AIPAC Lashes Out At Obama Administration Over Israel Statements

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the pro-Israel lobbying group, released a statement over the weekend lacing into President Obama for what it calls "escalated rhetoric" on the part of the administration in response to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's push for new housing units in East Jerusalem.

"The Obama Administration's recent statements regarding the U.S. relationship with Israel are a matter of serious concern. AIPAC calls on the Administration to take immediate steps to defuse the tension with the Jewish State," according to the statement. "The Administration should make a conscious effort to move away from public demands and unilateral deadlines directed at Israel, with whom the United States shares basic, fundamental, and strategic interests."

The Israeli plan to add additional housing units in East Jerusalem came during Vice President Joe Biden's recent trip to the region to help jumpstart Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. Even Netanyahu acknowledged the timing of the announcement was "unfortunate."

Biden sharply criticized the plan during his trip.

"I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem," Biden said in a statement last week. "The substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I've had here in Israel."

AIPAC will be holding its annual policy conference in Washington from March 21 to 23. Netanyahu is scheduled to appear at the gathering.

Here is the full AIPAC statement:

The Obama Administration's recent statements regarding the U.S. relationship with Israel are a matter of serious concern. AIPAC calls on the Administration to take immediate steps to defuse the tension with the Jewish State.

Israel is America's closest ally in the Middle East. The foundation of the U.S-Israel relationship is rooted in America's fundamental strategic interest, shared democratic values, and a long-time commitment to peace in the region. Those strategic interests, which we share with Israel, extend to every facet of American life and our relationship with the Jewish State, which enjoys vast bipartisan support in Congress and among the American people.

The Administration should make a conscious effort to move away from public demands and unilateral deadlines directed at Israel, with whom the United States shares basic, fundamental, and strategic interests.

The escalated rhetoric of recent days only serves as a distraction from the substantive work that needs to be done with regard to the urgent issue of Iran's rapid pursuit of nuclear weapons, and the pursuit of peace between Israel and all her Arab neighbors.

We strongly urge the Administration to work closely and privately with our partner Israel, in a manner befitting strategic allies, to address any issues between the two governments.

As Vice President Biden said last week in Israel, "The cornerstone of the relationship is our absolute, total, unvarnished commitment to Israel's security. Bibi, you heard me say before, progress occurs in the Middle East when everyone knows there is simply no space between the United States and Israel. There is no space between the United States and Israel when it comes to Israel's security."

Comments

[SageSpencer]

01:36 PM on 03/23/2010

Re: My Comments Posted 01:17 PM on 3/19/2010 and 07:34 PM on 3/21/2010.

My comments posted on 3/18/2010 at 13:49:41 and 13:53:50 that then disappeared from the thread are now back.

Thank you.

[icouce]

04:52 PM on 03/22/2010

Again Mr. US1st2009, it's not enough to claim I talk in circles -- you must show it.

It doesn't matter if you capitalize everyone's name or how many degrees and credentials they have -- they are not infallible, human beings as capable of error as anyone else -- this is mere and "Appeal to Authority" on your part, which is a well understood logical fallacy used by individuals trying to bolster weak arguments. Argument are constructed with facts, out of which premises are established and conclusions drawn, not by claiming that so-and-so said so, so it must be true.

I have shown the fact that direct aid to Israel are not gifts or grants, and are not in "TRILLIONS.". I have shown where in fact there's a repayment schedule on which Israel has never defaulted -- you fail to address that, but instead engage in personal attack.

I have shown point by point where Dr. Stauffer's alleged instances of "indirect aid" to Israel are expenditures, which in the context of the Cold War and continuing dangers in the world, the U.S. would have to make regardless of the existence of a Israeli-Palestinian conflict -- you conspicuously fail to address those issues as well, and again choose to attack me personally instead, and make false allegations of facts you cannot possibly know, for which you produce no evidence except your fevered conjectures.

[icouce]

04:52 PM on 03/22/2010

Mr. Silverstein's and your own conclusions are that anyone defending and elucidating the facts of history must be a dupe or agent of Israel or a Israeli lobby -- again, with no evidence except conjecture and the notion that if concerned citizens are asked by a political group to express their concerns, that in itself disqualifies their concern -- a more ridiculous conclusion would be hard to manufacture.

I am confident that anyone reading our exchanges with an open mind, will come to the correct conclusion as to whom is presenting measure and reasoned debate, and who is engaging in personal invective and failing to prove their allegations.

