The AIPAC ask– US must support Israel if it decides to trigger war with Iran

Israel/Palestine
on 71 Comments

The AIPAC policy conference begins today in Washington, and hundreds of our legislators will be feted, and pressed to endorse legislation saying that the U.S. will support Israel if it decides to attack Iran. Alex Kane reported on the AIPAC ask earlier this week, including this morsel of the legislation:

Urges that, if the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in self-defense, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.

And here is James A . Russell at Lobelog lamenting the Graham-Menendez push:

Astonishingly, as the Department of Defense and other Federal agencies are handing out furlough notices to employees (myself included), the Senate appears set to take up a joint resolution endorsing the idea of the United States joining an Israeli attack on Iran.

The non-binding resolution, introduced yesterday by Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ), suggests that the nation should effectively outsource the decision to go to war to another country.

Weeks after publicly castigating incoming Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel for his previous remarks suggesting that the Israeli lobby exercised too much influence in Washington, these Senators have, well, just shown how craven they are to that same lobby on the eve of the annual meeting of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). We can be sure that many of their colleagues will join Graham and Menendez in this push for another war.

Just how this country is supposed to fight another war while it’s cutting back on the civilians that keep the Navy’s ships at sea, its Air Force planes in the air and its land forces in the field, is a mystery. That is to say nothing of the myriad of other federal agencies whose workers police our borders, gather intelligence on our enemies and perform countless other functions to help keep the US safe. Perhaps the Senate has a plan to count on a NRA-sponsored citizens’ militia to make up for the shortfall?”

71 Responses

  1. American
    March 3, 2013, 12:07 pm

    Well non binding resolutions aren’t legistation——but they are a good way to show AIPAC who’s doing the donkey for them.

    However, there were a blue million non binding resolutions ‘against ‘ Iran calling for war, sanctions, etc. before the US actually put sanctions on Iran— and a blue million non binding resolutions against Palestine before they ever got passed into actual law.

    So these resolutions can be building blocks toward actual legistation.

  2. Citizen
    March 3, 2013, 12:10 pm

    Disgusting.
    I’ve been watching AIPAC 2013 on JLTV. They trotted out a bunch of hi-tek Israeli inventions helping mankind medically, or helping our soldiers. Then they trotted out how Israel is helping poor Africans. Ever watch old grainy film from the Nazi Era showing the world the hi-tek and humanitarian things Germans were doing? They also had some Israeli women, who spoke perfect English (probably raised in USA), telling us all how she was teaching all Americans to be Golden Goys willing to sacrifice themselves to save Jews.

    Second two hours of today’s AIPAC conference is on JLTV tonight. Then it’s on JLTV again tomorrow evening. Right now, on JLTV, they are broadcasting Israel’s crappy version of Sesame Street. Sheesh.

    • American
      March 3, 2013, 3:10 pm

      @ Citizen

      Is that a TV channel and online?

    • Citizen
      March 3, 2013, 9:40 pm

      @American

      JLTV is a cable tv channel devoted to Jewish life here and abroad–Israel is the main subject on most of its shows. One does not have to pay extra for it like most cable channels bringing European culture and news from any specific European country.
      JLTV also has its own web site.

  3. pabelmont
    March 3, 2013, 12:30 pm

    And APIAC (and assorted Zionist donors) give so LITTLE to Congress. It’s embarrassingnhow CHEAP it is to buy total devotion. See here for a Zionist view and here for an anti-Zionist view.

  4. Palmyra
    March 3, 2013, 12:48 pm

    “Ask” used as a noun makes my skin crawl. It’s a new pundit fav for some reason, used to both soften a demand and turn it into a benign forgone conclusion, whatever it is, by whomever. I’ve seen it many times in the past few months when the punditry is referring to this or that recalcitrant party who must not be offended or have their officialness challenged(MIC, TBTFs, SC)….so I guess by definition it’s appropriate for AIPAC. It still makes my skin crawl. Can we not promote newsspeak here, please?

    • ritzl
      March 4, 2013, 11:22 pm

      Have to say that “ask” is just part of the lobbying lexicon. It’s a necessary forced prioritization. You can’t ask for everything because legislators can’t respond to everything, therefore you have to narrow what you “ask” for to the one or two (two, if you’re lucky or funded, or related by marriage…) things that are most important.

      Where I agree is that it’s bizarre and nauseatingly cloying that the MSM (not in the sense of this article, because Phil is making a specific point) seems to have adopted the insider lingo to make themselves look “smart” or “connected.” Sickening. They’re generally neither.

      This (phrasing) too will pass as MSM wafts on to the next “we’re smarter than you” thing/term. Kinda like “sea change.” But the “ask” will remain the pivotal interaction between “petitioners” and legislators.

      Phil’s point was, to me, that to use a precious “ask” to subordinate US interests behind Israel’s was extaordinarily brazen, in a US legislative institution/sense.

