AIPAC’s ‘unlimited’ funds are greatest obstacle to peace, former British foreign sec’y says

Israel/Palestine
on 113 Comments
Jack Straw (l) and Einat Wilf (r) at roundtable, from Wilf's Facebook page

Jack Straw (l) and Einat Wilf (r) at roundtable, from Wilf’s facebook page

Huge news in the Israeli media, but not ours, though it’s about our politics. Einat Wilf is a former member of the Israeli Knesset who was present at an international leaders’ roundtable in London last week and reported on her Facebook page:

I nearly fell off my rickety British chair today when former UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw spoke at the Round Table Global Diplomatic Forum in the British House of Commons. Listing the greatest obstacles to peace, he said “unlimited” funds available to Jewish organizations and AIPAC in the US are used to control and divert American policy in the region and that Germany’s “obsession” with defending Israel were the problem. I guess he neglected to mention Jewish control of the media….

Haaretz headlines its report: ‘Ex-U.K. FM: Jewish money biggest obstacle to Mideast peace’ ‘Unlimited’ funds available to U.S. Jewish groups are controlling American Mideast policy, Jack Straw reportedly states in British parliament debate.” Ynet has cast the same report in darker terms:

Former British Foreign Secretary and Labor MP Jack Straw made harsh anti-Semitic statements during a British parliament debate last week, Yedioth Ahronoth reported.

More from Einat Wilf’s Facebook page:

“It was appalling to listen to Britain’s former foreign secretary…His remarks reflect prejudice of the worst kind. We’re used to hearing groundless accusations from Palestinian envoys but I thought British diplomats, including former ones, were still capable of a measure of rational thought.”

“Throughout the debate I reiterated that the origin of the conflict was the Arab and Palestinian unwillingness to accept the Jewish people’s legitimate right to a state of their own, and that as long as that willingness is absent there will be no true solution.”

It is amazing that ideas that were once blacklisted as being anti-Semitic are coming more and more into the mainstream, as people seek to explain the power of the Israel lobby. It is a necessary discussion, and should entail such information as the fact that two potential Republican presidential candidates were in Israel last week, surely in an effort to win Sheldon Adelson’s millions.

Or Eric Alterman’s statement that conservative Jewish organizations

“have the money and power to interfere with my career and undermine my ability to earn my living as a writer and a scholar.”

Or this donor-braggartry from rightwing rabbi Shmuley Boteach about his dear friend, liberal New Jersey Senator-elect Cory Booker.

And, as a friend, he has so often agreed to participate in our organization’s public events – obviously not earning a penny…. If he met wealthy donors at these events, he was always speaking to them about projects they could fund in Newark for the benefit of residents…

Or indeed Norman Finkelstein’s statement on our site that when it comes to policymaking in Israel and Palestine, “on this particular issue [American Jews] constitute a—perhaps, the—decisive voice.” What does that power derive from? As Straw says, the shadow of the Holocaust and the debt the world owes Jews has played a large role in Israeli immunity. I’m sure such ideas are important for Chris Matthews. But the lobby is also a huge factor, and money is the mother’s milk of politics.

Update: This piece stated originally that Wilf is still a member of the Knesset.

113 Responses

  1. just
    October 28, 2013, 10:43 am

    “It is amazing that ideas that were once blacklisted as being anti-Semitic are coming more and more into the mainstream, as people seek to explain the power of the Israel lobby. ”

    It’s been a long time coming, and it is most welcome that the truth is catching fire. The truth was/is never anti- Semitic.

    Many thanks to all of the folks/contributers here at Mondoweiss.

    • justicewillprevail
      October 28, 2013, 12:47 pm

      What is even more amazing is that the Israeli PR machine and its apparatchiks can assert, with a straight face, that the vast (particularly in relation to those available to the Palestinians) funds which AIPAC and co disburse, the millions funnelled into senators offices, think tanks, media organisations etc has no influence on US policy. Why, if it makes no difference and isn’t a factor, do they spend hundreds of millions on influencing people then? Trying to shrug it off as irrelevant, or even more disingenuously, claiming that is ‘antisemitic’ to even notice the mechanism by which Israel pursues its interests, is so ridiculous as to be laughable. But it does indicate the peculiar fact-free bubble that Israel inhabits when it suits itself, and demands that others do the same.

    • seafoid
      October 28, 2013, 12:49 pm

      Justice is hardly antisemitic either.

      • just
        October 28, 2013, 12:51 pm

        Absolutely correct, seafoid. Thanks for that.

      • seafoid
        October 28, 2013, 1:00 pm

        Neither is allowing people in Gaza to live their lives with dignity.

  2. Citizen
    October 28, 2013, 10:48 am

    Straw also said Friday he would step down as a member of parliament at the 2015 general election. As usual, the big politicians never say sh*t about this until they leave office. If they do, they don’t stay in office long. Lesson nearly always learned, it appears.

  3. Shmuel
    October 28, 2013, 10:51 am

    His remarks reflect prejudice of the worst kind… I thought British diplomats, including former ones, were still capable of a measure of rational thought.

    No other possible explanation, Dr. Wilf (PhD, political science, Cambridge)?
    Well, the important thing is that you reiterated throughout. That’s what round tables are for.

    • pabelmont
      October 28, 2013, 11:51 am

      Cute, Shmuel.

      No doubt she sat at the head of the round table and interjected her (repetitive) ideas (again and again) from the head of the round table, where she, as a dedicated Zionist (and thus a knower of the truth of all relevant matters) deserved to sit, that is, at the head of the round table. Who knows, perhaps she, alone, sitting there at the head of the round table, knew all these important truths.

    • LeaNder
      October 28, 2013, 12:06 pm

      This is interesting in our context: Dr. Einat Wilf Joins NGO Monitor’s International Advisory Board

      And here is the her thesis, yes Cambridge:

      Main author:Wilf, Einat.
      Title: Global actors and global politics : the case of the World Jewish Congress campaign against the Swiss Banks / Einat Wilf.
      Other Entries: University of Cambridge. Faculty of Social and Political Sciences.
      Description: 248 leaves : ill. ; 30cm.
      Notes: Date approved: 14 October 2008.
      Thesis (Ph.D) — University of Cambridge, 2008.

  4. Jim Holstun
    October 28, 2013, 11:00 am

    I think Straw’s arguments are mildly anti-Semitic, in a fashion that should not flabbergast us, coming as they do from a member of the British ruling class who has previously opined about Pakistani men slavvering over white girls. Not because AIPAC doesn’t have some power and use it assiduously to further Zionist depravities, but because Straw overlooks the massive and continuing support for Israeli colonialism coming from US munitions manufacturers, oil companies, and the employees reliant on them–a network of wealth and power into which Mr. Straw (a gross betrayer of his peasant rebel namesake) is through integrated.

    Follow the money.

    • pabelmont
      October 28, 2013, 11:59 am

      follow the money is always good advice, but the money is not always visible.

      Would defence-for-Israel dry up or increase if Israel were forced to end the occupation (or even to make peace with Palestinians)? Would it thereby get all chummy with Hezbollah and Iran? A lot of M/E countries buy USA’s weapons.

      Would Israel’s spying on its neighbors (and sharing that spying with USA) end or continue if the occupation were to end?

      One of Israel’s objections to 2SS is that its waist (at Jerusalem) would then be only 10 miles wide, endangering it to invasion and bombing etc. This seems to me silly, because Israel’s IDF is so strong. But anyhow, why would one expect Israel to stop buying American arms just because it ended the occupation?

