Thread: AIPAC

Originally Posted by sabang

I don't know how you define 'dregs' but if being amongst the most educated, cultured, cosmoplitan, and affluent people in the Arab world meets your definition then I guess it's the Palestinians. The current sad situation is a result of Israeli oppression. These are the ancient Phoenicians you are talking about. They had an advanced culture when our ancestors were daubing themselves with ochre and dancing around fires.

That's the definition the other Arabs of the region looked upon the folks that occupied Palistine before modern-day Israel.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by sabang

I don't know how you define 'dregs' but if being amongst the most educated, cultured, cosmoplitan, and affluent people in the Arab world meets your definition then I guess it's the Palestinians. The current sad situation is a result of Israeli oppression. These are the ancient Phoenicians you are talking about. They had an advanced culture when our ancestors were daubing themselves with ochre and dancing around fires.

That's the definition the other Arabs of the region looked upon the folks that occupied Palistine before modern-day Israel.

I reckon you will find that was envy booner, because over the Christian era centuries modern day Lebanon and Palestine were a good deal more affluent and advanced than the rest of the 'Arab' world. It was basically the trade entrepot (along with Constantinople/Istanbul) between east and west.
Ironically, the historical stereotype of those people was similar to the modern stereotype of the Jews- money obsessed merchants who ripped you off at any opportunity.

Originally Posted by sabang

I reckon you will find that was envy booner,

That might very well be as I've not made a study of the region beyond a few trips to Israel and work in Egypt for a couple years.

Originally Posted by surasak

AFAIC AIPAC and AARP are the two most dangerous lobbies that control so much of what is wrong with the United States today.

Wrong.
The ACLU is one of the most dangerous.

Originally Posted by attaboy

We're talking about systematic mass murder of a specific group of people.

Stalin is said to have killed tens of millions long before the Nazis fired up the ovens. So why do we remember the Jews who were killed but not the others? Why do we put our nation on the line for something we weren't responsible for? Why do we continue to make Americans targets for extremism when it is completely unnecessary? Why does the lobby for a small insignificant nation hold such power over a superpower, second possibly only to the AARP in terms of power?

When war came, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and British PM Winston Churchill allied themselves closely to Stalin, though they were well aware his regime had murdered at least 30 million people long before Hitler's extermination of Jews and gypsies began. Yet in the strange moral calculus of mass murder, only Germans were guilty.

Though Stalin murdered three times more people than Hitler, to Roosevelt he remained "Uncle Joe."

The British-U.S. alliance with Stalin made them his partners in crime. Roosevelt and Churchill helped preserve history's most murderous regime, to which they handed over half of Europe in 1945.

After the war, the left tried to cover up Soviet genocide. Jean-Paul Sartre denied the gulag even existed.

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.

Seven million died in the 'forgotten' holocaust - Eric Margolis

Originally Posted by surasak

Stalin is said to have killed tens of millions long before the Nazis fired up the ovens. So why do we remember the Jews who were killed but not the others? Why do we put our nation on the line for something we weren't responsible for? Why do we continue to make Americans targets for extremism when it is completely unnecessary?

Who says it's unnecessary?
Remember, Israel is the one and only bastion of democracy in a sea of totalaitarianism and thuggery in the ME right now...

So what?

It's not a democracy.
It's not in our best interest.
It's not affordable.
It's not even culturally similar.

^^^Are you posing an 'it's all the same thing' argument?

Originally Posted by attaboy

^^^Are you posing an 'it's all the same thing' argument?

Not per se. I'm asking how a lobby for such a small group of people gains so much power as to make it criminal to speak or deny about what happened to them (while at the same time clouding the fact that worse atrocities occurred, and, ironically, the same group commits the same atrocities since 1949).

Why do we remember only the Holocaust? Why is it special? What about everyone else?

You're proabably the most informed poster here. Why would you say it is criminal to speak or deny about happened to Jewish people?

Hate crimes legislation in the U.S. The UNGA condemns denial of the Holocaust. Many European countries make it a crime to deny it.

If anyone dares speak bad about Israel said person is automatically labelled an anti-Semite.

Were the rounding up of Soviet minorities for labor and execution any less systematic? Or do we fail to discuss that because there's no ARPAC?

The Hate Crime legislation enacted was a terrible hit to the Constitution. It was brought on by Clinton's direction to the justice department to agressively pursue gun violations and so-called militia group prosecutions. But still, Hate Crime legislation in the USA does not make it illegal to deny the Holocaust.

I can't agree about your next assertion. Many Jews are critical of the Israeli government and they would agree with you on some of your points other than your accusing them of the same atrocites as the nazis.


I've come to the conclusion you don't distinguish between a gulag and Auschwitz.

Or do we fail to discuss that because there's no ARPAC?

Tell me your opinion.

I don't see the difference between Auschwitz or any other camp that had the same purpose. The only real difference is the political will that forces remembering one tragedy (as if it were unique and had never happened to any other group) and the lack of political power that allows a similar (if not numerically a worse one) from even being discussed. Much of this power comes from AIPAC.

Some Israelis are critical of the government, but, not enough to change what has been done or is being done to non-Jews in Israeli controlled areas.

The fact that Jews were persecuted in one place gives them no right to be the persecutor in another.

Why does AIPAC have such control over our government?

Switching back to using "Israelis" instead of "Jews"? Too bad your dislike for them clouds your ability to see the difference between the two camps.

Originally Posted by surasak

Originally Posted by attaboy

^^^Are you posing an 'it's all the same thing' argument?

Not per se. I'm asking how a lobby for such a small group of people gains so much power as to make it criminal to speak or deny about what happened to them (while at the same time clouding the fact that worse atrocities occurred, and, ironically, the same group commits the same atrocities since 1949).

Why do we remember only the Holocaust? Why is it special? What about everyone else?

Oh really? Again it's the same thing?

Are you saying Jewish people should be limited in expressing their interests to their govenment.

Sorry about the unreferenced noun.

When I speak of Israel I refer to the government in power that is committing the kinds of atrocities in the occupied territories and in Lebanon when supposedly Israel was established for the reason of preventing said atrocities against Jews. Are the victims becoming the persecutors? AIPAC isn't committing the atroticies, but, rather AIPAC is an agent for the Israeli government (who is).

When I refer to Jews I refer to those who live everywhere in the world practicing a certain faith.

I am wondering why (as a mattter of principle) why one atrocitiy is remembered while other similar ones are forgotten (if the only reason for doing such is due to the ability of one group to exercise political power, disproportionately even, over one government) while another major atrocity is swept under the carpet (if not because the victims failed to possess the same political and economic power and because the government responsible happened to be an ally during WWII).

Why did we look away as Stalin continued purges while we prosecuted the Nazis? Why do we remember the Holocaust while the purges in the Soviet Union (far worse in terms of number) aren't even discussed?

Why does AIPAC have such control over American politicians and foreign policy in the Middle East and why do our Congressmen/Senators/Presidents fear saying anything bad about Israel (this applies to both parties)?

You can't get away from this post:

Not per se. I'm asking how a lobby for such a small group of people gains so much power as to make it criminal to speak or deny about what happened to them (while at the same time clouding the fact that worse atrocities occurred, and, ironically, the same group commits the same atrocities since 1949).

(underling done by me)
You basically said Jews = Nazis.

It's true other atrocities don't receive as much awarness because of a lack of resources devoted to making it known. Is that someone's fault? Another reason we know of the Holocaust is because US troops liberated some of the camps. To a lesser degree Americans know of the Baatan Death March, The Rape of Nanking and the Killing Fields of Cambodia.

But you said through their interest groups they "cloud" the fact that other atrocities exist. That's total bs and you know it. I don't know of any other ethnic group that devotes as much time and resources to human rights interests and genocide rememberance than do Jewish people.

Concerning Stalin, you answered the question. He was our ally and people need a simple story so they don't hesitate to commit themselves to the cause. Thus Hitler bad Stalin good. Actually is was more like Hitler=bad Soviet Union=mystery ally. I think also there was sympathy in the US for the communist movement. The pacifists didn't want us to get involved in the European war up until Hitler attacked the Soviets. The pacifist phrase "The Yanks Aren't Coming" quickly became 'we're on our way'.

We looked away while Stalin purged because it went on within the borders of a sovereign nation. We were busy prosecuting an agressor.

As far as AIPAC what do you propose? How do we limit interest groups from lobbying government? All elections could be financed with public funds but that would solidfy the two party system and interest groups would still find ways to gain elected officials attention. Elected officials are supposed to listen to their constituents.

Yes, if we use a 'free market' argument, then AIPAC has as much right as anyone else to lobby. Perhaps you might say they just do a better job.
I do however believe that the funding of all Lobby groups and political parties should be a matter of public record.
There is also the matter of access- would say a Palestinian lobby group enjoy as much access to the corridors of power as AIPAC, or for that matter the tobacco, big pharma, oil land NRA lobbies?

Originally Posted by attaboy

You can't get away from this post:

Not per se. I'm asking how a lobby for such a small group of people gains so much power as to make it criminal to speak or deny about what happened to them (while at the same time clouding the fact that worse atrocities occurred, and, ironically, the same group commits the same atrocities since 1949).

(underling done by me)
You basically said Jews = Nazis.

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

But you said through their interest groups they "cloud" the fact that other atrocities exist. That's total bs and you know it. I don't know of any other ethnic group that devotes as much time and resources to human rights interests and genocide rememberance than do Jewish people.

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.

Seven million died in the 'forgotten' holocaust - Eric Margolis

I'm not talking about the Jewish people. The author linked there is the one making the accusations.

Originally Posted by attaboy

As far as AIPAC what do you propose? How do we limit interest groups from lobbying government? All elections could be financed with public funds but that would solidfy the two party system and interest groups would still find ways to gain elected officials attention. Elected officials are supposed to listen to their constituents.

As far as foreign governments are concerned it should be treason for any group of U.S. citizens to lobby the United States government on behalf of another nation in this manner and it should be treason for any U.S. representative to accepts funds from any group promoting or representing any foreign nation.

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

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.

This does not surprise me, BF.

But can you point me to a link or article?

I do believe this, however.

Some of the illustrous PNAC supporters barely deny it, saw it on a BBC documentary. No link.

I wonder if Paul Wolfowitz is in on it?