Posted on: March 25, 2007 Posted by: Mitchell Plitnick Comments: 8

Congresswoman Lynn WoolseyThe recent House of Representatives vote to extend $100 billion in funding for the war in Iraq has managed to once again feed the myth of the all-powerful AIPAC/Israel lobby. This time, it was the late exclusion of a clause in the bill that would have required Congressional approval for any military action against Iran.

The measure, of course, would have been a welcome bit of prudence. Even many of his one-time supporters have come to realize that George W. Bush’s administration cannot be trusted. And from all reports, AIPAC did indeed lobby vigorously for the removal of that clause. But to say they were the reason for, or even a major factor in that clause being rescinded flies in the face of the facts.

It was obvious from the outset that there would be a cadre of Democrats who would oppose such a clause. This includes not only leading pro-Israel Democratic figures but also other Democrats who are less identified with Israel but more so with the conservative wing of the party.

Moreover, not only was the vote on the bill — with or without the Iran provision — going to be split largely along party lines, but the weakness of the resolve to get the US out of Iraq reflected by the bill meant that some of the more progressive Democrats would not vote for it. So the bill was already very vulnerable.

Of the 14 Democrats who voted against the bill, six did so because they objected to the Congressional restrictions on the war effort. Of the other eight, not one made any mention at all of the Iran provision as a reason. Even if we assume that some of them would have been swayed by the Iran restriction, given the fact that they had all expressed objections to the bill on the basis of its weakness regarding Iraq, it seems unlikely the Iran language would have swayed all of them.

But let’s grant that those eight would have supported the bill with the Iran language included. The two Republicans who supported the bill certainly would have been lost. That’s a net gain of six votes. The actual vote was 218-212, with one vote of present and three members not voting (there is one empty seat in the 435-member House). That means a swing of only ten votes would have been needed to defeat the bill.

AIPAC’s efforts were hardly required to effect that small a swing, should the language on Iran have been included. This is especially true because nothing resembling this bill is going to actually become law. Bush has promised a veto, which obviously will not be overridden in the House. What emerges from the Senate and the subsequent talks between the two chambers of Congress is not going to look like this bill. Thus, it made a lot more sense for the strongest anti-war Representatives like Barbara Lee, Dennis Kucinich, Lynn Woolsey and Maxine Waters to vote against this bill in any event, while the majority of the Out of Iraq caucus voted for it to cooperate with Nancy Pelosi and the party leadership.

There are obvious Democrats who would have voted against the bill if it contained the Iran language. Some are famous for their myopic, Israel-first of the Middle East, such as Gary Ackerman, Tom Lantos, Elliot Engel and Rahm Emanuel. But there are over 40 “Blue Dog Democrats” in the House (a nickname for the conservative wing of the party), and a good number of them would have turned against this measure with the Iran language in it, with no urging from AIPAC being required (some of them did vote against the bill).

Scolding the President for his dishonest and bumbling actions regarding Iraq and requiring increased accountability toward a withdrawal is one thing. But weakening his hand in dealing with a country which is currently perceived as a major threat but with whom we are not yet at war is a very different matter.

The restriction on attacking Iran would have been most wise. This President has clearly proven he can’t be trusted with anything, let alone the decision to launch a war. But any diplomat will tell you that such a Congressional resolution would be perceived as weakening the American stance against Iran’s nuclear program. Because I think that even if such a weakening were to come about, the stance, given the unity at the UN Security Council would still be plenty strong, I think that’s a small price to pay to ensure that Bush cannot plunge us into a war that would make the catastrophe of Iraq seem like a picnic by comparison. But that’s not a calculus I expect to see in Congress.

It’s pretty clear that the Democrats in Congress are opposed to an attack on Iran. Statements from such leading, yet relatively hawkish (at least on the Middle East) figures as Nancy Pelosi, Gary Ackerman and even Hillary Clinton in recent days confirm this. And it remains true that only Congress has the power to declare war, despite the foolish resolutions passed over four years ago regarding the so-called “war on terror.” That Congress did not want to set the precedent of restricting all military action against a country seen as our primary adversary these days (rightly or wrongly) is hardly surprising and needs no AIPAC influence to explain it.

This sort of thing is the trouble with the double-edged sword of opening up the much-needed discussion on AIPAC and the extensive lobbying and public relations efforts made on behalf of the policies of the Israeli government (which is not, I hasten to add, the same as the best interests of Israel or Israelis). Much of the power of the “Israel Lobby” has always been overstated, and that overstatement is part of the discourse that is now being aired.

The danger of this is two-fold. One, without a realistic appraisal of AIPAC’s impact, efforts to provide balance in American politics are going to fail. Two, any lobby gains its strength from how powerful it is perceived to be. If the amount of money they can mobilize, or the number of votes they can sway is overstated, that lobby becomes that much more powerful.

There’s little doubt that AIPAC and the many so-called “pro-Israel” PACs hold a good deal of sway in Congress (where they operate virtually unopposed, which is what gives them much of their strength) and in the realm of public discourse. They thus have a significant, though far from absolute, influence on many parts of American policy with regard to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

But outside of that issue, when it comes to the larger Middle East, other very significant interests come into play much more powerfully (oil, geo-strategic concerns, arms manufacturers, corporate interests, among others) and the activities of AIPAC become one ingredient, and not close to the major one, in a potpourri of concerns that go into the formulation of policy. The idea that the so-called “pro-Israel Lobby” got us into the war in Iraq is both misguided and demonstrably false. This will be explored further in future pieces in this space, after a paper another author and I are developing on this subject is released. You can view some preliminary points on this issue here.

AIPAC is one of the most effective lobbies in the country. They are very good at what they do, and their track record is one of remarkable success. They are not a sinister organization, but simply one which plays the game of American politics as well as anyone and better than most. They also stand unopposed, despite representing what is very much a minority view not only among Americans at large but also among American Jews. That is a condition the American system was not built for, especially in the realm of foreign policy, and AIPAC takes the advantage of that situation that any political advocacy group would take.

AIPAC thus has a level of influence over policy that must be challenged. We can challenge it by also doing the job of political advocacy with great skill, something that is almost entirely lacking at this time. We do ourselves no good by exaggerating the power AIPAC wields, any more than we do by underestimating it.

8 People reacted on this

  1. I agree completely with your conclusions, particularly the last two paragraphs. It seems to me what troubles most Americans about AIPAC stems from the two things you point out, namely that they represent an extreme minority, and yet, because of they play the game very well, their membership has an effect on policy which is disproportionate to its size.

    I would add that, through its influence on politicians, AIPAC also has an effect on public discourse on policy which is also disproportionate its size.

    You note that counter-advocacy is almost completely lacking at this time. As a gentile, I am puzzled by this. Why is this so?
    Has AIPAC tended to hegemonically constrain discourse within the Jewish community? Why are the views of the majority of Jews so under-represented in our system?

    BTW, Nancy Pelosi has hinted that she intends to re-introduce “the Iran language” later in the form of a stand-alone bill:

  2. This essay is a nearly complete waste of bandwidth. Mr. Plitnick says:
    “We do ourselves no good by exaggerating the power AIPAC wields, any more than we do by underestimating it. ”
    What in the hell should that be taken to mean?
    In fact, its meaning is merely a fog machine to create a new topic for discussion–of an old subject. Namely, the repetitious allegation that AIPAC only speaks in harmony with a fractional minority of American Jews. This is FALSE.
    Jews are well reputed for having opinions all over the board, on virtually every imaginable subject, including Israel. But there are NOT an unlimited number of general viewpoints of the singular subject of Israel, per-se. One is either a supporter, a partial supporter or an opponent.
    That means that Jews fit into one of those three categories. AIPAC of course is an organization that advocates unconditional and unequivocal support for everything Israel. But to say that only a tiny fraction of American Jews associate themselves with such views would be the same as saying that only a tiny fraction of Americans are in agreement with the National Rifle Association. VERY wishful-thinking from a culture of wishful-thinking bloggers.

  3. […] You can also listen to today’s “AIPAC 101″ show on Your Call on San Francisco’s KALW featuring Salon’s Gregory Levey, who wrote Inside America’s powerful Israel lobby, and M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum. (Read Jewish Voice for Peace policy director Mitchell Plitnick’s different analysis in which he argues that AIPAC’s role in striking the Iran language from the Iraq spending bill has been over-estimated.) These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. […]

  4. Mitchell, I totally agree with the overall thrust of your argument about the danger of overestimating AIPAC – and in fact made the same argument myself, see

    Round to AIPAC on Iran Provision – But the Fat Lady Is Just Warming Up

    One small detail quibble: I don’t think there is any reason to assume that the two Republicans who voted for the supplemental would have voted against it if the Iran language were included. Both (Jones and Gilchrest) have co/sponsored resolutions to the same effect as the Iran provision that was on the supplemental – the President should not attack Iran without Congressional authorization. Jones, in fact, is the original sponsor of the main one. See

  5. Mitchel, which side are you on?

    “They are not a sinister organization, but simply one which plays the game of American politics as well as anyone and better than most.”

    Really? So how do you describe AIPAC, a bunch of goodhearted people exercising their constitutional right to buy off the political system with a $60M budget?

    So this is a fair game for you? And AIPAC is winning because they are just better players? If that is really your view you should join Lunz’s firm and be a player yourself.

    I’m dumbfounded that you can utter such an endorsement of Washington’s corruption.

  6. Thank you Mitchell for your article

    It is important to have constructive dialogue and exploratory respectful debate on the role and power of AIPAC and how it’s influence fits in with other very powerful Washington lobbies, such as the Oil Industry; the Arms-Aerospace corporate lobbies, which makes billions off of arming Israel, Saudi Arabia and others; the Christian Right which has become extrmeely powerful and the Intelligence community (CIA;NSA, etc).
    Together, all these groups, of which AIPAC is one of the very powerful players, are exponentially more powerful than the sum of their parts.
    It doesn’t do any of us any good to take entrenched positions on the power of AIPAC. We know it is very powerful, we need to learn more about how it acts in concert with these other lobbies to create the toxic stew in Washington that has lead to such havoc in the Middle East.

    Francesca ROsa

    Gracias, sus datos han sido recibidos con éxito.
    Le responderemos lo antes posible.
    Nombre: ROBERTO
    Comentarios: INMORTALIDAD SOBRE UNA ROCA. VIVA LA REPUBLICA… ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? : ?????? ?????? 2006 ?? ?????? 5:43 1 -?????? ???????? ???????? ???? : ??? ????? 2006 ?? ?????? 7:07 ???? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?????????? ???? ????? ???? ??????.?? ????? ???????? ?? ?????? ??????.????? ????? ???????? ??? arcángel ?????? ?? ?? ???? ?? ??????? ?? ???? ?????? ?????? ? ????????? ?? ??? ???? ???????? ?? ?????.??? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???? ????? ??????? ? ????? ?? ?? ????.??? ???? ?? ?? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ???.??? ?????? ?? ?????????? ??? ???? ?? ??????? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????????? ??? ?? ??? ???? ???????????? ???? ?? ??? ??? ???? ????????? ??????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?? ???? ?? ?????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ? ??? ??? ????? ???????? ???? ??? ???????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ??? ?????.?? ???? ????? ??? ??? ??? ? ?? ????????????????? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ? ??? ???? ????? ?? ?????????? ?? licantropía.?????? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ??????? ?? ???????? ? ?? ???? ??????.????? ??? ?? ?????? ?????? ???? ????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?????????? ???? ??? ????? ??? ?????.????? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ??? ????? ???????? ??? ?? ?????? ? ??? ???? ??? ?????? ? ?????????? ????? ????? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ????.?????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ? ??? ?????????? ???????? ??? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ?? ??? ?????.??? ???? ????? ???? ???????? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ??????? ??????? ? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??? ???? ?? ????? ???????? ???????.??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??? ???? ????? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ??????? ??????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ????.????? ????? ?????? ????????? ?? ??? ????.??? ?? ?? ???? ??????? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?? ?????.??? ?????? ????????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????????? ??????.???????? ??????? ???? ???? ????.?? ???? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ??? ??????.?????? ?????? ?? ???? ??????.???.???? ???????? ??? ?????? : ????? : ???????? ?????? ??? ??????? : ???? ???????? – ? ?? nombre :?????? ???????? ???????? ROBERTO GONZALEZ DOMINGUEZ Says: September 7th, 2006 at 5:43 pm 1. Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez Says: August 31st, 2006 at 7:07 pm Soy la persona que esta dentro de cada cuadro, inclusive se podría decir que son mis pensamientos. En diferentes religiones poseo distintos títulos. Para unos soy un santo, para otros soy un arcángel y para otros cuantos uno de los cuatro jinetes del Apocalipsis, Poseidon, Adan, el Ala que dibuja Leonardo Da Vinci. También se podría decir que mi perro es el diablo, pues estoy dentro de cada cuadro. Desde que nací tuve la decisión de quedarme con mis padres. Los Ángeles o músicos comenzaron a dedicarme todas sus canciones o a develar mis sentimientos por medio de la música, de igual forma comenzaron a dedicarme la mayoría de las películas, pues soy una de las pocas persona que poseen la piedra filosofal o sea cada libro que lea por mas fantasioso que este, comienza a volverse realidad para mi, aunque para algunas personas y religiones también soy un alquimista, se podría decir que mi melena son los cuadros que existen por el universo. Por cada libro que leo por mas fantasioso que este, se me viene un problema y comienza a volverse realidad para mi, aun asi hable sobre vampirismo o licantropía. A veces convierto el agua en vino de la tanta sangre que derramare en un futuro, o en mi nombre se derramo. Gracias a todos mis títulos se podría decir que fui el creador del vampirismo y el primer hombre lobo sobre la tierra. También podría decirles muchas cosas sobre el más viejo de los vampiros, y que algunos como David Copperfild aun siguen con vida, que Buda ni Cristo no están muertos, y que hay otros tres tipos de vampiros en este planeta incluyéndonos a nosotros mismos, pues el que me ve jamás muere. Aunque a veces me sano con las lunas del agua, también me emborracho, o emborracho a las personas con las lunas que aparecen en el agua cuando agito un vaso. De igual forma me protejo y platico con un rayo láser que recibo desde el profundo espacio exterior, que para muchos seria una súper computadora, pues no hay pregunta imposible para el, aunque se puede manipular para que cure a todas las personas, aun no hay personas que financien mis proyectos. Como despedida podría decirles que cuando nací me fui oliendo el cuadro de un personaje pobre, que un tío colgó en la pared de la casa de mi abuela. Talvez por ello los animales todo el día plieguen. Me tengo que financiar para adherir mi existencia con la de los cuadros. Tengo las llaves del vaticano en mi pueblo protegidas por el subcomandante Marcos. Al dalai lama cortando cabezas en mi pais. A Bin Laden tomandose video en el estado. Y decenas de reyes en mi correo. Tambien recibo mis propias ordenes desde el espacio hacia mi ordenador. Bendiciones de Ayatola, Mohamad y Tolomeo. Todas las fotos me las dedican el papa Juan Pablo II y Yaser Arafat. Todo esta planeado por la diferencia de calendario. Desde Oriente Proximo.Atte. ALA Donaciones No. de Cuenta: 5470 4649 4172 0516 Tipo de tarjeta: UNI Santander-K Banco: Santander Serfin Mi nombre: Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez ROBERTO GONZALEZ DOMINGUEZ Says: September 7th, 2006 AT 5:43 p.m. 1. Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez Says: August 31st, 2006 AT 7:07 p.m. I am the person who this within each picture, inclusively could be said that they are my thoughts. In different religions I have different titles. For I am santo, for others I am arcángel and for other whichever one of the four riders of the Apocalypse, Poseidon, They accept, the Ala that Leonardo Da draws Vinci. Also it would be possible to be said that my dog is the devil, because I am within each picture. Ever since I was born I with my parents had the decision to have left. Los Angeles or musicians began to dedicate all their songs to me or to reveal my feelings by means of music, similarly began to dedicate to me most of the films, because I am one of the few person that has the filosofal stone that is each book that reads by but fantasioso which this, begins to become reality for my, although for some people and religions also I am an alchemist, would be possible to be said that my melena is the pictures that exist by the universe. By each book which I read by but fantasioso which this, a problem comes to me and begins to become reality for, even so it speaks on vampirismo or licantropía. Sometimes I turn the water wine of as much blood that will spill in the future, or my name flare. Thanks to all my titles could be said that I was the creator of the vampirismo and the first man wolf on the Earth. Also it could say many things to them on oldest of the vampires, and that some as David Copperfild even follows with life, that Buddha nor Christ are not deads, and that are other three types of vampires in this planet including us to we ourself, because the one who never see me dies. Although sometimes I heal myself with moons of the water, also me emborracho, or emborracho to the people with the moons that appear in the water when I shake a glass. Similarly I protect myself and platico with a laser beams that receipt from the deep deep space, that stops a many serious super computer, because there is no impossible question for, although can be manipulated so that it cures to all the people, not yet are people who finance my projects. As dismissed it could say to them that when I was born I was smelling the picture of a poor personage, who an uncle hung in the wall of the house of my grandmother. Talvez for that reason the animals all the day fold. I must myself finance to adhere my existence with the one of the pictures. I have the keys of the Vatican in my town protected by the subcommander Marks. To dalai it licks cutting heads in my country. To Bin Laden taking itself video in the state. And tens of kings in my mail. Atte. ALA Donations Not of Account: 5470 4649 4172 0516 Bank: Santander Serfin Type of card: UNI Santander-K Mi nombre: Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez DOMINGUEZ de GONZALEZ de ROBE
