As Ehud Olmert assumes the position of Israeli Prime Minister, a trip down memory lane:
Support for Israel was the major theme of the 2002 Road to Victory conference held by the Christian Coalition in Washington, D.C. October 11-12. Long known as a major source of troops for the right-wing of the Republican Party, the CC has undergone a lot of changes in the last few years. It has always advocated Christian support for the Israeli state, but never so thoroughly and vociferously as this year. At the conference and in the exhibit area there were more Israeli flags than American flags and Stars of David vastly outnumbered Crucifixes. At a solidarity rally scheduled for the Ellipse in front of the White House, but moved to the convention centre due to rain, Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert thanked the “lovers of Zion” for their help and support. His Christian audience gave him a standing ovation while waving a sea of Israeli flags. In the meantime, about 300 Jews who had not learned that the rally had relocated, heard their own speakers on the Ellipse.
Israel may be desperate for international support, but relying on, and courting, the Christian fundamentalist vote will undoubtedly end in a messy divorce. Furthermore, the Republican Party has turned into a religious sect.
..and who says theocracy isn’t alive and well in “The West”?
“more Israeli flags than American flags and Stars of David vastly outnumbered Crucifixes”
The Christian Coalition is mainly a Protestant affair. Normally, only Catholics wear crucifixes. So there should have been more Stars of David than Crucifixes.
And as ‘Support of Israel’ was the theme, there should have been more Israeli flags than American.
America’s longstanding solidarity with Israel suits most Americans just fine, but it does set some people’s teeth on edge. Two of those people are Stephen Walt, the academic dean of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, and political scientist John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago, co-authors of a sour new polemic about the insidious “Israel Lobby” that manipulates US policy in the Middle East and dragged the Bush administration into war.
Walt and Mearsheimer are not the first to wade into these swamps. In March 2003, US Representative James Moran inveighed against Jews at an antiwar rally: “If it was not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq,” the Virginian Democrat fumed, “we would not be doing this.” It was at about the same time that Professor Edward Said of Columbia University was ranting: “Wherever you look in the Congress there are the tell-tale signs either of the Zionist lobby, the right-wing Christians, or the military-industrial complex, three inordinately influential minority groups who share . . . unbridled support for extremist Zionism.” A year earlier it had been South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, lamenting that “the Israeli government is placed on a pedestal” in the United States; no one dares oppose Israel “because the Jewish lobby is powerful — very powerful.”
But the truth is precisely the reverse. America’s loyalty to Israel isn’t engineered by a Zionist cabal that dupes American citizens and hijacks their government. US policy tends to align closely with Israel’s because Americans like Israel. They instinctively sympathize with Israel’s fight for survival in one of the world’s most dangerous neighborhoods. If public opinion weren’t robustly pro-Israel in the first place, the White House and Congress would be far less inclined to give Israel’s advocates the time of day. There’s a name for that phenomenon. It’s called democracy.
My apologies. Ripped off from Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe.
From Justin Raimonod of antiwar.,com and the American conservative:
Chris Mar 31st, 2006 at 1:19 am
You forgot the first four crucial sentences, In the eighteenth century…
Slap! Well of course! Just like there is a proponderance of Iraqi flags when US citizens hold a pro-Iraqi People Rally. Quiz: which is more insane? The suggestion that there would be more Iraqi flags, or the suggestion that the US people would ever bother with a rally for the people they’re bombing to death (and freedom)?
In the 19th, 20thj and 21st centuries, normally only catholics wear crucifixions. Protestants normally wear plain crosses.
“Between 1949 and 1956, for example, Israeli security forces killed between 2,700 and 5,000 Arab infiltrators, the overwhelming majority of them unarmed.
So what? They were supposed to find out if they were armed before they were killed in the act of infiltrating? That suggestion is insane.
So what? Were suicide bombers supposed to frisk the poelp they were abotu to blow up in a cafe before hitting the switch?
are you completely and utterly insane or has the the Ziuonsit mind controlling you were subjected to been triggered by some secret word you hear recently?
