Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: What the US elite really thinks about Israel

Posted 2 years ago on March 22, 2012, 3:24 p.m. EST by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

http://www.counterpunch.org/2009/12/07/what-the-u-s-elite-really-thinks-about-israel/

DECEMBER 07, 2009 0 Surprising Results of CFR Survey What the U.S. Elite Really Thinks About Israel by JEFFREY BLANKFORT The Council on Foreign Relations is always near the top of the Left’s list of bogeymen that stand accused of pulling the strings of US foreign policy. It is right up there with the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission, right? Wrong. If that was the case, those arguing that US support for Israel is based on it being a "strategic asset" will have a hard time explaining a Pew Research Center survey on America’s Place in the World, taken of 642 CFR members between October 2 and November 16. The Pew poll not only reveals that the overwhelming majority, two-thirds of the members of this elite foreign policy institution, believes that the United States has gone overboard in favoring Israel, it doesn’t consider Israel to have have much importance to the US in the first place.

What can be concluded from the answers to questions that dealt with the Israel-Palestine conflict is that the general public forms its opinions from what it hears and reads in the mainstream media which are largely biased towards Israel while CFR members have greater access to as well as interest in obtaining more accurate information and are less susceptible to pro-Israel propaganda. That apparently not a single US newspaper saw fit to report on the opinions of CFR members, under those circumstances, is not surprising. The evidence:

(1) That on a list of countries that will be the "more important as America’s allies and partners" in the future, just 4 per cent included Israel which placed it in a tie with South Korea and far behinf China, 58 per cent, India, 55 per cent, Brazil,37 per cent, the EU, 19 per cent, Russia, 17 per cent, Japan, 16 per cent, the UK and Turkey, 10 per cent, Germany, 9 per cent, Mexico, 8 per cent, Canada, Indonesia, Australia and France at 5 per cent. CFR voters were allowed to make up to seven selections.(Q19)

(2) When asked which countries would be less important to the US, Israel, at 9 per cent was behind 22 countries including Canada and Mexico and in the region Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.(Q20)

(3) What was particularly revealing is that "in the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians," only 26 per cent of the CFR sided with Israel, compared with 51 per cent of 2000 members of the general public who were polled over the same period. While but 16 per cent of CFR members sided with the Palestinians compared to 12 per cent of the public, 41 per cent of the CFRers sided with "both equally" as opposed to 4 per cent of the public. Supporting neither was 12 per cent of the CFR and 14 per cent of the public. (Q33)

(4) That the CFR has not had a major hand in making US Israel-Palestine policy nor is it in agreement with those who did is strikingly revealed by the response of its members when asked their opinion of US Middle East policies. The problem, according to 67 per cent of CFR members (as compared to 30 per cent of the public) is that the US favored Israeli too much, while only 2 per cent (as opposed to 15 per cent of the public) believed that US policy overly favored the Palestinians.. Twenty-four percent of the CFR believed US policy "struck the right balance" as did 29 per cent of the public. (Q34)

(5) The overwhelming majority of CFR members, 69 per cent, think that Pres.Obama is "striking the right balance" between the Israelis and Palestinians as compared with a slim majority, 51 per cent of the public. Thirteen percent of the CFR believes that Obama is "favoring Israel too much," as compared with 7 per cent of the public, while 12 per cent thinks he is siding with the Palestinians, a position taken by 16 per cent of the public. (Q35)

Regarding Iran, one detects the same gap between the CFR and the public. Whereas a 64 per cent-34 per cent majority of the polled CFR members see Iran as a major threat to US interests, compared with a 72-20 per cent per cent majority of the public, only 33 per cent of the CFR would support an attack on Iran should it get a nuclear weapon as contrasted with 63 per cent of the public. (Q7)

The percentages are almost reversed when it comes to Pakistan with 63 per cent of the CFR supporting US military action were "extremists…poised to take over Pakistan," whereas only 51 per cent of the public would approve such a move. (Q24). This is another indication of the success of Israel’s porte-paroles in the mainstream media in building up the Iran threat while downplaying the potential threats to the stabilty of nuclear-armed Pakistan. The entire Pew survey can be viewed here: http://people-press.org/reports/questionnaires/569.pdf

JEFFREY BLANKFORT is a long-time pro-Palestinian activist and a contributor to The Politics of Anti-Semitism. He an be contacted at jblankfort@earthlink.net

5 Comments

5 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 2 years ago

(4) That the CFR has not had a major hand in making US Israel-Palestine policy nor is it in agreement with those who did is strikingly revealed by the response of its members when asked their opinion of US Middle East policies. The problem, according to 67 per cent of CFR members (as compared to 30 per cent of the public) is that the US favored Israeli too much, while only 2 per cent (as opposed to 15 per cent of the public) believed that US policy overly favored the Palestinians.. Twenty-four percent of the CFR believed US policy "struck the right balance" as did 29 per cent of the public. (Q34)!

[-] 1 points by Dumpthechump (96) 2 years ago

The Israel Lobby, especially its Jewish minority section, don't seem to realize how they're dancing on their own graves in goading the USA to attack Iran!

Thank you for these useful references ShubeLMorgan2. We need more like you at OWS.

When the USA loses the war, these same sanctimonious formerly-Zionist Christians - the majority of Zionists - will reread their New Testaments and discover there who really lobbied to kill their jebus! The breakdown of Judaeo-Christianity...

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

"Judeo-Christianity" who woulda thunk... http://palsolidarity.org/2006/11/hebron-day-06/

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Secretariat (33) 2 years ago

""NATO is staging "Massacre of Christians in Syria by Muslims", by bringing Al Qaida and other radical Islamists to Syria, in order to initiate a war, where they can nuke Iran, give a lesson to rising China, control Middle East oil resources, and allow some people to print as much money as they wish by using petrodollars, so they can control the society and the world through their wealth and power. This will also allow capitalism to continue by breaking the Eastern and the Socialist spirituality which is growing around the world and which is the biggest threat to capitalist ruling elite. ""

[-] 1 points by Dumpthechump (96) 2 years ago

Yes, this situation makes Syria very problematical. Assad is undoubtedly corrupt and vicious - and should be deposed - but the problem is that the opposition is Sunni-led (meaning Al Qaida as its crudest manifestation) which will oppress Alawite, Shia and Christians worse than Assad's Alawites oppressed the Sunnis.

That the Sunnis have the clear majority means that they will win any civil war if they get arms (now very likely). Either the country breaks up on religious lines or Iran and Shia-dominated Iraq intervene to help the "3 minorities" i.e. Shia, Alawites and Christians, the intervention primarily aimed to help the first against the Sunnis.

Hence this may be the very scenario triggers WW3 i.e. Israel responding to Iranian military presence in Syria (defending local Shia from Syriac Sunnis)!

[Removed]