Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less

[Roane]

I skimmed through the whole thread just now, from the point where you started on Chomsky, and I didn't find the people saying the quotes are fabricated. I did it quite fast, so maybe I missed it. What were you referring to?

It's distracted folk from Israel's atrocities, so job done.

 

[Idxomer]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Raoul]

Why is there such a weird obsession with AIPAC?

They're a loud, chatty lobby group who have very small, in the grand scheme of things, impact in the US political system.

Prior to post 2020 election, AIPAC themselves didn't even do any direct funding of candidates, and even the affiliated groups funding barely put them in the top 50% of PACs.

Now, they've formed a proper superpac and have never broke into the top 20 of contributers, spenders or influencial hitters.

JETO, on behalf of Japan, have 2x'd what AIPAC have spent, and nobody really knows or cares. Liberia are the most influential lobbying group in the USA, strangely enough.

Between Liberia's two main lobbying groups, they've spent 200 million USD lobbying in 2023.

I agree that there's a lot of pro Israeli influence in US congress and senate, but it's to do with the intrinsic backgrounds of many of the political class as opposed to some brash loudmouth mid-tier lobbying group.

I'd agree with this. The fundamental culture within the US political class and large swaths of American society identifies with and is connected, through religious ties or otherwise, with the existence of Israel. Groups like AIPAC have simply become the tip of the iceberg pantomime villains of the Israel-Palestine conflict, much as the likes of Soros have on the right.

 

[Idxomer]

I'd agree with this. The fundamental culture within the US political class and large swaths of American society is connected, through religious ties or otherwise, with the existence of Israel. Groups like AIPAC have become the pantomime villains of the Israel-Palestine conflict, much as the likes of Soros have on the right.

Your last bit is just silly, a mainstream news channel did a 6-minute segment on its increasing influence. There will always be a few who exaggerate their reach but ultimately their influence and meddling are real and impact American politics.

The main villains are of course the IOF/Israeli government and the US, people should never forget this.

 

[Idxomer]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Ekkie Thump]

I'd agree with this. The fundamental culture within the US political class and large swaths of American society identifies with and is connected, through religious ties or otherwise, with the existence of Israel. Groups like AIPAC have simply become the tip of the iceberg pantomime villains of the Israel-Palestine conflict, much as the likes of Soros have on the right.

I'd partially disagree with this. Obviously AIPAC has limited influence on the American zeitgeist but the fact that the fundamental culture within the US is largely supportive of Israel makes fringe cases easier to silence. Nipping in the bud is a wonderful strategy so a few million goes a lot further when you only need to shut up a few irritating Democratic Representatives rather than convince an entire nation.

AIPAC doesn't seek to change American opinion so much as help maintain it.

 

[AfonsoAlves]

I don't know if your claims are true. But I don't think they are. You say that Liberia is the most influencial with 200 million but AIPAC is not in top 20 spending close to 100 Million? And Japan spend 2x than AIPAC (therefore 200) and is not top contribuitor with liberia? some of the numbers doesn't add up. But of course correct me if I am wrong

Then, AIPAC had been the top contributor to several politicians in US. Among them Speaker Johnson that being the tp contributor during his campaign, they quadrupled the donation after the Gaza campaign. Of course Johnson had no problem on pass the Israel aid package

You las sentence " it's to do with the intrinsic backgrounds of many of the political class..." might be completely true, but donations reinforces and/or props up this intrinsic backgrounds and makes sure that the ones that they don't have the intrinsic backgrounds are the ones that wins.

No one is saying that Israel changes anti-zionist politician to a zionist politician but that donates the ones that favours them or the ones that are neutral and not give a damn, to give a damn for the money that are being given

Where are you getting your data from?

AIPAC have not spent close to 100 million on lobbying, not even close.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/am...pendcycle=2022&id=D000046963&topnumcycle=2024

AIPAC have spent 10.1 million in the 2024 cycle on lobbying + contributions.

