By Jeff Gates *

Illustration by Carlos Latuff

Israelis and pro-Israelis object when they hear that charge. How, they ask, can we so few wield such influence over so many? Answer: It's all in the math. And in the single-issue advocacy brought to bear on US policy-making by dozens of "domestic" organizations that now compose the Israel lobby, with AIPAC its most visible force.

The political math was enabled by Sen. John McCain whose support for all things Israeli ensured him the GOP nomination to succeed George W. Bush. McCain's style of campaign finance reform proved a perfect fit for the Diaspora-based fundraising on which the lobby relies. Co-sponsored by Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, this change in federal election law typifies how Israeli influence became systemic.

"McCain-Feingold" raised the amount (from $1,000 to $2,300) that candidates can receive from individuals in primary and general elections. A couple can now contribute a combined $9,200 to federal candidates: $4,600 in each of the primary and general elections. Primary elections, usually low-budget, are particularly easy to sway.

Importantly for the Diaspora, this change also doubled the funds candidates can receive withoutAt gun point regard to where those contributors reside. A candidate in Iowa, say, may have only a few pro-Israeli constituents. When campaign support is provided by a nationwide network of pro-Israelis, that candidate can more easily be persuaded to support policies sought by Tel Aviv. Diaspora-based fundraising has long been used by the lobby with force-multiplying success to shape US foreign policy. Under the guise of reform, John McCain doubled the financial resources that the lobby can deploy to elect and retain its supporters.

Fulbright was Right. The influence-peddling process works like this. Candidates are summoned for in-depth AIPAC interviews. Those found sufficiently committed to Israel's agenda are provided a list of donors likely to "max out" their campaign contributions. Or the process can be made even easier when AIPAC-approved candidates are given the name of a "bundler."

Bundlers raise funds from the Diaspora and bundle those contributions to present them to the candidate. No quid pro quo need be mentioned. After McCain-Feingold became law in 2003, AIPAC-identified bundlers could raise $1 million-plus for AIPAC-approved candidates simply by contacting 10 like-minded supporters. Here's the math:

The bundler and spouse "max out" for $9,200 and call 10 others, say in Manhattan, Miami, and Beverly Hills. Each of them max out ($10 x $9,200) and call 10 others for a total of 11. (111 x $9,200 = $1,021,200.)

Imagine the incentive to do well in the AIPAC interview. One call from the lobby and a candidate can collect enough cash to mount a credible campaign in most congressional districts. From Tel Aviv's perspective, that political leverage is leveraged yet again because fewer than 10 percent of the 435 House races are competitive in any election cycle (typically 35 to 50).

Additional force-multipliers come from: (a) sustaining this financial focus over multiple cycles, (b) using funds to gain and retain seniority for those serving on congressional committees key to promoting Israeli goals, and (c) opposing any candidates who question those goals.

"Jewish Achievement" reports that 42 percent of the largest political donors to the 2000 election cycle were Jewish, including four of the top five. That compares to less than two percent of Americans who are Jewish. Of the Forbes 400 richest Americans, 25 percent are Jewish according to Michael Steinhardt, a key funder of the Democratic Leadership Council. The DLC was led by Jewish Zionist Sen. Joe Lieberman when he resigned in 2000 to run as vice president with pro-Israeli presidential candidate Al Gore.

Money was never a constraint. Pro-Israeli donors were limited only by how much they could lawfully contribute to AIPAC-screened candidates. McCain-Feingold raised a key limit. The full impact of this foreign influence has yet to be tallied. What's known, however, is sufficient to apply the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Of the top 50 neoconservatives who advocated war in Iraq, 26 were Jewish (52 percent).

Harry Truman, a Christian Zionist, remains one of the more notable recipients of funds. In 1948, he was trailing badly in the polls and in fundraising. His prospects brightened dramatically in May after he recognized as a legitimate state an enclave of Jewish extremists who originally planned to settle in Argentina before putting their sights on Palestine.

That recognition was opposed by Secretary of State George C. Marshall, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the bulk of the diplomatic corps, the fledgling Central Intelligence Agency and numerous distinguished Americans, including moderate and secular Jews concerned at the troubles that were certain to follow. Not until 1984 was it revealed that a network of Jewish Zionists had funded Truman's campaign by financially refuelling his whistle-stop campaign train with $400,000 in cash ($3 million in 2009).

To buy time on the public's airwaves, money raised from the Israel lobby's network is paid to media outlets largely owned or managed by members of the same network. Presidents, senators and congressmen come and go but those who collect the checks rack up the favours that amass lasting political influence.

