Multiple reports say Chuck Hagel to be Defense Secretary nominee

Israel/PalestineUS Politics
on 165 Comments
Chuck Hagel
Chuck Hagel

President Obama is expected to pick former Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel as his new Secretary of Defense on Monday, setting up a battle between the left and right flanks of the Israel lobby and between realist supporters of Hagel and his neoconservative detractors. 

Foreign Policy‘s Josh Rogin has the story:

White House officials and sources close to Hagel declined to confirm to The Cable that Hagel is the president’s choice to be the replace Leon Panetta at the helm of the Pentagon, but several sources close to the process said have told The Cable that the White House and Hagel have been in touch on a regular basis and that Hagel is indeed the expected pick. Decisions about the timing and logistics of the announcement are being finalized now.

The Cable had previously confirmed that Hagel successfully complete the vetting process, as have Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter and former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy.

But other White House observers cast doubt on the Hagel pick earlier today. Speaking on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” show, reporter Chuck Todd said that while Obama was in love with the idea of picking Hagel, the administration was going to yank the former senator from contention later today. Watch Todd’s prediction:

We’ll have to wait and see who is right: Rogin or Todd. On the same show, as Think Progress notes, the panel derided the campaign against Hagel as “unbelievable,” “disgusting” and “disgraceful.”

The Daily Beast’s Eli Lake also reports that Hagel is Obama’s pick. 

Update: After his morning appearance casting doubt on the Hagel nomination, Todd reports for NBC that “key special-interest groups involved in national security issues say they have been told to be prepared for a Chuck Hagel nomination for Defense Secretary, either as early as Monday or perhaps more likely Tuesday of next week.

Meanwhile, Rogin also notes another interesting tidbit related to the Hagel pick: the leader of the Log Cabin Republicans, which took out a full-page ad in the New York Times opposing Hagel, has resigned. The Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald had raised questions about where the Log Cabin Republican group, a pro-gay conservative organization, got the money for the ad. Greenwald questioned whether advocates for Israel or neoconservatives had paid for the New York Times ad.

And in other Hagel news, Jewish Voice for Peace has endorsed the potential pick. From an e-mail they sent out to supporters:

America’s Israel Lobby has unleashed a vicious smear campaign against former U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel, an independent thinker who President Obama wants for Secretary of Defense.

Unless we act now to counter thousands of emails that Israel lobby groups have already sent to the White House, President Obama may yield to pressure, sending the message that the Israel Lobby has veto power over all key positions in the Administration.

Sign the petition now and send to everyone you know.

Chuck Hagel is an old-school conservative Republican, unlikely to make major changes in foreign policy. But he is being targeted because he is reluctant to go to war with Iran, believes we should keep the door open to dialogue with groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, and doesn’t kowtow to AIPAC.

His conservative track record means he may not be everyone’s top pick, but this battle is much bigger than Chuck Hagel.
 

165 Responses

  1. seanmcbride
    January 4, 2013, 3:18 pm

    If this appointment comes to pass, we are on the verge of entering a new era of American Mideast policy — one triggered by the behavior of Benjamin Netanyahu, Likud Zionists, neoconservatives and Jewish settlers in the occupied territories.

    • Krauss
      January 4, 2013, 4:57 pm

      Time for a top 25 list, Sean? ;)

    • AbeBird
      January 5, 2013, 11:24 am

      He will be trained quickly to work respectfully with Israel and Netanyahu …. If Congress approves to Obama this nomination ….

      • James Canning
        January 5, 2013, 1:52 pm

        Of course Hagel would be respectful, in dealing with Israel (and Netanyahu, if he remains PM). This is essential. Even if Hagel tells Israel it must get out of the West Bank.

      • Kathleen
        January 6, 2013, 3:56 pm

        James great to read you over here from Race for Iran. Got a great question and comment in about Hagel’s nomination with James Kitfield on Washington Journal this morning. Directed folks to Race for Iran. Have plugged Mondoweiss on C Span a great deal also. Great clear answer from Kitfield. Although he did refer to Iran’s nuclear program as a nuclear weapons program. And often and purposeful mistake by many. He was also repeating the Obama directed comments about Syria. He said Hagel will more than likely make it through the nomination process and came right out and said that Israel and the I lobby were the ones standing in his way. Came right out and said it

      • James Canning
        January 9, 2013, 7:54 pm

        Thanks, Kathleen. Keep up the great work!

    • hophmi
      January 5, 2013, 8:17 pm

      Which is what? You act like there’s never been a paleoconservative in government before. He’s the Secretary of Defense, not the Secretary of State. I predict no meaningful change in US policy toward Israel.

      • gingershot
        January 6, 2013, 12:03 pm

        ‘I predict no meaningful change in US policy toward Israel.’

        You wish – is that why every neocon on earth is soiling their pants, because ‘there will be no war on Iran for Israel, without which, Israeli Apartheid is LOST’?

        Your feigned nonchalance is as amusing as it is so revealing of your desperation

      • hophmi
        January 6, 2013, 3:21 pm

        No, I’ve maintained from the beginning that I think Hagel’s influence on the US-Israel relationship will be fairly muted. My position on him is based in some part on his Israel-related comments (your support of him seems to be wholly based on them), but more based on his anti-gay, anti-climate change comments, the tone of his public statements, and his party affiliation. You are locked in the same trap as the neocons are. The neocons think every person who is not to the right on Israel is the end of the world. You are the flipside of that equation; you think anyone in the center-left on Israel is the messiah-incarnate. Both of you share an obsession with Israel, and you both deserve one another.

      • Annie Robbins
        January 6, 2013, 4:18 pm

        Both of you share an obsession with Israel

        oh come on hophmi, pot calling kettle black. you’ve been around here long enough we all know defending israel is not some happenstance thing for you.

        is anti-gay, anti-climate change comments, the tone of his public statements, and his party affiliation

        oh please.

      • Shingo
        January 6, 2013, 5:39 pm

        My position on him is based in some part on his Israel-related comments (your support of him seems to be wholly based on them), but more based on his anti-gay, anti-climate change comments, the tone of his public statements, and his party affiliation. You are locked in the same trap as the neocons are.

        You’re not even trying to make a convincing argument Hop. You’ve given up trying and are here just to go with he motions.

        Climate change? Are you for real? Can you even tell us what Bob Gates or Leon Panetta had to say on climate change?

        As for the anti gay comment, it’s clear that like the Bill Kristols of this world, you are simply using it as a blunt instrument – if you were serious about is record on gays, you would dig a little deeper and consider the fact that Steve Clemons has come out in defence on Hagel’s record on gays, or Hormel’s acceptance of his apology and subsequent endorsement of Hagel.

        No, you and the neocons will simply keep parroting that he’s a bigot no matter how much evidence to the contrary is presented to you.

      • Kathleen
        January 6, 2013, 3:58 pm

        With Kerry and Hagel in the line up there will be “meaningful change” or the one state solution..one person, one vote will be coming out of people around the world louder and clearer over the next year. One state is going to be loud and clear if there is not real movement by Israel soon.

  2. Dan Crowther
    January 4, 2013, 3:38 pm

    Not to diminish the Prediction Skills of McBride – but this one I can guarantee doesn’t come true:

    “If this appointment comes to pass, we are on the verge of entering a new era of American Mideast policy” – Sean “Alex P. Keating Plainview” McBride

    Not. A. Chance.

    • Mooser
      January 4, 2013, 5:08 pm

      Well Dan, I won’t be outdone by McBride’s previous prognostication, so here’s mine: ‘If the sun comes up tomorrow, it will be a new day!’

    • libra
      January 4, 2013, 5:35 pm

      Dan, try not to sound so pleased about what you are predicting (indeed, guaranteeing) yourself. I mean, it’s not that you actually want continued confrontation (perhaps even war) with Iran, is it?

      • stopaipac
        January 6, 2013, 11:22 am

        what sean says is the sad truth. i don’t think it has anything to do with wanting it to happen. but wishful thinking will not get us anywhere. he will be serving under Obama, and if people here are not already aware of Obama’s record of unqualified support for Israeli apartheid, then you need to pick up a newspaper… or read Mondoweiss.
        Obama’s choice, if it is indeed Hagel, could have been worse. and it might help Out the anti-Palestinian lobby as extremists when america watches part of the Lobby attack him. But do remember that Hagel has his friends in the anti-Palestinian Lobby, such as J Street. they know how to support the status quo.
        Obama’s choice for Sec of State, John Kerry, could not be any friendlier to aipac. No Change from Obama, you can believe it. it will only come from us.

      • James Canning
        January 6, 2013, 1:34 pm

        Many powerful Democrats demand that Obama toe the Aipac line, to a large degree.

    • seanmcbride
      January 4, 2013, 5:45 pm

      When Israel’s relations with the United States and Europe collapse, it will be sudden, shocking and irrevocable — but in retrospect perfectly inevitable — the product of conflicts and tensions that had been accumulating beneath the political surface for decades.

      What’s the problem? A critical mass of Zionists — not all of them, but enough to make a significant difference — are not rational actors. They are not quite right in the head. In fact, they are distinctly wrong in the head — essentially members of a messianic and xenophobic ethno-religious nationalist cult that feeds off and is energized by apocalyptic conflict with cult outsiders — the rest of the world — 99.9% of the human race.

      • Annie Robbins
        January 4, 2013, 5:54 pm

        sean, are you including non jewish zionists in your ‘critical mass’ calculations? a person like hilary clinton, would she be an outlander zionist, or part of the ‘messianic, xenophobic, ethno-religious nationalist cult’?

      • seanmcbride
        January 4, 2013, 6:08 pm

        Annie,

        I would definitely define Hillary Clinton as an outlander Zionist, someone who could defect from the cult at any time. She is too smart and too sane to get sucked in by the core cult agenda — no doubt she can see where it is going and how it is going to end up.

