Influence? You bet! So does GB, SA, and several others, but those, for some reason, don't matter. I disagree with your assessment about too much influence, but you, unlike so many at least say "foreign policy!" It has become now that Israel controls all our policies and it is absurd.

that demands a constant defensive posture. Israel does and so any actions they take can easily be miscued.

Having said that, over the years, I believe some people in the far right in both Israel and the US over conflate situations in order to drag the US and Israeli populations into a more offensive posture.

recorded history.

My statement is simply a matter of how the situation stands right now.

Open the link provided, it will have what Bill said in a gray box, and it isn't "Israel controls the US."

there is no ellipsis, there is a comma!

You did not write down what he said and I showed it by taking it directly from the article, which anyone who clicks on the reticle will see no ellipsis and, instead, a comma.

The comma, as opposed to an ellipsis, means he is saying the prior subject, Republicans, are the ones saying it.

I didn't "fly off the handle" but I did use capitalization and other indicators to make words more prominent. Since you have corrected the mistake (and I didn't see the note), do you now agree Maher did NOT say "Israel controls the US government?" Because you have yet to correct that assertion, as far as I can tell.

ETA: You made the change to the post after my comment, then another comment from you. I had no reason to return to the original comment and see you made the changes. I am not alerted if a previous comment I have addressed has been changed after the fact.

Peace.

can't even be discerned. You probably have to hear the conversation preceding it.

He COULD be saying that Republicans have been saying for 2 years that Israel controls our govt. Or he COULD be saying that he, Maher, thinks Israel controls our government because the Republicans have been sounding like the Israeli govt for 2 years. Or he COULD be saying something else.

You just can't tell from the poorly worded sentence. Sounds like an off the cuff remark. Have to hear the preceding conversation.

But what I wonder most is, what does it matter what Maher said? He says a lot of stuff...some good, some bad, some sharp and witty and clever, a little crap. He's a political satirist.

What Bill Maher meant by that poorly worded statement is that "the Israeli government is controlling the Republicans, or at least has been for the last couple of years...at least that's the way the Republicans have been behaving."

So....what's wrong with that statement? I don't get it.

He's not saying that the Israeli government is, in fact, controlling our entire govt. You could even read into it that he's saying the Republicans are ACTING as if they're puppets, regardless of whether they are or not. Sarcasm.

Typical Maher. He says it like he sees it. Others may disagree with his statement. But I don't see it as a big deal. Unless, of course, the Israeli government IS controlling things...and the acknowledgement of it is most unwelcome.

I'm not saying I think that at all. But all these things are true, and are much too analytical about a statement by a political satirist.

Bill Maher: ‘The Israelis Are Controlling Our Government’ (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022384925)

Bill Maher tonight (Friday) took on the GOP opposition to Chuck Hagel becoming the next defense secretary with the particular sticking point that he has made some controversial remarks about Israeli influence on the U.S. government. Maher argued the fact that this is causing such outrage only proves that the Israeli government does have undue influence on the United States.

in my post. That the only reason people would get so upset over Maher's statement is if, in fact, the Israeli govt were controlling our govt. Otherwise, it's just yet another wisecrack by Maher, and he's made a lot.

Much ado about nothing, IMO.

BTW, I'm a supporter of Israel, as the number of people ignoring me after a few posts in the Israel/Palestine group proves. But there's no denying that Israel has a lot of influence here, just like the NRA does, and some other groups.

for example, someone could take issue with your saying Israel has "undue influence" and point to that same google search. You could come back and say, "I didn't say Israel controls the U.S. government, i said it has undue influence", but that seems weak in the face of an accusation of anti-semitism.

...I would agree with you that Israel has undue influence over US foreign policy, and that the reasons for this are many and nuanced. The lazy way to say that is to state that Israel "controls our government", even if one doesn't mean that in a full soup-to-nuts way. To me, the operative point is that we take actions on the world stage we shouldn't be taking, and we do so on the behalf of and sometimes at the behest of Israel.

Always vetoing stuff at the U.N. in their favor, and I bet if Israel was attacked, we (the United States) would ride to their rescue, even if it meant World War 3. That is mind blowing to me, that we would risk a nuclear war in defense of a tiny far away foreign country.

I love that type of BS propaganda. Always? Really?

"I bet if Israel was attacked, we (the United States) would ride to their rescue,"

You mean the US would actually defend an ally? How dastardly!

Risking nuclear annihilation, which potentially could mean the end of civilization, seems to me to be a hell of a big commitment over one small foreign country.

Cold War ended 22 years ago, my friend. Now, I do think there is legitimate cause for concern over the aftermath of a nuclear Israeli-Iranian conflict, or even, god forbid, nuclear terrorism, but any chance for WWIII in the traditional sense was pretty much nipped in the bud when the U.S.S.R. gave up the ghost in 1991.

Whether you agree with the them, the fact that they exist would negate your claim that this is BS propaganda. As for defending our ally, I think if Iran attacked Israel, we would definitely help them. However, as with all our allies, we should not allow ourselves to be drawn into any war that we think is unjustified.

Even your qualifer of "often" is not even correct. One simply needs to look at the number of UNSC resolutions passed against Israel, compared to the 34 (?) vetoes the US has used in regards to Israel.

rather than deal with the facts. The fact is the US was the only member of the security counsel to veto a condemnation of Israel's continued expansion in Palestinian territory. This is just one of the many (I think 34 can qualify as many) times the US has protected Israel in the UN.

Yes, I know facts fly in the face of the typical anti-Israel propaganda. Of course someone like you would think 34 is "many" despite over 200 resolutions being passed against Israel, but most would not see it as "many", that's your quibble, for obvious reasons.

Is it not true that the US has blocked many condemnations Israel in the UN. I know it is easier to throw smoke screens up against any facts you find inconvenient but it does not make them go away.

the US DOES NOT ALWAYS veto anti-Israel resolutions.

Now, was that clear enough for you?!

Talk about smokescreens...

and you probably will still not be able to answer a yes/no question. If you had to get into issues instead of spouting taking points you would not be wasting so much of my time. Now, I have a life to live so goodbye.

ask your question. Let's see if it is a real one or a locial fallacy (Have you stopped beating your wife? or Why do hate the color blue?).

On Edit: I did answer your question, you just didn't like or understand the answer, which is not my concern.

Security Council:

175 Total Resolutions
74 Neutral
4 Against the perceived interests of an Arab state or body
97 Against Israel
General Assembly:

Cumulative Number of Votes cast with/for Israel: 7,938.
Cumulative Number of Votes cast against Israel: 55,642.

Link

To even mildly criticize or point out reality is, can, and will be taken by some to be the same as a preaching hate against a people based on religion.

The fact that you point out the obvious is lost on those people.

You're right btw

criticizing France, Great Britain, Australia, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Germany for their internal disputes, is about equal to those criticizing Israel...NOT.

Whom do you think you're kidding?

I didn't think so.

The occupation of Palestine is hardly an internal Israeli matter, no matter what Zionists think.

Remember the 'Coalition of the Willing'? Britain - or rather the Blair government as most Brits were against it- collaborated very strongly with the Iraq war. Bush might not have been able to go as far with it as he did without Blair's assistance. Australia and Spain also collaborated, though their influence may not have been as strong.

That's the relevant point. It's always the relevant point.

but that no one wants to address the facts in my op, is just sad.

Wouldn't we do the same for, say, South Korea?

Why should the United States protect all these countries, do we really want to be an empire? Maybe it is time to stop controlling the world, and focus on our own country. We got plenty of troubles to work on methinks.

to defend Israel. Yes, we are obligated. Because before, during, and especially after WW2 we did not let the displaced Jews come to the US. Neither did our allies in the war. We decided in favor of forming Israel, even though it meant taking land from an already existing country. We had our part in creating the problem in the middle east; therefore, we must protect what we created. The people we promised to protect. There. I said it. It was born out of antisemitism in part, in part out of the desire of some people to fulfill prophecy: Jewish, Christian, perhaps Muslim and definitely LDS.

No one will ever be able to prove how much of it was antisemitism; however, one only has to remember that Jewish refugees were turned away in the early years of the war, at a time when we already knew they were being treated horribly. That continued until the government could no longer deny knowing, until it was public knowledge - not about the horrors of the camps per se, but about the ghettos at least. But by that point few could escape, either. Very convenient for our immigration policy, don't you think?

I certainly do not agree with Netanyahu. But we made our bed decades ago at the expense of 2 peoples whose descendants deserve much better. I wish we could give them better. Both of them. Maybe wave a magic wand or something. That's what it'll take.

..there was no existing country, only a protectorate of the United Kingdom. The other factor is the oncoming "cold war", though it wasn't called that at this point in history. The "commies were coming" and they (the US, Europe, and a few other allies) needed a foot in the door in Middle East, as many of the former satellite countries were now becoming independent and running right into the arms of the Soviet Union. The hopes were Israel, Jordan, and Lebanon would ally with us giving us a major foothold in the region; it didn't play out quite like that.

That's another thing. People have no clue how huge a role the UK played in the development of the Cold War. In fact, way, way before that of the fear of communism. I could go on and on about that. People ignored the threat of Hitler because they were so damned afraid of communism.

ETA: I should say we were hand in glove with the UK on that. We agreed wholeheartedly on the threat of communism, to the point that we didn't even intervene with fascism when we should have to help the UK out in WW2. Not soon enough.

of Israeli occupation of the Palestinian people and West Bank holy land.

According to history, my friend.

Stay with the program (ie thread). The US does NOT ALWAYS veto anti-Israel resolutions.

Which isn't even remotely accurate and even you would have to admit that, despite the desire to want it to be true.

Perhaps you were thinking of the sub thread with quinnox. The one that I was not in.

Then what was the point of your comments about the vetos in context of this subthread?!


ETA: I was having a similar conversation above and thought it was the same one. My apologies. Goes to show it is important to remember what part of thread you are in when having multiple posts.

The continued seizure of Palestinian land in the West Bank is not only wrong, morally, it cannot end well for either side.

Eventually the Israeli settlements will squeeze the Palestinians into smaller and less desirable communities. The situation will further deteriorate as the Palestinians begin to resist. What now has the makings of an invisible apartheid system will soon become a lot more evident.

We now justify our support of Israel because it is the only democracy in the region, supposedly. As the expansion continues and the rights of the Palestinians are suppressed, we will eventually have to come to terms with the fact that our money is not buying democracy and hopefully we will do what we should have done years ago. Turn of the money tap until BOTH sides come to an equitable way to live together.

Both via within the Jewish population, i.e. Ethopian Jews, (When they are not trying to use forced birth control on them) and other "less favored" ethnic Jewish groups etc.

Then outside Israel you have the general Arab population which outstrips the Israeli population growth too.

Give it a couple of decades. It's all about the math.

throughout history. Jews are certainly no more or no less discriminated by immigration laws today. i don't see how immigration policy today obligates us to give Isreal more support than say mexico.

And calling anyone who points the obvious state of affairs out "an anti-semite" is bullshit.

BTW I am not stating one way or the other if Israel is playing puppeter, or the man behind the curtain of the American Govt. I just dont like inaccuracies.

Its the cash flows that got me interested and several incorrect statements. if you look you start to see some amazing patterns develop.

I am working on my CPA and Forensics accounting and Fraud Masters.

First AIPAC has no major groundswell of American contributors.

[link:http://www.irmep.org/990/2009_AIPAC_Sched_B.pdf|
THEY ONLY HAD TWO CONTRIBUTORS:
(2009)
THE FIRST GAVE: 48,542,187
THE SECOND GAVE: 13,503,472
Total: 62,045,659 ]

Another thing
2011
81 members of congress went off on junkets to Israel, paid for by the American Israel Education Foundation, an AIPAC spinoff that has been funding such trips for years. During the August recess nearly a fifth of the U.S. Congress will visit a single country whose entire population is less than that of New York City.

Still looking finding some real interesting expenditures by AIPAC and its subsidiaries.

Third more patterns but, I got schoolwork,

Really all one needs to do is look at the Congress as targets of largess and you see lots of patterns develop. Don't look at just the Politicians, look at the families where they get jobs, who has interests in the companies that have those job openings, schools are the politicians kids suddenly receiving sholarships, etc.

Was looking at demographics, this summarization seems reasonable:

"Jewish‐Americans also differ on specific Israeli policies. Many of the key
organizations in the Lobby, like AIPAC and the Conference of Presidents of
Major Jewish Organizations (CPMJO), are run by hardliners who generally
supported the expansionist policies of Israel’s Likud Party, including its hostility
to the Oslo Peace Process. The bulk of U.S. Jewry, on the other hand, is more
favorably disposed to making concessions to the Palestinians, and a few
groups—such as Jewish Voice for Peace—strongly advocate such steps."

Ok, back to studying, I have a test Monday in Forensics accounting, bleh.

. . . the antisemitism card was played.

to me as race "card".

That you are either ignorant of history or don't give a shit, hardly makes it a "card".

You said that Israel had undue influence and then had to "balance" it by claiming antisemitism, as if Bill Maher was antisemitic. What nonsense.

You have two or three who agree with you, and many many who don't.

Having said that, Israeli supporters control over what can be said here on DU about Israel is alarming.

And Billy Graham is in the same boat as Maher, I do believe. Funny how the right wing fundies are all in favor of allowing Israel to do whatever the fuck it pleases to the Palestinians and other Arab neighbors, and don't the right wing fundies control the US government? Why, yes they do!

So there you have it. Israel does control the US government in more ways than actual citizens like us do.

It has undue influence or control on US ME policy. Frankly, it is a distinction without a difference.

For precisely this purpose, Israel has cultivated Fundie allies who in turn worship Israel to further the faux Christian, crony capitalist agenda.

It is very invigorated and well capitalized. It has its fingers in everybody's pie. It is insidious, pervasive and omnipotent.

In the beginning it was a good cause, but now is the work of evil. Strong words? Yes. "By their fruits yee shall know them."

Seriously, over the years on DU I have never had a problem criticizing Israel or Israeli actions.

And no shit, that Israel and virtually every other nation and interest with a powerful lobbying arm, has more influence over the U.S. Government than ordinary citizens..

I think I understand the dynamics of DU. And I don't really give a shit if DUers are trying to tell me that they believe that Israel controls the U.S. I stand by every word of my OP.

Read the posts.

And it's up to the CTers to prove that Israel controls the U.S. Furthermore, I'll start any thread I want. Don't like it? send an alert.

that Israel doesn't control ANY government except its own, and given its highly unfit-for-purpose electoral system, even that is doubtful!

America both influences, and is influenced by, Israel, as is the case with America and the UK. In both cases, the mutual influence is not always beneficial; but that isn't the same thing as saying that Israel - or the UK - controls America.