JOSHUA FRANK: Entrenched Hypocrisy -- Hillary Clinton, AIPAC and Iran

[Tace]

By Joshua Frank -- World News Trust

President Bush’s position on Iran is “disturbing” and “dangerous,” reads a recent screed written by AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee). Recently the Bush administration accepted a Russian proposal to allow Iran to continue to develop nuclear energy under Russian supervision and AIPAC is downright pissed.

In a letter to congressional allies, mostly Democrats, the pro-Israel organization admitted is was “concerned that the decision not to go to the Security Council, combined with the U.S. decision to support the ‘Russian proposal,’ indicates a disturbing shift in the Administration's policy on Iran and poses a danger to the United States and our allies.”

Israel, however, continues to develop a substantial nuclear arsenal, and in 2000 the British Broadcasting Corporation reported that Israel has most likely produced enough plutonium to make up to 200 nuclear weapons. So, it is safe to say that Israel’s bomb building techniques are light years ahead of Iran’s dismal nuclear program. Yet the major U.S. ally in the Middle East still won’t admit they have capacity to produce such deadly weapons.

And while AIPAC and Israel pressure the U.S. government to force the Iran issue to the U.N. Security Council, Israel itself stands in violation of numerous U.N. Resolutions dealing with the occupied territories of Palestine, including U.N. Resolution 1402, which demands that Israel withdraw its military from all Palestinian cities at once.

more

http://worldnewstrust.org/modules/AMS/article.php?storyid=1998

[Chi-Town Exile]

1. More Anti-Israel Claptrap

"President Bush’s position on Iran is “disturbing” and “dangerous,” reads a recent SCREED written by AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee)."

SCREED? Gee, this article isn't too ONE-SIDED is it?

After seeing the word "SCREED" need I even bother to read this?

[Jim Sagle]

2. Joshua Frank is a fake Democrat who bashes Democrats exclusively.

[Chi-Town Exile]

3. Probably another self-loathing Jew .... zzzzzzz nt

[...of J.Temperance]

4. I agree 100% with your comment about Joshua Frank n/t

[OKNancy]

5. Effete, spoiled, parvenu, snot-nosed pretender.

The author of this, not the subject.
I've about had it with all this high and mighty so-called political commentators who bash THE ONLY PARTY that is going to be able to do anything good in this country. I'm sorry, but this article reeks.

I can't believe I'm defending Hillary Clinton ( I'm 100% true-blue Clarkie) but there is nothing wrong with speaking at a pro-Israel group about the dangers Iran poses. It's a rouge country with a nut ball in charge. Israel is our ally and as far as I know, we are still supposed to support our allies.
Now, we shouldn't invade or bomb Iran, we should do like Clark said and work the diplomatic channels...which it will take a DEMOCRATIC administration to do because the Bushies are too brain-dead-macho-strutting-idiots to figure out that is the way to go.

I see way too much of this "an enemy of my enemy" is my friend bullshit. Iran sucks, al-Queda sucks, Osama is scum ( stole that from Skinner), insurgents who kill innocents suck, people who want make women property again suck.

George Bush and his friends suck too. It doesn't make me like the above people or groups any more because he is such an asshole.

----------------
Here is an example of this authors other commentary...hates Democrats


Despite John Kerry's cozy relationship with big green organizations like the Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters, the Senator should not be mistaken as a friend of the environment.
http://www.counterpunch.org/frank10212004.html

This is a Jan 22 2005 ( a full year ago ) article about bombing Iran
He disses Kerry, Obama and Dean in this one:
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/jfrank.php?articleid=4521
Even DNC chair hopeful Howard Dean, allegedly the liberal arm of the Democratic Party, concurs Bush has not been tough enough on Iran. The Forward quotes Dean as saying, "The United States has to ... take a much harder line on Iran and Saudi Arabia because they're funding terrorism."

