Rahm Emanuel: Barack Obama's Sarah Palin?

Jubilation was heard in Tel Aviv as Haaretz, the Israeli daily, boasted November 6th: "Obama kick-starts transition, picks Israeli Rahm Emanuel as chief of staff."

Best known for his fundraising prowess among wealthy Jewish Democrats, the naming of Emanuel as the first presidential appointment echoes Sarah Palin's famous one-liner, "I love Israel." That claim was voiced in her vice-presidential debate with Joe Biden who is featured on a YouTube video famously proclaiming, "I am a Zionist."

In sharp contrast to Obama's claim that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake, Emanuel claims he would do it again today. As chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, he directed party funds to pro-invasion candidates and recruited candidates to oppose anti-war Democrats.

Known in Washington as an outspoken pro-Israel hardliner, he joins Speaker Nancy Pelosi in bringing to the Middle East peace process a record of support for Tel Aviv's targeted assassinations of Palestinian political leaders. ("Pelosi supports Israel's attacks on Hamas group," San Francisco Chronicle, June 14, 2003).

Those who sought a break with pro-Israel policies can look forward to an "assistant president" who is the son of a Jerusalem-born member of the Irgun, a Zionist-terrorist group active in Palestine from 1931-1948. Born an Israeli due to his father's dual Israeli-U.S. citizenship, Emanuel relinquished his Israeli citizenship when he turned 18 but not his fierce allegiance to the Zionist state.

As chair of the Democratic Caucus and fourth ranking in the House leadership, Rahm Israel Emanuel escorted Barack Obama to a June 2008 board meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) just after the candidate proclaimed Israel's security "sacrosanct."

AIPAC Operative

In 1984, Emanuel and David Axelrod (Obama's senior campaign strategist in 2008) worked alongside AIPAC on a campaign to unseat Illinois Senator Charles Percy who was then chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. That electoral success followed a victorious AIPAC-directed campaign in 1982 when Springfield attorney Richard Durbin was recruited to oppose Paul Findley, an 11-term Congressman. Findley learned too late the political costs visited on U.S. policy-makers who challenge the Israeli-fication of U.S. foreign policy.

Durbin was just elected to his third term in the Senate where he serves as assistant majority leader. He shares a house in Washington with New York's Charles Schumer, third in the Senate leadership and one of 13 Jewish Senators (up from 11). Durbin and Schumer are junior to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. A Zionist-inclined Mormon (also known as "the Lost Tribe of Israel"), Reid concedes his admiration for the Israel lobby: "I can't think of a policy organization in the country as well-organized and respected."

Emanuel's rapport with AIPAC's extensive campaign-financing network enabled Bill Clinton to amass a record-breaking $72 million in 1992. Those funds helped his fledgling presidential candidacy weather the media storm over the Jennifer Flowers sex scandal and a controversy over his Vietnam-era draft status. Emanuel's aggressive pro-Israel fundraising strategy also drained funds from rival Paul Tsongas who soon withdrew, citing a shortage of funds. Emanuel then served for five years as a senior strategist for the Clinton White House before joining investment bankers Wasserstein Perella where he became managing director of the Chicago office.

Of the nine Democratic members of the Illinois delegation elected in 2002, Emanuel was the only one to support the October 2002 Congressional resolution authorizing war in Iraq. In the course of winning his 2008 race with 74% of the vote, Emanuel was the topmost House recipient of campaign contributions from hedge funds, private equity firms and the securities industry.

Known since childhood as a "convinced Zionist," Emanuel and his brothers attended summer camp in Israel. During the 1991 Gulf War, he joined the Israel Defense Forces as a civilian volunteer (akin to a reservist) where he worked in a motor pool repairing trucks. Operating as an adjunct to the Israel lobby as both a fundraiser and a member of Congress, Emanuel has long served as a loyal sayanim (Hebrew for "volunteer") in support of policies pursued by Tel Aviv.

Those who voted for the candidate of change may be surprised to see a change in party but not in policy. Their candidate may also be induced to make decisions that undermine his presidency and discredit his commitment to change. Emanuel served as senior White House adviser on strategy for Clinton-era health care reform. The spectacular failure of that first-term initiative brought a speedy end to the legislative momentum of the last administration that sought change.

In parsing the message signaled by this first selection, is this high-profile appointment a hopeful sign of change in U.S. foreign policy? Or is it meant to appease Israel? Is Rahm Israel Emanuel a harbinger of change Americans can believe in? Or is his appointment a sign the fix is in?

Comments

[Fein]

I concur 100 percent and can only hope that the appointment is only a gesture of appeasement.

I can't decide which is more depressing, Israel's depraved conduct in the ME or our own acceptance
of another country's meddling in our national affairs.

[Doremus]

The Chief of Staff basically controls access to the president if I remember my civics lessons.
How likely will it be for this CoS to permit anti-war voices or voices critical of Israeli governments to have access to President Obama?

Obama couldn't have sent a clearer or more disturbing message to anti-war Americans or to Arab countries that he will stick to the war-mongering, AIPAC line on foreign policy.

As far as "The Arabs have total equality in the law of Israel", that is patently false.

[JeffGates]

The tradition of pro-Israelis has been to focus on staffing the small point in the funnel of information into decision-makers"who are no better than the information they're provided.

You don't need to be the vice-president, just serve as his chief of staff (Lewis Libby) and control the information flow to a self-absorbed person known to decide in a profiled fashion. You don't need to be the CIA Director, start up your own operation (Douglas Feith) inside the Pentagon (the Office of Special Plans) and funnel fixed, false and flawed information through the Deputy Secretary of Defense (Wolfowitz) into the White House decision-making process.

Those profiled in Guilt By Association (October 2008 release) are skilled at displacing facts with what people can be deceived be believe"Iraq WMD, ties to Al Qaeda, meetings in Prague, mobile biological weapons laboratories. The issue is not whether this is being done; that component of the evidentiary trail is clear. The question is how, by whom and to what purpose. That's the issues addressed in this first book in the Criminal State series as developed on www.criminalstate.com

[Brilligulous]

The idea that Obama would pick Emanuel to appease Israel seems far fetched. He has already expressed his strong support for Israel.

The position of Chief of Staff is not a policy position, it is more of a staff managerial position in support of the president's policies. If he had appointed Emanuel as Secretary of State that might be an issue.

This article reminds me of the Republican attacks on Barack HUSSEIN Obama. Why include Emanuel's middle name to make a point? To me, that completely discredits the author if this article. Huffington Post should remove this article; it only serves to fuel conspiracy theorists.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

That response misconstrues the role of a chief of staff. Washington doesn't work in such "stovepipe" fashion. Emanuel is gatekeeper, policy filter and policy maker. Please see Guilt By Association (released October 2008) for why the middle name is relevant. Our association with the extremist behavior of religious fundamentalists in Israel has made Americans appear guilty by our government's support of Tel Aviv's thuggish behavior.

U.S. support of Israel's expansionist agenda continues to be a source of serial provocations throughout the region, undermining our credibility and costing us untold amounts in both blood and treasure. Our first president was eloquent in his Farewell Address in cautioning us against such "entangling alliances" particularly where there is a "passionate attachment" and the potential to create the "illusion of a shared common interest." What could be more passionate than giving the name of a foreign nation to someone? To pretend that is irrelevant is to deny the obvious, as evidenced by the consistency of Emanuel's behavior over several decades.

[SOLERSO68]

Im not sure how he is "like palin" except that palin claimed to "love Isreal", whatever that means. Palins Isreal loving has little to do with any kind of thought through policy. she just believes that "support" for Isreal has something to do with jesus letting all the good people into heaven soon.
Obama is trying hard to find the best people for the jobs he needs them to do. thats all. If ive learned one thing about President Obama this year its that there WONT be any co-rulers, i think its his way or the highway. I cant see that as a bad thing given his politics and remarkable personal ability, after 8 years of a sock puppet president,who is dominated by ultra right wing special interests.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

A president's decisions are no better than the information and intelligence on which those decisions are made. When it comes to decision-making about the Middle East, is national security best served by Rahm Emanuel serving as chief of staff?