The US system of government is meant to ensure that members of the House represent the concerns of Americans who reside in congressional districts — not a nationally dispersed network (a Diaspora) committed to advancing the agenda of a foreign nation. Federal elections are meant to hold senators accountable to constituents who reside in the states they represent, not out-of-state residents or a foreign government.

In practical effect, McCain-Feingold hastened a retreat from representative government by granting a nationwide network of foreign agents' disproportionate influence over elections in every state and congressional district. Campaign finance "reform" enabled this network to amass even more political clout — wielding influence disproportionate to their numbers, indifferent to their place of residence and often contrary to America's interests.

This force-multiplier is now wielded in plain sight, with impunity and under cover of free speech, free elections, free press and even the freedom of religion. Therein lies the perils of an entangled alliance that induced the US to invade Iraq and now seeks war with Iran. By allowing foreign agents to operate as a domestic lobby, the US was induced to confuse Zionist interests with its own.

* Jeff Gates is a widely acclaimed author, attorney, investment banker, educator and consultant to government, corporate and union leaders worldwide; an adviser to policy-makers worldwide; former counsel to the U.S. Senate Finance Committee; and author of numerous articles and books including his latest book Guilt by Association: How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War, Democracy at Risk and The Ownership Solution. See www.criminalstate.com

With all my personal reservation over Gen. Colin Powell's history and relation to Middle East wars and suffering; his recent stand against his party's racism is brave.

Today in 'Meet the Press' at MSNBC, he spoke up for all Muslims and fair minded-Americans and definitely let-down his own party and washed his hands from the republicans rhetoric.

"Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is?"

Not only that, but he also explained why he support Obama and chose to go against his own party's selection, McCain. He said:

I'm also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, "He's a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists." This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

Then he continues:

I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards–Purple Heart, Bronze Star–showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn't have a Christian cross, it didn't have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life. Now, we have got to stop polarizing ourself in this way. And John McCain is as nondiscriminatory as anyone I know. But I'm troubled about the fact that, within the party, we have these kinds of expressions.

But the really right answer is, what if he is a Muslim? What if he is Arab-American? What if he is Black-American? What if he is . . .

Complete transcript of this interview is here!

I am sure many of us remember the 1995 Israeli November election between the Labor Party of Yitzhak Rabin which supported peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians and the Likud Party lead by US raised Benjamin Netanyahu which apposed any peace and reconciliations between the Arabs and Israel which ended in the murder of the late Yitzhak Rabin at the hand of a right wing Yigal Amir a supporter of Benjamin Netanyahu and the Likud.

Any one following the Israeli elections can see were the election was heading with the Likud painting Yitzhak Rabin as a traitor to the Zionist cause with posters appearing everywhere with Rabin wearing the Arab head dress "Kafyia" with some members of the Likud calling Rabin the hero of 48, and 56 a Nazi The Likud incitement against Labor and especially Rabin reminds us of what is going on the Republican Party and US presidential election.

While the Republican Party and John McCain may be not be a Likud or a Benjamin Netanyahu, however many of the Republican Party faithful and core supporters and ideologue are in fact Likud with disdain for the Democratic Party and its candidate Barack Obama not much different from the way the Likud was inciting anger, fear even hate against the Labor candidate Rabin culminating in the cold blooded murder of Yitzhak Rabin dashing any chance for peace in the Middle East.

The last few weeks have seen the ugly face of the Netanyahu Factor in American politics with both Sarah Palin and John McCain creating the "conditions" for the anger and hate speech we hear and we see prevalent in all of the McCain-Palin elections rallies. The Likud and Zionist supporters of McCain and Palin have been leading the "hateful" charge against Barack Obama, distributing some 40 millions DVD "Obsession" linking Obama with "Radical Islam" and even giving the impression that Obama is a "closet" Muslim, with some even going further claiming he is an "Arab". To McCain and Palin and their supporters and the Jewish Likud and Evangelical Zionists there is nothing wrong with being an Arab or a Muslim, just like there is nothing wrong with being Christian or Jewish or Black or White or Hispanic. We should do our best to make sure that America does not become an Israel. Certainly there is nothing wrong with a Black and Christian Obama.

Like the Likud Party of Israel the Republican Party is desperate to win the election and will not put an end to the "hate" speech often heard at McCain-Palin election rallies. John McCain is borrowing so much from Benjamin Netanyahu election campaign against Yitzhak Rabin with so much hateful incitement, if not encouraging hateful and the spreading of rumors and lies, John McCain is failing to distance himself and his election campaign from hate organization such as those that sponsored and distributed 40 million DVD's full of hate and venom against Obama, Muslims and Arabs. "Obsession" is a Netanyahu Factor that can God/Allah forbid leads to the Israelization of US elections. John McCain and Sarah Palin should be careful and must and should take immediate steps to put an end to the Netanyahu Factor in America's Presidential Elections.

