Operating Beyond the Law: Israeli Agents in the US

When a state arises from the dispossession of an Indigenous people and when that state persists in the brutalization, murder, and humiliation of the Indigenous people, some vociferous voices are likely to respond to such moral outrages. The dispossessors would be compelled to expiate their crimes or try and cover up their crimes. The Lobby1 is frequently accused of attempting to prevent or stifle debate about Israel and itself: a fabricated taboo. Nonetheless, more and more attention is being focused on The Lobby’s role in covering up Zionist crimes and its own criminal activity in the United States.

09764437-7-6cov220condense.jpg

Foreign Agents
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee from the 1963 Fulbright Hearings to the 2005 Espionage Scandal

by Grant F. Smith
(Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy, Washington, D.C., 2007)
Paperback ISBN: 0-9764437-7-5
Hardcover ISBN: 0-9764437-8-3

Just what is The Lobby, and how did it come about? Grant F. Smith, a director of research at the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy in Washington, D.C., has written a primer on The Lobby. In Foreign Agents: The American Israel Public Affairs Committee from the 1963 Fulbright Hearings to the 2005 Espionage Scandal, Smith chronicles AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee, originally the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs until a name change in 1959) from its origins in the American Zionist Council through the 1963 Fulbright Senate Hearings and up to the current campaign to push the United States to militarily attack Iran.

Smith tells of four laws that regulate the sphere within which AIPAC operates in the US: the Logan Act, which prohibits unapproved diplomacy on behalf of the US; federal election laws, which govern funding of campaigns and prohibit nonprofit corporations from coordinating political action committees (PACs) nationally; the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA), which requires disclosure of foreign agents and their activities in the US; and the 1917 Espionage Act which prohibits unlawful disclosure to another state of US national intelligence that is damaging to the US. Smith writes, “AIPAC has serially violated these four laws.”

AIPAC is able to get away with this because of its expanding influence in education, media, government, and the courts. However, there have been attempts to rein in AIPAC.

The Fulbright Senate hearings arose from a concern about the influence of unregistered foreign agents on policy and the public in the US. The corporate media is targeted with pro-Israel propaganda, is evidenced by the 1963 memo from Harry Steinberg of the American Zionist Committee. Such propaganda has thwarted US government efforts. Smith mentions one declassified US state department memo, indicating that the Israeli government and The Lobby had sabotaged the John F. Kennedy administration’s attempt to resolve the plight of Palestinian refugees.

Smith describes AIPAC’s murky operations, hiding it finances through intermediaries and money laundering, and refusing to divulge the names of its financial backers.

A measure of gratitude might be expected for US largesse provided to Israel, diplomatic maneuvers on its behalf, and forgiveness of Israeli crimes against the US. Smith, however, details Israeli sales of advanced US military technology to nations like China without US government approval, using underhanded methods to negotiate trade deals with the US, interfering in US elections, spying on the US, and Israeli terrorism against the US.

During bilateral free trade discussions, Israel used stolen US international trade documents to negotiate to its advantage. Smith notes that after the US-Israel Free Trade Agreement came into effect, the US trade deficit had ballooned to $47.5 billion by 2006.

The sanctity of US elections is also violated by Israel. Smith details shady shenanigans during the 1986 California Senate race and the 1988 AIPAC AstroTurf Political Action Committee — the latter, a scandal involving illegally coordinating PACs across the US. Efforts at upholding election laws have been lax. Eventually, the Federal Election Committee had to be sued to enforce violations of US election law in 1987. The outcome was disappointing and its appeal to the Supreme Court has been side-stepped repeatedly, leaving the case in limbo 20 years later.

Another legal prosecution ongoing is that against AIPAC employees Keith Weissman and Steven Rosen charged with mishandling classified US government information. Yet, as Smith reveals, Paul McNulty, the chief prosecutor in the case, let it be known that he wanted AIPAC to emerge minimally scathed.

Smith writes, “Israeli government officials were certainly involved in the Operation Susannah terrorist attack against US targets … [and that AIPAC] and its leadership have been strenuously engaged in garnering and channeling unconditional US political support for the ethnic cleansing and brutalization of indigenous Palestinian populations from conquered lands annexed, seized, or illegally occupied by Israel.”

Smith writes that The Lobby directed the US to “one of the most inane causes ever conceived: the military invasion of Iraq.” Moreover, Smith found that “the attacks of 9/11 provided a powerful catalyst to once again misdirect the US economy at an advantageous moment for the Israel lobby.”

Iraq has been devastated, and over a million Iraqi civilians have been killed following AIPAC lobbying for the illegal invasion. With Gazans being starved, Iraq in tatters, Lebanon slowly recovering, and Syria bombed, now AIPAC has its sights set on Iran. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), as Smith makes clear, is a propagandizing arm for AIPAC objectives. The desire for a US military attack on Iran is attested to by a 47% increase in WINEP’s Iran-centric media placements.

The violent thrust of Zionist colonialists into the Middle East has been turned it into a zone of lethality. The US colludes in the crimes of Zionism and has thereby, understandably, made itself an enemy of many Middle Eastern peoples. This is the danger of having Israeli agents operate beyond the law in the US. This is why Smith’s book is so valuable. It illuminates AIPAC chicanery in manipulating US policy in the Middle East.

In Foreign Agents, Grant Smith has drawn together the historical threads of a foreign lobby group that has managed to slip between the cracks despite its connection to numerous illegal activities in the United States. Foreign Agents reveals what every American citizen should know about AIPAC, the Israeli lobby which holds sway over many US politicians, and hence US politics, often to the detriment of US interests. A must read book.

  1. Israel Lobby is an imprecise designation; sociologist James Petras’s designation of Zionist Power Configuration better captures the essence of The Lobby, the latter designation I will apply in this review. []
Kim Petersen is a former co-editor of the Dissident Voice newsletter. He can be reached at: kimohp@gmail.com. Twitter: @kimpetersen. Read other articles by Kim.

