Yup. Doesn’t even matter if the POTUS warns:
Obama: ‘Israel Doesn’t Know What Its Best Interests Are’
Surely someone will come along shortly and spin the article in Israel’s favor. And hurl thinly veiled insults at me.
Par for the course.
Not from me. I can’t say I disagree with Obama - which is one reason why I won’t be voting for Netanyahu next week.
That doesn’t change the fact that your arguments are still full of shit.
Yet again, someone else’s words offered without any analysis or elaboration on your part. And yet again, it’s not relevant to the thread other than that you’ve found yet another article with someone criticizing Israel and you’re treating GD like it was your LiveJournal. Do you really not comprehend that your response to newcomer has nothing, at all, to do with his comments, Dick’s comments, or anything that’s happened in this thread since you revealed that you don’t know what the word “exacerbate” means? You just posted a random “Grrr, Israel BAD!!!” article while contributing nothing, at all.
Do you truly not understand that your “Oh oh oh, here’s another off-topic article that’s critical of Israel, read this!” shtick really doesn’t require notice, let alone response? But okay, I will “spin” this by pointing out that your Conspiracy Theory about the Zionist Occupied Government is, yet again, gainsaid by yet another one of your own cites. Here you have Obama publicly standing up to and criticizing Israel. But of course, in your own words, the dreadful Zionists control the US media and government, from the top down.
You didn’t even notice the contradiction, did you?
You won’t be retracting your position and apologizing for such an absurd CT, will you?
And complaining about “thinly veiled insults” loses some of its impact if your posts in the public record are characterized by things like making up lists of everybody in the US government whose names sound Jewish to you (while deliberately removing those who you realize aren’t Jews) and suggesting that they all be investigated for Dual Loyalty simply because they’re Jews, regardless of what their actual politics are. To say nothing of how you actually claimed in public and evidently without embarrassment, that the United States government and media, from the top down, are controlled by International Zionists in order to dominate our country on behalf of The Jewish State.
Ah well, back up on the cross if you feel the need.
Nope. But I’m confused. Didn’t you just say that “American MSM coverage of the IP conflict is not just grossly biased, but controlled from the Gov on down.”? And now you’re linking to a story critical of Israel’s leadership that appeared on bloomberg.com, which is part of a company controlled by Michael Bloomberg, who is, um, Jewish?
One’s head spins. :smack:
Forget it Jack. It’s Chinatown.
Don’t you understand? If someone says that Israel is bad, that means Israel is bad. If someone says Israel is good, Israel made them say it, which means that Israel is bad.
It’s perfectly sound logic.
The same principle applies to US policy: If the US does something which Israel doesn’t like, it’s a true expression of American democracy. If the US does something which Israel does like, it’s a result of the machinations of the Israel lobby, subverting the democratic process.
My token Jew, a New York Democratic political consultant for thirty years, is saying that big donors in new York are Israel Firsters. You’re entitled to your opinion about his opinion but I’m happy for people reading to decide for themselves which opinion has more credibility.
The owner of Haaretz also points out that the jewish lobby in Amercia is entirley captured by the settler movement and responds to their concerns. There may well be 70 odd percent od Jewish-Americans who are liberal and a lot of Israelis who are the same but it’s the money guys who call the shots for the politicians.
That’s why when Israel inevitably annexes the West Banka nd slips further and further into an apartheid state with no respect for the rule of law the Jewish lobby in America will continue to back the Israeli government and excuse their illegality (it’s a tough neighbourhood etc etc) and I expect American politicians to continue to back Israel except for the odd small choreographed bit of meaningless kabuki.
And I’d extend the same question to all pro-Israel people here. If Israel does decide to annexe the West Bank and abandon any attempt at a two-state solution, continue to ignore the rule of law etc etc, will you still support them. Also, too, is there any point at which you’d stop supporting Israel? What would it be?
I absolutely agree. It’s a waste of time arguing with certain people. All you can do is present an argument and let people reading decide if they agree or not.
Israel is unrelentingly attacked from the left? How many divisions do the left have? It’s also attacked by public opinion the world over. Here’s one example :
Israel has been described as the top threat to world peace, ahead of North Korea, Afghanistan and Iran, by an unpublished European Commission poll of 7,500 Europeans, sparking an international row. The survey, conducted in October, of 500 people from each of the EU’s member nations included a list of 15 countries with the question, ‘tell me if in your opinion it presents or not a threat to peace in the world’. Israel was reportedly picked by 59 per cent of those interviewed.
Even Israeli politicians recognise Israel is fucked. Ehud Olmert said that if Israel continue to go down the apartheid route they’d end up in a South Africa-like struggle and it’d mean the end of Israel. Since he said that Israel has lurched much further to the right and Palestinians will outnumber israelis in three or four years…
United Nations Security Council resolution 446, adopted on 22 March 1979, concerned the issue of Israeli settlements in the “Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”.[1] This refers to the Palestinian territories of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip as well as the Syrian Golan Heights.
In the Resolution, the Security Council determined: “that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East”
United Nations Security Council resolution 465, adopted unanimously on 1 March 1980, was on the issue of the Israeli settlements and administration in “the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem”. This refers to the Palestinian territories of the West Bank including East Jerusalem, Gaza Strip and the Golan Heights.
After noting a report by the Security Council Commission established in Resolution 446 (1979), the Council accepted and commended its work while criticising Israel for not cooperating with it. It expressed concern at Israeli settlement policy in the Arab territories and recalled resolutions 237 (1967), 252 (1968), 267 (1969), 271 (1969) and 298 (1971). It further called upon the State and people of Israel to dismantle such settlements.
The resolution continued by condemning Israel for prohibiting the travel of the Mayor of Hebron, Fahd Qawasma, to the Security Council, requesting it allow him travel to the United Nations Headquarters. It then ends by asking the Commission to continue investigating the situation in the occupied territories with regard to depleted natural resources, while monitoring the implementation of the current resolution, asking it to report back to the Council by 1 September 1980.
The resolution calls on all states ‘not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connection with settlements in the occupied territories’.
Vote: For: 15 Abs.: 0 Against: 0 Subject: Territories occupied by Israel Result: Adopted
You’re describing a forum where one might share Their Humble Opinion. You’re posting in a forum for something called “debate”. That means you actually need to provide facts, and citations, and logic, and not just voice racist nonsense about wealthy Jews in America being Israel Firsters. Of course you can find people to agree with you, Dick. You’re posting in a thread with at least one person who honestly believes that Zionists control the US government and media. Do you think truth is determined by popularity, or by the fact that you could prove it and defend it with actual facts? Doesn’t it give you pause that you are utterly unable to defend your claims and must rely on this same bullshit each and every time you get your head handed to you in Great Debates, when you retreat to claims that subjectivity is somehow valid since, lo and behold, your opponents reliably and regularly show you are talking out of your hat on the facts, logic, and context?
The forum title may be a hint, Dick. It’s for debate. Not presenting your opinions and letting people decide if they agree with Dick’s Fiction, or the truth. Not that your “1,000,000 Stormfronters can’t be wrong!” tactic isn’t just charming.
I really think the Doper anti-Israel crowd need to post a hell of a lot more, this is awesome. You’re what, the third person in this thread to now voice an absolutely bonkers Conspiracy Theory, this time claiming that the only times politicians don’t “back Israel” is choreographed theater.
You’re also ignoring the fact that I already proved that your Jewy Jew McRabbi Jewerson is provably inaccurate when it comes to describing the minds and opinions of American Jewish voters. Lo and behold, you have managed to not notice or acknowledge the hole in your claim. And, naturally, you’re fooling nobody at all. You are selectively quoting someone who you certainly don’t trust or believe in, at all, and if anybody used one of his quotes that was pro-Israel, you’d dismiss it out of hand. Go figure. Oh, I already know your dodge, Dick. It’ll be a variation on “But when someone who’s pro-Israel says anything anti-Israel, we can assume it’s true!”
Well, shit, if he says it, it must be true. I mean, you’ve got Jewy McRabbi and Jewy McHaaretz, obviously we don’t need to know anything other than that they’re Jews saying mean things about Israel.
However, and I’m sure you’re not disturbed by it, but you still can’t provide any proof for even one single one of your claims, and you’re now claiming that sure, 70% of Jews are real Americans, but it’s the big ones who are Israel Firsters. Ya know, those wealthy Jews, can’t trust 'em. And you know this, not because you’re simply putting forward your fantasies about evil wealthy Jews with zero proof behind your claims, but because you have valid statistical and demographic information which you will share immediately. Without delay. Right?
… no?
Funny, could’ve sworn you were already corrected on your error there too. I wonder, why oh why are you describing a very loose umbrella of religious and secular organizations, organizations which take a whole range of positions regarding Israel, as “the Jewish lobby” and claiming it always supports Israeli positions. Wait, let me guess, we can either look at the fact that there is no such thing as a “the Jewish Lobby” in America and your argument is willfully ignorant, offensive bullshit… or we can try to balance the truth against your argument that’s erroneous, fictional, fallacious, and anemic to the point of utter impotence are equal, and well however people vote, that’s what’s real.
Tough call, Dick.
Let’s put Evolution up to a referendum too, right?
“… do y’all notice that I am utterly unwilling and unable to provide a single shred of proof for my claims and yet pretend that they should be taken seriously? Have you realized that every time I’m caught in a huge heap of bullshit, I refuse to simply admit error or modify my position, and instead claim that the shit I just dreamed up is somehow equivalent to things that really exist back in reality? Have you noticed that, unable to defend my own positions, it’s much easier for me to go on the attack and/or change the subject? Speaking of which, how many of you would support annexing the West Bank? And if you would, have you no decency and are you really just Zionist puppets??? WHAT IS YOUR CREDIBILITY?!?!? Hunh hunh hunh?!??!”
Oh, thankfully there are some ‘mavericks’ out there, alright! Thanks for not resorting to calling Michael a “self-hating Jew” though – good on you.
But to further the point, as expounded on by Dick, will you still support Israel on its path to self-destruction? Meaning breaking each and every resolution adopted against them?
And thank you, Alessan – a pleasure exchanging pleasantries with you as always. Though believe it or not, I find you to be the most honest poster on this topic from the Israel side. No sugar-coating your responses and no dancing around the so-called GD “rules,” just telling it like you see it – a fight for the survival of the fittest.
Oh, and no sleep-inducing scrolls. Many thanks. 
And take good care.
Forget it, Tom. It’s The West Bank.
Sorry. Doesn’t scan. Not only does that not fit the allusion, it is not I who has shaped an opinion based on fact free “heads I win - tails you lose” cherry-picking.
… and have you stopped beating your wife yet? 
Zionists don’t have wives.
They have minions.
Well, to be fair, they have dupes and puppets as well!
Leading to the eternal question: who is likely better in bed - minions, dupes or puppets? Inquiring minds, etc.
I would say that undue influence is influence of their arguments on our government that exceeds the merit of their arguments or the popular support for their positions.
Of course some of this is going to come down to your opinion of the merits of Israel’s positions on things like settlement activity and treatment of Palestinians but we do not tolerate this sort of behaviour from any of our other allies and yet we stand in opposition to almost the entirety of the rest of the world to defend them against the recognition of their oppressed neighbor.
I’m not going to say that AIPAC is the most detrimental lobby in DC, that honor probably goes to folks like Grover Norquist, and several corporate interests but when it comes to foreign policy, I cannot think of a place where we are willing to expend more international diplomatic political capital for an ally that continues to behave badly.
[quote=“tomndebb, post:823, topic:595182”]
Two discussions in this thread:
[li]whether the AIPAC exerts undue pressure, (as opposed to being one more voice among many in a typical democratic republic)[/li][/quote]
I’ve defined undue influence as best as I can and it ultimately comes down to whether or not you think we have responded reasonably in opposition to almost the entirety of the rest of the world in defending an ally that keep behaving poorly and whether the reason for our response is due to the influence of outfits like AIPAC.
[quote]
[li]whether it is a legitimate claim that some number of U.S. citizens (greater than a couple of hundred*) genuinely hold dual loyalty or place loyalty to Israel above their loyalty to the U.S.[/li][/quote]
I think there are immigrants of all shapes and sizes that hold dual loyalty and will root for the country of their birth over the country of their citizenship during the world cup and the Olympics. That doesn’t bother me. The existence of outfits like AIPAC don’t bother me. The fact taht they have so much influence bothers me.
After AIPAC’s leaders get caught crow about how much influence they have, you think there is no evidence that they have this influence? Next you’ll be telling me that there is no evidence that the NRA has undue influence in DC.
hehe, wanna bet. Some people would have you believe that we would stand in opposition to the rest of the world in recognizing the Palestinian people as a nation because its just the right thing to do and we would probably do it even if AIPAC didn’t exist.
Its not that its a waste of time. Its that you are merely stating the the obvious and they respond by asking for ironclad proof of it.
Yes of course. There is a huge amount of hostility out there towards Israel. So why would you be surprised that the Right has a lot of influence among Israeli voters?
I kinda doubt it – I suspect you are confusing your wishes with reality. But in your view, what policies should Israel follow, going forward, to avoid being “fucked”?
Ok, so these two security council resolutions are the sole source of your claim that it would be “illegal” for Israel to annex the West Bank?
I know!
Isn’t it just a drag when you just know that AIPAC controls public opinion and poilcy in the United States, and then some wise guy asks how you actually know that? Next thing you know, they’ll be asking for proof that vaccines cause autism, or something. I mean, isn’t it just obvious?
Keep fighting the good fight Damuri and keep “If someone disagrees with me, it’s due to them being a Zionist patsy” as your go-to position. That’ll help you sway American opinion, that’s for sure.