Ross’s presence assured that ‘flow of bundled donations was unabated’ to Obama –Blumenthal

Israel/Palestine
on 58 Comments

Max Blumenthal always pins the tail on the donkey, he is trying to speak directly about how American politics works. “Dennis Ross: The undiplomatic history,” at Alakhbar, frankly describes Ross as the stand-in for the Israel lobby inside the Obama administration. Notice Blumenthal’s relentless and honest focus on fundraisers. This is what is at stake right now in the Obama-Romney faceoff, the disposition of the permanent government of the Israel-Palestine issue, the lobby. Read the whole thing at the link. Some key excerpts:

Clinton’s presidential campaign drew momentum from the Israel lobby’s anger at President George H.W. Bush, who momentarily withheld loan guarantees to Israel to force Shamir to accept a settlement freeze. Clinton’s top individual donor was Haim Saban, an American-Israeli media tycoon committed to cementing Israeli influence over American policy. Saban raised US$3.5 million at an event he hosted for the Clinton campaign, then helped secure the appointment of WINEP co-founder Martin Indyk as US Ambassador to Israel once Clinton was elected….

When the George W. Bush administration took power, Ross cooled his heels at WINEP, collecting a US$230,000 annual paycheck while padding his wallet with over US$220,000 in speaking fees from pro-Israel organizations like AIPAC. Ross delivered a total of zero speeches for Arab and Muslim groups during this period. Ross also found time to join leading neoconservatives in making the case for invading and occupying Iraq.

With the mission accomplished in Iraq, Ross joined John Bolton, Donald Rumsfeld, Douglas Feith and a Who’s Who of neocons to produce a report called “Meeting the Challenge: US Policy Toward Iranian Nuclear Development.” The paper was a bellicose collection of arguments for ramping up conflict with the evildoers of Iran. Veteran national security analyst Jim Lobe summarized the document most succinctly when he called it “a road map to war.”

The same year, Ross emerged in a novel role as a campaign proxy for Obama, who was attempting to weather a storm of slander from his Republican opponents. The latter accused Obama of everything from crypto-Islamic sentiments to a hidden pro-Palestinian agenda, pointing to a past relationship with Rashid Khalidi (the horror!) that in fact amounted to little more than a casual friendship.

From Obama’s vulnerability on the Israel issue came Ross’s strength, allowing the veteran insider to emerge as Obama’s de facto liaison to the Jewish donors who accounted for so much of the Democratic Party’s base of funding.

During the final months of the campaign, Ross was junketed to synagogues in affluent suburbs from Pennsylvania to Florida to reassure nervous pro-Israel voters that he would be their man on the inside, working for Israel’s interests at every turn.

When Obama appeared at the annual convention of AIPAC in 2008, Ross inserted a provocative line that reflected his personal zealotry: “Jerusalem must remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided.”

By mouthing the phrase, Obama contradicted official US policy, generating embarrassment and controversy that forced him to backpedal immediately afterwards. But thanks to the guiding hand of Ross, the candidate doubts inside the pro-Israel community that he might prove insufficiently pliant. Thus the flow of bundled donations continued unabated.

Ross’s departure from the Obama administration has fueled concerns about the President’s fundraising potential. “Ross’s departure is not a diplomatic problem for the White House; it is instead a problem for the Obama re-election campaign,” wroteElliot Abrams, the neoconservative former Assistant Secretary of State for the Bush II administration. “For Ross was the only official in whom most American Jewish leaders had confidence. As most of them are Democrats who have long accepted Ross’s faith in the ‘peace process,’ they viewed his role as the assurance that a steady, experienced, pro-Israel hand was on or near the tiller.”

Ross’s dual role as Obama’s Jewish consigliere and Middle East advisor was the ultimate symbol of the Israel lobby’s corruption of American foreign policy. Ross may have failed at each turn, but each successive failure has enabled maximalist Israeli impulses, from the construction of settlements to the siege of the Palestinian population. In this regard, Ross fulfilled his promises to his cohorts in the lobby.