Even if Obama is the sole decision-maker, his presidency is dependent on people around him providing unfiltered information without a preconceived outcome or bias. Other presidencies have failed on that basis and have led us into unnecessary wars.

[JuneO]

So, you are assuming that if Obama is listening to various people, they either all have the same opinion, or that he will make his decision simply based on what Rahm tell him?

I think you are making a mistake that so many have made during this election cycle, which is to underestimate the Obama's intelligence.

The job of a President is to listen to the view points of various people, and make a reasoned and wise judgment. I would hope you are not implying that Obama should not listen to Rahm because he may be biased towards Isreal.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

Though Mearsheimer and Walt broke the taboo when chronicling the disastrous impact of the Israel lobby on the U.S., on Jews and on Israel, they err in comparing the Israel lobby to conventional lobbyists.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

Though Mearsheimer and Walt broke the taboo when chronicling the disastrous impact of the Israel lobby on the U.S., on Jews and on Israel, they err in comparing that lobby to domestic lobbyists.

Senator William Fulbright was correct in the 1960s: AIPAC should be required to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Illinois Congressman Paul Findley was the first member of the U.S. Congress openly targeted for removal by the lobby. AIPAC recruited attorney Richard Durbin to oppose Findley. Durbin is now #2 in the Senate leadership where he shares a house in Washington with New York Senator Charles Schumer who is #3.

The political success of the Israel lobby is one of America's best kept secrets. In 1984, the lobby successfully targeted Senator Charles Percy for removal, another chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, AIPAC openly bragged about the intimidation that the lobby intended Percy's defeat to work on other lawmakers.

AIPAC Executive Director Tom Dine was later dispatched to Europe by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright where, from a senior position in the US Agency for International Development, he oversaw the massive fraud that financially pillaged Russia while creating a handful of oligarchs. In a nation where less than two percent would qualify for Israeli citizenship, eight of the richest nine oligarchs qualified.

Dine then helped coverup that fraud when he was appointed head of Radio Free Europe, the official broadcasting arm of the U.S. government.

[FatNSassy]

While I personally don't like him, one can hardly compare him to Palin. He is an experienced insiders and she is completely clueless!

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

But isn't that the point: an experienced insider shares with the " clueless" outsider an intense personal loyalty to the interests of a foreign nation. From Tel Aviv's perspective, wouldn't Palin serve Tel Aviv's interests as well as Emanuel? When making presidential decisions about that volatile region, isn't Rahm Emanuel Obama's Sarah Palin? Isn't the passionate attachment to Israel a key component informing the decision-making of both?

[JuneO]

I'm not sure how you reach the conclusion that Sarah Palin is "passionately attached" to Isreal. What makes her passionately attached? Are her parents Isreali immigrants?

Moreover, why do you assume that Obama himself is not "passionately attached" to Isreal, such that it really makes no difference who picks?

I think your article makes a lot of unfounded assumptions, which significantly reduces its credibility, and weight.

[Dustee]

One thing for sure, Emanuel's got Obama's back no matter what you say. They've been friends for a long time and Rham is loyal. Don't think Obama is some kind of naive punk.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15388.html

[amyleck]

Based on his history with Bill Clinton, Rahm doesn't strike me as loyal.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

Those hoping for success by the "candidate of change" need to recall that Rahm Emanuel with White House political strategist for the health care reform advanced during Clinton's first term, with disastrous results. Then he led the effort that successfully enacted the North American Free Trade Agreement over the objections of the party that nominated Clinton for the presidency. Where do Emanuel's loyalties lie? To defraud, by definition, first requires the creation of trust. Emanuel, Penny Pritzker and other politically active Chicagoans nurtured this candidate's career over many years. In that sense, the candidate of change is much like the Clintons in their reliance on an ideologically allied corps of Israel-first supporters. Let Obama propose a change in U.S.-Israeli relations and we'll see if it's Obama's back that Emanuel has got.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

The tradition of pro-Israelis has been to focus on staffing the most narrow point in the funnel of information into decision-makers whose decisions are no better than the information on which they rely.