We hope that the Likudist's and the Evangelical Zionists within the Republican Party, the US and within the McCain-Palin campaign will put an end to their venom and hateful incident against Barack Obama, Arabs and Muslims in the US and injections of race, faith into the presidential election and undermining the American political process that survived and made American a leader in the world. It is enough they have undermined America's political, military and economic leadership in the world. John McCain and Sarah Palin should learn the lesson from the Netanyahu Factor and concentrate in the remaining days on the issues important to the American public. The economy, social justice and America's leadership in the world are of great importance to the American public and must be the only issues in the this very, perhaps most critical election in US history where the American voters will decide whether we will have another 8 years of George Bush disastrous leadership and Zionist Likud policies both domestic and international or we take America forward toward 21st Century different from the one envisioned by Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Elliot Abrams, Alan Greenspan who brought us nothing but a total disaster at home and abroad.

How would you have completed the phrase?

• YouTube - All I Got's Gone

Ernest Stoneman's recording "All I Got's Gone" (1928). Film footage from 1937 film: Telephone Operator. Music and video are in the public domain.

• Israel and Complete 911 Timeline

1987: Hamas Forms with the Support of Israeli Intelligence. Sheikh Ahmed Yassin forms Hamas as the military arm of his Islamic Association, which had been licensed by Israel ten years earlier (see 1973-1978). According to Charles Freeman, a former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia, "Israel started Hamas. It was a project of Shin Bet, which had a feeling that they could use it to hem in the PLO." [CounterPunch, 1/18/2003; Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 191, 208]

• Obsessionwithhate.com - The Real Story behind the Obsession Hate DVD

Obsessionwithhate.com The Real Story Behind the Obsession Hate DVD Project and the Radical Right's War Against Islam

• Talk to Hamas - Haaretz

In the winter of 1991, Saddam Hussein bombed Tel Aviv. For a month and a half, long-range missiles landed on the city. People panicked and many fled to Jerusalem, while the leaders issued pompous statements about the terrible blow the Iraqi dictator was about to receive.

But nothing happened. We did nothing.

• McCain Leads Obama in Palestinian Territories: Angus Reid Global Monitor

One-in-three residents of the West Bank and Gaza Strip would like Republican John McCain to win the 2008 United States presidential election, according to a poll by the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion. 33.5 per cent of respondents favour McCain, while 27.7 per cent support Democratic nominee Barack Obama.

• US 'War on Terror' Has Not Weakened al Qaeda, Says Global Poll - World Public Opinion

The US's 'war on terror' has failed to weaken its prime target al Qaeda, according to people in 22 out of 23 countries surveyed in a new poll for the BBC World Service. On average only 22 per cent believe that al Qaeda has been weakened, while three in five believe that it has either had no effect (29%) or made al Qaeda stronger (30%).

And while negative views of al Qaeda are most common in nearly all of the countries surveyed, this is not the case in Egypt and Pakistan - both pivotal nations in the conflict with al Qaeda.

Two videos you haven't seen on FOX News or the MSM.
THE QUESTION IS WHY?!

1. Video tapes/clips of McCain - Demanding Immediate and Unconditional Withdrawal of American Troops from Somalia!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8TFKXHiefs

2. Video tapes/clips of McCain - Demanding Immediate and Unconditional Withdrawal of American Troops from Haiti!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=palbo-ilalU

What a hypocrite!

By Timothy Gatto

The last few weeks have been enlightening, although utterly depressing. If this sounds like a contradiction, all anyone must do to understand what I'm talking about, is to listen to the podcasts from my radio show (http://blogtalkradio.com/headingleft/liberalpro) from the last two weeks. My guests have been some of the most enlightened liberal minds in America, and their message has been that this empire's days are drawing to a close, along with what is left of our civil liberties and our economic system. Our way of life, our lifestyle itself, is unsustainable in this age of dwindling resources and constant war.

If circumstances were not so dire, the reaction of politicians from the two major parties and the pundits from the mainstream media, along with those from the so-called "progressive blogosphere" on recent world events and the U.S. Presidential race would actually be quite amusing. The mainstream media's reaction to events is totally predictable, the views of writers from the left, less so. Some are right on the money, others, sadly, have been sucked into this political non-drama between the Republicans and Democrats as if it all actually meant something, as if anything the principle players say or do will change anything at all. The truth about the elections is that the Democrats have again set themselves up to fail, but not without first giving Americans the illusion that they have a choice between opposing ideologies, instead of the truth, which is that there is really no difference between the Democrats and Republicans.

I see a growing number of Americans realizing that they actually have no choice at all. I listen to the fear mongers from both political parties screaming that a vote for a third party candidate will insure the victory of McCain or Obama, as if it really mattered between them whether it is McCain or Obama that sets up shop in the Oval Office. There are some that have been playing party politics for so long that they have failed to notice this. While the political operatives spin their stances on the economy, foreign policy, abortion and God, the people that see the big picture, the ones who see reality, watch the danse macabre in the background, ushering in global collapse and unending war.

The statements made by Condoleezza Rice and George W. Bush about the recent hostilities between Georgia and Russia did not raise an eyebrow from Obama or McCain, nor did they raise questions from those that comment on all things political. The recent chiding given to Russia by Bush and Rice that this is the 21st Century and that sovereign nations do not invade other sovereign nations, was hysterically amusing, if the deaths of more than a million Iraqi's and thousands of dead Americans weren't involved, this would be a great plot for a big screen comedy hit.

The reality that we face in the beginning of this 21st Century is that nothing, from military action to economic sanctions to covert "regime change" operations, is "off the table" if it will make a profit for the corporations that control America. The fact that this nation is the largest debtor nation on Earth, with a national debt of 9.5 Trillion dollars (and rising fast), has little or no effect on the future policies of these deaf and dumb corporate politicians. This country could have paid for its energy needs for the next decade with what we have spent to steal them. The gigantic two hundred year party that America has been throwing is rapidly coming to an end. I would like to be able to say that it is the American people that are bringing about the end of the American Empire, but it's not the people that are turning out the lights, the fact is that this nation is swiftly going belly-up.

The truth, as I see it, is that the last thing the Democrats want right now is to win this election. A victory for Obama in November will insure that it will be the Democrats that end up paying the bill for the excesses of the Bush regime. The American people will also expect the Democrats to bring about these changes they have been calling for. This is something that just won't happen. The corporate- military-industrial-complex will not allow it to happen. The truth is that it would be better for the Democrats not to have to deal with an angry American populace, or if they respect the people's wishes, angry corporatists that will pull the plug on their funding and so many political careers.

The people that are running this country have no plan for the future. They have no answers, nor are they looking for any. The climate in the country is that the problems we have are so overwhelming, that they just aren't being addressed. The people are so involved in just trying to survive from day to day that any type of populist movement for change seems unlikely. Our rights have been stripped away from us and more of them are being abrogated with each passing day. The enemy in this government's "Global War on Terror", if you look at the laws passed against them, has been the American people themselves. The American government can spy on us, torture us, deny us representation by legal consul, take our property and kidnap us, just by suspecting that we are terrorist sympathizers. This is dictatorship by innuendo.

While our government goes off the deep end with their wars for corporate profit and for other nation's natural resources, Americans are coming to the conclusion that it is time that we started fending for ourselves. Some companies, like Donald Rumsfeld's Searle, manufactures products like Aspartame that many researchers' claim has ceased an 800% increase in brain tumors since it was released for human consumption in 1984. Many other companies release PCB's, dioxins and other carcinogens into the soil, water and air. Research on technologies that would reduce our dependence on fossil fuels is not only being deprived of government funding, but they are also being hidden and subverted so that the multi-national oil corporations can continue to make unheard of profits. Companies like Monsanto designed genetically engineered seed that will not produce next year's crop because the seed is sterile, making farmer's line up for new seed at whatever the market will bear.

The disparity between the haves and have-not's in this nation grows each year; the top 1% of the richest families holds 38% of the nation's wealth. Senator's bring home a median income of 1.2 million dollars and Congressmen 675,000 dollars and then they don't require the wealthy Americans that make over $250,000 a year to pay their fair share. I wonder why? Not only that, I see them fill their father's Senate and Congressional seats as if Congress was based on The House of Lords, but I don't see them filling the treasury's coffers. The people following the campaigns of these corporate candidates and report on their religious views, their choice of fast foods and report on things that have no bearing on how they could perform the task they are trying to get elected for ask no difficult questions such as why hasn't there ever been a criminal investigation into the events that happened on 9/11? No questions as to why we support a regime in Israel that keeps building settlements on the West Bank and keeps Gaza in a state of siege while they bulldoze homes and bomb civilians?

Meanwhile the Attorney General wants to give the FBI more power to spy on American citizens. The articles of impeachment proposed by Rep. Kucinich stay locked away in some desk drawer. No questions as to why we gave Georgia over three billion dollars of military aid and put over 2,000 U.S. military advisers there along with over 1,000 Israeli advisers, decisions that prompted them to foolishly attack South Ossetia. There is no real debate over the positioning of nuclear missiles in Poland that would give us first strike nuclear capability and leave Russia defenseless against any aggression we may initiate. Although this situation could lead to a nuclear confrontation that could conceivably destroy not only both Russia and the U.S., but all human life on Earth! It doesn't seem to be an area of contention between Obama and McCain, even though the United States is wrong in doing this. Russia has declared Poland a target for a nuclear attack, all over a position taken by the U.S. that is indefensible!

The world at large is facing food and water shortages. The United Nations becomes more ineffective at combating war and famine with each passing day. The United States is virtually bankrupt, our infrastructure is disintegrating and our industry is being sold off overseas. The corporations that run this country don't care, they can just move to another nation. The American people will be left here, holding the bag, so to speak. The very worst thing about empires is that eventually they fall. This empire will be replaced, maybe not right away, but eventually another nation will create an empire to replace us.

I'll be glad to see this empire go. Once it's gone, if we are still left alive, we could concentrate on the things that are actually important, things like restoring our rights and living in dignity. Things like reversing the disparity between rich and poor so that we all share our nation's wealth more equitably. Things like fixing our infrastructure, access to heath care for all, an educational system that teaches critical thinking and problem solving instead of how to take tests, and things like creating a sustainable level of agriculture and sustainable energy that reduces our reliance on fossil fuels for energy.

Meanwhile, for now, we will hear about increasing our military and where our next barrel of oil will come from. We will hear about threat levels and terrorists. We will argue about where our military should build more bases and what nations we should arm. We will watch as our unions take over the health programs of large corporations and agree to pay cuts for their workers so that their executives can continue to pay themselves hundreds of millions each year while the company uses red ink on their balance sheets. We will see more "free trade" agreements so as to outsource our industry better. We will see the re-created fourth fleet grow in size to counter a "dangerous" Latin America that is becoming increasingly socialist (even though their being a military threat is almost inconceivable). We will continue to pay a private concern to print our money at interest so that we will be forever beholden to the international banking cartel.

I'd like to see McCain or Obama respond to this article. They won't, simply because they can't. We will hear all sorts of inane statements and proposals that will be used as diversions to insure that we won't focus on the real issues. Meanwhile, I'll try not to laugh at these political analysts that don't have a clue about the way they are being used by McCain and Obama who I'm sure are laughing at them in private together.

timgatto@hotmail.com

http://liberalpro.blogspot.com

Syrian cartoonist Ali Farzat

Written by George Bisharat

A new buzzword is arising from the network of Israeli think tanks and security-oriented academic departments bent on instigating a U.S. attack on Iran: "national suicide." The term describes a supposed Arab Muslim tradition of politically motivated suicide at the national, not just individual, level. Arab Muslim regimes have purportedly launched ruinous wars they could not have reasonably hoped to win, condemning their nations to destruction.

The notion of an "irrational" and thus untrustworthy Iranian regime has already been widely discussed in the U.S. It is regularly invoked by Sen. John McCain on the stump. The term "national suicide" advances the notion and gives it a patina of academic respectability.

Israeli jurist and former Knesset member Amnon Rubinstein recently editorialized on "national suicide" in the Jerusalem Post. Citing Israeli army Lt. Col. Ari Bar Yossef, Rubinstein offered Saddam Hussein, Yasser Arafat and the Taliban in Afghanistan as exemplars of this new construct. Hussein could have avoided overthrow by giving U.N. arms inspectors free rein to search his country. Arafat, after the failure of the Camp David peace talks, could have continued negotiating but resorted to violence. Finally, the Taliban could have given up Osama bin Laden to the U.S. but instead invited self-destruction. All this because, per Rubinstein, these leaders prefer dying to "negotiating with infidels."

"National suicide" will soon be an incantation by neoconservative and other pro-Israeli pundits and politicians on the "bomb Iran" bandwagon. Its strategic implications are clear: We can't trust irrational regimes because they are not deterred by threat of annihilation. Therefore, extraordinary actions -- such as preemptive attack -- may be not only justified but necessary. It further shifts moral responsibility to the victim. In the "national suicide" formulation, it is the martyr that chooses death, while the actual killers are merely the instrument by which the suicide -- or, as the case may be, the destruction of a country -- is carried out.

Yet the idea of an Arab Muslim tendency toward self-destruction is wrongheaded and dangerous.

"National suicide" is easier to believe in if you're willing to lump all Arabs and all Muslims into a single mind-set. For example, the Palestinian national movement under Arafat was staunchly secular; members of the non-Arab Taliban are Islamist extremists. The concept elides the enormous diversity within the Arab and Muslim worlds and ignores the local particularities of their multifarious -- and sometimes ideologically opposed -- political movements. A hint of these intra-regional tensions was displayed in Bin Laden's recent audiotape denouncing Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah.

What of the supposed examples of "national suicide"? In fact, Hussein allowed U.N. inspectors relatively unfettered access to his country -- belatedly, to be sure, and under pressure from the international community. But by then the neoconservative push for war had already reached inevitability -- the facts be damned.

Arafat, for his part, continued negotiating after Camp David in Taba and never chose to ignite the second intifada. The uprising was sparked by Ariel Sharon's provocative visit to the Al Aqsa mosque and was fueled by Palestinians' sense of betrayal over a peace process that brought no peace but doubled the number of Israeli settlers on their land. The "Arafat chose violence" canard was rejected by the Mitchell report. Ami Ayalon, former head of Israel's Shin Bet security service, concluded: "Yasser Arafat neither prepared nor triggered the intifada."

Finally, if members of the Taliban committed suicide, they are an uncommonly vigorous corpse. They are still hanging tough and continue to resist the U.S. on the battlefield.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a convenient whipping boy. He has frequently predicted Israel's eventual demise, and yet -- accurately translated -- he has not threatened it with offensive attack. Nor does he command the country's armed forces.

Israel, with an estimated 100 to 200 nuclear warheads, should fear no existential threat from Iran. But Iran is a source of inspiration and material support to Hezbollah and Hamas, two forces that harass Israel and impede its regional hegemony. Israel's local challenges are insufficient to justify a U.S. strike on Iran -- thus the need to gin up "national suicide" and the specter of nuclear Armageddon.

Iran is a nation of 70 million people, many of them discontented with their government's performance. Nothing would unite and rally them around the current regime better than a foreign attack.

We dearly need sobriety and responsible conduct in our relations with Iran and the broader Middle East. We do not need another reckless venture impelled by fanciful terms and politically motivated spin.

George Bisharat is a professor at Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco and writes frequently on law and politics in the Middle East.

Who won? Watch and find out!

As an Arab, an uprooted Palestinian, the AIPAC annual conference is interesting for me to follow, not because I expect anything good from it, but because this is the annual event in which U.S. leaders show their real mettle. Unfortunately, it was always disappointing for me and others in the Middle East, but we understand the real reason which most Americans are not aware of (by design), despite that the truth behind AIPAC was revealed over and over again, but little (if any) was done to counter the impact and control of AIPAC on U.S. foreign policy (if not U.S. national policy as well).

It is not a secret and for those who don't know what American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) stands for, their slogan displayed prominently on their website's frontpage is "America's Pro-Israel Lobby". So we are not reinventing the wheel when we reaffirm that AIPAC, from their own words:

"As America's leading pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC works with both Democratic and Republican political leaders to enact public policy that strengthens the vital U.S.-Israel relationship. With the support of its members nationwide, AIPAC has worked with Congress and the Executive Branch on numerous critical initiatives -- from securing vital foreign aid for Israel to stopping Iran's illicit nuclear program."

This year's conference started today and will continue until 4^th June in Washington, D.C. AIPAC is expecting 7000+ participants to attend the annual policy conference. The importance of this year's conference is due to the fact that among the speakers are the most important U.S. policy makers at present. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Bush, Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Harry Reid (Majority Leader), Mitch McConnell (Republican Leader), Nancy Pelosi (Speaker of the House), and the list goes on.

Actually, while I was writing the names, I was asking myself: "Is there any event in the U.S.A. that brings together this spectrum of U.S. policy makers under one roof?" Maybe! In fact I hope something or someone else other than this Zionist policy shapers, makers and drivers, can or does.

Before I forget, Olmert is also delivering a speech there... and because all of the names I mentioned above (and more) are the guests, the 7000+ AIPAC participants received in advance a "warning letter" - if I may call it that - ahead of the conference, telling them to be polite and act as they are expected and paid to be, hypocrites.

Here is the letter:

"Dear Policy Conference Participant,

This year's AIPAC Policy Conference is shaping up to be one of the most exciting yet, and we're grateful that you will be part of it.

We have a record number of delegates participating and an incredible array of speakers and honored guests.
Included among those addressing us will be:
· All four leaders of the House and Senate;
· The three Presidential candidates;
· And Israel's Prime Minister.... to name just a few.

Every single one of them is a strong friend of AIPAC and a dedicated proponent of the special relationship between the United States and Israel.

As a delegate to this year's conference, we think that you should understand exactly why we have invited America's leaders to join us. AIPAC, America's pro-Israel Lobby, has the unique role of building friendships with everyone who is involved in affecting and strengthening the U.S.-Israel relationship. We fully embrace the bipartisan spirit that has formed the basis of that relationship for 60 years.

The goal of the conference, as always, is to have every speaker, honored guest, Member of Congress, Senator, and administration official who joins us feel that we have done everything we can to extend our hand in friendship. They must walk away from the conference knowing that we look forward to working together, with them, to make America and Israel stronger. Each speech and appearance at the conference is an important opportunity for us to accomplish that critical goal.

We have always had the perspective that these speakers and guests have been invited into our home and we will treat them with the warmth, deference, respect, and appreciation that anyone would be accorded as such.
Therefore, how we conduct ourselves during the conference, individually and collectively, is a matter of great importance. Because we know that you - Democrats, Republicans, and Independents -- come to this conference with one overriding concern - a stronger U.S. -Israel alliance - we ask that you act and react to every speech, address, and briefing, that will be offered as part of the conference program in only the most positive manner.

Thank you in advance for your positive participation in this year's historic gathering. We look forward to seeing you in Washington and appreciate your support in making this year's Policy Conference a successful and enjoyable experience for everyone who attends."

Self explanatory I guess. Of course criticism for Obama already started, as American Jews were made to believe (and advertise it as a fact) that Obama is Pro-Palestinian!!! Where? When? Zionists only know.

Obama is scheduled to give his speech on 4^th June and there are rumours that ex-Presiedent Jimmy Carter has written Obama's AIPAC speech. If this is true, it explains why American Jews have already judged Obama is 'no good' for U.S. Presidency. Now, being optimistic, and assuming that rumour is true, the question is: "Does Obama have the courage to deliver the speech as is?" I can only wish that this is true and only then I will believe in Obama's "Hope" and "Change".

It's only a dream, so let's wait and see.

Speaking of "Change," at the 2008 Hay Festival in Hay, Wales, Carter gave this speech as reported in the Guardian article titled "Carter: 10 minutes to change the world":

"When I'm the president of the United States," he intoned, the voice still strong, "My country will never again torture a prisoner. When I'm the president of the United States, we will never again attack another country unless our security is directly threatened. When I'm the president of the United States, human rights will be the foundation of our foreign policy." He went on in that vein, with ringing declarations on global warming, a promise to honour international agreements and to bring "security and peace to Israel and all its neighbours and treat them all on an equal basis." The audience thundered its applause, signalling that this was the American speech they yearned to hear. Carter insisted that a new president would not need a hundred days to change America's image in the world, just the "ten minutes" required to say those words.

For a "Change", we have a "Hope" that one day, U.S. and the world will have a person with the above description. Can it be Obama? I doubt. Although Obama claims:

"I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more than any other candidate in this race to take on lobbyists - and won. They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president."

But, does this apply on AIPAC? Now that would be "change we can believe in". If he does, then only I can congratulate the U.S. for their "Freedom" and will support their "Hope".

Dropping Bush, Cheney and Rice's expected speeches as we know their mettle and understand their need to secure their future salaries, and dropping the non presidential candidate speakers, what we are left with? Clinton and McCain! Honestly speaking, I don't see a difference between the two. Both are agents of the same policy maker lobby, AIPAC.

Putting aside Clinton's history and due to lack of expectations from her towards just peace and fair resolution to the Palestinian catastrophe, I'm left with the McCain, who delivered one of his worst speeches today at AIPAC as scheduled. The least that can be said about it that it was disgusting. The man doesn't even recognize the catastrophe of Palestinians or their rights as human beings.

Following are excerpts from his speech followed by my comments:

"...In all of this, we will not only be defending our own safety and welfare, but also the democratic aspirations of the Iranian people. They are a great and civilized people, with little sympathy for the terrorists their leaders finance, and no wish to threaten other nations with nuclear weapons. Iran's rulers would be very different if the people themselves had a choice in the matter, and American policy should always reflect their hopes for a freer and more just society. The same holds true for the Palestinian people, most of whom ask only for a better life in a less violent world.