58 Responses

  1. Kathleen
    November 15, 2011, 9:57 am

    “Ross may have failed at each turn, but each successive failure has enabled maximalist Israeli impulses, from the construction of settlements to the siege of the Palestinian population. In this regard, Ross fulfilled his promises to his cohorts in the lobby.”

    Fulfilling his job for the I lobby and Israel.

    Checking NPR no programs or segments focused in an in depth way on Ross’s departure..

    Hope Max digs into the conflict between Mitchell and Ross. Ross fueling the conflict with Iran. And what happened to the upper level Iranian officials allegedly involved with the attempt to kill the Saudi Ambassador. That story was all over the place for about four days and then disappeared. Did Ross have anything to do with this?

    • hophmi
      November 15, 2011, 1:03 pm

      “That story was all over the place for about four days and then disappeared. Did Ross have anything to do with this?”

      I’m sure, whether he did or not, you’re going to repeat this question nine million times to make it seem like he did.

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 1:52 pm

        hophmi what do you think is the explanation for that story being all over the place and then disappearing? Think the alleged claims had some holes in them?

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 2:50 pm

        “hophmi what do you think is the explanation for that story being all over the place and then disappearing? Think the alleged claims had some holes in them?”

        I have no idea. I don’t think it was a very developed plot. There may also be a government interest in protecting the informants involved and thus, a desire to keep the story off the front pages.

      • Woody Tanaka
        November 15, 2011, 2:05 pm

        “I’m sure, whether he did or not, you’re going to repeat this question nine million times to make it seem like he did.”

        Kind of like the way you keep repeating the lie (and, yes, it is a lie, a lie of omission) trying to paint the “wipe off the face of the map” mistranslation as being other than a mistake, when it wasn’t an accurate translation of Ahmadinejad’s statement, and when the mistranslation by INRA was corrected by the Foregin Minister. Like that?

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 3:44 pm

        I have only asked the question about why this alleged involvement of Iranian officials in the attempt to kill Saudi ambassador has disappeared several times. And if Ross was involved with any of the development of the claims?

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 5:10 pm

        “And if Ross was involved with any of the development of the claims?”

        Do you have any reason (i.e., actual evidence) to suggest that he was?

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 5:48 pm

        I am asking a question. His resignation coming not to far after those alleged claims turned into a major flop.

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 5:55 pm

        “I am asking a question.”

        Yes, yes, you’re asking a question. I get it.

        Now go and answer it, instead of insinuating something you know you can’t prove.

      • Woody Tanaka
        November 15, 2011, 6:10 pm

        “Now go and answer it, instead of insinuating something you know you can’t prove.”

        Who needs to prove anything?? Didn’t you just say, “The prosecution never proved OJ murdered those two people, but we all know what happened.”

        The same here. I would even venture to say that I think it is more likely that OJ was innocent than that Dennis Ross hasn’t worked for his entire life in order to advance the interests of Israel over anything else, even any residual loyalty he might have to the US.

  2. Kathleen
    November 15, 2011, 10:00 am

    Max’s article
    “AIPAC, the key arm of the Israel lobby, issued a rare statement hailing Ross’s legacy. “In his tireless pursuit of Middle East peace, Ambassador Ross has maintained a deep understanding of the strategic value of the US-Israel relationship and has worked vigorously to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.”

    If he had been working vigorously to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons he would have been pushing Israel to sign the NPT and demand that Israel stop threatening Iran almost daily.

    • hophmi
      November 15, 2011, 1:04 pm

      “If he had been working vigorously to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons he would have been pushing Israel to sign the NPT and demand that Israel stop threatening Iran almost daily.”

      What?! Why do you think Iran would care if Israel signed the NPT? Please enlighten me. Do you think Iran gives a damn about the NPT?

