones for themselves; Arabic surnames specially were dropped.

I think that was a communist idea - at one tine - a New Name for the New Communist Man.

Babak Makkinejad

There is no strategic solution available to Israelis except the continuation of status quo - they know that.

Unfortunately, France and later US made it impossible to make peace with Israel.



Yes. My friend General Amnon Lipkin was forced by the government to change his surname to Shahak (Hey You! sort of). Without the change they would not send him for foreign schooling in the US. pl


Babak, I have to admit that I am slightly drawn to Griffin's definition of the "facist core", which may be quite close to your "New Man" never mind if left or right.

The Palingenetic Core of Fascist Ideology


Not only based on this, I am quite open to looking at Iran as a response to Western interference, which as a result makes me pretty immune to attempts to describe it as a "fasho"*-religious" society ONLY.

*Germans tend to call "Fascho" whatever they consider fascist, I have never looked into a comparative German-British-American-French usage angle. But it seems to have the same easy going usage as in the US.


That said, there can be different reasons for changing your name, if it feels somewhat unfamiliar in a specific context, for instance. You don't want to stick out name wise. Or by whatever means keep a link to a larger tradition?

Before women could keep their own name after marrying, it feels there was an option concerning very complicated names for German ears. I can easily understand that you don't want to spell your name all the time. And obviously the usual Israel habit closely connected with the Jewish nation was to make your name fit into the national narrative,'BUT in Oren's case it may have happened to avoid the wrong internationalist associations. We would need to ask specialists about that.

By the way, the history around "Jewish names" in Germany is interesting, but is also only a part of the larger story.

Babak Makkinejad

Thank you for your comments.

I always spell my last name.

I had an office mate who was a Polish-American whose last name was even more difficult to write and to pronounce than mine.

Yet his family in US had kept to that surname for more than a century.

And the famous Austro-American movie actor Arnold Schwarzenegger had been advised that he had to change his name (as well as his accent) for otherwise he would have no hope of success in America.

I think the way the word "Fascist" is used nowadays is generally in opposition to authority - often of any kind.

During the Iranian Revolution, soldiers had surrounded Tehran University and the university students were shouting: "Death to the Fascist Shah!", "Death to the Fascist Shah!".

The soldiers, largely conscripts from the provinces, at a loss as how to respond and not knowing any better, started yelling: "Long Live the Fascist Shah!", "Long Live the Fascist Shah!"

Babak Makkinejad

So there was coercion, I thought it was voluntary.

different clue


Re-antisemitization of broad spreads of public opinion flowing from Likudista actions would also be a hoped-for outcome by the Likudists and such. They hope it would enable them to harvest relatively vast new numbers of involuntary Jewish expellees and refugees from various countries.

If the various country-loads of people see and understand this goal (demographic harvesting) as being part of what is behind Likudist ( and other Revisionist-derived) behavior, people may choose to excercise the analytical and spiritual discipline required to avoid falling into the re-antisemitization trap. That would require choosing to focus their displeasure on actual Likudists and fellow travelers and supporters identifiable by expressed thoughts or actions taken. People may well choose to make that choice if they are aware or informed that that choice exists AS a choice to be taken if desired.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

October 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Blog powered by Typepad