      • Jim Holstun
        October 28, 2013, 12:51 pm

        No, one wouldn’t–at least I wouldn’t. The occupation is good for Israeli and American business, but there would no doubt be ways to keep things heated up even if Israel retreated to its earlier ethnically-cleansed borders.

        But my point is that overreliance on the myth of the omnipotent Israel lobby can sometimes seep over into something quite noxious, as in Jack Straw’s vision of the bottomless moneybag of World Jewry. So what–they have all the money as well as controlling Hollywood and the rest of the media? What a crock. With allies like Jack Straw, and Gilad Atzmon. . . .

      • Shingo
        October 28, 2013, 4:18 pm

        But my point is that overreliance on the myth of the omnipotent Israel lobby can sometimes seep over into something quite noxious, as in Jack Straw’s vision of the bottomless moneybag of World Jewry.

        In which case, you don’t really have a point. Your argument borders on taking things to the other exteme, that if AIPAC isn’t omnipotent, then it’s not powerful at all.

      • Shingo
        October 28, 2013, 4:24 pm

        So what–they have all the money as well as controlling Hollywood and the rest of the media? What a crock.

        Yeah, it’s just that high profile Jews boast about it, but it’s still a crock right ?

      • pabelmont
        October 28, 2013, 5:57 pm

        Jim,
        Of course, it would be best for the USA and the world if the USA’s government-buying-capitalist model of economy-governance-confab were scrapped and replaced with one where:
        [1] no one can spend money for political action in USA but human beings
        [2] there is a (relatively low) limit on the total cumulative such expenditure PER PERSON (maybe a $5000 limit) (covering all political action, fed, state, local).
        But we are a long way from there. Imagine if BANKs and DEFENSE and PHARMA and ZION were not allowed to spend their vast funds for political manipulation! (Dream on, PAB!)

      • Theo
        October 28, 2013, 2:00 pm

        pabelmont

        “why would one expect Israel to stop buying american arms….”

        Israel is not really buying any arms from us.
        First of all, we GIVE them newly developed arms to field test them for effectiveness on palestinian women and children. During the 1970s we gave them the F-16s, (or F-15s?), before our pilots could fly one of them.
        In addition they get a few billion cash every year to pay for those arms, so who is really paying the bill? Yes, we, the american taxpayers!
        I wish BMW or Mercedes would give me the cash and force me to spend it on their cars! I would do it with a huge smile on my face.

      • Hostage
        October 28, 2013, 11:13 pm

        One of Israel’s objections to 2SS is that its waist (at Jerusalem) would then be only 10 miles wide, endangering it to invasion and bombing etc.

        The Jewish State already bisects the Palestinian one. Gaza and the West Bank are the territories which are threatened by invasion and bombing, not Israel.

      • homingpigeon
        October 29, 2013, 9:12 am

        Yes indeed, when hasbarists explain that Israel is only ten, or eleven, or seven miles wide at Latroun on the ’67 lines and therefore is entitled to “widen” that waist lest the Palestinians someday cut Israel in half, not everyone notices that it is Israel that has successfully truncated the two Palestinian areas. I have gradually collated a list of about a dozen things that hasbara accuses the Palestinians of doing or being able to do which are projections of actions that the Israelis have already done themselves.

        “Dharabni wa baka, laHaqni wa ishtaka: he hit me and cried, he chased me and complained.”

    • lysias
      October 28, 2013, 2:09 pm

      British ruling class? Jack Straw is as middle class as it is possible to be:

      Straw was born in Buckhurst Hill, Essex, England, the son of Joan Sylvia (née Gilbey)[1][2] and Walter Arthur Whitaker Straw,[1] an insurance salesman. He is of 1/8 Jewish descent – his maternal grandmother’s father having come from an Eastern European Jewish family (Straw himself is a Christian).[3][4] Straw was brought up in Loughton, Essex, by his mother, on a council estate after his father left the family.[5] Walter Straw had been sent to prison in 1939 for being a conscientious objector.[6]

      Straw’s studies were at a direct grant grammar school and at the University of Leeds, where he was a notorious student leftist.

    • Shingo
      October 28, 2013, 4:14 pm

      I think Straw’s arguments are mildly anti-Semitic, in a fashion that should not flabbergast us, coming as they do from a member of the British ruling class who has previously opined about Pakistani men slavvering over white girls.

      That’s a pretty moronic statement given that the American ruling class were making the same comments about Islam in general.

      Straw overlooks the massive and continuing support for Israeli colonialism coming from US munitions manufacturers, oil companies

      Probably because no one has explained exactly what purpose Israel has served oil companies nor proven whether arms manufacturers stood to make any less by being able to sell their arms to countries like Iran – who incidentally had a shit load of oil.

      Nor does it explain what they get out of the current arrangement when Israel has a defato veto or arms sales to Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States.

      The fact is that wealthy Jewish donors had US politicians under their control since the early 1900s, at least 60 years before there was any arms shipments of note to Israel.

      So yeah, follow the money and try to stay consistent.

    • bintbiba
      October 28, 2013, 5:50 pm

      Mr. Straw is of Jewish background, though no longer practicing,apparently.
      Most likely has got disenchanted with the ideal and myths. Another grand gentleman is MP Gerald Kaufmann , who always spoke his mind about the deeds of Israel vis a vis the Palestinians. (Not sure he is still an MP, though he never minced his words while in Parliament).

    • thankgodimatheist
      October 28, 2013, 8:04 pm

      “Straw’s arguments are mildly anti-Semitic”
      Really? You surely must be aware that casually throwing around the anti-Semitic slander is making it almost void of any substance.
      btw, Straw is of 1/8 Jewish descent – his maternal grandmother’s father having come from an Eastern European Jewish family (Straw himself is a Christian).

    • Inanna
      October 28, 2013, 11:16 pm

      I’m the first person to argue the structuralist line but I think that we have to recognise that the cultural influences here are also important and help to reinforce the structuralist features. The Israel Lobbies have very strong organisations to reinforce and mobilise the power that the structural features (US weapons manufacturers, oil companies etc). There are limits to this power – those lobbies have not been able to get the US to attack Iran, for example or invade Syria but they maintain the fealty of key congresspersons.

      Contrast that with Saudi Arabia. SA buys massive amounts of weapons from the US and pays for it. They were stopped from buying all sorts of things from US weapons manufacturers in the 1980s by Congress even though Reagan and his cabinet supported the sale. It was lobbying by AIPAC that did it. SA then went to the UK where Margaret Thatcher eagerly welcomed them and their oil money and US companies mourned. But SA changed its tune to a more US/Israel friendly one and the Congressional doors opened. In this case, the cultural features won over the structural. Saudi Arabia does not have the local sub-population or the lobbying apparatus geared towards its interests. It has chosen to invest heavily in the US – buying US banks, media interests etc – that is, it has chosen to become part of Big Capital in the US, part of the “structure”. That has limits too, in that they have not received the cooperation they want from the US on Syria.

      The lesson here is that these elites within the structure do not themselves have one interest but also compete against each other, whether those elites are weapons manufacturers or member of lobbying groups. I think that to speak in terms of unlimited power/money on the part Jews is at the very least insensitive and it plays to anti-semitic tropes concerning Jews/wealth/business acumen. But to speak of the role of cultural elites in enforcing a narrative and using the resources they have to lobby for their views is in no way anti-semitic. I think that it would be good to have Straw’s words rather than rely on Dr Wilf who seems a very unreliable narrator.

