Bipartisanship at last: U.S. politicians line up to castigate Palestinian unity deal

In stark contrast to partisan wrangling over the budget and women’s rights, Democrats and Republicans are lining up to demand the cut-off of U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority as a response to the reported unity deal between Hamas and Fatah. Expect the Obama administration to take heed and agree with Congress–especially with the 2012 elections approaching.

The rhetoric from both sides of the aisle is uniform. It’s the Israel lobby’s line. It’s telling, for example, that a staunch Republican and neoconservative pro-Israel hawk like Jennifer Rubin would approvingly quote an otherwise reliable liberal like Representative Gary Ackerman, a Democrat from New York:

The purported deal, which does not require Hamas to accept Israel’s right to exist, or the binding nature of prior Palestinian commitments, or even to require Hamas to temporarily forgo violence against Israel (as if it were some kind barbaric of addiction, or compulsion), is a recipe for failure, mixed with violence, leading to disaster. It is a ghastly mistake that I fear will be paid for in the lives of innocent Israelis.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the Republican chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs committee, similarly said:

The reported agreement between Fatah and Hamas means that a Foreign Terrorist Organization which has called for the destruction of Israel will be part of the Palestinian Authority government. U.S. taxpayer funds should not and must not be used to support those who threaten U.S. security, our interests, and our vital ally, Israel.

Interestingly, though, there are some, if not many, analysts and activists in solidarity with the Palestinian cause that will be happy with a cut off of U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority (for different reasons than Congress). U.S. aid, which has gone to train the Palestinian Authority’s security forces, has contributed deeply to the split between Hamas and Fatah.

As Ali Abunimah noted for the Electronic Intifada, “in The Palestine Papers, the main concern of Ramallah officials was always to maintain Western financial aid to the PA, and not to make any agreement with Hamas that would jeopardize American and European financing for the PA.” The Western financial aid has been used to crack down on Hamas. But if U.S. and European aid is cut off, perhaps the Palestinian Authority would no longer imprison Hamas members and quash dissent. That would go a long away towards true Palestinian unity.

Alex Kane, a freelance journalist based in New York City, blogs on Israel/Palestine and Islamophobia in the United States at alexbkane.wordpress.com, where this post originally appeared.  Follow him on Twitter @alexbkane.

About Alex Kane

Alex Kane is an assistant editor for Mondoweiss and the World editor for AlterNet. Follow him on Twitter @alexbkane.
Posted in Gaza, Israel Lobby, Israel/Palestine, US Policy in the Middle East | Tagged , , , ,

{ 69 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. jewishgoyim says:

    Israelis are yelling about everyone in the world trying to “deligitimize Israel”. This seemed to me like a shallow concept that hasbara thinkers came up with out of lack of inspiration. It never really made any sense to me. How could one deligitimize Israel? What would a “deligitimized Israel” look like? How could it be hurt by that?

    It finally struck me: I think it is in fact inspired by the very strategy they are using against Hamas! They are just projecting their behavior and intent on an unknowing and disorganized collective (the Rest Of the World). To me it’s pretty clear that it’s like a deranged individual looking at the world around it as if the everybody was thinking along his own twisted lines.

    Of course, as we see, deligitimizing Hamas has real potency whereas “deligitimizing Israel” makes no sense and is a pure abstract hasbara concept.

  2. lysias says:

    Exactly what is it that makes Israel “our vital ally,” as Ileana Ros-Lehtinen calls her? There’s no treaty of alliance, is there?

    • Citizen says:

      NO, lysias, there is not, just lots of memorandums of understanding over the years (never parsed by our US MSM) that enmesh our government and its military-industrial-security complex with that of Israel’s. This legislation has been woven for a long time now, totally out of the ken of the average American citizen, and in every MOU, Israel is by far the net beneficiary, both in terms of material reward, and in terms of Israel’s values supplanting American values. And Ros-Lehtinen knows it, as do all the other Jewish Israel Firsters in our congress. And yet, Ros-Lehtinen would not want the USA to declare Israel our next state. Why? Because then Israel would only be represented by 2 US senators instead of all of them!

      • lysias says:

        Not only that, but Israel would then be subject to our courts and such legal requirements as equal protection and separation of church and state.

  3. ChrisB says:

    Every once in a while, Congress gets together and acts in a moral manner. I know it upsets you, but you’re just going to have to get used to it.

