Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Joe Lieberman and Treason

When interviewed by Fox News on why Julian Assange has not been charged with treason, Joe Lieberman responded: "I don’t understand why that hasn’t happened yet."

If Joe Lieberman does not understand what treason is, we would like to explain to this Israel firster. You see Joe, treason is ONLY applicable to someone like you, an American citizen who at any available opportunity puts Israel's interest above America's. Since Julian Assange is an Australian, he CANNOT be charged with treason. If you really want to know who is guilty of treason, just look in the mirror.



Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Huckabee wants to execute whistleblower for treason

Mike Huckabee, the failed presidential candidate in the 2008 election, whose love and loyalty to Israel goes far beyond the love and loyalty for his home country, told the Politico website: "Whoever in our government leaked that information is guilty of treason, and I think anything less than execution is too kind a penalty."

We here at Israel Firsters would like to propose a loyalty test and anyone failing this test will be charged with treason and be summarily executed, exactly the same kind of punishment Huckabee wanted for the whistleblower. We would love Mike Huckabee to be the first subject to be tested.



Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Traitor Alert: Allen West thinks Israel's representation in the Congress is not strong enough

Seriously, we are not kidding here. The newly elected Republican congressman from Florida thinks "the Obama Administration has shown an unprecedented disregard for the sovereignty of the State of Israel." His proofs? The Obama Administration was "browbeating Israel for building homes in their rightful capitol" and "disrespecting Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House." Now how is asking Israel, recipient of more than $3 billion U.S. tax payer dollars a year and unwavering diplomatic support from us, not to build on stolen land - putting the lives of our soldiers at risk - disregarding the "sovereignty of the State of Israel?" In fact, one can correctly note that Israel is not respecting its own sovereignty by continuing to build on stolen land.

And do you know what is so traitorous about Allen West? He is unabashed in declaring his "commitment to Israel will rise above mere statements of support," making absolutely no mention of his commitment to the United States of America, the ONLY country he is supposed to commit to serve as an elected official.

How we long for those days when traitors like Allen West are sent to their rightful places: condemned to the gallows.



Friday, November 12, 2010

Cantor to Netanyahu: Whatever you do, we will side with you



One of the favorite Israel firsters among us is Eric Cantor. For him, there is absolutely no pretense at all where his loyalty lies. There are a lot of Israel firsters among our lawmakers but usually they tend not to too brazen in exhibiting their disloyalty. But not Eric. This soon-to-be the "highest ranking Jew ever in Congress" met personally with the leader of a foreign state and assured him that he would "side, as a policy, with that leader against the president." This is quite extraordinary.



Monday, October 25, 2010

Mark Kirk, proudly representing the Tel Aviv district

We don't know about you guys but when we visited Mark Kirk's campaign website, we really thought he was running for an office in the Israeli Knesset. Otherwise, why would someone who is campaigning to be a U.S. senator want to show his loyalty and his accomplishments for a completely foreign state? As a matter of fact, his campaign website proudly proclaimed him as a "Pro-Israel Champion." We initially had to rub our eyes and looked at it again to make sure we did not misread "Pro-America Champion" as "Pro-Israel Champion." Only in America would a politician swear his loyalty for another country and expect to be elected.




Thursday, September 30, 2010

Traitor Joe calls for war on Iran

No one should be surprised by now with Traitor Joe - aka Joe Lieberman - wanting us attack Iran for the sake of Israel. Traitor Joe claims that the "single most important test of American power in the Middle East today is whether we succeed or fail in stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons capability." The single most important test of American power - if there is anything left - in the Middle East today is whether we can stop our undying support of Israel no matter what it does. If Traitor Joe wants to go to war on Iran, he should leave us out of it and he should do so as an Israeli since he is pretty much a citizen of Israel.

Friday, September 24, 2010

Traitors seeking release of convicted traitor

One would think that a convicted traitor - who had stolen more than 800,000 pages of classified documents and given them to Israel for financial gains, therefore compromising our intelligence network when Israel turned around and gave the same information to our former Cold War enemy Soviet Union - should rot in jail for the rest of his life. But no, four traitorous Congressmen - Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) and Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) - are currently circulating a letter seeking clemency for Jonathan Pollard, the convicted traitor. In a statement issued by Barney Frank's office on Thursday, he claimed "the positive impact that a grant of clemency would have in Israel, as a strong indication of the goodwill of our nation towards Israel and the Israeli people," and that this "would be particularly helpful at a time when the Israeli nation faces difficult decisions in its long-standing effort to secure peace with its neighbors."

Rep. Frank, do you know what would really help this current sham of a peace process? Instead of continuously going down this path of giving Israel everything it wants and protecting Israel to our own detriment, threaten Israel that we will withhold the $3 billion dollars a year of military/financial aid if they continue to build settlements on illegally occupied land. That is the only way Israelis can be made to change their undesirable behaviors.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Two fucking whores

There is really no better word to describe the two Illinois Senate candidates than two fucking whores. Republican Mark Kirk and Democrat Alexi Giannoulias are out-whoring each other to show who is more loyal to Israel, even though they apparently have forgotten that they are actually running for the United States Senate in the United States of America.

Alexi Giannoulias whored himself at a Town Hall last month by declaring he has "essentially the exact same" position on Israel as his Republican opponent. He believed "in the safety and security of Israel, especially dealing with external threats like a nuclear-armed Iran." He thought "we need to continue to show our unwavering partnership with the only 'democracy' in the region."

Not to be out-whored, Mark Kirk insisted he was "the only candidate with a proven record" on leading many "Israel-related issues."

It is depressing to know that because most Americans have been conditioned by their lawmakers' unconditional support of Israel, they no longer find it weird and reprehensible that the two candidates running for the U.S. Senate are trying to out-whore each other to demonstrate he is more pro-Israel than the other. How did we get to this sorry state? How can we reclaim our country back from these Israel firsters?



Monday, August 9, 2010

Look who's pushing for confrontation with Iran



Conflating Israel's interest with ours is a common strategy employed by Israel firsters, as we have illustrated here on numerous occasions. But this full-page Ad in the New York Times brought this fictitious integration into a whole new level: Stopping Iran from going nuclear will help us "cut our addiction to foreign oil, boosts clean energy technology, and moves our nation dramatically towards reduced energy dependence!" Naturally, these Israel firsters will waste no opportunity to bamboozle us into thinking that we share EVERYTHING with Israel: "foreign regimes that hold anti-American and anti-Israel sentiments," "threaten America's and Israel's national security, "reduced energy dependence is absolutely vital to our national security, to Israel’s safety."

Now who among us are pushing for this confrontation with Iran? Unfortunately but predictably, it's the who's who of major Jewish American and pro-Israel lobbying groups.



Philip Weiss of Mondoweiss wished he could say this was a canard, but he couldn't.



Jewish and democratic state

We have always contended that Israel's claim of being a Jewish and democratic state is oxymoronic. According to the brave Haaretz columnist Gideon Levy, defining Israel as a Jewish state condemns them to living in a racist state. He further asserts:
In Israel, this racism is embedded in the state's most fundamental values. There is no other state whose immigration laws are blatantly and unequivocally based on the candidates' bloodlines. Jewish blood, whether authentic or dubious, is kosher. Other blood, from those of other creeds or nationalities, is unacceptable."

Gideon also ponders upon the meaning of the term "Jewish state" that Israelis toss about endlessly:
Does anyone actually know the meaning of the term "Jewish state" that we bandy about so much? Does it mean a state for Jews only? Is it not a new kind of "racial purity"? Is the "demographic threat" greater than the danger of the state's becoming a religious enthnocracy or an apartheid state? Wouldn't it be better to live in a just democracy?

Friday, August 6, 2010

Elie Wiesel, the weasel

If we have to nominate someone as the biggest fraud in the Western Hemisphere, we can think of no one other than Elie Wiesel. How this weasel managed to win the Nobel peace prize is beyond us. But then again, if Barack Obama could win it for literally doing nothing, may be it is not too difficult to be a Nobel laureate after all.

Recently, Elie Wiesel weighed in on Israel's decision to deport 400 children of migrant workers from Israel. He told Haaretz he found it "hard to believe that such a thing is happening in Israel" and he wondered "where is the Jewish spirit, the Jewish heart and the Jewish compassion?" Amazingly, this is coming from someone who placed a full page ad in the New York Times, criticizing Obama's public spat with Israel over its projects to steal land from Palestinians in East Jerusalem for building Jewish housing. One has to wonder why Wiesel was not evoking the same "Jewish spirit, the Jewish Heart and Jewish compassion" when it comes to Palestinians.

Wiesel could not fathom how "such a thing is happening in Israel" even though Israel has been treating its Palestinian citizens like second class citizens for decades. In his eyes, Palestinians probably do not exist and they are a figment of someone's imagination, otherwise how can one who claimed Jews "would be more sensitive to the suffering of others" - because of all the deportations that fill the Jewish people's history - not apply the same "compassion" to Palestinians?

Seriously, every time we hear this Israel-first weasel speaks about "compassion", we feel like punching someone - him - in the face.



Friday, July 16, 2010

Joe Sestak was willing to put his life on the line to defend Israel

In a letter sent out by Rep. Joe Sestak's attorney Jared Solomon, he claimed Sestak "was willing to put his life on the line to defend Israel," and it was "offensive and outrageous to suggest that he does not stand with Israel." Reading the above statements, one would have come naturally to a conclusion that Joe Sestak was running for office in Israel.

In a normal world, it does not make sense for any candidate running for office to claim that he was willing to put his life on the line to defend a foreign state. It certainly makes no sense to have to defend how one "stands with" a foreign state. But when it comes to Israel, there is really nothing ordinary or conventional. Just for Israel, our lawmakers have to whore themselves to show how much they are willing to do for it, proclaiming that they are willing to put their lives on the line in order to defend it. Can't you see how wrong this picture is?

Congressman Joe Sestak could have responded to those attack ads challenging his lack of support for Israel by declaring that he is Senatorial candidate for the United States of America and not Israel, and he is loyal to no countries other than the United States of America. That was all Rep. Joe Sestak needed to say. But instead, Rep. Sestak felt the need to respond to the attack ads by whoring himself, like most of our lawmakers, to demonstrate how pro-Israel he was.

Disgusting.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Slow day at "work" for Chuck Schumer

The sun, moon and earth must be aligned or something. We are extremely surprised that Sen. Chuck Schumer actually took the time to write an open letter to Apple, after spending ALL his time catering to Israel's every need. It must be a slow day at work - in serving Israelis - for Chuck.

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

President George Washington's warning in his farewell address

President George Washington's warning in his farewell address on the dangers of "passionate attachment of one nation for another" is so true now more than ever.
So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

Remember President George Washington's warning, and remember well. This brings us to the traitorous group Emergency Committee for Israel started by none other than Israel Firsters William Kristol and Gary Bauer. When asked about this group, Kristol said they are "the pro-Israel wing of the pro-Israel community." How an American who made treasonable statements like these for years and yet still remains relevant is beyond us. Anyone who advocates something similar for countries other Israel would have been called out as a traitor and be shunned from public long ago.

Thursday, July 1, 2010

House and Senate passed a nonsense resolution

When was the last time the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate pass a resolution calling for the release of an American solder and express concern for his well-being? We certainly do not remember. But just to show you how the Israel Lobby got our lawmakers by their balls, H.Res.1359 and S.Res.571, which call for the release of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who is being held captive by Hamas, have been passed in both the House and the Senate.

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

Israel Firsters, explain this!

One of the main reasons why a lot of Israel Firsters in this country wanted us to provide unwavering support for Israel is because it is a "democratic" state, while also noting that it is a Jewish state. These idiots can't seem to see the oxymoronic notion of a state being democratic and Jewish at the same time with more than 20 percent of its population being non-Jewish. Israelis of Palestinian descent have always been treated like second class citizens. One recent evidence of this glaring discrimination is the Deputy Health Minister Ya’acov Litzman "delaying the transfer of ministry budgets to Nahariya’s state-owned Western Galilee Hospital because its director-general is an Israeli Arab." So Israel Firsters, is this the behavior of a "democratic" state?

Friday, June 25, 2010

Let's not fool anyone here

Democrats' attempt to pass an extension of jobless aid failed as they could only muster 57 votes in the Senate against 41 nays, 3 short of the 60 required to prevent the Republicans from filibustering it. Other than a lone Democrat senator Ben Nelson who sided with the Republicans, this was voted right down the party line.

Contrast this with the passing of a conference report on sanctioning Iran by a vote of 99-0. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said that it was necessary to pass the conference report that "will impose tough new sanctions on Iran," because "Iran has oppressed its own people, violated United Nations resolutions, challenged America and threatened Israel." Seriously, let's not fool anyone here. The reason why these lawmakers are so eager to impose even more sanctions on Iran is not because of Iran oppressing its own people, Iran violating United Nations resolutions or Iran challenging America. Iran being a "threat" to Israel is the ONLY reason.

Israel has oppressed Palestinians, violated countless United Nations Security Council resolutions, challenged America by disregarding our policies against stealing land from the Palestinians and building Jews-only settlements, and attacked its neighbors on numerous occasions, but why aren't we imposing any sanction on Israel? In fact, not only are we not imposing any sanction on this Jewish pariah apartheid state, we are giving Israel billions of dollars a year, arming it to its teeth and vetoing resolutions after resolutions against Israel in the United Nations Security Council. Can at least one day go by without these Israel firsters selling us out?

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Israel firsters not restricted to politicians

Based on who we have outed so far, you can be excused for thinking that Israel firsters are limited to politicians. Just to show you that there are Israel firsters in all walks of life, we proudly present to you an Israel firster from the "liberal" bastion known as Hollywood: Jon Voight. Mr Voight, one who never minces his words when it comes to his support of Israel, recently wrote an open letter to President Obama.

In his letter, Jon Voight claimed that Obama "will be the first American president that lied to the Jewish people" about his statements on defending Israel. Jon Voight further claimed that instead of defending Israel, Obama has "propagandized Israel, until they look like they are everyone's enemy," thereby "putting Israel in harm's way" and "promoted anti-semitism throughout the world." This is what is so wrong with Israel firsters like Jon Voight because they believe that we, as Americans, are supposed to defend a foreign entity. For his information Mr Voight, when Obama, like all other Presidents of the United States before him, swore his oath to be the President of this country, he swore to preserve, protect and defend our Constitution. He did not swear to protect a pariah state that is hell-bent on ethnically-cleansing non-Jews from its occupied territories. Strangely enough, Mr Voight made no mention of the $205 million dollars that President Obama requested for and speedily approved by our gutless Congress to help Israel develop a missile defense system. Obama must be a really big "anti-semite" to have made this request: Taking money that we do not have - most likely borrowing from China - and giving it to Israel.

There is no better way to promote anti-semitism throughout the world than what Israel has been doing since its founding in 1948. Since Israel claims it represents all Jews, it is only natural for others to associate what Israel has been doing with Jews. You can't just go around occupying land, settling them with your own citizens, ethnically-cleansing natives while committing serious human right abuses without expecting to suffer the consequences of doing so. People like Jon Voight do not seem to understand that Israel is putting itself in harm's way solely because of its actions, not due to some unexplainable ingrained anti-semitism in gentiles.

This is the content of Jon Voight's open letter:
President Obama:

You will be the first American president that lied to the Jewish people, and the American people as well, when you said that you would defend Israel, the only Democratic state in the Middle East, against all their enemies. You have done just the opposite. You have propagandized Israel, until they look like they are everyone's enemy — and it has resonated throughout the world. You are putting Israel in harm's way, and you have promoted anti-Semitism throughout the world.

You have brought this to a people who have given the world the Ten Commandments and most laws we live by today. The Jewish people have given the world our greatest scientists and philosophers, and the cures for many diseases, and now you play a very dangerous game so you can look like a true martyr to what you see and say are the underdogs. But the underdogs you defend are murderers and criminals who want Israel eradicated.

You have brought to Arizona a civil war, once again defending the criminals and illegals, creating a meltdown for good, loyal, law-abiding citizens. Your destruction of this country may never be remedied, and we may never recover. I pray to God you stop, and I hope the people in this great country realize your agenda is not for the betterment of mankind, but for the betterment of your politics.

With heartfelt and deep concern for America and Israel,

Jon Voight

Monday, June 21, 2010

U.S. Congress, Israeli occupied territory

No matter how you feel about Pat Buchanan, he was right on the money when he commented that the U.S. Congress is the Israeli occupied territory. Witness this AIPAC-sponsored letter, signed by 85 out of 100 of our Senators to President Obama. The letter reads:
We write to affirm our support for our strategic partnership with Israel, and encourage you to continue to do so before international organizations such as the United Nations. The United States has traditionally stood with Israel because it is in our national security interest and must continue to do so.

Israel is our strongest ally in the Middle East and a vibrant democracy. Israel is also a partner to the United States on military and intelligence issues in this critical region. That is why it is our national interest to support Israel at a moment when Israel faces multiple threats from Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the current regime in Iran. Israel’s opponents have developed clever diplomatic and tactical ploys to challenge its international standing, whether the effort to isolate Israel at the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference or the recent effort to breach the naval blockade around Gaza.

We fully support Israel’s right to self-defense. In response to thousands of rocket attacks on Israel from Hamas terrorists in Gaza, Israel took steps to prevent items which could be used to support these attacks from reaching Gaza. Israel’s naval blockade, which is legal under international law, allows Israel to keep dangerous goods from entering Gaza by sea. The intent of the measures is to protect Israel, while allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza.

Late last month when Israel learned that groups operating in Turkey wanted to challenge its blockade of Gaza, Israel made every effort to ensure that all humanitarian aid reached Gaza without needlessly precipitating a confrontation. Israeli forces were able to safely divert five of the six ships challenging the blockade. However, video footage shows that the Israeli commandos who arrived on the sixth ship, which was owned by the Turkish Humanitarian Relief Foundation (the IHH), were brutally attacked with iron rods, knives, and broken glass. They were forced to respond to that attack and we regret the loss of life that resulted.

We are deeply concerned about the IHH’s role in this incident and have additional questions about Turkey and any connections to Hamas. The IHH is a member of a group of Muslim charities, the Union of Good, which was designated by the US Treasury Department as a terrorist organization. The Union of Good was created by and strongly supports Hamas, which has been designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the US State Department. We recommend that your administration consider whether the IHH should be put on the list of foreign terrorist organizations, after an examination by the intelligence community, the State Department, and the Treasury Department.

We commend the action you took to prevent the adoption of an unfair United Nations Security Council resolution, which would have represented a rush to judgment by the international community. We also deplore the actions of the United Nations Human Rights Council which, once again, singled out Israel. Israel has announced its intention to promptly carry out a thorough investigation of this incident and has the right to determine how its investigation is conducted. In the meantime, we ask you to stand firm in the future at the United Nations Security Council and to use your veto power, if necessary, to prevent any similar biased or one-sided resolutions from passing.

Finally, we believe that this incident should not derail the current proximity talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. We hope that these talks will move quickly to direct negotiations and ultimately, to a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

These are the 85 Israel-first U.S. Senators who have sworn their allegiance to Israel:
Alexander, Lamar
Barrasso, John
Baucus, Max
Bayh, Evan
Begich, Mark
Bennet, Michael
Bennett, Robert
Bond, Christopher
Boxer, Barbara
Brown, Scott
Brown, Sherrod
Brownback, Sam
Burr, Richard
Burris, Roland W.
Cantwell, Maria
Cardin, Ben
Carper, Tom
Casey Jr., Bob
Chambliss, Saxby
Coburn, Tom
Cochran, Thad
Collins, Susan
Conrad, Kent
Corker, Bob
Cornyn, John
Crapo, Mike
DeMint, Jim
Dorgan, Byron
Durbin, Richard
Ensign, John
Enzi, Mike
Feinstein, Dianne
Franken, Al
Gillibrand, Kirsten
Graham, Lindsey
Grassley, Charles
Hagan, Kay
Hatch, Orrin
Hutchinson, Kay Bailey
Inhofe, Jim
Inouye, Daniel
Isakson, Johnny
Johanns, Mike
Johnson, Tim
Kaufman, Ted
Klobuchar, Amy
Kohl, Herbert
Kyl, Jon
Landrieu, Mary
Lautenberg, Frank
LeMieux, George
Levin, Carl
Lieberman, Joseph
Lincoln, Blanche
Lugar, Richard
McCain, John
McCaskill, Claire
McConnell, Mitch
Menendez, Bob
Mikulski, Barbara
Murkowski, Lisa
Murray, Patty
Nelson, Ben
Nelson, Bill
Pryor, Mark
Reed, Jack
Reid, Harry
Risch, Jim
Roberts, Pat
Schumer, Charles
Sessions, Jeff
Shaheen, Jeanne
Shelby, Richard
Snowe, Olympia
Specter, Arlen
Stabenow, Debbie
Tester, John
Thune, John
Udall, Mark
Vitter, David
Voinovich, George
Warner, Mark
Whitehouse, Sheldon
Wicker, Roger
Wyden, Ron

The following U.S. Senators did not swear their allegiance to Israel (Click on the names to thank them for at least not swearing their allegiance to Israel this time round):
Akaka, Daniel
Bingaman, Jeff
Bunning, Jim
Byrd, Robert C.
Crapo, Mike
Dodd, Chris
Feingold, Russell
Gregg, Judd
Kerry, John
Leahy, Patrick
Merkley, Jeff
Rockefeller, John D.
Sanders, Bernie
Udall, Tom
Webb, Jim

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

New York's finest

Israel can always depend on these American Israel Firsters whenever it gets in trouble. On a bright sunny day, these Israel Firsters representing various Congressional districts in New York gathered to profess their love for a foreign state while chastising Americans who were on the flotilla that was violently attacked by Israel in international water. Instead of calling for an investigation for an American that was shot four times in the head by Israeli commandos, these Israel Firsters had the chutzpah to ask the State Department to ban every non-American flotilla participant from entering the United States.

The lawmakers who showed up at this Israel love fest organized by the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York are the usual suspects: Anthony Weiner, Carolyn Maloney, Jerry Nadler and Eliot Engel. Surprisingly, it also included the fallen-from-grace Charlie Rangel. Did they promise Rangel that he would get his chairmanship on the Ways and Means Committee back if he joins them Israel Firsters?

Sunday, June 13, 2010

Wednesday, June 9, 2010

Remember USS Liberty

Yesterday was the 43rd anniversary of the attack on USS Liberty by Israel on June 8th 1967. You may wonder why you don't hear too much of it in our mainstream media. In fact, a search on Google News revealed that not one, I repeat, not one mainstream media - print, online, cable TV, network TV - mentioned a word about this intentional attack on us by our so-called ally.

Here are some mention of the attack on USS Liberty that we managed to find:

And finally, you can now watch a free 51-minute documentary called "The Loss of Liberty".

Friday, June 4, 2010

Tribalism

Glenn Greenwald wrote an excellent post explaining why so many American Jews from different political beliefs are united when it comes to Israel:
I can't express how many emails I've received over the last week, from self-identified Jewish readers (almost exclusively), along the lines of: I'm a true progressive, agree with you on virtually every issue, but hate your views on Israel. When it comes to Israel, we see the same mindset from otherwise admirable Jewish progressives such as Anthony Weiner, Jerry Nadler, Eliot Spitzer, Alan Grayson, and (after a brief stint of deviation) Barney Frank. On this one issue, they magically abandon their opposition to military attacks on civilians, their defense of weaker groups being bullied and occupied by far stronger factions, their belief that unilateral military attacks are unjustified, and suddenly find common cause with Charles Krauthammer, The Weekly Standard, and the Bush administration in justifying even the most heinous Israeli crimes of aggression.

It will never cease to be mystifying (at least to me) that they never question why they suddenly view the world so differently when it comes to Israel. They never wonder to themselves:
I had it continuously drummed into my head from the time I was a small child, from every direction, that Israel was special and was to be cherished, that it's fundamentally good but persecuted and victimized by Evil Arab forces surrounding it, that I am a part of that group and should see the world accordingly. Is this tribal identity which was pummeled into me from childhood -- rather than some independent, dispassionate analysis -- the reason I find myself perpetually sympathizing with and defending Israel?

Thursday, June 3, 2010

More citizenship stripping

Citizenship-stripping Traitor Joe has a lot in common with the Interior Minister of Israel Eli Yishai:
Interior Minister Eli Yishai petitioned Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein to help him revoke the Israeli citizenship of Israeli Arab MK Hanin Zuabi, who took part in efforts to break Israel's blockade of Gaza on a flotilla of aid ships earlier this week.

Sad but true

Wednesday, June 2, 2010

The exception



The primary mission here at Israel Firsters is to expose American politicians who are more loyal to Israel than the country they represent. However, for this post, instead of revealing more Israel Firsters - trust us, there are many more of them to be laid bare - we have decided to show you there are politicians with unquestionable loyalty to this country. One such patriot is Marcy Winograd, a Jewish lady who is running in the Democratic primary against the diehard Zionist war-profiteering incumbent Rep. Jane Harman in California's 36th district.

Recently, Marcy Winograd was interviewed by Jeffrey Goldberg, one of the chief propagandists for Israel. During the interview, Marcy made this comment regarding Henry Waxman:
I would hope that all of our lawmakers would pledge allegiance to this country as the country they represent.
Brilliant! It is so refreshing to have a politician running for office publicly questioned the loyalty of some of our politicians. Ironically, we only "discovered" Winograd's campaign on NJDC (National Jewish Democratic Council) blog post criticizing her support for a one-state solution. We immediately made a donation to Winograd's campaign after reading what NJDC has to say about her. Thanks NJDC!

If you want to elect more sensible and loyal politicians like Marcy Winograd, support her campaign now!

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Let the propaganda begins

Deputy Foreign Minister of Israel Daniel Ayalon instructing Israel's American minions on how to defend the indefensible:
Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon held a conference call with over 700 Jewish-American leaders, following the Gaza flotilla raid.

Ayalon explained the importance of the operation and the humanitarian situation in Gaza. He stressed that "Israel and the international community cannot be diverted from the real problem in the Middle East – a nuclear Iran."

Israel Firster of the week: Anthony Weiner



Rep. Anthony Weiner, a Jewish Democrat representing New York 9th Congressional district, made the following statement in reaction to Israel's flotilla raid:
While the demand for answers seems to echo in capitals around the world, the facts here are largely known.

We know this tragedy was instigated by Turkey. We know that Israel had not only warned that this boat was in violation of an entirely lawful blockade, but had offered safe harbor to the boat in Ashdod. We also know that a known terrorist group – Hamas – has put its hateful agenda over the well being of its people.

Any loss of life is tragic. This loss was the result of Turkish instigation and Hamas terror policies. Even if we are the only country on earth that sees the facts here, the United States should stand up for Israel.

So regardless of the fact that the Israelis have committed an act of high-sea piracy in international water, which directly resulted in the deaths of more than ten civilians, Anthony Weiner wants the United States to stand up for Israel. Instead of blaming Israel for hijacking the boats, killing and injuring many civilians and illegally detaining about 700 of them, this Israel Firster is accusing Turkey of daring to bypass this unlawful Israeli blockade in order to provide aid for the starving Gazans. Weiner's blame-shifting is akin to the attorney for a rapist shamelessly blaming the rape victim for dressing provocatively.

Friday, May 21, 2010

Bipartisanship at its best...

...when it comes to Israel. Democrat and Republican politicians may disagree on almost every single issue right down the party line but when it comes to passing laws to give Israel our tax dollars, the votes are near unanimous. Such is the case with the law just passed yesterday, giving Israel $205 million dollars for its production of short range rocket defense system. With one in ten of us unemployed, our budget deficit at all time high and our economy in shamble, our elected politicians still managed to hand over money that we do not have to Israel. As a matter of fact, the House of Representatives voted in favor of the bill by a wide margin of 410 - 4. Two of the four no votes are Rep. Ron Paul and Rep. Dennis Kucinich, both are the last remaining handful of true patriots in the Congress.

Howard Berman, Jewish Congressman from California, said that "with nearly every square inch of Israel at risk from rocket and missile attacks, we must ensure that our most important ally in the region has the tools to defend itself." Ted Deutch, another Jewish Congressman who voted for the bill, applauded the Obama Administration for supporting the missile system and stressed that the Administration "must always work to address the threats posed to Israel not only by short-range missiles, but by the looming possibility of a nuclear-armed Iran.”