      • Taxi
        October 28, 2013, 11:35 pm

        Don’t you just love how middle eastern the name ‘Wilf’ is?

        It’s like Mr. and Mrs. Smith claiming to hail from Mongolia.

      • Inanna
        October 30, 2013, 3:22 am

        I once sat on a very long flight on Olympic Airways from Athens to Singapore where the lovely elderly Eastern European Jewish couple next to me tried to convince me that the Falashas in Ethiopia were originally white and gradually become black by living among black people, not by inter-marrying with them or converting them. Same for European Jews. They just got lighter hair, skin and eyes by living in a cold climate. When I asked about the incidence of the breast cancer gene in Ashkenazi Jewish women that is not carried by non-European Jews, they were silent and I decided there was not point in continuing the conversation with over 8 hours of flight time to go.

        So yeah, by their standards, Wilf really is Middle Eastern. And it shows how an ideology can really dumb down its believers.

  5. eljay
    October 28, 2013, 11:09 am

    >> “Throughout the debate I reiterated that the origin of the conflict was the Arab and Palestinian unwillingness to accept the Jewish people’s legitimate right to a state of their own, and that as long as that willingness is absent there will be no true solution.”

    1. The origin of the conflict was Jewish terrorism in Palestine, the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their homes and lands, and the establishment of an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” in Palestine.

    2. The Jewish people are not inhabitants of a geographic region, and a “Jewish State” does not represent the self-determination of the inhabitants of a geographic region and their realization of an autonomous, secular, democratic and egalitarian state of and for all people of that geographic region. The Jewish people do not have a legitimate right to their own state.

    • RoHa
      October 28, 2013, 9:24 pm

      “the Jewish people’s legitimate right to a state of their own,”

      I am still waiting for an argument, using standard moral principles, to establish that alleged right.

    • Castellio
      October 28, 2013, 11:31 pm

      I too was brought up abruptly by that statement “that as long as that willingness is absent there will be no true solution.”

      It is, apparently, not sufficient there be a state where Jews have equal rights and protections. The Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims native to the area must willingly accept their own inferior status and unequal treatment, both legally and in practice, for there to be a “true solution”.

      So a well educated seemingly intelligent person insists that her racism be normalized, and perceives that as a reasonable request to which all others should readily comply.

  6. hophmi
    October 28, 2013, 11:10 am

    “It is amazing that ideas that were once blacklisted as being anti-Semitic are coming more and more into the mainstream”

    You think it’s amazing. I think it’s disturbing, and that all decent-minded people should be against it. That’s a major difference between us. As Walt and Mearsheimer said clearly, pro-Israel groups and constituents are exercising their rights as Americans to advocate the policies they are the right ones.

    Mr. Straw will have a black mark on his record for this, as he should, and as all should who express such hate, even if it is couched in the fashionable language of the times.

    • Kris
      October 28, 2013, 11:42 am

      “Pro-Israel groups and constituents are exercising their rights as Americans…”

      Right. Just as pro-GMO groups are exercising their rights as Americans, and pouring money into Washington state to influence our vote on labeling GMO foods.

      Please explain why it’s okay to point out that the pro-GMO groups have huge amounts of money, and therefore influence with all levels of government, but it’s “anti-semitic” to make the same observation about Jewish organizations?

    • Cliff
      October 28, 2013, 11:46 am

      It’s not disturbing. It’s the damn straight TRUTH.

      Jewish organizations do have a near endless supply of money to fund anti-democratic campaigns.

      Whether it be censoring a Palestinian CHILDREN’S art exhibit or attempting to censor the recent metro ads.

      You and your cult are only haters in this equation.

      Walt and Mearsheimer would agree with phrases like ‘Jewish money’ – and plenty of journalists use the term casually. It’s a term that Zionists themselves use.

      The implication is understood to be the organized pro-Israel community and no one thinks otherwise except you trolls who FEIGN ‘concern’ and cry ‘hatred’.

      You do this to police the debate. Any cracks in the narrative, any challenges to your hegemony and you’ll pounce. You’ll play up the incident as another Shoah because any and all threats to Jewish colonialism must be met with hysteria to keep people AFRAID.

      That is your entire act: FEAR, HATE, WAR, LIES.

    • Woody Tanaka
      October 28, 2013, 11:49 am

      “As Walt and Mearsheimer said clearly, pro-Israel groups and constituents are exercising their rights as Americans to advocate the policies they are the right ones.”

      The fact that they’re exercising their rights doesn’t mean that what they’re doing is just or right or in the best interest of the US. Frankly, yes, the law of the US permits people to warp the policies of the US in favor of an evil alien state. That doesn’t mean that anyone has to be happy about it.

      “Mr. Straw will have a black mark on his record for this”

      LMAO. you cheer on thugs that murder your fellow American citizens and who drop white phosphorus on children and Straw is the one with the “black mark”?? What a twisted immoral world you live in.

    • MRW
      October 28, 2013, 11:50 am

      Hate? And I’ll bet you’re so ‘hurt’ as a result, aren’t you?

      • thankgodimatheist
        October 28, 2013, 8:10 pm

        Yes, I think he is. It takes very little to hurt poor little Hophmi, knowing the whole world is “against us”..

    • amigo
      October 28, 2013, 1:45 pm

      Nothing disturbing about telling the truth.I have no love for Straw because of his criminal involvment in the attack on Iraq but at least he is trying to redeem himself.

      That it bothers you hoppy is just an added bonus.Your unhappiness is matched only by my pleasure.

      Stay tuned hoppy, many more revelations to come.

      Drip, drip, drip.

    • Theo
      October 28, 2013, 2:09 pm

      hophmi

      There is a saying that ” if you tighten the springs on an instrument too much, it eventually will break”.
      That is what you zionists did for the last 68 years, putting on the pressure with the word “anti-semitic” if you did not like just about anything. The pressure cooker is about ready to explode, so watch it.
      Why don´t you go and plant a few olive trees for the palestinians and follow it up with a marching orders for those settlers. It may just save your skin.

    • Hostage
      October 29, 2013, 6:09 am

      You think it’s amazing. I think it’s disturbing, and that all decent-minded people should be against it. That’s a major difference between us.

      LOL! You’re a Zionist doing concern trolling. Here is the web page of the Jewish Federations of North America, which makes the ironic claim that AIPAC is “The only American organization registered to lobby Congress in support of the U.S.-Israel relationship.”
      link to jewishfederations.org

      Of course it’s no joke that every organization on that page lobbies Congress on behalf of Israel.

      For example, here is a news article which describes William Daroff, vice president for public policy and director of the Washington office of Jewish Federations of North America and a registered lobbyist, and Joyce Garver Keller, Columbus-based lobbyist and executive director of Ohio Jewish Communities. They explained that Israel tops their organizations 2012 election campaign agenda.

      The Jewish Federations and its affiliates also contributed 2 million dollars to political campaigns. link to opensecrets.org

      That’s just one. Now why on Earth is it out-of-bounds to discuss each of the self-described “major Jewish organizations” and their registered lobbyists, FEC reports on their political spending, and the fact that the State of Israel tops their agenda year after year?

  7. Hostage
    October 28, 2013, 11:16 am

    Throughout the debate I reiterated that the origin of the conflict was the Arab and Palestinian unwillingness to accept the Jewish people’s legitimate right to a state of their own”

    There’s a racist idea if ever there was one. Straw is quite correct. The Jewish organizations and AIPAC can rely on unlimited funds being made available to them. None of them ever went broke betting on that either.