[US1st2009]

03:56 PM on 03/22/2010

icouce talk's in circles every time he SPAMs another message. icouce asks for verifiable sources, rather than "some conspiracy theory" and when they are provided icouce immediately dismisses them regardless of the international standing of the multiple institutions the sources represent.

DOCTOR Stauffer, Richard Silverstein, and I haven't failed anything, you just fail to get off your israeli talking points.

you're just that you're an endless SPAM machine like your masters programmed you.

[icouce]

10:15 PM on 03/21/2010

Contrary to popular belief, historical facts and the conclusions to which they lead, are not endlessly malleable to suit one's ends nor are they propaganda. However, continually attacking people's motivations and impugning their credibility without directly offering a counter argument, is mostly certainly propaganda of the most vile type. Perhaps some people are persuaded by such rank tactics, but I'm willing to bet more thoughtful citizens are not.

If Mr. US1st2009's concern were merely the repayments of foreign debts owed to the U.S., there are plenty of countries to choose from, whose debt in the aggregate far exceeds aid to Israel - direct or "indirect," http://gbk.eads.usaidallnet.gov/data/a/ - However, Mr. US1st chooses to focus his efforts on Israel. I'm willing to bet his motivations are not as patriotic and benign as he would have us all believe.

http://gbk.eads.usaidallnet.gov/data/

[US1st2009]

05:31 PM on 03/21/2010

Hasbara spam alert

With Israel's foreign ministry organising volunteers to flood news websites with pro-Israeli comments, Propaganda 2.0 is here

Richard Silverstein
guardian.co.uk, Friday 9 January 2009 11.05 GMT

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/09/israel-foreign-ministry-media

we were all wondering why a self-proclaimed "Cuban-American living in Hollywood" would create a HP id just to spam this thread over 100 times. now we know the answer.

"Now, we know that the Israeli foreign ministry itself is orchestrating propaganda efforts designed to flood news websites with pro-Israel arguments and information."

check out Richard's article.

[icouce]

08:30 PM on 03/21/2010

You're laughable and pathetic. I wish this was a live web-cam site so I could point my camera out the window and everyone could see the Hollywood sign over my shoulder. If you live in LA and care to meet in a public place, I'm game -- name a daylight time and place -- unless you yourself are stuck in a cyber-café in Amman or something. And for the umpteenth time, arguments are valid or invalid based on factual evidence and the merits of the conclusions drawn therefrom. attacking the creditability of individuals, because you cannot engage their argument on their merits, does not constitute a refutation of their augments. Evidently, this is just too difficult a concept for you to grasp.

Interestingly, you've made over 70 anti-Israel posts this month, some of them fairly vitriolic and all most all are attacking individuals and not the merits of their positions, but that's not propaganda, right? :) We have no why of knowing who you are or that you're not an agent of Hamas or Fatah, or of some Western or Arab apologist entity. As a matter of fact, we have no way of knowing who anybody really is on this forum, but I accept that they are who they say they are, because in any case, it is inconsequential to the merits of the arguments they make -- the validity of arguments are not dependent on the person making them.

[US1st2009]

09:08 PM on 03/21/2010

once again talking in circles with the loosest of arguments only to create more spam.

you attempt to call me out for my US and American Citizen patriotism? you claim to be American but all you do is spew israeli propaganda. you could care less about the Great Recession Americans are facing. it doesn't matter to israel so it doesn't matter to you.

you attempt to slam me for supposedly 70 PRO- AMERICA posts "this month!?"

you created your id a few days ago JUST TO SPAM THIS THREAD OVER 100 TIMES!

spam away as your masters direct.

[US1st2009]

12:42 PM on 03/21/2010

icouce wonders "why won't anyone talk to my obsessive sp@m?"

[SageSpencer]

07:34 PM on 03/21/2010

You may consider icouce's 100 + comments spam, but at least his comments are appearing on this thread. I posted three comments on this thread on March 18th. 1)13:49:41 2)13:53:50
3)14:18:05. All three are on my comment page, but 1&2 are only visible on this thread if I am logged in...2 days ago they were only visible if clicked FROM my comment page Therefore, they are not visible on the public thread and maybe/maybe not visible to HPosters when you are logged in?? I tried to post about this issue last night and my attempt to discuss the issue wasn't posted. I will be keeping screenshots of all my attempts to post to this thread from now on.

[US1st2009]

09:02 PM on 03/21/2010

that is very strange SS. i noticed you said this previously on 01:17 PM on 3/19/2010.

hopefully they will get through.

