The Israeli Lobby

[PopeTom]

A conversation (http://addambombb.livejournal.com/108565.html?thread=582933#t582933) I've had with someone recently touched upon Loose Change and current US activities in the Middle East. I attempted to point people to various pages that discount Loose Change as a legitimate source for information concerning the events of 9/11 but during the conversation it was also brought up:

(Also worth considering is the Zionist element in the federal gov't - both the powerful Israeli lobby (the tail wags the dog, as it were) and the bountiful supply of apocalyptic-minded Christian fundamentalists - and their mutual interest in the security of (Greater) Israel.. They and the transnationals share some notable interests, by golly!)


After a bit he spouted off this:

As for defending my statement that the sun rises every day there's a Zionist lobby, follow the money. Official US aid to Israel crept up toward $5 billion a year around 1992. The Cold War is in a cold grave, but Israel still gets $3 billion a year on the books (and who knows what else behind the scenes). That works out to $500 per capita. US citizens are giving every Israeli citizen - whether Jew or gentile, adult or child, worker or parasite - $500 every year on paper. Israel has carte blanche on the money it receives, making it unique. Why dat? Quite simply, it must be an effective Israeli lobby!


and he sent me to this (http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011/$File/rwp_06_011_walt.pdf) .pdf. which it seems he's quoted from.

Now one thing from checking The Greenbook (http://qesdb.cdie.org/gbk/index.html) the figure of Israel receiving 1/5th of the US foreign aid budget (as the .pdf states) hasn't been true since 1996. Plus it looks like an average of 11-12% has been sent to Israel over the last decade.

Is anyone familiar, positive or negative, with this so called Israel Lobby?
The .pdf I linked to says itself:


We use “the Lobby" as a convenient short-hand term for the loose coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to shape U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction. Our use of this term is not meant to suggest that "the Lobby" is a unified movement with a central leadership, or that individuals within it do not disagree on certain issues


If it is not a unified movement to sway US policy towards Israel then is it misleading to refer to it as a lobby at all?

Mostly I am posting this query here because, as a general rule, the JREF Forum seems to be a good source of information on both sides of an issue.
So thanks to all respondents in advance.

-PopeTom

[andyandy]

wiki's
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Israel_Lobby_and_U.S._Foreign_Policy

has a pretty good over-view of "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" by John Mearsheimer....

Mearsheimer and Walt argue that "No lobby has managed to divert U.S. foreign policy as far from what the American national interest would otherwise suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that U.S. and Israeli interests are essentially identical".[1] They also claim that AIPAC jeopardizes the United States' national security[4] They accuse the Lobby of "controlling debate" and they decry the "campaign to eliminate criticism of Israel from college campuses"

there's plenty of criticism....but i think this sums it up quite well....

Noam Chomsky, professor of linguistics at MIT, asserts that he did not find the thesis of the paper very convincing. He said that Stephen Zunes has rightly pointed out that "there are far more powerful interests that have a stake in what happens in the Persian Gulf region than does AIPAC [or the Lobby generally], such as the oil companies, the arms industry and other special interests whose lobbying influence and campaign contributions far surpass that of the much-vaunted Zionist lobby and its allied donors to congressional races."

i'd tend to agree - this idea of a Jewish conspiracy - that a group of shadowy "shylocks" are secretly controlling global policies sounds depressingly familiar.....The Protocols of the Elders of Zion anyone? :(

[zenith-nadir]

Jews control the white house....Israel recieves too much foreign aid...

The next step in that evolution is "there were no jews in the World Trade Center on 9-11"...."the Mossad planned 9-11"..."the US invaded Iraq for Israel"...

source (http://www.appma.org/press_releasedetail.asp?id=84)

In 2006, Americans’ spending on pets is projected to be higher than ever:

* $15.2 billion for food
* $9.3 billion for supplies and over-the-counter medications
* $9.4 billion for veterinarian care
* $1.8 billion for live animal purchases
* $2.7 billion for other services

...but god forbid America sends 4 billion to Israel...those dirty jews! ;)

[webfusion]

...but god forbid America sends 4 billion to Israel.

The USA doesn't 'send' that much to Israel.

The State of Israel obtains aid through various financial support mechanisms; including loan guarantees, military equipment subsidies and buyback deals, and technological-partnership assistance (THEL defense systems, GREEN PINE array radar, and other cooperative efforts), and also a great deal of money is not a 'gift' outright, but is in the form of loans.
There are also substantial private donations (JNF, HADASSAH, etc.)

