The Arab Lobby Controls US Media and Foreign Policy
The Arab Lobby Controls US Media and Foreign Policy
http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2007/09/arab-lobby-controls-us-media-abd.html
Last year Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal donated $20 million each to Harvard and Georgetown Universities for programs in Islamic studies. The good prince also owns a chunk of Time/AOL the company who’s unit CNN employs the anti Israel Christiane Amanpour.In November of 2005, Fox’s O’Reilly showed live footage of the French Intifada as it raged in Paris. According to WorldNetDaily, Saudi billionaire Prince al-Waleed bin Talal, (aka Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Bin AbdulAziz AlSaud), who owns 5-6% of the Fox News Channel, personally called Rupert Murdoch and asked him to change the offensive (but accurate) caption: “Muslim Riots” to the less offensive (and less accurate) “Civil Riots.” Within thirty minutes, the Prince had his way.
In December 2005, Prince Al-Waleed donated $20 million each to Harvard University and Georgetown University to finance Islamic studies. The gift to Georgetown, which set up the Prince Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding in his honor, was the university’s second-largest donation in history, and the gift to Harvard was among its 25 largest. Any idea of what the skew of thoses studies are.
Prince Alwaleed bin Talal is the largest single stockholder in Time and Citibank he is a one man Arab Lobby. But you wont hear Messers Walt and Mearsheimer talk about him or any of the other Saudi investors who challenge our free speech and influence American foreign policy.
What’s so nefarious about Jews exercising their right to speech?
By Jeff Robbins
September 7, 2007
A crop of Israel’s critics — most prominently Jimmy Carter and now Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, the authors of “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” — have managed something of a feat: They express no concerns about the massive pro-Arab effort, funded in significant measure by foreign oil money, taking American Jews to task for participating in the American political process; meanwhile, they inoculate themselves against charges of anti-Jewish bias by pre-emptively predicting that “the Jewish lobby” will accuse them of it.
Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer, in particular, have been heralded by Israel’s critics for their “courage” in attacking American Jews, who have allegedly “strangled” criticism of Israel. Their case seems one part laughable, and one part eyebrow-raising.
An anecdote from my own experience with the anti-Israel lobby may shed some light on the absurdity of the Walt-Mearsheimer offensive. Not long after Sept. 11, 2001, I received a call from a major defense contractor asking for a favor. I was serving as president of the Boston chapter of the World Affairs Council, a national organization that debates foreign policy, and the defense contractor was one of the Council’s principal sponsors.
The Saudi Arabian government was sponsoring a national public relations campaign to cultivate American public opinion, and was sending Saudi emissaries around the country to make the case that Saudi Arabia was a tolerant, moderate nation worthy of American support. Would the Council organize a forum of Boston’s community leaders so that the Saudis could make their case?
While this was patently no more than a Saudi lobbying effort, we organized the forum, and it was well-attended by precisely the slice of Boston’s political and corporate elite that the Saudis and their defense contractor benefactor had hoped for. The Saudis maintained that their Kingdom should be regarded as a promoter of Middle East peace, and that the abundant evidence that Saudi Arabia was in fact promoting a virulent brand of extremist Islam should be discounted.
Saudi Arabia paid for the trip of its emissaries to Boston, for the Washington, D.C.-based public relations and lobbying company which organized the trip, and for the Boston public relations and lobbying company that handled the Boston part of the visit. And it drew upon the resources and relationships of the defense contractor, which sells hundreds of millions of dollars of military equipment to Saudi Arabia, to support and orchestrate its public relations effort.
The billions in petrodollars Arab states spend in the U.S. for defense, construction, engineering and consulting contracts position them nicely to win friends in high places, and friends are what they have. That is true all over the world, is true in this country, and has been true for quite some time. As U.S. Secretary of State Cordell Hull noted 60 years ago, “The oil of Saudi Arabia constitutes one of the world’s great prizes.” His successor, Edward Stettinius, opposed the creation of a Jewish state in the Middle East, stating “It would seriously prejudice our ability to afford protection to American interests, economic and commercial . . . throughout the area.”
The Saudis and their allies have not been shy about supplementing their considerable leverage in the U.S. by targeting expenditures to affect the debate over Middle East policy by funding think tanks, Middle East studies programs, advocacy groups, community centers and other institutions.
To take one obvious example, just last year Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal donated $20 million each to Harvard and Georgetown Universities for programs in Islamic studies. Prince Alwaleed, chairman of a Riyadh-based conglomerate, is the fellow whose $10 million donation to the Twin Towers Fund following the Sept. 11 attacks was rejected by then-Mayor Rudolph Giuliani after the Saudi Prince suggested that the U.S. “re-examine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance toward the Palestinians.”
Georgetown and Harvard had no apparent qualms about accepting Prince Alwaleed’s money. The director of Georgetown’s newly-renamed Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center rejected any suggestion that the Saudi magnate was attempting to use Saudi oil wealth to influence American policy in the Middle East. “There is nothing wrong with [Prince Alwaleed] expressing his opinion on American foreign policy,” he said. “Clearly, it was done in a constructive way.”
In other words, for those who accept the Arab line on the Israel-Arab conflict — namely, that it is the product of Israeli intransigence in some form or another — the increasing proliferation of Middle East-funded enterprises all across the country aimed at advancing the Arab view of the conflict constitute “nothing wrong.” Nor are those hewing to the anti-Israel line troubled by the way in which the massive Islamic bloc of nations, by dint both of their number and their economic leverage over the rest of the world, are able to guarantee an incessantly anti-Israel agenda at the United Nations and other international fora.
Although the aggressive deployment of petrodollars and oil-based influence from foreign sources aimed at advancing a pro-Arab line constitutes “nothing wrong” as far as Israel’s critics are concerned, a new political fashion holds that there is something very wrong indeed about American Jews and other American backers of Israel expressing their support for Israel, and urging their political leaders to join them in that support.
Our major newspapers and networks, with correspondents in Israel able to take advantage of an Israeli political system that is a free-for-all and an astonishingly vibrant and self-critical Israeli press, report daily on every twist and turn of the conflict and are very frequently critical of Israel. As for American campuses, most objective observers would have little difficulty concluding that far from being criticism-free, they are in fact dominated by critics of Israel. Clearly, as strangleholds on criticism go, whatever stranglehold the pro-Israel community has on debate in the U.S. is a very loose one indeed.
If the charge that American Jews are able to stifle criticism of Israel is simply silly, the leveling of the charge that there is something nefarious about Jews urging support for the Jewish state raises questions about whether Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer have descended into a certain ugliness. And the tactic of trying to neutralize those questions by loudly predicting that they will be asked, however clever a tactic it may be, does not neutralize them.
It is apparently the authors’ position that, even in the face of the overwhelming leverage of an Arab world swimming in petrodollars, with a lock on the U.N. and an unlimited ability to pay for pro-Arab public relations, American Jews are obliged to stay silent. In essence, Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer have repackaged the “the-Jews-run-the-country” stuff which has long been the bread and butter of anti-Semites.
Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer deny that they are anti-Semitic, and that is certainly good news. But where they are apparently content with foreign oil money being used to advance a pro-Arab position on the Middle East, but devote themselves to criticizing American Jews for lobbying their public officials in support of the Jewish state, one may legitimately wonder what phrase would apply. Surely, one’s denial that he is anti-Semitic, while welcome, is hardly dispositive; after all, the marked increase in anti-Semitism around the world is well-documented, and yet one rarely hears anyone actually announce that they are anti-Semitic, or that their views are anti-Semitic.
But if anti-Semitism is too harsh a term, and if the word “bigoted” is also taken off the table, perhaps one can be forgiven for concluding that “anti-Jewish bias” fits the bill here. After all, where there is nothing wrong with foreign money from Arab countries advancing a pro-Arab agenda in Messrs. Walt’s and Mearsheimer’s world — but there is something very wrong with American citizens who are Jewish exercising their civic right to speak out on behalf of Israel and taking issue with the pro-Arab agenda — even the most vehement disclaimers of any bias against Jews lack a certain credibility.
The potency of the Middle East-funded anti-Israel lobby around the world and in the U.S. is difficult to ignore. Yet, Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer and others who adhere to an anti-Israel line ignore it. In and of itself, this is not surprising. When at the same time they portray American Jews’ efforts to make the case for Israel as morally suspect, however, they open themselves up to reasonable charges of something far more troublesome than mere hypocrisy, and that is anti-Jewish bias, by whatever name.
Mr. Robbins, a U.S. Delegate to the U.N. Human Rights Commission during the Clinton administration, is an attorney at Mintz, Levin in Boston and represents David Project in the Islamic Society of Boston lawsuit.
Global domination Islamofascism CAIR "moderate" Islam War on terror 9/11 "palestinians" Arab lobby Islamic lobby Arab lobby
Muslim lobby Media Control 911 foreign policy Saudi Arabia Oil lobby Hamas ]
Labels: American Muslims, anti israel bias, anti Israel bigotry, Arab Lobby, Arabs, Control, foreign policy, islamic lobby, Islamo Arab lobby, Israel
Letter Denouncing Jimmy Carter For His Anti-Semitism
Letter Denouncing Jimmy Carter For His Anti-Semitism
The Jerusalem Connection
http://support.tjci.org/site/PageServer?pagename=PetitionCarter&JServSessionIdr011=txpeawkoo2.app7aThe Honorable Howard Dean
Chairman Democratic National Committee
430 S. Capitol St. SE
Washington, DC 20003
Dear Governor Dean:
We are writing to share our deep concern about the decision of your party to have former President Jimmy Carter continue to serve as Honorary Chairman of Democrats Abroad, the official Democratic Party organization for Americans living outside the United States. We urge you to reassess his suitability for that honored status in light of his recent outrageous remarks regarding Hamas.
As you probably know, in public comments made on June 21 after receiving a donation for his foundation from a group in Dublin, Ireland, the former President castigated our government and the governments of Israel and the European Union for withholding direct aid to Hamas leaders in the Palestinian Authority. Carter described this policy as “criminal.”
It has been nearly a decade since the State Department under President Clinton designated Hamas as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. As you know, it is illegal for individuals in our country—much less the federal government itself—to knowingly provide material support or resources to an organization that has been so designated.
In light of these considerations, it is the course of action Carter is advocating—provision of direct aid to Hamas by the U.S. government—that would be “criminal.” In light of Hamas’ long record of murderous attacks on civilians in Israel and within the Palestinian territories, it would also be grossly immoral.
As former ambassadors, we have learned—sometimes through difficult experience—that the words used by prominent Americans while overseas can resonate more loudly than remarks uttered at home for domestic consumption.
That seems especially true in this instance. You may recall that last November, a Hamas subsidiary issued a communiqué calling on sympathizers to attack American targets “all over the globe.” It is difficult for us to understand how Carter can be deemed fit to serve as Honorary Chairman of Democrats Abroad after having urged support for Hamas.
Mr. Chairman: You have credited Jimmy Carter with spurring your entry into public service. While campaigning for the office of President of the United States, you left Iowa just days before the all-important caucuses to visit Carter at his home, and in public remarks you made while standing beside him you said, “I think Jimmy Carter is a loved figure all over America for his moral standing and the way he has conducted himself in helping others since he's left the presidency.” And you said that if elected, you would seek to “follow the example of Jimmy Carter.”
But when Carter published a book smearing Israel as an “apartheid” state, your committee issued a statement asserting that “on this issue President Carter speaks for himself, the opinions in his book are his own, they are not the views or position of the Democratic Party.”
In view of Carter’s most recent remarks, however, we urge you to go further and take prompt action to ensure that Carter is stripped of the formal role your party has bestowed upon him by removing him as Honorary Chairman of Democrats Abroad. As Republicans, we know that we will agree to disagree with Democrats like you about many things, but we are hopeful that on this matter, we can find common ground.
Thank you for your careful attention to this request.
Sincerely,
Amb. Stuart A. Bernstein (retired), Denmark
Amb. Joseph B. Gildenhorn (retired), Switzerland
Amb. Earle I. Mack (retired), Finland
Amb. John Price (retired), Mauritius
Amb. Mel Sembler (retired), Italy / Australia
Amb. Ron Weiser (retired), Slovakia
_________________
Related:
Jimmy Carter WITH the Arab Muslim (hate) Lobby
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26045Jimmy Carter's Hatred: Funded by Arab Money
http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2006/12/jimmy-carters-hatred-funded-by-arab.htmlThe Islamic Apartheid that created a myth against democratic Israel
http://freeisraelnow.blogspot.com/2007/06/islamic-apartheid-that-created-myth-on.htmlCarter admits:
CNN.com - TranscriptsPlus, our interview with former President Jimmy Carter. ... "I recognize Israel is a wonderful democracy with freedom of speech and equality of treatment ..."
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0612/13/ltm.01.htmlAll of Jimmy Carter's Lies in One Place Israelated - English ... Factual errors and distortions downplaying anti-Israel violence and Arab .... CNN, The Situation Room, Nov. 28, 2006. You could check with all the records. ...
http://www.israelated.com/node/7432Technorati - Freedom Anti west Intolerance Terrorist oganization Hamas 'palestinian' propaganda Al Aqsa Alaqsa Arabs Jews Muslims Christians 'palestinian' terrorism Suicide bombing Torture chambers Homicide bombing London bombing Honor killing Muslim clerics Mullahs Islamic Hitler Iran Regime Ahmedinejad Iran nukes Human rights War on terror jihad Genocide bombing Anti Israel bias Arab racism Anti Israel racism Islamofacsism Conflict Israel Islamic Jihad Hamas "palestinian" Animalism "palestinian" cruelty "palestinian" Savagery "Palestine" "Palestinians" Israelis Jewish refugees Victims of terror Moderates Islam Radical Islam Militants Arab occupation Arab Muslims Indoctrination Arab hatred Muslim hatred 'Palestinian' hatred 'Palestinian' Child abuse Jewish refugees Death cult 'Palestinian' human shields 'Palestinian' human bombs Arab oil lobby Arab oil mafia Islamic Aparthied Ethnic cleansing Passover massacre Muslim Arabs Arab atrocities Damour massacre Hebron massacre Politically correct Muhammad "palestinian" propaganda "Palestinians" Netanya massacre Hamas Abu Sayaaf Beheading Honor killing Jerusalem massacre Passover massacreBus bombing Islamists Mufti Koran Quran Radical Islam Islam Islamophobia Beslan massacre CAIR Islamic phobia Sharia Fatwa Mullah Kafir Infidels Islamofascism Islamic fascism Whabbism Whabbist Wahabbi Saudi Arabia AntiSemitism Anti West Cartoons Islamofacism "religion of peace" Huzbullah Arabism Ahmadinejad Ethnic cleansing Human shields "Palestinians" Israelis Jewish refugees Victims of terror Moderates Islam Radical Islam Militants Arab occupation Arab Muslims Indoctrination Arab hatred Muslim hatred palestinian violence Gaza Islamic Inquizition Honor killing Culture of death Death cult Arabism Zionism Mehdi Mahdi Iran Beithanoun Beit Hanoun Jimmy Carter Islamic apartheid Druze Kurds Asaad Damour Bethlehem Hama massacre CarterLabels: antisemitism, Appeasement, Arab Lobby, Arabism, Carter, hatred, Islamic apartheid, islamic lobby, Islamism, Jimmy Carter
How much did the Islamic lobby pay Obama??? or How much does a pro-palestinian line cost?
How much did the Islamic lobby pay Obama??? or How much does a pro-palestinian line cost?
Let's make it clear, Arab Muslims' obsession with their 'palestinian brothers' was never about sympathy for them but about anti-Israel fascism.
No wonder why they never had any interest in changing their situation (which is only due to 'palestinians' putting violence over economy, Jihad over progress), they're a useful tool ONLY when being still on the bottom.
After the frustration by Arabs, Muslims on Obama's cold shoulder to the so called "palestinian". (Arab Obamania? El-Shorbagi thinks Arabs ought to pay attention to all presidential candidates http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2007/833/in2.htm), Something must have happend so that Brack Obama had to say something in sympathy for the self inflicted violence-obsessed death cult, knows as the 'palestinian people'.
Obama: Palestinians Matter, Too
http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070314/cm_thenation/1517517
Iowa Democrat troubled by Obama statement on Palestinians http://www.belleville.com/mld/belleville/news/politics/16897403.htm
The question is, How much did the Arab lobby, the Muslim lobby, the Arab-Oil lobby, or even the wahabbi lobby FINALLY pay the candidate.
Labels: American Muslims, anti Israel bigotry, anti Israel fascism, Arab Americans, Arab Lobby, Arabism, islamic lobby, Islamism, Israel, Lobbies, Lobby, Obama, Oil, palestinians
