Let me start by saying that I am neither a fan of Hillary Clinton, nor AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Clinton is a pandering warhawk who shifts her opinions and beliefs according to the latest polls, concerned only with accruing power and wealth. She believes the rules do not apply to her.
AIPAC is also concerned with accruing power and wealth, though not for itself directly, instead amassing wealth and influence for Israel, which receives some $3.1B a year in military aid from the U.S. This is on top of mass amounts of “donated” military equipment, despite Israel being perfectly wealthy and already one of the most heavily armed and modernized nations in the Middle East.
The laudable thing about AIPAC is that at least its point of view never shifts: it portrays itself as the constant victim, in the face of facts and history. However, Israel also doesn’t believe in playing by the rules, as one can see by the hundreds of civilians (including women and children and 600% more Palestinians killed v.s Israelis) regularly killed during its attacks that were indifferent to avoiding civilian deaths, and in its constant expansion of settlements in violation of U.N. rulings and its own signed treaties.
When you combine these two forces you get a perfect storm of hubris, bias and an ongoing commitment to the United States engaging in prolonged warfare abroad.
I have written before about AIPAC and its public relations agenda, which utilizes politicians who are too scared to disagree (lest they be branded “anti-Semitic”) in combination with the media – which have given up on any efforts at journalistic integrity regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict – to paint themselves as worthy of constant support and pity.
In the wake of Hillary Clinton’s speech to AIPAC (which Bernie Sanders declined, to his credit, as he believes in an honest and neutral approach to the conflict) I am finally not alone in my criticism of AIPAC and the politicians who shill for it. Ben Norton at Salon has a very well written piece highlighting the exact omissions of facts and outright lies told by Clinton to the complicit masses that attended the recent AIPAC conference. I highly recommend reading this piece, which goes into detail to counter every one of Clinton’s pandering and one-sided claims that are an affront to any seeker of truth.
In brief, some of Clinton’s comments with my responses italicized (full speech here):
– She was thrilled with the expanded security and intelligence cooperation – never mind that Israel was the biggest espionage threat to the United States last year
– “It would be a serious mistake for the United States to abandon our responsibilities, or cede the mantle of leadership for global peace and security to anyone else.” – because we clearly need to continue to instigate attackers worldwide and expend American money and lives for an already proven-to-fail strategy.
– “The United States should provide Israel with the most sophisticated defense technology so it can deter and stop any threats.” – We already do this, at a massive cost to taxpayers.
– “Palestinian leaders need to stop inciting violence, stop celebrating terrorists as martyrs and stop paying rewards to their families.” – As mentioned, the ongoing violence is primarily a result of the continued expansion of Israeli settlements, meanwhile, as Ben Norton notes in his piece, Israel considers Baruch Goldstein, a Jewish extremist who murdered 29 unarmed Palestinians at a site of worship, a hero.
– “Everyone has to do their part by avoiding damaging actions, including with respect to settlements. Now, America has an important role to play in supporting peace efforts. And as president, I would continue the pursuit of direct negotiations. And let me be clear — I would vigorously oppose any attempt by outside parties to impose a solution, including by the U.N. Security Council.” – what to say here? Clinton thinks “everyone has to do their part,” but Israel hasn’t, continues to break treaties to halt settlements and ignores U.N. Security Council solutions. And that’s a great thing, according to Clinton. Goodbye, logic! Hello, pandering!
I could go on, but the gist of this is that a Clinton presidency, if her pandering to AIPAC is to be believed, will undoubtedly lead to more warfare and unrest in the Middle East, additional loss of American lives and countless billions or trillions spent fighting a fight that isn’t our own and would be highly unlikely to effect Americans. This is, simply, a match made in hell.