Israel is one of the few countries that actually pays back the money which America has lent to it. Most other loans around the world are 'written off' (such as the countless billions to Egypt). Also, private and institutional investors who hold Israel Bonds can sit quietly and be very confident of the stable value of these bonds.

Zenith-Nadir has presented much of the relevant information about US aid to Israel in past threads, in great detail, with links to many sources. It is obvious that he is extremely frustrated by the OP, which almost looks like trolling...

That being said --- I'll give PopeTom the benefit of the doubt and ask:
What exactly are you attempting to accomplish?

Do you notice any negative impact on your way of life in America, arising from US support for Israel?

[Hutch]

Well, we do send about $2.2 Billion in Foriegn Military Financing (FMF) to Israel (FY 07 request per State Department info on the web is $2.34B) and FMF is a "grant", not a loan. This is approximaltely 47% of the total planned FMF budget for FY07.

As for other funding, I will defer to webfusion.

[Furious]

[QUOTE=webfusion;1678663 It is obvious that he is extremely frustrated by the OP, which almost looks like trolling...

That being said --- I'll give PopeTom the benefit of the doubt and ask:
What exactly are you attempting to accomplish?

Do you notice any negative impact on your way of life in America, arising from US support for Israel?[/QUOTE]


If you followed the link to his conversation, PopeTom basically suspects someone of conspiracy woo-ism, and upon not getting evidence of a Zionist lobby, posted here in the hopes of getting more information after finding only a few factbooks on the subject.

I think your implication of trolling is misguided, PopeTom looks to be more uninformed skeptic on this topic rather than digging for dirt on Israel. Calm down. :)

[webfusion]

Well, we do send about $2.2 Billion in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) to Israel .. as a "grant", not a loan. This is approximaltely 47% of the total planned FMF budget for FY07.

Mitchell Bard's article on JewishVirtualLibrary covers a lot of ground.
For anyone seeking details of US Aid To Israel, this is a good place to start.

Roughly 26 percent of what Israel receives in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) can be used inside Israel for various military upgrades (on purchases from Israeli companies such as ELBIT and IAI). The remaining 74 percent of FMF is spent in the United States to generate profits and jobs. More than 1,000 companies in 47 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have signed contracts worth billions of dollars through this program.

Israeli defense industries are on the cutting edge of the future, and if you were to ban ALL pro-Israel political influences from the halls of Congress, I am pretty sure that the Pentagon itself would take care to assure a continued funding level to Israel, for practical business and security reasons.

As for the other aid, I say that Americans should be proud of their monetary support to a nation that does not fritter it away. Israel has utilized the contributions in so many positive and useful ways, and the value far exceeds the actual dollar amounts.

Beyond that, Israel and USAID cooperate to distribute vast funding to the Palestinians, helping them achieve a better life, too.
http://www.usaid.gov/wbg/
Since 1993, Palestinians have received more than $1.7 billion in U.S. economic assistance via USAID projects.

[webfusion]

Furious -- yes, a re-reading of his OP supports your contention that he's looking for information, and not trying to cast aspersions.

I didn't get that from the outset, and thank you for making your post, it was helpful. I do apologize to PopeTom, and hope he rejoins the discussion.

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
BTW, I would like to know what his avatar of the crossed scimitars and the Apple-K refers to? (addambombb forum)

[PopeTom]

Yes, basically what Furious said.

Part of the LJ conversation involved the person I had quoted talking about the "Zionist element in the federal gov't".

Maybe it's a bit of an over reaction but damn near every time I see some one use the word "Zionist" I think "conspiracy nut". Am I wrong in the term "Zionist" always being linked to Israel and the Jewish people (regardless of country of origin) as being from the conspiracy mongers?

As for my avatar, It's a Discordian Pirate flag. :)

-PopeTom

[Chaos]

It seems to me "Zionist" is used by conspiracy theorists much like "CIA" - a buzzword, to be used as a placeholder when they have no idea whom in particular they want to blame in their conspiracy theory.

[webfusion]

The term 'zionist' is often an easy and comfortable substitute for 'jews' ---
thereby providing a reasonable "out" for people who can claim that they aren't referring to all jews but rather only to the 'illegal occupiers & usurpers' in Palestine (and by extension, their supporters overseas).

I personally consider the term "Zionist" to be a positive and constructive reference. The entire Zionist enterprise has been a valuable and productive effort, for the past 120 years. No other movement on this planet can point to the types of social, economic and political advances which characterize Zionism.

Yeah, the Arabs got their underpants in a twist, but for unfounded reasons.
One of the most telling instances of Arab-Zionist good intents can be found in the Faisal - Frankfurter letter of March 3, 1919:
"We Arabs...look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist Movement"

[Cleon]

The term 'zionist' is often an easy and comfortable substitute for 'jews' ---
thereby providing a reasonable "out" for people who can claim that they aren't referring to all jews but rather only to the 'illegal occupiers & usurpers' in Palestine (and by extension, their supporters overseas).

And often the claim that "zionist" is a substitute for "jews" makes a nice out for people who'd rather make claims of anti-semitism when the Country That May Not Be Criticized is questioned.

[webfusion]

Israel is criticized, and fairly so, for lots of things. The true situation is such that many people question and disagree with various actions (or inactions) of the Israelis.

However, Cleon, you have created a strawman with your "Country That May Not Be Criticized" ----

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/722007.html
Article published in the Israeli press by Meron Benvenisti.
Critical of Israel.
Published and open for discussion.

[webfusion]

The US State Department just created a new post for an envoy for monitoring and combating anti-Semitism. Gregg Rickman was appointed to the position.

Are specific acts defined as anti-Semitic, or anti-Zionist? Rickman knows that distinguishing between the two, if at all possible, is one of the most complicated problems he will have to face. Where does the line fall between hatred of Jews and political opposition to, or even hatred of, Israel? Rickman knows that in Israeli eyes, the difference is minimal. Everyone is particularly sensitive when they are the ones being criticized, Rickman said, adding that some people consider anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism to be the same thing. He will need to come up with criteria to determine what is permissible and what is forbidden, what is anti-Semitic and what is just political when it comes to Israel.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/722031.html
Shmuel Rosner, reporting from Washington DC

Mr Rickman, BTW, comes into the job after heading the small (but "increasingly influential" -- sic) Republican Jewish Coalition lobby.

[Cleon]

"What is permissible and what is forbidden?"

Wow.

[webfusion]

He was referring to his own job description, and how he sees it developing under the State Department's watchful eye.
As the article clearly indicates, at State Dep't, the creation of this position was not supported by the people who he'll have to be dealing with now. So, the sentence you quoted means that Mr Rickman will have to evaluate what kinds of Anti-Semitism are blatant (permissible to go after and publicize as part of his mandate), and what kinds are more along the lines of political "anti-Zionist, Anti-Israel" criticism which would not warrant his involvement (forbidden to pursue and combat).

You think that his background makes him a good or bad candidate for this job, Cleon?

[shemp]

This thread title is misleading. I came here thinking there would be discussion of Israeli hotel design.

[PopeTom]

This thread title is misleading. I came here thinking there would be discussion of Israeli hotel design.

If it was about hotel design I would have posted in the History, Literature, and the Arts forum. That seems more appropriate.

:P

-PopeTom

[Mycroft]

And often the claim that "zionist" is a substitute for "jews" makes a nice out for people who'd rather make claims of anti-semitism when the Country That May Not Be Criticized is questioned.

Anti-Zionism is much more than merely criticizing Israel.

Zionism is the movement that led to the creation of Israel, so anti-Zionism would be supporting a movement to undo that creation. That goes far beyond mere criticism.

[Skeptic]

The reason we think "zionist" is often a replacement for "jew" is not because some people criticize zionism, but because they criticize it in exactly the same way jews were criticized by antisemites.

There's a difference between criticizing israel, or zionism, as such, and repeating the same old antisemitic canards with "zionist" instead of "jew".

Let's examine what we heard in this forum alone about the "zionists". inter alia, these include:

1). They have no right to live in "occupied Palestine" because they are foreigners; (alternatively, that it is OK if they live there as long as they agree to be at the mercy of the Arabs who are the real owners of the land);
2). It is an intolerable insult, clearly inviting (and justifying) violence, for "zionists" to move into one's neighborhood;
3). They control the media through undue influence;
4). They control the US government through undue influence;
5). American zionists have a dual loyalty and are thus not to be trusted;
6). zionists are primitive religious fanatics;
7). zionists should go back where they came from (Europe especially);
8). zionists are responsible for the war in Iraq;

...and so on.

