| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 6:59 am Post subject: |
| From: "Jeffrey Blankfort"
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:20:02 -0700
Subject: New pro-Israel lobby NO alternative to AIPAC]
For those who might have hoped that this new pro-Israel lobby might be fundamentally different from AIPAC, this article should put an end to that, particularly since an arch zionist former congressman Mel Levine is one of those involved. What this "new" operation appears to be is a slick move by liberal zionists to dampen the discussion and debate about the power and influence of the Israel lobby that was raised in the paper by Professors Mearsheimer and Walt, by Prof. Tony Judt and more recently by James Petras in his new book, The Power of Israel in the United States.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/773520.html
New pro-Israel lobby as alternative to AIPAC By Amiram Barkat
Dovish pro-Israel members of the American Jewish community are planning to set up a pro-Israel alternative to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee lobby (AIPAC), the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) reported yesterday.
Among the figures behind the initiative are billionaire philanthropist George Soros, who has not been involved with Israeli issues until now, philanthropists Charles Bronfman and Mel Levine, a former Democratic congressman and now high-powered West Coast lawyer.
Meretz chairman MK Yossi Beilin yesterday commended the establishment of the new lobby. Beilin told Haaretz that the lobby would not compete with AIPAC but portray another facet of American Jewry.
"It's important for both the administration and congress to know that AIPAC is a right- wing organization that represents only part of the Jewish community in the United States," Beilin said.
Soros' decision to take part in forming the lobby came as a surprise, as he has been considered anti-Zionist. After meeting the lobby's other founders, Soros said he would take part in its founding ceremony on October 26 in New York.
The founders have been discussing ways to persuade the Bush administration to increase its involvement in finding a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The initiative for the lobby is spearheaded by Dr. David Elcott, executive director of the Israel Policy Forum (IPF), an advocacy think tank founded to counter AIPAC's objection to the Oslo Accords. | |  | | Alpha | | Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 8:33 am Post subject: AIPAC tops Congressional travel spending after congressional |
| From: "Jeffrey Blankfort"
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:25:58 -0700
Subject: AIPAC tops Congressional travel spending after congressional scandals / $1.34 million this year, down from $3.9 million in 2003 "The slowdown in spending has ended the institute's traditional top-spender status, dropping it to second behind
the American Israel Education Foundation, which has emerged as the new top sponsor despite its close ties to the
most powerful pro-Israel lobbying group in Washington.
The foundation spent $583,131, sponsoring 62 trips to Israel for lawmakers, their relatives and staff from July 2005
to July 2006.
Unlike the extravagant golfing trips that marked the Abramoff scandal, the foundation sends congressional
members to Israel with an intense itinerary packed with tours and meetings with top-ranking officials and
academics. "
http://www.sfgate. com/cgi-bin/ article.cgi? file=/chronicle/ archive/2006/ 10/15/MNGA4LPP3B 1.DTL&type=printable
__._,_.___
Steep drop in travel spending after congressional scandals
$1.34 million this year, down from $3.9 million in 2003
- Kimberly Geiger, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Sunday, October 15, 2006
Spending on travel by members of Congress has dropped to one-third of its peak three years ago in the wake of scandals surrounding lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who illegally provided vacations and other gifts to powerful lawmakers.
Congressional travel spending has dropped to $1.34 million thus far this year from its peak of $3.9 million in 2003, according to PoliticalMoneyLine, a watchdog group that follows money in politics.
While nonprofit groups are allowed to pay for lawmakers' travel for conferences and other educational purposes, Friday's guilty plea by Ohio Republican Rep. Bob Ney -- the first House member convicted in connection with the Abramoff scandal -- reinforced the suspicions that lobbyists use the nonprofits to funnel money for congressional perks.
"With all the unflattering attention that Jack Abramoff has brought to privately sponsored trips, I'm amazed that in this election year any member of Congress is willing to take a trip that could appear like a junket," said Massie Ritsch, spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics, another watchdog group. "If travel is down compared to past years, Abramoff and the demands of campaigning are probably the reasons."
Most Bay Area House members have cut their use of sponsored trips -- Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, has accepted only $8,643 in privately financed travel expenses during 2006, down from $12,991 three years ago. Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto, has not accepted a privately funded trip all year, and accepted only one in 2005, down from her usual two trips per year in previous years.
Rep. Mike Honda, D-San Jose, has taken three trips valued at $1,543 this year, including a visit to Houston for a conference on disaster relief paid for by the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, compared with $7,260 in privately funded travel expenses in 2003.
But Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, has increased his use of privately sponsored travel from $29,862 worth of trips in 2003 to $32,221 worth this year, according to records provided by www.politicalmoneyline.com, the watchdog group's Web site.
Miller took five trips thus far in 2006, including travel to a conference on "political Islam" in Istanbul sponsored by the nonpartisan Aspen Institute.
The trips charted by the watchdog groups do not include taxpayer-financed travel for government business paid through the members' administrative office budgets.
In data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics, the Aspen Institute, which is well known for spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on congressional trips to places like Dublin, Jamaica and Hawaii, cut such spending from $700,000 in 2004 to just $428,177 on 76 trips for the period from July 2005 to July 2006.
The slowdown in spending has ended the institute's traditional top-spender status, dropping it to second behind the American Israel Education Foundation, which has emerged as the new top sponsor despite its close ties to the most powerful pro-Israel lobbying group in Washington.
The foundation spent $583,131, sponsoring 62 trips to Israel for lawmakers, their relatives and staff from July 2005 to July 2006.
Unlike the extravagant golfing trips that marked the Abramoff scandal, the foundation sends congressional members to Israel with an intense itinerary packed with tours and meetings with top-ranking officials and academics.
The cost of the trip varies by member, but most spend about $8,000 if they travel alone, $14,000 if they bring a relative or spouse. The cost includes airfare, hotel and food expenses for a one-week trip.
Josh Block, a spokesman for the Israel foundation, said the trips "have long been considered among the most substantive, educational and valuable trips available for members of Congress," and insisted that they are not intended to be used as a lobbying outing.
"While in Israel, members have the opportunity to meet with Israeli and Palestinian officials, journalists, academics, political leaders ... hear from speakers representing diverse views across the political spectrum and get a personal, firsthand view of issues of great importance to American policy in the Middle East," Block said.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma, took the trip in August 2005 (her expenses were $8,864) just before Israel's disengagement from the Gaza settlements. Woolsey said that she agreed to go because her delegation was scheduled to meet with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian officials, and that she was disappointed when that part of the trip was canceled after she arrived.
"The experience only furthered my belief that this (Bush) administration's Middle Eastern policy has been a failure, and (that) achieving peace will require the U.S. to engage at the highest diplomatic levels as an honest broker," Woolsey said of the weeklong trip -- one of four trips sponsored by private groups that she took in the past two years.
Other California lawmakers whose visits to Israel were sponsored by the charity include Republican Rep. Dan Lungren of Gold River (Sacramento County), who spent $14,415; Republican Rep. John Doolittle of Rocklin (Placer County), who spent $16,789; Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman of Los Angeles, who spent $13,912; and Democratic Rep. Jim Costa of Hanford (Kings County), who spent $8,954.
The charity is a nonpartisan organization that sponsored trips for Republicans and Democrats equally.
But while the organization is considered an independent entity, its affiliation with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee -- a lobby that is consistently ranked among the nation's most powerful interest groups -- blurs the lines between lobbies and nonprofit educational groups. Members of Congress are banned from accepting travel expenses from lobbyists.
Founded in 1990, the education foundation shares its office space and phone number with AIPAC -- the lobbying group. In 2005, 17 of the foundation's directors were also vice presidents on the group's board, and one was the president. Group spokesman Block is also the spokesman for the charity.
Yet Block insisted the arrangement is ethical, calling it "an example of the proper way to conduct privately funded congressional travel."
Members of Congress are barred from accepting travel expenses from lobbyists. This year, public outrage over the Abramoff scandal prompted House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., to introduce a lobbying reform package that would have ended all privately funded trips. Unable to agree on even modest reforms, however, the GOP abandoned the effort, and Congress left Washington for its campaign recess without tightening rules on travel.
Ritsch, of the Center for Responsive Politics, said the arrangement between the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Israel education foundation is typical because of loose regulations from lawmakers.
"The distinction that ethics rules make between lobbyists and their clients seems to be a distinction without a difference," he said. "Lobbyists and their clients share the same goal: to influence lawmakers to their benefit. So does it really matter who pays for the trip?"
The National Center for Public Policy Research -- a group that was named Friday in connection with Ney's guilty plea in the Abramoff influence-peddling scandal -- hasn't sponsored a trip since 2003, but the top 25 sponsors of congressional travel include trade groups, foreign advocates, industry groups and companies such as Microsoft Corp. and Airbus.
Along with the Israel education fund and the Aspen Institute, other big-spending nonprofits included Fu Jen Catholic University, based in Taiwan, and the Chinese International Economic and Cooperation Association -- a group whose efforts involve ensuring American support for Taiwan -- which collectively spent $140,000 sponsoring congressional trips to Taiwan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the Web
To see the latest PoliticalMoneyLine report on congressional travel, go to www.politicalmoneyline.com/cgi-win/x_PrivateSummary.exe?DoFn=
E-mail Kimberly Geiger at kgeiger@sfchronicle.com. | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 7:30 am Post subject: |
| Exclusive: Feds Probe a Top Democrat's Relationship with AIPAC
The Department of Justice is investigating whether Rep. Jane Harman and the pro-Israel group worked together to get her reappointed as the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee
Posted Friday, Oct. 20, 2006
Did a Democratic member of Congress improperly enlist the support of a major pro-Israel lobbying group to try to win a top committee assignment? That's the question at the heart of an ongoing investigation by the FBI and Justice Department prosecutors, who are examining whether Rep. Jane Harman of California and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) may have violated the law in a scheme to get Harman reappointed as the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, according to knowledgeable sources in and out of the U.S. government.
The sources tell TIME that the investigation by Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which has simmered out of sight since about the middle of last year, is examining whether Harman and AIPAC arranged for wealthy supporters to lobby House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi on Harman's behalf. Harman said Thursday in a voicemail message that any investigation of — or allegation of improper conduct by — her would be "irresponsible, laughable and scurrilous." On Friday, Washington GOP super lawyer Ted Olson left voicemail messages underscoring that Harman has no knowledge of any investigation. "Congresswoman Harman has asked me to follow up on calls you've had," Olson said. "She is not aware of any such investigation, does not believe that it is occurring, and wanted to make sure that you and your editors knew that as far as she knows, that's not true... . No one from the Justice Department has contacted her." It is not, however, a given that Harman would know that she is under investigation. In a follow-up phone call from California, Olson said Harman hired him this morning because she takes seriously the possibility of a media report about an investigation of her, even though she does not believe it herself.
A spokesman for AIPAC, a powerful Washington-based organization with more than 100,000 members across the U.S., denied any wrongdoing by the group and stressed that it is not taking sides in regards to the committee assignment. Spokespersons for Justice and the FBI declined to comment.....
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1549069,00.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1159193487588&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Report: FBI, Justice Dept. probe AIPAC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JPost.com Staff, THE JERUSALEM POST Oct. 21, 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
US Justice Department and FBI prosecutors are examining whether Representative Jane Harman of California and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) may have violated the law in a scheme to get Harman reappointed as the top Democrat in the House Intelligence Committee, according to a Time magazine report
US government sources told Time that the investigation is examining whether Harman and AIPAC arranged for wealthy supporters to lobby House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi on Harman's behalf. Harman said Thursday that any investigation of - or allegation of improper conduct by - her would be "irresponsible, laughable and scurrilous."
On Friday, Republican lawyer Ted Olson left voicemail messages with Time underscoring that Harman has no knowledge of any investigation.
"Congresswoman Harman has asked me to follow up on calls you've had," Olson said. "She is not aware of any such investigation, does not believe that it is occurring, and wanted to make sure that you and your editors knew that as far as she knows, that's not true...No one from the Justice Department has contacted her." It is not, however, a given that Harman would know that she is under investigation.
In a follow-up phone call from California, Olson said Harman hired him this morning because she took seriously the possibility of a media report about an investigation of her, even though she did not believe it herself.
A spokesman for AIPAC stressed that it is not taking sides in regards to the committee assignment.
"Both Congressman Hastings and Congresswomen Harman are strong leaders on issues of importance to the pro-Israel community and would be exemplary Democratic leaders for the House Intelligence Committee," AIPAC stated.
AIPAC also maintained it "would never engage in a quid pro quo in relation to a federal investigation, and the notion that it
would do so is preposterous."
The group claims it was not aware that the Justice Department was looking into the issue, and said that AIPAC was told by the Justice Department in 2005 that neither the organization nor any of its employees were the focus of the government investigation.
Spokesmen for the US Justice Department and the FBI declined to comment.
Around mid-2005, the investigation expanded to cover aspects of Harman's quiet but aggressive campaign to persuade Pelosi to reappoint her to the prestigious position on the House intelligence panel.
The alleged campaign to support Harman for the leadership post came amid media reports that Pelosi had soured on her California colleague and might name Rep. Alcee Hastings of Florida, himself a major supporter of Israel, to succeed Harman.
A congressional source told Time that the lobbying for Harman has also included a phone call several months ago from entertainment industry billionaire and major Democratic party contributor Haim Saban. A Saban spokeswoman said he could not be reached for comment. A phone call pushing for a particular member's committee assignment might be unwelcome, but it would not normally be illegal on its own. And it is unclear whether Saban - who made much of his fortune with the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers children's franchise - knew that lobbying Pelosi might be viewed by others as part of a larger alleged plan.
Saban has donated at least $3,000 to Harman's campaign, according to Federal Election Commission records. The Saban Center for Middle East Policy, which he sponsors at the prestigious Brookings Institution, boasts Harman among its biggest fans.
"When the Saban Center talks, I listen," Harman said at a Saban Center briefing in February on US strategy in Iraq.
This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1159193487588&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 6:26 am Post subject: |
| US vs. AIPAC
by Dr. Abbas Bakhtiar
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Nov06/Bakhtiar02.htm
November 2, 2006
Anyone remotely familiar with the American political landscape knows that the Israeli lobby plays a very large role in shaping US foreign policy in the Middle East. This influence has been achieved through clever use of financial muscle and control of large sections of the media from newspapers to cable TV channels to think-tank organizations. Many of the Israeli lobby groups of today can trace their roots to the early 50s, when the American Jewish population needed to organize itself to fight the existing hidden prejudices and discrimination and to break the hidden barriers to their advancement. In their fight to overcome these difficulties they targeted both the media and the politicians. It was thought (correctly) that media played a very important role in creating or destroying the public image of any minority group in the country.
But somehow along the way, some of these organizations were hijacked by Zionists who equated Jewishness with being the loyal supporters of Israel. This minority group set about turning these lobbying groups’ agendas from one of fighting against prejudice to one of working to advance Israel’s interest. A large number of Jewish Americans naturally did not, and do not, agree with the aim of these Zionists. This silent majority (such as the Neturei Karta group, Peace now movement etc) is seen by the Zionists as false Jews who are traitors to the state of Israel.
These lobbying groups have consistently worked to advance their perceived interest of Israel around the world, not realizing that their policies and actions may not be in the long-term interest of the state of Israel and may even be counterproductive to the Jews’ interest around the world. By relying on the force of money and media, they have tried hard to persuade people to see the world from their point of view, not noticing that extreme use of these tools will eventually create a counter reaction.
After having succeeded in penetrating the corridors of power, these groups have become over-confident and arrogant. What used to be suggested is now demanded. What was previously politely asked for is now commanded. How long can this continue before it triggers a terrible reaction is anyone’s guess; but it surely cannot continue unchecked for long.
The strength of these groups have increased to such a level that they can now determine the outcome of elections (through money and the media). The situation has gotten so bad that now, most of the congressional hopefuls (Democrats and Republicans), even presidential hopefuls, have to declare their absolute support for Israel first before even entertaining the thought of running a serious election campaign.
One of these pro-Israel lobbying groups is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). We know of course that AIPAC has some very wealthy members. These supporters (official/unofficial) also control major part of the media. Money and media are the things that determine the outcome of most elections. So it is not surprising to see that most politicians and government officials always try to stay on extremely friendly terms with AIPAC and its clones.
But things have gotten out of hand. One no longer can determine where the US foreign policy starts and where Israel’s ends and whether the US foreign policy is being formulated in Washington or in Tel Aviv. Are the elected officials in US (knowingly or unknowingly) working to advance US interest or Israel’s interest?
“While reportedly under investigation for her ties to an influential pro-Israel lobbying organization, California Rep. Jane Harman last month hosted a private dinner for the group that was attended by two top Bush administration officials -- Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte and Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff.
The Sept. 13 dinner took place at the home of Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Select Committee on Intelligence, and was attended by over 120 top financial backers of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The highlight of the evening was a panel discussion in which Harman played the host, questioning Negroponte and Chertoff about Mideast developments, international terrorism and homeland-security issues, according to an AIPAC official.” [1]
Why was California Rep. Jane Harman being investigated?
“The FBI has been looking into claims since mid-2005 that Harman of California, the top Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, made explicit pledges to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, AIPAC, in exchange for the group's support in her quest to keep her spot on the intelligence panel.
The Washington Post reports one of those pledges was that for AIPAC's help, she would ask Republican administration officials to ease up on a probe of two former AIPAC lobbyists charged with violating the Espionage Act by receiving national defense information and transmitting it to journalists and Israeli Embassy employees. News of the FBI's investigation first appeared last Friday in Time magazine.” [2]
What is being produced in the intelligence committee? It is Intelligence assessments of course. The very thing that can be used to justify wars such as the one going on in Iraq or the one that is contemplated for Iran.
“U.N. inspectors investigating Iran's nuclear program angrily complained to the Bush administration and to a Republican congressman yesterday about a recent House committee report on Iran's capabilities, calling parts of the document "outrageous and dishonest" and offering evidence to refute its central claims.
Officials of the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency said in a letter that the report contained some "erroneous, misleading and unsubstantiated statements." The letter, signed by a senior director at the agency, was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the House intelligence committee, which issued the report. A copy was hand-delivered to Gregory L. Schulte, the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna.” [3]
Every now and then, through these scandals we get a glimpse of the power of AIPAC. We have a top elected official pledging allegiance to a lobby group for Israel to KEEP HER JOB on the INTELLIGENCE PANEL. What does this say to you? Is it the American people who are determining who works in various positions in the government or state of Israel? Anyway, why was she, while being under investigation, giving a dinner party for the very same group of people that she was being accused of working for? And more importantly, who were these AIPAC financial backers and what did they want from Director of National Intelligence and Secretary of Homeland Security? Why did they have dinner with a person that is under investigation? Can you think of anything? Could it be that they were discussing Iraq II (i.e. Iran)?
But it seems what is very obvious to outsiders, is still unknown to the American people. Even after scandal after scandal, the things continue as before. The Iraq war is still claiming thousands of lives and yet people have already forgotten how it was started in the first place. They have forgotten that it was the very same lobbying groups and their favorite politicians (both Democrats and Republicans) that were manipulating facts to start a devastating and unjustified war. We just have to look at one of the convicted lobbyist to see who knew of the events a year before the American people did.
If I was an American, I would ask my President to explain why some lobbyist like Abramoff would know about the plans for an invasion of Iraq a year before he informed the congress. And who was Abramoff’s Israeli friend that he was passing the information to and why? Look at the following e-mail (page 26) from Mr. Abramoff to his Israeli friend with the handle: “Octagon1”.
From Abramoff, Jack (Dir-DC-Gov)
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 8:31 AM
To: “octogon1”
Subject: RE: Sunday
I was sitting yesterday with Karl Rove, Bush’s top advisor, at the NCAA basketball game, discussing Israel when this email came in. I showed it to him. It seems that the President was very sad to have come out negatively regarding Israel, but that they needed to mollify the Arabs for the upcoming war on Iraq. That did not seem to work anyway. Bush seems to love Sharon and Israel, and thinks Arafat, is nothing but a liar. I thought I’d pass that on.
Octagon1 is the handle for Jack Abramoff’s friend who apparently was an Israeli official.
Exactly one year after Mr. Abramoff’s email to his Israeli friend, President Bush informed the American people that having tried all diplomatic avenues to solve the Iraqi “crisis”; he had no choice but to invade Iraq.
March 18, 2003
Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)
Consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), and based on information available to me, including that in the enclosed document, I determine that:
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone will neither (A) adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq nor (B) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
Sincerely,
GEORGE W. BUSH
Well, it seems to me that some lobbyists knew much more about US foreign policy than some elected officials in the Congress and the Senate. Again I may be totally wrong. It may be that the AIPAC financial backers wanted to discuss the tax reform and its effect on the intelligence services’ employees. After all there must have been something to do with intelligence work otherwise they would not have invited the Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte and Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff.
Or may be AIPAC wanted to talk to these gentlemen about Jonathan Pollard, a convicted Israeli spy and a former United States Naval civilian intelligence analyst. After all, recently most of the Israeli newspapers have been saying that Mr. Pollard should be released and sent to Israel.
Or may be they wanted to know about the US intelligence agencies’ progress in finding the supposedly, Israel’s highly placed agent code named “Mega”.
