“isn’t it odd that she [Rosenthal] has to defend her qualifications for a position in the U.S. government by saying how much she “loves” a foreign country?”

Yes!! it is very odd

wow, Robert, powerful article

how stymied our entire country is by this bickering, by a few pro-Israelis! (can a few pro-American’s get in on this debate?)

The truth is, that Jewes people are first and for all Jewes, maby they are afther that citizen of the country where they live, they create every where Jewes base, and the whole is working for Israel.

So you can not speek about Jewes Americans, they play the American citizen, but are tru and tru Jewes working and living for Israel, maby I generalize to much here, a good friend of me, who is a Jew but married an Christion Dutch woman, told me how lucky he wash, to escape the burden and pression of the Jewes religion, and how he lather on more or less wash banned, from social living.

The not Jewes has to be very jalouse, but as you start atacking this untru citizen, they make you a anti-Semiet, but I think as they have the right to work and fight and maby the commitment for their country and tribut, we have the same right to fight alian lobbys and people who use our countrys as base for their objectives.

Ha’aretz says U.S. officials face ‘pro-Israel’ background check

By Stephen M. Walt

“December 09, 2009 “FP” Dec. 02, 2009—There is an amazing story in Ha’aretz today on the “pro-Israel” litmus test that determines who is permitted to serve in the United States government. Here’s the sort of lede you’re not likely to read in the New York Times or Washington Post:

  Every appointee to the American government must endure a thorough background check by the American Jewish community.

  In the case of Obama’s government in particular, every criticism against Israel made by a potential government appointee has become a catalyst for debate about whether appointing “another leftist” offers proof that Obama does not truly support Israel.”

The story goes on to rehearse what happened to Chas Freeman (whose appointment was derailed by the Israel lobby because he voiced a few mild criticisms of Israel’s behavior) and reports that similar complaints are now being raised against the appointment of former Senator Chuck Hagel. Even more bizarrely, the Zionist Organization of America and other rightwing Jewish groups are complaining about the appointment of Hannah Rosenthal to direct the Office to Combat and Monitor Anti-Semitism. Why? Apparently she’s been involved with J Street and other “leftwing” organizations that ZOA et al deem insufficiently ardent in their support for the Jewish state, and has suggested that progressive forces need to be more vocal in advancing the peace process.

One has to feel a certain sympathy for Ms. Rosenthal, who is forced to defend her own appointment by telling an interviewer:

  I love Israel. I have lived in Israel. I go back and visit every chance I can. I consider it part of my heart. And because I love it so much, I want to see it safe and secure and free and democratic and living safely.”

These are fine sentiments, but isn’t it odd that she has to defend her qualifications for a position in the U.S. government by saying how much she “loves” a foreign country? For an American official in her position, what matters is that she loves America, and that she believes anti-semitism is a hateful philosophy that should be opposed vigorously. Whether she loves Israel or France or Thailand or Namibia, etc., is irrelevant. (And yes, it’s entirely possible to loathe anti-Semitism and not love Israel).

But the real lesson of all these episodes is the effect of this litmus test on the foreign policy community more broadly. Groups in the lobby target public servants like Freeman, Hagel, and Rosenthal because they want to make sure that no one with even a mildly independent view on Middle East affairs gets appointed. By making an example of them, they seek to discourage independent-minded people from expressing their views openly, lest doing so derail their own career prospects later on. And it works. Even if the lobby doesn’t manage to block every single appointment, they can make any administration think twice about a potentially “controversial” choice and use the threat to stifle open discourse among virtually all members of the mainstream foreign policy community (and certainly anyone who aspires to public service in Washington).”
************

Click on link for the rest of article:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24145.htm

Won? You make it sound like a poker game.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Many historians, Israeli ones too, question the story that the ‘67 war was one of self-defense and instead point to it being a continuation of provocations begun the year before and stretching back to the ill fated aggression against Egypt in 1956 or as Illan Pappe posits; the final fulfillment of Ben Gurion’s Plan Dalet to conquer all of Eretz Israel cleansing the land of its indigenous inhabitants. 

FWIW - the Jordanians exercised legal, if temporary, sovereignty over the West Bank based on the ‘49 Armistice.

What is without question and un-recognized by any entity except Israel itself is the annexation of East Jerusalem, the military occupation of the West Bank, and the siege of Gaza penning its inhabitants in what’s become a modern day analogue to the Warsaw Ghetto. Saying the West Bank was not part of a sovereign territory and hence Israel was justified in taking it is simple mnemonic prestidigitation.

But we all know Israel doesn’t give a whit about what the international community says. As long as the US government genuflects to the right wing Israeli lobby i.e. AIPAC it has virtual carte blanche in the area.

In Israel’s case, where the prior holder of the west bank had seized that land unlawfully, the state(Israel) which subsequently takes the territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has against that prior holder, a better title.

Occupation:

From dictionary.com

2.    possession, settlement, or use of land or property.
4.    the act of occupying.
5.    the state of being occupied.
6.    the seizure and control of an area by military forces, esp. foreign territory.

What occupation?  The West Bank has Never been sovereign territory, and was won from a nation which held no legal claim to the area.

“Compare pictures - facts and truth on the new holocaust  

THE GRANDCHILDREN OF HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS FROM WORLD WAR II ARE DOING TO THE PALESTINIANS EXACTLY WHAT WAS DONE TO THEM BY NAZI GERMANY …
BUILDING WALLS & FENCES TO KEEP PEOPLE IN PRISON”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Click on link to view these horrific & incredible photos. See & judge for yourself:

http://mwcnews.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27972&Itemid=26

Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah - we took it by force fair and square and if we want to ethnically cleanse it by force we’ll damn well do what we please. Screw international law. To hell with the UN, EU, Russia and the rest of the international community. Its ok for us to commit crimes against humanity because God said this this land is ours. It says so right in the Bible and the Torah. So there, now leave us alone but please keep sending us your dollars.

And as for a peace agreement - we have no intention to make peace - there’s too much money to be made with the status quo - all Arabs out!

not occupied territory;  land is theirs to build on.

They are just creating an new hollocaust, but this time in Palestina.

By DocReality, December 9 at 11:49 pm #

These animals make the Nazis look like amateurs

The comparison is startlingly and compellingly inane and vicious in the standard bigoted leftist way. Whereas the Nazis flat-out murdered tens of millions in a genocidal war of conquest, Jews build homes on ancestral lands which are legally disputed and acquired in a defensive war against genocidal aggressors.

Why let a thoughtless meme get in the way of truth?

Asshat.

These animals make the Nazis look like amateurs