The language of Power

Israel/Palestine
on 54 Comments
Obama Rice Power
(Photo: Pete Souza / White House)

In her first appearance before the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, Samantha Power, Obama’s pick for next U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, made clear that she will spend her time in the role much as her predecessor Susan Rice did: acting as Israel’s consummate defender, fear-mongering about Iran, and opposing any move to champion Palestinian human rights or self-determination.

Rice, who has been appointed as Obama’s National Security Adviser, has said repeatedly that the American delegation to the UN “often works in ‘lockstep’ with the Israeli delegation” and spends “an enormous amount of time defending Israel’s right to defend itself and defending Israel’s legitimacy.”

“It’s an issue of utmost and daily concern for the United States,” she declared last year.  A few months ago, she reiterated this point, insisting that her role as an apologist for the Israeli government is “a huge part of my work to the United Nations” and that the United States “will not rest in the crucial work of defending Israel’s security and legitimacy every day at the United Nations.”

Power has already proven herself a loyal replacement, disavowing any semblance of past critical thinking when it comes to Israeli human rights abuses and abrogation of international law and fear-mongering about Iran’s nuclear program. It is no surprise Washington hawksZionist ideologues and even the Israeli government are falling over themselves to sing her praises.
In her confirmation hearing yesterday, Power revealed her adherence to AIPAC talking points, essentially working her way down the tried and true list of boilerplate phrases.  ”The United States has no greater friend in the world than the State of Israel,” she said, adding, “Israel is a country with whom we share security interests and, even more fundamentally, with whom we share core values – the values of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.”

“America has a special relationship with Israel,” she stated, to the surprise of no one and the consternation of George Washington‘s ghost. “I will stand up for Israel and work tirelessly to defend it,” she promised.

Perhaps her most disturbing comments, however, were about Iran. Shamelessly exploiting the horror of the Holocaust to fear-monger about the Islamic Republic, she declared:

 

“…within this organization built in the wake of the Holocaust – built in part in order to apply the lessons of the Holocaust – we also see unacceptable bias and attacks against the State of Israel. We see the absurdity of Iran chairing the UN Conference on Disarmament, despite the fact that its continued pursuit of nuclear weapons is a grave threat to international peace and security.”

With this statement, Power, in her eagerness to check off all the buzzword boxes prescribed by AIPAC, directly contradicts the consistent assessment of the United States’ own intelligence community, which has repeatedly concluded that Iran is, in fact, not pursuing a nuclear weapons as it has no nuclear weapons program.

Early last year, an unnamed U.S. intelligence official told the Washington Post that Iran has not decided to pursue nuclear weapons, explaining, “Our belief is that they are reserving judgment on whether to continue with key steps they haven’t taken regarding nuclear weapons.”  At the time, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta affirmed this position, admitting, ”Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No.”

Soon thereafter, the New York Times reported, ”Recent assessments by American spy agencies are broadly consistent with a 2007 intelligence finding that concluded that Iran had abandoned its nuclear weapons program years earlier.” This, the paper noted, “remains the consensus view of America’s 16 intelligence agencies.”

Either Samantha Power is an idiot or she’s lying.

In fact, there was a time when Power wasn’t so confident in making such a declarative statement. In a 2008 interview with Miller-McCune, Power noted that she was “not an expert on Iran,” but condemned the “American sabre-rattling” of the George W. Bush administration. “The threats – implicit and explicit – of U.S. military action have united very diverse secular, Islamist and nationalist strands,” she said, adding that American “belligerence” had “backfired.”

When asked specifically about whether she thought “Iran is trying to create nuclear weapons,” Power replied, “It would surprise me if they weren’t, but I don’t know.”

Still, she disparaged the findings of the National Intelligence Estimate and simply assumed Iran “would see as in its interests to amass as much firepower as possible,” due to the foreign threats it faces. Nevertheless, she stated, “It does not seem as though the Iranian regime is close to possessing nuclear weapons” and said that “when U.S. leaders claim Iran poses an imminent threat, they are not currently heard as credible.”
 
Now, five years later, Power sounds exactly like Bush’s own UN Ambassador, perennial Iran hawk John Bolton, who in 2006, insisted to the UN Security Council that “Iran had defied the international community by continuing its pursuit of nuclear weapons” and that this “pursuit of nuclear weapons constituted a direct threat to international peace and security.”
 
Furthermore, Power’s incredulity regarding what she deems the “absurdity of Iran chairing the UN Conference on Disarmament,” betrays her own ignorance on Iran’s constantly-repeated stance regarding nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament.
 
Iran has long championed a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone (NWFZ) in the Middle East and is a party to all disarmament treaties on weapons of mass destruction, including the Biological Weapons ConventionChemical Weapons Convention, and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.  Israel, however, is not a member of any of them.

Last year, Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi stated that Iran fully supports the establishment of a NWFZ, but that Israel, and its American backers, presented the ”only obstacle to the creation of such a zone…due to its persistent refusal to join the NPT and to place its nuclear facilities under the IAEA safeguards system.”

 
Earlier this month, at the “International Conference on Nuclear Security: Enhancing Global Efforts” held in Vienna, Iran’s Ambassador to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh reiterated his nation’s commitment to universal nuclear disarmament. “The best guarantee for nuclear security is definitely a world free from nuclear weapons,” he said, “as a result of which nuclear disarmament process could reinforce nuclear security efforts.”
 
The United States consistently blocks crucial international conferences dedicated to nuclear non-proliferation for the sole purpose of protecting Israel’s massive nuclear arsenal from scrutiny.
 
Samantha Power has surely embraced her new role in Turtle Bay as Israel’s stalwart apologist, going to so far as to promise her Congressional interlocutors that she will push for Israel to gain a seat on the United Nations Security Council as a representative of – get this – the Western European bloc of nations, despite being located in the Levant, which is indisputably in the continent of Asia and far to the East of even Eastern Europe, from which it is separated by hundreds of miles of water.
 
Abe Foxman, the Anti-Defamation League’s hasbarist-in-chief, once called Susan Rice a “gladiator” fighting in the United Nations on behalf of Israel.  There is no question Samantha Power will, for the sake of our “special relationship” and “shared values” with an aggressive, nuclear-armed, settler-colonial apartheid state, similarly take up the sword and continue to unleash hell on the entire Middle East.
 
Originally posted at Wide Asleep in America.
About Nima Shirazi

Nima Shirazi is co-editor of the Iran, Iraq and Turkey pages for the online magazine Muftah. His political analysis can be found on his blog, WideAsleepinAmerica.com, where this post first appeared. Follow him on Twitter @WideAsleepNima.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

54 Responses

  1. Chu
    July 19, 2013, 11:08 am

    What’s pathetic is that the US punditry and the editorials of the national papers lack the will to lay out what is happening.

    This women first and foremost has to lick the boot of Israeli occupation to even be considered to represent the United States as the ambassador to the United Nations.

    Perhaps she’ll do a better job of defending Israel that Rice. What a buffon she was on the Aljazeera interview. Probably the worst example of diplomacy I’ve witnessed recently.
    link to youtube.com (4.34 mins)

  2. NYIronweed
    July 19, 2013, 11:33 am

    Is this what the measure is now for US Senate confirmation as American Ambassador to the UN? A LOYALTY OATH TO ISRAEL??? Can it be? First the Secretary of Defense (Hagel) and now the UN Ambassador (Power). Does the US have no other national interests before the international body? Before the world. Are Israeli interests of more concern to the US Senate than the concerns of the American people? This will not end well for the American people. Of that we can be certain. Our elected officials have made a wrong turn somewhere, indeed.

    • Daniel Rich
      July 19, 2013, 7:32 pm

      @ NYIronweed,

      Q: A LOYALTY OATH TO ISRAEL???

      R: Not to piss on your parade [or be rude in any way, form or shape, as ur from NY], but unless you’ve been hibernating over the past 6 decades that’s exactly what the US [foreign] policy has been about.

      “Today the secret is out. We really are not just five diplomats. We are at least six including John Bolton.”

      JFK was the last pres to object to something Israeli before he famously went “Back and to the left…, back and to the left…” as filmed by Zapruder [a Jewish American] and his supposed assailant being gunned down by Jack Rubenstein [another Jewish American].

      But all that is sheer coincidence…

  3. seanmcbride
    July 19, 2013, 12:00 pm

    Israel is now far more important for American politicians and US government officials than the United States of America, Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Ireland, Netherlands, Japan, China, etc. — they declare their Israel-centric agenda on a daily basis — shout it to the rafters. And Samantha Power has resoundingly made this point once again.

    The vast majority Americans have closer cultural and emotional ties to other nations around the world than Israel — especially Western European nations.

    Would anyone care to place a bet on how this situation is going to turn out? — the outcome seems obvious.

    • James Canning
      July 19, 2013, 1:32 pm

      @seanmcbride – - Yes, let us follow the money. It explains why American politicians are so eager to serve as stooges for Aipac et al. No matter how much damage this does to the national security interests of the American people.

    • Chu
      July 19, 2013, 1:45 pm

      I’d say it’s guaranteed. Being a woman, born in Ireland, is going to look like a fascinating selection the white house has made. The pundits will gush for weeks.

      She must look at Barack and know that he had to prostrate before & throughout
      his term, so she started out with a strong pledge to Israel, then got back to business.

      I just don’t understand how you go from being the advocating for human rights
      throughout your career, and then to get elected, that you will unconditionally support of the the greatest abusers of human rights records (see B’Selem for proof!). But what congressperson will ask a question like this?

      The Nation Article:

      The only real friction occurred between Power and Marco Rubio, who pressed her on comments she made previously regarding the Israeli/Palestinian peace process and the United States’s record on human rights. Power was quick to disavow her response to a hypothetical question posed in 2002 (what should be done in the event that one of the parties in the Israeli/Palestinian were poised to commit genocide), in which she said that such a scenario would warrant the establishment of “a mammoth protection force” and “might mean alienating a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import.” It’s a testament to the strength of that constituency and the taboo against criticizing Israeli policy that Powers felt compelled to retract her words.

      “I would never apologize for America,” Powers said repeatedly. “America is the light to the world.” She was unwilling to give a straight answer when Rubio asked if she believed, as indicated in a decade-old article, that the United States has ever committed or sponsored crimes. “I believe the US is the greatest country on earth,” she responded, and went on to refer to the abuse at Abu Ghraib as a “mistake.”

    • Castellio
      July 19, 2013, 5:00 pm

      For a while seanmcbride I wondered where you might have gone. It’s good you’re back. However, in this case, I would like you to clarify the “obvious outcome”, as I can’t see it.

      My best guess is an attack on Iran, but I don’t know if that’s really what you are implying. You might mean an undemocratic American government, as the government’s functioning allegiance is not to its own people. Or perhaps you mean other countries turning away from the US as their leaders and people begin to believe what Americans are actually saying and doing.

      Or perhaps you mean something else.

      • seanmcbride
        July 20, 2013, 10:13 am

        Castellio,

        For a while seanmcbride I wondered where you might have gone. It’s good you’re back. However, in this case, I would like you to clarify the “obvious outcome”, as I can’t see it.

        Hi. The only reason I ever participate in discussion forums is to engage in a learning process — to instigate and analyze dialectic with the objective of advancing my understanding of the world. My purpose is never to propagandize or to try to convert others to my point of view. I simply want to figure out how the world works.

        I dropped out of Mondoweiss for awhile after reaching a plateau in developing my understanding of Mideast politics — dialectical processes had ground to a halt after I tried to open up discussion here about the role of the worldwide Jewish religious establishment in propping up and driving forward the entire Zionist project and dissolving all meaningful distinctions between Judaism and Zionism. That, apparently, is an insight or proposition that is much too difficult for even many anti-Zionists to handle. Fascinating stuff — now I understand why it is that efforts to reform or revise Zionism from within the Jewish community are not likely to go anywhere. Big insight absorbed.

        In any case, regarding the obvious outcome: the relentless and single-minded pursuit of Jewish ethnic nationalist interests by the worldwide Jewish establishment in the European and American contexts is likely to provoke a ferocious backlash from non-Jewish ethnic groups in both Europe and the United States down the road. That’s a non-brainer, in my opinion — just do the cultural math and apply your understanding of basic human nature to the situation.

        I have even gone so far in the past to predict that Zionism, on its current course, and with its current ideological assumptions about the world, has the potential to provoke the biggest explosion of antisemitism in world history, worldwide. I still think that is a possible scenario, although not a certain one.

        Many Zionists (especially religious Zionists) are looking forward to precisely this outcome — they may succeed in making it happen.

      • American
        July 20, 2013, 3:32 pm

        Castellio says:
        July 19, 2013 at 5:00 pm

        For a while seanmcbride I wondered where you might have gone. It’s good you’re back. However, in this case, I would like you to clarify the “obvious outcome”, as I can’t see it.

