Ackerman says effort to hold Israel to int’l law is ‘anti-Semitism’

Israel/Palestine
on 44 Comments

Here’s Gary Ackerman, congressman from Long Island, in the Jerusalem Post, professing his Zionism. A lot of excerpts because this is so crazy. The Jews are a “separate” people, Jewish legislators from around the world must represent Israel, Palestinian statehood initiative is devastating…


While many differences exist among Jewish parliamentarians, the concept of ahavat Yisrael – literally, “love of Israel” – is common to us all. It is for this reason that 55 Jewish parliamentarians from 22 countries have assembled in Jerusalem under the auspices of the World Jewish Congress….

I don’t believe that increasing attacks on Israel’s right to exist and efforts to label its acts of self-defense “war-crimes” or even “crimes against humanity” are actually rooted in a belief in international law, or a principled evaluation of Israeli military operations.

What I believe is really driving most of these claims is a deep-seated and stubborn refusal to see Jews as a people. This conceptual failure – whether rooted in anti-Semitism (which it is) or ignorance (which it is) – leads to a refusal to accept Israel as a Jewish state, or to accept that it, like every state, has a fundamental right to self-defense.

Only Israel, the one and only Jewish state, is subjected to the humiliation of having its right to exist routinely questioned, and the right of its people to be free from violence openly rejected. Only Israel is the permanent whipping boy of the United Nations.

So we are faced with a paradox: While the anti-Semitism and discrimination Jews have historically faced (and in some places rightfully continue to fear) are based on the view of Jews as a people apart, the ongoing assault on Israel’s legitimacy is built upon the idea that the Jews are not a separate people at all, and are thus not entitled to self-determination…

THE PALESTINIAN plan to take their case for statehood to the UN General Assembly poses great danger for Israel. If this initiative were to succeed– or worse, to slip out of control, – the results could be devastating. Israel could be exposed to sanctions and pressures beyond the wildest hopes of its worst enemies.

But in addition to these external challenges, we face a more intimate one that we share with the entire Jewish people. How do those of us who are representatives from all over the world and every part of the political spectrum come together to protect and advance our common interests?

44 Responses

  1. Dan Crowther
    July 1, 2011, 9:40 am

    “How do those of us who are representatives from all over the world and every part of the political spectrum come together to protect and advance our common interests?”

    How about Take your punk a** to Israel and stay there. If the rest of us are so scary, leave “our” countries, weird that Ackerman basically says “his people” dont really belong anywhere else in the world, what a rabid anti-semite; because the only way Jews can be “self determined” is in Israel, according to this clown. So fine, go live in a tent on another person’s land and join the dig for King David’s tent city.

    • American
      July 1, 2011, 3:49 pm

      How many ways does CONFLICT OF INTEREST have to be explained and defined for Ackerman and all those like him?

      wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn Source
      Conflicts of interest related … – Conflicts of interest … – Organizational conflict of …Conflict of Interest (definition)www.businessethics.ca/definitions/conflict-of-interest.html –
      “We can define a conflict of interest as a situation in which a person has a private or personal interest sufficient to appear to influence the objective …

      conflict of interest legal definition of conflict of interest …legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/conflict+of+interest – CachedSimilar
      A term used to describe the situation in which a public official or fiduciary who, contrary to the obligation and absolute duty to act for the benefit of …

      What is conflict of interest? definition and meaningwww.businessdictionary.com/definition/conflict-of-interest.html – CachedSimilar
      Definition of conflict of interest: A situation that has the potential to undermine the impartiality of a person because of the possibility of a clash …

      Responsible Conduct Research : Conflicts of Interestccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/rcr/rcr_conflicts/…/index.html –
      ilar
      Conflict of interest | Define Conflict of interest at Dictionary.comdictionary.reference.com/browse/conflict+of+interest – CachedSimilar
      the circumstance of a public officeholder, business executive, or the like, whose personal interests might benefit from his or her official actions or …

      Conflict of Interest – What is a Conflict of Interest – Conflict …biztaxlaw.about.com/od/glossaryc/g/conflictinteres.htm –
      Definition: A conflict of interest is a situation in which an individual has competing interests or loyalties. A conflict of interest can exist in several …

      Conflict of interest – Definition and More from the Free Merriam …www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conflict%2Bof%2Binterest – CachedDefinition of CONFLICT OF INTEREST. : a conflict between the private interests and the official responsibilities of a person in a position of trust …