    • annie says:

      I know it upsets you, but you’re just going to have to get used to it.

      congress ‘gets together’ over aipac all the time, there’s nothing unusual about it in the least. i don’t think most americans are aware of it but if they were i do not think they would ‘get used to it’, i think they would reject it which is why it isn’t talked about much or acknowledged in the msm.

      so, it remains to be seen what we will ‘just have to get used to’. one thing is certain tho, israel keeps delegitimizing itself day in and day out. we are going to keep exposing that because the israel lobby is like a nightflower, it thrives in darkness. the more exposure to light and truth the worse it will become for israel.

      I know it upsets you, but you’re just going to have to get used to it.

      • GuiltyFeat says:

        “the more exposure to light and truth the worse it will become for israel.”

        In what way are things becoming worse for Israel? And why is so important to you that they do?

        Annie, I thought you, of all people, understood that the aim is to make things better for the Palestinians, not worse for Israel. I feel like you’ve fallen into someone else’s routine here.

        • annie says:

          gf, israel is an apartheid state that tries to pass itself off as a liberal democracy. we shouldn’t be funding it while it blows us off, not much different than what congress is threatening wrt the PA.

          exposure to light and truth is what is important to me, always. your psychobabble is immaterial to the conversation.

        • GuiltyFeat says:

          Let’s say I agree with you.

          The problem here, surely, is that Congress (and the EU) believe that Hamas is a terrorist organization.

          There are two ways to go. Convince Congress (and the EU) that Israel is also a terrorist organization and cut off funding to both, or convince Congress (and the EU) that Hamas is not a terrorist organization and maintain funding to both.

          It’s your Congress, Annie, but I know which one I think’s more likely to work. The only problem is in order for anyone to convince anyone that Hamas is not a terrorist organization they kinda haveta stop acting like one (firing anti-tank missiles at schoolchildren for example). I know what you’re about to say, but I’m just talking about the path of least resistance here. As far as your Congress is concerned Israel has nothing to prove while Hamas does. It may not be fair, but that’s what’s going on.

          I think Bibi’s an idiot, but at least he understands that much. He’ll keep on shmoozing the fools on the hill right until the moment when Haniyeh denounces violence and reaches out his hand to shake it. That’s the way to wipe the smile off both of Bibi’s faces.

        • annie says:

          There are two ways to go. ……I know what you’re about to say, but I’m just talking about the path of least resistance here.

          no, the path of least resistance is another way besides your two. let congress cut off funds to the pa, in fact disband the pa as far as i am concerned. heck, how much of that usaid builds the apartheid roads anyway? the world is bigger than the US/IS and EU for that matter. you act like abbas didn’t think this would be the likely response, that’s silly. the US has always threatened to cut off funds. don’t you remember before they started calling the blockade the blockade (and claimed it was ‘in response’ to hamas attacks) it was ccalled the economic embargo? planned when hamas won the election and went into effect immediately after inauguration? i’m sure they expected this.

        • Citizen says:

          GF, you are aptly named. Annie is talking about how sunshine and light are a disinfectant. More sunshine, more bleach, less Israel First germs in Uncle Sam’s toilet bowl.

        • Citizen says:

          No, GF, in order for anyone to convince anyone that HAMAS is not a terrorist organization is to donate lots more money to one of the two American main political parties, or both, as is the case now to have the contrary official POV. Just imagine what could be done with Rachel “Pancake Girl” Corrie’s murder if she had been defending an Israeli home from a Palestinian bulldozer paid for by the USA.

        • annie says:

          i really don’t like hearing rachel referred to that way. i understand you were making a point but it’s still grossly offensive. just saying. (i also don’t like pc patrols..so sorry but i couldn’t go one more time hearing that and saying nothing)

        • Leigh says:

          GF, you’re assuming that US and EU support for Israel is a reasoned position, but from the way in which evidence is routinely ignored and “polly wants a cracker” phrases repeated, it is clear that emotions and money play a much larger role than reasoning here. So congress cannot be convinced of anything.

          As the Guardian said today about the American birthers who are still unconvinced of Obama’s American citizenship: “As Jonathan Swift once said, you can’t reason somebody out of something they were never reasoned into.”

          I think that’s why the Palestinians, including their leadership, are now appealing to international civil society to force the issue, like they did with apartheid South Africa.

      • ChrisB says:

        Most Americans support Congress in the support of Israel.

        I know it upsets you, but you’re just going to have to get used to it.

        • annie says:

          lol, you crack me up

        • Leigh says:

          Sigh. Most people supported slavery until they realised the immorality of it. Most people were racists until they were won over by the enlightened minority. Most people believed in the inferiority of women, even though they were wrong all along. So if that’s your strongest argument, it needs some work.

          Anyway, opinion polls tend to show a lot of sympathy for Israel, but many also show that Americans prefer that the US does not take sides in the conflict. Do you still want to use the majority view now that it’s been cleared up?

        • Shingo says:

          Most Americans support Congress in the support of Israel.

          Most Americans believed Iraq had WMD and was behind 911. 

          Now they don’t.

          Most Americans uppity the Arab uprisings, even if they are caddie Israel.

          I know it upsets you, but you’re just going to have to get used to it.

        • Ani Ishmael says:

          But backing Hamas, who is probably 3rd in the list of terrorist organizations responsible for American deaths, would be moral?

          Americans are skeptical of Muslim terrorist organizations who kill American civilians.

          (Feel free to bring up the Liberty which happened over 40 years ago)

        • Chaos4700 says:

          But backing Hamas, who is probably 3rd in the list of terrorist organizations responsible for American deaths

          Care to make anything else up? It would make a nice bookend to your making sport of the murder of American military personnel, there, actually.

        • Shingo says:

          But backing Hamas, who is probably 3rd in the list of terrorist organizations responsible for American deaths, would be moral?

          Which Americans have Hamas killed?

          Americans are skeptical of Muslim terrorist organizations who kill American civilians.  

          Not I’d they happen to be a neocon or right wing pro Israeli politician, in which case the MEK are celebrated.

    • Woody Tanaka says:

      “Every once in a while, Congress gets together and acts in a moral manner.”

      LMAO. Yeah, the morality of the paid-off-public servant. This isn’t morality; hell, this isn’t governance. It’s customer service. The Lobby is just getting what they paid for.

    • Chaos4700 says:

      “Moral” is doing the bidding of a foreign interest that would rather, oh I don’t know, almost sink one of our naval vessels in international waters in order to try to bring about the Lavon Affair, Part 2?

      Yeah. I’m going to be using the phrase “fifth column” on this thread a lot. Shoe fits. Americans need to not end up with the tread marks on their forehead.

  4. seafoid says:

    All you can do is laugh. Congress is a joke.

    Here is some help

    link to guardian.co.uk

  5. annie says:

    thanks alex, good report.

    rubin’s a tool. the one w/the ‘barbaric addiction’ to violence is israel.

  6. Theo says:

    “we should not use US taxpayers money ro support a foreign terrorist group”…

    My sentiment!! We should stop immediately all payments to Israel, because the money supports such terrorist organisations as the IDF, the Mossad, Shin Ben, the settlers who terrorize the local population and not to forget jewish spies working for Israel, such as Pollak was.
    We should all write an e-mail to our congresspersons on this.

    • Michael W. says:

      Theo, why stop there? Why not stop funding for NATO, US Army, Navy, & Air Force?

      • Chaos4700 says:

        You know, the very definition of a “fifth column” is a foreign allegiance that goes out of its way to compromise the host countries defenses. Rather like a parasite.

        Do you really think most Americans see Israel as anything more than that, when it comes down to it? You really think you can threaten the US army as a way of preserving Israel’s parasitic relationship with the US.

        That’s cute.

        • Ani Ishmael says:

          Do you really think most Americans see Israel as anything more than that, when it comes down to it?

          Chaos I don’t think you are like minded people see Israel or America like you see them.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          I’d question what you said but your grammar is so terrible that your reply is virtually indecipherable. It’s like been cursed out in a foreign language. You know someone’s saying something objectionable but you can’t really formulate a verbal response to a semi-verbal challenge.

      • Citizen says:

        Well, Michael W, we’d like to fund those entities in the hope that next time around, they get to fire at Israeli jets when they attack the next US intelligence-gathering ship.

        • Michael W. says:

          Chaos, I was only asking those questions rhetorically. Do you really think I want to eliminate the Defense budget? I didn’t threat anyone. Many Americans here ignore the fact that the US military acted a lot like the IDF over the past 10 years. Of course, it’s a Mondoweiss past time to blame those wars on neo-cons and Israel.

          Citizen, why wait? Why not demand that the US/NATO go all “Libya” on Israel? But till then, are you willing to fund these entities that have killed so many more civilians than Israel over the past 10 years? How many Iraqis, Afghans, and Libyans are you willing to sacrifice for the improbable chance that the Israelis will be next?

          Just to clarify, I don’t want the US defense budget eliminated. I’m just trying to get you guys to compare Israel’s and America’s actions over the past 10 years and then ask yourselves, “Why is Gen. Ashkenazi a terrorist and not Gen. Mullen?”

        • Chaos4700 says:

          Many Americans here ignore the fact that the US military acted a lot like the IDF over the past 10 years

          Oh believe me, a lot of us noticed that. That’s why I think the Israel Lobby need to be stripped of power in order to save the United States. That is who needs to be de-funded.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          You proceed from the mistaken assumption that the posters here are uniform in the belief that the US is a shining angel, forever free of any taint. Not so. I for one, believe that the US’s crimes are as bad if not worse than Israel’s and have stated so on many occassions. Domestically, the US is better, though, and the US actions overseas hasn’t lasted since 1967, like Israel’s.

        • Citizen says:

          The neocons & PEPs are terrorists, and who said Gen Mullen is not a terrorist?

        • Michael W. says:

          Chaos, instead of “stripped of power”, did you mean “stripped of rights”?

          Citizen, I’m assuming you are American, and you are greatly at odds with the American criminal justice system. How do you think this American system should change to uphold your values and the Constitution? Or is it just a matter of enforcing the current laws?

        • Citizen says:

          Michael W, I assume you did not grow up in America, and you did not go to an American law school, graduate from there, practice law in at least one American jurisdiction, and you do not understand the US Constitution as interpreted by SCOTUS since the early days of the USA up to the present times. Otherwise, your comment to me makes no sense. My comments do not reflect a deviance from the totality of US law. Where do you think it is otherwise?

        • Citizen says:

          Adm Mike Mullen (a fellow Irish-American) is on CSPAN2 now, at 4PM EST. Does the US have a mutual defense treaty with Israel as we do with South Korea, given US treaties are inter alia constitutionally “the law of the land”? No. Does the 98% gentile US remain a supporter of the humane principles laid down after so many dead jewish and gentile dead apropos of WW2, and of the international legal principles following in accordance with the Nuremberg tribunal’s wake? Mullen says we should be very, very careful about what the US does regarding Syria. At the moment he says, we are in the stance of no boots on the ground in Syria. Mullen says he thinks of the dead and maimed US uniformed soldiers in the Middle East. I think of those, and also of the same catagory who were/are not American born, and I think of the highest values of the USA. What are you thinking of, What is your point?

        • Citizen says:

          And now, very timely also, we have Hillel Fradkin, from the Hudson Institute, hosting on CSPAN2 “THE SYRIAN POLITICAL UNREST & VIOLENCE to all Americans who actually can afford cable TV service, and who actually give a damn as they worry about the price at the pump, and how will they pay for that and food for their family, let alone how to maintian a roof over their head.

          Ammar Abudulhamd, Syrian author and activist, says Syria’s Assad has been emerging strong as ever. Yet, in the last couple of years also, people have been working against this, for democratic change in Syria. There is limited room for protest in Syria. The Arab Spring must operate in Syria in these confines. So we must go with the flow apropos the very young protesters in Syria. A new generation there. The Arab Spring has uppped the ante.
          Should we open the font with Israel? Will the Syrians fight for Arab dignity apropos Israel? Do we want the Syrian army to play a role in this, and accordingly, in the role against the role of Israel in the ME? This is a movement of new Arab and Jewish coalition, the movement for Arab and Jewish change. More inclusive. The ICC is our partner in this endeavour.

          Hillel Fradkin, comments, followed by Hanin Ghaddar (Lebanon website), “It’s always the people victims in fact , who are leading from behind.

          Hanin Ghaddar, NOW Lebanon website,managing editor: Whoever is coming to Syria to take over, before the Arab uprising, there was no choice outside the USA/Israel kind.
          People our questioning this.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          No, I mean “stripped of power.” Nobody has the right to commit espionage on the US and get away scot free.

        • Antidote says:

          “the US actions overseas hasn’t lasted since 1967, like Israel’s”

          Huh?

          “US’s crimes are as bad if not worse than Israel’s”

          Infinitely worse

      • Theo says:

        Michael W.

        The US. Army, Navy, etc. are not a foreign entity, it is our own. If they are “terrorists” is up to your viewpoint.

        The NATO should be dismantled, it is a black hole where billions are lost without a result. As almost always, a military alliance that goes rouge after it´s usefullness isw expired.

        By the way, thanks for having removed my comment.

  7. chet says:

    If Hamas can be persuaded to recognize the “existence” of the State of Israel and renounce violence, the UNGA vote to recognize the Palestinian State is almost guaranteed.

