Following the heavy coverage of AIPAC’s (the virulently pro-Israeli government lobby) multi-day annual Washington convention in March, the mainstream media might have been interested for once in covering alternative viewpoints like those discussed at the April 10th conference “The Israel Lobby: Is it Good for the US? Is it Good for Israel?” (Israellobbyus.org). Fairness and balance in reporting should produce at least some coverage of such an event.
Oh, Ralph Nader, are you unpatriotic?
Thanks, Mr. Nader, for the update on the zionist lobby's progress. We can see that nothing is changing.
This is a good piece which not only brings us to currency on the relationship between the corporate media and the Israeli lobby but also describes the victims of the goddamned US-Israeli alliance.
we can't be sure that an overwhelming or all white people with mosheic cult or having relatives who practice this cult have any connection to hebrews and/or judeans.
one can never be the label "anti-semitic"--one can only be against what mizrahim and white colonialists have done against indigenous population of palestina which probably descend from ancient canaanites who have been inhabiting that region for millennia even ere hebrews invaded it 3.2k years ago.
the modern invaders or colonial imperialists from europe can now succeed ONLY by .
expelling all or most palestinians.
the final solution would depend mostly or ONLY on christo-mosheic world.
Glad to see Ralph is continuing to take principled positions regardless of their popularity..
Anybody think Clinton is going to do the same?
Run again Ralph!
'What the f--k?"
Thank you Ralph, as always pertinent, relevant, bringing us trenchant analysis without compromise.I'd gladly "cast my vote away" again for you.
Please show me the "anti-Jewish invective" that has been expressed in this thread.
I notice that you provide no substantiation for any of your specifics.
Here's an easy way to quantify AIPAC's influence on our government. How many times has Israel NOT gotten its way on any issue? The answer is quite specific: zero.
Gotta love those facts.
From the article by Mr. Nader: "So, where were the reporters of the mainstream media?"
Any questions? Simple as that, if it's not reported it didn't happen.
You find yourself asking absurd questions: whose in charge here. For the Middle East, it is a fair question and the most likely answer is the Israeli lobby. Refining the point, Israel doesn't dictate everything the US does in the region, just where they have a vital interests. If you ask yourself a simple question: when have we ever acted against Israel's interests after World War II.
Well, what about the Suez crisis in 1956. Indeed, we did act against Israel's interests and we are forever citing it as the glorious moment when we acted in our interests and against those of Israel. I am sure someone will point out others but I can't.
I think it proves something we all know. Democracy has no defense against militant, talented, powerful minorities and it is only saved if those minorities decide it is its best interests to serve our national interest, and where interests collide, the people in a democracy are in deep, deep, trouble.
I think that the claim that the US acted against Israel's interests in the Suez Crisis is debatable.
As I recall, by the time the US and USSR intervened in that mess, the three invaders (Israel, Britain, and France) had already failed in their primary objective which was to keep the canal open.
Dear Mr. or Ms. "IPrayForRevolution",
Bozhidarbalkas comment did indeed contain a typical anti-Semitic canard and warranted criticism. But you have completely nullified any valid criticism that you might have offered by spewing all the usual vile Zionist bullshit used to justify Israeli savagery and barbarism.
What sort of revolution do you pray for? I suspect that I want nothing to do with it!
Bozhidarbalkas comment used the typical anti-Semitic canard which tries to de-legitimize Jewish ethnicity. However "I pray for revolution" ended up sounding even more vile by spouting all the usual Zionist, anti-Arab racist canards...
Stop Pretending Why? - The Press Blackout.
The Government and the Press have been Subverted, Completly and Wholly.
...in fact that many of the Current On-Air-Talent was culled for the unlikely source of Prisoners and Street Prostitutes, many of which came from the Sacramento Area of California. The Prostitution aspect along with the use of such Narcotics as Heroin appears to be being utilized as a "Mind Control" Feature along with the Degradational Effects of "Hazing" these people into "Compliance" by setting firm examples of what their lives could consist of without complete compliance and cooperation of their "Handlers". These People that I have purposely Identified to show a Pattern of Incident and Distribution has remained unchallenged for over 4 Years.