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 1:50 pm

        Iran signed and abides by the NPT. Israel continually threatens Iran and continually repeats and promotes unsubstantiated claims about Iran. Many nations have expressed their deep concerns about Israel’s uninspected and undeclared stockpiles of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons that are stored four stories down in the ground. Israel started the arms race in the middle east and their un inspected stockpiles of weapons continue to be a threat to peace in the region.
        Israeli nuclear capability and threat. Many nations have written to the IAEA about Israel’s thread for decades
        link to iaea.org

        Iran and other nations in the region have called for a nuclear free zone
        link to news.bbc.co.uk

        Hophmi what could your argument possibly be against Israel signing the very same agreement that they demand that their neighbors abide by? WTF could your argument be?

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 2:19 pm

        Iran and many other nations have brought Israel’s continued unwillingness to sign the NPT and their unwillingness to be inspected by the IAEA as a threat to peace in the middle east. You can access these letters over the decades at the IAEA’s website.

        Hop what could your argument be against Israel getting away with not signing the NPT. India and Pakistan too. More pressure needs to be put on all three nations to sign the NPT

      • Mooser
        November 15, 2011, 2:27 pm

        “WTF could your argument be?”

        Oh, I know what Hophmi’s argument is, I’ve heard it all my life. It basically boils down to “whatever those damned Arabs are up to, it can’t be any good!”

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 2:37 pm

        “Hop what could your argument be against Israel getting away with not signing the NPT.”

        What’s Israel’s interest in signing the NPT? What does Israel stand to gain? You tell me.

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 2:44 pm

        “Iran signed and abides by the NPT.”

        It does not abide by the NPT. It was found to be non-compliant in 2003. That’s what all of this inspection stuff is for. That’s why the UNSC passed a resolution in 2006 ordering it to stop uranium enrichment and imposed sanctions when Iran refused to comply. That’s why the IAEA reported Iran was non-cooperative in 2009.

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 4:05 pm

        They have never proven that Iran is enriching uranium above the levels that they are legally able as a signator of the NPT

        Chronology of events and inspections
        link to iaea.org

        Israel should sign the NPT
        Obama: Israel should sign nuclear non-proliferation treaty
        link to haaretz.com

        link to news.antiwar.com
        Israel Undermining NPT, ElBaradei Warns
        IAEA Chief Also Lashes Out US Over Iraq Carnage
        by Jason Ditz, February 16, 2009
        | Print This | Share This | Antiwar Forum

        IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei says that Israel’s status as the Middle East’s only nuclear power and its only non-signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is a major obstacle to efforts for global nuclear disarmament.

        “What compounds the problem is that the nuclear non-proliferation regime has lost its legitimacy in the eyes of Arab public opinion because of the perceived double-standards concerning Israel, the only state in the region outside the NPT and known to possess nuclear weapons.” Though Israel has never formally admitted to its arsenal, it is widely accepted that it has a considerable number of nuclear weapons.

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 5:17 pm

        “They have never proven that Iran is enriching uranium above the levels that they are legally able as a signator of the NPT”

        The prosecution never proved OJ murdered those two people, but we all know what happened.

        UN Security Council sanctions do not come from nowhere. First you erroneous argued that Iran was in compliance. Now you suggest “they” have “never proven” that Iran is enriching uranium above the NPT level.

        Why are you so eager to defend Iran?

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 5:53 pm

        They have never proven that Iran is enriching uranium beyond the level that they are legally able.

        “Why are you so eager to defend Iran” Because I think Israel is a bully. Iran has never threatened the US or Israel. But Israel almost daily threatens Iran based on unsubstantiated claims. Hophmi don’t you think there are enough people dead, injured and displaced due to the agenda of the neo, oil, theo cons?

        Now it is clearly evident that the only lives you are concerned about are Jews. But some of us have a much broader perspective and deeper concerns about the larger circle of humanity. Know that it is difficult for you to stretch your brain matter around but that is the case for some of us

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 6:27 pm

        “Iran has never threatened the US or Israel. ”

        That’s ridiculous. They call them the Great and Little Satan. They fund terrorist groups that attack Israel and kill Israeli civilians. They have a three-decade history of belligerent rhetoric toward Israel. They have been involved in attacking US troops in Iraq. It’s simply nonsense to say they have never threatened Israel or the US. Iran hasn’t threatened Israel and US. The sky isn’t blue and grass isn’t green.

        “But Israel almost daily threatens Iran based on unsubstantiated claims. ”

        They never threaten Iran as a state. They threaten to disarm its nuclear capabilities. And the claims are not unsubstantiated at all. There’s an almost decade-long history of IAEA censure, UNSC condemnation, and sanctions. It didn’t come from nowhere.

        “Hophmi don’t you think there are enough people dead, injured and displaced due to the agenda of the neo, oil, theo cons? ”

        None of this has to do with Iran. There is a reason most of the West and most of the Middle East is worried about this issue.

        “Now it is clearly evident that the only lives you are concerned about are Jews. But some of us have a much broader perspective and deeper concerns about the larger circle of humanity. ”

        Take your self-righteousness and shove it up your ass. I care about everybody. I am not a supporter of attacking Iran. I don’t want any Muslims to die. All the same, I can recognize that it’s a threat to Israel by its rhetoric, its record of non-compliance, and the behavior of totalitarian regimes.

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 8:38 pm

        “There is a reason most of the West and most of the Middle East is worried about this issue. ”

        Because Israel and the I lobby demand that they “worry”

        And I don’t believe you Hophmi I don’t think you give a rats ass about anyone who is not Jewish. Almost everything you write has to do with the protection of Israel no matter what they do at all cost. Killing others, invading other countries.

        It is interesting that the moderators here at Mondoweiss have allowed you to say to me “shove it up your ass” because when I have said such things like “your head is up where the sun does not shine” . They have not posted it.

        Hophmi it is your “self righteousness” and ethno centric superiority complex that keeps your head up where the sun does not shine. There we both were able to get ass comments in

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 9:38 pm

        Hophmi “I care about everybody.”

        One of your biggest lies

      • Mooser
        November 15, 2011, 9:49 pm

        “I can recognize that it’s a threat to Israel by its rhetoric, its record of non-compliance, and the behavior of totalitarian regimes.”

        Well, then, don’t just stand there, Hophmi! Get going! It’ll take time to get to Israel, sign the necessary papers, get fitted for a new uniform….

      • Charon
        November 15, 2011, 9:52 pm

        hophni, you don’t care about anybody. You are just another sociopath who thinks they are a wizard with words. You hate Palestinians. You hate Arabs. You hate Muslims. Deny it all you want, you’ve exposed your bias

        Iran has a good reason to call the US the big Satan and Israel the little Satan. Google Operation Ajax. I’m sure you already know that.

      • Woody Tanaka
        November 15, 2011, 2:03 pm

        “What?! Why do you think Iran would care if Israel signed the NPT? Please enlighten me. Do you think Iran gives a damn about the NPT?”

        In your fevered paranoia, Iran is trying to arm to kill you, specifically or Israel. In reality, if they are seeking a nuclear weapon, it is for protection from Israel and the US. If Israel’s lawyer really worked for the US, he might have understood that and perhpas pushed the Israelis to make the necessary assurances, including signing the NPT, to prevent an arms race. But Ross got his marching orders from Tel Aviv, and there you go.

        The funniest part is when people then say that if Iran gets a weapon then that would “start” an arms race in the region.

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 2:45 pm

        “The funniest part is when people then say that if Iran gets a weapon then that would “start” an arms race in the region.”

        Which people?

        It’s the Saudis who say that. And frankly, it’s common sense.

      • Woody Tanaka
        November 15, 2011, 3:54 pm

        Which people?

        It’s the Saudis who say that. And frankly, it’s common sense.

        Okay. Let me try again, and I’ll use small words for you: The Mideast nuclear arms race is already underway, and Israel started it.

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 4:07 pm

        Israel started the arms race in the middle east. The only President to demand that Israel open up Dimona to inspections was President Kennedy. The only President and the last President to do so.

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 5:05 pm

        “Israel started the arms race in the middle east.”

        There’s no arms race in the Middle East. Arab countries in the Gulf do not feel existentially threatened by Israel. They do feel threatened by Iran. Therefore, if Iran gets the bomb, the Sunnis will seek it as well.

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 5:09 pm

        “Okay. Let me try again, and I’ll use small words for you: The Mideast nuclear arms race is already underway, and Israel started it.”

        Again, that’s not accurate. There is no arms race in the Middle East. The idea of an arms race dates from Cold War times. Today the conflict is Sunni-Shia. The Saudis and the smaller Sunni emirates feel threatened by Iran. Therefore, it is likely that if Iran gets the bomb, they will seek it as well. The I-P conflict is a side show. Iran isn’t getting the bomb only because of Israel. It’s getting the bomb because it wants to dominate the Sunni Arabs in the Gulf. Israel’s been in the region for 63 years and had the bomb for almost 50.

        There is more to political analysis than Israel-bashing.

      • Woody Tanaka
        November 15, 2011, 5:41 pm

        “Again, that’s not accurate. There is no arms race in the Middle East. The idea of an arms race dates from Cold War times.”

        Nonsense. The idea of an arms race preceded the Cold War. Additionally, the conflicts in the Middle East are not binary, as was the case in the Cold War.

        “Today the conflict is Sunni-Shia. The Saudis and the smaller Sunni emirates feel threatened by Iran. Therefore, it is likely that if Iran gets the bomb, they will seek it as well.”

        Yes, and if Iran is going for the bomb, it wants it both to strengthen its influence in the region and protect itself from the existential threat posed by the US and Israel.

        “The I-P conflict is a side show. Iran isn’t getting the bomb only because of Israel.”

        No, but you are a damned fool if you don’t list Israel in the top 2 reasons.

        “It’s getting the bomb because it wants to dominate the Sunni Arabs in the Gulf.”

        In part, but also, in part, to protect itself from the wolves at the door, namely the US and Israeli. Saddam is dead and Kim Jong Il is not. That’s not random.

        “Israel’s been in the region for 63 years and had the bomb for almost 50.”

        Right. And started the arms race.

        “There is more to political analysis than Israel-bashing.”

        And to it than looking at the world in Zionism-colored glasses, too.

      • Woody Tanaka
        November 15, 2011, 5:43 pm

        ‘There’s no arms race in the Middle East. Arab countries in the Gulf do not feel existentially threatened by Israel. They do feel threatened by Iran. Therefore, if Iran gets the bomb, the Sunnis will seek it as well.”

        Yes, it’s a three way race: The Iranians feel existentially threatened by the Israelis, which forces the Iranians to arm, which causes the Arab states to arm.

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 5:53 pm

        “Yes, it’s a three way race: The Iranians feel existentially threatened by the Israelis, which forces the Iranians to arm, which causes the Arab states to arm.”

        I don’t believe the Iranians feel an existential threat from the Israelis. The Israelis have not pledged to wipe Iran off the map. They merely have said they will, if necessary, keep it from going nuclear. Israel has not called for an end to the Islamic Republic.

      • Woody Tanaka
        November 15, 2011, 6:08 pm

        “I don’t believe the Iranians feel an existential threat from the Israelis.”

        Given the bullying rhetoric and saber-rattling by the Israelis, they should.

        “The Israelis have not pledged to wipe Iran off the map.”

        They’ve pledged worse. (And no one has pledged to wipe anyone off the map, unless you’re still a liar about that.)

        “They merely have said they will, if necessary, keep it from going nuclear. Israel has not called for an end to the Islamic Republic.”

        First, they have no right to do either. and Second, Israel’s track record in the region shouldn’t lead anyone to take it’s statements on face value, especially Iraq.

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 8:31 pm

        “The Israelis have not pledged to wipe Iran off the map”

        But they threaten to bomb their nuclear facilities all of the time. Seymour Hersh has written extensively about how Israel has forces on the ground in Iran and let’s not forget the act of war that Israel has all ready committed by attacking Iran via Stuxnet. Israel is the aggressor. Period

        And you know that Iran has never said “wipe Israel off the map” You know this and why do you keep lying about this? It appears you are all about people dying based on lies especially in regard to what Israel demands

        link to juancole.com
        “The precise reason for Hitchens’ theft and publication of my private mail is that I object to the characterization of Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as having “threatened to wipe Israel off the map.” I object to this translation of what he said on two grounds. First, it gives the impression that he wants to play Hitler to Israel’s Poland, mobilizing an armored corps to move in and kill people.

        But the actual quote, which comes from an old speech of Khomeini, does not imply military action, or killing anyone at all. The second reason is that it is just an inexact translation. The phrase is almost metaphysical. He quoted Khomeini that “the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time.” It is in fact probably a reference to some phrase in a medieval Persian poem. It is not about tanks.”

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 9:34 pm

        Your a liar and in denial. Many nations have written to the IAEA and said that they feel threatened by Israel’s nuclear weapons. I am tired of linking to those letters for you at the IAEA because you do not go read them

      • lysias
        November 15, 2011, 2:34 pm

        Iran has repeatedly offered to renounce nuclear weapons as part of a deal making the Middle East a nuclear-free zone. Guess who won’t agree to that.

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 2:46 pm

        “Iran has repeatedly offered to renounce nuclear weapons as part of a deal making the Middle East a nuclear-free zone. Guess who won’t agree to that.”

        Sure, it will be a nuclear-free zone and Iran will continue to make war with Israel through Hamas and Hezbollah.

        If you believe the assurances of Iranian leaders, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. No one puts any stock in what they say except them and their useful idiots in the West.

      • Mooser
        November 15, 2011, 10:04 pm

        “If you believe the assurances of Iranian leaders, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. No one puts any stock in what they say except them and their useful idiots in the West.”

        I mean, they’re Iranians for Chris’sake! They’re nearly black! Now look at us Israelis, almost as, or just as white as you Americans. Now, who ya’ gonna trust?
        And of course, there’s Israel’s long history of complete veracity, and willingness to comply!

    • Charon
      November 15, 2011, 1:07 pm

      FTA: When Obama appeared at the annual convention of AIPAC in 2008, Ross inserted a provocative line that reflected his personal zealotry: “Jerusalem must remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided.”

      By mouthing the phrase, Obama contradicted official US policy, generating embarrassment and controversy that forced him to backpedal immediately afterwards. But thanks to the guiding hand of Ross, the candidate doubts inside the pro-Israel community that he might prove insufficiently pliant.

      About that Jerusalem line, Ross told the Jerusalem Post “The fact of the matter is, Jerusalem is Israel’s capital. That’s a fact. It’s also a fact that the city should not be divided again. That’s also a fact.” Ross then goes on to say that the US policy is final status must be determined by negotiations which is contradictory to his “facts.” Why was this man involved in the peace process? Fact – Jerusalem is not Israel’s capital because the international community does not recognize it as such. Only Israel does, and Israel doesn’t even know where their borders are at. Saying the city should not be divided is an opinion and not a fact. What Israel considers Jerusalem extends well into the WB these days. In his book, Ross claims he urged Barak to accept a divided Jerusalem. Given what he told Jerusalem Post, I doubt this claim without proof. Especially because he sneaked that verbiage into the Obama speech.

      Aaron David Miller, who worked with Ross for years, calls him “Israel’s lawyer” in his book and said he only saw the politics of I/P from the Israeli vantage point. He would pre-consult with the Israelis on every decision. This is what Ross said about Miller:

      “Aaron was always arguing for a just and fair proposal… that the Palestinians were entitled to 100 percent of the territory. Swaps should thus be equal… on the basis that every other Arab negotiating partner had gotten 100 percent. Why should the Palestinians be different? I disagreed.”

      They ARE entitled to 100% of the territory. Obviously they’re not going to be able too, but from a negotiating standpoint Gaza, the WB, and all of EJ and the Old City are occupied Palestinian territory. That is what they bring to the negotiating table. You can’t ask them to sacrifice it without 100% compensation. Why do none of these Ziocons understand what negotiation is? And that is why the negoitations and the peace process are finally dead, Ross is primarily responsible for killing it. His luncheon with Jewish leaders probably had a big “Mission Accomplish” banner hanging up.