        I would certainly place many non-Jewish Zionists among the critical mass of true believers at the center of the cult — especially the entire Christian Zionist and Christian Armageddonist contingent. They can’t wait to go zooming over the cliff and into the drink, using Israel for their joy ride.

        Many Diaspora Jews are of course on the verge of disconnecting themselves from this train wreck. They can do the political math.

      • Mooser
        January 4, 2013, 6:56 pm

        “Many Diaspora Jews are of course on the verge of disconnecting themselves from this train wreck. They can do the political math.”

        Well, when you’re dealing with people who’s “core drivers” are so different from a regular person’s, it’s the best you can hope for. You can’t expect them to reason from principles or even empathy, can you? Better to lay low until the next opportunity!

      • Mooser
        January 4, 2013, 7:01 pm

        “When Israel’s relations with the United States and Europe collapse, it will be sudden, shocking and irrevocable — but in retrospect perfectly inevitable”

        Yeah, events do tend to turn out that way, in retrospect. But then, it’s a new era, everyday.

      • Rusty Pipes
        January 4, 2013, 7:04 pm

        Just because the former senator from New York knows exactly which buttons to push to get the maximum returns from the Democrats’ ATM, does not mean that she is an ideologue. As a United Methodist, she certainly is not a Messianic Christian Zionist of the Hagee stripe. She is an extremely ambitious and driven woman, who was able to raise tremendous amounts of money for her 2008 primary bid and, if she is so inclined, would be able to do so again in 2016. If potential major donors are cult members, she’ll say anything they want to hear to get them to write a check.

      • Mooser
        January 4, 2013, 7:24 pm

        Clinton as an outlander Zionist”

        “Outlander”? Maybe, but could “outlier” be the more bon of the two mots?

      • Annie Robbins
        January 4, 2013, 7:40 pm

        does not mean that she is an ideologue. As a United Methodist, she certainly is not a Messianic Christian Zionist of the Hagee stripe

        oh i know, i was just trying to figure out where those other zionists (outliers, the ones who are not part of the critical mass) figured into sean’s calculations. at first i thought i better brush up on my definition of critical mass, but all i could find was descriptions of a bike race.

        perhaps i am completely disillusioned about who is and who is not an average american zionist.

        Critical mass may be closer to majority consensus in political circles, where the most effective position is more often that held by the majority of people in society. In this sense, small changes in public consensus can bring about swift changes in political consensus, due to the majority-dependent effectiveness of certain ideas as tools of political debate.

        i guess i am just not comprehending how “A critical mass of Zionists” the messianic, xenophobic ethno-religious nationalist cult figures that make up(according to sean’s calculations) the majority of american zionists(which probably account for about 100 million people there abouts) are going to swiftly change the political consensus. in certain regards i would consider clinton an outlier (certainly achievement wise, in many areas really) but as far as the power of zionism, i happen to think it comes from the people, the un-messianic, un xenophobic un ethno-religious nationalist un cultly figures. the ones lessdedicated shall we say.

        you see, i actually believe the critical mass of zionists are rational actors, and that is why small changes in public consensus can bring about swift changes in political consensus. the majority of american zionists are people who never really questioned zionism. they just, y’know, support lil israel until all of a sudden one day they wake up and realize how damaging that’s been to our country. they’re flipable. whereas , the messianic, xenophobic ethno-religious nationalist cult zionists will be harder nuts to crack, and there’s a lot less of them too.

      • seanmcbride
        January 4, 2013, 7:58 pm

        Annie,

        Anyone who uses the phrase “Judea and Samaria” is one of those messianic Zionists — and there are many Zionists of that type in American politics — especially in the Republican Party — and at the very highest levels of the Republican Party. Call them biblical Greater Israelists. Israel Firsters Supreme.

        Zionists with a more liberal, humanist and secular outlook — especially in the Democratic Party — have played a major role keeping the American government under the thumb of the Israeli government — but I think we are fast reaching a point where they are going to peel off — the game is getting too crazy for their tastes, self-interest and self-image.

      • Annie Robbins
        January 4, 2013, 8:24 pm

        i agree sean

      • FreddyV
        January 5, 2013, 6:16 am

        @seanmcbride:
        ‘I would certainly place many non-Jewish Zionists among the critical mass of true believers at the center of the cult — especially the entire Christian Zionist and Christian Armageddonist contingent. They can’t wait to go zooming over the cliff and into the drink, using Israel for their joy ride.’

        ====================================================

        Here’s the problem. The Christian Zionists believe they’ll be raptured up to heaven before Israel is destroyed. You’re right in that they’re pinning their beliefs on Israel and are very happy to attach events in the Middle East to their interpretation of the End Times, but stand with them and ultimately go off the cliff with them? Not according to Christian Zionist teaching! Jesus is going to carry the Christians off into the clouds before the world wipes the Jews out. It’s very politely coded as ‘The Time Of Jacob’s Trouble’. It’s also described as The Greatest Bloodbath In Human History.

        It kinda sounds a bit nuts and very Anti Semitic to me, but that’s what those crazy ‘Jew loving’ Christian Zionists believe…..

        The funniest thing is that Israelis know this and are completely happy to make bedfellows with the likes of Hagee, happily taking donations to build settlement projects and steal Palestinian land.

        You really couldn’t make it up.

      • Boston
        January 5, 2013, 8:39 am

        The Clintons and all the other non Jewish pols who do the bidding of the Lobby are not Zionists. They are ambitious opportunists willing to do anything for those who can make or break their career. They are not believers, they are cynical greedheads. In their own way, they are far more guilty than the true believers

      • hophmi
        January 5, 2013, 8:19 pm

        Says the chicken little who always places way too many people in his crazy Zionist camp. Don’t fall for the fancy language, folks. It’s still the same lame-brained idea.

      • hophmi
        January 6, 2013, 1:16 am

        “Anyone who uses the phrase “Judea and Samaria” is one of those messianic Zionists” This is about as true as saying that anyone who uses the phrase “West Bank” is a Hamas-sympathizer.

        “Zionists with a more liberal, humanist and secular outlook — especially in the Democratic Party — have played a major role keeping the American government under the thumb of the Israeli government” Tripe. There is no evidence that the American government is “under the thumb” of the Israeli government.

      • James Canning
        January 6, 2013, 1:59 pm

        More accurate to say the US Congress is under the thumb of the Israel lobby?

      • Mooser
        January 4, 2013, 6:46 pm

        A critical mass of Zionists — not all of them, but enough to make a significant difference — are not rational actors. They are not quite right in the head. In fact, they are distinctly wrong in the head — essentially members of a messianic and xenophobic ethno-religious nationalist cult that feeds off and is energized by apocalyptic conflict with cult outsiders — the rest of the world — 99.9% of the human race.”

        This is great! The number of people in the “messianic and xenophobic ethno-religious nationalist cult” just keeps on shrinking. Eventually, it’ll shrink enough to be contained in one list. That would still be too big for the comment section, probably deserves its own article.

      • Keith
        January 5, 2013, 4:13 pm

        MOOSER- “Eventually, it’ll shrink enough to be contained in one list. That would still be too big for the comment section, probably deserves its own article.”

        Please, not another list! And an article? Mooser, are you trying to sink Mondoweiss?

      • Mooser
        January 5, 2013, 5:50 pm

        “Please, not another list! And an article? Mooser, are you trying to sink Mondoweiss?”

        When I load those threads with 200-500 comments, I wonder how much bandwidth freeboard the old ship of anti-Zion really has!

      • thetumta
        January 4, 2013, 9:24 pm

        “A critical mass of Zionists — not all of them, but enough to make a significant difference — are not rational actors. ”

        Five Dolphins to get it started! A critical mass. October/1973 and WW1 rolled into one. Break out the Kool-Aide and nuclear weapons. This is definitely going to be interesting?

        Hej!

      • James Canning
        January 6, 2013, 1:35 pm

        Aipac’s power and control of the US Congress seems to be growing, not receding.

      • Kathleen
        January 8, 2013, 11:22 am

        The Hagel hearings are going to tell that story

      • Kathleen
        January 6, 2013, 4:02 pm

        Sounds like Charles Krauthammer’s (what a last name) description of the Iranian government “not rational actors, not quite right in the head” Just the description on the other foot. Watched a discussion between Fareed Zakaria, Krauthammer and a few others on Cspan. Krauthammer and the other pro Israel no matter what rep just kept repeating all of Israel’s fear mongering and false claims about Iran. Nothing new on their part

      • James Canning
        January 7, 2013, 2:12 pm

        Yes, Krauthammer. Energetic shill for “defence” contractors and for endless war in the Middle East, to “protect” Israel.

    • Shingo
      January 4, 2013, 8:02 pm

      Not. A. Chance.

      I beg to differ. It might be unrealistic to suggest Hagel uhimself will make a difference, but change is inevitable, whether intended or otherwise.

      • Dan Crowther
        January 4, 2013, 10:45 pm

        Sure Shingo, a change is probably inevitable – Sean was declaring Hagel himself to be the change – again, not a chance. If McBride had said, ” a possible step in the right direction, we shall see” I’d have seconded it.

    • American
      January 4, 2013, 10:54 pm

      @ Dan

      Do you pay attention to actual events? Understand what they mean?
      When the US didn’t try to squelch the Egyptian revolution to ensure Mubarak stayed in power and kept the status quo with Israel that was a ‘change’.
      Changes don’t always produce results immediately.
      But there have already been incremental changes in ME policy…not all along the same line, they varied with the actors involved.
      When the US didn’t go ‘all out’ and it didn’t go all out, to pressure other countries off the Palestine UN vote, that was a change…a big one…filed under ‘doing nothing” change.

      • Dan Crowther
        January 5, 2013, 11:51 am

        American says:
        Do you pay attention to actual events? Understand what they mean?
        —–
        Ha. No, I don’t, you got me.

