I learned then that the event had been canceled.
Mark Glenn, one of the Coordinators, informed me that three days prior, the Marriott requested payment of $20,000.00, although there was no such requirement in the contract.
Mark told me he was able to secure $8,000 within twenty-four hours and even after a visit from a representative from CAIR, Council of American-Islamic Relations [http://www.cair.com/] informed the Marriott's Events Coordinator that twenty speakers from around the Nation were on their way; the event would not happen at the Marriott as planned.
Dr. Hesham Tillawi, Palestinian American, Political Analyst and TV show host of "Current Issues" reported that he spoke with Marriott Representative, Diana Harrison. "I asked her if we came up with all the money, would that be OK and she responded, 'The event has been canceled.'"
I had traveled from Florida to speak about how freedom of speech had been denied in Israel to Mordechai Vanunu, and was aghast to learn it also had been squelched in Irvine.
While I did not agree with many things some of the speakers said during the rescheduled event at a local church that began nine hours after originally planned, I uphold that all people have the right to think their own thoughts and speak their own minds.
The conference continued on Sunday, but I had already split and found out on Monday that some of the speakers, who spoke on Sunday, were white supremacists. I thank God I was not in attendance, for I abhor and detest any ideology which presupposes any person is superior to any other.
I am however grateful to have made the long trip to meet the diversity that is America; Christians, Muslims, agnostics and two Orthodox Rabbis against the ideology of Zionism, but most especially to have had the opportunity to hear the President of the USS LIBERTY Veterans Association, Phillip F. Tourney.
The Rest WAWA Blog October 16, 2007:
Posted by: wawa on Oct 16, 2007 7:59 AM
Eileen Fleming, Reporter and Editor
Author "Keep Hope Alive" and "Memoirs of a Nice Irish American Girl's' Life in Occupied Territory"
Producer "30 Minutes With Vanunu."
| Why would Israelis prepare a presidential candidate ranking page? |
I don't remember seeing a similar interest in '08 elections from another country.
Documentary 'The Israel lobby - The influence of AIPAC on US Foreign Policy'
In a reference to Michael Moore and Farhenheit 9/11, you make the comment that he was wrong to say the American oil companies are behind the US Middle East foreign policy.
Well, the companies may or may not have been, I do not have information on that. What we do know however is that for recurring White House administrations, oil was and is the central driving force. Not just in the Middle East, but across the Caspian sea and the "Stan" states.
1. In 1985 Bob McFarlane devised a top secret review of US strategy for Iran. (Partially declassified in 1987). The central theme was access to oil in the Caspian Sea zones, and safety of shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.
2. The opening line of President Bush Sr's 1991 presidential directive authorising the commencement of Desert Storm to force Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait was "Access to Gulf oil and security of friendly states in the area are vital for America's security."
2. The US media are peppered with admissions by former Treasury secretaries and retired generals. Middle East oil and access to cheap energy is vital to America's economic well being. It was, it has now been confirmed, central to the Iraq invasion. It was "all about oil".
3. Oil was the driving force behind America's demonisation of Libya in the 1980s. Libya made it easy with a clumsy and at times dangerous foreign policy. But those 41 billion barrels (equal to one third of all north American and Canadian reserves at that time) of high grade low process cost oil were the driving force. The evidence emerged in 1995 when the White House emails relating to Iran-Contra and other Middle Eastern disputes were published by the National Security Archive of America, edited by Tom Blanton. Incidentally, the first consignments of arms to Nicaragua in Iran-Contra were carried on Israeli ships, and funded by tranches of Saudi Arabian money.
Best wishes to you both for an excellent exposure of Israel's malign influence on US policy over the last sixty years.
|M&W's book is a good "primer" on the history of the Middle East conflict. But there is nothing particularly new in the book for those who have already done their homework on the subject. What is disappointing about the book is that it avoids completely the real core issue, which is Zionism. The debate that needs to take place is not about the lobby but rather what makes the lobby and the millions of Israel supporters so hyper-passionate to the point of being dangerous to those who oppose them? Zionism is a brainless idea, for those who have looked at it closely, hatched in the 1890's by about the need for a "national homeland" for a religious group. Most of those who are attracted to the notion are not even religious. Yet they are passionate. Why? What do they know about the Jewish people? No one denies that Jews were abused in European history, mainly because they were a minority religious group who had to stay united because they believed, and still believe, that the Messiah is going to come to their people. Under those circumstance better stick together. But is this a reason to embrace a notion that that religious group needs to have its own country? No Rabbi in the 1890's asscribed to Zionism. So who makes this claim on behalf of all Jews? Perhaps we should go back to the 1890's and start again. Zionism has nothing to do with Judaism. The problem is that we are now in the year 2000 and it's too late to claim your own territory. Israel is the only country that claims to be democratic yet does not have a constitution. Why? How many readers know this? The reason is that it is impossible to write a sensible document about a Zionist nation. Why is this not central M&W, who apologize every three paragraphs about not being anti-Semitic. Do M&W not realize Zionism is at heart of all the "anti-Semitic" hyteria in the first place? The famous "Protocols", first written in the early 1900's, were widely believed for the very reason that Zionism had just been born at the First Zionist Conference. The Protocols were perported to be the minutes of this meeting. Was it so implausible? What we now know about the Israel Lobby makes the Protocol's logic all the more logical. Are we headed for another wave of anti-Semitism? If so is there anything surprising about it?|