Thread: AIPAC

Originally Posted by Butterfly

well, actually you guys should know by now, that Mossad agents have infiltrated deept most of the US government agencies. No surprise there.

That's cool since we're on the same side - what's the beef?

Originally Posted by sabang

I wonder if Paul Wolfowitz is in on it?

In on what?

However, Wolfowitz is a PNAC member and charter member that signed his initials in the beginning.

Originally Posted by Milkman

Originally Posted by sabang

I wonder if Paul Wolfowitz is in on it?

In on what?

However, Wolfowitz is a PNAC member and charter member that signed his initials in the beginning.

Pick a conspiracy, any conspiracy-
Worldwide Jewish conspiracy
Mossad manipulation of the US to the top levels
One world government
The Illuminati
Alien rectal probing
Shape shifting reptiles (note the facial features?)
CIA mind control experiments

Feel free to add your own.

^
Don't worry...I'm sure Butterfly, Yellowsomething and crew will be around shortly with the latest...

Originally Posted by surasak

What is the explanation for the U.S. sitting idly by while other millions were killed since WWII? Because they weren't Jews? Was it appeasement that allowed the massacres in Rwanda? Bosnia? China? Russia? The Sudan?

Unless the U.S. is either a majority Jewish nation (or perhaps secretly controlled by the Jews) I see neither a logistical nor logical reason to support a nation whose support has cost us thousands of Americans' lives when we so conveniently do nothing to stop other atrocities.

I can't imagine you intended to perpetuate the fairytale that the US is secretly controlled by the Jews, so I shan't ask when this happened though it probably occurred post-WWII otherwise there may be some mild difficulty explaining the Holocaust...but of course, this may have been an integral part of the cunning Jewish plan.

Also difficult to plonk for '45-'48, as the Jews were just dusting off after decimation and in the process of organising a nation, so it might be reasonable to suggest they were unlikely to have had the manpower or resources or inclination to undertake the secret overthrow of the greatest nation on earth.

So of course we are left with post-48, during which the Jewish state has enjoyed several conflicts of survival, endured close to 60 years of attrition, and have yet to find a rumour of peace, though many claim this too is part of the conspiracy and as a side note we should revile the children of the Prophet who have failed future generations by not wiping them out.

I seem to have missed it, so please remind us when it was that the Jews secretly overwhelmed the US?

On the other hand, if you mean the US admin realised early on that it's plain daft to trust the peacelovers over the Jews, and that the Jewish state warrants unmitigated support for being the only reliably democratic outpost in the region - hey, warts and all, because some do periodically voice their concern that Israel still exists despite being imperfect - then of course it's easy to understand.

I'll put this down, seeing as it's rarely mentioned in dispatches. It's not just natural justice or international law that says Israel should withdraw from the Occupied Territories. It's common sense.
Consider the long term security and survivability of the country. In a situation where almost half of your own countries population is Arab (including the occupied territories), where your own indigenous population is deeply divided on the issue- but only a modest minority absolutely, implacably not willing to withdraw, where your nation is a speck surrounded by potentially hostile neighbours, albeit a well armed one (hey Egypt, Syria and Turkey ain't nothing to be sneezed at, and what about Iran going nuclear), where the whole world, bar the USA, is implacably against your cause and ongoing justifications and excuses, well maybe the time is well ripe to start looking a bit further ahead then your nose and your own short term, selfish interests.
Surely the Jews have maintained a homogenous culture for long enough to realise that one's own interests are not necessarily served in the long term by stealing the easiest available plum just because you can.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

That's cool since we're on the same side - what's the beef?

The side of killing innocent civilians in a senseless war ? Then I guess all is well then.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

That's cool since we're on the same side - what's the beef?

The side of killing innocent civilians in a senseless war ? Then I guess all is well then.

And who is doing all the suicide bombings?

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by sabang

I wonder if Paul Wolfowitz is in on it?

Ironically, the World Bank has been used widely by undercover CIA agents for missions abroad. At least in the past. Probably same now.

No joke.

A bit off topic, but in HK I knew some senior anti-corruption people who were involved in some pretty sensitive, sneaky beaky stuff. All Brit's.
Whilst they had a fair bit of respect for the FBI, they thought the CIA was a joke.

Originally Posted by keda

Originally Posted by surasak

What is the explanation for the U.S. sitting idly by while other millions were killed since WWII? Because they weren't Jews? Was it appeasement that allowed the massacres in Rwanda? Bosnia? China? Russia? The Sudan?

Unless the U.S. is either a majority Jewish nation (or perhaps secretly controlled by the Jews) I see neither a logistical nor logical reason to support a nation whose support has cost us thousands of Americans' lives when we so conveniently do nothing to stop other atrocities.

I can't imagine you intended to perpetuate the fairytale that the US is secretly controlled by the Jews, so I shan't ask when this happened though it probably occurred post-WWII otherwise there may be some mild difficulty explaining the Holocaust...but of course, this may have been an integral part of the cunning Jewish plan.

Also difficult to plonk for '45-'48, as the Jews were just dusting off after decimation and in the process of organising a nation, so it might be reasonable to suggest they were unlikely to have had the manpower or resources or inclination to undertake the secret overthrow of the greatest nation on earth.

So of course we are left with post-48, during which the Jewish state has enjoyed several conflicts of survival, endured close to 60 years of attrition, and have yet to find a rumour of peace, though many claim this too is part of the conspiracy and as a side note we should revile the children of the Prophet who have failed future generations by not wiping them out.

I seem to have missed it, so please remind us when it was that the Jews secretly overwhelmed the US?

On the other hand, if you mean the US admin realised early on that it's plain daft to trust the peacelovers over the Jews, and that the Jewish state warrants unmitigated support for being the only reliably democratic outpost in the region - hey, warts and all, because some do periodically voice their concern that Israel still exists despite being imperfect - then of course it's easy to understand.

How do you explain how a PAC (Political Action Committee) represents so much power (#2 in power in terms of ability to lobby the government) and represents so few people while at the same time being a front for another nation?

AIPAC is the leading player in what is sometimes referred to as "The Israel Lobby" -- a coalition that includes major Jewish groups, neoconservative intellectuals and Christian Zionists. With its impressive contacts among Hill staffers, influential grassroots supporters and deep connections to wealthy donors, AIPAC is the lobby's key emissary to Congress. But in many ways, AIPAC has become greater than just another lobby; its work has made unconditional support for Israel an accepted cost of doing business inside the halls of Congress. AIPAC's interest, Israel's interest and America's interest are today perceived by most elected leaders to be one and the same. Christian conservatives increasingly aligned with AIPAC demand unwavering support for Israel from their Republican leaders. (In mid-July, 3,000-plus evangelicals came to town for the first annual "Christian United for Israel" summit.) And Democrats are equally concerned about alienating Jewish voters and Jewish donors -- long a cornerstone of their party. Some in Congress are deeply uncomfortable with AIPAC's militant worldview and heavyhanded tactics, but most dare not say so publicly.

AlterNet: AIPAC's Dangerous Grip on Washington

Remember, the original name for AIPAC was "American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs."

Would an "American Islamic Committee for Public Affairs" be any more palatable?

Are those in control of the government in Israel not guilty of oppression, extermination, and other atrocities against the Palestinians?

No they are not. they are securing the safety of Israeli citizens; Jewish, Arab and Christian. The Israelis exert pressure on the Palestinians. We've gone over it before. The Israelis would give up land if they felt they had an honest partner in peace. They don't have any proof of it despite years of trying. Iraq should give people a clear example of what the Palestinians would do if they were living inside the "green zone" of Israel.

For the western Allies, Nazism was the only evil; they could not admit being allied to mass murderers. For the Soviets, promoting the Jewish Holocaust perpetuated anti-fascism and masked their own crimes.

The Jewish people, understandably, saw their Holocaust as a unique event. It was Israel's raison d'etre. Raising other genocides at that time would, they feared, diminish their own. This was only human nature.

The writer of the article you linked, Margolis, concluded it better served the Allies and the Soviets to not draw attention to Soviet crimes. he goes on to explain his opinion why Jews at that time did not say anything. I'd bet Eric Margolis is Jewish. So a Jew has written an article which brings to light Soviet purges ( I wonder why he didn't take the opportunity as a Jew to include the Soviet pogroms?) so people may learn and he has provided you with material to criticize Jewish interest groups. Jewish interest groups cloud things and push their own tragedy up front and center yet here is a Jew posting and article for you to quote from. You should thank the Jew.

Google "jewish dafur" " jewish tibet" I don't think jewish people are selfish.

Would an "American Islamic Committee for Public Affairs" be any more palatable?

Interest groups connected to the Palestinian cause do lobby. Watch PBS's America at the Crossroads. The victim status works very well for the Palestinians. It's easier to manipulate people if they are the victim, the underdog and the downtrodden. The Palestinians play up to people's love of the romantic defiant image of a youth throwing a rock at a tank. It's theatre. Having an obvious powerful lobby wouldn't fit the image.

I'm not comfortable with foreign agents lobbying the US government. I want to add that Israeli interests are not the only ones who do. As China becomes more influential in it's pursuit for resources and security and as its economy has a greater influence over the world economy people will line up in their halls too. That's real life.

allo kerux nice to have you back, we could have fun with the vassal state bit if my ignore's lifted.

Originally Posted by keda

allo kerux nice to have you back, we could have fun with the vassal state bit if my ignore's lifted.

here ya go keda I don't think he put me on ignore.

ok put me back on ignore

Your wish is my pleasure.

This message is hidden because keda is on your ignore list.

What Americans really need to know about Israel:

The Cost of Israel to US Taxpayers

Total costs spent manipulating the U.S. government to support Israel: $42 million and counting:

Pro-Israel PAC Contributions to 2006 Congressional Candidates

Iraq was invaded solely to provide security to Israel:

""With Iraq no threat, why invade a sovereign country?," he wrote. "The answer: President Bush's policy to secure Israel. Led by [Paul] Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and Charles Krauthammer, for years there had been a domino school of thought that the way to guarantee Israel's security is to spread democracy in the area."

Several Zionist organizations, as well as some prominent Jewish political figures, quickly chastised Hollings, and his remarks were denounced as anti-Semitic."

'Iraq was Invaded to Secure Israel,' says Senator Hollings, and 'Everybody Knows It.'

Again, why does such a small insignificant nation have such a stranglehold on America?

On May 2 the Senate, in a vote of 94 to 2, and the House, 352 to 21, expressed unqualified support for Israel in its recent military actions against the Palestinians. The resolutions were so strong that the Bush Administration--hardly a slouch when it comes to supporting Israel--attempted to soften its language so as to have more room in getting peace talks going. But its pleas were rejected, and members of Congress from Joe Lieberman to Tom DeLay competed to heap praise on Ariel Sharon and disdain on Yasir Arafat. Reporting on the vote, the New York Times noted that one of the few dissenters, Senator Ernest Hollings of South Carolina, "suggested that many senators were after campaign contributions."

Aside from that brief reference, however, the Times made no mention of the role that money, or lobbying in general, may have played in the lopsided vote. More specifically, the Times made no mention of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. It's a remarkable oversight. AIPAC is widely regarded as the most powerful foreign-policy lobby in Washington. Its 60,000 members shower millions of dollars on hundreds of members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. It also maintains a network of wealthy and influential citizens around the country, whom it can regularly mobilize to support its main goal, which is making sure there is "no daylight" between the policies of Israel and of the United States.

The Israel Lobby

Didn't work though did it.
Entertain the world, and try invading Iran.

How often is something done soley for one interest group on such a massive scale? Maybe there is a collection of separate voices calling for the strategy of democracy in the Middle East? Maybe Arabs themselves? Arabs and Persians who are sick of dictatorships in conjucntion with religious moral police ruling their country? Howabout the groups of western activists who call the USA swine for dealing with the Saudi Royal family? They seem to get plenty of airtime from the media. Each interest group; Jewish people, Arabs and Persians, western activists and religious Christian sects, each of them pursuing their own interests, pushes for decisions in the same direction.