[icouce]

08:31 PM on 03/21/2010

In addition, Mr. Silverstein presents no evidence for the claims made in his article, accept to claim that if people blog or engage in some other pro-Israel activity, it must be propaganda, but protesters in Seattle organized by Voices of Palestine and other groups, including Jewish Voice for Peace, is not? In addition, in the article a Jewish lady says that the state of Israel betrays Jewish values. I find that hilarious, because she seems to be arguing that upholding one's values is more important than national survival, but I can't help but notice she doesn't live within range of Kassam rockets -- only in a fantasy world where all issues are black an white are values more important than survival.

[icouce]

05:43 PM on 03/20/2010

This is fairly hilarious. It's a definition for a blogosphere term meaning to take someone's argument apart point-by-point, implying there's something unfair or unseemly about doing so.

Referring to British journalist Robert Fisk: "Fisking"
The blogosphere term fisking refers not to what Mr. Fisk does but to what is done to him, and others; the "fisker" begins by copying text from the "fiskee," and then constructs a point-by-point criticism of the text. "The fisker can without too much trouble make the fiskee look ridiculous." The term originated from attacks on Fisk's credibility,but has been extended to others, even the Archbishop of Canterbury.

[icouce]

04:55 PM on 03/20/2010

Hey Muck-Raker, I notice you respond to me, but you don't allow me to reply to you?-- how convenient . That must be a new fangled concept in debate.

Providing citation is not a matter of overwhelming your with copious links, helter-skelter, but rather to provide the means to verify the source for specific claims. The way it's done in any book, essay, academic paper or a comment aspiring to seriousness, is to make a point followed by a citation SPECIFIC to the point one is making; either indexed in a note section or a the bottom of the page.

For example, you provide the following link: http://www.jkcook.net What am I suppose to do with this, read the entire site and then decipher what particular point of yours you're trying to support with it?

[icouce]

04:55 PM on 03/20/2010

Another link Muck Raker provides is http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/john-mearsheimer/the-israel-lobby. In the essay that authors admit that none of the evidence they give represents original documentation or is derived from independent interviews. Is it not fair to ask why these distinguished academics chose to publish a paper that does not meet their usual scholarly standards?

[icouce]

04:55 PM on 03/20/2010

The Executive Summary of the U.N. report on Jenin, http://www.un.org/peace/jenin, this statement, "The report was written without a visit to Jenin or the other Palestinian cities in question...," it uses "documents in the public domain and papers submitted by NGOs." It admits the authors have no firsthand knowledge. It cites the deaths of "441 Israelis and 1,539 Palestinians."

The Jenin incident was precipitated by attacks on Israelis form within the camp. In context of ongoing violence, the report cites "suicide bomb attacks against Israelis by Palestinian groups increase in frequency." The recounts reference, "Testimony of the wife of martyr Nasser Abu Hatab," "Story of martyr Ashraf Abu Al-Hija'. The use of the word "martyr" is a clear and unequivocal bias, as none of the 441 Israelis who were killed are referred to by this moniker.

Moreover, the entire report is biased by the fact that the Palestinian account is highlighted while legitimate Israeli concerns leading up to the incursion are given short shrift. In addition, in all of reports of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the mere disproportion of casualties is use as certain evidence of Israeli malfeasance. The implication being that one cannot call an action self-defense if it results in disproportionate casualties, or that is the action were legitimately carried out, the casualties would have been in closer proportion to one another -- THE INANITY OF THIS PROPOSITION IS BREATH TAKING!

[icouce]

04:54 PM on 03/20/2010

You have also provided a couple of links to the reports of Mr. Frisk. First, Mr. Frisk is outraged the notwithstanding the Armenian Genocide, Israel maintains ties to Ankara -- the hypocrisy, he fumes. My answer is, "So what?" The U.S. has ties to China who has a stellar record of violent repression. We fought alone side the USSR in WWII, notwithstanding Stalin's systemic killing of million of ethnic minorities. What Mr. Frisk, and many others fail to grasp about realpolitik, is that purpose of a country's foreign policy is not to act as moral arbitrator on the world stage. That is too big a role for even the U.S. or the U.N., let alone small and vulnerable Israel. What Mr. Frisk fails to grasp is that a country may have greater interests than taking the "moral high ground." In other words, appearing to be non-hypocritical DOES NOT TRUMP ALL OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

[icouce]

04:54 PM on 03/20/2010

Finally you provide a link to a site not even pretending to be balance and unbiased; http://www.globalresearch.ca. Here apartheid, the new buzz on the left, is used to describe the situation vis-a-vis the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the treatment of Arab citizens of Israel. First, the Palestinians in Gaza and the W. Bank are not Israeli citizens -- one requirement of the descriptive "apartheid" to apply. Second, Palestinian citizens of Israel enjoy more civil right, in addition to actual representation in the Knesset than do Palestinian refugees living in Jordan, Egypt or Lebanon -- hypocrite!

