and worked on a kibbutz in Israel.

However, in all honesty, I am not sure why he did not go to AIPAC. On the one hand, he could want nothing to do with that meeting. On the other hand, he really cannot afford to take a break from campaigning.

AIPAC has yet to respond the The Intercept as to why Bernie was not afforded similar courtesy.

But here is the transcript of his comments…

https://berniesanders.com/sanders-outlines-middle-east-policy/

a snub.

I suspect it would have gone over like a lead balloon there, though.

Friendship requires telling friends difficult truths sometimes.

Of course it's nothing that some prominent and well-regarded Israelis haven't been saying for decades, too- that the Occupation was destined to eat away at the soul of Israel, unless addressed.

Unfortunately now untenable has gone on so long it's hard to imagine any other tenant at all.

I also saw parts of Bernie's speech in Washington (I think).
He was the only one to mention the rights and needs of the Palestinians.
All the rest spoke of them as an enemy.
He did himself a favor by not going. The pandering was nauseating.

Thanks for that review!

Today just really affected me for some reason. I think Im anti slaughter the Palestinians not anti Israel. I lived in Libya for years. We have our caucus on Saturday.

I have friends I respect who are Clinton supporters and who abhor war and are staunch environmentalists. I have a difficult time understanding how they support her given her hawkishness and support of certain disastrous environmental policy (fracking and keystone pipeline). When we discuss it they seem to do all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify or ignore these things about her.

They're not incompatible, don't let anyone tell you they are.

she turned her back on her party, her country and the poor Iraqi people when she, not only agree with Bush (the worst president in history), she stood before the Senate and repeated Bush's lies. She has blood on her hands and she has never shown any remorse for her decision. Many of her friends got richer from that decision.

At what point does logic come into some of the Sanders Camp rhetoric?

... progressive, important or if people have syndromes or some shit.

That would've a go in 2000 or 1984, but not now

Wall Street. She supports fracking for profits and job killing free trade agreements. They are not the same. She still shows no empathy for those living with chronic pain for which medical marijuana would alleviate. She is a conservative. She likes wars. She has the neocons endorsement. The defense budget will grow under her and the safety nets will shrink. But for some that's ok because she is tough and that's more important than empathy.

... any of his other votes that are well known that people get hides on for posting.

Sorry guys, he's not Obama... he's someone that's been in Washington 2194n2 years and has a track record.

Nothing can be posted that will change that

.. Sanders can throw no stones

And second of all, Clinton would have voted the same way. She never votes against those corporations that give her money. And again she lied to Congress about the need to invade Iraq. She mimicked the Republicon lies. And the results were horrendous. While her friends were making hundreds of billions our families were dying. The war and the resulting actions like the Patriot Act destroyed our freedoms and liberties to a point that I don't think we can ever recover. The trillions that the middle and working class had to pay hurt us badly while Clinton's friends raked in the wealth. Since the middle and working classes are the ones paying for our infrastructure and safety nets, they were dealt a death blow. But those that admire her because she amassed a sickening wealth from those that she has helped or can help seem to ignore those among us that are struggling.

Not to worry, the Clinton Aristocracy will let us eat cake.

Those facts might be tough to handle.

Fracking? She has always supported fracking even when we peons are in the street protesting the destruction of our water supplies. Oil company profits are more important, right? Tell me the facts.

How about "free" trade that kills our jobs but makes the corporations billions. I guess you think we are just collateral damage.

How about helping our college students get an education without becoming in dept to the corporations that support Clnton's campaign. She tells them to get a job. Pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

How about domestic spying? Let Big Brother spy on us because we will be safer? Did you ever read the Constitution?

Prisons For Profits. One of the most hideous positions that Clinton has taken. Here is what Black Lives Matters has to say:

That's a completely different question than how important the issues on which Sanders and Clinton disagree are relative to the issues on which they agree.

Actually one poll said I agreed 97 percent with Sanders. Hanging onto HRC but with a less tighter grip.

echoed by complicit, partisan establishment media.

First, It refers to the short time that Hillary and Sanders were in the Senate at the same time.

Second, OF COURSE, both of them voted with the Democratic Caucus most of the time.

Third, the Senate is a very conservative body and many of the votes are ceremonial.

Fourth, when Sanders voted differently from Hillary, it was on very important issues, like the Iraq War.

I often post before I read the whole thread.

than the years she spent as First Lady.

and she never will

I think it is a complex situation with no small amount of knee-jerking on all sides, and one real tragedy is that for whatever combination of reasons, any two state solution seems practically dead in the water.

position of The Family.

IMO, no one in power on the Palestine side or the Israeli side thought the two state solution would happen. However, the "peace" "process" made a lot of money for a lot of people.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Find a way for the world's plutocrats to make more money on actual peace (as opposed to a peace process) and we'll have world peace.

Until then, we'll see a lot of kabuki theater.

And carnage.

There was real optimism at the time, that a real workable and lasting deal was on the horizon.

Unfortunately it fell through around 2000, I have my opinions on who was to blame but if I wanted those debates I would hang out in I/P... As a practical matter, though, the Palestinians became discouraged and disillisioned and the Israeli public disengaged and turned inward.

I am too tired to look back at what I posted, but my recollection was that I posted the latter. If I messed up, let me correct it now. Those in real power on both sides.

My bad.

If you were Israel, a small country, becoming overcrowded, surrounded by Muslim nations, making new controversial settlements here and there, often attacked by people who blow themselves up, exactly how much land would give up for that ever-elusive "second" nation? If I were Israel, I'd give up zero. If I were a Palestinian leader, I'd know that, but I'd want 100% anyway--and, even if Israel gave up a percentage, who is going to persuade random terrorists to stop blowing themselves up for anything short of 100%?

that that didn't happen, iirc.

and if I wanted to have that debate I would do it in I/P.

Seriously?

Nothing else?

BTW, I agree with Bernie on this.

Op must be a republican

unholy alliance between the GOP and the rw religious fundamentalists.

Leaning Sanders now because of his stance on Israel and the Palestinians. I've long been fed up with our politicians pandering to AIPAC and our deference to Israel, even with a clear wingnut like Netanyahu in power.

I too agree with him on this issue. I hope you will let us know about your caucus experience after it's over.