Nearly 300 Congress members declare commitment to 'unbreakable' U.S.-Israel bond

Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
117,566
What I can't find is the actual list of congresscritters who signed this.

Nearly 300 Congress members declare commitment to 'unbreakable' U.S.-Israel bond


Nearly 300 members of Congress have signed on to a declaration reaffirming their commitment to "the unbreakable bond that exists between [U.S.] and the State of Israel", in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The letter was sent in the wake of the severe recent tensions between Israel and the U.S. over the prior's decision to construct more than 1,600 new housing units in East Jerusalem, a project it announced during U.S. Vice President Joe Biden's visit to the region.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took advantage of his trip to the United States this week to try to mend the rift with the Obama administration, but he was greeted with cold welcome by the White House.

Netanyahu also met during his visit with members of Congress, who welcomed him with significantly more warmth.

The letter from Congress expresses its "deep concern" over the U.S.-Israel crisis, and emphasizes that lawmakers had received assurances from Netanyahu that the events leading up to the recent tensions would not be repeated.

Letter from members of Congress

Dear Secretary Clinton:

We are writing to reaffirm our commitment to the unbreakable bond that exists between our country and the State of Israel and to express to you our deep concern over recent tension. In every important relationship, there will be occasional misunderstandings and conflicts.

More here: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1159159.html
 
It's not an unbreakable United States-Israel bond, it's an unbreakable federal government-Israel bond. At some point, the states are going to come to their senses and force the federal government to choose between their bond to the states and their bond to Israel. This is the United States of America, not the Federal Government of America.

I have no doubt that if the Founders were "founding" the US today, they would all agree that there's no need for a centralized federal government, because the state representatives can just communicate by email and maybe have a conference call a couple times a year.
 
It's not an unbreakable United States-Israel bond, it's an unbreakable federal government-Israel bond. At some point, the states are going to come to their senses and force the federal government to choose between their bond to the states and their bond to Israel. This is the United States of America, not the Federal Government of America.

I have no doubt that if the Founders were "founding" the US today, they would all agree that there's no need for a centralized federal government, because the state representatives can just communicate by email and maybe have a conference call a couple times a year.



This is a real good post.
 
makes me wonder how much of the Crusades was religious fanatcism and how much was clueless and corrupt politicians. Crusades 2 has alot of both at any rate
 
The letter should have read:

We acknowledge that whatever the Israeli government does is divine, and we will be cursed by God if our taxpayers' money does not go towards Israel and her ethnic cleansing of all non-Jews. After all, they're used to this - their taxes help support our own foreign policy kill innocents all the time!

Hooray for submissive allegiance to a foreign entity!
 
That ^^^^ A lot.

I still haven't been able to find a list of signers.

I went through about 12 pages of a google search, and nothing.

Oh, guess what else is wonderful? Petraeus is backtracking on his comment that "America's relationship with Israel is important, but not as important as the lives of America's soldiers."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1159165.html

Petraeus told reporters on Thursday that the report - which he claimed had been taken out of context - had been drafted because: "We noted in there that there was a perception at times that America sides with Israel and so forth. And I mean, that is a perception. It is there. I don't think that's disputable."...
 
Back
Top