In the 11 years since former Navy analyst Jonathan Jay Pollard was convicted of selling U.S. military-intelligence documents to Israel, both Jerusalem and Washington have worked hard to heal the wounds from that spy scandal. But apparently both countries are still stealing secrets from each other. Last week the Washington Post revealed that the National Security Agency's electronic snoopers, which had been listening in on the phone conversation of an Israeli intelligence officer, uncovered tantalizing evidence that Israel may have a mole even better placed than Pollard was: a senior U.S. official code-named "Mega" who may be passing on U.S. diplomatic intelligence. [4]
After all, during Monica Lewinsky affair, there were strong rumours that the President was being pressured to forget about Mega or else.
The British investigative journalist Kevin Dowling has released an article for publication to a variety of British and American news organizations, charging that the Israeli Mossad was bugging the Watergate apartment telephone of Monica Lewinsky, and was able to obtain material used to blackmail the Clinton administration into shutting down a probe of widespread Israeli espionage in Washington.
Dowling reports that well-placed sources in Tel Aviv say that full transcripts of more than 30 sexually explicit conversations between Clinton and Lewinsky are held by the Israeli foreign intelligence service, the Mossad.
The backdrop is as follows, Dowling reports, and it is backed up by published sources in the U.S., that the U.S. government was aware, from late 1995 on, that the Mossad was carrying out extensive espionage activity in the United States. When the Defense Investigative Service issued a warning to defense contractors about the Israeli spy program, the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith went into an all-out mobilization to denounce the DIS memo as "anti-Semitic." Of course, just one year earlier, the ADL had been the subject of a lengthy espionage probe by the FBI and the San Francisco Police; and the ADL had earlier been deeply implicated in the Jonathan Pollard spy affair.
In May of 1997, the Washington Post and other media reported that the U.S. National Security Agency had intercepted a phone conversation between a Mossad officer posted at the Israeli embassy in Washington, and Danny Yaton, the Mossad chief, in Tel Aviv, during January 1997. The Mossad agent was seeking clarification whether he should attempt to obtain a copy of private letter from then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher to Yassir Arafat, via a Mossad mole high up in the Clinton administration codenamed "Mega." The Mossad boss told the agent that under no circumstances should "Mega" be approached, as s/he was the top Israeli penetration agent inside the Clinton inner circle. An extensive FBI counterintelligence probe to determine the identity of the high-level Israeli mole in the U.S. government was triggered by the NSA intercept.
Comparisons to the Pollard spy affair were naturally raised; the deeper issue is that many observers believe that Pollard's controller (sometimes referred to as "Mr. X," or the "X Committee") is still burrowed deep in a high-level position in a U.S. government agency.
According to the Tel Aviv sources cited by Dowling, there was an emergency meeting of top Israeli intelligence officials, as soon as the NSA intercept was discovered; a Mossad electronic-bugging team of yalohim was dispatched to Washington, and one of the targets of their operation was the home telephone of Monica Lewinsky.
According to the Dowling sources, the Mossad obtained wiretap tapes of at least 30 X-rated conversations between the President and Lewinsky. These tapes, according to the sources, were hand-carried back to Tel Aviv, and were then used to blackmail the Clinton administration into calling off the search for "Mega"; the threat was that if the search for "Mega" were not shut down, the Israelis would begin leaking material from the tapes.” [5]
Or maybe they wanted to talk about AIPAC’s Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman problems.
The immediate issues of illegal receipt of classified information, possible espionage, and failure to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) are bad enough, but the larger issue is the exposure of AIPAC's operating methods. The FBI has a couple of years' worth of wiretap evidence, and the information initially leaked to Rosen and Weissman by Larry Franklin was linked to the push for war with Iran (a rather timely issue, to say the least). The Israel lobby knows good and well that if the transcripts of their conversations with Capitol Hill staff get publicized by way of a trial, they are going to be a lot less effective. Their power has rested on being able to promote Israel's interests (as they see them) away from public view -- i.e., they didn't have a position on the Iraq War resolution, but everyone in Washington of any degree of political sophistication knew that they were making an "unofficial" effort to secure its passage. If most Americans knew the extent of this sort of "hush hush" political arm twisting, and the damage it does to American interests, there would be a movement to counterbalance AIPAC, particularly now that a clear majority of Americans believe the Iraq War was a mistake, and have an interest in knowing who was responsible for misleading us into it. [6]
Or maybe the AIPAC financial backers simply wanted to know about all those Israeli agents that were arrested right after 9/11.
FBI Investigates Foreign Spy Ring -- U.S. Companies Deny Involvement
In the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the FBI reportedly stumbled on an espionage ring that had penetrated the wiretapping system of U.S. law enforcement. Fox News Channel reported that the FBI was holding nearly 100 Israeli citizens with direct ties to foreign military, criminal and intelligence services.
In a follow-up to these reports, the FBI did not deny that such actions had been taken. However, FBI spokesman Paul Bresson would not answer specific questions on the reported espionage.
"We have seen the Fox News segments that aired several weeks ago on this topic and found some inaccuracies with it. Because they are sensitive issues, I do not have the luxury of discussing what precisely was accurate and what was inaccurate about their reporting," stated Paul Bresson, spokesman for the FBI.
"Most of the questions [asked by NewsMax.com] are not directly answerable by CALEA [Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act]. Your questions may be more properly addressed to our National Security Division, which I know would never discuss this with you, unfortunately," stated Bresson
Are Israeli Spies in the U.S.?
"First, they have taken advantage of a technically bumbling and compromised law enforcement and counterintelligence community and may have essentially made U.S. law enforcement wiretapping activities a branch of Israeli intelligence. It would be quite impressive if true," noted Brown.
"They have used their technical expertise in-house to identify and exploit cutting-edge technologies and companies. In gaining control over those technologies and companies, they would also have shown a deft handling of merger and acquisitions, personnel recruitment, and playing the capital markets.
"In addition, as publicly traded companies, private and institutional investors from around the world would be funding Israeli intelligence activities. Again, pretty impressive, if true, and really pretty much the model, or a variation of the model, now used by the intelligence agencies of China, Russia and some of our European allies," said Brown.
"If they [the Fox reports] do turn out to expose Israeli intelligence operations, one's admiration for Israeli ingenuity would be more than tempered by amazement at the sheer stupidity and recklessness of the Israelis' actions," noted Brown.
"First, they would have seriously damaged their relationship with the United States on many levels. Since that relationship is fundamental to Israel's existence, not a smart move.
"Second, while Israel, like the prodigal son, will always be able to ultimately rely on America's protection, Israeli high-tech companies are a major target for Russian intelligence and organized crime," stated Brown. [7]
Or maybe they just wanted to shake hands with the big guys in the government. Whatever the case may be, there is simply too much evidence of Israel’s involvement (mostly through lobbying groups such as AIPAC) with how things are run in US. This creates a huge problem in a democracy; where people expect their representatives to work for their interest and not for the interest of a foreign power. The United States simply cannot become an enforcing arm of the State of Israel. It is too costly for the United State and too dangerous for the world. We have seen some of the consequences of this in Iraq, and if we are not careful, we may see it again in Iran. Who will be next: Syria, Egypt or Sudan? Which other country is on the list of threats to the state of Israel? Should United State systematically engage in one war after another to make Israel feel secure? What about US security? Should US start a war with 52 Islamic countries, one after the other, just to ensure that Israel remains a regional superpower? Are the American people willing to pay the price? Will the silent majority (Jews) remain passive and allow this Zionist minority group to destroy them as well? These are questions that only the American people (Jews and gentiles) can answer.
Abbas Bakhtiar lives in Norway and is currently writing a book about the reasons behind the United States involvement in Iraq and Iran. He's a former associate professor of Nordland University in Norway. He can be reached at: bakhtiarspace-articles@yahoo.no.
Other Articles by Abbas Bakhtiar
* New World Order and the Economic Man
* Who Will Pay the US Debt?
* US vs. Iran: Is an Attack Inevitable?
* The Great Deception: The Propaganda That We Pay For
* Saudi Arabia and Jordan: With Friends Like These…
* The Coming Financial Crises?
* Why the United States Invaded Iraq and is Now Thinking About Invading Iran
NOTES
[1] Newsweek, “What’s for Dinner?,” October 25, 2006.
[2] Fox News, “FBI Investigating Whether Harman Made Improper Promises to Pro-Israel Group”, October 25, 2006.
[3] Washington Post, “U.N. Inspectors Dispute Iran Report By House Panel,” September 14, 2006.
[4] Time, “HUNT FOR A MOLE:IS A SENIOR U.S. OFFICIAL IN WASHINGTON PASSING INTELLIGENCE TO ISRAEL?,” May 19, 1997
[5] What Really Happened, “DID THE MOSSAD BUG MONICA (HONEY TRAP) LEWINSKY'S PHONE? ,” September 21, 1998.
[6] Gorilla in the room, “Rosen and Weissman Refuse to Take the Fall for AIPAC,” April 24, 2005.
[7] NewsMax.com, “FBI Investigates Foreign Spy Ring - U.S. Companies Deny Involvement,” January 16, 2006.
HOME | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 7:16 am Post subject: Breaking the Silence |
| http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_11_06/print/featureprint.html
November 6, 2006 Issue
The American Conservative
Breaking the Silence
The debate ignited by Walt and Mearsheimer gathers momentum.
by Scott McConnell
Scarcely a month ago, New Republic editor Marty Peretz was chortling about how John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt “had a two-week run in the prints and blogs ... and then, poof, they disappeared.” How desperately Peretz, whose magazine last spring published no less than four articles maligning the pair’s essay on the Israel lobby, must have wished this to be true. And how shaken he would have been to see the line snaking around the block outside Cooper Union’s Great Hall, pressing for scarce tickets. For not only had John Mearsheimer not disappeared, he was appearing on a great New York stage with NYU professor Tony Judt and Middle East scholar Rashid Khalidi, debating the Israel lobby with former Clinton aides Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk and the Israeli Shlomo Ben Ami.
There wasn’t a TV crew in sight, and inside the ambiance was middle-aged, those with the tedious foresight to book tickets early. My friend Philip Weiss (whose blog, mondoweiss.observer.com, has the most lucid commentary in America on matters related to the debate topic) pointed out New York publishing superstars within the buzzing crowd. We had, so it seemed, been magically transported to a pre-cable era when essays or books were the ignition wires of ideological politics—except the debate can be viewed at the London Review of Books website, where even a computer semiliterate like myself can manage to see it.
The most common tactic of opponents of Walt and Mearsheimer is to falsify or oversimplify their argument, knowing that the time and effort required to correct the falsehood leaves little room to advance the discussion. The pair are regularly said to accuse “Jews” of being involved in a “cabal” (or, as Marty Peretz put it, they “purported to prove that US foreign policy was run by the Jews for the interests of Israel and Israel alone”). Such was the general tenor of Indyk’s attacks during the debate, and he impressed no one. But M&W’s detractors did score occasionally. Ross argued that while the pair claimed the lobby had helped push the United States into the Iraq War, everyone knows the Democratic Party is more in thrall to AIPAC and its fundraising than the GOP. But, Ross noted triumphantly, if Gore had been elected there would have been no Iraq War. This was clever: to answer it would require a complicated unpacking of the lobby’s influence on Republicans through neocons and evangelical Zionists as opposed to Democrats—and one feels that Dennis Ross doesn’t really deserve to be lumped in with the likes of Doug Feith and David Frum. But most of the blows were glancing, and Mearsheimer and his supporters got to make effective and subtle points.
Judging by audience reaction, the best lines belonged to Tony Judt, a European history professor of British (and Jewish) origin at the top of his field, who has burst from an academic cocoon to become one of the country’s most important essayists in the realm where culture intersects foreign policy. Early on Judt quoted Arthur Koestler in support of the idea that the proper measurement of an argument is in its truth, and that it matters not at all whether bigots might make the same case for their own reasons. Koestler, some 50-plus years ago, had been explaining to American intellectuals that just because there were demagogic and ignorant anti-communists didn’t mean that communism wasn’t a real and evil force. Judt also let drop the bombshell that a major publication (most knew it was the New York Times) had asked him if he was Jewish while considering an article from him last spring on the Walt-Mearsheimer essay—his point being that the editors only felt it safe to allow criticism of the Israel lobby in their august pages if his answer were affirmative. He further related that he was told by Amos Elon, the Israeli author, that when Elon had asked an Israeli ambassador of the 1960s what had been his greatest accomplishment, the emissary replied, “I have convinced the Americans that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.”
Rashid Khalidi reminded the audience of the general vastness of the subject, which is hardly touched by examination of more discrete matters such as the lobby’s role in spurring high levels of aid to Israel or sparking the decision to attack Saddam. America’s entire Mideast conversation is tilted in one direction, shaping what legislation is written, how it is interpreted, how experts are credentialed or marginalized, how candidates run their campaigns. On any other political question—abortion, guns, health care—it is understood that there are two sides, but in the United States (and only in the United States), where Israel is concerned there is only one position. One need only note last summer’s 410-8 House vote in support of Israel’s campaign against Lebanon to realize that Khalidi is correct. Judt put a point on the argument: the “dual loyalty” charge is essentially meaningless in that many Americans—not just Jews, of course—so thoroughly identify Israel’s interests with America’s that there is really a single loyalty at work, so that skepticism about Israel’s policies is thus largely conceived of as un-American and explicable only by reference to dark impulses.
Shortly after the debate, I read that Walt and Mearsheimer have contracted to do a book expanding on the subject with Farrar, Straus and Giroux, a top publisher. This is welcome and surprising news. Last May, a friend well placed in the book industry told me he thought it extremely unlikely that a mainstream house would “take the risk” of signing a Walt-Mearsheimer book; their subject was simply too dangerous.
Of course, the lobby is still trying to suppress discussion. Several days after the debate, Tony Judt was scheduled to talk to a group called Network 20/20, which regularly meets at the Polish consulate in New York. Abe Foxman of the ADL got on the phone to the consulate, reminded the Poles how much damage he could do to them if he and his friends were to brandish the “anti-Semitism” club against Poland, and “poof” (to quote Marty Peretz again), the consulate called off Judt’s event.
There will surely be more of this in the months and years to come. But the cat is now out of the bag, and despite the lobby’s best effort to suppress it, there will be a more freewheeling debate about whether America’s Mideast policy should be so completely Israel-centric. The subject has simply become too important to ignore. During the Cold War, hawks like myself usually deferred to the Norman Podhoretzes on the Mideast—they obviously cared so much about it—and doves mostly limited their own campaigns to Central America and nuclear weapons. It was always easier to suppress doubts, if one had them, about Israel’s brutal treatment of the Palestinians since nothing good for one’s career or ability to influence any other cause could come from being labeled “anti-Israel.”
But with the Mideast now on the front burner, as even Bush administration officials acknowledge, America will have no allies whatsoever in the war against terrorists unless progress is made towards a fair settlement of the Palestine question; it is shameful to remain silent. Walt and Mearsheimer have opened the door, and others of great eminence have joined them. The Iraq War highlights the price of continued indifference or silence, and the price can only grow steeper. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 8:19 am Post subject: |
| From: "Clarity Press, Inc." <clarity@islandnet.com>
Subject: Book: The Power of Israel in the United States / James Petras Date: 11 Oct 2006 21:13:07 PDT
You are listed as a subscriber to receive book announcements from Clarity Press, Inc.
If this is incorrect and you wish to be removed, please click here
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
“CAN WE TALK… ?”
Breaching the Wall of Silence on Israeli Power in the United States
The inability of Americans to sustain a debate that addresses the power of Israel in the United States is well known and openly discussed outside America. As the UK Financial Times has noted: “Reflexes that ordinarily spring automatically to the defense of open debate and free enquiry shut down—at least among much of America’s political elite—once the subject turns to Israel." The groundbreaking article on the Israel Lobby by Mearsheimer and Walt—even though published in the UK—evoked a storm of protest and accusation in the USA. In a further effort to open debate on the issue here in the United States, Clarity Press, Inc. is pleased to announce the publication of The Power of Israel in the United States by James Petras
The Power of Israel in the United States is a chapter-by-chapter rigorous analysis and documentation of the power of Israel via the Israeli, Jewish or Pro-Zionist Lobby on US Middle East policy. It raises serious questions as to the primary beneficiary of US policy, and its destructive results for the United States. The extraordinary extent of US political, economic, military and diplomatic support for the state of Israel is explored, along with the means whereby such support is generated and consolidated. Contending that Zionist power in America ensured unconditional US backing for Israeli colonization of Palestine and its massive uprooting of Palestinians, it views the interests of Israel rather than those of Big Oil as the primary cause of the disastrous US wars against Iraq and threats of war against Iran and Syria. It demonstrates and condemns US imitation of Israeli practice as it relates to conduct of the war on terrorism and torture. It sheds light on the AIPAC spying scandal and other Israeli espionage against America; the fraudulent and complicit role of America's academic "terrorist experts" in furthering criminal government policies, and the orchestration of the Danish cartoons to foment antipathy between Muslims and the West. It questions the inability in America to sustain or even formulate a discourse related to the subject of Israeli influence on the United States. It calls for a review of American Middle East policy with a view to reclaiming US independence of action based upon enlightened self-interest and progressive principles.
Winner of the Life Time Career Award of the American Sociological Association, James Petras is a Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York. He is the author of 62 books published in 29 languages, and over 560 articles in professional journals, including the American Sociological Review, British Journal of Sociology, Social Research, and Journal of Peasant Studies. He has published over 2000 articles in nonprofessional journals such as the New York Times, Guardian, Nation, Christian Science Monitor, Foreign Policy, New Left Review, Partisan Review, Temps Moderne, Le Monde Diplomatique, and his commentary is widely carried on the internet. He has eminent standing in the progressive/left community, with long involvement in social justice struggles.
Public interest in Israeli influence on the US is immense. On the date of this press release alone, the Google search engine registered over a quarter of a million persons searching for information based on the keywords, “the Israeli lobby”. Yet there are surprisingly few scholarly works addressing the extent of Israeli influence upon American decision-making, and the means and processes whereby this occurs—in testimony to the point at issue.
The catastrophic Israeli assault on Lebanon, the war in Iraq, and threat of deepening US descent into the quagmire by an attack on Iran—with all that this portends for the well being of Americans and the American infrastructure—has heightened public concern at the costs and benefits of US Middle East policy, and its readiness to question received norms. The time is ripe for a re-assessment of American Middle East policy since, as the Financial Times reiterates: "Nothing is more damaging to US interests than the inability to have a proper debate about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict". James Petras' The Power of Israel in the United States sets the full parameters.
"James Petras takes us on a fearless truth trip—with lucid style, tough factual blows, commanding research and compelling analysis. This is an eye-opening, must-read book for every advocate of democracy."
Michael Parenti, author of The Culture Wars and Superpatriotism
"An outstanding analysis of the political machinery responsible for so much suffering in the Middle East: the social science equivalent of John Adam´s opera 'Klinghoffer'. Brilliant and substantive."
John Saxe-Fernandez
Professor of Political Science
National Autonomous University of Mexico
and leading world authority on US foreign policy and the oil industry
For additional reviews and Table of Contents, go to
http://www.bookmasters.com/clarity/b0030.htm
Subject: New Book: The Power of Israel in the United States by Jim Petras
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Nothing is more damaging to US interests
than the inability to have a proper debate
about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."
Financial Times, Editorial, Saturday, April 01, 2006
The Power of Israel
in the
United States
by James Petras
Price: $16.95
ISBN: 0-932863-51-5 * 192 pp. * 2006
PREPUBLICATION DISCOUNT:
PURCHASE THIS BOOK NOW FOR
ONLY $12.00 plus shipping/handling
Call: 1-888-281-5170
or Tel: 620-229-8979
Fax: 620-229-8270
Email: qpdistribution@skyerock.net
REVIEWS AUTHOR SUMMARY CONTENTS ORDER
REVIEWS
"A provocative analysis of a serious problem that should be discussed and debated widely among the U.S. public, academics, and the policy establishment, this book succeeds in exposing in great detail the enormous power and influence of Israel and the Jewish Lobby in shaping U.S. policy toward the Middle East."
Berch Berberoglu, Ph.D.
Professor of Sociology, University of Nevada, Reno
Author of TURMOIL IN THE MIDDLE EAST.
?Once again James Petras takes us on a fearless truth trip?with lucid style, tough factual blows, commanding research, and compelling analysis. This is an eye-opening, must-read book for every advocate of democracy and every opponent of imperialism.?
?Michael Parenti,
author of The Culture Struggle and Superpatriotism
?An outstanding analysis of the political machinery responsible for so much suffering in the Middle East: the social science equivalent of John Adam?s opera ?Klinghoffer?. Brilliant and substantive?.
John Saxe-Fernandez,
Professor and Senior Researcher, Faculty of Political Science National Autonomous
University of Mexico and leading world authority on US foreign policy and the oil industry
?Jim Petras has been one of the few courageous individuals, in or outside of academia, to take a critical view of the pro-Israel lobby and its influence over US Middle East policy and to challenge the ?conventional wisdom? on the part of the Left that Israel acts as a ?cop on the beat? and is simply serving America?s imperial interests.?
Jeff Blankfort,
A leading Jewish authority, writer and critic in the US on the pro-Israel Lobby
?Jim Petras is one of the best informed political scientists of his generation, not given to avoiding difficult issues. Here he addresses one such, which he tackles in a characteristically challenging way.?
Tom Brass, Editor
The Journal of Peasant Studies
?Jim Petras, a man with vast expertise assembled in Latin America, takes the Leftist anti-imperialist discourse one step further, beyond safe condemnation of American imperialism.He begins where Chomsky and Zunes stop. In this book, Petras turns to the Middle East, where he discovers, through the haze of anti-Muslim polemics, assassinations and tortures, the identity of the decisive factor: that of ?Jewish power shaping US policy in the Middle East against the interest of Big Oil?.
Petras? critique of ?soft Left? with its fear to alienate wealthy and influential Jewish supporters is a breath of fresh air; this critique has to be internalised if the Left wills to regain its place in society.?
Israel Shamir, Jaffa
Leading Russian-Israeli intellectual, writer, translator and journalist
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
James Petras is a Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York. He is the author of 62 books published in 29 languages, and over 560 articles in professional journals, including the American Sociological Review, British Journal of Sociology, Social Research, and Journal of Peasant Studies. He has published over 2000 articles in nonprofessional journals such as the New York Times, the Guardian, the Nation, Christian Science Monitor, Foreign Policy, New Left Review, Partisan Review, TempsModerne, Le Monde Diplomatique, and his commentary is widely carried on the internet. His publishers have included Random House, John Wiley, Westview, Routledge, Macmillan, Verso, Zed Books and Pluto Books. He is winner of the Life Time Career Award, Marxist Section, of the American Sociology Association, the Robert Kenny Award for Best Book, 2002, and the Best Dissertation, Western Political Science Association in 1968. His most recent titles include Unmasking Globalization: Imperialism of the Twenty-First Century (2001); co-author The Dynamics of Social Change in Latin America (2000), System in Crisis (2003), co-author Social Movements and State Power (2003), co-author Empire With Imperialism (2005), co-author)Multinationals on Trial (2006).
He has a long history of commitment to social justice, working in particular with the Brazilian Landless Workers Movement for 11 years. In 1973-76 he was a member of the Bertrand Russell Tribunal on Repression in Latin America. He writes a monthly column for the Mexican newspaper, Le Jornada, and previously, for the Spanish daily, El Mundo. He received his B.A. from Boston University and Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley.
SUMMARY
This book is a chapter-by-chapter analysis and documentation of the power of Israel via the Israeli, Jewish or Pro-Zionist Lobby on US Middle East policy. It raises serious questions as to the primary beneficiary of US policy, and its destructive results for the United States. The extraordinary extent of US political, economic, military and diplomatic support for the state of Israel is explored, along with the means whereby such support is generated and consolidated. Contending that Zionist power in America ensured unconditional US backing for Israeli colonization of Palestine and its massive uprooting of Palestinians, it views the interests of Israel rather than those of Big Oil as the primary cause of the disastrous US wars against Iraq and threats of war against Iran and Syria. It demonstrates and condemns US imitation of Israeli practice as it relates to conduct of the war on terrorism and torture. It sheds light on the AIPAC spying scandal and other Israeli espionage against America; the fraudulent and complicit role of America?s academic ?terrorist experts? in furthering criminal government policies, and the orchestration of the Danish cartoons to foment antipathy between Muslims and the West. It questions the inability in America to sustain or even formulate a discourse related to the subject of Israeli influence on the United States. It calls for a review of American Mid East policy with a view to reclaiming US independence of action based upon enlightened self-interest and progressive principles.
ISBN: 0-932863-51-5 $16.95 2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION / 11
PART I: ZIONIST POWER IN AMERICA
Chapter 1.
WHO FABRICATED THE IRAQ WAR THREAT? / 19
The Jewish Lobby, Not Big Oil /21
Chapter 2.
THE US-IRAQ-ISRAEL-ZIONIST CONNECTION / 27
Who Benefited from the Iraq War? / 27
Unanswered Question: September 11 and the Israelis / 35
Theoretical Issues / 36
Who Finances the State of Israel? / 39
Support for Israel from the US Government / 41
Israel Bonds / 43
Accomplices to Genocide / 45
The Zionist Power Configuration in the United States / 46
The ZPC in Action: The Iraq War / 48
Israel and the Right of Free Speech / 54
Chapter 3.
THE LIBBY AFFAIRE AND THE INTERNAL WAR / 61
Chapter 4.
EXPOSING THE EXPOSɺ SEYMOUR HERSH
AND THE MISSING ZIONIST-ISRAELI CONNECTION / 65
The Zionists and Torture in Iraq / 67
A Close Look at Hersh?s Method / 67
Conclusion / 71
Chapter 5.
THE SPY TRIAL: A POLITICAL BOMBSHELL / 73
AIPAC On Trial / 76
PART II. ISRAEL AND MIDDLE EAST WARFARE
Chapter 6.
THE HOUSE OF HORRORS:
TORTURE, ASSASSINATIONS AND GENOCIDE / 82
Empire Building / 82
Imperial Consolidation / 83
Targeted Assassinations / 84
Destruction of Civilian and Military Infrastructure / 86
Conclusion / 90
Chapter 7.
ISRAEL?S FINAL SOLUTION:
THE ASSAULT ON GAZA / 93
Introduction / 94
>From the Present to the Past / 95
The Final Destruction of Six Myths about the Jewish
State and the Lobby / 96
1.Israel and Democracy / 97
2.Israel and Peace / 97
3.Israel and the Possibility of a Two-State Solution / 99
4.Israel and Terror / 99
5.The Jewish Lobby: The Central Issue / 100
6.Israel and Prisoner Exchanges: The Record / 102
Mass Media Propaganda at the Service of Ethnic Cleansing / 104
Epilogue / 107
Chapter 8.
"MAD DOGS"* RAVAGE LEBANON / 110
Epilogue / 117
Chapter 9.
ISRAEL?S WAR WITH IRAN:
THE COMING MIDEAST CONFLAGRATION / 121
Introduction / 121
Israel?s War Preparations / 121
Israel?s War Deadline / 122
US-Israeli Disagreements on an Iran War / 123
Fabrication of Iran?s Nuclear Threat / 128
Conclusion / 131
..
Chapter 10.
THE CARICATURES IN MIDDLE EAST POLITICS / 135
Denmark: Center of Mossad Activity / 137
Flemming (or Flaming) Rose: Journalist with a Cause / 138
Provoking Conflict Between Muslims and the West / 138
Sayanim?Defenders of Western Civilization / 140
Mossad War Propaganda and the ?Cartoon Controversy? / 140
Beyond Religious Blasphemy / 142
Epilogue / 144
PART III. EXPERTS ON TERROR OR TERRORIST EXPERTS?
Chapter 11.
EXPERTS ON TERROR:
LOOKING IN THE MIRROR / 146
The Terror Expert Genre / 147
Interrogation: Questions for the Terror Experts / 149
Bibliography / 156
Chapter 12.
SUICIDE BOMBERS:
THE SACRED AND THE PROFANE / 157
Introduction / 157
Total War: Content and Consequences / 158
Total War and the Resistance / 159
Degradation: The Logic of Total War / 159
The Technique of Degradation: The Larger Meaning / 160
Political Consequences of Defiling the Sacred / 161
Suicide Bombers: A Response to the Desecraters / 162
Conclusion / 163
PART IV: DEBATES
Chapter 13.
NOAM CHOMSKY AND THE PRO-ISRAEL LOBBY:
FIFTEEN ERRONEOUS THESES / 166
Introduction / 166
Chomsky?s Fifteen Theses / 168
Conclusion / 178
Chapter 14.
CONFRONTING ZIONISM AND
RECLAIMING AMERICAN MIDDLE EAST POLICY / 180
INDEX / 186
* ?Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.?
General Moshe Dayan, Former Israeli Defense Minister
ORDER INFORMATION
To order directly from Clarity Press, Inc.
or Distributors
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Jeffrey Blankfort"
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 22:13:56 -0800
Subject: [IntelligentMinds] Hear Jim Petras on The Power of Israel in the US Dear Readers,
On Wednesday, November 1, I interviewed James Petras, author of the
recently published The Power of Israel in the United States (Clarity
Press) and we spoke about the effect that Israel and the Jewish Zionist
lobby's control over the Democratic Party will have if the Democrats
regain the House, the role of the lobby in fomenting the Iraq war and
the unwillingness of Left pundits such as Noam Chomsky and Michael Klare
to acknowledge that reality and the lobby's influence. That and more,
and you can listen to it by clicking on
http://www.radio4all.net/proginfo.php?id=20412
Jeff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Lobby and the Israeli Invasion of Lebanon :
Their Facts and Ours
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Aug06/Petras29.htm
audio/video link for excellent interview with James Petras about the power/influence of the pro-Israel lobby in the USA :
http://easylink.playstream.com/currentissues/petras.wvx
Israeli-US Strategy: Lebanon and Iran
By James Petras
Even as the bricks were still smoldering from 9/11, Israeli ideological point men, Senator Lieberman and Undersecretary for Defense Wolfowitz urged Washington to attack Iran by launching either simultaneous or sequential wars.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14862.htm
The Next Phase of the Middle East War
By Michel Chossudovsky
Confirmed by official statements and military documents, the US in close coordination with Britain (and in consultation with its NATO partners), is planning to launch a war directed against Iran and Syria.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14860.htm | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:19 am Post subject: Journalists' Coverage of Middle East Shallow and Distorted |
| Journalists' Coverage of Middle East Shallow and Distorted
Robert Fisk
11/09/06 "AAN" -- -- DEARBORN, MI – Journalists in the "West" should feel a burden of guilt for much that has happened in the Middle East because they have, with their gullibility, sold a fictitious version of events.
Their constant references to a "fence" instead of a wall, to "settlements" or "neighborhoods" instead of colonies, their description of the West Bank as "disputed" rather than occupied, has bred a kind of slackness in reporting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Just as it did in Iraq when so many reporters from the great Western newspapers and TV stations used U.S. ambassador Bremer's laughable description of the ferocious insurgents as "dead-enders" or "remnants" - the same phrase still being used by our colleagues in Kabul in reference to a distinctly resurgent Taliban which is being helped, despite General Musharraf's denials, by the Pakistani intelligence service, the ISI.
Much worse, however, is the failure to enquire into the real policies of governments. Why, for example, was there no front-page treatment of this year's Herzliya conference, Israel's most important policy-making jamboree? Most of the important figures in the Israeli government - they had yet to be electe - were in attendance.
The conference was the place where Ehud Olmert first suggested handing over slices of the West Bank: "The choice between allowing Jews to live in all parts of the land of Israel" - the "land of Israel" in this context included the West Bank - "and living in a state with a Jewish majority mandate giving up part of the land of Israel. We cannot continue to control parts of the territories where most of the Palestinians live."
However, most speakers agreed that the Palestinians would be given a state on whatever is left after the huge settlements had been included behind the wall. Benjamin Netanyahu even suggested the wall should be moved deeper into the West Bank. But the implications were obvious.
A Palestinian state will be allowed, but it will not have a capital in East Jerusalem nor any connection between Gaza and the bits of the West Bank that are handed over. So there will be no peace, and the words "Palestinian" and "terrorist" will, again, be inextricably linked by Israel and the U.S.
There were articles in the Israeli press about Herzliya, including one by Sergio Della Pergola in which he warned of the "menace" to Israel of Palestinian birth rates and advised that "if the demographic tie doesn't come in 2010, it will come in 2020." Earlier conferences have discussed the possible need for the revoking of the citizenship rights of some Israeli Arabs.
Already this year, "Haaretz" has reported an opinion poll in which 68 per cent of Israeli Jews said they would refuse to live in the same building as an Arab - 26 per cent would agree to do so - and 46 per cent of Israeli Jews said they would refuse to allow an Arab to visit their home.
The inclination toward segregation rose as the income level of the respondents dropped - as might be expected - and there was no poll of Palestinian opinion, though the Palestinians might be able to point out that tens of thousands of Israelis already do live on their land in the huge colonies across the West Bank, most of which will remain, llegally, in Israeli hands.
All these details are available in the Arab press - and of course, the Israeli press, but are largely absent from our own. Why? Even when Norman Finkelstein wrote a damning academic report on the way Israel's High Court of Justice "proved" the wall – deemed illegal by the Hague - was legal, it was virtually ignored in the West. So, for that matter, was the U.S. The academics' report on the power of the Israeli lobby, until the usual taunts of "anti-Semitism" forced the American mainstream to write about it, albeit in a shifty, frightened way. There are so many other examples of our fear of Middle Eastern truth.
Is this really the best that we journalists can do? Save for the indefatigable Seymour Hersh, there are still no truly investigative correspondents in the U.S. press. But challenging authority should not be that difficult. No one is being asked to end the straightforward reporting of Arab tyrannies. We ae still invited to ask - and should ask - why the Muslim world has produced so many dictatorships, most of them supported by "us." But there are too many dark corners into which we will not look. Where, for example, are the CIA's secret torture prisons? I know two reporters who are aware of the locations. But they are silent, no doubt in the interests of "national security."
And so on we go with the Middle East tragedy, telling the world that things are getting better when they are getting worse, that democracy is flourishing when it is swamped in blood, that freedom is not without "birth pangs" when the midwife is killing the baby.
It's always been my view that the people of this part of the earth would like some of our democracy. They would like a few packets of human rights off our supermarket shelves. They want freedom. But they want another kind of freedom - freedom from us. And this we do not intend to give them. Which is why our Middle East presence is heading into further darkness. Which is why I sit on my balcony and wonder where the next explosion is going to be. For, be sure, it will happen.
Bin Laden doesn't matter any more, alive or dead. Because, like nuclear scientists, he has invented the bomb. You can arrest all of the world's nuclear scientists but the bomb has been made. BinLaden created al-Qaeda amid the matchwood of the Middle East. It exists. His presence is no longer necessary.
And all around these lands are a legion of young men preparing to strike again, at us, at our symbols, at our history. And yes, maybe I should end all my reports with the words: Watch out!
Robert Fisk’s new book is "The Conquest of the Middle East."
Copyright © Pacific News Service | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:13 am Post subject: |
| AIPAC Builds Ties With
New Lawmakers
11-9-6
"AIPAC reached nearly every lawmaker elected in Tuesday's mid-term congressional elections as part of its effort to educate political candidates on the value of the U.S.-Israel relationship.
During the campaign that ended Tuesday, nearly every viable candidate met with AIPAC professional staff members and submitted a position paper summarizing his or her views on U.S. Middle East policy. A non-partisan organization, AIPAC has for decades worked with Republican and Democratic members of Congress to strengthen the ties between the United States and Israel."
http://www.aipac.org/briefing/ | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
