|February 22nd, 2007||#21|
Join Date: Jun 2006
|February 25th, 2007||#22|
AIPAC Demands "Action" on Iran
AIPAC Demands "Action" on Iran
"An American Strike on Iran is Essential for Our Existence"
Former CIA counterterrorism specialist Philip Giraldi, comparing the propaganda campaign against Iran to that which preceded the war on Iraq, has recently declared, "It is absolutely parallel. They're using the same dance steps-demonize the bad guys, the pretext of diplomacy, keep out of negotiations, use proxies. It is Iraq redux." He's only one of many in his field (including Vincent Cannistraro, Ray McGovern, and Larry C. Johnson) doing their best to expose the Bush-Cheney neocon disinformation campaign according to which Iran is planning to produce nukes in order to commit genocide, while abetting terrorists in Iraq who are killing American troops.
Their efforts, and those of many others, are producing results. The mainstream corporate press is far more skeptical about administration claims pertaining to Iran than they ever were towards the equally specious claims made about Iraq on the eve of the 2003 invasion. The American people are now inclined to distrust claims made by nameless officials about Quds Force-provisioned IEDs and EFPs, etc., supposedly smuggled by "meddling" Iranians into Iraq. Unfortunately the Congress dominated by Democrats elected in a popular expression of antiwar sentiment has not taken a firm stance against an attack on Iran based on lies. Maybe given the nature of the power structure it simply can't.
Giraldi matter-of-factly sums up the unfortunate politics of situation.
"The recent formation of the Congressional Israel Allies Caucus should. . . .be noted as well as AIPAC's highlighting of the threat from Iran at its 2006 convention in Washington, an event that featured Vice President Dick Cheney as keynote speaker. More recently, Senator Hillary Clinton addressed an AIPAC gathering in New York City. Neither was shy about threatening Iran. AIPAC's formulation that the option of force 'must remain on the table' when dealing with Iran has been repeated like a mantra by numerous politicians and government officials, not too surprisingly as AIPAC writes the briefings and position papers that many Congressmen unfortunately rely on."
In other words, the American Israel Political Action Committee is the main political force urging---indeed, demanding---U.S. action. That's the AIPAC already under scrutiny for receiving classified information about Iran from Lawrence Franklin, former Defense Department subordinate of Douglas Feith. (That's the neocon Feith who supervised the Office of Special Plans---headed by Abram Shulsky, the neocon specialist on Leo Strauss who currently heads up the Iran Directorate at the Pentagon---that shamelessly cherry-picked intelligence to support the Iraq attack. That's the Franklin who worked in the OSP, and was sentenced last month to 13 years in prison. Feith has not been indicted on any charge and continues to insist in defiance of reason and even a Pentagon internal investigation finding it "inappropriate" that his office's disinformation project was "good government." Small wonder Gen. Tommy Franks, formerly head of the U.S. Central Command, famously called Feith "the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth." Congressional investigations are just now getting underway into Feith's role in facilitating the invasion of Iraq.)
That's the AIPAC embarrassed by the indictment of its policy director Steven Rosen
and senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman
for illegally conspiring to pass on classified national security information to Israel. Despite the already intimate ties between Israeli and U.S. intelligence (documented by Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski among others) it seems the Israelis felt obliged to spy on the Pentagon to learn just how inclined the Americans were to oblige them by attacking Iran.
Now, as Israeli calls for a U.S. attack on Iran become more shrill by the day, AIPAC recognizes that the American people profoundly distrust Vice President Cheney and the nest of neocon liars he has sheltered. The Bush-Cheney war machine has been pretty well exposed, and that must worry the warmongers within the group. Israeli Defense Force chief artillery officer Gen. Oded Tira has griped that "President Bush lacks the political power to attack Iran," adding that since "an American strike in Iran is essential for [Israel's] existence, we must help him pave the way by lobbying the Democratic Party (which is conducting itself foolishly) and US newspaper editors. We need to do this in order to turn the Iran issue to a bipartisan one and unrelated to the Iraq failure." Tira urges the Lobby to turn to "potential presidential candidates. . . so that they support immediate action by Bush against Iran," while Uri Lubrani, senior advisor to Defense Minister Amir Peretz, tells the Jewish Agency's Board of Governors that the US "does not understand the threat and has not done enough," and therefore "must be shaken awake."