It includes the Names of Two Presidents of the United States, a First Lady, the Duchess of York, a Republican Vice Presidential hopeful of 2008, and an as yet unlisted Justice of the Supreme Court. The Disturbing Pattern not only points to a significant Influence of American Politic across the board, but lends itself toward Criminal Racketeering in the effort to Disenfranchise the Entire American Political Process and the Free Press.
These Illegal Actions, Infiltrations and Subversion of the Free Press and Government cannot be allowed to Stand, as Its Danger to the Public Good is All to Clear. See: President and the Press Speech of April 27, 1961 by President John F. Kennedy.
Here are the Lists I have compiled on American Journalists so far:
Media Subversion List 2010
Media Subversion List 2012
Media Subversion Map of Sacramento and Hub Distribution United States
You can also find Court Records from Sacramento County Superior Court for approximately 20
Subjects Listed in regard to the participation in PC 647b activity related to prostitution.
For All Links - See: Red 'X' Society on Facebook
I GATHER THAT A LEBANESE ARAB, RALPH NADER, AND THE ZOGBYS WHO ARE ALSO ARABS, WILL BE ENTIRELY OBJECTIVE ABOUT ISRAEL
Why the media did not attend this Palestinized conference?
Why is the Two State Solution Dead? I can name one very good reason:
There never has been in history a Palestinian People, a Palestinian nation, country, Palestinian language, Palestinian religion, history, archeology and ancient artifacts, cuisine, art, culture, civilization, currency or coin. All of these can be characterized as Hebraic. In other words, these characteristics define PEOPLEHOOD.
Israel shares people and nationhood with the world's nations. The Palestinians do not. The Palestinians were mainly migrant workers who squatted on Jewish land for jobs, to rebuild the ancient Jewish state when the Zionists decided it was time.
GOOGLE: The PALESTINIANS - The Invented People of a Fabricated Nation
GOOGLE : Palestinian History a Fiction: The Mitrokhin Archives
You will fin the necessary links including the 9000 19th century photographs of a desolate Israel missing its Palestinians pining for their verdant green "paradise" which never existed. You will fine Mark Twain's INNOCENTS ABROAD link to his entire book that described in 1869 what actually existed in "Palestine" - a territory, never a nation or country. It describes the WEST BANK - which refers not to a territory, but the west bank of the Jordan River - the 1922 mandated demarcation between lands for Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Arabs. Before the 60s when one referred to a "Palestinian," one referred to a Jew - not an Arab or Muslim.
A PLO leader, Zuheir Mohsen, admitted it in a 1977 interview in TRUOW, a Dutch publication, merely a decade after Palestinian people and nationhood were invented in MOSCOW! At the time the Russian’s secret service exported radicalism and revolution into the Mideast – as well as it was arming ALL the Arab regimes of the area. Meanwhile they trained Egyptian Yasser Arafat (aka “a Palestinian”), in Russia! The documents to prove these facts are on the record. Mohsen was subsequently assassinated. He said:
***“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism.”***
How much clearer can it get?
LASTLY, understood by most Americans why the media rightfully and correctly ignored Nader's agitation-propaganda fest:
GOOGLE: NRO Obama the Jew
Now you too understand.
