What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

the MYTH of the two party system

Status
Not open for further replies.

spillmind

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
780
Reaction score
13
Points
16
Location
Palo Alto, Ca.
Bush and Pelosi are both totally corrupt Zionist puppets.

AP - Mon Nov 13, 1:08 PM ET
WASHINGTON - President Bush, responding to concerns Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert brought to the White House, called on Monday for worldwide isolation of Iran until it "gives up its nuclear ambitions."

The risk to the world extends beyond Israel and the Middle East, Bush said in Oval Office remarks to reporters after meeting with Olmert for an hour. The United States and Israel say they believe Iran is working on nuclear weapons, although Tehran says its work on the technology is aimed only at producing energy.

"Iran's nuclear ambitions are not in the world's interest," Bush said. "If Iran had nuclear weapons it would be terribly destabilizing."


link

what presents more of a disinterest for the people of the united states, is that the incoming majority leader is also a zionist tool: link

text:

November 8, 2006

WASHINGTON, Nov. 8 (JTA) - Before a packed meeting of the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee three years ago, U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi
(D-Calif.) connected her political support for the Jewish state with her
personal life.

"My daughter is Catholic. My son-in-law is Jewish," she said. "Last week
I celebrated my birthday and my grandchildren - ages 4 and 6 - called to
sing 'Happy Birthday.' And the surprise, the real gift, was that they
sang it in Hebrew."

Now that the Democrats have taken control of the U.S. House of
Representatives, the party is expected to install Pelosi, 66, as
speaker, making her the first woman to hold the position that is two
heartbeats away from the presidency.

Political observers say it's no surprise that the congresswoman from San
Francisco considers herself close to the Jews.

The daughter of Thomas D'Alesandro Jr., a former mayor of Baltimore,
Pelosi grew up in a Democratic family with Jewish neighbors and friends.

"She likes to say that, growing up in Baltimore, she went to a bar or
bat mitzvah every Saturday," Amy Friedkin, a former president of AIPAC
and a friend of Pelosi's for 25 years, wrote in an e-mail message to
JTA.

Friedkin noted that there's even a soccer field in the Haifa area of
Israel named after the lawmaker's family.

While the Republicans had campaigned partly on the premise that support
for Israel among Democrats has waned, exit polls from Tuesday's voting
show that Democrats won an overwhelming majority of the Jewish vote.

With Pelosi as speaker, Jewish activists and officials are confident
that the U.S. Congress will remain strongly pro-Israel.

"I've heard her say numerous times that the single greatest achievement
of the 20th century" was the founding of the modern state of Israel,
Friedkin wrote. "She has been a great friend of the U.S.-Israel
relationship during her entire time in Congress and is deeply committed
to strengthening that relationship."

Sam Lauter, a pro-Israel activist in San Francisco, has known Pelosi for
nearly 40 years. He was 5 years old when the Pelosis moved into his San
Francisco neighborhood, he recalls. The two families lived on the same
street.

"She's one of the classiest," most "straightforward people you could
ever meet," Lauter said. "She's incredibly loyal."

Lauter said the Pelosis used to attend the first night of the Passover
seder at his parents' house.

"As far as the Jewish community is concerned, she feels our issues in
her soul," he said.

To illustrate his point, Lauter told a Pelosi story that has become
almost legendary in the Jewish community.

At an AIPAC members luncheon in San Francisco right after the Sept. 11
terror attacks, Pelosi was speaking when an alarm sounded.

"Everybody started getting nervous, scrambling toward the door," Lauter
recalled. One person, though, was reading the words of Hatikvah, the
Israeli national anthem, above the din. It was Pelosi.

"It actually calmed the crowd," Lauter said. "You could see people
actually smiling, saying 'Wow.' "

This "wasn't something done purposefully to show everyone that Nancy
Pelosi supports the Jewish community," he said. It "actually came from
inside her."

Lauter and others say Pelosi will have to draw on that inner strength as
speaker, since Lauter predicted that she will hear from those in the
Jewish community who argue that Democrats no longer support Israel the
way they used to.

Some Republicans, in fact, questioned Pelosi's support for Israel this
summer. The congresswoman ended up removing her name as a co-sponsor
from a House resolution supporting the Jewish state during its war with
Hezbollah because it did not address the protection of civilians.

While Pelosi's aides said she was not going to lend her name to a
resolution that did not contain a word she had written, Republicans
criticized the move.

"It highlights a real wave within the Democratic Party that wants a more
'evenhanded' approach on these issues, and that wants to view Israel
through the same prism as we do Hezbollah," Matt Brooks, the executive
director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, said at the time. "Watering
down is not acceptable right now."

Brooks could not be reached for comment this week.

For his part, Lauter believes the argument about the Democrats and
Pelosi is false.

For instance, he noted Pelosi's quick response to former President
Carter's description of Israel's settlement policies as "apartheid" in a
forthcoming book.

Pelosi publicly announced that Carter does not speak for the Democratic
Party on Israel.

Rabbi Doug Kahn, director of the Jewish Community Relations Council in
San Francisco, also applauded Pelosi's repudiation of Carter's position.

He has known Pelosi since she started representing his district in 1987.
Kahn said his group has always had an excellent working relationship
with her. And he praised her passion for issues that relate to equal
opportunity, social justice and peace.

Kahn, echoing Lauter's point, said that Pelosi, coming from a city with
such a liberal political reputation, will face challenges from the
liberal segments of the Democratic Party that have criticized Israeli
policies.