    • Shmuel
      October 28, 2013, 11:20 am

      As Walt and Mearsheimer said clearly, pro-Israel groups and constituents are exercising their rights as Americans to advocate the policies they are the right ones.

      Do others have the right to criticise the impact such groups and constituents may have on US foreign policy and its consequences in the ME, or do they merely have the right to a black mark on their records?

      • just
        October 28, 2013, 11:23 am

        bull’s eye, Schmuel!

      • MRW
        October 28, 2013, 11:48 am

        Thanks, Shmuel. Stolen as my own comment. ;-)

      • JennieS
        October 28, 2013, 4:00 pm

        Excellent analysis!

    • Woody Tanaka
      October 28, 2013, 11:42 am

      “There’s a racist idea if ever there was one”

      Exactly. Wilf’s statement is a libel, especially considering that it is the Arabs who have had a Peace Plan pending for a decade that Wilf’s people have flipped the bird to.

  8. OlegR
    October 28, 2013, 11:37 am

    Straw basically said that Jews have way too much money and that he does not approve the way they choose to spend it.
    And you don’t find this antisemitic , not even a little bit ?

    • just
      October 28, 2013, 11:42 am

      Your “interpretation” of Straw’s remarks is incredibly hilarious.

      • OlegR
        October 28, 2013, 11:43 am

        What would be your interpretation to what he said ?

      • Cliff
        October 28, 2013, 12:11 pm

        Exactly what the Israeli Knesset member wrote until she gave her own spin:

        She said:

        Listing the greatest obstacles to peace, he said “unlimited” funds available to Jewish organizations and AIPAC in the US are used to control and divert American policy in the region and that Germany’s “obsession” with defending Israel were the problem.

        Completely reasonable view.

        It’s only after this summary that you trolls ADD ON a supposed belief that he meant ALL JEWS EVERYWHERE REGARDLESS OF politics, income level, etc.

        You’re the one FANTASIZING about antisemitism.

      • seafoid
        October 28, 2013, 12:34 pm

        “Former British Foreign Secretary and Labor MP Jack Straw made harsh anti-Semitic statements during a British parliament debate last week, Yedioth Ahronoth reported.”

        Idiot always tells its reader that Europe is hopelessly anti-Semitic. It was even featured in the movie Defamation.

        Does anyone know how Adelson turned out to be a real life 24/7 anti-Semitic trope?

      • eljay
        October 28, 2013, 1:05 pm

        >> What would be your interpretation to what he said ?

        I don’t know what Straw actually said (I tried Googling for a transcript of his comment, but couldn’t find one), but my interpretation of Wilf’s statement paraphrasing what Straw supposedly said is that a key obstacle to peace in the Middle East is the ability of very well-funded pro-Israel groups in the U.S. to shape U.S. policy regarding Israel.

        That sounds pretty accurate.

      • talknic
        October 28, 2013, 7:31 pm

        @ OlegR “What would be your interpretation to what he said ?”

        What he actually said is what he said.

        You’ve changed what he said to get your interpretation = propaganda

        Haaretz quotes only a few words = propaganda

        Ynet does likewise (whereas they quote Dr. Wilf comments quite fully ) = propaganda

        Dr. Wilf’s face book page doesn’t quote him at all = propaganda

    • Woody Tanaka
      October 28, 2013, 11:43 am

      “Straw basically said that Jews have way too much money and that he does not approve the way they choose to spend it.”

      No, Straw did not “basically” say that.

    • Shmuel
      October 28, 2013, 11:48 am

      Oleg,

      I don’t know what Straw said, only what Wilf said he said, and even that does not add up to your crude paraphrase.

      Are the actions of the pro-Israel lobby in the US and Germany’s automatic support for Israel in Europe among the greatest obstacles to peace (according to Wilf, he was “listing”; were there other items on the “list”?)? Perhaps they are and perhaps they aren’t, but why does saying that they are necessarily “reflect prejudice of the worst kind” (as opposed to prejudice of the best kind?)?

      • OlegR
        October 28, 2013, 11:53 am

        So you are perfectly all right with his statement (assume it’s accurate),
        “Unlimited funds” and all.
        No annoying feeling that you already heard or read something like that before ?
        Jewish organizations have a tons of money and they use it to influence the foreign policy of a country they are citizens of.
        What nerve.

      • Woody Tanaka
        October 28, 2013, 12:13 pm

        “No annoying feeling that you already heard or read something like that before ?”

        There’s your problem. The rest of us are actually reacting to what’s there, not some fantasy you’re concocting in your head.

      • Shmuel
        October 28, 2013, 1:40 pm

        So you are perfectly all right with his statement (assume it’s accurate),
        “Unlimited funds” and all.

        Assuming that Wilf has reported Straw’s statement accurately, what he said was that two of the greatest obstacles to peace in the ME are the impact of political/financial clout of “Jewish organizations and AIPAC” on US foreign policy, and Germany’s automatic support for Israel (for whatever reasons, but you’re not interested in that part anyway).

        Let’s break the first part of Straw’s reported remarks (the one that interests you) into two: US foreign policy in the ME, and its causes.

        There is nothing controversial about saying that US foreign policy in the ME is an important contributing factor to stability/instability in the region. Exactly how important or decisive is open to debate (Wilf could certainly have engaged Straw on that point – no hard feelings).

        As for the contributing factors to determining US foreign policy in the ME, one may lean more toward Chomsky (my personal understanding) or more toward Walt and Mearsheimer, or favour some other analysis, but the pro-Israel lobby/ies exist, are heavily Jewish (whether they actually represent the views of US Jews is another matter entirely) and extremely well funded. “Unlimited funds” is certainly not meant to be taken literally, but considering the huge resources mobilised by the pro-Israel lobby, it strikes me as reasonable hyperbole.

        No annoying feeling that you already heard or read something like that before ?

        Not annoying, but yes, Walt and Mearsheimer said something similar.

        Jewish organizations have a tons of money and they use it to influence the foreign policy of a country they are citizens of.

        Do these organisations have lots of money and use it to influence their country’s foreign policy or not? They would hardly be effective foreign policy lobbies if they didn’t (on both counts). So why is the impact that they have not allowed to be critically discussed?

      • Hostage
        October 28, 2013, 11:03 pm

        Jewish organizations have a tons of money and they use it to influence the foreign policy of a country they are citizens of.

        About a month ago these Jewish lobbies were saying the President had the authority to launch military strikes against Syria and that he ought to do so with or without the permission of the UN Security Council. They deployed 300 paid lobbyists to Capitol Hill to press for an authorization to commit acts of war against other UN members states, Syria and Iran. The is no God damn doubt that these oranizations represent a threat to peace in the ME and for the country where they are citizens.

      • Woody Tanaka
        October 29, 2013, 1:41 am

        “Jewish organizations have a tons of money and they use it to influence the foreign policy of a country they are citizens of.”

        Yet they’re doing it on behalf of an alien state, to the benefit of a bunch of aliens (who are creating an Apartheid state), regardless of the benefit or (more often) detriment of the US and Americans. That’s the problem.

    • MRW
      October 28, 2013, 11:48 am

      No.

    • Cliff
      October 28, 2013, 11:50 am

      Straw did not say ALL JEWS, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY ARE ORGANIZED OR NOT have endless funds.

      He said the Jewish ORGANIZATIONS – meaning the organized Jewish community – meaning ZIONIST Jewish groups.

      And he is ABSOLUTELY right.

      Of course you LIARS want to make it seem as if he made a nonsensical gross generalization.

      It doesn’t even make sense to say ALL JEWS have endless funds. What a idiotic strawman.

      Why the hell is Oleg not banned yet for this bullshit trolling?

    • Taxi
      October 28, 2013, 11:56 am

      It’s not antisemitic if it’s true, oleg.

      “It ain’t bragging if it’s true” – Mohammad Ali.

      The phrase above, immortalized in a song by the great Dan Bern:

    • RoHa
      October 28, 2013, 9:14 pm

      “And you don’t find this antisemitic , not even a little bit ?”

      If what Straw said was true, then it doesn’t matter how “anti-Semitic” it is. You just want to use the charge “anti-Semitic” as a form of censorship.

      You, and all the others who toss around such labels* to censor claims and stifle debate, are enemies of truth and reason, and that makes you enemies of the human race, for it is only by using reason to pursue truth that we can attain any measure of justice.

      *”Anti-Semitic” is by no means the only label used in this way.

      • RoHa
        October 28, 2013, 10:34 pm

        Test: Which commas should be removed from my previous post?

      • Taxi
        October 29, 2013, 4:46 am

        I am nervously putting out my knuckles for your ruler, master RoHa:

        ‘You and all the others who toss around such labels* to censor claims and stifle debate, are enemies of truth and reason and that makes you enemies of the human race, for it is only by using reason to pursue truth that we can attain any measure of justice.’

      • RoHa
        October 29, 2013, 8:56 pm

        Tut, tut, tut.

        You were right to remove the comma after “You”, but, by itself, that made it even worse. When the first comma is removed, everything up to debate becomes a subject clause, so there should be no comma after “debate”.

        (Ask yourself, “In what circumstances is it legitimate to put a comma before a verb?)

        The trap lies in “enemies” If I had written “an enemy”, then all the commas would have been obligatory, but “enemies” means I am including “all the others” as part of the subject.

        However, I shall, on this occasion, spare you the ruler, since the initial fault was mine.

        As one of the Mahanes would say, “Quandoque bonus dormitat RoHa.

      • Taxi
        October 30, 2013, 6:58 am

        Thanks for the lesson, RoHa, especially the “trap” part – good to know.

        Keep putting out grammar tests – I love it! Reminds me of my strict yet instructive grandad :-)

        Hey I thought more people would take the test too – feels like I’m the only one on the dance floor – LOL!

    • Annie Robbins
      October 29, 2013, 5:14 am

      Straw basically said that Jews have way too much money and that he does not approve the way they choose to spend it.

      actually, what he “basically” said was that unlimited funds available to Jewish organizations like AIPAC are used to control and divert American policy in the region and that Germany’s obsession with defending Israel were the problem.

      that’s sort of a no brainer if you ask me.

      And you don’t find this antisemitic

      racist? why is it racist? if my sister had a gazillion bucks and i didn’t approve of the way she spent it would that be racist? this is not racist or anti semitic. it’s a fact that Jewish organizations have a ton of money (endless) to advocate for radically rightwing stuff (think adelson!) and it’s quite normal to not approve of unlimited funds going to policies one disagrees with. but where the charge of racism comes from is beyond me.

      show me some right wing pro israel project that didn’t get funded. just one. they do not exist.

  9. Nevada Ned
    October 28, 2013, 11:47 am

    US financial aid to Israel, running around $3B/year, would not have continued for so long, and at such a high level, were it not for two facts: (1) the influence of the Israel Lobby, and (2) US policymakers think that the US and Israel have common interests, at least in the long run and for the most part.
    The common interest between the US and Israeli ruling classes lies in a common opposition to Arab nationalism. Both the US and Israel want to keep the Arab world divided, backward, and weak. The US takes this position because they see Arab nationalism as the main threat to US control of the oil of the Middle East. The Israelis take this position because they fear that if the Arab world becomes strong and united, the Arabs will oppose Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians.
    For example, the US had opposed Nasser because he was an advocate of Arab unity and strength. Nasser had an appreciative audience through the Arab world. 1967, Israel utterly crushed Nasser, and Nasserism never recovered. Another example: the US gave bunker-buster weapons to Israel, which used them on Hezbollah, but Hezbollah survived anyway.
    (For the US, it’s easier to give Israel the weapons than to have the US bomb Hezbollah).
    Of course, counter-arguments can be made: there have been a number of developments that are impossible to explain if you think that US and Israeli interests are identical. Examples: Israel wants the US embassy moved to Jerusalem. The US has refused. Israel wants Pollard pardoned. The US refuses. Israel wants to attack Iran, now. The US is going a different route – an economic blockade of Iran now, and a possible future attack. The Israeli attack on the US Liberty. The list goes on and on and on.
    One more thing: the Walt/Mearsheimer book was written by two members of the foreign policy Establishment. Normally, members of the foreign policy Establishment don’t write books for the general public. (Instead, they write articles for Foreign Affairs that nobody reads). Walt and Mearsheimer wrote their book (knowing they were going to be smeared as anti-Semites) because they thought the US tie with Israel was too close, and was hurting US interests. And of course, Jimmy Carter’s book is in the same category as the Walt/Mearsheimer book: a member of the Establishment wants to put some distance between the US and Israel.

  10. Taxi
    October 28, 2013, 12:01 pm

    Is Germany really obsessed with israel? The German people? Or the German government? And the German youth, are they all obsessed with israel too? Perhaps a German native can clue us in.

    • jenin
      October 28, 2013, 5:18 pm

      Disclaimer: I am not German, but my boyfriend is Swiss (from the German part) and has spent a lot of time in Germany and knows many Germans. According to him, it is very hard to criticize Israel in Germany because of German holocaust guilt, and very few people are brave enough to do it. This is why Germany merely abstaining (instead of opposing) the UN vote recognizing the Palestinian state was so surprising. However, he said among the younger generations this is changing rapidly (as it is here) for obvious reasons, and when he reads the comments section of the Spiegel there is far more criticism of Israeli policies than there was 10 years ago. As far as obsessed, I don’t think that’s a word he would use to describe the German people’s relationship with Israel.

    • Theo
      October 29, 2013, 9:30 am

      I am not german native, however live in Germany since several decades, have a german wife and her relatives to rely on.

      The german government must be under tremendous pressure or blackmail, perhaps both of them, to toe the faithful line of the zionists. If a politiker ever dares to criticise the israeli doings in Palestina, his career is ruined, even if he spoke the truth!
      The MSM is just as mumm as the american counterparts, reports of crimes commited by the IDF never appear in newspapers or TV news. Newspaper columns are very pro Israel, it seems the palestinians just do not exist!
      The people, aspecially the younger ones, have very little interest in politics, and according to my experience Israel is a non-issue to them.
      On the other hand the neo-nazis are growing in numbers every year, so do their demonstrations, however they are against anything foreign, beside anti-semitism they really favour bashing turks, africans and arabs.
      However, this is a pan-european problem, rightwing parties in France, the Neaderlands or even in GB are gaining support.

      Suma sumarum, in Germany there is no sign of any new anti-semitism, they are busy to make a few euros more. I personally wish the young would pay more attention to politics and what their politicians do.

  11. MRW
    October 28, 2013, 12:03 pm

    Is Einat Wilf misinformed or brain-dead?

    Now is a good time to reiterate a blog post MJ Rosenberg put up on October 15.

    The centerpiece of his [Netanyahu’s] discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was this: his demand that Palestinians recognize Israel “as a Jewish state.”

