…During the question and answer period the following points of interest were brought out by audience members and speakers: that the peace movement is too divided by “post-modern” diversity issues and needs to be more united; assertion the CNN commentator Wolfe Blitzer, who used to work for AIPAC and the Jerusalem Post in Israel, has dual citizenship with Israel, but never mentions this conflict of interest (if true, perhaps we should protest CNN until he admits it); that American Jews need to organize a progressive lobby to counter AIPAC, but none of the existing groups can yet do that; that Bush believes he was chosen by God to start Armageddon; that the Iranian people overwhelmingly support Ahmadinejad’s fight against U.S. imperialism and it is none of American’s business who Iranians elect as their president; that “Hands off Iran” should be our motto; that Americans and the U.S. government has a racist and imperialist supremacist complex.

source

kirk murphy, in case you return here…

Thanks for responding. I agree with every word you say about David Duke. You should have seen the way he verbally assaulted Blitzer tonight. Wolf did not appear to flinch, just kept asking his questions. In my haste to post my comment, I did not address the obvious fact that Duke is evil and his word is not to be trusted.

Nevertheless, he did raise an interesting question, given the general unpopularity that AIPAC has among some of the commenters here. I would like an answer to the lobbyist question, if for no other reason than to prove that Duke was lying.

I will check back here later.

I guess the answer is yes. What was the question?

CNN’s Vice President of Racism and Associates

…One other CNN stalwart also deserves mention and considerable scorn. He’s longtime CNN reporter and anchor Wolf Blitzer who daily spews a different brand of racism along with the usual mix of US empire-supportive lies, myths, rationalizations and lots more heard all over the corporate media airwaves. Blitzer currently hosts a weekday afternoon program called The Situation Room as well as the Sunday Late Edition talk show. He began his journalism career with Reuters in their Tel Aviv bureau before moving to Washington as White House correspondent for the hard line ultraconservative Jerusalem Post. He’s held a number of positions at CNN as military affairs reporter during the Gulf war, White House correspondent and more. What’s ignored about Blitzer that should stir controvery is that at one time he was a lobbyist for the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). That and his one-time connection to the Jerusalem Post are part of his roots making it impossible for Blitzer to be objective reporting on anything about Israel or events in the Middle East. It’s easy and probably accurate to see him as AIPAC’s on-air man at CNN. It’s also no surprise that the preponderance of guests he has on with him share his views which are clearly one-sided and strongly pro-Israel….

Thanks for responding. I agree with every word you say about David Duke. You should have seen the way he verbally assaulted Blitzer tonight. Wolf did not appear to flinch, just kept asking his questions. In my haste to post my comment, I did not address the obvious fact that Duke is evil and his word is not to be trusted.

Nevertheless, he did raise an interesting question, given the general unpopularity that AIPAC has among some of the commenters here. I would like an answer to the lobbyist question, if for no other reason than to prove that Duke was lying.

I will check back here later.

David Duke, on The Situation Room, accused Wolf Blitzer of having been a “lobbyist for AIPAC” as evidence of Blitzer’s alleged bias against [anti-semites?]

Blitzer did not deny it, just changed the subject.

Wikipedia says Wolf worked “for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee as a publication editor.”

Anybody know whether Blitzer was a lobbyist for AIPAC?

Not that there’s anything wrong with that, just curious.

Holy shite.

David Duke* is evil beyond evil.

Nevertheless, if Blitzer did AIPAC’s editorial work, that’s of interest.

(note: I in no way agree with anything that idiot/racist Duke may have opined.

My sole interest is in the verifiable assertion that Wolfie edited for AIPAC.)

* Duke’s evil is obvious, and I simply restate it to be thorough. I’m very certain – no snark here :) – that all here know this, so I hope my statement of the obvious doens’t imply any omission by anyone else.

I just can’t help saying what an evil person Duke is.

Did AP tailor the quote to make it sound like Leahy believes we need to weaken the “hunt for terrorists?”

(snip)
“In his speech at Georgetown University, Leahy did say that reclaiming the chairmanship after a brief possession of the gavel in 2001-02 would be a period of “restoration, repair and renewal” after what he termed years of the Bush administration’s virtually unchecked power to hunt for terrorists even within U.S. borders.”
(snip)

yes.

(snip)
“In his speech at Georgetown University, Leahy did say that reclaiming the chairmanship after a brief possession of the gavel in 2001-02 would be a period of “restoration, repair and renewal” after what he termed years of the Bush administration’s virtually unchecked power to hunt for terrorists even within U.S. borders.”
(snip)

Brown has to go!

He’s got 5 years to prove you wrong. Don’t know what those years and the votes he will cast will show. Time will tell. And pressure from the rabid lambshers of the left.