If this is not an example of Israel's stronghold over the U.S. Government, then I do not know what is. It is coming to the point where Washington D.C. is an extension of Tel Aviv. In fact, I am beginning to suspect that the United States Government is sacrificing the Middle East Peace Process in order to sustain the "special relationship." But why? What has Israel done for the United States recently, instead of making President Obama look like a passive politician in the pockets of the Jewish establishment? They certainly have not looked after our interests in the same way we have looked after theirs for the past six decades. Yet we are afraid of alienating a state that is acting more like Apartheid South Africa can the only democracy in the Middle East. And believe me, I use the term democracy loosely in this context.

For readers of this blog, does anyone remember that infamous American principle of free speech and free expression? Apparently our lawmakers on the Hill have forgotten the concept. Now public servants have to shut their mouths and keep their policy opinions to themselves in order to improve their chances for career success. God forbid our government should question Israel's ILLEGAL occupation in the West Bank. God forbid we should criticize P.M. Netanyahu's refusal to compromise with the Palestinians, lest we alienate the powerful Zionist lobby in the United States.

But perhaps I should not be too upset. After all, if I was a politician raking in millions of dollars a year from pro-Israel lobbying organizations, I would hold off on spouting my views as well. Like many things in international politics, policy behavior is a two-way street; Israeli intimidation on the one hand and American dependence on the other.

Sadly, this is now the status-quo of the "special relationship" Israelis and Americans speak of so proudly. Special for the Israelis, but obviously not so special for the United States.

http://depetris.wordpress.com

from Walt's usual analysis of this subject is how INCREDIBLY competitive Israel advocacy is in the United States. The fight for the same dollars from the same people means that these organizations have to be ridiculously strident in their pronunciations to get heard and raise money. As part of that competition for who can scream the sky is falling loudest, they also have target even trivial issues, i.e. Rosenthal, random academics, throw away lines in wire service copy, etc.

People also overstate the role of the Israeli government in these efforts, as well as the level of coordination between the different organizations. The competition is so fierce that the Israeli government agencies charged with public diplomacy usually try to stay out of these battles (although they are rarely disappointed with the result). For example, pressure for Ambassador Oren to stay away from J Street did not come from Israel -- it came from more right-wing American organizations that the Israeli Foreign Ministry did not want to piss off.

Further, it should also be noted that anywhere from a third to a half of all the money raised for primary elections in Israel comes from the United States. That's officially; unofficially, the percentage is higher.

So when we are talking about the Israeli lobby in the US and its activities, it is important to keep in mind how very American the whole thing is (Israel is mainly the trophy). In other words, don't blame the Jews; blame our First Amendment right to oligarchy.

Finally, the Israeli press (Haaretz, especially the English version, is not representative of mainstream Israeli opinion) talks a lot, and rather openly, about the role of Jewish organizations and Jewish money in American politics. It is something that affects Israelis a great deal, and not something they have a tremendous amount of control over. They do a worse job covering the Christian Zionists in the US, for reasons I won't get into.

With no disrespect, does the tail wag the dog or the dog wag the tail?. Natasha Mozkavaya seems to think that the tail wags the dog, and short of calling on an Amercian "intifada" against the Amercian Jewish lobby groups, she has managed to write a very intelligent article with a message, that can be read from various perspectives, differently.

I really don't know if the article appears in Ha'aretz Hebrew edition {I can't open it for the time being}, but if it does, I think if I was an Israeli citizen, I would take comfort that, no matter what President Obama says or promises, the Jewish groups hold him from where it hurts. And myself as comer from the Arab world, and I do not claim represnetation here of anyone, I can see it from an Arabo-Centric perspective, that, Ms. Mozkavaya is trying to say that, the Arabs should not hope anything to be done in their favour by President Obama, without Israel's consent. Moreover, if the Arabs need to lobby the USA for anything, then they will have to run to Israel, to do the effective lobbying for them.
The article has a sting in the tail, from whichever perspective anyone looks at it.
khairi janbek.paris/france

The more stories like this I read, the more I flash back to Washington's farewell address:

...[N]othing is more essential, than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular Nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. [...] [A] passionate attachment of one Nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite Nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite Nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the Nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained; and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, (who devote themselves to the favorite nation,) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

This is why the US is hated in the middle east.

Why bother pretending we are a impartial arbitrator?

What? There is an "Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism" in the State Dept?

Steve you are probably being probed.

What do they do all day long? Issue propaganda that Hummus is Israeli?

F. that! I want my taxes back from that office.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_To_Monitor_and_Combat_Anti-Semitism

Israel-bashers have an anti-US agenda and are therefore not appropriate for US political office.

The "marketplace of ideas" is a central and essential component of an effective democracy. When certain ideas are deliberately suppressed, the power of democracies to identify the best ideas is weakened, and with it, the democratic process itself. It is clear that the Israel lobby (as well as many others) attempts to promote ideas/policies that it favors. While there is nothing patently illegal about this, the Israel Lobby's influence is sufficiently great not only to strike fear into those holding (or seeking to hold) elective office, but also those seeking appointive positions in our government, as Prof. Walt and others point out. In the meantime, the American people are being deprived of the full and open debate regarding U.S. middle eastern policy that is so badly needed. We have in effect a perfectly legal lobby which does the bidding of the Israeli government. This state of affairs has thereby subverted the democratic process as it applies to American foreign policy in the middle east. Moreover, our media is filled with Israeli apologists and--while it pretends to be a true fifth estate--it suppresses and/or distorts the other side of the story. What is to be done?

Can someone explain: we are supposed to be allies with Israel.

I understand that we help Israel A LOT: like $5billion/yr.

What does Israel do for us?

First of all, Walt is being openly evasive by pretending that Chas Freedmans appointment was solely due to his virulently anti-Israel views. Even a wikipedia search reveals how his ties to the Saudi Arabians and other shady dealings made him completely incapable of serving such a high position of intelligence. Further, Israel supports all the similar democratic values that America does amidst a sea of dictators, and is facing a multitude of existential threats that mostly derive from Iranian control. Professor Walt is very aware of this, and unless hes anti-Semitic *(which countless reputable academics have charged), he at minimum is not concerned with the ability of Israel to survive. I also read his defense to the infamously anti-Israeli and systematically destroyed piece of anti-Semitic trash the likes haven't seen since the Protocols of Zion. Point being, Israel was of great help to the US during the Cold War, which Walt also acknowledges. His main thesis if your unaware is that Israeli interests are now detrimental to US vital strategic interests, rather than in the past when they were mutually beneficial. However, unless you truly are content with Iran wiping Israel off the face of the earth, how can you rationalize not continuing to aid its most steadfast and reliable ally. Frankly, its a shame that Israel is painted in such a narrative that people dont realize how much the state has done to achieve piece, only to be spat in the face. Do you want to stop aid to Britain, just because it killed civillians in Afghanistan? I mean its a total double standard to single out Israel for doing the same things Western countries are currently doing in COIN warfare, albeit with MUCH less media coverage. Just come on, give Israel a chance. If they had a viable negotiation partner, peace would have been achieved LONG ago. And Prof. Walt knows this too. To watch him spew this nonsense is irrational considering the fact that his selective memory and inherent bias only allows him to throw Israel under the bus, despite his knowledge of the reality on the ground. Its flat out academic dishonesty on his part.

The viable negotiation partners were either killed or held in prison. Get with the facts.

If a lowly civil servant or FSO had professed loyalty to a foreign state, their clearance would be revoked.

Israel did sod-all to help the US in the Cold War. They couldn't wait for its end to bring in thousnds of Russian immigrants.

I challenge anyone to give me a single instance of an action the Israelis took to help the US in the Cold War.
Not one single action.

They were preoccupied with suppressing their natives, and attacking their neighbours.

The US doesn't owe the Israelis anything. It is only the influence of the very clever and ruthless Israel Lobby that is winning the day, in what is still, basically, a decent America.