But he is confident that Pelosi, as speaker, will be effective in
persuading people with a broad range of views on the Middle East, the
importance of maintaining bipartisan support for Israel.

When it comes to Israel, "she truly gets it," said Matt Dorf, a
consultant to the Democratic National Committee. She gets "Israel's
value and asset to U.S. security" and its "importance as the only
democracy in the Middle East."

Jewish organizational officials also commend Pelosi's record on Jewish
communal issues.

William Daroff, vice president for public policy for the United Jewish
Communities, the federation system's umbrella group and a Republican
himself, said the lawmaker has helped ensure federal funding of Jewish
family service agencies and Jewish hospitals and has supported
government programs and policies that Jewish organizations value, such
as Medicare and Medicaid.

He also noted that Reva Price, Pelosi's liaison to the Jewish community
for a year and a half, came from the Jewish Council for Public Affairs,
the umbrella group of local community relations councils.

Bringing on board such an insider was "really a masterful stroke,"
Daroff said.

Price, he added, has done a wonderful job of playing "traffic cop" with
Jewish organizations and in making sure that Pelosi's agenda is in tune
with that of the Jewish community.

She's been "a real champion of making sure the Jewish community is well
served," Daroff said of the lawmaker. "I'm sure she'll continue to be a
champion."


until the people of the united states throws israel out of our government, there will NEVER be peace on this planet.
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,128
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
No, until every nation in the world is free and and people are willing to stand up to evil, we wont have peace in this world.

Us leaving Israel wont create peace. It will simply give Islamic extremists more power to commit the genocide they continually promise.
 
OP
spillmind

spillmind

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
780
Reaction score
13
Points
16
Location
Palo Alto, Ca.
No, until every nation in the world is free and and people are willing to stand up to evil, we wont have peace in this world.

Us leaving Israel wont create peace. It will simply give Islamic extremists more power to commit the genocide they continually promise.

israel needs to be dissolved, and the jewish people need to be assimilated into the global societies, as they were before, and zionism is the root cause for the destability in the middle east.

here's a rabbi laying it out in pretty clear terms:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5JqRUJ3A3w[/ame]

more on the history of zionists and the arabs, an exhaustive political and world event history log, the first part is here to watch with 2 and 3, all free to view:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3AjnmDWDC8[/ame]

parts two and three are on the right, i encourage all americans to watch this and challenge it.

the zionist state is constantly harassing its borders, and has been expanding its dominion over the middle east since its formation in 1948. they have been oppressing arabs since world war I, and have had no aversion to sending american people to die for their interests. this has been well documented, and i can post pages upon pages of references if you doubt it.

until israel is held accountable for atrocities such as the massacre of women and children in Palestine on November 8, 2006, and america wakes up and throws the zionists out of her government, terrorism WILL NEVER STOP.
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
38,794
Reaction score
29,656
Points
2,905
Location
Arizona
Pretty scary stuff. I've said it many times before, both Neocons and Dems alike give blind support to Israel, under the false pretense that they are some sort of staunch ally that should they fall, we would too.

When it comes to Israel, "she truly gets it," said Matt Dorf, a
consultant to the Democratic National Committee. She gets "Israel's
value and asset to U.S. security" and its "importance as the only
democracy in the Middle East."
I guess practicing apartheid in a "democracy" is A-OK with Nancy and the Dems, just as much as it was with Bush and the neocons.

Let the plundering of our tax dollars continue, all for the sake of a foreign military.

This all just confirms my greatest fear: when push comes to shove and Israel starts getting waxed the Dems won't hesitate to send US troops to fight Israel's Zionist cause.

As RWA would say, the NWO is here. :mad:
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,128
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
Always expanding its borders? WTF are you talking about? Israel fights when they are attacked First. It has always done that. It hasnt changed at all.

If the Palestinian and other arab nations surrounding Israel stopped attacking them they wouldnt have any problem with them.
 

dilloduck

Diamond Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
53,240
Reaction score
5,795
Points
1,850
Location
Austin, TX
Bush and Pelosi are both totally corrupt Zionist puppets.

AP - Mon Nov 13, 1:08 PM ET
WASHINGTON - President Bush, responding to concerns Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert brought to the White House, called on Monday for worldwide isolation of Iran until it "gives up its nuclear ambitions."

The risk to the world extends beyond Israel and the Middle East, Bush said in Oval Office remarks to reporters after meeting with Olmert for an hour. The United States and Israel say they believe Iran is working on nuclear weapons, although Tehran says its work on the technology is aimed only at producing energy.

"Iran's nuclear ambitions are not in the world's interest," Bush said. "If Iran had nuclear weapons it would be terribly destabilizing."


link

what presents more of a disinterest for the people of the united states, is that the incoming majority leader is also a zionist tool: link

text:

November 8, 2006

WASHINGTON, Nov. 8 (JTA) - Before a packed meeting of the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee three years ago, U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi
(D-Calif.) connected her political support for the Jewish state with her
personal life.

"My daughter is Catholic. My son-in-law is Jewish," she said. "Last week
I celebrated my birthday and my grandchildren - ages 4 and 6 - called to
sing 'Happy Birthday.' And the surprise, the real gift, was that they
sang it in Hebrew."

Now that the Democrats have taken control of the U.S. House of
Representatives, the party is expected to install Pelosi, 66, as
speaker, making her the first woman to hold the position that is two
heartbeats away from the presidency.

Political observers say it's no surprise that the congresswoman from San
Francisco considers herself close to the Jews.

The daughter of Thomas D'Alesandro Jr., a former mayor of Baltimore,
Pelosi grew up in a Democratic family with Jewish neighbors and friends.

"She likes to say that, growing up in Baltimore, she went to a bar or
bat mitzvah every Saturday," Amy Friedkin, a former president of AIPAC
and a friend of Pelosi's for 25 years, wrote in an e-mail message to
JTA.

Friedkin noted that there's even a soccer field in the Haifa area of
Israel named after the lawmaker's family.

While the Republicans had campaigned partly on the premise that support
for Israel among Democrats has waned, exit polls from Tuesday's voting
show that Democrats won an overwhelming majority of the Jewish vote.

With Pelosi as speaker, Jewish activists and officials are confident
that the U.S. Congress will remain strongly pro-Israel.

"I've heard her say numerous times that the single greatest achievement
of the 20th century" was the founding of the modern state of Israel,
Friedkin wrote. "She has been a great friend of the U.S.-Israel
relationship during her entire time in Congress and is deeply committed
to strengthening that relationship."

Sam Lauter, a pro-Israel activist in San Francisco, has known Pelosi for
nearly 40 years. He was 5 years old when the Pelosis moved into his San
Francisco neighborhood, he recalls. The two families lived on the same
street.

"She's one of the classiest," most "straightforward people you could
ever meet," Lauter said. "She's incredibly loyal."

Lauter said the Pelosis used to attend the first night of the Passover
seder at his parents' house.

"As far as the Jewish community is concerned, she feels our issues in
her soul," he said.

To illustrate his point, Lauter told a Pelosi story that has become
almost legendary in the Jewish community.

At an AIPAC members luncheon in San Francisco right after the Sept. 11
terror attacks, Pelosi was speaking when an alarm sounded.

"Everybody started getting nervous, scrambling toward the door," Lauter
recalled. One person, though, was reading the words of Hatikvah, the
Israeli national anthem, above the din. It was Pelosi.

"It actually calmed the crowd," Lauter said. "You could see people
actually smiling, saying 'Wow.' "

This "wasn't something done purposefully to show everyone that Nancy
Pelosi supports the Jewish community," he said. It "actually came from
inside her."

Lauter and others say Pelosi will have to draw on that inner strength as
speaker, since Lauter predicted that she will hear from those in the
Jewish community who argue that Democrats no longer support Israel the
way they used to.

Some Republicans, in fact, questioned Pelosi's support for Israel this
summer. The congresswoman ended up removing her name as a co-sponsor
from a House resolution supporting the Jewish state during its war with
Hezbollah because it did not address the protection of civilians.

While Pelosi's aides said she was not going to lend her name to a
resolution that did not contain a word she had written, Republicans
criticized the move.

"It highlights a real wave within the Democratic Party that wants a more
'evenhanded' approach on these issues, and that wants to view Israel
through the same prism as we do Hezbollah," Matt Brooks, the executive
director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, said at the time. "Watering
down is not acceptable right now."

Brooks could not be reached for comment this week.

For his part, Lauter believes the argument about the Democrats and
Pelosi is false.

For instance, he noted Pelosi's quick response to former President
Carter's description of Israel's settlement policies as "apartheid" in a
forthcoming book.

Pelosi publicly announced that Carter does not speak for the Democratic
Party on Israel.

Rabbi Doug Kahn, director of the Jewish Community Relations Council in
San Francisco, also applauded Pelosi's repudiation of Carter's position.

He has known Pelosi since she started representing his district in 1987.
Kahn said his group has always had an excellent working relationship
with her. And he praised her passion for issues that relate to equal
opportunity, social justice and peace.

Kahn, echoing Lauter's point, said that Pelosi, coming from a city with
such a liberal political reputation, will face challenges from the
liberal segments of the Democratic Party that have criticized Israeli
policies.

But he is confident that Pelosi, as speaker, will be effective in
persuading people with a broad range of views on the Middle East, the
importance of maintaining bipartisan support for Israel.

When it comes to Israel, "she truly gets it," said Matt Dorf, a
consultant to the Democratic National Committee. She gets "Israel's
value and asset to U.S. security" and its "importance as the only
democracy in the Middle East."

Jewish organizational officials also commend Pelosi's record on Jewish
communal issues.

William Daroff, vice president for public policy for the United Jewish
Communities, the federation system's umbrella group and a Republican
himself, said the lawmaker has helped ensure federal funding of Jewish
family service agencies and Jewish hospitals and has supported
government programs and policies that Jewish organizations value, such
as Medicare and Medicaid.

He also noted that Reva Price, Pelosi's liaison to the Jewish community
for a year and a half, came from the Jewish Council for Public Affairs,
the umbrella group of local community relations councils.

Bringing on board such an insider was "really a masterful stroke,"
Daroff said.

Price, he added, has done a wonderful job of playing "traffic cop" with
Jewish organizations and in making sure that Pelosi's agenda is in tune
with that of the Jewish community.

She's been "a real champion of making sure the Jewish community is well
served," Daroff said of the lawmaker. "I'm sure she'll continue to be a
champion."


until the people of the united states throws israel out of our government, there will NEVER be peace on this planet.

Just because both parties agree on one thing doesn't make em one party.
 
OP
spillmind

spillmind

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
780
Reaction score
13
Points
16
Location
Palo Alto, Ca.
Just because both parties agree on one thing doesn't make em one party.

the fact that the zionists pay off both sides to cater to israel's interests, makes them one party, yes.

Always expanding its borders? WTF are you talking about? Israel fights when they are attacked First. It has always done that. It hasnt changed at all.

If the Palestinian and other arab nations surrounding Israel stopped attacking them they wouldnt have any problem with them.

fact: the israelis soldiers in lebanon were captured INSIDE of lebanon before the aggression broke out.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/israeli_solders.html

gaza strip is a PRISON

while i don't agree with all of what this website says, it's got some pretty interesting points:

***WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN KILLED BY IDF ON THIS LINK***
http://www.jewwatch.com

fact: israel is CONSTANTLY harassing, killing arabs around her borders. not to mention all the people abducted and being tortured in israel's dungeons.

if you want the history of israel attacking arabs, and vice versa, i suggest you watch those movies i posted, so you can get all the FACTS that are well documented.

here's another link, though it's made my a leftist loon that i don't totally agree with, he's done an amazing amount of research and all his claims about zionism are true and correct, and well footnoted.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1585562142333161866&q=stranger+than+fiction&hl=en

if you still don't believe me, avatar... tell us all here what exactly happened to the USS Liberty?

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ussliberty.html

or you can google uss liberty, where there are plenty of vets and their surviving families still pissed as all hell (as they should be) that to date, congress has NEVER ONCE investigated this attack.
 

dilloduck

Diamond Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
53,240
Reaction score
5,795
Points
1,850
Location
Austin, TX
the fact that the zionists pay off both sides to cater to israel's interests, makes them one party, yes.


That's an absurd statement, Spilly.; I know you goal here is to trash Americans who support Israel but your "one Party" stuff just doesn't fly. What do they do? Fake it for the public and then all sneak behind a curtain to giggle and eat bagels?
 
OP
spillmind

spillmind

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
780
Reaction score
13
Points
16
Location
Palo Alto, Ca.
That's an absurd statement, Spilly.; I know you goal here is to trash Americans who support Israel but your "one Party" stuff just doesn't fly. What do they do? Fake it for the public and then all sneak behind a curtain to giggle and eat bagels?


a) my goal is not to trash americans that support israel, it's to expose the zionist corruption and control over our goverment, both 'parties'.

b) lieberman is a perfect example of a zionist who doesn't need a party.

c) there are no far left (liberal) politicians anymore. at best any are centrist, and most are right, on both sides of the aisle.

they aren't giggling, they aim to control the middle east, and they will do everything in their power to send americans to die for their ambitions.
 

dilloduck

Diamond Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
53,240
Reaction score
5,795
Points
1,850
Location
Austin, TX
a) my goal is not to trash americans that support israel, it's to expose the zionist corruption and control over our goverment, both 'parties'.

b) lieberman is a perfect example of a zionist who doesn't need a party.

c) there are no far left (liberal) politicians anymore. at best any are centrist, and most are right, on both sides of the aisle.

they aren't giggling, they aim to control the middle east, and they will do everything in their power to send americans to die for their ambitions.

So Murtha is a tool of the Zionists and Kennedy is not a liberal ?
 
OP
spillmind

spillmind

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
780
Reaction score
13
Points
16
Location
Palo Alto, Ca.

no1tovote4

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
10,299
Reaction score
617
Points
138
Location
Colorado
While I agree that there is no real difference between the parties to speak of, other than the levers they use to "get out the vote", I seriously disagree that the US is a "tool" of the Zionists. It is more like Israel is the lever we use to have a foothold in the ME where we are more than accepted, but necessary for their survival.
 

rtwngAvngr

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2004
Messages
15,755
Reaction score
512
Points
48
While I agree that there is no real difference between the parties to speak of, other than the levers they use to "get out the vote", I seriously disagree that the US is a "tool" of the Zionists. It is more like Israel is the lever we use to have a foothold in the ME where we are more than accepted, but necessary for their survival.


Why waste energy disagreeing with the obvious?

http://www.mediamonitors.net/khodr49.html






Mohamed Khodr's Column

Sharon to Peres: "We Control America"
Congressional Pandering to Israel proves him Right



by Mohamed Khodr

On October 3, 2001, I.A.P. News reported that according to Israel Radio (in Hebrew) Kol Yisrael an acrimonious argument erupted during the Israeli cabinet weekly session last week between Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his foreign Minister Shimon Peres. Peres warned Sharon that refusing to heed incessant American requests for a cease-fire with the Palestinians would endanger Israeli interests and "turn the US against us. "Sharon reportedly yelled at Peres, saying "don't worry about American pressure, we the Jewish people control America."

"The Israelis control the policy in the congress and the senate."

-- Senator Fullbright, Chair of Senate Foreign Relations Committee: 10/07/1973 on CBS' "Face the Nation".

"I am aware how almost impossible it is in this country to carry out a foreign policy [in the Middle East] not approved by the Jews..... terrific control the Jews have over the news media and the barrage the Jews have built up on congressmen .... I am very much concerned over the fact that the Jewish influence here is completely dominating the scene and making it almost impossible to get congress to do anything they don't approve of. The Israeli embassy is practically dictating to the congress through influential Jewish people in the country"

-----Sec. of State John Foster Dulles quoted on p.99 of Fallen Pillars by Donald Neff

The long history of bipartisan Congressional support for Israel led former Secretary of State James Baker to call the Congress "The Little Knesset" after Israel's Knesset (parliament) in Jerusalem. Congress's embarrassing and unpatriotic display of allegiance to a foreign country that is dependent on American largesse and support is the unknown scandal to the American people. With the media's strong, biased and sympathetic portrayal of Israel while simultaneously denying any opposing view of Israel or human pictures and stories of the endless suffering of Palestinians, its no wonder that we the American people are so unaware of the true face of Israel. Thus shockingly but not surprisingly only 4 % of the American people are aware of Israel's 34 year brutal military occupation of the Palestinian people.

Only at times of war and threat upon the U.S. does our Senate ever exhibit the strong bipartisanship support of America it regularly provides Israel. Despite our current crisis in airline security, Congressional political bickering continued for weeks between Republicans and Democrats placing American lives at risk while foreign aid to Israel was quick and automatic (about $6 Billion), even at a time the Congress is telling us of budget deficits and lack of money for the unemployed American workers. As an American I am outraged at the blind historical allegiance our Senators have provided Israel while they neglect many of our pressing domestic issues such as airline security, Social Security and Medicare Reform, Education Reform, Health Insurance for needy Americans, Money for Dilapidated Schools, and Prescription Coverage for our Elderly. Our Congress operates on the premise that most Americans are disinterested in foreign policy thus they have a vacuum to provide Israel with blank checks and our latest F-16 fighter jets that Israel uses to kill Palestinian civilians. They depend on our media to keep us uninformed and distracted with Sports, Harry Potter, and scandals.

During America's war on terrorism, President Bush and Secretary Powell have worked hard to keep a fragile coalition among the 55 Arab and Muslim nations. To do that they've finally listened to British Prime Minister Tony Blair, other European and Arab leaders and reengaged in the MidEast peace process. Bush has ignored the Israeli Palestinian conflict since taking office thus allowing Sharon to reconquer and reinvade Palestinian territories during this Intifada that has cost over 800 Palestinian lives and 175 Israeli lives with hundreds of Palestinian homes demolished.

For the first time Bush uttered the word a "Palestinian state" (is it conceivable that the President of the most powerful nation on earth doesn't even dare utter these two words). Powell has repeatedly criticized Israel for its assassination policy, its house demolitions, its invasion of Palestinian controlled territory, while he and Bush have repeatedly asked Sharon to pull out of Palestinian territory, Sharon simply ignored them and even compared them to Nazi appeasers. None of Sharon's rebuttals of the American President during this crisis even generated any criticism from our brave Congress. No one can imagine any other country able to tell its benefactor "take your demands and shove it."

Now the stage is set for the much awaited Powell speech, a new initiative on the Middle East on Monday, November 19, in Kentucky. It's been billed as a historic speech. According to the British Telegraph site (telegraph.co.uk) on November 18, Powell's original aim was to set out the administration's vision for the creation of a Palestinian state, including complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and the West Bank, to be followed by peace negotiations on "final status" issues such as borders, refugees and the fate of Jerusalem. He has been encouraged by signs that moderate Arab states will recognize Israel and its continued right to exist if the Palestinians decide to do so themselves, an essential element of any peace agreement. Even Iran's long standing opposition to the Peace Process was dropped when last week President Mohammad Khatami of Iran said: "If the Palestinians accept this issue we will respect the wishes of the Palestinian nation."

However, and as is customary whenever there is a possibility of Israel being criticized, the Pro Israeli forces come out in force to pressure the White House to tone down or modify its wording. Due to intense pressure from Congress, the media, and the powerful American Jewish lobby, the White House has intervened to tone down Powell's speech on the Middle East planned for November 19. President George W Bush is believed to have blocked Powell from putting too much pressure on Israel to make concessions in the search for peace. As a result, according to Washington officials the watered down speech is "less of a new initiative and more of a general call for people to buck up their ideas".

THE ROLE OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE IN SERVING ISRAEL NOT AMERICA
89 SENATORS URGE PRESIDENT BUSH NOT TO HAMPER ISRAEL
November 16, 2001

According to the New York Times in an article titled "Senators Urge Bush Not to Hamper Israel" (Nov. 17), 89 Senators signed a letter to President Bush urging him not to restrain Israel from retaliating fully against Palestinian violence and to express his solidarity publicly with Israel soon. The letter was a preemptive strike against Secretary of State's Colin Powell's anticipated speech on the Middle East conflict intended to silence any direct or indirect criticism of Israel and from offering any hope to Palestinian aspirations of a homeland based on UN Resolutions 242 and 338 which call for Israel to withdraw from all occupied territories it conquered in its 1967 pre-emptive attack on Palestinian and Arab lands. In the letter the Senators praise Mr. Bush for refusing to meet with Arafat and for snubbing him at the U.N. refusing to even shake his hand.

As is usually the case the Letter was prompted by American Jewish groups imposing their sentiments upon "our?" Congress. According to the Times, the letter, "stemmed from a meeting two weeks ago between leaders of the American Jewish community and key senators and was proposed by Senator Christopher S. Bond, the Missouri Republican. Particularly active in providing advice on the letter was the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the principal lobbying group for Israel."

This letter by 89 Senators is one in a long history of letters and resolutions adopted by "our?" Congress meant to intimidate and squash any movement by a US President that seeks peace negotiations for the Israeli-Palestinian conflicts based on the internationally accepted formula of land for peace based on UN Resolutions 242 and 338.

This Congressional doormat policy toward Israel began on September 21, 1922 whereupon the U.S. Congress endorsed the British Balfour Declaration.

U.S. CONGRESS ENDORSES BALFOUR DECLARATION: SEPTEMBER 21, 1922

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress Assembled.

That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine of "A" national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which will prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected.

(Public Resolution No. 73, 67th Congress, Second Session).
Letter to President Ford by 71 Senators Concerning “Reassessment”
(December 9, 1974)

Dear Mr. President:

In writing to you about recent developments in the Middle East, we wish to reaffirm the commitment to the survival and integrity of the state of Israel that has been the bipartisan basis of American policy over 26 years and under five administrations.

We do not believe that a policy of appeasement (note: this appeasement charge written 27 years ago was just recently echoed by Sharon: thus the same cliches are used over and over again to protect Israel) will be any more successful now than it proved to be in Europe in the 1930's because we confront an appetite which grows on what it is fed.

We urge that you reiterate our nation's long-standing commitment to Israel's security by a policy of continued military supplies and diplomatic and economic support. In doing so, you will be acting in the best interests of the United States and with the support of the Congress and the American people. (note: again using the link that what's good for Israel is good for America, no one has been allowed to challenge this dangerous falsehood).
Senate Opposes Unilateral Declaration of a Palestinian State
March 11, 1999

By a vote of 98-1, the U.S. Senate approved a resolution March 11, 1999, asking President Clinton to oppose any unilateral declaration of an independent Palestinian state. A similar resolution was passed by the House on March 16 by a vote of 380-24. Sen. Robert Byrd, a West Virginia Democrat, cast the sole vote against the measure.
96 Senators Call on President Clinton to Support Israel (note: only part of letter shown
October 12, 2000

All but four members of the U.S. Senate signed the following letter to President Clinton expressing their solidarity with Israel. The four senators who did not sign were Spencer Abraham (R-MI), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Robert Byrd (D-WV) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE). The bipartisan letter was circulated by the Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS) and Tom Daschle (D-ND).

Dear Mr. President:

We write to you to express our solidarity with the State of Israel at this moment of crisis and our profound disappointment and frustration with PLO Chairman Arafat and the Palestinian Authority...We are deeply concerned at the continuing, coordinated campaign of Palestinian violence.

We urge you to express American solidarity with Israel at this crucial moment, to condemn the Palestinian campaign of violence, to do everything possible to secure the return of the three kidnapped Israeli soldiers from Lebanon, and to stand with Israel in international arenas - not only because we should, but because such actions are also the best way to restore the negotiating process.

America's open and abiding commitment to the security of Israel is the surest way to see our way safely through it.
53 US senators urge Red Cross to accept MDA
By Melissa Radler JPOST
 

rtwngAvngr

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2004
Messages
15,755
Reaction score
512
Points
48
Continued from above

continuedfromabove said:
August 2, 2001

In a bipartisan effort led by US Senators Peter Fitzgerald (R-Illinois) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-New York,) a group of 53 senators sent letters yesterday to Secretary of State Colin Powell and leaders of the Red Cross urging the world's largest humanitarian organization to grant full and immediate membership to Magen David Adom (Israel's equivalent of the Red Cross).
Letter Signed By 81 Senators Asking President Clinton Not to Pressure Israel
(note: part of letter below)

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing about the Middle East peace process, and the published reports of a disagreement between our Administration and the Israeli government that may lead to the United States publicly presenting a peace proposal which is known to be unacceptable to Israel. We hope these reports are not true.

We share your Administration's frustration with this lack of movement, but believe it would be a serious mistake for the United States to change from its traditional role as facilitator of the peace process to using public pressure against Israel. This would be particularly unfair and counterproductive since Israel has kept the promises it made at Oslo

America's commitment to Israel's security undergirds the entire peace process and provides Israel the confidence it needs to take very real risks for peace. American Middle East diplomacy, as you know and have shown so well, has always worked best when pursued quietly and in concert with Israel. We strongly urge you to continue our critical role as facilitator of a process that can ultimately succeed only through the direct negotiations by the parties themselves.

Sincerely,
Joseph I. Lieberman
Connie Mack

Letter from Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, to President Clinton: Gingrich Criticizes Clinton Pressure on Israel
May 6, 1998
(note: only part of letter shown)

Dear Mr. President,

I have followed the recent changes in your administration's Israel policy with a deep and growing sense of concern.

I strongly believe that genuine and lasting peace in Israel can only be achieved through voluntary direct dialogue between the parties, and not as a result of heavy-handed outside pressure by the United States. Israel must be able to decide her own security needs and set her own conditions for negotiations without facing coercion from the U.S.

If your administration uses its influence to unilaterally design a “solution ” or force Israel to the table..then what motivation does Chairman Arafat have to move toward common ground when America volunteers to drag Israel to his current position?

Worse, America's strong-arm tactics would send a clear signal to the supporters of terrorism that their murderous actions are an effective tool in forcing concessions from Israel. Such signals endanger Israel and further weaken the peace process. (note: same argument used before September 11 and after September 11)

Your administration must re-evaluate it policy in this area.

Sincerely,

Newt Gingrich
Speaker of the House

87 SENATORS, 209 REPRESENTATIVES LETTER TO PRESIDENT BUSH: SUPPORT ISRAEL
House, Senate Call for Reassessment of U.S.-Palestinian Relations April 6, 2001

(SOURCE: American Israeli Public Affairs Committee: AIPAC)

87 members of the Senate and the 209 members of the House sent letters to President Bush urging him to reassess U.S. relations with the Palestinian Authority.

Senate Letter (House Letter is Almost the Same)

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you out of a deep sense of frustration, anger and concern over recent events in the Middle East....Over the past several months, the Palestinians have initiated on average over 30 "incidents" a day against Israeli soldiers and civilians (note: not a single mention of Palestinian casualties that are 4 times the Israeli casualties or the international condemnation of Israel by the State Department and EVERY International Human Rights Organization.)

Given the drastic changes that have taken place in recent months we believe it is time for the United States to initiate a reassessment of our relations with the Palestinians. Such reassessment should, in our view, examine whether those Palestinian groups involved in violence, such as the PLO-affiliated groups Force 17 and Tanzim, should be designated as foreign terrorist organizations under Sections 219 of 8 USC 1189, whether US aid to the Palestinians is in fact meetings its goals, and whether it is appropriate for Arafat to be invited to meet with high-level officials in Washington while the violence continues; we also believe that you should reaffirm America's opposition to a unilaterally-declared independent Palestinian state.

It is also time for those of us in both parties who serve in Congress and in your Administration to restate our commitment to Israel's security and to the uniquely common values and interests which America and Israel share.

June 11, 2001

The House of Representatives included several pro-Israel provisions in the Foreign Relations Authorization Act. The legislation, which passed 352-73 on May 16, included a section authored by Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY), Jewish, calling upon the State Department to review the current travel warning for Israel, while Reps. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Eric Cantor (R-VA), Cantor is Jewish, included language criticizing the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic comments of Syria’s President Assad.

The House of Representatives voted to penalize Lebanon for not securing its border with Israel. The House attached a provision, offered by Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA), Jewish, to the Foreign Relations Authorization Act prohibiting certain U.S. support for the Lebanese military until the army takes control of the country’s border with Israel away from Hezbollah. (note: Israel withdrew from Lebanon after 22 years of military occupation)

The Red Cross retracts description of Israeli settlements as “war crime.” In response to a strongly worded letter from Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), Jewish, regarding recent statements emanating from the organization, Dr. Jakob Kellenberger, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross, stated unequivocally that the Red Cross does not consider Israeli settlement activity a “war crime.”

EXAMPLES OF SENATORS INDIVIDUALLY EXPRESSING THEIR SOLIDARITY WITH ISRAEL
SENATOR CHARLES SCHUMER's (D), ONE OF TEN JEWISH SENATORS: LETTER TO NYTIMES
August 1, 2001

In a letter to the editor published in the New York Times August 1, 2001, Senator Charles Schumer, Jewish Senator from New York, states that Ehud Barak offered the Palestinians a state of their own on 97% of the West Bank with a capital in East Jerusalem. He states that Mr. Arafat reject this offer and instead of choosing peace he orchestrated a wave of violence that ended the peace process. (note: The scope and substance of the offer he mentions is false and Barak's "generosity" which was never stated publicly has been refuted by American negotiators who also wrote in the New York Times)

SENATOR JOHN McCAIN (R) AGREES TO WORK FOR ISRAEL BY HEADING INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN TO FREE ISRAELI HOSTAGES IN LEBANON.

According to the Jerusalem Post of August 1, 2001 Israeli Knesset Speaker Avraham Burg asked Senator John McCain to head an international campaign to press for the release of three Israeli soldiers and a businessman held captive by Hizbullah in Lebanon. Senator McCain agreed. (note: as usual such items are not reported in the American media. No mention was made of the hundreds of Lebanese held captive by Israel and the over 3,000 Palestinian prisoners in Israel held without charge)

SENATOR JOSEPH BIDEN (D-Delaware) PLEDGES HIS ALLEGIANCE TO ISRAEL

In June of this year Senator Joseph Biden (D-Delaware), Chair of the powerful Foreign Relations Committee tells the Pro-Israeli Council on Foreign Relations that the Israeli-US friendship "is not a transitory event, a marriage of convenience, or a short-term alliance."

SENATOR JESSE HELMS (R-N. Carolina) CARES MORE ABOUT ISRAEL'S SECURITY THAN FORMER GENERAL AND PRIME MINISTER EHUD BARAK

According to the Jerusalem Post of August 16, 2000: "Jesse Helms Critical of Barak's Concessions"

Jesse Helms, chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is critical of Prime Minister Ehud Barak for making too many concessions at Camp David.

"Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered concessions unimaginable even several weeks ago; indeed, I believe he went too far," Helms wrote in an August 8 letter to Americans for a Safe Israel, a small, New York-based group opposed to the peace process begun at Oslo in 1993.

"Israel must have an agreement that leaves a defensible state; the borders contemplated at Camp David leave Israel vulnerable," Helms added.

No American citizen, no American organization, no American institution, and no American domestic need or policy ever receives the immediate undivided attention of "our?" Congress than the single issue of Jewish rs a America, that of Israel. Whatever Israel needs and whenever it needs it, it can count on the Jewish American lobby, on the Jewish American Congressmen and Senators, and on the Jewish American appointees in the executive branch, along with the voice of the powerful media to continue that "Large Sucking Sound" out of our Treasury, Commerce, and Pentagon toward the only country in the world more condemned and criticized by the world community than any other. Israel's cynical use of the murder of millions of Jews in the Holocaust and the intimidating use of America's Scarlet Letter "A" for Anti-Semitism has allowed it to steal land, murder civilians, and create the world's longest suffering Palestinian refugees, all in plain sight of a world silenced by its guilt and by America's power.

