AIPAC comes out for strike on Syria– and mentions Iran more often than Syria

As NJ Senator Robert Menendez said at the Kerry hearing today in the Senate, Syria is about Iran. And it is for AIPAC too. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee broke its silence today, urging a vote for the Syrian strike.

AIPAC was lying low. That was what everyone said. So: Who called AIPAC? And: why does Obama need AIPAC? Could it be because AIPAC can get 70 Senators’ signatures on a napkin in 24 hours?

From the modest lobby, without any reference to Israel:

AIPAC urges Congress to grant the President the authority he has requested to protect America’s national security interests and dissuade the Syrian regime’s further use of unconventional weapons. The civilized world cannot tolerate the use of these barbaric weapons, particularly against an innocent civilian population including hundreds of children.

Simply put, barbarism on a mass scale must not be given a free pass.

This is a critical moment when America must also send a forceful message of resolve to Iran and Hezbollah — both of whom have provided direct and extensive military support to Assad.  The Syrian regime and its Iranian ally have repeatedly demonstrated that they will not respect civilized norms.  That is why America must act, and why we must prevent further proliferation of unconventional weapons in this region.

America’s allies and adversaries are closely watching the outcome of this momentous vote. This critical decision comes at a time when Iran is racing toward obtaining nuclear capability. Failure to approve this resolution would weaken our country’s credibility to prevent the use and proliferation of unconventional weapons and thereby greatly endanger our country’s security and interests and those of our regional allies.  AIPAC maintains that it is imperative to adopt the resolution to authorize the use of force, and take a firm stand that the world’s most dangerous regimes cannot obtain and use the most dangerous weapons.

Jonathan Allen at Politico got the story first. Thanks to Max Blumenthal.

Also, if the Tea Party is so “isolationist,” as the media keep insisting, then why is Marco Rubio gungho on a Syria attack? Does it have anything to do with presidential ambitions?

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Israel/Palestine

{ 73 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. From the modest lobby, without any reference to Israel:

    who needs to mention israel when it’s glaringly from the ever present/pressure israel lobby. makes me puke.

    and here’s politico:

    The word “Israel” appears nowhere in the text of the statement, underscoring by omission the worry pro-Israel groups in the United States have about framing retaliatory strikes in a way that makes it look like Israel is pushing for an attack on Syria for its own interests.

    as if we won’t notice!!!!!!!!! it’s just like iraq!!!!!!!!!!!

    • just says:

      It’s exactly like Iraq and the neocons………..

      “Simply put, barbarism on a mass scale must not be given a free pass.”

      Look in the mirror AIPAC. Both the US and Israel have been guilty of barbarism– and still are.

      It’s not so hard for me to admit that I am cynical and believe that the “intelligence” has been “cooked”.

      “This critical decision comes at a time when Iran is racing toward obtaining nuclear capability. Failure to approve this resolution would weaken our country’s credibility to prevent the use and proliferation of unconventional weapons and thereby greatly endanger our country’s security and interests and those of our regional allies.”

      Total and utter puke- worthy bs. Again with “Iran”. Get real, AIPAC and the US government. How I hope that Moon and Ake Sellström will be completely honest.

  2. gingershot says:

    This attack on Syria will be an Israeli coup of enormous proportions – strategically it’s almost ‘as good as’/'or the same as’ having successfully triggered an American attack on Iran. I think this is ENORMOUS

    This is the ‘Real Mensch finally getting their Tehran’ – or 3/4′s of the way there

    Israeli WINS;

    1- Indefinite postponement of Palestine’s attempt for justice – who cares about Palestinians at the ICC when there’s a new decades long hot or semi-hot war with Syria/and or Iran?
    2- Decades long more turmoil with the American military killing Muslims in Syria/ and or Iran. Years of more American military indoctrination with ‘the Muslim as the enemy’
    3- American military killing Iranian units (and precedent thereof) currently stationed in Syria
    4- American military killing Hezbollah units (and precedent thereof) currently stationed in Syria
    5- Severing the support of Hezbollah from Iran by making a torn-apart Syria a barrier to contiguous land support, no resupply to Hezbollah so Israel can eventually attack with impunity
    7- Israel keeping the Golan forever next to the torn apart ex-Syrian state. (Claims it will refuse to negotiate with Al Nusra Al Qaeda Syria because it is ‘not a partner for peace’)
    8- Decades more maximal or likely enhanced US aid to Israel
    9- Probable future American involvement against Hezbollah – in case several yrs from now Hezbollah ever strikes back against Israeli attacks, and this painted as just as an extension of the US protecting Israel from ‘Syria’. This immunizes Israel from Hezbollah because of course any Hezbollah action against Israel ‘has already been decided’ as the same as a Syrian counterattack on Israel

    I really think this is a Rubicon and Netanyahu has hit the jackpot

    WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN for Israel

    If Israel/her Lobby pull this off – and I think they will – Israel has gotten over the hump to their promised land if not their Heaven – an American culture clash against Islam for the next 1000 yrs, with Israel sitting pretty and armed to the teeth

    This is a historic victory for Israel and her Israel Lobby – this is the effective completion/implementation of the ‘Clean Break Plan’ as well

    • kalithea says:

      You nailed it point by point!

    • Taxi says:

      Sorry gingershot,

      You talk about hizb and Iran like they’re gonna be fighting with sticks and stone. And you forgot to include Russia in the equation.

      Will America go to war in Syria on behalf of israel? Yes. Again!

      Will America and israel win? Well, if the destruction of tel aviv will be considered as a win for America, then yeah sure. Cuz sure as rain is wet, israel will get hit massively and beyond recognition.

      Israel’s defense against missile warfare is a tad too little, too late: Syria’s S300′s (simultaneously firing 300 missiles at once and at separate targets), Iran’s long range ballistic missiles (capable sending thousands of missiles per hour to tel aviv), (very likey too) Russia’s S800 (simultaneously firing 800 missiles at 800 separate targets), and the thousands upon thousands of hizbollah missiles and rockets and drones easily capable of reaching tel aviv and “beyond” – well, it ain’t that easy a feat for israel and USA to arrest all that missile action in midair – all heading at tel aviv.

      Let’s put it this way: it don’t matter who wins, tel aviv will be pulverized.

      Yeah the zionists want war. But maybe their foes want it even more cuz they’re ready to slay the dragon.

  3. The Israel lobby is determined to increase Iran’s isolation and the economic stranglehold of the US congress over millions of Iranian families in order to maintain Israel’s hegenomic power in the region and the increasing power of Its secret nuclear weapons arsenal.

    It is a strategy for war, regional conflagration and eventually nuclear disaster.

  4. American says:

    Glad to see the Lobby worred about being exposed—-tells me they are hearing and seeing rumblings about the Lobby.

    Rand Paul is now speaking in the Syria hearing—-he is lecturing Kerry about the constitution—-he’s making a fool of Kerry and O’s ‘going to the congress’ but announcing before hand that it wont matter what congress says O can still act even if the congress votes against it.

    So Paul ask Kerry to tell him if O *will or will not* abide by the congressional vote and for Kerry to tell him how this will make things better in the ME.

    Guess what Kerry said to that?

    Kerry– ‘lsrael could be attacked Senator if we dont prove US resolve in the region.’

    Yep, Israel was the first word out of Kerry’s mouth to that question. Then Kerry makes a further ass of himself by turning and asking a US commander at the hearing to also speak to this and the Commander says …….”no thanks Mr. Kerry”.
    That was funny cause Kerry was momentarily stunned into silence by the Commanders refusal and for a minute you could have heard a shoe drop in the chamber.
    Kerry is selling this strike so hard he has churned himself into a pile of steaming excrement.

    Everyone who has spoken so far is for strikng Syria except Paul. Several of them want us to also ‘punish Russia” and make it a ‘rouge nation’ for not caring about chemical weapons use.

    One Senator is now telling Kerry to declassify the evidence so the American people can see it and be satisfied….Kerry says no, it will ‘reveal too much’ about US sources. But then Kerry says it has already ‘leaked out’ anyway in the press talking about the “intercepts of Syrian phone calls’—-sooooo evidently that is the ‘Israeli intercepts” of phone calls that is their evidence and we arent allowed to hear.

  5. Bandolero says:

    Finally the efforts of Israel and the zionist war lobby against Syria are out in the open. So far Israel and it’s proxies were very much involved in organizing more bloodshed in Syria, but mostly leading from behind and working by proxy. I would like readers to point out to some earlier activism of Israel, her proxies and the lobby regarding the war on Syria:

    1996: A Clean Break: … Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces …

    May 2011: …there were a lot of armed men, militants, tens of guns, and they were with weapons and just moving along the border from Lebanon to Syria …

    January 12, 2012: Michael Weiss, Pro-Israel Neocon, Authors Blueprint for Western Military Intervention in Syria Approved by Syrian Ex-Pats

    February 7, 2012 : Ex-Mossad boss Efraim Halevy: Iran’s Achilles’ Heel

    July 24, 2012: Conservatives call on Obama to establish ‘safe zones’ in Syria

    December 12, 2012: Israeli Envoy Sees Radicals Risk Preferable to Assad

    January 17, 2013: Andrew Tabler/WINEP: Three bold steps to hasten the end of Assad’s regime.

    April 26 2013: Israel ambushed the US

    August 16, 2013: Tel Aviv Defense Minister: “Axis of Evil” Cannot Be Allowed to Win in Syria

    August 19, 2013, Israeli ex-ambassador Itamar Rabinovich: “Assad, Russia, Iran & Hezbollah pose a greater danger than al Qaeda!”

    All the way long Israel pushed the US to take military action for regime change in Syria to harm Iran. But Israel didn’t get it’s way to start the US leading the war on Syria. So what to do?

    Patrick Clawson – Israel Lobbyist Suggests False Flag Attack To Start War With Iran

    Then a CW attack near Damascus – conveniently when the UN inspectors were close. And: the central piece of evidence against the Syrian government comes from Israel and it seems to be “doctored”.

    And now AIPAC is openly advocating war on Syria.

    What else does the world and the US public need to understand what’s going on?

  6. In the past, Israel would go [through AIPAC] to individual congressman and senator.It will ask personally and discreetly and offer bribes and show the stick with the Isreali -flag- draped carrot to change position to shift opinion, to imbibe Isreali views and necessity as his or her own , then vote accordingly . Now it does not need to do that. It can give the microphone to one of gang who will anounce to the faithful to come out of the hibernation and cast vote the way desired by the master.

  7. gingershot says:

    U.S. Jewish groups call on Congress to approve use of force against Syria’s Assad

    U.S. Ambassador Oren states Israeli support for Obama’s claim that Syria must face “international consequences.”

    Foxman: Our people’s experience with gas mandates Jewish-moral response

    link to haaretz.com

  8. Kathleen says:

    Phil, Annie etc Chris Matthews focused long and hard on the situation with Syria tonight

    link to nbcnews.com

    Good show. “bring in the Zionist entity” Brings up Hillary’s vote for the Iraq war resolution.

    • just says:

      It’s about time that somebody on MSNBC did something honest again! I just worry that the owners of MSM has sent the memo re: Syria, etc. (Shhhhhhhhhhh!)

      Thanks, Kathleen. I’ll stream it. I gave up on CM and MSNBC quite awhile ago.!

    • American says:

      @ Kathleen

      I heard Matthews say that but I think he was mocking the ME states who refer to the ‘zionist entity’..not mocking AIPAC.

    • MRW says:

      If, as Chris Matthews worries, 2/3 of Democrats will be forced to back the Prez, then say hello to President Rand Paul in 2016. Clinton backed the Iraq War and she just announced “I am backing my President” on Syria. She ain’t presidential material either.

      • Kathleen says:

        Clinton was a hawk on Iraq, a hawk on the I/P issue, hawk on Iran. She is not a candidate that I will be putting much time in for. My mothers generation 80 somethings want to see a woman President so so bad before they die. Many women of my generation(the boomers) want a woman so bad does not seem to matter that Hillary is as hawkish as you can get. Ok not Louie Gohmert hawkish but pretty damn close. She is the true definition of a liberal Imperialist.

    • MRW says:

      Those two Russian ‘experts’ Simon Marks and Fiona Hill on CM’s show are examples of the profoundly arrogant western attitudes towards Russia, sneering at Putin as some idiot or junior leader, talking about him as if he has to prove himself as a geopolitical player. He manages a country twice the size of ours, brought it back from the brink of bankruptcy, and he’s been doing it for longer than Bush and Obama combined. He’s the geopolitical expert in this mess.

      Further, Putin knows what war will bring, the horror to his own people, the devastation of the land and lives. We’d all be speaking German if it wasn’t for the Russians in WWII. We hideous Americans sit in our seats in this country arm-chairing the death and destruction of others then flip to the Kardashians or America’s Got Talent. We have zero idea what it is to have bombs raining down on our houses and children, our infrastructure destroyed to rubble, not knowing if our families are alive or dead.

      I couldn’t believe that those two experts and CM sneered at Putin’s idea (which wasn’t his, it was Lavrov’s and someone else’s) to have Russian lawmakers come over here to convince Congress not to bomb Syria, and imply that it was Putin trying to run with the big boys geopolitically. What a crock.

      Man oh man, have we got a lot to learn. We’re getting stupider and uglier with each passing day.

      EDIT: Putin knows that Assad will strike back if he’s bombed. He has to. He has no choice. And Putin knows what he’s stocked Assad with, and some of it is materiel we (and the Israelis) have no defense against. So it will mean war.

      • just says:

        bingo.

        Our arrogance is legendary. Arrogant and hypocritical pretty much sums up our behavior on the ‘world stage’. Sad for us, sadder for the world.

        • Kathleen says:

          Yes indeed. CM talks about how the world will have even more reasons to hate us if we pre-emptively attack Syria. As if people in that part of the world don’t hate us enough all ready.

      • marc b. says:

        I have watched more MSM news in the past week than in the prior 52 weeks. absolutely, stunningly stupid. first, scott pelley of CBS evening news opens with a 20-second ‘briefing’, surveying the last half-century of the history of Syria, before a waif-laden photo montage from Damascus is played. then the ‘Russia experts’ on Matthews, a completely useless, superficial, uninformed analytical segment. (I thought ‘this can only improve’ after the male dolt spoke, but no, it got worser with the female dolt.) Matthews did end with an unequivocal statement on the severe, negative ‘unintended’ consequences of a strike on Syria (he repeatedly referenced the dead and dismembered civilians that will be the victims of such a strike, although he seemed more concerned about the PR implications of scenes of carnage than anything else.)

      • American says:

        “Man oh man, have we got a lot to learn. We’re getting stupider and uglier with each passing day.”…..MRW

        Indeed we are. Humpty Dumpty will fall off the wall.

      • American says:

        Want to really cringe over US stupidity?

        Yesterday Obama cancelled the one on one meeting he was suppose to have with Putin in connection with G2 Summit.
        And announced he will meet with ‘a delegation of Russian Gays instead ‘ to listen to their complaints about treatment of Gays in Russia.

        I dont even have the words to describe what this is and what it shows about Obama and the US.

    • Walid says:

      The Zionist entity has been in on the planning committee of the Syrian uprising from the start, so it’s no surprise that AIPAC is coming in on the kill. The only surprising thing so far is BHL that still hasn’t crept from under a rock to gloat about it and claim some of the credit as he claimed he was the hero behind the Libya invasion. Haven’t heard of him since the reprimand he supposedly got from Netanyahu for having overstepped his limit.

  9. Sammar says:

    No need to gag me with a spoon after that Senate debate. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
    What is most striking to me is that the use of chemical weapons by the Asad regime is presented as a fait accompli by Kerry and Co. while still no concrete evidence has been presented. I still dont understand what the point was of sending UN inspectors to check only IF chemical weapons were used but not to find out WHO had used them? In light of the proposed consequences of a military strike, wouldn’t that be an important thing to determine?

    I particularly liked the chutzpah of Kerry’s outrage that Russia and China were had blocked a UN resolution calling for the condemnation of the use of chemical weapons in Syria when not too long ago the US did exactly the same thing when their then-ally Saddam gassed the Kurds ( and Iranians).

    Does he really think that people have such short-term memories and already forgotten that little fact?

    From the comments of various senators, it is clear that a majority of the American population is not in favor of military action in Syria. Isn’t a democracy supposed to adhere to the will of the majority and not lobbies and big campaign donors only?
    Yeah, right…..

  10. MRW says:

    I don’t buy this ‘if Obama loses this vote, it will be devastating for him’ nonsense. The world will breathe a sigh of relief, if O honors it, and so will the American people.

    This horsepucky that we have to go to war to save Obama’s face is a greater shame.

    • just says:

      Agreed. The only shame is that diplomacy and peace are so reviled by so many. For the US and her uh, ‘allies’, it seems that diplomacy comes at the end of a gun, missile, wmd, drones, and lies.

      I never signed up for having our foreign policy outsourced to any other nation. If the US “strikes” Syria, people will die and more than our hands will be bloodied. NOT in my name. Why are the warmongers winning when so many are saying ‘no more’?

      “This horsepucky that we have to go to war to save Obama’s face is a greater shame.”

      It is ludicrous. The only faces that I care about are those of the civilians who perish because of our stupid and destructive “foreign policy”.

  11. Obsidian says:

    So AIPAC has done with Syria, what it did with the second Iraq war in 2003. Than as now, AIPAC waited until the wholly American decision to war was a fait accompli and than sided with America.

    • Shingo says:

      No, AIPAC made sure it was a fair accompli before coming out of the shadows.

    • amigo says:

      “So AIPAC has done with Syria, what it did with the second Iraq war in 2003. Than as now, AIPAC waited until the wholly American decision to war was a fait accompli and than sided with America.obsidious.

      The American decision was not a fait accompli when AIPAC made the following statement.

      “Earlier Tuesday, AIPAC issued a strong statement supporting the president’s call for congressional authorization of limited airstrikes against Syria. A senior official at AIPAC tells The Daily Beast that the organization’s leadership received a phone call from a senior White House official on Saturday, after the president’s surprise announcement that he would be seeking congressional authorization for a Syria strike, asking what AIPAC’s position would be on a congressional resolution. This official said the lobby received similar calls from Republican and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate.

      link to thedailybeast.com

      On AIPAC and Iraq,
      148 Gideon Levy, “A Deafening Silence,” Ha’aretz, October 6, 2002. 149 See Dan Izenberg, “Foreign Ministry Warns Israeli War Talk Fuels US Anti‐Semitism,” Jerusalem Post, March 10, 2003, which makes clear that “the Foreign Ministry has received reports from the US” telling Israelis to cool their jets because “the US media” is portraying Israel as “trying to goad the administration into war.” There is also evidence that Israel itself was concerned about being seen as driving American policy toward Iraq. See Benn, “PM Urging U.S. Not to Delay Strike”; Perelman, “Iraq Move Puts Israel in Lonely U.S. Corner.” Finally, in late September 2002, a group of political consultants known as the “Israel Project” told pro‐Israel leaders in the United States “to keep quiet while the Bush administration purses a possible war with Iraq.” Dana Milbank, “Group Urges Pro‐Israel Leaders Silence on Iraq,” Washington Post, November 27, 2002.”

      link to juancole.com

      Do you ever actually seek the truth before making a twit of yourself or do you believe all the crap you post here.

    • seafoid says:

      The elders of Zionism don’t work like that.

    • talknic says:

      @ Obsidian September 4, 2013 at 1:06 am

      LOL. Israel’s apologists will say anything, no matter how untrue or ridiculously illogical

    • kalithea says:

      During the lead-up to Iraq, the Pentagon that has strict security clearance had a “revolving door” for Israelis to the OSP. Therein Israelis helped cook up the fake intelligence with zealot Zionists manning high posts in the Pentagon:

      “According to The Guardian, Feith’s office had an unconventional relationship with Israel’s intelligence services:

      The OSP was an open and largely unfiltered conduit to the White House not only for the Iraqi opposition. It also forged close ties to a parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation inside Ariel Sharon’s office in Israel specifically to bypass Mossad and provide the Bush administration with more alarmist reports on Saddam’s Iraq than Mossad was prepared to authorise.
      “None of the Israelis who came were cleared into the Pentagon through normal channels,” said one source familiar with the visits. Instead, they were waved in on Mr Feith’s authority without having to fill in the usual forms.
      The exchange of information continued a long-standing relationship with Mr Feith and other Washington neo-conservatives had with Israel’s Likud party.”

      link to en.wikipedia.org

      So as in this case, where Israelis provided the CW “intelligence”; so then were the Israelis heavily involved in doing the same.

  12. K Renner says:

    Absolutely disgusting.

    The only way to resolve this is through old fashion dimplomacy– something that at the very least elements of the leaders in Tehran were always willing to do.

    But no– it’s bang the drum for an attack on Iran, and get as many toadies to suck up to Israel and Zionism.

    Harper here in Canada is singularly disgusting. He’s much worse then Obama, in the sense that Obama allegedly doesn’t like Nutandyahoo and criticized illegal Israeli activity in West Bank.

    Harper, on the other hand– good god, it’s like he’s Prime Minister of the CIJA and the resident Zionists, and no one else in the country.

  13. RE: “AIPAC comes out for strike on Syria”

    TAKE ACTION! ! ! TAKE ACTION! ! ! TAKE ACTION! ! !

    ● FROM RootsAction.org: Prevent an Attack on Syria Now

    If you live in the U.S. and want to email Obama, your senators and representative, expressing opposition to an attack on Syria, please click HERE.

    If you reside outside the United States, you can still sign this petition by clicking HERE.

  14. Obsidian says:

    As per WaPo’s Jennifer Rubin, ‘..the[Obama] administration….has now reached out in desperation to pro-Israel groups.’

    .link to washingtonpost.com

    Like I said, AIPAC isn’t behind the drive to war, Obama is.

    • seafoid says:

      Bullshit, Obsidian. Ha’aretz op eds have been spinning war since IDF intel first reported the “attacks”:

      Still waiting for proof BTW.

      • Obsidian says:

        @seafoid

        Here’s your proof.

        Eli Lake confirms, Obama sought out AIPAC’s help to pass the Congressional Resolution on Syria, not the other way round.

        ‘ A senior official at AIPAC tells The Daily Beast that the organization’s leadership received a phone call from a senior White House official on Saturday, after the president’s surprise announcement that he would be seeking congressional authorization for a Syria strike, asking what AIPAC’s position would be on a congressional resolution. This official said the lobby received similar calls from Republican and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate.’

        ‘The senior AIPAC official said the conversation with the White House was informational. “‘Where are you going to be on this?’ That was a similar message that came from the Hill as well,” this official said in describing the call from the White House and congressional leaders. “It was not so much an ask as much as an inquiry of where you are going to be.”’
        ‘But, this official also said, the message was clear that AIPAC’s participation in the lobbying effort to pass the authorization “would be helpful.”’

        link to thedailybeast.com

        • seafoid says:

          Obsidian

          Lying is Zionism’s business
          This war is for Israel and it sets up Yom Kippur nicely.
          Get the Syrians to atone for the Shoah.

        • Obsidian says:

          @seafoid

          Just who is lying?
          Eli Lake?
          The AIPAC official lying about the ‘phone call from a senior White House official’?

          You asked for proof and I gave it.
          Where’s your proof that the Zionists are lying about the several phone calls.

        • seafoid says:

          Obsidian

          I don’t even bother reading your stuff any more.
          Try someone else with your Eli Lake BS.
          And do tell us when the IDF makes available its slam dunk intelligence linking Assad to the gas.

        • talknic says:

          Obsidian claims a senior official at AIPAC proves AIPAC isn’t behind the drive to war, Obama is.

          ‘Are you guilty?’

          ‘No yer honor! Definitely not’

          ‘Why should anyone believe you?’

          ‘Because I say so your honor!’

        • ritzl says:

          @Obsidian So, alternatively, if I knew from past experience what Israel-via-AIPAC’s view of what I should do was (At this point, do I have to outline why that matters?), and I was inclined personally, or forced by popular will/polls as the case may be, to make an attack on Syria look legit through legislation, I too would overtly enlist the aid of the Lobby to make the case in Congress.

          As always, you all omit the underlying condition in order to make the spurious case. You start history at the point most beneficial to your manipulations.

          What Eli Lake said may have been, or was, accurate. That in no way changes the previously conceived direction of the policy, and what it will take to effect it. It just means that he saw the tail end of its strategic implementation. Per his recollections in the article you cited.

          I know that is reading my take into Lake’s statements, but it is hardly the “proof” you suggest it to be. In defense of my PoV, as so many have said here, this attack is a culmination of a process, not the beginning of it (’90s-era “Clean Break,” et. al.).

          But I’m starting to come to the view that this whole political/military/warmongering exercise is about a new, open-ended, perpetual AUMF applicable to Iran. So Obama strategizes that into the hands of Congress and calls upon AIPAC to work its magic to that end, but only when its push is needed for the larger goal and the avenues are in place to do so. Ergo, Lake only sees the effort once the avenues are in place. Again, hardly proof of AIPAC’s non-involvement in this crisis.

        • Obsidian says:

          AIPAC operates out in the open. Surely if AIPAC has been involved in this crisis and is driving the US to war against Syria, then there should be a laundry list of memos, phone calls to congressional offices, position papers, scheduled meetings, leaks to journalists, etc.

          Where is the proof, beyond Clean Break, a 1990s think tank piece, that AIPAC is driving this war.

        • Obsidian says:

          Seafoid. I’m done with you too.

        • Shingo says:

          As Steven Rosen, AIPACs point man ince boasted, a lobby is like a night flower. It blossoms in the dark and whilst in the sunlight.

          Surely if AIPAC has been involved in this crisis and is driving the US to war against Syria, then there should be a laundry list of memos, phone calls to congressional offices, position papers, scheduled meetings, leaks to journalists, etc

          There is, but anytime someone dates to reveal it – they are atta led mercilessly.

          Where is the proof, beyond Clean Break, a 1990s think tank piece, that AIPAC is driving this war.

          The fact that even Israeli lobby mouth pieces are openly recognizing Israel ‘s push for war with Syria.

          Any other pathetic questions?

    • eljay says:

      >> As per WaPo’s Jennifer Rubin, ‘..the[Obama] administration….has now reached out in desperation to pro-Israel groups.’

      The headline and the first paragraph of that article imply that the Obama administration is reaching out to pro-Israel groups, but the remainder of the article says nothing about it. All it talks about is how pro-Israel groups are lobbying hard to get bi-partisan support for offensive warfare against Syria (and Iran).

      The events of the last couple of weeks have sent a tremor through American pro-Israel leaders and organizations. For the first time in my memory, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee has put out a statement on a major national security issue:

      AIPAC maintains that it is imperative to adopt the resolution to authorize the use of force, and take a firm stand that the world’s most dangerous regimes cannot obtain and use the most dangerous weapons.

      Likewise the Republican Jewish Committee has sent out an “action alert” email … It called on pro-Israel Americans to overlook party affiliation. …

      • Obsidian says:

        See my post above to seafoid.

        • eljay says:

          >> See my post above to seafoid.

          I did. It does not support your assertion that the White House has “reached out in desperation”:
          >> ‘The senior AIPAC official said the conversation with the White House was informational. … “It was not so much an ask as much as an inquiry of where you are going to be.”‘

  15. Citizen says:

    Huffpo: Chomsky says, with or without congressional approval, a US-led attack on Syria is a war crime if not initially approved by UN.

    • just says:

      True– but when has that EVER stopped us before?

      Those pesky international laws are for everybody but the US and Israel.

      • Citizen says:

        Former POTUS Carter says the same thing as Chomsky. In comparison, an AEI rep was just on CSPAN WJ dissing going to the UN for anything; she said, essentially, Why bother going there to face UN SC vetos from Russia and likely China? Said she prefers to fly with US Constitution and US has good reason to strike Syria because its in US interest to do so.

        Perhaps Obama decided to take his case to Congress because the latest Pew poll showed only 29% of ordinary Americans favored military intervention in Syria (the majority opposed it because they feared any strike would expand quickly & US would face lots of blowback). He banked on the power of AIPAC in Congress. And AIPAC came out ASAP in public ASAP to support him. The die is cast, what the little people think about something is of no concern, even less so than usual when it comes to supporting Israel at any cost because that’s the one thing that always gets bipartisan support.

      • seafoid says:

        Israel is going to feel the full force of the international community one day. Zionism is evil on steroids at this stage .

  16. amigo says:

    Just watched Obummer in Sweden making the case for attacking Syria.

    One reporter asked him how , as a Nobel Peace Prize winner , he could attack a sovereign nation without UN approval.

    He spent some 15 minutes invoking the Holocaust and Iraq/Iran/ Americans security interests.He kept referring to the 400 Syrian Children lying senselessly dead ad infinitum.

    No mention of the 400 Palestinian Gazans laying senselessly dead covered in White Phoshporous.

    He sickens me

  17. just says:

    menendez @ AIPAC this year:

    “Thank you Lonny Kaplan for your always kind introduction, and for your support and friendship over the years and thank you to AIPAC for the warm welcome you have always given me every year, at every event I’ve attended. Let me also recognize the New Jersey delegation – some 500 this year. Some are here this morning – with Steve Klinghoffer and Mike Levin leading the way. Let’s hear it for New Jersey!

    Let me just say to all of you at AIPAC all who are committed to the strongest possible relationship between the U.S. and Israel – as I have been throughout my public service career — I look forward to working with you in my new role as Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.

    It is one of the Senate’s original ten standing committees and has helped shape American foreign policy through the complex geopolitics of our ever-changing world. The Committee has helped every American president – from Harry Truman to Barack Obama – protect and defend our fundamental promise to stand with Israel and the Israeli people in a strong and lasting alliance.

    As Chairman, I can say – without hesitation – I will keep that promise as I always have. There will never be daylight between the United States and Israel on my watch – never — not on my watch.

    I follow in the footsteps of two great Chairmen – Secretary of State John Kerry, and Vice President Joe Biden who yesterday, in his speech, stressed that Israel and the United States have always agreed on the strategic imperative that Israel be able to defend itself, and I couldn’t agree more.

    And I look forward to doing even more to strengthen our commitment to Israel, to shared democratic values — no matter what may bloom from the shifting sands of the Arab Spring.

    Whatever challenges lay ahead, whatever new threats we face… whether in the form of rockets from Gaza, a nuclear threat from Iran, the spillover of violence from Syria, or the rise of Islamist extremists anywhere in the region – the strength of Israel’s democracy will remain a beacon of hope for good governance, economic progress, and the power of an enlightened society to foster democratic ideals.”

    more here, if you can stomach it: link to menendez.senate.gov

  18. aiman says:

    AIPAC: “The civilized world cannot tolerate the use of these barbaric weapons….”

    AIPAC sounds a lot like Samantha Power @ twitter: “Findings of our assessment on #Syria are clear, and there’s a reason after WWI the civilized world agreed CWs should never again be used.”

  19. kalithea says:

    A year or so ago:

    Prophetic: (minute 5:24-)

    **Especially note who introduces him at the beginning.

    Yesterday:

    “Former US congressman Ron Paul says the United States is planning to strike Syria because Damascus is the doorstep for entering Iran.

    “The whole theory is we’re going to Syria because that’s the way you march into Iran,” Paul said in an interview with CNN on Tuesday.

    “At the same time, we’ve made it tougher… We’ve made it tougher for people who want to live in peace… and now we’re just stirring it up in Syria,” he argued.”

    Democrats and so-called Liberals are responsible for silencing and ostracizing the most important voices in Congress, and I can tell you this for a fact, the majority of them are closet ZIONISTS and wherever Zionists rule, Democracy doesn’t!

    • Democrats and so-called Liberals are responsible for silencing and ostracizing the most important voices in Congress

      i thought the gop top brass tanked him during the last election, they didn’t want him for the nominee. didn’t you watch the convention where they changed the rules right on the floor to oust him via chopping the legs off his delegates? tons of dems would have crossed party lines to vote for him, including me (which i mentioned in these threads). why are you so bent on laying all the blame on dems when the gop party faithful wanted him out of the running as well, not to mention the media?

      • RudyM says:

        Absolutely. I’ve forgotten most of the details, but the RNC totally screwed over Ron Paul and his supporters. I actually registered as a Republican for the first time in my life to vote for him in the primary (a futile move, I realize). In fact, I just sent in my voter registration form to go back to being a Democrat, because as much as I hate the Democrats (or the Democratic leadership), the connotations of being a registered Republican are too embarrassing to me.

        • kalithea says:

          Yes, the RNC screwed him over in the primaries, but during the nomination THE CAMPAIGN, when his non-intervention message mattered, when his narrative on defunding Israel mattered, Democrats are the ones who shouted him down and went viral posting slanderous material on him.

      • kalithea says:

        Oh please! Ron Paul was tarred and feathered as a nutty racist way before that on “Liberal” blogs. You and I were even at odds back then more than once, because of the hostility on this site by bloggers both in the comments section and in several articles posted here. I was swimming against the current here at the time.

        I’m not saying mind you this was the worst site, but IT DIDN’T HELP to advance his anti-war, non-interventionist narrative or push him to the forefront because you would counter that narrative with other criticism to detract from that narrative AND you even put up articles countering his non-interventionist narrative, even criticizing him as an isolationist.

        Yeah, there were some Liberals who are against Israel’s growing influence and war who tried to vote in Republican primaries, but they were a very small minority of Democrats. The rest, the majority, were all over the web accusing Dr. Paul of having authored racist material. And whyyyyy? It was a REPUBLICAN primary. Who cares if he would win that! No one should have cared THAT MUCH, except Democrats who didn’t want Mr. Hypocrite Drone Obama challenged in debates later by a credible, formidable opponent like Ron Paul. The attacks and criticism of him were viral on every Democrat and Liberal blog, and I was on Huffpo and here defending him day in an day out against the avalanche.

        If, the Republicans cheated in fixing primary votes, Democrats prepared the FERTILE ground for his political demise throughout the primary campaign by shouting him down, silencing him and distracting from these important issues of war with LIES. It was disgraceful!

        • of course i remember kalithea because i read enough of your ron paul rants to last a lifetime. you’ve told us all over and over and over and even accused the whole staff here, in which i challenged you over, and you couldn’t/wouldn’t back up (how could i forget!).

          it’s as if you’re obsessed w/screaming at everyone over this issue over and over and over is going to somehow bully us into…what? and you make dems responsible knowing full well it’s not dems who are in position to change the gop party to accept him as their nominee. during the political season, things get political and sometimes ugly. but you come on here and blame and rant. what’s the point? it’s not the dems fault the gop fixers would have none of it.

          lecture lecture lecture lecture. I was swimming against the current here at the time.

          you will always be swimming against the current with that attitude, always. there was a lot of support in these threads for paul, a lot. but for you, it was never enough, ever. there was no room for any differing view. you just moaned and groaned for months. and now your back lecturing us again with your screaming capital letters. seriously, grow up.

          AND you even put up articles countering his non-interventionist narrative

          lol, yep. there is not uniformity here (and there’s plenty of stuff that gets posted here i don’t agree with). move on.

  20. kalithea says:

    Yeah, I was passionate with the cause of NO MORE WAR. My bad, right? Rarely do I capitalize everything unless people are being slaughtered systematically by a so-called Democracy, then that passion for justice goes on overdrive. Have I shouted at someone here, hardly, although, I may have in utter frustration at the lies of a hasbara troll, and a few visit this site, but I doubt it went further than that, like you just painted me.

    I’m not very technically savvy in html, and I’d much rather put a few words in small, bold type, or underline, so capitals is my way of giving importance to a phrase.

    So excuse, me. Anyway, I’m not going to belabor the issue with you; it’s pretty clear you’re intent on embarrassing me for speaking my mind and being so candid. Oh and “bully” is way over the top – pointed/scathing–more like me.

    But I detest useless endeavors – so you win.

  21. Tuyzentfloot says:

    Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) have prepared a joint resolution that is supposed to be a lot easier to swallow than Obama’s proposal.
    link to foreign.senate.gov
    A limit of 60 days of assaults with maximum 30 days extension. There’s an awful lot that can be bombed in 60 days. Numbers like that are not about a punitive action, they’re about seriously degrading the regime’s power so that the balance tips in favor of rebel ground forces . It’s a resolution stops just short of regime change – for now. Libya was 6 months in all. So maybe AIPAC doesn’t want regime change, just that the fight goes on? The Saudi’s are clear about regime change.

    This stuff is really worrying. It’s Crocodile Dundee saying “You call this a mess? THIS is a mess!”
    And it bothers me that everyone is pointing at AIPAC. People don’t pay enough attention to Saudi Arabia. The Taliban were a Saudi project too. They’re propping up Salafis everywhere.

    What are the Saudi plans with the ‘trusted’ ground forces that are being prepared in Jordania. link to online.wsj.com . Taking over the chemical weapons sites?

    • eljay says:

      >> A limit of 60 days of assaults with maximum 30 days extension. … Numbers like that are not about a punitive action, they’re about seriously degrading the regime’s power so that the balance tips in favor of rebel ground forces .

      When a child hits a younger sibling, a punitive action by the parent is a firm slap on the arse and maybe some shouting for good measure.

      What the U.S. (Israel) is planning is the equivalent of the parent doing nothing at that moment, waiting a couple of days and then attacking the child and beating him to a bloody pulp with a hammer.

      It’s purely offensive, thoroughly aggressive, utterly unjust and completely immoral.

      Way to go, America (Israel)!

      • Tuyzentfloot says:

        It’s worse. I think the chemical weapons incident was very likely a black flag operation by Al Nusra. But as with the Iraq case, even if the chemical weapons story was false, it turns out that for many pro-war groups that wasn’t a major factor after all.

        (my hobby: ruining people’s metaphors :)

    • Tuyzentfloot says:

      I want to add something about the Saudis. There’s an important interview with Chas Freeman at lobelog about the tensions between Us and saudis: link to lobelog.com

      Now it’s interesting that the US is more or less in support of democratic movements, especially in Egypt. I think that is because they think the major polarisation is Sunni/Shia while a more important polarisation is autocratic/democratic. Iran is in the democratic camp, the oil monarchies are in the autocratic camp. Let’s say the US is a bit confused.