Why is Israel "our most important ally in the region?" Throughout the years, these are what the Israelis have done:
  • Attacked us unprovoked (remember the attack on USS Liberty in 1967?).
  • Stole secrets from us and sold it to our archenemy during the Cold War.
  • Committed war crimes using weapons that were provided by us that are meant for defensive use only.
  • Continues to build Jews-only settlements in the occupied territories in clear violation of international laws while completely ignoring our demands for them to cease this ethnic-cleansing activity.
  • Repeatedly commits serious human rights abuses against Palestinians with abusers rarely brought to justice.
  • Treats its own non-Jewish citizens like second class citizens (The term Jewish and democratic is really an oxymoron. Israel cannot be both Jewish and democratic simultaneously with more than 1/5 of its population being non-Jews).
  • Most importantly, putting the lives of Americans at risk by its actions because America has been associated with Israel by providing it with unwavering and undying support diplomatically, financially and militarily.

With Israel being our "most important ally," who needs enemies? All the so-called threats facing Israel are all consequences of Israel's past and present policies. If Israel wishes to live by the sword, then it will have to take the risk of dying by the sword. Why are our politicians risking the lives of our servicemen and women by taking responsibility for Israel's actions?

The full text of the bill contains the following reasons on why it is "essential" to provide this $205 million dollars funding to Israel:
(1) The State of Israel is under grave threat and frequent attack from missiles fired indiscriminately by Hamas terrorists on its southern border and Hezbollah terrorists on its northern border.

The State of Israel is under "grave" threat because it is still occupying West Bank (Palestine), Shebaa Farms (Lebanon), Golan Heights (Syria). If Israel wants to be the tough bully in the neighborhood, let Israel deal with its consequences. The easiest way to remove this threat is to withdraw from the occupied land.

(2) The Jewish State of Israel, as a close ally of the United States, requires and deserves all necessary assistance to defend itself from such indiscriminate attacks on its citizens.

The points I listed above unquestionably demonstrated that Israel is NOT our close ally. This myth about Israel sharing the same values as us is demonstrably false. We do not treat any particular group of citizens in our country as second class citizens, unlike Israel. Even though there are many Christians groups here that would like otherwise, our constitution requires that religion be separated from state. What does Israel being a Jewish state, one that is not particularly democratic to its Arab citizens and one that does not even have a constitution, share anything in common with us?

(3) The United States remains committed to Israel's qualitative military edge, including its advantage over non-state actors such as Hezbollah and Hamas, which boast increasingly sophisticated and powerful weapons as a result of support from Iran and other state actors.

What we have given Israel: Apache attack helicopters, Cobra attack helicopters, F-16 fighter/bombers, F-15 fighter jets, guided missiles, precision-guided bombs, Patriot missile batteries, howitzers, multiple launch rocket systems, satellite intelligence, etc.

What Iran/Syria are allegedly giving Hama and Hezbollah: home-made rockets, Katyusha, Scud (rumored).

Israel's "qualitative military edge" is undoubtably leaps and bounds over its opponents - of its own creation - crude weapon systems. What is so sophisticated about those Hamas home-made rockets and Hezbollah's unguided Katsuya rockets?

(4) Regional stability and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians requires that Israel can ensure the safety of its population against missile and other threats.

Regional stability and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians requires Israel not be belligerent and obey all necessary international laws. Peace can only be achieved between the two asymmetrical parties - I don't think I need to specify who's the David and who's the Goliath here - if the significantly stronger party understands that it is no longer able to abuse the much weaker party at will. By giving the Israelis the ability to counter the crude rockets from its opponents, we are actually making it harder to achieve regional stability and lasting peace since the Israelis can be even more belligerent in attacking its neighbors, now that it does not have to worry about the retaliations on its own citizens.

(5) The United States can help to advance the cause of peace by supporting Israel's ability to defend itself against missile and other threats.

On the contrary, giving Israel the "ability to defend itself against missile and other threats" actually makes it harder for Israel to negotiate in good faith. It can now continue to hold on to the territories it illegally acquired by force, knowing that there is absolutely nothing its opponents can do about it.

(8) President Barack Obama has stated: `Our commitment to Israel's security is unshakable.'.

It is a real mystery to me as to why we are committing to the security of a foreign state, this is especially so given the reasons I listed above.

(9) Vice President Joe Biden has stated: `From my experience, the one precondition for progress is that the rest of the world knows this--there is no space between the U.S. and Israel when it comes to security--none.'.

And is it still not clear to you why the Israelis dared to make the pie-in-your-face announcement on new housing development project in East Jerusalem during your visit to promote peace? It is a statement like this that makes the Israelis think that they can pretty much do whatever they want without having to suffer any consequences.

(10) Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates has stated: `President Obama has affirmed, the United States commitment to Israel's security is unshakable, and our defense relationship is stronger than ever, to the mutual benefit of both nations.'

What is the benefit to us? I can probably see the short-term benefit to Israel but how is putting the lives of Americans at risk being beneficial? I must be living in a wacky world where up is down and wrong is right. Can anyone make this claim with a straight face that supporting Israel's policies in stealing land while ethnically cleansing it of its original inhabitants, thereby enraging Arabs/Muslims around the world, putting the lives of Americans at risk is actually beneficial?

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Congressmen urge Obama to take personal interest in China

How would you have felt if you, as an American, read these headlines:

Chinese American Lawmakers: Obama Gets It On China

Congressmen urge Obama to take personal interest in China

Chinese American lawmakers urge Obama to visit China

Obama meets with 37 Chinese American politicians for a 'group hug and group gripe' session

Any level-headed citizen would probably be asking himself why these Chinese Americans politicians are asking President Obama to take "personal interest" in a foreign state and why he had to discuss "his support for China and strategies to counter the perception that he is not pro-China." Well, the headlines listed above are real, just swap out China/Chinese with Israel/Jewish.

Here's a list of the 37 Jewish members in both houses of Congress that met with President Obama.

1. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)
2. Benjamin Cardin (D-Md.)
3. Al Franken (D-Minn.)
4. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.)
5. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
6. Herb Kohl (D-Wisc.)
7. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.)
8. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.)
9. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.)
10. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
11. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.)
12. John Adler (D-N.J.)
13. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.)
14. Howard Berman (D-Calif.)
15. Stephen Cohen (D-Tenn.)
16. Ted Deutch (D-FL)
17. Susan Davis (D-Calif.)
18. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.)
19. Barney Frank (D-Mass.)
20. Jane Harman (D-Calif.)
21. Paul Hodes (D-N.H.)
22. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.)
23. Steve Kagen (D-Wisc.)
24. Ron Klein (D-Fla.)
25. Sander Levin (D-Mich.)
26. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.)
27. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.)
28. Jared Polis (D-Colo.)
29. Steve Rothman (D-N.J.)
30. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.)
31. Allyson Schwartz (D-Pa.)
32. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.)
33. Brad Sherman (D-Calif)
34. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.)
35. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.)
36. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.)
37. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.)

Here are statements made by some of "our" elected officials after this meeting:

The President gets it,” said Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-Brooklyn & Queens). “The President was reminded and conceded that there were missteps taken…There were communication problems in hitting the Israelis and then treating the Palestinians with kid gloves.

So telling the Israelis that they need to stop building on stolen land is considered "hitting the Israelis" and telling the Palestinians that they should not boycott the proxy talk regardless of Israel's decision on building on stolen land is "treating the Palestinians with kid gloves."

Rothman, an early backer of Obama's presidential candidacy, said the members thanked Obama for such initiatives, describing Obama as "the best president on U.S.-Israel military and intelligence cooperation in American history."

Can anyone else see the problem here? On one hand the Obama administration admonished the Israelis for daring to announce new building projects in occupied East Jerusalem - the administration appears to have a problem with the announcement itself but not with the act of building on stolen land, on the other hand, they are giving the Israelis $205 million dollars to help them deploy anti-missile defense system. Why would the Israelis act any differently from what they have been doing if after a public scolding we turn around and hand them cash?

It is always an honor to meet with the President of the United States, especially on an issue so vital to our national security. Israel has long been our best, and at times, only friend in the Middle East. Yet, the threats facing the Jewish state today are unprecedented. From the Iranian nuclear weapons program to the missiles in the hands of Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists, the United States must stand shoulder to shoulder with our ally, Israel. We must not be distracted by recent unfortunate disagreements. Rather, we must reaffirm the strength of our ties and understand that in a relationship between friends, as in family, there will be some disagreements. Through quiet dialogue, we will overcome differences and learn from each other, and, in turn, our nations will become stronger and our relationship deeper.

I look forward to an exchange of views with the President because I believe that helping to strengthen the U.S./Israel relationship is our common goal.

Once again, these Israel firsters are trying to conflate Israel's interests with ours. As separate sovereign nations, we DO NOT share the same interests. What is good for Israel is not always good for us. In fact, what appears to be good for Israel in the short term has never been good for us. So why do we have all these Jewish American politicians bamboozle us by telling us that strengthening the U.S./Israel relationship is our common goal?

"I do want to see the president step up and vocalize his support for Israel far more than he has. He just needs to do that," Berkley said.

Why does our president need to "step up and vocalize his support for Israel far more than he has?" The last time I checked, President Barack Obama is the President of the United States of America and not the leader of Israel. He is only accountable to Americans, not Israelis. Good citizens of Nevada's 1st congressional district did not elect Rep. Shelley Berkley to do the bidding for Israel. She was elected as a Congresswoman to serve Americans.

I have absolutely no problem with Jewish American politicians having affinity for Israel, just like recent immigrants to our great country may have cultural bonds with countries of their origins. What these Jewish American elected officials do as private citizens, whether it is financially or morally supporting Israel, is their own business. What really incensed me is when these politicians tell us that we share a common interests and face the same threats and therefore "the United States must stand shoulder to shoulder" with Israel. Israel, as a sovereign state, has its own policies. If it wishes to continue to illegally occupy land in contravention of international laws, it should be left to face the consequence of its own actions. Why are these Jewish politicians, in cohort with the Israelis, making us responsible for Israel's failed policies? Legitimate or not, the recurring basis cited by organizations that have attacked us is our undying and unwavering support of Israel. The fact that these politicians are serving the interests of a foreign state while putting the interests and lives of Americans at stake is reason enough try them for treason.

Friday, May 7, 2010

So who are Joe Lieberman targeting with his "Terrorist Expatriation Act" ?

(Update)

I had my suspicion when i first read the full text of Sen. Joe Lieberman's "Terrorist Expatriation Act". This bill was to "add joining a foreign terrorist organization or engaging in or supporting hostilities against the United States or its allies to the list of acts for which United States nationals would lose their nationality." Now who are those allies, or should i say, who is that ally if Americans are "providing material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization" and/or "engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities against" that will result in them losing their citizenship? Ignore for now the fact that this bill is completely unconstitutional, who is Joe Lieberman trying to "protect"?

My suspicion is confirmed by this article on the Washington Post which stated that this bill "would also allow citizenship to be stripped from Americans who support groups that target U.S. allies, such as Israel or India." Again, ignore the unconstitutionality of this bill, as even Rep. John Boehner knows this bill "would be pretty difficult under the U.S. Constitution", if Joe Lieberman is truly trying to protect Americans, why is there a need to add our "allies" in it? Does it make any sense to strip the citizenship of Americans who support organizations that are only involved in an asymmetrical war with Israel and not us?

Update:

Glenn Greenwald discussed the irony of Joe Lieberman sponsoring a citizenship-stripping bill which has its origin in a 1940 bill to strip citizenship off Americans who demonstrated their loyalty to a foreign power.

One ironic aspect of Lieberman's sponsorship of the citizenship-stripping bill for accused Terrorists is that the original 1940 law on which it is based was designed, as Frum put it, "to strip citizenship from Americans whoshowed themselves loyal to a foreign power."  Fortunately for Joe Lieberman (as well as for GOP Rep. Peter King), the U.S. Supreme Court in 1967 held that it is unconstitutional for Congress to strip the citizenship of any American who did not voluntarily renounce citizenship, even if that citizen proved himself loyal to a foreign country (adding to the irony, that case,Afroyim v. Rusk, involved an American citizen who had voted in Israeli elections and, as a result, had his passport renewal denied by the State Department on the ground that he had lost his American citizenship under The Nationality Act of 1940).  As the Afroyim Court put it (emphasis added):
[The Fourteenth Amendment] provides its own constitutional rule in language calculated completely to control the status of citizenship: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States . . . are citizens of the United States . . . ."  There is no indication in these words of a fleeting citizenship, good at the moment it is acquired but subject to destruction by the Government at any time.  Rather the Amendment can most reasonably be read as defining a citizenship which a citizen keeps unless he voluntarily relinquishes it. Once acquired, this Fourteenth Amendment citizenship was not to be shifted, canceled, or diluted at the will of the Federal Government, the States, or any other governmental unit.
The Court, in 1980, made clear what a person must do in order to be found to have "voluntarily renounced" his citizenship.  All of this underscores another great irony of Lieberman's advocacy of this bill:   although I'd be unequivocally opposed to any citizenship-stripping, if anyone merits having that done to them, it's Joe Lieberman, who proves -- yet again -- that he has no interest or belief in core American principles.

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Citizenship-stripping Joe



Head honcho of Israel Firsters Sen. Joe Lieberman, who never misses an opportunity to put the interests of Israel above America's, "is proposing a new law that could potentially strip Americans of their citizenship if they're involved with foreign terrorist organizations." So who, in Lieberman's proposed bill, has the power to strip Americans of their citizenships? The State Department. And who gets to designate groups as terrorist organizations? The same State Department.

So basically, with the bill that Lieberman is proposing, any American involved with an organization like Hamas, which is deemed a terrorist organization by the State Department even though its target has always been Israel and that it has not engaged in any terror acts against us, will have his citizenship stripped. Can one not see how unconstitutional this is?

If Joe Lieberman insists on ramming this down our throat, I propose adding a bill to strip citizenships off Americans who consistently put the interests of a foreign state above America's. Americans, like Joe Lieberman, who habitually supports Israel regardless of the harm that it causes us, shall lose their citizenships.

Instead of adding an unconstitutional law, may be we should just enforce the existing statute:
§ 1481. Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of proof; presumptions

(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality—
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if
(A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or
(B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer;

So how many Americans, who have served or are currently serving in the IDF, fall under the above mentioned categories? And how many of them have their citizenship stripped as a result of serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the IDF, swearing allegiance to Israel or has acquired the Israeli citizenship?

Friday, April 23, 2010

Inaugural post

(Update)


There is no one better to introduce you to Israel Firsters than Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY). Years after years, he can be counted on to put interests of Israel in front of America's, and blatantly so if I may add. Sen. Schumer pretty much defines what an Israel Firster is, one who has never ever put the interests of our great country ahead when it comes to Israel.

So it is not a shocker to me when i recently found out that he had publicly criticized President Obama over its slight change in policy in dealing with Israel's intransigence in building Jewish housing in the occupied East Jerusalem. In addition to signing an AIPAC-sponsored letter that suggested the Obama administration to keep its spat with Israel private, Sen. Schumer went on the conservative Jewish Nachum Segal Show and said the following:
"...I talked to Rahm Emanuel about, and the President about this week. I told the President, I told Rahm Emanuel and others in the administration that I thought the policy they took to try to bring about negotiations is counter-productive, because when you give the Palestinians hope that the United States will do its negotiating for them, they are not going to sit down and talk. Palestinians don’t really believe in a state of Israel, they, unlike a majority of Israelis, who have come to the conclusion that they can live with a 2-state solution to be determined by the parties, the majority of Palestinians are still very reluctant, and they need to be pushed to get there."
That is strange, so it is OK for us to do the negotiating for Israel, to give Israel almost $3 billions each year even though more than one in ten of us are unemployed, to provide classified intelligence that no other countries receive and to use our diplomatic currency in vetoing resolutions after resolutions against Israel at the UN, but it is not OK for us to "give the Palestinians hope that the United States will do its negotiating for them"? So what gives Sen. Schumer the impression that the United States will be doing the negotiation for the Palestinians? Is it the fact after years of saying yes to Israel and turning a blind eye to whatever it is doing to its neighbors, we finally have the guts to say no and to do so publicly?

Some Palestinians may not believe in a state of Israel, just like most Israelis have never entertained the idea of an independent Palestinian state right next to them. It was not until recently that a Prime Minister of Israel has begrudgingly accepted a Palestinian state, one that was envisioned to have no control over its border, its airspace and with large portion of its land permanently off-limit to its citizens. If Sen. Schumer is a Palestinian, is this the kind of state that he can imagine himself living in?


Update:
Over at Salon.com, Glenn Greenwald pointed out Sen. Schumer - "one of the most Party-loyal Democrats in Congress" who "for the first time ever, temporarily abandoned his role as Prime Defender of Wall Street ... in order not to impede the White House's financial reform package" - also threatened the Obama administration:
And right now there is a battle going on inside the administration, one side agrees with us, one side doesn’t, and we’re pushing hard to make sure the right side wins and if not we’ll have to take it to the next step.
Schumer didn't specify who the "us" there is, though this United States Senator did reference "the thing we should most be concerned about, of course, the threat to Israel."  Of course.  Schumer also spouted numerous ugly platitudes about the Palestinians, including expressing support for the despicable, inhumane blockade of Gaza on the ground that "when they vote for Hamas they are going to have to suffer the consequences."  As Steve Clemons notes, Schumer previously attempted to play a key role in building support for the Israel-revering John Bolton as Bush's U.N. ambassador, and Clemons asks rhetorically: "Has Chuck Schumer EVER Criticized Israel or its Leadership in the Way He Just Unloaded on Obama?