In fact, while campaigning for president, Dean contended that President Bush had been far too soft on Iran. In a March appearance on CBS' Face The Nation, Dean even went so far as to say that " is beholden to the Saudis and the Iranians."

Here is a review of his book:
He hates all Democrats. Especially Dean
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/engel9.html

More Democrat bashing, sound very much like some DUers
http://joun.leb.net/frank12212005.html
Nancy Pelosi's Truth

[IndianaGreen]

19. Did you know that Hillary snubbed Israelis opposed to the occupation

when she visited Israel in 2002, and that she also refused to meet with a single Palestinian leader?

Here is what Murdoch's The Times of London had to say about Hillary's second visit to Israel last November:

Israel mission helps Hillary and Condi to court Jewish vote

From Stephen Farrell in Jerusalem

THE TIMING is exquisite — the two women touted as frontrunners for the 2008 US presidential elections arrive simultaneously in Jerusalem to share an international stage critical to their domestic ambitions.

Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton have both been drawn to Israel for the tenth anniversary commemorations of the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, the former Israeli Prime Minister slain by a Jewish extremist.

It is a sombre backdrop, but an important occasion for any politician with an eye on the Jewish American vote. That is particularly true for Senator Clinton, who won her New York seat despite angering Jewish groups by embracing Yassir Arafat’s wife Suha in 1999 at an event where the latter accused Israelis of using poison gas. To be fair, Mrs Clinton has a perfectly good excuse. She is accompanying the real star of the commemorations, her husband Bill, the former President, who has been accorded a rock star status that both his potential successors must envy.

<snip>

Not to be outdone, Senator Clinton has lined up a programme described as “presidential-like” by one observer, and is expressing views that will certainly play well back home.

She met Mr Sharon and called him “courageous” for implementing the Gaza withdrawal. “This was an incredibly difficult position for him to take, and it caused great distress within Israeli society. But he did it as a means of demonstrating that he is trying to get back into a process,” she said.

Mrs Clinton also voiced support for Israel’s West Bank separation barrier, the wall-and- razor-wire obstacle denounced by Palestinians as a “land grab”, after a briefing by Israeli commanders at a vantage point overlooking its construction north of Bethlehem.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,251-1871413,00.html

[MH1]

20. Thanks for the links. I was looking for that on another thread.

The asshole saying that John Kerry is not a friend of the environment apparently doesn't think Leaque of Conservation Voters is either - they endorsed Kerry in the primaries, and in prior years have dubbed him one of their Environmental Champions. Just who the f**k do they think *is* a friend of the environment?

Anyway, thanks - Someone was asking me to "prove" that Counterpunch is a sack of liars, and I had lost that link. I won't lose it again.

Frank is a Democrat-hating jerk. Linking to that site should be banned from DU.

[Clara T]

23. There are a variety of articles

posted at counterpunch's website. Here is a short list of some of the authors of recent articles. Like any website that collects numerous articles it should be left up to individuals through their own research and experience to sort through the flotsam and jetsam. Censorship is a slippery slope. Personally I think it is also valuable to post articles from hard right authors so we can really know what their disturbed minds are thinking so as to better strategize against that kind of controlling mentality.

Authors:
John Ross
Bill & Kathleen Christison
Dave Zirin
Kevin Zeese
Norman Solomon
Paul Craig Roberts
Ron Jacobs
Cindy Sheehan
Vijay Prashad
Ben Tripp
Dave Lindorff
Francis A. Boyle
Brian Concannon
Lila Rajiva
Sen. Robert Byrd
Ray McGovern
Chris Floyd

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

22. Israel has spied on the US more than once

The Likud party is no better than W and the Neo-Cons. In many ways they are much worse.

How many innocent Palestinians have been killed by militant Israelis? Every time they kill some Palestenian kids with weapons made in USA, the Arabs have another reason to hate us.

They are a millstone around our neck as far as Middle East policy goes and just as repressive as any Nazi ever was.

However, most US politicians won't say anything like this because AIPAC will come after them in primaries if they are Democrats. Remember what they did to Cynthia McKinney?

Now, feel free to call me anti-Semetic, etc. It's the last line of defense. Total bullshit.

[Behind the Aegis]

29. The US has spied on Israel.

As for your last statement...:eyes:

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

34. The Israeli lobby drives our Middle East policy and I'm sick of it

I'd prefer we act in our national interest, not Israel's.

It makes no more sense than the way we allow a bunch of bitter Cubans in Miami drive our policy towards Cuba.

[Behind the Aegis]

35. No...

...our thirst for oil and unnatural relations with the Saudi Kingdom drive our policies.

[Peace Patriot]

6. Incomplete OP--you left out the part about Hillary...

Here's part of it:

"AIPAC’s hypocrisy is stomach-turning, to say the least.  The goliath lobbying organization wants Iran to be slapped across the knuckles while the crimes of Israel continue to be ignored.  And who is propping up AIPAC’s hypocritical position?  Senator Hillary Clinton of New York.

 "As the top Democratic recipient of pro-Israel funds for the 2006 election cycle thus far, pocketing over $58,000 as of October 31 last year, Senator Clinton now has Iran in her cross-hairs...."

------

It's quite a rant against Hillary, who is accused of ignoring Israel's violations of numerous UN resolutions and violence against Palestinians. Me? I tend to think the writer--Joshua Frank--is correct. A US Senator--and our gov't--should maintain an "honest broker" position, and a much more neutral stance, in trying to defuse the Mideast tinderbox. Wisdom and diplomacy are called for. The situation is very, very dangerous, with the potential to end all life on earth. (Read Carl Sagan's "The Cold and the Dark," about the impacts to our planet's atmosphere of even a limited nulcear exchange.)

But wisdom, diplomacy, neutrality and honesty are not in the cards. I think it's likely that we will have Hillary Clinton imposed upon us as our only choice for Democratic candidate for president in '08. And that means that we will have no say in an expanded Mideast war and extended US military occupation of several Mideast countries, after we have bombed Iran and Syria into submission. I would prefer a Gore/Kerry ticket--for reasons of "poetic justice"--both men were illegally deprived of the White House--and because I think they would NOT violate the sovereignty of those additional countries and slaughter more innocent people, whereas I think Hillary will.

But I truly believe that it will not be our choice. We now have Bushite corporatations--mainly Diebold and ES&S--tabulating all our votes with "TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code, with virtually no audit/recount controls. The corporate privatization of our election system is nearly complete, despite vigorous grass roots citizen efforts to stop it, and both the primary and general elections will be used to install more pro-war candidates, despite overwhelming opposition to the war by the American people. (58%! before the invasion, in Feb. '03; increased to something like 70% today).

The pro-war Party, which consists of the pro-war faction of powerful Democrats, and the near total pro-war bent of Republicans--has guaranteed success. Hillary may be somewhat kinder on social issues, but she has positioned herself for the main chance, by aligning herself, basically, withthe Bush Cartel and the Neo-Cons on the Mideast war.

They might let her win, for their own purposes. The fatcats can afford to yield a little on social issues. And I think only a Democrat can get them a military Draft. They may also want to start blaming the Democrats for Bush's financial and foreign policy disasters--as those chickens come home to roost--and make the Dems responsible for various kinds of protests that might erupt, all possibly preparatory to installation of the real Hitler, in '12. (They are most certainly setting up the precedents--torture, domestic spying, exceutive lawlessness, war by presidential fiat--for a dictator; the current fascists may be more thieves than Nazis, but the powers they are asserting--and seem to be getting away with--are scary as hell.)

I think that one of our few chances to recover our democracy is to get election reform under Hillary, who may have a hard time opposing election transparency. Either we restore our right to vote in the near future--state by state, county by county, or more quickly by a Congressional bill--or our democracy is over, although it will surely linger in the hearts of Americans and all free people, and never really die.

One other thing I would be wary of is political fractiouness--once the candidates are chosen for us, especially in '08, after we've tried to have our say in the primary campaigns. I fear the precedent of Germany in the early 1930s, when the center/left fell apart and could not govern. There are most certainly signs that we are being set up for center/left rupture, and for economic and other hardships, that paved the way for Hitler in that era. As much as the War Democrats anger me--and as betrayed as I feel by the Democratic Party leadership on our completely non-transparent election system, controlled by rightwing corporations--I am not inclined to split off, or to take my anger out on Hillary (if she becomes prez) which more properly belongs to the Bush junta. It is a hopeless endeavor (maybe a moral necessity, but hopeless as to practical effect) to protest this junta's actions; whereas it might not feel so hopeless against a Dem adminisitration. And there's the rub! We, the great progressive majority in this country, have only one party that is even worth speaking to. Will we rip it apart over the bombing of Iran, or a military Draft, or will we be better strategists this time, and bargain for restoration of our right to vote?

-------------------------

Some resources:

www.votersunite.org
www.verfiedvoting.org
www.UScountvotes.org
www.TruthIsAll.net
www.solarbus.org/election/index.shtml

Also of interest:
www.tmsfeatures.com/tmsfeatures/subcategory.jsp?file=20051124ctnbk-a.txt&catid=1824&code=ctnbk
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x380340
and
Sign the petition. http://www.rushholt.com/petition.html

[Tace]

7. Thanks For Including

Cheers

[OKNancy]

8. This thread isn't about election reform

However:

The United States of America is the leading democracy in the world. In order to maintain our strong democracy, every American must be confident in his or her ability to cast a vote, verify that vote, and never doubt that the vote that he or she intends to cast is counted. I have worked hard and will continue to work hard to ensure that every American has that confidence.

In an effort to achieve that goal, last year I joined Senators Bob Graham and Barbara Boxer in introducing the RECORD ACT to require all electronic voting systems to produce a voter-verified paper ballot for use in manual recounts. In addition, among other provisions, the legislation contained a number of requirements designed to significantly improve the security of voting systems. It also authorized funding to help states and local governments implement the paper trail requirement.

In the summer of 2004, I requested that the Government Accountability Office conduct a study of how the states were addressing a number of issues concerning our federal election systems, including provisional ballots, the purging of voters, voter registration, and identification. Before the November 2004 elections, I also sent a letter to President Bush, calling upon him to use his full authority to prevent voter intimidation and disenfranchisement of American citizens.

On February 17 of this year, I introduced the Count Every Vote Act of 2005 (S. 450), which was crafted to address many of the problems Americans experienced in trying to vote and have their vote counted in both the 2000 and 2004 elections. Specifically, the Count Every Vote Act addresses a wide range of problems, including long wait times in which to vote, the erroneous purging of voters, voter suppression and intimidation, and unequal access to the voting process. The legislation also requires a paper trail for all voters, mandates national standards in a variety of areas, including the registration of voters and the counting of provisional ballots, provides for re-enfranchisement for those convicted of crimes but who have fully repaid their debt to society, and calls for election day registration and a national holiday to make it easier for many Americans to vote.
http://clinton.senate.gov/issues/election/

[Peace Patriot]

12. I am glad to hear of these actions by Senator Clinton, but, really, the

Democratic Party leadership should have burned DC to the ground to prevent Bushite Corporations from gaining control of vote tabulation with 'TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code, and virtually no audit/recount controls.

Letters to Bush? Bah! His buds were counting the votes--in SECRET!

Really, it's quite an unforgivable failure of the Dem leadership. How can they have consented to this? They should have boycotted the election! THAT would have caused a ruckus! Instead of legitimizing ELECTION THEFT MACHINES.

Russ Holt's HR 550 is much more to the point: it will BAN UNDISCLOSED SOFTWARE, effectively elmininating private corporations from the voting system (among other things)--and that's what is needed. A ban on PRIVATIZATION. Sign the petition. http://www.rushholt.com/petition.html

Anyway, glad to hear this. Thanks for posting it! So, there may indeed be hope that we can achieve real election reform in a new Clinton regime. I would hope that would be true of any Democrat. But I'm glad to have it confirmed. But I don't think we should agree to any half-assed measures like these. I am wary of "national standards" because they might codify electronic voting, and deny the states and counties a choice. The best solution is paper ballots, until we can devise an open-source code and completely secure electronic system. The damage that has been caused by the Bushite electronic voting system, to our democracy, and to the people who are dead in Iraq, and in Louisiana, and the people who have been tortured, is difficult to get out of one's mind.

[Peace Patriot]

9. Note on some of the above comments:

We must never forget--because the Iranians have not forgotten--that the US destroyed Iran's democracy in 1953, and installed the horrible Shah, who ruled by torture.

We are reaping the fruit of that monstrous deed. When they finally got rid of the Shah--after 25 years of the worst kind of oppression--the country quite naturally fell into the hands of the imams, who have insulated the country from western influence, out of fear and JUSTIFIED paranoia. The Bush Cartel means them no good. They will freely slaughter tens of thousands of Iranians, to get control of their oil (and their oil contract with China), just as they did in Iraq. And the Bush junta is quite deliberately stoking up paranoia in Iran, and driving Iran to desperately seek nuclear weapons for their own protection.

Can you blame them?

The constant repetition of this remark by the Iranian politician (forgot his name) about the Jews, the Holocaust and Europe, among western war profiteering corporate news monopolies, and among western war profiteering politicians, is no accident. Bush has called THEM a third of the "Axis of Evil." There is irrationality and madness on both sides. The hated west bolsters up the imams' power; the hated "Axis of Evil" replies in kind. It is very, very similar to the leadup to the Iraq war. So WE should be VERY WARY of this manipulation of the newsstream. Have we learned nothing? (Does anyone even really know what this man said--that is not a translation by war profiteering corporate news monopolies? I know there was a retraction, by some other Iranian gov't figure. Do the quoters of the first guy ALSO quote the SECOND guy who issued the retraction?)

--------------

As for spoiled, snot-nosed, purer-than-thou, leftist male writers who defend the Palestinians (or take some other position offensive to the Democratic leadership, or find most Democratic Party leaders to be collusive and corrupt ), I get annoyed with these types of intellectual leftists, too. I stopped reading CounterPunch because, while I often agreed with the political analysis, I found NO POSITIVE ROAD TO TRAVEL THAT COULD EMPOWER PEOPLE LIKE ME, people who want American democracy to WORK RIGHT, people who believe in the fundamental fairness of Americans, and their love of peace and justice. Reading CounterPunch, you end up feeling that the only alternatives are to blow it all up or commit suicide. Is there nothing we can do?

My own analysis is that the majority of Americans are disempowered and, above all, DISENFRANCHISED. And so my personal mission is to help correct that--to throw these private corporations out of our election system--and to get a strong grass roots revolution under way, to accomplish that purpose. Revolutions often center around one catalyzing issue. Let it be our basic mechanism of power as a people: our right to vote, and our right to have our votes counted in fully transparent elections.

CounterPunch publishes some very good people--people who have helped educate me on a number of issues (on the Palestinian issue, for one thing, which I knew nothing about). And they often provide a forum for alternative views that should be heard. But the list of American sins and crimes that one reads there--and in some similar leftist publications--is not balanced with a description of the strengths of the American people and possible methods of ordinary people gaining power, here.

That is a big lack.

I found Josh Frank's article a bit shrill--and a bit overwritten. But he has a point. Hillary has allied herself with the Bush junta and with the Likud faction in Israel. That's true, as far as it goes. What next? What do we do when we are given no choice but to vote for Hillary or for some Republican Nazi? And why is it that we will have no choice? And how do we change that?

Those are my concerns. What's is beyond the leftist analysis? Where is empowerment by which to achieve better gov't policy--and real reform, for instance, a dismantling of this horrendous OFFENSIVE military machine that is such a temptation to fascist warmongers? HOW do we change this?

[Coastie for Truth]

11. You finally got to the core issue

They will freely slaughter tens of thousands of Iranians, to get control of their OIL (and their oil contract with China), just as they did in Iraq

it is all about

OIL

Not a "Greater Israel" or LIKUD or AIPAC - and it is set out in haec verb in the PNAC Bible --


AIPAC wouldn't make a pimple on a real Texas Oil Man's left butt cheek.

[Tace]

15. Peace Patriot -- I'm Very Interested In Your Reply

I'm the editor of World News Trust. I'm publishing Frank's stuff because we're open to well-reasoned submissions. Yet, I very much want to empower readers, and I want to provide avenues for solutions. Anyway, thanks for your reply. WNT is seeking to be a positive force. Cheers

[MH1]

21. Tace - please see posts 5 and 20 above.

If you continue to publish Frank's stuff, you are publishing a proven liar.

Is that the rep you want to build?

And "well reasoned" (which I won't sign up to anyway, but for purposes of argument...) is MEANINGLESS if the premises used in the reasoning are lies.

[Tace]

25. MH1 -- I'll Follow Up On Your Assertion That Frank Is Lying

I'll let you know what I come up with. Cheers

[Tace]

26. I Asked Frank What He Thinks About Your Assertion That He's Lying

He suggested you back up your assertion with facts.

Look, I don't want to get in the middle of something here. Frank's pieces are primarily commentary, or opinion. And, as you know, they are very controversial. Some people wholeheartedly agree. Others strongly disagree.

I don't necessarily agree with everything Frank writes. What's the common disclaimer? The opinions expressed by Frank are not necessarily those of World News Trust. Something like that. By the way, we put the author's name at the front the headline to indicate that the item is commentary. Perhaps we should mark commentary more clearly.

World News Trust is an ongoing grassroots effort with the participation of a few hundred DUers and others. The entire project is still in a very formative stage, and the WNT website is a very early open-source prototype. Most of the features, such as the forum, etc., are not yet functional.

WNT is meant to be non-partisan. Rather than a left-wing Fox, WNT is aimed at providing people with news of world events so that they can make informed decisions about their lives. That doesn't mean that we won't go after Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians or anyone else. It's just that, unlike DU, or say, Rawstory, we're progressive, but not partisan. We do, however, strive for the highest-possible journalistic standards. I encourage you to join the project, if you'd like. Simply register for the site, and we'll be in touch as the project unfolds.

We would like to have a lot more original news stories, but that costs money, and we've got a zero budget at this time.

If you'd like to take things up with Frank, contact him at [e-mail]

Cheers, Francis Goodwin

[kerrygoddess]

27. Kerry is the #1 Environmentalist in the Senate

Whenever I read anything from Joshua Frank I get that he has an axe to grind with all Dems. What is progressive about attacking everyone, especially those with good solid progressive records? That's regressive if you ask me.

[Tace]

30. Point Taken -- I Welcome Your Criticism

Interpretative journalism seeks to cover news in a way that is useful for people to make informed decisions about their lives. The key word is People -- not corporations, or governments, or the police.

I would use the word "scrutinize," rather than "attack," but I understand what you are saying. You make a good point.

[MH1]

32. *I* should "back up with facts?

Holy cow, Frank is the one that made the spurious, ridiculous accusation against Kerry in the first place. He didn't back his accusation up with any meaningful facts. He took meaningless trivia and stripped it of all context to make his point. When one of the premier environmental activist organizations in the country endorses the candidate in the primary, not to mention goes all out to try to get that person elected, a responsible journalist just MIGHT figure they should look at the situation a little more closely.

I had no idea you had a speaking relationship with Frank, btw. I'm glad you passed on our concerns.

The "Kerry not an environmentalist" article was so ridiculously off base - and clearly ill-intended, by its timing -that I would never have thought to write him about it - if I wrote to the author of every irresponsible hatchet job, I'd never get anything else done. Perhaps I will write to him now. He should understand that if he writes blatantly false pieces he will always be written off by people who know better.

And I once supported the Green Party and their goals. People like Nader, Cockburn, and Frank have pretty much burned all the bridges there, though. If someone wants to achieve what the Green Party claims to want, they'd better operate truthfully with regards to other people's actions and records. Otherwise they are just as bad as the neocons and other liars - not a dime's worth of difference between them, in my book.

[Tace]

33. : )

[kerrygoddess]

28. The vote in question

by Franks on the Healthy Forest Bill would not have made a difference. Here's how the Senate voted:

Senate Passage Vote: 10/30/2003 Passed: 80 - 14
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?vote_id=3338&can_id=S0421103

I'm all for raising a stink when a vote is close and someone misses it, but this where Franks embellishes instead of being forthright. The vote Kerry missed would not have changed the outcome. All of the environmentalists in this country recognize that Kerry is the environmental Senator.

[Tace]

31. I Encourage You To Tell It To Frank

I'm not sure how closely he's following this thread, and I can't act as middle-man in forwarding everyone's comments.

He can be reached at [e-mail]

Regards, Francis Goodwin

[Coastie for Truth]

10. You forgot some links - here they are

http://api-ec.api.org/newsplashpage/index.cfm>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=002006000000000000>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=002006001000000000>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=002006002000000000>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=B3460F57-7187-11D5-9F1B0008C7094D05>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=002006003000000000>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=002006004000000000>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=002006004001000000>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=002006004005000000>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=002006005000000000>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=002006006000000000>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=002006006007000000>
http://api-ep.api.org/issues/index.cfm?bitmask=002006008000000000>
http://api-ec.api.org/policy/index.cfm?bitmask=001001004000000000>

You were saying about powerful Washington lobbies with important friends in high places, like

[radio4progressives]

16. Peace Patriot - You are absolutely Spot on Target - bookmarked!

It is absolutely imperative that we have someone who is viewed as NEUTRAL - (no AIPAC or Likud ties)in brokering negotions with Iran, not just for the sake of the middle east, but the entire planet.

But I also regretfully agree with with your conclusions... And the underpinning issues around the Stolen Elections of 2000/2002/2004 (and most likely 2006)is key to understanding what's happened and why it will happen again unless WE Stop Them.

And I do love the idea of a Gore/Kerry ticket - that would be JUSTICE for each stolen election. Too bad too many paid operatives are trying frontload by constantly floating the list of usual suspects.

(sigh)

on edit: i also agree that the "powers that be" will likely put HRC in just cuz it appears they have their hands on the levers.

[AntiFascist]

24. Neocons playing both sides of the fence...

The ultimate goal of neocons, both Republican and Democratic, is to stir things up and drag out conflicts in the Middle East. It should be no surprise that Bush is enabling Iran while potential candidates for the 2008 presidency are coming to the rescue for Israel. This is the game we have been playing, maybe Israel is starting to catch on, realizing they are in the crosshairs.

[Peace Patriot]

13. One more thought on the OP. Someone upthread mentioned how they

hated those who target civilians--terrorist bombers--specifically Palestinians. And they also hate Bush & co. The two situations are rather different, however. Bush & co. slaughtered TENS OF THOUSANDS of innocent people, and has tortured many more, in Iraq. They have at their disposal the mightiest military machine in human history, replete with the most heinous weapons of mass destruction ever devised. They have near absolute power as to violence and every other kind of oppression. The Palestinians, on the other hand, are very weak, very poor, with little fire power (the proverbial rocks against tanks, often), and their lives are constantly made difficult by a number of oppressions--walls cutting them off from ancestral farmlands and orchards, refugee camps, checkpoints, rough treatment, imprisonment, torture, economic hardship, and social and political disorganization. The western world hardly ever hears about their plight, or their point of view on things. They are virtually without recourse.

Is it any wonder that they sometimes do desperate things, or that some of their leaders can play upon people's fears and hatreds to get them to do something desperate, like blow themselves up and take some Israelis with them?

Bush & co. slaughtered tens of thousands of innocent civilians BY CHOICE, in an unnecessary, unjust, illegal war, based on a pack of lies, conducted from a position of vast wealth and privilege.

The Palestinians, when they commit violent acts--all of which, taken together, don't even come close to the toll of the Bush junta--seem despairing and suicidal. What could drive people to such as act, as blowing themselves up? We really need to ask that.

We KNOW what the Bush Cartel is up to. But what are the Palestinians up to? And is it really fair to compare them?

Then there are the Israelis, who also seem desperate--although in a much stronger position than the Palestinians, due in part to their big bully of a brother, the US under the Bush junta. They are in an untenable position, in many respects--creating a medieval armed fortress amidst hostile neighbors. The two governments--Bushite and Likud--feed each other on unwisdom, it seems to me. It's kind of like a household full of guns, surrounded with fences and burglar alarms, and mean dogs, in a dangerous urban neighborhood. Are the people in that house really safe and secure? Is life worth it, to be living in an armed camp, afraid of everyone? How can community safety and security be achieved? That is, real safety and security. The big beneficiaries of that situation are the local gun dealers, and security firms--and, if they succeed in breaking into the armored house, the gangs who may steal all those guns.

Where is wisdom? What is real security? What does it consist of? And how to achieve it?

Anyway, I just wanted to point out the discrepancy of power between the Bush junta and the Palestinians (or others who may resort to suicide bombings or other desperate acts against civilians)--since someone upthread threw them together as all equally despicable. I don't think they are.

[OKNancy]

14. If you want to respond to my post

you should respond to me.

You wrote: hated those who target civilians--terrorist bombers--specifically Palestinians. And they also hate Bush & co

I never once mentioned Palestinians. I said insurgents who kill innocents. I think most people who read the post realized I meant Iraqi insurgents. In fact I said they sucked, not that I hate them.
By saying I said things I did not makes it look like I hate Palestinians.

All killers are bad, that was the whole point. For you to pull out the "George Bush is worse" stuff is exactly the point I was making. It's a bogus argument.
Palestinians have a right to a state of their own.
Israelis have a right to have their state and to not be wiped off the map as some wish.

You are right that I hate Bush.

[radio4progressives]

17. again, great to hear a voice of wisdom and insight as yours peace patriot

:applause:

[IndianaGreen]

18. Let's compare Hillary to Joe Lieberman, shall we?

When Hillary first visited Israel in 2002, she did not meet with a single Palestinian leader, preferring instead to meet with such rightwing luminaries like Binyamin Elon, Israel's Minister of Tourism who advocates the forceful removal of the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza. Hillary also shunned Israelis opposed to the occupation of Palestine.

When Joe Lieberman went to Israel in 2002, he met with members of Israel's peace movement and he traveled to Ramallah to meet with Palestinian leaders (not Arafat!).

Lieberman caught flak from the Israel's extreme rightwingers, while Hillary received accolades!

For additional information about Hillary read:

Hillary's Visit Is 'Transfer' Pol's Latest Coup

Re: http://www.forward.com/issues/2002/02.03.01/news2.html

Hillary in the Holy Land (her 2005 trip)

http://www.counterbias.com/468.html

Israel mission helps Hillary and Condi to court Jewish vote

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,251-1871413,00.html

To get a glimpse at the flak Lieberman caught, read:

Lieberman's Dream, Israel's Nightmare

http://www.kcholmim.org/nightmare.php