Debbie Netanyahu Schultz

Israel/Palestine
Debbie Wasserman Schultz 2
Debbie Wasserman Schultz 2

Haaretz has a piece by Chaim Levinson showing that Romney and Netanyahu share a number of donors. No surprises. But here is the most interesting nugget, involving the chair of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz:

The Falic family of Florida owns the company Duty Free Americas, which is active in both North and South America. The family patriarch, Fima Chaim, died in January 2012, but is survived by his widow and three children. Altogether, the family is responsible for donating NIS 165,000 [$40,000] to Netanyahu, split among several members (since the legal ceiling on individual donations is NIS 43,280 ). Before his death, Fima gave $20,000 to the Republican Party and smaller sums to various Republican candidates.

Unusually, however, he also donated to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Jewish congresswoman from Florida who chairs the Democratic National Committee. His sons Leon and Jerome, and his son-in-law Simon gave $40,000, $41,500 and $55,000, respectively, to the Republican Party, as well as smaller sums to individual Republican candidates, including Romney. All three have also donated to Democratic candidates, however – especially Wasserman Schultz.

(Here is the FEC data on the Falic family showing the contributions to Wasserman Schultz. They maxed out for her, at $2300 each.)

These donations help explain why Wasserman Schultz said, astonishingly, during the recent Democratic Convention that there must be no daylight between the Republican and Democratic Parties on support for Israel–

“We need to make sure that the fact that there has never been and will never be daylight between the two parties, or the support for Israel that we have in the United States– that that is conveyed to Jewish Americans across the country.”

It’s an astonishing statement because politicians are supposed to drive wedges between their party and the other one where differences exist in public opinion. But it’s obviously Not in Wasserman Schultz’s interest to do so here because the party needs to raise money, and she knows that for Israelcentric donors like the Falics, they don’t care which party gets in so long as that party is for rightwing Israel. And there are enough of those Israelcentric donors that if the Dems and Republicans openly debated issues that Americans might just differ on–say, going to war with Iran, or colonizing the West Bank– the Dems would have to move left– against war and against colonies– and lose some of those donors. This is the same reason the National Jewish Democratic Council is positioning Obama to the right of Romney on Israel!

Such contributions also explain the most devastating reporting nugget in Peter Beinart’s book, The Crisis of Zionism. When Netanyahu spoke to the Congress in 2011 and said that Jerusalem is not a settlement, and defied US policy in other ways too, the Congress gave him 29 standing ovations and, according to Beinart, Wasserman Schultz led the cheers. She stood up and clapped her hands over her head to indicate when others were supposed to stand too.

Some day the issue will be politicized. Some day Wasserman Schultz will have to abandon her rightwing pro-Israel friends or lose her job. Right now, no problem!

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

91 Responses

  1. chinese box
    October 1, 2012, 10:08 am

    She’s an embarrassment to the Democratic Party, along with Max Baucus and other shills for big money interests.

    • American
      October 1, 2012, 11:07 am

      She’s more than an embarrassment. She’s a agent for a Foreign country in our government.
      A US representive working for the interest of a foreign country against the interest of this country is treason imo.
      And all the crapola about her or any dems liberal creds don’t cancel out treason.

      We need a new definition of treason added to the laws to reflect current reality of Washington. That would get rid of 80% of congress.

      • David Doppler
        October 1, 2012, 11:32 am

        We don’t need to get rid of 80% of Congress, just demonstrate that members can refuse to stand up and applaud a dangerous clown on cue, can vote against AIPAC, and can decline to hire AIPAC-approved staffers, without being reamed. Arresting, prosecuting and jailing several treasonous leaders would suffice.

        We could start by asking Members what they’ve pledged to AIPAC and publishing those for all to see. Like Barney Frank said, there’s got to be some voices offsetting those that get upset for bucking AIPAC. Voices that are upset when AIPAC gets a rubber stamp.

        Or, alternatively, some much wiser people calling the shots in Israel, not abusing power to influence Washington that shouldn’t be taken for granted. Blundering Bibi is trying too hard to make America do stupid things. Just take the stupidest thing, and arrest the perpetrators – like that clown Clawson – for treason. That should topple Bibi and Avigdor.

      • Philip Munger
        October 1, 2012, 12:52 pm

        We could start by asking Members what they’ve pledged to AIPAC and publishing those for all to see…

        Each candidate for US House or Senate gets a questionnaire from AIPAC. It is fairly detailed. From your answers, they decide how to deal with you.

      • German Lefty
        October 2, 2012, 12:07 pm

        Each candidate for US House or Senate gets a questionnaire from AIPAC. It is fairly detailed. From your answers, they decide how to deal with you.

        Really? What if you don’t fill in the questionnaire? Can you give more details on the content?

      • Jeff D
        October 3, 2012, 6:53 am

        IIRC, I was reading an article about 2-3 years ago (either here on MW or in The Washington Post; don’t remember which) that said that no candidate for Federal office without AIPAC support had beaten an AIPAC devotee since 1974. Since the data should all be accessible, one of my as-I-get-time projects has been trying to nail down whether or not that is in fact accurate. If anyone wants to help out, on a statewide (for Senators) or district level (for Representatives [of whom, these days?]), feel free to get in touch.

      • Kathleen
        October 3, 2012, 8:42 am

        Now that is interesting. Have you ever read the questionnaire? Can we get one and put it up at Mondoweiss? To think Aipac is as powerful as ever after their two top officials were caught red handed accessing U.S. classified intelligence. After Jane “waddling on over to interfere in the Aipac investigation and trial” Harman did her best to shut that trial down seems Aipac has only grown stronger. Do folks think Harman was quietly asked to go?

  2. CitizenC
    October 1, 2012, 10:26 am

    I would like to believe it, but I doubt that the issue will ever be politicized, or that US support for Israel will ever change. Netanyahu’s blatant interference in presidential politics is outrageous, but it strikes me as much a sign of strength as weakness. Liberal columnists are critical, and people like Barney Frank and Henry Waxman, two of Israel’s biggest gophers in Congress, are “shocked, shocked” to find such goings-on. But Netanyahu has gotten all he has asked for from the US on Iran, more than Obama was inclined to give, short of overt war. Despite Bibi’s arrogance, there are no signs of comeuppance, au contraire, Congress upgrades US-Israel security and covert war on Iran to ever-higher levels.

    Meanwhile, switches have been set and trains are running, notably the Saudi/Gulf/Sunni attack on the Shia axis of Iran/Syria/Hizbollah. This is due in the first instance to the fall of the Saddam Hussein regime, and the ascendancy of the Shia in Iraq. This in turn is due largely to Israel and its grip on the US. The neocons’ partners in crime, the gentile radicals like Cheney and Rumsfeld, would not have conceived, let alone pulled off, the 2003 invasion, alone.

    Etc etc back to the 1940s… Israel has been instrumental in the neo-crusader assault on the region by the US, and in medievalizing regional politics, like the Shia/Sunni antagonism. The perception of and opposition to this in the US is utterly marginal, and the present embarrassment over Netanyahu’s antics is just a phase of indigestion which will pass. In my jaded view.

    • Kathleen
      October 3, 2012, 8:46 am

      Keep pushing. Keep contacting your Reps, MS media outlets. Set up a meeting with your Reps when they come home to their districts to discuss the I/P issue and U.S.’s unquestioniing support for Israel no matter what they do/ Demand that MSM outlets cover the I/P issue accurately. Keep dropping off If Americans Only Knew brochures everywhere you go. A shift is taking place and everyone who pushes is a part of that shift and awareness growing about the facts on the ground

  3. seanmcbride
    October 1, 2012, 10:41 am

    One shouldn’t assume that Debbie Wasserman Schultz enthusiastically supports the most right-wing and anti-liberal regime in Israeli history only because of Jewish campaign contributions — she is probably a passionate true believer and dedicated cultist when it comes to Zionism. She has drunk the Kool-Aid. She, like many other “liberal Zionists” in the Democratic Party (Chuck Schumer, Howard Berman, Brad Sherman, Ann Lewis, etc.), has been programmed and conditioned to pledge absolute loyalty to the Israeli government from birth. Her primary mission in life is to turn the United States into a tool of Israel and her narrow ethnic nationalist self-interest.