    RTO dit : 7 septembre 2006 CHEZ 5:43 P.M. 1. Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez indique : 31 août 2006 CHEZ 7:07 P.M. Je suis la personne que ceci dans chaque image, inclusivement pourrait être dit qu\’ils sont mes pensées. Dans différentes religions j\’ai différents titres. Pour moi suis santo, parce que d\’autres je suis arc?el et pour l\’autre celui qu\’un des quatre cavaliers de l\’apocalypse, ils acceptent, Poseidon, l\’aile du nez que Leonardo Da dessine Vinci. En outre il serait possible d\’être dit que mon chien est le diable, parce que je suis dans chaque image. Depuis que je suis né I avec mes parents a eu la décision à être partie. Los Angeles ou musiciens a commencé à consacrer toutes leurs chansons à moi ou à indiquer mes sentiments au moyen de musique, a pareillement commencé à consacrer à moi que la plupart des films, parce que je suis un de la quelque personne qui a la pierre filosofal qui est chaque livre par lequel lit mais le fantasioso qui ceci, commencent à devenir réalité pour le mon, bien que pour certains et religions également je sois un alchimiste, seraient possibles pour être dites que mon melena est les images qui existent par l\’univers. Par chaque livre par lequel je lis mais fantasioso pour lequel ceci, un problème vient à moi et commence à devenir réalité, néanmoins il parle du vampirismo ou licantrop? parfois je tourne le vin de l\’eau autant de sang qui se renversera à l\’avenir, ou de ma fusée nommée. On pourrait dire grâce à tous mes titres que j\’étais le créateur du vampirismo et du premier loup d\’homme sur la terre. En outre elle pourrait indiquer beaucoup de choses à elle sur plus vieux des vampires, et que certains comme David Copperfild suit même avec la vie, que Bouddha ni Christ ne sont pas des deads, et ce sont trois autres types de vampires en cette planète comprenant nous nous ourself, parce que celui qui ne me voient jamais des matrices. Bien que parfois je me guérisse avec des lunes de l\’eau, aussi moi emborracho, ou emborracho aux personnes avec les lunes qui apparaissent dans l\’eau quand je secoue un verre. De même je me protège et le platico avec les rayons laser qui acquittent de l\’espace profond profond, ces arrête des beaucoup d\’ordinateur superbe sérieux, parce qu\’il n\’y a aucune question impossible pour, bien que puisse être manoeuvré de sorte qu\’elle traite à toutes personnes, sont pas encore les gens qui financent mes projets. Car écarté lui pourrait dire à eux que quand je suis né je sentais l\’image d\’une pauvre personnalité, qu\’un oncle a accrochée dans le mur de la maison de ma grand-mère. Talvez pour cette raison les animaux tout pli de jour. Je dois moi-même financer pour adhérer mon existence avec celle des images. J\’ai les clefs de Vatican en ma ville protégée par les marques de subcommander. Au dalai il lèche des têtes de découpage dans mon pays. À Ben Laden se prenant visuel dans l\’état. Et dizaines de rois dans mon courrier. Atte. Donations d\’AILE DU NEZ pas de compte : banque 5470 4649 4172 0516 : Type de Santander Serfin de carte : Nombre d\’UNI Santander-k mille : Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez DOMINGUEZ del GONZALEZ del ROBERTO dice: 7 settembre 2006 a 5:43 P.m. 1. Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez dice: 31 agosto 2006 a 7:07 P.m. Sono la persona che questo all\’interno di ogni immagine, potrebbe dirsi complessivamente che sono i miei pensieri. Nelle religioni differenti ho titoli differenti. Per sono santo, dato che altri sono arc?el e per l\’altro quale uno dei quattro riders del Apocalypse, Poseidon, accetta, il Ala che Leonardo Da disegna Vinci. Inoltre sarebbe possibile da dirsi che il mio cane è il diavolo, perché sono all\’interno di ogni immagine. Da quando sono stato sopportato la I con i miei genitori ha avuta la decisione da lasciare. Los Angeles o i musicisti ha cominciato a dedicare tutte le loro canzoni a me o a rivelare le mie sensibilità per mezzo di musica, similmente ha cominciato a dedicare a me che la maggior parte delle pellicole, perché sono uno della poca persona che ha la pietra filosofal che è ogni libro da che legge ma fantasioso che questo, comincia a trasformarsi in nella realtà per il mio, anche se per alcune gente e religioni inoltre sono un alchemist, sarebbe possibile per dirsi che il mio melena è le immagini che esistono dall\’universo. Da ogni libro da cui leggo ma dal fantasioso cui questo, un problema viene a me e comincia a trasformarsi in nella realtà per, nondimeno parla sul vampirismo o licantrop? a volte giro il vino dell\’acqua di tant\’anima che si rovescerà in avvenire, o del mio chiarore nome. Grazie a tutti i miei titoli potrebbero dirsi che ero il creatore del vampirismo e del primo lupo dell\’uomo sulla terra. Inoltre potrebbe dire molte cose a loro su più vecchio dei vampires e che alcuni come David Copperfild persino segue con vita, che Buddha né Christ non è deads e quello è altri tre tipi di vampires in questo pianeta compreso noi noi ourself, perché quello chi non lo vedono mai dadi. Anche se a volte mi guar con le lune dell\’acqua, anche me emborracho, o emborracho alla gente con le lune che compaiono nell\’acqua quando agito un vetro. Mi proteggo similmente e il platico con i fasci laser che fanno una ricevuta dallo spazio profondo profondo, quei arresta i molti calcolatore eccellente serio, perché non ci è domanda impossibile per, anche se può essere maneggiato in modo che curi a tutta la gente, non ancora è la gente che finanzia i miei progetti. Poichè allontanato esso potrebbe dire a loro che quando sono stato sopportato stavo sentendo l\’odore dell\’immagine di povero personage, che uno zio ha appeso nella parete della casa della mia nonna. Talvez per quel motivo gli animali tutto il popolare di giorno. Devo io stesso finanziare per aderirmi la mia esistenza con quella delle immagini. Ho le chiavi del Vatican nella mia città protetta dai contrassegni del subcommander. Al dalai lecca le teste d\’attacco nel mio paese. A Bin Laden che si prende video nel dichiarare. E dieci dei re nella mia posta. Atte. Donazioni del ALA non del cliente: banca 5470 4649 4172 0516: Tipo de Santander Serfin di scheda: Nombre di UNI Santander-K miglio: Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez ROBERTO GONZALEZ DOMINGUEZ sagt: 7. September 2006 BEI 5:43 P.M. 1. Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez sagt: 31. August 2006 BEI 7:07 P.M. Ich bin die Person, die dieses innerhalb jeder Abbildung, einschließlich gesagt werden könnte, die sie meine Gedanken sind. In den unterschiedlichen Religionen habe ich unterschiedliche Titel. Für bin mich santo, denn andere bin ich arc?el und für anderes welches einer der vier Mitfahrer der Apocalypse, Poseidon, sie annehmen, der Ala, daß Leonardo Da Vinci zeichnet. Auch gesagt zu werden würde sein möglich, das mein Hund der Teufel ist, weil ich innerhalb jeder Abbildung bin. Seitdem ich geboren war, hatte I mit meinen Eltern die Entscheidung zum verlassen zu haben. Los Angeles oder Musiker fingen, alle ihre Liede mir einzuweihen an oder meine Gefühle mittels der Musik aufzudecken, anfingen ähnlich, mir einzuweihen, den, die meisten Filmen anfängt, weil ich einer der wenigen Person bin, die den filosofal Stein hat, der jedes Buch das liest aber fantasioso das dieses, Wirklichkeit für mein zu werden, obgleich für einige Leute und Religionen auch ich ein Alchemist bin, würde sein möglich, um gesagt zu werden, das mein melena die ist durch, Abbildungen ist, die durch das Universum bestehen. Durch jedes Buch, das ich aber fantasioso, das dieses, ein Problem zu mir kommt und, zu werden anfängt Wirklichkeit lese durch, für, allerdings spricht es über vampirismo, oder licantrop? manchmal drehe ich den Wasserwein so vielen Bluts, der zukünftig verschüttet, oder meines Namensaufflackerns. Dank alle meine Titel konnten gesagt werden, die ich der Schöpfer des vampirismo und des ersten Mannwolfs auf der Masse war. Auch sie könnte viele Sachen zu ihnen auf ältestem der Vampires sagen und daß einige, wie David Copperfild sogar mit dem Leben folgt, daß Buddha noch Christ nicht deads sind und die andere drei Arten Vampires in diesem Planete
    n einschließlich uns wir ourself, weil das sind, wer mich nie Würfel sehen. Obgleich mich manchmal ich mit Monden des Wassers heile, auch ich emborracho oder emborracho zu den Leuten mit den Monden, die im Wasser erscheinen, wenn ich ein Glas rüttele. Ähnlich schütze mich ich und platico mit den Laserstrahlen, die vom tiefen Weltraum quittieren, diesen stoppt viele ernster Supercomputer, weil es keine unmögliche Frage für, obgleich manipuliert werden kann, damit sie zu allen Leuten kuriert, sind nicht schon Leute gibt, die meine Projekte finanzieren. Da entlassen ihm zu ihnen sagen könnte daß, als ich geboren war, roch ich die Abbildung einer armen Persönlichkeit, die ein Onkel in die Wand des Hauses meiner Großmutter hing. Talvez aus diesem Grund die Tiere alle Tagesfalte. Ich muß selbst finanzieren, um mein Bestehen mit dem der Abbildungen zu haften. Ich habe die Schlüssel des Vatican in meiner Stadt, die durch die subcommander Markierungen geschützt wird. Zum dalai leckt es Ausschnittköpfe in meinem Land. Zu Bin Laden, der video im Zustand sich nimmt. Und 10 Könige in meiner Post. Atte. ALA Abgaben nicht des Kontos: Bank 5470 4649 4172 0516: Santander Serfin Art der Karte: UNI Santander-k Meile nombre: Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez 1. Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez diz: Agosto 31o, 2006 em 7:07 pm Cuadro de esta dentro de cada do que do persona do la do Soy, pensamientos inclusivos do mis do filho do que do podr?decir do SE. T?los dos distintos do poseo dos religiones dos diferentes do En. Santo do un do soy dos unos de Parágrafos, jinetes del Apocalipsis de cuantos uno de los cuatro dos otros do arc?el y parágrafo do un do soy dos otros de parágrafos, Adan, Poseidon, dibuja Leonardo Da Vinci do que do Ala do EL. EL diablo do es do perro da milha do que do podr?decir de Tambi?se, cuadro estoy de dentro de cada dos pues. Padres do mis do con do quedarme do decisi?e do la do nac?uve do que de Desde. O comenzaron dos m?sicos dos ?geles o de Los os canciones o de um sus dos todas do dedicarme sentimientos develar por medio de la m?sica de um mis, comenzaron igual do forma do de pel?las dos las de um mayor?de do la do dedicarme, que do persona de soy una de las pocas dos pues poseen o este filosofal do que do fantasioso dos mas do por do lea do que do libro do cada do mar do piedra o do la, comienza um realidad parágrafo milha do volverse, alquimista tambi?soy do un dos religiones dos personas y dos algunas de parágrafos do aunque, que dos cuadros dos los do filho do melena da milha do que do podr?decir do SE existen o universo do EL do por. Este do que do fantasioso dos mas do por do leo do que do libro do cada de Por, SE mim comienza do problema y do un do viene um realidad parágrafo milha do volverse, futuro hable do en un do derramare do que do sangre de en vino de la tanta do agua do EL do convierto dos veces do licantrop? A do vampirismo o do sobre do asi do aun, derramo do SE do nombre do en milha de o. Gracias um tierra do la do sobre do lobo do hombre do primer do EL de EL creador del vampirismo y do fui do que do podr?decir do SE dos t?los do mis dos todos. O sobre EL m?viejo de los vampiros dos cosas dos muchas de Tambi?podr?decirles, aun de David Copperfild do como dos algunos do que de y siguen o vida con, ni Cristo de Buda do que nenhuns est?muertos, incluy?onos do planeta do este de tres tipos de vampiros en dos otros do feno do que de y mismos dos nosotros, que do EL dos pues mim jam?muere do ve. Aunque veces mim sano las con lunas del agua, emborracho do tambi?me, emborracho de o um que con dos lunas dos las dos personas dos las aparecen o vaso do un do agito do cuando do agua do EL do en. O forma igual do De mim exterior do espacio do profundo do EL do desde do recibo do que do l?r do rayo do un do con do platico do protejo y, computadora do s?per do una do seria dos muchos de parágrafos do que, pues nenhum EL imposible de parágrafos do pregunta do feno, cura manipular do que de parágrafos do puede do SE do aunque personas dos las dos todas, aun nenhum que dos personas do feno financien proyectos do mis. O pobre do personaje de EL cuadro de un do oliendo do fui do nac?e do cuando do que dos podr?decirles do despedida de Como, la do t?colg? do un do que pared o abuela de de la casa de milha. O EL do todo dos animales dos los do ello do por de Talvez d?plieguen. Mim con financiar la de los cuadros do existencia da milha do adherir de parágrafos do que do tengo. Subcomandante Marcos do EL do por dos protegidas do povoado indígino de Tengo las llaves del vaticano en milha. Pais do en milha dos cabezas do cortando do lama do dalai do Al. Um estado do EL do en do vídeo do tomandose de Bin Laden. Correo de Y decenas de reyes en milha. Ordenador da milha do hacia do espacio do EL do desde dos ordenes dos propias do mis do recibo de Tambien. Bendiciones de Ayatola, Mohamad y Tolomeo. Fotos dos las de Todas mim papa dedican Juan Pablo do EL dos las II y Yaser Arafat. Por la diferencia de calendario do planeado do esta de Todo. Desde Oriente Proximo. Atte. ALA Donaciones Nenhum de Cuenta: 5470 4649 4172 0516 Tipo de tarjeta: UNI Santander-k Banco: Nombre de Santander Serfin milha: Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez ROBERTO GONZALEZ DOMINGUEZ???: 2006?9?7?5:43 p.m. 1?? Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez???: 2006?8?31?7:07 p.m.?? ?????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????? ??????santo????????Leonardo Da?Vinci????????4???????1?????????????????????????????arcángel???? ??????????????????????????????????? ?????????????i???????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????fantasioso??filosofal????????????1????????????????????????????melena??????????????&a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;a mp;# 31169;?????