Trending Topics:

‘Israelis are helping write US laws, fund US campaigns, craft US war policy’

on 47 Comments

At Al Jazeera, Ahmed Moor has a piece titled, “How the Israel lobby erodes US sovereignty.” Strong words. Moor says that Israelis are “helping write US laws, funding US campaigns, and helping craft US war-making policy.”

Part of his case is the Mark Kirk Senate bill on refugees that came straight out of Israel.

Ha’aretz reported that the senator had some help with his legislative burden, and not only from his deputy chief of staff, Richard Goldberg. It turns out that the amendment to the bill was first written by an Israeli politician. Einat Wilf, a member of the Israeli parliament, reportedly spent months working with current and former AIPAC employees, including Steve Rosen – who was once suspected by FBI agents of obtaining classified US government information and passing it on to Israeli officials - to deliver the language on Palestinian refugees to the US legislature.

In summary: a senator who suffered crippling neurological damage received legislation from an Israeli politician by way of AIPAC before he slipped it into a US bill that eventually became law. In other words, an Israeli politician helped write a US law. Then she boasted about it. “I have nothing against the descendents of refugees and I’m not asking them to give up of their dream of returning,” Haaretz quoted Wilf as saying. “But if we want a two-state solution, UNWRA can’t continue to aid an inflation of refugees … It ends up harming peace.”

Annie Robbins treated the same scandal on our site. When is the American press going to go after that story?

The good news is that leftists and realists are carving out new territory together. Moor’s post recalls Scott McConnell’s essay at the Mideast Policy Council of a year or so back, saying that Israel is a “transmission belt” for a lot of really bad ideas to the U.S., including Islamophobia:

[The special relationship] is at bottom a transmission belt, conveying Israeli ideas on how the United States should conduct itself in a contested and volatile part of the world. To a great extent, a receptive American political class now views the Middle East and their country’s role in it through Israel’s eyes…

the United States receives, principally, the enmity of Israel’s seemingly ever-expanding circle of foes, a small percentage of whom resort to terrorism. And, as an added bargain, it gets a powerful domestic lobby that now pursues as its main activity the incitement of wars between the United States and Israel’s enemies.

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is senior editor of and founded the site in 2005-06.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

47 Responses

  1. Les on June 30, 2012, 10:59 am

    Thanks to our media mavens, the Israel Lobby, like no other foreign lobby ever before, has become a fifth column in the US dictating to our Congress and the White House, no matter the political party. A media committed to “engineering consent” for total US support for Israel’s ethnic cleansing and occupation of the Palestinians, reports on behalf of, not on the Lobby/fifth column. When the State Department tells an American citizen jailed by Israel that it can’t help her because she isn’t Jewish, we have all the evidence needed to understand that Israel’s fifth column has the same death grip on the White House as it does on Congress. Jewish Voice for Peace won a huge victory against Caterpillar, totally ignored by a media that feels its is the sole Jewish voice worth anything.

  2. American on June 30, 2012, 11:08 am

    “Israel is a “transmission belt” for a lot of really bad ideas to the U.S., including Islamophobia”

    Yes it is. And the combination of US zios and neos is deadly. Has anyone ever seen a neo imperalist that wasn’t also a zio? There might be one or two but that’s about it. Both share a love of destruction and power. IOW, they are all psychopaths.
    In some ways it might be good if Romney gets elected, it would speed up this certain Isr’merica disaster and we could get it over with and start over.

    • ColinWright on June 30, 2012, 2:08 pm

      “…In some ways it might be good if Romney gets elected, it would speed up this certain Isr’merica disaster and we could get it over with and start over.”

      Let’s call that Plan B. I’d just as soon try for some less apocalyptic resolution first.

      Anyway, we won’t ‘start over.’ As the consequences of our policies become increasingly severe, we’ll react with ever-more infantile displays of aggression, xenophobia, and attempts to bludgeon all and sundry into quivering submission. As a rule, nations don’t respond to adversity in the most mature fashion.

    • CloakAndDagger on June 30, 2012, 5:15 pm


      In some ways it might be good if Romney gets elected, it would speed up this certain Isr’merica disaster and we could get it over with and start over.

      I share your sentiment, however, I am not confident that there would be enough remaining for us to start over. We have to stop them before they get us to the point of no return.

  3. annie on June 30, 2012, 11:57 am

    Moor has written a really good article. i hope everyone opens it and reads the whole thing.

    • American on June 30, 2012, 1:20 pm

      It is good–I had already read it yesterday in Al Jazeera.

    • American on June 30, 2012, 4:28 pm

      What Americans need is a 8 hour Front Line msm expose series on how Israel came about. The lies, deceptions, threats, mafia tactics, the use of the US and how the US was used even unbeknown to Truman until after the fact.
      The Israelis impersonating and pretending to speak for the US, as their CIA impersonations some time ago, is an old practice by zionist.
      While trying to get other country’s votes at the UN for Israel recognition in 47, US zionist would call leaders of other countries and represent themselves as spokespeople for the WH and America and threaten other countries if they didn’t vote for Israel. And all this was unknown by the WH or any American office or agency until after they had already done it.

      Oral History Interview with
      Edwin M. Wright

      In other words, the State Department didn’t even know who was making the decisions. Mr. Truman himself has the most remarkable of all statements in there, a memo that’s quoted, in which he says, “Something’s going on and I don’t know what it is. Somebody called up the President of Haiti and he said that it was me. [F.R.U.S., 1947 , Vol. V, p. 1309.] He said, ‘We want you to vote for the Zionist program.’ As a result the President of Haiti changed his vote to satisfy what he thought was me. I don’t know who this fellow was that called him up.”