    How many members of other ethnic groups in the Democratic Party behave this way? None that I can think of offhand. The NJDC (National Jewish Democratic Council) and the RJC (Republican Jewish Coalition) are two arms of the same Israel lobby and instruments of the Israeli government. They are working against the best interests of Americans.

    • Citizen
      October 1, 2012, 11:43 am

      @ Seanmcbride, yes, and real Americans like Sen Webb who are not chicken hawks in high power, even if as lame ducks, are few and far between, yet seem to favor Obama over Mitt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PO3Sj_eTYqc&feature=player_embedded#!

    • German Lefty
      October 2, 2012, 12:13 pm

      @ seanmcbride

      She has drunk the Kool-Aid.
      Thanks for making me look that up: “The phrase suggests that one has mindlessly adopted the dogma of a group or leader without fully understanding the ramifications or implications.”

      • seanmcbride
        October 2, 2012, 12:40 pm

        German Lefty,

        Re: drinking the Kool-Aid:

        Increasingly Zionism — the whole shebang, not just religious Zionism — is beginning to look like a classic cult, and a classic cult of an extreme variety — like Scientology, for instance, but much more dangerous, since it possesses a large arsenal of WMDs which it has threatened to use against the entire world.

        The cult nature of Zionism comes into focus whenever one tries to conduct a rational conversation with a Zionist — many of them are incapable of pursuing a rational discussion and will become violently abusive at the drop of a hat. They display all the signs and symptoms of cult programming and conditioning — especially mental rigidity and inflexibility combined with intense — sometimes hysterical — emotion. (Think of Pamela Geller.)

        If you disagree with a Zionist on anything, most of them will instantly define you as a cosmic enemy and someone who should be hated and destroyed — Amalek. No wonder Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, like most prominent American and European political figures, are afraid to cross the Israel lobby — it’s not worth the hassle. One is dealing with fanatics who think they are G-d’s sole agents on the planet.

        It’s no surprise that mentally challenged Christian Armageddonists — members of a deranged apocalyptic cult — have become the most enthusiastic supporters of Zionism in the United States. And it’s no wonder that so many rational and well-educated Jews are moving away from Zionism.

      • weindeb
        October 2, 2012, 3:23 pm

        Seanmcbride, “Increasingly Zionism — the whole shebang, not just religious Zionism — is beginning to look like a classic cult…” is a sadly unfortunate bit of semantic wisdom. I really find the situation quite hopeless, one locked into an inexorable pattern of unchallengeable, even non-discussable denial, requiring its adherents, even including such as secular Jews like myself, to be willing to be tossed into a vat of shit should they be so unthinkably rash as to point out the naked emperor. It seems to me that it all represents the most profound brain-washing in the history of such process and activity, and thus it, this process, is a major part of the crime, preventing even the thought of a just solution. Hitler and his sundry minions physically murdered millions of Jews, and now we can see, at least in large part, a reactive destruction of the very soul of Judaism and its once all-consuming ethics, as extolled by Micah and his ilk.

      • Mooser
        October 2, 2012, 4:42 pm

        Right you are Weindeb, and you know what? The least we can do, in view of the situation, is not to lie about our “soul of Judaism and its once all-consuming ethics”.
        It’s not a good way to go. Much too likely somebody who hasn’t even got the +15 could do a little hard thinking and go “Say the f–k what? Listen, my Jewish friend, if you had “all consuming ethics” maybe you wouldn’t be in this spot.”
        But hey, you fight it out along any lines you choose. And we’ll hope that soul and all consuming ethics puts in an appearance this time.

      • Mooser
        October 2, 2012, 4:53 pm

        Of course, of the arrogance and all-consuming entitlement which leads a person, at this point, to put in that boilerplate about the Jewish “soul” and “all-consuming ethics” I will say nothing. It would after all, only be my opinion.

      • TonyG
        October 3, 2012, 3:43 pm

        I agree with much of what you say, but I don’t think the identification of Zionism as a cult is accurate. I wish it were! A cult feels the need to defend itself, to seal itself off, from the wider society. Unfortunately, in the United States, the myths of Israeli innocence and virtue dominate our political discourse–Zionists have no trouble finding validation in the wider political culture. They defend themselves vituperatively and fanatically when challenged, but they almost never are challenged. They don’t need to be a cult–they have been successful at defining the parameters of “respectable” opinion on Israel/Palestine to correspond to their own narrow perspective.

      • ThorsteinVeblen2012
        October 2, 2012, 4:29 pm

        “Drinking the Kool-Aid” implies one is doing something unknowingly.

        Debbie Wasserman-Schultz deserves more credit than that. She knows what she is doing.

        She believes the public has “drank the Kool-Aid” and indeed they have.

        She believes her position is to do the bidding of her backers and that the public will support it no matter how extreme. War in Iraq – done. War in Iran – we’ll get it.

    • Kathleen
      October 3, 2012, 8:56 am

      All you have to do is listen to what she says and look at how she votes to know she is a true believer in the Apartheid state of Israel. She supports the criminal stance that Jerusalem is and will always be the capital of Israel. This stance goes right up against International courts decisions and UN resolutions. Schultz, Aipac and any supporters of this stance is blatant defiance of international decisions.

      Schultz is the new Aipac guard in congress and was given this chair position partially to keep the lid on this critical issue. Watch that interview with Soledad O’Brien and Schultz. Schultz comfortably lies over and over again about the vote on the Jerusalem..God issue during the Dem convention during that interview. Although she looks visibly uncomfortable with Soledad’s persistent and spot on questioning about the fairness of that decision Schultz repeatedly spins the 2/3 rds manipulated outcome in a totally deceitful way. She is the new leader of the Aipac guard in the house.

      • German Lefty
        October 3, 2012, 9:38 am

        @ Kathleen:
        Watch that interview with Soledad O’Brien and Schultz.
        I watched the video that you linked. Schultz repeats the same standard lines again and again, like a robot, without answering the questions. I really can’t stand such politicians. Why can’t politicians be sincere and human?

      • seanmcbride
        October 3, 2012, 12:54 pm

        German Lefty wrote:

        I watched the video that you linked. Schultz repeats the same standard lines again and again, like a robot, without answering the questions. I really can’t stand such politicians. Why can’t politicians be sincere and human?

        Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a Ziobot — the victim of cult programming and brainwashing. Rational thinking isn’t her thing. She’s a cheerleader for her narrow and selfish ethnic nationalist interests. The rest of the world doesn’t exist for her.

  4. just
    October 1, 2012, 10:45 am

    Is Boca Raton in DNS’s Congressional district?