Many Americans would find such statements deeply offensive in their arrogance and condescension. President Bush has indeed been weakened by the "Iraq failure" Tira acknowledges, arising from a war that the Lobby once endorsed with enormous enthusiasm. (As Gen. Wesley Clark put it way back in August 2002, "Those who favor this attack now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel." Recall that that weapon was imaginary.) So now, the Israeli war advocates aver, the U.S. president needs to be helped to do the right thing and attack Iran by lobbyists who will use their power to force the fools in the Democratic Party, especially presidential candidates. Because Americans don't understand and have to be shaken out of their current skeptical mode.
By who? By AIPAC, of course! The confidence expressed by these gentlemen (in the second most powerful political action committee in the country) is quite extraordinary. But alas, maybe it's warranted. Giraldi dispassionately concludes:
"Knowing that to cross the Lobby is perilous, Congressmen from both parties squirm and become uneasy when pressured by AIPAC to 'protect Israel,' even if it means yet another unwinnable war for the United States. The neocons know full well that if a war with Iran were to be started either inadvertently or by design, few within America's political system would be brave enough to stand up in opposition."
One should ask these spineless politicians how they suppose the people will remember their votes and positions within weeks of the "immediate action" Tira and his allies in the Bush administration (most notably Condi Rice's deputy Elliott Abrams, the most powerful neocon remaining in the team) are demanding. Will they not be blamed for the total collapse of cooperation between the U.S. occupation and Iraq's Shiite majority, the fall of the current client regime dominated by Iranian allies, the intensification of Shiite militia attacks on U.S. forces, the broadening of the current two-front war to enflame all of Southwest Asia?
One should ask those squirming manipulators blissfully ignorant of the Islamic world---clueless about the difference between Arabs and Persians or Sunnis and Shiites, coached almost entirely by State Department Zionists who don't bother to conceal their Islamophobia---to recognize that American Jewry is not generally pro-neocon nor united in support of an Iran attack. Indeed many American Jews are alarmed at Israeli/AIPAC efforts to push the U.S. into another crusader war on a Muslim nation. (A lot of them are in New York. Hillary might consult with them rather than suppose that her ticket to the presidency is the support of the Cheney-friendly Lobby. But I wouldn't hold my breath on that.)
One should ask the Lobbyists as well as the government of Israel that they think they serve (as well as the people of Israel, honestly divided in their opinions) how the security of the Jewish State will be abetted by a generalized war between Israel's great patron and the entire Muslim world.
When one plays this Islamophobic game of exploiting ignorance, fear, hatred and bigotry; when one conflates al-Qaeda with Iraq with Hamas with Hizbollah with Iran knowing that most Americans know little about the details and will be inclined to side (for now) with Israel against Muslims in general; when one lies (as the neocons do with such arrogance, supposing they will escape any consequences of the lies down the road)---then one invites a backlash. We live in a racist culture that easily slides into religious bigotry. Why use that culture (not so dissimilar to the German culture of the 1930s) so shamelessly---against Arabs and other Muslim peoples of the Middle East? One's disinformation with its murderous results in the Muslim world might just produce the ignorant conclusion that could sweep Middle America down the road: "The Jews made us do it." That's what the red-necks including a whole lot of today's brain-dead Christian Zionist fundamentalists will say as soon as everything goes wrong in the Middle East, Jesus doesn't come back and is nowhere in sight, and the three U.S. troops killed per day becomes six or ten for no good goddamned reason.
"They have the money, they control the media and the politicians. They made us attack Iran and now look what's happening." That's what the ignorant who can one day cry "Nuke 'em all!" referring to Muslims, and the next day swear "Fucking Christ-killers" will say. Is the Lobby's paranoia about Iran's uranium enrichment so severe as to risk that kind of assessment, that kind of blowback bigotry?