      Definition of Conflict of Interest | eHow.comwww.ehow.com › Culture & Society – CachedSimilar
      Definition of Conflict of Interest. When you place your trust in somebody, you expect them to have your best interests in mind. A conflict of interest can …

      conflict of interest – Definition of conflict of interest at …www.yourdictionary.com › Dictionary Definitions – CachedSimilar
      a conflict between one’s obligation to the public good and one’s self-interest, as in the case of a public officeholder seeking …

    • American
      July 1, 2011, 4:07 pm

      { Disloyalty applies to any violation of loyalty, whether to a person, a cause, or one’s country, and whether in thought or in deeds. Perfidy implies deliberate breaking of faith or of one’s pledges and promises, on which others are relying: It is an act of perfidy to cheat innocent people. Treachery implies being secretly traitorous but seeming friendly and loyal: In treachery deceit is added to disloyalty. Treason is performing overt acts to help the enemies of one’s country or government: Acting to aid a hostile power is treason. ”

      The only thing that prevents those like Ackerman from being ‘legally’ labeled Traitors is the US’s failure to recongize that Israel is indeed hostile to the US. In every other sense Ackerman and his fellow travelers fit the definitions of disloyalty, treachery and perfidy.

  2. Kathleen
    July 1, 2011, 9:42 am

    No dual loyalty there. Clearly Israel comes first. Ackermann actively undermining US National Security.

    Who is attacking Israel’s exist. The “right” to exist is of course a question. But based on International agreements Israel does exist based on the 67 border.

    Asking the Palestinians to say Israel has the “right ” to exist would be like asking native Americans to say that Europeans had the right to kill them, take their land and put them on reservations. Absurd

    • mig
      July 1, 2011, 1:49 pm

      No state has a “right to exist”. J.Goeppels is proud in hell how propaganda is still alive and kicking.

      • Woody Tanaka
        July 1, 2011, 2:01 pm

        Bees, not pees.

      • mig
        July 1, 2011, 2:53 pm

        Ah yes, mixed in hurry in our language how we write his name. GJ Woody ;)

  3. eGuard
    July 1, 2011, 9:44 am

    So Ackerman says: THE PALESTINIAN plan … for statehood [in] the UN … could be devastating. Israel could be exposed to sanctions and pressures ….

    Yesssss! A concrete and imminent result of that statehood! And he knows it.

    • justicewillprevail
      July 1, 2011, 9:51 am

      So justice for Palestinians, and equal treatment – the same declaration of statehood as Israel received – means deadly consequences for Israel? How can that be, Ackerman? It must mean that something is wrong with Israel if it can’t accept that Palestinians are equally deserving of status and rights as Israel? Perhaps it is Israel that has to change then? Your paradox isn’t a paradox, it is the self-contradiction that is built into Israel. Nobody is stopping you loving the region or history, but it doesn’t mean you have any more right to it than the people who have actually lived there for generations.

      • Theo
        July 2, 2011, 8:56 am

        Not generations, but thousands of years!!!

        The philisters, the forfathers of the palestinians, were there when the israelis moved into the area.

        So who has more rights, after all?

      • MHughes976
        July 2, 2011, 9:38 am

        Yes, indeed, according to Genesis 20-21 – the Phils were there before Abraham, ie early in the second millennium, let alone before the Israelites.
        The common opinion seems to be that the Phils were part of the Sea Peoples, invaders and marauders of a kind, who disrupted the ME around 1200 and that the earliest inscription referring to them dates from 1175-ish, about 30 years (which is not much!) after the first inscription, the Stela of Merneptah, referring to Israel.
        My head is too full of old things, I know. However, just to mention that there’s a new theory, according to (if I understood him) the Professor of Classics at my local university, which says that place name endings in -ene or -ina are characteristic of the Luwian people, who inhabited some provinces of the Hittite Empire. This would give a Luwian origin to some Greek cities, like Mytilene, and presumably to ‘Palestina’ – making the Phils one of the many neo-Hittite states, so heirs to one of the second millennium pre-Israelite civilisations of the ME.
        So perhaps someone can lend new plausibility to Genesis 10, which says that the ancestors of the Phils were the ‘CashLUhim’. Aha!

  4. seafoid
    July 1, 2011, 10:37 am

    Ackerman should listen to a man who has had a proper job and knows how the world works :

    link to haaretz.com

    Speaking in Jerusalem, he warned that the political standstill on the Palestinian front is dangerous for Israel. Lauder called on Netanyahu to launch a diplomatic initiative, even if this would mean “political suicide.” According to Lauder, “the only way for Israel to escape international isolation is to initiate negotiations without preconditions [with the Palestinians],” as Barak Ravid reported in Haaretz Wednesday. The international community is not interested in Netanyahu’s political problems, and the United Nations General Assembly is expected to overwhelmingly recognize a Palestinian state, Lauder warned. “Everything must be done so that this does not happen,” he said

  5. Chasev
    July 1, 2011, 10:45 am

    They’re a separate people? Then separate from the rest of the world. Round them up and ship them somewhere where they can be among themselves. Leave the rest of the world alone.

  6. Woody Tanaka
    July 1, 2011, 10:49 am

    The fact that the American people would permit their officers to appear at such an event is abhorrant. This thing is disgusting. If Ackerman can’t represent America 100%, then he should resign. If he thinks that he can represent America 50% and Israel 50%, he should be impeached.

  7. kalithea
    July 1, 2011, 11:46 am

    Because folks ONLY Israel is above the Law. Because Anti-Semitism and the “pooh-poor eternal victim” status can be used to trump anything: sabotage, terrorism, murder in sovereign countries, theft of passports, fraud, bribery, shooting fish in a barrel whenever it’s politically expedient: massacre of hundreds of civilians including hundreds of children, theft of land, oppression of others, violation of human rights….you name it, it’s a free for all, but ONLY for Zionists to stomp on the rule of Law and spit in our face!

    But that’s okay because Zionists are the pooooooooor VICTIMS and we must resign ourselves to the fact that they’re special and we’re their “donkey” slaves as Rabbi Ovadia put it.

    How stupid are our leaders? Oh, I forgot, some of them ARE Zionists and others converted to Zionism and have two allegiances.

  8. American
    July 1, 2011, 12:51 pm

    Ackerman, Schumer, & company do and say this kind of thing all the time. But worse is what they do for Israel under the public radar, in the name of and thru the US government, in their political positions.

    You know if the whole country just stopped and looked at and counted up and understood everything’ the US zionist have taken from and involved the US in since the day they came to this country….well I don’t know what would happen but it would change.
    I think some day the country as a whole is going to be forced by some event Israel creates to do just that.
    And some day this foreign fetish is going to get to be too much to swallow even for some of their political lackies in Washington.

  9. Chu
    July 1, 2011, 1:15 pm

    the man needs to stop pulling the victim card out.
    suck it up and join the real world.

    That is the only way forward.

  10. Charon
    July 1, 2011, 1:39 pm

    Pathetic. It seems that every article I read these days over at Wikipedia has a section on antisemitism. The “A” card needs to fall out of disuse. Most people don’t even care about it these days anyways. Only people whose careers can be crushed by being labeled an antisemite are paranoid about it (basically everybody in the MSM).

    Wikipedia has a section about criticism of Zionism being antisemitic. It basically says that people who hate Jews direct their hatred at Zionism to mask their antisemitism. Basically it says anybody critical of Zionism is a potential antisemite which is totally unfair. That’s like saying people who hate hip hop hate blacks or people that criticize immigration hate Mexicans. They don’t have sections for such things because it’s a stupid concept which is being used exactly as intended – to label people critical of Israel as “Jew haters”

  11. lysias
    July 1, 2011, 1:54 pm

    So we are faced with a paradox: While the anti-Semitism and discrimination Jews have historically faced (and in some places rightfully continue to fear) are based on the view of Jews as a people apart, the ongoing assault on Israel’s legitimacy is built upon the idea that the Jews are not a separate people at all, and are thus not entitled to self-determination…

    Hey, Ackerman, if the Jews as a people are entitled to self-determination, why aren’t the Palestinians?

  12. Leper Colonialist
    July 1, 2011, 2:02 pm

    Why do our friends run around patting themselves on the back and constantly referring to themselves as “The Light Unto The Nations” when it’s so painfully clear that theyare incapable of living up to that standard and get mighty mighty annoyed when anyone dares to point it out?

    Is there any standard they are willing to meet, except the one of total expediency based on the Israeli national travail-du-jour?

    I guess Rep Peter King got an early start on the holiday weekend, so the ever-relaible [if you're an unreconstructed Likudist] stepped up.