      In other words, somebody impersonated President Truman and threatened the President of Haiti. There were people who used President Truman’s voice and name and he didn’t know who they were. The State Department never found out who they were, but this is the way decisions are made in Washington. I think I know who that fellow was. It was Robert Nathan, because I met Robert Nathan frequently at the U.N. I had met him out in the Middle East, and he was the one who was running to the telephone booth and calling up the President of Liberia, calling up Costa Rica, telling them, “Unless you will vote for our program, we will see to it that the American interhighway system is not built through your country.” These people assumed that Nathan and Co. were acting for America and nobody had consulted them at all. This kind of thing went on at the U.N. and in Washington and if you want the documentary proof of it, it’s in Mr. Truman’s statement.

      Before I read this statement of Mr. Truman’s I’ll have to explain what the situation was. There was tremendous pressure upon the governments of other countries to vote for the partition program, which the Zionists had accepted. I was at the U.N. and was Mr. Henderson’s assistant and was there when he read some of these memos. I was reporting back to the State Department what was happening at the U.N.


      There were a number of Jewish Zionists at the U.N., like Robert Nathan, Bernard Baruch, and various other people, who were calling up the chiefs of other states and saying, “Unless you vote for this partition program, the United States will not build a road in your country; will not help you in aid or will not do something else.” They were pretending they had the authority of the President of the United States to determine policy, when they were just one individual operating on their own. They had no authority, no official position, but they were using the importance of the United States as a threat against these countries.

      Mr. Romulo, who was the Ambassador from the Philippines, had initially stood against this program; did not want the Zionist state. They have a lot of Moslems in the Philippines and they were afraid that this would create trouble.


      Romulo left Washington and flew to the Philippines. When he got there, the Philippine President called him in saying, “You know, I have information from Washington that if we vote the way you have stated, we’re not going to get any American aid. We’re going to change our vote.”

      Our ambassador also reported that the President had said that he had gotten this threat and was changing his vote.

      Upon this we immediately notified Mr. Truman and sent these documents right to him. “This is what is happening. These various Jewish representatives are simply using the authority of the United States, without any responsibility, in order to threaten people to vote for that program.”

      On December the 11th, Mr. Truman wrote this letter to Secretary of State Acheson:

      I read with a lot of interest your memorandum on the 10th in regards to the Philippine situation. [That’s the one I’ve just described.] It seems to me that if our delegation to the United Nations is to be interfered with by members of the United States Senate and by pressure groups in this country, we will be helping the United Nations down the road to failure. The conversation between the President of the Philippines and our Ambassador is most interesting. I have a report from Haiti in which it is stated that our consul in Haiti approached the President of that country and suggested to him that for his own good, he should order the vote of his country changed, claiming that he had instructions from me to make such a statement to the President of Haiti. As you very well know, I refused to make statements to any country on the subject of his vote in the United Nations. It is perfectly apparent that pressure groups will succeed in putting the United Nations out of business if this sort of thing is continued and I am very anxious that it be stopped.
      Harry S. Truman”

      That’s an official document. Somebody represented himself as the President of the United States to some foreign countries. This was the kind of threat that the Zionists used to change votes at that last session when finally it was voted by a small majority of two or three.

      These are documents you can quote and find in the Foreign Relations of the United States, 1947, Vol. V.”

      As far as I am concerned the Zionistas in the US should be treated as the criminal mafia they are, list them as terrorist, deport them, imprison them, I don’t care what is done with them….. just get rid of them.

      • Emma on July 1, 2012, 6:53 am

        Wow, that’s really interesting. I’d heard about the pressure the U.S. applied to get countries to change their votes in favor of the Partition Plan (which was in the end, as you well know, dropped by the Security Council and never passed into law). But this is the first I’d heard about that sort of fraudulent activity. Not so surprising really.

      • Hostage on July 1, 2012, 8:37 am

        But this is the first I’d heard about that sort of fraudulent activity.

        It was much worse than simple deception. Indian Prime Minister Nehru spoke out publicly about the way the UN vote had been adopted. He said the Zionists had tried to bribe India with millions and at the same time his sister who headed the Indian delegation to the United Nations, Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, had received daily warnings that her life was in danger unless she “voted the right way”. See Najma Heptulla, Indo-West Asian relations: the Nehru era, Allied Publishers, 1991, page 158,

        Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru had both publicly condemned Zionism. Gandhi had lived in South Africa and denounced Zionism as a form of racism, which he felt was identical to the kind of religious and racial discrimination he had fought all his life. His own journal, Harijan, of 26 November 1938 labeled the situation a crime against humanity:

        It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct … Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home. — See Homer A Jack (editor), The Gandhi Reader: a source book of his life and writings, By Mahatma Gandhi, Grove Press, 1994, page 218

        The UN “Question Of Palestine: Legal Aspects (Document 2), 31 March 1992 relates:

        As the events in Palestine moved towards a tragic finale, Gandhi reiterated his views on the subject in July 1946. He said:

