Pro-Israel Lobbyists Push to Eliminate Anti-Iran War Language from Pelosi Iraq Bill

[babylonsister]

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/mar/09/pro_israel_lobbyists_push_to_eliminate_anti_iran_war_language_from_pelosi_iraq_bill

Pro-Israel Lobbyists Push to Eliminate Anti-Iran War Language from Pelosi Iraq Bill

By M.J. Rosenberg

As everyone knows, House and Senate Democrats are trying to put together an Iraq war spending bill that will pressure the President to bring the troops home sooner rather than later. There is a general consensus on most issues relating to Iraq. However, the authoritative Congressional Quarterly daily report reveals today that some Democrats are fighting Speaker Pelosi's language which would prevent the President from going to war in Iran without the approval of Congress. Simply put, Pelosi wants to avoid a repeat of the Iraq experience in Iran. For Dems, this is a no-brainer, or so one would think.

But, according to CQ some of the same Democrats most vehement about ending the Iraq debacle are resisting denying the President unilateral authority to go to war in Iran. The hypocrisy is astounding. It is worth noting that the AIPAC conference begins in Washington this weekend with thousands of citizen lobbyists being deployed to Capitol Hill to deliver the message that Iran must be dealt with, one way or another.

This battle over the Pelosi language is part of the overall Iran effort.

And you thought it couldn't happen again!

Content of CQ report follows.

more...

[rodeodance]

1. oh, great, we can kiss the IraN provision Good-bye!

[Tom Rinaldo]

13. Some of us aren't sitting back waiting for leadership from Washington

We aren't waiting to see which voices in the Democratic caucus emerge loudest, those of reason or the war enablers. We've been through this one time too many already. We are now hard at work organizing our own people's lobby to Stop War with Iran before it ever starts.

Two days ago Wes Clark posted a Diary at Huffington Post called "The Danger of Silence"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gen-wesley-clark/the-danger-of-silence_b_42865.html

It accompanied the release of a new video by the stopIRanWar.com campaign. General Clark introduced it this way:

"Silence.

That is what worries me. With every passing day that the administration won't talk to Iran, we come closer to an Iranian nuclear weapon, and the time at which the decision must be made whether or not the administration will use its military option.

In today's video blog, Jon Soltz, chairman of VoteVets.org, and I discuss the serious consequences of using military force against Iran -- the impact on our men and women in uniform, U.S. influence in the region, and the stability of the Middle East."

Here is the link to that video:
http://www.stopiranwar.com/?page_id=16

You will notice that this video is a powerful tool for mobilizing opposition to the next war with Iran from across a very broad spectrum of voters. If you know anyone who has a yellow ribbon on their car, please make sure they watch this video. Get them the link, it's your patriotic duty!

The stopIranWar.com website also now has down loadable materials that we all can use to bring this campaign off of the web and onto the streets, including:

StopIranWar.com petitions that you can use in taking the campaign to the streets
StopIranWar.com T-Shirt Transfers complete with front, back, and sleeve images
StopIranWar.com signage for windows, cubes, and vehicles
StopIranWar.com doorhangers - yes, you can now go door-to-door in your neighborhood or apartment complex
StopIranWar.com postcards - a great way to reach your offline family and friends

Here is the direct link where all of these supplies can be downloaded from stopIranWar.com:
http://www.stopiranwar.com/?page_id=18

Yesterday Jon Soltz blogged live at kos. If you don't know who Jon Soltz is, here is his personal Bio blurb taken from kos:

"I'm Jon Soltz, Iraq War Veteran and chairman of VoteVets.org, a non-profit political organization dedicated to veterans advocacy. We're most known for our hard hitting political ads that show what it really means to support the troops."

Here is the link to that kos Diary by Jon Soltz.
http://www.dailykos.com/user/Jon%20Soltz/diary

On that Diary I asked Jon Soltz if there were plans to produce national TV Ads for the Stop Iran War campaign. VoteVets.org has produced incredibly powerful ads in the past, including "Because of Iraq" that got a good deal of national play immediately before the 2006 Congressional elections. Jon responded that if enough signatures could be gathered on the stopIranWar.com petition, it would give them the leverage they need to attract major donors to fund such a TV campaign.

Currently the number of signers is approaching 32,000. Please help us gather more and help kick this campaign into high national gear. Now is truly the time.

[dogman]

25. How sad is that.

There are supposed to be 100,000 members at DU. How many at Kos and the others? The total shows how many will bitch after the fact when they could do something now.

[DemBones DemBones]

20. Disgusting, isn't it? When will

we ever learn?

