Obama’s mild defiance at AIPAC cost him $10 million in Jewish donations

on 103 Comments

Adam Kredo in the Washington Jewish Week honestly addresses a central political issue that a far more prominent journalist, Robert Siegel on NPR, sought to mystify earlier this week. First Kredo:

One prominent Jewish leader who attended Obama’s AIPAC speech told me that “the Jewish community has a form of IBS [Irritable Bowel Syndrome] with the president. They’re unsettled.”

“It’s safe to say,” the source added, “that about $10 million [in Jewish donations to the Obama campaign] evaporated in that speech.”

Now here is Robert Siegel and Ron Kampeas of JTA talking about the same issue on NPR the other day. Note that Kampeas, who is a settler in occupied East Jerusalem, owns property there, is halfway honest about the money issue. But Siegel immediately makes it about voters. This is a lie, and Siegel knows it. Jewish voters can swing one state maybe, Florida. As the Wall Street Journal noted the other day, this is about money…

KAMPEAS: The issue is how it’s played with Jewish donors to the Democratic party and there, there has been some concern. There’s sort of three levels of Jewish donorship to the Democratic party. There are Jews that donate just because overall they favor the party and then on the right, there are Jews who only donate because of Israel….

SIEGEL: And is the degree of difference that we’ve seen between Mr. Obama and Mr. Netanyahu, do you think it’s substantial enough that republicans who are eager to peel away some votes from the Democrats in 2012 might actually have something to work with?

103 Responses

  1. Kathleen
    May 27, 2011, 3:20 pm

    “do you think it’s substantial enough that republicans who are eager to peel away some votes from the Democrats in 2012 might actually have something to work with?”

    Clearly the Republicans think they can peel some votes away on this issue. But in Ohio Kasich and SB 5 is huge. Blue collar voters in Ohio are pissed with the Republicans in a big way. Have been spending time in the Dayton Ohio region helping collect signatures on the SB 5 issue. Have spent quite a bit of time talking with fireman, police officers etc about why they voted for Kasich. I avoided asking them this question at one of the first protest at the Ohio state house in Columbus over the winter. But now am asking. Why they voted for Republicans and in particular Kasich? They are admitting what a serious mistake they made. Another shift is taking place with the Reagan Dems…they are coming back. Union strength is growing in Ohio. Senator Sherrod Brown has always stood on the side of the blue collar worker. I think there is going to be a strong sweep for Obama in Ohio. I don’t think the I/P issue is going to play out for the Republicans in Ohio. Florida is another issue.

  2. American
    May 27, 2011, 3:31 pm

    Doesn’t matter.
    If nothing changes between now and the election the repubs have already ruined themselves with Rand Pauls medicare proposal…now the right wing of the repubs is branded. So unless they come up with someone besides the current slew of done over fruitcakes Obama not getting the Jews money isn’t going to be that big a deal.
    And since the SC now made it legal for corps to give unlimited money to candidates the Jews money is going to be less important anyway.
    Now that what’s his name, the big casino Jew, has said he isn’t going to support Obama I have decided I will, and get out and raise some money for him which I didn’t do before.
    The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    • annie
      May 27, 2011, 3:50 pm

      don’t forget the gop owns the electronic voting machines companies. they do not have to win, they just need to show they could and then swing the vote. wrt obama the ptb didn’t really want a gop presidency last time they wanted the horrendous economic nightmare that had been created to be blamed on the dems.

      that is my hunch anyway.

      • Kathleen
        May 27, 2011, 4:07 pm

        They would have to steal Ohio this time around and that is not going to happen…the unions are on fire and they are going blue blue blue

      • Sand
        May 27, 2011, 5:52 pm

        I think the GOP will be more preoccupied with FL than OH. Elections come down to money and electoral votes.

        link to en.wikipedia.org

      • American
        May 27, 2011, 5:00 pm

        Do you think enough have caught on to the repub trickle down economics yet?
        Everyone should have by now.

      • LeaNder
        May 27, 2011, 5:27 pm

        Annie, how active are the critics of the electronic voting system. Have they given up by now?

      • Robert
        May 27, 2011, 8:52 pm


        Can you back up this assertion of fraud driven by the voting machine companies? I’m finding that Mondo (including comments) is 85% hard-hitting-but-true reporting and 15% overdoing it and blind-alley conspiracy theory. For example, the whole thing about Israel behind 9/11, theorized by Alan Sobrosky, is of the latter variety. Mondo is still extraordinarily useful, and I suppose that given the nature of the topic that 15% overdoing it is to be expected.

      • NorthOfFortyNine
        May 28, 2011, 12:30 am

        I’m finding that Mondo (including comments) is 85% hard-hitting-but-true reporting and 15% overdoing it and blind-alley conspiracy theory. For example, the whole thing about Israel behind 9/11, theorized by Alan Sobrosky, is of the latter variety.

        I am not familiar with the Sobrosky reference, but five Israelis were arrested on 9/11 after they were seen “celebrating” the attack. They were quietly released after 40 days and returned to Israel. where they then went on a talk show. On this talk show, one of them said: “Our purpose [there] was to document the event.”

        Document the event? Wtf? How can you document something without foreknowledge?

        The facts in the case are not in dispute. I won’t post links because likely would not be helpful for Phil’s site. But google [“document the event” 9/11]. You can see the talk show for yourself.

        This is not the time nor place to get into this, but to suggest we are groping down a “blind alley conspiracy theory” by asking these questions is unfair.

        Whatis more amazing is that so few in officialdon have followed on this.

      • Robert
        May 28, 2011, 2:43 am


        I took a look at this a few weeks ago. The FBI held the Israelis for a number of 40 days and came to the conclusion that they had a relationship to the Mossad, but that it was to investigate Arab fundraising in New Jersey, not 9/11. When the Israeli said that “Our purpose [there] was to document the event.” (this is translated from the Hebrew), that he meant “We were photographing the event”, which thousands of other people did. The FBI noted that the most difficult aspect of the case was the apparent dancing and joyous behavior of the Israelis while photographing 9/11, which they ultimately attributed to immaturity.

        This is an excellent link in one place link to 911myths.com .

        I’m saying that there is so much real Israeli and Israel Lobby trickery, that it places a special, scientific burden on people who follow it to knock out unsupportable conspiracy theories. We are the better for it.

      • Hostage
        May 28, 2011, 5:33 am

        Here is a computer programmer testifying at length under oath that he was hired to write software to rig elections in Florida by Speaker of the Florida House, Tom Feeney. Fenney was a paid lobbyist for the same voting machine manufacturer:
        link to youtube.com

        In a separate incident two counties on Florida’s east coast discovered that Sequoia Voting Systems’ had failed to reveal that one of its top executives was under indictment in a voting equipment and money laundering scandal.
        link to sptimes.com

        Here is Prof Ed Felton’s Princeton University Center for Information Technology Policy and Dept. of Computer Science “Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine”
        link to citp.princeton.edu
        And Their Response to Diebolds Reply
        link to freedom-to-tinker.com

        The University of California reported that Diebold and Sequoia Voting Systems could not be secured leading the California Secretary of State to decertify the systems link to freegovinfo.info

        California had no alternative system, so the state had to use the voting systems and cobbled together a paper trail system. The article mentions that Diebold filed lawsuits against Felton and other researchers who revealed Diebold’s flawed security system.
        link to pcworld.com

      • Donald
        May 28, 2011, 12:31 pm

        Thanks for that link, Robert. I agree with what you say about this website–most of it is valuable, but like much of the online left, there’s sometimes a tendency to believe things which aren’t supported by the evidence. ( I said that without using the term “conspiracy theory”. I’ve decided to stay away from the term –there’s nothing wrong with a conspiracy theory if there is good evidence for it and in fact everyone believes in some conspiracies.)

      • NorthOfFortyNine
        May 28, 2011, 5:24 pm


        I have have tried to respond to your post now twice, but both attempts were nixed. (I thought these posts were pretty mild, too. Anyway….)

        For what it is worth, the WaPo editorial board called Chase Freeman a conspriacy theorist for suggesting there was an Israeli lobby. See here: link to washingtonpost.com

        Be careful whose company you keep! -N49.