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 1:53 pm

        When Obama stated ““Jerusalem must remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided.” it was clear they had put his cajones in a vice grip

  3. Kathleen
    November 15, 2011, 10:19 am

    great article. Max nails it again
    “Ross’s dual role as Obama’s Jewish consigliere and Middle East advisor was the ultimate symbol of the Israel lobby’s corruption of American foreign policy. Ross may have failed at each turn, but each successive failure has enabled maximalist Israeli impulses, from the construction of settlements to the siege of the Palestinian population”

    Ross failing ensured Israel’s expansion of illegal settlements and illegal housing in E Jerusalem. If Ross or Israel had really wanted peace NO expansion of illegal settlements would have been in the Oslo agreement.

    • hophmi
      November 15, 2011, 1:05 pm

      “If Ross or Israel had really wanted peace NO expansion of illegal settlements would have been in the Oslo agreement.”

      If the Palestinians really wanted peace, they would not make a big deal out of building in neighborhoods that Israel is going to retain in land swaps.

      • Woody Tanaka
        November 15, 2011, 1:59 pm

        “If the Palestinians really wanted peace, they would not make a big deal out of building in neighborhoods that Israel is going to retain in land swaps.”

        Who said they are going to retain them? Isn’t that up for negotiations? Or are you putting a precondition on it?

        And if Israel really wanted peace, it would have accpeted the Arab peace deal.

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 2:48 pm

        “Who said they are going to retain them? Isn’t that up for negotiations? Or are you putting a precondition on it?”

        Pretty much everybody involved in Camp David and Taba and those who came after who understand what the land swaps are and why it’s a lot easier than destroying what are essentially established cities on the ground. Also everybody who understands that once people move to a settlement, they apparently don’t stop having children.

      • Woody Tanaka
        November 15, 2011, 4:04 pm

        “Pretty much everybody involved in…”

        So, in other words, when it benefits the Israelis, there will be pre-conditions galore. But when it comes to the Palestinians, they get the screws. Typical.

        “why it’s a lot easier than destroying what are essentially established cities on the ground”

        No need to destroy anything. Just tell the squatters to get the hell out.

        “Also everybody who understands that once people move to a settlement, they apparently don’t stop having children.”

        So what. The Isrealis should have thought of that when they broke international law when they founded this diabolical program of land theft in the first place.

      • hophmi
        November 15, 2011, 5:13 pm

        “So, in other words, when it benefits the Israelis, there will be pre-conditions galore. But when it comes to the Palestinians, they get the screws. Typical. ”

        What pre-conditions? The only new precondition in recent years is the Palestinian insistence on a complete halt to construction.

        “No need to destroy anything. Just tell the squatters to get the hell out.”

        Why don’t you go there and do it?

        “So what. The Isrealis should have thought of that when they broke international law when they founded this diabolical program of land theft in the first place.”

        Uh-huh.

        As I said, the adults in the room understand this is all going to be part of Israel anyway. The political extremists in the room have a vested interest in the conflict continuing.

      • Woody Tanaka
        November 15, 2011, 5:35 pm

        “What pre-conditions? The only new precondition in recent years is the Palestinian insistence on a complete halt to construction. ”

        The pre-condition that comes along with the assumption that the Israelis will be succesful in keeping this parcel of stolen land.

      • Kathleen
        November 15, 2011, 2:03 pm

        One state solution is on its way.

      • Mooser
        November 15, 2011, 2:34 pm

        “One state solution is on its way.”

        What? Never! We will have the Masadadammerung first! After all, why do the Jews need Israel? They can go anywhere, so they might as well wreck the place and leave rather than give it to the Arabs.
        The world has sabotoged Zionism, by not holding up its end of the bargain, continued anti-Semitism. How could the world do something so hateful? They left the poor Zionists nothing to do to obfuscate the failings of Zionism, with only an anti-Arab crusade to turn to. Good Lord, how the world hates us Jews! Look what they make us do!

