Abramoff and the Bush war agenda (You can't make this stuff up)

[ProSense]

Informed Comment
Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is Professor of History at the University of Michigan

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Abramoff and al-Arian: Lobbyist's "Charity" a Front for Terrorism

The guilty plea of fabulously wealthy and highly corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff raised the question of whether he would roll over on congressmen involved in illegal fundraising and other crimes with him. Some twenty Republicans on Capitol Hill are said to be in danger.

Abramoff's dense network of illicit finances and phony charities might end some political careers in the United States. But the investigation into his activities by the FBI also shed light on the ways in which rightwing American Jews have often been involved in funding what are essentially terrorist activities by armed land thieves in Palestinian territory.

Indeed, it was this terror funding of Israeli far right militiamen that tripped Abramoff up, since the FBI discovered that he had misled Indian tribes into giving money to the Jabotinskyites, and then began wondering if he had defrauded the tribes in other ways. (You betcha!) The Indian leaders were furious when they discovered they had been used to oppress another dispossessed indigenous people, the Palestinians, calling it "Outer Limits bizarre" and saying that they would never have willingly given money to such a cause.

Newsweek's Mike Issikoff reported last May that Abramoff diverted $140,000 from a charity ostensibly to benefit inner-city youths to militant Israeli colonists who had usurped land in the Palestinian West Bank. Isikoff wrote:

http://www.juancole.com/2006/01/abramoff-and-al-arian-lobbyists.html

Snip...


Yet, many in the US media persist in trying to use these fig leafs. It is not easy to understand who benefits from vilifying Arafat and making Sharon's policies of dictating unilateral “solutions” look good. Why would one discuss the withdrawal of Israeli troops and settlers from Gaza without explaining that per International Law, Gaza remains occupied or that in exchange for withdrawing the 2% of total settlers (from Gaza), Sharon added 4% settlers in the West Bank? One can understand the media’s concern for the health of an Israeli Prime Minister but what should never be excused is shabby journalism and hypocrisy in covering illnesses of leaders like Arafat versus Sharon.

Perhaps other affairs gives more hints of these double standards. Going back, one could site the dubious reasons for invading Iraq while supporting Israel (Israel was and continue to be in violation of 10 times more UN resolutions than Iraq ever was). More recently the Abramoff affair may also shed some light (and may be the straw that breaks the camels’ back). Abramoff pleaded guilty to defrauding Native American tribes of million and directing the money through fake charities to gain political influence and to help his pet causes. But why is it that many in the US media (with few brave exceptions) failed to mention that his top “cause” and his passion was Israeli colonization of Palestinian lands. Abramoff for example diverted money (“charity donations”) to Israeli settlers living illegally on Palestinian lands. His “customers” were told this money is intended for inner city poor Americans. Instead the money bought military hardware to help settlers terrorize native Palestinians. Ironically Native Americans were defrauded into funding oppression and colonization of other native people. Abramoff also used his influence with Congressman Bob Nye to get a government contract worth $3 million to an obscure Israeli security company and on and on.

But why is this information not being highlighted or even mentioned on the pages of major newspapers or discussed in TV programs. Could it be that this could harm the “special relationship” between the US and Israeli governments that is so well guarded now and so detrimental to US public interests. After all, even if one accepts the ludicrous suggestion that Israel is a democracy, why should we give Israel (0.1% of the world population) more money and resources and vetoes at the UN Security council than Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and Central America combined? Why should US taxpayers give more federal aid to Israel per capita than many states in the US? One can only be thankful that we have an international mainstream media, some courageous US media outlets that publish such information, and the Internet. Dare we hope that 2006 will be a pivotal year when the avalanche of information and public activism become so large that the fig leafs of misinformation, diversions and double-standards will be swept aside?


http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2006/01/1723673.php

[Erika]

1. Native Americans were defrauded

Yes, by Abramhoff. I guess thats why Gillespie wanted 50 more just like him.

Tell me that the GOP aren't racists. The names he called the natives were disgusting. But he was a $100,000 W donor. Money to the GOP rules all.

[JDPriestly]

2. Your post smells anti-semitic, anti-Jewish.

Face it, most Jews are Democrats. Most are liberal. Abramoff got most of his money from American Indian and corporate sources. He was involved in places as different as Russia and the Marianas. He is Jewish and either very Conservative or Orthodox I believe. He was bound to also be involved in Israel. But, I haven't seen evidence that he was all that involved there. There seem to be a lot of people out there who want to drag the Israelis through the mud no matter what happens. I'm surprised no one floated the theory that the Israelis had plotted the Katrina disaster. It's just yet another opportunity to put anti-Jewish ideas into the media. Abramoff was also actively funding Ohio and California Republican politicians. His influence buying was all over the place.

[ProSense]

3. Give me a break. There is much written

about this. I posted the articles as a source of information. His influence buying was all over the place as you said. Abramoff is first and foremost a crook. He was bound to be connected to the tribes too. You can read into the article whatever you want, but leave me out of your BS.

[ingac70]

4. Any exposure of the Israeli right makes you an "anti-Semite"

:sarcasm:

Didn't you know?

[No Exit]

6. Yes, and soon people will go to jail for it.

I mean, they're going to jail for "Holocaust denial" in Germany.

Why the hell should the law care if some guy thinks Hitler didn't kill any Jews? For that matter, why should the law care if some guy thinks the earth and everything on it were created in 7 days? It's only when someone is forcing those views on others that it should be the concern of... well, of anyone.

And, by the same token, when someone forces their view--that Israel must not ever be criticized--on others, we should all be concerned.

[No Exit]

5. Yes, and most American Jews would highly disapprove of

what Abramoff did--including, for example, funding that Israeli sniper school.

Abramoff did many wrong things. Some of them involved Israel. This does absolutely nothing to detract from the good that is done by those "most Jews" who are democrats. Please don't be paranoid.

American Jews who are democrats are my friends. The nation of Israel is not my friend. The taboo on criticizing the nation of Israel--and one of its enablers, Abramoff--is an affront to free speech. I don't want to curtail someone's free speech just because someone else is paranoid.

[No Exit]

7. Abramoff smells anti-American Indian.