[peacetalksforall]

2. WHich Dems - the ones who recently spoke to them - Clinton and Obama?

[babylonsister]

3. No, they're Senators. This is a House effort. Sounds like

Emmanuel and Pelosi are scrapping; I don't know who else is involved yet.

[annabanana]

12. Made sure to post when you know which Dems... I would like

to fire off a couple of pointed letters...

[donkeyotay]

4. But we're concerned bush wants to attack Iran

Taking Iran out of the bill would be leaving Iran on the table for the Decider, who has an incredibly bad track record. Does he care about us? Why is AIPAC still allowed such power over our congress?

[Robson]

26. OK...let us know.

When Americans get the answer to that question about AIPAC, let us all know. I suspect that Mearsheimer and Walt had some insight within their report but it was squelched.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-fairbanks14may14,0,3078249.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

In all honesty I'm truly sick and tired of special interests consisting of a tiny minorities of wealthy Americans running the USA to their benefit. Just because they have more money than most they receive special attention and influence. Note the qualifier and describer of these interest groups is wealth! Yeah it's happened since the beginning of time, but it doesn't mean we should accept it.

I'm really tired of this BS.

[lvx35]

5. What was AIPACs stance on Iraq before the fact?

can this be used to equate their current efforts with the past failures?

[Scriptor Ignotus]

21. you remember how Israel got bombed with SCUDs

during Gulf War I by Iraq? That wasn't that long ago.

Israel has no allies in the Middle East. They wanted Saddam replaced, although I am not so sure they wanted him replaced in the way that he was. Like every subject in Israel, I have a feeling the country's opinion is divided.

[flpoljunkie]

6. Recommend reading the CQ report below, if you did not click on the link in original post

CQ TODAY -- March 8, 2007
By Jonathan Allen, CQ Staff

Hawkish pro-Israel lawmakers are pushing to strike a provision slated for the war spending bill that would, with some exceptions, require the president to seek congressional approval before using military force in Iran.

The influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee also is working to keep the language out, said an aide to a pro- Israel lawmaker.

The language is likely to spark an internal battle among House Democrats, some of whom fear an expansion of the Iraq War into Iran and others who are wary of sending a signal to Tehran that Congress wants to take the use of force off the table.

Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois predicted that the language would ultimately not be included in the supplemental on the House side, although it is favored by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.; John P. Murtha, D-Pa., chairman of the Appropriations Defense Subcommittee; and some Jewish lawmakers.

Emanuel said opposition could extend beyond pro-Israel lawmakers. “‘Keep this all about Iraq’ is the view,” he said.

But a Democratic leadership aide said there are no plans to remove the provision.

“There’s heat,” the leadership aide acknowledged. “We’ve heard their concerns, but we think it’s likely to remain on the bill.”

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/mar/09/pro_israel_lobbyists_push_to_eliminate_anti_iran_war_language_from_pelosi_iraq_bill

[yurbud]

7. sounds like Pelosi is on the right track

[yurbud]

8. Israel has a couple hundred nukes. Iran won't be invading or nuking them any time soon

Iran's support for Hezbollah is primarily an irritant whenever Israel decides to invaded Lebanon, and Iran's support for Hez might be negotiable if Israel gave up the neocon dream of reducing all Muslim countries to chaos.

[yurbud]

9. vote this up on netscape so others see it (LINK)

http://news.netscape.com/story/2007/03/09/israel-lobby-says-no-iran-war-ban-in-iraq-bill

[patrice]

17. Done.

My question for my representative, whom I and friends will see tomorrow at a local even, hopefully I can get 2 minutes with him:

I understand that AIPAC and others are supporting debate amongst Democrats about verbiage in the Defense Appropriations bill that requires Congressional approval for military actions against Iran. A question about Israeli concerns here: Since Israel has nuclear weapons, Iran will not attack it. It appears that Israel's real problem is with Iranian support for Hezbollah in Lebannon. Do you agree that Iranian support for Hezbollah would be more negotiable if the U.S. and Saudi Arabia weren't destabilizing the region?

[yurbud]

18. which rep? I'd be curious to hear the reply. Problem is, AIPAC doesn't want advice or "help"

they want obedience.

In Iran's diplomatic overture to us, I think they mentioned recognizing Israel and defunding Hezbollah if Israel withdrew from the West Bank and Gaza. Even if Israel didn't want to do that, it is at least a reasonable starting point.

[patrice]

19. Dennis Moore

If I don't get to ask my question, preferably in front of the group, I'm seriously thinking about leafletting the bunch of them afterwards. It's a Democratic breakfast. What do you think?

My question revised:

I understand that the American Israeli Political Action Committee and others are supporting debate amongst Democrats to remove verbiage in the Defense Appropriations bill that requires Congressional approval for military actions against Iran. A couple of questions about Israeli concerns here: Since Israel has many nuclear weapons, Iran will not attack it. So, other than to show political strength against Nancy Pelosi, what is the point of removing this language from the appropriations bill in order to send a signal that the use of force will not be taken off of the table, when an Iranian attack on Israel is not likely in the first place?

And since it is unlikely that Iran will attack a nuclear armed Israel, it appears that Israel's real problem is with Iranian support for Hezbollah in Lebannon. Do you agree that Iranian support for Hezbollah would be more negotiable if the U.S. and Saudi Arabia weren't destabilizing the region?

[patrice]

22. I have decided that I am going to do both.

Ask Rep. Moore in front of the group if I get a chance and leaflet the crowd with the questions and Moores contact info.

[patrice]

23. How can I check on that "diplomatic overture"?

Google News?

Is that the Iranian memo that Condi didn't get?

[yurbud]

29. here's some links for a start

Washington Post lead paragraph:

Just after the lightning takeover of Baghdad by U.S. forces three years ago, an unusual two-page document spewed out of a fax machine at the Near East bureau of the State Department. It was a proposal from Iran for a broad dialogue with the United States, and the fax suggested everything was on the table -- including full cooperation on nuclear programs, acceptance of Israel and the termination of Iranian support for Palestinian militant groups.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/17/AR2006061700727.html

Democracy Now coverage:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/022707J.shtml

[patrice]

31. Thank You! n/t

[bonito]

10. Aipac website

http://www.aipac.org/about_AIPAC/default.asp

[robinlynne]

11. ok. This is a post which makes sense to talk about. nt

[Larry Allen]

14. If they want this war with Iran, they aren't pro-Israel

[LeftishBrit]

15. You are right there!!!!!

[HuffleClaw]

16. f*ck 'em, f*ck 'em all.

right in the EAR.


when a citizen of one nation puts ANOTHER nations' interests above their own something is terribly wrong.

[Robson]

24. What is AIPAC?

AIPAC appears to be a conservative organization affiliated with the Likud Party in Israel. They've also taken a stance in aggreement with the Israeli PM that the USA should not talk to Syria and Iran.

Is this an organization of American citizens lobbying for another country or are they Israelis lobbying for American power? I might be old fashioned here, but I like to see Americans lobbying for the USA.

BTW was the thread that was started discussing Israeli lobbying removed or moved as I can't seem to find it? I thought it had many good posts from all sides. edited to add: Forget the last sentence it was moved. But what does a discussion on lobbying influence have to do with Israeli-Palestiniean relations?

[KoKo]

27. Hey....Apparently AIPAC's BIG CONVENTION is in DC and their Lobbyists are

Pumped up and Fanning out to HIT THE HILL...

So, this isn't surprising. They aren't much different from Exxon/Mobil and the rest include the War Drum Beaters from the Military Industrial Complex in this this BATTLE for our TAX DOLLARS...Are they?

Let them all come...let them TAKE OUR TAX DOLLARS FOR THEIR POCKETS....Why should we care?

Pelosi is a Dork...and Hoyer is a Hero...Murtha is a "Talking Head for Peaceniks" and Bush Administration SPEAKS THE TRUTH...and Hoyer is a CENTRIST...and we SHOULD ALL LISTEN TO HIM FOR THE ROADMAP FOR DEM VICTORIES. Hoyer is DA MAN for CENTRISM.

:sarcasm: SPIN ....SPIN.......SPIN...and after awhile no one KNOWS WHAT TO BELIEVE...but SPIN...SPIN....SPIN..

[Clarkie1]

28. Clark warned about the "New York money people." PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION.

"How can you talk about bombing a country when you won't even talk to them?" said Clark. "It's outrageous. We're the United States of America; we don't do that. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the military option is off the table -- but diplomacy is not what Jim Baker says it is. It's not, What will it take for you boys to support us on Iraq? It's sitting down for a couple of days and talking about our families and our hopes, and building relationships."

When we asked him what made him so sure the Bush administration was headed in this direction, he replied: "You just have to read what's in the Israeli press. The Jewish community is divided but there is so much pressure being channeled from the New York money people to the office seekers."

At one point Melinda reminded him that she was taking down everything he said (a fact that would have been hard to miss, since she was taking notes on a not-inconspicuous legal pad). His response: 'Yes, I know." For Clark, this is the biggest foreign policy issue facing the U.S. "I'm worried about the surge," he said. "But I'm worried about this even more."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/dc-notes-wes-clark-is-_b_37837.html


www.stopiranwar.com

[Jcrowley]

30. K&R n/t