Trending Topics:

‘NYT’ describes Congress as Netanyahu’s wind-up toy

US Politics
on 19 Comments

One of the most upsetting things about that New York Times piece yesterday purveying Israeli government propaganda to the unwitting reader was the assumption throughout the piece that the Israeli PM can throw a switch and Congress will jump to his commands.

The article quotes Nahum Barnea, a columnist for Yedioth Ahronoth:

“The dilemma that Netanyahu faces today is not an easy one. He can push the leaders of the Republican majority in the two houses of Congress to try to torpedo the agreement”

Then reporter Jodi Rudoren says the same thing in her own voice:

How fiercely Israel fights the deal, particularly in Congress, could have broad implications for the strained alliance and the Middle East peace process.

She even states flatly that through Congress, Netanyahu could play Obama’s response to a UN Security Council resolution for a Palestinian state:

It is not hard to imagine Mr. Obama vowing to block [that resolution] if Mr. Netanyahu lowers the volume on Capitol Hill.

So Netanyahu can turn up or turn down the volume on Capitol Hill at will, and the president will be responsive? This may be a true assumption: we all know Netanyahu can get standing ovations at will on the Hill. But shouldn’t this power be addressed? When I watch the networks and the cables, this power is only occasionally hinted at, and never described with the outrage it deserves. We won’t be out of this mess till John Mearsheimer and Steve Walt (authors of The Israel Lobby) are regulars on MSNBC.

P.S. Today on CNN, host Jim Acosta asked California Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein whether Netanyahu was “overstepping his bounds” in opposing the Iran deal. She said:

“To be candid with you, this can backfire on him. I wish he would contain himself because he has put out no real alternative.”

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

19 Responses

  1. Blownaway
    April 5, 2015, 12:05 pm

    In a temporary burst of truth telling the NYT has a article today detailing GOP love for Israel and how much it costs….it’s all about money for love. The prostitution of the GOP.
    G.O.P.’s Israel Support Deepens as Political Contributions Shift

    • Kay24
      April 5, 2015, 12:25 pm

      It is all there, the graph, and the facts. We know just how devoted the Congress is to Israel, but it is still sickening to see it so clearly like that, especially to when it comes to the GOP. You do not need to have a crystal ball to predict that this traitorous group will go against President Obama on this. They will show the world exactly who is controlling them, dictates to them, and that they will even send our kids to fight wars they push us into, and that they will go against their own President, to please their masters. Congress and the media, have turned this nation into the United States of Israel. Hard to believe the world’s greatest superpower is controlled by a devious, parasitic nation, that has brought us nothing but trouble.

    • Donald
      April 5, 2015, 4:20 pm

      That story was amazing– a few years ago it would have been labeled anti-Semitic if it had appeared at some blog or in a book, but things are changing.

      The one thing lacking is that it focused mainly on Republicans–the final journalistic breakthrough will be when the phrase progressive except for Palestine makes it into a NYT story.

  2. Les
    April 5, 2015, 2:10 pm

    Alas not a single outlet of the our mainstream print and broadcast media opposes Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, any more than a single branch of organized Judaism in the US publicly supports the Right of Palestinians to exist.

  3. just
    April 5, 2015, 3:23 pm

    He and other cliff- hangers are still living in la- la land of yore: ‘America is easily moved’.

    For more tragicomedic relief, here’s Jon Stewart:

    “WATCH: Jon Stewart on the appeal of a chocolate bunny vs. a dead lamb’s bone
    The Jews have to up their game when it comes to competing with the Christian holidays, says the Daily Show host.”

    Nary a Peep about Iran.

  4. Eva Smagacz
    Eva Smagacz
    April 5, 2015, 4:14 pm

    • DavidDaoud
      April 7, 2015, 5:02 am

      I really detest his body language and facial expressions during that presentation.
      His arrogance and sense of superiority make me feel sick.

  5. just
    April 5, 2015, 4:30 pm

    Lindsey Graham, reportin’ fer dooty:

    “Hillary Clinton could get a better nuclear deal with Iran than President Barack Obama, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said on Sunday.

    “The best deal, I think, comes with a new president,” Graham said in an interview on CBS’ Face the Nation program. “Hillary Clinton would do better. I think everybody on our side, except maybe Rand Paul, could do better.”

    Clinton, Graham and Paul are all mulling presidency bids in 2016.

    Obama may have struck the best deal he could, Graham said, but he was a “flawed negotiator.” Graham’s interview was reported on the Politico website.

    “His foreign policy has failed on multiple fronts,” Graham said. “Nobody in the region trusts him. The Iranians do not fear or respect him, so he’ll never be able to get the best deal.”

    Graham also took Obama to task for saying that the alternative to the nuclear deal was war with Iran.

    “I believe there’s a better deal,” Graham said. “I don’t want a war, but at the end of the day I don’t want to give Iran the tools and the capability to continue to destroy the Middle East and one day attack us by building bigger missiles.”…

    …“I don’t mind giving the administration the time between now and June to put this deal together, because when you listen to the Iranians and Secretary [of State John] Kerry, it’s almost like you’re talking two different deals,” Graham said.

    “I support the idea of giving them time to put the deal together, but I insist that Congress review the deal, debate and vote on it before it comes final.””

    • Kay24
      April 6, 2015, 10:53 am

      Well Lindsay Graham certainly works hard for the $288,150 AIPAC contributions.
      If you take the top recipients of AIPAC campaign donations, you will the ones that get the most are some of the MOST vocal, and blindly supportive of their beloved nation, Israel.
      I would call this a list of American politicians who sold their soul to the devil.

      • just
        April 6, 2015, 11:17 am

        It’s really not “hard work”! Remember GW and his endless proclamations of “hard work”?

        Anyway, I went looking @ the link and was surprised to see this:

        “Steve Israel $-2,250”


      • Kay24
        April 6, 2015, 11:29 am

        Just that must have been a typo…Steve Israel not only got thousands of dollars:

        “Top House Recipients Funded

        Mark Kirk $458,979
        Ileana Ros-Lehtinen $141,507
        Howard Berman $122,600
        Eric Cantor $119,350
        Ted Deutch $104,031
        Steny Hoyer $100,050
        Shelley Berkley $98,501
        Gary Peters $94,522
        Ron Klein $88,550
        Nancy Pelosi $83,400
        Steve Israel $77,000

        He also got a few junket trips, where he went over to Israel and proclaimed his love and devotion to his fatherland.

        This just after Israel massacred unarmed civilians, bombed UN shelters, and killed little children playing soccer. Priorities eh?

      • just
        April 6, 2015, 11:32 am

        That’s one heckuva typo!


    • DavidDaoud
      April 7, 2015, 8:04 am

      → “I believe there’s a better deal,” Graham said.
      Who else said exactly the same words?
      Bibi, of course!

  6. Donald
    April 5, 2015, 4:46 pm

    The Republicans are Netanyahu’s windup toy. Nearly all the Democrats were as well, until it became a choice between Obama and Netanyahu. Now the question is how many will side with Netanyahu and how many with Obama.

    I also think the Rudoren piece ( and yes it is pure propaganda) outlines plan B for the Lobby. They may lose on Iran, but they may regroup and try to keep the US in Israel’s corner on Palestine. It might work–it depends on how Democratic politicians see their chances changing in 2016 if they defy the Lobby not just on Iran, but on the Palestinians.

    • wondering jew
      wondering jew
      April 6, 2015, 2:16 am

      The decisions to be made re: Palestinians, will revolve around the question as to Security Council resolutions, as in a new resolution to replace 242 or to be specific regarding 242’s ambiguities, and as such is totally in the purview of the president (nothing can be done by Congress to block the president, such as sanctions in the case of Iran). Democrats in Congress will by a wide margin support Israel and oppose Obama if he indeed backs a new UNSC resolution. Only a handful of democrats will back Obama on that issue. Iran is something different. First the role of Congress because of sanctions is much more central than regarding UNSC resolutions, and very few democrats will back Obama if he tries to reshuffle the decks in regards to 242.

  7. traintosiberia
    April 5, 2015, 8:40 pm

    Sholmo Ben Ami – The Complex Truth
    Hijacking Americas Middle Rast policy is not so easy
    ” They [ M and W] portray US politicians as being either too incompetent to understand Americas national interest ,or so undutiful
    that they would sell it to any pressure group for the sake of political survival.”

    Sholmo is former foreign minister of Israel.

    Maybe the truth was apparent to him in 2006 that this was the case but he felt its a secret , would remain so and would never see the daylight .

    • wondering jew
      wondering jew
      April 6, 2015, 3:00 am

      traintosiberia- you have misspelled Shlomo Ben Ami. Although the english version of this name is Solomon with a vowel between the “s” and the “L”, the Hebrew has no vowel between the “Sh” and the “L”.

  8. traintosiberia
    April 5, 2015, 8:46 pm

    There are more.

    “An uncivilized argument. Claiming that the lobby endangers America is irresponsible and wrong”
    Aaron Friedberg (Professor of politics and international affairs at Princeton University – FP

    The Mind-Set Matters
    Foreign Policy is shaped by leaders and events ,not lobbies
    Dennis Ross. FP
    Foreign Policy July August 2006.

  9. Pixel
    April 6, 2015, 4:49 am

    I’d love it if they wrote another seminal book.

Leave a Reply