What a freak!!
They did ensure there were women and children to ensure that they would die.
BRUSSELS, Belgium - The United States, the European Union, Russia and the United Nations warned the Hamas-led Palestinian government Thursday that it must recognize Israel and seek peace talks if it wants to be guaranteed continued aid.
“The Quartet concurred that there inevitably will be an effect on direct assistance to that government and its ministries” if those conditions are not met, the four mediators for Middle East peace said in a statement.
The new Palestinian Foreign Minister Mahmoud Zahar has said the new Palestinian Authority government would not give in to international pressure to change its ways and that it had no plans to negotiate with Israel.
***************************************************
Let’s see what happens next. I’m betting that they give in. Plaestinian governments have proven to be spineless most of the time.
Also, will they change the name to Hamastan? Palestine is becoming synonomous with ‘loser’.
So now you’re saying that if Hamas do recognize Israel and seek peaceful negotiations with Israel, that it wood be a sign of weakness n their part? Gee Chris, you have some seriously fucked up ideas don’t you?
Do you want Hamas to recognize Israel or not? Your true colors are coming out Chris. Seems that you actually want the violence to continue so that Israel don’t have to negotiate anything.
To his credit, at least Captain has voiced his support for a viable Palestinians state. You on the other hand seem to prefer the bloodshed.
And let’s be frank, if the international community, US included, were to put nearly that much pressure on Israel, you could bet they would do exactly as they were told. At the end of the day, the only thing that speaks to Israel is money anyway.
Such a juvenile mind. No wonder you could only get a job starting at boats all day.
The Government of Hamastan loses either way. First, they are addamant about not recognizing Israel. Their caharity providers have told them to recognize Israel or no more money.
Now Hamas either starves to death, eats its own people to survive, or gives in.
Hamastan… You can just smell the stench of losers.
No one puts that pressure on Israel because it is morally repugnant to do so to a party who clearly, by western statndards, do not deserve such treatment.
No one puts that pressure on Israel becasue it’s politically volatile to do so, as the MW repoirt has exposed.
Chris Mar 31st, 2006 at 4:48 am
…oh, riiiight, so that means there were more CROSSES at the rally than stars? (Assuming that the reporter, Jo Freeman, knows the difference between a cross and crucifix.) Incidenally, why do you classify the Anglican Protestants as “abnormal”.
Chris Mar 31st, 2006 at 6:42 am
Gee, you must really get around to check all these things out using your special ‘Terrorist Intention Detector’(TM).
Addamo Mar 31st, 2006 at 10:30 am
The one and only reason no-one puts pressure on Israel is because it is protected client-state of the US.
The one and only reason that the US stands with Israel is that it is right and moral, as far as the US is concerned.
Wrong. The SU does nothign out of morality or righteouness,. but what is right for US interests at the time.
Go back to reading children’s stories Chris. Your naivity is an embarassment.
Incidently, what is so righeous about stading with Israel? A state that has flouted more UN resolutions than any other, that has a repugnant human rights record and has been in violation of internaional law since 1967?
Chris Mar 31st, 2006 at 1:30 pm
No serious political scientist believes the US foreign policy has ever been dictated by anything other than self-interest. It doesn’t support states before moral reasons. For example, if it did, it wouldn’t also be supporting the otherhuman rights abusers in the Mid-East region. Nor would it have provided military, financial and diplomatic support to Pinochet as it does for Israel. Nor would it have provided military, financial and diplomatic support to Soeharto as it does for Israel. Nor would it have provided military, financial and diplomatic support to Somoza as it does for Israel. Hell, this was and is ‘real-politik’ most openly expressed by Kissinger.
