From: WVNS <ummyakoub@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 6:46 AM
Subject: [wvns] Obama snubs Netanyahu for dinner with Michelle
To: wvns@yahoogroups.com
Obama snubs Netanyahu for dinner with Michelle. Judea declares War on Obama
(1) Obama snubs Netanyahu for dinner with Michelle and the girls
(2) Obama 'humiliated' Netanyahu at meeting
(3) Lieberman to PM: Don't sign anything
(4) Kadima MP: Leiberman managing government with remote control
(5) Obama, Netanyahu Mum after Tuesday's Talks
(6) Judea declares War on Obama - Gilad Atzmon
(7) Clinton grovels to Netanyahu at AIPAC, on Iran sanctions
(8) Clinton grovels to Netanyahu at AIPAC: Bibi's Babe, by Alan Sabrosky
(9) Congressional Trips Sponsored by Pro-Israel Groups
(10) UN's Middle East Quartet urges Israeli settlement freeze
(11) Traditionalist Catholics disrupt Rabbi's sermon at Notre Dame
(1) Obama snubs Netanyahu for dinner with Michelle and the girls
Obama snubbed Netanyahu for dinner with Michelle and the girls, Israelis claim
Benjamin Netanyahu was left to stew in a White House meeting room for over an hour after President Barack Obama abruptly walked out of tense talks to have supper with his family, it emerged on Thursday.
By Adrian Blomfield in Jerusalem
Published: 2:52PM GMT 25 Mar 2010
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/7521391/Obama-snubbed-Netanyahu-for-dinner-with-Michelle-and-the-girls-Israelis-claim.html
The snub marked a fresh low in US-Israeli relations and appeared designed to show Mr Netanyahu how low his stock had fallen in Washington after he refused to back down in a row over Jewish construction in east Jerusalem.
The Israeli prime minister arrived at the White House on Tuesday evening brimming with confidence that the worst of the crisis in his country's relationship with the United States was over.
Over the previous two days, he had been feted by senior Republicans and greeted warmly by members of Congress. He had also received a standing ovation from the American Israel Public Affairs Affairs Committee, one of the most influential lobby groups in the United States.
But Mr Obama was less inclined to be so conciliatory. He immediately presented Mr Netanyahu with a list of 13 demands designed both to the end the feud with his administration and to build Palestinian confidence ahead of the resumption of peace talks. Key among those demands was a previously-made call to halt all new settlement construction in east Jerusalem.
When the Israeli prime minister stalled, Mr Obama rose from his seat declaring: "I'm going to the residential wing to have dinner with Michelle and the girls."
As he left, Mr Netanyahu was told to consider the error of his ways. "I'm still around," Mr Obama is quoted by Israel's Yediot Ahronot newspaper as having said. "Let me know if there is anything new."
For over an hour, Mr Netanyahu and his aides closeted themselves in the Roosevelt Room on the first floor of the White House to map out a response to the president's demands.
Although the two men then met again, at 8.20 pm, for a brief second meeting, it appeared that they failed to break the impasse. White House officials were quoted as saying that disagreements remained. Shimon Peres, the Israeli president, added: "Apparently they did not reach an understanding with the United States."
It was the second time this month that Mr Netanyahu has been at the receiving end of a US dinner-time snub.
A fortnight ago, Joe Biden the US vice president, arrived 90 minutes late for a dinner Mr Netanyahu hosted in Jerusalem after Israel announced plans to build 1,600 new homes in Ramat Shlomo, a Jewish settlement in the city's predominantly Arab east.
Erupting in fury, the United States described the decision to expand Ramat Shlomo as an "insult" that undermined Mr Biden's peace making efforts and demanded that it be reversed. Palestinians see east Jerusalem, captured by Israel during the 1967 Six Day War, as their future capital and regard any Jewish building there as a barrier to a peace settlement.
Mr Obama's mood further soured in the minutes before his meeting with Mr Netanyahu after it emerged that approval had been given for an even more contentious Jewish building project in the heart of one of east Jerusalem's Palestinian suburbs.
Sending a clear message of his displeasure, Mr Obama treated his guest to a series of slights. Photographs of the meeting were forbidden and an Israeli request to issue a joint-statement once it was over were turned down.
"There is no humiliation exercise that the Americans did not try on the prime minister and his entourage," Israel's Maariv newspaper reported. "Bibi received in the White House the treatment reserved for the president of Equatorial Guinea."
It is not the first time that Mr Netanyahu has been involved in a dinner-time snub, although he is arguably more used to delivering, rather than receiving, them.
In 1998, during his first term as Israeli prime minister, Mr Netanyahy angrily cancelled a dinner he was due to give with the then Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook.
Mr Cook had earned his host's ire after he briefly visited a new Jewish settlement in east Jerusalem with a Palestinian official and called for an end to all settlement construction in the parts of the city Israel occupied after the Six-Day war.
(2) Obama 'humiliated' Netanyahu at meeting
JASON KOUTSOUKIS HERALD CORRESPONDENT
March 26, 2010
http://www.smh.com.au/world/obama-humiliated-netanyahu-at-meeting-20100325-r000.html
JERUSALEM: The Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, returned to Israel last night after an apparently disastrous meeting with the US President, Barack Obama, in Washington.
According to leaked accounts reported in the Israeli media, Mr Obama humiliated Mr Netanyahu by leaving the meeting early.
''I'm going to the residential wing to have dinner with Michelle and the girls,'' Mr Obama reportedly said, adding that Mr Netanyahu should consult his aides about goodwill gestures Israel was prepared to make towards the Palestinians before renewed peace talks. '''I'm still around,'' he said. ''Let me know if there is anything new.''
The talks were shrouded in an unusual news blackout, with no statement issued after the meeting and no official photographs released. US officials said the two met alone for about 90 minutes. Mr Netanyahu then huddled with staff separately for 90 minutes before requesting a second meeting with Mr Obama.
When the President returned, Mr Netanyahu is said to have made a counter-offer which Mr Obama did not accept.
(3) Lieberman to PM: Don't sign anything
Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman spoke with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during Washington crisis, advised PM not to capitulate in face of American pressure, Ynet learns
Latest Update: 03.25.10, 17:47 / Israel News
Attila Somfalvi
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3868248,00.html
Did the prime minister decide not to provide a written pledge to the US during his Washington visit based on political and coalitional considerations? Ynet learned Thursday that amid the deepening rift between Jerusalem and Washington, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke with Foreign Minster Avigdor Leiberman, who advised him not to agree to US demands and urged him to return to Israel for further consultations.
According to US reports, Netanyahu conveyed a sense of "panic" during the trip.
"Apparently Bibi is very nervous, frantically calling his `seven (top ministers),' trying to figure out what to do," one Washington Middle East hand said Wednesday according to the Politico website. "The word I heard most today was `panic.'"
(4) Kadima MP: Leiberman managing government with remote control
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3868275,00.html
MK Shai: Leiberman managing government with remote control
Published: 03.25.10, 18:12 / Israel News
MK Nachman Shai (Kadima) responded to reports that Foreign Minister Avigdor Leiberman advised Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to comply with US demands and said, "The cat is out of the bag; Lieberman is managing the government with a remote control."
"Obviously Netanyahu does not have the mandate to move ahead without the real boss. Israel is giving up on strategic assets for a coalition that will dismantle in any case," said Shai. (Attila Somfalvi)
(5) Obama, Netanyahu Mum after Tuesday's Talks
By: ELISABETH GALINA
Published: March 24th 2010
http://www.shalomlife.com/eng/9062/Obama,_Netanyahu_Mum_after_Tuesday%27s_Talks/
After high tensions in Israeli/American relations, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu received a warm public reception from US Congress members Tuesday in Washington.
Leader of the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi assured Netanyahu that even though the US asked for a cease on settlement development in primarily Arab East Jerusalem, Congress continues to stand by Israel. Republican Leader John Boehner echoed Pelosi's statement claiming the United States has no stronger ally than Israel. Netanyahu met separately with members of congress and the Senate, finding support on both sides of the aisle, receiving a particularly affectionate response from Republicans.
