Israel Matzav: A word of caution about Obama's 'turnaround'

A word of caution about Obama's 'turnaround'

I have a sense of deja vu regarding President Obama's seeming turnaround. In the last couple of months, he has seemingly let up on pressuring Prime Minister Netanyahu and has lowered both the tone and the priority of the 'peace process.' Now, word is coming out of Washington claiming that Obama's speech on Thursday night will be conciliatory to Israel, and well it might be if he doesn't want to be booed out of the room when he speaks to the AIPAC convention on Sunday.

I feel like we're back in 2008. We're being told to ignore the fact that Obama sat in Reverend Wright's anti-Semitic church listening to his sermons for 20 years and listen only to what he is saying now. We're being told to ignore the fact that one of Obama's closest advisers called for sending US troops to Israel to enforce a 'Palestinian state' because he fired her anyway and she won't be part of his administration. We're being told that the 'new Obama' understands that Prime Minister Netanyahu has done all he can to bring about peace and that he realizes that we cannot even negotiate with an entity that includes an unrepentant Hamas. We're being told all these warm and fuzzy things. And they are all a lie.

When we look at Arab leaders, we are constantly warned - and rightfully so - to look at what they are saying in Arabic before accepting what they say in English at face value. In fact, an entire cottage industry (principally MEMRI and Palestinian Media Watch) has sprung up to translate the words of the Arab media into English. Similarly, we cannot just accept what Obama says to Israel supporters and ignore what he says to our opponents. So let's look at what Obama said to one of our opponents (whose word I have no reason to doubt on this), the insufferable MJ Rosenberg.

In 2007, the day after Obama declared his candidacy for president, I met with him in his office (I was then working for Israel Policy Forum).

Obama listened carefully while I explained why it was critical that he be an "honest broker" on Israel-Palestinian issues. Nothing I said, including my opinions of AIPAC's influence, would surprise anyone who reads my columns. My bottom line was that the occupation was terrible for the United States, for Israel and, most of all, for the Palestinians and that he should understand that the status quo lobbyists who defend everything Israel does are not representative of the Jewish community or anyone else.

Obama listened, cupped his ear, and said, "I can't hear you."

I didn't understand; I was sitting right next to him.

He then said: "No, not literally. I mean that I don't hear from people like you. But I hear from AIPAC {he then named the local AIPAC leader in Chicago} every week. I'm going to be President and, when I am, it is your job -- you and all the people who feel the way you do -- to make sure I hear that message. You cannot simply rely on t

he belief that you are right. You need to raise your voice so that I hear you and not just them."

So maybe, just maybe, the President wants us to shout and holler about, what appears to be, a sellout to AIPAC. After all, he is making no attempt to cover up what he's doing or why he's doing it. He only hears one voice.

Maybe Obama's latest actions are a cry for help.

Don't just read Yoram Ettinger's headline and assume that all is well for Israel in Washington. If Obama wins in 2012, all is not well. Every action Obama takes for the next 18 months has one goal and one goal only: To get himself re-elected. Once that happens (God forbid), the Obama who visited MJ Rosenberg, the Obama who sat in Reverend Wright's church, the Obama who was close friends with Rashid Khalidi and Ali Abunimah, is likely to come out of the closet.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: A word of caution about Obama's 'turnaround'

Love of the Land: New World’s Record for Chutzpah: Obama’s Seder

New World’s Record for Chutzpah: Obama’s Seder

Jonathan Tobin
Contentions/Commentary
28 March '10

Some 29 years ago, the first president Bush earned the enmity of American Jews with his rant about being “one lone guy” standing up against the horde of AIPAC activists exercising their constitutional right to petition Congress. Bush’s statement symbolized the intolerance and enmity that his administration felt toward Israel and its American friends. But say one thing for that Bush and his secretary of state, James “f@#$ the Jews” Baker: at least they never pretended to be anything but what they were, country-club establishment Republicans who were not comfortable with Israel or Jewish symbols. Not so Barack Hussein Obama.

After a week spent beating up on Israel, blowing a minor gaffe into an international incident, subjecting Israel’s prime minister to unprecedented insults that Obama would never think of trying on even the most humble Third World leader, and establishing the principle that the Jewish presence in eastern Jerusalem — even in existing Jewish neighborhoods — is illegal and an affront to American interests – after all that, Obama plans on spending Monday night mouthing a few lines from the Passover Haggadah at a Seder held in the White House.

According to the New York Times, Obama will take part in a Seder in the Old Family Dining Room along with a band of court Jews such as David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett. The Seder, as the newspaper notes, will end, according to tradition, with the declaration of “next year in Jerusalem.” (Never mind the current chill in the administration’s relationship with Israel.)

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: New World’s Record for Chutzpah: Obama’s Seder

Love of the Land: The Shadow Viceroy

The Shadow Viceroy

Lee Smith
Tabletmag.com
24 March '10

If no one was sure what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was going to tell the 7,500 delegates who descended on Washington for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Policy Conference early this week, everyone knew what Elliott Abrams was going to say. For more than a year, the former deputy assistant to President George W. Bush has been the most vocal critic of the Obama Administration’s handling of the U.S.-Israel relationship. With the recent Washington-Jerusalem confrontation over 1,600 apartment units still simmering, Abrams drew a standing-room-only crowd to his two AIPAC panels.

“If we distance ourselves from Israel,” Abrams told the audience, “the Jordanians, Egyptians and the rest of our allies in the Middle East will think, ‘if they can do it to the Israelis, why not us?’ ”

Abrams, while well under 6 feet tall, is a commanding physical presence, with broad shoulders and a prominent chin and nose, a profile worthy of a Roman coin. And like a provincial governor, he wielded power on behalf of a hegemon in a way that earned him more enemies at home than abroad. His rivals mock the policies he advocates, describe him as arrogant, and fear winding up on the wrong end of his sharp wit. While in the United States he is best known for his role in the Iran-Contra scandal, in the Middle East, he is simply “Elliott”—the man tapped by Bush to administer the daily conduct of U.S. policy in large parts of the region, with particular attention to democracy promotion and the Bush Administration’s “Freedom Agenda” in Egypt and throughout North Africa, as well as in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and the Palestinian territories.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: The Shadow Viceroy

Love of the Land: Moral blindness -- and truth and justice betrayed

Moral blindness -- and truth and justice betrayed

Melanie Phillips
The Spectator
23 March '10

How utterly extraordinary. Hillary Clinton made a big speech today to the US Jewish lobby group AIPAC – a speech of no small importance given the crisis in relations between the Obama administration and Israel. But in this speech, as Israel Matzav notes, she committed an astounding howler. Referring to the recent Palestinian naming of a square in Ramallah in honour of terrorist Dalal al Mughrabi, she said:

When a Hamas-controlled municipality glorifies violence and renames a square after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis, it insults the families on both sides who have lost loves ones in this conflict.

But Ramallah is not a Hamas-controlled municipality. Hamas controls Gaza. Ramallah is in the West Bank and is controlled by Fatah. The naming of the square was a Fatah event glorifying a Fatah terrorist. Does Clinton not know this? Of course she does. What this whopper tells us is that she – and the benighted Obama administration that wrote her lamentable speech – cannot and will not acknowledge that Fatah is a terrorist organisation that glorifies a terrorist who murdered not only dozens of Israelis but also the niece of an American Democratic senator.

Clinton and the Obamites cannot and will not acknowledge this because their whole Middle East strategy revolves around forcing Israel to give a state to Fatah -- because they ‘deserve’ it as moderate peaceful statesmen-in-waiting. As if. The fact that the Obamites are actually bullying Israel into accepting a Fatah-run terrorist state was unfortunately all-too graphically demonstrated when Fatah named its square after Mughrabi. So Clinton, purporting to attack the glorification of terrorist violence, turned the instigators into Hamas instead.

Her message to renounce violence, recognise Israel and abide by previous signed agreements (this from an administration that has torn up America’s own agreements with Israel) was addressed solely to Hamas. To Fatah, whose leaders declare they will never accept a Jewish state, whose armed wing continues to commit acts of terror and who have gone back on countless agreements, not one word of criticism.

The rest of Clinton’s speech was as bad if not worse.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Moral blindness -- and truth and justice betrayed

Love of the Land: PM Netanyahu corrects Secretary of State Clinton at AIPAC

PM Netanyahu corrects Secretary of State Clinton at AIPAC

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
23 March '10

Secretary of State Clinton sent a clear message to Israel in her AIPAC address that she and the Obama administration intend to continue with the "automatic pass" policy vis-a-vis official Palestinian compliance. That's "official" Palestinian compliance, since the verbiage can flow about "Palestinians" in general - while taking great care never to associate the criticism with the ruling Palestinian Fatah/PA leadership, this keeping Mahmoud Abbas and the rest of his team squeaky clean.

This dangerously destructive policy, that encourages Palestinian noncompliance, has a profound impact on the efficacy of third party supervision.

Simply put, since we already know that the United States has a "automatic pass" policy when it comes to official Palestinian compliance, it would be reckless and irresponsible to agree to an arrangement that hinged on the compliance assessment of the United States rather than leaving this ultimately up to the sovereign State of Israel itself.

So here is the line in Secretary of State Clinton's address to AIPAC, in which she bent over backwards to avoid criticizing the PA for an incident that the PA postponed during VP Biden's recent visit to avoid a PR fiasco. That's PA-Fatah postponed - not Hamas. But Mrs. Clinton's heavy blinders shield her from this truth:

"When a Hamas-controlled municipality glorifies violence and renames a square after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis, it insults the families on both sides who have lost loves ones over the years in this conflict."

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
AIPAC Conference March 22, 2010
www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/03/138722.htm
==================================================

And here is how Prime Minister Netanyahu responded:

"Regrettably, the Palestinian Authority has also continued incitement against Israel.

A few days ago, a public square near Ramallah was named after a terrorist who murdered 37 Israeli civilians, including 13 children. The Palestinian Authority did nothing to prevent it."

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu
AIPAC Conference March 22, 2010
www.pmo.gov.il/PMOEng/Communication/PMSpeaks/speechaipac220310.htm
==============================================================

If anything, Mr. Netanyahu was generous in understating the involvement of Fatah-PA. Its not that they did nothing to prevent it, they promoted it and were intimately involved in it.

So now we come to an interesting challenge for friends of Israel - and organizations that are friends of Israel.

Do they accept Mrs. Clinton's heavy blinders wording - and in turn the "see no evil hear no evil speak no evil" approach towards the PA.

Or do they reject such obfuscation and call for Washington to put an end to its "automatic pass" approach with the PA.

Love of the Land: PM Netanyahu corrects Secretary of State Clinton at AIPAC

Love of the Land: [Includes barefaced lie covering up PA] Secretary of State Clinton's Remarks at the 2010 AIPAC Policy Conference

[Includes barefaced lie covering up PA] Secretary of State Clinton's Remarks at the 2010 AIPAC Policy Conference

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
23 March '10

[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA:

"When a Hamas-controlled municipality glorifies violence and renames a square after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis, it insults the families on both sides who have lost loves ones over the years in this conflict."

Pop quiz.

What square was recently renamed after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis?

Answer: A square in Ramallah was named after the terrorist Dalal Mughrabi.

And who controls the Ramallah municipality?

Answer: Fatah.

Bonus question: Why does Clinton attribute the incident to Hamas?

Answer:: How do you spell cognitive dissonance?]

==============================

(Applause.)

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington Convention Center

Washington, DC

March 22, 2010
www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/03/138722.htm

Thank you. Thank you for that welcome. And it is wonderful to be back at AIPAC with so many good friends. I saw a number of them backstage before coming out, and I can assure you that I received a lot of advice.(Laughter.) I know I always do when I see my friends from AIPAC. And I want to thank Lee Rosenberg for that introduction. And congratulations, Rosy; you're going to be a terrific president. (Applause.

(Read full speech)

Love of the Land: [Includes barefaced lie covering up PA] Secretary of State Clinton's Remarks at the 2010 AIPAC Policy Conference

Love of the Land: AIPAC Panel: The Sands of Change Here in D.C.

AIPAC Panel: The Sands of Change Here in D.C.

Jennifer Rubin
Contentions/Commentary
21 March '10

A mesmerizing discussion Sunday afternoon was held among Elliott Abrams, Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal, and Asher Susser of the Moshe Dayan Center at Tel Aviv University as they examined the “sands of change in the Middle East.” Both Stephens and Susser traced the emergence of non-Arab states like Iran and Turkey (which is pivoting away from Europe as it becomes increasingly more Islamist in domestic policy and anti-Israel in its foreign policy), the decline of secular pan-Arabism, the tension between radicals and moderates, and the ascendancy of Shia regimes, which are displacing aging Sunni leaders as the region’s powerhouses.

Abrams made a different case: “The most important shift is in Washington.” He noted that in 1967, Israel won a tremendous, and the British left Aden, opening an era in which the U.S.-Israel alliance dominated the region. (”It took the 1973 war for the Arabs to learn that lesson.”) The question Arabs are asking now, Abrams said, is about what the American policy is on maintaining its dominance in the region. They want to know “whether the U.S. is prepared to maintain its position or let the region slip into a period of Iranian dominance.” On Iran’s nuclear ambitions specifically, Abrams reminded the crowd that the Obama administration says it is “unacceptable” if Iran gets a nuclear weapon. “But do they mean it’s unacceptable or just that it is a bummer?”

As for the Obami’s effort to separate the U.S. from Israel to increase our credibility with the Arabs, it is “no accident” Abrams said, that the Saudi’s 2002 peace plan, while not the basis for any viable peace agreement, would have ended with the recognition of Israel. When the Arab states realize that the U.S. commitment to Israel is unyielding and that they “can’t do anything about Israel, they begin to make peace.” If the U.S. should begin to change its position, Abrams cautioned, their attitude toward Israel will change as well. Then, Abrams added, citing Lee Smith’s book The Strong Horse, they will decide which is the weak and which is the strong horse in the region and act accordingly. How we act toward Israel affects how Arab states regard us. As we distance ourselves from Israel, the Arabs see that we “are proving to be an undependable ally.” So the place to determine the fate of the Middle East, he summed up, is “here.”

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: AIPAC Panel: The Sands of Change Here in D.C.

Love of the Land: Background: How Obama team attacks liberated Netanyahu

Background: How Obama team attacks liberated Netanyahu

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
15 March '10

At the start of the Ramat Shlomo incident Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu had to carefully and painstakingly weigh his moves as he attempted to placate Washington without causing a crisis in his own party and the ruling coalition.

This all changed when, over the course of the weekend, it became clear that the Obama team had decided to exploit the Ramat Shlomo incident to try and oust Netanyahu by forcing him to take actions that they themselves expected would ultimately break up his ruling coalition.

This simplified matters considerably.

Fine tuning was no longer relevant.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Background: How Obama team attacks liberated Netanyahu

Love of the Land: AIPAC Blasts Obama Administration

AIPAC Blasts Obama Administration

Jennifer Rubin
Contentions/Commentary
15 March '10

As unusual as it is for the ADL to weigh in on a controversial foreign-policy matter and blast an American administration, it is nearly unprecedented for AIPAC to do so. (Well, come to think of it, AIPAC blasted the Obami when they bestowed the Medal of Freedom on Mary Robinson, so perhaps we’ve reached a watershed with this administration, which seems bent on thumbing its nose at allies both domestic and international.) In a remarkable statement, AIPAC declared:

The Obama Administration’s recent statements regarding the U.S. relationship with Israel are a matter of serious concern. AIPAC calls on the Administration to take immediate steps to defuse the tension with the Jewish State. Israel is America’s closest ally in the Middle East. The foundation of the U.S-Israel relationship is rooted in America’s fundamental strategic interest, shared democratic values, and a long-time commitment to peace in the region. Those strategic interests, which we share with Israel, extend to every facet of American life and our relationship with the Jewish State, which enjoys vast bipartisan support in Congress and among the American people.

The Administration should make a conscious effort to move away from public demands and unilateral deadlines directed at Israel, with whom the United States shares basic, fundamental, and strategic interests. The escalated rhetoric of recent days only serves as a distraction from the substantive work that needs to be done with regard to the urgent issue of Iran’s rapid pursuit of nuclear weapons, and the pursuit of peace between Israel and all her Arab neighbors.

We strongly urge the Administration to work closely and privately with our partner Israel, in a manner befitting strategic allies, to address any issues between the two governments.

As Vice President Biden said last week in Israel, “Progress in the Middle East occurs when there is no daylight between the United States and Israel.”

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: AIPAC Blasts Obama Administration

Love of the Land: J Street Fails Its Fans

J Street Fails Its Fans

The hoopla surrounding the upstart lobby doesn't translate into instant political clout.

Lenny Ben-David
pajamasmedia.com
22 November 09

On November 3, the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to support Resolution 838 calling on the president and the secretary of state “to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration of the ‘Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’ [a.k.a. the Goldstone Report] in multilateral fora.”

The vote was 344 to 36, with 22 representatives copping out with a “present” vote and 30 not voting. I assumed, probably like other Washington observers, that the 36 members, who by their vote supported Goldstone’s anti-Israel report, were members who had accepted political contributions from J Street’s political action committee. After all, the upstart organization had just completed their much ballyhooed conference in Washington, sent their delegates to lobby on Capitol Hill, and had expressed strong reservations about the congressional resolution.

To be fair, J Street didn’t come out with a blatant declaration of opposition to the resolution. It just called for the passage of “a balanced, thoughtful Congressional resolution” or “amendment of the resolution before passage to bring it in line with the principles we articulate.” As one of J Street’s blogger allies wrote:

Members of Congress close to AIPAC introduced a resolution condemning the Goldstone report that is so one-sided it might have been drafted by the Likud Central Committee. J Street did not waste a moment. It issued a statement that it would not support the resolution.

J Street’s opposition couldn’t have been clearer.

J Street takes great pride in their upstart political action committee. “The PAC distributed over $578,000 to its candidates,” J Street’s website crows. “[That’s] more than any other pro-Israel PAC in the two-year cycle, despite only launching publicly in April 2008.”

[NB: That $578,000 distributed was out of more than $840,000 raised, according to Federal Election Commission records.]

Since that election cycle, J Street’s PAC boasted contributions in 2009 of more than $30,000 to Representative Donna Edwards of Maryland and $35,000 to Steve Cohen of Tennessee.

Those PAC contributions translate to political clout, right?

Absolutely wrong.

In the case of the Goldstone vote, not one of the top 10 J Street PAC recipients in the 2008 cycle voted against the pro-Israel resolution, and some of those candidates (Mary Jo Kilroy of Ohio, Gary Peters of Michigan, Debbie Halvorson of Illinois, and Steve Cohen) had received as much as $30,000 to $47,000. Only Donna Edwards, the J Street darling for whom the organization ran a special appeal in 2009, voted against the resolution. Others who voted with Edwards included Arab-American representatives, congressional gadflies such as Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, and a handful of representatives who are long-time critics of Israel.

Page 1 of 2 Next ->

Love of the Land: J Street Fails Its Fans

Israel Matzav: The FBI looks for Mr. X

The FBI looks for Mr. X

In the Washington Post, Gary Wasserman - who is writing a book about it - talks about the anti-Semitism behind the AIPAC case.

Ground Zero would be the 23-year-old case of Jonathan Pollard. Here one had a real spy, an American Jew working for the Navy who, out of concern for Israel as well as cash, copied and delivered thousands of classified documents. After his arrest in the 1980s, the belief took hold within counterintelligence circles that he was part of a larger spy ring. This led to the search for a "Mr. X," a high-ranking national security official who had helped direct Pollard to needed documents and continued to operate within the government. So the creation myth was born.

That no Mr. X was ever found is beside the point. More relevant is that Pollard could support an operational frame for organizing and understanding a murky, dangerous world. This anti-Zionist concept holds that Israeli objectives run contrary to U.S. national interests; that many American Jews, including those in senior policymaking positions, suffer from divided loyalties; and that pro-Israel political influence holds sway over U.S. government decisions.

While this politically incorrect frame is not going to be discussed in public speeches, its outline appears with a vengeance in the Rosen-Weissman case.

Franklin was apparently sent out by his FBI handlers to tempt Jews. He tried Adam Ciralsky at CBS News, who had once sued the CIA for anti-Semitism, and Richard Perle, who was on his way to vacation in France, as well as Pentagon employees who had done nothing more than work with Franklin. All turned down the offer of information

Read All at :

Israel Matzav: The FBI looks for Mr. X

Israel Matzav: Franklin: FBI AIPAC probe anti-Semitic

Franklin: FBI AIPAC probe anti-Semitic

In an exclusive interview with the Washington Times, former Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin (pictured) charges the FBI with anti-Semitism in its probe of AIPAC - the largest pro-Israel lobby in the United States - earlier this decade. Even though he was used as an informant, Franklin was originally sentenced to 13 years in jail as part of the probe, but that sentence was reduced to probation earlier this year after charges against two former AIPAC employees were dropped.

Read All at :

Israel Matzav: Franklin: FBI AIPAC probe anti-Semitic

U.S. Jews seek clues to Obama Israel policy in Netanyahu visit - Haaretz - Israel News

U.S. Jews seek clues to Obama Israel policy in Netanyahu visit

By Natasha Mozgovaya

Tags: AIPAC, benjamin netanyahu

WASHINGTON - American Jews are closely following Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Washington, in a bid to figure out where U.S. President Barack Obama's Israel policy is headed. Seventy-eight percent of American Jews voted for Obama, and now that he has shaken the hand of far-left Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and indicated that the United States expects Israel to abide by its commitment to freeze settlement construction and dismantle illegal outposts, many of those voters want to know whether their commitment to a liberal candidate has created a conflict with their commitment to Israel. Leaders of U.S. Jewish organizations have told Haaretz that even if not all American Jews share Netanyahu's political views, most Jews support Israel unequivocally - and they say that is the message that has to be conveyed to Obama. Read All at :

U.S. Jews seek clues to Obama Israel policy in Netanyahu visit - Haaretz - Israel News

Israel Matzav: Were AIPAC delegates instructed to lobby for a 'two-state solution'?

Were AIPAC delegates instructed to lobby for a 'two-state solution'?

Earlier this week, I linked an article from JPost whose headline was that AIPAC was sending its delegates to lobby members of the US Congress to sign a petition endorsing the 'two-state solution.' The article included the following in its text:

In this year's lobbying effort, to take place on Tuesday, the AIPAC thousands will be asking their congressmen to sign on to a letter addressed to Obama that explicitly posits the need for a "viable Palestinian state."

It is expected that the overwhelming majority of the congressmen will sign it.

Read All at :


Israel Matzav: Were AIPAC delegates instructed to lobby for a 'two-state solution'?

Israel Matzav: Biden and Kerry put the screws to Israel at AIPAC

Biden and Kerry put the screws to Israel at AIPAC

Vice President Joe Biden and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry have used their speeches at the AIPAC conference to put the screws to Israel.

Vice President Joe Biden and Democratic Senator John Kerry told the pro-Israel AIPAC lobby Tuesday that Israel must freeze all building in Judea and Samaria and make further concessions to the Palestinian Authority.

Read All at:

Israel Matzav: Biden and Kerry put the screws to Israel at AIPAC

Israel Matzav: Breaking: 'Spy' case against AIPAC staffers dropped

Breaking: 'Spy' case against AIPAC staffers dropped

Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports that the US Federal government has dropped its case against Keith Weissman and Steven Rosen - former staffers of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee - who had been charged under the 1917 Espionage Act with disclosing closely held defense information to a foreign agent.

Read All at :

Israel Matzav: Breaking: 'Spy' case against AIPAC staffers dropped

Israel Matzav: Government may drop AIPAC charges

Government may drop AIPAC charges

I've already gone on record saying that I believe that the timing of the charges against California Democrat Jane Harman is no coincidence, and that the charges that Harman offered to try to assist AIPAC lobbyists Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman were intended to shore up the US government's weak case against the two men. Wednesday's Washington Post all but confirms the connection.

Read All in :

Israel Matzav: Government may drop AIPAC charges