While it is now a little fashionable to say that Kissinger instituted the ‘real-politik’ doctrine, I think the historical record shows that Kissinger merely expressed it openly. The theory that the neo-cons have overturned the doctrine is hogwash. When you look at what they actually do, the basics are the same as ever: (1) secure sources of resources essential to the US economy; and (2) establish or support state regimes that do not threaten or challenge US influence and interests in the given region. That is not to say the US isn’t capable of producing outcomes that are moral, but it is to say that those outcomes are only sought where they either serve or do not contradict (1) and (2).
Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each year, roughly one-fifth of the foreign aid budget, and worth about $500 a year for every Israeli…
Other recipients get their money in quarterly installments, but Israel receives its entire appropriation at the beginning of each fiscal year and can thus earn interest on it. Most recipients of aid given for military purposes are required to spend all of it in the US, but Israel is allowed to use roughly 25 per cent of its allocation to subsidise its own defence industry. It is the only recipient that does not have to account for how the aid is spent, which makes it virtually impossible to prevent the money from being used for purposes the US opposes, such as building settlements on the West Bank. Moreover, the US has provided Israel with nearly $3 billion to develop weapons systems, and given it access to such top-drawer weaponry as Blackhawk helicopters and F-16 jets. Finally, the US gives Israel access to intelligence it denies to its Nato allies and has turned a blind eye to Israel’s acquisition of nuclear weapons…
Since 1982, the US has vetoed 32 Security Council resolutions critical of Israel, more than the total number of vetoes cast by all the other Security Council members. It blocks the efforts of Arab states to put Israel’s nuclear arsenal on the IAEA’s agenda.
John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt
Excellent post Edward,
Young Chris is in dire need of a history lesson, indeed an entire education.
You forgot to add Uzbekstan, another favourite of the US, who’s leader is not only a despot, but likes to boil his enemies alive. Further to that, we shoudl add to the list the number of democracies the US has heldped to overthrow. In the last 2 years, Aristide has been removed along with a failed coup attempt on Chavez.
The company Israel keeps (nto to mention Apartheid South Africa) should well and truly dispel any notion of morality.
I also agree entirely about this notino that the neocons are some counter to Kissinger’s real-politik. US foreign policy remains unchanged since WWII, albeit rebranded and repackaged for the masses.
You mean these Christians..the same ones who say we killed their saviour, are supporting us?
Well, not the same ones, different ones.
Now tell me again why?
Well, they say when all the jews go back to Israel, christians will go to heaven in a sort of ecstacy.
Right. - And everyone else will be left behind?
Right, but you can convert to christianity before that happens and still go to heaven.
Right. But up until then I can stay a jew?
Right.
This is more than funny.
Yes an educatino Chris.
If you had one, you wouldn’t be holding down a job fot for a mentally handicapped person.
Shut up and learn. You are making an nuisance of yourself.
Learn from a liar who couldn’t back up his claims? Your trollish behavior is just an indication that you actually know nothing.
Tell us more about your expertise in Nuclear technology. Everybody is waiting to find out why you didn’t know anything about radioactivity.
Ask away and I will answer your quesrion. My career as a nucealr engineer can be proven as can yours as the village idiot.
You were tasked and you screwed up, proving you knew nothing about nuclear technology. No second chances here.
Wrong. You asked me why uranium would be suitable for a dirty bomb. That has nothing to do with nuclear technology because dirty bombs are improvised devices. They are not manufactures to any spec.
Furthermore, my expericen in nucearl science did not include working on the manufacture of dirty bombs.
Of course, I wouldn’t expect someone with your vocation to understand that.
Of course that doesn’t stop you from your and you delusions of grandeur and appointing yourself the adjudicator in this forum. Your Napoleonic complex has not abated.
No, you were informed by knowledgable persons that your statement regarding the use of uranium could only come from someone ignorant of nuclear technology, thus proving you a liar.
No I was not informed by anyone. Who are the klnowledgeable persons you are refrring to?
Only an ignoramus woud trivialise the dangers of uranium dust. You are one fo those.
You are just talking shit as usual Chirs.
You were informed. Why are you lying about that?