Trending Topics:

Trump ‘has no business being president’ because he would be ‘neutral’ to Israel — Clinton tells AIPAC

on 107 Comments

If there was any doubt that Hillary Clinton is running to the right of Donald Trump on Israel, she removed it this morning with a fist-pumping hard-right speech to the Israel lobby group AIPAC that mentioned Israeli settlements just once, in passing, and continually derided the idea of American “neutrality” in the conflict, which Trump has embraced.

“We need steady hands, not a president who says he is neutral on Monday, pro-Israel on Tuesday and who knows what on Wednesday, because everything is negotiable!” Clinton said. In clear reference to Trump, she went on,”Well my friends, Israel’s security is not negotiable.”

The comments were a clear reference to Trump’s assertion that he wants to be neutral in what he says about the conflict because he aims to negotiate a deal between the sides as president, the hardest deal in the world.

“America can’t ever be neutral when it comes to Israel’s security and survival,” Clinton said. “Some things aren’t negotiable. And anyone who doesn’t understand that has no business being America’s president.”

The speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee was filled with red meat for Israel supporters. Clinton repeatedly denounced the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, BDS, as “anti-semitic”– an effort to “undermine Israel and the Jewish people.” She thereby equated Israel and Judaism, an equation that AIPAC wants her to make, but which many Jews do not accept.

She said that anti-Semitism was rife on American campuses and in Europe, and she told pro-Israel students: “Don’t let anyone try to silence you, bully you or try to shut down debate.”

Often projecting an adamant posture in the speech, Clinton said she was willing to use force against Iran if it violates the Iran deal, praised Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, and promised to invite the PM to the White House in one of her first acts in office. She concluded the speech by thrusting her fist in the air as she vowed to take the relationship to the “next level” so that Israel and the U.S. could face the future together.

Clinton’s speech contained scant reference to the peace process. Israel must be strong so it can take steps toward peace, she said, and after repeatedly criticizing Palestinians for allegedly inciting terrorism and teaching their children to hate Israelis, she noted that Israeli “settlements” also are not helpful. Though she would oppose any outside effort to impose a solution on the conflict, she added. And she urged the Obama administration to sign a ten-year aid agreement with Israel for more aid than ever, something the Israeli government has sought.

The big AIPAC audience at the DC convention center repeatedly interrupted her speech with applause, including when she praised Israelis for making a woman, Golda Meir, prime minister in the 70s and then asked, smiling, “Why has it taken us so long?”

She also said that democratic traditions were endangered in both the U.S. and Israel, but while citing Donald Trump’s anti-Muslim and Hispanic statements as evidence of such a worrying trend here, she had nothing to say about anti-Palestinian bigotry expressed by leading Israeli politicians.

Trump and his two Republican rivals, John Kasich and Ted Cruz, will address AIPAC tonight.

Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .

Posted In:

107 Responses

  1. Ira Glunts on March 21, 2016, 11:32 am

    Prediction: Trump will back off his “neutral” in the negotiations talk in front of AIPAC tonight.

    • Emory Riddle on March 21, 2016, 4:10 pm

      Ira. I bet not. He hasn’t gotten this far without being an astute reader of the voters. And his unwillingness to pander to the establishment powers that be is why he is getting so many more GOP votes than anyone else — despite the constant attacks on him by that Establishments.

      I suspect he will double down on his neutral stance, say how much he loves Israel, etc. Keep it vague but definitely not backdown on his neutral stance

      • Emory Riddle on March 22, 2016, 9:57 am

        I got that wrong. He went into the role of super panderer…although he did not take back his neutral stance comment. He decided to feed the lions red meat. As much as this crazy right wing crowd hated Trump, they cheered like crazy when he declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel (or that the embassy should be there or some such nonsense). They cannot help themselves. Jerusalem is recognized as an international city, open to Muslims, Xian, Jews et al. Only Israel claims it for itself.

      • Sibiriak on March 22, 2016, 10:21 am

        Emory Riddle: Jerusalem is recognized as an international city, open to Muslims, Xian, Jews et al. Only Israel claims it for itself.

        Palestine claims East Jerusalem.

    • annie on March 21, 2016, 6:12 pm

      remember the polls — most americans even wanted the US to remain neutral if israel attacked iran — presumably much more of a threat to israel than palestinians.

      • Atlantaiconoclast on March 22, 2016, 10:38 am

        But Americans don’t care enough about it to pressure their leaders. For that, I keep saying, we need a different approach, one that will directly challenge Israel’s status as our best friend. The skeletons in the closet must be revealed!

    • ahadhaadam on March 21, 2016, 6:56 pm

      Dead on. I just saw him speak and he pretty much outflanked everybody else and outdid all other candidates in groveling to AIPAC. So much for Maverick Trump.

    • hungrydave on March 22, 2016, 5:21 am

      The reason Trump said he’s neutral is because he’s stupid and doesn’t know the political landscape of foreign policy. Of course it’s common sense to be neutral right…? Wrong.
      Now he’s been filled in about the crazy world of US relations with Israel.
      It’s like asking a child. They’d say be neutral, be fair. Poor thing hasn’t grown up yet and learned the backwards rules

  2. Ossinev on March 21, 2016, 12:04 pm

    Classic example of a Zionist bought and bent American politician – and she is a Democrat FFS !
    No need for any pre conference reassurance dinner. She apparently spewed out all the Israel first vomit in her conference address.

    Real American Democrats including Jewish American Democrats must be so embarassed having this lying hypocrite as the front runner for their party.

    • Atlantaiconoclast on March 21, 2016, 12:45 pm

      Are you serious? There is no shame in their game, none whatsoever. Jewish progressive Zionists are the ultimate hypocrites.

    • echinococcus on March 21, 2016, 3:10 pm

      Ossinev — I believe you are in the UK, which explains your serious mistake. “Democrats” are the party currently administering US imperialism, including our direct complicity in the occupation and genocide of Palestine and the multiple wars of aggression being fought by the US on behalf of the Zionist entity. “Real American Democrats including Jewish American Democrats” are embarrassed neither by this nor the other of their two Zionist candidates, except if they don’t know which side is up.

    • JWalters on March 21, 2016, 6:02 pm

      ” Zionist bought and bent American politician”

      1. Stop Obama’s progress toward peace with Iran.

      2. Block free speech in America on BDS.

      3. Continue Israel’s 67 year Nakba against Palestinians.

      The consumation of corruption.

  3. tombishop on March 21, 2016, 12:08 pm

    This is what Hillary Clinton is defending and calling for an escalation of. “”Israel: The Broken Silence” | New York Review of Books

  4. Citizen on March 21, 2016, 12:30 pm

    Everything she said was boilerplate from Netanyahu’s mouth to the conference’s 18,000 Israel First audience’s ears. Cable TV news shows said little about the conference this morning. Fox showed her blasting Trump just as Phil says above. On Fox’s Outnumbered segment with the 4 lady pundits there was some discussion of it. Hillary and her allies working on playbook to take down Trump. She may have date with FBI. She and hubby did some things over the years the Israelis didn’t like and the Israeli’s never forget…

  5. Mooser on March 21, 2016, 12:46 pm

    “Come Together”?

    ??? What happened to the +15?

  6. Steve Macklevore on March 21, 2016, 12:52 pm

    An utterly despicable speech – sycophantic and embarrassing.