        “In my opinion, they (the Zionists) have erred grievously in seeking to impose themselves on Palestine with the aid of America and Britain and now with the aid of naked terrorism … One would have thought adversity would teach them lessons of peace. Why should they depend on American money or British arms for forcing themselves on an unwelcome land? Why should they resort to terrorism to make good their forcible landing in Palestine?”1/

        Jawaharlal Nehru, on his part, related the Palestine question to the wider issue of imperialism. Addressing the fiftieth session of the Indian National Congress, held in 1936, Nehru observed that “the Arab struggle against British imperialism in Palestine is as much part of the great world conflict as India’s struggle for freedom”.2/

        As Nehru saw it, England was pitting “Jewish religious nationalism against Arab nationalism” so as to “make it appear that her presence was necessary to act as an arbitrator and to keep the peace between the two. It was the same old game we have seen in other countries under imperialist domination, it is curious how often it is repeated”.3/

        Independent India’s stand on the rights of Palestinian people was rooted in the premises set forth by Gandhi, Nehru and the Indian National Congress during the freedom struggle. An elaborate exposition of the Indian viewpoint is contained in the special note submitted by the Indian representative on the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine.

        The aforesaid document is of singular importance because it offers a sound analysis of the Palestine problem in the perspective of history. The Balfour Declaration, it said, had no legal validity because the British Government had no legitimate right to make it at the time when it was made. The Mandate, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration, contravened the Covenant of the League of Nations in that the Palestinians were not consulted in regard to the choice of the Mandatary. Likewise the stipulation requiring the Mandatary to ensure the well-being and development of the indigenous people of the Mandated Territory was totally disregarded.

        Another grievous mistake was made when the Mandatary permitted the Jewish Agency, an extraneous body, not merely to collaborate with the administration of the country but “to run its own educational, industrial and economic system for a portion of the population” amounting to “a parallel government”. This encouraged the Jewish immigrants to magnify their original demand for a “national home” into the clamour for a full-fledged Jewish State reinforced by the ceaseless terrorist activities of the Haganah, the Irgun, and Stern Gang.

        The Indian note also questioned the rationale of zionism. Ancient association of a people with a land did not create political or legal rights in the present time. Nor is it reasonable to argue that profession of a faith by a person confers on him any special rights in a country.

        The document concluded that the destiny of Palestine should be decided on the basis of self-determination, a principle that forms the keystone of the Charter of the United Nations.4/

      • YoungMassJew on July 1, 2012, 1:56 pm

        Hostage, great source. Thank you for posting this. I knew that Gandhi opposed Zionism, but this made it ever so much clear.

      • ColinWright on July 1, 2012, 1:18 pm

        You mean Zionists engage in deception and lies on a breathtaking scale?

        ‘I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!’

      • MRW on July 2, 2012, 7:53 pm

        Thanks, American. I never knew this. Absolutely incredible.

  4. munro on June 30, 2012, 12:31 pm

    “Romney’s foreign policy advisers are graduates of the workshop of Dick Cheney and the various American outworks of the Likud or the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute. These people – including Cofer Black, Michael Chertoff, Robert Kagan and Dan Senor – have their eyes on a goal beyond victory in Syria and Iran: they look forward to a militarised approach to Russia and China.”

    • munro on June 30, 2012, 2:52 pm

      “In order to understand what motivates Bill Kristol’s professed hyper-patriotism, with its consistently disastrous prescriptions, it’s worth recalling how his father, Irving Kristol, reacted to Vietnam War critic Senator George McGovern. The presidential contender’s proposed cut in U.S. military expenditure would, according to the “godfather” of neoconservatism, “drive a knife in the heart of Israel.”

      “Jews don’t like big military budgets,” the elder Kristol explained in a Jewish publication in 1973. “But it is now an interest of the Jews to have a large and powerful military establishment in the United States … American Jews who care about the survival of the state of Israel have to say, no, we don’t want to cut the military budget, it is important to keep that military budget big, so that we can defend Israel.”’s-wars/

      Norman Podhoretz: “The night Ronald Reagan was elected President of the United States, I watched the returns in the company of a group of intellectuals who were so jubilant at the news of the mounting landslide that a passing stranger might have taken them for professional Republican Party workers or perhaps for fervent ideological conservatives. In fact, however, most of them were registered Democrats. Some had never before voted for a Republican; or if they had, it would have been in a local race and for a liberal of the species, such as Jacob Javits or John Lindsay in his original political incarnation.

  5. Dutch on June 30, 2012, 1:06 pm

    Wilf: “But if we want a two-state solution, UNWRA can’t continue to aid an inflation of refugees … It ends up harming peace.”

    A two-state solution is off the table, poor thing, because you took it off yourself. The good news is that a one-state solution will be by a superior way to bring the refugees and their descendents back home.

  6. YoungMassJew on June 30, 2012, 2:11 pm

    I think the headline is a little misleading in the sense that it’s really AIPAC (powerful American Jews) based out of the U.S. not Israel thats calling the shots. It makes it seem like Israelis, i.e. the average Joe Scholomo, are writing the laws.

    • Roya on July 1, 2012, 2:49 am

      Actually the Al Jazeera article referred to points to an Israeli MK (Einat Wilf) who reportedly spent months working on the bill. Not an average Scholomo, but still an Israeli.

    • RoHa on July 2, 2012, 2:37 am

      “AIPAC (powerful American Jews) based out of the U.S. ”

      Hold on. I thought AIPAC was based in the US. Is it based in Israel?

