Nadler’s False Flag

We were dismayed by the reference by several Jewish Democratic Congressman to Satmar in the debate last week over a Republican resolution that equates anti-Zionism with antisemitism. Reps. Jerry Nadler, Jamie Raskin, and Dan Goldman invoked the views of the Satmar community – which does not support the current secular state of Israel – in opposing the resolution.

According to Nadler, the premise of the resolution “is either intellectually disingenuous or just factually wrong. I can assure you that Satmar Hasidic Jews are not antisemitic.”

Nadler went on to say “Under this resolution. Those who love Israel deeply but criticize some of its policy approaches could be considered anti-Zionist. That could make every Democratic member of [Congress] because they all criticized the recent Israeli judicial reform package, de facto antisemites.”

Cheap shot Jerry and company. For one thing, no one we know labels an opponent of this or that Israeli policy as an anti-Zionist. “Anti-Zionist” is reserved for those who oppose the return of the Jews to the Holyland, like, say Palestinians – as a matter of principle and without any ifs, ands, or buts. And for some others too – those who urge that among all of the countries of the world, the only one illegitimate state is the only Jewish one.

The Satmar view, on the other hand, is hardly opposed to Jewish presence in Israel. In fact, “Return To Zion” is a fundamental and undisputed tenet of the Jewish faith. What is opposed in Satmar is any non-Moshiach-related return.

And Rep. Nadler knows all of this very well and his reference to Satmar was gratuitous.

But that should be neither here nor there in terms of the proposed resolution. Even Nadler recognizes the need for the resolution and the shakiness of his argument. Thus, in the course of the debate over the resolution, he is reported by The New York Times to have said, “Let me be unequivocally clear: most anti-Zionism, particularly in this moment, has a real antisemitism problem. But we cannot fairly say that one equals the other.”