[US1st2009]

10:31 PM on 03/19/2010

if you have a problem with DOCTOR Stauffer's credentials tell it to Harvard, the Diplomatic Academy in Vienna, Georgetown University, the Department of State’s Foreign Service Institute, and the Army and Navy war colleges.

"Dr. Stauffer taught economics and Middle East studies at Harvard (1971-1982), the Diplomatic Academy in Vienna (1982-85) and Georgetown University (1985-1989). He also lectured regularly at the Department of State’s Foreign Service Institute and at the Army and Navy war colleges.

Dr. Stauffer appeared before numerous tribunals and international bodies in Washington, DC and abroad, testifying as an expert in tax, nationalization and regulatory matters, including proceedings at The Hague."

his numbers documented $3 TRILLION in US Tax Payer dollars to israel in 2002!!!

END ALL AID TO ISRAEL NOW!

[icouce]

05:00 AM on 03/20/2010

I don't have a problem with Mr. Stauffer's credentials. However, there is a concept in logic call a fallacy -- they are uncontroversial, very well documented and understood -- and one of them is called an "Appeal to Authority." The fallacy is that the utterance of a set of premises a a conclusion based on those premises by an authority, DOES NOT in and of itself, prove the premises and the conclusion reached. This is not controversial or marginal in anyway. It is merely the logical formalization of the indisputable fact that authorities are not infallible. Therefore, an argument must stand the merits of its premises and the deducted or inducted conclusion therefore, not on the basis of the individual making the argument -- a falsehood uttered by the Pope has no more merit that if it were uttered by a six year old child. I don't see why you would argue otherwise.

So what you need to do, is not say this is true because so-and-so says it's true, but rather take my objections and they try and construct a counter argument that Mr. Stauffer might use, based on your understanding for his argument.

(see Appeal to Authority)
http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html

[US1st2009]

08:52 AM on 03/20/2010

try reading. i have said it repeatedly. NO MORE AID TO israel!

you can SPAM counter arguments about who did what to whom 10, 25, 50, 100, 1,000 years ago and it doesn't matter a whit. get it? i could not care less that you consider yourself THE world's self proclaimed expert on all things israel.

israel should demonstrate its appreciation for the TRILLIONS from American Tax Payers and its commitment to our "special relationship" by paying us back with Interest! after all israel is the most technological, most advanced, wealthiest, and most militarily advanced country in the world. israel would not exist without the US.

the US is in financial crisis, which clearly doesn't concern you. time for israel to step up and support this "special relationship"

[SageSpencer]

01:17 PM on 03/19/2010

Hello icouce:

I responded to all your responses to my comments. However I cannot seem to find two of them today.

They are comments I made: Posted 01:53 PM on 3/18/2010 and Posted 01:49 PM on 3/18/2010.

They are both attached below your comment Posted 01:53 PM on 3/18/2010 that begins “In addition, the proof that no such political entity as the so-called Palestinians” and ends “THE LIE IS THAT THERE HAS EVER BEING A POLITICAL ENTITY CALLED PALESTINE OR A COHESIVE NATIONAL IDENTITY NAMED PALESTINIANS!”

If I look at the “AIPAC lashes out at Obama thread”, my two comments are not there. If I look at my comment page, they are. So if HPost has some mechanism for deleting comments on a thread and leaving them on the Comments Page, then perhaps that has occurred. I hope that is not the case. US1st2009 has just wrote that you have made 80 comments. If that is the case, I would certainly hope I am allowed to make five. I will check back tomorrow to see if they reappear. If you wish to read them icouce, they are presently on my comment page.

[icouce]

07:43 PM on 03/19/2010

I appreciate your concern. From a technical point of view, this is not the best venue.

[icouce]

08:07 PM on 03/19/2010

In the '50 and the '60s Mr. Arafat, founder of the PLO (the Palestine Liberation Organization, not the PALESTINIAN Liberation Org.), did not call of a Palestinian homeland, he called for Arab armies to come and expel the Jews from Palestine and annex the territory to the larger Arab community -- presumably Egypt, Jordan or Lebanon. It was not until the Arabs failed to do so in '76 and '73, that we started to hear about a "Palestinian homeland." It was merely a change of tactics when military force didn't work.

I challenge you, or anyone on this thread, to find any document dated before 1973 where any so-called Palestinian leader calls for the establishment of a Palestinian state.