There's a book, War Against the People by Jeff Halper, which describes
Israel's war industry, how its military contractors develop armaments and
test them on the Palestinians before selling them to the world. Deborah
Murray has been scanning it, but it's long and, she says, a bit dry. Anyway,
Israel's policing of Palestinians is being taught to American police forces
to use against our government's perceived internal threats. Halper, by the
way, is Israeli. At any rate, the increasing cooperation between these two
governments is illustrated by Carl's article.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 10:34 AM
To: blind-democracy
Subject: [blind-democracy] Which "People" own the American Empire?
In the face of growing evidence, it is difficult to believe that the
American People are able to elect a government that has their best interest
at heart. The following article shouts loud and clear just how controlled
this government is, by the Industrial/Military Complex which appears to have
assumed command of the Empire, and places Corporate needs far ahead of those
of the American Working Class.
Carl Jarvis
***
U.S. Offers to Increase Military Aid to Israel
By JULIE IRSCHFELD DAVISJULY 1, 2016
WASHINGTON - The White House on Friday told members of Congress that it had
offered to substantially sweeten a decade-long military aid package for
Israel, the latest turn in months of fitful negotiations that have proceeded
despite deep divisions over the Iran nuclear deal.
Under the proposed terms, the United States would insist that the Israelis
use the tens of billions of dollars they receive under the deal to buy
United States-made goods and services, rather than spend a sizable portion
in their own country as they are permitted to do now.
The administration laid out details of the package in a lengthy letter to
senators who had written to the White House in April urging the completion
of a new aid deal.
In the thick of the debate last year over the Iran deal, Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel refused to negotiate with President Obama over
a so-called memorandum of understanding for a military aid package to
replace one that expires in 2018.
Once the Iran deal - which lifted sanctions in exchange for restrictions on
Tehran's nuclear program - went into effect, negotiations on a new aid
package commenced between United States and Israeli officials. But consensus
has been elusive.
In the letter on Friday, Susan E. Rice, Mr. Obama's national security
adviser, and Shaun Donovan, the director of the Office of Management and
Budget, said that the administration was prepared to increase the existing
military aid package for Israel, worth nearly $30 billion, and sign a new
one "that would constitute the largest pledge of military assistance to any
country in U.S. history."
That would include a new 10-year pledge to fund missile defense systems in
Israel, an arrangement now paid for in yearly installments and subject to
the often unpredictable annual appropriations process.
Such an aid agreement "would build on the unparalleled support that the
United States has provided to Israel under President Obama," Ms.
Rice and Mr. Donovan
said. "Through word and deed, this administration has done more for Israel's
security than any other in U.S. history."
group start media
Photo
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a press conference on Tuesday.
CreditPool photo by Ronen Zvulun group end
Mr. Obama has made it clear that completing the deal before he leaves office
is a priority, and Mr. Netanyahu has said he was eager to seal it as well.
But challenging political dynamics have complicated the talks.
Some analysts in the United States and Israel say that Mr. Netanyahu is
calculating that he may reach a more advantageous deal with a future
president, a charge that the Israelis strenuously deny. Others have
suggested that Mr. Obama is pressing to finish the agreement in part to
insulate himself against accusations that he has been too tough on Israel,
especially if he decides later this year to pressure the country to accept a
peace deal with the Palestinians that embraces a two-state solution.
The negotiations have unfolded in secret, with neither side willing to
detail its position on an agreement that people close to the talks have said
could top $40 billion. For months, United States and Israeli officials have
haggled over the price tag, as Israel has insisted on a higher figure than
the United States was willing to support.
But the decision by the White House to explicitly lay out its position on
how much of the money would be spent inside Israel - an issue that had
emerged as a sticking point - appeared to signal that a conclusion to the
talks could be near.
"The chances seem to be better now than they were a couple months ago"
that the two sides will reach a deal, said Ilan Goldenberg, the director of
the Middle East Security Program at the Center for a New American Security.
"Clearly, they're getting to the end one way or the other."
Under the existing agreement, Israel is permitted to spend about a quarter
of the military aid it receives outside the United States, and
13 percent of
it on fuel - allowances that no other recipient of United States funding
receives. Israel has spent about $1.2 billion a year - $7.9 billion since
the current deal took effect - in this way, the White House said.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
The provision originated in the 1980s as a way to spur the development of
Israel's defense industry, which is now booming. Israel has become one of
the top 10 arms exporters in the world, competing with the United States.
In their letter, Ms. Rice and Mr. Donovan said the aid package was being
negotiated in "an especially challenging budgetary environment,"
with the possibility
that automatic across-the-board spending cuts known as sequestration could
return in 2018. They said it was time to move away from the special
arrangements.
The White House also argued in the letter that the nuclear deal with Iran -
regarded by Israel as empowering a dangerous adversary bent on its
destruction - was in fact "crucial to the security interests of the United
States, Israel and the entire international community."
"We remain cleareyed about the threat to Israel's security posed by Iran, as
well as Iran's support for terrorism, its ballistic missile program, and its
destabilizing activity in the region," Ms. Rice and Mr. Donovan wrote.
That is "precisely why" carrying out the Iran deal is important, they added.