You don't need to be the vice-president, just serve as his chief of staff (Lewis Libby) and control the information flow to a self-absorbed person known to decide in a profiled fashion (Dick Cheney). You don't need to be the CIA Director, run your own faux intelligence operation (Douglas Feith) inside the Pentagon (the Office of Special Plans) and funnel fixed, false and flawed information through the Deputy Secretary of Defense (Paul Wolfowitz) into White House decision-making.

Those profiled in Guilt By Association are skilled at displacing facts with what people can be deceived be believe"Iraq WMD, ties to Al Qaeda, meetings in Prague, yellowcake uranium from Niger, mobile biological weapons laboratories, and so forth. The issue is not whether this is being done; that component of the evidentiary trail is clear. The question is how, by whom and to what purpose. Those issues are addressed in this first book in the Criminal State series. In an Information Age, if this is not treason, what is?

[tangenjill]

Here's the link to Ray Hanania:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ray-hanania/obamas-growing-pro-israel_b_141964.html

[tangenjill]

Dude...what's your beef? Didn't you read the article from the Chicago columnist (also Palestinian American) not to stress over Obama picking Emanuel. If we truly want Israel to make peace with the Palestinians then this is one way of doing it...Emanuel helped orchestrate Rabin and Arafat's handshake.

Your constant referencing his middle name and counting the number of Jewish members of the Senate (as though all Jews think alike), as well as talking of "Tel Aviv," instead of the capital, Jerusalem, makes it plain that you have no desire to meet as equals and make a balanced peace, but rather try and demonize those who would just because they care about Israel.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

Curious miscue in this comment in suggesting that Jerusalem and not Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel. Certainly that's what Hillary Clinton promised her constituents if she was elected president -- that the U.S. would consider Jerusalem the capital. For anyone wanting to sustain this conflict, that would be a wise and timely decision. The issue is whether Jewish members of the Senate can clearly and consistently support the national security interests of the U.S. Absent this entangled alliance with Israel, would we be at war in the Middle East?

Kalle Lasn, editor of Adbusters, pointed out that 26 of the 50 top neoconservatives are Jewish. That's 52% versus a Jewish population of 1.7% of the overall U.S. population. Suggesting that bias might well have colored their views on the advice they offered in advocating an invasion of Iraq, he posed the awkward question, "Why Won't Anyone Say They're Jewish?" He soon found out when ADL unleashed its enforcers of political correctness, savaging Lasn with the usual toxic charges that preclude open discussion of a long-obvious issue in mainstream media.

To suggest there is no influence wielded on decision-making by such shared viewpoints is naive in the extreme. To pretend that a passionate attachment for a foreign state does not color one's judgement lies at the heart of a problem that has long plagued U.S. foreign policy due to our unwavering support of Tel Aviv, no matter how extreme their policies.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

Yet both are handicapped by their passionate attachment to Israel which puts in question their capacity for decision-making consistent with the national security interests of the United States.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

Both have an abiding passion for Israel no matter how extreme the agenda pursued by Tel Aviv.

Emanuel is well known for his close relationship to the Israel lobby, including his legendary fundraising ability as he draws on those relationships to support political campaigns in return for an implied agreement to support Israeli policies.

For all the authors' good intentions"which I heartily applaud"the Mearsheimer/Walt book (The Israel Lobby) leaves the reader with the false impression that the values pursued by the Israel lobby are consistent with American values. The facts confirm Tel Avi's intent to pursue an expansionist agenda"at any cost. That agenda, if openly pursued, would be opposed by an informed American public. Palin's candor is less perilous that Emanuel's nontransparent bias.

Israel's consistent pursuit of their extremist agenda over the past six decades has gravely endangered U.S. national security and steadily eroded the international goodwill with which we emerged after WWII and the Cold War. By our association with a state committed to an agenda decreed by fundamentalist Judaism, Americans are made to appear guilty for our support of extremist policies that would never be supported were that agenda made transparent.

That suggests the U.S-Israeli alliance must be revisited in light of what we now know about this lobby (and about Israel) if we hope to restore our national security. Someone clueless about how to manipulate policy-making would be far less worrisome than an experienced insider.