  13. ritzl
    July 1, 2011, 2:40 pm

    Ackerman says that a reason for antisemitism is because Jews are viewed as a people apart, and supports Israel-as-solution by claiming that people should recognize that Jews are a people apart.

    There has to be a way on or off that circularity/riddle for Ackerman and other legislators if even the beginning of a solution is to be found to this conflict. The reasoning is much too blanketing of any and all counter-arguments, and self-reinforcing of Ackerman’s view of the world/reason for being adamant against solving the conflict (or recognizing avenues for approaching a solution and the modest introspection required to do so).

  14. Debonnaire
    July 1, 2011, 2:40 pm

    Can’t the FBI indict this corpulent schmendrick for treason?

    • Woody Tanaka
      July 1, 2011, 4:08 pm

      No. Treason is constitutionally defined and this doesn’t meet it.

    • thetumta
      July 2, 2011, 12:37 pm

      The FBI indicted the top two officers of AIPAC and and Air Force Colonel(Born-Again) working for the Security Council for Espionage. The Colonel confessed and was sentenced. Obama dropped the case on the other two. That was a surprise! I don’t know if they’ve managed to spring the Colonel yet? Indict Ackerman. Are you joking? There is an exception to the crime of treason defined in the Constitution(the only crime defined in the Constitution) that covers Zionist treason by Jews, but apparently not Christians.
      Hej!

  15. American
    July 1, 2011, 3:22 pm

    When I look at the ‘World Jewish Congress’ it seems about more than just Israel.
    The thread I see running thru everything to do with the zionist is hostility and disrespect toward the people and cultures they live among, even those they don’t live among in some cases.
    Recently I posted about the Jewish Veterans suing to have a cross on a war monument in Calif removed, as well as highway crosses used by some states to signify state troopers killed in line the duty. Several years ago a Jewish group sued an airport for decorating their entrance with a Christmas tree at Christmas. These are hostile, petty acts, aimed at destruction of traditions of another ‘people’, that are totally unnecessary, that accomplish nothing for anyone except for some Jews to prove they can defeat some other groups tradition.
    On the other hand I haven’t seen any gentile or religious groups sue over Obama having a menorah in the WH for some Jewish event he hosted.

    The “separateness” of Jews or any minority wouldn’t be a problem if it wasn’t a “hostile’ separateness that attacked others and the traditions of other people.
    The US Quakers for instance have been able to live separately in their own very different culture without any resentment at all from majority America because they aren’t hostile to those who aren’t one of them or demand anything from them or expect others to capitulate to them. I don’t know of anyone who discriminates against or treats Quakers with disrespect because of their religion or culture.
    I think anyone can see by the Quaker example that the problem of Jews in the US is not one of religious discrimination.
    The conversion of Jews from Judaism to “People-hood’ is the heart of the problem, regardless of when or how it stared .
    It grew the old ‘nation within a nation’ ideology….in the US case, a nation within ‘using’ their host nation for their own tribe and their foreign home nation.
    It seems throughout Jewish history, it is the most committed members who determine the direction of the entire group —which means the fanatics, the zionist, among the Jews lead.
    I don’t know what will determine how this ‘zionist fifth column’, for lack of a better term, will end up in and for America.
    Maybe it will be determined by that Israeli event that finally occurs. Maybe it will depend on how many Jews subscribe to the fifth column of the Ackermans as opposed to the Phils, Finkelstein’s and etc… Maybe it will create anti semitism to the point where there is a popular backlash the zionist can’t with stand.
    I have no idea of the ending or if it will end–but the fact is, it exist, it’s been a problem for a long time.

    • Woody Tanaka
      July 1, 2011, 4:09 pm

      “Recently I posted about the Jewish Veterans suing to have a cross on a war monument in Calif removed, as well as highway crosses used by some states to signify state troopers killed in line the duty. Several years ago a Jewish group sued an airport for decorating their entrance with a Christmas tree at Christmas. These are hostile, petty acts, aimed at destruction of traditions of another ‘people’, that are totally unnecessary, that accomplish nothing for anyone except for some Jews to prove they can defeat some other groups tradition.”

      I agree with the Jewish groups in those situations, because of the Church-State seperation issue which I, as an atheist, take very seriously.

      • American
        July 1, 2011, 9:11 pm

        You, as an atheist can ignore the crosses…I am not particularly religious either,
        But I think most sane people are fricking sick and tired of everyone with an ideology or belief or non belief climbing up on their high horse over any little sign of something that they themselves don’t believe in.

