Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)New York Times Deletes This Paragraph In Which White House Says AIPAC Is Key To War [View all]
This was in the New York Times last night:
Administration officials said the influential pro-Israel lobby group Aipac was already at work pressing for military action against the government of Mr. Assad, fearing that if Syria escapes American retribution for its use of chemical weapons, Iran might be emboldened in the future to attack Israel. In the House, the majority leader, Eric Cantor of Virginia, the only Jewish Republican in Congress, has long worked to challenge Democrats traditional base among Jews.
One administration official, who, like others, declined to be identified discussing White House strategy, called Aipac the 800-pound gorilla in the room, and said its allies in Congress had to be saying, If the White House is not capable of enforcing this red line against the catastrophic use of chemical weapons, were in trouble.
One administration official, who, like others, declined to be identified discussing White House strategy, called Aipac the 800-pound gorilla in the room, and said its allies in Congress had to be saying, If the White House is not capable of enforcing this red line against the catastrophic use of chemical weapons, were in trouble.
It was originally in this story. Now its gone. Its only remnant is in the Times search engine. If you put in gorilla, it points you to this story. But the gorilla aint there.
Obviously the White House and/or AIPAC did not want to be caught saying that the reason we are attacking Syria is to show AIPAC, the 800 pound gorilla, that we are serious about the war the lobby really craves: Iran.
But there it is. Or was.
AIPAC censorship even applies to the Times. Only in America (not Israel, where AIPACs power does not extend to Haaretz).
http://mjayrosenberg.com/2013/09/03/new-york-times-deletes-this-paragraph-in-which-white-house-says-aipac-is-key-to-war/
144 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
New York Times Deletes This Paragraph In Which White House Says AIPAC Is Key To War [View all]
n2doc
Sep 2013
OP
More and more it appears this push for war has nothing to do with chemical weapons...
last1standing
Sep 2013
#1
What "war"? The Syrian Civil War is pretty complex as is the involvement of Russia, Iran, the USA
KittyWampus
Sep 2013
#15
It's very likely that the rebels used chemical weapons on civilians as well.
last1standing
Sep 2013
#21
Have you seen something that proves Assad is responsible for this? Global press reports
sabrina 1
Sep 2013
#125
"because Hitler" isn't even an appeal to emotion: they've fallen one step beyond that
MisterP
Sep 2013
#36
The Chair of the Sen. Foreign Relations Comm will chair Syria war hearings, is a top-tier AIPAC
leveymg
Sep 2013
#2
Lobbyists for foreign countries should be banned from contributing to US politicians,
Ocelot
Sep 2013
#50
They were fired only after they were indicted, and AIPAC members then picked up their bills.
leveymg
Sep 2013
#93
Nobody says every AIPAC member is a spy, just that it needs to be registered as a foreign agent.
leveymg
Sep 2013
#100
So was the German-American Bund. But, they're still an unregistered foreign lobbying and agent for
leveymg
Sep 2013
#62
Ah...the wonders of search engines on the "Internets"...times have changed for sure.
Ninga
Sep 2013
#4
Also from NYT: redline was inserted into Obama's Aug. '12 speech under threat by Israel
leveymg
Sep 2013
#11
What is "a relevant amount of searches?" RU saying Russia forced the redlines and Israel didn't?
leveymg
Sep 2013
#13
Although an avid reader of the paper, I refer to it as the "Shady Lady" since the Iraq invasion. nt
adirondacker
Sep 2013
#16
No, I conclude from your libel that you're an internet hitman who has it in for her.
leveymg
Sep 2013
#89
Please feel free to believe the Sibel Edmonds myth if that is your pleasure.
Vinnie From Indy
Sep 2013
#102
luckily the Syrian rebels we support will do that for us, they like to eat livers too
Dragonfli
Sep 2013
#69
They lobby for foreign interests, I'd say that makes them a foreign lobby. /nt
Dragonfli
Sep 2013
#73
Not at all, I just feel that lobbying for foreign interests does not belong in our government.
Dragonfli
Sep 2013
#76
You can advocate for whatever foreign country who's interests you favor over ours - I don't care
Dragonfli
Sep 2013
#85
Of course, AIPAC is all about spying ON America FOR America, they barely acknowledge Israel exists
Dragonfli
Sep 2013
#137
Hey Dithers. You've made an accusation of anti-semitism. Get busy explaining yourself.
DisgustipatedinCA
Sep 2013
#115
Both sides in this civil war are our enemies. At least one side has used nerve gas
The Second Stone
Sep 2013
#32
and that's how a hegemony works: when its terminology is adopted even by its opponents
MisterP
Sep 2013
#48
"and, even if they were, that does not mean there can be no appropriate response."
rhett o rick
Sep 2013
#53
Weak comparison. "Bush" and "NeoCon" are trump card attempts that should be avoided.
Dash87
Sep 2013
#54
Jewish leaders wary as White House seeks support for Syria vote in Congress
Jefferson23
Sep 2013
#65
Dear God in Heaven: is this all about doing AIPAC's bidding? Is this what this war is all about?
indepat
Sep 2013
#110
When Susan Rice said "we have no anticipation" that Congress will vote against action against Syria
psychopomp
Sep 2013
#111