  4. lysias
    November 15, 2011, 2:31 pm

    Saban raised US$3.5 million at an event he hosted for the Clinton campaign, then helped secure the appointment of WINEP co-founder Martin Indyk as US Ambassador to Israel once Clinton was elected.

    Indyk was a really weird choice as a U.S. ambassador. Born in London, he spent most of the first 30 or so years of his life in Australia, where he was educated. He still speaks with an Australian accent. He only became a U.S. citizen in 1993, two years before he became our ambassador to Israel.

    • Kathleen
      November 15, 2011, 3:50 pm

      Former Congresswoman Jane “waddling on over to interfere in Aipac investigation” Harman is very close to Haim Saban.

      link to voices.washingtonpost.com
      “CQ’s sources, and sources cited today in the New York Times, say that Harman was caught on the wiretap telling the suspected Israeli agent that she would lobby Bush administration officials to reduce the charges against the two members of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) accused of spying. In exchange, the sources said, the suspected agent promised to help her get appointed chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

      CQ said that, according to its sources, Harman told the caller she would “waddle in” to the espionage case “if you think it would make a difference.” She also said, “This conversation doesn’t exist.”

  5. Kathleen
    November 15, 2011, 2:39 pm

    Nuclear Hysteria on Iran
    link to theamericanconservative.com
    “NEW YORK – The UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) long awaited, much ballyhooed report on Iran’s nuclear activities has been thunderously greeted here as conclusive evidence that Iran is working on nuclear weapons.

    Both Tehran and a 2007 U.S. combined intelligence assessment deny such claims.

    There’s little new in this report, and a lot of déjà vu. We read the old story floating around since 2002 about a mysterious laptop stolen from Iran and passed to U.S. intelligence. It allegedly contains scientific material about explosive compression methods to trigger a nuclear explosion, and designs to shrink nuclear warheads to fit in missile nosecones.

    The UN and western powers say this stolen computer’s contents conclusively proves Iran has violated the UN’s non-proliferation treaty, to which Tehran is a signatory. Israel and its American partisans are raising a hue and cry about an impending nuclear attack on the Jewish state by Iran’s “crazy” leaders. Republicans are baying for war against Iran.”

  6. dumvitaestspesest
    November 15, 2011, 8:56 pm

    “What’s so crazy about all this is that Israel has a very large arsenal of nuclear and bio-warfare weapons while Iran remains under UN nuclear inspection.

    The big nuclear powers – the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France – are in violation of the 1995 UN nuclear non-proliferation treaty that mandated eliminating all nuclear weapons within five years.
    Talk about the nuclear pots calling the Iranian kettle black.”

    • Charon
      November 16, 2011, 1:51 am

      If Iran seriously had an arsenal of nuclear weapons, it would put Israel in check. As long as the ME is nuke-free, Israel can bully them around. That’s really all this is about. Israel doesn’t even want to chance anything which is why they destroyed Iraq’s reactor. The US inspected in in 2003 determining it could not have been used to create weapons. That means Israel destroyed a sovereign country’s energy facility for no other reason other than the fact that their government is comprised of psychopaths and terrorists. Literally. (Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir were leaders of terrorist groups. This is no different than the USA supporting a ‘democratic’ nation led by Osama Bin Laden)

      Syria’s nuclear facility may have been the real deal, but the Zionists took care of it.

  7. Kathleen
    November 15, 2011, 9:40 pm

    While Obama may lose some of the big money from those who are far more committed to Israel than to the US. They will not be able to hide this time.

    I think the scale is tipping in small donations from folks who have had their lightbulbs turned on about this critical issue

    • Theo
      November 16, 2011, 10:35 am

      Obama is not a bit better than baby Bush was, he is only vastly more intelligent.
      He is killing civilians every day in Pakistan, a country that is our ally. Instead of withdrawing troops and closing military installations overseas, he opens up new ones in Australia, after all, someone must keep an eye on those savage aborigines!!
      That is not exactly why he got the Nobel Peace Prize, it was a prepayment based on his speaches, however he kept none of his promises.
      Do we want a sneaky lier as the next president?

Leave a Reply