  5. seanmcbride
    October 1, 2012, 11:32 am

    Debbie Wasserman Schultz in context:

    Israel lobby > Democrats > Aaron David Miller
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Abraham Foxman
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Al Franken
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Alan Dershowitz
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Alan Grayson
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Alan Solomont
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Alan Solow
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Ann Lewis
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Anthony Weiner
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Barney Frank
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Bernard Nussbaum
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Bernard Schwartz
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Bob Shrum
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Brad Sherman
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Carl Levin
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Chuck Schumer
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Dan Shapiro
    Israel lobby > Democrats > David Axelrod
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Debbie Wasserman Schultz
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Dennis Ross
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Dianne Feinstein
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Ed Koch
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Ed Rendell
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Eliot Engel
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Eliot Spitzer
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Evan Bayh
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Gary Ackerman
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Haim Saban
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Harry Reid
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Henry Waxman
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Howard Berman
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Howard Wolfson
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Ira Forman
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Jamie Rubin
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Jane Harman
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Jeffrey Goldberg
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Joe Lieberman
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Josh Block
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Ken Pollack
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Lanny Davis
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Larry Summers
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Lee Rosenberg
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Leon Fuerth
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Leon Wieseltier
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Leslie Gelb
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Lester Crown
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Madeleine Albright
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Marc Rich
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Mark Penn
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Mark Warner
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Marshall Wittmann
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Martin Indyk
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Martin Peretz
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Michael Milken
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Michael Steinhardt
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Nancy Pelosi
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Nita Lowey
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Penny Pritzker
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Rahm Emanuel
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Richard Cohen
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Richard Haass
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Robert Satloff
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Robert Wexler
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Ronald Lauder
    Israel lobby > Democrats > S. Daniel Abraham
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Sandy Berger
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Shelley Berkley
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Steny Hoyer
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Steve Grossman
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Steven Rattner
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Steven Spielberg
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Stuart Levey
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Susan Estrich
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Thomas Friedman
    Israel lobby > Democrats > Will Marshall

    (Additions and corrections welcome. We really do need an objective and detailed Wikipedia on the Israel lobby — it is an immense and important subject in contemporary American and global politics.)

    • Les
      October 1, 2012, 11:49 am

      Where do NPR, CNN, the NY Times, the New Yorker, etc., fit in this chart? Our media is worth much more money than even moneybags Adelson is willing to cough over.

      • seanmcbride
        October 1, 2012, 1:39 pm

        Les wrote:

        Where do NPR, CNN, the NY Times, the New Yorker, etc., fit in this chart? Our media is worth much more money than even moneybags Adelson is willing to cough over.

        One way to approach this:

        Israel lobby > Charles Krauthammer > Washington Post
        Israel lobby > David Brooks > New York Times
        Israel lobby > Fred Hiatt > Washington Post
        Israel lobby > Mort Zuckerman > New York Daily News
        Israel lobby > Mort Zuckerman > U.S. News & World Report
        Israel lobby > Rupert Murdoch > New York Post
        Israel lobby > Rupert Murdoch > Fox News
        Israel lobby > Sam Zell > Los Angeles Times
        Israel lobby > Thomas Friedman > New York Times
        Israel lobby > William Kristol > Weekly Standard
        Israel lobby > Wolf Blitzer > CNN

        and so on….

      • Nevada Ned
        October 1, 2012, 2:05 pm

        I wouldn’t count the LA Times as firmly in the Israeli camp. The LAT has run opinion pieces that are quite critical of Israel. For example, this one

        http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/15/opinion/la-oe-0915-aslan-palestinian-vote-20110915

      • seanmcbride
        October 1, 2012, 2:47 pm

        Ned Nevada,

        One of the most extraordinary anti-Zionist articles I’ve read during the last few years appeared in the Los Angles Times:

        article; AUTHOR Ben Ehrenreich TITLE Zionism is the problem SUMMARY The Zionist ideal of a Jewish state is keeping Israelis and Palestinians from living in peace. PUBLICATION The Los Angles Times DATE March 15, 2009 URL http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ehrenreich15-2009mar15,0,6684861.story

        But here’s the thing: to discern Sam Zell’s real views and agenda on Israel and Mideast politics one would have to subject the op-ed page of the Los Angeles Times to careful content analysis for the entire era of his ownership.

        How many pro-Israel and neoconservative op-ed articles has the Los Angeles Times published during that period compared to articles like those by Ben Ehrenreich? What are the hard numbers?

        Google or Wolfram Alpha should be able to answer questions like this within a few years.

      • seanmcbride
        October 1, 2012, 2:58 pm

        The opening paragraphs of Ben Ehrenreich’s essay:

        It’s hard to imagine now, but in 1944, six years after Kristallnacht, Lessing J. Rosenwald, president of the American Council for Judaism, felt comfortable equating the Zionist ideal of Jewish statehood with “the concept of a racial state — the Hitlerian concept.” For most of the last century, a principled opposition to Zionism was a mainstream stance within American Judaism.

        Even after the foundation of Israel, anti-Zionism was not a particularly heretical position. Assimilated Reform Jews like Rosenwald believed that Judaism should remain a matter of religious rather than political allegiance; the ultra-Orthodox saw Jewish statehood as an impious attempt to “push the hand of God”; and Marxist Jews — my grandparents among them — tended to see Zionism, and all nationalisms, as a distraction from the more essential struggle between classes.

        To be Jewish, I was raised to believe, meant understanding oneself as a member of a tribe that over and over had been cast out, mistreated, slaughtered. Millenniums of oppression that preceded it did not entitle us to a homeland or a right to self-defense that superseded anyone else’s. If they offered us anything exceptional, it was a perspective on oppression and an obligation born of the prophetic tradition: to act on behalf of the oppressed and to cry out at the oppressor.

        For the last several decades, though, it has been all but impossible to cry out against the Israeli state without being smeared as an anti-Semite, or worse. To question not just Israel’s actions, but the Zionist tenets on which the state is founded, has for too long been regarded an almost unspeakable blasphemy.

        article; AUTHOR Ben Ehrenreich TITLE Zionism is the problem SUMMARY The Zionist ideal of a Jewish state is keeping Israelis and Palestinians from living in peace. PUBLICATION The Los Angles Times DATE March 15, 2009 URL http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ehrenreich15-2009mar15,0,6684861.story

        It is astonishing that this article appeared in the Los Angeles Times in 2009. But there has been no followup since then in the mainstream media — these are forbidden and censored ideas. The Israel lobby must have blown a gasket over this essay and given Sam Zell an earful.

      • ColinWright
        October 1, 2012, 3:04 pm

        Nevada Ned says: “I wouldn’t count the LA Times as firmly in the Israeli camp. The LAT has run opinion pieces that are quite critical of Israel…”

        Yeah. That’s my impression as well. I wind up at the LA Time’s site occasionally, and they’ve struck me as toeing the line somewhat less assiduously than the NYT, for example.

      • seanmcbride
        October 1, 2012, 3:13 pm

        Nevada Ned — sorry for reversing your name. :)

      • Rusty Pipes
        October 1, 2012, 3:40 pm

        Alterman’s list from a decade ago is a good place to start, although there have been a few changes in the players since then. For Public Radio, let’s start with:

        Israel lobby > Terry Gross > NPR

      • Kathleen
        October 2, 2012, 8:03 am

        Robert Siegel, Scott Simon (never challenges the lobby or Israel) has repeated false claims about Iran. Diane Rehm has rolled over. Been a long time since they have spent a whole hour on the illegal settlements etc. In fact don’t think they have ever spent a whole hour on illegal settlements.

        Terri Gross is by far the most obviously biased but Siegel is coming in a close second

      • Kathleen
        October 2, 2012, 8:06 am

        I agree Ned. L.A. Times stepping out of line for awhile

      • Les
        October 2, 2012, 2:49 pm

        Less important than these columnists with their own by-line are the regular and routine stories themselves that never label East Jerusalem as occupied and never mention that those stories are taking place in the West Bank that is occupied by Israel. Add the use of racist images lifted by our media from anti-Semitic depictions of Eastern European Jewish men in World War I era publications, but now dressed for a broader audience as Middle Eastern Mullahs.

      • seanmcbride
        October 1, 2012, 2:15 pm

        This is the most important list to fill in:

        Israel lobby > billionaires > *

        For instance:

        Israel lobby > billionaires > Arnon Milchan
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Aubrey Chernick
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Boris Berezovsky
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Brian Roberts
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Bruce Kovner
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Frank Lowy
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Haim Saban
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Irving Moskowitz
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Larry Silverstein
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Leonid Nevzlin
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Marc Rich
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Michael Bloomberg
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Michael Dell
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Mort Zuckerman
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Penny Pritzker
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Roman Abramovich
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Ronald Lauder
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Ronald Perelman
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Rupert Murdoch
        Israel lobby > billionaires > Sheldon Adelson

        and so on.

        By my rough calculation there at least one hundred billionaires who constitute the backbone of the Israel lobby. They call the shots. They comprise a global network of influence. Collectively they wield unbelievable power in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, Israel, etc. Most of their activities are completely off the radar of the mainstream media (by design and deliberation).

        And this doesn’t even include a much larger number of hectomillionaires, slightly lower down on the wealth and power pyramid.

        For all his wealth, Mitt Romney is a bit player in this world — Sheldon Adelson is worth nearly 100 times as much as Romney. And most members of Congress are mere hirelings — disposable nobodies.

      • piotr
        October 1, 2012, 4:01 pm

        I have serious doubts about this list. I think that some individuals here are not billionaires, and quite a few are not active in Israel lobby.

        Some clearly made the list solely because of Jewish parentage, like Roman Abramovich. Any other reason for his to be on the list?

      • seanmcbride
        October 1, 2012, 4:22 pm

        piotr,

        The list is as good as gold and it is only the tip of the iceberg.

        Did you bother Googling [roman abramovich israel] before leaving your comment? Try Googling each name in combination with “Israel” for all the details.

        Name a single billionaire on the list who “made the list solely because of Jewish parentage” — wrong.

      • ColinWright
        October 1, 2012, 4:23 pm

        piotr says: “…I have serious doubts about this list. I think that some individuals here are not billionaires, and quite a few are not active in Israel lobby.

        Some clearly made the list solely because of Jewish parentage, like Roman Abramovich. Any other reason for his to be on the list?”

        Yeah. I’m reminded of the flurry over the ‘three billion’ billboards, when the owner of the billboard company was labeled a Zionist.

        I pointed out that all the evidence suggested that he was (a) a businessman, and (b) quite uninterested in Israel. He had a long record of giving to charitable causes — none of which were connected to Israel. Furthermore, his company had agreed to put the billboard up in the first place.

      • seanmcbride
        October 1, 2012, 4:40 pm

        Colin,

        You don’t know what you are talking about with regard to that list. Research before you type. There’s this thing called Google.

        One of the billionaires on that list has promised to spend as much as $100 million on the Republican Party during this election. Another billionaire is the lead financier of the Democratic Party. Numerous neocon think tanks and policy centers are funded by the names on that list — and there are dozens of other members of this select group.

        When discussing Israel and the Israel lobby, there is no more important and strategic topic to discuss — they run the show.

      • piotr
        October 1, 2012, 5:13 pm

        Roman Abramovich is most famous for being a governor of Chukotka, and for being a very obedient subject of Vladimir Vladimirovich. Like some other Russian tycoons, he contributes to certain Israeli charities, but nothing that I heard about Roman Arkadyevich sounds like “lobbying for Israel”.

      • seanmcbride
        October 1, 2012, 7:40 pm

        piotr,

        It took me less than five minutes to pull up this info on Abramovich:

        1. He is major funder of Chabad Lubavitch in Russia (and Chabad is a key component of the religious Zionist wing of the global Israel lobby — it engages in extensive lobbying for Israel, including in the US Congress):

        Oligarch Abramovich visits Moscow Chabad
        http://www.jta.org/news/article/2007/11/29/105599/abramovichchabad

        Chabad making more inroads in Russia
        http://www.jta.org/news/article-print/2007/08/31/103521/PenzaFJC?TB_iframe=true&width=750&height=500

        2. Yahoo Answers provided this:

        http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070129074234AAwieJ7

        Of Jewish background, Abramovich is a firm supporter of Jewish causes in Russia and Israeli causes, and has funded several projects in the Abramovich neighbourhood in Jerusalem, and in Tel Aviv. In addition, he is the richest Jewish person in Great Britain.

        3. He is involved in some interesting business disputes:

        NY court rejects Cherney’s plea to move case to Israel
        http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=243682

        Last week, Cherney announced that he would not be testifying at a court case involving Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich and former business partner Boris Berezovsky, currently taking place at the High Court in London.

        Cherney was expected to give evidence last week via video link, as a witness for Berezovsky, who alleges that Abramovich “threatened” and “intimidated” him in order to coerce him into selling his stake in Russian oil company Sibneft. He is seeking £3.5 billion from Abramovich.

        I can see there is much more in this vein as I quickly scan the Google search results.

        Are there any other people on the list whom you think should be crossed off because they are not, according to you, involved in Israeli affairs or lobbying? Which of the names on the list in your opinion play the most important role in the Israel lobby?

        I think a global network of pro-Israel billionaires is the key to understanding much of the behavior of the Israeli government and the Israel lobby. What do you think? Zionism is largely about money — very large sums of it controlled by a very few people. Israel originally was largely a Rothschild product.

      • seanmcbride
        October 1, 2012, 7:45 pm

        piotr,

        It would be interesting to see the guest list, don’t you think?

        “Russian-Jewish billionaire holds massive Passover seder in Eilat”
        http://www.haaretz.com/news/russian-jewish-billionaire-holds-massive-passover-seder-in-eilat-1.273815

        In a Passover Seder fit for a tycoon, Russian-Jewish billionaire and Chelsea Football Club owner Roman Abramovich has booked an entire floor of an Eilat luxury hotel for his guests, a hotel insider has told Haaretz.

        Abramovich’s special requests reportedly included a number of big-screen televisions for his guests to watch Chelsea’s Champions League game against Liverpool Wednesday night.

        A hotel insider reports that Abramovich arrived in the Red Sea resort town by private jet with a large entourage and made his way to the Royal Beach Hotel where he took dozens of rooms for himself and his guests.

      • piotr
        October 1, 2012, 8:56 pm

        seanmcbride,

        what you cite are activities that are not “lobbying”, i.e. trying to influence policies of states. Watching Chelsea against Liverpool is a rather cosmopolitan pasttime, and far from politics and policies. Chabad is perhaps a Zionist Jewish sect, but it is far from uniform. For example, Brooklyn Chabad newspaper mentions nothing about Israel.

        Suing fellow Jewish tycoon (or ex-tycoon by now) does not qualify as “lobby” activity. The closest I could find was a possibility that he contributed to Elad (settlers of City of David and Silvan) because he was present at an Elad function, but he refused to comment.

        The other thing is that when a billionaire contributes a million to some cause it does not truly mean that he supports it.

      • American
        October 1, 2012, 11:18 pm

        Abramovich is one of Russia Jewish mafia. He made his billions in Russian oil the old fashioned mafia way…..by making his competitors disappear, some ‘drown accidentally”, some died in attacks, some just plain disappeared. He went from school drop out and welder laborer to some kind of unspecified work for a car dealer that has some very unusual cash flows. He then went on to both bribing and threatening Russian officials in certain sectors. He got the Russia oil company because he brought in the gangster son of the then Russian president and then just in time to be the only bidder the only other competitor “died” a premature death and the only witness with suddenly killed in a street robbery.
        You don’t think an orphan welder with no money, who isn’t very smart according to those who have dealt with him, in the space of 2 years became the owner of a Russian oil firm without some serious gangster money do you. LOL

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9509947/Berezovsky-v-Abramovich-How-Roman-Abramovich-made-his-fortune.html

      • seanmcbride
        October 2, 2012, 12:28 am

        piotr,

        All the Chabadniks I have encountered have been pro-Israel militants. Some have been Kahanists.