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????fantasioso?????????vampirismo?licantropía?????????? ??????????????????????????????????????? ????????vampirismo??????????????????????????????????????????? ??????deads?????????3?????????????????????????????????ourself???????????????Copperfild????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????emborracho??????????????????????????????emborracho? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????platico????????????????????????????????????????????????????| 79;????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????Talvez??????????? ????????????????????????????????????? ??subcommander??????????????????????????? dalai????????????????? ???????????????????????? ??????????10? Atte? ??????????: 5470 4649 4172 0516?????: Santander Serfin????????: uni SantanderK mi?nombre: Roberto Gonzalez Dominguez ??????? ???????? ?????? ???????? : 7-? ????????, 2006 AT 5:43 ?. 00 ?. 1. ??????? ???????? ???????? ?????? : August 31st, 2006 AT 07 ?????, ? ??????, ??? ??? ? ?????? ?? ??????????, ???????????? ????? ???? ?? ???????, ??? ??? ???? ??? ?????. ? ?????? ???????? ? ???? ????????? ????????. ??? ? santo, ??? ?????? ? arcángel ? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ?? ??????? ????????? ???????????? ?, ?? ?? ????????, ???, ??? ???????? ?? ????? ????????. ????? ????? ???? ?? ???????, ??? ??? ?????? ???????, ????????? ? ?????? ? ?????? ??????????. ? ??? ??? ??? ? ??????? ? ? ????? ??????????, ???? ?? ??????? ? ????????. ???-???????? ??? ????????? ????? ????????? ??? ???? ????? ??? ??? ? ????????? ????? ?????? ??????????? ??????, ?? ????? ??????? ??? ??????????? ???????, ?????? ??? ? ???? ?? ???????? ???????, ??????? filosofal ??????, ??????? ?????? ?????, ??? ??????, ?? ?? ??????? ???? fantasioso, ???????? ????????? ? ????, ???? ? ????????? ??????? ? ???????, ? ? ???????, ????? ???????, ??? ??? melena ????? ??????????, ??????? ?????????? ? ????. ? ?????? ?????, ??????? ? ????????, ?? ??? ??? fantasioso, ???????? ??????? ?? ??? ? ???????? ???????????? ? ??????????, ???? ??? ??? ??????? ? vampirismo ??? licantropía. ?????? ? ???????? ?? ???? ? ????, ??? ????? ?????, ??????? ??????????? ? ??????? ??? ??? ??? ??????. ??????? ????, ??? ????? ????? ???????, ??? ? ??? ?????????? ? vampirismo ?????? ??????? ???? ?? ?????. ????? ??? ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ?? ? ????????? ?? ????????, ? ????
    ?????, ??? ????? ??? ????????? Copperfild ? ??????, ??? ?????, ?? ??????? ?? ????? ??????????, ? ?????? ??? ???? ???????? ?? ????? ???????, ??????? ??? ?? ourself, ?????? ??? ???, ??? ??????? ?? ?????? ????, ?????. ???? ?????? ? ??? ? ??????????????? ???????? ????, ????? ??? emborracho, emborracho ??? ? ?????, ??????? ?????????? ??? ? ????, ????? ? ???????? ??????. ????? ??? ?? ? ???????? ???? ? platico ? ????????? ??????, ??????? ?? ????????? ???????? ?????? ???????, ??? ????????? ?????? ????????? ????? ?????????, ?????? ??? ?????? ???????????? ??? ???????, ???? ????? ?????????????? ???, ??? ?? ????????? ???? ?????, ?? ????, ??????? ??????????? ??? ???????. ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??, ???, ????? ? ??????? ? ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????????, ??? ???? ?????? ? ????? ???? ???? ???????. Talvez ?? ???? ??????? ??? ???????? ???? ????. ? ?????? ??? ????????????? ?????????????? ????? ????????????? ? ????? ?? ??????????. ? ???? ????? ?? ???????? ? ??? ????? ?????????? subcommander ?????. ??? dalai ??? ??????????? ????? ?????? ? ???? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ? ????? ???????????? ? ?????????. ? ???????
    Consejo Ciudadano del Premio Nacional de Periodismo A.C.
    Gob. Francisco García Conde #5, Col. San Miguel Chapultepec, Tels. 5276 4480, 5515 6660; Fax 5276 4427

  8. […] It is as simple as that. Paul Krugman, “Way Off Base,” New York Times, April 16, 2007 ?John Walsh, “Why is the Peace Movement Silent About AIPAC?,” CounterPunch, April 17, 2007. ?See my extended appraisal. ?Hagit Borer, James Petras, and Norman Finkelstein, “The Pro-Israel Lobby Debate,” Dissident Voice, April 17, 2007. ?The idea that the U.S. ruling class had been financially damaged as a result of Bush’s adventures requires a commitment never to read a newspaper business section, just as the belief that AIPAC is merely a servant of “American imperialism” requires a commitment to never read Haaretz or any U.S. Jewish community paper. The blindness of both sides in this utterly silly debate is simply infuriating. ?Kevin Baker, “Stabbed in the Back,” Harper’s, June 2006. ?Mitchell Plitnick, “Over-Estimating AIPAC: The Iraq Spending Bill and the Stricken Language on Iran,” The Third Way, March 25, 2007. ? […]

Comments are closed.