The Israeli PM conferred with President Barack Obama twice Tuesday in the Oval Office for a total of two hours. Contrary to custom, reporters and photographers were not invited to see them shake hands or document the session. Obama and Netanyahu consulted for 90 minutes in the Oval Office, a half hour longer than scheduled. After the meeting the President retired to the residence while the Prime Minister stayed behind to consult with his staff in the Roosevelt Room. Later that evening, Obama was summoned back to the Oval Office to meet with Netanyahu for another 30 minutes. The White House did not release immediate statement providing a summary of the two leader's discussion.
The tone of the meetings was apparently chilly due to Israel's announcement of plans to build 1,600 new homes in East Jerusalem two weeks prior. In a speech to AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), Netanyahu rejected the Obama administration's plea that construction be halted on the new habitation units for Jewish families in the disputed area of Jerusalem claimed by Palestinians as their capital. Netanyahu has stressed that Israel wants to continue building new settlements in Jerusalem warning the US that if it supports the demands of Palestinians, the political peace process will be delayed for another year.
President Obama asked the Israeli PM for confidence building steps toward the Palestinians in order to launch indirect talks but differences continue to remain between Israel and the US. White House spokesperson Robert Gibbs told the media a day after the meeting that US officials are seeking clarification of Israel's plan to for further expansion of Jewish housing in East Jerusalem.
As reported by the Associated Press, the White House stands by its long-held contention that building in the largely Arab-section of the disputed holy city is destructive to the Mideast peace process.
Netanyahu is scheduled to meet with other US officials in Washington this week including George Mitchell, special US envoy to the Middle East.
(6) Judea declares War on Obama - Gilad Atzmon
From: Sami Joseph <sajoseph2005@yahoo.com> Date: 26.03.2010 05:14 PM
Subject: [altahrir] Fw: Judea declares War on Obama From: Gilad Atzmon <gilad@gilad.co.uk>
Judea declares War on Obama
Gilad Atzmon
Thursday, March 25, 2010
http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/judea-declares-war-on-obama-by-gilad-atzmon.html
Last week we read about AIPAC's assault against President Obama. It was reported that the Jewish Lobby in America took its gloves off. In the open, AIPAC decided to mount pressure on the American leadership and President Obama in particular.
"The Obama administration's recent statements regarding the U.S. relationship with Israel is a matter of serious concern," AIPAC said in its statement. AIPAC's reaction came after a weekend of U.S. recriminations and demands, following Israel's provocative announcement that it had given preliminary approval for the construction of 1,600 more apartments for Jewish settlers in a Palestinian neighborhood of eastern occupied Jerusalem. Unlike President Obama, who seems to be prioritizing issues like the health care reform bill and United States economic recovery, AIPAC claims to know what America's `real' interests are and how to achieve them. "The administration should make a conscious effort to move away from public demands and unilateral deadlines directed at Israel, with whom the United States shares basic, fundamental, and strategic interests". AIPAC also suggested that the American leadership should concentrate on a confrontation with Iran. "The escalated rhetoric of recent days only serves as a distraction from the substantive work that needs to be done with regard to the urgent issue of Iran's rapid pursuit of nuclear weapons".
Jewish lobbies certainly do not hold back when it comes to pressuring states, world leaders and even super powers. AIPAC's behavior last week reminded me of the Jewish declaration of war against Nazi Germany in 1933.
Not many people are aware that in March 1933, long before Hitler became the undisputed leader of Germany and began restricting the rights of German Jews, the American Jewish Congress announced a massive protest at Madison Square Gardens and called for an American boycott of German goods.
I obviously do not think that Obama has anything in common with Hitler. There is not much the two leaders share in terms of their philosophy, their attitude to humanism or their view of world peace.(1) However, it is hard to turn a blind eye to the similarity between AIPAC's behaviour last week and the Jewish American Congress' conduct in 1933.
On March 24, 1933, The Daily Express (London) published an article announcing that the Jews had already launched their boycott against Germany and threatened a forthcoming "holy war". The Express urged Jews everywhere to boycott German goods and demonstrate actively against German economic interests.
The Express said that Germany was "now confronted with an international boycott of its trade, its finances, and its industry....in London, New York, Paris and Warsaw, Jewish businessmen are united to go on an economic crusade."
{see Daily Express front page of March 24, 1933:
http://www.gilad.co.uk/storage/judea_declares_war_on_germany_2.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1269524345385}
Jewish texts tend to glaze over the fact that Hitler's March 28 1933, ordering a boycott against Jewish stores and goods, was an escalation in direct response to the declaration of war on Germany by the worldwide Jewish leadership. In fact the only Jewish enclave that is willing to admit the historical order of events that led to the destruction of European Jewry, is the anti Zionist Jewish Orthodox sect known as the Torah Jews. I assume that, similarly, once things turn sour between America and its Jewish lobbies, Jewish tribal ideologists will be the first to forget that it was the Jewish American establishment that worked so hard to nourish the inevitable animosity.
If you wonder why Jewish politicians repeat exactly the same mistakes time after time, the answer is easy. Jews do not know their Jewish history for there is no Jewish history.
As it happens, Jewish history is a set of fables tied clumsily together to portray a false image of a victorious narrative. Jewish history is a set of blind spots bundled together by myth, fantasies and lies, in order to present the illusion of a coherent past narrative and a vague semblance of chronology. Israeli professor Shlomo Sand taught us that the Zionists, and to a certain extent their Bundist rivals, were far from being shy of "inventing" the history of their Jewish nationhood. But it goes further, even the holocaust, which could be a major illuminating corner in Jewish reflection, was transformed into a rigid chapter that perpetuated blindness. As a vision of the past, it is there to hide and to disguise, rather than to reveal and inform. In a Jewish history book, you won't read about `Judea's declaration of war against Nazi Germany'. In Jewish history texts chronology always launches when Jewish suffering begins. Jewish history transcends itself beyond the notion of causality. It persuades us that persecution of Jews occurs out of nowhere. The Jewish historical text avoids the necessary questions as to why hostility evolves time after time, why do Jews buy so many enemies and so easily?
AIPAC leaders are clearly repeating the grave mistakes of their forebearers: the American Jewish Congress. They do not learn from their history, for there is not a single Jewish history text to learn from. Instead of a history text, Jews have the Holocaust, an event that matured into a religion.
The holocaust religion is obviously Judeo-centric to the bone. It defines the Jewish Raison d'être. For the Jews it signifies a total fatigue of the Diaspora, it regards the Goy as a potential `irrational' murderer. The new Jewish religion preaches revenge. It even establishes a new Jewish God. Instead of old Yehova, the new Jewish God is `the Jew' himself: the brave and witty being, the one who survived the ultimate and most sinister genocide, the one who came out of the ashes and stepped forward into a new beginning.
To a certain extent the Holocaust religion signals the Jewish departure from monotheism, for every Jew is a potential little God or Goddess. Gilad Shalit is the God `innocence', Abe Foxman is the God anti Semitism, Maddof is the God of swindling, Greenspan is the God of `good economy', Lord Goldsmith is the God of the `green light', Lord Levy is the God of fundraising, Wolfowitz is the God of new American expansionism and AIPAC is the American Olympus where American elected human beings come to ask for mercy and forgiveness for being Goyim and for daring to occasionally tell the truth about Israel.
The holocaust religion is the conclusive stage in the Jewish dialectic; it is the end of Jewish history for it is the deepest and most sincere form of `self love'. Rather than inventing an abstract God who prefers the Jews to be the chosen people, in the holocaust religion the Jews cut out the divine middle substance. The Jew just chooses oneself. This is why Jewish identity politics transcends itself beyond the notion of history. God is the master of ceremony. And the new Jewish God cannot be subject to humanly contingent occurrences. The new Jewish God, i.e. `the Jew', just re-writes fables that serve the tribe at any given time. This may explain why the Holocaust religion is protected by laws, while every other historical chapter and narrative is debated openly by historians, intellectuals and ordinary people
As one may guess, with such a self-centered intensive world-view, not much room is left for humanity, grace or universalism. It is far from being clear whether Jews can collectively recover from their new religion. However, it is crucial that every humanist stands up against the holocaust religion that can only spread misery, death and carnage.
(1) Unlike President Obama who postponed his Far East trip just to meet Israeli PM and sent his Secretary of State to appease his Jewish opponents promising more confrontation with Iran, Hitler actually reacted furiously to Jewish pressure.
(7) Clinton grovels to Netanyahu at AIPAC, on Iran sanctions
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1974747,00.html
Washington's Shrinking Options on Iran Sanctions
By TONY KARON Wednesday, Mar. 24, 2010
{photo- Clinton grovelling} Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu talks with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, March 22, 2010, in Washington, D.C.
Amos Ben Gershom / GPO / Getty Images {end}
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1974747,00.html
When Secretary of State Hillary Clinton addressed the Israel lobbying group AIPAC on Monday, one of her best-received lines was her vow that "the United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons." Israel and its advocates in Washington see Iran's nuclear program, rather than the conflict with the Palestinians, as the prime issue in the U.S.–Israel conversation. So Clinton talked up the Administration's efforts to halt Iran's uranium-enrichment program, citing "a growing international consensus on taking steps to pressure Iran's leaders to change course." Europe was on board, she said, and Russia wasn't far behind. "And although there is still work to be done, China has said it supports the dual-track approach of applying pressure if engagement does not produce results," Clinton added. "We are now working with our partners in the United Nations on new Security Council sanctions that will show Iran's leaders that there are real consequences for their intransigence ... Our aim is not incremental sanctions, but sanctions that will bite."
The actual level of progress on the Iran sanctions front, however, has not yet caught up with Clinton's tough talk — and there's little sign that any of the pressure being mustered will realistically stop Iran from slowly acquiring the means to create a nuclear bomb (though the U.S. believes Tehran has not yet decided to actually build such weapons). Even if Europe were unanimously on board — it isn't quite, particularly on the unilateral sanctions with which the U.S. wants to supplement U.N. efforts — Russia has yet to offer any clear support for new sanctions. And even while Secretary Clinton was in Moscow last week, the Russian government affirmed that it intends to fulfill its contract to bring Iran's Bushehr nuclear reactor online in June despite U.S. objections.
China, for its part, is not just playing hard-to-get on sanctions; it believes that Iran's nuclear program represents no imminent weaponization threat and that a lot more time must be allowed for dialogue in order to bring Tehran into full compliance with its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Despite Clinton's suggestion that Beijing supports the idea of parallel tracks of pressure and diplomacy, Chinese officials have repeatedly warned that sanctions could undermine prospects for a diplomatic solution, and has refused to consider the adoption of new measures at the Security Council. Beijing's opposition to new sanctions is shared by other Security Council members such as Brazil, Lebanon and Turkey. ...
(8) Clinton grovels to Netanyahu at AIPAC: Bibi's Babe, by Alan Sabrosky
From: Sami Joseph <sajoseph2005@yahoo.com> Date: 25.03.2010 02:25 AM
Subject: [altahrir] EL NITTEN'S BABE: KNEEPAD DIPLOMACY LIVES!
Bibi's Babe
Israel - not wanting America to be bored with only one and a half wars - evidently is trying to help by encouraging us into war with Iran, to spare them the cost of attacking it. Such a friend! Says Alan Sabrosky.
25 March 2010
By Dr. Alan Sabrosky*
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=38062
Kneepad diplomacy lives
There has been something verging on the surreal in the US-Israel interplay over the past year or so, culminating in the kick in – er, the face delivered to Vice President Biden two weeks ago with Israel's surprise announcement of yet more new settlement construction, and capped by Secretary of State Clinton's groveling submission to Netanyahu at a recent AIPAC conference. Her speech was the verbal equivalent of what a White House intern allegedly did for her husband once (or more) upon a time, supposedly earning "Presidential kneepads" thereby.
Israeli officials have repeatedly not only ignored but also openly insulted in word or deed the persons or policies of almost every senior American official with whom they have dealt, including Clinton, Biden, Middle East Envoy George Mitchell, and President Obama himself.
And they have taken it, one and all, occasionally with brief bursts of verbal anger that rapidly subsided into yet another steadfast affirmation of the eternal, undiminished, unchallenged and unchallengeable US willingness to underwrite the security of Israel, and especially to its absolute unwillingness to deny Israel a single dollar, bomb or bullet. God knows, I wish they had even half the same demonstrated commitment to the security of the United States and the well-being of the American people — but then, no one can easily serve two masters.
Creating a Shambles and Calling it Policy
Sure, America's Middle East policy is a shambles. America's standing is much lower now than when Obama came into office. The Iraq war is winding down, with no certainty at all how that country will go. Afghanistan is a mess, but then, Alexander the Great couldn't do much with it either, so that's no surprise. And Israel — not wanting America to be bored with only one and a half wars — evidently is trying to help by encouraging us into war with Iran, to spare them the cost of attacking it. Such a friend!
Then there are the long-suffering Palestinians, a people whose situation Obama himself declared in his one bright moment in Cairo last June to be "intolerable." Hello? Mr. Obama, did you sleep through so many classes that the meaning of that word slipped past you? Something that is "intolerable" needs to be put right, and by any objective measure, the US has the power on absolutely every dimension needed to do just that.
Ah, but that would mean actually doing something to Israel, or at least withholding something from it, or perhaps even voting against it in the UN. And that would mean bypassing Congress and going to the American people. And that isn't going to happen, at least with this Administration. Obama just isn't the man to do that job.
From Bad to Worse
The whole thing almost reminds me of a turnabout "battered spouse" exercise, in which the stronger lets the weaker do the beating, murmuring "now, dear" at intervals but letting the beatings continue. And as usual, whenever anyone else dares to point out what is happening, the battered spouse staunchly affirms a determination to stand by the battering partner, no matter what happens.
What is manifestly going to happen is that a demonstrably bad situation is going to get worse, and more than a few people are making that abundantly clear. Probably the only thing that might jolt the Israeli-dominated train of US Middle East mismanagement off its tracks, would be a catastrophe following a US strike against Iran producing US casualties way beyond those from the Vietnam War — something that could happen all too easily. And then, yet again, there is Gaza and the rest of the Palestinian Bantustan….
More dangerously, Clinton's hat-in-hand, I-love-you-now-and-forever verbal burlesque at the AIPAC conference makes two things abundantly clear. One is the extraordinary extent of Zionist control within and over the US Government — when you hurt someone or some Administration and it comes back for more, you have them. The other is how little the members of AIPAC themselves, at least nominally US citizens, care about the US itself — there isn't any longer even a facade of "dual loyalty," only loyalty to Israel alone.
I am very old-fashioned, and a decade in the US Marines gave me an odd affinity for qualities such as pride and loyalty and duty and honor. I'd like to hope that somewhere way down deep these supposed "leaders" of the most powerful country on earth would find something of those qualities in themselves, or at least acquire a sense of shame, and understand that they are there to safeguard America and Americans, and not to sustain Israeli militarism, racism and colonialism.
If they did, then Israel would find itself confronting sanctions and embargoes, its aid from the US would end, and the illegal blockade of Gaza would be forcibly broken — and that would be just for starters.
But that, too, isn't likely in the here and now. In the Middle East, as in so many other areas of public policy, the US Government and its so-called "leaders" simply are not a part of any workable solution. So perhaps we should just send them all some diplomatic kneepads emblazoned with the Star of David — although I do wonder what kind of a cigar Netanyahu will flash. __
*Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D, University of Michigan) is a ten-year US Marine Corps veteran and a graduate of the US Army War College. He can be contacted at docbrosk@comcast.net ==
This article was published one day earlier at intifada-palestine.com:
Bibi Netanyahu's Babe: Kneepad Diplomacy Lives!
24. MAR, 2010
http://intifada-palestine.com/2010/03/bibi-netanyahus-babe-kneepad-diplomacy-lives
(9) Congressional Trips Sponsored by Pro-Israel Groups
From: Sadanand, Nanjundiah (Physics Earth Sciences) <sadanand@mail.ccsu.edu> Date: 20.03.2010 02:08 PM
Congressional Junket Front-Page News Unless It's a Trip to Israel
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs
March 9, 2010 news_editor@wrmea.com
http://www.israel-palestinenews.org/2010/03/congressional-junket-front-page-news.html
http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/congressional-junket-front-page-news-unless-it%E2%80%99s-a-trip-to-israel/
The ongoing controversy regarding Representative Charles Rangel (D, NY-15) and trips to the Caribbean in 2007 and 2008 has refreshed the discourse on privately funded congressional travel. Following the Jack Abramoff scandal of 2006 stricter limits were adopted by the House in order to expose and prevent corporate-sponsored junkets. The new ethics rules stipulated that members could not accept trip funding from non-profits that had received corporate donations, which would constitute lobbying. ...
For further information regarding trips sponsored by AIEF and similar groups please consult the following table:
Rank Top Ten Members in Terms of Approved Trips Sponsored by Pro-Israel Groups Pro-Israel Groups Funded Travel* # of Trips Sponsored by Pro-Israel Groups*
1 Hoyer, Steny H (D, Maryland District 5 ) $142,426.02 17
2 Berkley, Shelley (D, Nevada District 1 ) $102,910.67 14
3 Blunt, Roy (R, Missouri District 7 ) $69,356.98 10
4 Kirk, Mark (R, Illinois District 10 ) $64,503.09 9
5 Green, Gene (D, Texas District 29 ) $50,527.94 4
6 Wexler, Robert (D, Florida District 19 ) $46,171.94 5
7 Pence, Mike (R, Indiana District 6 ) $45,288.05 5
8 Gohmert, Louis B Jr (R, Texas District 1 ) $44,753.60 3
9 Bachmann, Michele (R, Minnesota District 6 ) $44,381.14 3
10 Langevin, Jim (D, Rhode Island District 2 ) $43,302.15 7 ---
Member Pro-Israel Groups Funded Travel* # of Trips Sponsored by Pro-Israel Groups*
* - Trips are those approved, which includes all trips from office both by members and by staffers
... {a list of Congress members & their approved trips follows - see above link}
(10) UN's Middle East Quartet urges Israeli settlement freeze
From: Kristoffer Larsson <kristoffer.larsson@sobernet.nu> Date: 20.03.2010 04:19 PM
Middle East Quartet urges Israeli settlement freeze
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8575723.stm
Page last updated at 15:42 GMT, Friday, 19 March 2010
The international Quartet of Middle East peace mediators has urged Israel to freeze all settlement activity.
Speaking for the Quartet, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon condemned Israel's announcement of plans to build new homes in disputed East Jerusalem.
That move undermined efforts to restart indirect Israeli-Palestinian talks.
Speaking to the BBC, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton indicated that hardening the tone with Israel had paid off, with talks now back in prospect.
Mr Ban met Mrs Clinton and the other Quartet foreign ministers - new EU foreign policy chief Baroness Ashton and Russia's Sergei Lavrov - in Moscow.
In a strongly worded statement, the Quartet condemned Israel's announcement last week of planning permission for 1,600 new homes in East Jerusalem, occupied by Israel since 1967.
After the announcement, the Palestinians declared they could not begin US-brokered indirect, or "proximity", talks with the Israelis.
"The Quartet urges the government of Israel to freeze all settlement activity, including natural growth, dismantle outposts erected since March 2001 and to refrain from demolitions and evictions in East Jerusalem," Mr Ban said.
"Recalling that the annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognised by the international community, the Quartet underscores that the status of Jerusalem is a permanent status issue that must be resolved through negotiations between the parties, and condemns the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem."
Mr Ban stated the goal of an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement - including a Palestinian state - within two years. ...
(11) Traditionalist Catholics disrupt Rabbi's sermon at Notre Dame
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2010/03/traditional-french-catholics-disrupt.html
YOUNG, TRADITIONAL FRENCH CATHOLICS DISRUPT RABBI'S SERMON AT NOTRE DAME CATHEDRAL IN PARIS
by Michael Hoffman | March 24, 2010 | www.RevisionistHistory.org
... Last Sunday ("Passion Sunday" of Lent, March 21), a contingent of young, traditional French Catholics went to the famous medieval Cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris, France, where Cardinal Andre Vingt-Trois had arranged for Rabbi Rivon Krygier to give the sermon. When the rabbi attempted to commit this sacrilege, these brave souls arose in one body and with one voice, recited the Apostle's Creed and the rosary aloud in the Cathedral.
As a result, the rabbi was forced to retreat to the sacristy (in the back of the cathedral) as the officials of Notre Dame ordered an organ to begin playing to drown out the voices of the traditional Catholics. The Catholic television station KTO immediately cut off its live transmission as the protest began. ...
*********************************************************************
WORLD VIEW NEWS SERVICE
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment