At the End of Israel Visit, Ellison Says He’s ‘Still Learning’
Tuesday, August 21, 2007 at 10:01 pm
- 4 Comments
In an attempt to stay above the fray over the Arab-Israeli conflict, U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison, who just wrapped up a weeklong congressional trip in the Middle East, said it would be inappropriate for him to make policy decisions until he learns more about the nature of the protracted conflict.
“I’m in a learning mode like everyone else,” Ellison told the Jerusalem Post. “Until you reach a certain level of competence, it is not responsible to tell the world what you will do. I need to learn the dynamics of the region and understand some of the issues and personalities better.”
The 18-member Democratic Congressional delegation met both the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his Palestinian counterpart Salaam Fayad. The trip was sponsored by the American Israel Education Foundation, an independent, nonprofit organization affiliated with the America Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC.
During his tough campaign, Ellison pledged to visit Israel during his freshman year. This was his second visit there since he was elected last November.
In a toxic political environment like the one in the Middle East, Ellison managed to stay away from controversy.
“I need to build up some knowledge and expertise,” he responded to a question asking if he brought a different perspective to the area, cognizant that he’s the only Muslim in the Congress.
Ellison lambasted what he characterized as “crazies” who read the same Qur’an as he reads everyday and issue themselves a license to murder.
“The murderers and the extremists are into something I don’t know about. I don’t know how they read what they read and come out with what they do. They wouldn’t consider me a Muslim because I’m American, because I believe in the unity of people and that we are all on the planet to work together.
“The people who did 9/11 are hostile to everyone, and in fact if you are not the type of Muslim they want you to be, they would be happy to kill you, too. I am not a Muslim in their eyes because I am for tolerance and inclusion, and they don’t want an Islam that is inclusive.”
4 Comments
Comment posted August 22, 2007 @ 11:25 pm
But why AIPAC It is highly unfortunate that Rep. Ellison chose to go to Israel under AIPAC auspices. AIPAC has done more than any single group to promote a one-sided approach to the Israel/Palestine conflict. With the US giving Israel billions each year in military aid, the US loses all potential to act as a promoter of peace.
Ellison’s choice is even more unfortunate because he has plenty of local resources available who would have put him in touch with the active peace forces in both Palestine and in Israel. By picking AIPAC instead, Ellison also loses any possibility of promoting peace in the area. How sad!
Comment posted August 23, 2007 @ 7:37 am
Ellison visits Middle East If he really wanted to “stay above the fray over the Arab-Israeli conflict,” U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison would not have visited the Middle East with any organization affiliated with AIPAC. The US has already lost its negotiating edge as an honest broker in the Middle East because of its pro-Israel bias, largely due to the influence of AIPAC. It’s a slippery slope, and AIPAC has mastered the dubious art of entangling US politicians–especially Democrats–in its twisted reading of Israel’s occupation (a word you will not find in its vocabulary). AIPAC has managed to convince the US Congress that the 40-year illegal occupation is now merely a “fact on the ground” and that Palestinian resistance to this barbaric occupation is “terrorism.” Ellison has already gone on record as distancing himself from terrorists–now it remains to be seen if his definition of terrorist falls in line with that of AIPAC’s.
Comment posted August 22, 2007 @ 6:25 pm
But why AIPAC It is highly unfortunate that Rep. Ellison chose to go to Israel under AIPAC auspices. AIPAC has done more than any single group to promote a one-sided approach to the Israel/Palestine conflict. With the US giving Israel billions each year in military aid, the US loses all potential to act as a promoter of peace.
Ellison's choice is even more unfortunate because he has plenty of local resources available who would have put him in touch with the active peace forces in both Palestine and in Israel. By picking AIPAC instead, Ellison also loses any possibility of promoting peace in the area. How sad!
Comment posted August 23, 2007 @ 2:37 am
Ellison visits Middle East If he really wanted to “stay above the fray over the Arab-Israeli conflict,” U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison would not have visited the Middle East with any organization affiliated with AIPAC. The US has already lost its negotiating edge as an honest broker in the Middle East because of its pro-Israel bias, largely due to the influence of AIPAC. It's a slippery slope, and AIPAC has mastered the dubious art of entangling US politicians–especially Democrats–in its twisted reading of Israel's occupation (a word you will not find in its vocabulary). AIPAC has managed to convince the US Congress that the 40-year illegal occupation is now merely a “fact on the ground” and that Palestinian resistance to this barbaric occupation is “terrorism.” Ellison has already gone on record as distancing himself from terrorists–now it remains to be seen if his definition of terrorist falls in line with that of AIPAC's.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