    • US Citizen on March 21, 2016, 4:58 pm

      Well said Steve, well said. I tweeted the following out : If your loyalties lie with Israel, you’re free to leave the States; just surrender your US citizenship at the border. No man can serve two masters.

      I refuse to vote for her – she is going to set us back 20 years.

      The woman is a true menace.

    • bryan on March 22, 2016, 4:07 am

      “An utterly despicable speech – sycophantic and embarrassing.”

      I am not sure I agree entirely. She went to AIPAC, as she had to, and she reproduced a lot of the silly boilerplate that she (and every other leading US politician) repeatedly wheels out, as they have to. Most sycophantic and embarrassing was the lie, referring to Iranian ballistic missiles, that “Those missiles were stamped with words declaring, and I quote, “Israel should be wiped from the pages of history.” ”

      However, ignore all this silliness, and look at the general principles outlined in the speech, and imagine Netanyahu, sitting in Jerusalem, and grimacing at many of the things she said:

      * “As we have differences, as any friends do, we will work to resolve them quickly and respectfully. We will also be clear that the United States has an enduring interest in and commitment to a more peaceful, more stable, more secure Middle East. And we will step up our efforts to achieve that outcome.”

      * “Indeed, at a time of unprecedented chaos and conflict in the region, America needs an Israel strong enough to deter and defend against its enemies, strong enough to work with us to tackle shared challenges and strong enough to take bold steps in the pursuit of peace.”

      * “Now, all of this work defending Israel’s legitimacy, expanding security and economic ties, taking our alliance to the next level depends on electing a president with a deep, personal commitment to Israel’s future as a secure, Democratic Jewish state, and to America’s responsibilities as a global leader.”

      *”For the security of Israel and the world, we need America to remain a respected global leader, committed to defending and advancing the international order.”

      * “Today Iran’s enriched uranium is all but gone, thousands of centrifuges have stopped spinning, Iran’s potential breakout time has increased and new verification measures are in place to help us deter and detect any cheating. I really believe the United States, Israel and the world are safer as a result.”

      * “At the same time, America should always stand with those voices inside Iran calling for more openness. Now look, we know the supreme leader still calls the shots and that the hard-liners are intent on keeping their grip on power. But the Iranian people themselves deserve a better future, and they are trying to make their voices heard. They should know that America is not their enemy, they should know we will support their efforts to bring positive change to Iran.”

      * “Will we keep working toward a negotiated peace or lose forever the goal of two states for two peoples? Despite many setbacks, I remain convinced that peace with security is possible and that it is the only way to guarantee Israel’s long-term survival as a strong Jewish and democratic state. It may be difficult to imagine progress in this current climate when many Israelis doubt that a willing and capable partner for peace even exists. But inaction cannot be an option. Israelis deserve a secure homeland for the Jewish people. Palestinians should be able to govern themselves in their own state, in peace and dignity. And only a negotiated two-state agreement can survive those outcomes.”

      * “If we look at the broader regional context, converging interests between Israel and key Arab states could make it possible to promote progress on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Israelis and Palestinians could contribute toward greater cooperation between Israel and Arabs. I know how hard all of this is. I remember what it took just to convene Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas for the three sessions of direct face-to-face talks in 2010 that I presided over. But Israelis and Palestinians cannot give up on the hope of peace. That will only make it harder later.”

      * “Everyone has to do their part by avoiding damaging actions, including with respect to settlements. Now, America has an important role to play in supporting peace efforts. And as president, I would continue the pursuit of direct negotiations.”

      * “There is one more choice that we face together, and in some ways, it may be the most important of all. Will we, as Americans and as Israelis, stay true to the shared democratic values that have always been at the heart of our relationship? We are both nations built by immigrants and exiles seeking to live and worship in freedom, nations built on principles of equality, tolerance and pluralism.”

      * “But we cannot rest on what previous generations have accomplished. Every generation has to renew our values. And, yes, even fight for them. Today, Americans and Israelis face currents of intolerance and extremism that threaten the moral foundations of our societies.”

      **** “If you see bigotry, oppose it. If you see violence, condemn it. If you see a bully, stand up to him.”

      Far from this being “an utterly despicable speech” I can quite easily imagine Bibi, decoding the code, and writhing in utter discomfort: “That woman has entered the lion’s den, said some of the right things about Israeli technology, the threat from Hezbollah and the anti-Semitism inherent in BDS, but she has made far too many references to peace, the viability of a two-state solution, friendship with Iran, Democracy and pluralism. She has emerged having given herself the elbow room to continue Obama’s hostile approach. And that horrible dig in her closing remarks (“If you see bigotry, oppose it. If you see violence, condemn it. If you see a bully, stand up to him”) – that was not chastisement of the passing phenomenon of Trumpism, that was a dagger driving into the breast of the King of the Jews! Horrible woman.”

  7. pabelmont on March 21, 2016, 12:56 pm

    I wonder if big-banks, big-defense, big-pharma demand such a display of grovelling subservient loyalty-oath-spewing slavery of the politicians upon which they spend their political money as does big-ZIon. In the 50s what with fear-of-Communism and all, and McCarthy too, there were loyalty oaths required here and there, and some brave universities refused to fire professors who would not take the loyalty oaths or testify before Congressional investigative committees.

    [1951] Over 500 students crowded a lecture hall and corridors at Boston University yesterday to hear Dirk Struik, suspended M.I.T. professor, attack the president’s loyalty oath. Struik, now under indictment on charges of conspiracy to overthrow the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, was sponsored by the B. U. Progressives.

    The loyalty oath, and succeeding intimidation of Americans has struck at the very basis of academic freedom, and persecuted some of the country’s leading citizens, Struik said.

    Later, he insisted that he was a Marxist, and not a Communist.

    Clinton and big-Zion make me sick. Stalinism in action. See More of the Same with Hillary Clinton will not be Good for America

  8. Theo on March 21, 2016, 12:58 pm

    How low did our country sank during the past 50 years!
    During the first nearly 200 years a roman catholic had absolutly no chance to become the president due to the fear of the Vatican having an undue influence on him. John Kennedy had to convince our people that he being a catholic will not influence any way his decisions and the way he governs the country. He was our very last president not in servitude to Israel.
    Today one has to pledge an allegiance to Israel, a foreign country, even to be considered as a candidate for a higher public office, must visit Tel Aviv before elections to get final instructions, and assure them their undying servitude to be elected, as most of our congressmen do.
    Clinton, Cruz and all those traitors should be arrested and jailed for the good of this nation and anyone voting for them should also be classified as a traitor. You are selling your country as Quisling did during WWII. He was hanged for his deeds, should our politicians be treated the same way?

    • hophmi on March 21, 2016, 2:43 pm

      Spoken like a white supremacist.

      • Mooser on March 21, 2016, 3:32 pm

        “Spoken like a white supremacist.”

        Wow, I’m impressed! “rugal_b” has been influencing people here.

        Yes sir, if there’s anybody qualified to hand down a judgement of “spoken like a white supremacist,” it’s a Zionist. You keep working that line, “Hophmi”.

      • Emory Riddle on March 21, 2016, 4:20 pm


        Can’t dispute what Theo is saying so right to the name calling and labeling? Have you completely given up? Not even going to try?

      • oldgeezer on March 21, 2016, 5:31 pm


        So what are the odds of a Palestinian being PM of Israel?

        Don’t waste the keystrokes ….

      • MRW on March 21, 2016, 5:44 pm

        No. Spoken like an American. You pro-Israel types are tedious. And freeloaders.

      • Citizen on March 21, 2016, 6:10 pm

        @ hophmi
        How so?

      • Talkback on March 21, 2016, 7:22 pm

        Hows the big plank in your eye doing, Hophmi? Allready penetrating the brain?

      • Theo on March 22, 2016, 2:38 pm


        “spoken like a white supremacist”

        How wrong you are, during my life I had more so called colored persons als friends than white ones. I even had many jewish friends, because they were not blinded by the daily dose of ziocaine, but were interesting and intelligent human beings, not God´s messengers from the early days of jewish history!
        Sorry that you do not qualify!

  9. Marnie on March 21, 2016, 1:03 pm

    HRC – you give whores a bad name. They work for a living. You just say a few lines and get paid. Oh, forgot, you sold your soul to the devil, but that’s okay, you weren’t using it, right? Last week a taxi driver volunteered out of the blue “I love Hillary Clinton”. My response was “good for you”. He immediately went on the defensive and said “What, a woman can’t be president?” I said “A woman can be president, just not that woman! That’s nice you love her and Bill, but you can’t vote anyway!” This intrusiveness is SOP for the average israeli, but it’s getting more and more personal. I hate lying about the way I feel about things. It was like that 4 years ago but this time around it’s ridiculous. Thank you HRC for selling out the american people. May the rest of your life be a misery for what you’ve got planned for so many. The whore of Babylon.

    • JWalters on March 21, 2016, 6:09 pm

      A. Israel’s case has no basis in the full facts and logic.

      B. Israel’s only leverage is money.


      C. You are correct.

  10. MHughes976 on March 21, 2016, 1:13 pm

    For all that, there is still some wriggle room in her words. I can’t believe that the Israeli government and their supporting forces fully trust her. I am sure Trump is polishing up some words about security and all that.
    The real problem is that public opinion throughout the Western world would simply not understand hesitation or equivocation about security and the right to exist. Except for opinion within universities, that is – but that is an isolated area.

  11. ritzl on March 21, 2016, 1:15 pm

    75M human beings in Iran. They won’t miss a couple million [“Tops!!!”], will they?


  12. ckg on March 21, 2016, 1:36 pm
  13. Ossinev on March 21, 2016, 2:40 pm

    Thanks for the link. Truly a force de puke. I wonder how much she charged for it – great money if you are in the game. She and her team probably didn`t even even have to write the speech – likely prepared no doubt by AIPAC Hasbara Central and hand delivered (nb – NOT e-mailed) to her.

    “I have sat in Israeli hospital rooms holding the hands of men and women whose bodies and lives were torn apart by terrorist bombs”

    Can`t find any further information about this little bit of theatre .When exactly was it I wonder. Was it before or after her famous Bosnia dodging the incoming visit to Bosnia:

    And of course she doesn`t give a shit about all the bodies and lives of the little Palestinian children torn apart by Israeli war crimes.

    What a truly revolting piece of humanity. She and the Zionists deserve each other.

    Americans with conscience most certainly do not deserve to have this lying hypocrite as their next President.

  14. Mooser on March 21, 2016, 3:36 pm

    “Trump ‘has no business being president’ because he would be ‘neutral’ to Israel — Clinton tells AIPAC”

    And the rest of the US.

    And I was just about ready to confess that I didn’t think Trump really wants to be President.
    Looks like Hillary is stumping for him, tho. What a sad, weird election.

    • echinococcus on March 21, 2016, 4:01 pm

      Yeah. Can read, write, reckon (a lot) and murder but can’t even figure how to use her very own, bespoke-tailored Greater Evil.

  15. kalithea on March 21, 2016, 3:54 pm

    Hillary said. “If you see bigotry, oppose it. If you see violence, condemn it. If you see a bully, stand up to him.”

    That’s what I’m doing every time I come on this site! Israel is a BULLY with hundreds of nukes pointed at Iran; Israel uses violence to oppress a perpetually occupied nation of millions of Palestinians. Israelis are by far some of, if not, the most bigoted people on the planet!

    Hillary is a clear and present threat to millions of Muslims and she is already responsible for supporting and responsible for pushing military hostility that has led to the deaths of over one million Muslims and millions more displaced with her disastrous policies in regards to Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen, and she tacitly supports human rights violations in Bahrain. Hillary should not only be arrested for the domestic crimes she is being investigated for in the U.S., but an international warrant should be issued against her for war crimes as well.

    She is more dangerous to the cause for justice for Palestinians than any other candidate with the exception of Cruz and she is a serious threat to peace.

    Hillary is worst than GW Bush by a landslide since she has more blood on her hands than he does, and I’m understating when I write here that I would compare her to a female Cheney, taking on the role of Cheney in the Obama administration, and poses a serious threat to global stability!

    • JWalters on March 21, 2016, 6:15 pm

      I agree. Now is the time for a full truth assault on every front, especially all the mainstream online discussions. Make it impossible to ignore.

      • kalithea on March 21, 2016, 7:37 pm

        Exactly. This is a critical time and we can’t mince words. We must attack Hillary and Trump on all fronts. This has to be a herculean effort; we are at a turning point here and our own rights and the truth are on the line. We must fight their advance everywhere.

  16. michelle on March 21, 2016, 5:36 pm

    one wonders which party is this beast with no back running under
    by her actions and words one can’t tell
    it’s plain she’s no friend to Israel
    friends don’t let friends ‘drink and drive’
    G-d Bless

  17. MRW on March 21, 2016, 6:11 pm

    Bring on the bully, whatever. I want Trump to win the goddam election. The citizen participation in government for the next four years–both pro and con, mad and happy–would be a sight to behold. And Fox News would be apoplectic as well. Oh, joy.

    If I had the money to waste or the inclination, I would send all the neocons a four-foot cube of Charmin [American toilet paper for you furriners] on Trump’s Inaugural Day and laff my ass off.

    • Bumblebye on March 21, 2016, 7:29 pm

      Some of us furriners (UK) can find it on our supermarket shelves. I think the last ad I saw for it was a bear in the woods.

    • kalithea on March 21, 2016, 7:33 pm

      Guess you didn’t hear Trump’s Aipac speech — wake up! DUMP TRUMP THE FASCIST ZIONIST DICTATOR.

      • MRW on March 21, 2016, 8:18 pm

        I’m listening to it right now, Kalithea, and cringing. However, Bernie won’t get in. Can’t stand Clinton, and are you going to tell me she’s better on Israel than this shit I’m listening to now, that she not a “FASCIST ZIONIST DICTATOR” as well? Cruz is a non-starter, a deal-breaker with me.

        Trump’s rambling on about the Iran deal right now. Good fucking luck changing that, bubbaloo. But the hoi polloi doesn’t know that. He’s tossing red meat from the stage. How much of that he believes who knows. He probably thinks we gave $150 billion to Iran. Ha! It was Iran’s own money parked in its USD account at the Fed and the US VIOLATED the international agreement not to interfere with foreign country foreign reserve holdings.

  18. Bandolero on March 21, 2016, 6:55 pm

    Trumps speech to AIPAC jsut ended.

    It was a mixture of pandering to Israel and declarations of war on Iran, the UN and Palestinians. Sounding like Netanyahu’s second voice Trump got standing ovation multiple times during his speech.

    Compared to that even Hillary looked pro-Palestinian.

    • Mooser on March 21, 2016, 7:23 pm

      So Trump just failed to take advantage of that great build-up Hillary gave him? And big bad Trump tried to get a lifetime’s worth of groveling into one speech?

      “He thought he couldn’t lose, almost all the audience are Jews! Where did he go right”?

      • Bandolero on March 21, 2016, 7:48 pm


        Trump’s AIPAC speech from A-Z sounded as if he was Netanyahu running for US President.

        Read a rough transcript here.

        In short:

        Good evening. I speak to you today as a lifelong supporter and true friend of Israel. … My number one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran. … When I am president, I will adopt a strategy that focuses on three things when it comes to Iran. First, we will stand up to Iran’s aggressive push to destabilize and dominate the region. … Iran is a problem in Iraq, a problem in Syria, a problem in Lebanon, a problem in Yemen, and will be a very major problem for Saudi Arabia. … In Gaza, Iran is supporting Hamas and Islamic Jihad – and in the West Bank they are openly offering Palestinians $7,000 per terror attack and $30,000 for every Palestinian terrorist’s home that’s been destroyed. … Secondly, we will totally dismantle Iran’s global terror network. … Third, at the very least, we must hold Iran accountable by restructuring the terms of the previous deal. … The United Nations is not a friend of democracy. It’s not a friend to freedom. It’s not a friend even to the United States of America, where as all know, it has its home. And it surely isn’t a friend to Israel. With President Obama in his final year, discussions have been swirling about an attempt to bring a security council resolution on the terms of an eventual agreement between Israel and Palestine. Let me be clear: An agreement imposed by the UN would be a total and complete disaster. The United States must oppose this resolution and use the power of our veto. Why? Because that’s not how you make a deal. … A deal that imposes conditions on Israel and the Palestinian Authority will do nothing to bring peace. It will only further delegitimize Israel and it would reward Palestinian terrorism, because every day they are stabbing Israelis – and even Americans. … You don’t reward that behavior, you confront it! It’s not up the United Nations to impose a solution. When I’m president, believe me, I will veto any attempt by the UN to impose its will on the Jewish state. You see, I know about deal-making – that’s what I do. … When I become President, the days of treating Israel like a second-class citizen will end on Day One. I will meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu immediately. I have known him for many years and we will be able to work closely together to help bring stability and peace to Israel and to the entire region. … Meanwhile, every single day, you have rampant incitement and children being taught to hate Israel and hate the Jews. … In Palestinian textbooks and mosques, you’ve got a culture of hatred that has been fermenting there for years, and if we want to achieve peace, they’ve got to end this indoctrination of hatred. There is no moral equivalency. Israel does not name public squares after terrorists. Israel does not pay its children to stab random Palestinians. … Already, half the population of Palestine has been taken over by the Palestinian ISIS in Hamas, and the other half refuses to confront the first half, so it’s a very difficult situation but when the United States stands with Israel, the chances of peace actually rise. That’s what will happen when I’m president. We will move the American embassy to the eternal capital of the Jewish people, Jerusalem – and we will send a clear signal that there is no daylight between America and our most reliable ally, the state of Israel. The Palestinians must come to the table knowing that the bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable. They must come to the table willing and able to stop the terror being committed on a daily basis against Israel and they must come to the table willing to accept that Israel is a Jewish State and it will forever exist as a Jewish State. Thank you very much, its been a great honor to be with you.

        Just see Trump’s AIPAC speech here:

      • Mooser on March 21, 2016, 7:52 pm

        Thanks, “Bandelero”! Thanks much.

        Read speech and I’m speechless.

      • Mooser on March 21, 2016, 8:02 pm

        He hit every hasbara blathering-point!

        And now we’ll see if either of those two speeches go any further in the media than Mondo, and of course, the in-house publications.

        So now both candidates have pledged US security to Israel’s whims and intransigence. Wonder if the US public will hear about it on the networks.

        After all, the Republican establishment is looking for something, anything, to use against Trump…

      • eljay on March 21, 2016, 8:07 pm

        || Bandolero: … Trump’s AIPAC speech from A-Z sounded as if he was Netanyahu running for US President. … ||

        Good evening. I speak to you today as a lifelong supporter and true friend of Israel. … When I’m president, believe me, I will veto any attempt by the UN to impose its will on the Jewish state. … We will move the American embassy to the eternal capital of the Jewish people, Jerusalem – and we will send a clear signal that there is no daylight between America and our most reliable ally, the state of Israel. The Palestinians must come to the table knowing that the bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable. They must come to the table willing and able to stop the terror being committed on a daily basis against Israel and they must come to the table willing to accept that Israel is a Jewish State and it will forever exist as a Jewish State. … ||

        After a brief pause, he added: And, for the record, let me be clear that when it comes to negotiations between the Jewish State of Israel and those anti-Semitic, stab-a-Jew terrorists…I mean, the Palestinians, I will be neutral.

      • talknic on March 21, 2016, 9:06 pm

        OMG how utterly predictable

      • wondering jew on March 21, 2016, 10:05 pm

        Talknic- I assume you will object if I ask you a favor , nonetheless… reviving threads from almost a year ago is really tedious, navigation wise. If you wish to make a point, try to make it on a more recent thread. I suppose this is confusing to others and I will be accused of hijacking a thread, but nonetheless.

        Your point about a declaration of war in 1897 is not a new one . But in fact no shot was fired at that point in time and so someone as devoted to legal nuance would have to be more specific regarding what precisely denotes a declaration of war. To pursue this technical point a little further, at that time the ottoman empire,or the Turks, controlled palestine, so they were the controlling authority of the territory rather than the Palestinians (what percentage of Palestinians at that time would have called themselves that. A rose by any other name would still be indigenous.) Since we know from history that the Palestinians did nothing to throw out the turks, on what basis was Turkish colonization superior than the proposed jewish colonization. Of course the turks merely wanted to rule the turf rather than to live there and the Zionists (or many of them) not only wanted to live there, but also wanted to expel most of the inhabitants, but those thoughts were not approved by the Zionist Congress of 1897, so can you condemn the Congress for the thoughts and words of the leaders, when they themselves did not approve those words with their votes.

      • Mooser on March 21, 2016, 10:22 pm

        “OMG how utterly predictable”

        Yup, and the papers and pundits are already talking about the “differences” in the Trump and Clinton approach to Israel!

        (Watch out for “Yonah”, I think his coffee was a little too strong and it’s giving him a logorrhea attack.)

      • Bandolero on March 21, 2016, 10:28 pm

        Roger Stone on AIPAC Speech: ‘This Is the New Trump’

        Donald Trump’s speech Monday to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) showed voters what he will look like as the campaign continues, columnist Roger Stone tells Newsmax TV. … “He has always said that he is an unabashed supporter of Israel,” Stone said. “He fleshed it out. This is the new Trump.” …

        The speech was the first since his campaign began where Trump worked from a written speech, and Stone said that was important because Trump was talking substantive policy issues. …

        Stone warned of “Trojan horse delegates” he said who are falsely claiming to be Trump supporters, but would vote against him on procedural matters, including rules changes that would rob Trump of the nomination.

        “The Republican establishment, many of whom wear a second hat as lobbyists, will never throw in the towel,” Stone said. …

      • Sibiriak on March 22, 2016, 12:09 am

        yonah fredman: Your point about a declaration of war in 1897 is not a new one . But in fact no shot was fired at that point in time and so someone as devoted to legal nuance would have to be more specific regarding what precisely denotes a declaration of war.

        Are you referring to this statement? Or is there another?

        [talknic:]The Zionist Federation started the war in 1897 when it decided to colonize Palestine.

        There is no mention of any formal declaration of war. Starting a war refers to a chain of causality, not a legal act.

      • talknic on March 22, 2016, 12:32 am

        @ yonah fredman March 21, 2016, 10:05 pm

        “Talknic- I assume you will object if I ask you a favor”

        Your assumption is as wrong as your notions.

        “… reviving threads from almost a year ago is really tedious, navigation wise. If you wish to make a point, try to make it on a more recent thread. I suppose this is confusing to others and I will be accused of hijacking a thread, but nonetheless.”

        You are hijacking this thread. Salubrius, one of your ignorant fellows did the reviving go bitch at the right person on the right thread

        As to the remainder of your nonsense please re-post where it belongs, I’ll answer it there

      • Marnie on March 22, 2016, 12:35 am

        So basically the job of the president has been distilled and refined and is as follows:

        1) Make the zionist state happy, happy, happy, by whatever means necessary including:
        a. Make the Palestinian people disappear.
        b. Destroy Iran and
        c. Anyone else who upsets or makes the israelis ‘uncomfortable’.

      • wondering jew on March 22, 2016, 1:17 am

        Talknic- as dan ackroyd used to say, jane, you ignorant slut. Until the next time. Have a good day.

      • talknic on March 22, 2016, 7:42 am
      • bryan on March 22, 2016, 8:44 am

        So Trump has finally given his definitive statement on Foreign Policy, which he could not give before because he was too busy mugging up on the Iran Deal, which he is now the world number one authority upon, believe him. He has learned a bit about the rudiments of diplomacy and, believe him, he will use the US UN veto 100%, rather than employing a sort of half-hearted, watered down. wishy-washy, equivocating 95% sort of veto. Did anyone count the number of times he reassured the audience that they could “believe me”, and would anyone buying a second hand from a dodgy salesman whose patter so frequently resorted to this knock-out punch, or does he himself have massive doubts about his own veracity? Unfortunately the tattered vestiges of any remaining credibility he might have had are now completely shot through, because having laboured to establish that his forte lay in negotiation, and having emphasized that the art of negotiation revolved around not laying all your cards down on the table, he has now laid his entire hand down on the table, face up, and revealed what a pile of shite he had. The world’s greatest poker player (believe me) has just chucked in his hand and walked away from the table, having shown he is as big a loser as any of the idiots who declare their devotion to him.

  19. uh...clem on March 21, 2016, 7:21 pm

    I call her Pillory Clinton myself. It has a nice “ring” to it.

  20. Les on March 21, 2016, 7:30 pm

    Published on
    Monday, March 21, 2016
    Common Dreams
    Critics Aghast at ‘Disgusting Speech’ Clinton Just Gave to AIPAC

    Democratic presidential candidate speech praises “everything that is bad about Israeli policy and U.S. imperialism”
    Lauren McCauley, staff writer


  21. Kris on March 21, 2016, 7:33 pm

    Here are some brief interviews with people attending AIPAC. They are feeling “berned” because Bernie Sanders did not come in person to the event.

    “Did Bernie Burn AIPAC?”

    • Rusty Pipes on March 21, 2016, 8:01 pm

      I’m not a big fan of Qatari media, because AJ has been one of the biggest propagandists for the “moderate rebels” in Syria. But thanks for the link. I’m hoping to see more reports from alternative media.

      • Kris on March 21, 2016, 8:05 pm

        You’re welcome! This link is better, because you don’t have to scroll through that facebook website, searching for this:

      • on March 21, 2016, 8:36 pm


        I believe you are mistaken in assuming AJ+ is the same as Al Jazeera, the media firm based in Qatar. AJ+ is US based alternative news firm who is a subsidiary of Al Jazeera, and employs overwhelmingly local talents as producers, writers and journalists. All of their news staff have complete control on their work and are free to pursue their own narratives and coverage of events.

        As such, labelling them as a Qatari-based media is grossly inaccurate. I have found them to be exceptionally reliable, informative and honest, especially compared to the mainstream media or even other alternative news sites, such as Vox, Gawker and Buzzfeed.

      • Rusty Pipes on March 22, 2016, 3:26 pm

        AJ+ is the leftover of Al Jazeera America. Its material is progressive on everything except the Muslim Brotherhood and the Arab Spring — especially when it comes to Syria. That’s the Qatari meme.

      • on March 23, 2016, 1:44 am


        I’m not sure what you mean by not progressive when it comes to Muslim Brotherhood or Syria. AJ+ have consistently opposed violence on civilians and crackdown of peaceful protests,they were among the first major network to acknowledge the refugee crisis due to the war in Syria, and called out the demonization of genuine refugees as opportunistic migrants by the MSM. All very progressive in my book.

        Regardless, AJ+ is an American network that primary interests are in American affairs and events. As long as they are doing a good job covering domestic issues that actually affect the daily lives of people here, I see no reason to suspect their ties to Doha or their progressive leanings.

    • Marnie on March 22, 2016, 12:37 am

      “Berned” huh. I hope it leaves a nice big scar.

  22. Les on March 21, 2016, 8:26 pm

    Bernie Sanders Delivered A Killer AIPAC Speech … In Utah
    The pro-Israel group wouldn’t have liked what he said.
    03/21/2016 08:11 pm ET

    Samantha Lachman
    Staff Reporter, The Huffington Post

    Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) declined to speak at the country’s largest pro-Israel gathering in Washington on Monday. Instead, the Democratic presidential candidate, who is the only Jew in the race, gave a speech detailing his belief in a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — in Utah.

    But then the speech he gave would have ruffled feathers before the approximately 18,000 attendees at the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The people gathered at a high school in Salt Lake City were at least his supporters.

    AIPAC had invited Sanders and his rival for the Democratic nomination, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to speak. The group also invited businessman Donald Trump, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Ohio Gov. John Kasich, the three remaining Republican presidential hopefuls.

    Sanders was the only candidate to decline the invitation, citing scheduled campaign events in Idaho, Utah and Arizona, which host their respective caucuses and primary on Tuesday. (He did request to address the conference remotely, which the group decided wasn’t kosher.)

    Presidential candidates who come to AIPAC tend to emphasize their “unwavering commitment” to Israel’s security, with some warm anecdotes thrown in about past visits to the country and how much they loved it. The candidates this year, including Clinton, spent a large portion of their speeches talking about the Iranian nuclear deal, which AIPAC had tried unsuccessfully to torpedo.

    Most White House hopefuls don’t say what Sanders did in Utah, which is that Israel’s government should get serious about a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    “We are obligated to speak the truth as we see it, and that is what real friendship demands, especially in difficult times,” Sanders said. “It is important among friends to be honest and truthful about differences we may have.”

    While Sanders declared his support for Israel’s continued existence as a Jewish state, he also talked about Palestinian unemployment and poverty.

    “When we talk about Israel and Palestinian areas, it is important to understand that today there is a whole lot of suffering among Palestinians and that cannot be ignored,” he said.

    Clinton had mentioned the sensitive issue of Israeli settlements just once in her speech to AIPAC on Monday morning. In contrast, Sanders spent significant time condemning construction of the settlements as counter-productive to the currently nonexistent peace process. He said that peace would require “compromises on both sides.”

    He called it “absurd for elements in [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s government to say that building more settlements in the West Bank is the appropriate response” to the most recent round of violence in the country. He argued that new settlement construction ultimately undermines Israeli security and predicted that Israel would have to pull back settlements in the West Bank, “just as it did in Gaza.” And he criticized Netanyahu’s government for withholding tax revenue it collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority.

    This is a stronger position against settlements than that of most American political leaders, who talk about Israel swapping land with the Palestinians to compensate for some large settlement blocs in the West Bank that most assume would remain in Israel’s control under a two-state solution.

    Sanders did not explicitly lay out the parameters for what a two-state solution should look like. But he said that Hamas and Hezbollah would have to “renounce efforts” to undermine Israel’s security and that he’d require “the entire world” to recognize Israel’s right to exist. He also said that Israelis should feel secure from violence and terrorism, while Palestinians should have self-determination and civil rights. He argued in favor of ending the economic blockade of Gaza.

    The senator implicitly criticized AIPAC for lobbying against the Iran nuclear agreement last year.

    “I do not accept the idea that the pro-Israel position was to oppose the deal,” he said. “Preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon will strengthen not only America’s security, but Israel’s security as well.”

    In yet another line that presidential candidates don’t tend to take before the AIPAC crowd, Sanders called on Israel to end “disproportionate responses” to attacks — though he said any attack launched against Israel is “unacceptable.”

    Sanders condemned indiscriminate rocket fire from Hamas into Israel proper. But he also mentioned that he had spoken out “strongly against the Israeli counter-attacks that killed nearly 1,500 civilians and wounded thousands more” when Israel responded to rocket attacks by invading Gaza in 2014.

    “It is clear to me that the path to peace will require tapping into our shared humanity to make hard but just decisions,” he said, concluding the Israel-related section of a speech that also touched on the self-described Islamic State and civil war in Syria.

    Sanders’ speech would have made quite a statement at AIPAC, which places more of an emphasis on American-Israeli security cooperation and ignores the settlements issue.

    But he didn’t seem to want even his supporters to know he was giving a speech on foreign policy, although he had long promised one. His campaign tweeted about it just once while he was delivering his remarks, after sending a
    link to watch it live.

    • Atlantaiconoclast on March 22, 2016, 10:50 am

      I can’t believe more people don’t see the contradiction in supporting Israel as a Jewish state, but then opposing any attempt to limit changes to the current demographic balance in the US. Why is it ok for Jews to want a Jewish state, but wrong for Whites or any other group to want their own state?

      And why should Hezbollah be considered with Israel’s security when it is Israel that has occupied Lebanon. Hezbollah has never occupied Israel, let alone kill any significant number of Israeli civilians. Hezbollah is to terror what Madonna is to the Pope.

      • Mooser on March 22, 2016, 11:39 am

        ” Why is it ok for Jews to want a Jewish state, but wrong for Whites or any other group to want their own state?”

        Well, it depends! Do you intend to include Jews in the “Whites” “own state”? And on what basis?

        I’m sorry to ask so baldly and outright, but you must understand, “Atlantantacolonialist”, I am in a very equivocal position, and need to know where I stand as a Jew with “Whites” who want their “own state”?

        So how do Jews stand with the “White’s” “own state? In or out? Ebony, or ivory?

  23. kalithea on March 21, 2016, 10:30 pm

    The Lobby reigns supreme over the election process. Today the absolute power of Zionism was on full display and it is a revelation in pure evil and in the rampant corruption of the American political system by a foreign agent. Notice how strategically this Zionist conference falls into the political election calendar streamlining the narrative of the final candidates to mirror the will of Zionists. It was the most disgusting vomit-inducing spectacle I have yet to witness.

    The 1% lying within the 2% rule us all and the Palestinians. How do you begin to fight Colossus? There is no justice possible with such hermetic domination.

    • Atlantaiconoclast on March 22, 2016, 10:46 am

      You fight it by exposing what Israel has done to the US, as in the Lavon Affair, the attack on the USS Liberty, the spy scandals, and yes 9/11. Till that happens, Americans will never care enough to out-pressure AIPAC.

  24. Ossinev on March 22, 2016, 7:09 am

    “Ossinev — I believe you are in the UK, which explains your serious mistake. “Democrats” are the party currently administering US imperialism, including our direct complicity in the occupation and genocide of Palestine and the multiple wars of aggression being fought by the US on behalf of the Zionist entity. “Real American Democrats including Jewish American Democrats” are embarrassed neither by this nor the other of their two Zionist candidates, except if they don’t know which side is up”

    The Democrats which I am referring to are those Democrats (including Jewish Democrats) increasingly amongst the younger generation and on campus who are anti – Zionism and who support BDS. I recognise that the so called Democratic Party as such is little different from the Republicans when it comes to Zionism and being bought and bent by Zionists. I will admit that here in the UK it is difficult sometimes to comprehend just how overt and in your face the level of control exercised by Israeli First lobbyists in America is. It is also a major issue here in the UK but it is not so blatant and grotesque.

    • echinococcus on March 22, 2016, 8:34 am


      I see. It might be a point of American English usage –you were describing democrats (expressly named “lower-case d democrats” or “small d democrats” in oral discussion.) Not party members.

  25. Qualtrough on March 22, 2016, 8:12 am

    I can’t believe that anyone here thought for a moment that Trump would do anything other than completely pander to AIPAC. I hope you have learned your lesson!

  26. echinococcus on March 22, 2016, 8:29 am


    There’s no lesson, as Trump is playing a reality TV role, that of the Know-Nothing candidate resurgent to collect big crowds. By definition he’s playing the role of a loose cannon, and top of all that the role of a moneybags who can’t be bought.
    So by definition any and all gestures are possible at any time.
    In this particular case, it made a lot of sense and a lot of additional loyalty and votes to defy the Zionists. He blinked, big time. Possibly he is thinking of his business in case he loses.
    One thing I would certainly agree never to expect is for him to stick to any one theory or promise.

  27. JimMichie on March 22, 2016, 9:02 am

    So, Phil and Adam, is this short, tepid piece the best you could do on “The Hillary”? Here’s an example of what truly can be said about “The Hillary” and her gagging performance for AIPAC:

    Hillary Clinton’s AIPAC Speech Was a Symphony of Craven, Delusional Pandering

    And to make matters worse, not a word in Mondoweiss this morning about Bernie Sanders, the only practitioner of Judaism running for president. I think the least you could have done was to post his position on Middle East policy:

    Sanders Outlines Middle East Policy

    I’m also shocked, Phil and Adam, that Mondoweiss has not endorsed Bernie for president. What are you waiting for?

    • echinococcus on March 22, 2016, 9:34 am

      James Michie, it’s your endorsement of an outspoken Zionist with a very long criminal record of support to imperialism that is scandalous. That none of the dictatorship party candidates are any better is not an excuse.

      Also, since when are self-serving fluff pieces from the candidate’s own web site believable documentation?

      • kalithea on March 22, 2016, 9:59 am


        When last I asked you what is your alternative you mentioned Trump; but as you can see Trump sold out to Zionism in full much worse than Sanders, but in fact Trump never had any intention to deviate from the two-party line on Israel.

        So the best we can hope for is the status quo and to protect BDS from destructive legislation. So I’m still waiting for your viable alternative, and by viable I mean someone a substantial majority of Americans might support.

        From what I see only Sanders might have a chance; but it’s slim. So, if we want the least amount of damage done to the cause; and if we want to turn around the destructive policy in Syria and in the rest of the Middle East; as Sanders has spoken negatively on Saudi intervention in Syria and Yemen, then who do you think can make it to the Presidency with the least damaging foreign policy. Please enlighten me because from what I see in your posts you offer no solution or alternative whatsoever.

      • Boo on March 22, 2016, 10:57 am

        Trump is a political weathervane that always points in the direction of opportunism.

      • echinococcus on March 22, 2016, 11:41 am


        I had mentioned Trump mockingly as a “lesser evil”, only for lesser-of-two-evils voters, i.e. something totally unacceptable but for those who go by that absurd logic still better than any other “acceptable” offer these people are considering.

        It still is that. Trump is playing the role of a Know-Nothing tinhorn fascist in some reality show and remains totally unpredictable by human logic. Some of his statements on foreign policy are isolationist, that’s all the extent of his preferability (still, for those who would accept that lesser-evil logic.)

        I could never make sense of that kind of lesser-of-two-evils thinking in the US setting anyway. Even if your adored Bernie were not a hardened imperialist, a harebrained performer of the theater of the absurd (“Moslems to shoulder their responsibilities” so that Saudis in concert with Iranians invade Syria –some solution! You seem to have missed that Sanders is the main cheerleader for the Saudi-proxy rape of Yemen, Saudi-Turkish proxy war in Syria, and others) and a Zionist to boot, from the most dangerous faction, I still wouldn’t consider voting for him because he is running within the dictatorship party and he is sabotaging any attempts at multiparty democracy.

        I am not in the least interested in “someone a substantial majority of Americans might support”. I am not interested in “someone”, anyway, but in parties with clear programs and organizations that make individual members irrelevant. The only priority now is to destroy the single-party dictatorship, digging every day under its foundations, sometimes suffering major setbacks because of that “majority of Americans” gullible enough to see differences within the single-party dictatorship. Who of them comes to power now is totally irrelevant. We survived Bush and even Obama. Endorsing Sanders means keeping alive the despicable lie that there is any difference between one imperialist and the same thing –just because one uses flowery language and the other plays bad cop.

        But all that remains pointless with regard to this discussion group. We are here to figure out what’s best for Palestinian resistance and bringing down Zionism. My opinion is that bringing a Zionist to govern the US is not the best way, no matter if he passes as a “liberal” or “moderate”; in fact I much prefer a stark raving Likudster dripping blood, because that is the only chance to expose to the American public what the government is doing. Sanders won’t change anything in the Palestinian dynamic; he’ll only make things just as bad but hidden.
        By the way, legal hurdles will much accelerate the boycott movement; they will surely lead to JVP exposing itself and the general public finally getting interested. So “protecting BDS from destructive legislation” is not such a priority.

    • Mooser on March 22, 2016, 11:22 am

      “I’m also shocked, Phil and Adam, that Mondoweiss has not endorsed Bernie for president. What are you waiting for?”

      Why don’t you see the “about” page? I could be mean, and say Mondo is waiting for a check- the one they won’t get if they make an outright endorsement.

    • Boomer on March 22, 2016, 12:13 pm

      Thanks for the link to Goldberg’s piece at Slate. She states the truth about Mrs. Clinton. If Obama hasn’t been afraid to alienate the left, why should Mrs. Clinton (unless one believes in morality, that is).

  28. traintosiberia on March 22, 2016, 11:35 am

    “The aide added that progressives concerned about the hawkish tone should remember that Clinton has been a staunch advocate of diplomacy, noting her support for the Iran deal, which Clinton helped launch through back channels; her backing of a political transition in Syria; and “supporting a two-state solution and needing to take steps that encourage that ultimate outcome.”

    “The other thing I’d point [progressive critics] to is her emphasis on the values that underpin both why the U.S.-Israel relationship is so important, but also a real part of our global leadership,” the aide said. “That is also a really important point for those who try to paint her as a hawk — they are ignoring how much work she’s done on behalf of — whether it’s on women’s rights or gay rights or development — and really ensuring that those are core parts of our approach to foreign policy and a key element of our national security.”

    Even the aide has learnt how to lie exactly the way Clinton has been mastering the skill.
    The aide knows where,when and among whom , ” there is an orange” can be the answer to the question :”when is the next train” . So the answer that she is a great advocate for woman’s right to the fear of being hawk ( more precisely ,she is a war criminal ) sounds exactly like that answer .
    Americans don’t dislike being called children of Clinton after being called children of the greatest generation or of the God after every wars for last 70 yrs and they behave like one

    The meaning of the word seems to have changed like the attitude of the leaders to the interest of USA – thats why she can be labeled as the champion of the peaceful transition in Syria or as someone who launched the Iran deal through back door ( she kept the front door open so that it can disappear and get out )

    Her first job would be to invite Netanyahu. Who needs an elected President for that ? Doesn’t he own that land as part of the OT?

  29. Kathleen on March 22, 2016, 12:04 pm

    Once again Clinton genuflects on the altar of Aipac. “Same as it ever was…same as it ever was”

  30. on March 22, 2016, 12:35 pm

    The environment shapes the individual, never the other way around. Whether it’s Clinton, Trump Cruz or Bernie, the fact is all were born, grew up and molded into adults while living in a white supremacist, capitalist society, hence they all harbor white supremacist, capitalist ideals and engage in politics reflecting their own mindset. 99% of white people born within the same period as the current politicians are as racist, bigoted, immoral and are slaves of materialism as the best and worst of them.

    Like it or not, the only thing you can do is expect for this generation of politicians and their supporters to die out, and for the next generation to take their place. The next generation is woke, and have their foot planted firmly on the ground they stand on alongside their peers of various colours, faith, gender, sexuality and ethnicities. If Obama represent the 1% of today’s politicians, with his unmatched charm and intellect, honesty and courage, I am confident in the next generation it will be his inferior counterparts like Trump and Hillary occupying his place in the 1%.

    • Mooser on March 22, 2016, 2:47 pm

      “The environment shapes the individual, never the other way around.”

      That’s what I keep on trying to tell you, “rugal_b” I was a red-diaper baby! Used to play Czarists and Bolsheviks instead of cowboys and Indianans. Okay, a pink-diaper baby, but my Mom had been hoping for a girl.

      So don’t go high-hatting me about my environment! Dear kindly “rugal_b” sir, you gotta understand, it’s just our bringin’ up-ke, that gets us out of hand. Our mothers all are junkies, our fathers all are drunks.
      Golly Moses, natcherly we’re punks! Gee, dear “rugal_b” sir, we’re very upset;
      We never had the love that ev’ry child oughta get. We ain’t no delinquents,
      We’re misunderstood. Deep down inside us there is good! There is good!