        Chabad reportedly interfaces with Mossad for worldwide operations of various types.

        The Chabad site (chabad.org) turns up 125,000 hits on Israel.

        You wrote: “Brooklyn Chabad newspaper mentions nothing about Israel.” How do you know that? Is this a newspaper you read on a regular basis?

        But tell you what: substitute Bernard Marcus for Roman Abramovich on the list — do you have any problems with the names on that list now? Which ones?

        I think the operations of a global network of pro-Israel billionaires are the key to understanding much of the behavior of the Israeli government and the Israel lobby. What do you think? The general outlines of this power relationship were established by the Rothschilds’ early sponsorship of the Zionist project — little has really changed over the years.

      • ColinWright
        October 2, 2012, 12:56 am

        To seanmcbride: ‘…Colin,

        You don’t know what you are talking about with regard to that list. Research before you type. There’s this thing called Google…’

        I didn’t make any comment about your list: piotr seems to be handling that. I did note that apparently unsupported claims that so and so is a Zionist have been made before.

      • Kathleen
        October 2, 2012, 7:58 am

        Do you think some of Abramovich’s etc money makes it through into the Romney election coffers? Into Rove’s Republican super pac ?

      • seanmcbride
        October 2, 2012, 10:50 am

        Kathleen wrote:

        Do you think some of Abramovich’s etc money makes it through into the Romney election coffers? Into Rove’s Republican super pac ?

        It is interesting to speculate on scenarios like that. Sometimes the uppermost reaches of the Zionist establishment, which are dominated and controlled by billionaires with often shady backgrounds, have the look and feel of a sophisticated international organized crime network which is moving pieces in a single coordinated strategy all over the globe (certainly not just in the United States).

        It wouldn’t be surprising to learn that some of these billionaires have created a special secret account for funding all kinds of operations worldwide, many of them covert. Perhaps Mossad is their private police force.

        In any case, what we already know about *open* funding of the Republican and Democratic Parties by Zionist oligarchs and plutocrats is extremely scandalous. This is not a subject that the mainstream media choose to address, however, since they themselves are key components of the Zionist establishment.

      • piotr
        October 2, 2012, 11:35 am

        I read the newspaper once online. The lack of any word about Israel was a bit strange for a Jewish publication. Local news were from Crown Heights, so I thought it is “Chabadnik”.

        Some Jewish communities in NYC area are anti-Zionist, e.g. Satmars, so it could be a newspaper of anti-Zionists, but it seemed to me that it was just avoiding an issue that is controversial among NYC hassidim.

        Bernad Marcus: philantropy is not particularly Jewish, political donations modest for a billionaire, ca. 120k per year, Republican. Donated to Pawlenty for President, big donations to national Republican committees. I would conclude that while not a leader, he is a member of the Lobby.

      • seanmcbride
        October 2, 2012, 12:09 pm

        piotr,

        Bernad Marcus: philantropy is not particularly Jewish, political donations modest for a billionaire, ca. 120k per year, Republican. Donated to Pawlenty for President, big donations to national Republican committees. I would conclude that while not a leader, he is a member of the Lobby.

        Here is a list of the board of directors of the RJC (Republican Jewish Coalition) from 2007:

        Leonard Abramson, Sheldon G. Adelson, Jeffrey Altman, Wayne Berman, Ken Bialkin, Ronald H. Bloom, Elliott Broidy, Matthew Brooks, Bradley Cohen, Charles M. Diker, Stephen Distler, Lewis M. Eisenberg, Michael David Epstein, David M. Flaum, Ari Fleischer, Richard J. Fox, David Frum, Joel Geiderman, Tony Gelbart, Marc Goldman, Cheryl Halpern, Joel Hoppenstein, Howard Jonas, Sheldon Kamins, George Klein, Eliot Lauer, Laurence Carroll Leeds, Larry Levine, Mark Lezell, Marc Lipschultz, Earle I. Mack, Bernard Marcus, Jeffrey Marcus, Ken Mehlman, Larry A. Mizel, Morris Offit, Ronald Plotkin, Marvin Pomerantz, J. Philip Rosen, Lindsay Rosenwald, Alan Sager, Richard Sambol, Leonard Sands, Fred Sands, Jay Schottenstein, Martin Selig, Mel Sembler, Florence Shapiro, Mark Siegel, Ned L. Siegel, Walter Stern, Myles Tanenbaum, Allen Tessler, James Tisch, Ronald Weiser, Fred Zeidman

        http://www.nndb.com/org/258/000118901/

        You will notice that Bernard Marcus, the billionaire owner of Home Depot, is a board member, along with multibillionaire Sheldon Adelson and some other interesting people who have often been discussed on Mondoweiss. Marcus is a billionare Likud Zionist.

        And Marcus is still an RJC board member as of October 2012:

        http://www.rjchq.org/category/board-of-directors/

      • seanmcbride
        October 2, 2012, 12:19 pm

        piotr,

        I read the newspaper once online. The lack of any word about Israel was a bit strange for a Jewish publication. Local news were from Crown Heights, so I thought it is “Chabadnik”.

        Since you read the newspaper “online” you should be able to provide a URL for it. Let’s have a look. Every Chabadnik I have ever encountered has been a militant religious Zionist — they are obsessed with Israel.

        By the way, if you care to share: Nation(s) of citizenship? Ethnicity? Religious upbringing? Current religion? Political orientation and affiliations? Cultural biases?

        Obviously you are not a native English speaker.

    • LanceThruster
      October 1, 2012, 12:03 pm

      Would you put Barbara Boxer in this list?

      • lysias
        October 1, 2012, 12:27 pm

        For some reason, Boxer was one of the few senators (I think she may have been the only Democrat) who didn’t vote in that roll call for the pro-Israel resolution that passed the Senate 90-1 a week or two ago.

      • ColinWright
        October 1, 2012, 4:18 pm

        lysias says: “…For some reason, Boxer was one of the few senators (I think she may have been the only Democrat) who didn’t vote in that roll call for the pro-Israel resolution that passed the Senate 90-1 a week or two ago…”

        Good sign. This is the third time in recent memory ol’ weathervane Barb has pointed to stormy weather ahead for Eretz Israel.

      • Kathleen
        October 1, 2012, 12:28 pm

        She seems more reasonable but her votes line up with Israel’s and the Israel lobby agenda

      • seanmcbride
        October 1, 2012, 1:25 pm

        According to the NJDC, Barbara Boxer is “a stalwart ally of Israel”:

        http://www.njdc.org/blog/post/boxerfactsheetblog102710

        But she also recently criticized Netanyahu for his meddling in American politics.

        But, overall, yeah, with a few qualifications:

        Israel lobby > Democrats > Barbara Boxer

        Again, we need to be able organize and access all the available information about the Israel lobby (and there is a ton of it within easy reach from Google) within a Wikipedia framework. Facts, data, quotes, cites, timelines, lists, etc. regarding people, organizations, events, etc. Connect the dots.

      • seanmcbride
        October 1, 2012, 1:31 pm

        Why hasn’t the Democratic Party risen up as one and slapped down Netanyahu for his crude meddling in American politics on behalf of Mitt Romney and the Republicans?

        The answer is simple: quite a few Democrats care more about Israel (even under extreme right-wing and anti-liberal regimes) than they care about Barack Obama, the Democratic Party, liberalism or their fellow Americans. They are by any reasonable definition of the term Israel Firsters and de facto agents and operatives of the Israeli government.