We are perhaps arriving at a critical point in the history of the powerful Lobby, including its capacity to intimidate honest, critically reasoning people who do not embrace its fears, prejudices and preoccupations. It's under unprecedented scrutiny following the carefully argued paper by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" and Jimmy Carter's book Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid both published last year, to which it's reacted with its wonted technique of character assassination. The political power of the Lobby would appear to be reaching its zenith; and while it used its hand subtly in the build-up for war on Iraq, it now uses it in crude, bullying fashion. Israeli officials weren't publicly calling for the simple-minded Christian-Zionist Bush to "smite" Iraq to defend Israel in 2003, but now they're nervously demanding that Bush destroy Iran's nuclear facilities to prevent a "genocide" worse that that accomplished by Hitler! Their boldness betrays a confidence that they can indeed continue to shape American political discourse about the Middle East (to the exclusion of any audible Arab or Muslim voice) and that to challenge them is indeed "perilous."
"Attack Iran! NOW! Or support GENOCIDE! and side with the new HITLER! Destroy Iran's nuclear facilities! NOW! Or reveal your thinly-disguised ANTI-SEMITISM!"
That's the hyper-message calculated to stimulate an assault, to which the calm counterterrorism analyst Giraldi draws our attention. One could respond to the message with a polite, firm, principled refusal:
No thanks this time, AIPAC. You're just not credible. Can't do it for you. My constituents aren't into more war, and they think this whole Iran thing's a lot of hype. I can't support nuking Iran, and frankly, I don't see how you can either. I don't think you speak for all or even most American Jews, and you can't scare me this time by accusations of anti-Semitism. I can't have an attack on Iran my conscience, sorry. I'd rather be defeated in the next election. Keep your money; I just can't do what you ask.
Will the Congress targeted by the Lobby be able to say that? If it doesn't, all the belated, posturing moves to limit Bush's power, withdraw troops and end the imperialist war in Iraq will mean nothing. An attack on Iran will unleash the gates of hell. The attackers will argue that a new situation makes all prewar debate irrelevant (or even if encouraging doubt about the "existential" cause, downright treasonous). The fascistic proclivities of the administration will blossom immediately. The legal basis has been laid for the repression of the dissent an Iran attack will naturally inspire. Prison camps, suspension of habeas corpus. The proponents of the war are comfortable with these things, and the waters have already been tested.
O nation miserable,
With an untitled tyrant bloody-scepter'd,
When shalt thou see thy wholesome days again?
Can the American people allow this unelected unpopular administration, headed by a manifestly stupid sadistic fool, to continue to provoke international contempt and fear, while planning more carnage?
Last edited by William Robert; February 25th, 2007 at 05:37 PM.
|March 2nd, 2007||#23|
White Love Monger
Join Date: Mar 2007
Here is a chance to raise some hell.
|March 2nd, 2007||#24|
White Love Monger
Join Date: Mar 2007
Teach the public about these criminals
Anyone in the area want to confront them or just to make others aware?
Teach the public about these criminals, white traitors and jew alike.
|March 3rd, 2007||#25|
Jews are not superior
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA - House of Babylonia where greed, immigration and homosexuality flourishes and the jews love it.
Hillary Clinton and AIPAC: This two-face bitch will appear to be on everybody's side when in fact she favors no side. She 's only out for herself to win the presidential seat. She and her husband have caused the deficit to increase with their Savings and Loan scandal. Also, if anyone remembers, right after Bill was inaugurated, the IRS went nuts and it was falsely accusing people of owing thousands of dollars when they didn't at tax time. Many committed suicide. The IRS decided to audit millions to see how much money itz could squeeze of out people whether they owed or not. The moneylaundering entity was also giving people a hard time about their refunds.
The Clintons are bad news. Vince Foster's murder was never solved. It was left at suicide. This guy knew damaging information that could have put the Clintons in federal prison. Vince Foster was murdered.
In my book, the Clintons are no better than jews.
A jew can't handle "truth" with dignity, but refutes with lies of exaggeration.
Jews -- tall, tall, tall, tales they tell. Famous fairytale storytellers of the Holocaust.
Last edited by Hell Raising Woman; March 3rd, 2007 at 10:22 AM.
|March 3rd, 2007||#26|
Does the Israeli Tail Wag American Dog?
Does the Israeli Tail Wag American Dog?
A quarter century ago, the executive director of AIPAC – the American Israel Public Affairs Committee – established an analytical unit inside the organization to write in-depth advocacy papers for policymakers. The year was 1981, the president was Ronald Reagan, and AIPAC had just lost a hard-fought battle in Congress over the sale of AWACS surveillance aircraft to Saudi Arabia.
The AIPAC leader was an energetic former congressional aide named Thomas Dine, who used the setback to build AIPAC into a formidable political force.
Thomas A. Dine is the new CEO of the Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco, the Peninsula, Marin and Sonoma Counties.
Over the next few years, Dine quadrupled AIPAC’s grassroots membership as well as its budget and aggressively expanded contacts with Congress and policymakers. He set out to supply politicians with analyses geared toward advancing Israeli interests, in the stated belief that anyone who wrote papers read by policymakers would effectively “own” the policymakers.
|March 5th, 2007||#27|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The Former USA
Let's disseminate those videos, articles, links and resources all over the internet, on every forum, site, guestbook, media page and blog, and wake people up.
With intelligent, concetrated, concerted effort, we can affect the global racial and political process, and the best thing is, it's all legal.
"There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come."
Let's keep formulating and spreading the ideas, and then the times will change as a result.
|March 7th, 2007||#28|
Aipac Will Press for Hard Line on Iran Regime
5,500 terrorist's to Descend on Washington.
Aipac Will Press for Hard Line on Iran Regime
WASHINGTON — The Democratic-controlled Congress is moving to outflank both the Bush administration and the United Nations with the toughest set of sanctions against Iran that have ever been proposed.
The introduction of the new legislation comes as more than 5,500 members of America's largest pro-Israel lobby are set to arrive in Washington for their annual policy conference. They are expected to press Congress to endorse new legislation to sanction foreign companies that do business with Iran and to re-impose the import restrictions, on items such as rugs, pistachios, and caviar, which President Clinton lifted in 2000 to foster dialogue with an Iranian regime that was seen as reformist.
The goal of the sanctions is to deny Tehran funding that could be used to support terrorism and attacks on American troops in Iraq or to build nuclear weapons or missiles. With the United Nations hesitant to take significant action against Iran and even American allies in Europe hesitant to move beyond symbolic condemnations, the congressional actions are an attempt to signal to both Iran and its international business partners that Washington is running out of patience with Iranian misbehavior.
The new sanctions legislation introduced yesterday by Rep. Tom Lantos, the chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, differs from earlier sanctions bills in that it would not grant President Bush the authority to waive sanctions against oil companies that sign new agreements with the Islamic Republic.
AIPAC speaker hopes US gets nuked after Israel provokes war with Russia
SUNDAY NIGHT PLENARY - The U.S. and Israel: Tradition and Transcendence
Two eloquent voices from diverse backgrounds explore the history of U.S. involvement in the Middle East and how Americans from all faiths can find common cause in supporting Israel.
Pastor John Hagee
Author and Scholar Michael Oren
Special Guest Eitan Wertheimer, Chairman of the Board of ISCAR
Who's John Hagee? Sarah Posner can tell you all about it. I'll just note this:
In Hagee’s telling, Israel has no choice but to strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities, with or without America’s help. The strike will provoke Russia -- which wants Persian Gulf oil -- to lead an army of Arab nations against Israel. Then God will wipe out all but one-sixth of the Russian-led army, as the world watches “with shock and awe,” he says, lending either a divine quality to the Bush administration phrase or a Bush-like quality to God’s wrath.
But Hagee doesn’t stop there. He adds that Ezekiel predicts fire “‘upon those who live in security in the coastlands.’” From this sentence he concludes that there will be judgment upon all who stood by while the Russian-led force invaded Israel, and issues a stark warning to the United States to intervene: “Could it be that America, who refuses to defend Israel from the Russian invasion, will experience nuclear warfare on our east and west coasts?” He says yes, citing Genesis 12:3, in which God said to Israel: “I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you.”
To fill the power vacuum left by God’s decimation of the Russian army, the Antichrist -- identified by Hagee as the head of the European Union -- will rule “a one-world government, a one-world currency and a one-world religion” for three and a half years. (He adds that “one need only be a casual observer of current events to see that all three of these things are coming into reality.”) The “demonic world leader” will then be confronted by a false prophet, identified by Hagee as China, at Armageddon, the Mount of Megiddo in Israel. As they prepare for the final battle, Jesus will return on a white horse and cast both villains -- and presumably any nonbelievers -- into a “lake of fire burning with brimstone,” thus marking the beginning of his millennial reign.
So you see, John Hagee, who wants to see Israel adopt a hawkish foreign policy that he believes will result in its destruction at the hands of a Russo-Arab alliance is a friend of the Jews. By contrast, everyone who thinks a little pressure to make peace could wind up helping Israel in the long run is an anti-semite.
Last edited by William Robert; March 7th, 2007 at 08:03 PM.
|March 8th, 2007||#29|
Hardline Pastor Gets Prime AIPAC Spot
Hardline Pastor Gets Prime AIPAC Spot
John Hagee and his son Matthew
Growing ties between pro-Israel forces and a controversial, hardline “Christian Zionist” movement will move into the national spotlight at next week’s policy conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the pro-Israel lobby.
One keynoter at the event, which annually draws hundreds of lawmakers, administration officials, diplomats and political hopefuls, will be Pastor John Hagee, founder of Christians United for Israel (CUFI), author of several books about biblical prophecy and an opponent of new territorial concessions to the Palestinians on biblical grounds.
Rev. Hagee, who will speak at a Sunday plenary, was also a leading backer of a controversial Christian broadcast venture in Israel that critics charge sought to convert Jews.
And a time when pro-Israel forces are being accused of beating the drums for war with Iran, Rev. Hagee seems to believe such a conflict is both inevitable and necessary. In his apocalypse-oriented book “Jerusalem Countdown,” he predicted a nuclear showdown with Iran and said, “The end of the world as we know it is rapidly approaching ... rejoice and be exceedingly glad, the best is yet to be,” according to a Wall Street Journal report posted on the CUFI Web site.
Last year, Rev. Hagee told the Jerusalem Post that “I would hope the United States would join Israel in a military pre-emptive strike to take out the nuclear capability of Iran for the salvation of Western civilization.”
Israeli historian Michael Oren will also speak at Sunday’s plenary.
Giving Rev. Hagee such prominence at the premier pro-Israel gathering of the year — he attended last year’s conference — troubles some AIPAC supporters.
Rabbi Barry Block of Temple Beth El in San Antonio—the home of the John Hagee Ministries and to his 18,000-member Cornerstone Church—said he hopes the minister’s presence will be balanced by “Christians who support Israel but who do not share the ‘end of days’ theology and extremist anti-Palestinian positions and anti-Muslim prejudice so often spewed by Pastor Hagee.”
Rabbi Block, who said he is an “AIPAC supporter” and participates in local activities of the lobby, added that “there are those I love and respect in my community who believe we should work with Pastor Hagee on the important concern we share—the welfare of the state of Israel. However, despite what may be good intentions, I don’t think Pastor Hagee’s activism is good for Israel.”
Rabbi Haim Dov Beliak, cofounder of a We site that opposes Christian right church-state policies, said that Hagee’s AIPAC appearance will mark a “decisive point when the costs of a relationship with Hagee couldn’t be clearer. AIPAC has to know that Hagee’s push for an attack on Iran is not based on a logically constructed policy but on cherry-picked biblical verses. And it is only the first step to the end-times scenario that Hagee enthusiastically predicts will engulf Israel in a devastating war.”
A former AIPAC official said giving Rev. Hagee a key speaking slot represents one more step toward an AIPAC embrace of the Evangelicals that began more than two decades ago, and warned that it has political risks.
“This sends out a message of an endorsement by AIPAC at a time when these Christian groups seem to be losing power in Congress—and when the Democrats, who have long opposed this cozying up to the religious right, are now in power,” this activist said.
But many pro-Israel leaders believe Rev. Hagee and other Christian Zionists, representing a growing political force, are a critical addition to the pro-Israel coalition — especially as “mainline” Protestant churches continue to castigate Israel for its West Bank policies.
But Abraham Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League and a strong critic of many Christian right groups, said he is not alarmed about Hagee’s role in the policy conference.
“I think there is a role for him,” Foxman aid. “He has earned a certain recognition with the community because of his support for Israel.”
Foxman said he expects Hagee will get a good reception. “It’s a friendly platform,” he said. “I’m sure an overwhelming majority may be pleased with what he says.”
That reflects an annual conference expected to strike a hawkish note on a number of issues, starting with the threat of a nuclear Iran.
Other keynote speakers will include Israeli opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu and—health permitting—Vice President Dick Cheney. The current Israeli government will be represented by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, Defense Minister Amir Peretz and Ambassador Sallai Meridor.
Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh, several sources said, will tell delegates that increased aid to Palestinian moderates is in Israel’s interests—a call that may conflict with a major AIPAC theme.
In a show of both political clout and bipartisanship that has become routine for AIPAC, the conference will feature speeches by all four top congressional leaders.
AIPAC says “more than 6,000 pro-Israel activists, including 1,200 students representing over 390 campuses” will attend. “Lead by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and both House and Senate Republican leaders all speaking under the same tent, this year’s AIPAC Policy Conference underscores the bipartisan nature of American support for Israel,” according to AIPAC spokesman Josh Block. “The conference schedule also underscores the long history, breadth and diversity of America’s centuries of support for the Jewish homeland in Israel.”
Anxiety about Iran will dominate the conference, and it is a major element in the “action agenda” that, at least in theory, sets the group’s goals for next year. Members of the executive committee will debate and vote on the statement on Sunday.
Proposed new language in the policy statement supports using “all means necessary for the United States, Israel and their allies to prevent Iran and other nations from developing nuclear, biological or chemical weapons and the vehicles for their delivery.”
Lobbying for tougher sanctions legislation will also be a top priority for AIPAC delegates when they blanket Capitol Hill on Tuesday.
Protecting Israel’s big chunk of foreign aid has traditionally been a top AIPAC priority, but this year the group will also emphasize “closely monitoring assistance to countries that are not supporting American objectives in the region.”
At the top of that list: the Palestinian Authority. Congress has frozen an administration request for $86 million in emergency aid to boost Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas’ forces.
Pro-peace groups say they will not press AIPAC to soften its language about the Palestinians, as they have done in the past. Morton Klein, national president of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), will come to the executive committee meeting loaded with amendments aimed at toughening them.
The AIPAC conference will be the usual display of political clout, but the group also faces some new challenges, including a new Democratic leadership that remains strongly pro-Israel but less in lockstep with AIPAC than their Republican predecessors.
Congressional observers say AIPAC remains a legislative powerhouse, “but more lawmakers will now feel free to ask questions, especially about routine and nonbinding resolutions praising Israel and criticizing the Palestinians,” said a longtime pro-Israel lobbyist.
But AIPAC’s influence on signature issues like Iran and foreign aid to Israel remains intact despite the partisan shift, said Kean University political scientist Gilbert Kahn.
“AIPAC has successfully maneuvered itself through Democratic and Republican administrations, Democratic and Republican Congresses, and there’s no reason to think they won’t do it again,” he said.
Kahn said AIPAC has also strengthened itself by aggressively “pushing the Orthodox community to engage. You have more and more Orthodox rabbis who are touting AIPAC and touting joining AIPAC. AIPAC understands that if you get the rabbis on board, they in turn will press the community to get involved.”
That “dramatic shift,” he said, may make AIPAC “less representative, but it also strengthens the group as voices on Mideast policy become more diverse.
“It’s a source of strength because this is a community that is comfortable with the direction AIPAC has taken in recent years,” he said.
AIPAC also faces a rising challenge from Jewish groups on both the right and the left that take a different tack on Mideast policy, and that are increasingly active on Capitol Hill.
The Zionist Organization of America on the right and both Americans for Peace Now and the Israel Policy Forum on the left are expanding their lobbying, targeting areas where they feel AIPAC does not represent them.
None can come close to eclipsing AIPAC, although IPF, Washington sources say, is starting to build a network of campaign contributors who also support the group’s perspective on Mideast affairs—a key element in AIPAC’s strength.
Still, on the verge of the 2007 policy conference, they point to a changed lobbying environment for what remains the pre-eminent group on the pro-Israel scene.
Last edited by William Robert; March 8th, 2007 at 10:04 AM.
|March 9th, 2007||#30|
6,000 Pro-Israel terrorists gather for meeting in Washinton!!
Under fire, Israel lobby rallies US backers
Washington- After a sustained attack by critics including
former US president Jimmy Carter, the most powerful pro-Israel lobbying group in the US still boasts impressive political pull in Washington.
When the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) opens
its annual conference Sunday, a high-powered group of politicians,
academics and policy analysts - more than 6,000 people in all - is
expected to pack the capital's glassy convention centre.
US Vice President Dick Cheney is due to give a keynote speech
Monday stressing strong ties with Israel. The top four leaders of the
Republican and Democratic parties will also speak, underscoring the
tradition of bipartisan support for Israel in the US Congress.
"There's one issue - that is, support for the US relationship with
Israel - that brings everyone together," AIPAC spokesman Josh Block
AIPAC says the three-day conference will be its biggest ever - a
signal of self-confidence and, in its own way, a rebuttal of
unusually harsh questioning of the Israel lobby's influence.
Two US political scientists sparked a furious debate last spring
with an essay that portrayed Washington as slavishly devoted to
Israel and accused US President George W Bush's administration of
launching the war in Iraq to help Israeli interests.
Harvard professor Stephen Walt and the University of Chicago's
Walter Mearsheimer said their paper, published in the London Review
of Books, aimed to bring a largely taboo topic into the open.
Critics condemned the essay as historically inaccurate and an
opening for anti-Semitism. The authors insisted they were not
suggesting a Jewish conspiracy to hijack US foreign policy.
The dust had barely settled when Carter, who brokered the 1978
Israel-Egypt peace deal, hit US bookstores in November with a
broadside provocatively titled Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.
Carter charges that a "free and balanced discussion" of the Arab-
Israeli conflict has been impossible in the US.
"This reluctance to criticize any policies of the Israeli
government is because of the extraordinary lobbying efforts of the
American-Israel Political Action Committee and the absence of any
significant contrary voices," he wrote in the Los Angeles Times.
The book details "the abominable oppression and persecution" of
Palestinians, which in many ways "is more oppressive" than apartheid
was for black South Africans, Carter said.
Again, a storm erupted. Dennis Ross, a former US envoy to the
Middle East, accused Carter of manipulating facts. Kenneth Stein, a
Mideast scholar at Emory University's Carter Centre quit in disgust.
Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal
Centre, a Jewish human rights group, accused Carter of hostility to
Carter's own centre-left Democratic Party also distanced itself.
Speaker of the US House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi, one of the
highest elected US officials, said it was "wrong to suggest" that
Jews would support "ethnically based oppression."
In the White House, Bush and his Republican administration have
been one of the most staunchly pro-Israel governments of recent
times, partly due to a religious affinity for Israel among Christian
conservatives who strongly support Bush.
But public backing for Israel is also solid. A February poll on
the Middle East conflict found 58 per cent of Americans sympathize
with Israel and 20 per cent with the Palestinians. The Gallup survey
had a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.
"All trends indicate that Americans ... understand quite clearly
that the basic values we celebrate are reflected in only one country
in the Middle East - our ally Israel," AIPAC's Block said.
|March 12th, 2007||#31|
Ready to puke???
US Vice President Dick Cheney (video of Speech)
Pastor John Hagee, Founder and Senior Pastor, Cornerstone Church, San Antonio, Texas (video of Speech)
MK Binyamin Netanyahu (video of Speech)
AIPAC President, Mr. Howard Friedman (video of Speech)
AIPAC impact on the youth, Aaron Applbaum (video of Speech)
Last edited by William Robert; March 12th, 2007 at 10:08 PM.
|March 12th, 2007||#32|
This Suck-poop takes the fucking Cake!!
Pastor John Hagee, Founder and Senior Pastor, Cornerstone Church, San Antonio, Texas (video of Speech)
This mother fucker needs to be dealt with!!!
|March 22nd, 2007||#34|
The AIPAC Girl Pelosi Greenlight's Bush's Iran War
The AIPAC Girl Pelosi Greenlight's Bush's Iran War
If George W. Bush launches a pre-emptive war on Iran, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will bear full moral responsibility for that war.
For it was Pelosi who quietly agreed to strip out of the $100 billion funding bill for Iraq a provision that would have required President Bush to seek congressional approval before launching any new war on Iran.
Pelosi's capitulation came in the Appropriations Committee.
What went down, and why?
"Conservative Democrats as well as lawmakers concerned about the possible impact on Israel had argued for the change in strategy," wrote ghe Associated Press' David Espo and Matthew Lead.
"Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said in an interview there is a widespread fear in Israel about Iran, which ... has expressed unremitting hostility to the Jewish state.
"'It would take away perhaps the most important tool the U.S. has when it comes to Iran,' she said of the now-abandoned provision.