      • Antidote
        May 29, 2011, 12:10 am

        “and in fact everyone believes in some conspiracies”

        How about:

        The Arabs want to push us into the sea
        Iran is building the bomb to wipe Israel off the map (and quite possibly attack many other countries, including Canada — according to Netanyahu, on CBC, May 2010)
        The Palestinians are terrorists plotting to kill all the Jews
        The Islamists are planning to take over Europe, destroy democracy and oppress all the women
        Anti-semitism is the first sign of an impending Holocaust
        Anti-semitism is ubiquitous, eternal, irrational

        Hitler had set his mind on killing all the Jews as early as Mein Kampf. All Germans knew it and approved. The fact that the Nazis encouraged and enforced Jewish emigration in the pre-war period proves that Hitler was going to invade every country to which they fled, including the US. The fact that he transported German Jews to Palestine proves that he was later going to invade Palestine and kill all the Jews in the Middle East, together with the Mufti.

        Obama is a Muslim and is throwing Israel under the bus

      • Robert
        May 29, 2011, 1:07 am


        I should clarify the “conspiracy theory” part, here. Asking questions is, of course, perfectly appropriate. And I was interested in the 9/11 ideas enough to do some research, including the Israeli stuff. This guy Alan Sobrosky is supposedly the Director of Studies at the Security Studies Institute at the Army War College, and it looked serious. But the more I looked into it, there were good, Occam’s Razor answers to the things that he proposed. I respect the right to talk about these subjects.

      • NorthOfFortyNine
        May 29, 2011, 10:23 am

        //Asking questions is, of course, perfectly appropriate.

        I agree, but not all do. It was not so long ago that you simply could not ask questions regarding undue influence exerted by people in high places with strong ties to Israel. That is now changing.

        But there remain areas that are simply taboo. 9/11 is one of them. If 9/11 had happened in Russia or Malaysia, it would be a lot easier to get clarity. As it is, it is very tough to get our heads around. And we simply cannot talk about it in polite company. So it goes.

        The best example of the contextual nature of “conspiracy theories” is James Fallows’ treatment of the death of Mohammed al-Dura. If you’ll remember, (see here: link to theatlantic.com) al Dura was the kid who was shot in his father’s arms by Israeli soldiers during the Intifada. Fallows constructs what would otherwise be seen as a classic conspiracy theory to the effect that it was actually the Palestinians who shot the child to gain sympathy for the cause. In other words, he posits a false flag operation of a particular odious nature. Now, if the roles were reversed, if it were argued that Israel’s shot an Israel child and tried to pin it on Palestinians to garner sympathy, there would be an outcry. We would not be able to talk about it and if we tried, we would be seen as some sort of deviant, beyond the pale.

        But Fallows? He gets a cover story on the Atlantic.

        Conspricary theories are mostly in the eye of the beholder. I find the topic fascinating.

        Regards -N49.

      • Citizen
        May 29, 2011, 4:06 am

        Here’s what’s being sent around in Florida, a different take on what Obama did wrong–by everyday Christians who never heard of Mondoweiss: link to townhall.com

    • Jeffrey Blankfort
      May 27, 2011, 5:31 pm

      That big “casino Jew,” Sheldon Adelson, was in attendance at the AIPAC conference and he will spend more money on feed for his bets than you will raise for Obama who doesn’t deserve even that much.

      My, not unexpectedly, showing no backbone, that is he never used the words “occupation” or “settlements” (never mine “illegal’) he showed Israel’s critics that they should continue to find room under the bus.

      The one thing that he could have done but lacked the guts to do is BEFORE the AIPAC convention, to have gone before the American people as GHW Bush did on 9/12/91 and tell them the truth about the US-Israel relationship and that securing a just resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict was essential for US security (and he could have even quoted Petraeus in driving that point home.

      When Bush did that in 91, when faced with a certain override of his veto of Israel’s request for $10 billion in loan guarantees, the polls afterward showed that 85% of the public was with him and it wouldn’t have been much different for Obama if he had done the same last week. The result was that AIPAC and its lackeys in Congress had to slink into the shadows because the last thing either of those criminal bands want is for the American public in on the action.

      The belief that the American people love Israel is little more than a myth, apart from the Christian Zios and their Jewish counterparts, and that is shown by careful reading of the polls and the questions that are NOT asked of those interviewed.

      Moreover, if Israel was so important to Americans their support of it by members of Congress would be featured on their web sites. With but a handful of exceptions to find their opinions requires a search.

      • Bill in Maryland
        May 27, 2011, 6:10 pm

        Thank you Jeffrey. Your point that The one thing that he could have done but lacked the guts to do is BEFORE the AIPAC convention, to have gone before the American people as GHW Bush did on 9/12/91 and tell them the truth about the US-Israel relationship and that securing a just resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict was essential for US security (and he could have even quoted Petraeus in driving that point home). is very well taken. Right on.

        What a missed historical opportunity this election cycle would have been to do raise consciousness of the I/P reality among the American people. The Republicans are floundering, Big Labor is fired up, people are afraid of losing Medicare- Obama is going to get re-elected almost no matter what. Obama should have clearly and firmly distanced himself from Netanyahu and settlers and taken his case to the American People. This cycle he does not need Israel Lobby money to get re-elected! His re-election is secure. So his pandering and genuflecting is totally unnecessary this time around, if only he would put his trust in the American electorate.

      • Ellen
        May 27, 2011, 7:40 pm

        Bill, I have a feeling (and it is only that and based on anecdotal comments by those who usually do not even care about the I/P issue) that many Americans were turned off by the the display of our Congress cheering Bibi on. It struck a cord. They know at some level something is very wrong and then to witness that.

        Bottom up campaigning has worked for Obama. And the top is not working for the American people. The top small elite of AIPACers are not what is going to get Obama elected. The rest have been disenfranchised and do not want to sacrifice for a Nationalistic “Jewish” state. (Why a state must be called Jewish is a mystery. )

        I think it was last year when Donna Edwards of Maryland (Ann Arundel County) became a target of a public AIPAC attack. The result was she suddenly raised much sympathy money within days. This is telling.

        It could, indeed, be so that he does not need the Israel lobby at all to be elected and that the more they attack him, the better for his campaign. Perhaps Americans are waking up and their instincts tell them something is very wrong and that they do not want to build a Nationalistic Blut und Boden State or a greater Serbia build on mythological ideas of race, soil and privileged in the Middle East.

      • Sand
        May 27, 2011, 8:26 pm

        “…I think it was last year when Donna Edwards of Maryland (Ann Arundel County) became a target of a public AIPAC attack. The result was she suddenly raised much sympathy money within days. This is telling…”

        When “J-Street” “raised $15,000 from 270 contributors in four hours…”?

        link to blogs.jta.org

        The same J-Street that later on had told Edwards (via former Rep. Baird) if she spoke at a meeting whose group supported the two-state solution, but were also prepared to discuss! the viability of a one state solution if the 2SS didn’t work out — then they (J-Street) may not be able to support her any more. Probably the National Jewish Democratic Council as well.

        link to mondoweiss.net

        Also, it’s not just “AIPAC” that’s after her — read the rest of the JTA article. She also her local Jewish Community office after her.

        Obama’s campaign is managed by the I-Lobby, and many other D-campaigns are too. Look at how many campaign staff are from the I-Lobby, including interns — remembering the I-Lobby is not only AIPAC. It was a real eye-opener when I volunteered for Maria Cantwell’s last Senate campaign.

      • Sand
        May 27, 2011, 9:19 pm

        M J Rosenberg twitter: “I once was lost, but now I’m found. Was blind but now I see.” Waking up to the truth about THE LOBBY”/”The day I learned how AIPAC the Israeli govt and the media tries 2 intimidate Congress & almost always succeeds”
        link to twitter.com

        M J Rosenberg spills some beans on his early life (good for him!)

        How The Lobby Chills Middle East Debate [5/27/11]
        link to politicalcorrection.org

      • Les
        May 27, 2011, 10:10 pm

        Thanks for sharing the politicalcorrection link.

      • American
        May 27, 2011, 11:37 pm

        I agree and hope we are right.
        If we are right, then that plus the work of the Jewish groups like JVP and the Code Pink’ers…. might have enough momentum to make a difference.

      • American
        May 27, 2011, 6:13 pm

        I agree that Obama should have taken to the bully pulpit on the Israel issue and laid it out for Americans long ago, every president should have …….but he didn’t, they didn’t…except for GBush I.

        So what’s your solution? How do you intend to get the zios out of the WH and congress?
        Congress doesn’t give a rats ass what Americans think or want so what are you going to do about them?

        The only thing I can see that would work besides suiciding the cretins is Code Pink x’s a thousand showing up at every politicians campaign speech and challenging candidates on Israel and riling up the public enough to expose our support of Israel as a case of being Anti America if you are pro Israel.
        I am sorry to say the general public doesn’t do anything unless they are pissed off enough. So you have to get them pissed off.

      • bob
        May 27, 2011, 6:58 pm

        J Blankfort
        polls afterward showed that 85% of the public

        I’ve tried to find this poll. I’d like to use it. Do you have a link or a name I can reference?
        The closest i can come up for it is this

      • Jeffrey Blankfort
        May 27, 2011, 10:11 pm

        William Schneider, writing in the LA Times 9/29/91, wrote:

        “Bush issued a veiled threat…when he said, ‘I think the American people will support me’ in asking Congress to put off debate on Israel’s request…. The President was right. Subsequent polls showed an overwhelming majority of Americans in favor of postponing the loan guarantee–one poll showed 86%. In fact majorities also said they opposed giving Israel any loan guarantees at all.”

        Also Benjamin Ginsberg, in “Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State,” Univ. of Chicago, 1993, p. 220, described the public’s reaction which I cited in my article “Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel Palestine Conflict:

        “Never had a president addressed the American people with such frankness and none has since. Polls taken afterward indicated that Americans supported Bush by a 3-1 margin and half of those responding opposed providing any economic aid to Israel. Two weeks later, a NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey showed that while by 58 to 32% voters favored aid to the Soviet Union and by a margin of 55% to 29% supported aid to Poland, voters opposed economic support to Israel by 46% to 44%. Moreover, 34% saw Israel as the greatest impediment to peace in the region while only 33% saw the Arab nations in that role.” Those other figures were also mentioned in the LA Times article as well as in the Wall Street Journal, 9/26/91 Page A20.

        Bush’s throwing down the gauntlet threw AIPAC and the Lobby into what was probably the greatest crisis in its existence as the pile of clippings in my file drawer clearly indicates. Unfortunately, that moment was not seized upon by what there was of a Palestine solidarity movement at the time, it was ignored. Then, like now, it was taking its cue from Noam Chomsky who dismissed Bush’s statement as nothing more than a “raised eyebrow.” Which is one of the reasons I entitled my article: “Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict.”

      • bob
        May 28, 2011, 8:27 am

        Thanks a million!

      • Shingo
        May 27, 2011, 9:23 pm

         When Bush did that in 91, when faced with a certain override of his veto of Israel’s request for $10 billion in loan guarantees, the polls afterward showed that 85% of the public was with him and it wouldn’t have been much different for Obama if he had done the same last week.

        I am not convinced that would be as true today Jeffrey. I think the fact that it was a Republican president gave him latitude, the same way that only a Republican president could gave flown to China to make peace?

        The country has moved to the right immeasurably since 1991. There’s no way an Israeli leader would have dared to give Bibbi’s speech to an American audience.

      • Jeffrey Blankfort
        May 27, 2011, 10:27 pm

        We’ll never know Shingo, but I disagree. At the time, the US was in an economic recession not nearly as bad as this one and Bush told the American public all the US had done for Israel including the amount that each man, woman and child was receiving from the US government. I assure you that it would have been very easy for Obama to have made a speech crafted to the present economic reality which would have received the overwhelming support of the American people, plus a number of the Christian Zionists who are also hurting.

        One of the main differences between Bush I and Obama was that the former had people around him like Jim Baker who did not suck up to the Israelis whereas Obama has no one who can be remotely described as a critic of Israel. One needs to remember that even the Republicans opposed Bush’s decision to postpone the loan guarantees and he did it not once but twice. Not a single Republican senator, as I recall, backed him up.

        Bush did enjoy the advantage of having Shamir as Israel’s prime minister whose inability to speak good English was a definite liability for The Lobby but I don’t think Netanyahu’s eloquence would have mattered if an Obama speech two days earlier had focused on America’s needs and not Israel’s.

      • Thomson Rutherford
        May 28, 2011, 2:13 am

        “The belief that the American people love Israel is little more than a myth, apart from the Christian Zios and their Jewish counterparts ….”

        The small fraction of American nominal Christians who may (with loose language) be called “Zionists” do not “love Israel,” the nation; they “love” Israel the Holy Land. The Jewish State of Israel (the in-gathering) is useful in confirming their theological beliefs. It’s all about confirmation of belief.

        But just because these nuts don’t “love” the Jews of Israel doesn’t mean that they “hate” them, either.

      • Citizen
        May 28, 2011, 10:41 am

        People like Hagee and many bible-quoting middle Americans I know, often quote a passage in the bible that says, in effect, according to them, that Christians must always support the Jews because God said so, and if Christians don’t, they won’t get to heaven. The Christians I know like that never even met a Jew that they know of, although once in a while they know somebody who makes breaking news, such as Madoff, or Liberman, is a Jew. They are also dimmly aware a significant number of Jews lead the Fed Reserve/Treasury and are on Wall St. They are much more tuned into any Arab who does something wrong that makes the news. They are afraid the Muslims want to take away baby Jesus in their country. They always point to Soros as a Jew they know who is on the wrong side. In constrast, they never point to the Kroch Brothers, or any Jewish-American Israel First big donor.

      • Thomson Rutherford
        May 29, 2011, 2:01 am

        “… a passage in the bible that says, in effect, according to them, that Christians must always support the Jews because God said so, and if Christians don’t, they won’t get to heaven.”

        Citizen, I used to be very familiar with that passage long ago in my church-going days. I thought I could find it again (in Paul’s Epistle to the Hebrews) but no luck; must be in another book. This single passage, open to several interpretations due to Paul’s complex relationship with his fellow Jews* (whom he had largely failed to convert to the new universalist religion but upon whom he continued to confer fundamental significance), is of great importance in helping explain the fixation of some low-church Protestants on their mystic concept of “the Jews,” and the Jews’ religio-historical significance. The actual history of the Jewish people – after, say, the destruction of the Second Temple – is something of which most of them have little or no understanding.

        * Our written record of Paul’s ministry can be interpreted as a running battle with the Judaic “law” and what he called the “old Covenant,” which he came to view as archaic. In a manner of speaking, Paul (Saul of Tarsus) might be regarded as an early “Reform Jew.” Low-church Protestants have a never-fading fascination with Paul the Evangelist, rightly regarded as a pivotal individual in human history – but not exactly for the reasons they think.

      • Hostage
        May 29, 2011, 7:18 pm

        “… a passage in the bible that says, in effect, according to them, that Christians must always support the Jews because God said so, and if Christians don’t, they won’t get to heaven.”

        The concept is derived from Genesis 12:3. Paul apparently did not subscribe to the Hagee’s modern theory about the destruction of the Jews and Armageddon. He wasn’t after all the author of the Apocalypse.

        The passage you might have had in mind is Romans Chapter 11 where Paul revealed the “mystery” that God had not cast away his people Israel and that all of Israel will be saved for the sake of the promises made to the Patriarchs (rather than on the basis of the merits of the Patriarchs). Paul wrote that God will have mercy on whomever he wishes and he thought that included all of Israel: “26 And so all Israel shall be saved.. …32. For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.”

        In his article The Crisis of Tradition in Jewish Messianism”, the late Gershom Scholem suggested that Paul caved-in to outside pressures to abrogate the Law, but claims the antinomian tendencies of the Jewish community in the case of Sabbatai Zevi were based upon the Torah itself:

        In this instance the Torah as such was not abrogated by calling into question the validity of the law on account of the influence of propagandistic considerations. Rather the antinomian tendencies, which constitute the eruption of the utopian elements in Messianism, were built into the Torah itself. The boldness and radicality with which this was done compares very well with the paradoxes of Pauline theology.

        Until fragments of the Aramaic Testament Of Levi (4Q213-214) were discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls the book had only been preserved in Christian sources. It reflects the idea that the Maccabees were both priests and kings in line with a messianic interpretation of Bereishit – Genesis – 49:10 that the messiah would not be from the tribe of Judah, e.g. The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the student of the law from between his feet, until… The Maccabees obviously introduced a number of innovations in the law. For example the community treated Yom Kippur like a festive occasion – almost like Valentine’s Day – not a day in which the soul was afflicted, e.g. The daughters of Jerusalem would go forth, dressed in white, and dance in the vineyards – “And what did they say? – ‘Young man! Raise your eyes and behold what you choose for yourself ” (Ta’an. 4:8). Compare that with Vayikra – Leviticus – Chapter 23:27-30 especially 29 “For any person who will not be afflicted on that very day, shall be cut off from its people.”

        The Book of Ruth tends to discredit David for being a King based upon his pedigree, but the extra-biblical concept of “conversion” was introduced to solve this dilemma.

    • ToivoS
      May 27, 2011, 11:03 pm

      American writes:

      the repubs have already ruined themselves with Rand Pauls medicare proposal

      Correction, you mean Paul Ryan not Rand Paul.

      • American
        May 27, 2011, 11:40 pm

        Yes…thanks for correction…my mind is slipping today.

  3. Kathleen
    May 27, 2011, 3:37 pm

    Even though many of us disagree with many many ways that Obama has dealt specifically with the I/P issue, accountability for Bush torture and the immoral and illegal war in Iraq, drones etc.

    these are the folks who are going to carry Ohio for Obama.
    link to weareohio.com

    When the drive for signatures against SB 5 and for the referendum for the fall election has ended…Ohio will be blue blue blue

    • seafoid
      May 27, 2011, 4:58 pm

      What is SB5, Kathleen?
      By the way was that you in Max Blumenthal’s AIPAC video?

    • LeaNder
      May 27, 2011, 5:31 pm

      Yes, he still makes the tiny difference. But Phil once mentioned a book, if I remember correctly, his wife read, about the Obama campaign. I’ve been trying to find the article but so far to no avail. Can somebody help me on this?

  4. Kathleen
    May 27, 2011, 4:20 pm

    three of the many questions that I came away with from the Move over Aipac conference

    How does Saban, Soros channel money to the Dem party?

    How does Aipac get around the new legislation restricting paying for Reps trips anywhere? Israeli charitable organizations still sending our Reps to Israel? How do these groups get around the new legislation

    Talked with Jeffrey Blankfort about American Unions having a history of buying Israeli treasury notes. Had never heard this before. What do folks know about this?

    • American
      May 27, 2011, 5:56 pm

      The unions have been investing their pension money in Israeli bonds for a long time. I posted some info on this some time back.
      Also state and mimupical agencies invest their empolyees pension money in various Israeli instruments.
      The Calif teachers union has a lot of their money invest with Israel.
      There was a big blow up in Florida several years back over some town manager having put so much money into Israel investments.
      there are numerous financial people in the US who work this for them.

      This sector of Israeli ‘parasit-ism’ is like a bad loan made by a banker……the borrower get in trouble so to keep the loan from going bad the banker keeps extending more loans to help the borrower and try to save the first loan ……if Israel ever goes you will hear a huge sucking sound as US pensions invested there go down the drain.
      Ask your self why anyone in their right mind would put pension money into a country that congressional reports say still isn’t self supporting and needs aid to meet it’s obligaitons.

      • Sand
        May 27, 2011, 10:48 pm

        Interesting site — to find postings on unions and state entities etc. who are not happy about forced purchase of State of Israel Bonds (I would have liked more links — but usually you can google the text to get the source links/or original blog)

        link to dumpisraelbonds.com

    • Ellen
      May 27, 2011, 6:49 pm

      Kathleen, Unions buy “paper” from many governments. There would be nothing special about buying Israeli bonds, across the interest rate yield curve.

      What is a bit off (in my mind) about Israeli paper is how it is marketed. Sort of strange with logos like “A bond with Israel” and the language promoting government bonds is kind of wacky: The State of Israel….Mazel Tov Bonds” and kitschy stuff like that.

      We are talking about interest bearing instruments and nothing else.
      link to israelbonds.com

      • Jeff Klein
        May 27, 2011, 7:09 pm

        I don’t think this is true. As someone who has fought against the use of union funds — and other public money — the buy Israeli bonds, I never heard of any holdings of state bonds from other countries. I’d be interested to know the source of this comment.

      • Sand
        May 27, 2011, 7:38 pm

        Read a couple of interesting news articles about the management of Israel Bonds in the US.

        Haaretz (10/10): “…Israel Bonds is an American institution in every respect…”

        [an internal accounting investigation found:] “…the costs of raising the money were far greater than the costs of funds Israel obtained in independent bond issues on the free market,” he said. “We decided to carry out a reform, with which Matza cooperated fully and effectively…”

        “…Five years ago it could be said that the government was contributing to the Jews through Israel Bonds because they were getting very high interest. Today this is not the case…”

        [Interest rate cuts were made:] “…The cuts did not affect Israel Bonds’ budget: It is still $40 million for the administration ($30 million in the United States alone ) and another $6 million paid out as an annual fee to a commercial bank for customer management…”
        link to haaretz.com

        A new Head comes in January 2011, interestingly enough from:

        “…the Jewish Federation of Greater Washington, where, for the past four years, he served as managing director of the group’s endowment fund. In that fiduciary role, Harburger managed and coordinated the federation’s philanthropic donations…”
        link to washingtonjewishweek.com

        So, I’m wondering how much $$$ actually goes to Israel as opposed to keeping the I-Lobby alive here?

    • Jeffrey Blankfort
      May 27, 2011, 10:36 pm

      Saban writes a check or checks. As far as I know there are no limits to what one cannot donate to a political party which is where much of the big money goes which is why it is important who heads the DNC. Just appointed to that post is Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz from Florida. Need I say more?. Soros, as far as I know, does not give to the party but to groups like MoveOn where there is no limit.

      AIPAC set up the American-Israel Education Foundation as a “charity” whose only beneficiaries are members of Congress who get those same free trips that they did before. Local and some state officials are sent by the local Jewish federations as well as the ADL and governors and attorneys general are sent by the American-Israel Friendship Committee, “founded” by Hubert Humphrey and Nelson Rockefeller in 1971. Since these other groups are not considered “lobbies,” there are no restrictions on what they can do providing that that they can claim that most of their time is not spent on lobbying.

      • Kathleen
        May 29, 2011, 7:58 pm

        Jeffrey talked with you on the corner outside of the Aipac conference. We were listening to the young Palestinians mans story about his two brothers being killed. I asked the older Jewish Aipac attendee (man) whether he thought a Palestinian life was as valuable as a Jewish life ? He said “absolutely not” Then his wife came towards me in a very aggressive fashion and also said “no a Palestinian life is not as valuable as a Jewish life'” You were taping this. Did you get the footage? You were going to post it if it turned out.

        Thanks for your reply about Saban and Israeli bonds. We talked about the Israeli bond/ US labor issue also that evening. Thanks for your responses.

      • Jeffrey Blankfort
        May 30, 2011, 1:00 am

        I did get it, Kathleen, although I started after the young Palestinian told us about losing his brothers in Gaza, to which the elderly AIPAC delegate responded, “So?” and then twice emphatically replied, “Yes!: when asked if a Jewish life was worth more than a Palestinian life. But that’s de rigueur for these people. I hope to have it uploaded tomorrow.

      • Citizen
        May 30, 2011, 3:00 am

        Is a Palestinian life worth as much as a Jewish life?
        Is a black Jewish life worth as much as a white Jewish life?
        Is a black life worth as much as a white life?
        Interesting that any Americans feel they can say such things in public when I don’t personally know anyone who thinks so, or would ever say so, even in private.

        Why is David Duke banished to the fringe of society, basically an outcast, while such AIPACers represent the entitled cream of US society?

