Your Thoughts On Aipac, Please :)

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

You annoy me sometimes.

I take it you don't get the difference between lobbying for a U.S. organization to get decisions that favor that organization and lobbying for a foreign country.

(COMMENT)

I understand this distinction just fine. I see AIPAC as an American organization that furthers the cause of the American-Israeli relationship; Americans lobbying on behalf of a cause as great as our own, for the protection and support of another culture.

You Israel Firsters are truly a ridiculous bunch.

(COMMENT)

But this is something different. You are using the "Firster" slogan as if it is unpatriotic to promote the idea that it is a worthy cause to defend the protection and preservation of the Jewish Culture in Israel. I don't see that everything has to be about US (America and its cause); rather than leaving room to support other just causes. This slur is a veiled attempt at trying to make it appear that if you support Israel, you are unAmerican. When in fact, it is much more likely that if you support the HAMAS Cohort, or the aggregate Hostile Arab Palestinian, you are supporting enemies of the state.

I am for America, I support and defend her Constitution; but in doing so, I don't do it to the exclusion of all other causes (great and small).

You should be careful to recognize that your brand of support is not the only brand of support. You may want to support and defend the cause of HAMAS --- the Palestinian Islamic Jihad --- the Izz ad-din al-Qassam Brigade, etc; but there are others out there that think somewhat differently. Many that see what they are, what they stand for, and the methods they us to further their agenda are neither sound nor valid. They are terrorists. You may want to support terrorism --- but I'm sure you won't mind if I oppose their intimidation tactics. In fact, as the very America Firster and Patriot that you are, I think you would encourage those of us that see the threat potential of the HAMAS Cohort to speak our mind.

Most Respectfully,
R;

 

[pbel]

montelatici, et al,

You annoy me sometimes.

I take it you don't get the difference between lobbying for a U.S. organization to get decisions that favor that organization and lobbying for a foreign country.

(COMMENT)

I understand this distinction just fine. I see AIPAC as an American organization that furthers the cause of the American-Israeli relationship; Americans lobbying on behalf of a cause as great as our own, for the protection and support of another culture.

You Israel Firsters are truly a ridiculous bunch.

(COMMENT)

But this is something different. You are using the "Firster" slogan as if it is unpatriotic to promote the idea that it is a worthy cause to defend the protection and preservation of the Jewish Culture in Israel. I don't see that everything has to be about US (America and its cause); rather than leaving room to support other just causes. This slur is a veiled attempt at trying to make it appear that if you support Israel, you are unAmerican. When in fact, it is much more likely that if you support the HAMAS Cohort, or the aggregate Hostile Arab Palestinian, you are supporting enemies of the state.

I am for America, I support and defend her Constitution; but in doing so, I don't do it to the exclusion of all other causes (great and small).

You should be careful to recognize that your brand of support is not the only brand of support. You may want to support and defend the cause of HAMAS --- the Palestinian Islamic Jihad --- the Izz ad-din al-Qassam Brigade, etc; but there are others out there that think somewhat differently. Many that see what they are, what they stand for, and the methods they us to further their agenda are neither sound nor valid. They are terrorists. You may want to support terrorism --- but I'm sure you won't mind if I oppose their intimidation tactics. In fact, as the very America Firster and Patriot that you are, I think you would encourage those of us that see the threat potential of the HAMAS Cohort to speak our mind.

Most Respectfully,
R;

Boy, you really are beginning to sound like an Israeli Agent...An Israeli Firster is a term to denote allegiance to Israel First rather than the Nation the Israeli Firster is a resident or citizen...

But you knew that!

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

You must be kidding, Pbel. He has written a very articulate and accurate message of precisely what is going on and I applaud RoccoR. He is speaking the absolute truth and I applaud him for it. I'm sure it is a very unsettling message for those who wish to support terrorists such as HAMAS because it exposes them for what they are. People who support terrorists who are determined to destroy the United States of America and Israel. You should be ashamed of yourself, Pbel.

 

[pbel]

You must be kidding, Pbel. He has written a very articulate and accurate message of precisely what is going on and I applaud RoccoR. He is speaking the absolute truth and I applaud him for it. I'm sure it is a very unsettling message for those who wish to support terrorists such as HAMAS because it exposes them for what they are. People who support terrorists who are determined to destroy the United States of America and Israel. You should be ashamed of yourself, Pbel.

On your knees and kiss his ass in worship, Jerkemiah.

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

You annoy me sometimes.

I take it you don't get the difference between lobbying for a U.S. organization to get decisions that favor that organization and lobbying for a foreign country.

(COMMENT)

I understand this distinction just fine. I see AIPAC as an American organization that furthers the cause of the American-Israeli relationship; Americans lobbying on behalf of a cause as great as our own, for the protection and support of another culture.

You Israel Firsters are truly a ridiculous bunch.

(COMMENT)

But this is something different. You are using the "Firster" slogan as if it is unpatriotic to promote the idea that it is a worthy cause to defend the protection and preservation of the Jewish Culture in Israel. I don't see that everything has to be about US (America and its cause); rather than leaving room to support other just causes. This slur is a veiled attempt at trying to make it appear that if you support Israel, you are unAmerican. When in fact, it is much more likely that if you support the HAMAS Cohort, or the aggregate Hostile Arab Palestinian, you are supporting enemies of the state.

I am for America, I support and defend her Constitution; but in doing so, I don't do it to the exclusion of all other causes (great and small).

You should be careful to recognize that your brand of support is not the only brand of support. You may want to support and defend the cause of HAMAS --- the Palestinian Islamic Jihad --- the Izz ad-din al-Qassam Brigade, etc; but there are others out there that think somewhat differently. Many that see what they are, what they stand for, and the methods they us to further their agenda are neither sound nor valid. They are terrorists. You may want to support terrorism --- but I'm sure you won't mind if I oppose their intimidation tactics. In fact, as the very America Firster and Patriot that you are, I think you would encourage those of us that see the threat potential of the HAMAS Cohort to speak our mind.

Most Respectfully,
R;

I support the rights of the Palestinians, Christians and Muslims. Their right not to be imprisoned in Gulags, their right to return to their homes that were taken from after they were ethnically cleansed. I also believe the the US's one-sided support of Israel harms the US throughout the world economically and militarily. Therefore, the role of AIPAC which is for all practical purposes, an agent of Israel, and the Israel Firsters it has recruited, does great harm to the US. So, there is a great difference between a lobbying group that lobbies for a foreign country and one that lobbies for a domestic organization.

When peaceful resistance fails, what are a people to do. From 1948 to 1959 George Habash's Arab National Movement (secular with George a Christian as its head) tried the peaceful route and was dismissed by Israel. That led to the formation of Fatah and they went the violent route, as a result. Even Mandela agreed that violence was the only way to change the behavior of an oppressor.

As far as terrorists go. Israel is using terror to cow the Palestinian people into submission. What can induce more terror than the killing, in a few weeks, of hundreds of children of a people. As I said before, states classify organizations as terrorists when their aims are contrary to those wanted by that state and classifies groups as Freedom Fighters when they behave as badly or worse, e.g. Contras, Muhajedin etc. The PKK, a Kurdish group in Turkey, is classified as a terrorist group by the U.S. The Kurds of Iran, who are more violent than the PKK, are considered Freedom Fighters by the U.S. So don't give your hypocritical line on terrorists. Terrorist or Freedom Fighter depends on one's point of view. In fact, the same group can be classified a Freedom Fighter or Terrorist depending who their opposition is. The Afghan Muhajedin were Freedom Fighters when fighting the Russians (also killing school children bombing schools) and magically became Terrorists when they began calling themselves Taliban and began fighting against the West.

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

In an effort to stay on point, I'll address the applicable portion; recognizing the other points you made without prejudice.

When peaceful resistance fails, what are a people to do. From 1948 to 1959 George Habash's Arab National Movement (secular with George a Christian as its head) tried the peaceful route and was dismissed by Israel. That led to the formation of Fatah and they went the violent route, as a result. Even Mandela agreed that violence was the only way to change the behavior of an oppressor.

(OPENING)

The current struggle in the conflict between the Arab and Israeli is summed-up by the key points articulated by the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD):

• The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
• A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
• The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.

(COMMENT)

During the period 1948-thru-1959 (until 1967), the territory known today as the State of Palestine was the West Bank under the annexation of Jordan and Gaza Strip under Occupation and effective control of Egypt. This was a period in which Dr George Habash, MD was associated with the group known as the Youth of Vengeance (YoV); a Marxist organization that opposed the Arab Kingdoms as a traditional form of government. The YoV was active in conducting minor attacks against Arab Kingdom targets, but was not successful in forcing any serious political change.

It wasn't until the post-1967 War that Dr George Habash, MD (AKA: al-Hakim) that he founded the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). And later (1974), al-Hakim (Habash) organized the "Rejectionist Front" (RF) that directly opposed the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the PLO/Palestine National Council (PNC) Ten Point Program. The RF was a confederation of terrorist groups that consisted of:

• Arab Liberation Front (ALF)
• As-Sa'iqa
• Abu Nidal's Fatah-Revolutionary Council
• Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP)
• Palestinian Popular Struggle Front (PPSF)
• Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)
• Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLP-GC)

So, my first point is, that al-Hakim never tried the "peaceful route." From his earliest days in the YoV, he advocated violence; NOT peaceful means. His RF was a major contributing factor in the organization of assets in "Black September" which resources of Fatah fedayeen (along with elements of PFLP, as-Sa'iqa were involved) attempted the coup d’état to seize Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan; and later the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich.

My second point is, al-Hakim never wanted to pursue peaceful means. He wanted to establish chaos and revolution in Marxist/Leninist fashion.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

In an effort to stay on point, I'll address the applicable portion; recognizing the other points you made without prejudice.

When peaceful resistance fails, what are a people to do. From 1948 to 1959 George Habash's Arab National Movement (secular with George a Christian as its head) tried the peaceful route and was dismissed by Israel. That led to the formation of Fatah and they went the violent route, as a result. Even Mandela agreed that violence was the only way to change the behavior of an oppressor.

(OPENING)

The current struggle in the conflict between the Arab and Israeli is summed-up by the key points articulated by the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD):

• The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
• A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
• The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.

(COMMENT)

During the period 1948-thru-1959 (until 1967), the territory known today as the State of Palestine was the West Bank under the annexation of Jordan and Gaza Strip under Occupation and effective control of Egypt. This was a period in which Dr George Habash, MD was associated with the group known as the Youth of Vengeance (YoV); a Marxist organization that opposed the Arab Kingdoms as a traditional form of government. The YoV was active in conducting minor attacks against Arab Kingdom targets, but was not successful in forcing any serious political change.

It wasn't until the post-1967 War that Dr George Habash, MD (AKA: al-Hakim) that he founded the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). And later (1974), al-Hakim (Habash) organized the "Rejectionist Front" (RF) that directly opposed the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the PLO/Palestine National Council (PNC) Ten Point Program. The RF was a confederation of terrorist groups that consisted of:

• Arab Liberation Front (ALF)
• As-Sa'iqa
• Abu Nidal's Fatah-Revolutionary Council
• Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP)
• Palestinian Popular Struggle Front (PPSF)
• Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)
• Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLP-GC)

So, my first point is, that al-Hakim never tried the "peaceful route." From his earliest days in the YoV, he advocated violence; NOT peaceful means. His RF was a major contributing factor in the organization of assets in "Black September" which resources of Fatah fedayeen (along with elements of PFLP, as-Sa'iqa were involved) attempted the coup d’état to seize Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan; and later the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich.

My second point is, al-Hakim never wanted to pursue peaceful means. He wanted to establish chaos and revolution in Marxist/Leninist fashion.

Most Respectfully,
R

George Habash, was a Christian Palestinian and a medical doctor. His earliest days, through 1958, which were the subject of my post were as the founder and member of the Arab Nationalist Movement which was " Ideologically, it was committed to socialism and secularism, but initially not Marxism. He was working as a doctor at refugee camps for most of that period FFS. You are the classic "befuddle them with bullshit" debater. And while he believed in political violence as a last resort at the time, his group did nothing violent against Israel.

 

[aris2chat]

AAI, ADC, CAIR, NAAA, etc. are active lobby groups and individual nations hire professional lobby groups and lawyers to lobby on their behalf. AIPAC is not even listed among the top lobby groups.

AIPAC and its affiliates are the largest donors to American Politicians...

AIPAC Money USC News21

The Individual Contributions
During the two decades M.J. Rosenberg worked for Democrats on the Hill, he and his congressional bosses nodded their heads in agreement when AIPAC members gave out its talking points every year on the last day of the annual policy conference.
“You just gotta say, ‘Yes sir, I agree, absolutely, nothing better than Israel,’ because you don’t want them to get mad at you. You wanna keep the campaign contributions going, ” says Rosenberg, who is now a senior foreign policy fellow at the progressive think tank Media Matters Action Network.
"Thousands of donors associated with AIPAC give hundreds of thousands of dollars to campaigns all around the country,” says Rosenberg, who also worked for AIPAC in the '80s but left after he thought the organization had adopted hawkish policies.
Smart political organizations like AIPAC understand writing a check directly from that organization to a candidate has minimal impact, says Dan Schnur, director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at the University of Southern California, a frequent speaker at AIPAC events.
“The much better way of catching the attention of a candidate, particularly a candidate who needs a lot of money for his or her campaign, is not just to write a check but to have large numbers of individuals each write their own checks,” he says, explaining one of the things that makes AIPAC so effective.
The Pro-Israel PACS
Since 1990, the whole of the pro-Israel lobby has given almost $96 million in congressional campaign contributions and funnels a lot of the money through local political action committees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that tracks money in politics.
Although AIPAC does not have its own PAC, it has its political department analyze who the pro-Israel congressional candidates are across the country and then distributes that information to the pro-Israel PACs, according Rosenberg.
“That's what they do,” Rosenberg says. “Otherwise they wouldn’t have a political department at AIPAC, and they have a big political department there.”
But AIPAC says it does not rate Congress members or work with any political action committees. Those running in its circles say they’re so successful because it’s not hard for them to make their case to elected officials.
“Congress is pro-Israel because America is pro-Israel. Have you ever pushed on an open door? It’s pretty easy,” says Josh Block, a former media relations head of AIPAC who now runs his own lobbying firm.
But some critics of AIPAC disagree that it’s such a simple equation, including one of the founders of J Street, an organization often seen as the more liberal alternative in the American Jewish community.
“If this were all about shared values,” says Daniel Levy, “then I imagine the question to focus at AIPAC would be, ‘Why aren’t the 30 political action committees associated with the AIPAC wing of pro-Israel advocacy disbanded?’ ”
On the Hill
Since 1998, AIPAC has spent $20,269,436 lobbying on the Hill, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan organization dedicated to tracking money in politics.
A team of 11 in-house lobbyists work for AIPAC, including the executive director himself, Howard Kohr, and Jeff Kuhnreich, former senior policy adviser to Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.).
The American Israel Education Foundation
AIPAC has an affiliate called the American Israel Education Foundation that spends money on educational programs, materials and travel to promote AIPAC issues. As a 501(c)(3) organization, contributions made to the American Israel Education Foundation are tax deductible, unlike those made to AIPAC. Under the law the AIPAC affiliate is limited in how much money it can give to political activities.
Since 2000, the foundation has spent almost $5 million on congressional travel to Israel and sent congressmen on a total of 575 trips, according to Legistorm, a nonpartisan organization that tracks money and travel of legislators. The top-five most expensive trips were taken by Republicans.

top givers, 2014
1Lawyers/Law Firms 2Retired 3Securities/Invest 4Health Professionals 5Real Estate 6Insurance 7Leadership PACs 8Oil & Gas 9Lobbyists 10Pharm/Health Prod 11Commercial Banks 12Electric Utilities 13TV/Movies/Music 14Misc Mfg/Distrib 15Misc Finance 16Crop Production 17Business Services 18Computers/Internet 19Hospitals/Nurs Homes 20Public Sector Unions.......

You guys just are so fixated on Israel that you ignore the facts. Some of these groups are giving $30 million plus per candidate

You need some new scripts

 

[Beelzebub]

One thing about AIPAC.

They're effective;

WASHINGTON (JTA) — The U.S. Senate unanimously approved a bill that would further enhance U.S.-Israel ties.

The bill approved Thursday, initiated by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), enhances Israel’s status as entitled to license-free defense technology, adds items to the weapons stockpile the United States maintains in Israel and which is available for Israeli use, requires increased congressional oversight to ensure that Israel maintains its qualitative military edge, encourages U.S.-Israel cooperation on developing energy technologies and encourages Israel’s entry into the visa waiver program, which would allow Israelis visa-free travel to the United States.

The latter provision had in earlier versions of the bill mandated such an entry, a central factor in holding up the bill over the last 18 months; the State Department had objected to Israel’s entry for a number of reasons, including a spike in illegal Israeli travel to the United States and discrimination faced by Arab and Muslim Americans entering Israel.

A similar bill passed the House in March. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which had made the bill must-pass legislation, encouraged both chambers to reconcile their bills and get it to President Obama’s desk for his signature.



Senate approves enhanced U.S.-Israel cooperation bill Jewish Telegraphic Agency

 

[docmauser1]

One thing about AIPAC. They're effective; ...

Kewl.