    • Mooser on March 22, 2016, 2:54 pm

      “The next generation is woke, and have their foot planted firmly on the ground they stand on alongside their peers of various colours”

      Yup, you don’t want to lose your balance while you’re doing that. Now everybody, aim carefully.

  31. James Canning on March 22, 2016, 1:21 pm

    Would Donald Trump in the WH be able to stop the growth of the illegal colonies of Jews in the occupied West Bank?

    Trump’s comments on Iran were unwise.

  32. Boomer on March 22, 2016, 2:22 pm

    According to Jason Ditz, the U.S. sought regime change in Syria to help Israel:

    “A State Department email of Hillary Clinton, available on WikiLeaks, lays out the Democratic front-runner’s strategy as an architect of US intervention in Syria, shows the flawed reasoning that beget the scheme. Perhaps most importantly, the document shows utter blindness to the huge problems that the war ultimately led to.”

    details at:

  33. Theo on March 22, 2016, 2:51 pm

    I listened exactly 3 minutes long to Trump at the AIPAC, then I had to shut it off before I puke all over my computer. He is another brown nosing vasall of Israel, it makes really no difference who will be the next president, he or she will be controlled from Tel Aviv.
    This is going on since Johnson, and I must wonder, how long will it take before the american people wake up to the sad facts, that they really have nothing to say about the policy of their elected goverments?

    • echinococcus on March 22, 2016, 3:28 pm


      Of all the thousands of electoral comments these last months, yours is the most relevant.

  34. Dan From Away on March 22, 2016, 3:37 pm

    HRC at AIPAC:

    “America can’t ever be neutral when it comes to Israel’s security and survival”

    Lest we forget:

    George Washington letter to Alexander Hamilton
    Date: May 8, 1796

    “The nation which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest.”


    “she told pro-Israel students: “Don’t let anyone try to silence you, bully you or try to shut down debate.”

    Does that advice apply to Palestine Solidarty as well? Or only “pro-Israel” voices? This reads as blatant incitement to me.

    DNC Convention floor fight, anyone?

  35. Boomer on March 22, 2016, 6:58 pm

    Dan asks whether Mrs. Clinton’s advice applies to Palestinians too. Good question. I’m not sure. The NYT has reported from Europe that:

    “Speaking by satellite from Washington with young Israelis and Arabs meeting here, Hillary Rodham Clinton said today that it would be in the long-term interest of the Middle East for the Palestinians to have a state.

    “Mrs. Clinton used the word ”Palestine” in answer to a question and then was asked why she would use that term ”considering the fact that right now this country does not exist.”

    “She replied: ”Well, I think that it will be in the long-term interest of the Middle East for Palestine to be a state, to be a state that is responsible for its citizens’ well-being, a state that has responsibility for providing education and health care and economic opportunity to its citizens.”

    “Mrs. Clinton added, ”I think that the territory that the Palestinians currently inhabit, and whatever additional territory they will obtain through the peace negotiations” should in the interest of peace be considered ”a functioning modern state.”

    I should note that she said that, and the NYT reported it, back in 1998. The NYT also inserted this note:

    “[In Washington, Marsha Berry, a spokeswoman for Mrs. Clinton, said that the First Lady was giving her own personal views and that they did not represent the position of the Clinton Administration.]”

  36. JLewisDickerson on March 22, 2016, 10:26 pm

    RE: that “COME TOGETHER” photo of Hillary Clinton at AIPAC

    She bag production
    She got walrus gumboot
    She got Ono sideboard
    She one spinal cracker
    She got feet down below her knee
    Hold you in her armchair, you can feel her disease
    Come together, right now
    Over me

    She roller-coaster, she got early warning
    She got muddy water, she one mojo filter
    She say, “One and one, and one is three.”
    Got to be good-looking ’cause she’s so hard to see

    Come together right now over me

  37. michelle on March 22, 2016, 11:45 pm

    Hillary is gifting America and the American people to Israel
    every and all man woman and child
    Israeli slaves
    for whatever services Israel demands
    bend over open wider and be expected to swallow
    iow just do what Hillary already does
    G-d Bless

  38. Ossinev on March 23, 2016, 1:02 pm

    The Daily Beetroot reports that the war of attrition between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump over who supports Israel the most is becoming more and more heated. After being accused by Trump of being lukewarm over Israeli Prime Ministers Benjamin Netanyahu`s demand that the next American administration significantly increase the annual American aid budget to Israel (currently standing at $3 billion ) Clinton is reported to have responded at a journalist briefing by announcing that if elected she would increase it to $30 billion a year. When one journalist asked where the funding for this large increase would come from she is reported to have said that it would be financed through “rationalisations” in US Army personnel and weaponry budgets as well as a what she described as a “redirection and restructuring” “ of the US welfare budget. Trump at a subsequent and separate briefing to a group of journalists is reported to have responded to this by describing the proposed $30 billion as “peanuts” and announced that he would increase the sum to $300 billion per annum saying that if elected the financial needs of Israel and Israelis would be his no 1 priority in both domestic and foreign policies. When asked where this huge increase would come from he is reported to have outlined a plan for a $1000 annual per head tax on all illegal Mexican immigrants ( with discounted rates of $750 for those under the age of 18 and over the age of 70) together with a total scrapping of the “wasteful” US welfare budget.

    Hillary Clinton is 68
    Donald Trump is 69

    • traintosiberia on March 23, 2016, 8:46 pm

      The neighborhood that has been turned upside down and been eviscerated from withing by Clinton has now become the reason for Clinton to lay prostrate at the feet of Netanayu and the rest in TelAviv

      “The former secretary of state suggested on CNN’s “State of the Union” that the situation is far more complex. She pledged to “defend and do everything I can to support Israel, particularly as the neighborhood around it seems to become more dangerous and difficult.”

  39. traintosiberia on March 23, 2016, 8:38 pm

    Clinton Email Shows US Sought Syria Regime Change for Israel’s Sake -T

    The paper’s ideal was that the US would impose regime change by supplying arms, but without US troops, and that Russia wouldn’t dare oppose America (noting Russia did nothing during Kosovo), that the new US-backed Syrian government would abandon ties with Iran, turn against Hezbollah, and potentially negotiate a peace settlement with Israel, while the rest of the Arab world cheers America “as fighting for their people.”

    2 Wikileaks Drops Hillary Email Bomb That Could End Her Campaign but FB Censored It
    Before the launch, the FBI was investigating the Democratic candidate’s use of a private server during her tenure as Secretary of State. The archive contains over 7,000 emails written by Clinton herself.

    The scary, albeit fascinating exposé on who’s in bed with whom in the halls of global power has expanded to include Facebook, according to WikiLeaks. The organization has accused the social networking site of censorship, saying Facebook is blocking users’ access to the latest Clinton dispatch.

    This is Clinton a liar a demagogue a sycophant who will her soul agian again to get money and media approval from Israel.

  40. Salubrius on May 11, 2016, 12:22 am

    The Jewish People have had the right to settle in Palestine west of the Jordan since 1920 when the Allied Principal War Powers of WWI recognized their ownership. The collective rights to political self-determination in Palestine had been won in a defensive war and the Principal War Powers recognized the appropriateness of their ownership by the Jewish People, implicity rejecting the Arab Claim for them at the Paris Peace Talks. Exercise of the right of self-government was deferred until two conditions were met that would be necessary for the Jewish People to administer a democratic government and to protect its people from foreign aggression.

Leave a Reply