Why the ISRAEL LOBBY has nothing to do with American interests is clearly stated by every US president since Washington up to Kennedy - BEFORE the Israel Lobby came into existence: American support for Israel IS, in the National Interest. It is also the RIGHT THING TO DO. All politics is business. Israeli return on investment for America in the sciences and technologies is a thousandfold the investment. ISRAEL IS THE BEST INVESTMENT AMERICA CAN MAKE - period. That is why Apple, Warren Buffett, Bill Gates and just about every major and many minor tech and medical tech companies have facilities in Israel
In communications alone Israel did $17 billion in business with the USA, and that does not include military systems, support, R&D, medical inventions, treatments, pharma; computer and computer security technologies, airport security; military intelligence that targets America's systems on ISIS and Israel's on HAMAS (the same thing - both are Jihadists whose purpose is not just to take territory not theirs, but to destroy western civilization as they have at Banyan, Mosul, Cairo and now, Palmyra.) Israel builds many of America's military systems, targeting and aircraft electronics. Israel employs directly AND indirectly, millions of Americans who put food on their family's tables, pay their mortgages and for their vehicles and college educations. Israel consists of one third of NASDAQ! Israel's technological prowess overwhelms that of the whole of Europe.
At a meeting with Chinese who are investing billions in Israel, the issues of the Palestinians came up. The conversation concerning the Palestinians lasted 7 seconds, which, according to the attendees, was six seconds too long.
The Israel Lobby for all intents and purposes is a fiction, it barely represents American Jews, never mind Israel.
GOOGLE: American Enterprise Institute JEWISH ACHIEVEMENT AND THE ISRAEL TEST
GOOGLE: New York Times THE TEL AVIV CLUSTER
Now you too can understand that Israel is more necessary for American prosperity and survival than you ever thought.
Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, for it is RACISM.
Zionism is the Jewish sovereignty movement. It's the same as the French, Russian, German, Irish, Brit, Spanish, Italian and other sovereignty movement. Zionism is the world's first LIBERATION, civil and human rights movement. It started with the Biblical Abraham's EXODUS to the Promised Land.
It continued with the EXODUS from Egypt
It continued with the EXODUS from Persia
It continued with the EXODUS from Sobibor, Treblinka, Auschwitz.
NGO Report on GAZA, via Arlene Kushner reporting from Jerusalem
IT ALWAYS PAYS TO HEAR BOTH SIDES OF ANY STORY...
June 16, 2015
“Slander without End”
Promoting lies about Israel’s “villainy” has become almost routine in many agencies and many parts of the world. Sometimes it reaches proportions that are so ludicrous, so without possible basis in fact, that it becomes a sort of self-satire. There was recently, for example, the action of the World Health Organization, a body of the UN, in singling out Israel among all the nations of the world for criticism. Israel’s “crime”? Violating the health rights of Druze and Arabs in the Golan, who are in need of “health related technical assistance,” whatever that means.
This is so absurd in light of the death of 200,000 Syrians within their own country, and the readiness of Israel to treat hundreds of wounded Syrians, providing them with the best of care, that no further comment is necessary.
But sometimes extensive “comment” is indeed necessary in order to refute the slander and provide the facts. This is the case with the war with Hamas in Gaza – Operation Protective Edge - that Israel fought last summer.
I have written many times about the painful difficulty of doing battle from a moral stance when confronting an enemy totally devoid of morality or concern for civilian life. There is no army on earth more moral in its fighting stance than the IDF. And a conflict such as Operation Protective Edge puts us in a horrific bind – for the enemy makes extensive use of human shields. IDF fighters are faced with a choice between killing Arab civilians in order to eliminate munitions that are to be used against Israeli civilians or refraining from an action in order to avoid hitting Arab civilians and thereby exposing Israeli civilians to lethal attack.
For Hamas, it’s a win-win situation. Either the IDF cancels an attack so as to not hit Arab civilians, thereby allowing rockets, etc. to remain available for use against Israel, or the IDF decides it must attack and Hamas then utilizes the death of Arab civilians in its PR war against Israel.
The UN Human Rights Council (an agency that is blatantly and notoriously anti-Israel) mandated a “Commission of Inquiry” to investigate the Israeli role in Operation Protective Edge. It was understood here in Israel from the get-go what the “findings” of this commission were likely to be.