[PattyElle]

I don't trust Emanuel and fear his power over Obama....not because he's Jewish but because Obama is already exhibiting his "people pleaser" ways & may not have the backbone. I am truly concerned about that.

[barackobama4prez]

Barack is his own guy. I'm not worried about this at all. When you look at his campaign, Obama ran it the way he wanted to, no matter what his critics, pundits and supporters thought.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

Several chapter excerpts from Guilt By Association appear at www.criminalstate.com. I urge a review of the introduction where you will find a description of how pro-Israeli policies are advanced in plain sight though non-transparently through a combination of agents, assets and an extensive network of sayanim (volunteers).

[Madrid]

This is the first time I can remember the Huffington Post has published an article critical of Israel and its racist supporters here in this country. And in response, let me say thank you from the bottom of my heart.

The US is not going to get out of the mess it is in as long as it lets Israel and its lobbies here define our foreign policy. Read the book by Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer. The US, like every country on the planet, has its own foreign policy interests, that are not identical to those of Israel.

Besides that, it is a lie to say that our values are similar to those of Israel-- we have a strict separation of church and state. Israel is an ethno-religious state that privileges one ethnicity and religion over others. Contemplate a US government that makes Christianity the state religion and gives special rights to Christians and you have a fair approximation of Israel's theocracy. Does anyone, including Jews, want something like that in our future? If you don't want it in our future, why do you support it with our tax dollars in 4 billion dollars of aid to Israel per year?

[veganphoto]

The Arabs have total equality in the law of Israel, except they have the privilege of not having to serve in the Army, but they can and do (in increasing numbers lately as well). Israel has even had PLO members in its Parliament (including the assistant speaker of the Parliament).

One example of just how fair Israel is, under the Jordanian capture of part of Jerusalem, it restricted Arabs from visiting the Dome of the Rock. When this part of Jerusalem was returned to Israel, Israel not only guaranteed that anyone could visit the Dome, but put local Arabs in charge of it.

[reliant1]

Some history

On 14 May 1948 the State of Israel was proclaimed according to the UN partition plan (1947).

Less than 24 hours later, the armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq invaded, forcing Israel to defend the sovereignty it had just regained in its ancestral homeland. The poorly equipped Israel Defense Forces repulsed the invaders in fierce fighting, which lasted 15 months and claimed nearly one percent of the country's Jewish population.

During the first months of 1949, direct negotiations were conducted under UN auspices between Israel and the invading countries (except Iraq which has refused to date),

resulting in armistice agreements which reflected the situation at the END of the fighting.

The coastal plain, Galilee and the entire Negev were within Israel's sovereignty.

Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) came under Jordanian rule.

Gaza Strip came under Egyptian administration, and the city of Jerusalem was divided, with Jordan controlling the eastern part, including the Old City, and Israel the western sector.


U.N. Resolution 181 partition plan was to divide the remaining 25% of Palestine into a Jewish Palestinian State and

a SECOND Arab Palestinian State (Trans-Jordan being the first)

based upon population concentration.

The Jews accepted --- the Arabs rejected.

Most of the Arabs living within "Israel" were encouraged to leave by the invading Arabs to facilitate the slaughter.

The Arabs who did not run away became today's Israeli Arab citizens. Those who fled became the seeds of the "Palestinian Arab refugees."

[nukemind]

Problem is 'ancestral' home can be applied to many people. Do the Roma get territory in northern Pakistan from whence they came? Do the Hungarians who claim Magyar ancestry get real estate in western Siberia? The list goes on and on.

Regardless, some points left out:

Israel actually invaded and occupied some Palestinian designated areas in the name of 'security' before the Arab states declared war. Mutual hostilties from day one, not just one side. Second, the state was based upon a precarious 'population concentration' as the Israel designated area had at least a 49% Palestinian population and virtually zero representation.