        My best guess is an attack on Iran, but I don’t know if that’s really what you are implying. You might mean an undemocratic American government, as the government’s functioning allegiance is not to its own people. Or perhaps you mean other countries turning away from the US as their leaders and people begin to believe what Americans are actually saying and doing.

        Or perhaps you mean something else>>>>>>

        Not answering for Sean but I believe I know what you are implying….correct me if I am wrong.
        The answer to your implied question is that imo, if I-Firstdom continues to push America/ns to some final point where the only option we have left is to choose between them or ourselves……then it will be they who will have to go.

  4. hophmi
    July 19, 2013, 12:49 pm

    More complaining, and more paranoid hyperbole from people like Sean, more apologizing for antisemites like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, more leftist irrelevance.

    The reason Power talks about Iran as a threat to US security is because – it is a threat to US security, as well as to the security of US interests in the Arab world. Outside of the cult, people understand that. They also understand that Power is probably one of the most qualified people to be US Ambassador to the UN in American history.

    • Woody Tanaka
      July 19, 2013, 1:42 pm

      “The reason Power talks about Iran as a threat to US security is because – it is a threat to US security, as well as to the security of US interests in the Arab world.”

      Well, then, I guess it’s in the US’s best interest to immediately engage with the Iranians in order to lessen that threat. But, oh, no, it’s in the best interest of israel’s politicians to have the looming presence of the next in the long line of “next Hitlers,” in order to scare up more votes for the righties in israeli elections. So which course does the US follow, the course that benefits the US or the one that benefits Likud??

    • Justpassingby
      July 19, 2013, 1:45 pm

      Pitting americans, arabs, world against Iran. Oh that old tactic. If you are such a chicken-hawk to fight your own wars, dont try to drag the world into the arena to do it for you, warmonger.

      Besides arab population think that Israel pose the biggest threat to them so quit lying.

      You are not the one to talk about racism, cults, paranoia by the way.

    • Cliff
      July 19, 2013, 1:47 pm

      Iran is not a threat to US security.

      The US is a threat to Iranian security. Israel is a threat to Iranian security.

      Ahmedinejad is out. Find a new boogeyman to scare-monger with.

      • NickJOCW
        July 20, 2013, 6:10 am

        Iran is not a threat to US security No, but it is a threat to US relevance. A democratic, peaceful, mutually cooperative ME would be a disaster, and support for Israel is the best way to steer clear of such a humiliating prospect. Heaven forfend it! Just imagine the damage it would do to US arms sales.

    • Chu
      July 19, 2013, 1:52 pm

      If Iran is a treat to US security, then so is North Korea. They are hardly a real threat.
      Cyberwarfare is a bigger threat to America’s domestic shores.

      The stuxnet virus was created by Israel and the US aimed at Iran. Who is the one conspiring with acts of war?

      ‘Outside of the cult, people understand that.’
      you’re the guy in the cult – remember that. I know it’s difficult, but don’t forget who was the one who called himself a ‘fanatic’.

    • Citizen
      July 19, 2013, 4:23 pm

      @ hophmi
      How is Iran a threat to US security? Please explain. The historical relationship between the two countries would logically make one come to the contrary conclusion, that is, USA is a threat to Iran’s security, sequentially, e.g., US intervention to install the Shah, US support of Saddam’s Iraq long aggressive war on Iran, the draconian economic sanctions of the Iranian people, US funding of Israel to back any “preemptive/preventive” war on Iran.

    • john h
      July 19, 2013, 6:16 pm

      More cloud cuckoo comments and mindless labeling. Better to say nothing than to keep being an embarrassment. What people understand is how to wink-wink and nod-nod.

    • ToivoS
      July 19, 2013, 10:20 pm

      What a weird comment. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not enter into this thread. And this: Power is probably one of the most qualified people to be US Ambassador to the UN in American history. is down right delusional. Adlai Stevenson? Richard Holebrook ? (though I disagreed with much of his politics, this guy was talented.) Looking through the list it could be she is more talented than Bolten. That could be debated however.

      • Shingo
        July 19, 2013, 10:24 pm

        Richard Holebrook ? (though I disagreed with much of his politics, this guy was talented.)

        In a bloodthirsty, murderous kind of way, yes. He was definitely well educated, but like so many of his ilk, a sadistic bastard.

        And if indeed Power is one of the most qualified people to be US Ambassador to the UN in American history, it speaks ill of her predecessors.

      • James Canning
        July 20, 2013, 2:11 pm

        Holbrooke favored negotiated resolution of inurgency in Afghanistan, and opposed the trebling of US troops carried out by Obama.

      • Donald
        July 19, 2013, 11:23 pm

        “What a weird comment. ”

        Hophmi just phones it in most of the time–if provoked, he can sometimes type something worth reading, but most of the time you can’t tell he’s even a “liberal” Zionist. Power grovels to power–nothing new there, she’s always done it, and since in this case she’s groveling to the Lobby Hophmi seems to like it.

        He’s right about leftist irrelevance though, at least in DC circles. Obama couldn’t care less what the left thinks or what Palestinians think.

      • James Canning
        July 20, 2013, 2:34 pm

        Power is a woman, knows a lot about foreign policy, and Obama trusts her. Big qualifications. Essential ones, for this president apparently.

    • eljay
      July 19, 2013, 10:36 pm

      >> The reason Power talks about Iran as a threat to US security is because – it is a threat to US security, as well as to the security of US interests in the Arab world.

      The reason Iran talks about the U.S. and the supremacist “Jewish State” of Israel as threats to its security is because they are very real, very present, very belligerent and very nuclear-armed threats to its security and to its interests in the Arab world.

    • Shingo
      July 20, 2013, 6:36 am

      The reason Power talks about Iran as a threat to US security is because – it is a threat to US security, as well as to the security of US interests in the Arab world.

      How does a state that has not attacked or invaded anyone in 300 years pose a threat to US security, as well as to the security of US interests in the Arab world?

      Outside of the cult, people understand that.

      False. The US intelligence community disputes it as so do most Israeli intelligence agencies. In fact, the only ones who believe it as a minority who cannot provide evidence of their position.

      They also understand that Power is probably one of the most qualified people to be US Ambassador to the UN in American history.

      If you believe that being a fawning sycophant of Israel is a qualification.

  5. James Canning
    July 19, 2013, 1:29 pm

    Samantha Power obviously is no idiot. So, we can agree she is lying because Aipac intimidated the White House and she was told to lie during the hearings.

    • Citizen
      July 19, 2013, 4:27 pm

      @ James Canning
      I don’t see how anyone can escape your logic. As somebody said, Power’s got Potomac Fever and jettisoned all her humanitarian principles for her career in the service of Israel, not matter the consequences to her new home, the USA. As a guy who is predominately of Irish extraction, I am ashamed of her.

      • amigo
        July 20, 2013, 6:26 am

        “As a guy who is predominately of Irish extraction, I am ashamed of her.”Citizen.

        As a Guy of full Irish extraction I too am ashamed of her.

        I wrote a letter to the editor of the Irish times a few days ago pointing out her turn from peace activist to AIPAC floosie.

        It of course was not printed.

      • James Canning
        July 20, 2013, 2:27 pm

        @amigo – - George Canning favored emancipation of Catholics in England, but he had to conceal his own visits to Ireland.
        Subservience to Israel lobby, at least in public, probably has become a “job requirement”.

      • seanmcbride
        July 20, 2013, 8:57 am

        Samantha Power is a useful idiot for the Israeli government, Likud, the Israel lobby, neoconservatives and the military-industrial complex — which is a smart career move for her and a terrible situation for Americans and the American interest.

        War profiteers find “liberal idealists” like Samantha Power to be a gift from God — the are easy to manipulate and exploit; they provide a pretty cover for engineering and launching aggressive and predatory wars that damage rather than promote the American interest.

        Samantha Power reminds one of another pro-Israel, pro-war enthusiast from Ireland who was manipulated by the Martin Peretz crowd — Andrew Sullivan. But Sullivan woke up. Power should take a close look at Andrew’s intellectual trajectory and perhaps speed up her own development.

      • James Canning
        July 20, 2013, 2:16 pm

        @Citizen – - Power’s private thoughts on being obliged to be subservient to Israel lobby publicly, would be most interesting.

    • Castellio
      July 19, 2013, 5:12 pm

      James, you are simply taking your personal projections of the possible and interpreting her through your eyes. Not a good idea.

      In her mind – if we are going to play that game – it is just as likely that she believes she is “seeing the situation more clearly” and is “more sensitive to the historical moment”.

      People do not cling to their past statements as the litmus test to their own integrity. Rather, they believe they had the courage to move on, and it is precisely that which proves their integrity.

      • James Canning
        July 20, 2013, 2:21 pm

        @Castellio — Do we assume Obama told Samantha Power to avoid a fight with Aipac during the confirmation hearings? Of course we do?

