<p>i don’t know what that means. they were either said, or they were not said. no serious news source has ever confirmed that they were said; the journalist who originally propagated the quotes can’t do so herself. yes, jews are influential at all levels of american society. so what? america and israel are aligned ideologically (and they basically have been for as long as israel’s been around), and i think this contributes more to their working relationship than does any sort of alleged mechanism of jewish control. i don’t see barack obama or hillary clinton bowing down to AIPAC at every turn, do you?</p>
<p>ConfucianNemisis: why should a work that Marvin Kalb states does not meet the basic standards of academia, contains factual errors, and has otherwise been discredited as an overblown incorrect portrayal of the Israel Lobby be included in this discussion?</p>
<p>EDIT: Sharon was the leader of a country in constant conflict. He faced hoaxes and lies from numerous Arab and Palestinian sources. He wasn’t going to specifically counter every single claim made about him. Besides, even if he did, people like your friend would probably cite his remarks as a cover-up and use them to give the quote legitimacy.</p>
<p>“Israeli radio network Kol Yisrael confirmed it and the newspaper is Ha’aretz”</p>
<p>What I mean is, can you find the article where Ha’aretz confirmed that this actually happened? Apparently, the columnist herself can’t even do so…</p>
<p>The two sources cited are pretty serious; Kol Yisrael has been around since the time Israel declared its independence and Ha’aretz is Israel’s oldest newspaper. </p>
<p>“I do not deny that the pro-Israel lobby is a major force in US politics (as are the AARP, NRA, etc…), but any claim that Israel “Owns The Congress” is downright silly.”</p>
<p>My point is that while Israel may not “control” America (as Sharon may or may not have said), it does have tremendous influence. One can make the case that Israel has so much influence on Congress people, that they pretty much control them when it comes to foreign policy. While the NRA and AARP do have a lot of power, at least they are aimed at representing the will of the American people, and not some foreign policy objective. </p>
<p>“i don’t see barack obama or hillary clinton bowing down to AIPAC at every turn, do you?”</p>
<p>While they do not make it obvious, all viable presidiential candidates do go out of their way to prove themselves to AIPAC (Obama being the obvious example).</p>
<p>ok, well in all honesty, it seems to me that you don’t really know what you’re talking about. so i think personally i’ll stop after this, because this is probably a waste of my time. but for the record…</p>
<p>what do you mean by “the two sources cited”? the first question to ask is, who’s citing the sources? the answer is…the same no-name websties who spread the information in the first place. you can’t use those websites as your proof. that’s circular reasoning. what i’m asking you to do is to find the ha’aretz article where this was reported (or the radio transcript). again, i don’t think you’ll be able to, because as it turns out, the sole american journalist who used these quotes in an article can’t do so herself. that’s bad journalism, and you’re verging on conspiracy theory with your comments!</p>
<p>“The two sources cited are pretty serious; Kol Yisrael has been around since the time Israel declared its independence and Ha’aretz is Israel’s oldest newspaper.”</p>
<p>But they have not really been cited, merely mentioned as possible sources for this quote. Since the original articles cannot be found and neither source claims to have published the quote, they cannot be considered cited sources.</p>
<p>“My point is that while Israel may not “control” America (as Sharon may or may not have said), it does have tremendous influence. One can make the case that Israel has so much influence on Congress people, that they pretty much control them when it comes to foreign policy.”</p>
<p>Nope; even Noam Chomsky, an avid anti-Zionist claims that the oil industry and arms manufacturers are more far more powerful and influential in US policy regarding the Middle East.</p>
<p>“While the NRA and AARP do have a lot of power, at least they are aimed at representing the will of the American people, and not some foreign policy objective.”</p>
<p>Not even close. NRA and AARP each represent the will of a specific cross-section of the American people, gun-owners and old people. They do not represent the will of Americans as a whole.</p>
<p>I’m going with brostrad and leaving this thread after this comment. Good night all.</p>
<p>“But they have not really been cited, merely mentioned as possible sources for this quote. Since the original articles cannot be found and neither source claims to have published the quote, they cannot be considered cited sources.”</p>
<p>But have they ever rebuked that they said something of that nature. If Sharon does not have the time to denounce what he allegedly said, then they sources should have the time to formally state that they, in no way, shape or form reported anything of the like. These quotes may have been said.</p>
<p>“Nope; even Noam Chomsky, an avid anti-Zionist claims that the oil industry and arms manufacturers are more far more powerful and influential in US policy regarding the Middle East.”</p>
<p>Is that why when the US sold Saudi Arabia weapons to guard against Iran, Israel protested and the US subsequently sent them (free of charge) superior weapons? No matter who Chomsky is or what he said, it is clear that, somehow, pro-Israel groups have more leverage than the oil industry when it come to Middle East politics. </p>
<p>“Not even close. NRA and AARP each represent the will of a specific cross-section of the American people, gun-owners and old people. They do not represent the will of Americans as a whole.”</p>
<p>True, but that’s what interest groups are for: they are meant to represent their constituents, which directly relate to domestic issues, which direcly affects their lives. While AIPAC may serve their constituents, it is the only interest group to have SO MUCH power in foreign affairs. While AIPAC does voice the concerns of their constituents, these concerns are mainly looking out for the interests of another country. I am not saying that AIPAC does not have a right to have influence, but I am saying that I do not think that it is healthy for America to have interest groups that effect foreign policy objectives. </p>
<p>Brostrad, While I cannot pull up the articles or the radio transcript, I no longer am saying that these quotes are true. But I fail to see how I am verging on conspiracy theory? All I am saying is that Israel has a tremendous effect on how America acts on foreign policy issues. And I do not think it is right.</p>
<p>
Does a single terrorist hiding amongst civilians give you the right to launch a rocket into the middle of the crowd?
Which other group ensure the safety of palestinians and actually helps them? Fatah? The corrupt group that only care about maintaining power? Israel? They bombed out the entire southern Lebanon area just because two Israeli soldiers were missing. The problem with Israel is that it doesn’t give a **** about the Palestinians, as long as the Chosen people are ok. You don’t convince a population to join hands by blowing them up and reducing their food, water and medicine. If Israel actually cared about ending the conflict, they would provide adequate food, water, medicine, and credit to Palestinians. Who would support terrorists if the other side offered better treatment?</p>
<p>“No matter who Chomsky is or what he said, it is clear that, somehow, pro-Israel groups have more leverage than the oil industry when it come to Middle East politics.”</p>
<p>I applaud you binghamton. Your reasoning and your ability to construct logical arguments is superlative. </p>
<p>Seriously, this is a gem…</p>
<p>This statement highlights both the cause of you ignorance and its manifestation as postulations animated by that magical “somehow”. Ovation.</p>
<p>Palestinian terrorists walk into civilian areas and kill innocent people. The Israeli government, when forced to bomb an area that has civilians (like during the Second Lebanon War, when terrorists were shooting rockets out of schools and hospitals and preventing their own civilians from leaving), will fly over the area first and rain down pamphlets that say “We are going to bomb this area in 6 hours, leave if you value your life”. This isn’t some made-up thing, it has be verified many times that Israel really does this. When has a Palestinian terrorist group EVER said “we are going to suicide bomb/shoot up such and such school in 6 hours”?
This argument seems absolutely ridiculous to me, the facts are plain as day and I can’t see anyone in their right mind taking a stance on the side of the terrorists. Israel does almost everything in its power to prevent civilian casualties, if nothing else because every time even a single Palestinian dies, the Israeli government gets flak for it. Did you know that when these people make up numbers like “this week 12 Palestinian civilians were killed”, they include suicide bombers? Its absolutely atrocious what the world media is doing to this argument.
I have been to Israel, and spent a considerable amount of time there. I have seen the after-effects of a months-long bombardment of ketyusha rockets on the north of Israel; entire towns completely evacuated and forests burned to the ground.</p>
<p>scifikayaker, now go to Gaza and West Bank and see how the Palestinians live their daily lives out of fear that Israel might attack once again. You may have spent time in Israel, but you didn’t see the other side. You just automatically assumed that Israel is the victim and the Palestinians are in some elevated position. It’s actually the other way around. </p>
<p>I’ve said this before on other sides. Until both Palestinians and Israelis learn the value of human life, and until both Palestinians and Israelis realize that each deserves to live as much as the other, the conflict will never end. Forget about religion. Just because Judaism says that Jews are God’s chosen people doesn’t entitle them to anything in this world, since a strikingly large minority of people don’t care for any religion other than their own. And most are smart enough to realize that religion has no place in politics. </p>
<p>It really gets me when I see non-Jews defend Israel because out of my six Jewish friends, only one ardently supports Israel, and I think before anyone else supports Israel, a majority of Jews should. Three have adopted a stance against Israel, and the other two have adopted a middle-ground approach much like my own. I’ve seen this trend amongst many Jews that I’ve met. I don’t how well my observations can apply to the Jewry, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it did apply well. </p>
<p>By the way, if you’re wondering, I’m Muslim.</p>
<p>“We are going to bomb this area in 6 hours, leave if you value your life”</p>
<p>You are right when you say this, however leaving everything you own is much easier said than done. Palestians are poor to begin with imagine having no house on top of that. </p>
<p>“Israel does almost everything in its power to prevent civilian casualties”</p>
<p>“I have been to Israel, and spent a considerable amount of time there. I have seen the after-effects of a months-long bombardment of ketyusha rockets on the north of Israel; entire towns completely evacuated and forests burned to the ground.”</p>
<p>Hezbollah (NOT defending them), a terrorist organization, capured two Israeli soldiers, the result is a month long bombing: over 500 Lebanese civilians KILLED, virtually all bridges in the country destroyed, essential highways rendered useless, transportation for necessary supplies (bread, water, electriciy, gas) STOPPED. Israel may have had its northern border bombarded by inaccurate and (comparitively) ineffective rockets, but Israelis KILLED about 500 innocent humans and a country’s entire infrastructure as retribution. </p>
<p>Not to mention, Israel had the luxury of placing its northern citizens in safe places where the rockets were basically useless (thankfully).</p>
<p>^^ I know I said I wouldn’t post anymore, but bingham, you need to check your facts before you post. The 2006 war in Lebanon was not simply cause by the capture of 2 Israeli soldiers. Hezbollah started the conflict by launching rockets into Israeli civilian towns (ie., no military presence) and then attacked an Israeli convoy, killing 3 soldiers and capturing 2. Among Hezbollah’s targets was a civilian hospital. In response to this, Israel launched a failed rescue attempt and lost 5 more soldiers. All the while, Hezbollah sends more rockets onto CIVILIAN targets. Israel responds with rocket attacks, airstrikes, and the land invasion to stop Hezbollah’s attacks on civilians and rescue its own troops. Guess who caused the Lebanese civilian deaths–Hezbollah, for setting up rocket sites within civilian targets. </p>
<p>To say that Israel had the luxury of having safe havens from rocket attacks totally counters your previous argument about Palestinians or Lebanese. Sure, Israeli’s can flee from the rockets, but their homes and property still remain to be destroyed. Why do you think that it is OK for Israeli homes to be destroyed on purpose, but not for Leabanese/Palestinian homes to be destroyed by Collateral?</p>
<p>…</p>
<p>
If the terrorists sent flyers into Israel 6 hours before they start shooting rockets, would that justify their bombing? If they said they will sent a suicide bomber to Tel Aviv tomorrow at 6pm, would that justify the manslaughter?</p>
<p>azn: your argument makes no sense.the israeli’s don’t send down those pamphlets to justify murder, they want to make sure that civilians are out of the way when they bomb their targets. if terrorists/Palestinians who shoot rockets into Israel did this - which, by the way, they don’t and probably never will - nobody would get hurt and, um, why would a terrorist intent on killing civilians act in such a self-defeating way? equivocating a response to the quivalent of a military attack - what was israel supposed to do? negotiate with non-negotiable terrorists? - with unwarranted terrorist attacks AIMED AT CIVILIANS is just plain wrong.</p>
<p>threads like these make me so upset :(</p>
<p>AZN: You seem to miss the fundamental point of the argument. Israel does everything reasonable to neutralize a threat (the rocket launch sites) while minimizing civilian casualties. Palestinians/Hezbollah do everything they can to maximize civilian casualties.</p>
<p>“To say that Israel had the luxury of having safe havens from rocket attacks totally counters your previous argument about Palestinians or Lebanese. Sure, Israeli’s can flee from the rockets, but their homes and property still remain to be destroyed. Why do you think that it is OK for Israeli homes to be destroyed on purpose, but not for Leabanese/Palestinian homes to be destroyed by Collateral?”</p>
<p>You have me here, and you are right, the only caveat (which I do not consider legitimate) is that at least Israelis have a government to rely on if their property is destroyed. While Palestinians will have no where to turn except for groups such as Hamas. </p>
<p>“Hezbollah started the conflict by launching rockets into Israeli civilian towns (ie., no military presence) and then attacked an Israeli convoy, killing 3 soldiers and capturing 2. Among Hezbollah’s targets was a civilian hospital. In response to this, Israel launched a failed rescue attempt and lost 5 more soldiers. All the while, Hezbollah sends more rockets onto CIVILIAN targets. Israel responds with rocket attacks, airstrikes, and the land invasion to stop Hezbollah’s attacks on civilians and rescue its own troops. Guess who caused the Lebanese civilian deaths–Hezbollah, for setting up rocket sites within civilian targets.”</p>
<p>The conflict began when Hezbolah killed 3 soldier and abducted 2 soldiers (agreed). However, they never sent any rockets to any civilian towns, until Israel bombed the Beirut International aiport the next morning (no Hezbolah rockets where being launched there). Israel’s intentions are clearly laid out in the following two excerpts from an article from CNN at the time: </p>
<p>“This affair is between Israel and the state of Lebanon,” Maj. Gen. Udi Adam said. “Where to attack? Once it is inside Lebanon, everything is legitimate – not just southern Lebanon, not just the line of Hezbollah posts.” </p>
<p>Earlier, Israel’s chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, told Israel’s Channel 10, “If the soldiers are not returned, we will turn Lebanon’s clock back 20 years.”</p>
<p>Clearly, in this case, Israel did not mind killing civilians or hindering the efforts of innocent civilians to escape. By the way, I do recall a direct strike at UN peacekeepers during the war.</p>
<p>“Palestinians/Hezbollah do everything they can to maximize civilian casualties.”</p>
<p>Palestinians are in a state of desperation. They are in such an oppressed state that reason has lost all value. Perhaps, if they were granted a proper means for living, they would be able to distinguish b/n the innocent civilians and the oppressive Israeli rule. I can’t speak for Hezbollah</p>
<p>^^
Which is why the Palestinian Gov’t refuses peace treaties…Which is why they refuse to stop the blockade by halting rocket attacks…Israel wouldn’t even be in the West Bank or Gaza if the Arabs hadn’t provoked Israel into the 6-day War.</p>