The Israelis were not poorly equipped. They had a battle hardened force of World War II vets with European tech and tactics. The Israelis started out on somewhat equal footing, but mounted a 50,000 strong force against the combined Arab 'armies' numbering 25,000 (population doesn't equal military power, just ask China when Japan conquered them during WWII). Still remarkable, but not unexpected. The Arabs were disorganized and poorly equipped. Israel continues to have problems in the region because they have never come to grips with how their state was created (imperialism) and the refugees they created. If they accept the Arab League proposal and stop haggling for more land they may yet live in peace in the region as they have with Egypt when they gave back the Sinai.

[mmmd]

I think if you put yourself in the Arab's shoes you will understand their resistance in 1948 to British-American partioning of their land. If part of the Rhinelands were given to Jews, that would make some sort of sense to them--- by why take from the Arabs who had no hand in the Jewish massacre? Would we Americans agree if some super power took, say Ohio, and tried to give it to some oppressed group as reparation? Of course not. The UN had no right to take lands from a sovereign state and create another. That's just not done.

[Fein]

"Most of the Arabs living within "Israel" were encouraged to leave by the invading Arabs to facilitate the slaughter."

As if that's some excuse to imprizon them in the occupied territories and confiscate their homes.

IDF's on history as recounted by Ilan Papp, proves this myth false using their own documents.
The only ones 'encouraging' the Palistinians to run was the IDF.

[special muppet]

If Israel is to be persuaded to make a deal with the Palestinians, the Israelis will need someone high up in the Obama camp that they are comfortable with. The Palestinians can relate to Obama, the Israelis like Emanuel. Maybe, finally, there will be a slim chance for peace.

[nukemind]

Sure hope that is the case. I really do.

[mmmd]

An "convinced zionist" like Emanuel next to the throne will make the israelis feel they have the upper hand and they will bargain for more. And if there is not an equitable deal the Palestinians will not accept it. So, no, I don't think Rahm's being there will help the peace process. But I'll hope too.

[reliant1]

The iminent threat of a Jewish takeover of the gov't seems to be upon us. Or maybe not...

I wonder - has anyone counted the number of Catholics in the gov't?

There could be a huge conspiracy afoot - and those clever Papists are just using the Jews as a diversion. They've had a lot of practice after all.

Well, no one needs to be reminded of the centuries of unspeakable horror lavished on the world via the Vatican.

And everyone knows the Catholics obey the Pope before anyone else...so my money is on the Catholics.

The Jew thing may just be a well coordinated smoke screen being launched and controlled from Rome.


Quis Custodiet ipsos custodes?

[Clare53]

Your post is a joke, right?

[nukemind]

Great article on a topic rarely discussed. Our Mideast policy has been dictated by extremists like AIPAC (who largely do not want to do a land for peace deal) and have undermined politicians in Israel who want to accept the Arab League proposal and return to the 67 borders: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/world/middleeast/30olmert.html

In fact, AIPAC and Emanuel are to the right of many Israeli leaders. They have created a climate in which you can't criticize ANYTHING Israel does or question our policies. Israel can remain an ally, but our best friend? What about Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Japan? The countries that took a direct part in the Cold War? This is all absurd propaganda. Frankly, our 'friendship' with Israel has led to our current precarious position in the Mideast region where all people see is us supporting whatever Israel does. Unfortunately, AIPAC and their cronies have done their job well as the majority (can't say how big of one but enough) appear to support the notion that criticism of Israel and its American allies is somehow anti-Semitic, even when you're Jewish (note the case of Norman Finkelstein)!

[reliant1]

Israel exists because of the USA. It was our influence and our support that pushed thru the UN partition in 1947.

We wanted it. We got it. We still have it.

[nukemind]

Actually, Israel exists because of Britain which backed partition of British Palestine and the Great Powers supported it as many felt guilty (and rightly so) for not doing enough to help Jews during the Holocaust. The Soviets just wanted to get rid of Jewish dissidents. Of course, the Palestinians paid the price for Euro-American guilt as it were since Israel was created in their midst without their approval as opposed to being set up in the middle of Germany where it would have been righteous justice.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

Who is the "we" within the electorate that wanted it? Certainly one "we" (Truman) wanted recognition of Israel as part of his strategy to be reelected in 1948. The entire senior cadre in the diplomatic corps, U.S. intelligence and the U.S. military were opposed. General George C. Marshall, then Secretary of State, assured Truman he would vote against him if he recognized that enclave of religious fundamentalists and terrorists as a legitimate sovereign state.

Marshall kept his promise never again to speak to White House counsel Clark Clifford. Clifford reminded the hugely unpopular Truman that campaign funders in New York would desert him if he did not proceed with recognition. Pro-Israeli supporters from coast to coast thereafter met Truman's campaign train to "financially refuel" his re-election effort with funds totaling $2.2 million in 2007 dollars.

Guilt by Association, the first release in the Criminal State series, chronicles how this "state" came into being and how it continues to play such a determinative role in U.S. foreign policy. That influence includes the multi-decade role played by the "Chicago Outfit" in presidential politics since no later than the 1920s and continuing through today.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

The concern is not whether or not Emanuel covers Obama's back in a presidential election. The question is not whether Emanuel is loyal to Obama but whether his attachment to Israel enables him to serve the interests of the U.S. above all other interests. The presidential oath of office says nothing about other nations, only the U.S.

[Paindujour]

Wow. I read this article and then went back to see the author's bio. I was looking for clues as to why it sounded so anti-Jewish/anti-Israel. It sounds more like a pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel rant using Emanuel as a convenient target, rather than a critique of Rahm Emanuel's qualifications for Obama's chief of staff.

Emanuel may or may not be an asset to Obama. Only time will tell. But if Mr. Gates merely wanted to point out Emanuel's political shortcomings, he went about it in a very strange and distasteful way.

[nukemind]

When is criticism of AIPAC and their allies NOT considered anti-Jewish in this country? Criticism of Israel was so muted during the campaign that only the fringe candidates even talked about. And all the candidates paid allegiance to the frankly rightwing AIPAC audience who back Likud politics in Israel as opposed to the diminishing power of the left in Israel (who find themselves battling against both their own rightwingers and their American backers). Emanuel sounds like he's more loyal to a foreign state than this country and this DOES NOT bode well for Obama's push for change.

[reliant1]

President Obama supports Israel. He always has. He has said so for years. His friendship with RE goes back decades as does his trust in him - hence his being chosen as CoS.

Take the next step...he was chosen by the President and the President shares his views, a well known fact - then the problem is not RE or A I P A C.

Your problem is not even with the President. How could you have cast a vote for someone who has views so opposed to your own, surely you are not surprised when the President acts and chooses and performs - just like he said he would.

[californiadreamer]

To me, far more alarming is the fact that Emanuel managed to earn about 16 million dollars between the time he left the Clinton White House and was elected to Congress. He did this working for an investment firm. Obviously he was extremely well paid as someone who could make things happen. The problem is, influence peddlers/lobbyists/fixers are not really connected to the aspirations of the American people. They make more money is a couple of years than most couples could making working together for several lifetimes. So, will Emanuel stand up for the struggling masses in our society or is he someone whose job it is to get those big contributions from Wall Street to help in the 1212 campaign? It seems many people have put a great deal of hope in Obama but he may turn out to be more like Clinton, continually running for re-election and trying to be all things to all people. We need a President who can make change happen, whether it is in our economic policy or in our foreign policy. Time will tell and many will be watching.

[Jeff Gates - Huffpost Blogger]

Moderate Jews are responding enthusiastically to the facts presented in Guilt By Association and to an evidentiary trail that isolates religious extremists from the moderates that are as appalled as anyone else familiar with how those chronicled in this account are masterful at displacing facts with what people can be deceived to believe -- Iraqi WMD, ties to Al Qaeda, meetings in Prague, etc. Excerpts are posted at www.criminalstate.com

If extremists in the Jewish community continue to wield the anti-Semite sword with such reckless abandon, they will make it useless as a shield when it may be needed to defend against genuine anti-Semites. Those who want to defend this nation from all enemies, both domestic and foreign, need to ensure that this charge loses its power to intimidate, discredit and misdirect.

To suggest that anti-Zionist is somehow anti-Jewish or anti-Israel is classic misdirection. Those committed to a form of governance based on informed choice must oppose such disinformation.