« A Death Rattle for the Lobby? - Cieran | Main | "9 States Stand in Support of Arizona Immigration Law" Fox news »

14 July 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


If this was an Emergency Committee for Muslims / Arab-Americans / Iranian-Americans or anything to that effect, you can bet that the very same people would be crying foul that Islam/terrorists has taken over America (as if they are not doing that already).


Familiar Neocons and Christian Zionist Head Up New “Emergency Committee for Israel”


‘Emergency Committee for Israel’ Refuses To Take Position On Two State Solution

".....according to the Emergency Committee for Israel, apparently, the national security interests of the United States in the Middle East should be subordinated to whatever the current Israeli government wants. I find this bizarre, and I think most Americans would probably agree."

John Howley

Glenn Greenwald points out that the NeoCons and Likudniks are very much at odds with the political views of a majority of American Jews.



Since a large percentage of Americans believe that Obama is a Muslim in disguise, there is too much fear of terrorism in the air to challenge the war party with a peace party. I find this kind of collective fear held by most Americans particularly hard to swallow given that Obama is on par with most beltway Republicans when it comes to being a neoconservative warmonger, peddling a very Zionist-friendly foreign policy. But I must say that this neocon lie would've never taken hold and spread to the mindless masses had it not been for the neocon propaganda machine churning out reams of falsehoods about Obama being some sort of Bible-hating peacenik that pals around towel-heads, despite his administration being filled to the brim with bloodthirsty Zionists.

And since an even larger percentage of Americans believe that Obama is a socialist, there is also too much Red Scare in the air to challenge the deficit commission with a jobs commission:


So whenever I hear the neocon propagandists spewing out bald-faced lies about how Obama is some sort of latter-day Marxist, who wants to squash the invisible hand with his iron fist, I can't help but think that the neoliberal deficit hawks have hooked up with the neoconservative war hawks to sink their claws into the Democratic Party, just as they have done to the Republican party, in order to guarantee themselves full-spectrum dominance in Washington regardless of which party is in power. But I can't think of anything more un-American than forcibly collapsing our two party system into one single party. So if there is any group of people here in the US that should be put on the terrorist watch list, it should be the neocons and their kissing cousins, the neolibs!


Unless I am mistaken, no lawsuit. The onus of proof would be on the American Government to prove beyond reasonable doubt that this organisation is under the control of the Government of Israel.

Otherwise, they are just a group of like minded Americans who are exercising their Constitutional rights, because they happen to believe that it is in Americas best interests to support Israel in this particular manner.

To put it another way; "You want I should stop ringing my brother in Tel Aviv every day? Don't you know he is a sick man who could die tomorrow? Shame on you!"

William R. Cumming

Many statutes enforced by DOJ do not allow private AG cases to be brought. Unfortunately case law on selective enforcement favors the past non-enforcement of FARA by DOJ. Perhaps your and my senators might entertain a private attorney general provision in some federal laws but doubt they would in this case. Always remember Justice does not equal Truth.

clifford kiracofe

1. "Harper" seems pretty level headed to me and presents good analysis and makes valid points here. I recall the National Review supported the Israeli-French-UK Suez operation....it has been Ziocon for a long long time.

2. On the Sestak thread, I posted this nugget from the Canadian Zionist David Frum of Reagan White House/axis of evil notoriety about the new exec dir of the "Emergency Committee""

"Noah Pollak, a friend of mine, and a brilliant advocate for rethinking Israel's self-defense in a new media era. He was instrumental in persuading the Israeli Defense Forces to launch their own YouTube channel, which did enormous service rebutting falsehoods during the Gaza campaign.

It's long been a thesis of mine, to adapt Clausewitz, that modern warfare is PR by other means. Pollak understands this truth (wrote his Yale thesis on it) - and friends of Israel will be excited to watch his deployment of the truth in the critical days ahead."

So if I get this right, this Pollak advised the Israeli military on psychologal/information war issues and is now going to manage this committee. Is Pollak as dual national? Or just wants to be helpful?

This Frum thing appeared in a blog on the Atlantic Monthly website. Who owns the Atlantic these days and what is going on there?

