Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 09:14 AM Sep 2015

AIPAC Spent Millions to Defeat the Iran Deal. Instead, It May Have Destroyed Itself

http://www.thenation.com/article/aipac-spent-millions-of-dollars-to-defeat-the-iran-deal-instead-it-may-have-destroyed-itself/

The powerful Israel lobby has been badly damaged, and that’s good news for both Palestinians and Israelis.

By M.J. Rosenberg

It is hard to exaggerate the damage inflicted on AIPAC by the congressional defeat of its efforts to torpedo the Iran nuclear deal. It is not as if AIPAC won’t live to fight again, because it will, but this defeat has ruptured the status quo, possibly forever.


The extent of its efforts to defeat the deal was unprecedented even for a lobby known for its no-holds-barred wars against past White House initiatives it considered unfriendly to Israel, going all the way back to the Ford administration. AIPAC, and its cutout Citizens For A Nuclear Free Iran, reportedly budgeted upwards of $20 million for a campaign that included flooding the airwaves with television spots; buying full-page newspaper ads, arranging fly-ins of AIPAC members to Washington, organizing demonstrations at offices of AIPAC-friendly members of Congress who were believed to be wavering, and ensuring that problematic legislators were officially warned by precisely the right donor. Rank-and-file AIPAC members were largely irrelevant to the process. Money did the talking, and also the yelling and the cursing when necessary. As one congressional staffer put it to me, “Taking money from AIPAC is like getting a loan from the mob. You better not forget to pay it back. They walk into this office like they own it.”

....................

Good news for the world!




79 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
AIPAC Spent Millions to Defeat the Iran Deal. Instead, It May Have Destroyed Itself (Original Post) Fred Sanders Sep 2015 OP
K&R... spanone Sep 2015 #1
K&R! Katashi_itto Sep 2015 #2
One can only hope that it has...... peacebird Sep 2015 #3
We could only wish that were true. BillZBubb Sep 2015 #4
The fact that not a single wavering Democrat not already 100% expected to favor Israel and AIPAC over America changed their Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #5
"to favor Israel over America" oberliner Sep 2015 #16
Not just me, the World unanimously sees it that way also! I am perfectly content with the company. Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #17
President Obama indicated that the defense of Israel is a top priority oberliner Sep 2015 #20
"Family"? Obscure word..but did Obama use that word or is that an implication from other words Obama has spoken? Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #21
"Israel isn’t just an ally, it’s not just a friend — it’s family." oberliner Sep 2015 #25
Yeah, family... R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2015 #71
Except not oberliner Sep 2015 #75
"Family" could indeed, as you say, be interpreted many ways - the pulling the word out of context to make a point was my only point. Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #79
Yeah. I've got cousins like that. GoneFishin Sep 2015 #44
And Israel, AIPAC, and the right wing call him a liar. BillZBubb Sep 2015 #24
Exactly oberliner Sep 2015 #26
Leaderships of all 3 are now aggressive conservative militarists opposed Hortensis Sep 2015 #32
Well, he's a secret stealth Muslim bent on our destruction. Enthusiast Sep 2015 #62
Just like family... R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2015 #72
"The World unanimously"?? You are either joking or extremely audicious. rhett o rick Sep 2015 #49
A dog whistle for over 60 years now....nt Joe the Revelator Sep 2015 #57
AIPAC will go nowhere. They represent the hingepin in NorthCarolina Sep 2015 #6
AIPAC will be back in the driver's seat if a republican is elected president tularetom Sep 2015 #7
Really? She supported the Iran deal two hours after it was announced. It is nice to make shit up still_one Sep 2015 #28
You mean she "supported" the deal tularetom Sep 2015 #35
+1 a whole bunch! Enthusiast Sep 2015 #63
in terms of enforcing the deal after 2016 6chars Sep 2015 #76
I could not agree more and that's what bothers me about her tularetom Sep 2015 #78
I guess you hear what you want. Rationalization is the key to happiness for some. nm rhett o rick Sep 2015 #50
don't count your chickens....like the posts about the demise of the gop dembotoz Sep 2015 #8
The chickens MAY not have have hatched yet, but the eggs are cracking. Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #11
Indeed, and the GOP seems to be a scrambled mess right now-- it's glorious Fast Walker 52 Sep 2015 #27
Republicons are just a silly distraction while the DLC Democrats ram thru rhett o rick Sep 2015 #51
+1 You nailed it an entire shit load. Enthusiast Sep 2015 #64
Yes Obama had his ducks all lined up before Wellstone ruled Sep 2015 #9
The Four Senatraitors have been noticeably quiet..why are they not loudly defending their positions? Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #10
This was a good read (TheNation). The four dems who voted against the bill: erronis Sep 2015 #18
I think this vote shows why Schumer should NOT be Senate Majority Leader later... cascadiance Sep 2015 #55
+100% Enthusiast Sep 2015 #65
You misspelled schemer. R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2015 #73
Their allegiance is not based on religion but rather on money and on fear of being primaried or tblue37 Sep 2015 #30
This vote outed the traitors padfun Sep 2015 #12
"We really need to remove the traitors from our midst." oberliner Sep 2015 #14
It's probably not the correct term, legally speaking. Scootaloo Sep 2015 #31
Nicely said. IdaBriggs Sep 2015 #67
Please don't forget profits and the almighty MIC. R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2015 #74
The CIA is our biggest traitor rusty fender Sep 2015 #37
Another fun dog whistle. Joe the Revelator Sep 2015 #58
"unfriendly to Israel" Martin Eden Sep 2015 #13
Propaganda thrives on lies and deceit and repetition of same using money....you ask a question that has no answer. Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #15
They're doing it for a reason and they know the reason, so there is an answer. Martin Eden Sep 2015 #19
It's about time! eom Duval Sep 2015 #22
I don't care too much for money... tomm2thumbs Sep 2015 #23
K&R. This quote needs to be spread far and wide: tblue37 Sep 2015 #29
We couldn't be that lucky Demeter Sep 2015 #33
How is it that foreign lobbyist are even legal? procon Sep 2015 #34
Citizen's United made political corruption legal in America, so foreign nations would be negligent Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #38
But Sen Sanders isn't for sale. What about H. Clinton? nm rhett o rick Sep 2015 #52
FARA lofty1 Sep 2015 #45
Great article. Scurrilous Sep 2015 #36
Suck it, AIPAC. Arugula Latte Sep 2015 #39
That's some long awaited good news! Thanks for posting it. (nt) Babel_17 Sep 2015 #40
Israel won't hesitate to kill Americans if they believe it will benefit them. bvar22 Sep 2015 #41
and 9/11 was an inside job.... Joe the Revelator Sep 2015 #59
I'm glad you have come to that realization. Enthusiast Sep 2015 #66
Thanks for highlighting this incident roscoeroscoe Sep 2015 #60
An outcome much to be hoped for. K&R Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2015 #42
the dynamic seems to have reversed itself--Bibi remade Likud in the GOP's image so it's now MisterP Sep 2015 #43
I guess the British must have been Turbineguy Sep 2015 #46
They've only Themselves to Blame Jason Huh Sep 2015 #47
K&R! zentrum Sep 2015 #48
I never understood how AIPAC is able to operate... ut oh Sep 2015 #53
Chalk one for independent-minded Congress peeps. May AIPAC slink off into the sunset of irrelevance. Surya Gayatri Sep 2015 #54
From The Nation article: Jason Huh Sep 2015 #56
A political earthquake. There have been many under Obama...next up, the NRA. Slo-mo revolution. Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #70
I agree with the President on this. LuvNewcastle Sep 2015 #61
Great news malaise Sep 2015 #68
Really mtasselin Sep 2015 #69
Great read underpants Sep 2015 #77

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)
4. We could only wish that were true.
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 09:25 AM
Sep 2015

AIPAC will remain a powerful force behind terrible US policy. If AIPAC is able to help defeat one of the Democratic senators who voted with the president, its influence will be increased. Some of those senators will have a decline in donors as retaliation.

The good news is AIPAC lost this one. For that we can be thankful. The bad news is that AIPAC is still very influential and will remain so.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
5. The fact that not a single wavering Democrat not already 100% expected to favor Israel and AIPAC over America changed their
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 09:32 AM
Sep 2015

minds must be crushing and would not have gone unnoticed by anyone who used to cower before them.

Obama counted 42 Senators before he negotiated the Iran deal Senate legislative procedure 3 months ago.

42 today.

 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
20. President Obama indicated that the defense of Israel is a top priority
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 10:58 AM
Sep 2015

And that Israel is more than an ally or a friend, but family.

He has expounding at length about how the agreement is, in fact, good for Israel.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
21. "Family"? Obscure word..but did Obama use that word or is that an implication from other words Obama has spoken?
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 11:01 AM
Sep 2015
 

R. Daneel Olivaw

(12,606 posts)
71. Yeah, family...
Sun Sep 13, 2015, 09:29 AM
Sep 2015

Like the argumentative and bigoted family member during the holidays: trying to cause a rukus.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
79. "Family" could indeed, as you say, be interpreted many ways - the pulling the word out of context to make a point was my only point.
Sun Sep 13, 2015, 03:59 PM
Sep 2015

In context, it still could be interpreted different ways...words are funny things, semantical tangles at times.

 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
26. Exactly
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 11:31 AM
Sep 2015

It's a difference of opinion regarding whether or not the deal is a positive one in terms of Israel's security.

Those who support the deal agree with Obama that it is.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
32. Leaderships of all 3 are now aggressive conservative militarists opposed
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 12:03 PM
Sep 2015

to diplomacy by nature, not by situation.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
49. "The World unanimously"?? You are either joking or extremely audicious.
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 08:06 PM
Sep 2015

The World doesn't unanimously agree with anything.

 

NorthCarolina

(11,197 posts)
6. AIPAC will go nowhere. They represent the hingepin in
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 09:44 AM
Sep 2015

the biggest taxpayer money laundering scheme the world has ever known. They will be protected by all of the US legislators on their payroll.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
7. AIPAC will be back in the driver's seat if a republican is elected president
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 09:45 AM
Sep 2015

And by "republican" I mean any candidate running with an "R" after his name, plus Hillary Clinton.

still_one

(92,110 posts)
28. Really? She supported the Iran deal two hours after it was announced. It is nice to make shit up
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 11:48 AM
Sep 2015

isn't it

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
35. You mean she "supported" the deal
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 12:18 PM
Sep 2015

If you had actually listened to the speech she gave at that right wing neocon think tank last week, she spent about 30 seconds saying diplomacy was important and 15 minutes detailing all the nasty shit she was gonna do to Iran if they even thought about reneging on the deal.

She's still trying to convince us that she's more macho than that wussy Obama.

6chars

(3,967 posts)
76. in terms of enforcing the deal after 2016
Sun Sep 13, 2015, 10:36 AM
Sep 2015

Obama can't do anything about it. candidates to succeed him should certainly say what their plans are.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
78. I could not agree more and that's what bothers me about her
Sun Sep 13, 2015, 11:06 AM
Sep 2015

She has made it very clear what her plans are and I oppose them.

Furthermore, we have five partners to this deal who might have a thing or two to say about her eagerness to start a war with Iran - the other four permanent members of the UN Security Council - (China, Russia, France, UK) plus Germany. I don't think she will be able to unilaterally implement military action against Iran without the full agreement of all parties, but I wouldn't put it past her to try.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
51. Republicons are just a silly distraction while the DLC Democrats ram thru
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 08:10 PM
Sep 2015

fracking, TPP free trade agreements, drone killings, XL Pipelines, Arctic drilling, and kill Social Security. The neocons love H. Clinton. I wonder why.

 

Wellstone ruled

(34,661 posts)
9. Yes Obama had his ducks all lined up before
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 09:56 AM
Sep 2015

he pulled the trigger on this one. Animosity over Israel's attempts to dictate US policy finally came to a head,and our President appointed Mr.Kerry point person to shut the AIPAC Yammering Stooges up once and for all. War Mongering Bibi got his come uppin's. Notice Chuckie Schumer is all quite. The only real noise is from the Republican peanut gallery and the D.C. Pundtocracy. There is more dollars to be made working with Iran than keeping with the poking a stick in their eye. Pisses the Cheney Neo-Cons off,but what the hay.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
10. The Four Senatraitors have been noticeably quiet..why are they not loudly defending their positions?
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 09:58 AM
Sep 2015

Could it be they allowed their religious allegiances to overwhelm their political allegiances and so they have no defence?

It happens.

It should not.

 

cascadiance

(19,537 posts)
55. I think this vote shows why Schumer should NOT be Senate Majority Leader later...
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 10:00 PM
Sep 2015

... when Reid leaves. Shows that he's working against party and the country's interests when lobby groups like AIPAC come calling! We can't afford that in the next Senate session.

Actually these senators voted for cloture on the bill that was against the deal, but I know what you meant.

tblue37

(65,269 posts)
30. Their allegiance is not based on religion but rather on money and on fear of being primaried or
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 11:57 AM
Sep 2015

voted out of office in the next election.

padfun

(1,786 posts)
12. This vote outed the traitors
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 10:23 AM
Sep 2015

IT showed who was aligned with the USA and who was with Israel. We really need to remove the traitors from our midst. We need what is best for the USA and not what is best for Israel.

Recently, I read something where the CIA considers MOSSAD one of their greatest spy threats. And make no mistake, they are VERY good at what they do. Hopefully this should open more eyes (I doubt it.)

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
31. It's probably not the correct term, legally speaking.
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 11:59 AM
Sep 2015

But I'm not sure the language has yet evolved a term for members of government who seek to start a war between their nation and another solely for the benefit of a third.

Martin Eden

(12,859 posts)
13. "unfriendly to Israel"
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 10:23 AM
Sep 2015

How is this agreement to curb Iran's nuclear program unfriendly to Israel?

I'm not talking about opposition to the deal by Netanyahu; I'm talking about Israel's actual security.

If this deal were to fall apart, Iran wouldn't have to give up so much of their fissile material and means of production. If they are indeed intent on acquiring nuclear weapons and it is Netanyahu's goal to prevent that, he should be in favor of the deal.

More likely what he's really trying to prevent is the revitalization of Iran's economy and normalization of relations with the rest of the world that will come with the lifting of sanctions. The issue isn't nukes so much as Iran's backing of Hezbollah and Hamas. I think AIPAC's lobbying has more to do with the I/P conflict than with nukes.

I also think Israeli hardliners see war between the US and Iran as a positive development -- and it's much more likely without this nuclear deal.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
15. Propaganda thrives on lies and deceit and repetition of same using money....you ask a question that has no answer.
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 10:27 AM
Sep 2015

Martin Eden

(12,859 posts)
19. They're doing it for a reason and they know the reason, so there is an answer.
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 10:43 AM
Sep 2015

Like I said, I think it has more to do with local conflicts than nukes -- and a desire for war with Iran at US expense.

tblue37

(65,269 posts)
29. K&R. This quote needs to be spread far and wide:
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 11:55 AM
Sep 2015

“Taking money from AIPAC is like getting a loan from the mob. You better not forget to pay it back. They walk into this office like they own it.”

 

Demeter

(85,373 posts)
33. We couldn't be that lucky
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 12:05 PM
Sep 2015

When people are grasping for power, they hold onto every evil idea that has ever been born. And the evil becomes immortal...

procon

(15,805 posts)
34. How is it that foreign lobbyist are even legal?
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 12:14 PM
Sep 2015

It's bad enough that Americans have take a backseat to the wealthy corporate lobbyists and billionaires who buy the representatives we elected to fix our local problems. It's unconscionable that we also have to compete with the millions that the state of Israel and other pro-Israel interests are throwing around to bribe our -- admittedly -- greedy and self serving American politicians. Israel doesn't care about what's best for America, nor should they, any more than Americans should put the interest of any other foreign country ahead of our own. I don't want to advance the warmongering and apartheid policies of Israel, and I certainly don't want any other foreign government trying to meddle in the government processes of America and making it even more corrupt than it is already.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
38. Citizen's United made political corruption legal in America, so foreign nations would be negligent
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 01:19 PM
Sep 2015

not to do take their share of the merchandise offered for sale!

lofty1

(62 posts)
45. FARA
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 05:58 PM
Sep 2015

There is the Foreign Agents Registration Act that is supposed to make a distinction between a foreign lobbyist and a foreign agent http://www.fara.gov/

 

Arugula Latte

(50,566 posts)
39. Suck it, AIPAC.
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 01:31 PM
Sep 2015

However, I think AIPAC will come back like an infection where you didn't use up all your antibiotics.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
41. Israel won't hesitate to kill Americans if they believe it will benefit them.
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 03:21 PM
Sep 2015

USS Liberty after being struck and strafed with cannon fire by Israeli fighters and torpedo boats despite the huge American Flags and US ID numbers plainly visible from any side.
This was no accident.

http://www.usslibertyveterans.org/

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
43. the dynamic seems to have reversed itself--Bibi remade Likud in the GOP's image so it's now
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 04:45 PM
Sep 2015

the GOP-Israel (like how the Tories remade themselves into GOP-Canada)

90% of its money (and voters, the joke goes) come from the US now

instead of AIPAC being allowed to determine who is or isn't acceptable in both parties, now Israeli politics has made itself dependent on the US's good graces in a way that browbeating Washington for more money never had before

Turbineguy

(37,312 posts)
46. I guess the British must have been
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 06:29 PM
Sep 2015

asking this question in 1789 too. "Are those colonists ready for sovereignty?"

ut oh

(893 posts)
53. I never understood how AIPAC is able to operate...
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 09:04 PM
Sep 2015

legally.

Seems they lobby for Israel, not American Jews/American-Israeli....

Isn't that a foreign nation exercising influence on American politics? I thought the GOP and conservatives in general seem to never want foreign influence except when it helps their side...

 

Jason Huh

(36 posts)
56. From The Nation article:
Sun Sep 13, 2015, 12:13 AM
Sep 2015
...J Street didn’t do a fraction as much to defeat AIPAC as AIPAC and the Netanyahu government did themselves. Starting as far back as 2008, when the Israeli leadership first had to consider that Barack Obama would likely win the election, it did not take kindly to the president. Media reports told of Israelis being immune to the Obama mania that had seized the planet. Maybe it was his middle name or maybe something else. In 2012, Netanyahu all but endorsed Mitt Romney, allowing his associates to denigrate the president.

Netanyahu’s animus came to a head when his ambassador to the United States arranged for him to speak to a joint meeting of Congress about Iran this past March, without even letting the White House know that the prime minister was planning a visit. Netanyahu came and—how else to put this?—dissed the president of the United States in his own capital.


AIPAC’s power is built on the belief that it cannot be challenged with impunity, a belief that is on the verge of being exposed as illusory. When Senator Chuck Schumer, AIPAC’s Senate enforcer on Israel-related issues, cannot even deliver his and New York’s junior senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, it is clear that the bad old days of lobby intimidation may be passing. When as stalwart an AIPAC supporter as Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz defects because she fears that choosing AIPAC over a Democratic president could cost her the post she holds as chair of the Democratic National Committee, the power dynamic has clearly changed. When Congressman Jerry Nadler, who represents more Orthodox Jews than any other member of Congress, tells AIPAC that he won’t be with them this time, it is impossible not to sense a political earthquake.

In 2014, it was hard to find a single Jewish member of Congress (not even Senator Bernie Sanders) who would break with AIPAC’s support for Israel’s war on Gaza. One year later, nine of 11 Jewish senators and most of the Jewish House members are bucking AIPAC and the Israeli government on, of all things, the Islamic Republic of Iran.


We might get our foreign policy back for the first time since 1967!

LuvNewcastle

(16,843 posts)
61. I agree with the President on this.
Sun Sep 13, 2015, 07:04 AM
Sep 2015

I think the Iran deal is the best thing for the U.S. and Israel, not to mention Iran. It's probably not the best thing for the Likud Party and their desires for domination in the Middle East, but Likud doesn't represent most of Israel. I think it's possible to come up with a deal in which all parties can be winners, and I think this agreement comes the closest to that end.

mtasselin

(666 posts)
69. Really
Sun Sep 13, 2015, 08:32 AM
Sep 2015

It didn't cost them any money it was American tax payer money, did they get some bruises, yes, but they will come over and ask for more money and they will get it and the cycle continues.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»AIPAC Spent Millions to D...