Sen. Joe Lieberman's latest threat to scuttle health-care reform vowing to join a Republican filibuster to block an over-55 buy-in to Medicare, a proposal that he has long championed is raising questions about his motives.But no one is mentioning the unmentionable, the cause that has come to define Lieberman's career: Israel. Is it possible that Lieberman's obstructionist behavior doesn't relate to Connecticut's insurance industry or to his political ego the two most cited explanations but rather to a calculation that he can use his leverage on health care to limit the pressure that President Barack Obama can put on Israel to make concessions on a Mideast peace plan? After all, the more common explanations of Lieberman's behavior have holes in their logic. While it is true that Lieberman's constituent Hartford-based insurance companies fear any government intrusion in their industry, the actual proposals for the Medicare buy-in or the tightly constrained "public option" actually would benefit the industry in the near term. Those uninsured Americans 55 to 64 are customers whom the insurance industry doesn't want. They are the part of the uninsured population that is most likely to need medical care, which is why private insurers have driven up the rates so high that these people can't afford to buy health insurance. Letting these desperate Americans buy into Medicare wouldn't cost the health insurance industry much of anything and it would reduce the moral (and PR) crisis that has led so many Americans to view private insurers as vultures preying on the most vulnerable. .......either version actually helps the health insurance industry by siphoning off sick people and thus allowing the industry to corner the market on healthier customers, where the biggest profits lie. So, Lieberman may not be serving the industry's best interests by jeopardizing passage of a health reform bill. Not only does the industry stand to pick up tens of millions of new customers who will be compelled to buy insurance and sometimes with government subsidies but a decent reform bill also blunts demands for more radical changes. If Americans grow more furious with the current system its rising costs and its failure to cover nearly 50 million people voters might press for a single-payer approach which could eliminate private insurers altogether. For these reasons, the Lieberman-is- Another hypothesis is that Lieberman's behavior on health reform reflects his huge political ego and makes sense if he intends to seek re-election in 2012 as a "centrist" Republican. However, that political positioning argument doesn't hold much water either. If Lieberman is blamed for sabotaging health-care reform, he will solidify Democratic hatred of him, and many Republicans will still distrust his liberal positions on social issues like abortion. ...The Israel Factor Which brings us to Israel, which arguably has become Lieberman's most treasured priority in his political life. Mark Vogel, chairman of the pro-Israel National Action Committee, once said, "Joe Lieberman, without exception, no conditions
is the No. 1 pro-Israel advocate and leader in Congress. There is nobody who does more on behalf of Israel than Joe Lieberman." It was Lieberman's embrace of neoconservative ideology and his aggressive support for wars against Israel's Muslim enemies, the likes of Iraq's Saddam Hussein, that led Connecticut Democrats to deny Lieberman the Senate nomination in 2006 and prompted his successful run as an Independent. Partly because Obama opposed the Iraq War, Lieberman went on the stump for Republican John McCain in 2008, even questioning Obama's patriotism. A broken Obama could be easier to manipulate regarding Mideast peace talks and Iran. In recent months, Washington's neocons hectored Obama about escalating the war in Afghanistan and crowed about their success when Obama agreed recently to dispatch 30,000 more troops. Now, the neocons see their chance to complete Obama's transformation into a more articulate version of George W. Bush, making Obama a President who can sell their pro-war positions with much more polish and class. .........If Lieberman succeeds in sinking Obama's chief domestic priority health care reform or waters it down so much that it alienates Obama from his liberal base, Obama may find himself essentially the captive of the neocons... Lieberman has been careful not to connect his disruptive behavior on health-care reform to his support for Israel, but there can be little doubt that a chastened Obama, either defeated on health care or forced to sign a bill that liberals will view as a betrayal, will have much less political capital to expend in applying pressure on Israel.... Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. Full storyhursday, December 17, 2009
Is Joe Lieberman Protecting Israel?
Dec 20, 2009
Is Joe Lieberman Protecting Israel?
Kristol Clear: The Source of America's Wars
For instance, in a recent Washington Post opinion piece, William Kristol described Obama's West Point speech as "encouraging. But if the comments on the Post website are anything to go by, few ordinary Americans take Kristol's armchair warmongering seriously anymore. After all, as one poster quizzically asked, "A column by William Kristol the neocon that was wrong about everything from 2000-2008?" Although Kristol, like the rest of the neocons, "erred" about Iraq's WMDs and Saddam's links to Al Qaeda and 9/11, it would be a fatal error indeed to dismiss him as a fool. In order to understand what motivates Bill Kristol's professed hyper-patriotism, with its consistently disastrous prescriptions, it's worth recalling how his father, Irving Kristol, reacted to Vietnam War critic Senator George McGovern. The presidential contender's proposed cut in U.S. military expenditure would, according to the "godfather" of neoconservatism, "drive a knife in the heart of Israel." "Jews don't like big military budgets," the elder Kristol explained in a Jewish publication in 1973. "But it is now an interest of the Jews to have a large and powerful military establishment in the United States
American Jews who care about the survival of the state of Israel have to say, no, we don't want to cut the military budget, it is important to keep that military budget big, so that we can defend Israel." ...Following his father's advice, William Kristol has been a fervent supporter of massive U.S. military spending. In 1996, he co-authored with Robert Kagan an influential neocon manifesto titled "Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy." It recommended that "America should pursue a vision of benevolent hegemony ... "The defense budget should be increased dramatically, citizens should be educated to appreciate the military's vital work abroad, and moral clarity should direct a foreign policy that puts the heat on dictators and authoritarian regimes." In response, another influential opinion-maker, Charles Krauthammer, hailed Kristol and Kagan as "the main proponents of what you might call the American greatness school." It is hardly a coincidence, however, that all three advocates of "American greatness" care passionately about what Irving Kristol euphemistically referred to as "the survival of the state of Israel." Or that many of those "dictators and authoritarian regimes" just happened to stand in the way of Israeli hegemony in the Middle East. The following year, Kristol and Kagan co-founded the Project for a New American Century (PNAC)... In September 2000, PNAC published "Rebuilding America's Defenses," in which they famously acknowledged that "the process of transformation
is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor." One year later, they got their wished for "new Pearl Harbor" on September 11. The mass murder of almost 3,000 Americans was, as Benjamin Netanyahu indelicately put it, "very good" for Israel. The "Saddam must go" campaign, begun in a Kristol and Kagan editorial as far back as 1997, became so relentless that Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen dubbed it "Kristol's War." The Iraq War has, of course, also been called "Wolfowitz's War." But it could just as aptly have been named after Perle, Feith, Libby, Zelikow, Lieberman, or any of the other pro-Israeli insiders who took America to war by way of deception. Unless Americans soon realize that they've been deceived by those for whom "American greatness" is merely a means to advance "the survival of the state of Israel," that legacy promises to be an enduring one. Full storyThursday, December 17, 2009
Kristol Clear: The Source of America's Wars
Top: Irving Kristol (father). Bottom left-right: William Kristol (son), Robert Kagan, Charles Krauthammer
Sabbah - Maidhc Ó Cathail
...Americans feeling let down by Barack Obama's escalation of the war in Afghanistan should take careful note of those who welcomed yet another "surge." It might help them to identify the source of their seemingly endless wars.
Yehuda Hiss admitted taking Palestinian organs
This has just broken -- scroll down to see the two stories that have come out so far:
http://www.israel-
--
Alison Weir
Executive Director
If Americans Knew
office: (202) 631-4060
"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little."
- Edmund Burke
Daily News compilation:
http://israel-
If Americans Knew is a 501C3 nonprofit organization. Donations are tax-deductible and are critical for continuing our work to inform Americans accurately about Israel-Palestine. Checks can be mailed to If Americans Knew, 6312 SW Capitol Hwy, #163, Portland, OR 97239-1938. Credit card donations can be made online at http://www.ifameric
Blog: http://alisonweir.
--
NOW AN AMAZON KINDLE BOOK ON YOUR PC, iPHONE OR KINDLE DEVICE
Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides By Thomas Dalton
In this remarkable, balanced book, the author skillfully reviews and compares "traditional" and "revisionist" views on the "The Holocaust."
On one side is the traditional, orthodox view -- six million Jewish casualties, gas chambers, cremation ovens, mass graves, and thousands of witnesses. On the other is the view of a small band of skeptical writers and researchers, often unfairly labeled "deniers," who contend that the public has been gravely misled about this emotion-laden chapter of history.
The author establishes that the arguments and findings of revisionist scholars are substantive, and deserve serious consideration. He points out, for example, that even the eminent Jewish Holocaust scholar Raul Hilberg acknowledged that there was no budget, plan or order by Hitler for a World War II program to exterminate Europe's Jews.
This book is especially relevant right now, as "Holocaust deniers" are routinely and harshly punished for their "blasphemy," and as growing numbers of people regard the standard, Hollywoodized "Holocaust" narrative with mounting suspicion and distrust.
The author of this book, who writes under the pen name of "Thomas Dalton," is an American scholar who holds a doctoral degree from a major US university.
This is no peripheral debate between arcane views of some obscure aspect of twentieth century history. Instead, this is a clash with profound social-political implications regarding freedom of speech and press, the manipulation of public opinion, how our cultural life is shaped, and how power is wielded in our society.
http://www.amazon.
Peace.
Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367
ReporterNotebook@
MP: Israel stripped body organs off Palestinians
Israeli politician and leader of the Arab nationalist party, Ahmad Tibi, said on Saturday that a medical institution in Israel harvested appendages from the bodies of dead Palestinians in the 1990's.
According to Tibi, the body parts, which included heart arteries, bones, and corneal tissue, were used in organ transplants for Israeli soldiers.
Meanwhile, the Israeli television has shown a documentary in this regard, claiming that Israeli politician and Knesset member Aryeh Eldad was the main culprit behind the bodysnatching incident.
The organ theft issue was first brought to the fore in a report published earlier in August by Sweden's largest circulation daily, Aftonbladet.
According to the report, Israeli soldiers were snatching and killing Palestinian men to harvest their organs for sale on the black market. It sheds light on the case of Bilal Ahmed Ghanem, a 19-year-old Palestinian man, who was shot dead in 1992 by Israeli forces in the West Bank village of Imatin.
The report claimed that Ghanem's body was then abducted and returned several days later by the Israeli military with a cut from the stomach to the neck that had been stitched up.
When asked what happened to the body, the soldiers told Bilal's family that he had undergone an autopsy in Tel Aviv. The family, however, claims that his organs had been stolen.
After the incident, at least 20 Palestinian families told Bostrom that they suspected that the Israeli military had taken the organs of their sons after they had been killed by Israeli forces and their bodies were taken away.
The Israeli Foreign Ministry reacted with anger to the report, calling it "a grotesque libel to incite anti-Semitic sentiments."
Their anger was widely believed to be due to the fact that it had made reference to the recent arrests in New Jersey of several prominent US Jews for a number of alleged crimes, including brokering the sale of organs for transplant.
In 2004, pathologist Yehuda Hiss was removed from his post as head of the state-run L. Greenberg Institute of Forensic Medicine after a Health Ministry investigation found that he had been involved for years in taking body parts, such as legs and ovaries, without family permission during autopsies, and selling them to medical schools for use in research and training.
This is while in July 2009, a New York Rabbi, Levy Izhak Rosenbaum, was arrested after it became clear that he was the main broker for a major human organs trafficking ring.
According to Knesset Member Muhammad Baraka there are more than 600 dead Palestinians' bodies buried in what Israel calls 'the number graveyards', which were created for freedom fighters Palestinians killed in combat with the Israeli army.
Baraka requested in August that Israel return the bodies to their families, but his demand is yet to be taken into account by Israeli authorities.
SBB/DT
The views expressed and the links provided on our comment pages are the personal views of individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Press TV.
--
NOW AN AMAZON KINDLE BOOK ON YOUR PC, iPHONE OR KINDLE DEVICE
Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides By Thomas Dalton
In this remarkable, balanced book, the author skillfully reviews and compares "traditional" and "revisionist" views on the "The Holocaust."
On one side is the traditional, orthodox view -- six million Jewish casualties, gas chambers, cremation ovens, mass graves, and thousands of witnesses. On the other is the view of a small band of skeptical writers and researchers, often unfairly labeled "deniers," who contend that the public has been gravely misled about this emotion-laden chapter of history.
The author establishes that the arguments and findings of revisionist scholars are substantive, and deserve serious consideration. He points out, for example, that even the eminent Jewish Holocaust scholar Raul Hilberg acknowledged that there was no budget, plan or order by Hitler for a World War II program to exterminate Europe's Jews.
This book is especially relevant right now, as "Holocaust deniers" are routinely and harshly punished for their "blasphemy," and as growing numbers of people regard the standard, Hollywoodized "Holocaust" narrative with mounting suspicion and distrust.
The author of this book, who writes under the pen name of "Thomas Dalton," is an American scholar who holds a doctoral degree from a major US university.
This is no peripheral debate between arcane views of some obscure aspect of twentieth century history. Instead, this is a clash with profound social-political implications regarding freedom of speech and press, the manipulation of public opinion, how our cultural life is shaped, and how power is wielded in our society.
http://www.amazon.
Peace.
Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367
ReporterNotebook@
Israel admits harvesting Palestinian organs
Israel has admitted that pathologists harvested organs from dead Palestinians, and others without the consent of their families a practice that it said ended in the 1990s, it emerged at the weekend. The admission, by the former head of the country's forensic institute, followed a furious row prompted by a Swedish newspaper reporting that Israel was killing Palestinians in order to use their organs a charge that Israel denied and called "antisemitic" The revelation, in a television documentary, is likely to generate anger in the Arab and Muslim world and reinforce sinister stereotypes of Israel and its attitude to Palestinians. Iran's state-run Press TV tonight reported the story, illustrated with photographs of dead or badly injured Palestinians. Ahmed Tibi, an Israeli Arab MP, said the report incriminated the Israeli army. The story emerged in an interview with Dr Yehuda Hiss, former head of the Abu Kabir forensic institute near Tel Aviv. The interview was conducted in 2000 by an American academic who released it because of the row between Israel and Sweden over a report in the Stockholm newspaper Aftonbladet. Channel 2 TV reported that in the 1990s, specialists at Abu Kabir harvested skin, corneas, heart valves and bones from the bodies of Israeli soldiers, Israeli citizens, Palestinians and foreign workers, often without permission from relatives. The Israeli military confirmed to the programme that the practice took place, but added: "This activity ended a decade ago and does not happen any longer." Hiss said: "We started to harvest corneas ... whatever was done was highly informal. No permission was asked from the family." However, there was no evidence that Israel had killed Palestinians to take their organs, as the Swedish paper reported. Aftonbladet quoted Palestinians as saying young men from the West Bank and Gaza Strip had been seized by the Israeli forces and their bodies returned to their families with missing organs. The interview with Hiss was released by Nancy Sheppard-Hughes, professor of anthropology at the University of California-Berkeley who had conducted a study of Abu Kabir. She was quoted by the Associated Press as saying that while Palestinians were "by a long shot" not the only ones affected, she felt the interview must be made public, because "the symbolism, you know, of taking skin of the population considered to be the enemy, [is] something, just in terms of its symbolic weight, that has to be reconsidered. Israel demanded that Sweden condemn the Aftonbladet article, calling it an antisemitic "blood libel". Stockholm refused, saying that to so would violate freedom of speech in the country. The foreign minister then cancelled a visit to Israel, just as Sweden was taking over the EU's rotating presidency. Hiss was removed from his post in 2004, when some details about organ harvesting were first reported, but he still works at the forensic institute. Israel's health ministry said all harvesting was now done with permission. "The guidelines at that time were not clear," it said in a statement to Channel 2. "For the last 10 years, Abu Kabir has been working according to ethics and Jewish law." http://www.guardian The kidneys are paired organs that lie posterior to the abdomen, in the area of the lower back. The kidneys make urine, which is transported from the kidneys to the bladder by the ureters.Israel admits harvesting Palestinian organs
**NewsFlash: Israel admits harvesting Palestinian organs
Israel admits harvesting Palestinian organs
NOW AN AMAZON KINDLE BOOK ON YOUR PC, iPHONE OR KINDLE DEVICE
Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides By Thomas Dalton
In this remarkable, balanced book, the author skillfully reviews and compares "traditional" and "revisionist" views on the "The Holocaust."
On one side is the traditional, orthodox view -- six million Jewish casualties, gas chambers, cremation ovens, mass graves, and thousands of witnesses. On the other is the view of a small band of skeptical writers and researchers, often unfairly labeled "deniers," who contend that the public has been gravely misled about this emotion-laden chapter of history.
The author establishes that the arguments and findings of revisionist scholars are substantive, and deserve serious consideration. He points out, for example, that even the eminent Jewish Holocaust scholar Raul Hilberg acknowledged that there was no budget, plan or order by Hitler for a World War II program to exterminate Europe's Jews.
This book is especially relevant right now, as "Holocaust deniers" are routinely and harshly punished for their "blasphemy," and as growing numbers of people regard the standard, Hollywoodized "Holocaust" narrative with mounting suspicion and distrust.
The author of this book, who writes under the pen name of "Thomas Dalton," is an American scholar who holds a doctoral degree from a major US university.
This is no peripheral debate between arcane views of some obscure aspect of twentieth century history. Instead, this is a clash with profound social-political implications regarding freedom of speech and press, the manipulation of public opinion, how our cultural life is shaped, and how power is wielded in our society.
http://www.amazon.
Peace.
Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367
ReporterNotebook@