      • American
        July 20, 2013, 3:05 pm

        ‘In her mind – if we are going to play that game – it is just as likely that she believes she is “seeing the situation more clearly” and is “more sensitive to the historical moment”….Castellio

        Your game fail.
        Nothing ‘has changed’ about Israel for Powers to change her views.
        Except she wanted to represent the new revised United States –of Israel —at the UN.
        BWATZTTGASO

      • Castellio
        July 20, 2013, 4:44 pm

        I thinking you’re missing the point, American. I didn’t say that anything has changed in the Israel/Palestine situation, I’m saying Powers has changed, and now sees the world as a reflection of that change.

        And when asked about that change, she states clearly (too clearly for your liking) that she was previously wrong. In other words, she states her belief that she is a better person for the change.

        You and James think she must be lying. You probably think Obama, Hagel, Hillary, Kerry and Rice are lying too. That it’s all strategic.

        But if we watch what happens, the “Lie” you postulate will have no effect whatsoever. However, the public commitment to Israel, clearly stated, will be played out fully.

      • john h
        July 22, 2013, 12:29 am

        I think Castellio makes a fair point. Many of us here on Mondoweiss could probably say we came to be “seeing the situation more clearly” and thus became “more sensitive to the historical moment” about Israel/Palestine, than we were in our past. I sure can. And that we are therefore “a better person for the change”.

      • American
        July 22, 2013, 11:33 am

        “”And when asked about that change, she states clearly (too clearly for your liking) that she was previously wrong. In other words, she states her belief that she is a better person for the change…..Castellio

        So what ‘changed’ to make her think she was “previously wrong”?…Hum?
        What would that be?
        Nothng changed about Israel and I/P.
        So what convinced her she was previously wrong?
        For people to change their minds they have to have some ‘new’ imput.
        What was that besides wanting to make it in DC?

  6. weindeb
    July 19, 2013, 1:56 pm

    The same shit all the way, as the tail, our 51st state, continues to wag the dog.

  7. Shingo
    July 19, 2013, 6:06 pm

    We see the absurdity of Iran chairing the UN Conference on Disarmament, despite the fact that its continued pursuit of nuclear weapons is a grave threat to international peace and security.”

    The absurdity is Power’s outright lying.

    Contrary to Power’s claims, it is NOT a fact that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. In fact, the Chinese delegation reiterated this past week that there “It is not appropriate to impose new sanctions on Teheran since there is no evidence that the country is developing nuclear weapons” .

    link to europe.chinadaily.com.cn

    And what is absurd about Iran chairing the UN Conference on Disarmament, when it has no nukes and has repeatedly called for a nuclear free Middle East, while she promise to push for the country which has flouted more UN Resolutions than any other to become a non permanent member of the UNSC?

    • James Canning
      July 20, 2013, 2:23 pm

      Sauid Arabia and Iran have been two leaders of the effort to achieve a nuke-free zone in the Middle East (and to compel Israel to get rid of its nukes).

  8. justicewillprevail
    July 19, 2013, 6:34 pm

    Have they really no idea of how they debase themselves and their office with this kind of wide-eyed obeisance to a foreign power and its lobby? Are they all so much in thrall to their funders and promoters that they feel it necessary to utter such facile banalities, so clearly repeated from the aipac 101 handbook? They all seem to be Manchurian candidates, who have lost all capacity of independent thought, programmed to repeat the same old stale cliches and obvious distortions of the situation, utterly devoid of any relation to reality. Israel is now more important to these people than the country which they purport to represent. How absurd they are.

  9. Keith
    July 19, 2013, 6:42 pm

    “…she will push for Israel to gain a seat on the United Nations Security Council as a representative of – get this – the Western European bloc of nations, despite being located in the Levant….”

    There is a certain logic to this. Currently, Israel falls under the command responsibility of the US European Command, not the US Central Command which has responsibility for all of the countries in the Middle East except Israel. From its inception, Israel has always been an alien presence in the Middle East, always more oriented to Europe than its Arab neighbors, which it views with distaste.

    • amigo
      July 20, 2013, 6:17 am

      “From its inception, Israel has always been an alien presence in the Middle East, always more oriented to Europe than its Arab neighbors, which it views with distaste.”Keith

      No thanks Keith.We in the west do not want this occupation nation full of thieves and criminals in any capacity that requires daily contact with them.

