IsraelGate: The Arrogance of Jewish Power in the United States
December 12, 2017 at 9:42 am Written by American Herald Tribune (AHT) — The revelation that the Trump transition team colluded with Israel to sabotage a foreign policy initiative by the Obama White House made the news, sort of, when the story broke at the end of November. But it has since died, pushed down by the relentless pressure in the media to “disappear” all things critical of Israel or its behavior.
We’re revolutionizing the news industry, but we need your help! Click here to get started. Thanks to the ongoing investigation of Russiagate by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, we Americans have learned that prior to President Donald Trump’s inauguration, some of his closest advisers responded to Israeli solicitation to derail a United Nations vote on illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories. The effort to help Israel was implemented behind the scenes and in opposition to the official U.S. foreign policy.
Possible collusion with a foreign state has produced an avalanche of negative press coverage and congressional baying for blood related to Moscow and its President Vladimir Putin but similar action on the part of Israel has produced little to nothing in terms of a response from the Fourth Estate and political class.
Perhaps not too surprising, the story has actually taken a different turn, producing some opinion pieces, mostly from American Jews, insisting that Jared Kushner, the presidential son-in-law who was behind the effort, did the right thing because it was done “for Israel.” It is a sure sign of the invulnerability of those exercising Jewish power in the United States that something very close to treason involving a foreign country can be applauded with impunity. This is in spite of the fact that successful attempts to bury the story and even to justify what was done inevitably raises the issue of “dual loyalty” on the part of some American Jews who clearly see Israel as something that has to be protected and cherished even when it means doing serious damage to the American people and U.S. national interests.
One of the most illustrative opinion pieces written by an “Israel firster” appeared recently in Forward, America’s leading Jewish news and information website. It was entitled “Jared Kushner Was Right To ‘Collude’ with Russia – because he did it for Israel” before it was changed in the online edition to “Was Kushner doing the right thing?” The author, Daniel Kohn, lives in San Diego California. The article is particularly interesting as it makes a grotesque convoluted effort to not only justify what took place but also to sing the praises of Israel and all its works.
The extent to which the op-ed is characteristic of American-Jewish thinking regarding Israel is, of course, difficult to estimate but I would suspect that most Jews in the U.S., who are generally self-described progressives, would find much of it rather dubious, though many would be reluctant to openly criticize or counter the arguments being made for fear of ostracism by their community.
Kohn constructs a straw man around the fact that previous incoming presidential administrations have communicated with foreign governments during their transition periods. This is certainly true and even sensible. But, at the same time, meeting representatives of other countries cannot be allowed to undercut the policies being pursued by the White House team that is actually still in power. In this case, President Barack Obama had made clear that his opposition to the Israeli settlement expansion would be expressed through U.S. abstention on a United Nations Security Council vote condemning such activity.
In response, the government of Israel asked Jared Kushner to use Trump’s potential leverage to bring about a veto or delay in the resolution. Kushner clearly approached his task with some zeal, instructing incoming National Security Adviser Mike Flynn to contact the U.N. delegations of the countries on the Security Council to do just that, undercutting what Obama was doing. That is how the phone call from Flynn to Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak came about. t
Massive ‘Break the Internet’ Revolt Begins Today to ‘Save Net Neutrality’
December 12, 2017 at 5:41 am Written by Jake Johnson Major websites and social media platforms are teaming up for an “epic” online demonstration to show what the web would look like without net neutrality.
We’re revolutionizing the news industry, but we need your help! Click here to get started. (COMMONDREAMS) — In addition to making their voices heard in the streets, net neutrality defenders have planned a massive online demonstration this week ahead of the FCC’s scheduled vote on chairman Ajit Pai’s deeply unpopular plan to kill the open internet, which critics have denounced as “naked corporatism.”
Slated to begin Tuesday—and continue through to the scheduled vote by the Republican-controlled FCC on Thursday—the “Break the Internet” protest is aimed at showing “the world what the web will look like without net neutrality.”
The demonstrations will vary widely, depending on the platform. “Facebook and LinkedIn users will ‘break’ their profiles by changing their relationship status to ‘Married’ (to net neutrality) or adding a new ‘job’ of ‘Defending Net Neutrality,’” Fight for the Future noted in a press release on Monday. “Websites and apps will participate by doing something to ‘break’ their platform and encourage their users to contact Congress.”
Many major websites have been working in conjunction with activists to drive calls to Congress since the day Pai unveiled his plan to eliminate net neutrality rules just before Thanksgiving. According to Battle for the Net, over 833,000 calls have been made since November 21.
Last week, internet users flooded the front page of Reddit with posts shaming their representatives for selling out to the telecom industry—and applauding those who have stood firm in their support for net neutrality.
More of the same is expected on Tuesday, as websites large and small will use their platforms to mobilize further opposition to Pai’s attack on net neutrality with a variety of tools—from simple banners warning that the “FCC is about to vote to kill net neutrality” to video bumpers demonstrating “the kind of power that giant cable companies will have over us if we let the FCC end net neutrality rules.”
The World’s Most Dangerous Airports. #5 Makes No Sense! Knowledgedish Ad by Revcontent Find Out More > 53,083 Individual supporters of net neutrality have also been encouraged to participate by flooding congressional phone lines and using their platforms on Facebook, Twitter, and sites to raise alarm about the devastating consequences Pai’s proposals will have on the web.
Using the hashtag #BreaktheInternet, many have taken to Twitter to promote the upcoming demonstration and encourage others to take part.
View image on Twitter View image on Twitter
Koa Mirai @apeculture Don’t want to see this sign when you try logging on to the internet next? Now is the time to make a loud noise.. #BreakTheInternet #SaveNetNeutrality #SaveTheInternet #FreedomOfSpeech #NetNeutrality 5:54 PM – Dec 10, 2017 Replies 100 100 Retweets 67 67 likes Twitter Ads info and privacy
@ZephyrTeachout The FCC is days away from voting to kill NetNeutrality, but Congress can still stop them. On December 12th we’ll #BreakTheInternet to stop censorship, throttling, and extra fees: https://battleforthenet.com/breaktheinternet … 12:18 AM – Dec 11, 2017
Massive online protest planned two days before FCC net neutrality vote Congress can still save the Internet. But only if we make them. battleforthenet.com 43 43 Replies 1,593 1,593 Retweets 1,541 1,541 likes Twitter Ads info and privacy
Fight for the Future @fightfortheftr Announcing the epic Internet takedown of FCC Chairman Ajit Pai & powerful internet providers: starting 48 hours before the FCC vote to kill #NetNeutrality, we #BreakTheInternet & force Congress to stop the vote. Are you in? http://breaktheinternetprotest.org 8:37 PM – Dec 10, 2017 27 27 Replies 1,557 1,557 Retweets 1,444 1,444 likes Twitter Ads info and privacy By Jake Johnson / Creative Commons / Common Dreams / Report a typo
This article was chosen for republication based on the interest of our readers. Anti-Media republishes st
US State Dept Spends $1 Million Funding Venezuela Opposition
December 11, 2017 at 9:25 am Written by Jason Ditz
(ANTIWAR.COM) — U.S. officials seem to be pretty much unanimous on the need to meddle in Venezuela’s seemingly endless government crises. Yet a very core difference in how to approach this is leading to considerable dispute over the State Department’s latest program.
We’re revolutionizing the news industry, but we need your help! Click here to get started. State is paying some $900,000 to the Atlantic Council to “promote non-violent conflict resolution” in Venezuela, which is their subtle way of saying they’re trying to buy a regime change and the installation of a “democratically-run government,” obviously run by someone the U.S. likes.
What this boils down to is indirect funding for the Venezuelan opposition, one of many times when the State Department has put money into the hands of a think-tank to get them to try to coach a U.S.-friendly opposition movement into being both more successful politically and more beholden to U.S. interests.
Those for whom U.S.-imposed regime change usually means coup or war, particularly Congressional hawks, are expressing major opposition to the State Department plan, saying it is a waste of money and “buys Maduro time,” in as much as so long as the State Department is trying something short of an invasion, they’re not invading.
Absent from the debate on Venezuela is the option of staying out of the matter entirely. That’s something Venezuelan opposition figures have long urged of the U.S., noting that any whiff of U.S. meddling gives the government an excuse to paint the whole opposition as American puppets, and justify another crackdown.
Indeed, the simple fact that the State Department effort is public knowledge probably more than negates any impact at might have, as the damage done to opposition groups for taking this money will likely outstrip the $900,000 in aid they got.
By Jason Ditz / Republished with permission / ANTIWAR.COM / Report a typo
This article was chosen for republication based on the interest of our readers. Anti-Media republishes stories from a number of other independent news sources. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not reflect Anti-Media editorial policy.