They are badly served by the terrorist-led group in charge of Gaza. This is a group that still refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist, refuses to denounce violence, and refuses to acknowledge prior peace commitments. They deliberately target Israeli civilians, in an attempt to terrorize the Jewish population. They spread violence and hatred, and with every new bombing they set back the cause of their own people.

During my last visit to Israel in March, I saw for myself the work of Hamas in the town of Sderot, just across the border from Gaza. I saw the houses that have been hit by Hamas rockets. In the face of injuries, death, and destruction thousands of Israelis have fled the town. Many others have stayed, to carry on as best they can. I visited the home of a man named Pinhas Amar, who lives with his disabled wife, Aliza, and their children. One day, last year, the sirens sounded again to alert the town to incoming rocket fire. The rest of the family found cover. Aliza, on the other side of the house, was knocked out of her wheelchair and struck by shrapnel.

This occurred on December 13. And from that day until the day of my visit just some three months later, more than a thousand rockets had struck Sderot. Today, siren warnings are commonplace, the elementary schools are surrounded by concrete shelters and children walking the streets in costume for Purim celebrations did so in fear. No nation in the world would allow its population to be attacked so incessantly, to be killed and intimidated so mercilessly, without responding. And the nation of Israel is no exception.

Prime Minister Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas are engaged in talks that all of us hope will yield progress toward peace. Yet while we encourage this process, we must also ensure that Israel's people can live in safety until there is a Palestinian leadership willing and able to deliver peace. A peace process that places faith in terrorists can never end in peace. And we do no favors to the Palestinian people by conferring approval upon the terrorist syndicate that has seized power in Gaza.

...

And we have an additional task. In the summer of 2006, Hamas and Hezbollah kidnapped three young Israelis - Gilad Shalit, Eldad Regev, and Ehud Goldwasser - and have held them ever since. I met with the families of two of these men in December 2006, and heard firsthand about their ordeal. I committed then to bring attention to their situation, to insist that the Geneva Conventions are observed, and to call for the swift release of these men. These men are being unlawfully held, and they must be set free and returned home to Israel."

Full speech can be found here!

Now Mr. McCain... Staring from bottom upwards. Isn't it surprising that you only know and address in your "Historical" speech, three Israeli Prisoners of War (POW) and completely ignore almost 12,000 Palestinian POW:

"There are more than 11.870 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons, 117 of them are mothers. Some give birth while chained, and their children are forced to live in the cells where they do not live their childhood or play or go out.
I don't have to tell you about lack of healthy conditions, or medical negligence. Some prisoners are denied warm clothes sent to them by their families. They are held in 30 different prisons, and detention centers. 1189 prisoners are schools, collage, and universities students of both genders, 330 of the detained are children. Not only the students were detained, but their teachers too, there are 107 Palestinian teachers in Israeli prisons. 1150 Palestinian prisoners suffer acute illnesses."

What a shame! Is this the man you are voting for America to bring Justice and Peace and protect America from it's enemies?

Moving to the resistance "pipes he calls rockets" from Gaza, Mr. McCain... Do you know how many Pinhas Amar, Aliza and their children the Palestinian side has? Of course you don't know because you didn't have the courage to cross the borders from Sderot to Gaza. For those who want to know (obviously not Mr. McCain), only 4 Israeli civilians have been killed by Palestinians this year (two by pipe rockets and two by snipers, all from Gaza). In the same period, 333 people in Gaza have been killed by the Israeli Terrorist Forces, including 127 adult civilians and 56 children. In fact, more Gazan children were killed in the first four months of this year than in the whole of last year. This a fact that Mr. McCain ignores, if we assume that he knows at all.

On the other hand, Mr. McCain claims that because of Hamas, Palestinian have to suffer ignoring the fact that his belief in Israel's assumptions that - the Gaza siege would force Hamas to stop launching the pipes, and that the Gazan people would rise up and overthrow Hamas - have proved to be false. Hamas is now stronger than ever. And why? Because the "powerful Palestinian leader" that Mr. McCain and Zionist always claimed is missing is already there (they claimed before)... President Abbas! But you know what? Palestinian feel that they have been completely abandoned by the Palestinian Authority. Abbas, remains caught up in pointless talks with the hopeless Olmert. Watch the news Mr. McCain, Maybe then you can learn something about history and occupation of Palestine. Avoid CNN and Fox please!

Mr. McCain, it is a shame on America to vote for a person like you, who cannot differentiate between resistance and terrorists, between aggressor and victim, between terrorist-war criminals and democratic Israel! But what do you know? We never expect anything less or more from people like you.

End of story.

Couple of days ago we showed you what Obama and Clinton stand for.

Today, it's McCain's turn: