Let’s be clear lest we start carelessly saying “the Jews” by default, particularly since you mentioned a fear of discrimination or anti-Judaism (a more accurate term than anti-Semitism, since most Jews today are not Semites). The majority of American Jews do not share the Jewish and Christian neocons’s views. I am not saying “the Jews” are the driving force of US foreign policy, I am seeing that currently, the neocons are, and they are dominated by the views of neocon American Jews whom have a decidedly likudnik world view that has been directly responsible for getting the US into the Iraq war and for its actions against Iran.

Also, I advocate the value of understanding policy and political behaviour through its interrelatedness, one can not simply see it in discrete chunks, semantically and operationally cut off from other policies. In the larger scheme of things, the Israeli Law of Return is a big part of the problem and the conflict. I inserted it to remind readers of this fact, as stated. Is it directly related to the above argument about neocons? Perhaps not to this specific argument, and I didn’t explicitly make that claim and I’d like to think we are capable of carrying on more than a one-track argument. Perhaps this simply reflects our styles. You tend to want to contain your arguments and argue one thing at a time, whereas I will branch out or pitch it at the big picture scale. Neither is better or worse, just different approaches.

Nor was it claimed that Larry Franklin worked for AIPAC. I stated that he was (at the time) a top Defense Department official.

The USS Liberty incident was not an accident according to the Marines involved who witnessed what happened, which to my mind carries far more weight than official anodyne government statements.

“Most members of AIPAC support what they think is in the best interests of both Israel and the United States. ”

The operative phrase being “what they think”, which is increasingly being challenged, as represented by Walt and Mearsheimer’s arguments who are rightly questioning the propagated confluence of two separate countries’ interests. The argument is that AIPAC members are misguided, not malevolent, though I’m not sure we can see that with the same confidence about their neocon leaders. Americans are rightly concerned that their young men and women do not continue to be sent to die for wars that have been disasters for the US and that have benefited nought but Israeli regional supremacy and private contractors. And the arms manufacturers. The merchants of death are always beneficiaries of wars.

That’s relevant to the whole right of return debate, not to the question of whether or not Jews are the driving force behind US foreign policy. Just like I don’t know for certain whether they ever considered immigrating to Israel, you have no idea either. Since they have very comfortable lives in the States and important positions, it is safe to say they probably won’t be making Aliyah.

I don’t support Israeli spying on the US, especially not the use of Jewish Americans as spies. Firstly, exactly because the US is Israel’s greatest ally. Secondly, because of the fear of anti-Semitism. A handful of Jewish spies can make all Jewish Americans suspect in the eyes of other Americans. The most it can do is what’s considered “acceptable spying”. They say any embassy’s military attache is actually the top spy in the country. They should stick to that kind of stuff. Lately, by the way, it seems Israel has largely adhered to that. Even Ben-Ami Kadish was arrested for something he allegedly did in the 80′s.

The USS Liberty incident happened 41 years ago, and both Israel and the United States say it was an accident. Some think this was an Israeli attempt to drag the US into the war. It isn’t a cut and dried example of Israel crossing the line.

Just because AIPAC supports a hard line toward Iran (sanctions at this stage, by the way – a strike only as a last resort. At least if its stance is the same as Israel’s) doesn’t mean it is treacherous. Most members of AIPAC support what they think is in the best intersts of both Israel and the United States.

[...] these two convicted AIPAC officials [...]

For the record: Larry Franklin, the only person convicted in the AIPAC scandal so far, neither worked for AIPAC nor was Jewish. Rosen and Weissman, the AIPAC officials, have been indicted but their trial isn’t over yet.

While most countries might conduct spying operations, I tend to agree with Giraldi: “But the intensity and persistence of Israeli spying against the United States is particularly disturbing since Israel relies so heavily on American political and military support. Other allies like Britain, France, and Germany undoubtedly have spies in Washington, but there is a line that they do not cross.” The shocking USS Liberty incident is another example of the line being crossed.

I subsequently made two separate arguments, after acknowledging the imprecision of my hasty ‘dual citizen’ tag (yes I am aware of the dual citizen claims on the web that have no proof, and again no claim was explicitly made here about Bush administration Jews being dual citizens. I qualify this by still asserting they have dual loyalties. The Jewish American spies mentioned were not even Israeli (dual) citizens when convicted, this does not exactly work against my argument or the concerns I posit now, does it? They betrayed their own government even without Israeli citizenship granted. Another is criminal fugitive Marc Rich who was pardoned by the Clinton administration. I’m pretty certain I remember reading he now travels on an Israeli and yet another national passport. Please do correct me if you happen to know otherwise. And yes, this is separate from the second argument about those actively advocating strikes against Iran, which is the Israeli’s government’s position, or key sections/ personages therein.

There are however some connective links: these two convicted AIPAC officials work for an organisation that is actively calling for a strike against Iran, whether or not they individually did so is not certain, institutionally the assertion is still valid. Whether their espionage is directly connected or not I can not claim since the full details of the case are likely not available. Nevertheless it can not be ignored that they were important officials in a group who *is* urging military action.

“Maybe it is just easier to blame the Jews and Israel for everything.” No, the culpability takes us where the trail leads, it is not a matter of convenience, nor a matter of discrimination. One could easily claim it is just easier to level that (veiled) charge. Regarding the religious background of the recognised neocons, I would also dispute the claim that there are many more Christian Zionist ideologues. The neocons were spearheaded and driven by a core of Jewish American hardliners, and make up at around half the number of the core neocons.