  7. American on June 30, 2012, 3:02 pm

    How much of this has come from US zionism? Not all of it, but enough influence to make it even worse. The fish rots from the head down…we are rotting away.

    “If you told the average American that there was a very powerful politician who, after leaving office, tried to speak out when his conscience was bothered by the actions of his fellow political insiders; if you told them that he abandoned partisanship, calling out even members of his own political tribe; if you told them that he said what he thought to be true even when it was uncomfortable, even when it lost him friends, even when it was seen as a betrayal by other powerful people, who shunned him; if you told Americans all that, you would think they’d express admiration for the mystery man.

    Yet few celebrate Jimmy Carter.
    He criticizes America. People don’t like that.””

    Here’s his latest critique, published in The New York Times:

  8. Hostage on June 30, 2012, 3:06 pm

    In other words, an Israeli politician helped write a US law.

    I don’t think there’s any other explanation for a statute that recognizes the undivided city of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel or the one which requires the President to certify that the Hamas faction of the Palestinian Authority has recognized Israel as the State of the Jewish people before the PA can receive US foreign assistance.

  9. mudder on June 30, 2012, 3:27 pm

    I am awaiting to read on Mondoweiss the obituary of Yitzhak Shamir, Al Gore’s BFF. Please don’t disappoint.

  10. radii on June 30, 2012, 3:58 pm

    … it is straight-out dictating – as Sharon said, “We control America”

    after 9/11 America has transformed along israeli lines – total surveillance, thug tactics, obsessive focus on “terrorism” as a threat and as a tactic to erode rights and engage in state brutality

    israel was founded by mafias and terrorists (along with some regular folks and true believers) and these mafia elements were folded into the “legitimate” government of israel – so israel is a mafia state (what is it, 13 “families” control most of the economy there?)

    israel is the LAST country in the world (except maybe Somalia or Nigeria or Zimbabwe) that we should be emulating – israel’s entire state is founded on a theory that is antithetical to the U.S. Constitution and American values

    israel’s nefarious influence over the United States is nothing short of a clear and present danger and should be acted upon by the top military and intelligence leaders for the U.S.

    America cannot survive unless it removes the parasite that is israel and zionism – and by remove I mean specifically that agents and operatives for israel must be forced to register as foreign agents or be deported as spies

  11. Blake on June 30, 2012, 4:01 pm

    History of the US-Israel Relationship, Part I
    How the “Special Relationship” was created
    By Alison Weir

    While many people are led to believe that US support for Israel is driven by American establishment & U.S. national interests, the facts don’t support this theory. The reality is that for decades U.S. experts opposed Israel & its founding movement. They were simply outmaneuvered & eventually replaced. ¬Like many American policies, U.S. Mid East policies are driven by a special interest lobby. However the Israel Lobby consists of vastly more than what most people envision in the word “lobby.”

  12. RobertB on June 30, 2012, 4:41 pm

    History of the US-Israel Relationship, Part I

    How the “Special Relationship” was created

    By Alison Weir

    “June 26, 2012 “Information Clearing House” — While many people are led to believe that US support for Israel is driven by the American establishment and U.S. national interests, the facts don’t support this theory. The reality is that for decades U.S. experts opposed Israel and its founding movement. They were simply outmaneuvered and eventually replaced.­

    Like many American policies, U.S. Middle East policies are driven by a special interest lobby. However, the Israel Lobby, as it is called today in the U.S.[1], consists of vastly more than what most people envision in the word “lobby.”

    As this article will demonstrate, it is considerably more powerful and pervasive than other lobbies. Components of it, both individuals and groups, have worked underground, secretly and even illegally throughout its history, as documented by scholars and participants.

    And even though the movement for Israel has been operating in the U.S. for over a hundred years, most Americans are completely unaware of this movement and its attendant ideology – a measure of its unique power over public knowledge.

    The success of this movement to achieve its goals, partly due to the hidden nature of much of its activity, has been staggering. It has also been at almost unimaginable cost.

    It has led to massive tragedy in the Middle East: a hundred-year war of violence and loss; sacred land soaked in sorrow.

    What is less widely known is how profoundly damaging this movement has been to the United States itself.

    As we will see in this two-part examination of the pro-Israel movement, it has targeted virtually every significant sector of American society; worked to involve Americans in tragic, unnecessary, and profoundly costly wars; dominated Congress for decades; increasingly determined which candidates could become serious contenders for the U.S. presidency; and promoted bigotry toward an entire population, religion and culture.

    It has promoted policies that have exposed Americans to growing danger, and then exaggerated this danger (while disguising its cause), fueling recent actions that dismember some of our nation’s most fundamental freedoms and cherished principles.

    All this for a nation that today has reached a peak population of, at most, 7.4 million people; smaller than New Jersey.”


    Click on link below for the rest of the story:

  13. DICKERSON3870 on June 30, 2012, 5:52 pm

    RE: Moor says that Israelis are “helping write US laws, funding US campaigns, and helping craft US war-making policy.”

    MY COMMENT: And that is why Israel is an “existential threat” to the values of The Enlightenment ! ! !

    FROM WIKIPEDIA [Age of Enlightenment]:

    [EXCERPTS] The Age of Enlightenment (or simply the Enlightenment or Age of Reason) was a cultural movement of intellectuals in 18th century Europe and America, whose purpose was to reform society and advance knowledge. It promoted science and intellectual interchange and opposed superstition,[1] intolerance and abuses by church and state. Originating about 1650 to 1700, it was sparked by philosophers Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677), John Locke (1632–1704), Pierre Bayle (1647–1706), physicist Isaac Newton (1643–1727), and philosopher Voltaire (1694–1778). . .
    . . . No brief summary can do justice to the diversity of enlightened thought in 18th-century Europe. Because it was a value system rather than a set of shared beliefs, there are many contradictory trains to follow. As Outram notes, The Enlightenment comprised “many different paths, varying in time and geography, to the common goals of progress, of tolerance, and the removal of abuses in Church and state.”[33]
    In his famous essay “What is Enlightenment?” (1784), Immanuel Kant described it simply as freedom to use one’s own intelligence.[34] More broadly, the Enlightenment period is marked by increasing empiricism, scientific rigor, and reductionism, along with increasing questioning of religious orthodoxy.
    Historian Peter Gay asserts the Enlightenment broke through “the sacred circle,”[35] whose dogma had circumscribed thinking. The Sacred Circle is a term he uses to describe the interdependent relationship between the hereditary aristocracy, the leaders of the church and the text of the Bible. This interrelationship manifests itself as kings invoking the doctrine “Divine Right of Kings” to rule.
    Thus church sanctioned the rule of the king and the king defended the church in return.
    Zafirovski, (2010) argues that The Enlightenment is the source of critical ideas, such as the centrality of freedom, democracy, and reason as primary values of society – as opposed to the divine right of kings or traditions as the ruling authority.[36] This view argues that the establishment of a contractual basis of rights would lead to the market mechanism and capitalism, the scientific method, religious tolerance, and the organization of states into self-governing republics through democratic means. In this view, the tendency of the philosophes in particular to apply rationality to every problem is considered the essential change.[37] . . .

    SOURCE –

    • ColinWright on July 1, 2012, 5:29 am

      “And that is why Israel is an “existential threat” to the values of The Enlightenment ! ! !”

      I don’t care about ‘existential threats to the values of the enlightenment.’

      I do care about evil. And I particularly care about evil that I am forced to bankroll.

      • DICKERSON3870 on July 1, 2012, 3:06 pm

        RE: “I don’t care about ‘existential threats to the values of the enlightenment.’ I do care about evil. And I particularly care about evil that I am forced to bankroll.” ~ ColinWright

        MY COMMENT: Then I would say you are not seeing the forest for the trees. Because to my way of thinking, caring about evil that you am forced to bankroll IS one of the most important values of The Enlightenment ! ! ! N’est-ce pas?

        FROM WIKIPEDIA [Age of Enlightenment]:

        [EXCERPTS]: . . . Charles III, king of Spain from 1759 to 1788, tried to rescue his empire from decay through far-reaching reforms such as weakening the Church and its monasteries, promoting science and university research, facilitating trade and commerce, modernizing agriculture, and avoiding wars. He was unable to control budget deficits, and borrowed more and more. Spain relapsed after his death.[31] . . .
        . . . As to its [the Age of Enlightenment’s] end, most scholars use the last years of the [18th] century – often choosing the French Revolution of 1789 or the beginning of the Napoleonic Wars (1804–15) as a convenient point in time with which to date the end of the Enlightenment.[17] . . .

        SOURCE –

        ALSO SEE: “A Criminally Insane Government: It Came From Washington”, by Paul Craig Roberts, Counterpunch, 6/29/12

        [EXCERPTS] . . . It has proved to be more difficult for Washington to interfere in China’s internal affairs, although discord has been sowed in some provinces. Several years from now, the Chinese economy is expected to exceed in size the US economy, with an Asian power displacing a Western one as the world’s most powerful economy.
        Washington is deeply disturbed by this prospect. In the thrall and under the control of Wall Street and other special interest business groups, Washington is unable to rescue the US economy from its decline. The short-run gambling profits of Wall Street, the war profits of the military/security complex, and the profits from offshoring the production of goods and services for US markets have far more representation in Washington than the wellbeing of US citizens. As the US economy sinks, the Chinese economy rises.
        Washington’s response is to militarize the Pacific. The US Secretary of State has declared the South China Sea to be an area of American national interest. . .
        . . . For a country incapable of occupying Iraq after 8 years and incapable of occupying Afghanistan after 11 years, to simultaneously take on two nuclear powers is an act of insanity. The hubris in Washington, fed daily by the crazed neocons [and the Likudniks in Israel – J.L.D.], despite extraordinary failure in Iraq and Afghanistan, has now targeted formidable powers–Russia and China. The world has never in its entire history witnessed such idiocy. The psychopaths, sociopaths, and morons who prevail in Washington are leading the world to destruction.
        The criminally insane government in Washington, regardless whether Democrat or Republican, regardless of the outcome of the next election, is the greatest threat to life on earth that has ever existed.

        Moreover, the only financing the Washington criminals have is the printing press. In a subsequent column I will examine whether the US economy will complete its collapse before the war criminals in Washington can destroy the world.


      • DICKERSON3870 on July 1, 2012, 3:19 pm

        P.S. RE: “Washington, regardless whether Democrat or Republican, regardless of the outcome of the next election, is the greatest threat to life on earth that has ever existed.” ~ Paul Craig Roberts (above)

        MY COMMENT: I have decided that come hell or high water I will not be voting for Obama this November.
        No more battered spouse voter syndrome for me!

        • Jill Stein for President –

      • DICKERSON3870 on July 1, 2012, 9:11 pm

        P.S. FROM GARETH PORTER, 7/01/12:

        [EXCERPT] . . . Ever since late 2011, the impression of a heightened threat of an Israeli attack on Iran has been central to the crisis atmosphere over the issue [of Iran]. It has been the premise on which Israel has tried to reduce progressively Obama’s freedom of action on Iran with the ultimate objective of maximising the likelihood of an eventual U.S. attack on Iranian nuclear sites.
        The strategy of pressure on Obama was to be carried out through a combination of Israeli demands regarding U.S. diplomatic positions on Iran’s nuclear programme and pressure from the U.S. Congress at the prompting of the right-wing pro-Israel lobby organisation AIPAC, which operates in close consultation with the Likud government.
        The tandem of Israeli and Congressional targets of AIPAC would push for U.S. demands in the negotiations with Iran that would ensure their failure.

        Netanyahu would then seek to force a shift in Obama’s red line on the Iranian nuclear programme from evidence of intent to build nuclear weapons to evidence of determination to maintain a weapons nuclear capability. Allies of Netanyahu have suggested that the pressure on Obama to adopt a new red line would peak during the 2012 presidential election campaign.
        Even after Mofaz joined the coalition government in May, the Netanyahu strategy continued to unfold according to plan. A resolution in the U.S. House of Representatives originating in AIPAC that rejected “any U.S. policy that would rely on efforts to contain a nuclear weapons capable Iran…” was passed 401 to 11 on May 18. . .

        SOURCE –

      • DICKERSON3870 on July 1, 2012, 9:56 pm

        P.P.S. ALSO SPEAKING OF an “existential threat” to the values of The Enlightenment, SEE: “Fear & Loathing in Texas: State Republican Party Seeks to Ban Critical Thinking in Public Schools, by Devon G. Peña, Common Dreams, 7/01/12

        [EXCERPTS] What is it about the political rightwing in the Lone Star State? It seems like they are now competing with Arizona to take the lead as the nation’s most anti-education and anti-intellectual state. . .
        . . .The battle over the shaping of textbooks in Texas illustrates the intensity of the rightwing struggle to gain control over the curriculum materials used by public school teachers and students: The most widely discussed example of this unfolded over the course of 2010 when the Texas State Board of Education decided that the state’s history and social studies textbooks would have to change their semantics: From now on, textbook authors would have to change their language and the slave trade would have to be called the “Atlantic triangular trade,” American “imperialism” would become “expansionism,” and all references to “capitalism” were to be replaced with the use of the term “free enterprise.”
        The attack on critical thinking, or what the Texas GOP Platform calls “Higher Order Thinking Skills” represents the most recent iteration of a now familiar refrain
        : “Think like we tell you to think. Read only what we tell you to read. And the lack of truth will make you less free.” Oh, they leave that last part out!
        The anti-intellectual tendency in Texas rightwing politics has a deeper history. Richard Hofstader made this evident in his 1963 book, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life (New York: Knopf). Hofstader could have been writing about post-2007 politics when he penned the following insightful observations about fundamentalist ideologies in Texas:

        Although no one has ever tried to trace in detail the historic links between the radical right of the depression and post-depression periods and the fundamentalism of the 1920s, there are some suggestive continuities among the leaders…The late J. Frank Norris, a Southern Baptist preacher in the forefront of the anti-evolution crusade in Texas, later became one of the most colorful right-wing messiahs…(p. 132)

        Clearly, Rick Perry is channeling Norris by mixing his Christian Reconstruction spirituality with fervent anti-science beliefs. The 2012 Texas Republican Party Platform merely solidifies this paranoid and moronic tendency. . .


        ALSO SEE: “Perry misrepresented historian who wrote that Israel and Texas share ‘chauvinism’ and ‘belligerence’”

        AND SEE: “‘Atlantic’ expose on Rick Perry’s affinity for Israel ignores the H2Occupation of Palestine”

        AND SEE: “Tx. Gov. Rick Perry compares the US and Israel, but reaches the wrong conclusions”

      • DICKERSON3870 on July 1, 2012, 10:18 pm

        P.P.S. ALSO SEE: “Perry’s travel, security costs will stay secret until after 2012”, By Sari Horwitz, Washington Post, 8/27/11

        (excerpt) . . . In 2009, Perry traveled to Israel where he was given the “Defender of Jerusalem” award. According to a local television report, he and his wife flew first class at more than $5,000 per ticket, paid for by an energy company financier. Four security detail officers also went on the five-day trip at a cost of more than $70,000 to taxpayers. The expenses included $17,000 for rooms at the King David Hotel, nearly $13,000 for food and more than 350 hours in overtime pay. . .

        SOURCE –

        AND SEE: “Rick Perry: Israeli Settlements Are Legal ‘And I Support Them’”, By Ali Gharib, Think Progress, 8/27/11

        (excerpt) . . . Republican Presidential hopeful Texas Gov. Rick Perry broke with more than 40 years of bipartisan U.S. policy and issued a statement of blanket support for Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Perry also broke with more than 60 years of U.S. policy and declared that, among his first acts as president, he would move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. . .

        SOURCE –

      • DICKERSON3870 on July 1, 2012, 10:25 pm

        P.P.P.S. LASTLY SEE: “Houston Jewish Federation, Jewish Agency Fund Im Tirzu’s Assault on Israeli Universities” ~ by Richard Silverstein, Tikun Olam, 3/17/10

        (excerpts) What do the Houston Jewish federation, the Jewish Agency, John Hagee, and Im Tirzu have in common? They’re all either directly or indirectly funding a major assault on academic freedom on Israeli campuses. . .
        . . . The Israeli finance website, Calcalist, reports that John Hagee donated $120,000 to Im Tirzu in 2009 through the Jewish Agency. The money had been transferred to the [Jewish] Agency by the Houston Jewish Federation as part of an overall $5-million gift. $3-million of that came from [John Hagee’s] CUFI and went towards its largely pro-settler Israel philanthropy. Hagee passed the gift through the Agency in order to qualify for a U.S. tax deduction. . .
        . . . A second article in the Calcalist makes this important point:

        The Jewish Agency [funded by the Jewish Federations] supports organization’s from the Israeli lunatic right, which are attempting to destroy the values of academic freedom in Israeli higher education. The Agency, a body whose mission it is to bring new immigrants to settle in the Holy Land, instead transfers very large sums to poisonous organizations which seek legitimacy in attacking academics who’ve actually done something in their lives, having not just written propaganda exposes divorced from any reality.

        The columnist concludes by noting the absolute insanity of the Jewish Agency [funded by the Jewish Federations] providing funding to an organization that wishes to unleash the thought police on Israeli universities. . .


  14. southernobserver on June 30, 2012, 9:29 pm

    An interesting lawsuit against one of the israeli-firsters.

    I have no insight in to whether this true, but the reporter takes the time to specificy that: “Adelson’s donations are motivated in part his disapproval of Obama on Israel policy and by his belief that “the two-state solution is a stepping stone for the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people.” (It’s unclear what fate Adelson intends for the millions of Palestinians who remain under Israeli occupation, whom he considers “an invented people.”)”

    • ColinWright on July 1, 2012, 5:26 am

      Sheldon Adelson is an ignorant self-made billionaire who is now attempting to buy virtue by supporting Israel. He looks like a frigging frog.

      It’s like Andrew Carnegie and his libraries and universities — only for something really, really evil.

  15. homingpigeon on June 30, 2012, 10:48 pm

    I’m often inhibited by the fear that when discussing the power of Israel within the US government I might sound like one of the paranoid conspiracy theorists muttering about the Illuminati or the Jewish-Bolshevik weather machine. I’ve had friends react to me that way if I suggest that a politician who does not toe the Likud line is very likely to get smashed, or that the first step in campaigning for the US Presidency is to get the approval of Israel. Add that to the need to walk carefully on semantic eggshells in order to distinguish myself from classic anti-semites. How I envy those who take up the Tibetan cause not having to spent time convincing anyone that they are not racist haters of the Chinese!

    It is important to commit to memory the details such as are described by Ahmed Moor and be ready to state them in a discussion.

    When addressing the concept of US foreign aid and the huge chunk of the pie that goes to one tenth of one percent of the world’s population, I like to add that furthermore, if Israel is not satisfied with its chunk of the pie, no one gets foreign aid. The bill as a package does not pass. The peanuts for landmine clearing or polio vaccination somewhere are on hold. This can really get the eyeballs of incredulity rolling and spark hints of paranoid schizophrenia. I came to this realization back when Stephen Solarz was head of the Foreign Relations Committee and as a routine sent the foreign aid bill to AIPAC for review before submitting it to Congress. But he is long gone in a trail of bounced checks, unpaid bills, and an embezzling wife.

    Does anyone have an update on the mechanics of passage of the foreign aid bill with some details on how it is submitted, and who AIPAC works through on a regular basis to make sure it doesn’t pass if Israel is not satisfied?

    • Hostage on July 1, 2012, 8:53 am

      Does anyone have an update on the mechanics of passage of the foreign aid bill with some details on how it is submitted, and who AIPAC works through on a regular basis to make sure it doesn’t pass if Israel is not satisfied?

      Sure Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas), the chairwoman of the foreign operations subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations Committee; Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), the chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee; and Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), the chairman of the Senate subcommittee on international development and foreign assistance have each put holds on funding for the PA to derail its statehood bid and threatened to cutoff military aid to Egypt if the democratically elected government ends up running the country instead of the Army.

    • ColinWright on July 1, 2012, 1:25 pm

      “…Add that to the need to walk carefully on semantic eggshells in order to distinguish myself from classic anti-semites. How I envy those who take up the Tibetan cause not having to spent time convincing anyone that they are not racist haters of the Chinese!…”

      If all else fails, let ’em think you’re anti-semitic. After all, motivation, while significant, does not alter the truth or falsity of what one is saying. I can have any motives whatsoever for observing that two and two make four — it remains true that two and two make four.

  16. dakersting on July 1, 2012, 1:55 am

    ‘Haaretz quoted Wilf as saying. “But if we want a two-state solution, UNWRA can’t continue to aid an inflation of refugees … It ends up harming peace.”‘

    That’s a good example of how “two-state solution” is used as a substitute for “peace” – designed as right-brain propaganda, injecting a presupposition that Zionist racism, perpetuated by two-state segregation, can be masked as a “peace plan,” which just happens to require us to overlook the flaming racism of perpetuating the ethnic-cleansing that created “Jewish” supremacy in Palestine in the first place. The greatest danger to Zionism is that the world would wake up to the obvious and simply start objecting to financing Israeli policies of ethnic or religious prejudice that are illegal in all modern countries. THAT is the obvious, simple, and morally mandatory “solution” that can be hidden by nothing at all, except the deviousness of that “two-state” rhetoric, as exemplified above. Historians will some day look back and marvel at how well that huckster’s trick succeeded, for so many decades, in a world that sincerely imagined itself opposed to openly-declared racist violence – of which there could be no more flagrant example than forcing a “Jewish” state into a multi-ethnic region and quibbling, for decades, about how to best go about perpetuating that racist violence under the rubric of “peace.”

  17. ColinWright on July 1, 2012, 5:19 am

    “…Then she boasted about it. “I have nothing against the descendents of refugees and I’m not asking them to give up of their dream of returning,” Haaretz quoted Wilf as saying. “But if we want a two-state solution, UNWRA can’t continue to aid an inflation of refugees … It ends up harming peace.”…

    I suppose it would be uncharitable to remember this when it is the Israelis that are the refugees. Anyway, they’re all going to come here. It’ll be a fit punishment for our sins.

    • YoungMassJew on July 1, 2012, 11:01 am

      Yes, the sane ones are already coming here. Go into a neighborhood in Massachusetts with a significant Jewish population and you’ll hear Hebrew spoken more often than you used to, as well as seeing people wearing tea-shirts with Hebrew lettering as you can identify them that way to. They are right where they should be not causing suffering to people of color in Palestine. I’m not sure if they are causing “harm” or not but as long as they have regular jobs that doesn’t involve Israel firster activities or working for the sociopaths at Goldman Sachs they can live here. It might even help them de-program their racist indocrination by seeing white people not engaging in pogroms of refugees’ houses.

  18. NickJOCW on July 1, 2012, 8:19 am

    Much US political vacuity might be avoided if election periods were reduced closer to the European models. This would provide less time to spend these distorting millions and fewer opportunities for the obsessive prurience of the citizenry to effect the issue, thus, hopefully, concentrating minds on more significant matters. The present system is headed towards totalitarianism and not a particularly benevolent one either.

  19. talknic on July 1, 2012, 1:06 pm

    Doesn’t really matter about the US elections or who is in power. Whoever, they will face the same Israel First lobbyistas.

  20. traintosiberia on July 1, 2012, 1:20 pm

    Jewish devout of Israel does not get uptight when luminaries and pblic figures like Krystol,Podohoretz,Pipes ( Bomb Iran ) or Sheldon ,Adelson( Israel is the first and foremost concerns above and beyond everything) are quoted.But when the massages coming out of these folks are drilled and distilled in one word that is easily communicable to large number of people then the “shit’ hits the fan. The howl starts.The charges fly.The observers lose the job, are defamed,and ostracized.
    The chances of another Israeli-initiated war against,Gaza,Lebanon,and Iran in the case of Romney election as president during the month and weeks of transition is high.It will absolve US of any responsibility . Following a war like this ,war against Pakistan will gather steam ,again coming mainly from Israel for the same purpose i.e: further hegemonistic expansion of Israel while the west is intentionally distracted.

  21. lysias on July 2, 2012, 6:52 pm

    I’m now reading the new volume of Robert Caro’s biography of Lyndon Johnson, The Passage of Power. I have just now gotten to the following passage, on pages 81-82, about some events in early 1960, when Johnson was still trying to conceal the fact that he intended to seek the Democratic nomination for president:

    Then, in March, Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion visited the United States. New York attorney Edwin Weisl, a major financial supporter of both Israel and Johnson, had arranged for the two men to meet in New York. Saying that the meeting would make him look like a candidate, Johnson backed out at the last moment, however, and wouldn’t meet with the prime minister in public even when Ben-Gurion came to Washington. Johnson was finally taken secretly, without reporters being informed, to talk with Ben-Gurion at Abe Fortas’ Georgetown home.

    Weisl’s son Edwin L. Weisl, Jr. became Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Division of the Justice Department under LBJ. The elder Weisl was “a close friend of President Johnson and the chair of the New York State Democratic Party.”

    • philweiss on July 2, 2012, 9:52 pm

      so romney rushing to israel is just a well beaten political track

      • lysias on July 2, 2012, 10:34 pm

        The thought that occurs to me is that Israel already knew how reliable LBJ was by the time JFK was assassinated.

  22. MRW on July 2, 2012, 8:12 pm

    “Israel is a “transmission belt” for a lot of really bad ideas to the U.S.”

    * the disaster of flying out of an American airport
    * the fence at the US-Mexico border, exact copy of Israel’s wall
    * the horror of what has happened to the Canadian border patrol with Israeli training.
    * local law enforcement trained with Israeli biometric systems, and military security procedures, which is one way of getting around the posse comitatus law that “prevents the US military, National Gaurd, and the Air Force to be used against American people, including martial law” . . . so they let the Israeli military do it.
    * what just happened in Aurora CO where everyone standing around, or in a car, outside a bank robbery was handcuffed and put on the sidewalk under siege by police with high-powered rifles. If they objected, there were threatened and tasered. They threatened to shoot dead one kid who moved (check the photo). (Check the photo)

    Rawstory’s article last December highlighting Max Blumenthal’s piece about it:
    “Report: Israeli model underlies militarization of U.S. police”

    This is the scourge of Israel on these shores.

    And Israeli hasbarists on here wonder at our disdain for their “shitty little country.” You’re ruining ours.

Leave a Reply