    This is the nation state of the Jewish people….Recognize the Jewish state. As long as you refuse to do so, there will never be peace. Recognize our right to live here in our own sovereign state, our nation state – only then will peace be possible. I emphasize this here – this is an essential condition.

    It’s a new demand, one that only became Israeli policy when Netanyahu came to office. Every prime minister prior to Netanyahu only demanded that the Palestinians recognize Israel. But then, on September 9, 1993, PLO Chairman Yasir Arafat sent this statement to Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin (in exchange for Rabin’s recognition of the PLO as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people). This agreement stands to this day and is recognized as binding by both sides.

    The PLO recognizes the right of Israel to exist in peace and security. The PLO accepts United Nations resolutions 242 and 338. The PLO commits itself to the peaceful resolution of the conflict between the two sides and declares that all outstanding issues related to final status will be resolved through negotiations.

    This commitment — encompassing Palestinian acceptance of Israel’s three long-standing conditions – led to Rabin’s agreement to begin negotiations with the Palestinians.

  12. Taxi
    October 28, 2013, 12:10 pm

    Interesting that Jack Straw’s Wiki page suddenly and swiftly got an “antisemitic” passage added to his biog, regarding this incident:
    link to en.wikipedia.org

  13. upsidedownism
    October 28, 2013, 12:14 pm

    Don’t forget that Jack Straw is Jewish; as far as ‘black marks’ against him, don’t forget he was Tony Blair’s Foreign Secretary at the time of the 2003 Iraq invasion.

    • HarryLaw
      October 28, 2013, 3:18 pm

      upsidedownism @ “don’t forget that Jack Straw is Jewish;” This is how The Jewish Chronicle describes him……
      In an article discussing possible successors to Gordon Brown, Dubai-based Gulf News posed the question, “Jack Straw – a Jewish Prime Minister?” So just how kosher is he?

      For: Straw does indeed have Jewish ancestry on his mother’s side – his maternal great grandmother was a German-Jewish immigrant. Straw was brought up in Buckhurst Hill, Essex, where there is a synagogue. He went to Leeds University, one of our more haimishe institutes of higher education where he read law (noch). Having qualified, he branched out into media (as a researcher for World in Action) and then went into politics. If there was a classic Jewish career path, this would be it. He was also named by Labour MP Tam Dalyell as part of “a cabal of Jewish advisers” surrounding Tony Blair. Where there’s smoke…

      Against: Although Straw’s great grandmother was Jewish, it was the wrong one – on his mother’s father’s side. So Straw is not halachically Jewish. Indeed, in a speech given in 1995, he said: “I come from Jewish stock although I’m Christian now.” So even if he looks like a shul warden, he doesn’t want to be one of us. Straw’s father is from Barnsley – not a Jewish place.

      Verdict: The motion is defeated
      So we say he is 12% Jewish

      • PeaceThroughJustice
        October 29, 2013, 12:14 am

        Harry Law, keep your racist definitions to yourself. What matters is the choices people make, not their bloodlines, and Straw clearly chose not to make “Jewishness” the framework for his self-identity.

        But back to the subject — Straw has spoken out before, starting right after 9-11 when he suggested that it might not have been caused by a hatred of freedom: “One of the factors that helps breed terrorism is the anger which many people in this region feel at events over the years in Palestine.”

        This of course was going too far (an Israeli cabinet minister described the comments as “pornographic”), and Tony Blair quickly straightened him out–

        Tony Blair was forced to intervene personally to rescue Jack Straw from a diplomatic storm yesterday when the furious Israeli prime minister and president refused to meet him.
        link to theguardian.com

        Straw also said the following about Scooter Libby, “It’s a toss-up whether Libby is working for the Israelis or the Americans on any given day.” (Geoffrey Wheatcroft, The New Statesman, 25 April 2005)
        link to en.wikipedia.org

      • HarryLaw
        October 29, 2013, 5:00 am

        PeaceThroughJustice @ “Harry Law, keep your racist definitions to yourself.” I take the greatest objection to your accusation, the piece I quoted was taken from the Jewish Chronicle link to thejc.com, and it was offered as a comment, because upsidedownism had said he was Jewish in the comment above mine, I made no definition of Straw being of Jewish origin in fact the piece is taken entirely from the JC, neither do I care whether he is a Muslim or Christian or from Mars, I just don’t think that way, can I have an apology?

      • PeaceThroughJustice
        October 29, 2013, 10:47 am

        “the piece I quoted was taken from the Jewish Chronicle …”

        Couldn’t be any racism there.

      • Hostage
        October 29, 2013, 12:10 pm

        Here is another anti-Semitic comment. He fails to genuflect in the direction of San Remo and talks about “contradictory assurances”:

        “I didn’t agree with that stuff. I’m not a liberal imperialist,” Straw says. “There’s quite a lot wrong with liberalism, with a capital L, although I am a liberal with a small L. And there’s a lot wrong with imperialism. A lot of the problems we are having to deal with now, I have to deal with now, are a consequence of our colonial past.

        Straw is pumped up, and embarks on a list of British historical errors. “India, Pakistan – we made some quite serious mistakes. We were complacent with what happened in Kashmir, the boundaries weren’t published until two days after independence. Bad story for us, the consequences are still there. Afghanistan – where we played less than a glorious role over a century and a half.” He moves on to the Middle East: “There’s hardly a country . . . ” he checks himself, before going on: “The odd lines for Iraq’s borders were drawn by Brits. The Balfour declaration and the contradictory assurances which were being given to Palestinians in private at the same time as they were being given to the Israelis – again, an interesting history for us but not an entirely honourable one.”

        link to newstatesman.com

      • HarryLaw
        October 30, 2013, 6:53 am

        PeaceThroughJustice @ “Couldn’t be any racism there”. Undoubtedly, but in this instance they are correcting upsidedownisms assertion in the comment before mine,that Straw was Jewish [providing it is even possible to do that] and in the bargain Straw say’s ” I come from Jewish stock although I’m a Christian now” so the article makes clear that Straw wishes to be known as a Christian, which correlates perfectly with your views, “What matters is the choices people make, not their bloodlines, and Straw clearly chose not to make “Jewishness” the framework for his self-identity”. So for pointing out upsidedownism’s wrongful designation of the choice Straw has made, and affirming that the choice he has made, is to be known as a Christian in line with your views you called me a racist, it’s untrue and causes me great offence.

    • Bumblebye
      October 28, 2013, 3:52 pm

      No he isn’t – one of his great-grandfathers was.

      • MHughes976
        October 28, 2013, 5:02 pm

        But there is no objective test for being Jewish.

    • Shingo
      October 28, 2013, 4:47 pm

      And then he lost his job because he said that bombing Iran was an absurd idea.

    • thankgodimatheist
      October 28, 2013, 8:51 pm

      “Don’t forget that Jack Straw is Jewish”
      Not according to Wiki entry:
      “Straw is of 1/8 Jewish descent – his maternal grandmother’s father having come from an Eastern European Jewish family (Straw himself is a Christian).”
      link to en.wikipedia.org

      • Tobias
        October 29, 2013, 10:24 am

        which would make him 7/8 anti-semitic and 1/8 self hating

  14. Mike_Konrad
    October 28, 2013, 12:17 pm

    I have no doubt AIPAC has massive funds?

    Do you realize how much money the Saudis put into this contest?

    Who do you think finanaced a good portion of the Islamic Studies departments at major universities?

    The Oil companies do the Saudi’s bidding.

    Want to see a real Apartheid State … Saudi Arabia.

    If you criticize AIPAC, then be fair and criticize Saudi money.

    • seafoid
      October 28, 2013, 1:56 pm

      Saudi money sucks.

      But Israel is worse. The Jewish state is supposed to be all fluffy and decent and it can’t ever be.

    • Chu
      October 28, 2013, 4:20 pm

      red herring. no ones talking about the corrupt Saudis.

    • Shingo
      October 28, 2013, 5:03 pm

      Do you realize how much money the Saudis put into this contest?

      Go on. Tell us how much!! Because die the Saudis to out money in directly would be illegal. AIPAC gets away with it by being an American organization that funnels donations from Anerican citizens.

      Who do you think finanaced a good portion of the Islamic Studies departments at major universities?

      And how does that influence Congress? Oh that’s right, it doesn’t.

      The Oil companies do the Saudi’s bidding.

      What have they been bidding for? Military aid to Saudi Arabia?

      The fact is that Saudi Arabia’s political influence in Washington had been practically null. In fact, as we saw with Chas Freeman, being associated with Saudis or Saudi money is a poisoned chalice politically.

      <blockquote< Want to see a real Apartheid State … Saudi Arabia.

      Want to see another…Israel. Bloke Israel, Saudi Arabua has not subjugated the native population .

      If you criticize AIPAC, then be fair and criticize Saudi money.

      I’ll do they when the King of Saudi Arabia is invited to speak before Congress and gets 29 standing ovations, or becomes a key component of presidential, congressional, senatorial and mayoral campaigns. I’ll do that when the local lobby holds conferences attended by the president, Vice Presidents etc.

      Until then , there is no comparison.

    • talknic
      October 28, 2013, 5:10 pm

      @ Mike_Konrad Unlike Israel, is Saudi Arabia occupying another people? In breach of hundreds of UNSC resolutions is it? Saudi Arabian lobbyists busy in the US having the US UNSC veto vote maintained in order to keep Saudi Arabia protected from the consequences of 65 years of creating illegal facts on the ground outside of Saudi Arabia?

      • just
        October 28, 2013, 5:21 pm

        Excellent questions, talknic. I’ll be waiting for Mike’s factual responses.

      • talknic
        October 28, 2013, 7:38 pm

        @ just forever is a long time to wait link to talknic.files.wordpress.com

      • just
        October 28, 2013, 7:56 pm

        talknic– BRILLIANT!

        I cannot stop laughing…………I teared right up!

    • thankgodimatheist
      October 28, 2013, 8:59 pm

      “Do you realize how much money the Saudis put into this contest?”
      Nice try, Herr Konrad. Saudi money was never used to act on Palestinian issues. It’s ‘bomb Syria and Iran’ most of the time. Proof it worked? They rejected the seat at the UN that they worked so hard to get upon discovering it was to no effect.

      “Saudi to restrict relations with USA”
      A source has revealed that Saudi intelligence services chief, Prince Bandar bin Abdul-Aziz has told European diplomats that his country would restrict relations with the United States in protest to their position on Syria.

      The source, who spoke to the London based newspaper al-Quds al-Arabi, said that the restrictions would include weapon deals and oil trade.
      – See more at: link to middleeastmonitor.com

  15. Chu
    October 28, 2013, 12:21 pm

    Jack Straw: “unlimited” funds available to Jewish organizations and AIPAC in the US are used to control and divert American policy …

    The card of Anti-Semitism is wearing thin, as more see it is a shield to an open discussion about power politics. Is Straw’s statement really anti-Semitic – (unlimited funds, oooh)?

  16. just
    October 28, 2013, 12:43 pm

    My guess is that Wilf “nearly fell off my rickety British chair” when Straw said this earlier this year:

    “Jack Straw: Well, hang on a second, Israel has a most extensive nuclear weapons capability, it has no territorial ambitions apart from stealing the land of the Palestinians and it’s not going to use nuclear weapons for that but it has (a) very extensive nuclear weapons programme, and along with India and Pakistan are the three countries in the world, plus North Korea more recently, which have refused any kind of International supervision of their nuclear programme.”

    link to redressonline.com

  17. seafoid
    October 28, 2013, 12:45 pm

    Donor money is so important because Israel can’t win any arguments otherwise.

  18. Bandolero
    October 28, 2013, 2:21 pm

    Maybe it would be a good idea to try to get know what Jack Straw really said instead of taking the account of Einat Wilf for granted. She uses indirect language to describe what he said, so his actual words could have been quite different. And, as to my experience, it would not be the first time that zionists report criticism of the ideology of zionism or of the Israel lobby as anti-semitic slurs against judaism.

    Haaretz has a headline in that regard, but I have no login:

    Ex-U.K. FM denies anti-Semitic remarks on ‘Jewish money’

    link to haaretz.com

    Sounds to me as an indicator that Einat Wilf perhaps may have misrepresented what Jack Straw really said.

    • Shmuel
      October 28, 2013, 2:29 pm

      Excerpt from the Haaretz article:

      Straw wrote that he had voiced concerns at the seminar over Israel’s “settlement-building… on Palestinian land (in East Jerusalem, and the Occupied Territories). This is illegal, as the British Foreign Secretary William Hague has observed and in those terms. I said that this amounted to “theft” of Palestinians’ land.” In addition, he said that he advocated at the seminar “a tougher stand on this (and on the related issue of goods exported from the Occupied Territories by Israelis) by the European Union.” He said that he had pointed out in the past that one of the obstacles to a EU policy on this had been “the attitude of Germany, who for understandable reasons have been reluctant to be out of line with the Government of Israel.”

      While some of the reports had mentioned that Straw spoke of “Jewish money,” he said that he had spoken at the seminar of the “Israeli lobby” and “the problems which faced President Obama from AIPAC” and spoke of the way AIPAC spends large sums of money supporting pro-Israeli candidates in American elections.

      • Bandolero
        October 28, 2013, 2:37 pm

        Thanks Shmuel.

        I find that sounds completely different from what Einat Wilf reported.

      • Cliff
        October 28, 2013, 2:41 pm

        So in other words, the Israeli MK LIED and TWISTED HIS WORDS.

        Typical Zionist propaganda.

      • just
        October 28, 2013, 3:34 pm

        yep. Seems that they just can’t help themselves. Lying, twisting words and mistranslating are par for the course.

    • Cliff
      October 28, 2013, 3:41 pm

      There’s ALREADY a Wiki page section for this on Straw’s page.

      I guess the trolls could not help themselves.

      It seems as though every person in history has a sub-section entitled ‘Accusations of antisemitism’ on Wikipedia.

  19. DICKERSON3870
    October 28, 2013, 6:28 pm

    RE: “AIPAC’s ‘unlimited’ funds are greatest obstacle to peace, former British foreign sec’y says”

    FROM opensecrets.org (10/28/13):

    Pro-Israel: Money to Congress
    • Senators (top 20)
    • All cycles
    Candidate ////// Amount
    Lieberman, Joe (I-CT) $2,281,424
    Kirk, Mark (R-IL) $1,706,933
    Levin, Carl (D-MI) $1,661,835
    Specter, Arlen (D-PA) $1,376,605
    Obama, Barack (D) $1,371,325
    McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $1,339,348
    McCain, John (R-AZ) $1,303,682
    Clinton, Hillary (D-NY) $1,234,741
    Wyden, Ron (D-OR) $1,058,857
    Durbin, Dick (D-IL) $954,203
    Schumer, Charles E (D-NY) $866,149
    Boxer, Barbara (D-CA) $861,013
    Cardin, Ben (D-MD) $824,865
    Harkin, Tom (D-IA) $822,685
    Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA) $807,666
    Daschle, Tom (D-SD) $797,141
    Kerry, John (D-MA) $718,535
    Stabenow, Debbie (D-MI) $717,621
    Nelson, Bill (D-FL) $707,461
    Reid, Harry (D-NV) $699,784
    Lautenberg, Frank (D-NJ) $696,266

    SOURCE – link to opensecrets.org

    Members of the House (top 20)
    • All cycles
    Candidate ////// Amount
    Kirk, Mark (R-IL) $1,706,933
    Berkley, Shelley (D-NV) $1,440,906
    Wyden, Ron (D-OR) $1,058,857
    Cantor, Eric (R-VA) $1,005,480
    Durbin, Dick (D-IL) $954,203
    Schumer, Charles E (D-NY) $866,149
    Boxer, Barbara (D-CA) $861,013
    Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana (R-FL) $840,594
    Cardin, Ben (D-MD) $824,865
    Lowey, Nita M (D-NY) $786,063
    Hoyer, Steny H (D-MD) $781,565
    Stabenow, Debbie (D-MI) $717,621
    Nelson, Bill (D-FL) $707,461
    Berman, Howard L (D-CA) $694,090
    Menendez, Robert (D-NJ) $681,823
    Engel, Eliot L (D-NY) $628,197
    Levin, Sander (D-MI) $579,877
    Kyl, Jon (R-AZ) $551,297
    Pelosi, Nancy (D-CA) $530,049
    Israel, Steve (D-NY) $524,822

    SOURCE – link to opensecrets.org

    • DICKERSON3870
      October 28, 2013, 6:53 pm

      P.S. FROM opensecrets.org (10/28/13):

      ● Pro-Israel: Money to Congress

      • SUMMARY
      • All cycles

      Dems: $70,969,618
      Repubs: $39,958,026
      Other: $1,546,917
      All Candidates: Total to All Candidates: $112,474,561
      Incumbents Only: Total to Members: $91,696,169

      House
      # of Members / Avg. Contribution / Total
      Democrats 1,468 $17,787 $27,119,594
      Republicans 973 $14,977 $15,500,766
      Independents 2 $1,181 $15,350
      TOTAL 2,443 $17,452 $42,635,710

      The US House of Representatives has 435 members and 5 non-voting delegates.
      Totals may exceed 440 due to mid-term replacements.

      Senate
      # of Members / Avg. Contribution / Total
      Democrats 377 $82,141 $31,227,126
      Republicans 301 $53,446 $16,379,493
      Independents 5 $102,324 $1,381,590
      TOTAL 683 $71,725 $48,988,209

      The US Senate has 100 members.
      Totals may exceed 100 due to mid-term replacements.

      The numbers on this page are based on contributions from PACs and individuals giving $200 or more.

      All donations took place during the -1-All election cycle and were released by the Federal Election Commission on Sunday, August 18, 2013.

      SOURCE – link to opensecrets.org

  20. RoHa
    October 28, 2013, 9:41 pm

    “I nearly fell off my rickety British chair”

    Isn’t that an anti-Britishist statement?

    • just
      October 28, 2013, 10:41 pm

      lol!

      (I thought the same thing! You stated it very well.)

  21. thankgodimatheist
    October 28, 2013, 10:12 pm

    A must watch lecture by Joseph Massad:

    Video: Joseph Massad on Zionism’s strategy of “Peace is War”
    “In this fascinating lecture, Columbia Professor Joseph Massad unravels the obfuscatory language of “peace” the Zionist movement and Israel have always used to mask their aggressive and colonial intentions towards Palestine.”
    link to electronicintifada.net

    • Susan A
      October 29, 2013, 4:11 pm

      TGIA: there doesn’t appear to be a video there at the moment….

      • thankgodimatheist
        October 30, 2013, 6:42 pm

        Susan. I just clicked on it right now and it works..

  22. amigo
    October 29, 2013, 6:30 am

    ” Government body funds call center marketing illegal West Bank homes”

    World Zionist Organization supports Amana-run call center catering to people interested in buying housing in West Bank settlements – including illegally built homes.”haaretz

    “The World Zionist Organization’s settlement department, which is financed through state budgets, has transferred more than NIS 1 million to the settlement movement Amana over the past four years. The funds have been used to operate a call center for people interested in purchasing housing in the occupied territories, including apartments that were built illegally.

    Amana, the settlement branch of the Yesha Council, is headed by Ze’ev (“Zambish”) Hever. It operates a subsidiary company that constructs hundreds of housing units across the West Bank every year, including extensive and illegal operations in unauthorized outposts. Amana operates a call center that gives every caller details about potential purchases. The organization deliberately obscures any distinction between legal and illegal construction, and distributes a wealth of information on units that were built without permits. “haaretz.

    link to haaretz.com

    Any comments Mahane on the terrible occupation Israel is forced to carry out.Forced to steal more land and finance the construction of illegal squats and transfer of Israeli citizens to someone else’s land.FYI, these are war crimes.See 4th GC Art 49.

    Poor poor Israel.The victim of the State of Palestine forcing you to commit war crimes against your will.

    Hypocrite.

  23. Keith
    October 29, 2013, 7:57 pm

    “It is amazing that ideas that were once blacklisted as being anti-Semitic are coming more and more into the mainstream, as people seek to explain the power of the Israel lobby.”

    Yes, one can more freely discuss the Lobby without being labeled anti-Semitic, however, this is true only because sectors of the dominant elites (Carter, Mearsheimer and Walt, for example) support this change and benefit from it. I see little change in most other areas where charges of anti-Semitism remain a potent weapon for intimidation and for restricting the range of behavior and discussion. Make no mistake, this is a technique of social control used by the strong. To be labeled an anti-Semite usually has significant consequences, particularly in regards to organized harassment combined with threatened removal of funding. I am unaware of instances where American Jews are being intimidated and coerced by charges of anti-Gentile behavior. The ability to hurt someone while remaining invulnerable to retaliation establishes a power relationship. The people who benefit from this unequal relationship are likely to want to see it continue.

  24. Misterioso
    October 29, 2013, 9:08 pm

    This development brings to mind the petition signed by 31 prominent American Jews that was presented to US President Woodrow Wilson at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference.

    The petitioners included among others, Senator Henry Morgenthau Sr., former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey; Simon Rosendale, ex-Attorney General of New York; E.M. Baker, President of the Stock Exchange; New York Times publisher, Adlolph S. Ochs and Congressman Julius Kahn. These learned Jews feared that Zionist influence at the peace conference might lay the foundation for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine which they opposed. The petitioners warned against any commitment “now or in the future to Jewish territorial sovereignty in Palestine” and predicted that given the Arab presence in Palestine, Zionist objectives would inevitably lead to a violent struggle between the two groups. In conclusion, they asked the president to argue at the Peace Conference that “…Palestine be constituted as a free and independent state, to be governed under a democratic form of government, recognizing no distinctions of creed or race or ethnic descent….”

    To quote Senator Henry Morgenthau Sr.: “Zionism is the most stupendous fallacy in Jewish history….The very fervour of my feeling for the oppressed of every race and every land, especially for the Jews, those of my own blood and faith, to whom I am bound by every tender tie, impels me to fight with all the greater force against this scheme, which my intelligence tells me can only lead them deeper into the mire of the past, while it professes to be leading them to the heights. Zionism is… a retrogression into the blackest error, and not progress toward the light.”

Leave a Reply