Meanwhile:

https://www.opensecrets.org/fara?cycle=2023

AIPAC are putting out some absolute rookie numbers.

Where are you getting the claim that AIPAC spent close to 100 mill? Their entire revenue for 2023 was 88.1 million USD. They have 250 employees. Assuming the average salary for a DC lobbyist is 100k (presumably a lot higher), OPEX on salaries alone is 25 mill, I don't know how they can even conceivably come close to 100 mill without some very dodgy accounting malpractices and criminality.

 

[Raoul]

I'd partially disagree with this. Obviously AIPAC has limited influence on the American zeitgeist but the fact that the fundamental culture within the US is largely supportive of Israel makes fringe cases easier to silence. Nipping in the bud is a wonderful strategy so a few million goes a lot further when you only need to shut up a few irritating Democratic Representatives rather than convince an entire nation.

AIPAC doesn't seek to change American opinion so much as help maintain it.

I agree with this also. They are mainly an advocacy group that exist to maintain favorable US public perception of Israel.

 

[That_Bloke]

I'd partially disagree with this. Obviously AIPAC has limited influence on the American zeitgeist but the fact that the fundamental culture within the US is largely supportive of Israel makes fringe cases easier to silence. Nipping in the bud is a wonderful strategy so a few million goes a lot further when you only need to shut up a few irritating Democratic Representatives rather than convince an entire nation.

AIPAC doesn't seek to change American opinion so much as help maintain it.

Excellent take.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

I'd agree with this. The fundamental culture within the US political class and large swaths of American society identifies with and is connected, through religious ties or otherwise, with the existence of Israel. Groups like AIPAC have simply become the tip of the iceberg pantomime villains of the Israel-Palestine conflict, much as the likes of Soros have on the right.

Is there no feeling of “yes, I know we might have identified with them in some way but what they’re doing is horrific”?

and/or “why are we funding this when we have lots of worthy causes ‘at home’”?

Genuinely curious as to how the general US public feels about this

 

[Idxomer]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[maniak]

Genuinely curious as to how the general US public feels about this

The americans have been killing brown people for so long that most probably don't even see anything unusual about what israel is doing.

 

[Idxomer]

The americans have been killing brown people for so long that most probably don't even see anything unusual about what israel is doing.

Pro-Israeli groups have been panicking because Israel has never faced this kind of backlash inside the US before. It's also why their propaganda has become more deranged with time.

 

[VorZakone]

Where are you getting your data from?

AIPAC have not spent close to 100 million on lobbying, not even close.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/am...pendcycle=2022&id=D000046963&topnumcycle=2024

AIPAC have spent 10.1 million in the 2024 cycle on lobbying + contributions.

Meanwhile:

https://www.opensecrets.org/fara?cycle=2023

AIPAC are putting out some absolute rookie numbers.

Where are you getting the claim that AIPAC spent close to 100 mill? Their entire revenue for 2023 was 88.1 million USD. They have 250 employees. Assuming the average salary for a DC lobbyist is 100k (presumably a lot higher), OPEX on salaries alone is 25 mill, I don't know how they can even conceivably come close to 100 mill without some very dodgy accounting malpractices and criminality.

My guess is the 100m figure is a reference to this:

AIPAC is expected to spend $100 million across its political entities in 2024, taking aim at candidates they deem insufficiently supportive of Israel, according to three people with direct knowledge of the figure, who were granted anonymity to discuss private meetings.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/03/aipac-israel-spending-democratic-primaries-00144552

 

[Raoul]

Is there no feeling of “yes, I know we might have identified with them in some way but what they’re doing is horrific”?

and/or “why are we funding this when we have lots of worthy causes ‘at home’”?

Genuinely curious as to how the general US public feels about this

From my experience they don't view it through the lens of morals or ideals, but through the prism of religious and cultural familiarity - ie., Israel is needed to fulfill the end of times prophecy (all nonsense of course). Right of center evangelicals in particular, have deeply bought into this, which means the entire Republican party (ostensibly 50% of the American political duopoly) have as well, as have a lot of Democrats.