        Really–what it’s to you….if dead troopers have crosses on highways—how exactly does it damage your rights —ignore it–move on. If you don’t want a tyranny of the majority don’t try for a tyranny of the minorities either.

        You can wear a t -shirt or carry a sign that says I AM ATHEIST on any public street or highway or park. No one gives a damn.

        Seriously, this kind of anal rentitive narcissistic stuff has become absurd in the extreme. If you are worried about seperation of church and state you should be investigating the Dept of Education or Bush’s Justice Dept or similar agency instead of worrying about ‘symbols’ of cross and christmas trees in the country.

      • Woody Tanaka
        July 26, 2011, 9:32 am

        “You, as an atheist can ignore the crosses”

        I could, but I don’t have to. The First Amendment exists for a reason.

        “But I think most sane people are fricking sick and tired of everyone with an ideology or belief or non belief climbing up on their high horse over any little sign of something that they themselves don’t believe in.”

        Maybe so, but so what. I’m sure a lot of people are sick and tired of a lot of things. Why the hell can’t the Christians just simply learn to keep their religion out of government?? I don’t care if they want to put of crosses, but don’t use my money to do it.

        “Really–what it’s to you….if dead troopers have crosses on highways—how exactly does it damage your rights ”

        My taxes pay for it, and my government — my secular government — is constitutionally precluded from establishing religion. Do it in private if you want, but leave the government out of it.

        “If you don’t want a tyranny of the majority don’t try for a tyranny of the minorities either.”

        Preventing the government from being involved in religion and enforcing the secular nature of the government is “tyranny”???

        “You can wear a t -shirt or carry a sign that says I AM ATHEIST on any public street or highway or park. No one gives a damn.”

        Yes. But the difference is that I’m not asking the governmen to buy the shirt or prevent someone else from carrying their sign. That’s the difference. And if these cross-raisers were doing this on private property, with private funds, then I wouldn’t give a damn, either.

        “Seriously, this kind of anal rentitive narcissistic stuff has become absurd in the extreme.”

        And if the religious in this country would stop trying to get the government to advance their religion, then there wouldn’t be a problem.

        “If you are worried about seperation of church and state you should be investigating the Dept of Education or Bush’s Justice Dept or similar agency instead of worrying about ‘symbols’ of cross and christmas trees in the country.”

        Since I am worried about separation of church and state, I am worried about all this stuff.

      • RoHa
        July 1, 2011, 10:45 pm

        “I agree with the Jewish groups in those situations, because of the Church-State seperation”

        sepAration

        “issue which I, as an atheist, take very seriously.”

        I too take it seriously*, but American is suggesting that the motive of the Jewish groups is nothing to do with Church-State separation. The lack of Jewish protest at the menorah supports his suggestion.

        *Though I don’t see anything particularly religious about Christmas trees, except in Australia where Christmas is a festival for the national god XXXX.

      • Woody Tanaka
        July 26, 2011, 9:35 am

        “sepAration ”

        Okay. I suck at spelling. Sue me.

        “I too take it seriously*, but American is suggesting that the motive of the Jewish groups is nothing to do with Church-State separation. The lack of Jewish protest at the menorah supports his suggestion.”

        I think that is borne of necessity, because the Supreme Court decisions in these cases are so muddled by essentially holding that impermissible religious expression becomes somehow permissible if there is a lot of different kids of reglious expression.

      • MRW
        July 2, 2011, 7:15 pm

        What if the cross signified the State Trooper’s religion?

      • Woody Tanaka
        July 26, 2011, 9:35 am

        “What if the cross signified the State Trooper’s religion?”

        Then that would be a perfectly appropriate symbol for private people to place on private land in his honor.

  16. gingershot
    July 1, 2011, 3:57 pm

    Always the same Israeli ‘lawyer’s trick’ these days – Ackerman precisely captures the essence of the exact and authentic argument against Israeli Apartheid – and then goes on to demonize that and argue vehemently that that is anti-semitic.

    It is legal marshal arts a la Dershowitz – they immediately ‘accept’ the anticipated rational outcome but then neatly flip this ‘case against Israel’ into part of the ‘Case for Israel’

    ‘The Palestinian plan … for statehood [in] the UN … could be devastating. Israel could be exposed to sanctions and pressures”

    Damn straight.