3. I explained the evolution of the Neocon/Christian Right/New Right/Republican linkage in my book Dark Crusade (London: IB Tauris, 2009). Kristol, Gary Bauer are duly noted.


Meanwhile a bunch of Israelis are suing Al Jazeera in a New York court for "aiding Hezbollah" by covering the 2006 war in Lebanon.

Anyone want to take bets on which law gets enforced--the ban on foreign influence in US elections or the non-existent ban on terrorist journalists reporting on foreign wars?

These folks now have the arrogance to believe that they can take the law into their own hands by simply manipulating US law to suit
whatever ends they seek.

Patrick Lang


The government will not take action aginst AIPAC or an associated group like this. they have too much actual political power.

What needs to happen is that some citizen group does it. Where are all you lawyers? Looks at the definition of "agent" in the law. It fits perfectly.. pl

William R. Cumming

Cynthia! In 1994 William Grieder wrote a book entitled "Who Will Tell the People" describing how inside the DC beltway it is only one party and they coopt the outsiders running against DC. How the power of incumbency and the "need" to be reelected. These guys and gals feel the country owes them not the reverse. Self sacrifice is not their indelible trait of character. Rather more Gordon Gecko of Wall Street--Greed is good. As my grandfather used to tell me--Billy vote the ins out!


Good point. MondoWeiss reported that J Street has asked the Treasury Dept to investigate whether American non-profits who fund Israeli settlements are breaking the law. Most of these outfits are registered in the US as tax-deductibe charities.
Then the 30 plus international journalists who were on the Turkish flotilla have joined forces and brought suit against Israel.


By analogy, this is like the attempts at controlling campaign expenditures -- committees controlled by the candidate cannot exceed certain limits but the exact same thing can be done by as 'independent' expenditure by an issues committee as long as the candidate does not explicitly coordinate with the committee.

So unless Israel can be shown to be directly running or directly funding this committee there will be no successful law suit.

While Israel cannot use its own money to hire people to do these things without having those people register as agents, it is also true that if any American citizens want to say the things that Israel would like them to say and want to use their own money to do so, any attempt to force them to register as foreign agents would be an infringement on their right to freedom of speech.



The lawyers representing the Likudniks will make sure that their cases are put into a 'friendly court' where the judge is one of their buddies. They'll 'rig' the case like they have been doing for a number of years now. Since Pollard's conviction, behind the scenes, they have made sure that their buddies are located in the key positions, i.e. prosecutor's office, the different federal courts, and any appeals courts all the way along the yellow brick road to the SCOTUS.

Patrick Lang


If what you said is true, should we not repeal the FARA law? The law specifically applies to individuals. But, not perhaps to Zionist individuals? pl


Dr. Kiracofe,

When reading Frum's comments on Clausewitz I'm reminded of a statement attributed to Napoleon in response to Count Metternich "You can't possibly beat me, I spend 30,000 lives a month." The same arrogant disregard for life underlies Frum's statements.

(Another interesting quote from Metternich which might be aprapo:
"A people who can neither read nor write, whose last word is the dagger — fine material for constitutional principles! ... The English constitution is the work of centuries ... There is no universal recipe for constitutions." (from the wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klemens_Wenzel,_Prince_von_Metternich


"if any American citizens want to say the things that Israel would like them to say and want to use their own money to do so..."

Of course, those individuals probably have lots of "consulting" contracts with the Israel "unrelated" to any political activity. But, since money is fungible, part of it finds its way into supporting Israeli government causes.

In many other contexts (eg. narcotic drugs), it would be called money laundering. And it's what greases the corrupt skids of Washington these days.

clifford kiracofe

"The same arrogant disregard for life underlies Frum's statements"


Yes. Richard Perle, in reference to the Iraq war, told a European friend of mine once: "They (gentile Americans) fight for us (Jews)."

Neocons don't mind spending and wasting lives whether gentile or Jewish (American or Israeli). They consider themselves on a different plane "Beyond Good and Evil" in Nietzschean fashion.

I once heard that Wolfowitz had a piece of art depicting the Battle of Antietam in his office. I presumed that to be a cultic-esoteric thing in which he took some form of exquisite delight/pleasure in the depiction of so much death and suffering.

I attribute this to the influence of Wolfie's mentor Allan Bloom who was exposed to some rather deranged intellectual circles in Europe. Georges Bataille comes to mind, for example. (see: Shadia Drury, Alexandre Kojeve. The Roots of Postmodern Politics New York: St. Martin's, 1994).

clifford kiracofe


I forgot to mention that Napoleon is a cult hero to Neocons.

See the Drury book aforementioned on this point. This provides context, for example, for the the notorious Fukuyama "end of history" thing.

For Kojeve, the Battle of Jena (1806) marked "the end of history."

A point I am making here is that it is one thing to toss around the word "Neocon" and "Ziocon" but quite another to have some understanding on what is really going on with this intellectual network.

The fundamental questions being "Just who are the Neocons in the service of?" and "How are they subverting this Republic"? The where, when, and whys can be filled in. The answer is not some vague reference to Israel and mere Zionism, IMO.


Napoleon a a cult hero. Probably not a reference to the Code Napoleon and other reforms of French law. I recall a foreign film (French I believe) where upon Napoleon's return from Elba there was no one to meet him. Interesting film, with the rather interesting remark from the female lead responded to a question about Napoleon's glory with "yes, Napoleon filled the towns and villages of France with widows and orphans, to our great glory" Some things never change.


How Jewish victims use US law to extract money from those most tangentially involved--

"In a case that may set a precedent for seizing funds from terrorist sponsors, attorneys are fighting to have Iranian assets in France confiscated and handed over to American victims of terrorism.

A French appellate court is due to consider on Feb. 25 whether to continue holding $117 million in Iranian funds that have been frozen in France’s Natexis Banques Populaire.

At issue is whether these funds, part of the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran, are state funds, which are immune from seizure, or commercial funds, which may be subject to seizure.

The fight to obtain the money follows two U.S. court decisions, on Sept. 16, 2003 and March 24, 2006, in which U.S. district judges in Washington ordered Iran to pay dmages and interest of $87.5 million to 12 U.S. citizens injured in terrorist attacks in Israel in 1995 and 1997.

The courts in Washington determined that Iran was liable for the damages due to its sponsorship of Hamas, which orchestrated the attacks. The incidents included the 1995 bombing of an Israeli bus in the Gaza Strip and a 1997 triple suicide bombing in downtown Jerusalem by Hamas terrorists who planted rat poison in their bombs to maximize damage.

Iran never sent a representative to the court to provide a defense." (I wonder Iranians could have gotten visas to defend themselves?)

Too bad Palestinians don't have similar access to the US court system. I could end up costing Uncle Sam big time.


Clifford: I appreciate your comment "that it is not some vague reference to Israel and mere Zionism"...

What is it, then? A more specific reference? A reference to something else? Can you try in a sentence or two, a paragraph?

(Yes, I will read the Drury, and have read most of the writings of Leo Strauss.)


The problem is not so much who does certain things but the motivation with which they are done. There are certain things which are allowed if there is one motivation, but not allowed if there is another motivation. I can refuse to rent a house to any one who displeases me for any trivial reason -- say the color of their tie -- but I cannot refuse to rent because of the color of the person's skin.

I've not looked at this area of law but any area of law which turns on the motivations of the people involved gets very, very mushy. The Fundamentalists who are supporting Israel are doing so for reasons of their own beliefs about the
Bible -- they are not agents of Israel. They are not about to do whatever Israel wants if if conflicts with their own beliefs. Paid agents are an example from the other end of the spectrum. Nazis who had sworn loyalty to Hitler and were conducting propaganda exercises in the US would be another.

Proof is a problem also -- did the Senator change his vote to a pro-gun position because he saw the logic of an NRA argument or because he saw the logic of a future NRA contribution? If the deal is explicit, it's a bribe and it's illegal, if it's not discussed ahead of time,it is simply common sense and there is no problem. Of course the NRA is going to direct support to those who vote with them.

Patrick Lang


So you are in fact in favor of repeal of FARA?

I do not think the law requires employee status for someone or a group to be registered under FARA. What matters is the activity itself. pl


Jane, do you get paid to type the words "Hitler" and "Nazi"? Redactio ad Hitlerum.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad