Failure to Disclose at least Past Affiliations of Letter Writers Disguises CAMERA & JCRC leadership views as 'Public Discourse Consensus' Views

  As recently as April 2016 Eric Rozenman had his letter picked for publication demanding full disclosure of background of media organizations covering Israel with out of context quotes and guilt by association tactics to make the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs known more for controversy around its content than for the content itself.  By Oct 2016 Rozenman had another letter picked for printing, online and in offline 'dead tree' editions, in which the Washington Post fails to disclose his Camera present position, or past position if he has retired.  


In his Sept. 29 op-ed, “Remembering Shimon Peres,” former Israeli Knesset member and Labor Party representative Yossi Beilin referred to his country’s “illegal settlements in the occupied territories.” The League of Nations’ 1922 Palestine Mandate, Article 6, encourages “close Jewish settlement” on the land west of the Jordan River. The United Nations took over the mandate, and Chapter 12, Article 80 of the U.N. Charter, sometimes known as “the Palestine article,” affirms Jewish rights under it, including Article 6.
The United States endorsed British administration of the Palestine Mandate in the 1924 Anglo-American Convention, partly to affirm London’s commitment to reestablishing the Jewish national home in Palestine. This included the Jewish right of settlement as recognized by the mandate. The West Bank, taken by Israel in 1967 in a war of self-defense, is occupied territory. It also is, as the authors of the relevant U.N. Security Council Resolution, 242, noted, disputed territory. Sovereignty over it remains to be negotiated. Meanwhile, both Jews and Arabs have claims there.
Labeling Jewish West Bank communities “illegal settlements,” whether done by U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, U.S. officials or Beilin, amounts to a political, not juridical, declaration.
Eric Rozenman, Fairfax


    The only difference between Rozenman's April 2016 letter where his CAMERA position was disclosed and the October 2016 letter where his past or present CAMERA position wasn't disclosed was the location.  In April Eric Rozenman signed his letter Washington DC and in October the letter was signed from Fairfax presumably Virginia.  The subject and POV of both letters was supportive of right-wing party majority Israeli Knesset and Prime Minister policy positions.  It's highly likely that both letters were written by the same person and the different address, in combination with tight daily publication deadlines with fewer people doing more work, may have deceived letter selectors from considering if the writer was the same person. 


  If Mr. Rozenman has retired and no longer holds the position, as the Washington Director of CAMERA, it's still unethical by Post letter selectors to not disclose his former position as Washington Director of Camera.  Readers are as underserved, or poorly served, by Washington Post letter section editorial staff failure to disclose even a past position as Washington Director of Camera.


  The following letter by Allan Gerson, who had been a counsel to two UN Ambassadors more than 30 years before 2016, still had a disclosure of Gerson's past position.  Why was it so relevant to disclose Gerson's past position a greater amount of time in the past than Rozenman's that wasn't disclosed in October 2016 but was in March 2016?  


 In their Jan. 1 op-ed, “Speaking truth to our ally Israel,” Brent Scowcroft and Thomas R. Pickering professed to convey “simple truths.” These were neither simple nor true.
They wrote, “The Carter administration’s determination of the illegality of settlements under international law has never been reversed by succeeding Republican or Democratic presidents.” That declaration had a remarkably short shelf life. Upon taking office, President Ronald Reagan declared that the settlements were “not illegal” and instructed his U.N. ambassador, Jeane Kirkpatrick, and her successor, Vernon A. Walters, to veto Security Council resolutions employing the illegality language. Numerous draft Security Council resolutions containing that language were vetoed or never brought to a vote.
Until the recent abstention, that was the consistent U.S. posture based on the logic that legalistic condemnations are counterproductive and obstruct movement toward the goal of a directly negotiated resolution of the conflict.