        Many of these Israel First Democrats played a key role in working with neoconservatives in the Republican Party to enable the Iraq War.

      • Kathleen
        October 2, 2012, 7:51 am

        Going on for decades. Tiny bits of movement. In Ohio Kucinich never stayed in line. Senator Sherrod Brown always stays in the I lobby line. Oops Kucinich out. Dedistricting. Two amazing Dem candidates Kaptur and Kucinich went up against one another. Not sure where Kaptur falls on anti Palestinian and go get Iran (often put up by Ros Lehtinen and her I lobby team) legislation. But Kaptur won

      • Jeff D
        October 3, 2012, 7:12 am

        Just as a single shareholder can bring suit and force investigations into corporations (at least under the old rules), a single citizen should be able to do so regarding the loyalty or primary benefactor of a United States legislator.

        Granted, the window for enacting legislation like this closed somewhere in the 1950s, but a legislator or his/her staff members supporting the policies or leadership of a foreign country whose policies and actions can, on the preponderance of the evidence, be shown to have harmed United States citizens or interests in the past, should be prosecuted, very publicly, as high treason.

        Thought experiment for you folks who are saying, “But this is Israel we’re talking about!” Replace the name Israel with Italy, China or Venezuela and see if you feel the same way about it. “American” politicians aren’t obeisant to Zionist extremists for votes; it’s the dollars that “just happen” to be concentrated in so very few non-Zionist hands.

        Would we have allowed the IRA or the Khmer Rouge to commit this kind of lèse-majesté on a daily basis that we now celebrate from the sons of the Irgun?

      • LanceThruster
        October 3, 2012, 2:14 pm

        Thank you for the additional detail as there are areas where I felt she went beyond what most rank and file Dems were willing to for progressive causes, but still held back where she could take that same position of principle regarding Israel.

        I so want Israel’s saber rattling against Iran to backfire as they have to answer for their own nukes and failure to sign on to the NNPT. Technically, that means we are not allowed to funnel gobs of cash their way (boo-effing-hoo!).

    • Kathleen
      October 2, 2012, 8:11 am

      Basically in congress you might as well line up 99% of congressional members. Kerry, Clinton (when she was there) Biden (when he was there). Almost all congressional members have been in line for voting for what ever the I lobby demands or writes when it comes to anti Palestinian legislation, pro Israel, pro attack Iran etc etc.

      Might want to think about creating a very short list of the few who have stood up against the I lobby. Kucinich, Moran, a few more but not many. Are we aware of anyone in the Senate who has ever done so? No one comes to mind

    • German Lefty
      October 2, 2012, 12:22 pm

      @ seanmcbride:

      Alan Grayson belongs to the Israel lobby? Really? I remember one of his campaign ads in which he was endorsed by Oliver Stone. When Oliver Stone was on Real Time with Bill Maher, he spoke out against the occupation and explained the situation of the Palestinians. This prompted Bill Maher to call him “anti-Israel”.

      • seanmcbride
        October 2, 2012, 12:54 pm

        German Lefty,

        What do you make of this?

        article; AUTHOR Max Blumenthal TITLE Progressive Hero Alan Grayson’s Secret Life As An AIPAC Tool DATE December 2, 2009 URL http://maxblumenthal.com/2009/12/progressive-hero-alan-graysons-secret-life-as-an-aipac-tool/

        Grayson’s January 8th statement explaining his vote in favor of Israel’s assault on the Gaza Strip read like a mimeograph of those released by other AIPAC-friendly members of Congress. However, its introductory line stood out: “Congressman Alan Grayson, one of three incoming Jewish members of Congress, issued the following statement on the situation in Gaza.”

        Why did Grayson feel compelled to advertise his religion in a statement in favor of a war that would ultimately kill 1400 people, including at least 400 women and children.

        See the rest of the article for more and Google [alan grayson israel].

        Regarding Israel, Bill Maher has totally drunk the Kool-Aid — he is a militant Zionist. He is as irrational as the Christian and Muslim religionists he batters on a regular basis. Not a very developed person at all.

        Maher has also swallowed the nonsensical 9/11 official story hook, line and sinker — many high-level American government officials are too smart and well-informed about 9/11 to do that. Clearly Maher is terrified about where an honest investigation into 9/11 might lead.

        I appreciate Maher’s sharp wit and humor, but his “independent thinking” and “skepticism” are highly circumscribed by his cult Zionist beliefs. Ethnic and religious cultism tend to cripple the mind.

      • German Lefty
        October 2, 2012, 1:30 pm

        @ seanmcbride:
        Clearly Maher is terrified about where an honest investigation into 9/11 might lead.
        In your opinion, where would an honest investigation lead to?

      • seanmcbride
        October 2, 2012, 2:34 pm

        German Lefty,

        In your opinion, where would an honest investigation lead to?

        Anywhere from monumental incompetence, to passively permitting it to happen, to actively managing the entire operation from the start.

        Worst-case scenario: inside job and false flag op — not by the American government as a whole, but by a small cabal of traitors at high levels of the military-industrial complex who were eager to set the neoconservative Global War on Terror and Clash of Civilizations in motion.

        Mondoweiss frowns on 9/11 discussions, and I understand why — they could easily take over and cannibalize the entire Mondoweiss site — so I will leave it at that. Try reviewing all the comments made by 9/11 skeptics at Patriots Question 9/11:

        http://patriotsquestion911.com/

        Some credible government insiders claim to KNOW that 9/11 was an inside job and false flag op. The American mainstream media shut down all open discussion and investigations into 9/11 years ago once they realized that the controversy was getting out of hand. The entire topic is now close to forbidden in American politics — it is that volatile.

        Just recently a prominent neocon at WINEP (a leading organ of the Israel lobby) suggested that a false flag op was required to get an American war against Iran underway. The neocons don’t even try to disguise what they are all about.

        Few Americans realize that the World Trade Center bombing of 1993 was an FBI op — the US government was in control of the terrorist cell that did the deed all along. Osama bin Laden was on the US government payroll right up until 9/11.

      • LanceThruster
        October 3, 2012, 2:10 pm

        I remember cringing hearing Alan Grayson on radio mouthing the standard talking points on Israel as there was so much else about him I liked in regards to taking GOP bullies to task.

        It’s one of the very unfortunate ways our leadership is compromised in that even when telling the truth, they can only tell pieces of it as certain areas are off-limits, lest they sink their funding and election/reelection chances.

      • Kathleen
        October 6, 2012, 2:22 pm

        Really like Grayson on so many issues like so many so called liberal Dems who take a hard turn right (wrong) on the I/P conflict and Iran. Grayson’s votes line up with the I lobby. But then so do 99% of our Congressional Reps votes.

  6. lysias
    October 1, 2012, 12:05 pm

    Speaking of Florida politics, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen makes a brief appearance and her husband Dexter Lehtinen plays a more prominent role in Evan Wright’s How to Get Away with Murder in America: Drug Lords, Dirty Pols, Obsessed Cops, and the Quiet Man Who Became the CIA’s Master Killer. Dexter Lehtinen, U.S. Attorney (i.e., chief federal prosecutor) in Miami, made possible his wife’s election to her House seat by prosecuting the person favored to win the seat, Hialeah mayor Raul Martinez, when his wife was planning to run in a special election for the House seat of ailing Claude Pepper. To back up the charges against Martinez, Lehtinen sought the testimony of murderous mob kingpin Albert San Pedro. In return, San Pedro received an unusually broad grant of immunity for all his crimes (which included several murders).

    • seanmcbride
      October 1, 2012, 2:01 pm

      lysias,

      I just read the ebook version of this document on my Kindle — a real eye-opener. The mainstream media won’t dare to touch this investigative research, of course — we know that.

  7. Kathleen
    October 1, 2012, 12:25 pm

    Soledad Obrien did an incredible job of clearly exposing where Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s allegiances are committed to. Israel first. “DNC Chair Torn Apart Over Removal of Jerusalem from Platform” You tube Soledad cleaned Wasserman Schultz’s clock

    Schultz called the dissent on the Dem floor “a small amount of objection” Wasserman Schultz goes on and on about Obama supporting Jerusalem being the unquestionable capital of Israel.

  8. Ellen
    October 1, 2012, 1:01 pm

    Taking a step back, the issue is much bigger than the likes of Schultz. Much bigger than Zionist shills. There is a huge enterprise to protect and feed off the back of American taxpayers. Truth be told, this is not sustainable for Israel.

    For those interested in the shocking data of the vast amounts of “aid” sent to Israel relative to any country on the planet, just download it here

    https://explore.data.gov/Foreign-Commerce-and-Aid/Foreign-Assistance-Dashboard/btdv-vh8d

    Sum of FY 2013 Request Foreign Military Financing DOS and USAID Israel Stabilization Operations and Security Sector Reform Peace and Security $3,100,000,000.00
    Sum of FY 2012 Actual Base Foreign Military Financing DOS and USAID Israel Stabilization Operations and Security Sector Reform Peace and Security $3,075,000,000.00
    Sum of FY 2012 Request Foreign Military Financing – OCO DOS and USAID Israel Stabilization Operations and Security Sector Reform Peace and Security $3,075,000,000.00

    That “aid” under the rubric of Peace and Security goes primarily into arms industry shared by few hands on both sides of the Atlantic.

    • CitizenC
      October 1, 2012, 3:44 pm

      Those sums are small change to the US MIC and they are offered at favorable terms. Israel is allowed to buy its products, and when it buys US products, the sources are often US branches of Israeli companies, among other concessions and tricks.

  9. radii
    October 1, 2012, 1:08 pm

    DWS smiles a lot and gives puppy-dog-eyes … she must be nice … move along, nothing to see here

  10. Denis
    October 1, 2012, 2:47 pm

    Great post; great comments.

    I think this pretty well points out that it is a mistake to place Democrats on one side of the P/I problem and Republicans on the other. Moving Congress away from its Israeli sycophancy and dependency on shekels is going to require the public to see that this is not a D/R issue but a US/Israel issue. IMO, that US/I split in Congress is much more important, and much more deadly, than the party split.

    Sean, it would also be helpful to see the inverse of your analysis: which politicians, particularly Republicans, are objective and neutral regarding Israel? What journalists are? Getting support to these folks is more important than tearing down the Israel-firsters.

    I recall that someone in another MW thread linked to a FP piece by Mark Perry. Perry quoted a US general as saying [paraphrasing from memory here] that the US military was proud to support Israel when it was seen as a refuge for Jews, but the tide is turning now that it is seen as the road to WWIII. These military guys are not taking AIPAC money to keep their jobs. Once the country sees what they are seeing, AIPAC is toast. Who are the politicians (and journalists) who are on this trajectory already?

    • seanmcbride
      October 1, 2012, 4:05 pm

      Denis wrote:

      Sean, it would also be helpful to see the inverse of your analysis: which politicians, particularly Republicans, are objective and neutral regarding Israel? What journalists are? Getting support to these folks is more important than tearing down the Israel-firsters.

      Do you mean something like this?

      Israel lobby > critics > Andrew Bacevich
      Israel lobby > critics > Andrew Sullivan
      Israel lobby > critics > Anthony Zinni
      Israel lobby > critics > Bernard Avishai
      Israel lobby > critics > Brent Scowcroft
      Israel lobby > critics > Chuck Hagel
      Israel lobby > critics > Colin Powell
      Israel lobby > critics > George H.W. Bush
      Israel lobby > critics > Glenn Greenwald
      Israel lobby > critics > James Baker
      Israel lobby > critics > Jim Moran
      Israel lobby > critics > Jim Webb
      Israel lobby > critics > Joel Kovel
      Israel lobby > critics > John Mearsheimer
      Israel lobby > critics > Justin Raimondo
      Israel lobby > critics > Marc Ellis
      Israel lobby > critics > Mark Perry
      Israel lobby > critics > Martin Dempsey
      Israel lobby > critics > Michael Lind
      Israel lobby > critics > Pat Buchanan
      Israel lobby > critics > Pat Lang
      Israel lobby > critics > Paul Craig Roberts
      Israel lobby > critics > Philip Giraldi
      Israel lobby > critics > Philip Weiss
      Israel lobby > critics > Rand Paul
      Israel lobby > critics > Ray McGovern
      Israel lobby > critics > Ron Paul
      Israel lobby > critics > Scott McConnell
      Israel lobby > critics > Stephen Sniegoski
      Israel lobby > critics > Stephen Walt
      Israel lobby > critics > Zbigniew Brzezinski

      But do you notice something interesting? There are no billionaires, mainstream media owners or Wall Street leaders on the list. The current power structure is heavily stacked against critics of Israel and the Israel lobby. They have been effectively marginalized by the lobby.

      • Denis
        October 1, 2012, 11:41 pm

        You’re a wizard, Sean. I started a database months ago, and you just about tripled it. Thanks.

      • seanmcbride
        October 3, 2012, 11:42 am

        Denis,

        You’re a wizard, Sean. I started a database months ago, and you just about tripled it. Thanks.

        Let’s flesh out this template a bit more:

        Israel lobby > critics > *

        Israel lobby > critics > Alan Hart
        Israel lobby > critics > Alan Sabrosky
        Israel lobby > critics > Anthony Cordesman
        Israel lobby > critics > Arnaud de Borchgrave
        Israel lobby > critics > Bill Christison
        Israel lobby > critics > Bill Clinton
        Israel lobby > critics > Chas Freeman
        Israel lobby > critics > Chris Hedges
        Israel lobby > critics > David Petraeus
        Israel lobby > critics > Dennis Kucinich
        Israel lobby > critics > Grant Smith
        Israel lobby > critics > James Abourezk
        Israel lobby > critics > James Petras
        Israel lobby > critics > Jeff Gates
        Israel lobby > critics > Jimmy Carter
        Israel lobby > critics > Karen Kwiatkowski
        Israel lobby > critics > Kathleen Christison
        Israel lobby > critics > Lawrence Wilkerson
        Israel lobby > critics > M.J. Rosenberg
        Israel lobby > critics > Michael Scheuer
        Israel lobby > critics > Paul Findley
        Israel lobby > critics > Paul Pillar
        Israel lobby > critics > Ralph Nader
        Israel lobby > critics > Richard Sale
        Israel lobby > critics > Samantha Power
        Israel lobby > critics > Scott Ritter
        Israel lobby > critics > Steve Clemons
        Israel lobby > critics > Tony Judt
        Israel lobby > critics > Wayne Madsen
        Israel lobby > critics > Wesley Clark

      • German Lefty
        October 3, 2012, 12:24 pm

        @ seanmcbride
        Can you or anyone else tell me if Alan Hart is Jewish?
        Can we add Jill Stein to the list?

        You’re a wizard, Sean.
        Yes, let’s burn him at the stake.

      • seanmcbride
        October 3, 2012, 12:43 pm

        German Lefty,

        I am fairly certain that Alan Hart is Jewish, based on vague recollections. And yes: by all means add Jill Stein to the list.

        One could also fill in this template:

        Israel lobby > Jewish critics > *

        It would be a very long list indeed, comprising some of the best Jewish minds on the planet.

        At some point during my investigations into Mideast politics I began to realize that the best Jewish minds were almost uniformly critical of Zionism or outright anti-Zionists — and that nearly all the passionate Zionists were dullards. One sees abundant evidence of this state of affairs in the Mondoweiss archives.

        It can’t be emphasized too strongly: ethnic and religious nationalism tends to attract weak minds. Even strong minds that get sucked into that cult vortex tend to lose IQ points at an alarming rate.

  11. eGuard
    October 1, 2012, 4:26 pm

    The note that Peter Beinart writes a point does not absolve him of being a Zionist.

  12. piotr
    October 1, 2012, 5:01 pm

    Can one be a worse shill for GoI than Debbie Wasserman Schultz? Sadly, yes.

    Karen Harrington seems destined to be her GOP opponent in November (lucky Karen: one contender in the GOP primary for that congressional seat literally shot himself, apparently in an attempt to cut an appealing figure for the gun lobby, luckily only a small part of his finger was lost). Karen’s website has a nice entry “Pres. Obama is ‘No’ Friend of Israel”, among Obama’s crimes is his advocacy of a two state solution and the fact that he has met President of Egypt. Another entry says “Obama/Wasserman Schultz Shamelessly Pander to Hispanics”. Another entry is an endorsement by Michelle Bachman.

    “Once the country sees what they are seeing, AIPAC is toast”. One should hope.

  13. Rusty Pipes
    October 1, 2012, 6:28 pm

    Lose her job? Obama pushed Howard Dean out of this job and shoehorned DWS in because he wanted the DNC to return to its older style of fundraising. Even though the DNC has retained some of the fundraising strategy of appealing to smaller donors through online blitzes, it has retrenched from Dean’s “50 State Strategy” and refocused on raising from major donors and safe interests and organizations and pouring funds into safe districts and safe candidates.

    Grassroots activists had pushed hard for Dean to get chosen as chair in 2005 because the 50 State Strategy raised the brand of the Democratic Party, empowered activists to participate in their communities and helped get more progressive Democratic candidates on the ballot. The 50 State Strategy was a crucial part of the Democrats’ retaking the House in 2006 and laid the groundwork for the DNC’s GOTV efforts in 2008 that helped bring Obama into office.

    Obama has repaid all of this hard work and party infrastructure building by ditching Dean, taking the base for granted, distancing himself from the Democratic Party brand, ignoring crucial Democratic constituencies and pandering to center-right donors and interests. He made little use of the Democratically-controlled congress he inherited and he lost them in 2010.

    Wasserman Schultz has delivered according to the old model. The DLC may be a shell of its former self, but with DWS in charge, the DNC has become the DLC-lite. Although the grassroots was willing to take on the DLC, unless it is willing to name the Israel Lobby, it will not be able to tackle a key problem of major donor over small donor/grassroots volunteer interests in the Democratic Party’s decision-making process (as was obvious in the platform vote at the convention).

  14. DICKERSON3870
    October 2, 2012, 1:02 am

    RE: “Such contributions also explain the most devastating reporting nugget in Peter Beinart’s book, The Crisis of Zionism. When Netanyahu spoke to the Congress in 2011 and said that Jerusalem is not a settlement, and defied US policy in other ways too, the Congress gave him 29 standing ovations and, according to Beinart, Wasserman Schultz led the cheers.” ~ Weiss

    SEE: “Bibi and the Yo-Yos”, by Uri Avnery, Antiwar.com, 05/26/11:

    [EXCERPT] It was all rather disgusting.
    There they were, the members of the highest legislative bodies of the world’s only superpower, flying up and down like so many yo-yos, applauding wildly, every few minutes or seconds, the most outrageous lies and distortions of Binyamin Netanyahu.

    It was worse than the Syrian parliament during a speech by Bashar Assad, where anyone not applauding could find himself in prison. Or Stalin’s Supreme Soviet, when showing less than sufficient respect could have meant death.
    What the American Senators and Congressmen feared was a fate worse than death. Anyone remaining seated or not applauding wildly enough could have been caught on camera – and that amounts to political suicide. It was enough for one single congressman to rise and applaud, and all the others had to follow suit. Who would dare not to?
    The sight of these hundreds of parliamentarians jumping up and clapping their hands, again and again and again and again, with the Leader graciously acknowledging with a movement of his hand, was reminiscent of other regimes. Only this time it was not the local dictator who compelled this adulation, but a foreign one.
    The most depressing part of it was that there was not a single lawmaker – Republican or Democrat – who dared to resist. When I was a 9 year old boy in Germany, I dared to leave my right arm hanging by my side when all my schoolmates raised theirs in the Nazi salute and sang Hitler’s anthem. Is there no one in Washington DC who has that simple courage? Is it really Washington IOT – Israel Occupied Territory – as the anti-Semites assert? . . .

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://original.antiwar.com/avnery/2011/05/25/bibi-and-the-yo-yos/

    • DICKERSON3870
      October 2, 2012, 1:10 am

      P.S. RE: “These donations help explain why Wasserman Schultz said, astonishingly, during the recent Democratic Convention that there must be no daylight between the Republican and Democratic Parties on support for Israel . . .” ~ Weiss

      A RELEVANT QUOTATION: “You can’t use tact with a Congressman! A Congressman is a hog! You must take a stick and hit him on the snout!” ~ From ‘The Education of Henry Adams’, By Henry Brooks Adams (American journalist, historian, academic and novelist, 1838-1918)

      The Education of Henry Adams by Henry Adams – http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2044
      The Education of Henry Adams: An Autobiography (Google eBook) – http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Education_of_Henry_Adams.html?id=-ThaAAAAMAAJ

      P.S. Henry Brooks Adams’ paternal grandfather was Pres. John Quincy Adams, and his great grandfather was Pres. John Adams.

    • ColinWright
      October 2, 2012, 2:48 am

      “…It was all rather disgusting.
      There they were, the members of the highest legislative bodies of the world’s only superpower, flying up and down like so many yo-yos, applauding wildly, every few minutes or seconds…”

      Well, that was Israel’s at-the-gates-of-Stalingrad moment. It’s just over four months later — and my, how things have already changed. That’s going to stand as a ‘remember when’ moment for a lot of old Zionists twenty years from now.

  15. Kathleen
    October 2, 2012, 8:21 am

    Unable to link but folks should really go listen to Soledad O’Brien just take every argument of Schultz’s about the Jerusalem/God vote on the Dem convention floor and rip the lies to shreds. Debbie calls the dissent on the floor “a small amount of objection” O’Brien just takes her lies down. Saying I listened to the vote hundreds of times. It was even. And the screen told the chair of the convention to say 2/3rds. That interview tells a very clear story and it is not a good story in any way shape or form.

    Go google “DNC Chair Torn Apart Over Removal of Jerusalem From Platform” Schultz repeats over and over again that Obama supports Jerusalem as the present and forever capital of Israel. All of Jerusalem. Soledad O’brien rips Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s lies about the vote on the floor into shreds. Would really appreciate if someone would link to that on you tube for me. So appreciate it

    • American
      October 2, 2012, 9:04 am

      link to Soledad O’Brien —-Debbie Wasserman

    • John Smithson
      October 2, 2012, 10:02 am
    • Rusty Pipes
      October 2, 2012, 11:41 am

      DWS comes across as defensive and not reality-based on that show. However the context of that panel with Soledad O’Brien, gives the impression less of DWS’s lies being ripped to shreds than of a selection of Zionist spokespeople from right to center-left debating about whether the Democratic convention delegates were Zionist enough to be trustworthy. That’s how the issue was framed for the broad American public. There was no one representing the perspective of the delegates on the floor who voted against the platform amendments.

Leave a Reply