      They can learn to get along with their neighbours or preferably just fade away.

      • Shingo
        July 20, 2013, 6:54 am

        “From its inception, Israel has always been an alien presence in the Middle East, always more oriented to Europe than its Arab neighbors, which it views with distaste.”

        Colonizing Palestine was not a good idea was it?

      • Keith
        July 20, 2013, 12:57 pm

        SHINGO- “Colonizing Palestine was not a good idea was it?”

        From the perspective of the 99%, Zionism, like imperialism, is a rotten idea. However, from the perspective of the Israeli and American Zionist elites, colonizing Palestine provides certain tribal benefits. There are reasons why many of these Zionist billionaires are such ardent supporters of Israel just as there are reasons why people like Power devote their professional lives to serving empire even though the empire brings so much misery to so many and is jeopardizing the future of humankind. True power-seekers are fundamentally sociopath.

      • American
        July 20, 2013, 1:57 pm

        ‘“From its inception, Israel has always been an alien presence in the Middle East, always more oriented to Europe than its Arab neighbors, which it views with distaste.”’>>>>

        Zionism was first alien to Europe and the West…and still is.
        Now it is also alien to Arabia and the East.
        There is no inhabited region on earth that I can think of that Zionism wouldnt be alien to.
        It was born in alienation and will whither and will die in it.

    • James Canning
      July 20, 2013, 2:24 pm

      Surely one of Israel’s biggest blunders has been in failing to do more to “fit into” ints neighborhood. Meaning, stopping the growth of the illegal colonies in the West Bank.

  10. TwoRedDogs
    July 20, 2013, 1:12 am

    The administration learned from the Hagel confirmation clown show. It’s just a preemptive move.

    • James Canning
      July 20, 2013, 2:13 pm

      Surely a correct assessment.

    • Castellio
      July 20, 2013, 4:53 pm

      So, what surprising action do you think we’ll see after her appointment to the UN?

      I expect to see her try to get a seat at the Security Council for Israel, and leaning on countries to achieve that, telling them that it is a “necessary part of the peace plan”. I expect Canada, France, Australia and the UK to be among the first to quickly support that action.

      What do you expect to see that will support your argument that it’s all “preemptive”?

  11. Peter in SF
    July 20, 2013, 4:48 am

    Samantha Power has surely embraced her new role in Turtle Bay as Israel’s stalwart apologist, going to so far as to promise her Congressional interlocutors that she will push for Israel to gain a seat on the United Nations Security Council as a representative of – get this – the Western European bloc of nations, despite being located in the Levant, which is indisputably in the continent of Asia and far to the East of even Eastern Europe, from which it is separated by hundreds of miles of water.

    “Western European bloc” is shorthand for the Western European and Others Group, which also includes – get this – Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, which are all separated from Europe by thousands of miles of water. Right now, Australia is a non-permanent member of the UNSC, representing this bloc; Canada and New Zealand have also been on the UNSC in the past.

    With enough American pressure, the members of the WEOG bloc might be persuaded to choose Israel as their favored choice for UNSC: these are essentially the countries that engaged in the “white flight” during that Ahmadinejad speech in Geneva a few years back (I have to mention Ahmadinejad just to needle hophmi). But the problem is that although there are quotas for each bloc, in the actual election, every UN member state gets to vote.

  12. NickJOCW
    July 20, 2013, 7:29 am

    That this woman says these things about Iran doesn’t mean she knows them to be true, nor does it even mean she believes them to be true. It only means she has been instructed to act as if they were true…until further notice. Being a US ambassador, particularly to the UN, is hardly a job that calls for or even allows much in the way of independence of thought or action. It is even possible Obama may have winced slightly at her excesses.

  13. Citizen
    July 20, 2013, 11:54 am

    Power’s repeatedly asked now (on CSPAN) by congress vetting team how she will assure to get across to the Palestinians that the US will do all in its power to stop them from acting unilaterally to enhance their statehood status. She’s totally in AIPAC state of mind saying all the right things. Same with every questioner, who all ask her about Israel, to make sure she’s on the AIPAC team.

    • James Canning
      July 21, 2013, 1:50 pm

      Aipac knows that full UN recognition would make it harder for Israel to keep the West Bank, or any part of it without a deal with Palestine.

  14. James Canning
    July 20, 2013, 2:09 pm

    Australia, Canada, New Zealand were white components of British Empire. Easily included in a group with the UK.

Leave a Reply