Now, these sort of criticism aren't really factual criticism; they are simply a new dress for the old accusations about jews--foreigners, not to be trusted, primitive religious fanatics, secretly controlling the media/government, the secret causers of wars, should go back to where they came from, etc., etc. (Of course, when my grandfather emigrated to Palestine in the 1930s, that had something to do with the Germans telling him to go where he came from, that is, Palestine...)

It is not the criticism of "zionists" which is the problem as such, it is the kind of criticism which is the problem. For some strange reason I am paranoid enough to believe that if someone uses the same criticism against "zionists" that were used against the jews for thousands of years, that is merely antisemitism in a flimsy disguise.

[a_unique_person]

You have no issue at all taking others who are fanatics to task. That is, not all Jews are fanatics, but those who have been causing the trouble are the fanatics. Similar problem with Islam. However, in your case, you feel all Islam is to blame for the fanatics.

[webfusion]

Is the President of Iran a "fanatic"?

[a_unique_person]

He seems to have that wild eyed look to me. His election was pretty well a forgone conclusion when all the reasonable opposition was prevented from standing from election, IIRC.

[Mycroft]

6). zionists are primitive religious fanatics;

Or alternatively, the Zionist is the Godless athiest Jew who has turned his back on his own religion in order to pursue his ambitions. It depends on the audience, of course.

[Mycroft]

You have no issue at all taking others who are fanatics to task. That is, not all Jews are fanatics, but those who have been causing the trouble are the fanatics. Similar problem with Islam. However, in your case, you feel all Islam is to blame for the fanatics.

Are you claiming a Zionist is a fanatic Jew?

[UserGoogol]

The reason we think "zionist" is often a replacement for "jew" is not because some people criticize zionism, but because they criticize it in exactly the same way jews were criticized by antisemites.

Hitler also was a vegetarian. The criticism used against Jews were pretty generic claims. "They're trying to take over the world," "they've snuck into positions of power," "they can't be trusted" are claims which can be laid against any movement which is percieved as having disproportionate power.

Israel was established in one of the most geopolitically messy areas on Earth. Because it was a Western-style nation in an area which was not-so-Western, the United States quite sensibly allied with it in various conflicts. Ignoring that Israel is a Jewish nation, the messy circumstances of Israel's existance forces it to be brought into the spotline of global affairs.

As a result, even if Israel had been founded by gentiles, people would be saying many of the anti-semetic-sounding slurs which are laid against it. But of course, because Israel was not founded by gentiles, some of the anti-semetic-sounding slurs are laid against it because the speakers are anti-semites. So things can get mixed up.

It's a messy thing when a group which has long been suspected to have devious powers over world politics begins to gain actual (but modest) powers over world politics, especially when they are put into a situation which exxagerates every bit of power which they do have.

[Rob Lister]

Hitler also was a vegetarian. The criticism used against Jews were pretty generic claims. "They're trying to take over the world," "they've snuck into positions of power," "they can't be trusted" are claims which can be laid against any movement which is percieved as having disproportionate power.

Israel was established in one of the most geopolitically messy areas on Earth. Because it was a Western-style nation in an area which was not-so-Western, the United States quite sensibly allied with it in various conflicts. Ignoring that Israel is a Jewish nation, the messy circumstances of Israel's existance forces it to be brought into the spotline of global affairs.

As a result, even if Israel had been founded by gentiles, people would be saying many of the anti-semetic-sounding slurs which are laid against it. But of course, because Israel was not founded by gentiles, some of the anti-semetic-sounding slurs are laid against it because the speakers are anti-semites. So things can get mixed up.

It's a messy thing when a group which has long been suspected to have devious powers over world politics begins to gain actual (but modest) powers over world politics, especially when they are put into a situation which exxagerates every bit of power which they do have.

Well said.

[epepke]

Hitler also was a vegetarian.

Not true. He liked roast quail. He didn't eat much meat, though.

He was a tee-totaller, on the other hand.

Israel was established in one of the most geopolitically messy areas on Earth. Because it was a Western-style nation in an area which was not-so-Western, the United States quite sensibly allied with it in various conflicts.