I really wonder, to what extent American public opinion, and American politicians, are pro-Israel with or without the American Zionist groups influence?.

I have a feeling that gradually, we are coming to the conclusion that, neither American public opinion, is responsible for the way its outlook is formulated, nor American politicians are responsible for the manner in which they formulate US foreign policy vis a vis Israel.

So, Had it not been to the US Zionist groups' super influence, the US public opinion towards Arabs, and the US foreign policy in the Middle East would have been different?. I don't know, but I think humbly we are entering the danger zone of, implying that the US has abdicated all its resposnibilities; popular and official, in favour of a pretender group called the American Zionist lobby.

If Natasha Muzkavaya, wants to say that the Israel is invincible in its influence, then she is rather succeeding very well, even perhaps beyond her own expectations.
khairi janbek.paris/france

This must take some patience--calmly restating the obvious in the face of usual hysterics.

But it is important to do this, and above all avoid reacting in kind. Others should take note--the tone is very nearly as important as the content.

Just read Yossi Sarid´s opinion column, "I have no brother", on today´s Haaretz, as he says:

"It's hard to be a Jew. Recently it's been even harder, and not because the whole world is against us, but because we are against the whole world. Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion was right. It's important what Jews do - and what we did was cut ourselves off, like an errant planet that has strayed out of orbit. The settlers have cut us off. The world is looking at us through its telescope and asking "Is this Israel?" I am also asking the same question."

There is ALWAYS a dynamic struggle between a nation's interests and its internal politics.

It happens EVERYWHERE.

Its a component of democracy that is based on "consent of the governed" in whatever governmental form (monarchy, republic, direct democracy).

The desire to apply only one's perception of what is reason to foreign or any other policy, is something that is possible in a dictatorship (benevolent or later inevitably suppressive).

If I were king.

The one bright shining light for Americans is that American Jews come in so many different flavors and have so many differing opinions.

One of my Jewish friends recently corrected me when I had expressed a hope for peace in Israeli/Palestinian relations. His comment was, "You don't understand, we don't need peace; peace is not good for Israel." He went on to explain that with peace came too much compromise and that as long as there is a simmering state of quasi-war, the Americans will be more generous and tend to look the other way as Israel expands slowly but relentlessly into the areas of their neighbors. Specifically, sharing the water from the West Bank Aquifer is the biggest hurdle. If Palestinians received the water that is rightfully theirs, then Israelis would not be able to fill their swimming pools and have a dip before synagogue. Basic human fairness and dignity needs to be applied more evenly and a huge number of American Jews understand this - hence J Street.

If your good self is interested, Marc Lynch has posted a message on his blog, reagrding US public opinion.
khairi janbek.paris/france

Do you really mean to tell me that American Jews and certain organizations are out there making their political opinions known?????

Well I for one am just SHOCKED!!!!!

Whats next? Are they going to have the nerve to vote as well??

by E on Sat, 12/05/2009 - 4:44pm
"Do you really mean to tell me that American Jews and certain organizations are out there making their political opinions known????? Well I for one am just SHOCKED!!!!!
Whats next? Are they going to have the nerve to vote as well??"

SOME Jews and gentiles working through AIPAC and related lobbies have managed to seriously discourage the discussion of political opinions contrary to their own using several tactics which collectively amount to intimidation (smear tactics, threats to people's jobs, etc.). These lobbies have a stranglehold on almost all of our congressional representatives, who are afraid to disagree publicly from the Israeli government's wishes. Because of this, the Amercan people are indirectly supporting the illegal, apartheid, and inhumane occupation of the Palestinian territories, providing militant Islamicists with reasons to attack us, and also (in part due to this lobbying) fighting and dying in Iraq. When honest disagreement is routinely suppressed by smear tactics and worse, speech is no longer "free," and an essential condition for democracy has been lost.

Many, first of all Prof.Walt, will furiously protest, being
accused of Jew-hatred, But let us be honest: 90% of the
comments here are clearly anti-Semitic. How many opinions and
comments are published (and read) about the Saudi or even
the Palestinian lobby in Washington? To doubt the great
Israeli contribution throughout the Cold War is pure ignorance. Nobody forgot that the first Soviet MiG21 was
brought thru the Mossad to Tel-Aviv and forwarded to the
USA. Just ignorant Israel-bashers forgot the testing of
modern Soviet weaponry thru the Israeli Army in the Six-Day War, the Yom Kippur War and much more. Israel got military
assistance of many billion dollars (but so got Egypt and
many others), but Israel delivered more, than many others.
Stop the bashing. Jewish Americans love Israel, but Irish
or Italian American love their original homeland too, without
so much excessive hatred, mistrust and inciting.

conenorm, You are a perfect example of the convoluted reasoning that is regularly regurgitated from your part of the the world. Big contribution to the Cold War, eh. Have you forgotten Pollard who spied for Israel and the fruits of whose spying ended up in the hands of the Soviet Union? Nor was Pollard an aberration.

You are a perfect example of how the old "anti-Semite" canard is used to silence individuals in the US government, the media and just about anywhere else. What other gang runs outfits such as Campus Watch, NGO Watch, UN Watch, Media Watch and god know what/who else watch? Keep it up and you will make "anti-Semitism" a badge of honor.

While we're on the topic of "anti-semitism", have you read Shlomo Sand's book? Just who's the "Semite" here? Seems like it's really the Palestinians, and its the rabid Israeli Jews who are indulging in real "anti-semitism" against the Palestinians.

Views of a senior UK Jewish member of Parliament who is pro-zionist and his family suffered in the Holocaust:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMGuYjt6CP8

Re.
Goldstone report: Unreported in USA:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8257446.stm

Key excerpts: UN Gaza report

A United Nations investigation into Israel's campaign in the Gaza Strip earlier this year has concluded that there is evidence both sides committed war crimes.

Below are extracts from a UN statement accompanying the report:

[The report ] concluded there is evidence indicating serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law were committed by Israel during the Gaza conflict, and that Israel committed actions amounting to war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity.

The report also concludes there is also evidence that Palestinian armed groups committed war crimes, as well as possibly crimes against humanity, in their repeated launching of rockets and mortars into Southern Israel…

The Mission found that, in the lead up to the Israeli military assault on Gaza, Israel imposed a blockade amounting to collective punishment and carried out a systematic policy of progressive isolation and deprivation of the Gaza Strip. During the Israeli military operation, code-named "Operation Cast Lead," houses, factories, wells, schools, hospitals, police stations and other public buildings were destroyed… More than 1,400 people were killed during the military operation…

The report concludes that the Israeli military operation was directed at the people of Gaza as a whole, in furtherance of an overall and continuing policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population, and in a deliberate policy of disproportionate force aimed at the civilian population. The destruction of food supply installations, water sanitation systems, concrete factories and residential houses was the result of a deliberate and systematic policy which has made the daily process of living, and dignified living, more difficult for the civilian population…

The report underlines that in most of the incidents investigated by it, and described in the report, loss of life and destruction caused by Israeli forces during the military operation was a result of disrespect for the fundamental principle of "distinction" in international humanitarian law that requires military forces to distinguish between military targets and civilians and civilian objects at all times…

[The ]report describes a number of specific incidents in which Israeli forces launched "direct attacks against civilians with lethal outcome." These are, it says, cases in which the facts indicate no justifiable military objective pursued by the attack and concludes they amount to war crimes…

A number of other incidents the Report concludes may constitute war crimes include a direct and intentional attack on the Al Quds Hospital and an adjacent ambulance depot in Gaza City.

The Report also covers violations arising from Israeli treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank, including excessive force against Palestinian demonstrators, sometimes resulting in deaths, increased closures, restriction of movement and house demolitions. The detention of Palestinian Legislative Council members, the Report says, effectively paralyzed political life in the Occupied Palestinian Territories…

The Fact-Finding Mission also found that the repeated acts of firing rockets and mortars into Southern Israel by Palestinian armed groups "constitute war crimes and may amount to crimes against humanity," by failing to distinguish between military targets and the civilian population. "The launching of rockets and mortars which cannot be aimed with sufficient precisions at military targets breaches the fundamental principle of distinction," the report says. "Where there is no intended military target and the rockets and mortars are launched into civilian areas, they constitute a deliberate attack against the civilian population."

The Mission concludes that the rocket and mortars attacks "have caused terror in the affected communities of southern Israel," as well as "loss of life and physical and mental injury to civilians and damage to private houses, religious buildings and property, thereby eroding the economic and cultural life of the affected communities and severely affecting the economic and social rights of the population."

The Mission urges the Palestinian armed groups holding the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit to release him on humanitarian grounds, and, pending his release, give him the full rights accorded to a prisoner of war under the Geneva Conventions including visits from the International Committee of the Red Cross. The Report also notes serious human rights violations, including arbitrary arrests and extra-judicial executions of Palestinians, by the authorities in Gaza and by the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

The prolonged situation of impunity has created a justice crisis in the Occupied Palestinian Territory that warrants action, the Report says. The Mission found the Government of Israel had not carried out any credible investigations into alleged violations.

It recommended that the UN Security Council require Israel to report to it, within six months, on investigations and prosecutions it should carry out with regard to the violations identified in its Report. The Mission further recommends that the Security Council set up a body of independent experts to report to it on the progress of the Israeli investigations and prosecutions.

If the experts' reports do not indicate within six months that good faith, independent proceedings are taking place, the Security Council should refer the situation in Gaza to the ICC Prosecutor. The Mission recommends that the same independent expert body also report to the Security Council on proceedings undertaken by the relevant Gaza authorities with regard to crimes committed by the Palestinian side.

As in the case of Israel, if within six months there are no good faith independent proceedings conforming to international standards in place, the Council should refer the situation to the ICC Prosecutor.

not seen in USA:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHelVs2PL4g

O.K., e, I am quoting from a May, 2009 article by Prof. Mearsheimer of the U. of Chicago:

"Israel’s supporters in the United States often claim that the special relationship is not due to the lobby’s influence. The American people, they argue, identify closely with Israel and put significant pressure on their leaders to support it generously and unconditionally. But there is abundant evidence showing that this is not true. Recent polls indicate that over 70 percent of Americans think that the U.S. should not take sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and only 47 percent of Americans think that Israel’s influence in the world is “mainly positive.” Moreover, 60 percent of Americans have said that the United States should withhold aid to Israel if it resists pressure to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians."

And more:

"The United States is in deep trouble in the Middle East and has a serious terrorism problem in good part because of its unconditional support for Israel’s policies in the Occupied Territories. Backing Israel at almost every turn also makes it harder for Washington to get open support from moderate Arab states, even when dealing with common threats like Iran."

The link to Mearsheimer's full article is:

http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/may/18/00014/

E, I await your response.

E, for me, the "facts on the ground" speak loudest. I look at what people do, because it is usually a far better index of their true motivations than what they say. The Israeli govt.--while steadily claiming to seek peace and a just mideast settlement-- has consistently and illegally encroached on territory that the world court says belongs to the Palestinians since the '67 war. The U.S. govt. has consistently ignored or defended this theft. The U.S. media has for the most part done the same. High-ranking Israeli officials have admitted they are creating "facts on the ground" while pretending to seriously seek a just peace. These are my principal concerns, as well as the fact that most of our government's elected (and also appointed) representatives are being held hostage by AIPAC and its sympathizers. For more specific evidence, I suggest you read the "Israel Lobby," if you haven't already.

This is how the poor enfeebled little israelis behave:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQyIKyd2gqA

http://www.counterpunch.org/aloni01082007.html

Shulamit Aloni is the former Education Minister of Israel. She has been awarded both the Israel Prize and the Emil Grunzweig Human Rights Award by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.

January 8, 2007
This Road is for Jews Only
Yes, There is Apartheid in Israel

By SHULAMIT ALONI

Jewish self-righteousness is taken for granted among ourselves to such an extent that we fail to see what's right in front of our eyes. It's simply inconceivable that the ultimate victims, the Jews, can carry out evil deeds.

Nevertheless, the state of Israel practises its own, quite violent, form of Apartheid with the native Palestinian population.

The US Jewish Establishment's onslaught on former President Jimmy Carter is based on him daring to tell the truth which is known to all: through its army, the government of Israel practises a brutal form of Apartheid in the territory it occupies. Its army has turned every Palestinian village and town into a fenced-in, or blocked-in, detention camp. All this is done in order to keep an eye on the population's movements and to make its life difficult. Israel even imposes a total curfew whenever the settlers, who have illegally usurped the Palestinians' land, celebrate their holidays or conduct their parades.

If that were not enough, the generals commanding the region frequently issue further orders, regulations, instructions and rules (let us not forget: they are the lords of the land). By now they have requisitioned further lands for the purpose of constructing "Jewish only" roads. Wonderful roads, wide roads, well-paved roads, brightly lit at night--all that on stolen land. When a Palestinian drives on such a road, his vehicle is confiscated and he is sent on his way.

On one occasion I witnessed such an encounter between a driver and a soldier who was taking down the details before confiscating the vehicle and sending its owner away. "Why?" I asked the soldier. "It's an order--this is a Jews-only road", he replied. I inquired as to where was the sign indicating this fact and instructing [other] drivers not to use it. His answer was nothing short of amazing. "It is his responsibility to know it, and besides, what do you want us to do, put up a sign here and let some antisemitic reporter or journalist take a photo so he that can show the world that Apartheid exists here?"

Indeed Apartheid does exist here. And our army is not "the most moral army in the world" as we are told by its commanders. Sufficient to mention that every town and every village has turned into a detention centre and that every entry and every exit has been closed, cutting it off from arterial traffic. If it were not enough that Palestinians are not allowed to travel on the roads paved 'for Jews only', on their land, the current GOC found it necessary to land an additional blow on the natives in their own land with an "ingenious proposal".

Humanitarian activists cannot transport Palestinians either.

Major-General Naveh, renowned for his superior patriotism, has issued a new order. Coming into affect on 19 January, it prohibits the conveyance of Palestinians without a permit. The order determines that Israelis are not allowed to transport Palestinians in an Israeli vehicle (one registered in Israel regardless of what kind of numberplate it carries) unless they have received explicit permission to do so. The permit relates to both the driver and the Palestinian passenger. Of course none of this applies to those whose labour serves the settlers. They and their employers will naturally receive the required permits so they can continue to serve the lords of the land, the settlers.

Did man of peace President Carter truly err in concluding that Israel is creating Apartheid? Did he exaggerate? Don't the US Jewish community leaders recognise the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination of 7 March 1966, to which Israel is a signatory? Are the US Jews who launched the loud and abusive campaign against Carter for supposedly maligning Israel's character and its democratic and humanist nature unfamiliar with the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 30 November 1973? Apartheid is defined therein as an international crime that among other things includes using different legal instruments to rule over different racial groups, thus depriving people of their human rights. Isn't freedom of travel one of these rights?

In the past, the US Jewish community leaders were quite familiar with the meaning of those conventions. For some reason, however, they are convinced that Israel is allowed to contravene them. It's OK to kill civilians, women and children, old people and parents with their children, deliberately or otherwise without accepting any responsibility. It's permissible to rob people of their lands, destroy their crops, and cage them up like animals in the zoo. From now on, Israelis and International humanitarian organisations' volunteers are prohibited from assisting a woman in labour by taking her to the hospital. [Israeli human rights group] Yesh Din volunteers cannot take a robbed and beaten-up Palestinian to the police station to lodge a complaint. (Police stations are located at the heart of the settlements.) Is there anyone who believes that this is not Apartheid?

Jimmy Carter does not need me to defend his reputation that has been sullied by Israelophile community officials. The trouble is that their love of Israel distorts their judgment and blinds them from seeing what's in front of them. Israel is an occupying power that for 40 years has been oppressing an indigenous people, which is entitled to a sovereign and independent existence while living in peace with us. We should remember that we too used very violent terror against foreign rule because we wanted our own state. And the list of victims of terror is quite long and extensive.

We do limit ourselves to denying the [Palestinian] people human rights. We not only rob of them of their freedom, land and water. We apply collective punishment to millions of people and even, in revenge-driven frenzy, destroy the electricity supply for one and half million civilians. Let them "sit in the darkness" and "starve".

Employees cannot be paid their wages because Israel is holding 500 million shekels that belong to the Palestinians. And after all that we remain "pure as the driven snow". There are no moral blemishes on our actions. There is no racial separation. There is no Apartheid. It's an invention of the enemies of Israel. Hooray for our brothers and sisters in the US! Your devotion is very much appreciated. You have truly removed a nasty stain from us. Now there can be an extra spring in our step as we confidently abuse the Palestinian population, using the "most moral army in the world".

[Translated by Sol Salbe]
Shulamit Aloni is the former Education Minister of Israel. She has been awarded both the Israel Prize and the Emil Grunzweig Human Rights Award by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.

More from the Mearsheimer article cited above:

"Apartheid is not a viable long-term solution because the Palestinians will continue to resist until they achieve independence. Their resistance will force Israel to escalate the same repressive policies that have already cost significant blood and treasure, encouraged political corruption, and badly tarnished the nation’s global image. More importantly, there would be little support and much opposition to an apartheid state in the West, especially in the United States, where democracy is venerated and segregation is condemned. This is why Olmert said that going down the apartheid road would be suicidal for Israel." ...

"But bringing democracy to greater Israel would also mean the end of the Jewish state because the more numerous Palestinians would dominate its politics. That leaves ethnic cleansing, which would certainly keep Israel Jewish. That murderous strategy, however, would do enormous damage to Israel’s moral fabric, its relationship with Jews in the diaspora, and its international standing. Israel and its supporters would be treated harshly by history. No genuine friend of Israel could support such a heinous course of action."

My take: Israelis are between a rock and a very hard place, and they have no one to blame but themselves...

The EU Foreign Ministers are meeting today in Brussels to discuss the Palestinian-Israel issue and the Swedish proposal for East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine (nothing new in this proposal).

AlJazeera has managed a good disucussion on this. The most interesting part of the discussion was the LaLa Land where Israel lives, as demonstrated by the Israeli university professor. Not only does this poor fellow not know the history of the Jewish people, I'm left wondering at just what passes for education in Israeli universities with professors like this in place. I'm reminded of when I visited Jerusalem and was told that the walls surrounding Jerusalem were built by King David, when in fact they were built by the Ottomans and "King David" belongs in the same realm with King Arthur.

The rock and a hard place keep on grinding, if slowly.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/12/2009126225949104332html

Just read the comments here. Do you really believe that so many Americans are so passionate pro-Arab and anti-Israel
as you see here? The comments are written by a well financed
group of Arabists, their job is to fight in the blogosphere against anything Jewish, Israeli or Israel-friendly. Truth
is absolutely not important, just hate and incitement. Numbers are falsified : de facto 51% of Americans sympathize with Israel and just 17% with the Palestinians. The rest is neutral or refuse an answer. In this (and many similar) blogs all Americans are full of hate of Jews, "Zionists" and their friends in the "lobby" or the administration. This is the only battle, the Arabs can win. In all real battles were the results clear, then there are not "occupied territories" in Israel, just in "Palestine", Lebanon and Syria.

President Obama told Prime Minister Netanyahu that the illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank must stop expanding. Prime Minister Netanyahu offered to dismantle the illegal settler outposts instead.
"Yo, Netanyahu, dis settlement shit must stop."
"With all due respect, Your Blackness, how about if I just dismantle the outposts instead?"
"Yo, Jewboy, I ain't no dumb goy like W. You could spin him like a dreidel. I'm from the hood, yid. I mean bidness."
Netanyahu winced. This was worse than Clinton. Not only is Obama smart, he is serious.
"What about 'natural growth'?"
"What about 'dismantle'?"
"I can't do that for domestic political reasons. Can we talk about Iran?"
"Sure, I'll tell you about Iran. I whipped McCain's butt 365 electoral votes to 173. You lost to Livni but were able to cobble together a coalition of Israeli Rush Limbaughs. Unless you get with the program, dude, I will keep breaking these fragile coalition governments until I get one that knows how to say 'two-state solution.' Can you say that?"
"T…t…t…" Netanyahu could not say it.
"I didn't think so. I suggest you go home and practice. Next time you come here, why dontcha bring a map of Israel with borders. That would be interesting."
"Oy vay," thought Netanyahu. "Our worst nightmare: an American president with chutzpah."
"Now we can take a photo-op and pretend that I am beholden to the Likudniks. But, as Michelle and I tell Malia and Sasha, I want you to do your homework. Only DeGaulle could liberate Algeria. Only Nixon could go to China. Perhaps Netanyahu can liberate Palestine and earn a respected place in history. The alternative, of course, is to end up on the trash heap of forgotten Israeli prime ministers who fiddled while Palestine burned. Wait. Let me adjust my yarmulke."
Smiling broadly and shaking hands, the two world leaders pretended that all was sweetness and light. As the Israeli Prime Minister departed, President Obama imparted one more piece of advice.
"Yo, Netanyahu, one more thing. The tail does not wag the dog."

From: Mondoweiss.com

2/3 of members of Council on Foreign Relations say U.S. policy favors Israel too much

Posted: 08 Dec 2009 06:55 AM PST

Jeff Blankfort at Counterpunch shows that the Council on Foreign Relations’ elite knows what’s going on in Israel/Palestine to a degree that the American public does not. It is further evidence of the media’s failure to inform the public what so many are saying behind closed doors:

What can be concluded from the answers to questions that dealt with the Israel-Palestine conflict is that the general public forms its opinions from what it hears and reads in the mainstream media which are largely biased towards Israel while CFR members have greater access to as well as interest in obtaining more accurate information and are less susceptible to pro-Israel propaganda. That apparently not a single US newspaper saw fit to report on the opinions of CFR members, under those circumstances, is not surprising.

The evidence…That on a list of countries that will be the "more important as America’s allies and partners" in the future, just 4 per cent included Israel which placed it in a tie with South Korea and far behinf China, 58 per cent, India, 55 per cent, Brazil, 37 per cent, the EU, 19 per cent, Russia, 17 per cent, Japan, 16 per cent, the UK and Turkey, 10 per cent, Germany, 9 per cent, Mexico, 8 per cent, Canada, Indonesia, Australia and France at 5 per cent. CFR voters were allowed to make up to seven selections…..

What was particularly revealing is that "in the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians," only 26 per cent of the CFR sided with Israel, compared with 51 per cent of 2000 members of the general public who were polled over the same period. While but 16 per cent of CFR members sided with the Palestinians compared to 12 per cent of the public, 41 per cent of the CFRers sided with "both equally" as opposed to 4 per cent of the public. Supporting neither was 12 per cent of the CFR and 14 per cent of the public…

That the CFR has not had a major hand in making US Israel-Palestine policy nor is it in agreement with those who did is strikingly revealed by the response of its members when asked their opinion of US Middle East policies. The problem, according to 67 per cent of CFR members (as compared to 30 per cent of the public) is that the US favored Israeli too much, while only 2 per cent (as opposed to 15 per cent of the public) believed that US policy overly favored the Palestinians.. Twenty-four percent of the CFR believed US policy "struck the right balance" as did 29 per cent of the public.