  5. Les
    March 3, 2013, 12:55 pm

    It’s less important that both houses of our Congress are bi-partisan than it is that both are buy-partisan when it comes to money, including the publicity donated to them by our media, so long as they toe the line..

  6. jimmy
    March 3, 2013, 1:22 pm

    take the a…out of aipac…this has nothing to do with america

    • James Canning
      March 3, 2013, 2:34 pm

      jimmy – – You mean Aipac does not advance the interests of America?

      • jimmy
        March 3, 2013, 5:12 pm

        no…..I am a JC also..my last name goes back a 1000 years,,

    • Sin Nombre
      March 3, 2013, 2:50 pm

      Exactly right, particularly on display here: Notice that this Resolution doesn’t seem to address even in the least what *our* interests are. Instead, coming from the U.S. Congress, it’s just a cause-and-cost free sentiment: Don’t consider our interests, don’t consider our costs, just … support Israel, no matter what.

      And in this regard I wonder if we aren’t seeing a subtle switch to this idea, with the Lobby and etc. just quietly choosing to not bring up U.S. interests because at least they may have to fight such a quarrel out.

      I.e., much easier to avoid that losing quarrel.

      And that’s particularly so—as Russell notes—as the U.S. slips ever deeper into the economic pits. Can’t have costs discussed when *that’s* on the table.

      Very intriguing, and subtle if true.

  7. gingershot
    March 3, 2013, 2:13 pm

    What does the Israeli Lobby have on Lindsey Graham to explain his peculiar willingness to fellate donkeys on Israel’s behalf? – or is just the AIPAC-money and his craven desire to make sure he stays in power

  8. James Canning
    March 3, 2013, 2:33 pm

    What utter nonsense, that Israel’s “existence” is threatened by Iran.

    • talknic
      March 3, 2013, 6:14 pm

      James Canning “What utter nonsense, that Israel’s “existence” is threatened by Iran”

      Quite. Especially as the UNSC agree with Iran almost word for word. link to wp.me

      Is there any difference in the essence of the following two statements?

      1) “Israel must end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”

      2) “The occupation regime over Jerusalem must be erased from the pages of time”

  9. Reds
    March 3, 2013, 3:04 pm

    “Urges that, if the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in self-defense, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.”

    Gotta love how attacking someone is “self defense” and by not doing so is a danger to ones existence.

    This reminds me of the of the friend who nearly always gets into a fight at the bar and the younger brother saying “if you got our back if things goes down”. So you say yea if it’s in self defense. So the guy goes to the bar and sees someone he doesn’t like and starts threatening the guy. You ask your buddy to calm down and walk away but he goes on about how this guy said He shouldn’t be in the area and how he’s an threat to himself and others and doesn’t your buddy abusing his neighbor. Because of this every time your buddy gets a chance he threatens to hurt him but only if you are there and you will defend him because even know your buddy could win the fight he would get himself and his brother injured in doing so and would rather you do the fighting because you can not only take more but win the fight more swiftly.

    Israel= The buddy who cries self defense when starting fights and relying on the U.S. to defend it
    U.S.= So far is the guy being forced to back up is buddy even when his buddy is in the wrong
    AIPAC= Little brother convincing the U.S. it’s it duty to protect his older brother “Self-Defense” no matter what.

  10. Les
    March 3, 2013, 3:20 pm

    Although not a member of Congress, here’s an example of the free publicity our media provides AIPAC, from the front page online edition of today’s NY Times.

    Opinion
    To Achieve Mideast Peace, Suspend Disbelief
    By DENNIS B. ROSS

    Fourteen points to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

  11. Egbert
    March 3, 2013, 3:23 pm

    Yup, it’s IPAC all the way. All its members should be forced to register as agents of a foreign power.

  12. Taxi
    March 3, 2013, 3:24 pm

    Mondo folk,
    Early on last year, I think it was last February, maybe even before, I analyzed and determined that there would be no attack on Iran before our 2012 elections – despite the constant warmongering throughout the year by israel itself, by israel-firsters here in the USA and also by our msm. Simplified, I called it early and I called it right.

    Let me here give you my isreal/iran analysis for this year: a minimalist version of it as I don’t have time to elaborate right now.

    There will be NO STRIKE on Iran this year, or any other year. The Iran bluff-threat is over. Russia and America, with China sitting silent between them, have finally agreed that a nuclear Iran is a better scenario than direct military conflict between them over control of the mideast. Israel will just have to live with a nuclear-armed Iran – and it can. Choice of Hagel is the subplot message: enough realism compels us now to share the mideast with the Russians and the Chinese, for the time being at least, instead of fighting them for it and risk losing more than we can afford to lose. We are not the ONLY superpower anymore – we are one of a handful. It’s not ‘official’ yet, but it’s happening slowly, quietly, surely – and the more sober minds are preparing for it.

    It’s a waste of time to even follow Aipac’s summit or believe any vitriolic statements they make about Iran. They are now utterly inconsequential non-players beating their chests and grunting from the back row. The current Pentagon boss and White House resident prez know fully the folly of going to war where victory is not guaranteed.

    Neither wants to fight Iran for israel. Cuz that kind of a war right now will only weaken us tremendously. We have a better chance getting back on top of the world if we step aside temporarily and catch our breath and restock, restore and redirect. Obama’s plan is to create a warless decade for the majority armed forces in order to allow recovery for both the morale malaise of troops and the country’s economy (morale malaise of civilians) – though he will continue with his drone warfare strategy on ‘old’ wars – till it’s politically safe/expedient to stop.

    An attack on Iran is not in israel’s hands no more, it’s not in aipac’s hands either. It’s no longer an option on the table as far as Russia, America and China are concerned.

    And I hope my bit of analysis freaks out the freakazoid zionists – hope it haunts them every goddam day and night. It’s over Rover. You’re gonna be left alone to crumble from within. Like cancer, Apartheid has spread to every inch and corner of israel. I predict the rogue state will collapse from within and with a whimper inside a decade.

    I also predict that many Palestinians will feel sympathy to the israeli predicament – may even invite some of them to live as equals among them in liberated, realized Palestine.

    • jimmy
      March 3, 2013, 5:47 pm

      taxi…are you a taxi driver…….there is something the the US does not want to do to Iran,,,as bad as israel and its buddies in the US go…Bush didnt pull the trigger and niether will O..

      kerry has turned into a bas ta rd….

      I think O wants to make friends with Iran,,,,,…they have offered time and again

    • American
      March 3, 2013, 5:49 pm

      @ Taxi

      Hey Taxi, you may right again….but we still have a on going battle , we have to keep raising hell and try to stop US aid to Israel.

    • jimmy
      March 3, 2013, 5:51 pm

      so if the US attacked Iran…China get pissed..that makes senses

    • Sin Nombre
      March 3, 2013, 6:07 pm

      Even understanding that your analysis is “minimalist,” while it talks about the chances of an attack on Iran by the U.S., it says nothing about such an attack carried out by *Israel,* also then necessarily ignoring the question of what the U.S. would do in that event.

      And isn’t the question of an Israeli-led attack *really* suspiciously germane now given the terms of the AIPAC-pushed resolution?

      After all, it might be thought that Netanyahu pushed Obama as hard as he could to attack Iran before and Obama just proved to him that no, he wasn’t going to do same. Thus Netanyahu just gambled on Romney winning, and now that he sees that result has resigned himself to having to at least initiate an attack himself, thus making perfect sense of what we are seeing with this Resolution and what we’re told we can expect from the AIPAC conference.

      No?

      • James Canning
        March 3, 2013, 7:37 pm

        Worth bearing in mind: 3007 NIE on Iran (that Iran was not building nukes, in opinion of US intellgence). Ergo, US attack would have been illegal.

      • Taxi
        March 3, 2013, 11:29 pm

        @ Sin Nombre,
        Israel can’t go it alone and attack Iran – logistically, it can’t get there without Saudi/USA help. Also Netanyahu is a bully-coward who knows that the next regional war involving israel may very well wipe israel off the map. When your over-hyped and ‘most moral army’ can’t push back 3000 hizbollah fighters, well you ain’t exactly gonna be able to push back 600.000 hizbollah fighters in a wider war (not to mention simultaneous attacks by hamas, Egyptian brotherhood, Iran and Syria). Even if israel ‘can’ attack Iran solo, it would be challenged by Russia and China and due to USA’s weakened mideast influence and it’s reluctance today to go to war with two major world powers at the same time, israel would face the blunt consequences alone. Aipac shmaipac, it’s in Russia and China’s hands, not israel’s. Note that the only way the USA can challenge Russia and China in the mideast is through small proxy wars, that would need time and preparation. All Obama has to do to maintain some sort of political equilibrium at home is to give more arms to israel and yes diplomatic cover, but NOT American troops and without American troops physically backing israel, israel is sunk like a dead stone in the stormy oceans of China and Russia.

        @ Citizen,
        Obama has already agreed to turn a blind eye to illegal israeli settlement activity. It’s the only thing the zionist piranhas have been able to force on him. Illegal israeli settlement activity however will create more global BDS mass against it. I’m beginning to think that perhaps BDS will kill zionism sooner than cannon balls and bullets. And no it wouldn’t take 30 years like it did with S. Africa, thanks to the internet. Also, aid to israel may be ‘trimmed’ but will certainly continue under Obama.

        @American,
        Our congress is under zionist occupation, Iran war or not, we should definitely kick that lice-infested monkey off our backs and kick it with all our might I say!

        @Jimmy,
        No I am not a taxi driver, nor was I one in my past life.

      • James Canning
        March 4, 2013, 1:53 pm

        Surely the US is not trying to “challenge” China or Russia in the Middle East.

    • Citizen
      March 3, 2013, 9:57 pm

      @Taxi, do you see anything from Obama this year regarding a public statement, or even quiet talks to push Israel to quit settlement expansion? Will there be any threat to cut back aid to Israel?

      • flyod
        March 4, 2013, 6:57 am

        “I know that when I visit AIPAC I’m among friends–good friends, friends who share my strong commitment to make sure that the bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable today, unbreakable tomorrow–unbreakable forever.”

        President Barack Obama

      • bintbiba
        March 4, 2013, 10:43 am

        heh heh Taxi , impressive.

        Toujours les points sur les ‘i’ !!!
        You’ve been long gone, I was getting worried.

      • Taxi
        March 4, 2013, 1:55 pm

        Gracias bintbiba!

    • CloakAndDagger
      March 4, 2013, 1:58 am

      @ Taxi

      I analyzed and determined that there would be no attack on Iran before our 2012 elections

      Yes you did predict that last year and I promised you a crate of Napa Valley’s finest if your prediction was correct.

      The next time you are in the Bay Area (or Beijing), I will deliver on my promise (just can’t get myself excited about going to the ME to find you). Well done!

      • Taxi
        March 4, 2013, 9:16 am

        Thanks Cloaky!

        A friendly glass of bubbly with you next time I’m in the Bay Area would be lovely and more than enough alkee for me. You’re also invited to come down to my city of LA when I’m back there oooh say by summertime.

        I think the lesson to learn is not to be taken in by the main administrators of the politics of fear: our main stream media. Always remember that they will say all kindsa dramatic sh*t to please their ‘friends’ and sell their soiled-with-lies rags.

      • CloakAndDagger
        March 4, 2013, 3:12 pm

        @ Taxi

        Happy to provide as much alkee as you can stand in the Bay Area. Not likely to go to LA as I avoid that armpit of a city like the plague (no offense). Going through LAX is two notches below going to the dentist. SFO is so much friendlier in comparison!

        Stay safe wherever you are in the ME.

      • Taxi
        March 5, 2013, 12:00 am

        Cloaks,
        SFO is by far more ‘civilized’ than LA – but it’s small and too cold up there :-)

      • CloakAndDagger
        March 5, 2013, 6:50 pm

        @ Taxi

        Small is a good thing (who wants urban sprawl?) – and it is only cold in summer! :-)

      • Annie Robbins
        March 4, 2013, 9:31 am

        c&d, i vaguely recall predicting we’d be staving off israeli insistence to invade iran myself. can’t recall the exact wording of your prediction. there’s been some action on the p5+1 front lately, toivo’s mentioned it a couple times. good news actually, at least it seems like it.

        And so the games begin…

        link to mondoweiss.net

      • CloakAndDagger
        March 4, 2013, 3:17 pm

        @ annie

        I vaguely recall that you were looking at P5+1 talks last May as being a turning point, and my predicting that Israel would sabotage it before it happened. I claimed partial credit for that prediction because Israel did sabotage it, but the talks did happen, and ended up being of no consequence because of the sabotaging.

        This year, however, the upcoming talks look more promising, and Israel is not in as strong a position to derail it.

        Tipping point.

      • Annie Robbins
        March 4, 2013, 4:59 pm

        no, my article is sitting right there on top of that link, i didn’t predict it was a turning point. and i still do not think israel has succeeded in sabotaging the talks, otherwise they wouldn’t still be having them:

        link to telegraph.co.uk

      • CloakAndDagger
        March 4, 2013, 7:31 pm

        Hope you are right.

      • Annie Robbins
        March 4, 2013, 7:45 pm

        crossing my fingers big time. staving off israel staving off israel staving off israel …. one day at a time.

      • Taxi
        March 4, 2013, 11:53 pm

        Okay, I’ve had time to search up and it looks like I first called the ‘no war on Iran will happen’ on October 28th, 2011:

        Taxi October 28, 2011 at 4:27 am with 34 replies
        Jeffrey,
        There ain’t a chance in hell a war against Syria or Iran is gonna take place….
        —————————–
        Jeffrey Blankfort and I had a good discussion about it at the time – also with American and Cloak&Dagger.

      • CloakAndDagger
        March 5, 2013, 6:51 pm

        @ Taxi

        You were right about Iran but wrong about Syria (although our war is covert).

      • Taxi
        March 5, 2013, 8:18 pm

        Actually I was right about Syria too in the context of the time of the post: if memory serves, for about a month at that time, the neocons were loudly threatening to use Nato/go it alone/bomb/invade Syria and the msm was trashing up on Syria in support of an attack – till Russia and China stepped in and made it clear and certain that they will not allow an attack on Syria the way it had just happened to Libya. And yeah America took note of their red line, stopped talking sh*t out loud and started working covertly with the Syrian salafists. Hence now we have a rattled and rocked Syria and not a bombed/invaded one – compared to Libya or Iraq.

        Hence too the current proxy-war taking place on Syrian soil between USA, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Qatar VERSUS Russia and China. Or, in simplespeak: the Salafists versus the Syrian army.

    • eljay
      March 4, 2013, 9:41 am

      >> I predict the rogue state will collapse from within and with a whimper inside a decade.

      *sigh* So much for the Thousand-Year “Jewish State”… :-(

  13. American
    March 3, 2013, 3:33 pm

    U.S. lawmakers question military aid to Egypt, citing concerns about Israel

    link to washingtonpost.com

    >>>>>>>>>>>

    Since 1979 we US taxpayers have shelled out over 132 Billion + to Egypt and Jordon for their peace treaty with Israel..and total cost of Israel to the US has been 1.4 Trillion.

    And now aid to Egypt is being held up because I guess the Israelis in congress want the Egyptian military to overthrown Muris in order to get their military aid.
    And in addition to that the US is holding up the IMF economic loan to Egypt it needs to get to keep from going belly up. The sad thing is there are hundreds of investors lined up to invest in Egypt and set up manufacturing centers..but they won’t till Egypt gets the stamp of approval from a IMF loan which would show confidence in Egyptian political stablity.

    Bombing Iran is not the only war to start WWIII in the ME….let Egypt which represents a quarter of the Arab population in the ME melt down into starvation and chaos and you will see fireworks spread.

    Fucking, stupid, senseless, corrupt, pointless,..and we owe this bottomless pit of
    putrid quicksand the US is in to the US Zionist of 1948 and the Israel Cult Holocaust Industry…the biggest criminal con game ever played on the world.

    • CloakAndDagger
      March 4, 2013, 2:08 am

      @ American

      Most of us just want to raise our families and enjoy the fruits of our labor – not have it redirected to foreign countries for use in oppressing their families.

      Damn those I-firsters all to hell.

      • American
        March 4, 2013, 10:51 am

        “Damn those I-firsters all to hell.” …. Cloak & Dagger

        Amen!
        You know I’m not against US aid if it’s humanitarian aid to poor countries…but even in the humanitarian aid we give it is so poorly administered it ends up in the pockets of the corrupt third world leaders in the countries we give it too.
        God only knows what the US could have accomplished for humanity with the trillions upon dozen trillions of taxpayer money we’ve spent if we were competent in doing it …or actually gave a damn.

        The amount of our money that has been squandered and throw away and used to make dictators and US puppets rich is beyond imagining.

        BWTTGASO

      • CloakAndDagger
        March 4, 2013, 3:25 pm

        You know I’m not against US aid if it’s humanitarian aid to poor countries…

        I am not either, however, charity begins at home. We have so many homeless people in this country, and even people starving to death in this land of plenty. Some homeless guy just froze to death outside an abandoned home because he was too scared to break-in! That makes these I-firsters murderers in my book. How can anyone send a single dollar to Israel while our own people sleep on the streets and starve or freeze to death?

        Hang ‘em and let the wolves feast.

  14. jimmy
    March 3, 2013, 5:19 pm

    you know back when Ahmadinejad was first elected he did a an interview with ..Asian times..said he supported a two state solution ….

    • James Canning
      March 3, 2013, 7:41 pm

      Yes, and Iran has given signals from time to time it will accept Israel within “1967” borders if this deal is accepted by the Palestinians.

      • Kathleen
        March 4, 2013, 12:46 pm

        He often says he will go along with what the Palestinians agree to

      • James Canning
        March 4, 2013, 1:39 pm

        True. Is one American in 50 aware of this fact? Doubt it.

      • Kathleen
        March 5, 2013, 3:11 pm

        Well since the US MSM will not touch what he really says and instead have been repeating the neocons unsubstantiated claims about Iran we can not expect an educated American public about facts

      • James Canning
        March 6, 2013, 2:20 pm

        Very true. Educated populace unwelcome. Regarding Iran, Israel/Palestine, squandering on weapons by US, etc.

  15. American
    March 3, 2013, 6:00 pm

    Anti Semite Gives Speech on Foreign Policy to US State Department.
    Now I wonder who let Walt in? Is the Lobby slipping? I noticed that some Israeli zio agent/spy in the state Department alerted zio blog punks to this Walt appearence….LOL

    Israel Lobby’ Author Addresses State Department
    Coauthor of ‘The Israel Lobby’ tells State Department why ‘American foreign policy fails’

    BY: Adam Kredo
    March 3, 2013 1:17 pm

    A controversial author and longtime critic of the U.S.-Israel alliance lectured at the State Department Friday on the eve of the AIPAC policy conference, Washington’s largest annual pro-Israel gathering.

    Stephen Walt, coauthor of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy and professor of international affairs at Harvard University, was the featured speaker at the Secretary’s Open Forum on Friday afternoon. His topic: “Top reasons American foreign policy fails,” according to a copy of the event flyer posted in the hallways of Foggy Bottom.

    A controversial author and longtime critic of the U.S.-Israel alliance lectured at the State Department Friday on the eve of the AIPAC policy conference, Washington’s largest annual pro-Israel gathering.

    Stephen Walt, coauthor of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy and professor of international affairs at Harvard University, was the featured speaker at the Secretary’s Open Forum on Friday afternoon. His topic: “Top reasons American foreign policy fails,” according to a copy of the event flyer posted in the hallways of Foggy Bottom.

    It is unclear how high the U.S.-Israel relationship ranked on Walt’s list.

    One State Department insider provided the announcement flyer to the Free Beacon and expressed concern that the Department would host such a divisive figure.

    Walt’s speech, which took place as Secretary of State John Kerry traveled overseas on his first diplomatic tour, came days after the Senate confirmed Chuck Hagel as secretary of Defense on a sharply divided vote of 58-41. Walt emerged as a strong supporter of Hagel’s nomination, defending the former Nebraska GOP senator’s remarks that the “Jewish lobby” “intimidates” elected officials on Capitol Hill.

    The Washington Free Beacon reported on a contemporaneous account, written by a Hagel supporter, of a 2007 speech the then-senator delivered at Rutgers University in which he is alleged to have said that the State Department was an adjunct of the Israeli foreign minister’s office. Hagel said he did not recall making that statement in a letter to Senators Lindsey Graham (R., SC) and Kelly Ayotte (R., NH) and disavowed its content.

    Walt celebrated Hagel’s confirmation in an item posted on his Foreign Policy magazine blog two days before his State Department remarks, while cautioning his followers that “it would be a huge mistake to conclude that the lobby’s clout has been broken and that Obama will now be free to chart a new course.”

    His incendiary 2007 book, coauthored with University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer, argued that a shadowy collection of pro-Israel activists and groups, including AIPAC, tilts U.S. foreign policy toward Israel in a way harmful to American and Israeli interests, and suggested that a number of pro-Israel American Jews intentionally put the Jewish state’s interests, and more specifically the interests of the Israeli Likud party, before America’s.

    Walt’s accusations have been condemned by Jewish leaders as anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. A number of liberal commentators observed that the book was one-sided, conspiratorial, and had nothing to say about the murderous legacy of Palestinian terrorism.

    The Anti-Defamation League on numerous occasions has condemned Walt’s work an “anti-Israel screed.”

    ADL chief Abraham Foxman recently compared Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel’s controversial comments about the so-called “Jewish lobby” to Walt’s worldview.

    “The sentiments [Hagel's] expressed about the Jewish lobby border on anti-Semitism in the genre of professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt and former president Jimmy Carter,” Foxman told the Washington Post in December.

    The Secretary’s Open Forum was established in 1967. Speakers are handpicked by a “chairperson who serves directly under the Secretary of State,” according to the State Department.

    “The Open Forum provides opportunities for any employee to express professional views (including dissenting views) candidly, free of bureaucratic constraints, and under safeguards against pressures or penalties,” the description states.

    Jewish human rights group B’nai B’rith International was critical of Walt’s being invited to speak.

    “Walt is known for his biased and provocative comments about Israel and its friends and supporters,” B’nai B’rith said in an official statement to the Free Beacon. ”Israel is a close friend and ally of this country and his appearance at this forum is at odds with the long-standing and continuing friendship between the United States and Israel.”

    Neither Walt nor the State Department responded to Free Beacon requests for comment.’

    link to freebeacon.com
    &
    link to algemeiner.com

    • American
      March 3, 2013, 6:01 pm

      PS..nothing on Walt’s blog about this yet, maybe he will post his talk there this coming week.

      • CloakAndDagger
        March 4, 2013, 2:18 am

        @ American

        This is wonderful news! The fact that he was invited to speak to the State department is nothing short of a temblor! Just a year ago, one could not have predicted such an event.

        As I have stated elsewhere, we have reached the tipping point. Information is breaking out all over the place and the lobby is losing its game of whack-a-mole every day.

        I can’t wait to see what new revelation unfolds in the days ahead!

    • Kathleen
      March 3, 2013, 8:46 pm

      What great timing. This was not a mistake. Hagel gets through then Walt at a State Dept event the night before the Aipac conference, Call your Reps tomorrow and ask them to vote no on the Menedez/ Graham resolution. Ask others to do so too.

  16. Kathleen
    March 3, 2013, 8:40 pm

    Call your Senators tomorrow. Ask them to vote no on the Graham/Menendez resolution. Send out alerts to your email list, facebook. Let them know there are many people who oppose this warmongering resolution. Apply some pressure

    What the Hagel victory means
    link to walt.foreignpolicy.com
    I suspect a lot of people would like to believe Chuck Hagel’s confirmation as secretary of defense shows that Obama has broken the back of the Israel lobby and will now move U.S. Middle East policy in a direction that would be better for us, better for Israel, better for the Palestinians, and maybe even better for the entire region.

    Don’t count on it.

    It is of course a very good thing that the Senate confirmed Hagel. He had excellent credentials for the job, had done nothing to disqualify himself, and to have been denied the post on the basis of the lobby’s slander would have been truly disheartening. And there’s no question that the antics of the Emergency Committee for Israel (note: for Israel, not the U.S.), the Washington Free Beacon, Elliot Abrams, Ted Cruz, Jennifer Rubin, et al. ultimately did more harm to themselves than to Hagel. They revealed both their preference for innuendo over facts and their belief that support for Israel matters more than any other aspect of U.S. defense policy. As I’ve noted before, their behavior merely confirmed what some of us have been saying for a very long time, and they did so center-stage with the spotlight on. Very gratifying indeed.

  17. quercus
    March 4, 2013, 6:30 am

    @gingershot. I don’t think the Israel Lobby has anything” on Lindsey Graham but rather it is that South Carolina has over 3,000 defense contractors and from 2000 to 2011 has won over $25 billion in defense contracts. Research it for yourself. I typed in the keywords “defense contracts for South Carolina” and came up with the list from the site http://www.governmentcontracts.com.

  18. sardelapasti
    March 4, 2013, 9:51 am

    “… federal agencies whose workers police our borders, gather intelligence on our enemies and perform countless other functions to help keep the US safe. ”

    Are you reading what you write?

  19. Citizen
    March 4, 2013, 9:52 am

    Relabel Israel as top US ally so Israel avoids sequestration cuts (unlike, Pentagon, Education, Seniors, actual starving foreigners) & set up automatic partnering with Israel anytime Israel chooses to attack Iran:

  20. Citizen
    March 4, 2013, 10:14 am

    John McCain is talking now at AIPAC 2013 (on JLTV):

    Iranian centrifuges are spinning;
    Iran views attempts to talk with it as weakness;
    We need to work more closely with Israel if that action is necessary–no sunlight between us.

    Q How to reduce perception that Israel and US act alone?
    US leaders must always quickly remind US public when things like Goldstone Report hit the news–K G (NY congress woman)

    We are Israelis coming with The Holocaust so take Iranian threat very seriously. US should be cautious about another war, but Israel’s contemplated attack on Iran is not another war, just a single operation–retired Israeli official

    McCain on how to handle new Egypt:

    It’s very dangerous; world is in midst of change; Syria is international shame as US has allowed Syrian regime to murder 80,000; humanitarian aid alone don’t get it;
    Iran is supporting this massacre; Lebanon & Jordon are destabilized. US should directly provide arms to rebels and Israel should help. We need more pro-Israel, not less.

    US needs to continue to help Jordon keep some measure of calm, help Syrian refugees; region in flux–K G

    Israel is another (US) aircraft carrier “over there.” Iran is a vital US interest, not just Israel’s. US & Israel will share in natural gas & oil discovery–Israeli official who flew in same kind of jet McCain did (for Israel).

    WE need to remind European bankers daily not to do banking helpful to Iran.
    Fight the wrong narrative about Israel which has the moral ground; war with speeches. War of words is really important–come to Israel, meet our young innovative generation, etc.

    McCain:
    I have to tell my Baptist friends it’s hard to do the work of the Lord in the den of Satan.
    On Iran–Iran must know US/Israel will act together. We can’t just give Egypt blank check yet Egypt must not break Camp David treaty accords.

  21. Citizen
    March 4, 2013, 10:21 am

    Ad for NATAL on JLTV now–former IDF soldier with PTST showing how he’s helped from mental turmoil due to his role in Gaza. NATAL’s inventive therapy also helps US’s (mentally) wounded warriors, etc. Now the former soldier is playing guitar.

    Now AIPAC is back:

    It’s that same former IDF soldier at the mike. Open chested, big star of david necklace pendant. He’s grateful for NATAL’s help. He’s gonna play a song, dedicated to his family for their help. Flash to his family’s hens clapping. They all have Israeli blue ribbon medals around their necks. Sings in Hebrew.

  22. American
    March 4, 2013, 11:23 am

    What the h*** is with this?

    I was reading this news article about O’s upcoming trip and Pollard release issue and Lawrence Kolb going to Israel during O’s trip in some kind of effort to free Pollard:

    Lawrence Korb to Arrive in Israel to Aid Efforts for Pollard
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com › NewsCached
    You +1’d this publicly. Undo
    4 days ago – The officials also indicated that Obama does not intend to present any gestures involving Pollard during his visit to Israel next month. At the…

    Looking up Kolb I saw that he had been Ass. Sec. under Casper Weinberg and has been going 24/7 for years to get Pollard free. Kolb says his reason is it’s against his”American” principles to keep Pollard in prison. His ‘American’ principles claim is something he keeps ‘over-emphasing’ so much it doesn’t ring true to me so I was trying to find what his real interest in freeing Pollard is. So to see if whether he is maybe a ‘paid’ agent or part of the zionist circle I searched ‘Lawrence Kolb – Jewish’.
    And noticed this at the bottom of my search page:

    “Ad related to Lawrence Kolb – jewish
    This ad is based on your current search terms.