As we've seen throughout the rise of Trump - framing issues through the lens of culture often allows the public to buy into them, even when facts say otherwise.

 

[berbatrick]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[The Corinthian]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Giggsyking]

Why is there such a weird obsession with AIPAC?

They're a loud, chatty lobby group who have very small, in the grand scheme of things, impact in the US political system.

Prior to post 2020 election, AIPAC themselves didn't even do any direct funding of candidates, and even the affiliated groups funding barely put them in the top 50% of PACs.

Now, they've formed a proper superpac and have never broke into the top 20 of contributers, spenders or influencial hitters.

JETO, on behalf of Japan, have 2x'd what AIPAC have spent, and nobody really knows or cares. Liberia are the most influential lobbying group in the USA, strangely enough.

Between Liberia's two main lobbying groups, they've spent 200 million USD lobbying in 2023.

I agree that there's a lot of pro Israeli influence in US congress and senate, but it's to do with the intrinsic backgrounds of many of the political class as opposed to some brash loudmouth mid-tier lobbying group.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

AIPAC is the only PAC in top 20 who its interest is the relation of USA with a foreign government.

 

[4bars]

Where are you getting your data from?

AIPAC have not spent close to 100 million on lobbying, not even close.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/am...pendcycle=2022&id=D000046963&topnumcycle=2024

AIPAC have spent 10.1 million in the 2024 cycle on lobbying + contributions.

Meanwhile:

https://www.opensecrets.org/fara?cycle=2023

AIPAC are putting out some absolute rookie numbers.

Where are you getting the claim that AIPAC spent close to 100 mill? Their entire revenue for 2023 was 88.1 million USD. They have 250 employees. Assuming the average salary for a DC lobbyist is 100k (presumably a lot higher), OPEX on salaries alone is 25 mill, I don't know how they can even conceivably come close to 100 mill without some very dodgy accounting malpractices and criminality.

Thanks for the links and proving me wrong. Something was floating my head. 100 million is what they are planning to spend in contributions alone

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/03/aipac-israel-spending-democratic-primaries-00144552

In this article you can see that they already spend +40 millions this year.

You are right, not 100 millions yet.

In this article though, you can see that they even spend 4 millions in one sole candidate and also, as I mentioned, they were the top contributors to key politicians in US.

Israel doesn't dominate the world, but certainly, as other lobby groups, are influencing the US politics. This kind of foreign influence with so much ramifications as we can see in the Gazan genocide, would not be tolerated by China and Russia so openly cheered by AIPAC itself and would be called election inerference

 

[2cents]

Israel doesn't dominate the world, but certainly, as other lobby groups, are influencing the US politics. This kind of foreign influence with so much ramifications as we can see in the Gazan genocide, would not be tolerated by China and Russia so openly cheered by AIPAC itself and would be called election inerference

AIPAC is an American organization, not Israeli.

 

[2cents]

Where are you getting your data from?

AIPAC have not spent close to 100 million on lobbying, not even close.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/am...pendcycle=2022&id=D000046963&topnumcycle=2024

AIPAC have spent 10.1 million in the 2024 cycle on lobbying + contributions.

Meanwhile:

https://www.opensecrets.org/fara?cycle=2023

AIPAC are putting out some absolute rookie numbers.

Where are you getting the claim that AIPAC spent close to 100 mill? Their entire revenue for 2023 was 88.1 million USD. They have 250 employees. Assuming the average salary for a DC lobbyist is 100k (presumably a lot higher), OPEX on salaries alone is 25 mill, I don't know how they can even conceivably come close to 100 mill without some very dodgy accounting malpractices and criminality.

I think AIPAC raises a lot of funds beyond its own budget through private donations.

 

[4bars]

AIPAC is an American organization, not Israeli.

So if it would be American Russian Public Affairs Committee (ARPAC) and would lobby for russian influence and doubling down because of Ukraine war, and boast in tweeter that they are funding politicians, everything would be fine, right? and would not raise an eyebrow because would be an american organization and not "foreign"

 

[2cents]

So if it would be American Russian Public Affairs Committee (ARPAC) and would lobby for russian influence and doubling down because of Ukraine war, and boast in tweeter that they are funding politicians, everything would be fine, right? and would not raise an eyebrow because would be an american organization and not "foreign"

The entire lobbying system in America baffles me and I find it disturbing and corrupting at all levels. However within the parameters of that system there doesn’t seem to be anything to prevent a collection of concerned American citizens with pro-Russian sympathies from organizing and mobilizing exactly along the same lines that AIPAC has - except that such a collection of citizens likely doesn’t exist, and if they did they would still run up against the opposition of the Beltway think-tankers, who have historically perceived American and Russian interests to be diametrically opposed, and the wider historical antipathy of American society to Russia as a state and culture. These are not obstacles that exist in the case of pro-Israel activism, quite the opposite in fact.

Or to use another example - Trita Parsi, quoted above bemoaning AIPAC’s influence, is the founder of the National Iranian American Council, an organization deeply unpopular with anti-regime diaspora Iranians for its alleged ties to and lobbying on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It operates freely and legally within the same parameters as AIPAC, and, a few years of the Obama administration aside, has not and cannot come close to achieving the kind of success AIPAC can boast of (that I suspect Parsi is quite envious of), for reasons very similar to a hypothetical pro-Russian lobby.

 

[That_Bloke]

Trump would start war in the Middle East.

I don't know about that, but the American Muslims/Arabs taking the risk of having the orange madman in the White House, seem to forget that 10/7 and the ongoing genocide in Gaza are partly a result of his mandate.

People forget Trump's decision to move the US embassy to Jerusalem and the Abraham Accords lead by the repulsive, soulless ghoul named Kushner, isolated the Palestinians even more and were about to effectively officialize the death of a Palestinian State. Trump will be the undertaker of Ukraine and Palestine if he's re-elected.

Be careful of what you wish for.

 

[AfonsoAlves]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

AIPAC is the only PAC in top 20 who its interest is the relation of USA with a foreign government.

But it's not.

Refer to the link I sent of the values of the 2024 (so far) contributions, The top contributors are all lobbying groups representing a nation state. Liberia alone has throw in almost 200 million.

I think AIPAC raises a lot of funds beyond its own budget through private donations.

But as a registered PAC they have to be all documented. The budget solicitation system is just about the only transparent thing in the whole Lobbying revolving door that is DC.

Thanks for the links and proving me wrong. Something was floating my head. 100 million is what they are planning to spend in contributions alone

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/03/aipac-israel-spending-democratic-primaries-00144552

In this article you can see that they already spend +40 millions this year.

You are right, not 100 millions yet.

In this article though, you can see that they even spend 4 millions in one sole candidate and also, as I mentioned, they were the top contributors to key politicians in US.

Israel doesn't dominate the world, but certainly, as other lobby groups, are influencing the US politics. This kind of foreign influence with so much ramifications as we can see in the Gazan genocide, would not be tolerated by China and Russia so openly cheered by AIPAC itself and would be called election inerference

Can you highlight the parts which suggest 40+ millions? I think i'm missing something but I only did skimread, my apologies.

I'd also be interested in understanding politico's sourcing and why they are not listed on open secrets.

The latter I agree with, but unfortunately it's already happening. CCTV America, which is a Chinese Lobbying Group furthering the interests of the CCP has, alongside other CCP lobbying groups, spent almost 50 million USD in 2023 alone.

Since 2016, no lobbying interest group has spent more than China, with a total of almost 400 million spent.

If it were up to me, AIPAC shouldn't exist and neither should all the other lobbyists paying for the interests of foreign governments but alas here we are. My point is just that AIPAC are nothing special.

 

[Idxomer]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Idxomer]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[VorZakone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[4bars]

The entire lobbying system in America baffles me and I find it disturbing and corrupting at all levels. However within the parameters of that system there doesn’t seem to be anything to prevent a collection of concerned American citizens with pro-Russian sympathies from organizing and mobilizing exactly along the same lines that AIPAC has - except that such a collection of citizens likely doesn’t exist, and if they did they would still run up against the opposition of the Beltway think-tankers, who have historically perceived American and Russian interests to be diametrically opposed, and the wider historical antipathy of American society to Russia as a state and culture. These are not obstacles that exist in the case of pro-Israel activism, quite the opposite in fact.

Or to use another example - Trita Parsi, quoted above bemoaning AIPAC’s influence, is the founder of the National Iranian American Council, an organization deeply unpopular with anti-regime diaspora Iranians for its alleged ties to and lobbying on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It operates freely and legally within the same parameters as AIPAC, and, a few years of the Obama administration aside, has not and cannot come close to achieving the kind of success AIPAC can boast of (that I suspect Parsi is quite envious of), for reasons very similar to a hypothetical pro-Russian lobby.

I read several of your comments on the Israel lobbying and a comment that stand out for simplistic but completely true is that you said (paraphrasing) that you can't accuse Israel / jews to control american politics through AIPAC because they are just lobbying that any other group like for example irish. That is why I am very careful when I talk about the topic because you are 100%. And an example is the sentence of the quote you quoted me

...Israel doesn't dominate the world, but certainly, as other lobby groups, are influencing the US politics...

But as you are right, that they don't dominate specifically much more than another group, it is true that they are influencing and calling AIPAC being american, being that is absolutely true, we can be as facetious to deny that is a foreign influence. And as you point out to reinforce my point, any money that comes from lobbying on behalf of a third country will be publicized as good money and another kind of money coming from a third country will be not publicized or even hidden as dangerous to be a traitor to US

There is AIPAC - publicized
There is Russian money on the shadows - not publicized

AIPAC money is increasing exponentially due to Gaza genoicide - AIPAC keep publicizing
Russian money is probably increasing due to Ukraine's war - Not publicized

Russian money is of course assumptions but it is hardly deniable for anyone

As much as Israel is an ally and Russia an historical foe, I don't think a foreign power should shape US policies and see how the US is helping fighting an invader (Russia) and in the other side Is helping fighting the invaded (Palestine).

The morals of the citizens should shape this policies if they would be well informed and how they would rather prefer to spend their taxes. Or not expenditure at all or if it a justified caused

And definitely what you said, any PAC/superPAC being AIPAC or another it ends corrupting the politicians

 

[Tibs]

Is there a UK version of AIPAC?

 

[Kaos]

Is there a UK version of AIPAC?

There isn't really a equivalent in the sense of there being a central, uniform Lobbying PAC.

You've got organisations like the JLC who are more inclined towards forwarding interests of British Jews, which occasionally overlaps with issues surrounding Israel. And then you have parliamentary groups attached to both major parties (the conservative/labour friends of Israel) which a number of MPs are members of.

 

[4bars]

But it's not.

Refer to the link I sent of the values of the 2024 (so far) contributions, The top contributors are all lobbying groups representing a nation state. Liberia alone has throw in almost 200 million.



But as a registered PAC they have to be all documented. The budget solicitation system is just about the only transparent thing in the whole Lobbying revolving door that is DC.



Can you highlight the parts which suggest 40+ millions? I think i'm missing something but I only did skimread, my apologies.

I'd also be interested in understanding politico's sourcing and why they are not listed on open secrets.

The latter I agree with, but unfortunately it's already happening. CCTV America, which is a Chinese Lobbying Group furthering the interests of the CCP has, alongside other CCP lobbying groups, spent almost 50 million USD in 2023 alone.

Since 2016, no lobbying interest group has spent more than China, with a total of almost 400 million spent.

If it were up to me, AIPAC shouldn't exist and neither should all the other lobbyists paying for the interests of foreign governments but alas here we are. My point is just that AIPAC are nothing special.

...United Democracy Project closed out 2023 with nearly $41 million in the bank...

United Democracy Project is AIPCA's superPAC. And again, I misread it. they didn't spend 40 millions. is what they have to spend. Sorry for the confusion

 

[Roane]

Is there a UK version of AIPAC?

CST

 

[2cents]

Months ago there were reports Israel wanted different clans and families to administer Gaza, a tried-and-failed method from decades ago. In the past couple of weeks there have been all sorts of reports saying Israel wanted to provide weapons for clans within Gaza, with a claim of intention to facilitate aid deliveries [Reuters] [Mada Masr] [Israel Hayom].

Last week there were reports that Israel contacted a group of Gaza's powerful clans and families with this offer, which was reportedly rejected by all, as they refused to cooperate except through the involvement of security services in Gaza, in other words Hamas' civilian authorities & police [Al Jazeera Arabic] [Younis Tirawi Twitter].

Spoiler: Younis Tirawi Twitter post

• Head of the families in Gaza informed UN officials at today's meeting that they refused to cooperate except through the security services in Gaza.

• The families expressed their willingness to cooperate in bringing in and distributing aid, provided that they coordinate with the security services in Gaza.

• Head of the Israeli military coordination personally contacted the families, but his offer of cooperation was rejected.

• An expected meeting on Saturday between UNRWA officials and the police officials in Gaza to agree on the mechanism for the entry of aid.

More reporting on this now - https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-ea...nians-in-charge-of-gaza-aid-2da63078?mod=e2tw

(edit): Times of Israel summary of the pay-walled WSJ report -https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveb...aid-before-transitioning-into-governing-body/

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

Is there a UK version of AIPAC?

Oi!PAC

 

[Denis79]

Oi!PAC

 

[Denis79]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

They have intentionally targetted journalists in the past, so it wouldn't surprise me if this is true.

 

[Idxomer]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Idxomer]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

The Rafah ground invasion has been a distraction from the start. People there are getting bombed every day in any case.

 

[Giggsy PO]

If you are getting your information about this conflict from sources that purposefully engage in deception and fake stuff, then it's very relevant. The fact you refuse to share the source only makes people more suspicious.

You came here all guns blazing convinced chomsky is an anti-semite. He's not. Does that not make you wonder what other things you might have been lied to about from those sources?

In fairness I would say that the Khazar theory is one of those things that, on the face of it, does not appear to be problematic as a proposal; but 95% of the time it seems to be genuine antisemites pushing it. That’s been my experience of encountering it online for many years anyway.



I am genuinely interested in your reference to Chomsky’s understanding of the violence of 1929. I’m not a ardent defender of Chomsky, he’s as open to criticism as anyone else writing on this topic, and his most enthusiastic fans do tend to regard his word as semi-divine and defend it accordingly. But I have a particular interest in 1929 right now and although it’s never occurred to me to check what Chomsky has written on it (after all he’s not a historian or an Israel-Palestine specialist at all), your post prompted me to check his Fateful Triangle for any references. In the midst of a very brief overview of the British Mandate period, which I would agree heavily reflects the standard Arab narrative of those years, he has a paragraph on 1929 that actually wouldn’t look out of place in an Israeli school textbook:

​

“They repeatedly resorted to terrorist violence against Jews. The most extreme case was in late August 1929, when 133 Jews were massacred. The “most ghastly incident” was in Hebron, where 60 Jews were killed, most of them from an old Jewish community, largely anti-Zionist; the Arab police “stood passively by while their fellow Moslems moved into the town and proceeded to deeds which would have been revolting among animals,” and a still greater slaughter was prevented only by the bravery of one member of the vastly undermanned British police. Many were saved by Muslim neighbors.”​

So I’m intrigued as to whether he has subsequently revised his understanding of that awful episode, and if so what new sources might have prompted him to do so. Or perhaps you feel the above quote represents a misinterpretation in some way?

The main problem is his use of sources and references. The devil is always in the details. I based this on the analysis by Werner Cohn, which you can find here. I find it really well argued.