    It’s a brilliant or stupid legal strategy – depending upon Israel’s realpolitik power to swing the argument – which with the help of Ackerman and the rest of the Israeli Lobby and the Sieg Heil-ing US Congress, has been formidable enough to carry the day for decades

    If Ackerman and Israel succeed – they have essentially delegitimized the main strength of their opponent’s legal and moral argument. If the fail … well hell, Israel is already an illegal state, how much worse could it get?

    The point is… Israel IS an illegitimate state as far as all Israeli settlements in Palestine and it’s Apartheid policies – if they (Ackerman and the Israelis) succeed in delegitimizing that argument then PRESTO Israel can continue to argue it is ‘legitimate’

    These are the desperate arguments of desperate sociopaths

  17. Duscany
    July 1, 2011, 5:13 pm

    Elliott Abrams said recently that President Obama had “no great love” for Israel. This apparently was big news in Jerusalem Post. My first thought was, so what? Since when are American presidents supposed to abjectly profess their love for foreign countries?

    If I were to announce that Ronald Reagan, or Bill Clinton or Dwight D. Eisenhower had no great love for Britain, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Poland, or Norway, I doubt anyone would give it a second thought.

    And yet to be successful American presidents have to confess to a deep seated “love of Israel.”

    Well, great balls of fire. We know the prime minister of Israel has a deep seated love of Israel. Isn’t that enough? Why does the American president have to add expressions of his love too?

  18. seafoid
    July 1, 2011, 5:52 pm

    You know, one day Jews will be targeted again somewhere just because they are Jews because that is the way of Christian things and it will be time to cry out antisemitism and the word will have lost all meaning.

  19. RoHa
    July 1, 2011, 10:38 pm

    “While the anti-Semitism and discrimination Jews have historically faced (and in some places rightfully continue to fear) are based on the view of Jews as a people apart, the ongoing assault on Israel’s legitimacy is built upon the idea that the Jews are not a separate people at all,”

    Let me get this straight.

    Taking the line that Jews are a separate people, and using that idea as a basis for treating them differently, is wrong. (And, worse than wrong, it’s Anti-Semitic!)

    Taking the line that Jews are not a separate people, and using that idea as a basis for not treating them differently, is wrong. (And, worse than wrong, it’s Anti-Semitic!)

    Paradox is right! (But probably Anti-Semitic.)

    • annie
      July 2, 2011, 1:53 am

      roha, i just realized we made the same point.

      • RoHa
        July 2, 2011, 2:10 am

        Great Minds think alike, annie.
        Even if they are Anti-Semitic.

      • annie
        July 2, 2011, 2:49 am

        searching for emoticon… in waiting

  20. annie
    July 1, 2011, 11:05 pm

    this is called damned if you do damned if you don’t:

    While the anti-Semitism and discrimination Jews have faced …..are based on the view of Jews as a people apart, the ongoing assault on Israel’s legitimacy is built upon the idea that the Jews are not a separate people at all, and are thus not entitled to self-determination…

    he should make up his mind.

    sep·a·rate….Forming or viewed as a unit apart or by itself

  21. Avi_
    July 2, 2011, 5:22 am

    It is for this reason that 55 Jewish parliamentarians from 22 countries have assembled in Jerusalem under the auspices of the World Jewish Congress.

    Oh the irony is delicious. So, let me get this straight, there is NO Jewish cabal because saying so would be anti-Semitic, but there is a World Jewish Congress to which Jewish politicians are urged to join and some already have, from 22 countries. OK. Got it.

  22. Jabberwocky
    July 2, 2011, 6:53 am

    Mr. Ackerman may not have committed treason in his actions but one can argue that he and those like him are in breach of their Oath of Office: link to conservativeusa.org

    They are not abiding by the “true and faithful” clause because they have declared allegiance to a foreign country. This is actually grounds for US citizenship to be revoked.

    Not sure how one would instigate legal action against those government officials that have declared their allegiance to Israel; as the wars we have entered into as a result of their support of Israel are not in the interests of the USA.

  23. Linda J
    July 2, 2011, 9:04 pm

    “We know the prime minister of Israel has a deep seated love of Israel.”

    What I think he loves is power; same as Obama.

  24. howardtlewisiii
    July 6, 2011, 2:22 am

    This Ackerman must have been desperatre for a friend to put himself out
    like that. He will not get far with out the crooked voting machines.

Leave a Reply