Iraq is in the news daily – the killings increasing, the chaos obvious, the reasons for going to war just as clear as they were 4 years ago, and the US administration exposed on all fronts for its terrible failings in this monstrous war with even Republican senators now standing up against continuing "the surge". Yet, our government insists that Australia must stay the course because it would be cowardly to do otherwise, as well as for all the other reasons – our national interests (read oil), our commitment to our ally - the US, and our determination to fight the indefinite "war on terrorism".
With the federal elections only months away, people with conscience would be wondering just how best to cast their vote to stop Australia's involvement in this insane high stakes power play for control of the Middle East. The following article gives an indication of what the people are up against.
These influences are no less prevalent in Australia: our leaders on both sides of politics have declared their unquestioning support for Israel with nary a mention of Israel's blatant violations of international law and its refusal to adhere to UN resolutions.
With thanks to John Haines for alerting me to this article. - SK
"Whatever AIPAC Wants, AIPAC Gets"
Democratic Defectors
and the Israel Lobby
by Jerry Kroth
Counterpunch
10 July 2007
In November, the American electorate repudiated Bush's Iraq debacle and
established Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate promising to
bring this "flawed policy wrapped in illusion" to a decisive end. Bush
vetoed their withdrawal timetable, but voters urged their leaders to hold
the line and not be bullied. In the end, though, 37 Democratic senators
capitulated and gratuitously gave the President his $100 billion no-strings-
attached blank check . . . enough money to pay tuition and fees for 1.3
million college students for four solid years!
Deep disappointment set in. Cindy Sheehan, the liberal icon, was so
demoralized she resigned and returned to private life. In June, a CNN poll
reported that "respect for Congress" plummeted to the lowest level "ever
recorded."
Bloggers called them "traitor Democrats", and the descripto[n] is apropos.
At the time of the vote, sixty-two percent of the American people favored a
time-table for a withdrawal, but, more significantly, "seventy percent" of
Democrats were so inclined. Voting against this burgeoning tide of anger
betrayed the will of the people and party that put these Democrats in office.
Curiously, all of the traitor democrats were huge career recipients of funds
from the Israeli lobby. If we took ten Democratic apostates and compared
them to ten Democrats who stood by the voters, pro-Israeli PAC contributions
were "ten times" greater for the turncoats than those who stayed with their
constituencies ($322,000 versus $34,000 on average).
To be specific: Carl Levin, outspoken critic of the war and, we thought,
a loyal supporter of the new regime to end it, defected and blithely turned
his back on his Michigan support base. Despite his strident anti-war
rhetoric, the Grand Rapids Independent reports Levin has supported Bush all
the way "consistently funding the war and not introducing any meaningful
legislation to bring it closer to an end." Practically unknown to his
constituents, Levin is one of the largest beneficiaries of Pro-Israeli PAC funds
collecting $600,000 in career contributions according to the Washington
Report on Mideast Affairs.
Barbara Boxer, Denis Kucinich, and Earl Blaumenauer, all opponents of the
war, collectively got $73,000, but turncoat-democrats, Dan Durbin, Max
Baucus, and Frank Lautenberg scooped up in excess of a million plus untold
benes [sic] like travel funds.
What comes out in the wash is the best PAC money can buy: Three months
before we invaded Iraq, a New York Times poll showed only 30 percent
of the American people favored an all-out invasion, but the Israeli lobby
(AIPAC) did, and it prevailed. Hardly a sprinkling of Americans favored the
"surge", a meager fourteen percent, but AIPAC did, and the surge is
surging as we speak. Fewer than thirty percent of Democrats supported that
no-strings-budget, but AIPAC did, and the conclusion plays out another
hackneyed chorus of "Whatever AIPAC wants, AIPAC gets."
In 1992, the director of the Israeli lobby, David Steiner, was surreptitiously
recorded bragging about playing a role in selecting the Secretary of State and
what he got for Israel: "Besides the $10 billion in loan guarantees which
was a fabulous thing, $3 billion in foreign, in military aid, and I got almost
a billion dollars in other goodies that people don't even know about!" When
the tape was made public, Steiner resigned, but it underscored the incredible
power, access, and influence this lobby has.
Two professors, Mearsheimer and Walt, recently insinuated that American
democracy has been suborned by the Israeli lobby, echoing Senator
Fulbright's 1989 indictment that AIPAC had usurped the electoral process
and could "elect or defeat nearly any congressman or senator that they
wish." Such observations do not fall on deaf ears. Over half the senate and a
third of the congress obediently attended the AIPAC annual convention
(versus less than a dozen visiting the NAACP's event). Non-attendance can
suggest a lawmaker might be soft on terrorism, or, god forbid, anti-Semitic.
Anti-war idealists might think that soon this American war crime, the
shock-and-awe carnage, the torture, and the renditions are coming to an end,
but the agenda of AIPAC seems bent on keeping American armies in the
Middle East as an Israeli first line of defense for the indefinite future. Their
major attack dog, Joe Lieberman, recently gave a hint on Face the Nation as
to might be next: " military strikes" against Iran. . . all apparently to
guarantee that Israel will remain the only nuclear power in the Middle East.
So if you think you voted, or are planning to vote, to bring the troops home
and end this national embarrassment, some fool's gold waiting for you at the
end of that rainbow.
Jerry Kroth, Ph.D. is a professor of psychology in California and author of
Conspiracy in Camelot: the complete history of the assassination of John Fitzgerald
Kennedy.
__,_._,___
0 Have Your Say!:
Post a Comment