52 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. jaime said on December 10th, 2007 at 10:08am #

    Here we go again.

    1) Jews are indigenous to the Middle East. And are just as indigenous if not more so than the Palestinian Arabs there now.

    2) Jews have lived in the Middle East continuously for thousands of years

    3) Jesus was Jewish.

    4) When Jews returned to the Middle East to reestablish a Jewish state they BOUGHT land from the locals.

    5) After the UN partitioned two states of Israel and Palestine in 1948, 5 Arab countries attacked and attempted to annihalate the nascent state of Israel and all of its inhabitants. They failed. The Jews took more land in a defensive war, which they are entitled to keep. Palestinian Arabs were displaced as a result of this war.

  2. Deadbeat said on December 10th, 2007 at 10:36am #

    Here we go again…

    [1] 700,000 indigenous Palestinians were expelled by the Zionist.

    [2] Israel is a racist entity

    [3] Israel is committing ethic cleansing of the Palestinians

    [4] Zionism is a racist ideology that has influenced U.S. politics and has polluted U.S. culture

  3. Ron Horn said on December 10th, 2007 at 10:52am #

    Jaime: Your five points, most of which contain partial truths, are essentially irrelevant to the thesis of the article that there are a very influential group of people in the U.S. who, committed to the interests of Israel, have illegally influenced U.S.’ policies and actions. In other words, they, the Zionists, function as a Fifth Column in the U.S.

  4. jaime said on December 10th, 2007 at 12:05pm #

    Thanks Ron,
    I read the article. However, it begins with a series of fundamental untruths.

    “When a state arises from the dispossession of an Indigenous people and when that state persists in the brutalization, murder, and humiliation of the Indigenous people..”

    Israel did not arise by dispossessing an “indigenous people.” There have been continuous enclaves of Jewish inhabitants in what we now call Israel for thousands of years and Zionist movement of the middle 1800’s to the 1900’s BOUGHT tracts of land from Arab landowners there. THEY DIDN’T CONQUER IT OR VIOLENTLY DISPLACE THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS.

    If you can prove otherwise, then please do so.

  5. greybeard said on December 10th, 2007 at 3:12pm #

    Tragically, Jaimie’s mind cannot be influenced by facts; it is occupied by an ideology. This mindset is well described by Lawrence Davidson in ‘Orwell and Kafka… http://www.logosjournal.com/davidson.htm

  6. greybeard said on December 10th, 2007 at 3:17pm #

    P.S. One of the few things that Ilan Pappe and Bennie Morris agree upon is that ethnic cleansing occurred. Morris merely laments that it was incomplete.

  7. jaime said on December 10th, 2007 at 3:56pm #

    Thanks Greybeard.

    I have another handicap here that you don’t. If the editor thinkis I’m making too good an argument, my post gets censored. This is because they don’t trust you to look at all sides of an issue and make your own conclusions. Specifically, I posted some info to illustrate my point concerning the FOUNDING of the modern State of Israel.

    As indicated above, the Zionist movement of the late 19th and early 20th century did not ” violently displace indigenous people.” They bought land to settle on.

    Like for instance, the townsite of what is today’s Tel Aviv.

    Details and history available here: http://www.macalester.edu/courses/geog61/rrobinson/index.html

    Now to address your point about Morris and Pappe. I believe that they’re problems with Israel and the displacement of the Palestinians date back to their unsuccessful 1948 war of attempted annihilation.
    And that’s fine, as far as that goes. But my point addressed Mr. Petersen’s opening phrase: “When a state arises from the dispossession of an Indigenous people” which is either an honest mistake or a deliberate distortion. Either way it’s historically incorrect.

    Thank you.

  8. dan elliott said on December 10th, 2007 at 4:08pm #

    Just a note to thank you, Kim, for your excellent review of this most important work.

    My take is that Grant Smith has compiled a Dossier, equivalent to a Police Report, which a prosecutor would use as the basis for a pleading in the appropriate format with which to go before a Grand Jury to seek an indictment.

    Once you read what Smith has laid out, you can’t avoid the conclusion that certain individuals, organizations, & “institutions” (such as Brookings?) have for decades been committing Felonies, doing acts in flagrant violation of Federal statutes, not to mention treaties/int’l law agreements/documents to which the US is signatory.

    So my question now is: who can we sue? Where are the progressive-minded lawyers who are going to find a way to get these matters into Federal Court?

    Surely under the US Constitution there has to be a way for citizens to bring to account a Prosecutor who fails to enforce the law?

    Not that litigation by itself will solve the problem, but if a respected team of attorneys filed such a suit & then held a Press Conf. on the courthouse steps, would The Nation & Democracy Now be able to avoid covering it?
    OOPS! just realized I’m doing it again: typing directly into a Comments box, which is a good way to lose everything typed by accidentally hitting the wrong key with my elbow, chin, whatever…

    So thanks again,

    SEND

  9. jaime said on December 10th, 2007 at 4:30pm #

    Hey Dan,

    Israel and Israeli agents running the US elections process?
    Some kind of parallel universe to what’s been taking place after the Annapolis Meeting and the internationally sanctioned “Road Map?”

    Uh huh.

    You’re going to need a BIG retainer, Honey….

  10. heike said on December 10th, 2007 at 4:40pm #

    Talk about being “occupied by an ideology.” Here is another view of Davidson.

  11. Dennis Brasky said on December 10th, 2007 at 9:42pm #

    After over 60 years of attempting to buy land (and promise NEVER to sell or lease it to an Arab!) as well as starve Palestinians out with the infamous Buy Jewish/Hire Jewish policy, the Zionist Yishuv (settler community in Palestine) owned no more than 7% of the land in 1947, according to the records of the Jewish National Fund. When Palestinian Arabs were expelled or sought to escape from the violence and bloodshed – and massacres like Deir Yassin, April 9, 1948 – as people throughout history have done during war, they were not allowed to return and their land, homes and farms were designated Absenteee Property and taken over by the State of Israel. Imagine abandoning your home because of a fire, hurricane or toxic train wreck and then told that you can’t return and that your property is no longer yours.