There will never be peace for America as long as we the American citizens allow a foreign nation to dictate our foreign policy and who becomes our friends and our enemies. For sometime Israel and its "controlled Congress and media" are pushing our country to expand our war and murder of civilians to the Arab countries Israel deems standing in its vision of "Greater Israel."

At the beginning we supported Israel to be our client state in the oil deserts of Arabia, now its us who've become the client state for Israel. Israel is committing atrocities with our money and weapons---killing in our name. This has more to do with our national pride, identity, and role in the world than it does with Muslims, Palestinians, or Afghanistan. Is this our country, is this "our?" Congress, is Bush our President, and is Colin Powell our Secretary of State.

What Powell will say and not say on Monday November 19 will tell the American people and the world whether we are in charge of our destiny or is Israel. Let's pray that no more Americans die for Israel's sake and for the sake of reelecting "our?'" brave Congressmen.
 

rtwngAvngr

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2004
Messages
15,755
Reaction score
512
Points
48
That's an absurd statement, Spilly.; I know you goal here is to trash Americans who support Israel but your "one Party" stuff just doesn't fly. What do they do? Fake it for the public and then all sneak behind a curtain to giggle and eat bagels?


It is effectively one party, dilllo. On the most important issues of the day, they are of one mind. SOmetimes they pander with different rhetoric, but they're basically the same.

And in fact, look for a new party, The Unity Party, coming up by '08. I think they already have a site and I think McCain is involved somehow.


http://www.unity08.com/believe
 

dilloduck

Diamond Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
53,240
Reaction score
5,795
Points
1,850
Location
Austin, TX
It is effectively one party, dilllo. On the most important issues of the day, they are of one mind. SOmetimes they pander with different rhetoric, but they're basically the same.

And in fact, look for a new party, The Unity Party, coming up by '08. I think they already have a site and I think McCain is involved somehow.


http://www.unity08.com/believe

What is it that you consider to be the most important issues of the day. I know McCain sees himself as the great unifier but I'll pass on unifying under a tent of false feel good compromises.
 

rtwngAvngr

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2004
Messages
15,755
Reaction score
512
Points
48
What is it that you consider to be the most important issues of the day. I know McCain sees himself as the great unifier but I'll pass on unifying under a tent of false feel good compromises.


The border. Trade with china. Keeping a free media.

The new party will be basically the neocon/liberal party. Both believe in subjugating the world to some form of new order of their own creation. One schemes to take over government with business, the other strives to take over business with government. Together, they will be quite the little fascist regime. Let them have each other. I prefer marginalization.
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
38,794
Reaction score
29,656
Points
2,905
Location
Arizona
It is more like Israel is the lever we use to have a foothold in the ME where we are more than accepted, but necessary for their survival.

While I agree "we" are necessary for their survival ("we" more acurately=our tax dollars), how is it that Israel is any kind of "foothold" for us in the ME? We do not have any bases in Israel and they never helped us in our wars against Iraq. We established our own "foothold" in Kuwait and now even in Afganistan and Iraq. I fail to see how Israel is some sort of invaluable military asset to have in the ME. Not that I wish to be enemies with Israel, but if we were to cut our tax funding of Israel would they still be our ally? If not, are they really that good of an ally to have? And it is utter nonesense to hear this administration as well as past administrations herald Israel as some kind of shinning example of democracy in the middle east. If they are the best example of democracy in the ME, no wonder the Arab countries are weary of the West's democracy.
 

rtwngAvngr

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2004
Messages
15,755
Reaction score
512
Points
48
Very good points, Hawk. Let's see how this mason spins it this time.

(TUBAL CAIN! / "The Kandinksy's painted on both sides?")
 

no1tovote4

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
10,299
Reaction score
617
Points
138
Location
Colorado
While I agree "we" are necessary for their survival ("we" more acurately=our tax dollars), how is it that Israel is any kind of "foothold" for us in the ME? We do not have any bases in Israel and they never helped us in our wars against Iraq. We established our own "foothold" in Kuwait and now even in Afganistan and Iraq. I fail to see how Israel is some sort of invaluable military asset to have in the ME. Not that I wish to be enemies with Israel, but if we were to cut our tax funding of Israel would they still be our ally? If not, are they really that good of an ally to have? And it is utter nonesense to hear this administration as well as past administrations herald Israel as some kind of shinning example of democracy in the middle east. If they are the best example of democracy in the ME, no wonder the Arab countries are weary of the West's democracy.

It centralizes a focus and creates a balance of power. The threat of their nuclear weapons often keeps nations in check where they otherwise might be more directly attacking Israel. By focusing on Israel, much of our influence elsewhere is less effectively followed...

I can list more, but there are benefits to the US for Israel to be there as it is. If you notice we have never truly offered an effective peace plan to those nations, it isn't because we couldn't, it's because the status quo "benefits" us more according to those making those decisions.

The Arab nations who fear Israel because of the US power behind them centralize their forces there, rather than spreading them. They spend more money on home security rather than "donating" to terrorist causes because they believe they need to protect themselves.

All of this is done without wasting one US life, at the cost of some terrorism in the ME, which these people clearly are willing to "allow" when an end is actually pretty clear and could be easily done with the amount of control the US actually has over Israel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$145.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top