      • Kathleen
        May 29, 2011, 8:00 pm

        I brought up to many folks that we should zero in on Debbie Wasserman Schultz the new DNC head. The I lobby sure knows how to shut it down, the debate, keep the coffers open. But there is much being written about the I/P issue now becoming a full fledged wedge issue. Now it will become even more apparent how there is no light between how the alleged liberal Dems and Republicans on this issue.

      • Hostage
        May 29, 2011, 10:12 pm

        I’ve seen Debbie Wasserman Schultz on a couple of news shows supporting Obama. She has been saying that basing negotiations on 1967 borders is nothing new and that the idea won’t turn off most Jewish voters.

        Here are her remarks with citations (scroll down) DNC chair argues Obama isn’t losing support of Jewish voters

        Andrea Mitchell went on the record saying Netanyahu lectured Obama like a schoolboy and that he really went too far. (video) When she sat down to interview Netanyahu he stuck to his talking points, but she went after him on Israel being isolated from world opinion, the 1967 borders, his treatment of Obama, & etc. Here is a link to the transcript and (scroll down) the video.

    • Danaa
      May 27, 2011, 10:40 pm

      The reason unions invest in israeli bonds (and therefore in the settlement and ethnic cleansing enterprise israel is officially engaged in) is simple: though a given union’s rank and file members are not predominantly Jewish – far from it, in fact (eg, service unions, many states teacher unions, AFL_CIO, etc), their accountants, legal retainers and labor union leaders are. Why that is so is also simple (no need to resort to conspiracy theories) _ accounting and law professions, especially when it comes to labor law, are popular occupations for Jewish Americans. Sometimes (oftentimes?) for the best of reasons. It’s just a natural career path for many. Unfortunately, it is also natural for a significant subset of jewish Americans – including those in the law and accounting professions – to put israeli bonds on the map as an investment possibility, and not because it’s a particularly good one. It’s there on their radar screen, that’s all.

      It is time however to remind labor that rank and file unionized jobs do not count so many jews among their members, and should therefore not be considered a natural AIPAC ally. That there are not many jewish people in certain occupations is, again, hardly the result of secret cabals. It’s really the same reasons that the Armed Forces have a miniscule representation among jews (less than 0.1%, I read somewhere – more than an order of magnitude fewer than in the general population). Jewish Americans are, for the most part, middle and upper middle class, so any “blue collar” occupation will not likely have many among its workers (exceptions noted – don’t be mad Mooser – I met a jewish hell’s angel once…and we found we had much in common). As an example, just how many machinists or service workers do any of us know that are Jewish? how many on the manufacturing floor? for that matter, how many mechanical engineers? or auto workers, or elementary public school teachers in some medium city school system (please don’t bring up the LA Unified or New York…).

      So it’s perfectly appropriate to ask why is it that when the majority of Jewish american occupations are in the professions, academia, media, law, business, finance etc. which are not, as a rule, unionized, the unions leadership is said to be so pro-Israel? what for? where’s the commonality of interests exactly? maybe once upon a time, when Israel portrayed itself as a socialist heaven, but now – when it has the same failed neo-liberal (and then some)policies as the rest of the West?

      I think it’s time to look closely at the leadership of those unions as well as their legal/finance management teams. To do that we need means to educate the rank and file within labor….and no, I am not saying this is easy, since, for example, I bet most of us are not part of a union either.

      BTW, if anyone has useful statistics that’s credible and can shed light on these issues, I’d be interested.

      • Jeffrey Blankfort
        May 28, 2011, 12:26 am

        Jewish unionists were very much in the forefront of the early labor struggles in this country and consequently the union leadership has reflected that long after, outside of the social welfare and teaching professions, Jews became a minority in the US labor force. Hence, while the overwhelming majority of the workers in hospitals and restaurants, in the needle trades and the service industries have become overwhelmingly people of color, both native born and immigrant, their leadership has remained predominantly Jewish and, moreover, one of the cornerstones of the pro-Israel lobby, a fact that separates the US labor movement from that of the rest of the world as much as does its non-celebration of International Workers Day, May 1, which, ironically, celebrates an incident that took place in Chicago in 1886. Moreover, those that haven’t been Jewish like the current and last three heads of the AFL-CIO, George Meany, Lane Kirkland, and John Sweeney, have been even more pro-Israel in their actions and espousings than some of their Jewish counterparts, Kirkland having bragged that he had been to more Israel Bonds dinners “than any man alive.”

        That this does not reflect the sentiments of labor’s rank and file was easily proved when I and a colleague, Steve Zeltzer, founded the Labor Committee on the Middle East in SF in 1987, and found it easy to get resolutions supporting Palestinian workers passed at the local and even state level conferences. On one occasion, after the Western States conference of the SEIU had passed one of our resolutions favoring Palestinian workers and criticizing their treatment by Israel, the head of the largest SEIU local in California, 935, David Aroner, who was Jewish but not a Zionist, took the resolution to his first meeting as a member of SEIU’s national board along with copies of our Middle East Labor Bulletin. He was, he later told me, at the point of getting the board to approve it when then SEIU chief, John Sweeney, now head of the AFL-CIO, called a recess in which he explained to the other board members why they could not pass a resolution critical in any way of Israel, and so that was that and they didn’t.

        It should be noted that criticizing the labor unions within the Left was as much a taboo as criticizing Israel which was the reason we formed LCOME. As it happens, the Palestine Solidarity Committee, was under the political influence of Line of March, a Marxist group similar to the CPUSA but without having ever gone through the radical stage and like the CP its goal was to move the Democratic Party to the left, Phyllis Bennis having been one of its more notable members.

        When it became apparent that the PSC, of which I was one of the founders, would not take on the AFL-CIO nor the Israeli labor federation, Histadrut, I left the PSC and co-founded LCOME. Our first action in August ’87 was to picket the annual dinner that the SF Labor Council threw for the Histadrut which had an office in SF, protesting about its ties to So. Africa. Not only was the picket embarrassing for the labor council and Assembly speaker Willie Brown who spoke at the dinner but for the Histadrut. It closed its office soon afterward and there were no more Histadrut dinners.

        What is important was that our approach to union members was to portray Palestinians as fellow workers and not as “victims,” and it was not hard for the former to begin to see the latter in an entirely different light. Unfortunately, even though we developed a national membership, we were forced to shut down in 1995 when we lost our fiscal sponsor and couldn’t find another one.As far as I know, that was the only organized attempt to win over American workers to the Palestinian cause and we never got any support from the solidarity movement or the traditional left groups whose false romance with organized corrupt labor exists to this day,

      • Danaa
        May 28, 2011, 2:25 am

        Jeffrey, thanks for the interesting history. Looks like you know a heck of a lot more about the tortuous history of labor support for Israel in this country than I do, having done work on that in person.

        Though I would say that if I learnt anything in life it’s that timing is indeed everything. Oftentimes, when people conjure luck as the reason for something happening or not, the luck is really in the timing. And the ’80s and 90’s and even the ’00’s may not have been the right time to challenge the powers-that-be. The tide is turning though and just over the horizon it’s possible to glimpse the return of the “worker”. Maybe because of neo-liberal forces trying to turn workers back into peasants. That means that soon, the time may be ripe again to remind labor just who is and who isn’t on its side. especially as the days of jewish labor bosses are fading, legacies having a way of running out the clock.

        Just a long-winded way of saying that perhaps the stars are realigning for old histories to be revisited. Have you summarized all this in an article before? I hate to see your interesting angle on labor buried in a comment section. Perhaps something above the line? I promise to bring my own pitch fork if there’s a proper raiding party that can storm some barricades….

      • seafoid
        May 28, 2011, 3:23 am

        Thanks for that facsinating piece, Jeffrey. There’s a whole expose of how Israel turned from a socialist hope to a neoliberal nightmare to come as well. Israel is still trading in many areas on the image it had in the 50s.

      • Citizen
        May 28, 2011, 7:11 am

        “Union pension funds have also been used by trade union bureaucrats to purchase Israel Bonds. The most notorious case is the former international Ladies Garment Workers Unions (ILGWU), now called UNITE, a union whose workers are 95% Black, Hispanic, and Chinese, most earning at or below the minimum wage. UNITE’s leadership and staff is overwhelming Jewish and earning between $100,000 to $350,000 a year plus expenses. By channeling over $25 million in pension funds to Israel, the US workers are deprived of access to loans for housing, social services, legal defense, etc. Clearly the Jewish trade union bosses have a greater affinity for the State of Israel and its oppression of Palestinian workers than they have with their own poorly organized workers, employed under some of the worst working conditions in the US.” More: link to thirdworldtraveler.com

      • Kathleen
        May 29, 2011, 8:13 pm

        Grew up in a union family. As Jeffrey clearly knows and states many Jews in the labor force 30,40 years ago.

        Jeffrey hope you do a post on the labor union/bond /Israel issue

    • Sand
      May 27, 2011, 10:44 pm

      “Red Sox’s” Daily Kos diary ‘frequent tags’ reminded me — Saban put $251,000 of his own $$$ into McAuliffe’s failed campaign. Just think, that’s just ‘1’ campaign. [Stephen Bing gave $250,000].

      link to projects.washingtonpost.com

  5. Avi
    May 27, 2011, 4:22 pm

    It’s astonishing what passes for “defiance” these days, especially when AIPAC are projecting. They are the ones who are defiant, aiding and abetting a criminal enterprise.

  6. Debonnaire
    May 27, 2011, 4:45 pm

    Jewish money still too controversial to mention – what a joke. As far as votes, if he plays this right – Obama will gain 25 votes for every Jewish voter ready to defect. The lesson of the monster success of Mel Gibson’s THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST in the face of a heavy-handed Jewish media campaign against it is there to be learned.

  7. MHughes976
    May 27, 2011, 4:57 pm

    I read somewhere recently – can’t recall exact reference – that President Obama has a double-digit lead over all known Republican candidates, and it’s a bit late for a dark right-wing horse to emerge from the stable. In that context the loss of 10m. doesn’t seem enough to turn the balance.
    In a way I was shocked by the human congressional yoyos of whom Avnery speaks. I could see that the forces of reason have yet, despite all the hopes expressed on this site, to make a serious impact on mainstream opinion. But I also let myself hope that this moment was an apogee from which the Zionist forces will decline. It would be hard to repeat without looking ridiculous, don’t you think?

    • Jeffrey Blankfort
      May 27, 2011, 10:45 pm

      To the last question, the answer is, “no.” You don’t look ridiculous when every year the number of people who turn out for your conferences is greater than the year before, when you can get 3/4 of the members of Congress, up from 50%, and go from 1000 to 1500 college students, including 215 student body presidents.

      Until and unless the movement makes taking on this organization, frontally, and its links to local members of Congress a primary task it will continue to thrive. At the moment, however, the leading groups opposing the various US wars, e.g., ANSWER, etc., are comfortably encapsulated in the notion that US support for Israel is based on it being a “strategic asset” for US imperialism. What is curious is that only AIPAC and its cohorts in the organized Jewish community share that fiction with them. In fact, in his history of the US, Israel and Palestinian relationship, ANSWER’s poobah, Dick Becker, devoted the first two chapters to explaining why the Israel Lobby was not the problem.

      • Kathleen
        May 29, 2011, 8:10 pm

        and what a myth that Aipac really took a hit during the Aipac espionage investigation and 9 time delayed and then dismissed trial? What other lobby can access classified US documents pass them on to a foreign nation and little is done. And the same lobby organization that has been illegally accessing US classified documents gets stronger

  8. American
    May 27, 2011, 4:59 pm

    Who got most of the hispanic vote last time? I forgot—if I ever even knew.
    Did they mostly vote dem?
    The black community will stick with Obama I imagine.
    It’s funny because I said once long ago that if anyone could up the voting rates of the black community they could swing elections.

    • chet
      May 27, 2011, 6:47 pm

      In the 2008 election, the youth voters and the black and hispanic voters came out in huge numbers.

      What if those huge numbers aren’t achieved this time?

  9. bob
    May 27, 2011, 5:02 pm

    Lets see how this gets buried.

  10. seafoid
    May 27, 2011, 5:39 pm

    The dependence of US politics on the type of money Obama will spend to get re-elected is sick.
    Is it any wonder, Americans, that 58% of all income growth in the US between the 1976 and 2007 went to the top 1% of the population?

    The top 0.01% or 15000 households had 1.7% of all income in 1976 and 6.04% by 2007. By 2004 the top 1% of wealth holders in the US held 42% of all financial and real assets, the most unequal distribution since the 1920s. The top 20% held 93% of such assets

    And you wonder why your country is in such a mess.

    link to guardian.co.uk

    “Our political system protects and enriches a fantastically wealthy elite, much of whose money is, as a result of their interesting tax and transfer arrangements, in effect stolen from poorer countries, and poorer citizens of their own countries. Ours is a semi-criminal money-laundering economy, legitimised by the pomp of the lord mayor’s show and multiple layers of defence in government. Politically irrelevant, economically invisible, the rest of us inhabit the margins of the system. Governments ensure that we are thrown enough scraps to keep us quiet, while the ultra-rich get on with the serious business of looting the global economy and crushing attempts to hold them to account.”

    Nader :

    The corporate state moves on. Corporate power has unique characteristics. It is perfectly willing and able to corrupt, regardless of sexual or ethnic preference. It offers equal opportunities to be corrupted or coopted . That’s why it’s very difficult for the civil community, which is affected by principles, nuances, honest disagreements, to confront the monistically commercial corporations. No one says ‘the big debate inside Exxon is whether to go more for oil or solar. That’s why every religion in the world, in their scriptures, issues a warning not to give too much power to the merchant class. The commercial instinct is relentless, consistent, limitless in achieving its goal. It will run rough-shod to destroy, co-opt or dilute civic and spiritual values that stand in its way.

    • Sand
      May 27, 2011, 6:04 pm

      “…The dependence of US politics on the type of money Obama will spend to get re-elected is sick…”

      Also, the crazy system that allows a small state like Wyoming to have the same number of Senators as California. The political climate here is only going to get worse.

  11. gazacalling
    May 27, 2011, 6:12 pm

    I don’t even listen to NPR anymore. I’m so sick of them. They should be defunded.

    Can you imagine if Fox News asked for a government handout? NPR is as liberal as Fox News is conservative. Why should one get government welfare checks and not the other?

  12. DICKERSON3870
    May 27, 2011, 6:48 pm

    RE: …the source added, “that about $10 million [in Jewish donations to the Obama campaign] evaporated in that speech.” – Kredo

    Just a countin’!
    Countin’ the number of Jewish donors!
    Countin’ up the money donated (or not) by the Jews!
    “Red Sox” over at that trashy Daily Kos is gonna be so p.o.’ed!
    Daily Kos: Mondo Strikes Again as Weiss Counts More Jewslink to dailykos.com

    • DICKERSON3870
      May 27, 2011, 7:32 pm

      P.S. I’ve been a thinkin’ again, ya’ll. I’ll try not to make it a habit.
      You know, about all those mean, hateful things that nasty “Red Sox” creep over at the anti-Semitic Daily Kos said about how our Phil’s always a countin’ Jews. You know: “one Jew…two Jews…three Jews…a dollar; all for the Jews, stand up and holler!”

      Where the dickens was I? Oh yeah, Phil and his countin’ compulsion. Well, last night this blindingly bright light suddenly came in through the bathroom window* while I was a doin’ my bidness. I won’t burden ya’ll with all the sordid details, but suffice it to say I had beaucoup revelations that I will be sharing with ya’ll over the coming weeks. So ya’ll fasten ya’ll’s seatbelts, ya’ll!

      Now, where the hell am I? Oh yeah, Phil and his compulsive Jew countin’. Well, do ya’ll ‘member that movie about that Rain Man dude that would just about go berserk if he couldn’t watch that Judge Wapner guy hold his People’s Court every weekday? Well one of my Divine-like** revelations involved that li’l feller and his constant countin’. Ya’ll ‘member that? He counted ‘most everything, and I do mean EVERYTHING! Poor feller would count the cracks in the street, the number of Alpha-bits in his cereal bowl, and even the little doodads on the necktie that Scientologist guy sometimes wore. And he ‘specially liked Counting Blue Cars, ya’ll.***

      Where the devil was I, ya’ll? Oh yeah, Phil and his penchant for countin’. So anyways, I have it on “good authority” that our Phil is what they call aughtistic, like that Rain Man fella. That’s why he’s alway’s a countin’ everythin’. He can’t help it, ya’ll! He can’t stop himself! So it’s really not right to make fun of him like that “Red Sox” a-hole prick over at the despicable Daily Kos did the other day. Pardon my foul language ya’ll, but that “Red Sox” is worse than Breitbart, or even Drudge! He seems a heap more like a “Blue Sox” to me. Let’s just say I don’t take kindly to it. Not at all! Not one damn bit, ya’ll!