Not exactly true. The first allies of Israel were France and the Soviet Union. Britain teamed up with them on the Suez Canal grab. The US didn't like that much and risked a confrontation with the Soviet Union to stop it. The US also had an arms embargo against Israel that lasted about 14 years. I personally remember the first AWACS planes sold to Israel after the ban was lifted; it was a minor scandal, since the US had been in a condition of enmity toward Israel for so long.

The US didn't become friendly toward Israel until 1967 and not a solid ally until 1973.

As a result, even if Israel had been founded by gentiles, people would be saying many of the anti-semetic-sounding slurs which are laid against it. But of course, because Israel was not founded by gentiles, some of the anti-semetic-sounding slurs are laid against it because the speakers are anti-semites. So things can get mixed up.

Could be.

It's a messy thing when a group which has long been suspected to have devious powers over world politics begins to gain actual (but modest) powers over world politics, especially when they are put into a situation which exxagerates every bit of power which they do have.

It still impresses me that a people that make up about 3% of the US population, about 85% of the Israeli population, and practically nothing anywhere else can run the damn planet. They must have really large penises.

[webfusion]

by epepke:I personally remember the first AWACS planes sold to Israel after the ban was lifted; it was a minor scandal, since the US had been in a condition of enmity toward Israel for so long.

Ah yes, those old Hawkeye E2-C propeller planes.
http://air.xuexue.net/others/eng/e2.htm

Anyway, you bring up an interesting connection to the OP ---- take a look at the major scandal that involved the sale of Airborne Warning and Control Systems to Saudi Arabia (1981) (http://www.house.gov/hasc/openingstatementsandpressreleases/107thcongress/02-05-23murphy.html), a decision that Israel opposed and the Israeli Lobby in the USA vigorously tried to stop ---- and yet failed to prevent.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/bg153.cfm

Israel also tried to sell their own homegrown-AWACS (Phalcon) to China and the Israeli Lobby failed to overcome the objections of the US administration, and the sale was halted (apparently under considerable pressure from the Taiwan Lobby)
http://www.taiwandc.org/twcom/91-no5.htm

Yes, this entire subject of AWACS does have a lot to do with the OP --- http://www.worldpress.org/2301.cfm and by reading the various articles written at the time (and also in 2001, when India wanted the Phalcon itself (http://www.tribuneindia.com/2001/20011225/world.htm#1)) we can see various commentaries that have a direct bearing on the level of influence that pro-Israel groups wield in the halls of Congress and the White House.

[zenith-nadir]

But of course, because Israel was not founded by gentiles, some of the anti-semetic-sounding slurs are laid against it because the speakers are anti-semites. So things can get mixed up.


2003-10-21 10:51 (http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-10/21/content_274012.htm)

Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said in an interview published on Tuesday that widespread criticism of a recent remark he made about Jews showed "arrogant" Jews controlled the world.


05:55 28/05/2006 (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/720308.html)

"If the holocaust did happen, Israel should be in Europe and not in Palestine," Ahmadinejad told Germany's Der Spiegel news magazine.

08:36, February 09, 2006 (http://english.people.com.cn/200602/09/eng20060209_241156.html)

"Hamas will not recognize Israel and we will not give legitimacy to occupation," Khaled Mashaal, Hamas' political leader who was currently at a visit to Egypt, told a press conference. Mashaal said Hamas would not give up violence as it was entitled to resist what it regarded as occupation of the Palestinian land by Israel.


It's all the jews fault.....jews control the world....Israel should be in Europe, the holocaust never really happened....repeat 1,000,000 times, then blame the jews for something else... ;)

[a_unique_person]

Mahatir Mohammed is gone, and the Malaysians were, on the whole, glad to see him go. (IMHO). He was seen as a dinsoaur from the old days, who would hate, torture, imprison and cripple his own deputy as much as any Jew.

[zenith-nadir]

Mahatir Mohammed is gone, and the Malaysians were, on the whole, glad to see him go. (IMHO). He was seen as a dinsoaur from the old days, who would hate, torture, imprison and cripple his own deputy as much as any Jew.The point is not that Mahathir Mohamad is no longer in office but that there is a disporportionate amount of attention paid to the woo woo theories such as "jews control the world/congress/American foreign policy/media". These memes/ideas/theories/opinions/beliefs can be documented coming from heads of state right down to folks on a message board - who, it seems, PopeTom encountered.

It makes me wonder why people spend so much time villifying jews and/or Israel - see: aid to Israel - when there are so many other real and actual threats to ones' way of life. I mean really when was the last time sending 4 billion to Israel "threatened" anyones' way of life?

To me it's the old shell game... keep the old myths alive by repeating the woo woo "jews control the world/congress/American foreign policy/media" crap while keeping peoples' focus off the real threats - islamic fundamentalism, terrorism, theocracies, torcher, dictatorships, lack of human rights/womens rights, militancy, illiteracy, povery, racism...

The sick and scarey part is folks in power such as Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniya repeat these woo woo conspiracy theories without a shred of shame, they actually believe what they say.

[PopeTom]

So I composed a reply (http://addambombb.livejournal.com/108565.html?thread=596501#t596501) which I will paste below. If you want to follow any of the links go to the LJ post linked previous :)


Once one has a place to start on this topic there is a whole lot to read through.

First off from the Mearsheimer-Walt paper:
"We use "the Lobby" as a convenient short-hand term for the loose coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to shape U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction. Our use of this term is not meant to suggest that "the Lobby" is a unified movement with a central leadership, or that individuals within it do not disagree on certain issues"


Personally I think referring to it as a lobby when they quite clearly state that is not a unified movement is misleading. Also it seems to allow them to include or exclude as they see fit.

From here:
"Besides cherry-picking data, Mearsheimer and Walt define, rather expansively, the Israel lobby as a "loose coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer US foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction." So an evangelical preacher is a lobbyist; a Jewish academic is a lobbyist; a neoconservative columnist is a lobbyist, and of course, a registered lobbyist is a lobbyist."

From Jewish Virtual Library article you link to above. The last part of that article, titled Measuring Influence seems telling.

"Lobby success also varied depending on the policy at issue. The lobby was very successful in overcoming presidential opposition on economic issues, but rarely able to defeat the president on security and political issues."

So out of the 27% the lobby was able to overcome presidential opposition it seems it was mostly on economic issues, not security or political ones. This would suggest that if the executive branch had not already had it's heart set on a war with Iraq then the lobby would have been unlikely to sway it otherwise.

There are also parts of the report that are just wrong. One I was able to confirm myself, and you can check my work if you like The Greenbook supplied the data. 1996 was the last time that Israel received anything close to 1/5th of all US foreign aid for the year, the average for the last decade is between 11 and 12 percent of over all foreign aid.

I also think that comparing straight out foreign aid for Israel and other democratic/industrialized nations can be misleading since the US, through treaties, does supply a lot of defensive support to countries that does not fall under the heading of foreign aid, but does cost the US quite a lot on an annual basis. One example that I saw bantered about was South Korea not having as much of a defense burden since the US takes up most of that through having a military presence there.

I'd recommend reading the references used in the Wikipedia criticism section. I personally didn't read much into articles (found through Wikipedia or other sources) that basically said the original paper was wrong because it's authors are Anti-Semitic. So if you wanted to discuss any of those you will have to direct me to which ones.

Though I do agree with what seemed to be a general consciences among the criticisms that the paper is really just a rehashing of old ideas. Almost a retelling of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

I think I'll stop here since I may be wandering a bit, if there are specfic issues you'd like to focus on let me know.

At least Addam will have something to read once he's out of the hospital. :)

-PT


-PopeTom

[David Swidler]

It still impresses me that a people that make up about 3% of the US population, about 85% of the Israeli population, and practically nothing anywhere else can run the damn planet. They must have really large penises.

...and that's after the circumcision.

Thanks, I'm here all week. Try the filet mignon; it's excellent.

[Skeptic]

...and that's after the circumcision.

Thanks, I'm here all week. Try the filet mignon; it's excellent.

With your title ("carrot Mohel"), I suppose that's an expert opinion?

[David Swidler]

We card-carrying members (hah!) of the International Jewish Zionist ConspriacyTM always strive to be a cut above the rest.

[UserGoogol]

It's all the jews fault.....jews control the world....Israel should be in Europe, the holocaust never really happened....repeat 1,000,000 times, then blame the jews for something else... ;)

Yeah, those are the anti-semitic speakers I was talking about.

[Dr Adequate]

In 2006, Americans’ spending on pets is projected to be higher than ever:

* $15.2 billion for food
* $9.3 billion for supplies and over-the-counter medications
* $9.4 billion for veterinarian care
* $1.8 billion for live animal purchases
* $2.7 billion for other services This is because the world is actually run for the benefit of cats.

We're just helpless pawns in their little game.