        American continues:
        When the US didn’t try to squelch the Egyptian revolution to ensure Mubarak stayed in power and kept the status quo with Israel that was a ‘change’.
        —————

        Not really. When forced to finally ditch a dictator, the US has done it. For the record, the US was supplying lethal and non lethal armaments(in addition to regular arms shipments) during the early days and weeks, and then tried to put up Omar Suleiman, Head of Torture, as Mubarak’s replacement. So, let’s not pretend the US just sat idly by during the Egyptian Revolution.

        Jumping forward to the present, we see the US-Egyptian relationship to be strikingly similar to the Mubarak era. You seem to have missed the sweeping counter revolution in the ME. IMF money and arms for a political party supported from the outside by the Gulf Monarchies, how is this any different?

        American then goes on with some paternalistic declarations about not getting impatient and so on. Not worth the comment, hard to take seriously some put downs from a guy who comments anonymously – American talks about “change” surrounding this issue, how about going by your own name? I do.

        American then finishes with a declaration that the US “didn’t go all out” in pressuring UN members off a yes vote recently for Palestine. It doesn’t take Hostage to cite innumerable examples where US administrations have allowed “anti-israel” resolutions to be put forth and even passed at UN general assembly – this is not in any way “change”.

        It used to be people protested the pentagon, now we campaign for it’s leadership. Kind of shameful, in my opinion.

      • American
        January 6, 2013, 1:40 am

        Hey Dan….

        Post your address , work or home address, and I will write to you in my name ….maybe….lol
        I had an ecounter with a malcontent cyber stalker years ago so I am leery of people who are ‘personally’ aggressive toward others on the net…..but I’ll take a chance…post your phone number..we can chat.

      • Dan Crowther
        January 6, 2013, 11:27 am

        I find it funny that American is accusing me of being personally aggressive after numerous substance free posts from him accusing sooo many others of being flat stupid. I’m seeing a disturbing trend among the White Knights……

        American’s non response to my post is what really tells the story here

      • Mooser
        January 6, 2013, 5:52 pm

        “the White Knights……”

        Dan, I do think they rather assigned themselves too big a job responding to you in the other thread. I wonder what their “core drivers” are? Oh well, if there’s one thing you can’t accuse Christians of, it’s “messianism” (sic).
        No great chiliast cook-offs for them!

      • seanmcbride
        January 6, 2013, 9:27 pm

        Mooser,

        Dan, I do think they rather assigned themselves too big a job responding to you in the other thread. I wonder what their “core drivers” are? Oh well, if there’s one thing you can’t accuse Christians of, it’s “messianism” (sic).

        My respect for your comments here on Mondoweiss continues to plummet. You have been taking too many wild swings that miss their targets.

        Dan’s opponents didn’t bring a defense of Christianity into their disagreements with him — in fact I am not sure that any of his opponents are Christians.

        They did, however, think that his impassioned (fanatical) attacks on WASPs — all of them without exception — was appalling and poorly informed about the state of WASP power in the United States and the world.

        Check the latest billionaires lists on Forbes and Bloomberg to understand how power is really aggregated and distributed in the United States these days. WASPs have been in serious decline since the 1960s. Phil Weiss has discussed this issue in depth on Mondoweiss.

      • Mooser
        January 7, 2013, 3:26 pm

        “WASPs have been in serious decline since the 1960s.”

        Exactly! And that’s why we all should make every effort to finish what you call “WASP power” off! This is no time to slacken our efforts, so close to victory! I’m with Dan, we don’t stop til the job is done. But I sure hope they’ll keep showing “Bewitched” reruns on TV. I get a kick out of that show.

  3. doug
    January 4, 2013, 4:03 pm

    Amazing. Color me shocked! Pleased, but shocked.

  4. David Doppler
    January 4, 2013, 4:05 pm

    Cooper’s prior statement favoring Hagel suggests he may have resigned because he didn’t want to be part of an organization whose very public opposition (or voice participating in a smear campaign) could be purchased by un-nameable funding sources. Or maybe he himself sold out for a price to be revealed. Or his board terminated him for doing so. Let’s see where he lands.

    One consequence of the extended Hagel trial balloon phase is that it provides more and more rope for the Netanyahu-Likud-led Israel Lobby to hang itself with. To an unprecedented extent, the machinations, mechanisms, and methods of this most effective night flower are stretched out in the morning sun. And Mondoweiss is there with its magnifying glass to examine them. We’ll see if they survive the heat of the day and the intensifying scrutiny.

    As for me, I say there should be no Likud-Loyalty-Litmus test for high government office.

    • Annie Robbins
      January 4, 2013, 4:10 pm

      One consequence of the extended Hagel trial balloon phase is that it provides more and more rope for the Netanyahu-Likud-led Israel Lobby to hang itself with. To an unprecedented extent, the machinations, mechanisms, and methods of this most effective night flower are stretched out in the morning sun.

      gee, ya think? ;)

  5. Krauss
    January 4, 2013, 4:15 pm

    I’m beginning to see this as Obama’s revenge, but we should not let ourselves be carried away. It was a trial balloon after all. Had it been shot down, Obama would have bended to the lobby as usual. He didn’t fight for Hagel one iota. If Hagel gets the nod, he can thank a large well of support from the liberal quarters of the media, not Obama. That is pretty stunning when you think about it.

    Nonetheless, it’s impossible not to see the dragged-out effects of this coming so close to the Israeli election. Obama probably knows that as the election looms closer, and as the fascist far-right rises and rises in Israel, any kind of pushback against Hagel will be met even more ferociously by liberal, especially Jewishly liberal, quarters in the press, as a valve to regulate their fears and anxieties against what they, correctly, see as Israel’s national suicide in slowmotion.

    But again, Obama here, as usual, is really a side character. The main players here are the journalists and the intellectuals and there’s been plenty of healthy intra-Jewish debate on this topic. Jewish liberals are no longer getting rolled(or allowing themselves to get rolled) and Gentile liberals are slowly, slowly coming out of the woodworks to attack the neocons. They still feel compelled to use ‘Jewish shields’, so to speak, (basically a Jewish liberal as an alibi) but even this tendency is slowly decelerating.

    But, fundamentally, if Hagel gets the nod will anything substantial change? I don’t think so, but the main effects won’t be on the policy side, rather on the culture and/or the media. And that shouldn’t be underestimated.

    • Annie Robbins
      January 4, 2013, 4:37 pm

      He didn’t fight for Hagel one iota.

      obama was right not to say a word during this pre nomination fight. if hagel is nominated (and i think he will be) it moves into another realm. the more i think about it, the smarter it seems he floated this nomination for so long. the neocons put on quite a show. they are still putting on a show, and it’s becoming more and more desperate, digging their own grave. and obama didn’t even have to open his mouth.

      • Krauss
        January 4, 2013, 5:03 pm

        It’s true that Obama didn’t need to open his mouth – his work was done for him by the liberal quarters of the media. Now that they’ve done his work for him, he suddenly looks like a genius. But remember that during the first week the WH was on the verge of dropping Hagel multiple times, only to have yet another liberal voice find his or her backbone and support Hagel, thereby forcing the debate forward.

        I stand by my statement that Obama doesn’t deserve cred if Hagel gets nominated, the media does. And I agree with you that the neocons have been digging their own graves. I did notice that after the election, everyone talked about minority outreach or about not being the party of Wall St. Yet nobody talked about problem of neocons and their venomous agenda. Hopefully that will slowly start to change within the GOP ranks, but the dissent from liberals – such a far cry from the group-think of the Iraq war – has already been finalized. It was pretty hilarious to read the wounded and semi-outraged rant by the bigoted “liberals” who got left behind, like here: link to tnr.com

      • Annie Robbins
        January 4, 2013, 5:41 pm

        But remember that during the first week the WH was on the verge of dropping Hagel multiple times

        link? says who?

      • peeesss
        January 5, 2013, 4:20 am

        I agree, re, “says who”. I too did not believe Obama would withstand the pressure of the Jewish ,oh I am sorry, the Israeli Lobby and proceed with the nomination. If it is true that Hagel will be nominated, I will be. surprised, happily surprised. But where does one find evidence that”the WH was on the verge of dropping Hagel multiple times.”? And where does one find these “Liberal Quarters of the Media” ferociously advocating for Hagel. It has been the “realists”, “Establishment” and past and present Military members , repubs and Dems that have rallied and .apparently, succeeded in giving Obama the necessary backing to make such a choice. The real issue will be at the nomination proceedings in the Senate. Will Hagel be forced to take back his anti-war Iran statements and dialogue, true, tranparent, honest dialogue with Iran. Will he stand up and defend his critical remarks about the Israeli Lobby and some Israeli actions, re. Settlements , Palestinians. Of course, I agree mith some comments noting that Hagel is certainly conservative and a member of the foreign Policy Establishment and certainly no “Leftist”. But if he withstands the attacks and cynical questioning he will receive at the nomination hearings without backing down on his past thoughts on Israel/Palestine, Iran, Hamas, I , for one, would be grateful that Obama, for once, did not back down before AIPAC and Hagels neo con critics.

      • Mooser
        January 5, 2013, 12:35 pm

        “Jewish ,oh I am sorry, the Israeli Lobby…”

        Thank you for the correction.

      • seanmcbride
        January 5, 2013, 1:49 pm

        Mooser,

        You responded to peeesss’s remark:

        “Jewish ,oh I am sorry, the Israeli Lobby…”

        with the comment:

        “Thank you for the correction.”

        Actually, we need to start bearing down on the role of the Jewish lobby within the Israel lobby with maximum force.