"'I don't think it was a very wise idea to take things off the table if you're trying to get people to modify their behavior and normalize in a civilized way,' said Gary Ackerman of New York."
According to John Nichols of The Nation, Pelosi's decision to strip the provision barring Bush from attacking Iran without Congress' approval "sends the worst possible signal to the White House."
"The speaker has erred dangerously and dramatically," writes Nichols. Her "disastrous misstep could haunt her and the Congress for years to come."
Nichols does not exaggerate.
If Bush now launches war on Iran, he can credibly say Congress and the Democrats gave him a green light. For Pelosi, by removing a provision saying Bush does not have the authority, de facto concedes he does have the authority.
Bush and Cheney need now not worry about Congress.
They have been flashed the go sign for war on Iran.
Pelosi & Co. thus aborted a bipartisan effort to ensure that if we do go to war again, we do it the constitutional way, and we do it together.
Nothing in the provision would have prevented Bush, as commander in chief, from responding to an Iranian attack or engaging in hot pursuit of an enemy found in Iraq. Nor would the provision have prevented Bush from threatening Iran. It would simply have required him to come to Congress * before launching all-out war.
Now Pelosi has, in effect, ceded Bush carte blanche to take out Iran's nuclear facilities. It's all up to him and Cheney.
For this the nation elected a Democratic Congress?
Why did Pelosi capitulate? Answer: She was "under pressure from some conservative members of her caucus, and from lobbyists associated with neoconservative groups that want war with Iran and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)," writes Nichols.
The Washington Times agrees as to who bully-ragged Nancy into scuttling any requirement that Bush come to the Hill before unleashing the B-2s on Arak, Natanz and Bushehr:
"Last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi received a smattering of boos when she bad-mouthed the war effort during a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and the Democratic leadership, responding to concerns from pro-Israel lawmakers, was forced to strip from a military appropriations measure a provision meant to weaken President Bush's ability to respond to threats from Iran."
This episode, wherein liberal Democrats scuttled a bipartisan effort to require Bush to abide by the Constitution before taking us into a third war in the Middle East, speaks volumes about who has the whip hand on Capitol Hill when it comes to the Middle East.
Pelosi gets booed by the Israeli lobby, then runs back to the Hill and gives Bush a blank check for war on Iran, because that is what the lobby demands. A real candidate for Profiles in Courage.
As for the presidential candidates, it is hard to find a single one willing to stand up and say: If Bush plans to take us into another war in the Mideast, he must first come to Congress for authorization. And if he goes to war without authorization, that will be impeachable.
All retreat into the "all-options-are-on-the-table" mantra, which is another way of saying, "It's Bush's call."
The corruption of both parties is astonishing. Republicans used to be the party of the Constitution: "No more undeclared wars! No more presidential wars!"
Democrats used to be the party of the people. The people don't want this war. They don't want another. The Jewish community voted 88 percent for Democrats in November, and 77 percent oppose Iraq.
So says Gallup. Yet, just because the Israeli lobby jerked her chain, the leader of the Peoples' House has decided she and her party will leave the next war up to Bush.
|April 4th, 2007||#35|
New AIPAC Video Documentary
This new Dutch documentary was created as a result of the controversy created by Mearsheimer and Walt's "The Israel Lobby"(50 minute vid)
Good video Interview coverage with Mearsheimer.
Over all good documentary.
Good Highlights of the main reasons Israel is going down.
Supports the conclusion below.
Israel's Demise is coming!! The writing is on the Wall!!
Last edited by William Robert; April 4th, 2007 at 08:49 PM.
|December 17th, 2007||#36|
Kike-Whore McCain Just another AIPAC, JINSA, ADL Fool.
McCain names Broxmeyer top Jewish adviser
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) named the chairman of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs as the top Jewish adviser to his presidential campaign.
Mark Broxmeyer, already a top fund-raiser for the McCain campaign, will serve as the chair of McCain's Jewish Advisory Committee, a campaign statement said.
Broxmeyer, a New York property developer, is national chairman for JINSA, a group that promotes close Israel-U.S. security ties and that has been one of the most consistent supporters of the Bush administration's Iraq policy. Broxmeyer has taken the lead in promoting JINSA's exchange program for Israeli and U.S. law enforcement officials.
McCain's campaign for the Republican nomination nearly collapsed over the summer, but in recent weeks he has made strides in early primary states.