    Israel, as the price of admission to the UN agreed to comply with Resolution #194, allowing the Palestinians the right to return to their homes or be fairly compensated. Israel has ignored this resolution ever since, claiming that it is unfeasible to allow so many people (4 million in the Palestinian Diaspora) into a small country. Yet Israel has long sought to convince millions of Jews from the US, Canada, West Europe, Russia, and Argentina to make aliyah – move to Israel. Obviously it’s not a question of too many people but too many ARABS which would make a JEWISH state impossible.

  12. Sunil Sharma said on December 10th, 2007 at 9:43pm #

    Jaime,

    To say your comments are censored here on DV is just utter horse shit. Your numerous — and always anticipated — objections to any article we’ve run pertaining to the Israel-Palestinian conflict have always been approved for posting by all three of us editors. As long as your comments pertain to the specifics of a commented-upon article and aren’t ad hominem abusives, and they as far as I know have complied with these requirements, they get posted. So, if you want to disagree with the articles, call us purveyors of untruths regarding Palestine, yadda yadda . . . be my guest. But please, let’s not enjoy free reign in the Comments section and then have the audacity to cry censorship because that’s a crock.

    Best,

    — Sunil

  13. Mayday said on December 10th, 2007 at 10:41pm #

    Jamie,
    As I understand it many of the indiginous Jews of Palestine (the Jews prior to the immigration of European Jews) were, and still are, against the idea of a Zionist state. Some have religious objections, others because of the tragic effects it has had on the Palestinian people. If so I do not believe one can claim them in any foundational way as a justification for a Jewish state.
    The fact of the matter is that there is a Jewish state and it doesn’t matter what the initial justifications were. What matters now and what matters most is that they give justification NOW to their existence. That possibility, I believe, exists. Sadly, and ironically, the unqualified nature of US support (as crafted by AIPAC) enables a hubris that, in the end, destroys any justification of Israel and may lead to the destruction of Israel itself. Fortunately there is more ACTUAL debate in Israeli media than there ever is in US media. Debate that recognizes that the love of one’s country does not preclude recognition of its faults

  14. jaime said on December 10th, 2007 at 11:05pm #

    Thank you Sunil,

    So why pray tell was my earlier info about the founding of Tel Aviv removed?

    No ad hominems. (even though I get plenty of them) Not even a complaint about antisemitism.

    Editorial consistency is not exactly a strong point here.

    Meanwhile, neither Ron nor anyone else has effectively countered my 2 points. Intentionally or not Mr. Petersen’s opening premise is historically untrue.

    1) The modern state of Israel was not founded by conquering and displacing “indigenous people.”

    2) Jews are indigenous to the Middle East.

  15. Angie Tibbs said on December 10th, 2007 at 11:24pm #

    “Jamie”, seemingly the resident fiction writer in DV’s Comment section, is back doing what he does best — defending amd/or ignoring ongoing Israeli terrorism and, in the processs, attempting to rewrite history. This time he has changed his tactic somewhat. It isn’t enough that he lists out his pathetic attempts to disinform. Now he is challenging us by ending his little spiel with a flourish: “If you can prove otherwise, then please do so”.

    Wrong, O not so wise one! You are making these assertions. You prove them. Your arrogant “if you can prove otherwise, then please do so”, is right up there with another phrase I’m sure you are familiar with, that being “you didn’t answer my question”.

    Check out any open forum where Israeli atrocities are discussed, and you’ll hear from a multitude of “Jamies”, all uttering the same propaganda. This twisted mindset has nothing to do with ideology. It has all to do with keeping the sheep in line and ensuring that the truth is nicely trampled on.

    Having already proven himself delusional, Jamie then whines, “If the editor thinkis I’m making too good an argument, my post gets censored.” (His typos, not mine.)

    What “argument” might that be? It would never occur to this individual that the editors of DV have every right to decide what is published in their newsletter and what isn’t. And as DV is on the side of truth and justice, Jamie ought not be surprised if, as he says, his ”post gets censored”.

    The terrorist state of Israel was founded on brute force in someone else’s homeland. And it has been maintained through brute force and outright lies ever since. Jamie, of course, wouldn’t dream of mentioning that it was Jewish terrorisrts, Begin and Shamir, leaders of the brutal Stern and Irgun gangs, who introduced terror techniques into Palestine in the early forties. These included car bombings, kidnappings. assassinations. and the like, all of which have been refined and maximized by the more sophisticated Israeli terrorism of today.

    The Jewish/Israeli eradication of all things Palestinian – their lives, their homes, their lands, their culture – has been a work in progress prior to 1947 and it continues to the present day.

    Even if we start with the deliberate and premeditated bombing of King David Hotel in July 1946 (with agreement from David-Ben-Gurion) wherein a mostly civilian group of 92 innocents were slaughtered, Jewish/Israeli terrorism has been monumental.

    From the night time Baldat al-Shaikh massacre on January 30/31, 1947 wherein 60 or more civilians were returned to dust (again, mostly older people, women, and children) on to Yehida, Khisas, Qazaza, the unspeakable horrors of Deir Yassin (again, all civilians) on through the decades (and I’ll name just a few) — the 1953 massacre at Qibya. another night time atrocity that targeted and killed approximately 60 civilians in their homes; Al-Sammou in 1966 where 18 people were murdered; the Hanin Massacre (20 people) the Saida Massacre in 1981 (another 20 dead) on to Qana in 1996 wherein 106 civilians were vapourized (116 wounded) when Israel terrorists attacked a UN compound; on to the second Qana massacre in 2006 (again, all civilians, over half children), the history of Israel is littered with the bodies of dead Palestinian and Lebanese men, women, and children in massacre after massacre, and there is no end in sight.