        Richard Silverstein, today, at his Tikun Olam blog, explains why this is so, and provides a fact-based list to help us understand precisely how the Jewish lobby operates:

        “Jewish Foundations Support Islamophobia at Home, Settler Triumphalism Abroad”

        link to richardsilverstein.com

        Most Jewish foundations support the equivalent of Bubbeh’s chicken soup: Israel, synagogues, youth groups, Jewish education, Jewish studies programs, etc. But over the past ten years or so, as the ideological battle within Israel has intensified with a rightward nationalist drift, a number of foundations have led a drive toward the increasing politicization of Jewish philanthropy. Three of the most radical in their funding objectives are located in the west: the Koret Foundation in San Francisco, which is based on the fortune amassed by a successful Jewish clothing manufacturer, with a reported $473-million in assets and $19-million in grants in its latest IRS filing. The Fairbrook Foundation, based on the $1-billion technology fortune of Aubrey and Joyce Chernick, is based in Los Angeles and had $50-million in assets and $5-million in grants in its last available 2010 IRS filing. The Irving Moskowitz Foundation, which had assets of $48-million and grants $5-million, supports the radical settler vision of its namesake, whose fortune was made buying and selling hospitals and in running a Southern California bingo-parlor.

        These foundations are major funders of the most extreme of Jewish groups and individuals including David Horowitz, Pam Geller, Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes, The Israel Project, MEMRI, and many others. The agenda of these funders is decidedly Islamophobic and contributes enormously to the current hostile atmosphere toward Muslims in the U.S. and Israel. They funded Geller’s “Ground Zero Mosque” jihad, her NY subway ads. They helped Daniel Pipes create and fund his lawfare campaign called The Legal Project, which provided free legal representation to leading Dutch Islamophobe politician, Geert Wilders; and for MEK official, Hassan Daioeslam, in defense of his libel suit with the National Iranian American Council.

        The main problem with Jewish Islamophobia is that it turns the Israeli-Arab conflict into a religious holy war when it’s really a battle over political power. Injecting religion as these radical ideologues do, makes resolving differences almost impossible. Finally, in smearing the religion of most of those living in the Middle East, it almost guarantees that no Muslim will be able to tolerate a Jewish presence there as well.

        Similarly, these radical philanthropists fund the most extreme of the settler movement. Those who not just espouse violence and hate against Palestinians, but engage in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian neighborhoods of East Jerusalem.

        Because so much of the activism of the radical Jewish right is shrouded in obscurity, I like to debunk this periodically by showing you the money: who has it, where it’s going, and what it’s doing.

        * The following is a list, by Foundation, of some of the most radical of these groups and how much they’ve received. I last blogged about the Fairbrook Foundation’s 2008 IRS 990. The following is from the 2010 report:

        American Freedom Alliance
        $80,000

        Ateret Cohanim (De-Arabizing East Jerusalem)
        $30,000

        Kiryat Arba Yeshiva
        $110,000

        Center for Security Policy (Frank Gaffney’s Sharia-obsessed non-profit)
        $100,000

        Central Fund for Israel (general support for radical settlers and settlements)
        $150,000

        CAMERA (right-wing media advocacy)
        $25,000

        David Horowitz Freedom Center
        $160,000

        Foundation for the Defense of Democracies
        $190,000

        Heritage Foundation
        $50,000

        Hudson Institute
        $75,000

        Middle East Forum (Daniel Pipes)
        $270,000

        Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE-David Yerushalmi)
        $90,000

        Zionist Organization of America
        $200,000

        * While the Koret Foundation has a distinctively more regional focus in a lot of its Jewish grantmaking, it is nonetheless playing a major role funding right-wing pro-Israel groups whose political ambitions are national and international in scope. Here is a list of some of the far-right Jewish groups it funded in 2011. Grants may be paid between 2011-2013:

        American Israel Education Foundation (AIPAC Israel junkets)
        $20,000 (2012)

        American-Israel Cooperative Enterprise (former Aipac staffer, Mitchell Bard)
        $50,000 (2012)

        Central Fund for Israel
        $20,000

        Chabad
        $80,000

        David Horowitz Freedom Center
        $45,000

        Federalist Society
        $180,000

        Friends of the IDF
        $22,000

        Hudson Institute
        $25,000

        Institute for Jewish and Community Research (funding Ken Marcus’ campus anti-Semitism initiative)
        $100,000

        The Israel Project
        $50,000

        Investigative Project on Terrorism
        $25,000

        Jewish Agency (Natan Sharansky)
        $45,000

        Middle East Forum (Daniel Pipes)
        $50,000

        MEMRI
        $200,000

        Scholars for Peace in the Middle East
        $70,000

        StandWithUs (Bay Area chapter, one of whose members engaged in a physical assault at a Jewish Voice for Peace meeting)
        $50,000

        Ayn Rand Institute
        $13,000

        Center for Security Policy
        $225,000

        * These are the grants listed in the Moskowitz Foundation’s 2011 IRS report:

        Central Fund for Israel
        $260,000

        Ir David (the settler archaeological excavations which are at the heart of the campaign to depopulate Palestinian East Jerusalem)
        $1,000,000

        Friends of IDF
        $40,000

        Honenu (legal defense for settlers accused of nationalist violence like Yigal Amir)
        $20,000

        MEMRI
        $100,000

        Young Israel
        $100,000

        Zionist Organization of America
        $100,000

        Western Wall Foundation
        $100,000

        Friends of Itamar
        $25,000

        Center for Security Policy
        $100,000

        Americans for a Safe Israel
        $50,000

        Nefesh B’Nefesh (supporting immigration, often to settlements)
        $300,000

        Your thoughts?

        You might use Richard Silverstein as a model of how to conduct an honest analytical inquiry into Mideast politics.

      • peeesss
        January 5, 2013, 7:35 pm

        Mooser, that was an attempt at humor. You did catch that, I hope.

      • Mooser
        January 6, 2013, 5:28 pm

        . “You did catch that, I hope.”

        Yes, I did! But I couldn’t resist.

    • Kathleen
      January 6, 2013, 4:05 pm

      I don’t think it is Obama’s revenge I think he sees this is the only way he can go if he is actually going to make a difference. Israel has all ready kicked him and Biden in the cajones really hard. Taking a different tactic. Hillary is a roll over and clearly such a warmonger…Obama taking a different tactic and a welcome one for millions of us.

      • James Canning
        January 7, 2013, 2:10 pm

        Writing in The Times (London) last month, Bronwen Maddox said Hillary Clinton’s primary focus in her last months in office, was to enhance her prospects for 2016.

  6. piotr
    January 4, 2013, 4:35 pm

    I am not as optimistic as McBride, because I was optimistic 4 years ago.

    However, there were some changes and there will be some further changes. To realists (very small population admits to notice reality, but secret realists may include Obama and a large part of Establishment) it is clear that Israeli government views its mission as trying to get as much of Greater Israel as it can get away with. Without getting a signal to stop, there is really no telling how far it can really go. Of course, some ueber Zionists like Adelson love it, but my Kremlinology of the Lobby indicates that there is a bitter aftertaste after the victory scored in 2009/2010 when the idea of “settlement freeze” is squelched. I think that even among the Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations there was a hope that GoI will not go as far as it did, and now the election campaign in Israel promised that we have seen nothing yet.

    Getting Hagel as a Secretary of Defense is a delicate signal, but somewhat beyond “words of concern” that became such a bad joke.

  7. quercus
    January 4, 2013, 4:55 pm

    Hot Diggety DOG! It may be the first thing Barack will have done that makes me hope that he may have some ba**s.

  8. piotr
    January 4, 2013, 5:00 pm

    Right after my post I got a call from DNC, apparently I gave them something one year ago and now I can renew membership. I said that I will wait until Hagel is nominated.

  9. Stephen Shenfield
    January 4, 2013, 5:01 pm

    It might be risky to hold our breath. This thing keeps stretching on. Now Obama is going to make the announcement on Monday. Or maybe Tuesday. On Monday it will be promised for Tuesday, or maybe Wednesday. Getting the pattern? Like he’s inviting the lobby to exert more pressure. Perhaps he is after a prize for the most pusillanimous politician ever.

  10. seethelight
    January 4, 2013, 5:08 pm

    Is the Hagel nomination what Obama was thinking of when he reportedly told Peter Beinert at the White House late last year: “Hang in there” ?

  11. Scott
    January 4, 2013, 5:32 pm

    Count me as optimistic. Obama did this over-cautiously, but it seems that he did it. If Hagel is confirmed, as I think likely, it will be the most substantial defeat for the lobby perhaps in my lifetime. Its loss on AWACs to Saudi Arabia will seem minor league. And once they lose one big one, there’s the possibility they will lose their deterrent power. Be seen as a paper tiger. The Hagel confirmation will be the first domino!

    I’m not counting victory yet; but as Jerry Haber pointed out several weeks ago, even a losing confirmation fight will be extremely educational, and will pave the way for future victories.

    Plus Al Jazeera– coming to a cable station near you. No longer will we have to breathe heavily when Chris Matthews tip toes up somewhere near the truth. They can bloody hire Chris Matthews and tell him to call it like sees them. Or someone else. And we’re only four days into January!

    • ritzl
      January 4, 2013, 10:02 pm

      Kinda OT, but at Haaretz:

      U.S. Jewish leaders express ‘concern’ about impending Al Jazeera incursion into millions of American homes

      link to haaretz.com

      The usual suspects are involved…

      “U.S. Jewish leaders” are really, visibly overplaying their hand at the moment, with this and Hagel. I can’t imagine Americans accepting being told what we can or can’t view. If we don’t like it we won’t watch.

      If Al Jazeera goes in-depth investigative most of the time, I think they’ll get the audience. Picture PBS “Frontline” quality, but taboo (i.e. too controversial for public funding and/or where Al Gore won’t go) subjects. Or get that woman (Abby Martin) from RT. From what I’ve seen they seem to be able to offer probing news that others don’t bother with, let alone broadcast (their coverage of Occupy* was remarkable).

      I suspect too, that media is one way Jews combated real and durable antisemitism 100+ years ago. Oprah did it more recently. Maybe it’s time for an Arab/Muslim-friendly media “wedge.”

      I stray… Though it would be great to see an article on AJA entré here. Important, from more than just the “Jewish leaders” perspective.

      • dbroncos
        January 5, 2013, 1:11 am

        I’d love to see an Al Jazeera broadcast of “Dead In The Water”, the excellent BBC documentary about the USS Liberty. To my knowledge it has never been broadcast in the US. Imagine that, Americans learning the ugly truth about the Liberty ship from an Arab TV network which, according to the intrepid Bill O’Reilley, is anti-American.

      • ritzl
        January 5, 2013, 9:47 am

        Or “Five Broken Cameras.”

        The possibilities are endless.

      • James Canning
        January 5, 2013, 2:04 pm

        Bravo!

      • American
        January 5, 2013, 2:29 pm

        ”I’d love to see an Al Jazeera broadcast of “Dead In The Water”, the excellent BBC documentary about the USS Liberty. To my knowledge it has never been broadcast in the US.”……dbroncos

        It hasn’t…and it would be explosive. Nothing ever made the news either about the IDF trying to set up the US Marines for attacks in Beriut.
        I would love to imagine that richer than God Qatar has in mind some small interest in busting up the Israeli slant of the US msm with ALJe.

      • hophmi
        January 5, 2013, 8:42 pm

        Since most Americans view Al-Jazeera as the network that served as Osama bin-Laden’s mouthpiece, I wouldn’t count on them accepting much of what it says, particularly on controversial issues like this.

      • Ellen
        January 6, 2013, 12:10 pm

        Most Americans have never seen Al Jazeera. And sadly, most uncriticaly believe whatever they are told by those in authority.

        But the documentary in question (Dead in the Water) was produced by the BBC, which is highly respected by most all Americans.

      • Donald
        January 6, 2013, 12:39 pm

        There may also be legitimate reasons to be critical of Al Jazeera–As’ad Abu Khalil (the “Angry Arab” blogger) thinks their coverage on the Syrian civil war has been biased. Not that he sides with the government–he despises both the regime and its fundamentalist opponents. I think he thinks that Al Jazeera is forced to toe a certain editorial line imposed by the government in Qatar.

        But of course the main reason Al Jazeera is reviled in the US is just that it doesn’t adhere to the biases that the US political mainstream prefers.

      • hophmi
        January 6, 2013, 12:43 pm

        Most Americans have little concept of what the BBC is.

      • munro
        January 6, 2013, 1:01 pm

        Video: “Dead In The Water” BBC documentary about the USS Liberty

      • James Canning
        January 6, 2013, 2:02 pm

        A statement broadcast by Al Jazeera, does not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of Al Jazeera. I take it you think most Americans are unable to grasp this fact?

      • Ellen
        January 6, 2013, 3:52 pm

        No, not true. Keep trying, Hop.

        Btw, BBC’s Dr. Who is gaining huge ratings in the US. This generation’s Upstairs/Downstairs.

        link to thefutoncritic.com

      • hophmi
        January 6, 2013, 4:27 pm

        I would doubt that more than a third of Americans know what the BBC is.

      • chinese box
        January 7, 2013, 10:11 am

        would doubt that more than a third of Americans know what the BBC is.

        The low opinion you have of your fellow Americans is really showing through in your comments on this thread.

      • James Canning
        January 7, 2013, 2:48 pm

        Extreme ignorance of the typical American is beyond question.

      • hophmi
        January 7, 2013, 4:24 pm

        LOL. Disingenuous as usual. Most Americans do not follow foreign media sources. They follow their local news, as would be expected. Perhaps there is a poll somewhere out there indicating American familiarity with the BBC. I highly doubt it.

  12. Ramzi Jaber
    January 4, 2013, 5:39 pm

    As stated in my other comments, I am ALL FOR Sen. Hagel. I’m afraid it will change nothing.

    The powers that are the puppet masters behind the scenes regarding P/I are the american zionists, the christian fundamentalists, and the neocons that are more zionist, more israeli, more likudnic, more jewish, more extremist than even naftali bennett and his other habayit hayehudi ilk.

    • piotr
      January 4, 2013, 9:09 pm

      Split in the elite is one prerequisite for change.

      The contradiction between “regular American Zionists and imperialists” and the gung-ho Zionist extremist and neo-cons (meaning, imperialists who just want eternal wars everywhere) was brewing for some time and it is breaking into open. Once the boil is lanced, many things can come out.

      The shape of American foreign policy can be seen in the face of Hillary Clinton. It seems that she aged 20 years in 4 years. The combination of doing crap, eating crow and understanding what you are doing cannot be good for you. Dealing with always irate and complaining Israelis and members of the Lobby and having to be polite with them, I guess it would age me 40 years in 4 years. Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra?

  13. Citizen
    January 4, 2013, 5:41 pm

    Waiting with baited breath. Maybe Hagel will be nominated during the Notre Dame v Alabama game…. Yeah!

  14. ToivoS
    January 4, 2013, 6:05 pm

    Dailykos is reporting this same story and continuing their criticism of Hagel. They are bringing up the antigay angle but do not mention Israel or Iran. One minor change is that comments are running about 50-50 for and against Hagel and they are being allowed to discuss the Lobby (I got banned there years ago bringing up that touchy subject). They might be finding themselves in a dilemma. If they continue banning over this issue they will probably lose all of their readers.

    • Annie Robbins
      January 4, 2013, 8:52 pm

      omg, i just went over there and checked it out toivo. you’d think he was being nominated for a cabinet position representing gay americans. i’m half way down the thread and not one peep on iran. what’s with that site?

      • ToivoS
        January 4, 2013, 10:04 pm

        what’s with that site?

        I guess they have been purging people who make those connections for so long that they have selected a self censoring cadre.

      • Annie Robbins
        January 4, 2013, 11:32 pm

        toivo, i read something surprising there that no one even commented on, only one rec:
        link to dailykos.com
        (my bold)

        * [new] I don’t think so. Israel lobby is going to be (1+ / 0-)

        almost impossible to defeat and they’ve already decided he’s and anti-semite. I think this nomination goes down. Israel lobby is far, far stronger than the President.

        Yo.

        by brooklynbadboy on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 03:59:03 PM PST

        he was responding to a poster saying ” i don’t see many democrats opposing their president’s choice. i think most republicans would come around, too.”

      • HPH
        January 5, 2013, 1:10 pm

        I did a quick look through the comments at the link from Annie. My impression is that the majority of the longer, thoughtful comments are strongly supportive of Sen. Hagel. Some of the shorter, negative comments seemed to be repeats of the information from the smear campaign. They weren’t interesting. However, the longer, negative comments, in the minority, were more thoughtful and interesting.

      • American
        January 5, 2013, 12:17 am

        DKos has lost 30% of their advertising revenue…..they are going down.
        Unless they get zio money or ultra liberal to finance them.
        They are fringe, very fringe.
        I keep reminding people….45% of all registered voters are registered independent or unaffiliated. 45% of all voters means both registered dem and republicans are fminorities…about 27% of the vote each.
        The middle decides the elections and they go for the lesser of the evils.

      • Mooser
        January 5, 2013, 12:37 pm

        “Unless they get zio money or ultra liberal to finance them.”

        So you think Daily Kos can make a

      • Mooser
        January 5, 2013, 1:23 pm

        So you think Daily Kos can make a (damn this keyboard) a

        Edit: sorry there is something wrong here, and I better change keyboards.

      • James Canning
        January 5, 2013, 3:02 pm

        There clearly has been an organised effort to change the subject, and to make it appear that Hagel should be opposed in order to promote “gay rights”.

      • Kathleen
        January 6, 2013, 4:06 pm

        Clearl the “gay rights” issue being used for cover.

      • hophmi
        January 6, 2013, 4:33 pm

        If you think that Hagel’s public slander would not have become an issue regardless of what he was nominated for, you’re in denial. Gay rights groups, who are powerful in the Democratic party as interest groups and as donors, don’t tend to like bigots who smear members of their community.

      • Annie Robbins
        January 6, 2013, 4:42 pm

        Gay rights groups, who are powerful in the Democratic party

        do you know of any recent (post apology) statements by gay rights groups connected to the dem party lambasting him? links?

      • Shingo
        January 6, 2013, 5:37 pm

        If you think that Hagel’s public slander would not have become an issue regardless of what he was nominated for, you’re in denial.

        No, you’re just dishonest. We would ever have even heard of his statement from 14 years ago is he were another Israeli political whore. In fact, it speaks volumes that they had to go back 14 year sot find anything he said even controversial. Obviously those who went looking were pretty determined to being him down.

      • American
        January 7, 2013, 1:08 pm

        ‘don’t tend to like bigots who smear members of their community’…hoppie

        Aside from the fact the ‘general’ attitude toward homosexuals has changed the last decade…Hormel wasn’t just a gay, he was a nutcase gay, a militant gay, inserting gayness into every arena of his life and politics.
        And he did have an agressive, in your face “attitude about it. That doesn’t make a good US rep or a diplomat . So that probably compounded the opposition to him.

      • James Canning
        January 7, 2013, 2:50 pm

        Hagel is not a bigot. Hagel is not consumed with being “PC”. Thank goodness.

  15. radii
    January 4, 2013, 6:35 pm

    If Hagel simply says this, “The national security interests of the United States come first.” I will be thrilled. Something that innocuous would be a shot across the bow to the zio-crazies in charge over in israel that we are no longer their complaint Host to their parasitic machinations.

    • Carowhat
      January 5, 2013, 9:43 pm

      “If Hagel simply says this, “The national security interests of the United States come first.” I will be thrilled.”

      I too would be thrilled to see anyone in public life say this. But it won’t happen (and Hagel won’t repeat this sentiment). There simply are too many supporters of Israel who believe that it’s anti-Semitic for Americans to put America first because this carries the implication that people who support Israel don’t put America first. While this is in many cases true, it is another of those things which simply can’t be said in America today. I suspect if Obama does in fact nominate Hagel (and I’m thinking more and more that he won’t) Hagel will suddenly start talking like he loves Israel so much he will bomb Iran before 5 pm his first day on the job.