      Why, it wouldn’t surprise me one little bit if our poor, woe out Phil is a sittin’ in front of his computer monitor right this very minute countin’ every single pixel on the screen! When all he has to do is multiply out the screen resolution! Of course, he did go to Harvard, not MIT. Poor, poor, pitiful Phil!

      And I ‘specially feel sorry for his missus. What did she ever do to deserve having to put up with Phil’s autism? Countin’ this. Countin’ that. Always a countin’! That can get mighty damn old, mighty damn quick-like; don’t ya’ll think? She sho’ as hell ain’t no “lucky duck”! That’s for dadgum sure!
      * She Came In Through the Bathroom Window, The Beatles (VIDEO, 01:58) – link to youtube.com
      ** Divinelink to en.wikipedia.org
      *** counting blue cars, original acoustic version (VIDEO, 10:00) – link to youtube.com

      • DICKERSON3870
        May 27, 2011, 10:33 pm

        P.P.S. Do ya’ll know anything about that Asperger syndrome thingy? Just wonderin’. I’m not askin’ for myself, mind ya’.
        * Joe Cocker: She came in through the bathroom window (VIDEO, 03:05) – link to youtube.com

      • Danaa
        May 27, 2011, 10:51 pm

        This was cute, Dickerson. Off to count me some jews now….maybe some dust mites too, while I’m at it. Better yet, count the white patches of hair on my calico cat…as opposed to the yellow….or the black. I’m sure she’d be very patient…

      • Robert Werdine
        May 28, 2011, 8:47 am


      • DICKERSON3870
        May 28, 2011, 1:29 pm

        I especially love to count the freckles on my backside. I wonder what the rancid, malodorous “Red Sox” over at the Jew-hating Daily Kos would have to say about that. “Tuches aufn tish”, perchance?
        Tuches aufn tishlink to tomdispatch.com

      • DICKERSON3870
        May 28, 2011, 2:08 pm

        I also like countin’ crows, but ya’ll please don’t tell “Red Sox” on me. G_d only knows what he/she/it (“Red Sox”) would have to say about that!
        Counting Crows: Mr. Jones (VIDEO, 05:38) – link to youtube.com

      • DICKERSON3870
        May 28, 2011, 3:04 pm

        And, now I’m a wonderin’ what “Red Sox” would think about the ‘The Naked and Famous’ singin’: “Can’t help myself but count the flaws…” I bet he/she/it would have sumpin’ really nasty to say about that, y’all!
        The Naked And Famous: Young Blood (VIDEO, 03:53) – link to youtube.com

      • Daniel Rich
        May 28, 2011, 3:19 am

        Hi dickerson,

        As far as I’ve seen/read, Mr. Weiss doesn’t hide behind an alias [Red Sox], is open about his thoughts [not seeking pats on back, aka not afraid of disagreement] and very straightforward. If that’s wrong, I don’t mind being very, very wrong.

        Is a zebra a black animal with white stripes or a white one with black stripes?

      • DICKERSON3870
        May 28, 2011, 1:44 pm

        RE: “Is a zebra a black animal with white stripes or a white one with black stripes?”
        REPLY: This here is one o’ dem “trick” questions an’ I’m not fallin’ fer it (that is, unless the answer is in the Bible)!

      • American
        May 30, 2011, 12:18 am

        The answer is obviously…. a zebra is a animal with black and white stripes.

    • Les
      May 27, 2011, 10:17 pm

      If Daily Kos represents the kind of truly ugly enemies Phil makes, Mondoweiss can count itself not just proud but successful.

      • DICKERSON3870
        May 27, 2011, 10:47 pm

        Upon further reflection (on Daily Kos), I suppose there have been worse cults. Heaven’s Gate comes to mind.
        Come to think of it, Marshal Applewhite reminds me a bit of “Red Sox”. Bonnie Nettles even more so!

  13. eGuard
    May 27, 2011, 8:28 pm

    First, the 10M$ “evaporates”, so won’t go to the GOP.
    Second, that’s not much. Not decisive.
    Third, even if it were 100M$, there is no GOP candidate for whom it would make a win.

  14. dbroncos
    May 27, 2011, 9:12 pm

    Obama is risk averse. He’s unwilling to take strong, principled stands on any major issue (bank fraud, health care, I/P, climate change) in the hopes that he won’t lose voters or campaign donors. In seeking the middle ground he’ll lose both. Does he think he’ll win over Republicans by being a conservative Democrat? Independents, likewise, will not be convinced by a mediocrity. He’s made a lot of mealy-mouthed compromises without much to show for it.

  15. optimax
    May 27, 2011, 10:35 pm

    I just read Red Sox’s peice on Weiss’ Jew counting. When WASPs were the dominant group (I know they’re still there, just not so high a percentage) it was ok to count them in positions of power: in Congress, SCOTUS, CEOs, media, Boy Scouts, bankers, wherever there was a whiff of power. But pointing out the number of Jews in power today is considered anti-Semetic. It is just a frigging fact. That’s the problem with being ultra-p.c.–you cannot mention certain facts because of past injustice: pogroms, lynchings, burnings, massacres, humiliations, beatings, confiscations, crucifixions. People, especially the colorless white goy, are always on the verge of returning to their feral state. But not being able to have on honest dialogue based on the facts allows the present power structure to march us peons into slavery and Armag-get-done.

    Phil is not blaming the Jews for all the world’s problems but to not notice the ethnic influences of the elite in Israel and America is like trying to follow a crooked path through the forest with a blindfold on. My main concern is with my country–the U.S.–and to understand our dysfunctional relationship with Israel.

    If I can acknowledge Jewish genius–Heifetz, Bellow, I have an anti-Semetic brain block on the painter’s name, Billy Wilder, Sammy Davis, Jr.–why can’t I mention the ones who are screwing up my country like Greenspan, Leiberman, Harman, blah, blah? Hell, even Phil brought up the ONE Jew who was lynched in the South in the 30s or 20s, when thousands of Blacks (over 80% after the CW) and Whites (over 90% before the CW) were lynched. But Phil can’t help himself–he’s Jewish, and I can’t help myself–I’m a goy.

    I should give Red Sox kudos for his activism in support of dogs, especially the misunderstood and much abused Pit Bull. I’m a dog lover and some of my good friends are from the Bully breeds.

  16. American
    May 28, 2011, 12:18 am

    We should call Netanyahu by his real name…. ‘Mileikowsky’.
    His father for whatever reason decided he didn’t like Mileikowsky and started calling himself Netanyahu.

    • Daniel Rich
      May 28, 2011, 3:28 am

      Hi American,

      Q: His father for whatever reason decided he didn’t like Mileikowsky and started calling himself Netanyahu.

      R: He first opted for ‘Yahoo,’ until he learned the real meaning of that word.

      • seafoid
        May 28, 2011, 2:20 pm

        Those Zionist names always make me smile. I met a woman in Israel called Kinneret after the Hebrew name for the sea of Gaililee. Imagine Americans called Superior or Huron. They tried to reinvent everything and leave the past behind but it was such a naive vision without any understanding of the nature of the world.

  17. ToivoS
    May 28, 2011, 1:06 am

    I always defended dailykos for avoiding the IP issue — after all it is a highly partisan Democratic Party site and tries to avoid devisive issues. Last week when Netanyahu blatantly insulted Obama in coordination with the GOP I figured this would force them to change their tune. Republicans attacking a Democrat, right. Wrong. They avoided the whole smelly mess entirely.

    Dailkos refuses to criticize anything Israel even to defend the leader of their party. Damn site is run by an El Salvadorean too: what is going on over there? Donations maybe?

    • Jethro
      May 28, 2011, 2:18 am

      No, you’re mistaken. They dogged the congressional dems and they eviscerated the zios trying to downplay it. Look at these two articles and check out the comments.

      link to dailykos.com(Non)IssueUPDATED?via=stream

      link to dailykos.com(Rec-List)-is-an-Anti-Semite?via=stream

      • ToivoS
        May 28, 2011, 3:00 pm

        Thanks for the correction. I scanned the main articles posted on their opening page from Friday through Sunday — did’t see anything there but also didn’t pursue the diaries.

        The comments were good.

  18. Thomson Rutherford
    May 28, 2011, 1:17 am

    Philip Weiss, do you ever pause to wonder what historians 50 years from now will be writing and saying about the Israel lobby and its effects on the course of American history? On the history of the Jewish people?

    • Citizen
      May 28, 2011, 10:49 am

      TR, do you mean when the future students read about the origins of WW3, which was kicked off by a pretextual bombing of Iran by either US or Israel or both?

  19. American
    May 28, 2011, 1:40 am

    Back to Israeli bonds….this is a short overview of the deal back in ’93 . As you can see with some simple gooling it’s only gotten larger and deeper since. Another thing to realize is that when the US guarentees billions of Israel’s bonds that amount has to be “considered an obligation” on our balance sheet in other words part of our national debt.
    Maddoff could only dream of a ponzie scheme this large

    link to wrmea.com

    “At Berkeley, the hot topic was a bill in the California state legislature to permit state employees’ and state teachers’ pension funds to invest in Israeli bonds guaranteed by the U.S. government. At that point the bill had been passed by the California State Assembly, and the Senate was expected to take up the issue sometime in September. It is only one part of an effort by the government of Israel’s lobby in the United States to move some of the ever-increasing aid to Israel out of the federal budget, where it is becoming a real issue, into investments in Israel bonds by the huge state government pension funds. By turning such funds, from many different U.S. states and cities, into a major source of aid to Israel, its U. S. Lobby hopes to defuse a potentially explosive issue.

    Whether or not this effort will succeed will depend on the amount the American public learns about the purchase of Israeli bonds by the widely scattered pension funds. Already, some 12 states have authorized this new means of financing Israeli deficits, which are mounting and are no more likely to be repaid than Israel’s direct debts to the U.S. government. (Israel has never repaid a loan from the U.S. government. All, eventually, have been forgiven by the U.S. Congress.)

    Since in the end these bonds issued by Israel will be the responsibility of the American government if Israel is unable to repay them, it makes little difference whether the aid to Israel is voted by Congress or authorized by the state legislatures, which control state pension funds. Either way, U.S. taxpayers ultimately will foot the bill. By raising its money in many states, however, the Israeli government spreads the political risk and makes it harder to identify the total amount of aid flowing from so many U. S. sources to Israel. Now it will be necessary to survey the current exposure of each of dozens and perhaps hundreds of state pension funds to identify the total amounts they have invested in U.S. government-guaranteed loans to Israel.

    No other country has such access to U.S. pension funds, and Israel is hardly the best risk. Japanese, German or other bonds from industrialized nations have had far better in vestment ratings. But the key to Israeli access to the funds has been that these formerly extremely risky Israeli bonds now are guaranteed by the U.S. government. No U.S. state or municipal bonds carry such U.S. government guarantees, of course.”

    link to ozar.mof.gov.il

    3. Public offerings under U.S. Government Guarantees

    In April 2003, the United States approved up to $9 billion in loan guarantees for the State of Israel to be issued through 2005. This program was extended until 2011 (with a carryover year in 2012). The notes issued by Israel under U.S. Government guarantees enjoy a credit rating similar to U.S. Government notes (AAA). Therefore in practice the yields on these notes are only slightly higher than the yields on U.S. Government notes.

    It is important to mention that despite this attractive funding option, Israel does not intend to stop issuing unsecured sovereign bonds in global markets.’

    New York Pension Funds Buy Israel Bonds – New York TimesApr 4, 1991 …
    For the first time since the 1970’s, the United States agreed to guarantee some Israeli bonds as part of an aid package, her office said. …

    FORM 18-K ANNUAL REPORT OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL … – Israel BondsFile Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    …in which the United States will guarantee all payments of principal and interest on bonds issued by Israel. The loan guarantees are available until 2011 (with …

  20. optimax
    May 28, 2011, 10:40 am

    My apologies to Phil. The reason I brought up the Leo Frank lynching is that the incident is brought up perennially (I’ve seen it covered indepth more than any other one lynching) as an indicator Americans have always been on the verge of instigating a holocaust. Lynching was used to terrorize Blacks but not Jews as a group–the numbers don’t add up.
    Just to be clear I’m WASP and Irish–WASPish–and I’m sure many of my ancestors escaped the hellhole of a perpetually warring, aristocratic Europe for a better life in America. And it makes me angry to see America perpetually at war and an elite successfully establishing an inherited aristocracy.

    • seafoid
      May 29, 2011, 2:20 am


      The Holocaust projecting is way off but I think it is true that there was a need for an ADL once.

      Hilton Als wrote a superb essay called GWTW for a book called “Without Sanctuary” and it is here on page 19

      link to media.wiley.com

      He says “America has an obsession with niggers, both black and white”.

      US Jews used to be outsiders but they were never niggers- “all wrong, niggerish, outrageous, violent, disruptive, uncooperative, lazy, stink- ing, loud, difficult, obnoxious, stupid, angry, prejudiced, unreasonable, shiftless, no good, a liar, fucked up “. The Irish in the US were once.

      Maybe some day the CEO and CFO of Goldman Sachs will be black but I doubt it.

  21. bob
    May 28, 2011, 3:10 pm

    Larry Wilkerson: Congress’s ‘remarkable’ reaction to Netanyahu might be explained by money

    Larry Wilkerson, a former chief of staff to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, appeared on The Real News to discuss Congress’s reaction.

    “Even the obsequiousness of the United States Congress from time to time during States of the Union or other type speeches doesn’t come anywhere near this” Wilkerson marveled. “This was a refutation, really, of the standing policy position of the sitting president of the United States by the separate and equal branch of government, the Congress, with a foreign leader being the center pole around which they coalesced this opposition. It’s really quite remarkable.”

    When asked what he thought might explain the reaction, Wilkerson replied, “It’s a mystery to me, except money. That’s the only answer I can come up with. … Congressmen and women … understand what a powerful entity in America is the lobby group AIPAC for Israel, and that generates a lot of coin, a lot of money.”

  22. Citizen
    May 29, 2011, 9:22 am

    Ilan Berman, American Foreign Policy Council is on CSPAN WJ now, talking about his concern about Iran. I tweeted a bunch of questions and one got on:
    “When’s the last time Iran started a war, how many centuries?” Berman conceded Iran has not started a war in centuries, and went on to justify his concerns because “Iran is also an ideology, and also a movement.” And both threatned, he says, the USA & the regional states. One phone caller was cut off by the host with an apology to Berman as soon as he said the guest was a “Zionist” after making a generic statement that all discussion of Iran in the USA is political.

  23. optimax
    May 29, 2011, 4:51 pm

    Seafoid, I just noticed your reply and read the essay “Are Black People Cooler Than White People?”, but it appears it was written by Donnell Alexander. Thank you, it was thought provoking.

    It made me think about cool and how it has changed, for me, from the youthful need of peer acceptance to living according to my given nature, instead of someone elses idea of who I should be. I believe in limitations but philosophically they are formed by Taoism, and I see life as a river with its course determined by its banks and bottoms grade. And that is the context within which I think of Anatole Broyard, who wrote “Kafka Was the Rage.” A book I enjoyed but a writer that was condemned by many for passing as white. A light-skinned black man who grew up in New Orleans, moved to New York, and couldn’t relate to the blacks there because he was steeped in literature and modern art. Everyone thought he was white and when he died and people discovered he was black, there was an uproar. To me it’s absurd to dis someone that doesn’t follow his or her racial, gender, class or intellectual stereotype. Broyard, like Alexander, followed his own path and that is the most diificult thing for a society to accept–any society.

    Seafoid, Your comments, like those of many here, teach me much.

Leave a Reply