    Going back to 1947 the preferred modus operandi was to enter Arab villages under cover of darkness when residents were asleep and murder them in their beds. The IDF continues this tactic today, thus maximizing the terror already being experienced by an occupied people. And then, as now, the propaganda machine was working overtime.

    I note Jamie doesn’t question or mention the zionist desire for “The Greater Israel”. Because, of course, underneath all the diversionary tactics, the Greater Israel is becoming more and more a reality. Ilan Pappe and Benny Morris call it ethnic cleaning; I call it what it is — the slow motion genocide of the Palestinian people. And, no, the words are not interchangeable..

  16. jaime said on December 11th, 2007 at 12:17am #

    Thanks Angie, but you know that’s just more of the same old piss and moan.

    And strange as it may seem, Israel is actually looking to get out of the occupation business, not go for more of it.

    Would you believe that there actually are folks out here who WANT to see a reasonable settlement and a successful, prosperous Palestinian state side by side with Israel.

    Anybody can keep bringing up recriminations. It takes guts to build for a viable future. Slight problem is that not everyone’s on the same page, and of course there are others who just can’t accept a majority Jewish state in the Middle East.

    So what do you want to do now? Do you want to kill everyone in Israel? Do you think an armed response is the way to go? Or do you think that it’s better to try and negotiate something?

    That’s not a facetious line of questioning. There are are plenty of folks on this board who would be very happy to see rivers of blood. In the name of Peace and justice, of course.

  17. Laurence Lowe said on December 11th, 2007 at 1:01am #

    A while back, a nasty, violent group of people attacked and murdered the Citizens living peacefully in the towns and cities of Palestine. Men, women and children were slaughtered. Their motive? They desired the original occupants land. Their justification? Their God told them it was OK to do so. Nice guy.
    Eventually they, in turn, were kicked out. By the Romans as it happens.
    Now, 2000 years later, people from all around the world, mostly of different ethnicity but a similar religious belief, claim the right to that land and have waged a ruthless expansion against those who have lived there for the last two millennium.
    If this behaviour is to be sanctioned, as it seems so many people who live in the west think, so must America respect the desire of their original Native peoples, Britain the Celts, Europe the pre- Gemanic tribes etc., etc., etc., if the wish to have their own lands back. So what are you waiting for Jamie – out you go. Oh, and by the way, leave the keys in the door. Dunno where you can go though. Most of the planet is already spoken for.

  18. jaime said on December 11th, 2007 at 9:26am #

    “Dunno where you can go though. Most of the planet is already spoken for.”

    Almost Exactly my unanswered point above. You’ve got a population of 7 million relatively well armed people, most of whom simply have no where else to go. About 1/2 the population are descendants from Jews of Arab countries who were immediately and violently exiled, penniless and stateless the day after the UN declared the partition of the Middle east and the creation of the modern state of Israel.

    Another big portion are survivors and their descendants of the European Holocaust of the Jews.

    What do you want to do about these people? Kill them all? Or try and work something out?

    Right now, as difficult as it is, folks are attempting to do so. How about this. Instead of nurturing violent fantasies about how “Jews control the world,” why not do something positive towards the realization of a viable Palestinian state? ie: develop business skills and volunteer them to build industry and exports in what will eventually become a Palestinian state?

    Or does that make too much sense?

  19. Angie Tibbs said on December 11th, 2007 at 10:16am #

    “Thanks Angie, but you know that’s just more of the same old piss and moan”.
    This is, indeed, a curious but predictable description of 60 years of brutal Israeli oppression/occupation, Jamie. To dismiss the ongoing massacres of the Palestinian people as “old piss and moan” speaks loudly to your support of Israeli terrorism. It says that you believe it is perfectly okay to kill Palestinian people, terrorize them, keep them defenceless, without civil, human, social, and economic rights, destroy their culture, and then pretend they are the oppressors. You have shown us your twisted mindset in all its ugliness.

    “And strange as it may seem, Israel is actually looking to get out of the occupation business, not go for more of it”.
    Excuse me? “Occupation business”? The brutal annexation of the Palestinian homeland “an occupation business”? Get out of it? Considering its illegal squatters, known foolishly as “settlers”, have terrorized, with the aid of the willing Shin Bet and IDF, much of the West Bank, especially Hebron and Nablus, considering that the terrorist state of Israel is annexing most of East Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley as we speak, it certainly looks as though it is getting out of the occupation business. Bad choice of words there, Jamie. Occupation is not a “business”. It is a crime.

    “Would you believe that there actually are folks out here who WANT to see a reasonable settlement and a successful, prosperous Palestinian state side by side with Israel.”
    Oh, come now. How often have Zionists uttered such an asinine comment? Believe me if there are people out there who “WANT’ (the capital letters are Jamie’s not mine) a successful and prosperous Palestinian state “side by side with Israel”, I can only ask them in all seriousness, where, pray tell, is this “Palestinian state” going to be? Quite a myth, one of many, isn’t it? Are you talking about a few noncontiguous enclaves here and there in the West Bank, traversed over by Jews only roads? Are you talking about pushing the Palestinians from what’s left of the West Bank and East Jerusalem into Gazam and surround it as is the case today, keep every Palestinian nicely trapped in a huge outdoor prison? A concentration camp, if you will? Because right now to suggest a “Palestinian state” after the PA infrastructure was destroyed down to the last computer disk by terrorist, Ariel Sharon and his killers in 2002, is but a continuation of the propaganda we’ve been listening to for way too long. You’re not fooling anyone with this nonsense.

    “Anybody can keep bringing up recriminations.”
    Actually, Jamie, no one on this planet can bring up “recriminations” with the practised ease of jews inside and outside of Israel. In fact, jews like Simon Wiesenthal travelled the world searching out Nazi war criminals, and we are never allowed to forget for a moment the holocaust narrative which is always dusted off and brought to the fore whenever anyone dares to criticize the terrorist state of Israel and its multitude of war criminals past and present. You once again show your lack of concern when crimes are committed by jews against Palestinians. How dare you suggest for a moment that one human being is more important, more worthy of living, than another? How dare you suggest that those who commit atrocities against the Palestinian people be free to do so at will and with impunity and their crimes must never be mentioned?

    “It takes guts to build for a viable future”.
    For whom? It’s difficult to build any kind of present, much less a future, when one never knows when a husband, father, brother, son, mother is going to be yanked out of the family home and held in detention indefinitely simply because they are Palestinian; when one isn’t allowed to farm and harvest one’s crops; when olive trees that have stood for centuries are bulldozed into the earth, or stolen in broad daylight by illegal squatters; when Palestinian children are not safe anywhere from the ever present threat of an IDF terrorist’s bullet; when Palestinian people are denied access to medical assistance and hospitals cannot obtain crucial medical supplies; when electricity is curtailed, and on and on, one blatant war crime against humanity after another, a tactic Israel is well versed in. In fact, no one does it better or more often. And you have the gall to speak about a “viable future”?

    “Slight problem is that not everyone’s on the same page, and of course there are others who just can’t accept a majority Jewish state in the Middle East.”
    You’re correct. Everyone is not, blessedly, on the same page. People of good conscience can clearly see what Israel’s game plan is, and to be on the “same page” would be to support and applaud ongoing terrorism against an indigneous people.

    As for a “majority Jewish state”, what a racist concept! If someone were to suggest a “white only” or “black only” state, the world would be outraged. Racism is racism, and a “majority Jewish state” reeks of racism.

    “So what do you want to do now? Do you want to kill everyone in Israel? Do you think an armed response is the way to go?” An armed response from whom? It sickens me to constantly hear the self-absorbed whining about poor little Israel; a brutal entity, kept afloat on the backs of tax payers of the United States, pretending to be a victim. Not only does it havc the largest military in the region, together with every conceivable war toy including nuclear weapons, but it has ensured over the years of occupation that no one in the immediate area would ever attain weapons with which to defend themselves; hence, it can attack (and has and does) at will. The 1967 war is a brutal and deadly example of Israeli lies.

    As for “wanting to kill everyone in Israel”, are you not being rather facetious? Tossing out the diversionary tactic again, aren’t you, Jamie? Much like “Israel has a right to defend itself” – as if no one else in the Middle East does. How you could ask this question in light of the ongoing Isreali extermination of the Palestinian people is incomprehensible.

    “Or do you think that it’s better to try and negotiate something?”
    You mean, like, Oslo? That little charade presented a perfect opportunity for Isreal to broaden its illegal squatter neighbourhoods, to establish facts on the ground, and continue to whine about Palestinian “terrorism” when Israel, itself, was, and continues to be, the master of terrorism. Or Camp David? That exercise in lies and deceit, the mythical “generous offer” of war criminal, Barak, followed by the provocative visit to the Temple Mount by life-long terrorist, Ariel Sharon, which resulted in the cold blooded murder of several Palestinian activists, which led to the second Intifadah. Since September 2000, a total of 972 (and counting) Palestinian children have been murdered by Israeli terrorists masquadering as an army; thousands of adults have been returned to dust, and thousands more have been mained and permanently injured.

    The farce at Annapolis in late November is another example of nothing actually being done but plenty of rhetoric interspersed with the usual meaningless cliches. I would suggest to you, Jamie, that when the word “peace” is uttered by Israeli politicians and/or its military (one and the same) it becomes a dirty word. Because Israel does not want peace, it has never wanted peace. It wants all of Palestine. Its actions speak much louder than its words.

    “That’s not a facetious line of questioning.”
    Others on this site can arrive at their own conclusions re your “questioning”.

    “There are are plenty of folks on this board who would be very happy to see rivers of blood.”
    There has been no shortage of Palestinian blood, has there, Jamie? And body parts of Palestinian men, women, and children splattered about the West Bank and Gaza. Have you raised your voice in condemnation against the spilling of Palestinian blood over the past 60 years?

    Don’t speak of peace and justice while supporting Israeli terrorism coupled with the zionist dream of a Greater Israel. Peace without justice is meaningless. How can you support and/or justify the ongoing murder and dispossession of Palestinian people that Israeli terrorists carry out with impunity?

    If you believe occupied and oppressed people should not be free to live in peace and security, what does that make you?

  20. jaime said on December 11th, 2007 at 11:54am #

    I’m sorry Angie.
    Your note presumably to me is so filled with hysterical misconceptions unfounded accusations and, frankly, hateful fantasy that there’s really not much point in further discussion with you.

    Here’s two examples of irrational hate:

    You wrote:
    “…To dismiss the ongoing massacres of the Palestinian people…”

    ONGOING MASSACRES? What ongoing massacres? What ongoing massacres? This is your purely hateful fantasy.

    “..you believe it is perfectly okay to kill Palestinian people, terrorize them, keep them defenceless…..”

    WHERE HAVE I SAID THAT? The fact is that I never have.

    Don’t put words in my mouth. If you want to bring bring someone up on what they posted, then quote what they wrote so everyone can see.

    Otherwise you’re ranting like someone who’s mentally ill.

    Go to the gym and hit a punching bag.

  21. Kim Petersen said on December 11th, 2007 at 12:41pm #

    I’m sorry Jaime.

    Your note presumably to me is so filled with hysterical misconceptions [and] unfounded accusations and, frankly, hateful fantasy that there’s really not much point in further discussion with you.

    As for ongoing massacres, try the assassination of Sheikh Yassin and seven other humans in 2004. Try seven Palestinians, three of them children, killed on a beach in Beit Lahia by Israeli shells in the summer of 2006. Try the mass starvation now taking place in Gaza. Patrick Cockburn wrote on 8 September 2006: “Many people are being killed by Israeli incursions that occur every day by land and air. A total of 262 people have been killed and 1,200 wounded…” The article began ominously: “Gaza is dying. The Israeli siege of the Palestinian enclave is so tight that its people are on the edge of starvation. Here on the shores of the Mediterranean a great tragedy is taking place that is being ignored because the world’s attention has been diverted by wars in Lebanon and Iraq.” This is a massacre in the making. Your reply to Angie adduces that you “dismiss the ongoing massacres of the Palestinian people.” Denial of these massacres may better be termed “hateful.”