    • Kathleen
      January 6, 2013, 4:07 pm

      Bingo Radii

  16. doug
    January 4, 2013, 6:51 pm

    Drudge is now headlining the GLBT’s against Hagel. Links to neocon WeeklyStandard. Strange bedfellows. lol.

    • seanmcbride
      January 4, 2013, 8:52 pm

      Doug,

      Drudge is now headlining the GLBT’s against Hagel. Links to neocon WeeklyStandard. Strange bedfellows. lol.

      One presumes that you know that Matt Drudge is basically a Jewish neocon, with the same agenda as William Kristol and his PNAC/Weekly Standard cronies, but on a much lower intellectual rung. Drudge has always pushed key neocon themes on the Drudge Report.

      • doug
        January 5, 2013, 10:21 am

        seanmcbride,

        Accurate presumption. Drudge drives a lot of traffic and is the net’s version of the old supermarket National Enquirer. The headlines he chooses are typically inflamatory and often misleading. Similar to the yellow journalism of old. His headlining the Weekly Standard’s discovery of a LGBT group that opposes Hagel is just precious.

      • hophmi
        January 5, 2013, 8:25 pm

        Except that you present NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that Drudge’s religion (he says he “failed” his bar mitzvah and comes from a Reform background) plays any role in what he does.

        So AS USUAL, you’re simply looking at the religion and ASSUMING, based on nothing, that it’s a nefarious thing. This is very definition of antisemitism.

      • Cliff
        January 6, 2013, 9:33 am

        Of course Drudge fits the Jewish Neocon archetype.

        And since when does he have to be a RELIGIOUS Jew to be considered Jewish?

        Once again hoppy’s mendacious bullshit hasbara is allowed through moderation. Especially when we’re talking about unfounded and slanderous accusations of antisemitism in our political culture?

        hophmi is exactly the kind of Zionist Jew/Israel Firster who pays vapid lip service to the non-existent 2SS/doesn’t support even a boycott of settlement goods and companies/’card-carrying’ member of fascist Jewish groups like the ADL, AJC, etc.

      • Ellen
        January 6, 2013, 9:43 am

        Assuming based on nothing is the basis of “Antisemitism?” Now I know what an AntiSemite is!

        Someone who makes assumptions or projection with any basis in fact.

        Hop, you talking about some of the posting here?

      • hophmi
        January 6, 2013, 4:29 pm

        No, Cliff. You want to say Drudge is a neocon; that’s fine. Neocon is a political position. you cannot, and have not, substantiated that his Judaism has anything to do with his being a neocon, and I do not see you or Sean noting the religion of anyone except for the Jews.

      • Mooser
        January 6, 2013, 5:36 pm

        But Hophmi, Akiva Eldar says “Only non-Jews can save Israel”! How can they save us if they don’t even no who we are? Gotta get the basics in line before they go on to the advanced stuff like “enforcing a radical rethinking of Judaism”.
        Naturally, some small lapses in etiquette, a few embarassing moments or misunderstandings are bound to arise in such a process, but it’ll all be for the best in the end. Don’t you think so, Hophmi, from your “left of center” viewpoint?

      • Cliff
        January 10, 2013, 2:13 pm

        Judaism isn’t the issue. Jewish ethnicity is the issue. A cultural group.

        Drudge fits the mold of other Jewish neocons like Bill Kristol.

        Unless of course, you’re saying that Jewish identity is restricted to Judaism and you’re not a Jew unless you practice Judaism.

      • seanmcbride
        January 10, 2013, 2:34 pm

        Cliff,

        Judaism isn’t the issue. Jewish ethnicity is the issue. A cultural group.

        Jewish *nationalism* is the issue — both Jewish ethnic (sometimes secular) and religious nationalism.

        Since the worldwide Jewish religious establishment has ardently embraced Jewish nationalism — and fused the ideologies of Judaism and Zionism — Judaism is a huge factor in all controversies about Israel — but not the only factor.

      • hophmi
        January 10, 2013, 2:54 pm

        Please tell me the last time you referred to someone as a Christian neocon or a Muslim neocon or an atheist neocon.

        Thank you.

      • seanmcbride
        January 10, 2013, 3:15 pm

        The Drudge Report: phobic about Muslims, blacks and women. Pushes the neocon agenda up and down the line. Slows to a standstill on Saturdays. Played a key role in engineering Monicagate, which was spearheaded by Likud Zionists who were trying to undermine Mideast peace efforts being pursued by Bill Clinton. Neocon-oriented Andrew Breitbart was a close Drudge associate.

      • seanmcbride
        January 11, 2013, 9:32 am

        I have often used the terms Christian neoconservative, Protestant neoconservative, Roman Catholic neoconservative, etc.

        In fact, some time ago I defined a formal ontology and set of categories for defining neoconservatives.

        For example, using compound categories, where [*category1+*category2] describes a particular type of neoconservative:

        1. neoconservative+Christian
        2. neoconservative+Christian Zionist
        3. neoconservative+Jew
        4. neoconservative+Jewish nationalist
        5. neoconservative+Mormon
        6. neoconservative+not Jewish
        7. neoconservative+Orthodox Jew
        8. neoconservative+Presbyterian
        9. neoconservative+Protestant
        10. neoconservative+religious Jew
        11. neoconservative+religious Zionist
        12. neoconservative+Roman Catholic
        13. neoconservative+Zionist

        (There are many more relevant compound categories of this type.)

        And a few of the instances that can be generated from these compound categories, where [*category /i *instance]:

        1. Jewish neoconservative /i Irving Kristol
        2. Mormon neoconservative /i Mitt Romney
        3. Presbyterian neoconservative /i James Woolsey
        4. Roman Catholic neoconservative /i Alexander Haig

        But the main point: the neoconservative movement is overwhelmingly dominated by Jews and Jewish nationalists like Irving Kristol — a conclusion that can be easily arrived at by data mining the lead journal of neoconservatism — Commentary Magazine:

        http://www.commentarymagazine.com

        1. Sort ethnic and religious groups by number of articles published by members in Commentary Magazine.

        2. Sort ethnic and religious groups by number times mentioned in Commentary Magazine.

        And so on.

  17. James Canning
    January 4, 2013, 8:08 pm

    Let us hope Obama in fact proceeds with the nomination of Hagel. Great choice for Defence.

  18. gingershot
    January 4, 2013, 9:43 pm

    I think Obama is going to take the Neocons OUT – just like he did to Romney and Netanyahu over the last several months.

    The method he will use – is using – is to let the enemies momentum just carry them past the point where they could have landed their blows and where there is no turning back. Then he strikes.

    It is a martial art for Obama – an ambush – a jujutsu-move (no pun intended)

    Obama is invisible – there is no Obama ‘there’ – and then his opponent is suddenly destroyed, almost as if by himself

    I think Obama has handled this brilliantly – he has let all the Neocons come out of the woodwork to try to bully and bum-rush the nomination out of contention. He has let his enemies assemble themselves all bunched up together in his ambush zone – and he has kept all his powder dry.

    He has done nothing but watch it all and let everybody see for themselves that the Israeli Lobby has precisely NOTHING – just like Israel was given the time and opportunity and highlights to see Netanyahu as a madman last Fall

    Does everybody remember what Obama did to Romney during the debates when Mitt thought he had him with Benghazi issue? – and as he set up his best laid attack he hears the fateful words ‘Please proceed governor’ – with Obama nodding as he watches Mitt go past the point of no return in his candidacy? Then the quick slash and cutting him off at the knees? It was masterful…

    Does everyone remember what Obama did to Netanyahu last fall? – letting Netanyahu commit himself past the point of no return until all the wise men of Israel itself (Dagan, Diskin, Gantz, etc) were on the verge of a general’s revolt and trying to commit Bibi to an insane asylum themselves? – and then and only then, like with Romney, the quick slash and cutting Netanyahu off at the knees? It was likewise masterful…

    One of the Israeli Lobby mouthpieces, David Gregory, pronounced it ‘over’ for Hagel a couple of weeks ago- as his Meet the Press hit on Hagel using his ‘Lobby Regulars’ – Andrea Mitchell, Chuck Schumer, Lindsay Graham, and Joe Lieberman (on Cnn) – all magically appeare at once and did the Cheney-Era ‘neocon echo chamber’ number on Hagel

    I think the Neocons just finally met their match – they just don’t know it yet

    Haaretz already has an article up calling a battle royale confirmation fight a LOSE/LOSE for the Israeli Lobby.

    This is going to be FUN

  19. Qualtrough
    January 4, 2013, 10:20 pm

    Still not sure if this will come to pass, but if it does I pray to God that Hagel really is as pure as Caesar’s wife because as I write this there are people who are going through his kindergarten records to find something, something, they can use to quash his nomination.

  20. Blank State
    January 4, 2013, 11:19 pm

    BS.

    Read the flowery and lauditory fluff piece in today’s L.A. Times about Flourney. Also note this POS Obama backing down on closing Guantanamo by a stroke of the pen today. Obama is the ultimate fraud. You folks are daft if you think Hagel is going to get this nomination. Its all bullshit, stage play.

    My bet? Obama has already made the call to Flourney telling her she’s in, but mums the word until he cinches whatever sell-out deal he is making behind the scenes with the right wing pukes.

  21. Taxi
    January 4, 2013, 11:25 pm

    Chomsky: “The Gravest Threat to World Peace”:

    link to truth-out.org

    • James Canning
      January 5, 2013, 2:08 pm

      And why has Hillary Clinton done so little to promote a nuclear-weapons-free Middle East? ISRAEL LOBBY.

      • munro
        January 6, 2013, 2:30 pm

        Hillary is also a sell out on Cluster Bombs because of the J Lobby
        link to thedailybeast.com

        IDF commander: We fired more than a million cluster bombs in Lebanon
        Phosphorous and cluster bombs heavily used; unexploded munitions litter wide area of Lebanon.
        “What we did was insane and monstrous, we covered entire towns in cluster bombs,” the head of an IDF rocket unit in Lebanon said regarding the use of cluster bombs and phosphorous shells during the war.
        link to haaretz.com

        Lobby also determined to undermine Canada’s
        leading role advancing the Anti-Personnel Mines Convention (the landmines treaty)
        link to ottawacitizen.com

  22. David Doppler
    January 5, 2013, 12:58 am

    Shields and Brooks led off with a discussion of Hagel on PBS NewsHour this evening. link to pbs.org

    A couple highlights:

    DAVID BROOKS: “I spent — first — on three subjects, first, his integrity. I spent a lot of time with him during the Iraq war, and I didn’t agree with where he was going, but he followed his conscience, he followed the evidence, and he did the hardest thing that is — one of the very hard things, which is to be unpopular in your workplace.”
    . . . .
    [Explaining the opposition:] Well, part of [Hagel’s] realism is less of a moral and ideological commitment to Israel, and more of an effort to rebalance our position in the Middle East.
    I think there is some genuine element to that. And so I do think he is a bit a part of that. He has been part of some organizations that have run articles, you know, about the Israel lobby that have talked about an apartheid Israel. So he has been associated with some people who have said some reasonably inflammatory things. [parse "reasonably inflammatory"!]

    MARK SHIELDS: And I think there are some people who view any criticism of whatever the administration is in Likud as somehow disloyal to the state of Israel. If you say what the Labor Party in Israel says about Benjamin Netanyahu in this country, you would make yourself vulnerable to charges of anti-Semitism in some quarters.

  23. mcohen
    January 5, 2013, 8:24 am

    the netanyahu bomb diagram and chuck hagel have one thing in common-they both represent a lost battle against chinese influence.one in iran and one in vietnam
    but that might be a good thing because the sarge might still be able to teach the officer a trick or two about listening to what the troops have to say

    • James Canning
      January 6, 2013, 2:40 pm

      China has been trying to persuade Iran to stop enriching uranium to 20 percent. Surely this is a good thing.

      Have you forgotten that Vietnam was aligned more with the Soviet Union, rather than China, after that country achieved reunification?

  24. HPH
    January 5, 2013, 10:32 am

    Haaretz has an article about the impending Sen. Hagel nomination (Divisive, Israel-centered battle royal looms in Washington as Hagel appointment appears imminent). I noticed that most of the 24 comments are supportive of the Sen. Hagel nomination. Another article on this access-controlled site expresses concern about Al Jazeera having access to millions of American homes. Once again, it seems that the Mondoweiss readers have invaded the Haaretz site.

  25. American
    January 5, 2013, 11:30 am

    I am finally learning to laugh at these people….instead of going ballistic when I see their dribblings…..lol

    link to washingtonpost.com
    Jennifer Rubin

    ”In some sense this is a win-win for the right. If Hagel is nominated and a heated confirmation hearing ensues, the president will be forced to defend Hagel’s comments insinuating American Jews are guilty of dual loyalty (“The Jewish Lobby” and “I’m not the Senator from Israel” are some of Hagel’s more memorable code words). Whether Hagel gets confirmed or not becomes irrelevant to those wanting a teachable moment about the president and his priorities. As one pro-Israel activist resigned to a Hagel nomination put it, ” It should be a clarifying moment.”

    Yea it will be a clarifying moment….but not a moment that will be good for I-Firsters no matter how it goes.
    This column of Rubin’s reminded me of what someone said the other day about how writers in major papers and publications just ‘lie’ these days…that’s how kindergarten stupid it is…unsourced, unverified statements, twisted, incomplete quotes, a lot of things that are ‘made up’ and thrown out to the public. Anyone know anyone who has much respect or trust for what they see in the WP or NYT or hear in most of the msm these days? I don’t. Everyone is a cynic with good reason.

    • David Doppler
      January 5, 2013, 1:03 pm

      Interesting to see nearly unanimous comments following this article attacking Rubin, supporting Hagel.

    • HPH
      January 5, 2013, 8:17 pm

      The essence of this article is captured in the title: “Conservatives relish prospect of Hagel confirmation fight.” The idea is that a Sen. Hagel nomination would be a disaster for the Obama presidency. She says “Indeed, it is Democrats on Capitol Hill who seem glum and pro-Israel critics of the president who are nearly giddy with anticipation.” Evidently, the pro-Israel critics have flipped from being negative about the nomination to being supportive. It’s probably too late to stop this anticipated nomination and the disaster it will create. Perhaps Pres. Obama’s only option is to resign immediately.

  26. American
    January 5, 2013, 2:51 pm

    link to jewishpress.com

    Chuck Hagel told Israel Supporters: “Let the Jews Pay for It!”

    By: Lori Lowenthal Marcus
    Published: January 4th, 2013

    ”According to a report in the Washington Free Beacon, during the late 1980′s, when Chuck Hagel was the president and chief executive officer of the World United Service Organizations (USO), he threatened to close down the Haifa USO Port because of financial concerns. The USO is a non-profit, non-partisan organization that provides services and recreation to members of the U.S. military.
    The Haifa USO Port was opened in late 1984, as the Sixth Fleet had begun making regular stops at the port since the late 1970s, and especially in the wake of the bombing of the U.S. Marine’s barracks in Beirut. The Haifa USO was open 24 hours a day when U.S. ships were in port.
    Hagel’s conduct regarding the effort to keep the port open shocked Jewish leaders who were part of a discussion with him about the matter in 1989, according to the Beacon‘s report.
    “He said to me, ‘Let the Jews pay for it’,” said Marsha Halteman, director for military and law enforcement programs at the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), which led the battle to keep USO Haifa operational.
    According to Halteman, Hagel’s behavior was clearly anti-Semitic.
    “He essentially told us that if we wanted to keep the USO [in Haifa] open—and when I say ‘we,’ he meant ‘the Jews’—he said the Jews could pay for it,” said Halteman, who recalled being taken aback by the comment.
    “I told him at the time that I found his comments to be anti-Semitic,” she said. “He was playing into that dual loyalty thing.”
    Despite Hagel’s behavior, a combination of congressional support, appeals from the Sixth Fleet, and the efforts of JINSA to raise substantial funds, enabled the Haifa port to stay open. It was not until the fall of 2002 that the Haifa USO port finally closed for good because of security concerns — this was the height of the Second Arab Uprising.
    The Beacon report quotes a USO spokesperson as saying they have “no records of any discussion to close the USO Center in Haifa while Charles Hagel was CEO and President of the USO from 1987 to 1990,″ adding that the USO staff “are still working to determine when after 2000 the USO Center in Haifa closed.”
    But an Internet search uncovered an AP report from 1990 which clearly states that the port almost closed because of financial concerns. An article from the Times of London reveals that the U.S. military banned its members from stopping at the Haifa port following the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen on October 12, 2000.
    What is perhaps even more shocking – if true – than Hagel’s comments that Jews should pay for the Haifa USO Port is that, according to a conservative Nebraska blogger, Hagel once told an employee of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Ally Milder, that she was a “[expletive] tool from AIPAC.”
    Add to these latest examples of—shall one say—surprisingly indelicate behavior, the news that even such liberal politicians as outgoing Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) are “strongly opposed” to Hagel becoming Secretary of Defense, and it becomes increasingly hard to imagine that Hagel will get the nod. But if Hagel does get the nod, it is even harder to imagine that his nomination will survive the confirmation process.’

    This is funny….even us non Senators who don’t have to sign off on budgets giving Israel billions know that if AIPAC or JINSA or some other Jewish/Israeli org wants money for anything it’s always cause it will do something for Israel…it sure wasn’t because they give a damn about US sailors having a USO center for relaxation. Now why would they care? Do they think it would be a good propaganda center for Israelis to mingle with US sailors…or do they want them to hang out there instead of making forays into Israel? Or was it just another ‘US thingy’ connection they could claim in Israel? They always have a motive for Israel.
    I would have told them to pay for it themselves also. And it’s none of their f’ing business where the US keeps USOs or closes USOs.

    • Ellen
      January 6, 2013, 9:06 am

      Interesting and pathetic hit piece on Hagel — where the author makes a case with unsubstaintiated heresay by a single individual and an unamed internet blogger from Nebraska.

      It is so transparent and primitive, stuff like this can only help Hagel.

      • American
        January 6, 2013, 12:29 pm

        It is so transparent and primitive”…Ellen

        It usually is….I don’t know how to describe the mentalities of these attack people ..maybe old fashioned ‘gutter snipes’ is the right description for them.

      • American
        January 7, 2013, 12:54 pm

        BTW…Steve Clemons at the Atlantic just blew this smear away.
        He called the Isr Navy Commander and the woman who ran the US USO at the port for 20 years and they both said this was total nonsense….said they could not have though more highly of Hagel.
        Clemons also went on to show that Hagel had raised more money to fund the USO than anyone else and that the Hafia USO was closed down because US ships did not stop enough any longer to make it worthwhile.

  27. MHughes976
    January 5, 2013, 7:05 pm

    I wouldn’t be surprised if Hagel, when nominated, made strong and vocal commitments to Israeli security and to the containment of Iran. In that event, would much have changed?

    • Ramzi Jaber
      January 6, 2013, 9:41 am

      Couldn’t agree more. The zionizts know how to play the game and the “reverse” game as well. That’s what they did to Obama….. Hussein, Moslem, Khalidi, Wright, etc. to the point where he was BOXED and FORCED to OVER-COMPENSATE. This gave us Obama’s UNSHAKEBALE commitment to the zionist israel regime.

      The zinoist lobby never loses.

    • James Canning
      January 6, 2013, 2:05 pm

      Would Hagel have helped convince Obama not to treble the US troop presence in Afghanistan? Gates argued strongly for it.

  28. Kathleen
    January 5, 2013, 7:42 pm

    Seeing this potential announcement all over the tickers going across the pages of the MSM cable. Praying. This would say so much about the direction of the Obama administration. Two Vietnam Vets as Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State….two individuals who hopefully be really reluctant to promote any more wars based on unnecessary claims. Let’s also hope, pray that the Governor of Massachusetts does not choose the self appointed arrogant Barney Frank for a temporary Senator. He is all Israel all I lobby and would vote against Hagels nomination. Frank is the definition of a PEP…and would go for an attack on Iran based on what Israel wants

    • hophmi
      January 5, 2013, 8:40 pm

      Or it would say that Obama wants someone who can take the heat when he cuts advocates cuts in defense spending. Just because you’re excited about Hagel’s position on Israel doesn’t mean it actually has anything to do with this nomination.

    • Ellen
      January 6, 2013, 9:10 am

      Frank has too much mud on his shoes. Freddie Mac, anyone? His mother’s Boston charity for low income housing? The conflicts are too deep and he had a direct hand in the corruption of US housing/lending legislation.

      This is what disqualifies him for the seat, and I suspect will be a reason that the govenor of MA will not give him the nod.

  29. hophmi
    January 5, 2013, 8:27 pm

    Still haven’t seen anyone defend Hagel as being the best available person for the job.

    • libra
      January 5, 2013, 8:46 pm

      Well hophmi, I’m still working through a stack of resumes to see if someone better is available. No luck so far but I haven’t seen yours yet. Are you available?

    • justicewillprevail
      January 5, 2013, 9:30 pm

      Thanks to the Israel lobby, that is not the question any more. However, even if it is, there is a very good case to be made for him, on both sides. One of the outstanding virtues is that he is capable of thinking outside of the think tanks and media hype, as in the argument for war against Iran, an obvious rerun of the disastrous Iraq campaign promoted by the neocons and the Israel lobby.

    • Donald
      January 6, 2013, 12:54 pm

      “Still haven’t seen anyone defend Hagel as being the best available person for the job.”

      I doubt one ever gets the best available person for any job, except by a fluke. Hagel may or may not be the best manager. Robert McNamara was a genius manager, but as it turns out an utter disaster for America (not to mention what he did for the Vietnamese).

      Hagel is probably the best available pick if you want someone in there who has experienced war and is skeptical of chickenhawk arguments for more wars. He realizes that an attack on Iran would be a catastrophe. (I know you think that’s unlikely from what you said in another thread and I hope you’re right, but putting Hagel in there means at least one powerful voice against it.) He’s probably more supportive of Israel in a real sense than the vast majority of people who say they support Israel, for those who place some importance on that issue. By that I mean that if you want the average Israeli (of whatever ethnicity) to live a happy life you’d be well advised to put some pressure on the Israeli government to stop going down a path that will lead to disaster for all concerned. Hagel seems to understand this better than many “supporters” of Israel.

  30. hophmi
    January 5, 2013, 8:52 pm

    Flournoy is my recommendation.

    • piotr
      January 5, 2013, 10:23 pm

      Flournoy is very homely and speaks bureaucratese. Hagel is comparatively handsome and speaks English.

      link to thedailybeast.com

    • Shingo
      January 5, 2013, 11:01 pm

      Of course she is Hop – she has absolutely no qualifications and is another pro Israeli puppet.

    • Ramzi Jaber
      January 6, 2013, 7:20 am

      hophmi, how transparent! I thought you’d recommend Michael Oren…….

    • Ellen
      January 6, 2013, 9:20 am

      She is a good Apparatchik. And has a “slew of medals” to show for it!

      (anyone who das worked for or around the military know you get medals and awards for all the time from “good citizenship” to “cleanest shoes.” )

    • Cliff
      January 6, 2013, 12:33 pm

      Flournoy is not your recommendation, hoppy

      its the ‘recommendation’ of Israel Firsters

      you’ve simply regurgitated their talking points (or lack thereof, since they just filibuster her credentials)

      what are her positions? that’s all that matters

      Hagel isn’t a newbie to government and he had credentials as well

      and he isn’t a complete suck-up, bought-and-paid pro-Israel hack (which you prefer)

      you have no opinions of your own. you just quote wikipedia LOL

      • hophmi
        January 6, 2013, 4:31 pm

        It’s my recommendation. Yeah, and Hagel is yours, and not the recommendation of Palestine firsters.

        Her positions are similar to Hagel’s.

        As I said before, I do not know Flournoy’s positions on Israel. You can hurl all the invective at me that you want; it discredits you, not me.

      • Shingo
        January 6, 2013, 5:35 pm

        As I said before, I do not know Flournoy’s positions on Israel. You can hurl all the invective at me that you want; it discredits you, not me.

        Who do you think you are fooling Hop? The only reason you even know about Flournoy at all is because Israeli firsters have pushed for her to be considered.

      • Cliff
        January 6, 2013, 7:11 pm

        I never said Hagel was my choice. I just think the ‘controversy’ over Hagel is important because it exposes the Lobby and Israel Firsters. The LCR and whoever funded that ad of theirs, ‘liberal’ Rachel Maddow, the ADL and Abe Foxman, Barney Frank, etc. and other episodes thus far. All these vocal denunciations of Hagel by the Lobby and various pro-Israel charlatans in the media make the Israel/Palestine issue more visible.

        It’s good that you admit you know nothing about Flourwhatever. Your first comment about her was simply a recitation of her awards, copy and pasted from Wikipedia probably.

        You’ve said that she is more qualified because of those awards, but that would imply that those awards are an objective judge of her character and expertise. They aren’t.

        Not that they don’t mean anything at all. A lot of those awards/positions certainly show that she’s an Establishment darling. And it’s not as if Hagel is Edward Said or Noam Chomsky.

        But you have not said anything about Flourwhatever’s positions (ON ANYTHING). Since we’re here on an Israel-Palestine blog, you’d think you would know something about her views on Israel and the ME. But clearly, they can’t be bad. She’s not Hagel and that is what matters to you and your political faction.

        Hence, you reflexively support her because the Lobby supports her and your political community supports her (Zionist Jews who pay lip service to the 2SS but remain steadfast in their belief that the settlements aren’t a problem until ‘final status negotiations’ and blah blah blah more piece process red tape pablum).

  31. Taxi
    January 5, 2013, 11:58 pm

    Hagel gets thumbs up from Michael Moore:
    link to readersupportednews.org

  32. irmep
    January 6, 2013, 2:06 pm

    Today Robert Reich, on the George Stephanopoulos Sunday yak show, wondered why Obama would expend political capital on confirmation, but wouldn’t touch the Israel lobby angle that George laid out on the table.

    A few moments later, Reich launched into an in-depth analysis of the NRA’s “modus-operandi” to keep gun-control issues off the table.

    As Phil previously noted, Reich’s approach to the Israel lobby is “affected ignorance.” This time in service to the anti-Hagel drive.

    link to mondoweiss.net

    • James Canning
      January 7, 2013, 2:37 pm

      As much attention as possible should be given to Sheldon Adelson’s relentless promotion of Israeli expansionism even if this means endless war in the Middle East. Adelson likes to back foolish American politicians, who seem unaware they are stooges in a continuing scheme that undermines the national security of the US.

  33. Kathleen
    January 6, 2013, 4:10 pm

    Hagel thumbs up from Scowcroft, Dr. Zbig, Friedman, Richard Haas, Colin Powell I think. Folks are lining up. But with Schumer and others to shoot him down in the Senate going to be an interesting run. A few people have really nailed it by pointing out one of the big things Hagel needs to repeat is that US National Security comes first. Period. Who is going to argue except the I lobby and Israel

  34. gingershot
    January 7, 2013, 12:16 pm

    The Israeli Lobby’s power over the US political apparatus should not be looked at as independent from Israel – a set back for one is a set back for the other because they are the SAME thing

    The way to rid the US of the Neocon/Israeli Lobby cabal will be to fundamentally destabilize it in two major ways – with the 2nd dependent on the first

    Firstly – the Israeli/Israeli Lobby- hoaxed up and forced war with the US on Iran must be stopped and stopped cold

    Secondly – Israeli Apartheid must be crippled and then dismantled

    These two acts will constitute such a blow against the Israel Lobby in US that Kristol, Krauthammer, and the rest of the neocons currently in power will themselves be fundamentally destabilized and discredited.

    America free of the neocons/Israeli Lobby domination will be a 2nd American revolution where the world and US foreign policy and US behavior at the UN do not revolve around the Israeli ‘drama queen’ agenda of trying to sustain Israeli Apartheid in the face of reality.

    Israeli Apartheid is the greatest destabilizing force in the Middle East as well as America itself because Israeli leaders (like the obsessed Netanyahu) will do anything and everything to try to hang on to Israeli Apartheid/the Palestinian occupation if they have to bring the world, US, and Middle East down around their ears to do it.

  35. James Canning
    January 7, 2013, 2:08 pm

    Core function of Israel lobby is to dupe the American public into thinking their national security is threatened by “enemies” of Israel, when Israel through its own foolish policies virtually demands that Israel face “enemies”.

  36. hophmi
    January 7, 2013, 4:25 pm

    “Israeli Apartheid is the greatest destabilizing force in the Middle East as well as America itself because Israeli leaders (like the obsessed Netanyahu) will do anything and everything to try to hang on to Israeli Apartheid/the Palestinian occupation if they have to bring the world, US, and Middle East down around their ears to do it.”

    This continues to be one of the stupidest ideas of the day, particularly given what’s happening in Syria right now.

    • Shingo
      January 7, 2013, 5:45 pm

      This continues to be one of the stupidest ideas of the day, particularly given what’s happening in Syria right now.

      And yours happens to be the stupidest but enduring defences. Yesterday it was look at Darfur, today it’s look at Syria. And when the vioelnce in Syria is over, you’ll be pointing at some other flash point in the globe while Israel egregious war crimes and human rights violations continue unabated and with impunity.

    • James Canning
      January 9, 2013, 2:07 pm

      Can we assume you agree that Israel’s continuing occupation of the West Bank does severe damage to the image of the US in the Middle East?

Leave a Reply