Mr. Scowcroft and Mr. Pickering also wrote, “The Obama administration [is] in line with its predecessors.” Not only was allowing the resolution to pass a break, but so too was allowing the resolution’s stance of equating East Jerusalem with occupied territory. The Reagan administration vetoed resolutions containing such language on the grounds that the future of Jerusalem is to be negotiated and not decided by U.N. fiat. That policy was consistently pursued until now.
As long as the Palestinians refuse direct negotiations without preconditions, Israeli settlements are likely to continue. A change in U.S. policy to unleash U.N. fiats is hardly likely to affect that dynamic.
Allan Gerson, Washington
The writer was chief counsel to U.N. Ambassadors Jeane Kirkpatrick and Vernon A. Walters
 in the Reagan administration.
  


  In June 2015 the Washington Post disclosed a past JCRC board membership on a letter by Julia Weller.  


 June 18, 2015
The June 16 letters “Boycotting Israel isn’t anti-Semitic” were from Jewish people who identify with the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel. Being Jewish does not exempt a person from being anti-Semitic or give a free pass to make allegations about Israel.
The boycott, divestment and sanctions movement and its supporters are no different from the Arab countries that have boycotted Israel for decades and tried to force the United States into acquiescing to these boycotts by imposing an oil embargo in the early 1970s. Their avowed intent has always been to destroy Israel’s economy and bring the nation to its knees. The anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism is no different. It is not Israel’s policies to which it objects, but the very existence of a Jewish state.
There are far more Jewish people and organizations in the United States that support Israel and its policies of withstanding economic and physical terrorism than those who support the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.
Julia Weller, Bethesda
The writer is a former board member of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington.



  The JCRC functions as the public policy advocacy (lobbying) arm on state and local issues related to supporting Israel government policy as AIPAC does on the federal level.  Most, if not all, Jewish community federations in the USA have a JCRC although some change the name slightly often calling it a CRC (community relations council) without the word "Jewish."  



   By December of 2016 another letter by Julia Weller was picked for online and offline 'dead tree' printing.

  I am displeased with President Obama’s decision to abstain and not veto the despicable resolution condemning Israel for its settlements in Judea and Samaria [“U.S. abstains from U.N. vote on Israel,” front page, Dec. 24]. Israel disputes the claim of Palestinians to that land as much as Palestinians dispute Israel’s right to build settlements. These conflicting claims are to be resolved by negotiations, face to face, between Israel and Palestinians, not by third parties such as the United Nations.
To presume that Palestinians have the rightful claim is sheer arrogance and, contrary to what U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power said to the Security Council, does not reflect the consistent policies of Republicans or Democrats. Instead, the notion of a two-state solution came into being only after the Oslo Accords.
The Palestinians have never recognized Israel’s right to exist; until they do, the two-state solution is a non-starter.
Mr. Obama’s actions have contradicted all prior administrations’ positions and underlined that his policies have contributed to the destruction of ancient cities and the horrors inflicted on civilian populations in the Middle East. His presidency will go down as the worst in modern times. President-elect Donald Trump, despite his flaws, will be a breath of fresh air.
Julia Weller, Bethesda



  Similar to the October 2016 failure to disclose Eric Rozenman's affiliation or past affilation with CAMERA within 6 months of a disclosure, Julia Weller's past JCRC board membership was not disclosed in December 2016 after it was disclosed in June 2015.  Contrast with the disclosure of Allan Gerson's past position as a counsel to two UN Ambassadors in the Reagan administration between 1981 and 1988.  The two failures to disclose background of letter writers, Julia Weller and Eric Rozenman, that hides past or current affiliations, that may shape or 
'all but require' alignment of one's views with others in order to obtain a paid position or be invited to serve on a nonprofit board, helps the JCRC of Greater Washington and CAMERA  'launder' views of their respective groups' leadership as apparently the views of 'just a concerned citizen.' The views are actually of two interest groups, JCRC and CAMERA, that are using the 'letters to the editor' section to confer legitimacy from the source of the distribution of the views, by the Washington Post instead of being printed or posted online on a CAMERA or JCRC publication or web site where readers would 'consider the views of the owner of the information source' more skeptically.