    Visit Google’s Ads Preferences Manager to learn more, block specific advertisers, or opt out of personalized ads.
    Offensive Search Results
    link to google.com
    We’re disturbed about these results as well. Please read our note here”

    Which directs you to explaination for the offensive label:
    ”An explanation of our search results
    If you recently used Google to search for the word “Jew,” you may have seen results that were very disturbing. We assure you that the views expressed by the sites in your results are not in any way endorsed by Google. We’d like to explain why you’re seeing these results when you conduct this search.

    A site’s ranking in Google’s search results relies heavily on computer algorithms using thousands of factors to calculate a page’s relevance to a given query. Sometimes subtleties of language cause anomalies to appear that cannot be predicted. A search for “Jew” brings up one such unexpected result.

    If you use Google to search for “Judaism,” “Jewish” or “Jewish people,” the results are informative and relevant. So why is a search for “Jew” different? One reason is that the word “Jew” is often used in an anti-Semitic context. Jewish organizations are more likely to use the word “Jewish” when talking about members of their faith. The word has become somewhat charged linguistically, as noted on websites devoted to Jewish topics such as these:

    link to jewishworldreview.com
    Someone searching for information on Jewish people would be more likely to enter terms like “Judaism,” “Jewish people,” or “Jews” than the single word “Jew” In fact, prior to this incident, the word “Jew” only appeared about once in every 10 million search queries. Now it’s likely that the great majority of searches on Google for “Jew” are by people who have heard about this issue and want to see the results for themselves.

    The beliefs and preferences of those who work at Google, as well as the opinions of the general public, do not determine or impact our search results. Individual citizens and public interest groups do periodically urge us to remove particular links or otherwise adjust search results. Although Google reserves the right to address such requests individually, Google views the comprehensiveness of our search results as an extremely important priority. Accordingly, we do not remove a page from our search results simply because its content is unpopular or because we receive complaints concerning it. We will, however, remove pages from our results if we believe the page (or its site) violates our Webmaster Guidelines, if we believe we are required to do so by law, or at the request of the webmaster who is responsible for the page.

    We apologize for the upsetting nature of the experience you had using Google and appreciate your taking the time to inform us about it.

    Sincerely,
    The Google Team

    P.S. You may be interested in some additional information the Anti-Defamation League has posted about this issue at link to adl.org. In addition, we call your attention to Google’s search results on this topic”

    Now obviously I didn’t enter the word Jew or Jews–which is what the explaination says is ‘offensive”..I entered “Jewish”. Yet got this offensive notice.

    Just to test google I re entered Lawrence Kolb search using terms like Catholic, Muslim, Christian Zionist, Islamist, Arab, white racist, Mexican, and string of other religious and ethnic identifiers.
    And I got no notice of offensive results on any of those.

    I consider this to be a from of attempted intimitation and what’s more even though their explaination says “Jewish” is acceptable it plainly is not because you still get the offensive search result using Jewish. This is ridiculous.

    • Annie Robbins
      March 4, 2013, 1:01 pm

      how weird american

      P.S. You may be interested in some additional information the Anti-Defamation League has posted about this issue at link to adl.org

      gee, ya think?

      • American
        March 4, 2013, 1:18 pm

        It is weird and ridiculous. I don’t even know if Kolb is a Jewish name but I’ m go experiment with google and pick some names maybe of some known Jewish actors and then a non Jewish actor or writers and some Jewish and non Jewish politicians and see what kind of results I get.

      • American
        March 4, 2013, 1:33 pm

        Well this is totally weird.
        I put in ‘albert einstein – jewish’, then jerry steinfield- jewish, then Joe Lieberman – jewish and got the ‘offensive search results on each of those.
        But when I put in the single word “Jewish’ without any name attached to it I didn’t get the offensive search results.

        So? …they don’t want people searching to see if someone is Jewish or not? Why?
        I put in Mursi- Muslim and Jack Kennedy -Catholic and I didn’t get any offensive notice so I guess it’s o.k. to see if someone is Muslim or Catholic.

      • flyod
        March 4, 2013, 3:52 pm

        zionist power comes from control of the press. control of the press must now include the web. it was inevitable

      • WeAreAllMadeOfStars
        March 5, 2013, 7:27 am

        Welcome to the rest of the world American ;-)
        As far as I remember there has been complaints to Google by some people in France that when searching for a name, Google would automatically add “juif” (Jewish) as a suggestion. For example, when looking for Lawrence Kolb Google woud suggest “Lawrence Kolb juif”. Obviously many people performed the same search as you did and the algorithm from Google brought this suggestion. I believe Google added a filter as a response to the complaints.
        I tested with my name here in Europe and Google did not display any warning. If I have some spare time I’lly try to provide you with links. You can believe what I just wrote above, but please don’t believe me if say they have the power. Oh and by the way try searching Larry Page, Sergey Bryn ;-)

Leave a Reply