The New York Times has done a good thing today by putting AIPAC on its front page in a piece that says that Israel was "one of the big winners" of the midterm elections, due to the elevation of Republicans who support Netanyahu's hellbent course.
The encouraging news in the piece, on the front page, is the statement that Kentucky Senator-elect Rand Paul might take a stand against aid to Israel, he has already said as much to AIPAC. This threat is quickly countered by Chuck Schumer:
“One of the first things Congressman [Eric] Cantor can do is to make sure that his colleagues vote for aid to Israel,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, who also met with Mr. Netanyahu.
Mr. Schumer and others worry that support for Israel in Congress, long a bipartisan article of faith, could become politicized in a way that will end up harming Israel’s interests.
So: American support for Israel might be "politicized." I.e., the American people would then get to debate the issue, rather than face wall to wall support among their leaders, enforced by fatcat lobbyists with access. And journalists would have to write about the lobby, as they write about the gun lobby, the anti-abortion movement, or any other ideological special interest.
Though the Times reporters, Mark Landler and Jennifer Steinhauer, are typically close-mouthed about the character of that special interest. They speak of Eric Cantor's devotion to the Jewish state without saying anything about his recent pledge of allegiance to Netanyahu over Obama; maybe they should have described Schumer's genuflection to AIPAC, when he declared that he is Israel's guardian, in Hebrew. God forbid it should say a word about the religion of Schumer, Cantor, or Robert Wexler, who all play tambourines and speak in tongues in this report.
P.S. The Times also mentions wingjob Allen West, the new Republican congressman from Palm Beach, a heavily Jewish district. From West's website:
Above all, the Jewish State needs stronger representation in Congress and a solid voice that will not be afraid to stand up to the Obama Administration’s appeasement of Islamic terrorism.
Congress, including Ron Klein, whom West beat, almost unanimously backed the Israeli mass killing of civilians in the Gaza Strip in January 2009: 390-5. I guess that's not good enough.
{Sigh}
Did we read the same article?
They also claimed that the election was likely to result in reduced influence of Israel on the basis of tea baggers reluctance to spend money on any foreign aid.
oh yawn. didn’t you hear cantor is separating israel from the rest of the global community so we can cut everyones funding and not touch israels?
D Makovsky & Robert Satloff led a delegation of 40+ New York bankers to Israel-Egypt- Jordan-West Bank recently. Makovsky said that vis a vis the new Republican majority in Congress and some Tea Party calls to cut aid to Jordan, Egypt, Israel, etc. and to cut defense,
* poor Bibi — losing sleep worrying about spending other people’s money.
ps. that link was a really, really interesting discussion — one example: Barbara Slavin asked (around 1hr 6 min) if Israel will be asking US Senate for a formal treaty of alliance; Satloff says (close to the end) that Israeli intelligence official said threat of delegitimization is greater than Iran threat [my interpretation: Israel is more a danger to itself than is anybody else in the world]; and, Satloff continued, an Egyptian official said that the Arab-Israeli conflict poses the very real danger of morphing into a Jewish-Islamic conflict, and if it does, that conflict cannot be resolved.
re a treaty, Makovsky said a treaty would run into a wall of zionist self-determination, but on the other hand, a treaty would guarantee the ability to deter Iran, ie. Israel could bomb Iran.
“They also claimed that the election was likely to result in reduced influence of Israel on the basis of tea baggers reluctance to spend money on any foreign aid”
Which is why Cantor wants to allocate Israel’s aid to the defense budget, so that he can claim to suport the cut to foreign aid, while simulatenously carrying water for Israel.
In any case, if aid sried up, the US tryrants in ME will hopefully feel the pressure, beginning with Egypt.
The American people would then get to vote on the issue
shiver me timbers. what would they do without the line about how americans all support israel.
which reminds me i have to go collect more signatures for our california initiative to quit investing our state pension funds in settlement growth.
annie — see the link to Makovsky-Satloff + 40 NY bankers delegation to Israel.
Should those banks become targets of BDS? It’s reasonable to assume the goal of the delegation was to find ways to pump US and international money in Israel, which supports settlement activity that is contrary to international law and against the best interests of the American people. The Stuart Levey logic ought to apply to any US and worldwide banks that invest in Israel: investment in Israel contributes to terror; it should be sanctioned; violations of an anti-invest in Israel stricture should be punished with heavy fines that are paid to the people of the US and to Palestinian victims of Israel.
god people like shuemer don’t need to be in congress firstly in my opinion that it hurts Israel interests is a good thing because Israel “interests” harm everyone. secondly he is an american congressperson representing americans. he shouldn’t be concerned with how things effect other states interests other than if they will spark a major conflict. the only interests he need be concerned with out american ones
RE: “Congress, including Ron Klein, whom West beat, almost unanimously backed the Israeli mass killing of civilians in the Gaza Strip in January 2009: 390-5. I guess that’s not good enough.” – Weiss
MY COMMENT: It’s apparently not good enough for Florida’s Gold Coast. And I think it’s hilarious that a member of the Hell’s Angels (and black, to boot) will be representing “Boca” and “Palm”. Who’d a thunk it?
Have I mentioned that I winter in Palm and play polo most seasons? This ain’t my first chukkar, folks!
FOR YOUR LISTENING PLEASURE: Meet My New Congressman. God Help Me! ~ by Nicole Sandler, Radio Or Not, 11/16/10
So, while Congressman-elect Allen West joins Senator Charles Schumer in cheering on the Zionist entity in its siege of Gaza and demolition of the homes of Palestinians in East Jerusalem (actions that, according to General David Petreaus, endanger U.S. troops in Afghanistan and national security here in the homeland). he’s accusing President Obama of appeasing Islamic terrorism? How? By his feeble effort to put a brake on the actual cause of Islamic terrorism, Israel’s acts of aggression against its neighbors? Hold on there, congressman-elect, that’s like saying that someone who at long last is attempting to put a leash on his vicious and mad dog which keeps running across the street and attacking neighbors – angering them so much that they organize a posse to shoot the mad dog – that this person is to blame for the neighbors’ response? Yes, to the extent that said person has encouraged the viciousness in this dog and allowed it to run loose, he can be considered guilty of appeasing the mad dog. But appeasing the neighbors who rightfully rose up against this dog? Nonsense, since what he’s doing by restraining the animal is to take the inciting aggressor out of the picture. And with the dog thus restrained, the posse automatically disbands, which is conflict resolution, not appeasement. Late in restraining the dog, yes, but better late than never. Who, then are the appeasers? In addition to the person who owns and trained the dog (until his turnabout), anyone else who contributed to the animal’s aggressive and violent behavior.