    If they don’t, then what?

    • Leigh says:

      Chet, kind of, although it seems as if most of the world has wisened up to this. First, Hamas has accepted the two-state solution; one of those two states will be Israel, one will be Palestine. Many people and probably countries can see that this amounts to enough of a recognition of Israel. Second, many of those same people and countries can see that the vast majority of the violence is perpetrated by Israel, and few are unrealistic enough to expect even further non-violence from the already least violent side. Many countries can also recognise the difference between Hamas and other more extreme groups, and have even publically warned that the blockade of Gaza is likely to breed more extremism. So these old bogeymen seem to be getting much weaker.

      The question about the UNGA resolution is how much money the US will be willing to spend to bribe countries to vote against it. I’m thinking of states like Nigeria, Uganda, Chile, Norway, etc. etc., who basically think a Palestinian state is a good idea, but who are afraid of the master’s wrath. Hamas’ views are mostly irrelavant in that process.

      • chet says:

        Leigh – I concede your points that the acceptance of a two-state solution constitutes an implicit recognition of the State of Israel and that the extreme groups and not Hamas are responsible for the rockets, but my concern is that Hamas will be confronted to make the concessions EXPLICIT and may well refuse.

        This would be a powerful tool for the Israelis and the American apologists to use against the Palestinian UNGA vote.

        • annie says:

          my concern is that Hamas will be confronted to make the concessions EXPLICIT and may well refuse.

          who is going to confront hamas to make concessions explicit? fatah? the pa? hamas has already said they will agree to anything put to a referendum of the palestinian people. the reason unity was prevented before was because, thru egypt, the US/IS already tried to force hamas for concessions. why should they concede anything when nothing is on the table from israel? nothing! us/is pre condition for hamas (the elected representatives of the majority of palestinians) was always to concede to their demands, not the pa or fatah’s demands. i think it is very likely both fatah and hamas have more in common than not and unlikely fatah will be demanding hamas submit or concede that which they don’t have control of anyway which is the voice of palestinians.

        • American says:

          I am fairly sure it will occur to Palestine to say they will ‘recognize” Israel the same day they receive their own statehood and are recognized by Israel. That would be my reply to the recognition demand. And if Israel demanded to be recognized as a Jewish state I would reply that wouldn’t be accurate as they have some non Jews in their state. Israel is irrational, they needed to be treated and handled as non rational beings or as “rationally handicapped” and responded to repeatedly as you would to a two year old child until they find irrational demands and temper fits don’t work any longer.
          Considering the fact that the majority of people in the world are ‘reasonable” that mutual recognition exchange would be regarded as ‘fair’ …by everyone but the Israelis.

        • Shingo says:

          That would be my reply to the recognition demand. And if Israel demanded to be recognized as a Jewish state I would reply that wouldn’t be accurate as they have some non Jews in their state.

          Even better, reply by pointing out that no state recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, not even the US.

        • Citizen says:

          Not even Harry Truman, who crossed out the adjective “jewish” as to the state he recognized first, the state of Israel.

      • Citizen says:

        Yes, let’s have a repeat of how Israel obtained its legitimacy.

    • Shingo says:

      If Hamas can be persuaded to recognize the “existence” of the State of Israel and renounce violence, the UNGA vote to recognize the Palestinian State is almost guaranteed.

      So is a US veto at the Security Council.

  8. seafoid says:

    This US aid is like Judas and his 30 pieces of silver. Freedom is worth more than a couple of hundred million dollars.

  9. clenchner says:

    It follows that if Hamas deems the PA to be a worthy partner for a political agreement, that anti-PA and anti-Abbas die hards are revealed to be politically irrelevant.
    Also of note: with Hamas and Fatah engaged in coalition politics, the lack of popular support for other political parties who are neither Hamas nor Fatah stands out with even greater force.
    To the extent that they exist (and they do) they might me as relevant in Palestine as the Green Party and the Libertarians are in the US. Personally, that makes me sad; I’m a fan of the Palestinian People’s Party, which has an important and storied history. (Go Salfit!) But affection is not analysis.

  10. Sin Nombre says:

    Seems to me that if there was ever to be any progress made this was something inevitable that the P’s had to confront. I.e., the U.S. was never going to be helpful, so its irrelevance had to increase to get anywhere, and thus the P’s giving up U.S. money at some point was inevitable.

    I wonder about the smartness of the timing of this on the P’s side though. The next ratchet in making the U.S. less relevant is the U.N. vote thing maybe in Sept. So why now hand Israel (and its Charley McCarthy, the U.S.) the argument to be made to any vacillating Euros that this merger of the PA and Hamas shows that Israel has no partner for peace and blah blah blah?

    At the very least I would have thought waiting until after such a UN vote was had maybe, then facing the utterly predictable cutoff of US funds, but then being able to appeal to other countries (like the Euros too) to replace those funds arguing that now that nationhood had been established of course all factions had to be gathered in and etc.

    Regardless and again, if the P’s were ever gonna get anywhere it was inevitable that they would lose US funding somewhere down the line, so just hope they apparently have decided to bite that bullet now with some thinking behind it.

    • Woody Tanaka says:

      It’s damned if you do and damned if you don’t. Absent this agreement, the cry from the Israelis and its puppets would be that the UN vote can’t be approved because Hamas and Fatah are fighting, so Palestine is split.

  11. eee says:

    The devil is in the details. Let’s wait for the actual agreement to be signed and the new government to be formed.

  12. Pamela Olson says:

    Israeli government after the unity deal: “How can we talk to the Palestinians? They’re unified in a way we don’t like!”

    Israeli government after the Hamas/Fatah split: “How can we talk to the Palestinians? They’re not unified!”

    Israeli government after Hamas won elections in 2006: “How can we talk to the Palestinians? They elected someone we don’t like!”

    Israeli government after Abbas was elected and before Hamas won elections: “How can we talk to the Palestinians? Their leader is weak and doesn’t fully represent the Palestinians!”

    Israeli government before Arafat died and Abbas was elected: “How can we talk to the Palestinians? Their leader is a terrorist!”

    Hm… I’m sensing a theme here…

  13. Bumblebye says:

    It’s “tri”-partisan. The chorus boys (and girls) following their “Dear Leaders” in Israel.

  14. Shingo says:

     The purported deal, which does not require Hamas to accept Israel’s right to exist, or the binding nature of prior Palestinian commitments, or even to require Hamas to temporarily forgo violence against Israel

    Rubin is such a pathetic hack.

    Notice how the prior commitments are only “binding” when it comes to the Palestinians, yet when Lieberman declares are prior agreements null and void, or when Sharon and Netenyahu trash Oslo and the Road Map, not a word is mentioned.

  15. Les says:

    If it’s true that Palestinians will receive aid from other nations, I would hope that any aid for weapons does not allow them to be used against fellow Palestinians which is what the US explicitly and exclusively requires with the weapons and training we supply. The justification for such aid by the US makes as much sense as it would have for the US to have provided aid to Judenrat police forces to maintain the peace between Hitler’s forces and the Jews, for the worthy goal of regional stability and in a fashion that does not favor one side over the other.

  16. Eva Smagacz says:

    By reducing/removing American aid to Palestinians, Americans are removing their most potent leverage against Palestinian Government and make themselves redundant when it comes in being able to shape “peace negotiations”.

    Netanyahoo must be very happy to have neutered American administration at last, by US Congress no less!

    • Shingo says:

      very good point Eva,

      I was thinking the same thing. By reducing/removing American aid to Palestinians, that open the door for actors like Iran to step in. Now wouldn’t that be an own goal?

  17. American says:

    Well I’m gonna say what I always say.

    You’re gonna have to get the Israelis out of the US congress…not only for the sake of the Palestines and other ME spots, but for the sake of the US.
    Otherwise nothing is going to change.
    UNLESS…..Europe and the rest of the world has had enough of our crap and hypocrisy in the ME and on Israel and decides to totally ignore the US…which they seem more and more inclined to do since they have seen Obama’s weakness and 180 on the issue after his lofty Cairo speech.
    The public is going to have to call those like Ackerman and others what they are…traitors, agents of foreign interest, whatever….liken it to a McCarthy redo if you will– but that’s what it is likely to come down to as nothing else has worked. In fact a lot of the public is already doing that. If that frightens the Israeli politicians in this country maybe that would be a good thing….a nice dose of scare might do wonders in rearranging their priorities.
    Fear, like money is a great motivator.

    BTW, Mother Jones has an excellent article this week on why politicians don’t pay pay attention to the wishes of Americans….because only the rich and dedicated fanatical can apply the two things that work on politicians…fear and money, money and fear.

    • Citizen says:

      Yep, and who needs Mother Jones to tell them the power of a bag of gold, or tons of cheap printing press US dollars in one hand, and a stack of “Anti-semite!” stickers in the other? Nobody living in 2011 AD.