    And how you cry when someone deduces your unspoken mindset. And who began with such tactics? Did you not write first the “hateful” nonsense: “Do you want to kill everyone in Israel?” WHERE HAD ANGIE SAID THAT? The fact is that she never did.

    Don’t put words in other people’s mouths. If you want to bring someone up on what they posted, then quote what they wrote so everyone can see. It’s not nice to have your words thrown back at you, is it?

    I submit that your reply is better characterized as “filled with hysterical misconceptions.”

    So stop “ranting like someone who’s mentally ill” and take your own advice: “Go to the gym and hit a punching bag.”

  22. Kim Petersen said on December 11th, 2007 at 12:53pm #

    Thanks for your note Dan.

    Grant Smith has written in his book about the reluctance of the government to press charges against AIPAC’s illegal acts and even the Supreme Court’s reluctance. As Smith wrote, the evidence is all there to prosecute, but there is a lack of political and, it seems, judicial will to apply the law.

    As a general statement, some might suggest that “progressive-minded lawyers” is an oxymoron.

  23. jaime said on December 11th, 2007 at 1:15pm #

    Webster:
    1mas·sa·cre \ˈma-si-kər\
    Function: noun Etymology: Middle French
    Date: circa 1578

    1 : the act or an instance of killing a number of usually helpless or unresisting human beings under circumstances of atrocity or cruelty 2 : a cruel or wanton murder 3 : a wholesale slaughter of animals 4 : an act of complete destruction

    ————-

    Dear Kim,

    Sheik Yassin’s assassination in 2004 with collateral victims is NOT an ONGOING massacre.

    There is NO MASS STARVATION going on in Gaza right now. There are shortages of items that used to be imported from Israel. But due to DAILY ONGOING ATTACKS by Gazans, the shipping terminals to Israel are mostly closed.

    Also, the word “massacre” implies that the victims are helpless. The Gazans are violently attacking Israelis across an internationally recognized border with terror weapons like rockets and mortars.
    They’re heavily armed. And by no means helpless.

    I’m going to keep a copy of this just in case you think your readers shouldn’t consider what I’ve said.

  24. jaime said on December 11th, 2007 at 1:23pm #

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Yassin

    Nice fellow, Mr. Yassin.

    “the Palestinian bin Laden”

    Yassin, responsible for numerous murderous terror attacks, resulting in the deaths of many civilians, both Israeli and foreign.

    Yassin co-founded Hamas with Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi, originally calling it the Palestinian Wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, and becoming its spiritual leader. Hamas is regarded as a terrorist organization by many national governments.[2]

    Yassin became disillusioned with the peace process with the Israelis and was skeptical that it would ever actually lead to peace. He instead supported resistance against Israel. He also asserted that Palestine is an Islamic land “consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day” and that no Arab leader had the right to give up any part of this territory. [1]

    Yassin did not restrict his remarks to Israelis, but included all Jews stating that “Reconciliation with the Jews is a crime.”

  25. Angie Tibbs said on December 12th, 2007 at 7:30pm #

    “mas·sa·cre \ˈma-si-kər\
    Function: noun Etymology: Middle French
    Date: circa 1578

    1 : the act or an instance of killing a number of usually helpless or unresisting human beings under circumstances of atrocity or cruelty 2 : a cruel or wanton murder 3 : a wholesale slaughter of animals 4 : an act of complete destruction ”

    And this refutes what, Jamie? Certainly it does not, under any circumstances, disprove what I wrote. Item (2) in your posted definition reads “a cruel or wanton murder”. If the assassination of Sheikh Yassin was not “a cruel or wanton murder”, what was it? Assassinating a helpless, almost blind elderly man in a wheelchair while he was leaving morning prayers certainly falls into your own posted definition of a massacre.

    The execution of Dr. Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi falls under the heading of a “cruel or wanton murder”; likewise, the 972 (and counting) Palestinian children who have been killed by Israeli terrorists since September 2000. The thousands of unarmed men and women who have been gunned down, or blown to bits by an Israeli bomb or missile, by definition, have been massacred. And please don’t try and argue the meaningless, trite “collateral damage”. People of good conscience do not accept such immoral acts. It is simply a sick description of murder, and Israeli terrorists are quite proficient at murder.

    So by posting your chosen definition, you have confirmed what I’ve stated about ongoing massacres of the Palestinian people. Where does that leave you?

    The only time a massacre is not a massacre is when Israel commits same!!

    We have been informed by the Israeli propaganda machine, working on its chosen goal in life — maximizing the perception of Israel under seige whilst defaming the Palestinian people and those of us who dare seek truth and justice — that as Isreali massacres go, there were none.

    a) there was no Deir Yassen in 1948
    b) no Sabra and Shatilla in 1982
    c) no Jenin in 2002
    d) no Qana in 1996, no Qana in 2006
    e) no Beit Lahia in June 2006
    f) no Beit Hanoun in November 2006
    g) no Lebanon in 2007

    I could go on right back to the early 1940s, but I have no intention of taking up the amount of space required to list same. However, I can well imagine the flutter of activity such a list of all Israeli massacres would elicit as those in denial rush forth to claim, for instance, that Dahmash Mosque massacre never happened!

    You are not going to have it both ways, Jamie, and I am not remotely interested in playing your semantics game. Undeniably, many people are dead at the hands of Israel, and that is murder! And as your Webster definition states a massacre is cruel and wanton murder, well . . .

  26. Mayday said on December 12th, 2007 at 10:32pm #

    Notice how the comments here are no longer about the original article? Just an observation.

  27. jaime said on December 12th, 2007 at 11:49pm #

    Thanks Angie,

    Rantisi and Yassin.

    And that folks, is our cheering section for the Hamas here today.
    No big deal.

    But to most of the free world they are a murderous, backward terrorist group.

    They gave the world a great gift. Raising children to hate and kill and stuffing their heads and hearts with fairy tales about 72 virgins in paradise if they blew up pizza parlours and hospitals.

    So you still didn’t answer my most basic question. How would you begin to resolve the conundrum that is the Middle East situation between the Palestinians and the Jews? All I’ve seen you offer so far are recriminations and distortions.

    Do you think that this can or should eventually be resolved with blood or with ink?

  28. jaime said on December 13th, 2007 at 2:13am #

    Let’s have a closer look at Angie’s “ongoing massacres”

    Deir Yassen in 1948

    – No doubt WAS was a massacre by the Israelis. Occurred during the 1948 war, in response to Arab atrocities against Jewish population.

    Sabra and Shatilla in 1982

    – No doubt WAS a massacre. But was by Lebanese Christians against Palestinians in Lebanon in direct response to atrocities against them. Not committed by Israelis. Although the area in which this happened was theoretically under Israeli military control.

    Jenin in 2002

    – Technically Not a massacre. A pitched battle between the IDF and heavily armed Palestinians. IDF was responding to terror masssacres in Israel by Palestinian suicide bombers.

    Qana in 1996, Qana in 2006

    I think the first was an accidental shelling of a civilian area in Lebanon by IDF. Could be called a massacre. Second was a bombing of an apartment building used by armed Hezbollah soldiers as a civilian shield mfrom which they launched missiles, which is considered an atrocity.

    Beit Lahia in June 2006

    Lebanese war. Confrontations with armed and trained Hezbollah soldiers. Not a massacre.

    Beit Hanoun in November 2006

    No massacre there. IAF called off attacks after civilian women surrounded buildings in which armed Palestinian soldiers were holed up.

    Lebanon in 2007

    ? The war between Israel and Hezbollah ended in 2006. Perhaps this is about the bombings of Lebanese political leaders by Hezbollah or Syrian operatives. Israel had nothing to do with those.

  29. gerald spezio said on December 13th, 2007 at 7:32am #

    It is an established fact that Israel-first Zionists have effectively and overwhelmingly infiltrated the US government.

    These same Israeli foreign agents have engineered the “most murdering foreign policy in the name of Israel’s Zionist expansionism.”

    Here is what the Israel-first Zionists are working toward;
    http://www.theunjustmedia.com/the%20zionist_plan_for_the_middle_east.htm

  30. jaime said on December 13th, 2007 at 1:25pm #

    Looks like Angie ran away. Oh well. See ya Angie! Give my regards to Bin Laden.

    BTW I made a little error above. In 2006 there was a tragedy at Bet Lahia involving about 8 or 10 Gaza civilians who were accidentally killed because of an Israeli artillery shell that went tragically off course. The Israelis at the time were responding in kind to a barrage attack from Gaza.
    A tragedy to be sure, but not an ONGOING one.

  31. Hatuxka said on December 14th, 2007 at 10:36pm #

    Discussion of the biggest lynchpin of war and misery in the middle east-AIPAC really has Jaime in a state.

    “Give my regards to Bin Laden”? So unlike the professional propagandists for Israel you’re admitting that all this has something to do with Bin Laden. Ergo, Bin Laden’s actions have much to do with the issue of Palestine.

  32. IRmep said on December 15th, 2007 at 8:44am #

    “Mayday” added “Notice how the comments here are no longer about the original article? Just an observation.”

    The facts contained in the book “Foreign Agents” and Kim’s review are not in dispute. They may be suppressed, ridiculed, attacked with red herring, and censored.

    But they cannot be debunked.

  33. jaime said on December 15th, 2007 at 9:33am #

    Kim’s review IS in dispute even though many of us haven’t read the book.

    His opening premise , indeed his opening sentence beginning with

    “…When a state arises from the dispossession of an Indigenous people..”

    is completely and historically inaccurate. Therefore at this point I wouldn’t give either the book or his review serious consideration.

    Jews ARE indigenous to the Middle East. Jesus was Jewish, not Chinese, not Fijian, not Icelandic, Jewish.

  34. Deadbeat said on December 15th, 2007 at 11:55am #

    Jews are indigenous to the Middle East but so are the Palestinian Arabs. The plan of Zionist is ethnic cleansing of the Arabs who are indigenous to Palestine. This notion that Jews should be permitted to ethnically cleanse Palestine is racist to its core and unjust. Jamie clearly defends this utterly racist and vile agenda.

  35. hp said on December 15th, 2007 at 1:11pm #

    Depends on what your definition of “Jew” is.
    Did the word “Jew” even exist in the days of Jesus?

  36. gerald spezio said on December 16th, 2007 at 10:34am #

    A Jewish humanist, Anna Baltzer, speaks eloquently about the Zionist land grab in the occupied lands of Palestine.

    Anna’s video shows some Israelis trying to help the Palestinians stay on their land.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtRLtm507tQ

  37. jaime said on December 16th, 2007 at 2:23pm #

    1) Deadbeat…the Pals aren’t being “ethnically cleansed” by the Israelis. Fact is they kill more of each other than the Israelis do. Plus, their population grows every year. So call it something else.

    2) “Did the word “Jew” even exist in the days of Jesus?”
    Uh yeah. The word is derived from JUDAH. What’s your point, hp?

  38. hp said on December 16th, 2007 at 8:35pm #

    I think you’re wrong Jaime. Derived when?
    The Sindhu river is in the Vedas but the word Hindu is not.
    Get it?

  39. Luftigus said on December 16th, 2007 at 10:10pm #

    According to former Mossad agent Viktor Ostrovsky, AIPAC routinely sends the the Israeli Embassy names of American Jews who want to do something for Israel. That is how Jonathan Pollard’s name came to the attention of the Mossad. In other words, AIPAC is a recrutment center for Israeli espionage.

    As matters turned out, Mossad decided Pollard was too weird to be in their employ, and so he was handed to a different intelligence agency, LAKAM. The latter, no doubt assisted by moles in the U.S. Government, went wild, demanding Pollard collect vast quantities of secret information on many subjects. That is how Pollard got caught. He was left with no time to do his own work, and so his non-work related activities attracted the scrutiny nof his boss, who figured out that Pollard was a spy.

    As soon as Pollarad came under suspicion, his LAKAM handlers fled the country, taking with them the Israeli passport that Pollard had expected to be his salvation. Pollard and his wife sought refugte in the Israeli Embassy, which kicked them out–into the waiting arms of the astonished FBI.

    No honor among thieves.

    What say you, Jaime?

  40. jaime said on December 16th, 2007 at 11:37pm #

    News to me. Who’s Jonathon Pollard?

  41. Luftigus said on December 17th, 2007 at 4:49pm #

    Pollard is a big hero in Israel, and the Israeli govt forever is trying to get him released. Pollard’s supporters argue that he was only taking info that the Israelis should have been given anywy. This overlooks the fact that Pollard obtained anti-sub warfare info that the Israelis traded to the Soviets. The Israelis also gave info to the Chinese, but I don’t know what that was.

    Israeli public assumes Pollard was trying to help Israel. There was some of that, but his major motivation was financial, and he planned to spread out his espionage activities like some evil genius in the 007 movies.

    Pollard and his wife were addicted to expenive restaurants. Pollard blimped out. He is much thinner now. Mrs. Pollard was imprisoned for a time. She has divorced her former partner in espionage.

    Israelis set up a hidden office for copying the material Pollard stole. One day Pollard, terrified because the door would not open, thought the place had been raided by FBI. It turned out that the female copy technician did not come to the door because she was getting laid.

    So Jaime, now you know.

  42. jaime said on December 18th, 2007 at 12:08am #

    “The Israelis also gave info to the Chinese, but I don’t know what that was.”

    “the female copy technician did not come to the door because she was getting laid.”

    Fascinating! Just…how did you know that the Israelis gave info to the Chinese if you didn’t know what it was?

  43. hp said on December 18th, 2007 at 6:30pm #

    Answer; because they’re Israelis.

  44. Mike McNiven said on December 19th, 2007 at 7:37pm #

    Thank you Mr.Peterson!

    Also, it would be very helpful if someone investigates the role of the criminal German intelligence services in facilitating the work of Mossad projects/agents . The Guatemala tragedy is a good point to start. Countless number of peasants and their supporters got massacred in a joint US-German-Israeli operation!

  45. jaime said on December 20th, 2007 at 9:35am #

    “…Countless number of peasants and their supporters got massacred in a joint US-German-Israeli operation…”

    You wouldn’t happen to have something more specific for that statement, would you Mike? How about some dates, documentation etc. ?

    Otherwise, I have to suggest that what you posted was just BS.

  46. Mike McNiven said on December 20th, 2007 at 5:43pm #

    For those who have forgotten,

    The massacres took place in the 80’s and 90’s in Guatemala! (including the Clinton years!)

    Sister Dianna Ortiz, a world-known victim of those operations, is just one example!

    The German role is very important because without it Mossad cannot do its work! Exposing this criminal relationship is in the best interest of all the Jews who support “peace with social justice”! The German support for the Islamic fundamentalists, also, is a danger for all those who believe in “peace with social justice”!

  47. jaime said on December 20th, 2007 at 8:47pm #

    So I guess that means Mike can’t or won’t substantiate his so-called joint “US-German-Israeli operation.”

    Geez there’s a crap like this on this board.

  48. jaime said on December 20th, 2007 at 8:48pm #

    sorry that should have read:
    “Geez there’s a lot of crap like this on this board.”

  49. Mike McNiven said on December 22nd, 2007 at 9:54pm #

    Sister Dianna Ortiz (google.com)

  50. jaime said on December 22nd, 2007 at 11:56pm #

    OK I googled Sister Dianna Ortiz. She’s a victim of Torture. Maybe the CIA was behind the goons involved.

    Where’s your joint US-German-Israeli operation, Mike?

    Why not just admit that it adds nothing useful to this thread?

  51. Angie Tibbs said on January 8th, 2008 at 11:16pm #

    Jamie, in obvious glee, makes the pathetically stupid assertion that “looks like Angie ran away”. (Wishful thinking, what?)

    Then, with a dismissive verbal shrug, he adds, “Oh well. See ya Angie! Give my regards to Bin Laden”. (Look within Israel, Jamie, and you will find a multitude of individuals who make bin Laden look like a preschooler. Never have so many war criminals congregated in one place!)

    This nonsense has added nothing to the discussion with respect to Mr. Kim Petersen’s excellent article, but that’s the purpose of it, isn’t it, Jamie? Keep readers focused on anything except the issue at hand. Of course, you’re familiar with this sort of thing, aren’t you? You and the countless others who clutter up open forums with this sort of trash on a daily basis. It’s what you do.

    I will state this once and for all time. I do not run away. From the likes of you, Jamie, and your
    disinformation and propaganda, nor any other individual who defends Israeli racism, facism, terrorism, war crimes, masssacres. Make a note of that comment, Jamie, and stick it close to your computer. It will prevent you from making an even bigger fool of yourself in the future.

    I have been away from my computer for several weeks as a result of eye surgery followed by unexpected complications. It has been a lengthy process, and a trying one, but blessedly I shall soon be capable of resuming my fight against evil.

    And I would suggest, Jamie, that you study Israeli massacres a lot closer because I am not going to allow you to minimize Israeli crimes, revise them, nor project the blame on to the Palestinian and Lebanese victims.

  52. Cheating Wife said on March 18th, 2009 at 9:32am #

    This is right here, in the present, not the future.