We understood from the history of the Goldstone Report, and from the bias of persons involved with the commission. William Schabas resigned in February from his role as head of the inquiry, after he was charged with bias because he had previously done work for the PLO.
We knew from the virulently anti-Israel stance of NGOs – such as B’Tselem - that gave alleged testimony to the commission.
In an effort to preempt the anticipated international effect of the UNHRC inquiry, NGO-Monitor and UN Watch last week released a major report entitled “Filling in the Blanks.” It can be read in its entirety here: All emphasis in sections I cite below is added.) NGO MONITOR DOT ORG GAZA CONFLICT PDF
I particularly would like to call your attention to two sections.
One, beginning on page 71, is “The Credibility of Reports and Allegations from Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) Regarding the 2014 Conflict,” which provides important context to a seriously misunderstood set of circumstances:
A ‘soft power’ political war, says this report, is “led by NGOs that claim the mantle of universal human rights and humanitarian goals...
“NGOs...adopt the rhetoric of human rights and international law in their publications and campaigns. By couching political attacks in legal terms, NGOs seek to create a veneer of credibility and expertise for their claims...
“NGOs like HRW, Amnesty International, Oxfam, Save the Children, B’Tselem, and others issue splashy, full-color publications, accompanied by videos and interactive multimedia. Under a façade of universality and morality, they push their narratives using highly sophisticated and expensive efforts led by media, advertising, and fundraising professionals...Their campaigns achieve visibility globally in the biggest news outlets, including The New York Times, the BBC, and Le Monde.
“NGOs escape critical evaluation by the media and other actors due to a ‘halo effect,’ by which groups perceived to promote ‘good’ principles are insulated from scrutiny by a cloak of morality. This ‘halo effect’ compensates not only for the lack of accountability but also for the lack of expertise in the military and diplomatic spheres with which many NGOs concern themselves.”
The report considers the fact-finding methodology of NGOs, which is often lacking in thoroughness and impartiality. In a study cited in the American Journal of International Law, for example, it was found that, “There is often difficulty in distinguishing ‘between objective facts and slanted information provided for partisan purposes.’”
Another analyst cited found that NGOs “focus to near exclusion on what the attackers do, especially in asymmetrical conflicts where the attackers are Western armies,” and the reports tend “to present to the public and press what are essentially lawyers’ briefs that shape the facts and law toward conclusions that [they] favor… without really presenting the full range of factual and legal objections to [their] position.”
The second section, beginning on page 127, is Appendix 1,
“Submission to the United Nations Independent Commission of Inquiry on the 2014 Gaza Conflict
by Colonel Richard Kemp CBE [Commander British Empire].
Colonel Kemp, pictured below, commanded the British Forces in Afghanistan in 2003. He also worked in the UK Cabinet Office on intelligence relating to international and domestic terrorism. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad were among the extremist groups that he monitored and assessed.
The Colonel was in Israel for much of the summer 2014 Gaza conflict, and was briefed by Israeli political leaders, senior officials and IDF soldiers from top rank to private.
“In my opinion the actions taken by the IDF were necessary to defend the people of Israel from the ongoing, intensive and lethal attacks by Hamas and other groups in Gaza. It is the inalienable duty of every government to use its armed forces to protect its citizens and its terrain from external attack...
“I know of no other realistic and effective means of suppressing an aggressor’s missile fire than the methods used by the IDF, namely precision air and artillery strikes against the command and control structures, the fighters and the munitions of Hamas and the other groups in Gaza. Nor have I heard any other military expert from any country propose a viable alternative means of defense against such aggression.
“Much of the Hamas military infrastructure was located amongst the civilian population in Gaza. In these circumstances, neutralizing the threat from Hamas made civilian casualties unavoidable. Under the Laws of Armed Conflict this fact does not render such operations illegal assuming they were necessary. However the IDF had a duty to distinguish between legitimate military targets and civilians and to ensure that operations were conducted in accordance with the principle of
proportionality as well as necessity.
“It is worth emphasizing that proportionality is not, as often believed by critics of Israel, a relationship between the numbers of casualties on either side in a conflict, but a calculation that considers whether the incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated in an attack.
“From my own research as well as briefings from and discussions with Israeli legal, military and political leaders, I understand and know well the ethos and operating principles of the IDF and I know that their commanders place great emphasis on adherence to the laws of armed conflict. This includes the principle of proportionality...
“...the IDF codify the relevant laws into rules of engagement that determine when Israeli military personnel may or may not use lethal and less than lethal force...IDF rules of engagement keep the IDF soldier within the laws of armed conflict by a significant margin. All Israeli soldiers are trained on these rules and regulations and the IDF emphasizes continuous updating of this training for their troops.
“I have found that communication of these directions is effective. In my experience the most junior soldiers in the IDF understand them and the imperative of adhering to them in conflict.
“Israel’s emphasis on preventing civilian casualties during this conflict started at the top. The Prime Minister, the Minister of Defense and the Chief of Staff of the IDF made clear their directions that civilian casualties were to be minimized. I was told that the first item on the agenda of every meeting of the Israeli security cabinet during the conflict was Palestinian civilian casualties...
“I was briefed on the following procedures that were routinely implemented prior to launching an attack in Gaza. Before a target could be attacked at least two separate and independent intelligence sources had to verify that it was a legitimate military target...
“Each separate aerial attack mission had to be personally authorized by the Commander of the Israeli Air Force or one of his deputies, at least one of whom had to be present in the operations center throughout the conflict. Authorization was also subject to legal advice. To confirm whether or not civilians were in the target area surveillance had to be conducted by both manned combat aircraft and unmanned air vehicle (drone).
“If surveillance or other intelligence sources confirmed the presence of civilians, or the presence of civilians was suspected, one or more of a series of measures was taken to warn the civilians before the attack could go ahead. These measures were:
Broadcast radio message.
Warning via UN.
An additional measure was the use of a specially designed harmless airdropped munition known as ‘knock on the roof’ which was dropped on buildings to make a loud percussion...”
You can see a leaflet drop in Gaza here (from AP, not this report):
THE ISRAELIS CAN HOLD THEIR HEADS HIGH - Latest report by an international panel of generals.
You might also want to see this news item:
“A multinational military group comprised of former chiefs of staff, generals and politicians submitted a report to the United Nations on Friday indicating that Israel went to great lengths to adhere to the laws of war and to protect Palestinian civilians during last summer’s 50-day war with Hamas in and around the Gaza Strip...
“The High-Level International Military Group on the Gaza Conflict in 2014 held a fact-finding mission to Israel between May 18-22. It was was reportedly given unprecedented access to senior officials, and investigated allegations of war crimes and disproportionality.
“The group found that ‘during Operation Protective Edge last summer… Israel not only met a reasonable international standard of observance of the laws of armed conflict, but in many cases significantly exceeded that standard.’
“They wrote that ‘in some cases Israel’s scrupulous adherence to the laws of war cost Israeli soldiers’ and civilians’ lives.’
“...The war that Israel was eventually compelled to fight against Hamas and other Gaza extremists was a legitimate war, necessary to defend its citizens and its territory against sustained attack from beyond its borders,” the group wrote, adding that even in that time of war, Israel took extraordinary measures to protect the lives of innocent Palestinian civilians.
“’Each of our own armies is of course committed to protecting civilian life during combat. But none of us is aware of any army that takes such extensive measures as did the IDF last summer to protect the lives of the civilian population in such circumstances,’ the report read.”
“...The mission was headed by the former chief of staff of the Bundeswehr and chairman of the NATO Military Committee, General Klaus Naumann, and included 10 other generals, chiefs of staff, politicians and officials from Holland, Spain, Italy, Australia, Colombia, the US and the UK.”
I trust anyone reading the material I have submitted above can reply in an honest, fair, and factual way.