Israel

[Torurot]

The Biden Effect
By ROGER COHEN
Published: March 15, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/op...t-edcohen.html

NEW YORK €” I€™m tempted to see Vice President Joe Biden€™s visit to
Israel as a parable: Nice guy wanders into mess and truth is revealed.

We€™ve had, for example, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu clarifying
the fact that, €œIsrael and the U.S. have mutual interests, but we will
act according to the vital interests of the state of Israel.€

Of course, the United States, too, has €œvital interests.€ They include
reaching a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine for which
the physical space erodes daily as Israeli settlements in the West
Bank expand.

Peace is a vital American interest for many reasons, including its
inalienable commitment to Israel€™s long-term security, but the most
pressing is that the conflict is a jihadist recruitment tool that
feeds the wars in which young Americans die.

This is not rocket science. Yet over the past decade the United States
has been facilitating the costly settlements enterprise by pouring
$28.9 billion into Israel. America€™s strategic goal of Israeli and
Palestinian states living side by side in security has been undermined
by its own blank-check diplomacy.

Well, goodbye to all that €” maybe. Something shifted when Biden (€œYou
need not be a Jew to be a Zionist€) was thanked for his unstinting
support of Israel with a snub: The announcement that another 1,600
apartments for Jews will be built in east Jerusalem, a pure
provocation when restarting peace talks is the core U.S. aim.

President Barack Obama was furious. In a top-down administration like
this one, you don€™t get Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lambasting
Netanyahu for 43 minutes and David Axelrod, a senior White House
adviser, speaking of €œan affront€ and €œan insult€ and a €œvery, very
destructive€ step if America€™s measured leader is not immeasurably
incensed. That truth is also worth knowing.

Obama has reason to be angry.

Netanyahu, betraying the growing Israeli taste for the status quo,
torn between rightist instincts and coalition partners on the one hand
and his ego€™s sensitivity to the peacemaker€™s halo and history books
on the other, has been toying with Obama.

A year ago, in March 2009, I wrote that, €œObama€™s new policies of
Middle Eastern diplomacy and engagement€ would involve €œa probable
cooling of U.S.-Israeli relations.€ I believed that Israel had misread
or underestimated a core strategic shift of the Obama presidency: away
from the with-us-or-against-us rhetoric of the war on terror toward a
rapprochement with the Muslim world as the basis for isolating
terrorists.

Well, here€™s the cooling. You can€™t have rapprochement with Muslims
while condoning the steady Israeli appropriation of the physical space
for Palestine. You can€™t have that rapprochement if U.S. policy is
susceptible to the whims of Shas, the Sephardic ultra-Orthodox party
in Netanyahu€™s coalition that runs the Interior Ministry and announced
the Biden-baiting measure.

The Israeli right, whether religious or secular, has no interest in a
two-state peace. I had lunch the other day with Ron Nachman, the mayor
of Ariel, one of the largest West Bank settlements. He told me
breezily that there €œcan be no Palestinian state,€ and that €œIsrael
and Jordan should divide the land.€ I liked his frankness. It
clarifies things.

It€™s time for equal frankness from Netanyahu. Do €œthe vital interests
of the state of Israel€ include continued building in East Jerusalem
and the steady takeover of the West Bank, or does his embrace of the
airy phrase, €œtwo states for two peoples,€ have more than camouflage
meaning?

Netanyahu€™s apology is not enough. The United States is asking for
€œspecific actions.€ I€™d say at a minimum that would include the
annulment of the 1,600-apartments plan. Israel, always ready to mock
Palestinian disarray, might also ensure that its leader knows what
members of his own government are doing.

This is a watershed moment. Palestinian violence, Palestinian
anti-Semitic incitement and jihadist infiltration of the Palestinian
national movement all undermine peace efforts. They are unacceptable;
Biden was right to €œironclad€ the U.S. commitment to Israeli security.
But it€™s past time that Palestinian failings cease to serve as an
excuse for Israel€™s remorseless, cynical scattering of the Palestinian
people into enclaves that make a farce of statehood. That is €œan
affront€ to America.

In this sense, Biden€™s foray has been salutary. It brought U.S. €œvital
interests€ to the surface. It challenged Israel€™s ostrich-like
burrowing into polices that, over time, will make one divided,
undemocratic state more likely than €œtwo states for two peoples.€ It
asked again the question posed recently by David Shulman of the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem: Are Israelis, cocooned, still able €œto see,
to imagine, and to acknowledge the suffering of other human beings,
including those aspects of their suffering for which we are directly
responsible?€

The mass-market daily Maariv had a front-page post-Biden cartoon of
Obama cooking Netanyahu in a pot. It was supposed to illustrate a
relationship €œin flames.€ But the image €” a black man cooking a white
man over an open fire €” also said something about the way Israel views
its critics.

Israel is wrong to mock its constructive critics. They alone can usher
the country from the one-state dead end €” a vital Israeli interest.

[Tomcat]

What surprises me is that many guys here think that life is somehow supposed to be fair. It aint and it never will be , whoever has the strongest hand will exert their force. Thats life folks...

I mean the Arabs hate the Jews and vice versa so its not surprising that they knock the shit out of each other, lets not beat around the bush , its human nature.

If the Arabs are so upset why dont they start another war. Its the only way they will change the situation and everyone knows it. Unless China backs them up they would most definately lose .

[rossco]

The whole question of Israel and Palestine took yet another turn today - how can you justify a country building homes for their people in an area not belonging to them?

If someone built a house in my back yard I would be extremely annoyed.

The USA has always supported Israel in both munitions and know how since 1947 - large lobby in the US.

The time has come (and I admire the new stance by the US) to broker peace.

If one was to turn the clock back the US has an appalling record on human rights.

The pioneers decimated the indigenous population (Red Indian) right up until the middle of the last century. This is historical fact. It was only in the 1970's that the indigenous Indian recognized that their rights, as a reservation, allowed them to flaunt Federal regulations - good for them.

The pioneers sold them whiskey and cigars - now they do the same to the offspring of the same pioneers + gambling. That is poetic justice.

USA embargoed South Africa when it was still persecuting its own minorities. Indians and Blacks.

The original population of South Africa was the Hottentots - not Zulu/Ashanti. Interesting justice. There are few Hottentots today.

So back to Israel. The West CREATED Israel in 1948 - it had not existed for a long time.
It was born out of guilt for the atrocities of 1938/45 - we are endlessly reminded of that fact. Bless Spielberg!

Does this then support the atrocities of last year? Should we all just accept:

Arab hate Israel.

Up until the 1970/1980's there was a chance of peace but the US likes to have Israel 'on side' in this region.
The US provide/supplied/nurtured a war machine in Israel.

If I was living next door I would be nervous and concerned about the US political position.

So a bulldozer arrives at your door and knocks down your house - fair play?

I accept that the tension in the region is high BUT it is up to more mature/stable/sensitive countries to find a middle ground.

Look at the long game - the US short game has created/fueled the problem.
Of course the geographic landscape is governed by the big powers but only America has achieved dominance without colonial occupational policy.

You can Bomb/Decimate but can you govern?

A piece of trivia.
The UK dominated India as a colony for a long period of time - not all good.
They did implement infrastructure - Railways, communications, roads and political structure
The Courts, still today, are conducted in English - because prior to colonization there were too many diverse dialects.

What will the US war machine leave to Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine?

I am not 'bashing' the US but its foreign policy is still too short term and biased.
Many years ago a professor told me about Worldwide Political games:

Europe plays chess - tactical and thought out long term
US - they play poker - instant win or lose and no art.

Even in WWII the underlying main objective, by Roosevelt, was to dismantle the European imperial powers.

Israel is incredibly fortunate for all the support it has garnered, mainly from the US, and should now accept, after 60 years, to coexist with neighbors.

Why cannot Jerusalem be a 'world heritage' site governed by the UN - Jews, Christians, Muslims all with equal right to visit. Why should Israel control it?

Israel is not interested in compromise nor any other position beyond personal dominance. Thanks to the US investment it has the power to do so.

I am now going to sell bulldozers to Israel - I may as well make a buck while they fight!

[Torurot]

CounterPunch Diary
"My Fellow Americans, Tonight I'm Going to Talk Frankly About a Pesky
Little Nation Called Israel .. "
http://counterpunch.org/cockburn03192010.html
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN Weekend Edition March 19 - 21, 2010

Don€™t get excited. It€™ll never happen. Is there really a crisis in
US-Israeli relations? Yes and No. Yes, because the world€™s premier power
doesn€™t care to have its vice president publicly humiliated by a midget
of a nation whose entire population is smaller than that of Los Angeles
country. No, because the elected politicians nominally running the
government of the world€™s premier power live in mortal fear of the
Israel lobby in the United States. This time, as always, No will carry
the day. (You can find a detailed narrative by Jeffrey Blankfort on this
site today, from which much of this Diary is drawn.)
http://counterpunch.org/blankfort03192010.html

Consider Biden€™s reaction the day after Interior Minister Eli Yishai,
probably with Netanyahu€™s foreknowledge, announced the scheduled
building of 1600 apartments €“ Jews only €“ in East Jerusalem, right at
the moment Biden was trying to breathe life into the €œpeace process€. As
the Israeli newspaper Haaretz points out, those projected 1600 units are
part of 50,000 planned for the eastern part of the city.

So here€™s the vice president of the United States of America,standing
with all the injured dignity of a man who has just had a bucket of
sewage dumped over his head and who amid his discomfiture, actually did
use the word €œcondemn€ and €œIsrael€ in the same paragraph. The next day
Biden heads for Tel Aviv university and confides to the audience that he
is a Zionist and that, €œthroughout my career, Israel has not only
remained close to my heart but it has been the center of my work as a
United States Senator and now as Vice President of the United States.€
Get that: €œthe center of my work.€ This mission statement is not quoted
in the U.S. press.

Then Biden repeats the nonsense he spouted when he arrived in Jerusalem:
that €œthere is no space -- this is what they [the world] must know,
every time progress is made, it's made when the rest of the world knows
there is absolutely no space between the United States and Israel when
it comes to security, none. No space. That's the only time when progress
has been made.€

Of course, if any €œprogress€ can be identified across the past forty
years €“ a debatable claim €“ it€™s only because an American president has
nerved himself to briefly lay down the agenda with threats and menaces,
all duly retracted when the Lobby regroups and commences its counter-attack.

Finally Biden sidles up the €œcrisis€. €œI appreciate€¦ the response your
Prime Minister today announced this morning that he is putting in place
a process to prevent the recurrence of that sort of that sort of events
[sic] and who clarified that the beginning of actual construction on
this particular project would likely take several years €¦ That's
significant, because it gives negotiations the time to resolve this, as
well as other outstanding issues. Because when it was announced, I was
on the West Bank. Everyone there thought it had meant immediately the
resumption of the construction of 1,600 new units.€

Yes, that€™s exactly what it did mean, the resumption of the construction
of the 1600 units. And as the Israeli newspaper Haaretz points out,
those projected 1600 units are part of 50,000 units planned for the
eastern part of the city. Natanyahu has said these are non-negotiable,
whatever Washington might say, let alone the pitiful Palestinian Authority.

Amid the anguished cries of the Arab princes and emirs that Israel€™s
brazen conduct towards Biden made it that much harder for them to sell
the Palestinians down the river, Obama€™s chief political aide, David
Axelrod, undoubtedly with clearance from his boss, told NBC News that
not only was Israel€™s conduct an "insult" to the United States but
"destructive" of the Middle East peace process.

Hillary Clinton let it be known she€™d read the riot act to Netanhayu
down the phone for 43 minutes. Her spokesman claimed she€™d described the
planned units in East Jerusalem as sending a €œdeeply negative signal
about Israel's approach to the bilateral relationship and counter to the
spirit of the vice president's trip" and that "this action had
undermined trust and confidence in the peace process and in America's
interests." Meanwhile, special envoy George Mitchell cancelled his trip
to the region.

So, yes, we can call it a crisis, but not one that will be prolonged.
Obama is not the first president to have lost patience with Israel for
messing up Uncle Sam€™s larger plans. Mrs Clinton is not the first
Secretary of State to shout angrily down the phone to Tel Aviv.

Blankfort, historian of the Lobby, reels off other crises, all
satisfactorily resolved in Israel€™s favor. In 1975 President Gerald Ford
and his Secretary of State Henry Kissinger publicly blamed Israel for
the breakdown of negotiations with Egypt over withdrawing from the
Sinai. Ford said he was going to tell the American people that US-Isarel
relations should be recast. Prodded by AIPAC, 76 US senators signed a
letter to Ford telling him to lay off Israel. He did.

In March, 1980, President Carter was forced to apologize after US UN
representative Donald McHenry voted for a resolution that condemned
Israel€™s settlement policies in the occupied territories including East
Jerusalem and which called on Israel to dismantle them.

In June of the same year, after Carter requested a halt to Jewish
settlements and his Secretary of State, Edmund Muskie, called the Jewish
settlements an obstacle to peace, Prime Minister Menachem Begin
announced plans to construct 10 new ones.

In August, 1982, the day after Reagan requested that Ariel Sharon end
the bombing of Beirut, Ariel Sharon responded by ordering bombing runs
over the city at precisely 2:42 and 3:38 in the afternoon, the times
coinciding with the two UN resolutions requiring Israel to withdraw from
the occupied territories.

In March, 1991, Secretary of State James Baker complained to Congress
that €œEvery time I have gone to Israel in connection with the peace
process.., I have been met with an announcement of new settlement
activity€¦ It substantially weakens our hand in trying to bring about a
peace process, and creates quite a predicament.€ In 1990, he had become
so disgusted with Israel€™s intransigence on the settlements that he
publicly gave out the phone number of the White House switchboard and
told the Israelis, "When you're serious about peace, call us."

On September 12, 1991 President George Bush, Sr got sufficiently
infuriated by AIPAC€™s success in getting enough votes in both houses of
Congress to override his veto of Israel€™s request for $10 billion in
loan guarantees, that he declared to the television cameras, "I'm up
against some powerful forces. They've got something like 1,000 lobbyists
on the Hill working the other side of the question. We've got one lonely
little guy here doing it." A national poll taken immediately afterward
gave the president an 85 per cent approval rating. The Lobby blinked but
not for long. Not only did the loan guarantees ultimately go through,
but Jewish voters turned strongly against Bush in the €™92 elections, a
fact which Bush Jr never forgot.

As Blankfort also recalls, in January 2009, former Israeli Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert publicly boasted that he had €œshamed€ Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice by getting President Bush to prevent her from
voting for a Gaza cease-fire resolution at the last moment that she
herself had worked on for several days with Arab and European diplomats
at the United Nations.

Olmert bragged to an Israeli audience that he pulled Bush off a stage
during a speech to take his call when he learned about the pending vote
and demanded that the president intervene.

€œI have no problem with what Olmert did,€ Abraham Foxman, national
director of the Anti-Defamation League, told the Forward. €œI think the
mistake was to talk about it in public.€

In sum, as Stephen Green wrote in "Taking Sides: America's Secret
Relations with Militant Israel" (Morrow, 1984) a quarter century ago,
"Since 1953, Israel, and friends of Israel in America, have determined
the broad outlines of US policy in the region. It has been left to
American presidents to implement that policy, with varying degrees of
enthusiasm, and to deal with tactical issues."

There are powerful forces in America that wish that this was not so,
starting with the US military. Before Biden€™s trip no less a prominent
and widely admired commander as General David Petraeus wrote a memo to
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, with its sentiments reduplicated in testimony
last Tuesday before a US Senate Armed Services Committee.

In his prepared statement to Congress, Petraeus described the
Israeli-Arab conflict as the first €œcross cutting challenge to security
and stability€ in the CENTCOM area of responsibility [AOR]. €œThe
enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present
distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests in the AOR.€

Petraeus then told the Senate committee that €œThe conflict foments
anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favoritism for
Israel. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and
depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and
weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world.€ Not long
before, Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, warned the Israelis
publicly that an attack on Iran would be a €œbig, big, big problem for
all of us.€

In Israel the widely-read Yediot Ahronoth reported that privately Biden
had echoed Petraeus€™s sentiments, telling Netanyahu that Israel€™s
conduct was €œstarting to get dangerous for us.€ €œWhat you€™re doing
here,€ Biden reportedly said, €œundermines the security of our troops who
are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. That endangers us, and
it endangers regional peace.€

Would not the charge that Israel is putting harm€™s way the lives of
Americans battling terror on the front lines be devastating if toughly
presented by a capable politician to the American people? Yes it would.
Honestly conducted polls, without weasel wording, would probably give
the politician making such a charge ratings as higher or higher than
Bush got in 1991.

So will Gen. Petraeus, assuming he embarks on a political run in 2012 or
2016, make such a move? First of all, one can make the assumption that
after his memo and testimony it won€™t be long before we€™re reading some
investigative story about the €œquestionable claims€, associated with
Gen. Petraeus€™ numerous medals, maybe even disclosures of Flashmanesque
prudence on the field of battle. Secondly, any Republican candidate has
to court the Republican ultra-Christians, passionate in support of
Israel, by reason of doctrinal scheduling of the ultimate Rapture.
Thirdly, why scare all Jewish campaign money back into the Democratic Party?

As Blankfort remarks, shortly before the first time he met with
President Obama, 76 US senators, led by Christopher Dodd and Evan Bayh,
plus 330 members of the House, sent AIPAC-crafted letters to the
president calling on him not to put pressure on the Israeli prime
minister when they met. The House, do not forget, cheered on Israel€™s
onslaught in Gaza and by 334 to 36 condemned the Goldstone Report.

The Democrat Party is heavily reliant on major Jewish political funders,
up to 60 per cent of the top tier of contributors, according to
Blankfort. Soon AIPAC has its convention (at which Tony Blair will be a
minor attraction). Here will come all major politicians to fawn and pay
tribute. On June 3, 2008, right after he had finally prevailed in the
race for the nomination against Hilary Clinton, Obama addressed the
AIPAC crowd, some 7,000 strong: €œWe will also use all elements of
American power to pressure Iran,€ he assured AIPAC.€ I will do
everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
Everything in my power. Everything and I mean everything.€ He swore he
wouldn€™t talk to the elected representatives Palestinians, Hamas. To
thunderous applause he declared, "Jerusalem will remain the capital of
Israel, and it must remain undivided." The next day, Obama€™s foreign
policy advisors, aghast at this outburst, issued some corrections.

As Uri Avnery, the veteran Israeli writer and peace activist
expostulated furiously in the wake of this last sentence: http://counterpunch.org/avnery03152010.html €œAlong comes
Obama and retrieves from the junkyard the outworn slogan €˜Undivided
Jerusalem, the Capital of Israel for all Eternity€™. Since Camp David,
all Israeli governments have understood that this mantra constitutes an
insurmountable obstacle to any peace process€¦. The fear of AIPAC is so
terrible, that even this candidate, who promises change in all matters,
does not dare. In this matter he accepts the worst old-style Washington
routine. He is prepared to sacrifice the most basic American interests.
After all, the US has a vital interest in achieving an
Israeli-Palestinian peace that will allow it to find ways to the hearts
of the Arab masses from Iraq to Morocco. Obama has harmed his image in
the Muslim world and mortgaged his future - if and when he is elected
president€¦ If he sticks to them, once elected, he will be obliged to
say, as far as peace between the two peoples of this country is
concerned: €˜No, I can't!€™

So yes, the crisis will soon be over, and no, there is no new era in US-Israel relations in the offing.

[pacman]

That is a long but instructive article.

There will never be peace in the Middle East while Israel chooses to act in such antagonistic fashion. Something they can afford to do while they are under the protection of the US.

Now that the US is embroiled in several wars in the region & need to forge better relationships with the Muslim nations to ensure peace, the cracks are appearing in the Israel/US alliance.

Iran knows that they can bring this to a head & are playing dangerous politics. If the US puts their dependence on oil before their allegiance to Israel, Israel may find themselves expendable.

The end game has started & we must hope that wise heads prevail because a nuclear war will cause more damage than just a few wrecked nations.

[Torurot]

From the pages of Paul Woodward:
netanyahu-threatens-american-interests
http://warincontext.org/2010....terests

MUCH more at the link:

In Yoav Shamir€™s brilliant documentary, Defamation, http://vimeo.com/9102650 there is a scene in which Abe Foxman, the president of the Anti-Defamation League, and a group of the ADL€™s wealthy American supporters are talking about how they feel about Israel and how deep is their bond and commitment to the Jewish state€™s survival. The consensus is that their attachment is like that of a parent for his or her own child; that they would sacrifice their own lives if that€™s what Israel needed.

It€™s hard to be clear about what state of development this Israel-child is in €” rebellious teen, nursing infant or still tied by an umbilical chord. Whichever it is, the source of much its sustenance (unlike the ADL) is largely ignorant of the relationship.

When pollsters ask Americans about Israel they pose trite questions and solicit inane responses. But were Americans polled to find out whether they are happy to be providing aid which amounts to $1000 per Israeli citizen year in, year out, the likely responses would range from disbelief, to shock, to outrage. Americans who thought that number sounded €œabout right€ would be in a small minority €” especially in this struggling economy.

CNN€™s Jack Cafferty poses the question: Is it time for the United States to get tougher with Israel? http://www.youtube.com/v/0NrJv4nxn0s&hl=en_US&fs=1&

[TTChang]

(Tomcat @ Mar. 12 2010,21:30) The fact is you could rant on for ever about perceived injustice in the world. ......  Bashing up the other guys is Human nature isnt it. Im being realistic here , not moralistic.

I've got friends that are Jews, and a smaller number of Moslems.  But whatever i think of those people doesn't blind me to injustices wreaked by certain Middle Eastern states  .... 'because that's 'human nature'    

USA is looking increasingly foolish .... as Israel waves a large middle-finger salute to its large sponsor ....but more important is the message it sends out to moderate moslems.

Civilization is probably not realistic or moralistic, but there are plenty of us willing to debate the subject of arrogant bully states punishing those who oppose them.  And not just accepting that as 'human nature'!

[Guest]

(TTChang @ Mar. 21 2010,17:24)

(Tomcat @ Mar. 12 2010,21:30) The fact is you could rant on for ever about perceived injustice in the world. ......  Bashing up the other guys is Human nature isnt it. Im being realistic here , not moralistic.

I've got friends that are Jews, and a smaller number of Moslems.  But whatever i think of those people doesn't blind me to injustices wreaked by certain Middle Eastern states  .... 'because that's 'human nature'    


Civilization is probably not realistic or moralistic, but there are plenty of us willing to debate the subject of arrogant bully states punishing those who oppose them.  And not just accepting that as 'human nature'!

Well said TT.
It's these injustices that cause people to strap bombs to themselves,and to fly airliners into skyscrapers in New York.As long as America turns a blind eye to Israels excesses,expect more of the same.All these things are linked.
You cant have a lasting peace without justice.Who was it who said"its not those who can inflict the most,but those who can endure the most will eventually win"?

[Tomcat]

Bin Laden never gave two hoots about the Palestinians and only adopted it as a crowd pleaser later on when he was getting his arse kicked. His gripe was about USA Troops on Saudi soil and the monarchy and Israel was on the back of his agenda

many Palestinians are Socialists or other and/or not his sect of Sunni Islam

I think he hated the Sikhs more than Israelis

[whore]

The UK slaps Israel by expelling their Ambassador. About time too.

Taken from BBC news

The UK is to expel an Israeli diplomat over 12 forged British passports used in the murder of Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai in January.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband told the Commons there were "compelling reasons" to believe Israel was responsible for the passport "misuse".

He said: "The government takes this matter extremely seriously. Such misuse of British passports is intolerable."

Israel's ambassador to London, Ron Prosor, said he was "disappointed".

[Torurot]

The status quo is unsustainable. Really?
http://warincontext.org/2010....-really
by Paul Woodward on March 22, 2010

A week ago, Gen David Petraeus referred to €œa perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel€ that fuels anti-American sentiment across the Middle East.

He knows €” as does anyone else who is even marginally aware of the issues €” that this is not simply a matter of perception.

The United States does not merely exhibit favoritism towards Israel. Its political leaders express a level of loyalty towards the Jewish state that should be regarded as unseemly by any patriotic American.

Last week, right on the heels of receiving what was widely regarded as a monumental insult, Joe Biden said: €œThroughout my career, Israel has not only remained close to my heart but it has been the center of my work as a United States Senator and now as Vice President of the United States.€

On Friday, Hillary Clinton spoke of US relations with Israel as €œdeep and broad, strong and enduring,€ and today at the AIPAC conference in Washington said that America€™s future is €œbound up with the future of Israel.€

This is the status quo that should be changed but shows every sign of being thoroughly sustainable. It is one in which American politicians shamelessly pander to Israel€™s wealthy supporters and cast aside any semblance of dignity in their efforts to display their unfailing devotion to the Jewish state.

The obsequious nature of these flourishes of unvarnished affection is further reinforced by the fact that neither on a political level nor a popular level are such feelings reciprocated from the other side.

As Chris McGreal wrote yesterday:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment....lements
In a country permeated by fear and insecurity, Israelis define the rest of the world not by loyalties but by varying degrees of distrust. You can hear it among residents of Jewish settlements deep in the occupied territories and in the cafes of liberal Tel Aviv: angst over the perception of a new wave of antisemitism gripping Europe, the incomprehension over foreign condemnation of Israel€™s crimes in Gaza, the common agreement that the United Nations is a conspiracy against the Jewish state.

In all of this, the US emerges as the least distrusted country by far€¦ . Israelis recognise that they have long counted on Washington to pay a good chunk of their military budget and provide diplomatic cover for the illegalities of occupation.

Israel depends on defense and political aid from Washington and Washington dances to the tune of the Israel lobby.

Those who now hold on to the notion that this administration is intent on shifting the political dynamic simply because it proclaims that the Israeli-Palestinian status quo is unsustainable are paying attention to the wrong status quo.

[Ivor Biggun]

(whore @ Mar. 24 2010,01:21) The UK slaps Israel by expelling their Ambassador. About time too.

Taken from BBC news

The UK is to expel an Israeli diplomat over 12 forged British passports used in the murder of Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai in January.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband told the Commons there were "compelling reasons" to believe Israel was responsible for the passport "misuse".

He said: "The government takes this matter extremely seriously. Such misuse of British passports is intolerable."

Israel's ambassador to London, Ron Prosor, said he was "disappointed".

It was the Mossad Head of Station who was expelled- bang goes his cover

[whore]

Israel up to no good again. Killing civilians of another country in international waters.

EU leaders are meeting tonight to discuss the crisis caused by Israels recent actions. They will more than likely release a statement condemning the killing of human rights workers (again) and then it will be back to business as usual in continuing the Isreali aparthied on the Palastinian people.

[Stewart]

Israel up to no good again. Killing civilians of another country in international waters.

Hmmmm....interesting video just released by the Israelis showing the soldiers abseiling down onto deck and getting attacked by the crowd on deck. (not the videos from o deck we all saw yesterday - these were taken from one of the Israeli ships alongside

The first 3 guys down got the shit kicked out of them......

My first instinct was to condemn Israel just like everyone else is doing.....but watching that, i am sure there are 2 sides to this story

[Bumpa STIKKA]

Israel sent out a clear warning that it was going to enforce the long standing blockade, but the faggot do-gooders went in anyway. Tossers.