Congress' constitutional duty is putting Israel first!
House Dems Unanimously Vote to Condemn Withdrawal From Syria - Oct 16, 2019
In a Wednesday vote, the House overwhelmingly backed a resolution expressing opposition to
the end of the US war in Syria, and calling on the US to protect the Syrian Kurds from
Turkey. The vote was 354-60, with the majority of Republicans supporting it, and unanimous
support from Democrats who cast votes .
Positions from Democrat leaders suggested an unconditional opposition to Trump ending
any war and withdrawing any troops under any circumstances. They also objected to the
notion that a president could end a war without their permission .
"Netanyahu calls ICC war crimes probe anti-Semitic"
In breaking news, the International Criminal Court (ICC) today accused Netanyahu of being
anti-Gentile and intend to lay charges against him for this. Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Iran,
Jordan and several other countries offer to bear witness against him while Saudi Arabia &
the Gulf States say they will offer character references in his defense.
Government imposes gag on ICC controversy
Dec 22, 2019 @ 15:47
The Israeli government in its weekly session on Sunday classified as secret all references to
the decision of the International Crimes Court in the Hague to probe Israel for offences in
"Palestinian areas." The ministers passed the subject over to the security-policy cabinet. PM
Binyamin Netanyahu again denounced the Hague court: "While we are moving forward in new areas
of hope and peace with our Arab neighbors, the ICC in The Hague has taken a step backwards.
On Friday, it finally became a weapon in the political war against the State of Israel."
"... Also seldom acknowledged by left remainers is that the EU is structurally neo-liberal and is enforcing austerity on the peoples of Europe. Read Costas Lapavitsas: 'The Left Case Against the EU'. ..."
"... Another unmentionable is that important parts of Corbyn's programme would have been illegal under the rules of the EU's single market. ..."
"... The fact is that America became an extension of Britannia. Actually the biggest part of the Empire known as the East India Company. Don't believe me. Take a look at the flag. All the bars without the stars. ..."
"... "Corbyn in the UK represented a last futile effort to re-transform the British Labour party, trying to turn the clock back into what it was once. But the core and base for that reconstitution no longer exists. And that's also, at least in part, why Labour suffered the historic defeat yesterday. And why Nationalism is on the ascend once again. ..."
"... Nationalism is undermining national unity in the UK–just as it is doing so in the USA and in Spain, Italy, and elsewhere in Europe, and let's not forget India and Kashmir, and other locales in Asia. Capitalism in crisis always turns to nationalism as a shield to divert blame for its economic and social troubles on 'the others'. The extreme version of this nationalist 'blame it on the outsiders game' is called Fascism. ..."
"... Even with all the abuse, gaslighting, spoiler candidates and a winter election on cold rainy dark prexmas day – nearly 11 MILLION GENUINE voters did choose Corbynite Labour. ..."
It is an anger that would be shared by millions, if they understood the truth about the way
they have been deceived and manipulated by the UK Establishment, not simply over the election
but over the most fundamental issues of trust and decency.
Some of the most evident deceptions that were used against Jeremy Corbyn, such as the
mendacious claims of anti-semitism, have been well aired – if not successfully
countered.
The failure to challenge and dismiss these claims rests almost entirely with the most
influential media – the BBC and Guardian particularly – who have the greatest
influence with Labour voters, even though they may not have been initially responsible for
contriving this high-level smear campaign.
The producers of those media and the journalists who work for them are also primarily
responsible for failing to present an opposing view that legitimised Labour's position and
demonised that of the Tories.
One issue stands out a mile in the context of anti-Semitism claims, being Israel's
continuing crimes against Palestinians, and the silence on the extraordinary and illegal moves
being made by the Israeli government during the election period.
The apparent basis for accusations against Corbyn of anti-Semitism is because of his
historic support for the Palestinian cause and legitimate criticism of Israel's barbaric and
criminal treatment of those living in the occupied West Bank and in Gaza. If any direct
reference was made to this viewpoint, it was only in references to Corbyn's "support for
terrorists" – meaning Hamas.
But reflecting on the election campaign, the absence of any direct reference to foreign
affairs, and policies on which Labour may have had significant support from many in the UK, is
striking. In fact it is more than that – it is indicative. Because the sub-text –
the subliminal message beneath the main issues of contention was always about foreign
affairs.
... ... ...
In his recent
essay on the operation of propaganda , Edward Curtin highlighted the power of movies in
embedding false ideas in peoples' minds, something also noted by Christopher Donnelly in his
exposition on "hybrid warfare".
There is, I think, now substantial evidence that both the broadcasting and suppression of
particular movies played a part in pushing the UK electorate into voting against its interests.
It was the coincidence of these two movies' appearance – and disappearance, with the
election period that makes the case persuasive.
Capricornia Man ,
I was with this author all the way until he made the infantile complaint that only 30 per
cent of the electorate voted for Brexit. The corollary of this is, of course, that LESS than
30 per cent voted to remain. But such inconvenient, if obvious, truths need not be mentioned
if you happen to be a crusading leftist remainer.
Also seldom acknowledged by left remainers is that the EU is structurally neo-liberal and
is enforcing austerity on the peoples of Europe. Read Costas Lapavitsas: 'The Left Case
Against the EU'.
Unmentionable, too, is that the undeclared leader of the stop-Brexit campaign is one Tony
Blair who has called Brexit "rancid" and has reputedly put ten million pounds of his own
money into this campaign.
Another unmentionable is that important parts of Corbyn's programme would have been illegal under the rules of the EU's
single market.
The author follows a well-trodden path in insulting working-class people who voted 'leave'
allegedly in "ignorance" and had "longstanding prejudices".
With this kind of stuff coming from sections of the left, why be surprised that sections
of the working class voted for the right?
When Labour promised in 2017 to implement Brexit, it achieved a 10 percent swing and
almost won the election. When the Blairites turned Labour into a remain party in 2019, it
lost the general election badly.
How many times does the electorate have to show what it wants before EU-idolaters will
accept it?
You have some very insightful comments on this site. Also you publish a needed antidote to
the Guardian and all the other mainstream propaganda out there.
Personally I was ambivalent about Brexit being from across the pond or as the elites like
to say from the "colonies" I didn't really think it was my business. Unlike some from the
commonwealth ( the euphemism for the British Empire) like to go on about our love for
guns.
Compare what happened at the Battle of the Little Big Horn to Wounded Knee. Just as a
thought experiment but I digress. Not too much because we're told that thanks to what would
become the Second Amendment we gained "Independence" from Britain. A nice fairytale we were
all taught in school and like GW chopping down some cherry tree because he couldn't tell a
lie or whatever. More myth than actual truth.
The fact is that America became an extension of Britannia. Actually the biggest part of
the Empire known as the East India Company. Don't believe me. Take a look at the flag. All
the bars without the stars.
Maybe I'm wrong but I see this whole Brexit now is an effort to resurrect an
Anglo-American alliance and all drunken Boris who has as much tact as his Russian counterpart
who almost single handedly and handily destroyed Russia by selling it off at bargain basement
prices which is what I'm sure Boris II plans to do and set up the old mercantile empire using
America's military much like Israel is using us as a "force multiplier".
Thus I sympathize with you all over there. Here we dodged the bullet known as Clinton who
probably would have turned us all into radioactive dust if elected for Trump who in reality
was the lesser of two evils but evil just the same since he seems to be selling us out to the
Rothschilds who as you know rule the City of London and are the benefactors of the terrorist
state of Israel.
Personally I thought you would have been better off with Cobryn but instead got Boris the
Terrible who promises to "get Brexit done". I wish you all the best and hope that it all
comes out alright.
" things will certainly go wrong for Boris. The great "Get Brexit Done" lie may have
helped him back to Downing Street, but it left untouched the insoluble conundrum at the
heart of Brexit – the fact that we can maintain the close economic relationship with
the European Union on which Britain's prosperity depends; or we can go for the sort of
low-cost, low-regulation "Singapore-on-Thames" that Johnson's financiers (oligarchs, hedge
funds, expatriate media barons) demand "
Merry Christmas!
M. le Docteur Ralph ,
You are a civil servant for an exceptional nation, a nation so exceptional that it expends
almost 4% of its GDP on defence, but a nation that is also so exceptional that it expends
that 4% of GDP simply by printing up pieces of paper in the basement.
Imagine a bunch of loser nations get together and have this really stupid idea of creating
their own new currency.
If these bunch of losers succeed instead of printing up pieces of paper in the basement
you will have to pay real money to finance that 4% of GDP and pay those outlandish bonuses to
the bosses of the industrial complex that receives your defence spending.
So, the first thing you do is you use your prison bitch to join the proto-new currency and
then you use your Hungarian Jewish asset to force your prison bitch to leave. A failure.
Next, you push the exchange rate against your own currency so low that you are sure the
loser nations will bend, they do not. A failure.
Next, you raise their new currency so high against your own currency that they cannot
trade and you are sure that the loser nations will bend, they do not. A failure.
Next, you take the country where your security services have previously established a
military junta and with your leading investment bank help you falsify their national
accounts. A failure but a disaster for the country in question. Everyone is too scared to sue
your leading investment bank.
Next, you take your prison bitch of a country and get them to run a referendum to leave
the loser nation trading block. You fix the referendum through postal votes. Then you run an
election and get an upper-class clown elected to make sure they leave on absolutely the worst
terms possible.
You are sure that this time you are on to a winner, pity for the prison bitch country,
pity for the risk for the whole of the rest of the world given what happened when you helped
your buddies at Goldman tank Lehman, but who cares you live in Chevy Chase and your
government pension is perfectly secure.
George Mc ,
Just found this helpful essay on possible future scenarios of the UK. And they're not happy
ones:
"Corbyn in the UK represented a last futile effort to re-transform the British Labour
party, trying to turn the clock back into what it was once. But the core and base for that
reconstitution no longer exists. And that's also, at least in part, why Labour suffered the
historic defeat yesterday. And why Nationalism is on the ascend once again.
And why, after the next crisis, even ascendant Nationalism as we see it today may not be
sufficient for the continuation of late Neoliberal rule for global capitalism."
because it refers to an earlier part:
"Nationalism is undermining national unity in the UK–just as it is doing so in the
USA and in Spain, Italy, and elsewhere in Europe, and let's not forget India and Kashmir,
and other locales in Asia. Capitalism in crisis always turns to nationalism as a shield to
divert blame for its economic and social troubles on 'the others'. The extreme version of
this nationalist 'blame it on the outsiders game' is called Fascism."
Dungroanin ,
Not so George.
Here are 3 simple upsides:
1. Even with all the abuse, gaslighting, spoiler candidates and a winter election on cold
rainy dark prexmas day – nearly 11 MILLION GENUINE voters did choose Corbynite
Labour.
2. Many of the backstabbing exLabour and pains in the arses are gone from their shouty AS
accussing perches.
3. Aside from losing Pidcock (to postal fraud) the next leadership is looking like a great
team and will be backed by the still solid membership- and the remainder shit on shoe
parachutists are deselected in good time for next election.
Its a long game politics and there was no predicted wipeout – Again.
"... The US strategy is based on two core principles: (1) Maintain – extend hegemony over whole world. (Resources, military etc etc) (2) Act as Israel's Golom. ..."
"... Of course this (very abbreviated) view of US "strategy" is open to the criticisms that it's both dumb & evil. As if US establishment cares. Compared to cost of traditional "war" it's pretty cheap ..."
In truth, infinite war is a strategic abomination, an admission of professional military
bankruptcy. Erster General-Quartiermeister Ludendorff might have endorsed the term,
but Ludendorff was a military fanatic.
Check that. Infinite war is a strategic abomination except for arms merchants, so-called
defense contractors, and the " emergency
men " (and women) devoted to climbing the greasy pole of what we choose to call the
national security establishment. In other words, candor obliges us to acknowledge that, in some
quarters, infinite war is a pure positive, carrying with it a promise of yet more profits,
promotions, and opportunities to come. War keeps the gravy train rolling. And, of course,
that's part of the problem.
Who should we hold accountable for this abomination? Not the generals, in my view. If they
come across as a dutiful yet unimaginative lot, remember that a lifetime of military service
rarely nurtures imagination or creativity. And let us at least credit our generals with this:
in their efforts to liberate or democratize or pacify or dominate the Greater Middle East they
have tried every military tactic and technique imaginable. Short of nuclear annihilation,
they've played just about every card in the Pentagon's deck -- without coming up with a winning
hand. So they come and go at regular intervals, each new commander promising success and
departing after a couple years to
make way for someone else to give it a try.
... ... ...
Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election
already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to
declare: "Enough! Stop this madness!" Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white,
that person will deserve the nation's gratitude and the support of the electorate.
Until that occurs, however, the American penchant for war will stretch on toward infinity.
No doubt Saudi and Israeli leaders will cheer, Europeans who remember their Great War will
scratch their heads in wonder, and the Chinese will laugh themselves silly. Meanwhile, issues
of genuinely strategic importance -- climate change offers one obvious example -- will continue
to be treated like an afterthought. As for the gravy train, it will roll on.
1. WW1 had total casualties (civilian and military) of around 40M. WW2 had total
casualties of 60M. So yes WW2 was more deadly but "pales in comparison" is hardly justified,
especially relative to population.
2. Marshal Foch, 28 June, 1919: "This is not a peace. It is an armistice for 20
years."
WW1 inevitably led to WW2.
The only politician with a modest national stage to have said that (and meant it) in the
last 50 years was Ron Paul, who was booed and mocked as crazy. Trump made noises in that
direction, but almost as soon as the last words of his oath echoed off into the brisk January
afternoon, he seemed to change his tune. Whether he never meant it, or decided to avoid the
JFK treatment, who knows.
No, as I believe Will Rogers said, democracy is that form of government where the people
get what they want, good and hard.
I supported Ron Paul in 2012. But after his candidacy was crookedly subverted by the
Establishment (cf., Trump's) I vowed never to vote again for anyone that I believe unworthy
of the power wielded through the public office. I haven't voted since, and don't expect to
until the Empire collapses.
Kirk Douglas starred in a great film about fighting in World War I: "Paths of Glory." I
highly recommend the film for its accuracy, best described in Wiki by the reaction of
governments:
Controversy
On its release, the film's anti-military tone was subject to criticism and censorship.
In France, both active and retired personnel from the French military vehemently
criticized the film -- and its portrayal of the French Army -- after it was released in
Belgium. The French government placed enormous pressure on United Artists, (the European
distributor) to not release the film in France. The film was eventually shown in France in
1975 when social attitudes had changed.[17]
In Germany, the film was withdrawn from the Berlin Film Festival to avoid straining
relations with France;[18] it was not shown for two years until after its release.
In Spain, Spain's right-wing government of Francisco Franco objected to the film. It was
first shown in 1986, 11 years after Franco's death.
In Switzerland, the film was censored, at the request of the Swiss Army, until
1970.[18]
At American bases in Europe, the American military banned it from being shown.[18]
No, it's not the generals who have let us down, but the politicians to whom they
supposedly report and from whom they nominally take their orders.
I'd say both. The generals have greatly assisted in stringing along the trusting public,
always promising that victory is just around the corner, provided the public supports this or
that final effort. Petraeus in particular willingly played his part in misleading the public
about both Iraq and Afghanistan. His career would be a great case study for illuminating what
is wrong with the U.S. today.
As to the apparent failure of the Afghanistan war – one must be careful to separate
stated goals from real ones. What kind of "lasting success" can the U.S. possibly hope for
there? If they managed to defeat the Taliban, pacify the country, install a puppet regime to
govern it, and then leave, what would that achieve? The puppet regime would find itself
surrounded by powers antagonistic to the U.S., and the puppets would either cooperate with
them or be overthrown in no time. The U.S. are not interested in winning and leaving –
they want to continue disrupting the peaceful integration of East, West, and South Asia.
Afghanistan is ideally placed for this purpose, and so the U.S. are quite content with
dragging out that war, as a pretext for their continued presence in the region.
I would disagree on one point though: "Today, Washington need not even bother to
propagandize the public into supporting its war. By and large, members of the public are
indifferent to its very existence."
This is an error. A majority of the American public think that wasting trillions of
dollars on endless pointless foreign wars is a stupid idea, and they think that we would be
better off spending that money on ourselves. It's just that we don't live in a democracy, and
the corporate press constantly ignores the issue. But just because the press doesn't mention
something, doesn't mean that it does not exist.
So during the last presidential election Donald Trump echoed this view, why are we
throwing away all this money on stupid wars when we need that money at home? For this he was
attacked as a fascist and "literally Hitler" (really! It's jaw-dropping when you think about
it). Despite massive propaganda attacking Trump, and a personal style that could charitably
be called a jackass, Trump won the election in large part because indeed most American don't
like the status quo.
After the election, Trump started to deliver on his promises – and he was quickly
beaten down, his pragmatist nationalist advisors purged and replaced with defense-industry
chickenhawks, and now we are back to the old status quo. The public be damned.
No, the American people are not being propagandized into supporting these wars. They are
simply being ignored.
When are you going to stop insulting our intelligence with this Boy's State civics crap?
You're calling on political leaders to stop war, like they don't remember what CIA did to
JFK, RFK, Daschle, or Leahy. Or Paul Wellstone.
Your national command structure, CIA, has impunity for universal jurisdiction crime. They
can kill or torture anyone they want and get away with it. That is what put them in charge.
CIA kills anybody who gets in their way. You fail to comprehend Lenin's lesson: first destroy
the regime, then you can refrain from use of force. Until you're ready to take on CIA, your
bold phrases are silent and odorless farts of feckless self-absorption. Sack up and imprison
CIA SIS or GTFO.
Since Spain was smart enough to stay out of both World Wars (as was Switzerland, of
course), I wonder what Franco was thinking when he banned the film. Anyway, the final scene
may be the best final scene in the history of movies.
This writer, a retired military officer whose son died in service to the yankee imperium
seems to have as good a grasp as any if not a better grasp than any about the nature of the
yankee system of permanent war.
While I agree the slave-American is ignored, I think the elected, salaried members of the
elected government are also ignored.. The persons in charge are Pharaohs and massively
powerful global in scope corporations.
Abe Lincoln, McKinnley, Kennedy discovered that fact in their fate.
Organized Zionism was copted by the London bankers and their corporations 1897, since then
a string of events have emerged.. that like a Submarine, seeking a far off target, it must
divert to avoid being discovered, but soon, Red October returns to its intended path. here
the path is to take the oil from the Arabs.. and the people driving that submarine are
extremely wealthy Pharaohs and very well known major corporations.
I suggest to quit talking about the nation states and their leaders as if either could
beat their way out of a wet paper sack. instead starting talking about the corporations and
Pharaohs because they are global.
The yawning silence accompanying the centennial of the Great War is baffling to me. It was
the pivotal event of the 20th century. It was the beginning of the unmanning, the
demoralization of Western Civilization. It was the calamity that created the World we inhabit
today.
I've heard nary a peep about it in the U.S. over the last four years. It's as if it were
as remote in people's consciousness as the Punic Wars.
The World Wars (I and II) can be seen as an increasingly desperate attempt of a fading
British Empire to hold on to and maintain its power and hegemony, with the material, human,
and moral cost of the wars actually accelerating the empire's demise.
Likewise, the current endless "War on Terra" can be seen as an increasingly desperate
attempt of a fading American Empire to hold on to and maintain its power and hegemony, again
with the material, human, and moral cost of this war actually accelerating its demise.
But in the meantime, in both examples, the Bankers and the MIC just keep reaping their
profits, even at the expense of the empires they purportedly support and defend.
In a traditional sense the author is right. Strategy is the attainment of political goals,
within existing constraints. (diplomatic, political, resources etc)
"Goals" traditionally means "victories". (WWI is a great example of the sometimes dubious
idea of victory)
Has the US ceased to have a strategy ? No. (Their strategy is myopic & self destructive
– ie it's not a "good" strategy)
The US strategy is based on two core principles: (1) Maintain – extend hegemony
over whole world. (Resources, military etc etc) (2) Act as Israel's Golom. Afghanistan,
at (relatively) minimal cost, US controls key land mass (& with possible future access to
fantastic resources). Threaten, mess up Russian – Chinese ambitions in this area. Iraq:
Israeli enemy, strategic location, resource extraction. Syria: Israeli enemy, strategic
location, key location for resource transfer to markets (EU esp). Deny Russia an ally. Libya:
who cares ? Gaddafi was a pain in the arse. Iran: Israeli enemy, fantastic resources, hate
them regardless.
Of course this (very abbreviated) view of US "strategy" is open to the criticisms that
it's both dumb & evil. As if US establishment cares. Compared to cost of traditional
"war" it's pretty cheap ( which is funny, because it's such a yummy gravy train for the
1% sorry, actually, forgot the FIRST core principle of US strategy: enrich all the "right"
people)
'There has never been a just [war], never an honorable one–on the part of the
instigator of the war. I can see a million years ahead, and this rule will never change in so
many as half a dozen instances. The loud little handful–as usual–will shout for
the war. The pulpit will– warily and cautiously–object–at first; the great,
big, dull bulk of the nation will rub its sleepy eyes and try to make out why there should be
a war, and will say, earnestly and indignantly, "It is unjust and dishonorable, and there is
no necessity for it." Then the handful will shout louder. A few fair men on the other side
will argue and reason against the war with speech and pen, and at first will have a hearing
and be applauded; but it will not last long; those others will outshout them, and presently
the anti-war audiences will thin out and lose popularity.
Before long you will see this
curious thing: the speakers stoned from the platform, and free speech strangled by hordes of
furious men who in their secret hearts are still at one with those stoned speakers–as
earlier– but do not dare to say so. And now the whole nation–pulpit and
all– will take up the war-cry, and shout itself hoarse, and mob any honest man who
ventures to open his mouth; and presently such mouths will cease to open. Next the statesmen
will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man
will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and
refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that
the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of
grotesque self-deception'.
- Satan, in Mark Twain's "The Mysterious Stranger" (1908)
European politicians, the war on terror, and the triumph of Bankers United: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/06/12/europe-brainwashed-normalize-relations-russia/
"Europe has not had an independent existence for 75 years. European countries do not know
what it means to be a sovereign state. Without Washington European politicians feel lost, so
they are likely to stick with Washington .
Russian hopes to unite with the West in a war against terrorism overlook that terrorism is
the West's weapon for destabilizing independent countries that do not accept a unipolar
world."
The world is ripe for barter exchange. Screw the money changers.
"With impeachment imminent, Kushner has pushed out his enemies, installed allies, and
taken control of the campaign and large swaths of policy -- only Kellyanne Conway is still
pushing back.
Inside the West Wing, Kushner has both eliminated opponents and installed acquiescent
officials. "Jared was very frustrated with [Reince] Priebus and John Kelly," a Republican
close to the White House, said. Acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney "was Jared's pick," the
source said, and has allowed Kushner to function as de facto chief of staff. "Mick has
decided not to be in control," a former West Wing official said. "Jared treats Mick like the
help. There's no pushback," a prominent Republican said. John Bolton, who recently mocked
Kushner in a private speech, has been replaced by Robert O'Brien, a Kushner ally. Sources say
that Vice President Mike Pence and his advisers don't challenge Kushner after a string of
leaks that Kushner wanted to replace Pence on the ticket with Nikki Haley. "Pence people look
at Jared apprehensively. Pence treats Jared as a peer," said former Trump aide Sam Nunberg.
(The White House did not respond to a request for comment.)"
Jared the Jew Prince is the number one reason not to reelect Trump.
The pandering by Donald Trump and those around him to Israel and to some conservative
American Jews is apparently endless. Last Wednesday the president signed
an executive order that is intended to address alleged anti-Semitism on college campuses by
cutting off funds to those universities that do not prevent criticism of Israel. To provide a
legal basis to defund, the administration is relying on title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, which prohibits any discrimination based on race, color or national origin. Since the Act
does not include religion, Trump's order is declaring ipso facto that henceforth
"Jewishness" is a nationality.
The executive order does not mention Israel by name, but it does state that its assumptions
are based on "the non-legally binding working definition of
anti-Semitism adopted on May 26, 2016, by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance
(IHRA), which states, 'Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as
hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward
Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions
and religious facilities'; and (ii) the 'Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism' identified by
the IHRA, to the extent that any examples might be useful as evidence of discriminatory
intent."
The IHRA "contemporary examples" supplementing the basic description are important. They
considerably broaden the definition of anti-Semitism, to include "Accusing Jewish citizens of
being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the
interests of their own nations" and "claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a
racist endeavor." The examples also included holding Israel to a higher standard than other
nations when criticizing it, and IHRA offers no possible mitigation even if the accusations
are, in the case of the behavior of some Jews and of Israel, accurate.
Those who are confused because in the past expressions like "Italian" or "Irish" or
"British" meant actual countries should recognize that Trump-speak never respects any
connection with reality when there is political advantage just sitting out there waiting to be
snatched and exploited. And that imperative is considerably multiplied when one is referring to
either the state of Israel or of Jews in general, particularly as seen by the Trump White
House, which clearly and repeatedly sends the message that it reveres both. Trump's order will
in effect constitute a government-promoted argument that Jews are a people or a race with a
collective national origin, like Italian or Polish Americans, an assertion that clearly is
untrue.
In fact, suppressing criticism of Israel on college campuses using a
"weaponized" claim of anti-Semitism has long been a major foreign policy objective of the
Israeli government even though nonviolent assembly and free speech are guaranteed by the U.S.
Constitution. Congress has several times considered a comprehensive Anti-Semitism Awareness
Act, though it has not passed due to legitimate free speech concerns. The nonviolent Boycott,
Divestment and Sanctions movement (B.D.S.), which is very active on American campuses, has been
particularly targeted and criticism of it is frequent in the media and from Congress while also
emanating from the White House. As most accredited colleges receive federal funding, which can
be considerable at a major research university, the executive order will create a major dilemma
over how to respond, particularly for those schools that have Middle East study programs.
Work on the presidential executive order was initiated in the summer inside the White House
by a team led by Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, together with his close
aide special assistant to the president Avi Berkowitz. They sought to develop a formula whereby
government policy would equate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, and Donald Trump both agreed
with that assessment and followed through on it. On December 8 th he promised to
take action against B.D.S. and other critics
in a speech delivered before the Israeli-American Council. The speech is worth reading in
full by anyone who is concerned that the United States now has a government that favors one
already privileged, wealthy and powerful constituency in particular and is not committed to
upholding the civil liberties of all Americans.
Israel is an apartheid state. Covering up for its crimes against humanity as well as its war
crimes is something of a growth industry in the United States, with Zionist billionaire
oligarchs launching new foundations on a regular basis. Jewish power in the U.S. means that
Israel always has been given a pass, even when it deliberately attacked and sought to sink the
U.S.S. Liberty, an American Naval vessel in international waters in 1967. Thirty-four crewman
died in the assault. The subsequent investigation of the attack was whitewashed by the
president, secretary of state and the Navy department while the survivors were threatened with
imprisonment if they revealed what had occurred. That is how a powerful and ruthless Israel
acting through its traitorous domestic proxies operates and it illustrates how feeble the
Establishment is in standing up to it.
This latest outrage, in which free speech and association will be denied to benefit one
group on the basis of its claimed perpetual victimhood, had its genesis earlier this year when
the federal government's Education Department ordered Duke University and the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill to reorganize the Consortium for Middle East Studies program run
jointly by the two colleges in part based on their failure to include enough "positive" content
relating to Judaism. The demand came with a threat to suspend federal funding of Title VI
Higher Education Act international studies and foreign language grants to the two schools if
the curriculum were not changed.
The Education Department was particularly irate over a conference in March called "Conflict
Over Gaza: People, Politics and Possibilities." A Republican congressman was outraged by the
development and asked Secretary DeVos to
investigate because the gathering was full of "radical anti-Israel bias."
Coverage of the story revealed that "Betsy DeVos, the education secretary, has become
increasingly aggressive in going after perceived anti-Israel bias in higher education." Her
deputy who has served as a focal point for the effort to root out anti-Israel sentiment is
Assistant Secretary of Civil Rights Kenneth L. Marcus, who might reasonably be described as
"a career pro-Israel advocate," the founder and president of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for
Human Rights Under Law, which he has used to exclusively defend the rights of Jewish groups and
individuals against BDS and other manifestations of Palestinian pushback against the Israeli
occupation of their country. He has not hesitated to call opponents anti-Semites and has worked
with Jewish students to file civil rights complaints against college administrations, including
schools in Wisconsin and California. In an op-ed
that appeared, not surprisingly, in The Jerusalem Post , he observed that even when
student complaints were rejected, they created major problems for the institutions involved.
"If a university shows a failure to treat initial complaints seriously, it hurts them with
donors, faculty, political leaders and prospective students."
Last year Kenneth Marcus reopened an
investigation into alleged anti-Jewish bias at Rutgers University that the Obama
Administration had closed after finding that the charges were baseless. Marcus indicated that
the re-examination was called for as his office in the Education Department would henceforth be
using the IHRA-derived State Department definition of
anti-Semitism that also includes "denying the Jewish people their right to
self-determination," making virtually all criticism of Israel a civil rights violation or even
a hate crime.
Critics of the Trump move,
many of whom are themselves Jewish , are uncomfortable with being placed by government into
one category, noting inter alia that ALL students are de facto already
protected by Title VI, which has been interpreted as making all forms of discrimination
illegal. And they also note that the law was never intended to protect individuals whose
feelings were hurt or who claim to be unwelcome or even threatened by someone saying something
that they disapprove of. Since such protection is clearly the intention of the executive order,
it is undeniable that the Trump's latest ploy is little more than a mechanism to pressure
colleges into effectively banning B.D.S. and other groups critical of Israel.
And the order itself raises at least one unpleasant thought: if "Jewishness" is a nation
even though it is demonstrably not one, what is the alleged Jewish nationality all about? Is
this just one more example of the politics of Jewish identity or is it really some form of dual
loyalty, with American Jews divided between those who are loyal to the U.S. and those who are
loyal to some supra-nationality or allegiance? The fact is, that Donald Trump himself has
several times expressed the view that American Jews, particularly those who are politically
liberal, should be more loyal to Israel.
There is a certain irony in all of this political theater, that the wealthiest and most
powerful identifiable group in the United States should yet again be playing the victim is in
itself astonishing. And making it a crime to deny Israel legitimacy while at the same time
denying the same thing to Palestinians should give anyone pause.
And there is also considerable hypocrisy in that pro-Israel groups on campus have been if
anything better funded and more aggressive in promoting their point of view than B.D.S. has
been without any consequences. Canary
Mission , for example, claims to "document people and groups that promote hatred of the
U.S.A., Israel and Jews on North American college campuses" by posting their names, photos and
personal information on its website. Israeli-American real estate investor and billionaire Adam
Milstein is reported to be its principal funder while the site's
listings have been allegedly used by the Israeli border security officials to deny entry to
pro-B.D.S. American citizens and also with potential employers to deny applicants jobs.
The Lawfare Project's Campus Civil Rights Project meanwhile helps aggrieved Zionist
students to "take legal action to ensure that schools live up to their legal obligations to
protect Jewish students from anti-Semitic harassment, intimidation, and discrimination."
So here we are again. Special privileges for the perpetual victims. And no one in the media
is willing to tell it like it is, while the handful of meek voices in congress have been
effectively silenced. So sad, particularly as an election year is coming up and there will
undoubtedly be much more of this. When the Israelis occupy nearly all of the West Bank with
Donald Trump's approval and start "relocating" the existing population, who will be around to
speak up? No one, as by that time saying nay to Israel will be a full-fledged hate crime and
you can go to jail for doing so.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that
seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its
email is [email protected] .
This is a case of extreme 1st amendment rights abuse, not solely for violating freedom of
speech, the press, the right to assemble, and redress the government with greivances, but it
is also making both an establishment of religion, and prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
If this anti-Semetic definition is to be claimed to allow for the free exercise of
Judaism, then it would only be fitting that it is anti-Islamic to Boycott, Sanction, and
Divest from the Islamic Republic of Iran, which again, proves that this has made Judaism the
established religion in America, where most Americans are Christians.
There are no equal protection laws passed for Christianity, Islam, Buddism, Hinduism,
Taoism, Zoroastrianism, Seiks, or any other religion.
This is totally insane! I know that Ivanka converted to Judaism, and Trump loves his
daughter, but this is disgusting!
Donald Trump's so-called "antisemitism" Executive Order Is abominable, reprehensible
& downright tyrannical. It is a blatant attack against the First Amendment protection
of free speech and for all intents and purposes elevates all things Jewish to royalty
status in America -- being granted official government protection against any kind of
criticism.
In this video, Chuck Baldwin exposes the fact that not only is Donald Trump a hack for
Zionism; he is also a wanna-be tyrant -- and this Executive Order proves it.
Here's the full transcript:
[MORE]
Donald Trump's Executive Order this past week will empower the federal Department of
Education to withhold funding to campuses that do not squash anti-Israel rhetoric. In other
words, it is now official government policy to deny college students and faculty members
their natural and constitutional right to criticize, especially and primarily, if they
criticize any and all things Israel. This will also, doubtless, include speech that supports
Palestinian rights. Trump also declared that the religion of Judaism is a nationality or
ethnicity, and is beyond criticism. Can you imagine the outcry if he had declared
Christianity to be a nationality. Plus, by issuing this Executive Order, Donald Trump has
made every Christian and non-Jew in the United States a second class citizen. But don't
expect Robert Jeffress and his gaggle of Christian Zionists to figure that out. I have said
repeatedly that Donald Trump is America's first Zionist president. And Trump's actions
continue to prove that statement right. Trump's latest attack against the constitution
– specifically the First Amendment – is just his latest sellout to Israel. I'll
say it straight out: Donald Trump is not trying to make America great. He's trying to make
Israel great. By the way, I'm glad to see the rabid Jewish Zionist, Mark Levin, agree with
me. At the signing ceremony of this draconian Executive Order, Levin called Trump "America's
first Jewish president." Even casual research will easily discover that Trump's family is
dominated by Jewish Zionists, as is his circle of friends and business associates. What a
coincidence! Trump says his EO is protecting free speech on college campuses. That's a lie.
His EO is squashing free speech specifically, speech that criticizes Israel or Zionism.
Donald Trump is a pathetic puppet of the likes of the ultra Zionist billionaire, Sheldon
Adelson. Even worse is the fact that the Christian Zionist preachers and churches in this
country are as much Adelson's puppet as is Trump, which is why they love Trump so much. And
all of this hypnotic support for faux Israel can be traced directly to the false teachings of
John Darby and CI Scofield and the thousands of Christian Zionist churches and scores of
Christian Zionist colleges that those two men created. Now, the Zionist, Donald Trump, is
trying to prohibit colleges from criticizing Zionism. If you were looking for an impeachable
offence, this blatant abridgement of the First Amendment by the president of United States is
it. But, don't expect Democrats in Congress to challenge Trump's unconscionable EO that
officially elevates Jewishness to royalty status. Because the same Israeli Lobby that
controls the Republicans in Washington DC also controls the Democrats. Trump's EO will deny
funding for colleges and universities unless they prohibit the right of faculty and students
to exercise their First Amendment freedom of speech to criticize Israel. How long will it be
before Donald Trump decides to criminalize anyone who criticizes Israel? Donald Trump is not
only a Zionist hack, he is a wannabe tyrant, and this Executive Order proves it! [loud
applause]
@Bragadocious'Obama considered something similar to this. He also signed two major international trade
agreements with anti-BDS language. Giraldi said nothing about this; I checked. He did mention
the trade agreements but forgot the punchline: Obama signed them into law! Why one standard
for President Zero, another for Orange man?'
We'll have to revisit this if Obama becomes president again.
Silly on the part of Jews. If they are counted separately, it becomes even harder to hide
that they are absurdly overrepresented in all the desirable professions.
Thank you again for your courageous reporting, Mr. Giraldi.
This is a very interesting situation!
I am seeing it with a double-vision.
If this so, and passed into law?!
Then, what possible legal excuse still exists for not declaring AIPAC, and all of the other
'special interest extra-governmental agencies', foreign agents of a foreign
'nation'?
@geokat62
Thank you for the clip geokat62 . Chuck Baldwin simply speaks the truth.
But here is where I diverge from the conclusions of the good pastor. Trump has now stated the
obvious, Jews are a race and a religious cult. Besides this truth he is,
hopefully, forming an irreparable wedge between secular and Zionist Jews. This only helps the
majority in this nation. Unfortunately this majority also includes Christian Zionists, a
heretic group even more revolting than Zionist Jews.
I still believe that Trump is cynically doing this to protect his flanks from the rabid
Zionists, who with the rest of that Jew Cabal, who hate him more than anything, would all
attack Trump and make him a one term POTUS.
Because, believe it or not, Trump is still better than any of the Demo'krat candidates out
there for, as the 'good pastor' said, both political parties are owned .
As far as the exec. order itself it is unconstitutional and will be shot down in the courts.
But if this power isn't checked and destroyed now it will become a crime to even think anti I
z rael thoughts (Orwell, Huxley et al).
A pox on that most artificial of nation states, BDS now but in a conflict 4 more years of
Donald because I can see him going to war with the NEOCONS over Russia and other Satanic
goals of the Cabal. Time will tell and hopefuly Trump will do the right thing.
What you stayed is not equal protection. The law prohibits the criticism and boycott of a
Jewish state. The government has a double standard. It is a rock solid case of an
establishment of Judaism as the religion of America.
The government has boycotted, sanctioned, and divested from the Islamic Republic of Iran,
which is an Islamic state, but not the terrorist group, and in fact the adversary of the
terrorist group IS.
The Israeli government has waged war on every religion, and so has our own government by
refusing Christians and Muslims to criticize the barbaric racial holocaust, precisely as
Hitler refused to allow Catholics and Protestants to criticize his racist policies, the Nazis
raided the Catholic and Protestant churche, seized assets, and placed clergy in concentration
camps.
This anti-Semetic law is an affront to all religions because it has nothing to due with
the Jewish religion and everything to do with the Israeli government. It has nothing to do
with Jewish people and everything to do with the Israeli government.
This is simply an effort to silence any criticism of murderous regimes and the holocaust
against Islam, precisely as Hitler had done in Germany towards those who criticized his
insane racist policies and barbaric holocausts.
How would it fly if Trump's EO instead forbade criticism of Russia in schools and colleges in
USA?
Very strange that something like this could ever be written and signed. A fast budding and
explicit "Judeo lese majetse" is unfolding before our eyes. And if it is meant to protect
Jews as a race and nation, then that will naturally induce people to see them as exactly
that: a separate nation. Will this quell concern about loyalty or raise more doubt?
p.s. In 2018, Israeli army expert snipers made a turkey shoot of Palestinians marching on
the 70th anniversary of their people being ethnically cleansed from their ancestral homeland.
A "shoot to cripple" policy only murdered several score but, with high speed dum dum bullets,
they blasted bloody wreckage through the flesh and bones of many thousands of unarmed people.
You may not see them on your porno channels and game shows, but a large number will be
crippled for the rest of their lives.
This is a good example of a very recent state sponsored atrocity on a large scale.
Students in our schools and colleges might want to examine this in a variety of ways. The
history, legality, ethics, demographic dilemmas etc. Sure, it might roll over into some
criticism and activism, e.g. DBS Israel, but is that to be prohibited by our government? What
sort of citizens are our schools and colleges supposed to be cultivating if students are not
permitted to exercise their freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of
conscience?
Critics of the Trump move, many of whom are themselves Jewish, are uncomfortable with
being placed by government into one category, noting inter alia that ALL students are de
facto already protected by Title VI, which has been interpreted as making all forms of
discrimination illegal.
A positive side of this is that even the most dopey university students now understand the
situation
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United
States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy. My Administration is committed to combating the rise of anti-Semitism and
anti-Semitic incidents in the United States and around the world. Anti-Semitic incidents have
increased since 2013, and students, in particular, continue to face anti-Semitic harassment
in schools and on university and college campuses.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., prohibits
discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities
receiving Federal financial assistance. While Title VI does not cover discrimination based on
religion, individuals who face discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin
do not lose protection under Title VI for also being a member of a group that shares common
religious practices. Discrimination against Jews may give rise to a Title VI violation when
the discrimination is based on an individual's race, color, or national origin.
It shall be the policy of the executive branch to enforce Title VI against prohibited
forms of discrimination rooted in anti-Semitism as vigorously as against all other forms of
discrimination prohibited by Title VI.
Sec. 2. Ensuring Robust Enforcement of Title VI. (a) In enforcing Title VI, and
identifying evidence of discrimination based on race, color, or national origin, all
executive departments and agencies (agencies) charged with enforcing Title VI shall consider
the following:
(i) the non-legally binding working definition of anti-Semitism adopted on May 26, 2016,
by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which states, "Antisemitism is a
certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and
physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals
and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities";
and
(ii) the "Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism" identified by the IHRA, to the extent
that any examples might be useful as evidence of discriminatory intent.
(b) In considering the materials described in subsections (a)(i) and (a)(ii) of this
section, agencies shall not diminish or infringe upon any right protected under Federal law
or under the First Amendment. As with all other Title VI complaints, the inquiry into whether
a particular act constitutes discrimination prohibited by Title VI will require a detailed
analysis of the allegations.
Sec. 3. Additional Authorities Prohibiting Anti-Semitic Discrimination. Within 120 days of
the date of this order, the head of each agency charged with enforcing Title VI shall submit
a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy,
identifying additional nondiscrimination authorities within its enforcement authority with
respect to which the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism could be considered.
Sec. 4. Rule of Construction. Nothing in this order shall be construed to alter the
evidentiary requirements pursuant to which an agency makes a determination that conduct,
including harassment, amounts to actionable Start Printed Page 68780discrimination, or to
diminish or infringe upon the rights protected under any other provision of law.
Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or
otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head
thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to
budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the
availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive
or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its
departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other
person."
theguardian.com : "Believe it or not ,
Barack Obama had Israel's best interests at heart " By Avi Shlaim :
"Obama's actual record during his eight years in office make him one of the most pro-Israeli
American presidents since Harry S. Truman . Obama has given Israel considerably more money
and arms than any of his predecessors ."
"... The outsized role of U.S. Israel lobby operatives in abetting the theft of Syrian and Iraqi oil reveals how this powerful lobby also facilitates more covert aspects of U.S.-Israeli cooperation and the implementation of policies that favor Israel. ..."
"... Israel imported massive amounts of oil from the Kurds during this period, all without the consent of Baghdad. Israel was also the largest customer of oil sold by ISIS, who used Kurdish-controlled Kirkuk to sell oil in areas of Iraq and Syria under its control. To do this in ISIS-controlled territories of Iraq, the oil was sent first to the Kurdish city of Zakho near the Turkey border and then into Turkey, deceptively labeled as oil that originated from Iraqi Kurdistan. ISIS did nothing to impede the KRG's own oil exports even though they easily could have given that the Kirkuk-Ceyhan export pipeline passed through areas that ISIS had occupied for years ..."
"... This arrangement orchestrated by Jeffrey, served the long-time neoconservative-Israeli agenda of empowering the Kurds, selling Iraqi oil to Israel and weakening Iraq's Baghdad-based government. ..."
"... The WINEP connection to the KRG-Israel oil deal demonstrates the key role played by the U.S. pro-Israel Lobby, not only in terms of sustaining U.S. financial aid to Israel and ratcheting up tensions with Israel's adversaries but also in facilitating the more covert aspects of U.S.-Israeli cooperation and the implementation of policies that favor Israel. ..."
"... Yet the role played by the U.S. Israel lobby in this capacity, particularly in terms of orchestrating oil sale agreements for Israel's benefit, is hardly exclusive to Iraq and can accurately be described as a repeated pattern of behavior. ..."
The outsized role of U.S. Israel lobby operatives in abetting the theft of Syrian and
Iraqi oil reveals how this powerful lobby also facilitates more covert aspects of U.S.-Israeli
cooperation and the implementation of policies that favor Israel.
Kirkuk, Iraq -- "We want to bring our soldiers home. But we did leave soldiers
because we're keeping the oil," President Trump stated on November 3, before adding, "I like
oil. We're keeping the oil."
Though he had promised a withdrawal of U.S. troops from their illegal occupation of Syria,
Trump shocked many with his blunt admission that troops were being left behind to prevent
Syrian oil resources from being developed by the Syrian government and, instead, kept in the
hands of whomever the U.S. deemed fit to control them, in this case, the U.S.-backed
Kurdish-majority militia known as the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).
Though Trump himself received all of the credit -- and the scorn -- for this controversial
new policy, what has been left out of the media coverage is the fact that key players in the
U.S.' pro-Israel lobby played a major role in its creation with the purpose of selling Syrian
oil to the state of Israel. While recent developments in the Syrian conflict may have hindered
such a plan from becoming reality, it nonetheless offers a telling example of the covert role
often played by the U.S.' pro-Israel lobby in shaping key elements of U.S. foreign policy and
closed-door deals with major regional implications.
Indeed, the Israel lobby-led effort to have the U.S. facilitate the sale of Syrian oil to
Israel is not an isolated incident given that, just a few years ago, other individuals
connected to the same pro-Israel lobby groups and Zionist neoconservatives manipulated both
U.S. policy and Iraq's Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in order to allow Iraqi oil to be sold
to Israel without the approval of the Iraqi government. These designs, not unlike those that
continue to unfold in Syria, were in service to longstanding neoconservative and Zionist
efforts to balkanize Iraq by strengthening the KRG and weakening Baghdad.
After the occupation of Iraq's Nineveh Governorate by ISIS (June 2014-October 2015), the
Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) took advantage of the Iraqi military's retreat and, amidst
the chaos, illegally seized Kirkuk on June 12. Their claim to the city was supported by both
the U.S. and Israel and, later, the U.S.-led coalition targeting ISIS. This gave the KRG
control, not only of Iraq's export pipeline to Turkey's Ceyhan port, but also to Iraq's largest
oil fields.
Israel imported massive amounts of oil from the Kurds during this period, all without the
consent of Baghdad. Israel was also the
largest customer of oil sold by ISIS, who used Kurdish-controlled Kirkuk to sell oil in
areas of Iraq and Syria under its control. To do this in ISIS-controlled territories of Iraq,
the oil was sent first to the Kurdish city of Zakho near the Turkey border and then into
Turkey, deceptively labeled as oil that originated from Iraqi Kurdistan. ISIS did nothing to
impede the KRG's own oil exports even though they easily could have given that the
Kirkuk-Ceyhan export pipeline passed through areas that ISIS had occupied for years.
In retrospect, and following revelations from
Wikileaks and new information regarding the background of relevant actors, it has been
revealed that much of the covert maneuvering behind the scenes that enabled this scenario
intimately involved the United States' powerful pro-Israel lobby. Now, with a similar scenario
unfolding in Syria, efforts by the U.S.' Israel lobby to manipulate U.S. foreign policy in
order to shift the flow of hydrocarbons for Israel's benefit can instead be seen as a pattern
of behavior, not an isolated incident.
"Keep the oil" for Israel
After recent shifts in the Trump administration in its Syria policy, U.S. troops have
controversially been kept in Syria to " keep the
oil ," with U.S. military officials subsequently claiming that doing so was "a subset of
the counter-ISIS mission." However, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper later
claimed that another factor behind U.S. insistence on guarding Syrian oil fields was to
prevent the extraction and subsequent sale of Syrian oil by either the Syrian government or
Russia.
One key, yet often overlooked, player behind the push to prevent a full U.S. troop
withdrawal in Syria in order to "keep the oil" was current U.S. ambassador to Turkey, David
Satterfield. Satterfield was previously the assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern
Affairs, where he yielded great influence over U.S. policy in both Iraq and Syria and worked
closely with Brett McGurk, the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iraq and Iran and
later special presidential envoy for the U.S.-led "anti-ISIS" coalition.
Over the course of his long diplomatic career, Satterfield has been known to the U.S.
government as an Israeli intelligence asset embedded in the U.S. State Department. Indeed,
Satterfield was named as a major player in what is now known as the AIPAC espionage scandal,
also known as the Lawrence Franklin espionage scandal, although he was oddly never charged for
his role after the intervention of his superiors at the State Department in the George W. Bush
administration.
David Satterfield, left, arrives in Baghdad with Secretary of State Mike
Pompeo, right, and Joey Hood, May 7, 2019. Mandel Ngan | AP
In 2005, federal prosecutors cited a U.S. government official as having illegally passed classified
information to Steve Rosen, then working for AIPAC, who then passed that information to the
Israeli government. That classified information included intelligence on Iran and the nature of
U.S.-Israeli intelligence sharing. Subsequent media reports from the New York Times and
other outlets revealed that this government official was none other than David Satterfield, who
was then serving as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near East Affairs.
Charges against Rosen, as well as his co-conspirator and fellow AIPAC employee Keith
Weissman, were dropped in 2009 and no charges were levied against Satterfield after State
Department officials shockingly claimed that Satterfield had "acted within his authority" in
leaking classified information to an individual working to advance the interests of a foreign
government. Richard Armitage, a neoconservative ally with
a long history of ties to CIA covert operations in the Middle East and elsewhere,
has since claimed that he was one of Satterfield's main defenders in conversations with the
FBI during this time when he was serving as Deputy Secretary of State.
The other government official named in the indictment, former Pentagon official Lawrence
Franklin, was not so lucky and was charged under the Espionage Act in 2006. Satterfield,
instead of being censured for his role in leaking sensitive information to a foreign
government, was subsequently promoted in 2006 to serve as the Coordinator for Iraq and Senior
Adviser to then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
In addition to his history of leaking classified information to AIPAC, Satterfield also has
a longstanding relationship with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a controversial
spin-off of AIPAC also known by its acronym WINEP. WINEP's website has long listed Satterfield
as one of its experts and
Satterfield has spoken at several WINEP events and policy forums, including several
after his involvement with the AIPAC espionage scandal became public knowledge. However,
despite his longstanding and controversial ties to the U.S. pro-Israel lobby, Satterfield's
current relationship with some elements of that lobby, such as the Zionist Organization of
America (ZOA), is complicated at best.
While Satterfield's role in yet another reversal of a promised withdrawal of U.S. troops
from Syria has largely escaped media scrutiny, another individual with deep ties to the Israel
lobby and Syrian "rebel" groups has also been ignored by the media, despite his outsized role
in taking advantage of this new U.S. policy for Israel's benefit.
US Israel Lobby secures deal with Kurds
Earlier this year, well before Trump's new Syria policy of "keeping the oil" had officially
taken shape, another individual with deep ties to the U.S. Israel lobby secured a lucrative
agreement with U.S.-backed Kurdish groups in Syria. An official
document issued earlier this year by the Syrian Democratic Council (SDC), the political arm
of the Kurdish majority and U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a New Jersey-based
company, founded
and run by U.S.-Israeli dual citizen Mordechai "Motti" Kahana, was given control of the oil
in territory held by the SDC.
Per the document, the SDC formally accepted the offer from Kahana's company -- Global
Development Corporation (GDC) -- to represent SDC in all matters pertaining to the sale of oil
extracted in territory it controls and also grants GDC "the right to explore and develop oil
that is located in areas we govern."
The SDC's formal acceptance of Global Development
Corporation's offer to develop Syrian oil fields. Source | Al-Akhbar
The document also states that the amount of oil then being produced in SDC-controlled areas
was 125,000 barrels per day and that they anticipated that this would increase to 400,000
barrels per day and that this oil is considered a foreign asset under the control of the United
States by the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
After the document was made public by the Lebanese outlet Al-Akhbar , the SDC claimed
that it was a forgery, even though Kahana had separately confirmed its contents
and shared the letter itself to the Los Angeles Times as recently as a few weeks ago.
Kahana previously attempted to distance himself from the effort and
told the Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom in July that he had made the offer to the
SDC as means to prevent the "Assad regime" of Syria from obtaining revenue from the sale of
Syrian oil.
The Kurds currently hold 11 oil wells in an area controlled by the [Syrian] Democratic
Forces. The overwhelming majority of Syrian oil is in that area. I don't want this oil
reaching Iran, or the Assad regime."
At the time, Kahana also stated that "the moment the Trump administration gives its
approval, we can begin to export this oil at fair prices."
Given that Kahana has openly confirmed that he is representing the SDC's oil business
shortly after Trump's adoption of the controversial "keep the oil policy," it seems plausible
that Kahana has now received the approval needed for his company to export the oil on behalf of
the SDC. Several media reports have
speculated that, if Kahana's efforts go forward unimpeded, the Syrian oil will be sold to
Israel.
However, considering Turkey's aversion to engaging in any activities that may benefit the
PKK-SDF – there are considerable obstacles to Kahana's plans. While the SDF -- along with
assistance from U.S. troops -- still controls several oil fields in Syria, experts assert that
they can only realistically sell the oil to the Syrian government. Not even the Iraqi Kurds are
a candidate, considering Baghdad's firm control over the Iraq-Syria border and the KRG's
weakened state after its failed independence bid in late 2017.
Regardless, Kahana's involvement in this affair is significant for a few reasons. First,
Kahana has been a key player in the promotion and funding of radical groups in Syria and has
even been
caught hiring so-called "rebels" to kidnap Syrian Jews and take them to Israel against
their will. It was Kahana, for instance, who financed and orchestrated the now infamous trip of
the late Senator John McCain to Syria, where he met with Syrian "rebels" including Khalid
al-Hamad – a "moderate" rebel who gained notoriety after a video of him eating the heart
of a Syrian Army soldier
went viral online . McCain had also admitted
meeting with ISIS members, though it is unclear if he did so on this trip or another trip
to Syria.
In addition, Kahana was also the mastermind behind the "Caesar" controversy, whereby a
Syrian using the pseudonym "Caesar" was brought to the U.S. by Kahana and went on to make
claims regarding torture and other crimes allegedly committed by the Assad-led government
Syria, claims which were
later discredited by independent analysts. He was also very involved in
Israel's failed efforts to establish a "safe zone" in Southern Syria as a means of covertly
expanding Israel's territory from the occupied Golan Heights and into Quneitra.
Notably, Kahana has deep ties -- not just to efforts to overthrow the Syrian government --
but also to U.S. Israel lobby, including the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP)
where Satterfield is as an expert. For instance, Kahana was a key player in a 2013 symposium organized by WINEP
along with Syrian opposition groups intimately involved in the arming of so-called "rebels."
One of the other participants in the symposium alongside Kahana was Mouaz Moustafa, director of
the "Syrian Emergency Task Force" who assisted Kahana in bringing McCain to Syria in 2013.
Moustafa was listed as a WINEP expert
on the organization's website but was later mysteriously deleted.
Kahana is also intimately involved with the Israeli American Council (IAC), a pro-Israel
lobby organization, as a team
member of its national conference. IAC was co-founded and is chaired by Adam Milstein , a
multimillionaire and convicted felon who is also on the boards of AIPAC, StandWithUs,
Birthright and other prominent pro-Israel lobby organizations. One of IAC's top donors is
Sheldon Adelson, who is also the top donor to President Trump as well as the entire Republican
Party.
Though the machinations of both Kahana and Satterfield to guide U.S. policy in order to
manipulate the flow of Syria's hydrocarbons for Israel's benefit may seem shocking to some,
this same tactic of pro-Israel lobbyists using the Kurds to illegally sell a country's oil to
Israel was developed a few years prior, not in Syria, but Iraq. Notably, the individuals
responsible for that policy in Iraq shared connections to several of the same pro-Israel lobby
organizations as both Satterfield and Kahana, suggesting that their recent efforts in Syria are
not an isolated event, but a pattern.
War against ISIS is a war for oil
In an email dated
June 15, 2014, James Franklin Jeffrey (former Ambassador to Iraq and Turkey and current U.S.
Special Representative for Syria) revealed to Stephen Hadley, a former George Bush
administration advisor then working at the government-funded United States Institute of Peace,
his intent to advise the KRG in order to sustain Kirkuk's oil production. The plan, as Jeffery
described it, was to supply both the Kurdistan province with oil and allow the export of oil
via Kirkuk-Ceyhan to Israel, robbing Iraq of its oil and strengthening the country's Kurdish
region along with its regional government's bid for autonomy.
Jeffrey, whose hawkish views on Iran and Syria
are well-known , mentioned that Brett McGurk, the U.S.' main negotiator between Baghdad and
the KRG, was acting as his liaison with the KRG. McGurk, who had served in various capacities
in Iraq under both Bush and Obama, was then also serving Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
for Iraq and Iran. A year later, he would be made the special presidential envoy for the
U.S.-led "anti-ISIS" coalition and, as previously mentioned, worked closely with David
Satterfield.
James Jeffrey, left, meets with Kurdish Regional Government President Massoud
Barzani, April 8, 2011, at an airport in Irbil, Iraq. Chip Somodevilla | AP
Jeffrey was then a private citizen not currently employed by the government and was used as
a non-governmental channel in the pursuit of the plans described in the leaked emails published
by WikiLeaks. Jeffrey's behind-the-scenes activities with regards to the KRG's oil exports were
done clandestinely, largely because he was then employed by a prominent arm of the U.S.'
pro-Israel lobby.
At the time of the email, Jeffrey was serving as a distinguished fellow
(2013-2018) at WINEP. As previously mentioned, WINEP is a pro-Israel foreign policy think-tank
that espouses neoconservative views and was created in 1985 by researchers that
had hastily left AIPAC to escape investigations against the organization that were related
to some of its members conducting espionage on behalf of Israel. AIPAC, the American Israeli
Public Affairs Committee, is the largest registered Israel lobbyist organization in the US
(albeit registration under the Foreign Agents Registration Act would be more suitable), and, in
addition to the 1985 incident that led to WINEP's creation, has had members indicted for
espionage against the U.S. on Israel's behalf.
WINEP's launch was funded by former President of the Jewish Federation of Los Angeles,
Barbara Weinberg, who is its founding president and constant Chairman Emerita. Nicknamed
'Barbi', she is the wife of the late Lawrence Weinberg who was President of AIPAC from 1976-81
and who JJ Goldberg, author of the 1997 book Jewish Power, referred to as one of a
select few individuals
who essentially dominated AIPAC regardless of its elected leadership. Co-founder alongside
Weinberg was Martin Indyk. Indyk, U.S. Ambassador to Israel (1995-97) and Assistant Secretary
of State for Near Eastern Affairs (1997-99), led the AIPAC research time that formed WINEP to
escape the aforementioned investigations.
WINEP has
historically received funding from donors who donate to causes of special
interest for Zionism and Israel. Among its trustees are extremely prominent names in political
Zionism and funders of other Israel Lobby organizations, such as
Charles and Edgar Bronfman and the Chernicks .
Its
membership remains dominated by individuals who have spent their careers promoting Israeli
interests in the U.S.
WINEP has become more well-known, and arguably more controversial, in recent years after its
research director famously called for false-flag attacks to trigger a U.S. war with Iran in
2012, statements well-aligned with longstanding
attempts by the Israel Lobby to bring about such a war.
A worthy partner in crime
Stephen Hadley, another private citizen who Jeffrey evidently considered as a partner in his
covert dealings discussed in the emails, also has his own past of involvement with
Israel-specific intrigues and meddling.
During the G.W. Bush administration, Hadley tagged along with neoconservatives in
their numerous creations of fake intelligence and efforts to incriminate Iraq for possessing
chemical and nuclear weapons. Hadley was one of the promoters from within the U.S. government
of the false claim that 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi officials in Prague.
What this particular claim had in common with the 'Iraq meets Atta in
Prague' disinformation, and other famous lies against Iraq fabricated and circulated by the
dense neocon network, was its source: Israel and pro-Israel partisans.
The distribution
network of these now long-debunked claims was none other than the neoconservatives who act
a veritable Israeli fifth column that has long sought to promote Israeli foreign policy
objectives as being in the interest of the United States. In this, Hadley played his part by
helping to ensure that the United States was railroaded into a war that had long been promoted
by both Israeli and American neoconservatives, particularly Richard Perle -- an advisor to
WINEP -- who had been promoting regime change in Iraq for Israel's
explicit benefit for decades.
In short, for covert intrigues to serve Israel that would likely be met with protest if
pitched to the government for implementation as policy, Hadley's resume was impressive.
Israeli interests pursued through covert channels
Given his employment at WINEP during this time, Jeffrey's intent to advise the KRG to
sustain Kirkuk's oil production despite the seizure of the Baiji oil refinery by ISIS is
somewhat suspect, especially since it required that 100,000 barrels per day pass through
ISIS-controlled territory unimpeded.
Jeffrey's email from June 14, therefore, demonstrated that he had foreknowledge that ISIS
would not disturb the KRG as long as the Kurds redirected oil that was intended originally for
Baiji to the Kirkuk-Ceyhan export pipeline, facilitating its export and later sale to
Israel.
Notably, up until its liberation in mid-2015 by the Iraqi government and aligned Shia
paramilitaries,
ISIS kept the refinery running and, only upon their retreat, destroyed the facility.
One would normally expect ISIS to be opposed to such collusion given that the KRG, while a
beneficiary of the ISIS-Baghdad conflict, was not an ally of ISIS. Thus, a foreign power
with strategic ties to
ISIS used its
close ties to the KRG and assurances that it was on-board for the oil trade, to deliver a
credible guarantee that ISIS would 'cooperate' and that a boom in production and exports was in
the cards.
This foreign power -- acting as a guarantor for the ISIS-KRG understanding vis-a-vis the
illegal oil economy, represented by Jeffrey and clearly not on good terms with Iraq's
government -- was quite clearly Israel.
Israel
established considerable financial support as well as the provision of armaments to other
extremist terrorist groups active near the border between the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights
and Southern Syria when war first broke out in Syria in 2011. At least four of these extremist
groups were led by individuals
with direct ties to Israeli intelligence . These same groups, sometimes promoted as
'moderates' by some media, were actively fighting Syria's government – an enemy of Israel
and ally of Iran – before ISIS existed and
eagerly partnered with ISIS when it expanded its campaign into Syria.
Israel has also long promoted the independence of Iraqi Kurdistan, with Israel having
provided Iraq's Kurds with weapons, training and teams of Mossad advisers as
far back as the 1960s . More recently, Israel
was the only state to support the KRG independence referendum in September 2017 despite its
futility, hinting at the regard Israel holds for the KRG. Iraq's government subsequently
militarily defeated
the KRG's push for statehood and reclaimed Kirkuk's oil fields with assistance from the
Shia paramilitaries which were responsible for defeating ISIS in the area.
A 2014 map shows
the areas under ISIS and Kurdish control at the time. Source | Telegraph
This arrangement orchestrated by Jeffrey, served the long-time neoconservative-Israeli
agenda of empowering the Kurds, selling
Iraqi oil to Israel and weakening Iraq's Baghdad-based government.
WINEP's close association with AIPAC, which
has spied on the U.S. on behalf of Israel several times in the past with no consequence,
combined with Jeffrey's long-time acquaintance with key U.S. figures in Iraq, such as McGurk,
provided an ideal opening for Israel in Iraq. Following the implementation of Jeffrey's plan,
Israeli imports of KRG oil constituted 77 percent of Israel's total
oil imports during the KRG's occupation of Kirkuk.
The WINEP connection to the KRG-Israel oil deal demonstrates the key role played by the U.S.
pro-Israel Lobby, not only in terms of sustaining U.S. financial aid to Israel and ratcheting
up tensions with Israel's adversaries but also in facilitating the more covert aspects of
U.S.-Israeli cooperation and the implementation of policies that favor Israel.
Yet the role played by the U.S. Israel lobby in this capacity, particularly in terms of
orchestrating oil sale agreements for Israel's benefit, is hardly exclusive to Iraq and can
accurately be described as a repeated pattern of behavior.
Agha Hussain is an independent researcher based in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. He specialized
in Middle Eastern affairs and history and is an editorial contributor to Eurasia Future,
Regional Rapport and other news outlets.
Whitney Webb is a MintPress News journalist based in Chile. She has contributed to
several independent media outlets including Global Research, EcoWatch, the Ron Paul Institute
and 21st Century Wire, among others. She has made several radio and television appearances and
is the 2019 winner of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in Journalism.
"My administration will never tolerate the suppression, persecution or silencing of the
Jewish people," Trump declared at the ceremony, which doubled as a Hanukkah party.
Zionism was a movement born in Europe during the end of the 19th Century, whose objective
was to found a Jewish nation-State.
At the beginning, it was kind of a well-intentioned movement: there were a lot of
locations discussed for the foundation of this new country, all of them uninhabited land
(from empty portion of land in Africa to a piece of Patagonia).
In the 1930s, many Zionist bigwigs indeed supported the Nazis: their rationalization was
that the Nazi threat would push their cause both because Hitler would expel all of the Jews
from Germany and because that would trigger more funds to their cause.
It's important to highlight that the Holocaust per se was an improvisation made during
WWII: the original plan was to deport, not kill, the German Jewish population.
Russ @ 33 whitewash the Nazis while smearing the Muslims? really I don't know how to answer
that question? AFAICT the Nazis in Germany were not bad guys.. the Nazis were just the
government in a nation targeted by the oil guys and their bankers because Germany was taking
their thunder and out producing the industries of the western oil and bankers guys, and
making new colonies about the world.. and because if Germany had ever hooked up with Russia
all western bets were off and because before wwI, Germany was highly integrated with, and
very well thought of by the Ottoman empire (even building for the Ottoman a RR to transport
the Ottoman oil to markets) and because the western oil and bankers guys wanted that Ottoman
owned oil and the western oil and bankers guys wanted German competition out of the picture
so the western oil and banker guys installed in the USA a propaganda monster and a banking
monster and used those monsters and the rule of law to push the Americans into supplying the
force that was used to herd the Eastern Jews into the Ottoman Empire in order to allow the
western oil and banker guys to take the oil from the Ottoman and in order to remove Germany
and keep Germany from competing in the global economy.
Probably I should have attributed the origin of Zionism as reflective of intentions
reflective of greed to the Ottomans, not the Muslims it was the Ottoman that first felt the
impact of Zionism. What happened in Wilhelm's Germany was forced on Germany.. what happened
in Hitler's Germany was forced on Germany.. The difference between the German Governments and
the people governed by the German Governments is the same as the difference between the
people governed by the British Government and the people governed by the American
Government.
Humanity has no say under the top down nation state system. What these top down
governments say and do<= never reflects what the governed people want, but always reflects
what the propaganda says the governed want. What those who win elections say they will do,
never reflects in their actions; instead accomplishments and effort of sitting politicians
are targeted to satisfy the deep dark well hidden agendas developed by the Global
Zionist.
It is the Zionist, not the Jews, not the banks, not the corporations, not the poor man on
the park bench, not even the gods, that run the world. Until now, the humanity has allowed
the Zionist to run the world, and until 1897 there was no way to identify them into a single
group. Most people just are not interested in telling everyone else how to live, or to make
other people into private property slaves, or chase for profit that which is in someone
else's back yard, most humans just want to live their short 80 years or so in relative peace
and comfort.
If you can shed some explanatory light on your question.. it would be helpful. Thanks for
the reply..
"... The scandal is from the witchhunters, the abusers -- vicious liars who slander Labourites as anti-semites based on nothing. ..."
"... Thanks Emma for posting a longer list here in another thread, of Labour's Jewish anti-Semites hounded out by the vicious witchhunters. Again, while the Israel Lobby and Jewish organizations wield a lot of power in the USA, it has never gotten that crazy here. ..."
"... Jews like the existence of antisemitism. It's how they can do whatever they want - from robbery to torture to murder - without anyone complaining or doing anything about those actions. ..."
Corbyn also appeared indecisive, or somewhat worse than that, when it came to Labour's
burgeoning anti-Semitism scandal, in which some Jewish Labour MPs or candidates were targeted
for abuse by pro-Palestinian leftists.
What a lie, an inversion of the truth, from Salon. Repeating the utterly and cynically
manufactured fake anti-semitism smear. The scandal is from the witchhunters, the abusers --
vicious liars who slander Labourites as anti-semites based on nothing.
Thanks Emma for
posting a longer list here in another thread, of Labour's Jewish anti-Semites hounded out by
the vicious witchhunters. Again, while the Israel Lobby and Jewish organizations wield a lot
of power in the USA, it has never gotten that crazy here.
Jews like the existence of antisemitism. It's how they can do whatever they want -
from robbery to torture to murder - without anyone complaining or doing anything about those
actions.
In REALITY this rejection of Judaism has many centuries. But, then again, all those
mentally weak enough to follow religious fairy tales do reject in the same manner other fairy
tales.
"Mr Corbyn took up an invitation to join a delegation paying respects to those killed in a
1985 Israeli bombing of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) headquarters in
Tunis.
Yes. Mr Corbyn has confirmed he did lay a wreath, saying this was for those who died in the
1985 bombing."
Where's the smear? The people Israel bombed at the PLO HQ in Tunis included the
perpetrators of the Munich Massacre of 1972, and Corbyn laid a wreath to commemorate these
jihadist savages.
You posted your dancing Pepe The Frog meme so, it's clear that you're yet another white
nationalist fool who would hand over white working class people to their Corporate Owners
under the guise of "we;re only going to hurt the brown people & the Muslims". What's so
sad is how many white working class people fall for such shit.
"... And this brings me to the US elections. The only way to counter the demagoguery of a "part monster and part buffoon" is to attack him "stridently" from the Left and NOT from the Right. A candidate CANNOT be feckless on issues of social justice, BUT on the other hand cannot be seen as an ALLY to the security state. ..."
"... This is an impossible task in the US, especially when there's only two "right-wing" political parties. This explains why the "supposed" opposing political party-- the Democrats only will attack Trump on national security issues rather than for his numerous social crimes--hence alienating "Trump's working-class" who view this attack as bogus and meaningless. But this is the inevitable outcome when the non-opposition political party is controlled by the security/surveillance state. ..."
"Corbyn confronted a widely-despised, internally-divided government, whose leader is viewed as part monster and part buffoon,
amid record social inequality and growing support for socialism. (This description applies to Boris Johnson and Donald Trump.
) The UK is now led by an extreme-right Conservative government which, under Boris Johnson, is pledged to exit the European Union
(EU) on January 31 in order to complete the "Thatcher revolution."
Several contributing factors led to Corbyn's loss: the election was a mandate on BREXIT; the mainstream media mercilessly and
relentlessly attacked Corbyn as being an antisemitic Russian asset; and the growing emergence in dispossessed rural areas of a
nationalist right wing ideology targeting refugees as the reason for working-class austerity. In other words, the ruling class
clearly stacked the "propaganda" deck against Corbyn and ensured his defeat......
It should be noted, that the day after the election the U.K. pound surged. The explanation for this is simple, the financiers
and bankers know that the workers who voted for Bojo will have a greater chance of losing their socialized medicine before they
ever get back their good paying manufacturing jobs.
And this brings me to the US elections. The only way to counter the demagoguery of a "part monster and part buffoon" is to
attack him "stridently" from the Left and NOT from the Right. A candidate CANNOT be feckless on issues of social justice, BUT
on the other hand cannot be seen as an ALLY to the security state.
This is an impossible task in the US, especially when there's
only two "right-wing" political parties. This explains why the "supposed" opposing political party-- the Democrats only will attack
Trump on national security issues rather than for his numerous social crimes--hence alienating "Trump's working-class" who view
this attack as bogus and meaningless. But this is the inevitable outcome when the non-opposition political party is controlled
by the security/surveillance state.
A Leftist candidate running within the Democratic Party needs to SEPARATE his campaign "entirely" from the security state nonsense
(propaganda) and aggressively speakout against the imperialist agenda and how the trillions spent on endless needless wars MUST
be reallocated to rebuilding the decaying infrastructure, improving public education, Medicare-for-All, ending homelessness, etc...
In other words, to excite the "entire" working-class you have to GENUINELY prove that you DESPISE the decades long policies imposed
by the ruling class which betrayed US workers and led to their economic demise.
This type of political campaign requires "battling" the security state who'll use the state-run mainstream media to demonize
their candidacy in right wing outlets or ERASE and mock their candidacy on "progressive" media cable channels. Propaganda, will
be unleashed nonstop to taint their message so that their campaign platform will eventually politically alienate both the Left
and the Right
"... there is no anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. This was all hatched by the Netanyahu government in Jerusalem along with the Blairites. Watch the 4 al jazeera 'The Lobby' videos on youtube - it's all there. ..."
4 things: 1 = Farage did a deal with Johnson to field Brexit Party candidates in 300 odd
seats Labour seats that the Tories targeted, to split the Labour vote. This is what did the
damage. Johnson is going to give Farage a knightood for services to the Tory Party.
2 = that Labour didn't support the leave referendum vote was a wrong (actually
catastrophic) descicion.
3 = advocating a second referendum vote igored the idea that the election was a second
referendum.
2 & 3 hastened core Labour voters to go for Johnson's 'get brexit done' which is doesn't.
It's Brexit in name only &, the UK will not leave the EU. Johnson is lying again
4 = there is no anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. This was all hatched by the Netanyahu
government in Jerusalem along with the Blairites. Watch the 4 al jazeera 'The Lobby' videos
on youtube - it's all there.
I appreciate your analysis. I did not understand the average Briton's [hatred | distrust |
fear of] the E.U. Some examples would be nice. US media painted Brexit as a complete
folly.
College students are free to protest the behavior of Russia without being labeled
anti-Russian; they can protest the People's Republic of China without being accused of
sinophobia.
Why does Israel need a special dispensation from this? If the argument is that any
criticism of Israel for any reason is antisemitic, then you are essentially saying that
Israel should be uniquely immune from criticism that every other country on earth is subject
to.
The irony is that insisting that Israel is above criticism and deserves special treatment
creates more genuine anti-Semites than any criticism of Israel ever could.
Like in old times Jews are incorrectly equalized with the financial oligarchy as group and hated accordingly... The fact that
they are overrepresented among financial oligarchy does not help iether. And the quote from the article: ""unique position to
control the policy of nations There is not a war, a revolution, an anarchist assassination, or any other public shock, which is
not gainful to these men; they are harpies who suck their gains from every new forced expenditure and every sudden disturbance of
public credit." is fully applicable to financial oligarchy. In this sense Anti-Semitism is primitive and misguided form
of the protest against the rule of financial oligarchy. The quote above is fully applicable to vulture financial capital and
capitalists such as Romney and his Bain Capital, a
private equity firm he helped co-found in 1984. The same is true about vulture hedge funds such as
Elliott Management and Aurelius Capital
Management and thier role in Argentina debut repayments (The final payout on the debt to the bondholders was negotiated at $6.5
billion. Which made Paul Singer something like
"the enemy of the people of Agrentina" figure. Via Comcast they control MSNBC.
At the same time financial oligarchy now is much better organized, controls MSM, and uses
Anti-Semitism as a smear to suppress political opponents like it was with Corbin in the UK. Even minor incidents are classified as
a crime: "Over the last 12 months, there were
246 anti-Semitic crimes in the Big Apple, up from 144 over the previous 12 months.
The number of anti-Semitic assaults jumped to 33 in 2018, up from 17 in 2017, and is on pace
to rise again this year, with 19 in just the first half of the year."
Notable quotes:
"... one Labour member was told that the Jewish Labour Movement was "financed and controlled by the Israeli government." ..."
"... In 2016, at the Oxford University Labour Club, Auschwitz was described as "a cash cow." ..."
"... Jeremy Corbyn himself has written the foreword to the reissue of a 1902 book by J.A. Hobson that includes a chapter on Europe's financial and political life as controlled by "men of a single and peculiar race" who were in a "unique position to control the policy of nations There is not a war, a revolution, an anarchist assassination, or any other public shock, which is not gainful to these men; they are harpies who suck their gains from every new forced expenditure and every sudden disturbance of public credit." Corbyn praised the book as "a great tome" and "brilliant." He attacked the BBC in 2011 for being in thrall to those who believe the Jewish state "has a right to exist." Yet Corbyn still had the endorsement of the Guardian . Tony Blair told us he would vote for Corbyn's party -- despite 50 percent of British Jews saying they would "seriously consider" emigrating had Labour won the election. ..."
Here's a confession. For much of my adult life, I thought real anti-Semitism was dead in the
West. Yes, I imagined it existed on the far fringes of both right and left. By real
anti-Semitism, I should hasten to add, I don't mean criticism of Israel's policies of West Bank
settlements or of the Israeli government's attempts to sabotage Barack Obama's foreign
policy.
I mean the kind of conspiracy theories, slurs about money, and charges of dual loyalty that
were once commonplace in mainstream Western discourse. Maybe it was because I grew up in an era
that focused on the horrors of the Holocaust that it seemed unconscionable to me that people
would ever bring up these old smears. Or because in Washington, I had become used to seeing how
often any and all criticism of Israel was reflexively dismissed as anti-Semitic (I did work at
The New Republic in the 1990s after all).
But I was wrong. This virus has returned like a deadly flu. The
domestic terror attack on a kosher deli in Jersey City is yet another case in which
terrifying Jewish Americans where they should feel perfectly at home -- a deli, a
synagogue , a school -- has become a regular reality.
This is Brooklyn in the fall of 2019:
On Friday night, surveillance video captured a man throwing a brick through the
window of a Hasidic girls' school in Crown Heights. On the same night in the Borough Park
neighborhood, at least three identifiably Orthodox men were
punched by assailants . Also in Borough Park, multiple Orthodox Jews had eggs thrown at
them over the weekend.
Over the last 12 months, there were
246 anti-Semitic crimes in the Big Apple, up from 144 over the previous 12 months.
The number of anti-Semitic assaults jumped to 33 in 2018, up from 17 in 2017, and is on pace
to rise again this year, with 19 in just the first half of the year.
A June 13 incident in which a man screamed "Fuck all Jews" and "Kill all Jews"
at a fellow straphanger -- before chucking the victim's phone onto the tracks. In March,
a subway ad featuring the image of Ruth Bader Ginsburg was found with a swastika and "Die,
Jew Bitch!" scrawled over
the Jewish Supreme Court justice's face .
A friend of mine who was visiting London was spat on in broad daylight for wearing a kippa.
In 2017, a 27-year-old Parisian deliberately tortured and murdered a 65-year-old teacher by
throwing her out of her own window, because
she said, "I felt persecuted. When I saw the Torah and a chandelier in her home I felt
oppressed. I saw her face transforming." He was treated leniently by the judges
because he had been smoking weed, and was alleged to have had a psychotic episode. No, I'm
not making that up.
Bari Weiss has a comprehensive
account of this surge of Jew-hatred. Among those Jew-haters is Bernie Sanders surrogate
Linda Sarsour:
The part of her talk that circulated online focused on the apparent hypocrisy of
progressive Zionists: How, Ms. Sarsour asked about people who are the No. 1 target of white
supremacists, can they claim to oppose white supremacy when they support "a state like Israel
that is built on supremacy, that is built on the idea that Jews are supreme to everybody
else?"
In Britain, a formal complaint about
anti-Semitism in the Labour Party from the Jewish Labour Movement was leaked last week. It
makes for some sobering reading. Here are a few of the incidents these Jewish socialists have
compiled: In
March 2019 , a Labour councilor made a joke about "Jew process"; she also rewrote the
"First they came for the Jews " trope to include "they came for the anti-Zionists"; one Jewish
Labour member claims that at local Labour Party meetings, he was called "a Tory Jew,"
"Zio-scum," a "child killer," and told "to shut the fuck up, Jew" and "Hitler was right." One
former Labour councilor was
told to "go home and count your money"; one Labour member was
told that the Jewish Labour Movement was "financed and controlled by the Israeli
government." Two Labour delegates at the annual party conference in 2018
averred that Jews are "subhuman" and that "they should be grateful we don't force them to
eat bacon at breakfast every day." These are in reports from Labour Party officials.
In the broader Labour movement, it's just as bad. In 2016, at the Oxford University Labour
Club, Auschwitz was
described as "a cash cow." Online, Jews have been described as "bent-nosed manipulative
liars"; there have been claims that Zionists ran the Nazi death camps; and former Labour MP
Luciana Berger was
subjected to horrifying abuse in 2018, such as "we shall rid the Jews who are a cancer on
all of us." Another Jewish Labour MP, Ruth Smeeth, was called a "yid cunt" and a "fucking
traitor." Margaret Hodge MP has been described on pro-Corbyn Facebook pages as "Zionist bitch,"
a "zionist remedial cancer," "under orders from her paymasters in Israel." She has received
abusively anti-Semitic emails, among which include the following: "Isn't better [sic] that
troublemakers like yourself return to where you and your religion comes from. If you think
about it in detail, your are the ones who are racist, by telling us what we must do to please
you. We are in our homeland." And: "Your smear campaign in defense of a racist ethno-state
would make Goebbels proud." It's striking how many Jewish women have experienced some of the
worst anti-Semitic abuse.
The Labour Party leadership has been extremely slow in addressing these complaints --
countless are pending -- so that the Jewish Labour Movement has had to
appeal to the Equality and Human Rights Commission. Jeremy Corbyn himself has written the
foreword to the
reissue of a 1902 book by J.A. Hobson that includes a chapter on Europe's financial and
political life as controlled by "men of a single and peculiar race" who were in a "unique
position to control the policy of nations There is not a war, a revolution, an anarchist
assassination, or any other public shock, which is not gainful to these men; they are harpies
who suck their gains from every new forced expenditure and every sudden disturbance of public
credit." Corbyn praised the book as "a great tome" and "brilliant." He
attacked the BBC in 2011 for being in thrall to those who believe the Jewish state "has a
right to exist." Yet Corbyn still had the endorsement of the Guardian . Tony Blair told
us he would vote for Corbyn's party -- despite 50 percent of British Jews saying they would
"seriously consider" emigrating had Labour won the election.
To give a sense of how unseriously the rise in Jew-hating has been taken, look at what Mayor
Bill de Blasio of New York said after the
Jersey City news: "This confirms a sad truth, there is a crisis of anti-Semitism gripping this
nation. And now this threat has reached the doorstep of New York City." Now? And on the
doorstep? After the surge in anti-Semitic violence in the city for the past two years?
Why this relative indifference? Perhaps for the same reason I didn't see it coming: So many
of us thought this kind of thing was done with, we dismissed some of this news from our minds.
But perhaps too it is a function of the race of these particular anti-Semites. We easily
recognize -- as we should -- the familiar and ugly anti-Semitism of the far right, which
remains much more of a threat than the far left. There was a telling
tweet by Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, when she first heard the Jersey City news: "This is
heartbreaking. White Supremacy Kills." But the anti-Semitism of the Black Hebrew Israelite
movement doesn't as well? Remember the last time the Black Israelites were in the news -- for
taunting and lobbing racist insults at the white schoolboys from Covington. Adam Serwer, who
sees white supremacy everywhere, reassured
us that there was nothing really to see here: "Its members stand on crowded street corners
with bullhorns and yell vile things, including racist, sexist, and homophobic slurs, at anyone
who passes by. D.C. residents do not respond to these provocations with confrontation. They
ignore them." If those same insults were delivered by members of the Klan on street corners,
would Serwer have said the same thing?
And that helps expose how the social-justice movement has diminished anti-Semitism as a
threat. Since racism has been redefined to mean "structural racism" -- as opposed to prejudice
against others because of the color of their skin -- the Black Israelites or groups of young
black men in Brooklyn as agents of bigotry doesn't compute for many of the woke. Under the new
orthodoxy, people of color are almost by definition incapable of manifesting racial hatred,
because it is merely a form of power. We were told by Tamika Mallory, former co-president of
the Women's March, that "white Jews, as white people, uphold white supremacy." That is, Jews
are victims but also victimizers according to these rules. The social-justice response to
targeted murders of Jews qua Jews is thereby qualified.
This is not to deny that white supremacists are a much bigger threat overall. They are. We
need many more resources to tackle them. But that does not help the Orthodox in Brooklyn or
East London. We should know by now that anti-Semitism is a peculiarly resilient toxin, can
infect anyone's soul, and can easily inhabit the minds of those on the left as well as on the
right. Time to wake up, and take this poison seriously.
The only anti-semitic thing I've seen has been the way the mainstream political/media class
in both the US and UK have adopted the longstanding neo-Nazi claim that all Jews are Zionist
agents and therefore one can't be anti-Zionist without being anti-Jew as such.by: Russ @ 57
yes, I agree give an example..
what i see is the Zionist are once again asking the masses to attack the Jews, just as the
masses were asked to
Attack the Jews in Hitler's Germany.. its a divide and conquer world.
this is the story in America This is
the story in Iraq
The decision to settle large numbers of Jews in Palestine after the First World War was in my
view one of the most disastrous ever taken by a British government. From that inevitably
followed the Arab Revolt, the Nakba, and all the tragedy since. English Outsider @ 62
<=blackmail brought the British government assistance in using Jewish Immigration to
occupy and take from the Ottoman their oil rich land. Certain oil companies were involved
also.
The White House
In his
Farewell Address
, of 1796 America's first president George Washington famously warned his fellow
citizens that " a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils.
Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases
where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the
former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or
justification."
In today's United States, there is no more "passionate attachment" than that which
exists with Israel. The tie that binds is assiduously cultivated by the media and the politically
ambitious, so much so that the Jewish state is frequently referred to hyperbolically as America's best
friend and closest ally. But Israel, with its own regional interests driving its policies, is in
reality neither a friend nor an ally.
Politicians mired in the past like Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer can see no light
between Israel and the United States. Pelosi has
declared astonishingly
that "I have said to people when they ask me if this Capitol crumbled to
the ground, the one thing that would remain is our commitment to our aid and I don't even call it
aid our cooperation with Israel. That's fundamental to who we are." Biden has repeatedly
denounced any reduction
in the ridiculously high level of military assistance given to Israel to
convince it to modify its behavior as "bizarre," while Schumer
has identified himself
as the Jewish state's "shomer" or guardian in the US Senate.
Many members of the Democratic Party base are no longer enchanted by Israel and one would like to
know what politicians like Biden and Pelosi really think about the Jewish state, but it is unlikely
that that will ever be revealed. It is nevertheless clear that the adhesion to Israel by Democrats has
been far overshadowed by the constant pandering to the Jewish state that has been the hallmark of the
current administration of Donald J. Trump. To be sure, the musical chairs line-up of neo-conservatives
that has included John Bolton, Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo has been unstinting in its praise of the
malignant Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but it is the president himself who has raised
the level of adoration to heights previously not observed coming out of the White House.
Donald Trump has overturned long standing foreign policy positions to favor Israel even more than
has been the case hitherto. He withdrew from the nuclear pact with Iran, has moved the US Embassy from
Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, has recognized Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights, has declared the
illegal settlements on the West Bank "not illegal," has cut off funding to the Palestinians and the
United Nations and is sending signals that he will approve further moves by the Jewish state to annex
much of the remaining Palestinian territory. Along the way, his Ambassador to Israel David Friedman
has been making excuses for Israeli shooting of unarmed demonstrators and the everyday brutality
inflicted on the hapless Palestinians.
Worse might even be coming, as Secretary of State Pompeo and Netanyahu
have recently been discussing
a formal defense pact which would obligate the United States to
intervene on the side of Israel if it were to go to war, even if the war were initiated by the Jewish
state. As Israel is now reportedly
considering the value
of a possible pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran, the stakes could not be
higher.
But as bad as all that is, nothing outdoes the speech delivered by Trump in Florida last Saturday
in front of the Israeli American Council (IAC) National Summit. IAC is a basically right-wing group
funded largely by Las Vegas casino multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who is also a close adviser to
the president on the Middle East. Its annual gathering included 4,000 mostly well-heeled Israelis and
American Jews who cheered and periodically chanted "four more years!" as the president was speaking.
Trump spoke for 45 minutes, most of which consisted of preening over how much he has done for
Israel. But he also discussed Jews in America,
saying that
"We have to get the people of our country, of this country, to love Israel more, I
have to tell you that. We have to do it. We have to get them to love Israel more. Because you have
Jewish people that are great people -- they don't love Israel enough." He also said that his audience
should be supporting him and not voting for Elizabeth Warren, whom he called "Pocahontas," saying
"You're not going to vote for the wealth tax Let's take 100 percent of your wealth away."
There was
considerable pushback
almost immediately coming from Jewish groups and prominent individuals who
saw Trump's words as classic borderline anti-Semitic tropes. Trump, who often speaks to Jewish
audiences in the second person, saying "you" rather than "we," clearly sees the Jewish attachment to
Israel as normal and acceptable, but there is an implicit second message about potential disloyalty to
the United States.
In August he said
that American Jews who vote for Democrats show "either a total lack of knowledge
or great disloyalty."
And Trump also is not reluctant to link Jews with money, a generally taboo subject that he has
raised before, most particularly when he was campaigning and he told an audience of Jewish Republicans
that "you're not going to support me because I don't want your money. You want to control your
politicians, that's fine." And, of course, the irony is that everyone who has not been asleep knows
very well that the Israel Lobby in the US and Europe is indeed all about money. Money buys access to
power.
For someone who has spent much of his life around Jews in the New York business world, Donald Trump
is remarkably ignorant of their political culture. To be sure there is a group of oligarch
billionaires that includes Adelson, Paul Singer, Ron Lauder and Bernard Marcus who are politically
conservative and fund Trump as well as other Republicans. They do so not because Trump is good for the
United States but because he is a gift to Israel and can easily be bought or persuaded.
But most Jews, while supporting the existence of Israel, do not exactly see things quite that way
and many Jews of a liberal persuasion want to see a secure Israel that will deliver justice for the
Palestinians. Plus, Trump's authoritarianism and denigratory, abrasive style offend many Jews, so the
president will not be getting many Jewish votes no matter what he does. His approval rating is
29% among Jewish voters nationwide
, according to a Gallup poll
while only 17% of Jews
voted Republican in 2017. And one would have thought even the narcissistic
president
might
have noticed the large number
of Jewish witnesses, "experts" and congressmen who seem to be "out
to get him" in the impeachment hearings.
Beyond that, Trump's constant exaltation of the Israelis and of Jews in general as something like a
gift to humanity should offend all other Americans. The president is elected to represent the
interests of all Americans, not just a wealthy and powerful ethno-religious minority that is able and
willing to give him a great deal of money to run his political campaigns. It is unthinkable that a
national politician should mount his bully pulpit to praise interminably any specific ethnic group,
and so it should be. It is offensive and completely unacceptable, particularly as in this case it is a
favor bought that brings with it grave damage to genuine US interests and could easily lead to a major
war in which Americans will die.
Nevertheless, the painful issue of who is loyal to what is genuine, particularly when a dedicated
and powerful group affiliated with a foreign country is able to game the system to get what it wants.
We are all supposed to be Americans first. In her comment on the Trump speech, conservative pundit Ann
Coulter maintained that the president
didn't go far enough
in impugning the loyalty of some Jews to Israel, writing, "Could we start
slowly by getting them to like America?"
Philip Giraldi
December 12, 2019 |
Featured Story
Donald Trump and Israel: When Does a 'Passionate Attachment' Threaten National Security?
In his
Farewell Address
, of 1796 America's first president George Washington famously warned his
fellow citizens that " a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of
evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common
interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of
the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter
without adequate inducement or justification."
In today's United States, there is no more
"passionate attachment" than that which exists with Israel. The tie that binds is assiduously
cultivated by the media and the politically ambitious, so much so that the Jewish state is
frequently referred to hyperbolically as America's best friend and closest ally. But Israel,
with its own regional interests driving its policies, is in reality neither a friend nor an
ally.
Politicians mired in the past like Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer can see no light
between Israel and the United States. Pelosi has
declared astonishingly
that "I have said to people when they ask me if this Capitol crumbled
to the ground, the one thing that would remain is our commitment to our aid and I don't even
call it aid our cooperation with Israel. That's fundamental to who we are." Biden has repeatedly
denounced any reduction
in the ridiculously high level of military assistance given to
Israel to convince it to modify its behavior as "bizarre," while Schumer
has identified himself
as the Jewish state's "shomer" or guardian in the US Senate.
Many members of the Democratic Party base are no longer enchanted by Israel and one would
like to know what politicians like Biden and Pelosi really think about the Jewish state, but it
is unlikely that that will ever be revealed. It is nevertheless clear that the adhesion to
Israel by Democrats has been far overshadowed by the constant pandering to the Jewish state that
has been the hallmark of the current administration of Donald J. Trump. To be sure, the musical
chairs line-up of neo-conservatives that has included John Bolton, Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo
has been unstinting in its praise of the malignant Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,
but it is the president himself who has raised the level of adoration to heights previously not
observed coming out of the White House.
Donald Trump has overturned long standing foreign policy positions to favor Israel even more
than has been the case hitherto. He withdrew from the nuclear pact with Iran, has moved the US
Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, has recognized Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights, has
declared the illegal settlements on the West Bank "not illegal," has cut off funding to the
Palestinians and the United Nations and is sending signals that he will approve further moves by
the Jewish state to annex much of the remaining Palestinian territory. Along the way, his
Ambassador to Israel David Friedman has been making excuses for Israeli shooting of unarmed
demonstrators and the everyday brutality inflicted on the hapless Palestinians.
Worse might even be coming, as Secretary of State Pompeo and Netanyahu
have recently been discussing
a formal defense pact which would obligate the United States
to intervene on the side of Israel if it were to go to war, even if the war were initiated by
the Jewish state. As Israel is now reportedly
considering the value
of a possible pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran, the stakes could not
be higher.
But as bad as all that is, nothing outdoes the speech delivered by Trump in Florida last
Saturday in front of the Israeli American Council (IAC) National Summit. IAC is a basically
right-wing group funded largely by Las Vegas casino multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who is
also a close adviser to the president on the Middle East. Its annual gathering included 4,000
mostly well-heeled Israelis and American Jews who cheered and periodically chanted "four more
years!" as the president was speaking.
Trump spoke for 45 minutes, most of which consisted of preening over how much he has done for
Israel. But he also discussed Jews in America,
saying that
"We have to get the people of our country, of this country, to love Israel more,
I have to tell you that. We have to do it. We have to get them to love Israel more. Because you
have Jewish people that are great people -- they don't love Israel enough." He also said that his
audience should be supporting him and not voting for Elizabeth Warren, whom he called
"Pocahontas," saying "You're not going to vote for the wealth tax Let's take 100 percent of your
wealth away."
There was
considerable pushback
almost immediately coming from Jewish groups and prominent individuals
who saw Trump's words as classic borderline anti-Semitic tropes. Trump, who often speaks to
Jewish audiences in the second person, saying "you" rather than "we," clearly sees the Jewish
attachment to Israel as normal and acceptable, but there is an implicit second message about
potential disloyalty to the United States.
In August he said
that American Jews who vote for Democrats show "either a total lack of
knowledge or great disloyalty."
And Trump also is not reluctant to link Jews with money, a generally taboo subject that he
has raised before, most particularly when he was campaigning and he told an audience of Jewish
Republicans that "you're not going to support me because I don't want your money. You want to
control your politicians, that's fine." And, of course, the irony is that everyone who has not
been asleep knows very well that the Israel Lobby in the US and Europe is indeed all about
money. Money buys access to power.
For someone who has spent much of his life around Jews in the New York business world, Donald
Trump is remarkably ignorant of their political culture. To be sure there is a group of oligarch
billionaires that includes Adelson, Paul Singer, Ron Lauder and Bernard Marcus who are
politically conservative and fund Trump as well as other Republicans. They do so not because
Trump is good for the United States but because he is a gift to Israel and can easily be bought
or persuaded.
But most Jews, while supporting the existence of Israel, do not exactly see things quite that
way and many Jews of a liberal persuasion want to see a secure Israel that will deliver justice
for the Palestinians. Plus, Trump's authoritarianism and denigratory, abrasive style offend many
Jews, so the president will not be getting many Jewish votes no matter what he does. His
approval rating is
29% among Jewish voters nationwide
, according to a Gallup poll
while only 17% of Jews
voted Republican in 2017. And one would have thought even the
narcissistic president
might
have noticed the large number
of Jewish witnesses, "experts" and congressmen who seem to be
"out to get him" in the impeachment hearings.
Beyond that, Trump's constant exaltation of the Israelis and of Jews in general as something
like a gift to humanity should offend all other Americans. The president is elected to represent
the interests of all Americans, not just a wealthy and powerful ethno-religious minority that is
able and willing to give him a great deal of money to run his political campaigns. It is
unthinkable that a national politician should mount his bully pulpit to praise interminably any
specific ethnic group, and so it should be. It is offensive and completely unacceptable,
particularly as in this case it is a favor bought that brings with it grave damage to genuine US
interests and could easily lead to a major war in which Americans will die.
Nevertheless, the painful issue of who is loyal to what is genuine, particularly when a
dedicated and powerful group affiliated with a foreign country is able to game the system to get
what it wants. We are all supposed to be Americans first. In her comment on the Trump speech,
conservative pundit Ann Coulter maintained that the president
didn't go far enough
in impugning the loyalty of some Jews to Israel, writing, "Could we
start slowly by getting them to like America?"
In today's United States, there is no more "passionate attachment" than that which
exists with Israel. The tie that binds is assiduously cultivated by the media and the politically
ambitious, so much so that the Jewish state is frequently referred to hyperbolically as America's best
friend and closest ally. But Israel, with its own regional interests driving its policies, is in
reality neither a friend nor an ally.
Politicians mired in the past like Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer can see no light
between Israel and the United States. Pelosi has
declared astonishingly
that "I have said to people when they ask me if this Capitol crumbled to
the ground, the one thing that would remain is our commitment to our aid and I don't even call it
aid our cooperation with Israel. That's fundamental to who we are." Biden has repeatedly
denounced any reduction
in the ridiculously high level of military assistance given to Israel to
convince it to modify its behavior as "bizarre," while Schumer
has identified himself
as the Jewish state's "shomer" or guardian in the US Senate.
Many members of the Democratic Party base are no longer enchanted by Israel and one would like to
know what politicians like Biden and Pelosi really think about the Jewish state, but it is unlikely
that that will ever be revealed. It is nevertheless clear that the adhesion to Israel by Democrats has
been far overshadowed by the constant pandering to the Jewish state that has been the hallmark of the
current administration of Donald J. Trump. To be sure, the musical chairs line-up of neo-conservatives
that has included John Bolton, Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo has been unstinting in its praise of the
malignant Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but it is the president himself who has raised
the level of adoration to heights previously not observed coming out of the White House.
Donald Trump has overturned long standing foreign policy positions to favor Israel even more than
has been the case hitherto. He withdrew from the nuclear pact with Iran, has moved the US Embassy from
Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, has recognized Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights, has declared the
illegal settlements on the West Bank "not illegal," has cut off funding to the Palestinians and the
United Nations and is sending signals that he will approve further moves by the Jewish state to annex
much of the remaining Palestinian territory. Along the way, his Ambassador to Israel David Friedman
has been making excuses for Israeli shooting of unarmed demonstrators and the everyday brutality
inflicted on the hapless Palestinians.
Worse might even be coming, as Secretary of State Pompeo and Netanyahu
have recently been discussing
a formal defense pact which would obligate the United States to
intervene on the side of Israel if it were to go to war, even if the war were initiated by the Jewish
state. As Israel is now reportedly
considering the value
of a possible pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran, the stakes could not be
higher.
But as bad as all that is, nothing outdoes the speech delivered by Trump in Florida last Saturday
in front of the Israeli American Council (IAC) National Summit. IAC is a basically right-wing group
funded largely by Las Vegas casino multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who is also a close adviser to
the president on the Middle East. Its annual gathering included 4,000 mostly well-heeled Israelis and
American Jews who cheered and periodically chanted "four more years!" as the president was speaking.
Trump spoke for 45 minutes, most of which consisted of preening over how much he has done for
Israel. But he also discussed Jews in America,
saying that
"We have to get the people of our country, of this country, to love Israel more, I
have to tell you that. We have to do it. We have to get them to love Israel more. Because you have
Jewish people that are great people -- they don't love Israel enough." He also said that his audience
should be supporting him and not voting for Elizabeth Warren, whom he called "Pocahontas," saying
"You're not going to vote for the wealth tax Let's take 100 percent of your wealth away."
There was
considerable pushback
almost immediately coming from Jewish groups and prominent individuals who
saw Trump's words as classic borderline anti-Semitic tropes. Trump, who often speaks to Jewish
audiences in the second person, saying "you" rather than "we," clearly sees the Jewish attachment to
Israel as normal and acceptable, but there is an implicit second message about potential disloyalty to
the United States.
In August he said
that American Jews who vote for Democrats show "either a total lack of knowledge
or great disloyalty."
And Trump also is not reluctant to link Jews with money, a generally taboo subject that he has
raised before, most particularly when he was campaigning and he told an audience of Jewish Republicans
that "you're not going to support me because I don't want your money. You want to control your
politicians, that's fine." And, of course, the irony is that everyone who has not been asleep knows
very well that the Israel Lobby in the US and Europe is indeed all about money. Money buys access to
power.
For someone who has spent much of his life around Jews in the New York business world, Donald Trump
is remarkably ignorant of their political culture. To be sure there is a group of oligarch
billionaires that includes Adelson, Paul Singer, Ron Lauder and Bernard Marcus who are politically
conservative and fund Trump as well as other Republicans. They do so not because Trump is good for the
United States but because he is a gift to Israel and can easily be bought or persuaded.
But most Jews, while supporting the existence of Israel, do not exactly see things quite that way
and many Jews of a liberal persuasion want to see a secure Israel that will deliver justice for the
Palestinians. Plus, Trump's authoritarianism and denigratory, abrasive style offend many Jews, so the
president will not be getting many Jewish votes no matter what he does. His approval rating is
29% among Jewish voters nationwide
, according to a Gallup poll
while only 17% of Jews
voted Republican in 2017. And one would have thought even the narcissistic
president
might
have noticed the large number
of Jewish witnesses, "experts" and congressmen who seem to be "out
to get him" in the impeachment hearings.
Beyond that, Trump's constant exaltation of the Israelis and of Jews in general as something like a
gift to humanity should offend all other Americans. The president is elected to represent the
interests of all Americans, not just a wealthy and powerful ethno-religious minority that is able and
willing to give him a great deal of money to run his political campaigns. It is unthinkable that a
national politician should mount his bully pulpit to praise interminably any specific ethnic group,
and so it should be. It is offensive and completely unacceptable, particularly as in this case it is a
favor bought that brings with it grave damage to genuine US interests and could easily lead to a major
war in which Americans will die.
Nevertheless, the painful issue of who is loyal to what is genuine, particularly when a dedicated
and powerful group affiliated with a foreign country is able to game the system to get what it wants.
We are all supposed to be Americans first. In her comment on the Trump speech, conservative pundit Ann
Coulter maintained that the president
didn't go far enough
in impugning the loyalty of some Jews to Israel, writing, "Could we start
slowly by getting them to like America?"
The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture
Foundation.
Spotlight on defense authorization bill: Saudi Arabia wins big with assist from
Kushner
The White House secured a major reprieve for Saudi Arabia this week by convincing
Congress to drop several provisions from its annual defense bill before the House passed it
on Wednesday. The Senate is expected to vote on the bill next week. Gone are sanctions on
key Saudi officials for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and restrictions on US
support for Riyadh's campaign in Yemen. The New York Times reports that President Donald
Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner – who reportedly maintains a
direct WhatsApp line with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman – played a key role in the
negotiations.
The United Arab Emirates also came out ahead as the final bill removes language
taking aim at the $8 billion in emergency arms sales to Gulf countries that Trump
authorized in May citing the threat of Iran. The UAE had lobbied against these provisions
and also opposed calls for a report detailing the "military activities" of the UAE, Saudi
Arabia and other international actors in Libya. . The final bill no longer singles out
specific countries but still requires "a detailed description of the military activities of
external actors" in the country.
We always stick by our friends, through thick and thin and murder, and war crimes, and
terrorism, and well, all of it. After all, what are friends for?
"... Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law and special adviser, wrote in the New York Times that the definition "makes clear [that] Anti-Zionism is antisemitism". ..."
Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law and special adviser, wrote in the New York
Times that the definition "makes clear [that] Anti-Zionism is antisemitism". I'm a
Zionist. But on a college campus, where the purpose is to explore ideas, anti-Zionists have a
right to free expression.
I suspect that if Kushner or I had been born into a Palestinian family displaced in 1948, we
might have a different view of Zionism, and that need not be because we vilify Jews or think
they conspire to harm humanity. Further, there's a debate inside the Jewish community whether
being Jewish requires one to be a Zionist. I don't know if this question can be resolved, but
it should frighten all Jews that the government is essentially defining the answer for us.
The real purpose of the executive order isn't to tip the scales in a few title VI cases, but
rather the chilling effect. ZOA and other groups will hunt political speech with which they
disagree, and threaten to bring legal cases. I'm worried administrators will now have a strong
motivation to suppress, or at least condemn, political speech for fear of litigation. I'm
worried that faculty, who can just as easily teach about Jewish life in 19th-century Poland or
about modern Israel, will probably choose the former as safer. I'm worried that pro-Israel
Jewish students and groups, who rightly complain when an occasional pro-Israel speaker is
heckled, will get the reputation for using instruments of state to suppress their political
opponents.
Antisemitism is
a real issue, but too often people, both on the political right and political left, give it a
pass if a person has the "right" view on Israel. Historically, antisemitism thrives best when
leaders stoke the human capacity to define an "us" and a "them", and where the integrity of
democratic institutions and norms (such as free speech) are under assault.
... ... ...
Kenneth Stern is the director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate, and the author
of the forthcoming The Conflict Over the Conflict: The Israel/Palestine Campus
Debate
Corbyn rendered his party toxic. His penchant for standing in solidarity with terrorists
and anti-Semites opened a seal out of which a cascade of anti-Jewish sentiments poured,
engulfing his party in scandal. His brand of radical socialism was insufferably hidebound.
His expressions of sympathy for history's greatest criminals were thoughtlessly dogmatic.
The Labour Party under Corbyn drifted so far toward overt Jew-hatred that Britain's chief
rabbi denounced the institution. The Archbishop of Canterbury agreed with that assessment,
as did 85 percent of the country's Jews. There was no ambiguity here.
Sanders may be insulated from the charge that he shares these suspicious sentiments
because he is Jewish, but this clear pattern raises some disturbing questions. It is
incumbent on the press to ask them. To at least a degree, Sanders clearly evinces some of
Corbyn's instincts on policy, but his affiliations suggest a similar tolerance for the
radical left's occasionally anti-Semitic indulgences.
Opposing antisemitism is a core value of progressivism. So it's very troubling to me
that we are also seeing accusations of antisemitism used as a cynical political weapon
against progressives. One of the most dangerous things Trump has done is to divide
Americans by using false allegations of antisemitism, mostly regarding the US–Israel
relationship. We should be very clear that it is not antisemitic to criticize the policies
of the Israeli government.
Ending that occupation and enabling the Palestinians to have self-determination in an
independent, democratic, economically viable state of their own is in the best interests of
the United States, Israel, the Palestinians, and the region. My pride and admiration for
Israel lives alongside my support for Palestinian freedom and independence. I reject the
notion that there is any contradiction there. The forces fomenting antisemitism are the
forces arrayed against oppressed people around the world, including Palestinians; the
struggle against antisemitism is also the struggle for Palestinian freedom . I stand in
solidarity with my friends in Israel, in Palestine, and around the world who are trying to
resolve conflict, diminish hatred, and promote dialogue, cooperation, and
understanding.
Speaking
before Sheldon Adelson's Israeli-American Council the other day, Trump took a shot at Jewish
Americans who he says don't "love Israel enough."
"We have to get the people of our country, of this country, to love Israel more," Trump
said . "We have to get them to love Israel more because you have people that are Jewish
people, that are great people – they don't love Israel enough. You know that."
Typical of Trump, this is scatter-brained. He begins by talking about "the people of our
country," which sounds like everyone, but ends up focusing on Jews who "don't love Israel
enough." In either case, Trump talks rubbish.
First off, observe that although Trump stands accused of fomenting anti-Semitism by such
remarks, he actually turns the loyalty issue upside-down. He doesn't say that some Jewish
Americans are too loyal to Israel (presumably at the expense of America), which is
what a classic anti-Semite would say, but that they are not loyal enough. Recall that he
previously labeled Jews who vote for Democrats
"disloyal." Disloyal to whom? Disloyal to Israel! We know this because he's criticized
the Democratic Party for "defending [Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, who sympathize with
the Palestinians] over the State of Israel." Trump's critics seem to overlook this twist
because it doesn't fit their stock narrative.
But turning to the matter at hand, Trump now entitles us to ask: what's so lovable about
Israel anyway? The modern state was founded through a campaign of ethnic cleansing –
violent expulsion of Arabs, that is, non-Jews, from their long-held properties – and
outright massacres and terrorism. For the next couple of decades it subjected those who
avoided expulsion to martial law. Then in 1967 it conquered the remainder of Palestine, the
West Bank and Gaza Strip, creating new refugees. Since then Israel has denied the inhabitants
of those territories all rights while the Israeli occupiers built privileged Jewish-only
settlements and otherwise usurped the land it acquired through aggressive force –
contrary to morality and international law. The West Bank today resembles apartheid South
Africa. But things are even worse in Gaza, a small, crowded piece of land under blockade that
dissenting Israelis call a concentration camp and others euphemistically refer to as merely
the world's largest open-air prison. Gaza consists largely of refugees from the 1947-48
ethnic cleansing and their families.
So, I ask again, what's lovable about Israel? Is it because Israel calls itself the
nation-state of the Jewish people (whether or not they live or want to live there) and Jews
were treated horribly by Christian Europe, culminating in the monstrous Nazi Judeocide? That
doesn't make Israel lovable. It is accountable for its crimes against humanity in Palestine
regardless of the atrocities Jews suffered elsewhere. Israel is not exempt from moral
judgment.
As for Jewish Americans in particular not loving Israel enough, Trump has again stuffed
his foot in his mouth, something so commonplace that most people don't notice it. Like other
Americans, Jewish Americans are not obligated to love Israel. How could they be? They are not
part of a supposed Jewish national people – they are Americans with a particular
private religious faith (unless they are secular). If they wanted to become Israelis, they
would have done so.
Israel, despite what it claims, cannot be the nation-state of all Jews everywhere
(even atheists with Jewish mothers); it is the state only of its own Jewish
citizens/nationals. The 25 percent of non-Jewish Israeli citizens unfortunately are out of
luck, but then it shouldn't call itself a democracy. Jewish Americans have roots in many
countries, yet no one would say they are obliged to love those places.
We may ask: what does today's state of Israel have to do with the Jewish creed, especially
the universalism of the prophets? Little, really: Zionism was a secular movement that
disparaged traditional and secularized Jews in Europe and America. Theodor Herzl et al.
promised a new Jew in his own state, strong and hardy farmers and soldiers, unlike the frail
bookish scholars and rootless "parasitic" financiers of the so-called "diaspora." (It wasn't
a diaspora since the Judeans were not exiled by the Romans in 70 CE.) That's one reason
Zionism was a minority movement for a long time.
No one is clear about what it means to be a Jewish state. True, you have to be a properly
credentialed Jew to get the benefits the Israeli state offers, but that only means having a
Jewish mother or being converted by an approved Orthdox rabbi. (Conservative and Reform
converts need not apply.) Jews and non-Jews may not marry each other, but that is not a
religious injunction for Israelis; rather it's a matter of secular (pseudo-)ethnic purity.
It's feared that Israeli children of interfaith marriages are less likely than other children
to identify as Jewish – but then what would happen to the "Jewish people's" state?
In fact, no Jewish national ethnicity exists to be kept pure, but many Israelis
(who do constitute an Israeli ethnicity) don't accept that. Nevertheless, Jews
worldwide are of virtually every ethnicity, culture, language group, and color, and despite
what Israel's apologists say today, Hitler was wrong: there is no Jewish race (or gene or
blood). Most Jews descend from the converts of many ethnicities -- Judaism was a wide-ranging
proselytizing religion roughly from 200 BCE to 200 CE (and later) -- and most ancient
Israelites, Judahites, Yehudis, and Judeans never left their homes, although many of their
offspring converted to Christianity or Islam.
For the record, ancient kingdoms of Israel, Judah, Yehud, and Judea, according to the Old
Testament, were no more lovable bastions of enlightenment than any other kingdom in the
vicinity, what with their authoritarian monarchies, military conquests, genocides, Hebrew and
gentile slave labor, animal and occasional human sacrifice, forced conversion of gentiles,
suppression of religious pluralism among the Hebrews, and persecution and even capital
punishment of sundry peaceful nonconformists, such as homosexuals and dissenters.
Moreover – and I wouldn't expect Trump to know this – there is a long and
honorable tradition of Jewish anti-Zionism . It goes back to the days of Herzl, though
his idea of a "return" to Canaan originated earlier with non-Jews for perhaps
less-than-honorable reasons. On different grounds, Orthodox and Reform Jews vehemently
opposed Herzl's movement. (See details on this and other matters discussed here in my book
Coming to Palestine .) The Orthodox regarded the Zionists as charlatans because a
"return" was not to occur until the Messiah appeared in order to redeem the sinful Jews; the
Orthodox anti-Zionists did not regard any of the atheists running the Zionist movement as
Messiahs – even if they had Jewish mothers.
The Reform shared that disdain for the Zionists and Zionism but on different grounds.
First, they rejected the premise that the people around the world who profess Judaism
constitute an exiled national people, race, or ethnicity. Judaism is just a religion, they
said. Second, they objected to a country that would proclaim itself the nation-state of all
the "Jewish people," including Jews who don't and won't live there. This, they said, would
harm the Jewish citizens of other countries and the non-Jewish residents of Israel.
Third, they knew that Palestine was not a "land without a people," and so they rejected the
land theft and expulsion they knew would be required to make a Jewish state there. I would
say the Reform were right. (The remnant of this movement resides at the American Council for Judaism .)
So, Mr. Trump, I can't see how Jewish Americans, who when surveyed rank justice high on
their list social concerns, have an obligation to love Israel – or how this admonition
from you, an enthusiast for Palestinian oppression, could possibly be taken seriously.
President Donald J. Trump, in a speech to The Organization of Eminent Jewish-American
Magnates (TOEJAM), shocked his audience yesterday by vowing to "finish the job Hitler
started."
Amid audible gasps, Trump continued: "By 'finish the job,' I mean the Greater Israel
project. Did you know that without Hitler, Israel never would have existed? It was Hitler who
signed the Transfer Agreement to send Jews to Palestine. He later became the Zionists' number
one PR asset. Without Hitler and the Nazis, the world never would have allowed you, brutal
killers, to slaughter and expel the Palestinians."
In Paper Against Gold (1812), Cobbett expressed the belief that the concepts of paper
money and the national debt were basically Jewish "tricks and connivances," endorsed by an
aristocracy grown greedy and toothless. Initially a loyalist, Cobbett later came to the opinion
that while the concept of aristocracy was not altogether bad or illegitimate, the British
aristocracy had betrayed and exploited the people it was supposed to lead. That the aristocracy
had given itself over to Jewish thought, through ties of blood and finance, was hinted most
strongly in the Political Register of December 6 1817:
Let us, when they have the insolence to call us the 'lower orders,' prepare ourselves with
useful knowledge, and let these insolent wretches marry amongst one another, 'till, like the
Jews, they have all one and the same face, one and the same pair of eyes, and one and the
same nose. Let them, if they can, prevent their footmen from bettering their blood and from
reinforcing the limbs of their rickety race; and let us prepare for the day of their
overthrow. They have challenged us to the combat. They have declared war against us .
Cobbett's views on finance capital and the ruling class can only be regarded as fiercely
oppositional, and the same holds for such "infamous anti-Semites" as Wilhelm Marr , Adolf Stoecker , Georg Ritter von Schonerer
, Pierre-Joseph
Proudhon , and Alphonse Toussene l, all of whom
combined a radical critique of Big Capital with opposition to the specific role of Jews in
finance, culture, politics, and society. In fact, many of these figures articulated specific
reasons as to why a separate and distinct critique of "Semitism" was required. A key feature of
nineteenth century socialism was a strong anti-Semitism that rejected Jewish-Marxist claims to
being part of "the people," and many anti-Jewish socialists portrayed such claims as
opportunistic and cryptic strategies to secure power anew under the new form of government. One
of the most memorable statements of the era in this regard is the French socialist
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's remark that far from being genuine, Karl Marx was "the tapeworm of
socialism." Proudhon (1809–1865), seen by many as the father of anarchism, regarded
apparently socialist Jewish "allies" like Heinrich Heine as "nothing but secret spies" whose
hidden agenda was merely to secure the continuation of age-old Jewish privileges and
protections under the guise of a putative social justice. In light of the historical trajectory
of anti-Jewish critique and the biographies of its major proponents, Žižek's
assertion that anti-Semitism is merely a "fetish" that obstructs criticism of capitalism is
simply unsustainable.
V. Jews, Big Capital, and the Ruling Class
Equally unsustainable is the implication that Big Capital and the establishment ruling class
is not, and has not been, significantly Jewish over historical time. Žižek simplifies
and caricatures the Middle Ages as a time when "the Jew emerged as the enemy, a parasitic
intruder who disturbs the harmonious social edifice." Žižek obviously employs the
term "harmonious social edifice" with skepticism and disdain, seeing the pre-existing order
(that before the arrival of the Jews) as fraught with exploitation, tensions, and
contradictions. In Žižek's framework then, Jews may be a chaotic capitalist force
that enters Europe, but this was a Europe already experiencing chaotic capitalist forces, and
therefore it would be irrational to blame Jews for anything arising from their emergence and
expansion in Europe. What needs to be distinguished here is the distinction between what might
be termed the organic development of finance in Europe, [18] and the exorbitant and often extremely negative developments ushered in by
the arrival of the Jews and their subsequent special relationship with European elites and with
capitalism itself.
The organic development of finance and class divisions in Europe is demonstrated in the
evolution of feudalism as a result of the adoption of heavy cavalry by the Franks in the eighth
century, with other, non-military, aspects of continental feudalism arising as the inevitable
social repercussions of this change in military organization. [19] Since knights needed money, horses, servants, attendants, and freedom from
all other non-military occupations, like tilling the soil, knighthood gradually became an
upper-class affair. Increasing technological sophistication then made mounted warfare more and
more expensive and caused knights to become more sharply distinguished from the ordinary
peasant. It also caused free peasants to become less and less valuable as soldiers, and they
therefore declined towards mere servitude. It was, therefore, in a sense inevitable that the
new class of knights should become a landed aristocracy, and its members were thus in a sense
destined to low-level jurisdiction of a semi-agricultural kind over their peasants. This
situation really was, in a sense, a "harmonious social edifice" to the extent that it followed
a clear logic and permitted these communities and their territories to be competitive in a
rapidly changing military and geopolitical context. The ruling classes were obliged to adopt
paternalistic practices in relation to the peasantry, and outright exploitation was rare since
it could be dangerous and counterproductive in that it could provoke a mass uprising and thus
damage militarily-valuable social cohesion. The social edifice was thus indeed "harmonious" in
the sense that it was coordinated and balanced, and was generally beneficial to the organic
national community.
The arrival of Jews in Europe undoubtedly created an imbalance in these class relations, and
between the ruling class and the lower orders. Evidence of this imbalance in medieval Europe
can be obtained both from surviving documentation and artefacts, and from analogous modern
situations such as the the Great Romanian Peasant Revolt of 1907, during which Jewish intrusion
into the existing quasi-feudal social arrangement ended in widespread rebellion and societal
collapse due to the specific excesses of Jewish exploitation. The arrival of the Jews in
Western Europe as a financial and geopolitical power can be dated to their ascent under the
Carolingians in the ninth century, and possibly earlier in the Narbonne where they were noted
as an extraordinarily wealthy class. In this development, the birth of formal, symbiotic
relationships between Jews and self-interested European elites, we see a crucial fissure in
European class relations. Jewish financiers entered into the harmonious social edifice as
privileged and protected outsiders whose sole purpose was to accelerate and distort resource
transfer between European classes, rendering internal class division less about communal
efficiency than about personal gain. In this system, paternalism gave way to such situations as
the permitted Jewish trade in Christian slaves (a key reason for the agitations for Agobard of
Lyons) and widespread exploitative tax farming.
One of the great modern myths, a stroke of Jewish revisionist genius, is that Jews were
forced into such practices by restrictive laws on the ownership of land, and certain other
local contexts. This is historicist relativism at its most bankrupt and, thankfully, modern
scholarship is slowly eroding such misrepresentations and outright falsehoods. Take, for
example, the most recent edition of The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion ,
which states the "remarkable" fact that Jews
whether in Narbonne in 899 or Gironne in 922, in Trier in 919 or Worms in 1090, in
Barcelona in 1053 or Toledo in 1222, or in early medieval England, were permitted to acquire
and own land if they wished. Not only were Jews legally permitted to own land, they could
acquire significant amounts (especially in Italy, southern Spain, southern and east-central
France, and Germany); possessed fields, gardens, and vineyards; and owned, transferred, and
mortgaged land holdings. They preferred to hire tenants, sharecroppers, and wage laborers to
work their lands. For themselves, they chose the most skilled and profitable occupations,
foremost money lending. [20]
Essentially then, we see the immediate and deliberate entrance of the Jews into European
society at the level of knight, if not higher, but without any of the logic or benefits of the
position of knight within the organic social edifice. The Jew in this new social order existed
for no logical reason other than the personal enrichment of certain elites and the communal
enrichment of the Jews themselves. This may be regarded as the first perversion of capitalism
and the first true exploitation (excessive or unfair use of workers with no reason other than
greed) of the serving class within this system.
Again, dispensing with historicist relativism, we can demonstrate the pattern of Jewish
disruptive behaviors within capitalism with reference to analogous modern conditions. For
example, the arenda system of late nineteenth- and early twentieth century-eastern
Europe (especially Poland, Ukraine, and Romania) was remarkably similar to the feudal system of
medieval Western Europe. The arenda system can be regarded as broadly harmonious until
the mass influx of Jewish arendasi during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which
saw the Jews increasingly operate as tax farmers, property agents, customs agents, and loan
merchants. Jewish monopoly in these roles prompted both the rapid commercialization of land and
the expansion of Big Capital, both of which were intended by Jews to exclusively benefit their
in-group. Since the existence of entire Jewish communities depended on exploitative capitalism,
Jews fiercely contended for monopolies in key areas. For example , The Va'ad
Medinat Lita (Lithuanian Jewish Council) twice passed a resolution supporting the lease of
customs and taxes by Jews, stating: "We have openly seen the great danger deriving from the
operation of customs in Gentile hands; for the customs to be in Jewish hands is a pivot on
which everything (in commerce) turns, since thereby Jews may exert control."
Crucially, high Jewish position in the social hierarchy was not accompanied by paternalism
of any kind. In fact, Jews are notable throughout history for their incredibly hostile and
exploitative behaviors towards non-elite Europeans. Philip Eidelberg, a historian of the Great
Romanian Peasant Revolt of 1907, describes how Jewish arendasi " exploited the estates
more ruthlessly than the native Rumanian arendasi ." He continues by explaining that
Jews were not interested in the long-term prosperity of estates or their workers, and often
hiked rents to breaking point "even at the risk of eventually exhausting the available land and
inventory." [21] In Rumania, Jews enjoyed monopolies, with Eidelberg demonstrating that
Jewish bankers would decline to grant capital to any non-Jew wanting to enter this form of
finance. [22] Thus, the Jews competed for profit solely with each other, ever-increasing
the chokehold on their European peasantries. Eidelberg writes that "the result was a bidding
spiral in which the peasant was the loser. In fact, it was just such a competition between the
two greatest Jewish arendas families -- the Fischers and the Justers -- which was to
help spark the 1907 revolt." [23]
Jews, of course, continue to occupy conspicuous roles in the worst and most exploitative
aspects of capitalism. Jews have also continued to acquire land for exploitative purposes, the
most interesting example being the
Argentinian activities of the British Jewish oligarch Joe Lewis , a tax avoider
and currency speculator who made his billions alongside George Soros when both gambled on the
British pound sterling crashing out of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1992. As one
commentator explains, "Soros' and Lewis' bet against the pound actually led to the pound
crashing, after Soros ordered his hedge fund to " go for the
jugular " and aggressively trade against the currency, thereby prompting its sharp
devaluation. Though Soros is often called "the man who broke the Bank of England" as a result
of the $1 billion in profits he made on that fateful day, Lewis is said to have
made an even larger profit than Soros." While these Jews made billions, the British public
suffered a rapid economic recession. Lewis didn't mind. He repeated the experiment in Mexico,
causing the Mexican
peso crisis , which "led to a massive jump in poverty, unemployment and inequality in
Mexico and left its government beholden to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) through a loan
package arranged by then-U.S. President Bill Clinton."
Growing extravagantly rich from parasitic currency speculation, Jewish oligarchs Soros and
Lewis, together with co-ethnic Big Capitalists Eduardo Elsztain and Marcelo Mindlin, started
buying massive tracts of Argentine real estate, particularly in Patagonia, where they pooled
resources to take over local banks, the regional water supply, oil and gas wealth, and the
area's largest energy supplier. Lewis then set about buying tens of thousands of hectares,
declaring his wish to create "his own state in Patagonia." Some locals were willing to sell
their land. One, Irineo Montero, had refused, and he, along with his wife María Ortiz
and their employee José Matamala, were all found dead under mysterious
circumstances. Lewis' land consolidation was then made complete, and paved the way for a
Zionist enclave that has exploited locals so thoroughly that there have been regular massive
demonstrations ("March for Sovereignty) against this new Jewish ruling class, attracting 80
percent of the local population. According to the research of former French intelligence
officer turned journalist Thierry Meyssan, Lewis is much more amenable to his fellow Jews, and
has been inviting thousands of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers to his territory annually.
In late 2017, former French intelligence officer turned journalist Thierry Meyssan alleged : "Since the
Falklands War, the Israeli army has been organizing 'holiday camps' in Patagonia for its
soldiers. Between 8,000 and 10,000 of them now come every year to spend two weeks on Joe Lewis'
land."
What we see here is just a very modern example of the millennia-old Jewish pattern of
establishing full-scale operations for extracting a nation's riches and exploiting its people.
We must earnestly ask of Slavoj Žižek: Has Big Capital and the establishment
ruling class not been, and does it not remain, significantly Jewish?
Jeremy Corbyn, knifed by his senior lieutenants and failed by his media team, is on the
danger list and now looks isolated.
At the fatal NEC (National Executive Committee) meeting this week to discuss whether the
party should adopt the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism in full, with all its examples, he
prepared and presented a 500-word statement to water down the definition but this met with an
angry reaction from most NEC members and he dropped it.
According to the Guardian the most controversial passage in Corbyn's draft statement
said: "It cannot be considered racist to treat Israel like any other state or assess its
conduct against the standards of international law. Nor should it be regarded as antisemitic to
describe Israel, its policies or the circumstances around its foundation as racist because of
their discriminatory impact, or to support another settlement of the Israel-Palestine
conflict."
That these words caused such a rumpus tells us all we need to know about the mentality of
the modern Labour Party. It is surely self-evident that the Israel project was racist from the
start and confirmation, if any were needed, is provided by the discriminatory nation state
laws, emphasising Jewish supremacy, recently passed by the Knesset. Why deny the glaring truth?
And last time I checked there was no 'settlement' of the Israel-Palestine conflict and the
two-state idea endlessly talked about but never energetically pursued was stone-dead.
At the end of a stormy meeting the NEC accepted the IHRA definition and all its examples
but added a statement "which ensures this will not in any way undermine freedom of expression
on Israel or the rights of Palestinians."
But the Israel lobby were still not satisfied and renewed their whingeing. The Jewish
Leadership Council's chief executive, Simon Johnson, said Corbyn had "attempted shamefully to
undermine the entire IHRA definition", adding that the free speech caveat "drives a coach and
horses" through that definition. "It is clearly more important to the Labour leader to protect
the free speech of those who hate Israel than it is to protect the Jewish community from the
real threats that it faces."
A false dichotomy of course. And if their case cannot withstand free speech it must have
been bullsh*t in the first place.
Richard Angell, director of the centre-left Progress group, said
: "The Jewish community made it clear and simple to Labour: pass the IHRA definition in full
– no caveats, no compromises. Jeremy Corbyn and the Momentum-dominated NEC have just
failed the most basic test. A 'right to be racist' protection when debating the Middle East is
not just wrong, it harms the cause of peace but it will also continue a culture where Jewish
people cannot feel at home in Labour."
Today's decision is an insult. Labour does not know better than Jewish people about
antisemitism."
He was backed up by another Progress director, Jennifer Gerber, who is also a director of
Friends of Israel. She said: "It is appalling that the Labour party has once again ignored the
view clearly and repeatedly stated by the Jewish community: that it should adopt the full IHRA
definition without additions, omissions or caveats.
"The IHRA definition has been adopted in full by 31 countries, including the UK, as well as
over 130 UK local councils, the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the judiciary. A
'freedom of expression on Israel' clause is unnecessary and totally undermines the other
examples the party has supposedly just adopted."
The recurring message is that free speech is a threat and doesn't seem to have a place in
their world.
Re-frame anti-Semitism accurately – don't accept skewed version by the Israel
lobby
So let's get this straight: DNA research confirms that the great majority of those calling
themseves Jews are not of Semitic blood. So does anti-Semitism mean what it says? Shouldn't it
mean that if we outlaw anti-Semitism we outlaw being nasty to the genuine Semites of the Holy
Land, i.e. the indigenous people who include Palestinians whether Muslim, Christian or Jewish?
And are they not terrorised and persecuted by the Israeli regime which is the chief perpetrator
of anti-Semitism and which has oppressed, dispossessed, impoverished and slaughtered those
people for 70 years?
Corbyn and his New Look Labour Party were in a position to lead a move to 'unskew' the
definition of anti-Semitism and re-frame it accurately – with of course the help of the
various campaign and BDS groups worldwide. But now they've effectively muzzled themselves.
And for some strange reason Corbyn and his team, throughout the unpleasant warfare in his
party over anti-Semitism, completely ignored the warnings issued by legal experts Hugh
Tomlinson QC, Geoffrey Robertson QC, Sir Stephen Sedley and others which explained how:
the IHRA definition is "too vague to be useful" and conduct contrary to it is not
necessarily illegal. Public bodies are under no obligation to adopt or use it and, if they
do, they must interpret it in a way that's consistent with their statutory obligations and
with the European Convention on Human Rights, which provides for freedom of expression and
freedom of assembly;
the right of free expression is now part of UK domestic law by virtue of the Human Rights
Act;
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights bestows on everyone "the right to
freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without
interference ";
the IHRA definition is open to manipulation. "What is needed now is a principled retreat
on the part of Government from a stance which it has naively adopted,"says Sedley;
calling Israel an apartheid state or advocating BDS against Israel cannot properly be
characterized as anti-Semitic. Furthermore, any public authority seeking to apply the IHRA
definition to prohibit or punish such activities "would be acting unlawfully";
it is "not fit for any purpose that seeks to use it as an adjudicative standard. It is
imprecise, confusing and open to misinterpretation and even manipulation".
Robertson adds: "The Governments 'adoption' of the definition has no legal effect and does
not oblige public bodies to take notice of it. The definition should not be adopted, and
certainly should not be applied, by public bodies unless they are clear about Article 10 of the
European Convention on Human Rights which is binding upon them, namely that they cannot ban
speech or writing about Israel unless there is a real likelihood it will lead to violence or
disorder or race hatred."
Crucially, freedom of expression applies not only to information or ideas that are
favourably received or regarded as inoffensive, but also to those that "offend, shock or
disturb the State or any sector of the population" – unless they encourage violence,
hatred or intolerance.
What's more, the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee recommended adoption of the
IHRA definition of anti-Semitism subject to the inclusion of these two caveats :
(1) It is not antisemitic to criticise the Government of Israel, without additional evidence to
suggest antisemitic intent.
(2) It is not antisemitic to hold the Israeli Government to the same standards as other liberal
democracies, or to take a particular interest in the Israeli Government's policies or actions,
without additional evidence to suggest antisemitic intent.
The Government in adopting the IHRA definition dropped these caveats saying they weren't
necessary. But you'd expect that from an administration brazednly stuffed with members of the
Zionist Tendency.
These top legal opinions are lethal ammunition. Had Corbyn and his media team deployed them
to good effect the baying attack dogs would have been stopped in their tracks.
So the IHRA definition is not something a sane organisation would incorporate into its Code of
Conduct – certainly not as it stands. It contravenes human rights and freedom of
expression. But when did the admirers of apartheid Israel ever care about other people's
rights?
Stuart Littlewood in Great Britain on election day
[ Editor's Update: The BBC/Sky/ITV poll suggested the Conservative would win 368 seats, 42
above the 326 needed for an absolute majority in the House of Commons ]
– First published December 12, 2019 –
It's polling day in the UK. Right up to the last gasp so-called anti-Semitism has been used
as a lethal weapon in this general election campaign. Ignorant and gullible people, supported
by a mischievous mainstream media, have deployed it indiscriminately to trash Jeremy Corbyn and
his Labour Party and to remove a number of candidates from the lists .
I have watched pushy TV reporters demanding to know if their quarry "has a problem with
Jews". So how would you deal with an onslaught of media and even party slurs, assuming you
aren't guilty as charged?
Do you have a problem with Jews?
Which Jews are you talking about?
Er, Jews in general
No.
Any particular Jews?
Yes.
Oh. Which ones then?
Israeli Jews.
Why?
Don't you know what's going on over there?
Umm
Go do your homework. I'm busy.
You are accused by your party of making anti-Semitic remarks. What do you say to that?
What anti-Semitic remarks?
They say you criticised the state of Israel
Wouldn't you, if you knew what's going on over there?
What do you mean?
Do your homework. I'm too busy to give you a history lesson.
Your leader has said repeatedly that anti-Semitism isn't tolerated. Yet you made
anti-Semitic remarks about another party member.
Is he/she a Semite?
Er, Jewish anyway. That makes him a Semite.
Not necessarily. Very few Jews are Semites according to DNA research. On the other hand most
Palestinians are. Are you saying my remarks were directed at someone I thought was a
Palestinian? Now that would make a great story.
The IHRA [International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance] definition is what we must go on .
blah, blah blah
The IHRA definition doesn't stand up.
Why do you say that?
Read Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the UK's own
Human Rights Act 1998. I can express my views – so can you – even if we upset
someone, as long as we're not stirring up hatred or inciting violence.
But if you criticise Israel you stir up Jew-hatred.
No, Israel's criminal behaviour towards our Palestinian friends – Christian and Muslim
– is what stirs up Jew-hatred. The more savvy Israelis admit it.
But the IHRA definition is universally accepted
No it isn't. It's widely criticised. I'd suggest you read what top legal opinion such as Hugh
Tomlinson QC, Sir Stephen Sedley and Geoffrey Robertson QC have to say.
So where does anti-Semitism come in?
It doesn't really. And here's the irony. DNA research – for instance that done by Johns
Hopkins University and published by Oxford University Press – found that only a tiny
proportion of Jews are Semitic. Very few have ancestral links to the Holy Land, whereas most
indigenous Arabs, especially Palestinians, are proper Semites.
Have those findings been refuted? If not, the real anti-Semites would seem to be the
non-Semitic Israeli Jews with their hatred and oppression of the Palestinians – including
the Christian communities. If you're so hot on anti-Semitism why not go after them?
What about the Jewish community in the UK? We are told they are fearful and thinking of
leaving.
The Jews I know have integrated and prospered here. They love it and wouldn't want to be
anywhere else.
Are you saying they are not fearful?
There's a noisy Zionist hardcore that supports the Israeli regime and claims to speak for
British Jews. They make the Jewish community nervous about a backlash. Fortunately an
increasing number of Jews oppose Israel and its brutal policies and actively campaign for
Palestinian freedom from Israel's military occupation. This is admirable but means the hardcore
Israel flag-wavers are getting more and more hysterical.
The Labour Party is under investigation for anti-Jewish racism. Isn't it shocking? What do
you say to that?
The Equalities and Human Rights Commission is investigating to see if the party has committed
any unlawful acts or failed to deal with complaints in a proper and effective manner. It says
it may have regard to the IHRA working definition of anti-Semitism and associated examples
"while recognising it is a non-legally binding definition".
So it looks bad for the Labour Party.
The party certainly has some explaining to do, especially the excessive time it takes to
investigate and set up hearings and its policy of suspending the accused before checking the
truth of the allegations. It must do better. But I suspect the general public are getting bored
with the whole subject. And so am I.
Jewish hedge fund manager Henry Laufer keeps a low profile.
Laufer and his business partner Jim Simons burned
$14 million on Hillary Clinton in 2016. He is currently spending $2.8 million on figures
like Nancy Pelosi and disgraced, corrupt Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz's re-election
campaign.
The Laufers are also generous patrons of Media Matters for America, the anti-free speech
organization that has made multiple attempts to get Tucker Carlson off the air.
Paul Singer [***] (GOP)
If you're wondering why so many prominent conservative figures are **** stars and
homosexuals, it's all downstream from international *** Paul Singer.
Singer, who puts the
"vulture" in "vulture capitalist," is one of the country's top funders of homosexual
activism and the
reason the Republican party did not fight against gay marriage. He was instrumental in
paying to
obtain the infamous "Steele Dossier," which falsely claimed Donald Trump was being
blackmailed by Vladimir Putin with video of prostitutes urinating on him in Russia. He has a
wide array of politicians, journalists and other influential people in his pocket, largely
dedicated to pushing hawkish Israel policies, homosexuality and
discrediting critics of capitalism .
Going into 2020, the hedge fund oligarch is pouring $3.4 million dollars into Lindsey
Graham's PAC , the WFW Fund (dedicated to financing female conservatives) and the American
Unity PAC (a group dedicated to advancing homosexual activists inside the Republican
party).
While the JEWS that run and own google decide your fate, their *** buddies are doing this
to your U.S. political system:
'Zionist Money Already Corrupting the 2020 Elections'
by Eric Striker
"WATCHING THE last Democratic debate, you would think the candidates were vying for an
electorate that is 90% Black and illegal alien.
Issues like jobs, infrastructure, even foreign policy were largely ignored.
The [***] parasites in the shadows making a mockery out of representative democracy have
good reason to be confident: they are already starting to corrupt the 2020 elections.
Open
Secrets analyzed the most recent donor data for the top 10 political donors going into
next year's first quarter.
Unsurprisingly, 8 out of 10 of these fat cats are Jews.
Henry and Marsha Laufer [JEWS] (Democrat)
Jewish hedge fund manager Henry Laufer keeps a low profile.
Laufer and his business partner Jim Simons burned
$14 million on Hillary Clinton in 2016.
He is currently spending $2.8 million on figures like Nancy Pelosi and disgraced, corrupt
Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz's re-election campaign.
The Laufers are also generous patrons of Media Matters for America, the anti-free speech
organization that has made multiple attempts to get Tucker Carlson off the air.
Karla Jurvetson [***] (Democrat)
Jurvetson, whose real surname is Tinklenberg, is a physician who recently divorced
billionaire Steve Jurvetson.
Her ex-husband is a big player in Silicon Valley, known for hosting
drug-fueled orgies where mentally disturbed tech CEOs dress up like bunny rabbits.
Paul Singer [***] (GOP)
If you're wondering why so many prominent conservative figures are **** stars and
homosexuals, it's all downstream from international *** Paul Singer.
Singer, who puts the
"vulture" in "vulture capitalist," is one of the country's top funders of homosexual
activism and the
reason the Republican party did not fight against gay marriage. He was instrumental in
paying to
obtain the infamous "Steele Dossier," which falsely claimed Donald Trump was being
blackmailed by Vladimir Putin with video of prostitutes urinating on him in Russia. He has a
wide array of politicians, journalists and other influential people in his pocket, largely
dedicated to pushing hawkish Israel policies, homosexuality and
discrediting critics of capitalism .
Going into 2020, the hedge fund oligarch is pouring $3.4 million dollars into Lindsey
Graham's PAC , the WFW Fund (dedicated to financing female conservatives) and the American
Unity PAC (a group dedicated to advancing homosexual activists inside the Republican
party).
Deborah Simon [***] (Democrat)
The *** Simon inherited her money from her property development father, Melvin Simon, of
Simon Property Group. The elder Simon was the subject of multiple lawsuits when he
ripped off his shareholders and paid himself a $120 million dollar bonus.
Deborah has so far spent $3.5 million dollars on various Democratic PACs, including $1
million dedicated to bankrolling David Brock's operations.
Bernard Marcus [***] (GOP)
Bernard Marcus, the Jewish emigre who founded Home Depot, was one of the a handful of
billionaires to give Donald Trump big donations during his 2016 presidential run.
Now, Zionist activist Marcus has set aside $4.6 million dollars to keep Senate Majority
leader Mitch McConnell and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, both up for re-election in
2020, in his pocket.
George Soros [***] (Democrat)
Soros is one of many Jewish finance-capitalists corrupting our politics. He spent $20
million during the 2016 election.
Today, Soros looks to be the big fish in small bowls by targeting prosecutorial races.
This is dangerous, as few people pay much attention to District Attorney races, even though
these figures have the power to put innocent people in prison and let guilty people go
free.
The $5.1 million he's utilizing this quarter have all gone to his new "Democracy PAC,"
which played a
major role in getting extremist prosecutors elected in Virginia. Soros also famously
provided $1.7
million dollars to fellow *** Larry Krasner, who ran for prosecutor in Philadelphia as a
literal supporter of Black Lives Matter.
Superficially these elections are low stakes, so even a few hundred thousands dollars can
guarantee a landslide victory for the most absurd and extreme candidates. Soros' money going
into 2020 promise to accelerate the US judicial system's decline into anarcho-tyranny .
Tom Steyer [***] (Democrat)
Steyer is yet another Jewish hedgefund manager with a penchant for lavish political
spending.
Steyer funds countless neo-liberal think-tanks and Democratic party causes. Now, he is
planning to blow
$100 million on his highly unpopular presidential run.
This billionaire who made much of his money in the coal industry is now primarily pushing
climate change , which is really
just austerity through the backdoor . This quarter, he has spent $6.5 million on his own
Super PAC, NextGen Climate Action.
Donald Sussman [***] (Democrat)
This hedgefund *** leads in donations during this period.
Sussman is Paul Singer's former business partner and played a major role in the
billionaire cabal that tried to win the Democrats the whole Congress in 2018.
He is giving $7.5 million to various Democratic party PACs, and has a special interest in
Cory Booker's flagging campaign -- currently polling at 3%.
Please think about it, folks. These companies thrive on H1B Visas and foreign talent. With
the social power invested in these companies, the foreign-born employees create yet another
conduit of foreign election influence.
The H-1Bs have ruined the industry. So much American talent is underemployed or unemployed
simply because they can't get noticed amidst the oceans of foreign nationals.
The so-called "Anti-Defamation League," like every Jewish interest group, doesn't
practice what it preaches. In fact, the ADL under CEO Johnathan Greenblatt is one of the
main organizations working to defame its political enemies and to censor free speech
online. Their cause? As usual, securing Jewish ethnic interests.
This is what it all boils down to in the end. All the censorship is at the behest of the
ADL and crony CEOs (mostly Jewish) working in tandem to attack free speech on the
internet...
"... The Washington Examiner first reported Friday that lawyers for the Free Beacon -- a conservative outlet based in the nation's capital -- funded the project from fall 2015 to spring 2016, when it pulled its funding as Trump looked set to clinch the nomination. ..."
"... Washington Free Beacon ..."
"... After the Democrats took over funding of the operation in mid-2016, Fusion GPS would hire former British spy Christopher Steele and would lead to the production of the so-called "Trump dossier," filled with salacious but unconfirmed claims about how Trump was compromised by the Russians. ..."
"... The Free Beacon noted in its statement that it had "no knowledge of or connection to the Steele dossier, did not pay for the dossier, and never had contact with, knowledge of, or provided payment for any work performed by Christopher Steele." ..."
"... The Free Beacon is funded in large part by the New York hedge fund billionaire and major GOP donor Paul Singer. The New York Times reports that Singer initially supported Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) for the Republican nomination, but later spearheaded a campaign to deny Trump the nomination even after Rubio dropped out of the race. ..."
"... While supporting Republican establishment favorites such as Rubio and 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney, Singer was a major backer of Common Core and was the founder of a super-PAC that has the express purpose of turning the GOP pro-gay marriage. ..."
"... Kristol is also the founder of the Weekly Standard, which like the Free Beacon has a neoconservative foreign policy outlook. The Free Beacon was co-founded by two former Weekly Standard writers, chairman Michael Goldfarb and editor-in-chief Matthew Continetti. ..."
The Washington Free Beacon, funded by GOP mega-donor Paul Singer, was the original funder of
Fusion GPS' research project that attempted to dig up dirt on then-candidate Donald Trump -- a
project that would later be funded by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's
campaign.
The Washington Examiner first
reported Friday that lawyers for the Free Beacon -- a conservative outlet based in the
nation's capital -- funded the project from fall 2015 to spring 2016, when it pulled its
funding as Trump looked set to clinch the nomination.
Lawyers for the Free Beacon informed the House Intelligence Committee of its role in the
funding on Friday. The outlet issued a statement
standing by its decision to fund the project:
Since its launch in February of 2012, the Washington Free Beacon has retained
third party firms to conduct research on many individuals and institutions of interest to us
and our readers. In that capacity, during the 2016 election cycle we retained Fusion GPS to
provide research on multiple candidates in the Republican presidential primary, just as we
retained other firms to assist in our research into Hillary Clinton.
After the Democrats took over funding of the operation in mid-2016, Fusion GPS would
hire former British spy Christopher Steele and would lead to the production of the so-called
"Trump dossier," filled with salacious but unconfirmed claims about how Trump was compromised
by the Russians.
Fusion has come under scrutiny for its
alleged ties to Russia, including the fact that many of the claims
originate from Kremlin sources -- meaning that the information came from inside the Russian
government.
The Free Beacon noted in its statement that it had "no knowledge of or connection to the
Steele dossier, did not pay for the dossier, and never had contact with, knowledge of, or
provided payment for any work performed by Christopher Steele."
"The Washington Free Beacon has issued a statement asserting that it had no involvement with
Christopher Steele or the dossier he compiled from Russian sources," Jack Langer, spokesman for
the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told Breitbart News. "The Beacon has
agreed to cooperate with the House Intelligence Committee to help the Committee verify this
assertion."
Yet, the revelation is likely to fuel questions about the role the so-called "Never Trump"
movement played in an effort that would eventually inflict damage on President Trump, and that
was possibly part of a Russian misinformation scheme.
The Free Beacon is funded in large part by the New York hedge fund billionaire and major
GOP donor Paul Singer. The New York Times reports
that Singer initially supported Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) for the Republican nomination, but
later spearheaded a campaign to deny Trump the nomination even after Rubio dropped out of the
race.
While supporting Republican establishment favorites such as Rubio and 2012 presidential
candidate Mitt Romney, Singer was a major
backer of Common Core and was the
founder of a super-PAC that has the express purpose of turning the GOP pro-gay
marriage.
The Examiner reports that the Free Beacon was originally part of the 501(c)(4)
tax-exempt organization -- the Center for American Freedom -- but in 2014 became a for-profit
organization. The Center's original board of directors includes William Kristol, a prominent
"Never Trump" activist.
Kristol is also the founder of the Weekly Standard, which like the Free Beacon has a
neoconservative foreign policy outlook. The Free Beacon was co-founded by two former Weekly
Standard writers, chairman Michael Goldfarb and editor-in-chief Matthew Continetti.
***Update***
"The Washington Free Beacon has issued a statement asserting that it had no involvement with
Christopher Steele or the dossier he compiled from Russian sources," Jack Langer, spokesman for
the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told Breitbart News. "The Beacon has
agreed to cooperate with the House Intelligence Committee to help the Committee verify this
assertion."
TrumpAlways •
2 years ago • edited I smell McCain. Anyone else smell McCain with a little bit of
Bush in there...
the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance)
definition of anti-Semitism
the official guideline for Title VI is as following "Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as
hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals
and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities." So this hatred against certain ethnic
category. Much like Russophobia. Looks pretty reasonable to me. For example, claiming that
Paul Singer is a criminal financial racketeer is not anti-Semitism, because Romney is not that different.
"... The order will effectively interpret Judaism as a race or nationality, not just a religion, to prompt a federal law penalizing colleges and universities deemed to be shirking their responsibility to foster an open climate for minority students. ..."
"... But the IHRA is hotly disputed. The State Department has adopted it but critics say it is too vague and all-encompassing, and can be a trap for honest critics of Israel's domestic and foreign policies. For example, it describes as anti-Semitic "denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination" under some circumstances, and offers as an example of such behavior "claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor." ..."
With his son-in-law and senior advisor Jared Kushner hovering inches behind him, President Trump
signed an executive order Wednesday that interprets Judaism as a nationality or race and religion so that the federal government
can threaten to withhold funds from schools deemed to be fostering anti-semitism in school activities, programs, curricula and classrooms.
What it really will do is put a chill on speech, as skittish administrations shut down protests, screen speakers, and monitor classrooms
for unsanctioned criticisms against Israel.
"It is a game changer," said Trump legal advisor Alan Dershowitz who along with Kushner promoted the plan to Trump. "One of the
most important events in the 2,000-year battle against anti-Semitism."
12/11/19, 11:42 A.M.: President Trump is expected to sign an executive order that will effectively put a chill on BDS (Boycott
Divestment Sanction) campaigns or any other campus protests against Israel's treatment of Palestinians, illegal settlements, or U.S.-Israel
foreign policy.
The order will effectively interpret Judaism as a race or nationality, not just a religion, to prompt a federal law penalizing
colleges and universities deemed to be shirking their responsibility to foster an open climate for minority students.
Currently, Title VI prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin. By declaring Judaism a nationality
rather than religion, it puts it under the rubric of federal protection, unlocking all sorts of tools for the school to shut down
speech. As of this writing, however,
Jewish Insider claims to have a copy of the executive order and says, contra to the NYT, there is no mention of national
origin in it.
Nevertheless, the order as being reported will allow the federal government to force schools to restrict protests and monitor
speech and curriculum in the classroom. For example, if there is an active BDS organization on campus or ongoing protest against
the lockdown of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, it might be deemed anti-Semitic and the Department of Education could threaten a
withdrawal of financial assistance to the school. This goes, perhaps more importantly, to courses and professors that are accused
of being "anti-Semitic." We can see where this is going.
From the Jerusalem Post :
A senior administration official said on Tuesday that antisemitism on campuses is often hidden in an anti-Israel agenda.
If campuses that receive money from the government adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism in cases of discrimination, students
who will feel that they are being bullied on college campuses would be able to complain to their institution's administration,
who will then need to decide if the incident is considered antisemitic.
Trump's order would make the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance)
definition of anti-Semitism the official guideline
for Title VI.
But the IHRA is hotly disputed. The State Department has adopted it but critics say it is too vague and all-encompassing,
and can be a trap for honest critics of Israel's domestic and foreign policies. For example, it describes as anti-Semitic "denying
the Jewish people their right to self-determination" under some circumstances, and offers as an example of such behavior "claiming
that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."
The White House's latest move, if fulfilled, is a huge victory for pro-Israel organizations here in the United States that, according
to Forward magazine
has been funneling tens of millions of dollars into combating constitutionally protected boycotts on school campuses and in American
states.
Not only well-funded by groups like AIPAC, according to Forward, these pro-Israel campaigns use social media bird-dogging
and rapid response strikes against student governments and planned demonstrations and other measures to cast the pro-Palestinian
protests as anti-Semitic. In the states, they've convinced lawmakers and governments to pass laws that would require any companies
and individuals working for the government to sign "contracts" or other affidavits declaring that they would never boycott Israeli
companies or be denied work.
These laws have been overturned by multiple courts as unconstitutional.
Nevertheless, afraid of the "anti-Semitic" taint, federal and state elected officials have not only continued to pass these laws,
but have
proposed criminal charges against offenders.
The issue has riven the Democratic party, with pro-Palestinian and free speech proponents on one side, and pro-Israeli advocates
(joining all but a few Republicans) on the other. The often raucous BDS debate has quieted down from earlier this year, when Rep.
Ilhan Omar was forced to apologize
for her own comments when criticizing the anti-boycott laws, but Trump is sure to re-invigorate things now.
Meanwhile, a slow-burn smear campaign has begun against 2020 candidate Bernie Sanders, who is Jewish, and who has also spoken
out against what he calls are attacks against BDS and free speech.
In this outrageous Federalist piece yesterday, Melissa Langsam Braunstein, "a former U.S. Department of State speechwriter,"
suggests Sanders is "associating with antisemites," ignoring "far-left" and "Islamist" anti-Semitism, and employing secret anti-Semites
on his staff. Again, criticism of Israel's Palestinian policies and supporting people who support the boycotts seem to be the core
definition of Bernie's burgeoning anti-Semitism here.
This is should be an alarming sign for anyone, but it may be worse for Bernie. He is up in the polls, which makes him a target.
He is also an avowed socialist who has been openly against the anti-boycott movement on Capitol Hill. In addition, he could suffer
the same slings and arrows that his compatriot Jeremy Corbyn is taking across the pond. The Labor Party leader and candidate for
prime minister has been accused of being personally anti-Semitic for his criticism of Israel and his entire party criticized for
fostering a
"culture
of anti-Semitism" and not taking serious various formal complaints against it.
Read this whole Atlantic piece for the details, but the money passage for our purposes is here:
Disproportionate hatred of Israel is one strand of left-wing anti-Semitism. The other is the conspiracist turn, turbocharged
by social media, which gains succor from attacks on "the elite," "the 1 percent," "the mainstream media," and "billionaires."
Corbyn has made such attacks a key part of Labour's appeal, adopting the slogan "For the many, not the few." The trouble is that
while all of these are superficially innocent phrases -- as well as useful ways of describing a world in which wealth and opportunities
are unequally distributed -- it is clear that some supporters hear them as a
dog whistle
This is Sanders' platform, too. Heck it is a critical part of Elizabeth Warren's and President Trump's appeal. If this kind of
populism–and to be sure I am not talking about the Reddit "turbo charged" racist conspiracy driven memes that we all know are
out there -- is to be deemed "a dog whistle," we may all be accused of anti-Semitism before the year is done.
It's wonderful when people hold onto their culture and heritage. The idea of "melting pot" wasn't some kind of blast furnace that
stripped immigrants of their past, but rather a blending of the many different cultures that created something uniquely American.
To be an American doesn't mean abandoning caring about your homeland - but it does mean that you should prioritize the success
and prosperity of your fellow Americans more than you do the success and prosperity of those in the land you left behind.
The implication of labeling Judaism a nationality (and the implicit tying that to Zionism) is that American Jews owe their
first loyalty not to fellow Americans ... but to Judaism, and by the associative property, to Israeli Jews.
A very dangerous path for American Jews to trod, as history has shown repeatedly.
The ironic thing here is that Trump is managing to play to three different bases here
- to the most conservative Zionist Jews in America
- to Evangelical Christians who are happy to have a cudgel to use in their battle against those who don't embrace the idea of
a Judeo-Christian America, and
- to White Nationalists who themselves don't consider Jews to be part of "White Culture" and will enjoy referring to a Federal
declaration of Jewish otherness
As one writer succinctly put it, a lot of these endeavors are indicators that the influence and power of the Jewish elite is slowly
and irreversibly diminishing.
The Orange Moron can do anything he wants in this vein but it will most likely only speed up what is already in motion...
we may all be accused of anti-Semitism before the year is done
When an American vessel in neutral waters was deliberately attacked by Israel in 1967, all subsequent investigation of the
attack was whitewashed and the survivors threatened with imprisonment. Nothing has been done to restore the dignity of the veterans.
When the late Paul Findley compiled copious evidence of Israel's stranglehold on institutions of government and education,
using a fringe publishing house to present his findings, which enjoyed 9 weeks on the Washington Post 's bestseller list,
nothing was done to forestall the Lobby's influence.
When the FBI held tens of Israeli nationals engaged in suspicious activity in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, subjecting them
to polygraph tests which some failed, Richard Armitage and Alan Dershowitz applied
political pressure to free them and send them packing to Israel. Nothing more was done.
When professors Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer provided a thoroughly documented analysis of Israel's headlock on American
foreign policy, proving that it was Israel who drew us into the current Middle Eastern quagmire, nothing was done to forestall
the Lobby's influence.
And now Israel, applying its usual pressure in Washington, wants Americans to fight yet another war on its behalf, this time
against Iran, who has done nothing to America since the 1970s.
If you discuss these plain-as-day, readily available facts, you're called an "anti-Semite" and a "Nazi." If you want to discuss
them on YouTube, you risk being demonetized or deplatformed. If you raise the topics in the public square, you're certain to confront
censure, if not unemployment.
And, however much one may naively regard some claims as "conspiratorial," these phenomena are just the tip of the proverbial
iceberg.
You had better get used to it. Free speech isn't free and there's one group in America that's more interested in eliminating
it than any other.
Of course, mentioning this is "anti-Semitic" as well.
Trump is first and foremost pandering to his evangelical Christian supporters and a few rich Jewish donors here. He doesn't care
that he feeds into anti-semitism by implying that Jewish Americans identify with Israel rather than the U.S. Most Jewish Americans
won't vote for him (he has almost a 70% dis-approval rating with Jews in the U.S.). He's also toadying to Netanyahu, who he identifies
with. Netanyahu is continually under investigation for corruption.
College students are free to protest the behavior of Russia without being labeled anti-Russian; they can protest the People's
Republic of China without being accused of sinophobia.
Why does Israel need a special dispensation from this? If the argument is that any criticism of Israel for any reason is antisemitic,
then you are essentially saying that Israel should be uniquely immune from criticism that every other country on earth is subject
to.
It started in Europe with creating a class of people protected from free speech, then the envelope widened to include immigrants
and then muslims then leftists use it to prevent a discussion on immigration and then you get 10+ years of pedophile and female
muslim rape gangs patrolling streets and having the entire crime known by police and covered up for fear of hate speech toward
a group even though its specific groups that engage in honor killings, terrorist attacks, knifing s, grooming gangs, rape gangs,
etc.
The crisis of Us propaganda machine caused by Trump election serious undermined Israel lobby
effectiveness... Schiff behaviour and Epstein scandal were two nail in the coffin.
"This is a historic opportunity", whispered one of Netanyahu's insiders into
Ben Caspit (a leading Israeli journalist)'s ear this week: ..
...
What sort of history might that be? Why six months? Well, Caspit points up: "Netanyahu's
people, headed by minister Yuval Steinitz clearly state that a widespread war is likely
to erupt in the next six months between Iran and its adversaries in the region, including
Israel". And the new Defence Minister, Bennett, threatens Iran on an almost daily basis.
"Perhaps Netanyahu simply needs a war with Iran in order to survive politically," one
of the Blue and White leaders told Caspit: "That is scary and dangerous " .
There nothing new with that one might say. Netanyahoo has for years plotted to instigate
a U.S. war on Iran. But there was so far no reason for the U.S. to wage one. War needs a
narrative, a story than can be sold to the people who will have to pay for it. Crooke sees
a possible one in the recent riots in Iran and elsewhere:
Well,
here it is : "For a long time it looked like the spread of Iranian influence across
the Middle East was unstoppable. Now, the entire Iran-hegemony enterprise is at risk.
Protests have been going on in Iraq and Lebanon for weeks, bringing their economies to a
near standstill, and forcing their Iran-approved prime ministers to step down. There's no
end in sight to the protests ".
And hence, the Israeli push – led by the newly-appointed Defence Minister,
Bennet, that now – precisely – is the moment for the US to act against Iran.
This is the narrative for war.
So the idea is that the current turmoils in the 'axis of resistance' countries -
Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran - has weakened Iran so much that it can be attacked.
But a look at each of those countries shows that it is doubtful that the narrative is
true.
Posted by b at
18:26 UTC |
Comments (34) Thanks b for adding to the analysis of Crooke's fine article. It was good
to get confirmation of my prediction that Iran had its own internal internet that can be
sealed, which also means its internal military com system is separated from the global
internet--external cyber attacks will no longer see success. Today Zarif said he wanted
to exchange further prisoners with the Evil Outlaw US Empire, but the "ball's in Trump's
court;" and after this latest failed operation, Iran likely has hundreds it could parlay.
Some may have missed Pepe Escobar's reporting on Iran b
posted in the weekly review listing, thus its inclusion. Iran's economy will continue to
improve as it's now operating in markets and systems outside Imperial control thanks to the
myopia blurring anything beyond its nose. Iran's key move along with Russia was to
diversify its economy away from energy sales and focus on promoting its human capital.
RAI News interview (in English) with Assad now available on Youtube . SAG put it up
after RAI News broke agreement to transmit it by a set date.
With the Washington Post
reporting on Bush, Obama and Trump's lies about Afghanistan , it's becoming hard to
understand why anyone still believes any of the bullshit about Syria propagated by the
Washington elite including the CIA and State Department.
I agree B, no way the bankers and their corporate scum can expect to defeat Iran at this
point. Iranian response to an attack from anywhere might not be good for Israel.
Netanyohu and Google seem to be competing for the most dangerous entities award. very
interesting the competition. The Iranian's seem intent on defending themselves.
I live in the south of France. Yesterday morning by opening the shutters at 6 o'clock, I
saw in the night sky, facing east, a cohort of bright spots (lit by the rising sun of the
east) as far as the eye can see. I went out and I understood, hearing a low continuous
rumbling, that they were fighter planes over 8000 meters that were heading in the
north-west-> southeast direction. I counted about 80 but I missed a lot. We are always
worried when we see the pack ... Maybe it's future turbulence for the Middle East ...
My Lebanese colleague explained to me last week that most wealthy Lebanese don't keep their
money abroad, as you might suppose, but in Lebanon, in dollar accounts, because the
interest rates are that much better. And so they're stuck with being limited to withdrawing
$300 a week.
Patience if a virtue for the Iranian people, but never misunderstand it by weakness, Iran
is doing everything right, it has brought a rather under developed country in the 40-70's
to a highly advanced country in terms of technology and education. It partially reflects in
its military, but it definitively reflects in the daily life for Iranians.
There is no doubt in my mind Iran will be a powerhouse a decade for now, there are few
countries in the ME, northern Africa and southern Asia that will be able to compete with
Iran in many areas.
The apartheid regime's nightmare is exactly that, and Iran thus share it with the key
members of The Resistance, and that is very scary to the anyone in Occupied Palestine.
I see, absolutely no way, that the US will venture in a war with Iran, not for the
apartheid regime and not for anyone, any war with Iran means one thing, the end of the
Occupation in Palestine, and surely the US doesn't want that, so sanctions will continue,
war rhetoric will continue, until cheap warmongers are removed or a change in US Dollar
dominance happens to the point anyone depending on it is forced to look for a different
route thus geopolitics are changed for good. We are closer to either options, closer and
closer.
regarding the constant narrative on going to war with iran..some will do all in their
power to continue to convince the need for this - netanyahu in particular.. but aside from
it being a huge mistake, how much of this is driven by capitalism and its need to exploit
every corner of the earth?? is this really what the narrative is about - chasing after
money 24-7? it sure looks like it to me... how else do the financial sanctions get
rationalized? and, they are not working as your example notes.. when they get applied, the
countries in question, find alternatives to kelloggs corn flakes and etc. etc whether it be
in russia or iran... the financial sanctions have unintended consequences for the empire..
the empire imposes them to control the real narrative - the financial narrative -
capitalism... it ain't working! time for war is the answer to all this, if you side with
the present capitalist system..
that bit about "the Hariri family had earned $108 million between 2006 and 2015 from
interest on the public debt." is pretty shameful and embarrassing for the hariri family
with it's ties to ksa... i can't see how this works out for them long term, not that the
hariri family are any different then the bush family and etc.. being willing to exploit
your fellow citizens seems to imply money trumps national identity.. of course everyone
knew this already... all these kleptomaniacs need to go live on an island somewhere and
kill themselves trying to up one each other over this world game called monopoly.. most of
us aren't into this game.. why force it on the world?
@Canthama #10
Indeed, it is ironic that Iran - despite literally decades of sanctions and international
isolationism plus a long shooting war - has managed to create a very credible military and
economy.
This is especially in contrast to all of its neighbors.
The brief interchange with Assistant Secretary Schenker, shows a man believing his own
propaganda, and believing in his exceptionalism. The belief in one's own exceptionalism
leads one to view oneself as superior to others (ie. Aryan Supremacy under the Nazis).
Unfortunately, this belief leads to hubris, which leads to arrogance where one
overestimates one's own capabilities and underestimates the capabilities of one's
adversary; this always leads to fatal misjudgments.
The problem I have with the notion that Netanyahu has become more dangerous is that
it downplays the long-term planning for war and deep-seated animosity toward Iran.
Multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson, once Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's key
supporter, and his wife Miriam testified to police that Sara Netanyahu was "crazy" and
that "she decides everything," including key appointments and even some political
matters , in the Netanyahu household, Channel 13 reported Sunday.
"She's completely crazy," said Sheldon Adelson, publisher of the Israel Hayom daily.
"She was compulsive about photos of herself and how she looked. She said 'I'm the first
lady, I'm a psychologist and I teach children about psychology.' ... She would tell my
wife that if Iran attacked it would be her fault because we didn't publish good pictures
of her," said Adelson, a leading donor to Israeli and Jewish causes as well as to the
Republican Party ...
... Dr. Miriam Adelson told police that Sara chooses the people who work with the
prime minister. "She chooses the workers, the people around him, the staff, his
secretary. Then she knows everything that goes on," she said. When asked if Sara
Netanyahu influences governmental appointments, Adelson said, "Those too, I believe."
...
If Netanyahu has become more dangerous because he is trying to avoid being indicted on
various bribery, fraud and other corruption charges, then Sara Netanyahu will have become
just as dangerous as well because she's trying to avoid corruption charges herself.
How on earth did Israel end up with such a dysfunctional de facto monarchy?
Is the Iranian national budget really $36 billion? That seems astonishingly tiny, certainly
compared to the USA's $2 trillion or whatever. I think New York City's budget is $92
billion. Yet Iran stands.
Despite all the damage it does across the globe, It never ceases to amaze how little,
ultimately, is the practical effect of the USAs seemingly endless economic and military
resources.
"War alone brings up to their highest tension all human energies and imposes the stamp of
nobility upon the peoples who have the courage to make it." -- Benito Mussolini
"It is well that war is so terrible, else we should grow too fond of it." -- General
Robert E. Lee
"Magnificent! Compared to war all other forms of human endeavor shrink to
insignificance.
God help me, I do love it so!" -- General George S. Patton
I hope that Bibi gets his way.
"Israel" declared its independence a few years after I was born and has been a troublesome
parasite ever since.
I hope that it will cease to exist before I die.
It's utterly insane for a shitty little fake country to incubate so much hatred that it
wishes to destroy a country of 80 million Human Beings for reasons which have yet to be
explained in any coherent manner. Why do Jews hate ALL Iranians so much?
I'm quite confident that an attack on Iran by "Israel" will make my
dream come true.
I feel a bit sorry for the Good Jews in "Israel" and I hope that both of them escape before
"Israel" is destroyed as a direct result of its own psychopathy, angst, racism and hatred.
Thank you b for an ineresting post. I find two statements by Alaistair Cooke disturbing and
incongruous.
And, in Syria, US forces are trying to use the Syrian Kurds to block connective links
between Iran and Iraq (tightening the economic siege), whilst Israel attacks Iranian
infrastructure there, from the air.
This shows either a typo or a confused sense of the borders between the three nations.
Regardless it is a serious element of his story but poorly expressed.
On the other hand – in what may also be understood as an 'other' aspect to a
'preparing of the stage', Israel is at work to pacify Gaza (with Gulf cash); and the US
is active with the Houthis in trying to tamp down the war with Saudi Arabia: i.e.
de-conflicting other potential war fronts.
Read that twice and see if it conforms to what is actually happening in the real world.
I read it as a complete misrepresentation of reality. Weasel words perhaps but I cannot
take this guy seriously.
Regarding the Iranian state and the rounded up violent 'colour revolution' gangs. I
suspect that Iran became aware of the preparation and plans for a new year surprise and the
fuel price hike was deliberately brought forward and the initial demonstration / protest by
citizens was intended to prematurely trigger the violent gangs while they had intense
surveillance in place from the minute of the price rise statement.
The shutting down of the global internet was an excellent strategy to force the activist
disrupters to rely on the internal tightly monitored network. We may be seeing an effective
snuff mechanism to put the fires out before they commence. If the model works it will
severely inhibit the global finance subversives from undermining nations that don't want
them around.
Stunning/not-stunning, as ever, to see the US asst, Secretary of State, in seemingly the
same breath, take credit on behalf of the US for wreaking the economy of Iran, while
blaming Iranian 'incompetence' and supposed misuse of funds for Iran's economic problems!
Of course, it seems the 'journalist' didn't call this incoherent narrative out for either
its dishonesty or its sheer ethical awfulness.
I'm not sure exactly what Alfred @27 meant by the incompetence of Iran and Venezuela, but
certainly if you're cursed by having oil or anything like that under your land, it's a bad
idea to compound the predicament by shackling your economy to it.
If the threat of external predation leaves you no choice but to extract and export the
stuff in order to get the money to buy/develop military hardware, at least don't let any
surplus money corrupt and inflate your domestic economy.
He is bad for Jewish programmers, nurses, etc. He is certainly good for Jewish financial
oligarchs like Adelson and singer as well as Zionists like natuanuahoo.
Notable quotes:
"... I think it was an Israeli friend who first told me that Judaism, unlike other faiths, has rarely been a religion of oppression -- but that the reason was simply lack of opportunity, a diagnosis that recent Israeli governments seem determined to confirm. ..."
"... An aside: American Jews almost all support Israel, but many don't support the policies of its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. But that's presumably a distinction Trump doesn't understand, at home or abroad ..."
On Saturday Donald Trump gave a
speech to the Israeli American Council in which he asserted that many in his audience were
"not nice people at all," but that "you have to vote for me" because Democrats would raise
their taxes.
Was he peddling an anti-Semitic stereotype, portraying Jews as money-grubbing types who care
only about their wealth? Of course he was. You might possibly make excuses for his remarks if
they were an isolated instance, but in fact Trump has done this sort of thing many times, for
example asserting in 2015 that Jews weren't supporting him because he wasn't accepting their
money and "you want to control your politicians."
Well, it's not news that Trump's bigotry isn't restricted to blacks and immigrants. What is
interesting, however, is that this particular anti-Semitic cliché -- that Jews are
greedy, and that their political behavior is especially driven by their financial interests --
is empirically dead wrong. In fact, American Jews are much more liberal than you might expect
given their economic situation.
... ... ...
In other words, American Jews aren't the uniquely greedy, self-interested characters
anti-Semites imagine them to be. But it would be foolish to make the opposite mistake and
imagine that Jews are especially public-spirited; they're just people, with the same virtues
and vices as everyone else. I think it was an Israeli friend who first told me that
Judaism, unlike other faiths, has rarely been a religion of oppression -- but that the reason
was simply lack of opportunity, a diagnosis that recent Israeli governments seem determined to
confirm.
An aside: American Jews almost all support Israel, but many don't support the policies
of its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. But that's presumably a distinction Trump doesn't
understand, at home or abroad
Excellent column to which I would add only that Trump is not pro-Israel. Rather, he is
pro-Netanyahu because he identifies with individuals he identifies as apparent "strong men"
and believes that making "deals" with Netanyahu and others of his ilk will be mutually and
personally beneficial. Trump has no concern with national policy or the best interests of the
U.S. It's all about his power and wealth and he is open to deals with others who share his
principal concern with self-benefit above all else. Any action taken by Trump that may seem
pro-Israel in reality is merely a means to a self-serving and perhaps corrupt end. Birds of a
feather...
Surprised Paul didn't mention the main sponsor of the group that invited Trump to speak, the
Israeli American Council, is Sheldon Adelson, whose politics are of the minority in the
Jewish community but very close to Trump (and Bibi's). Which actually makes the speech rather
even uglier, perhaps.
Difficult to appreciate why the US, or Krugman for that matter, would support a
religion-based Apartheid country, much less associate with that country's chief lobbying arm.
Say what you will about our founding fathers, but George Washington was absolutely prescient
and correct in his farewell address when he advised against "a passionate attachment of one
nation for another"; the "variety of evils" he warned of regularly manifest themselves.
The question is not who is Trump bad for. The question is- who is he good for! He is not so
great for his own die-hard supporters, or even his own long term interest. In fact, he
sabotaged his own presidency and basically got himself into this impeachment affair. Almost
everyone is suffering under this guy. Vast majority realized that as soon as he became the
President. Many realized it little later. Hopefully the remaining tiny few will understand in
near future.
Dear Professor K, weaponizing religion is nothing new. What's most amazing is that people
were cheering him while being marginalized as stereotypes. The God of Mamon won the evening.
This is the only religion Trump adheres to. Apparently it's popular among other religions
too.
In my first 59 years, I'd never felt concern for my physical safety as a Jew in this country
until this man became president. I knew exactly where this was all headed at the moment Sean
Spicer took to the podium and lied to the country about the inauguration crowd size in his
first official act for Trump. It made me sick to my stomach, and I couldn't believe that most
people were laughing it off as no big deal. Any Jew who trust this administration is a fool,
and although there a few more "precise" Yiddish words for these members of my tribe, I'll
refrain from using them as I'm sure you can fill in the blanks just fine.
A good reference to this opinion column, which was written and probably edited by highly
intelligent people- The Stupidity of Intelligence: What Happened to Common Sense? Every
sentence could be easily argued and overturned based upon some simple facts.
Trump and his minions try to buy Jewish support by backing right wing Israelis in their goal
of a greater Israel at the expense of the Palestinians. In fact, when asked if Trump is
anti-Semitic, one his strongest supporters, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, gave the standard
response, "Trump supports Israel". Supporting Israel is a political position. All the while,
Trump has about as much use for Jews as Archie Bunker had for the Jews in his fictional law
firm, Rabinowitz, Rabinowitz and Rabinowitz. Then they often mention that his son-in-law is
Jewish, like he had a choice in the matter. Simultaneously, Trump derives strong support from
white nationalists that would be perfectly happy to send all American Jews to Israel. Those
two motivations are inexorably linked. Because of this linkage, I can't understand for one
minute how American Jews can support Trump. Is the money that good? Do they think that their
money can protect them? Others have made that mistake before.
Among Trump's lies is that he is far more friendly to Israel than Obama was. Sadly, some Jews
take this lie as fact and, because of this, overlook everything else Trump does or says,
supporting him without wavering, no matter what.
The difference is intelligence. My college psychology textbook said that Russian Jewish
immigrants had the highest IQs of all identified ethnicities. Number two was all other Jews.
Of course they voted for Hillary.
The attachment the wealthy have for the Republican Party goes beyond just a lower tax rate.
It is power and deference. The wealthy want an unquestioned dominance that not only protects
and expands their wealth, but celebrates them not only for their wealth as symbol of personal
success but of their moral superiority. Obama certainly did not threaten their wealth, and,
in fact, pursued policies that protected them from the worst of the Great Recession. Yet, the
masters of wealth whined endlessly about Obama not respecting them and that his language
toward them was disrespectful and not sufficiently deferential. Trump's "policies" threaten
long term economic health, and the wealth creation that keeps concentrating wealth at the
top. His trade gyrations, his dismantling of the environmental regulatory regime to favor
fossil fuels, and his reward and punishment of private corporations based on politics are
doing the damage that no Democrat would ever inflict. Yet, nary a corporate executive will
said a word, and far too many are happy to be props at events for Trump's endless
glorification of himself. Because they, like Trump, believe themselves heroes and geniuses
whose domination should never be questioned. So they and Trump wind up all being pretty
comfortable with each other. The neo-liberal promise of free market economics producing
rational economic actors free from political motives and protecting all of us from political
abuse rings pretty hollow.
"I think it was an Israeli friend who first told me that Judaism, unlike other faiths, has
rarely been a religion of oppression -- but that the reason was simply lack of opportunity, a
diagnosis that recent Israeli governments seem determined to confirm." Considering my age,
and extrapolating therefrom, I think Einstein beat your friend to it. Pondering the moral
weight given to Jewish thought at the time, Einstein thought political power was behind it,
Jews simply had not the opportunity. As not unusual, Einstein's theory has been supported by
experiment.
Prof. Krugman, I loved this statement " An aside: American Jews almost all support Israel,
but many don't support the policies of its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. But that's
presumably a distinction Trump doesn't understand, at home or abroad" Please make sure that
your colleague Bret Stephens get this memo.
The audience at the Israeli American Council cheered Trump enthusiastically through out his
whole speech. They cheered when he said he learned his tricks from Sheldon Adelson. They
cheered when he said that maybe he should stay for eight more years. They hardly thought he
was anti-Semitic. He has done exactly what he promised his big donors starting with the
embassy in Jerusalem. His shutting down of any opposition to the Netanyahu administration
especially the BDS movement . He seems to know his audience very well and they were loving
it.
Trump is not just saying "look at the taxes you are saving", he's saying "look what I've done
for Israel!" I don't understand why the media persists on calling him a white nationalist.
His daughter and son in law are strict Jews, he recognized Jerusalem as the capital of
Israel, he's given them the Golan Heights and has listened to their advice on Iran (bad
idea). He's not after Jewish votes necessarily, because there are only about 2 million Jews
in the U.S . But being more "affluent on average" he's more likely after some big campaign
contributions.
Everyone in my Jewish family votes Democratic, although we have all done well financially. I
remember growing up that my Dad would say that he personally would benefit financially from a
Republican administration, but that it would not be good for the nation as a whole. I believe
that it is not just self-interest and fear of anti-Semitism that has led Jews to favor the
Democratic party, but also Jewish values, including wanting to make the world a better place.
An argument can also be made that Netanyahu (extreme Right) has been excessively partisan to
the degree that it has divided both Israel and diaspora Jews. Israel might be bettered by
negotiating with all of its territorial stakeholders. Land is at issue. Palestinians will not
vanish or evaporate. The West Bank must be addressed. The Trump rubber stamp of a Jarusalem
Embassy does not solve much.
@Justice Support for Israel may mean many things, at its most basic it's a belief that Israel
had and still has a right to exist among the nations of the world. If one believes that at
its inception it was and continues to be nothing more than an "ethnoreligious state," that
imay not be support , though Krugman distinguises between the former and criticism of the
current Israeli administration. I suppose the commenter would also find theocratic states
like Saudi Arabia or Iran "deeply problematic " One thing for sure is that most Jews will not
suport the supposedly Zionist Trump when he says that Jews who vote Democratic are either
uninformed or disloyal.
@Justice My own take is that american jews support having a home for jews, esp in the land
they came from. But the government of Israel is conservative while most american jews are
more liberal. There are many liberal jews in Israel. I support the idea of a homeland for the
jews, just not how that has been accomplished. Real democracy is fragile and far too many
countries are moving from democracy to more authoritarian governments.
I'm told that many Israelis who were enthusiastic about Trump got a wakeup call when he
abandoned the Kurds. They now better understand that he regards everyone as disposable, and
can't imagine that anyone could be motivated by something other than pure-self interest.
@Eben Sadly, Donald is not the first president to abandon the Kurds. In the words of Henry
Kissinger, "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests." Yes, this could
conceivably at some time in the future be relevant to Israel. Even if not under Donald.
@edwardc - Kissinger, "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests." Our
current problem is that the "interests" being pursued are solely those of Donald Trump
personally -- appeasing his secret Russian lenders; doing the bidding of "tough" guy
dictators like Turkey's so he can feel tough himself and build hotels in their capitals;
exercising his long held bigotry about people of color in this country. Our allies the Kurds,
on the other hand, helped with an actual, important US national interest: beating ISIS and
holding it back from growing again to where it can resume attacking us. But since that
doesn't put money in Trump's pocket he abandons the cause.
@Eben : I have great empathy for the Kurdish people, but does "support for the Kurds" mean we
must stay in Iraq and Afghanistan literally forever? we've already been there going on 17
years -- at the cost of trillions of dollars spent and thousands of American lives.
"In last year's midterms, 52 percent of voters with incomes over $200,000 voted Republican,
compared with only 38 percent of voters with incomes under $50,000. The rightward tilt is
especially strong at the very top; although there are a few high-profile liberal
billionaires, most of the extremely wealthy are also extremely right-wing." And that group
will vote for Trump for re-election even if he is impeached unfortunately.
Israel does not seem to understand the long term damage being done to its country. The U.S.
has always been its number one defender, but there is a whole generation of Americans that
think Israel is bad, that it is mistreating the Palestinians. Demographics are working
against it. Israel can always look to Europe, but I don't know how that is going to work out
in the long run.
@Gone Coastal Trump is all about the sugar high you get from immediate gratification of the
baser impulses. His influence will end soon enough, perhaps another five years but the
potential destruction of the Repulican party and the reaction against Trumpism could last for
decades. Its a big danger to Israel if Israel is just seen as the last gasp of European
colonialism and a part of the Western white world : a European imposition on the middle east.
Roosevelt tried to create institutions that would lead to peace though out the life times of
the people who lived when he was president. Sadly Trump is making strides to destroy the
institutions initiated by Roosevelt, leaving a world where small countries are more easily
bullied by their larger neighbors.
Anti-Semitism in UK serves the same role as Neo-McCartyism in the USA as demonstrated by
RussiaGate.
There is a deep analogy between neo-McCarthyism complain in the USA nad anti-Semitism campaign in the US Parliament.
Notable quotes:
"... Luciana Berger (image on the right), a Jewish MP who has highlighted what she sees as an anti-Semitism problem under Corbyn, led the charge, stating at the Independent Group's launch that she had reached "the sickening conclusion " that Labour was "institutionally racist". ..."
"... She and her allies claim she has been hounded out of the party by "anti-semitic bullying". Berger has suffered online abuse and death threats from a young neo-Nazi who was jailed for two years in 2016. There have been other incidences of abuse and other sentences, including a 27-month jail term for John Nimmo , a right-wing extremist who referred to Berger as "Jewish scum" and signed his messages, "your friend, the Nazi". ..."
"... That is one reason why anti-semitism smears have been so maliciously effective against anti-Zionist Jews in the party and used with barely a murmur of protest – or in most cases, even recognition that Jews are being suspended and expelled for opposing Israel's racist policies towards Palestinians. ..."
"... The Blairites in Labour, joined by the ruling Conservative Party, the mainstream media and pro-Israel lobby groups, have selected anti-semitism as the terrain on which to try to destroy a Corbyn-led Labour Party, because it is a battlefield in which the left stands no hope of getting a fair hearing – or any hearing at all. ..."
Breakaway MPs hope that smearing Corbyn will obscure the fact that they are remnants
of an old political order bankrupt of ideas
The announcement by seven MPs from
the UK Labour Party on Monday that they were breaking away and creating a new parliamentary
faction marked the biggest internal upheaval in a British political party in nearly 40 years,
when the SDP split from Labour.
On Wednesday, they were joined by an eighth Labour MP, Joan Ryan , and three Conservative
MPs. There are predictions more will follow.
With the UK teetering on the brink of crashing out of the European Union with no deal on
Brexit, the founders of the so-called Independent Group made reference to their opposition to
Brexit.
The chief concern cited for the split by the eight Labour MPs, though, was a supposed
"anti-semitism crisis" in the party.
The breakaway faction seemingly agrees that anti-Semitism has become so endemic in the
party since Jeremy Corbyn became leader more than three years ago that they were left with no
choice but to quit.
Corbyn, it should be noted, is the first leader of a major British party to explicitly
prioritize the rights of Palestinians over Israel's continuing belligerent occupation of the
Palestinian territories.
'Sickeningly racist'?
Luciana Berger (image on the right), a Jewish MP who has highlighted what she sees as an
anti-Semitism problem under Corbyn, led the charge, stating at the Independent Group's launch
that she had reached "the sickening
conclusion " that Labour was "institutionally racist".
She and her allies claim she has been hounded out of the party by "anti-semitic bullying".
Berger has suffered online abuse and death threats from a young neo-Nazi who was
jailed for two years in 2016. There have been other incidences of abuse and other
sentences, including a 27-month jail term for
John Nimmo , a right-wing extremist who referred to Berger as "Jewish scum" and signed his
messages, "your friend, the Nazi".
In an interview with the Jewish Chronicle, the former Labour MP said the Independent Group
would provide the Jewish community with a " political home that they,
like much of the rest of the country, are now looking for".
In a plea to keep the party together, deputy leader Tom Watson issued a video in which he
criticised his own party for being too slow to tackle anti-Semitism. The situation "poses a
test" for Labour, he said, adding: "Do we respond with simple condemnation, or do we try and
reach out beyond our comfort zone and prevent others from following?"
Ruth Smeeth , another Jewish Labour MP who may yet join a later wave of departures, was
reported to have broken down
in tears at a parliamentary party meeting following the split, as she called for tougher
action on anti-semitism.
Two days later, as she split from Labour, Ryan accused the party of being "infected with the
scourge of anti-Jewish racism".
Hatred claims undercut
The timing of the defections was strange, occurring shortly after the Labour leadership
revealed the findings
of an investigation into complaints of anti-semitism in the party. These were the very
complaints that MPs such as Berger have been citing as proof of the party's "institutional
racism".
And yet, the report decisively undercut their claims – not only of endemic
anti-semitism in Labour, but of any significant problem at all.
That echoed an earlier report by the Commons home affairs committee, which found there was
"no reliable, empirical
evidence " that Labour had more of an anti-semitism problem than any other British
political party.
Nonetheless, the facts seem to be playing little or no part in influencing the anti-semitism
narrative. This latest report was thus almost entirely ignored by Corbyn's opponents and by the
mainstream media.
It is, therefore, worth briefly examining what the Labour Party's investigation
discovered.
Over the previous 10 months, 673 complaints had been filed against Labour members over
alleged anti-semitic behaviour, many based on online comments. In a third of those cases,
insufficient evidence had been produced.
The 453 other allegations represented 0.08 percent of the 540,000-strong Labour membership.
Hardly "endemic" or "institutional", it seems.
Intemperate language
There is the possibility past outbursts have been part of this investigation. Intemperate
language flared especially in 2014 – before Corbyn became leader – when Israel
launched a military operation on Gaza that killed large numbers of Palestinian civilians,
including many hundreds of children.
Certainly, it is unclear how many of those reportedly anti-semitic comments concern not
prejudice towards Jews, but rather outspoken criticism of the state of Israel, which was
redefined as anti-semitic last year by Labour, under severe pressure from MPs such as Berger
and Ryan and Jewish lobby groups, such as the Board of Deputies and the Jewish Labour
Movement.
Seven of the 11 examples of
anti-semitism associated with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition
adopted by Labour concern Israel. That includes describing Israel as a "racist endeavour", even
though Israel passed a basic law last year stripping the fifth of its population who are not
Jewish of any right to self-determination, formally creating two
classes of citizen.
Illustrating the problem Labour has created for itself as a result, some of the most
high-profile suspensions and expulsions have actually targeted Jewish members of the party who
identify as anti-Zionist – that is, they consider Israel a racist state. They include T ony
Greenstein, Jackie Walker, Martin Odoni, Glyn Secker and Cyril Chilson .
Another Jewish member,
Moshe Machover , a professor emeritus at the University of London, had to be reinstated
after a huge outcry among members at his treatment by the party.
Unthinking prejudice
Alan Maddison , who has been conducting statistical research on anti-semitism for a
pro-Corbyn Jewish group, Jewish Voice for Labour, put the 0.08 percent figure into its wider
social and political
context this week.
He quoted the findings of a large survey of anti-semitic attitudes
published by the Institute for Jewish Policy Research in 2017. It found that 30 percent of
respondents from various walks of society agreed with one or more of eight anti-semitic views,
ranging from stereotypes such as "Jews think they are better than other people" to Holocaust
denial.
However, lead researcher Daniel Staetsky concluded that in most cases, this was evidence of
unthinking prejudice rather than conscious bigotry. Four-fifths of those who exhibited a degree
of anti-semitism also agreed with at least one positive statement about Jewish people.
This appears to be the main problem among the tiny number of Labour Party members identified
in complaints, and is reflected in the predominance of warnings about conduct rather than
expulsions and suspensions.
Far-right bigotry
Another of the institute's findings poses a particular problem for Corbyn's opponents, who
argue that the Labour leader has imported anti-semitism into the party by attracting the "hard
left". Since he was elected, Labour membership has rocketed.
Even if it were true that Corbyn and his supporters are on the far-left – a highly
questionable assumption, made superficially plausible only because Labour moved to the
centre-right under Tony Blair in the late 1990s – the institute's research pulls the rug
out from under Corbyn's critics.
It discovered that across the political spectrum, conscious hatred of Jews was very low, and
that it was exhibited in equal measure from the "very left-wing" to the "fairly right-wing".
The only exception, as one might expect, was on the "very right-wing", where virulent
anti-semitism was much more prevalent.
That finding was confirmed last week by surveys that showed a significant rise in violent,
anti-semitic attacks across Europe as far-right parties make inroads in many member states. A
Guardian report noted that the "figures show an overwhelming majority of
violence against Jews is perpetrated by far-right supporters".
Supporters of overseas war
So what is the basis for concerns about the Labour Party being mired in supposed
"institutional anti-semitism" since it moved from the centre to the left under Corbyn, when the
figures and political trends demonstrate nothing of the sort?
A clue may be found in the wider political worldview of the eight MPs who have broken from
Labour.
All but two are listed as supporters of the parliamentary "Labour Friends of
Israel" (LFI) faction. Further, Berger is a former director of that staunchly pro-Israel lobby
group, and Ryan is its current chair, a position the group says she will hold onto, despite no
longer being a Labour MP.
So extreme are the LFI's views on Israel that it sought to exonerate Israel of a massacre
last year, in which its snipers shot dead many dozens of unarmed Palestinian demonstrators in
Gaza in a single day. Faced with a social media backlash, it quietly took down the posts
.
The eight MPs' voting records – except for Gavin Shuker, for whom the picture is mixed
– show them holding consistently hawkish foreign policy positions that are deeply
antithetical to Corbyn's approach to international relations.
They either "almost always" or "generally" backed "combat operations overseas"; those who were
MPs at the time supported the 2003 Iraq war; and they all opposed subsequent investigations
into the Iraq war.
Committed Friends of Israel
In one sense, the breakaway group's support for Labour Friends of Israel may not be
surprising, and indicates why Corbyn is facing such widespread trouble from within his own
party. Dozens of Labour MPs are members of the group, including Tom Watson and Ruth
Smeeth.
Smeeth, one of those at the forefront of accusing Corbyn of fostering anti-semitism in
Labour, is also a former public affairs director of BICOM, another stridently pro-Israel
lobby group .
None of these MPs were concerned enough with the LFI's continuing vocal support for Israel
as it has shifted to the far-right under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to have stepped down
from the group.
'Wrong kind of Jews'
Anti-semitism has taken centre stage in the manoeuvring against Corbyn, despite there being
no evidence of significant hatred against Jews in the party. Increasingly, it seems, tangible
abuse of Jews is of little interest unless it can be related to Corbyn.
The markedly selective interest in anti-semitism in the Corbyn context among the breakaway
MPs and supposed anti-semitism watchdogs has been starkly on show for some time.
Notably, none expressed concern at the media mauling of a left-wing, satirical Jewish group
called Jewdas when Corbyn was widely attacked for meeting "the wrong kind of Jews". In fact,
leading Labour figures, including the Jewish Labour Movement, joined in the
abuse .
And increasingly in this febrile atmosphere, there has been an ever-greater indulgence of
the "right kind of anti-semitism" – when it is directed at Corbyn supporters.
A troubling illustration was provided on the TV show Good Morning Britain this week, when
Tom Bower was invited on to discuss his new unauthorised biography of Corbyn, in which he
accuses him of anti-semitism. The hosts looked on demurely as Bower, a Jewish journalist,
defamed fellow Jewish journalist Michael Segalov as a " self-hating Jew " for defending Corbyn on the
show.
Revenge of the Blairites
So what is the significance of the fact that the Labour MPs who have been most outspoken in
criticising Corbyn – those who helped organise a 2016 leadership challenge against him,
and those who are now rumoured to be considering joining the breakaway faction – are
heavily represented on the list of MPs supporting LFI?
For them, it seems, vigorous support for Israel is not only a key foreign policy matter, but
a marker of their political priorities and worldview – one that starkly clashes with the
views of Corbyn and a majority of the Labour membership.
Anti-semitism has turned out to be the most useful – and damaging – weapon to
wield against the Labour leader for a variety of reasons close to the hearts of the holdouts
from the Blair era, who still dominate the parliamentary party and parts of the Labour
bureaucracy.
Perhaps most obviously, the Blairite wing of the party is still primarily loyal to a notion
that Britain should at all costs maintain its transatlantic alliance with the United States in
foreign policy matters. Israel is a key issue for those on both sides of the Atlantic who see
that state as a projection of Western power into the oil-rich Middle East and romanticise
Israel as a guarantor of Western values in a "barbaric" region.
Corbyn's prioritising of Palestinian rights threatens to overturn a core imperial value to
which the Blairites cling.
Tarred and feathered
But it goes further. Anti-semitism has become a useful stand-in for the deep differences in
a domestic political culture between the Blairites, on one hand, and Corbyn and the wider
membership, on the other.
A focus on anti-semitism avoids the right-wing MPs having to admit much wider grievances
with Corbyn's Labour that would probably play far less well not only with Labour members, but
with the broader British electorate.
As well as their enthusiasm for foreign wars, the Blairites support the enrichment of a
narrow neo-liberal elite, are ambivalent about austerity policies, and are reticent at
returning key utilities to public ownership. All of this can be neatly evaded and veiled by
talking up anti-semitism.
But the utility of anti-semitism as a weapon with which to beat Corbyn and his supporters
– however unfairly – runs deeper still.
The Blairites view allegations of anti-Jewish racism as a trump card. Calling someone an
anti-semite rapidly closes down all debate and rational thought. It isolates, then tars and
feathers its targets. No one wants to be seen to be associated with an anti-semite, let alone
defend them.
Weak hand exposed
That is one reason why anti-semitism smears have been so maliciously effective against
anti-Zionist Jews in the party and used with barely a murmur of protest – or in most
cases, even recognition that Jews are being suspended and expelled for opposing Israel's racist
policies towards Palestinians.
This is a revival of the vile "self-hating Jew" trope that Israel and its defenders
concocted decades ago to intimidate Jewish critics.
The Blairites in Labour, joined by the ruling Conservative Party, the mainstream media
and pro-Israel lobby groups, have selected anti-semitism as the terrain on which to try to
destroy a Corbyn-led Labour Party, because it is a battlefield in which the left stands no hope
of getting a fair hearing – or any hearing at all.
But paradoxically, the Labour breakaway group may have inadvertently exposed the weakness of
its hand. The eight MPs have indicated that they will not run in by-elections, and for good
reason: it is highly unlikely they would stand a chance of winning in any of their current
constituencies outside the Labour Party.
Their decision will also spur moves to begin deselecting those Labour MPs who are openly
trying to sabotage the party – and the members' wishes – from within.
That may finally lead to a clearing out of the parliamentary baggage left behind from the
Blair era, and allow Labour to begin rebuilding itself as a party ready to deal with the
political, social, economic and environmental challenges of the 21st century.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email
lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Jonathan Cook, a British journalist based in Nazareth since 2001, is the the author of
three books on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He is a past winner of the Martha Gellhorn
Special Prize for Journalism. His website and blog can be found at: www.jonathan-cook.net He is
a frequent contributor to Global Research.
To Tony Hall , Director General of the BBC cc: Fran Unsworth and Tracey Henry
December 6, 2019
URGENT – "Is the BBC Antisemitic?"
We need to register with you our deep concern that, once again, and in the closing stages
of an acrimonious election campaign, the BBC's coverage of antisemitism charges against the
Labour Party has been both unbalanced and uncritical. Your reporting today of the Jewish
Labour Movement (JLM)'s repetition of its flimsily-based charges against the Party that it used
to support falls disastrously short of the Corporation's own formal standards of accuracy and
balance.
This represents what we can only call a flagrant breach, and of all times during a general
election campaign, of the BBC's legal commitment to due impartiality and fairness.
Over recent months, and with no remission during the election campaign, coverage of
allegations of Labour antisemitism has featured repeatedly in the BBC News, and often as the
lead item. In news programmes the allegations have been reported as quasi-factual, with no
indication that they are fiercely contested. In more discursive formats such as the Today
programme or Newsnight, presenters have consistently adopted a negative, attacking stance
towards anyone who questions the basis of the allegations. In complete contrast, those
making the allegations, usually based on hearsay rather than personal experience, are supplied
with leading questions and softball follow-up.
Jews are as diverse as any other substantial group in society. Yet people whose
representative status is highly doubtful are routinely presented by the BBC as 'representatives
of the Jewish community'. Surely you can ensure that your broadcasting staff know the facts
and convey them appropriately. The Board of Deputies, for example, has no supervised electoral
process – and in any case its synagogue-based membership covers no more than one third of
the UK's Jewish population. Secular Jews make up at least 50% of British Jews and have no voice
through the Board of Deputies.
In particular the voices of the large numbers of Jews who are Party members, who know how
atypical the quite rare examples of antisemitic behaviour in the party are, and who are
enthusiastic supporters of a Corbyn-led Labour government have been almost entirely ignored.
The BBC has allowed itself to be used as a megaphone for deeply contested charges.
The BBC's Guidelines state that when a partisan political position is put forward, an
opposing one, if it exists, should be broadcast too. The Labour Party does have many Jews who
support it and who are prepared to speak out, notably in the organisation Jewish Voice for
Labour. Our many requests to be able to present our experience and our perspective are
routinely ignored, and in the rare exceptions have never been given equal weighting with the
negative voices.
The BBC's coverage of the JLM's release of its evidence to the Equalities and Human Rights
Commission's inquiry (into any discrimination in Labour's processes for handling complaints of
anti-Semitism) is a prime example of the BBC's systematic imbalance. This deliberately-timed
attempted destabilization of the Labour Party's position by JLM has appeared in virtually every
main news bulletin today, including live coverage – uncontested – of the JLM news
conference on BBC News Channel.
The evidence that Jewish Voice for Labour gave to the EHRC inquiry was made public at the
time and is publicly available
on our web-site . This evidence is directly relevant to your news item but was not even
mentioned in today's extended BBC coverage. It seems that the BBC is treating us as the 'wrong
sort of Jew'.
All Jews are not the same. Asserting that they are is an aspect of anti-Semitism. The BBC
should be ashamed of its record in openness to the multiple voices of British jewry.
By behaving in the way that it has (and today's JLM coverage is only the latest example) the
BBC has, constructively, been contributing to an assiduously promoted anti-Labour agenda.
We look forward to immediate corrective action.
This letter will be published on our website.
Sincerely,
Leah Levane and Jenny Manson, co-chairs JVL
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article
to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
"... "I'm opposed to conditioning the aid, and I would fight it no matter what," Engel told Al-Monitor. "The Democratic Party has traditionally been a pro-Israel party, and I see no reason for that to change now. If there are people who are Democrats who don't feel that way, then I don't think they should be elected president of the United States." ..."
"... Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., is the most vocal proponent of conditioning Israeli military aid in the presidential race -- going even further left than J Street and all his primary opponents. At J Street's conference in October he said that some of the $3.8 billion in annual assistance "should go right now to humanitarian aid in Gaza." ..."
"... J Street has set any formal Israeli annexation of the West Bank as its red line for placing conditions on Israeli military aid. But it also supports the $38 billion memorandum of understanding. ..."
"... Shortly after the vote, Sanders campaign co-chair Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., as well as Reps. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., and Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., asked colleagues to sign a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo asking him to clarify whether Israel has used US military equipment while demolishing Palestinian homes in the West Bank. ..."
"... The letter, seen by Al-Monitor, notes that the Arms Export Control Act "narrowly conditions the use of transferred US-origin defense articles" and requires the president to inform Congress if the equipment is used for unauthorized purposes ..."
The Jews try to run US policy ..but lately the Dem base (and part of the party) has become
more pro Palestine.
Democratic (Jewish) lawmakers reckon with 2020 rhetoric on Israel aid
December 6, 2019
Presidential candidates who want to place conditions on Israeli military aid have prompted
pro-Israel House Democrats to go on the offensive.
REUTERS/Joshua Roberts
It's becoming harder and harder for pro-Israel Democrats on
Capitol Hill to ignore the increasingly critical voices of the US ally within their party and
the presidential race.
House Democratic leaders -- who happen to be some of the staunchest Israel supporters on
Capitol Hill -- this week added language supportive of the annual $3.8 billion military aid
package to Israel to a symbolic resolution that endorses a two-state solution to the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The stalled resolution passed 226-188, largely along party lines, today. But pro-Israel
Democrats only came on board after House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel,
D-N.Y., added their new language to the bill. The new provision is a response to the fact
that several presidential candidates have come out of the woodwork in recent months with
calls to place conditions on the largest recipient of US military aid.
"I'm opposed to conditioning the aid, and I would fight it no matter what," Engel
told Al-Monitor. "The Democratic Party has traditionally been a pro-Israel party, and I see
no reason for that to change now. If there are people who are Democrats who don't feel that
way, then I don't think they should be elected president of the United
States."
When Engel's committee first advanced the resolution in July, Democratic leaders opted not
to put it on the floor, even as they passed another nonbinding resolution condemning the
pro-Palestinian boycott, divestment and sanctions movement 398-17, which was backed by the
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
That changed last month after the Trump administration repealed a decades-old legal
opinion maintaining that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegal under international
law.
"There are those on the far-left side of the Democratic Party -- and some of the
presidential candidates -- who are pushing for new conditions on aid, especially in their
interactions with Gaza, which is run by Hamas -- a terrorist organization," Gottheimer told
Al-Monitor.
An October poll from the liberal Center for American Progress found that 56% of
American voters, including 71% of Democrats, oppose "unconditional financial and military
assistance to Israel if the Israeli government continues to violate American policy on
settlement expansion or West Bank annexation."
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., is the most vocal proponent of conditioning Israeli
military aid in the presidential race -- going even further left than J Street and
all his primary opponents. At J Street's conference in October he said that some of the $3.8
billion in annual assistance "should go right now to humanitarian aid in Gaza."
J Street has set any formal Israeli annexation of the West Bank as its red line for
placing conditions on Israeli military aid. But it also supports the $38 billion memorandum
of understanding.
Presidential hopefuls Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South
Bend, Indiana, have jumped on board with J Street's position. However, the current
front-runner, former Vice President Joe Biden, has flatly ruled out conditioning the aid.
Notably, J Street did not oppose the effort to amend the Lowenthal resolution with the
military aid language. That said, progressive Democrats do not necessarily view that
provision as incompatible with calls to attach strings to that assistance. Congressional
Progressive Caucus co-chair Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., called the Engel language
"meaningless."
"It's just restating what current practice or current law is," Pocan told Al-Monitor. "We
don't really see it as affecting the bill one way or the other. At any time if we feel like
we're better off putting conditions on money and holding back money, Congress could always do
that with any country through the normal process."
Shortly after the vote, Sanders campaign co-chair Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., as well as
Reps. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., and Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., asked colleagues to sign a letter to
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo asking him to clarify whether Israel has used US military
equipment while demolishing Palestinian homes in the West Bank.
The letter, seen by Al-Monitor, notes that the Arms Export Control Act "narrowly
conditions the use of transferred US-origin defense articles" and requires the president to
inform Congress if the equipment is used for unauthorized purposes
I am all for such definitions; their scope is too narrow, if anything.
I'd prefer a broad definition that would describe as anti-Semite any person who attends a
church or a mosque; who does not contribute to Jewish settlements; who does not believe in
God-chosen Jewish nation being above all mortal laws.
Maybe then the Gentiles would be healed of their fear of being labelled 'anti-Semite'.
England and France, two antagonists, two mainstays of European civilisation, are
simultaneously engulfed in paroxysm of Judeophilia. The result of the forthcoming very
important parliamentary elections in Britain hinges on this issue, with Labour and Tories
competing who will express their love of Jews more profusely, while the Jews can't decide whom
they loath less. France, after a year of the middle-class Yellow Vests rebellion, enters the
fresh working class uprising with million strikers rioting on the streets, but its parliament
finds prime time to ponder and rule how Frenchmen should love Jews and hate those who hate
them. What is the meaning of this charade?
Surely they do not argue about Jewish cuisine. While palatable, it is rarely more than that.
A proof can be found in Israel, where Arab food rules, Japanese is recognised, Italian
cherished but Jewish cuisine shines by its absence. It is not Jewish noses, though a
significant feature of facial anatomy, they are not more elaborate or prominent than, say,
Sicilian. It is all about ideas.
Judeophilia, love of Jews is a troublesome symptom of a dangerous malady, of elites'
estrangement from its working classes, the malady presently in full bloom in France and
England. Judeophilia strikes divided societies and could lead to their collapse much faster
than its Siamese counter-twin, antisemitism. It did so in the past, most famously in Kingdom of
Poland, where the szlachta (nobility) loved Jews and despised ordinary folks, the
bydlo ( rednecks), until their state collapsed. In a Christian, or post-Christian
society, Jews are a symbol, a signifier of a certain attitude and behaviour that is profoundly
non-Christian.
Jews are a small minority that defies the large society and opposes it. Jews care for
themselves and disregard the majority and its needs; they have no scruples beyond prescribed
by the criminal law; they feel no communality with the majority. Jews do not share communion
with majority, and do not appeal to the same deity. Jews prosper when the majority regresses.
They are fast to see a break and use it for their advantage.
We won't enter a discussion whether the real Jews fit the description, and to what extent.
That is how they are perceived by those who love them and who hate them. There were Jews who
acted against the paradigm, and they weren't considered 'good for Jews'. Bruno Kreisky, the
Austrian Chancellor, Lazar Kaganovich, the Soviet official, Leon Trotsky or Torquemada weren't
'good for Jews'. And there are plentiful Gentiles who were considered 'good for Jews', like
Hillary Clinton or Tony Blair. Usually they were bad for everybody else. So, while we shall
defer our judgment on 'real Jews', there is no doubt that philo-Semites are bad for your
health.
The dominant economic and political paradigm, Neo-Liberalism claims that Jewish attitude
is the right one, and that we all should emulate Jews. This is an impossible claim; a majority
can't emulate a minority. A society whose members relate to each other as Jews-to-Gentiles is a
cannibals' cabal, and that is exactly what happens in our world. Jews prosper because they are
few; if all emulate Jews, the result is misery, not prosperity . An all-Jewish society
can't exist; Israel is a place where Thai, Chinese, Ukrainians and Palestinians work, the
Russians and Druze guard them, while Jews do usual Jewish things.
In England, the Jews are divided about Boris Johnson. They do not want Brexit to succeed,
but the access of Corbyn scares them even more. Corbyn is an avowed enemy of no, not of Jews,
but of neo-liberalism. Combine it with his rejection of Israeli politics, and you come to the
sum of anti-Jewish attitudes. Yes, Corbyn is anti-Jewish, if you wish, even anti-Semite, i.e. a
man whom Jews hate, for he is against both Jewish modes of operation, the capitalist and the
Zionist. He is perfectly ok with people of Jewish origin, he has no prejudice, he is no racist,
but it is irrelevant. His victory won't be 'good for Jews', neither for Jews who bleed
Palestine, nor for Jews who prosper at the expense of the British worker. Perhaps Corbyn would
be wonderful for Jewish workers, but they are not represented in the Board of Deputies , and the Chief Rabbi does not care
for them.
On the international scene, Corbyn is not a friend of NATO. If he could he would take the UK
out of this obsolete military alliance. So would President Trump, who is looking for a
justification to steer the US out of NATO. Jews do not like this attitude. For them, the US and
the UK should stay in NATO, for NATO is a strong defender and supporter of the Jewish
state.
Brits have a difficult choice in the coming elections. Johnson is not too bad, and his stand
against EU should be applauded. Corbyn is likely to seek compromise on every position,
including Brexit, immigration, NATO, but his initial stand is good. For a working man, he is
the right choice. And the Jewish attitude to him is a strong indicator: of the two contenders,
Corbyn would be better for those who do not emulate Jews.
France
In France, the Jews are very close to power, and it is usually a sign that things do not
go well for native middle and working classes. Indeed things go from bad to worse. While a
million of French workers demonstrated against Macron's government, the French parliamentarians
discussed antisemitism. Not surprisingly, they accepted the definition produced by a Jewish
organisation. Demurring against this definition caused a lot of trouble for Corbyn; Macron had
learned a lesson.
I am all for such definitions; their scope is too narrow, if anything. I'd prefer a broad
definition that would describe as anti-Semite any person who attends a church or a mosque; who
does not contribute to Jewish settlements; who does not believe in God-chosen Jewish nation
being above all mortal laws. Maybe then the Gentiles would be healed of their fear of being
labelled 'anti-Semite'. This fear kills their souls more than the accusation. Though, best of
people, Shakespeare, St John the Divine, Dostoyevsky and Chesterton are considered
anti-Semites, and it did not diminish their fame and glory.
You can't escape this label; if they want they will attach it to your name. Likewise, a man
can't avoid being called a male chauvinist and accused of harassment by a radical feminist.
Anna Ardin, the Swedish feminist who accused Julian Assange of rape and destroyed his life as
surely as if she'd knifed him, also accused a student of harassment because he avoided looking
at her. Such accusations should be shrugged off.
France is not doing well because its elites are engaged in the rip-off and sale of their
country's industrial, political, and cultural assets. In the last few years, France had lost
Alstom, Pechiney, Technip, Alcatel. These premium assets were lost to US companies. French
businessmen and officials who were supposed to care about French heirlooms, betrayed their
trust and defrauded their country, that's why France is not doing well.
Not all of these treacherous men are Jewish, not by a long chalk. But Jews are invaluable
partners in such publicity-shy schemes, and that's why: "The Shoah Memorial is a secular temple
for the entirety of France's post-Christian elite. Holocaust foundations, Jewish communal
projects, Jewish benevolent societies and Jewish philanthropies allow the Jewish community to
discourage reporting affairs they are involved in. They can facilitate the deals in obscurity"
– I was told by a knowledgeable Jewish person, well versed with goings-on within the
French Jewish community and in the higher business, banking and political circles of the
Republic. I'll call him JT (I shall share more of his knowledge in the next essay – ISH).
–
"Jewishness has once again become a way of avoiding scrutiny and accountability. Only
anti-Semites dare to see a link between the sale of Alstom, Macron's career, the Rothschilds,
and the Jewish community." Wink wink.
"At two crucial moments Jewish communal support was decisive to Macron's political career;
first, at the second tour of the French elections, in which major Jewish organizations
unanimously cajoled and preached the Macron vote to all and sundry; second, to suppress the
Yellow Vests Uprising. Only anti-Semites dare to think the Rothschilds had anything to do
with either."
JT is very critical with France and French people: "French White gentiles are ashamed of
their past and identity, flee into hedonism, profligacy, drugs, anti-depressants, libertinism,
pornography, and homosexuality. Their Stockholm syndrome is driven by an
extra-European-birth-cohort whose numbers now exceed that of the native population. Unwilling
to fight for their land and heritage, ignorant of their past and increasingly illiterate, their
love of France is futile, superfluous, and incoherent at best.
"As France increasingly resembles a North African backwater, its Jews, the chief
facilitators of this demographic shift, have become its chief losers, and a process of Jewish
de-assimilation from the Republic has began. French Jews cannot identify with a society on
its last legs, and a spineless native population. In such circumstances, French Jews shift
their focus to survival and opportunism, not to national defence. Israel, Miami, New York
have become second homes. France's Jewish patricians (all to the last dual-citizens since the
fifties), are helpless. Their ties to an increasingly hard-up Israel and to the powerful
Jewish American community make them leaders of the fire-sale of France's industrial,
political, and cultural assets. France is sliding into failed nation status in which everyone
is abandoning ship."
French Jews help the US to rob France, says JT. The American companies supported by
all-powerful DoJ are the main reason why France does not prosper. When France attempted to tax
American Internet companies (Amazon, Google, Facebook) Trump threatened to slap 100% custom
duties on French wine. The right choice for France is to part the company with the Yankee
predator, to cease paying billions of fines for breaking unjustifiable unilateral American
'sanctions', to part with NATO and to laugh at Trump's demands to pay more for unnecessary
American protection. But France, and other European nations are hesitant. They do not jump at
the opportunity offered by Trump's stupidity and arrogance, though the Orange man did
everything he could to free the Europeans. He opened the gates, he insulted them and kicked
them, but they refused to leave the stables.
An Excellent American expert in International relations, Prof Michael Brenner of Pittsburgh
U, has noted:
"Europe's political class is psychologically unable to break free of its
dominant/subordinate relationship with America. This pattern endures despite the presence of
a mentally impaired man in the White House. The prognosis, therefore: 'Wither thou goest, we
go!" American leaders have exploited this compulsive deference ruthlessly. It allows
Washington to ensure European fealty at virtually no cost. Moreover, they can extract
compliance across a wide array of non-security issues – commercial, financial, IT
(warring against Huawei), political, diplomatic – by drawing on the same free-floating
loyalties.
Europe has been obedient to the siren call of Uncle Sam in following it over the cliff
time after time – in Afghanistan, in Iraq (France excepted), on Russia, on Iran (by
acquiescing in severe sanctions), on Saudi Arabia, in Yemen, in embracing Bolsonaro (invited
Keynoter at Davos), even on Venezuela and Bolivia. The ultimate test will come were
Washington to pick a fight with China that it, and the West, cannot win; will Europe then
take the final, fatal leap hand-in-hand?"
It appears that love of Jews is an integral element of this fealty, together with LGBT
nonsense and other peculiar American imports. Love of Jews and love of America – are they
separable at all? If and when France and England regain their independence, their Jews would
recover their normal place in their societies. Admittedly, it won't be a place at the top, but
it would be a respectful place of equals in a healthy society, rather than a place of a symbol
and a facilitator of foreign influence on the ruins of Europe, as it is now.
"... Charges of anti-Semitism against Corbyn are highly suspect. From what I can see, they all stem from Corbyn's remarks supporting Palestinian rights in the face of the Israeli government's institutionalized racism and oppression of Palestinians. ..."
"... Yes. This is clearly one of the most dirty tricks played by UK Israel lobby, if we talk about Corbin. Baseless charge of anti-Semitism became a political smear, the way to destroy political opponent. ..."
Charges of anti-Semitism against Corbyn are highly suspect. From what I can see, they all
stem from Corbyn's remarks supporting Palestinian rights in the face of the Israeli
government's institutionalized racism and oppression of Palestinians.
If Bernie were not Jewish, there would have been an enormous smear campaign against him
for exactly the same reasons.
Charges of anti-Semitism against Corbyn are highly suspect. From what I can see, they
all stem from Corbyn's remarks supporting Palestinian rights in the face of the Israeli
government's institutionalized racism and oppression of Palestinians.
Yes. This is clearly one of the most dirty tricks played by UK Israel lobby, if we talk
about Corbin. Baseless charge of anti-Semitism became a political smear, the way to destroy
political opponent.
Much like charge of "Putin stooge" in the USA. And Russophobia is very similar to
Anti-Semitism, if you think about it. It serves as a kind of politically correct
anti-Semitism.
"... A more plausible explanation is that Trump thought that by appointing such anti-Russian hard-liners he could lay to rest the Russiagate allegations that had hung over him for three years and still did: that for some secret nefarious reason he was and remained a "Kremlin puppet." Despite the largely exculpatory Mueller report, Trump's political enemies, mostly Democrats but not only, have kept the allegations alive. ..."
"... The larger question is who should make American foreign policy: an elected president or Washington's permanent foreign policy establishment? (It is scarcely a "deep" or "secret" state, since its representatives appear on CNN and MSNBC almost daily.) Today, Democrats seem to think that it should be the foreign policy establishment, not President Trump. But having heard the cold-war views of much of that establishment, how will they feel when a Democrat occupies the White House? After all, eventually Trump will leave power, but Washington's foreign-policy "blob," as even an Obama aide termed it , will remain. ..."
"... Listen to the podcast here ..."
"... War With Russia? From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate ..."
"... The John Batchelor Show ..."
"... Trump's anti-Iranian fever is every bit as ludicrous as the DNC's anti-Russian fever. There is absolutely nothing to support the anti-Iranian policy argument or the anti JCPOA argument. The only thing that is missing from all of this is Iranian hookers, and that would certainly be an explosive headline! ..."
"... You know why Rhodes called it the blob, right? Why he made it sound so formless and squishy? Ask yourself, how does a failed novelist with zilch for foreign-affairs credentials get the big job of Obama's ventriloquist? That's a CIA billet. It so happens that Rhodes' brother has a big job of his own with CBS News, the most servile of the Mockingbird media propaganda mills. ..."
"... It's not a blob, it's a precisely-articulated hierarchy. And the top of it is CIA. So please for once somebody answer this blindingly obvious question, Who is making US foreign policy? CIA, that's who. For the CIA show trial run by Iran/Contra nomenklatura Bill Barr and his blackmailed flunky Durham, Trump's high crime and misdemeanor is conducting diplomacy without CIA supervision. They come out and say so, pointing to the National Security Act's mousetrap bureaucracy. ..."
"... CIA runs your country. They've got impunity, they do what they want. We've got 400,000 academics paid to overthink it. ..."
"... We cannot trust that the people that destroyed the country will repair it. It is run by a Cult of Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths. If they were limited to just the CIA, America would be in far better shape than its in. The CIA is not capable of thinking or intelligence, so we should stop paying them. ..."
"... Drumpf has been a tool of the Wall Street/Las Vegas Zionist billionaires for many, many years. so his selection of warmongering Zio neo-con advisors should be no surprise. ..."
"... Perhaps part of the reason that Trump often seems to be surrounded by people who don't support his policies or values is, as Paul Craig Roberts suggested in 2016, that Trump would have real problems simply because he was an outsider. An outsider to the Washington swamp, a swamp that Clinton had been swimming in for decades. In short he didn't know who to trust, who to keep "in the tent" & who to shut out. Thus, we have had this huge churn in Secretaries & on so on downwards. ..."
"... Sociopaths are the ones that do the worst because they lack any concern or "Empathy", like robots. So I read that the socio's are some of the brightest people who often are very successful in business etc. and can hide the fact that they would soon as kill as look at ya, but cool as ice, all they want is to get what the hell they want! They don't give a rats petoot who likes likes it or not, except as . ..."
"... Trump hasn't fired any of the neocons, but he proved that he CAN fire defense executives. He fired the Sec of Navy for disagreeing with some ridiculous personal thing that Trump wanted to do. Since Trump hasn't fired any neocons, we have to conclude that he's fully on board. ..."
"... There are so many security holes in the constitution of the USA including that it was ratified by those who invented it, not by a vote put to the people that would be made to suffer being governed by it. Basically the USA is useless as a defender of human rights (one of which is the right to self determination). The so called bill of rights (1st 10 amendments) are contractual promises, but like all clauses in contracts if there is no way to enforce them, then there is no use for the clause except maybe propaganda value. ..."
"... In a normally functioning world you simply can't simultaneously argue that in one case West can bomb a country to force self-determination as in Kosovo, and also denounce exactly the same thing in Crimea. On to Catalonia and more self-determination ..."
"... Trump, among his other occupations, used to engage with the professional wrestling circuit. In that well-staged entertainment there is always a bad guy – or a ' heel ' – who is used to stir up the crowds, the Evil Sheik or Rocky's hapless movie enemies. It makes it ' real '. The ' heel ' is sometimes allowed to win to better manage the audience. But the narrative never changes. Our rational judgments should focus on what happens, and on outcomes – not on talk, slogans, speeches, etc Based on that, Trump is a classical ' heel ' character. He might even be playing it consciously, or he has no choice. ..."
"... To answer the question who runs ' foreign policy ', let's ignore the stadium speeches, and simply look at what happens. In a world bereft of enough profitable consumer things to do, and enough justifiable careers for unemployable geo-political security 'experts' of all kinds, having enemies and maybe even a small war occasionally is not such an irrational thing to want. Plus there are the deep ethnic hatreds and traumas going back generations that were naively imported into the heart of the Western world. (Washington warned against that 200+ years ago.) ..."
"... or maybe trump was a lying neocon, war-loving, immigration-loving neoliberal all along, and you and the trumptards somehow continue to believe his campaign rhetoric? ..."
"... The fact is Trump is not an anti-neocon (Deep State) president he only talks that way. The fact that he surrounded himself with Deep State denizens gives lie to the thought that he is anti-Deep State no one can be that god damn stupid. ..."
"... "TRUMP SUPPORTERS WERE DUPED – Trump supporters are going to find out soon enough that they were duped by Donald Trump. Trump was given the script to run as the "Chaos Candidate" .He is just a pawn of the ruling elite .It is a tactic known as 'CONTROLLED OPPOSITION' ". Wasn't it FDR who said "Presidents are selected , they are not elected " ? ..."
"... Trump selected the Neocons he is surrounded with. And he's given away all kinds of property that he has absolutely no legal authority to give. He was seeking to please American Oligarchs the likes of Adelson. That's American politics. "Money is free speech." Of course, there is another connection with foreign policy beyond the truly total corruption of American domestic politics, and that's through America's brutal empire abroad. ..."
"... Obama or Trump, on the main matters of importance abroad – NATO, Russia, Israel/Palestine, China – there has been no difference, except Trump is more openly bellicose and given to saying really stupid things. ..."
President Trump campaigned and was elected on an anti-neocon platform: he promised to reduce direct US involvement in areas where,
he believed, America had no vital strategic interest, including in Ukraine. He also promised a new détente ("cooperation") with Moscow.
And yet, as we have learned from their recent congressional testimony, key members of his own National Security Council did not
share his views and indeed were opposed to them. Certainly, this was true of Fiona Hill and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. Both of them
seemed prepared for a highly risky confrontation with Russia over Ukraine, though whether retroactively because of Moscow's 2014
annexation of Crimea or for more general reasons was not entirely clear.
Similarly, Trump was slow in withdrawing Marie Yovanovitch, a career foreign service officer appointed by President Obama as ambassador
to Kiev, who had made clear, despite her official position in Kiev, that she did not share the new American president's thinking
about Ukraine or Russia. In short, the president was surrounded in his own administration, even in the White House, by opponents
of his foreign policy and presumably not only in regard to Ukraine.
How did this unusual and dysfunctional situation come about? One possibility is that it was the doing and legacy of the neocon
John Bolton, briefly Trump's national security adviser. But this doesn't explain why the president would accept or long tolerate
such appointees.
A more plausible explanation is that Trump thought that by appointing such anti-Russian hard-liners he could lay to rest the
Russiagate allegations that had hung over him for three years and still did: that for some secret nefarious reason he was and remained
a "Kremlin puppet." Despite the largely exculpatory Mueller report, Trump's political enemies, mostly Democrats but not only, have
kept the allegations alive.
The larger question is who should make American foreign policy: an elected president or Washington's permanent foreign policy
establishment? (It is scarcely a "deep" or "secret" state, since its representatives appear on CNN and MSNBC almost daily.) Today,
Democrats seem to think that it should be the foreign policy establishment, not President Trump. But having heard the cold-war views
of much of that establishment, how will they feel when a Democrat occupies the White House? After all, eventually Trump will leave
power, but Washington's foreign-policy "blob," as even
an Obama aide termed it , will remain.
Listen to the podcast
here . Stephen F. Cohen Stephen F.
Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University. ANationcontributing editor, his most recent book,War With Russia? From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate, is available
in paperback and in an ebook edition. His weekly conversations with the host ofThe John Batchelor Show, now in their sixth
year, are available at www.thenation.com .
because of Moscow's 2014 annexation of Crimea or for more general reasons was not entirely clear.
In an otherwise decent overview, this sticks out like a sore thumb. It would be helpful to stop using the word annexation.
While correct in a technical sense – that Crimea was added to the Russian Federation – the word comes with all kinds of connotations,
that imply illegality and or force. Given Crimea was given special status when gifted to Ukraine for administration by the USSR,
one could just as easily apply "annexation" of Crimea to Ukraine. After Ukraine voted to "leave" the USSR, Crimea voted to join
Ukraine. Obviously the "Ukrainian" vote did not include Crimea. Even after voting to join Ukraine, Crimea had special status within
Ukraine, and was semi autonomous. If you can vote to join, you can vote to leave. Either you have the right to self determination,
or you don't.
This is what is so infuriating, Stephen! These silent coups of the executive branch have been taking place for my entire life!
Both parties are guilty of refusing to appoint cabinet members that the elected presidents would have chosen for themselves, because
both parties are more interested in making the president of the opposing party look bad, make him ineffective, and incapable of
carrying out policies that he was elected to carry out. That is the very definition of treason!
Things are a disaster. The JCPOA is at the heart of the issue and Trump and his advisors stubborn refusal to capitulate on
this issue very well may cause Trump to lose the 2020 election. Trump's anti-Iranian fever is every bit as ludicrous as the
DNC's anti-Russian fever. There is absolutely nothing to support the anti-Iranian policy argument or the anti JCPOA argument.
The only thing that is missing from all of this is Iranian hookers, and that would certainly be an explosive headline!
The anti-Iranian fever has created so much havoc not only with Iran, but with every country on earth other than Israel, Saudi
Arabia, and the UAE. Germany announced that it is seeking to unite with Russia, not only for Gazprom, but is now considering purchasing
defense systems from Russia, and Germany is dictating EU policy, by and large. Germany has said that Europe must be able to defend
itself independent of America and is requesting an EU military and Italy is on board with this idea, seeking to create jobs and
weapons for its economy and defense.
The EU is fed up with the economic sanctions placed on countries that the U.S. has black-listed, particularly Russia and Iran,
and China as well for Huwaei 5G.
Nobody in their right mind could ever claim this to be the free market capitalism that Larry Kudlow espouses!
You know why Rhodes called it the blob, right? Why he made it sound so formless and squishy? Ask yourself, how does a failed
novelist with zilch for foreign-affairs credentials get the big job of Obama's ventriloquist? That's a CIA billet. It so happens
that Rhodes' brother has a big job of his own with CBS News, the most servile of the Mockingbird media propaganda mills.
It's not a blob, it's a precisely-articulated hierarchy. And the top of it is CIA. So please for once somebody answer this
blindingly obvious question, Who is making US foreign policy? CIA, that's who. For the CIA show trial run by Iran/Contra nomenklatura
Bill Barr and his blackmailed flunky Durham, Trump's high crime and misdemeanor is conducting diplomacy without CIA supervision.
They come out and say so, pointing to the National Security Act's mousetrap bureaucracy.
CIA runs your country. They've got impunity, they do what they want. We've got 400,000 academics paid to overthink it.
The CIA has no authority what so ever as defined by the supreme law of the land, the constitution. That would make them guilty
of a coup which would be an act of treason, so if what you claim is true, why have they not been prosecuted.
It is a political game between to competing kleptocratic cults. The DNC and RNC are whores and will do what ever their donors
tell them to do. That is also treason. This country is just a total wasteland.
Everyone has pledged allegiance to fraud.
Too big to fail, like the Titanic and the Hindenberg.
We cannot trust that the people that destroyed the country will repair it. It is run by a Cult of Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths.
If they were limited to just the CIA, America would be in far better shape than its in. The CIA is not capable of thinking or
intelligence, so we should stop paying them.
Drumpf has been a tool of the Wall Street/Las Vegas Zionist billionaires for many, many years. so his selection of warmongering
Zio neo-con advisors should be no surprise.
What kind of stupid question is this? You mean you don't know or asking us for confirmation? If you really don't know then why
are you writing an article about it? If you do know then why are you asking the UNZ readers?
Perhaps part of the reason that Trump often seems to be surrounded by people who don't support his policies or values is,
as Paul Craig Roberts suggested in 2016, that Trump would have real problems simply because he was an outsider. An outsider to
the Washington swamp, a swamp that Clinton had been swimming in for decades. In short he didn't know who to trust, who to keep
"in the tent" & who to shut out. Thus, we have had this huge churn in Secretaries & on so on downwards.
It is run by a Cult of Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths.
That's ok but it's a bit unfair to Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths After all most of the country is Hedonistic as hell,
it sells commercials or wtf. Satanic is philosophical and way over the heads of these clowns, though if the be a Satan, then they
are in the plan for sure, and right on the mark. As for psychopaths, those are criminals who are insane, but they can have remorse
and be their own worst enemies, often they just go off and go psycho and bad things happen, but can be unplanned off the wall
stuff, not diabolic.
Sociopaths are the ones that do the worst because they lack any concern or "Empathy", like robots. So I read that the socio's
are some of the brightest people who often are very successful in business etc. and can hide the fact that they would soon as
kill as look at ya, but cool as ice, all they want is to get what the hell they want! They don't give a rats petoot who likes
likes it or not, except as .
So, once upon a time, a people got so hedonistic and they didn't watch the game and theier leaders were low quality
(especially religeous/morals ) and long story short Satan unleashed the Socio's , Things seem to be heading disastrously,
so will bit coin save the day? Green nudeal?
While massive attention is directed towards Russia and the Ukraine, the majority of the public are shown the slight of hand
and their attention is never brought near to the real perpetrators of subverting American and British foreign policy.
Doesn't matter if he's surrounded. A president CAN make foreign policy, and a president CAN fire people who disagree with his
policy. Trump hasn't fired any of the neocons, but he proved that he CAN fire defense executives. He fired the Sec of Navy
for disagreeing with some ridiculous personal thing that Trump wanted to do. Since Trump hasn't fired any neocons, we have to
conclude that he's fully on board.
The CIA has no authority what so ever as defined by the supreme law of the land, the constitution. That would make them
guilty of a coup which would be an act of treason, so if what you claim is true, why have they not been prosecuted.
--
first off the supreme law of the land maybe the Constitution and to oppose it may be Treason, but the Law that is supreme to the
Law of the land is Human rights law.. it is far superior to, and it is the TLD of all laws of the land of all of the Nation States
that mankind has allowed the greedy among its masses, to impose.
There are so many security holes in the constitution of the USA including that it was ratified by those who invented it,
not by a vote put to the people that would be made to suffer being governed by it. Basically the USA is useless as a defender
of human rights (one of which is the right to self determination). The so called bill of rights (1st 10 amendments) are contractual
promises, but like all clauses in contracts if there is no way to enforce them, then there is no use for the clause except maybe
propaganda value.
If you note the USA constitution has seven articles..
Article 1 is about 525 elected members of congress and their very limited powers to control
foreign activities. Each qualified to vote member of the governed (a citizen so to speak) is allowed to
vote for only 3 of the 525 persons. so basically there is no real national election anywhere .
Article II grants the electoral college the power to appoint two persons full control of the assets,
resources and manpower of America to conquer the entire world or to make peace in the entire world.
Either way: the governed are not allowed to vote for either; the EC vote determines the P or VP.
Article III allows the Article II person to appoint yes men to the judiciary
Where exist the power of the governed to deny USA governors the ability to the use the powers the constitution claims
the governors are to have, against the governed? <==No where I can find? Theoretically, the governed are protected from abuse
for as long as it takes to conduct due process?
One person, the Article II person, is basically the king when in comes to constitutional authority to establish, conduct,
prosecute or defend USA involvement in foreign affairs.
No where does the constitution of the USA deny its President the use of American resources or USA military power, to
make and use diplomat appointments, or to use the USA to use the wealth of America and the hegemonic powers of the USA to make
a private or public profit in a foreign land. <= d/n matter if the profit is personal to the President or if it assigned by appointment
(like the feudal powers granted by the feudal kings to the feudal lords) to corporate feudal lords or oligarch personal interest.
AFAICT, the president can USE the USA to conduct war, invade or otherwise infringe on, even destroy, the territory, or a
private or public interest, within a foreign sovereign more or less at will. So if the President wants to command a private
or secret Army like the CIA, he can as far as I can tell, obviously this president does, because he could with his pen alone shut
it down.
Seems to me the "NO" from Wilson's four points
no more secret diplomacy peace settlement must not lead the way to new wars
no retribution, unjust claims, and huge fines <basically indemnities paid by the losers to the winners.
no more war; includes controls on armaments and arming of nations.
no more Trade Barriers so the nations of the world would become more interdependent.
have been made the essence of nation state operations world wide.
IMO, The CIA exists at the pleasure of the President.
@Curmudgeon all of that,
plus the Kosovo precedent.
In a normally functioning world you simply can't simultaneously argue that in one case West can bomb a country to force
self-determination as in Kosovo, and also denounce exactly the same thing in Crimea. On to Catalonia and more self-determination
Trump, among his other occupations, used to engage with the professional wrestling circuit. In that well-staged entertainment
there is always a bad guy – or a ' heel ' – who is used to stir up the crowds, the Evil Sheik or Rocky's hapless movie
enemies. It makes it ' real '. The 'heel ' is sometimes allowed to win to better manage the audience. But
the narrative never changes. Our rational judgments should focus on what happens, and on outcomes – not on talk, slogans, speeches,
etc Based on that, Trump is a classical ' heel ' character. He might even be playing it consciously, or he has no choice.
To answer the question who runs ' foreign policy ', let's ignore the stadium speeches, and simply look at what happens.
In a world bereft of enough profitable consumer things to do, and enough justifiable careers for unemployable geo-political security
'experts' of all kinds, having enemies and maybe even a small war occasionally is not such an irrational thing to want. Plus there
are the deep ethnic hatreds and traumas going back generations that were naively imported into the heart of the Western world.
(Washington warned against that 200+ years ago.)
Trump should have kept Steve Bannon as his advisor and should have fired instead his son-in-law. Perhaps "they" are blackmailing
Trump with photos like here: https://www.pinterest.com/richarddesjarla/creepy/
That would explain why Trump is so ineffective at making a reality anything he campaigned for.
or maybe trump was a lying neocon, war-loving, immigration-loving neoliberal all along, and you and the trumptards somehow
continue to believe his campaign rhetoric?
An anti-neocon president appears to have been surrounded by neocons in his own administration.
The fact is Trump is not an anti-neocon (Deep State) president he only talks that way. The fact that he surrounded himself
with Deep State denizens gives lie to the thought that he is anti-Deep State no one can be that god damn stupid.
or maybe trump was a lying neocon, war-loving, immigration-loving neoliberal all along, and you and the trumptards somehow
continue to believe his campaign rhetoric?
Halfway around the world from Washington's halls of power, Ukraine sits along a civilizational and geopolitical fault line.
To Ukraine's west are the liberal democracies of Europe, governed by rule of law and democratic principles. To its east are
Russia and its client states in Eurasia, almost all of which are corrupt oligarchies. [ ] In this war on democratic movements
and democratic principles, Russia's biggest prize and chief adversary has always been the United States. Until now, however,
Russia has always had to contend with bipartisan resolve to counter
No mention of China, and this is the problem with the whole foreign policy establishment not just the neocons. Russia is more
of an annoyance than anything, but they are still operating assumptions on what is the
Geographical Pivot of History , so they want to talk about Russia. Like an Edwardian sea cadet we are supposed to care about
Russia getting (back) a water port in Crimea. Mahan's definition of sea power included a strong commercial fleet. After tearing
their own environment apart like a car in a wrecking yard and heating up the planet China has taken time out from deforestation
and colonising Tibet, to send huge container vessels full of cheap goods through the melting Arctic round the top of Russia all
the better to get to Europe and deindustrialise it.
Western elites have sold out to China, seen as the future, so we hear about Russia rather than the three million Uyghurs in
concentration camps complete with constantly smoking crematoria, and harvesting of organs for rich foreigners.
Who
poses a greater threat to the West: China or Russia?
By the time the West finds itself in open conflict with Beijing, we will have lost our relative advantage. Brendan Simms and
K.C. Lin [ ] The concept of China being a threat is harder to comprehend. In what way? Yes, its hacking and intellectual property
theft is a headache. But is it worse than what Russia is up to? And don't we need Chinese investment, so does it really matter
if China builds our 5G mobile networks? In London, ministers agonise over these issues -- not knowing whether to pity China
(we still send foreign aid there), beg for its money and contracts (with prime ministerial trade trips), or treat it as a potential
antagonist.
Aid ! They sent robots to the far side of the Moon
Beijing has been the beneficiary of liberal revulsion at the Trump presidency: if the Donald is against the Chinese,
who cannot be for them? As a result, Trump's efforts to address China's unfair trade practices have so far missed the mark
with the domestic and international audience. As Trump declares war on free trade, China -- one of the most protectionist economies
in the world -- is now celebrated at Davos as the avatar of free trade. Later this month, China's Vice-President is likely
to be in attendance at Davos -- and there is even talk of him meeting with Trump. Similarly, the messiness of American politics
has made China's one-party state an apparent poster boy of political stability and governability.
"TRUMP SUPPORTERS WERE DUPED – Trump supporters are going to find out soon enough that they were duped by
Donald Trump. Trump was given the script to run as the "Chaos Candidate" .He is just a pawn of the ruling elite .It is a tactic
known as 'CONTROLLED OPPOSITION' ".
Wasn't it FDR who said "Presidents are selected , they are not elected " ?
Trump selected the Neocons he is surrounded with. And he's given away all kinds of property that he has absolutely no legal
authority to give. He was seeking to please American Oligarchs the likes of Adelson. That's American politics. "Money is free
speech." Of course, there is another connection with foreign policy beyond the truly total corruption of American domestic politics,
and that's through America's brutal empire abroad.
The military/intelligence imperial establishment definitely see Israel as a kind of American colony in the Mideast, and they
make sure that it's well provided for. That's what the Neocon Wars have been about. Paving over large parts of Israel's noisy
neighborhood. And that includes matters like keeping Syria off-balance with occupation in its northeast. And constantly threatening
Iran.
Obama or Trump, on the main matters of importance abroad – NATO, Russia, Israel/Palestine, China – there has been no difference,
except Trump is more openly bellicose and given to saying really stupid things.
By the way, the last President who tried seriously to make foreign policy as the elected head of government left half of his
head splattered on thec streets of Dallas.
@Jon Baptist We have
all been brainwashed by the propaganda screened by the massmedia ,whether it be FOX , MSNBC , CBS ,etc.. SeptemberClues.info has
a good article entitled "The central role of the news media on 9/11 " :
"The 9/11 psyop relied foremostly on that weakspot of ours .We all fell for the images we saw on TV at the time we can only
wonder why so many never questioned the absurd TV coverage proposed by all the major networks The 9/11 TV imagery of the crucial
morning events was just a computer-animated, pre-fabricated movie."
@follyofwar Pat inhabits
a strange Hollywood type world, where the US is always the good guy. He believes that, although the US may make foreign policy
mistakes, its aims and ambitions are nevertheless noble and well intentioned.
In Pat's world it's still circa 1955, but even then, his take on US foreign policy would have been hopelessly unrealistic.
"... Now consider the notion of "anti-Semitism." Google searches for that word and its close variants reveal over 24 million hits, and over the years I'm sure I've seen that term tens of thousands of times in my books and newspapers, and heard it endlessly reported in my electronic media and entertainment. But thinking it over, I'm not sure that I can ever recall a single real-life instance I've personally encountered, nor have I heard of almost any such cases from my friends or acquaintances. Indeed, the only persons I've ever come across making such claims were individuals who bore unmistakable signs of serious psychological imbalance. When the daily newspapers are brimming with lurid tales of hideous demons walking among us and attacking people on every street corner, but you yourself have never actually seen one, you may gradually grow suspicious. ..."
"... It has also become apparent that a considerable fraction of what passes for "anti-Semitism" these days seems to stretch that term beyond all recognition. A few weeks ago an unknown 28-year-old Democratic Socialist named Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez scored a stunning upset primary victory over a top House Democrat in New York City, and naturally received a blizzard of media coverage as a result. However, when it came out that she had denounced the Israeli government for its recent massacre of over 140 unarmed Palestinian protesters in Gaza, cries of "anti-Semite" soon appeared, and according to Google there are now over 180,000 such hits combining her name and that harsh accusatory term. Similarly, just a few days ago the New York Times ran a major story reporting that all of Britain's Jewish newspapers had issued an "unprecedented" denunciation of Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, describing it as an "existential threat" to the Jewish community for the anti-Semitism it was fostering; but this apparently amounted to nothing more than its willingness to sharply criticize the Israeli government for its long mistreatment of the Palestinians. ..."
I recently published a couple of long essays, and although they primarily focused on other
matters, the subject of anti-Semitism was a strong secondary theme. In that regard, I mentioned
my shock at discovering a dozen or more years ago that several of the most self-evidently
absurd elements of anti-Semitic lunacy, which I had always dismissed without consideration,
were probably correct. It does seem likely that a significant number of traditionally-religious
Jews did indeed occasionally commit the ritual murder of
Christian children in order to use their blood in certain religious ceremonies, and also
that powerful Jewish international bankers did play a large
role in financing the establishment of Bolshevik Russia .
When one discovers that matters of such enormous moment not only apparently occurred but
that they had been successfully excluded from nearly all of our histories and media coverage
for most of the last one hundred years, the implications take some time to properly digest. If
the most extreme "anti-Semitic canards" were probably true, then surely the whole notion of
anti-Semitism warrants a careful reexamination.
All of us obtain our knowledge of the world by two different channels. Some things we
discover from our own personal experiences and the direct evidence of our senses, but most
information comes to us via external sources such as books and the media, and a crisis may
develop when we discover that these two pathways are in sharp conflict. The official media of
the old USSR used to endlessly trumpet the tremendous achievements of its collectivized
agricultural system, but when citizens noticed that there was never any meat in their shops,
"Pravda" became a watchword for "Lies" rather than "Truth."
Now consider the notion of "anti-Semitism." Google searches for that word and its close
variants reveal over 24 million hits, and over the years I'm sure I've seen that term tens of
thousands of times in my books and newspapers, and heard it endlessly reported in my electronic
media and entertainment. But thinking it over, I'm not sure that I can ever recall a single
real-life instance I've personally encountered, nor have I heard of almost any such cases from
my friends or acquaintances. Indeed, the only persons I've ever come across making such claims
were individuals who bore unmistakable signs of serious psychological imbalance. When the daily
newspapers are brimming with lurid tales of hideous demons walking among us and attacking
people on every street corner, but you yourself have never actually seen one, you may gradually
grow suspicious.
Indeed, over the years some of my own research has uncovered a sharp contrast between image
and reality. As recently as the late 1990s, leading mainstream media outlets such as The
New York Times were still denouncing a top Ivy League
school such as Princeton for the supposed anti-Semitism of its college admissions policy,
but a few years ago when I carefully investigated that issue in quantitative terms for my
lengthy Meritocracy
analysis I was very surprised to reach a polar-opposite conclusion. According to the best
available evidence, white Gentiles were over 90% less likely to be enrolled at Harvard and the
other Ivies than were Jews of similar academic performance, a truly remarkable finding. If the
situation had been reversed and Jews were 90% less likely to be found at Harvard than seemed
warranted by their test scores, surely that fact would be endlessly cited as the absolute
smoking-gun proof of horrendous anti-Semitism in present-day America.
It has also become apparent that a considerable fraction of what passes for "anti-Semitism"
these days seems to stretch that term beyond all recognition. A few weeks ago an unknown
28-year-old Democratic Socialist named Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez scored a stunning upset primary
victory over a top House Democrat in New York City, and naturally received a blizzard of media
coverage as a result. However, when it came out that she had denounced the Israeli government
for its recent massacre of over 140 unarmed Palestinian protesters in Gaza, cries of
"anti-Semite" soon appeared, and according to Google there are now over 180,000 such hits
combining her name and that harsh accusatory term. Similarly, just a few days ago the New
York Times ran a
major story reporting that all of Britain's Jewish newspapers had issued an "unprecedented"
denunciation of Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, describing it as an "existential threat" to the
Jewish community for the anti-Semitism it was fostering; but this apparently amounted to
nothing more than its willingness to sharply criticize the Israeli government for its long
mistreatment of the Palestinians.
One plausible explanation of the strange contrast between media coverage and reality might
be that anti-Semitism once did loom very large in real life, but dissipated many decades ago,
while the organizations and activists focused on detecting and combating that pernicious
problem have remained in place, generating public attention based on smaller and smaller
issues, with the zealous Jewish activists of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) representing a
perfect example of this situation. As an even more striking illustration, the Second World War
ended over seventy years ago, but what historian Norman Finkelstein has so aptly labeled "the
Holocaust Industry" has grown ever larger and more entrenched in our academic and media worlds
so that scarcely a day passes without one or more articles relating to that topic appearing in
my major morning newspapers. Given this situation, a serious exploration of the true nature of
anti-Semitism should probably avoid the mere media phantoms of today and focus on the past,
when the condition might still have been widespread in daily life.
Many observers have pointed to the aftermath of the Second World War as marking a huge
watershed in the public acceptability of anti-Semitism both in America and Europe, so perhaps a
proper appraisal of that cultural phenomenon should focus on the years before that global
conflict. However, the overwhelming role of Jews in the Bolshevik Revolution and other bloody
Communist seizures of power quite naturally made them objects of considerable fear and hatred
throughout the inter-war years, so the safest course might be to push that boundary back a
little further and confine our attention to the period prior to the outbreak of the First World
War. The pogroms in Czarist Russia, the Dreyfus Affair in France, and the lynching of Leo Frank
in the American South come to mind as some of the most famous examples from that period.
Lindemann's discussion of the often difficult relations between Russia's restive Jewish
minority and its huge Slavic majority is also quite interesting, and he provides numerous
instances in which major incidents, supposedly demonstrating the enormously strong appeal of
vicious anti-Semitism, were quite different than has been suggested by the legend. The famous
Kishinev Pogrom of 1903 was obviously the result of severe ethnic tension in that city, but
contrary to the regular accusations of later writers, there seems absolutely no evidence of
high-level government involvement, and the widespread claims of 700 dead that so horrified the
entire world were grossly exaggerated, with only 45 killed in the urban rioting. Chaim
Weizmann, the future president of Israel, later promoted the story that he himself and some
other brave Jewish souls had personally defended their people with revolvers in hand even as
they saw the mutilated bodies of 80 Jewish victims. This account was totally fictional since
Weizmann happened to have been be hundreds of miles away when the riots occurred.
Although a tendency to lie and exaggerate was hardly unique to the political partisans of
Russian Jewry, the existence of a powerful international network of Jewish journalists and
Jewish-influenced media outlets ensured that such concocted propaganda stories might receive
enormous worldwide distribution, while the truth followed far behind, if at all.
For related reasons, international outrage was often focused on the legal confinement of
most of Russia's Jews to the "Pale of Settlement," suggesting some sort of tight imprisonment;
but that area was the traditional home of the Jewish population and encompassed a landmass
almost as large as France and Spain combined. The growing impoverishment of Eastern European
Jews during that era was often assumed to be a consequence of hostile government policy, but
the obvious explanation was extraordinary Jewish fecundity, which far outstripped that of their
Slavic fellow countrymen, and quickly led them to outgrow the available spots in any of their
traditional "middleman" occupations, a situation worsened by their total disinclination to
engage in agriculture or other primary-producer activities. Jewish communities expressed horror
at the risk of losing their sons to the Czarist military draft, but this was simply the
flip-side of the full Russian citizenship they had been granted, and no different from what was
faced by their non-Jewish neighbors.
Certainly the Jews of Russia suffered greatly from widespread riots and mob attacks in the
generation prior to World War I, and these did sometimes have substantial government
encouragement, especially in the aftermath of the very heavy Jewish role in the 1905
Revolution. But we should keep in mind that a Jewish plotter had been implicated in the killing
of Czar Alexander II, and Jewish assassins had also struck down several top Russian ministers
and numerous other government officials. If the last decade or two had seen American Muslims
assassinate a sitting U.S. President, various leading Cabinet members, and a host of our other
elected and appointed officials, surely the position of Muslims in this country would have
become a very uncomfortable one.
As Lindemann candidly describes the tension between Russia's very rapidly growing Jewish
population and its governing authorities, he cannot avoid mentioning the notorious Jewish
reputation for bribery, corruption, and general dishonesty, with numerous figures of all
political backgrounds noting that the remarkable Jewish propensity to commit perjury in the
courtroom led to severe problems in the effective administration of justice. The eminent
American sociologist E.A. Ross, writing in 1913, characterized
the regular behavior of Eastern European Jews in very similar terms .
Lindemann also allocates a short chapter to discussing the 1911 Beilis Affair, in which a
Ukrainian Jew was accused of the ritual murder of a young Gentile boy, an incident that
generated a great deal of international attention and controversy. Based on the evidence
presented, the defendant seems likely to have been innocent, although the obvious lies he
repeatedly told police interrogators hardly helped foster that impression, and "the system
worked" in that he was ultimately found innocent by the jurors at his trial. However, a few
pages are also given to a much less well-known ritual murder case in late 19th century Hungary,
in which the evidence of Jewish guilt seemed far stronger, though the author hardly accepted
the possible reality of such an outlandish crime. Such reticence was quite understandable since
the publication of Ariel Toaff's remarkable volume
on the subject was still a dozen years in the future.
Lindemann subsequently expanded his examination of historical anti-Semitism into a much
broader treatment, Esau's Tears , which appeared in 1997. In this volume, he added
comparative studies of the social landscape in Germany, Britain, Italy, and several other
European countries, and demonstrated that the relationship between Jews and non-Jews varied
greatly across different locations and time periods. But although I found his analysis quite
useful and interesting, the extraordinarily harsh attacks his text provoked from some outraged
Jewish academics seemed even more intriguing.
For example, Judith Laikin Elkin opened her discussion in The American Historical
Review by describing the book as a "545-page polemic" a strange characterization of a book
so remarkably even-handed and factually-based in its scholarship. Writing in
Commentary , Robert Wistrich was even harsher, stating that merely reading the book
had been a painful experience for him, and his review seemed filled with spittle-flecked rage.
Unless these individuals had somehow gotten copies of a different book, I found their attitudes
simply astonishing.
I was not alone in such a reaction. Richard S. Levy of the University of Illinois, a noted
scholar of anti-Semitism, expressed amazement at Wistrich's seemingly irrational outburst,
while Paul Gottfried, writing in Chronicles , mildly suggested that Lindemann had
"touched raw nerves." Indeed, Gottfried's own evaluation quite reasonably criticized Lindemann
for perhaps being a little too even-handed, sometimes presenting numerous conflicting analyzes
without choosing between them. For those interested, a good discussion of the book by Alan
Steinweis, a younger scholar specializing in the same topic,
is conveniently available online .
The remarkable ferocity with which some Jewish writers attacked Lindemann's meticulous
attempt to provide an accurate history of anti-Semitism may carry more significance than merely
an exchange of angry words in low-circulation academic publications. If our mainstream media
shapes our reality, scholarly books and articles based upon them tend to set the contours of
that media coverage. And the ability of a relatively small number of agitated and energetic
Jews to police the acceptable boundaries of historical narratives may have enormous
consequences for our larger society, deterring scholars from objectively reporting historical
facts and preventing students from discovering them.
The undeniable truth is that for many centuries Jews usually constituted a wealthy and
privileged segment of the population in nearly all the European countries in which they
resided, and quite frequently they based their livelihood upon the heavy exploitation of a
downtrodden peasantry. Even without any differences in ethnicity, language, or religion, such
conditions almost invariably provoke hostility. The victory of Mao's Communist forces in China
was quickly followed by the brutal massacre of a million or more Han Chinese landlords by the
Han Chinese poor peasants who regarded them as cruel oppressors, with William Hinton's classic
Fanshen describing the unfortunate history that unfolded in one particular village.
When similar circumstances led to violent clashes in Eastern Europe between Slavs and Jews,
does it really make logical sense to employ a specialized term such as "anti-Semitism" to
describe that situation?
Furthermore, some of the material presented in Lindemann's rather innocuous text might also
lead to potentially threatening ideas. Consider, for example, the notorious Protocols of
the Learned Elders of Zion , almost certainly fictional, but hugely popular and
influential during the years following World War I and the Bolshevik Revolution. The fall of so
many longstanding Gentile dynasties and their replacement by new regimes such as Soviet Russia
and Weimar Germany, which were heavily dominated by their tiny Jewish minorities, quite
naturally fed suspicions of a worldwide Jewish plot, as did the widely discussed role of Jewish
international bankers in producing those political outcomes.
Over the decades, there has been much speculation about the possible inspiration for the
Protocols , but although Lindemann makes absolutely no reference to that document, he
does provide a very intriguing possible candidate. Jewish-born British Prime Minister Benjamin
Disraeli certainly ranked as one of the most influential figures of the late 19th century, and
in his novel Coningsby , he has the character representing Lord Lionel Rothschild
boast about the existence of a vast and
secret network of powerful international Jews , who stand near the head of almost every
major nation, quietly controlling their governments from behind the scenes. If one of the
world's most politically well-connected Jews eagerly promoted such notions, was Henry Ford
really so unreasonable in doing the same?
Lindemann also notes Disraeli's focus on the extreme importance of race and racial origins,
a central aspect of traditional Jewish religious doctrine. He reasonably suggests that this
must surely have had a huge influence upon the rise of those political ideas, given that
Disraeli's public profile and stature were so much greater than the mere writers or activists
whom our history books usually place at center stage. In fact, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, a
leading racial theorist, actually cited Disraeli as a key source for his ideas. Jewish
intellectuals such as Max Nordau and Cesare Lombroso are already widely recognized as leading
figures in the rise of the racial science of that era, but Disraeli's under-appreciated role
may have actually been far greater. The deep Jewish roots of European racialist movements are
hardly something that many present-day Jews would want widely known.
One of the harsh Jewish critics of Esau's Tears denounced Cambridge University
Press for even allowing the book to appear in print, and although that major work is easily
available in English, there are numerous other cases where an important but discordant version
of historical reality has been successfully blocked from publication. For decades most
Americans would have ranked Nobel Laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn as among the world's greatest
literary figures, and his Gulag Archipelago alone sold over 10 million copies. But his
last work was a massive two-volume account of the tragic 200 years of shared history between
Russians and Jews, and despite its 2002 release in Russian and numerous other world languages,
there has yet to be an authorized English translation, though various partial editions have
circulated on the Internet in samizdat form.
ORDER IT NOW
At one point, a full English version was briefly available for sale at Amazon.com and I
purchased it. Glancing through a few sections, the work seemed quite even-handed and innocuous
to me, but it seemed to provide a far more detailed and uncensored account than anything else
previously available, which obviously was the problem. The Bolshevik Revolution resulted in the
deaths of many tens of millions of people worldwide, and the overwhelming Jewish role in its
leadership would become more difficult to erase from historical memory if Solzhenitsyn's work
were easily available. Also, his candid discussion of the economic and political behavior of
Russian Jewry in pre-revolutionary times directly conflicted with the hagiography widely
promoted by Hollywood and the popular media. Historian Yuri Slezkine's award-winning 2004 book
The Jewish Century provided many similar facts, but his treatment was far more cursory
and his public stature not remotely the same.
Near the end of his life, Solzhenitsyn gave his political blessing to Russian President
Vladimir Putin, and Russia's leaders honored him upon his death, while his Gulag
volumes are now enshrined as mandatory reading in the standard high school curriculum of
today's overwhelmingly Christian Russia. But even as his star rose again in his own homeland,
it seems to have sharply fallen in our own country, and his trajectory may eventually relegate
him to nearly un-person status.
A couple of years after the release of Solzhenitsyn's controversial final book, an American
writer named Anne Applebaum published a thick history bearing the same title Gulag ,
and her work received enormously favorable media coverage and won her a Pulitzer Prize; I have
even heard claims that her book has been steadily replacing that earlier Gulag on many
college reading lists. But although Jews constituted a huge fraction of the top leadership of
the Soviet Gulag system during its early decades, as well as that of the dreaded NKVD which
supplied the inmates, nearly her entire focus on her own ethnic group during Soviet times is
that of victims rather than victimizers. And by a remarkable irony of fate, she shares a last
name with one of the top Bolshevik leaders, Hirsch Apfelbaum, who concealed his own ethnic
identity by calling himself Grigory Zinoviev.
ORDER IT NOW
The striking decline in Solzhenitsyn's literary status in the West came just a decade or two
after an even more
precipitous collapse in the reputation of David Irving , and for much the same reason.
Irving probably ranked as the most internationally successful British historian of the last one
hundred years and a renowned scholar of World War II, but his extensive reliance on primary
source documentary evidence posed an obvious threat to the official narrative promoted by
Hollywood and wartime propaganda. When he published his magisterial Hitler's War ,
this conflict between myth and reality came into the open, and an enormous wave of attacks and
vilification was unleashed, gradually leading to his purge from respectability and eventually
even his imprisonment.
These important examples may help to explain the puzzling contrast between the behavior of
Jews in the aggregate and Jews as individuals. Observers have noticed that even fairly small
Jewish minorities may often have a major impact upon the far larger societies that host them.
But on the other hand, in my experience at least, a large majority of individual Jews do not
seem all that different in their personalities or behavior than their non-Jewish counterparts.
So how does a community whose individual mean is not so unusual generate what seems to be such
a striking difference in collective behavior? I think the answer may involve the existence of
information choke-points, and the ability of relatively small numbers of particularly zealous
and agitated Jews in influencing and controlling these.
We live our lives constantly immersed in media narratives, and these allow us to decide the
rights and wrongs of a situation. The vast majority of people, Jew and Gentile alike, are far
more likely to take strong action if they are convinced that their cause is a just one. This is
obviously the basis for war-time propaganda.
Now suppose that a relatively small number of zealous Jewish partisans are known to always
attack and denounce journalists or authors who accurately describe Jewish misbehavior. Over
time, this ongoing campaign of intimidation may cause many important facts to be left on the
cutting-room floor, or even gradually expel from mainstream respectability those writers who
refuse to conform to such pressures. Meanwhile, similar small numbers of Jewish partisans
frequently exaggerate the misdeeds committed against Jews, sometimes piling their exaggerations
upon past exaggerations already produced by a previous round of such zealots.
Eventually, these two combined trends may take a complex and possibly very mixed historical
record and transform it into a simple morality-play, with innocent Jews tremendously injured by
vicious Jew-haters. And as this morality-play becomes established it deepens the subsequent
intensity of other Jewish-activists, who redouble their demands that the media "stop vilifying
Jews" and covering up the supposed evils inflicted upon them. An unfortunate circle of
distortion following exaggeration following distortion can eventually produce a widely accepted
historical account that bears little resemblance to the reality of what actually happened.
So as a result, the vast majority of quite ordinary Jews, who would normally behave in quite
ordinary ways, are misled by this largely fictional history, and rather understandably become
greatly outraged at all the horrible things that had been done to their suffering people, some
of which are true and some of which are not, while remaining completely ignorant of the other
side of the ledger.
Furthermore, this situation is exacerbated by the common tendency of Jews to "cluster"
together, perhaps respresenting just one or two percent of the total population, but often
constituting 20% or 40% or 60% of their immediate peer-group, especially in certain
professions. Under such conditions, the ideas or emotional agitation of some Jews probably
permeates others around them, often provoking additional waves of indignation.
As a rough analogy, a small quantity of uranium is relatively inert and harmless, and
entirely so if distributed within low-density ore. But if a significant quantity of
weapons-grade uranium is sufficiently compressed, then the neutrons released by fissioning
atoms will quickly cause additional atoms to undergo fission, with the ultimate result of that
critical chain-reaction being a nuclear explosion. In similar fashion, even a highly agitated
Jew may have no negative impact, but if the collection of such agitated Jews becomes too
numerous and clusters together too closely, they may work each other into a terrible frenzy,
perhaps with disastrous consequences both for themselves and for their larger society. This is
especially true if those agitated Jews begin to dominate certain key nodes of top-level
control, such as the central political or media organs of a society.
Whereas most living organizations exist solely in physical reality, human beings also occupy
an ideational space, with the interaction of human consciousness and perceived reality playing
a major role in shaping behavior. Just as the pheromones released by mammals or insects can
drastically affect the reactions of their family members or nest-mates, the ideas secreted by
individuals or the media-emitters of a society can have an enormous impact upon their
fellows.
A cohesive, organized group generally possesses huge advantages over a teeming mass of
atomized individuals, just as a Macedonian Phalanx could easily defeat a vastly larger body of
disorganized infantry. Many years ago, on some website somewhere I came across a very
insightful comment regarding the obvious connection between "anti-Semitism" and "racism," which
our mainstream media organs identify as two of the world's greatest evils. Under this analysis,
"anti-Semitism" represents the tendency to criticize or resist Jewish social cohesion, while
"racism" represents the attempt of white Gentiles to maintain a similar social cohesion of
their own. To the extent that the ideological emanations from our centralized media organs
serve to strengthen and protect Jewish cohesion while attacking and dissolving any similar
cohesion on the part of their Gentile counterparts, the former will obviously gain enormous
advantages in resource-competition against the latter.
Religion obviously constitutes an important unifying factor in human social groups and we
cannot ignore the role of Judaism in this regard. Traditional Jewish
religious doctrine seems to consider Jews as being in a state of permanent hostility with all
non-Jews , and the use of dishonest propaganda is an almost inevitable aspect of such
conflict. Furthermore, since Jews have invariably been a small political minority, maintaining
such controversial tenets required the employment of a massive framework of subterfuge and
dissimulation in order to conceal their nature from the larger society surrounding them. It has
often been said that truth is the first casualty in war, and surely the cultural influences of
over a thousand years of such intense religious hostility may continue to quietly influence the
thinking of many modern Jews, even those who have largely abandoned their religious
beliefs.
The notorious Jewish tendency to shamelessly lie or wildly exaggerate has sometimes had
horrifying human consequences. I very recently discovered a fascinating passage in Peter
Moreira's 2014 book The Jew Who Defeated Hitler: Henry Morgenthau Jr., FDR, and How We Won the War ,
focused on the important political role of that powerful Secretary of the Treasury.
A turning point in Henry Morgenthau Jr.'s relationship with the Jewish community came in
November 1942, when Rabbi Stephen Wise came to the corner office to tell the secretary what
was happening in Europe. Morgenthau knew of the millions of deaths and the lampshades made
from victims' skin, and he asked Wise not to go into excessive details. But Wise went on to
tell of the barbarity of the Nazis, how they were making soap out of Jewish flesh.
Morgenthau, turning paler, implored him, "Please, Stephen, don't give me the gory details."
Wise went on with his list of horrors and Morgenthau repeated his plea over and over again.
Henrietta Klotz was afraid her boss would keel over. Morgenthau later said the meeting
changed his life.
Mirvis'
intervention in the election campaign makes sense only if he believes in one of two
highly improbable scenarios.
The first requires several demonstrably untrue things to be true. It needs for Corbyn to be
a proven antisemite – and not just of the variety that occasionally or accidentally lets
slip an antisemitic trope or is susceptible to the unthinking prejudice most of us occasionally
display, including (as we shall see) Rabbi Mirvis.
No, for Mirvis to have interfered in the election campaign he would need to believe that
Corbyn intends actively as prime minister to inflame a wider antisemitism in British society or
implement policies designed to harm the Jewish community. And in addition, the chief rabbi
would have to believe that Corbyn presides over a Labour party that will willingly indulge
race-hate speeches or stand by impassively as Corbyn carries out racist policies.
If Mirvis really believes any of that, I have a bridge to sell him. Corbyn has spent his
entire political career as an anti-racism campaigner, and his anti-racism activism as a
backbencher was especially prominent inside a party that itself has traditionally taken the
political lead in tackling racism.
... ... ...
Even now, our most prized rights, such as free speech, are being eroded and subverted to
protect Israel from criticism. In the US, the only infringements on the American public's First
Amendment rights have been legislated to silence those seeking to
pressure Israel over its crimes against the Palestinians with a boycott – similar to the
campaign against apartheid South Africa. In the UK, the Conservative manifesto similarly
promises to
bar local councils from upholding international law and boycotting products from Israel's
illegal settlements.
Rewarding war crimes
The real left focuses on this continuing colonial crime against the Palestinians not because
it is antisemitic (a claim the Economist survey amply refutes), but because the left treats
Israel as emblematic of British and western bad faith and hypocrisy. Israel is the imperial
west's Achilles' heel, the proof that war crimes, massacres and ethnic cleansing are not only
not punished but actively rewarded if these crimes accord with western imperial
interests.
But ardent friends of Israel such as Mirvis are blind to these arguments. For them, one
western antisemitic crime – the Holocaust – entirely obscures another western
antisemitic crime: seeking to rid Europe of Jews by forcing them into the Middle East, serving
as pawns on an imperial chessboard that paid no regard to the Palestinians whose homeland was
being sacrificed.
In his state of historical and political myopia, Mirvis cannot begin to understand that
there might be political activists who, in defending the Palestinian people, are also defending
Jews. That they, unlike him, understand that Israel was created not out of western benevolence
towards Jews, but out of western malevolence towards "lesser peoples". The real left in Britain
speaks out against Israel not because it hates Jews but because it holds dear a commitment to
justice and a compassion for all.
Mirvis, on the other hand, is the Zionist equivalent of a little Englander. He prefers
particularist, short-term interests over universalist, long-term ones.
It was he, remember, who threw his
full support behind Israel in 2014 as it indiscriminately bombed Gaza, killing some 550
children – a bombing campaign that came after years of an Israeli blockade on the
Palestinian population there. That siege has led the United Nations to warn that the enclave
will be uninhabitable by next
year.
It was Mirvis, along with his predecessor Jonathan Sacks, who in 2017 endorsed
the fanatical Jewish settlers – Israel's equivalent of white supremacists – on
their annual march through the occupied Old City of Jerusalem. This is the march where the
majority of the participants are recorded every year waving masses of Israeli flags at
Palestinians and chanting "Death to the Arabs". One Israeli newspaper columnist has
described the Jerusalem Day march as a "religious carnival of hatred".
Just goes to show how ... so called "Chief Rabbi" has become the most important commentator
on a British general election, and the Tories and much of the media in Britain absolutely
love it.
Not even America they would let a Rabbi blatantly interfere with a presidential election.
It's incredible how a British general election has literally become about Jews, I've never
seen anything like it in any other country. The media is so obsessed with what Jews think
anyone would think Corbyn was running to be PM of Israel!
FYI... An Israeli investigative journalist (and anti-Zioinist) Richard Silberstein gives us
this treasure trove on the FIVE EYES in Israel, the NSA and IDF:
Other Related Articles can be found on the website. How this guy can still operate is
amazing. He'd better not stray too far into the gray zone of reporting, is my guess. Gutsy
guy. More than can be said for US or Western Presstitutes.
"... Despite knowing that it was a failing investment, Qatar leaned on Brookfield to buy 666 Fifth Avenue from Kushner, to write off his debts ..."
"... Jared Kushner approached the government of Qatar for a bailout of 666 Fifth Avenue?" Castenda clarified. "Correct. That's what they told me. ... And they did it. ..."
"... the Qataris said Kushner told them: 'Choose one of two. You pay what I tell you to pay, or I unleash my dogs.'" "The dogs being who?" she asked. "Saudi Arabia and the UAE," Bender replied. ..."
"... American officials are the cheapest to recruit. "British officials, they demand millions to be recruited. American politicians, some of them accept $50,000." ..."
"We recruited both, Republicans and Democrats, but that's not good enough. We want to
rule the White House," the Qataris allegedly said. E
... ... ...
"Everything [Alan Bender] said in the deposition about me has happened," Imam Tawhidi told
The Post . "I believe in the deposition and await an investigation. All I want is to be
treated fairly," he added. However, Omar was not the only prominent American named in the
Bender testimony.
"They [the Qataris] said: 'We recruited both, Republicans and Democrats, but
that's not good enough. We want to rule the White House.' So they will," he told the court.
Indeed, if Bender's testimony is accurate, they are already close. Explaining that Qatar uses
western companies to effectively launder the money they paid to American citizens, Bender cited
a $1.4 billion payment which he claims was passed to Jared Kushner from Qatar, via a Canadian
company named Brookfield, which he says they have invested heavily in.
Despite knowing that it
was a failing investment, Qatar leaned on Brookfield to buy 666 Fifth Avenue from Kushner, to
write off his debts. "Why didn't they pay Kusher directly?" the lawyer for the plaintiffs, Ms.
Castenda, asked. "Too risky," Bender replied. "Jared Kushner approached the government of Qatar
for a bailout of 666 Fifth Avenue?" Castenda clarified. "Correct. That's what they told me. ...
And they did it.
And Kushner is happy with them because, according to them, I don't know
Kushner personally, but the Qataris said Kushner told them: 'Choose one of two. You pay what I
tell you to pay, or I unleash my dogs.'" "The dogs being who?" she asked. "Saudi Arabia and the UAE," Bender replied.
The Qataris were aware that as an investment the pay-off was a write-off,
but told Bender, "'We just paid it to pay off his debt. And as long as he's in the White House,
we have to do what he wants until we control the White House.' We as in Qatar," Bender
clarified. The Jerusalem Post has reached out to Mr Kushner's office for a response.
However, no comment has been received as of yet.
Among other claims made by Mr. Bender were
that: - The real power in Qatar is Mohammed Al-Masnad, known as 'the CEO.' "After a couple of
hours, I was convinced that the Emir of Qatar does not run the show and Mohammed Al-Masnad is
in charge of everything. He is also the Emir's uncle. [...] And the Emir's mother is the real
king of Qatar." - The second most powerful man in Qatar is a Palestinian, Azmi Bishara. - That
Jamal Khashoggi was set up by Qatar to be killed by the Saudis after he was found to have been
"playing both sides." "Jamal Khashoggi and Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal were very close friends,"
Bender said. "[Khashoggi] would receive sensitive secrets ... and he leaks them to the Qataris.
The Qataris would leak them to media outlets ... and he was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood.
I got that confirmation from the Qatari officials." - that "they [Qatar] finance almost 99
percent of Saudi dissidents in the US and the UK. They pay them."
Bender named Ghanem
al-Dosari, a well known YouTuber, as one such individual. - Three Italians, known as 'the
engineers' were paid by Qatar to hack the accounts of Saudi Arabian and the United Arab
Emirates's citizens. "E-mails, text messages, regular phone calls, laptops. Anything you can
think of. They hacked into all that."
American officials are the cheapest to recruit.
"British officials, they demand millions to be recruited. American politicians, some of them
accept $50,000." - The Qataris refer to Trump as "the orange man," and to Kushner as the
"descendant of pigs and apes," because he is Jewish.
"And they refer to other American Senators
and Congressmen who are Christians as 'Crusaders'."
"... Mirviz got prominent media coverage for his views this week in the London Times and Daily Mail, among others. Britain's rightwing media are owned by billionaire oligarchs who despise Labour's manifesto for progressive wealth redistribution. ..."
"... The antisemitic card is played to shield Israel from important criticism; and by Britain's plutocrats and their media who would rather see the public squabbling over spurious claims about antisemitism so they can keep on plundering wealth from the majority of British people. ..."
November 27, 2019 " Information Clearing House " - It is a
ludicrous situation when anyone criticizing Israeli state violations against Palestinians or
neighboring countries is then instantly discredited as being "antisemitic".
We see this in Britain and the United States all the time. Congresswomen like Ilhan Omar and
Rashida Tlaib have been denounced for being "anti-Jewish", including by President Trump, simply
because they protested
Israeli policy of occupying Palestinian lands or for having a malign influence on US
foreign policy.
In Britain, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and his party have once again this week been
vilified as "antisemitic" in prominent news media.
The reality is that
Corbyn is neither racist or anti-Jewish . The specious allegation stems from him and
sections of Labour being vehemently critical of Israel and its conduct towards
Palestinians.
If elected in the general election next month, Labour says it will cut military trade with
Israel and move to officially recognize a Palestinian state.
This conflation of valid criticism of the Israeli state with being "anti-Jew" is a cynical
distortion which is wielded to give Israel impunity from international law. It plays on moral
blackmail of critics by equating the
historical persecution of Jews and in particular the Nazi holocaust with the sanctity of
the modern Israeli state.
That distortion is exposed by many Jews themselves who have spoken out in the US and in
Britain to defend the right of people to criticize Israeli policies. They understand the vital
distinction between the Israeli state and the much wider existence of Jewishness. They
understand that to be opposed to Israeli state practices is in no way to mean animus towards
Jews in general.
Are You Tired Of The Lies And Non-Stop Propaganda?
Only in the past week, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has declared his government
intends to expand annexation of Palestinian territory in the West Bank. The land occupied by
Israeli forces since the 1967 Six Day War is
illegally occupied , according to multiple UN resolutions under international law. Now
Netanyahu wants to increase the violations. And with the support of the Trump administration
which also announced it was no longer viewing Israeli settlements on Palestinian land as
illegitimate.
Over the past month, the Israeli military
has stepped up airstrikes on the Gaza Strip where nearly two million Palestinians subsist
in abject poverty largely because of an Israeli blockade. One family of nine, including
children, was killed by an airstrike on their home on November 14. As always the death toll
among Palestinian civilians is grotesquely disproportionate to Israeli victims of rockets fired
from Gaza.
Israeli forces have also been carrying out hundreds of airstrikes in Syria, including the
capital Damascus, over the past year. Russia, among others, has condemned those attacks as
"unlawful aggression". Arguably, war crimes.
When Jeremy
Corbyn and Britain's Labour Party and a handful of American politicians speak out to
denounce Israeli violations they are doing so to uphold international law and voice support for
victims of state violence. That is a principled and honourable position.
Shamefully, the US and British governments and much of the corporate news media never do
speak out. They shield Israeli leaders from international accountability by vetoing UN
resolutions or by turning a blind eye. Pro-Israeli lobbies funnel massive donations to
politicians in Washington on both sides of the aisle, and to the British Conservative Party.
Their silence is bought. Not only silence but outright distortion, such as when people
criticize Israeli malfeasance – and there is much of that – then they are absurdly
character-assassinated as "antisemites".
Admittedly, many British Jews phoned into radio stations this week to complain that they
feel unwelcome in Britain due to what they perceive
as growth in antisemitism under the Labour Party . To be fair though, their claims were not
backed up by hard evidence of specifically anti-Jewish behaviour. They were eliding their
Jewishness with Labour's criticism of Israel.
The claims made against Corbyn this week by the British Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirviz of being
"unfit for office" because of an alleged complacent attitude towards antisemitism in his party
should be put in context.
Corbyn has apologized several times for a tiny fraction (less than 0.1 per cent) of party
members accused of antisemitism. Why should he be obliged to keep on apologizing, as BBC
interviewer Andrew Neil imperiously demanded again this week?
Chief Rabbi Mirviz is a self-declared friend of Conservative leader Boris Johnson and an
ardent, uncritical supporter of the Israeli state.
Mirviz does not represent all British Jews, as many other Jewish groups came out voicing
their support for Corbyn and his valid right of free speech to criticize Israel.
Mirviz got prominent media coverage for his views this week in the London Times and Daily
Mail, among others. Britain's rightwing media are owned by billionaire oligarchs who despise
Labour's manifesto for progressive wealth redistribution.
Official race-hate figures for Britain show that physical attacks against British Muslims
are preponderantly more than
attacks against any other religious minority, including Jews . Boris Johnson's
Conservatives have evident problems of fomenting Islamophobia. Yet we don't see British media
providing proportionate criticism on that to balance their focus on Corbyn and his alleged
views.
The antisemitic card is played to shield Israel from important criticism; and by Britain's
plutocrats and their media who would rather see the public squabbling over spurious claims
about antisemitism so they can keep on plundering wealth from the majority of British
people.
Finian Cunningham has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published
in several languages. He is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a
scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a
career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he
worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish
Times and Independent.
"... Mirvis has no lessons to teach Corbyn or the Labour party about racism. In fact, it is his own, small-minded prejudice that blinds him to the anti-racist politics of the left. His ugly message is now being loudly amplified by a corporate media keen to use any weapon it can, antisemitism included, to keep Corbyn and the left out of power – and preserve a status quo that benefits the few at the expense of the many. ..."
Chief rabbi Ephraim Mirvis has not only
misrepresented the known facts about Labour and its supposed antisemitism crisis. He has not
only interfered in an overtly, politically partisan manner in the December 12 election campaign
by suggesting that Jeremy Corbyn –
against all evidence – is an antisemite.
By speaking out as the voice of British Jews – a false claim he has allowed the UK
media to promote – his unprecedented meddling in the election of Britain's next leader
has actually made the wider Jewish community in the UK much less safe. Mirvis is contributing
to the very antisemitism he says he wants to eradicate.
Mirvis'
intervention in the election campaign makes sense only if he believes in one of two
highly improbable scenarios.
The first requires several demonstrably untrue things to be true. It needs for Corbyn to be
a proven antisemite – and not just of the variety that occasionally or accidentally lets
slip an antisemitic trope or is susceptible to the unthinking prejudice most of us occasionally
display, including (as we shall see) Rabbi Mirvis.
No, for Mirvis to have interfered in the election campaign he would need to believe that
Corbyn intends actively as prime minister to inflame a wider antisemitism in British society or
implement policies designed to harm the Jewish community. And in addition, the chief rabbi
would have to believe that Corbyn presides over a Labour party that will willingly indulge
race-hate speeches or stand by impassively as Corbyn carries out racist policies.
If Mirvis really believes any of that, I have a bridge to sell him. Corbyn has spent his
entire political career as an anti-racism campaigner, and his anti-racism activism as a
back-bencher was especially prominent inside a party that itself has traditionally taken the
political lead in tackling racism.
Rising tide of nationalism
The second possibility is that Mirvis doesn't really believe that Corbyn is a Goebbels in
the making. But if that is so, then his decision to intercede in the election campaign to
influence British voters must be based on an equally fanciful notion: that there is no
significant threat posed by antisemitism from the right or the rapidly emerging far right.
Because if antisemitism is not an issue on the right – the same nationalistic right
that has persecuted Jews throughout modern history, culminating in the Nazi atrocities –
then Mirvis may feel he can risk playing politics in the name of the Jewish community without
serious consequence.
If there is no perceptible populist tide of white nationalism sweeping Europe and the globe,
one that hates immigrants and minorities, then making a fuss about Corbyn might seem to make
sense for a prominent Jewish community leader. In those circumstances, it might appear to be
worth disrupting the national conversation to highlight the fact that Corbyn once sat with
Hamas politicians – just as Tony Blair once sat with Sinn Fein leaders – and that
Corbyn's party has promised in the latest manifesto to stop
selling weapons to Israel (and Saudi Arabia) of the kind that have been used to butcher
children in Gaza. Mirvis might believe that by wounding Corbyn he can help into power a
supposedly benevolent, or at least inoffensive, Tory party.
But if he is wrong about the re-emergence of a white nationalism and its growing entry into
the mainstream – and all the evidence suggests he would be deeply wrong , if this is what he
thinks – then undermining Corbyn and the Labour party is self-destructiveness of the
first order.
It would amount to self-harm not only because attacking Corbyn inevitably strengthens the
electoral chances of Boris "
watermelon smiles " Johnson. It plays with fire because Mirvis' flagrant intervention in
the election campaign actually bolsters a key part of the antisemitic discourse of the far
right that is rapidly making inroads into the Conservative party.
Succour to white nationalists
White nationalists are all over social media warning of supposed Jewish global conspiracies,
of supposed Jewish control of the media, of supposed Jewish subversion of "white rights". It
was precisely this kind of thinking that drove European politics a century ago. It was
arch-antisemite
Arthur Balfour who signed off the Balfour Declaration of 1917 that sought to end Britain's
"Jewish problem" by encouraging European Jews to move far away, to a part of the Middle East
then known as Palestine.
That is, of course, why today's white supremacists love Israel, why they see it as a model,
why they call themselves "
white Zionists ". In creating a tribal democracy, and one heavily fortified, land hungry,
belligerent and nuclear-armed, Israel has done for Jews exactly what white nationalists hope to
do again for their white compatriots. The white supremacists' love of Israel is intimately
bound up with their hatred and fear of Jews.
Mirvis has given succour to white nationalist discourse both because he has spoken out
against Corbyn without offering evidence for his claims and because those entirely
unsubstantiated claims have been echoed across the media.
There is good reason why the
billionaire-owned print media and the Establishment-dominated BBC are happy to exploit the
antisemitism smears – and it has nothing to do with concern for the safety of Jews. The
corporate media don't want a Labour leader in power who is going to roll back the corporate
free-for-all unleashed by Margaret Thatcher 40 years ago that nearly bankrupted the rest of us
in 2008.
But that is not what those flirting with or embracing white nationalism will take away from
the relentless media chorus over evidence-free antisemitism claims.
Mirvis' intervention in the democratic process will drive them more quickly and more deeply
into the arms of the far-right. It will persuade them once again that "the Jews" are a
"problem". They will conclude that – though the Jews are now helping the right by
destroying Corbyn – once the left has been dealt with, those same Jews will then subvert
their white state. Like Balfour before them, they will start thinking of how to rid Britain and
Europe of these supposed interlopers.
This is why Mirvis was irresponsible in the extreme for meddling. Because the standard of
proof required before making such an intervention – proof either that Cobyn is an
outright Jew hater, or that white nationalism is no threat to the UK – is not even close
to being met.
The left's anti-imperialism
In fact much worse, all the evidence shows the exact reverse. That was neatly summed up in a
survey this month published by The Economist, a weekly magazine that is no friend to Corbyn
or the Labour party.
It showed that those identifying as "very left-wing"
– the section of the public that supports Corbyn – were among the least likely to
express antisemitic attitudes. Those identifying as "very right-wing", on the other hand
– those likely to support Boris "
piccaninnies " Johnson – were three and a half times more likely to express hostile
attitudes towards Jews. Other surveys show even worse racism among Conservatives
towards more obviously non-white minorities, such as Muslims and black people. That, after all,
is the very reason Boris "
letterbox-looking Muslim women " Johnson now heads the Tory party.
The Economist findings reveal something else of relevance in assessing Mirvis' meddling. Not
only is the real left (as distinguished from the phoney, centrist left represented by Labour's
Blairites) much less antisemitic than the right, it is also much more critical of Israel than
any other section of the British public.
That is easily explained. The real left has always been anti-imperialist. Israel is a
particularly problematic part of Britain's colonial legacy.
Elsewhere, the peoples who gained independence from Britain found themselves inside ruined,
impoverished states, often with borders imposed out of naked imperial interest that left them
divided and feuding. Internal struggles over the crumbs Britain and other imperial powers left
behind were the norm.
But in a very real sense, Britain – or at least the west – never really left
Israel. In line with the Balfour Declaration, Britain helped to establish the institutions of a
"Jewish home" on the Palestinians' homeland. British troops may have departed in 1948, but
waves of European Jewish immigrants were either encouraged or compelled to come to the newly
created state of Israel by racist immigration quotas designed to prevent them fleeing
elsewhere, most especially to the United States.
The west helped engineer both the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and Israel's creation to
solve Europe's "Jewish problem". It provided the components necessary for Israel to build a
nuclear bomb that won it a place at the international top table and ensured the Palestinians
were made Israel's serfs in perpetuity. Ever since, the west has provided Israel with
diplomatic cover, military aid and special trading status, even as Israel has worked
relentlessly to disappear the Palestinian people from their homeland.
Even now, our most prized rights, such as free speech,
are being eroded and subverted to protect Israel from criticism. In the US, the only
infringements on the American public's First Amendment rights have been legislated to
silence those seeking to
pressure Israel over its crimes against the Palestinians with a boycott – similar to the
campaign against apartheid South Africa. In the UK, the Conservative manifesto similarly
promises to
bar local councils from upholding international law and boycotting products from Israel's
illegal settlements.
Rewarding war crimes
The real left focuses on this continuing colonial crime against the Palestinians not because
it is antisemitic (a claim the Economist survey amply refutes), but because the left treats
Israel as emblematic of British and western bad faith and hypocrisy. Israel is the imperial
west's Achilles' heel, the proof that war crimes, massacres and ethnic cleansing are not only
not punished but actively rewarded if these crimes accord with western imperial
interests.
But ardent friends of Israel such as Mirvis are blind to these arguments. For them, one
western antisemitic crime – the Holocaust – entirely obscures another western
antisemitic crime: seeking to rid Europe of Jews by forcing them into the Middle East, serving
as pawns on an imperial chessboard that paid no regard to the Palestinians whose homeland was
being sacrificed.
In his state of historical and political myopia, Mirvis
cannot begin to understand that there might be political activists who, in defending the
Palestinian people, are also defending Jews. That they, unlike him, understand that Israel was
created not out of western benevolence towards Jews, but out of western malevolence towards
"lesser peoples". The real left in Britain speaks out against Israel not because it hates Jews
but because it holds dear a commitment to justice and a compassion for all.
Mirvis, on the other hand, is the Zionist equivalent of a little Englander. He prefers
particularist, short-term interests over universalist, long-term ones.
It was he, remember, who threw his
full support behind Israel in 2014 as it indiscriminately bombed Gaza, killing some 550
children – a bombing campaign that came after years of an Israeli blockade on the
Palestinian population there. That siege has led the United Nations to warn that the enclave
will be uninhabitable by next
year.
It was Mirvis, along with his predecessor Jonathan Sacks, who in 2017 endorsed
the fanatical Jewish settlers – Israel's equivalent of white supremacists – on
their annual march through the occupied Old City of Jerusalem. This is the march where the
majority of the participants are recorded every year waving masses of Israeli flags at
Palestinians and chanting "Death to the Arabs". One Israeli newspaper columnist has
described the Jerusalem Day march as a "religious carnival of hatred".
It was Mirvis and Sacks that encouraged British Jews to join them on this tub-thumping trip
to Israel, which they
suggested would provide an opportunity to spend time "dancing with our brave soldiers".
Those soldiers – Israeli, not British – occupy West Bank cities like Hebron where
they have locked down life for some 200,000 Palestinians so that a handful of crazed religious
Jewish bigots can live undisturbed in their midst.
What is so appalling is that Mirvis is blind to the very obvious parallels between the
fearful Palestinians who hastily have to board up their shops as a Jewish mob parades through
their neighbourhood and today's white supremacists and neo-Nazis in the west who seek to march
provocatively through ethnic minority communities, including Jewish neighbourhoods, in places
like Charlottesville
.
Mirvis has no lessons to teach Corbyn or the Labour party about racism. In fact, it is his
own, small-minded prejudice that blinds him to the anti-racist politics of the left. His ugly
message is now being loudly amplified by a corporate media keen to use any weapon it can,
antisemitism included, to keep Corbyn and the left out of power – and preserve a status
quo that benefits the few at the expense of the many.
Kushner's Apparent
Extortion of Qatar is an interesting gem. If you remember Rex Tillerson quitting, Saudi
Arabia and the UAE almost going to war with Qatar and then Brookstone Partners, financed by
Qatar paying, 1.4 billion for Kushers failed 666 building in NY where they were hemorrhaging
money.
Indeed, if Bender's testimony is accurate, they are already close.
Explaining that Qatar uses western companies to effectively launder the money they paid
to American citizens, Bender cited a $1.4 billion payment which he claims was passed to Jared
Kushner from Qatar, via a Canadian company named Brookfield, which he says they have invested
heavily in.
Despite knowing that it was a failing investment, Qatar leaned on Brookfield to buy 666
Fifth Avenue from Kushner, to write off his debts.
"Why didn't they pay Kusher directly?" the lawyer for the plaintiffs, Ms. Castenda,
asked.
"Too risky," Bender replied.
"Jared Kushner approached the government of Qatar for a bailout of 666 Fifth Avenue?"
Castenda clarified.
"Correct. That's what they told me. ... And they did it. And Kushner is happy with them
because, according to them, I don't know Kushner personally, but the Qataris said Kushner
told them: 'Choose one of two. You pay what I tell you to pay, or I unleash my dogs.'"
"The dogs being who?" she asked.
"Saudi Arabia and the UAE," Bender replied.
The Qataris were aware that as an investment the pay-off was a write-off, but told
Bender, "'We just paid it to pay off his debt. And as long as he's in the White House, we
have to do what he wants until we control the White House.' We as in Qatar," Bender
clarified.
From comments: "After all, Pompeo might as well announce hippos can fly. The settlements are
illegal. That's a matter of fact -- not opinion."
Notable quotes:
"... If one is seeking evidence to suggest that Pompeo, a man who lies with a fluency that takes one's breath away, is delusional, it would certainly have to include his self-assessment that he has a reputation to protect. It is possible to cite many instances in which Pompeo has asserted something that is absolutely contrary to the truth, though one might also have to concede that he could often be saying what his factually challenged boss wants to hear. When Pompeo was Director of the CIA he even joked openly about how "We lied, we cheated, we stole." ..."
A story has been
circulating suggesting that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will soon be resigning because
he needs to focus on planning for his campaign to become a Senator from Kansas in 2020. This is
good news for the United States, as Senator Lindsey Graham has had no one he is able to talk to
about exporting democracy by blowing up the planet since Joe Lieberman retired and John McCain
died. And the tale even has a bit of palace intrigue built into it, with an interesting back
story as Pompeo is apparently considering his move because he fears that staying in harness
with Donald Trump for too long might damage his reputation. There are also reports that he has
been traveling to Kansas frequently on the State Department's dime to test the waters, a
violation of the Hatch Act which prohibits most government officials
from engaging in self-promotional political activities unrelated to their actual jobs.
If one is seeking evidence to suggest that Pompeo, a man who lies with a fluency that
takes one's breath away, is delusional, it would certainly have to include his self-assessment
that he has a reputation to protect. It is possible to cite many instances in which Pompeo has
asserted something that is absolutely contrary to the truth, though one might also have to
concede that he could often be saying what his factually challenged boss wants to hear. When
Pompeo was Director of the CIA he even joked openly about how "We lied, we cheated,
we stole."
Mike Pompeo's
latest concession to the war criminals in charge of Israel, clearly intended to boost the
electoral chances of Benjamin Netanyahu, is only the most recent dose of the Secretary of
State's falsehood piled on fiction. It is generally assumed that the move to help Bibi by
interfering in Israeli politics has been made in an effort to have Tel Aviv reciprocate by
putting pressure on its many American fellow travelers in the media and congress to go easier
on Trump in the impeachment saga. And Trump would also expect additional reciprocity when he
runs again in 2020. Even though Netanyahu, who has been indicted over bribery and fraud, will
not be able to shift many liberal Jewish votes, he will be able to get allies like mega
billionaire Sheldon Adelson to pony up tens of millions of dollars to support the GOP
campaign.
The Trump Administration's gifts to Israel are unprecedented, including moving the capital
to Jerusalem and acknowledging the annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights. Pompeo, driven by
his Christian Zionist beliefs, has been the point man on many of those moves, ably assisted by
a U.S. Ambassador David Friedman, ex-bankruptcy lawyer, who has served as a consistent advocate
and apologist for Israel with little or no concern for actual American interests. One might
also observe that if Pompeo is truly interested in running for the Senate a little help and
cash from Israel and its many friends might be very welcome.
The Pompeo gift to Bibi was announced early last week. He said that the Trump Administration
is now rejecting the 1978 State Department Hansell Memorandum legal opinion that the creation
of civilian settlements in occupied territories is indeed "inconsistent with international
law." In a sense, he was giving something away to Israel that neither he nor the Israelis
legally possess. He said that he was "accepting realities on the ground" and elaborated on his
view that the White House believes legal questions about settlements should be dealt with in
Israeli courts, meaning that the hapless Palestinians would have no voice in developments that
would deprive them of their homes.
Per Pompeo, "Calling the establishment of civilian settlements inconsistent with
international law has not advanced the cause of peace. The hard truth is that there will never
be a judicial resolution to the conflict, and arguments about who is right and who is wrong as
a matter of international law will not bring peace."
Pompeo's latest statement, consistent with many of his earlier ones, is completely contrary
to the Fourth
Geneva Convention framework of international law governing behavior by occupying military
powers that was established after the Second World War. It ignores the fact that the status
quo of expanding settlements has only taken place because of Washington's refusal to do
anything about it. The State Department's new interpretation completely embraces arguments
being made by hard-line politicians in Israel and opens the door to endorsement by the White
House of a total de facto or even de jure annexation of the West Bank by the
Jewish state.
Pompeo was talking about the nearly 700,000 illegal exclusively Jewish settlers currently on
the West Bank and in East Jerusalem. Palestinians, in many areas under a brutal regime of
martial law enforced by the Jewish state's army and police, have virtually no rights and are
subject to increasing violent attacks by the settlers. Not surprisingly, Pompeo's statement was
rejected by everyone but the Israelis and the usual crowd in the U.S. Congress and media, but
even some leading Democratic candidates, including Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, found
the decision troubling. The 28 member European Union declared that "All settlement activity is
illegal under international law and it erodes the viability of the two-state solution and the
prospects for a lasting peace. The E.U. calls on Israel to end all settlement activity, in line
with its obligations as an occupying power."
And, of course, there are potential consequences when a government does something stupid.
Shortly after Pompeo's announcement, the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem put out a security advisory
warning Americans traveling in the West Bank, Jerusalem and Gaza, stating, "Individuals and
groups opposed to [the Pompeo] announcement may target U.S. government facilities, U.S. private
interests, and U.S. citizens." It suggested that visitors ought "to maintain a high level of
vigilance and take appropriate steps to increase their security awareness in light of the
current environment."
There is inevitably considerable discussion in some circles regarding what the new situation
on the West Bank actually means. To be sure, the number and size of settlements will increase,
but some knowledgeable critics like Gilad Atzmon
suggest that the move will backfire on the Israelis, who, by taking control of the land,
will eventually have to accept some kind of one state solution, giving the Palestinians
considerable rights in a not-completely-denominational state. He observes how " inadvertently,
Trump has finally committed the U.S.A. to the One State Solution. It is hard to deny that the
area between the 'River and the Sea' is a single piece of land. It shares one electric grid,
one pre-dial code (+972) and one sewage system. At present, the land is ruled over by a racist,
tribal and discriminatory ideology through an apparatus that calls itself 'The Jewish State'
and declares itself home for every Jew around the world; yet, is abusive, lethal and some would
say genocidal
toward the indigenous people of the land Pompeo's declaration provides an explicit and
necessary message to the Palestinians in general and in the West Bank in particular. The
conflict is not progressing toward a peaceful resolution. Those amongst the Palestinians who
advocated the 'Two States Solution' will have to hide now. Pompeo has affirmed that there is
one Holy Land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. From now on the battle over
this disputed land is whether it will be subject to the racist discriminatory ideology implied
by the notion of 'The Jewish State' and its '
National Bill ,' or if it will transform itself into a 'State of its
Citizens' as is inherent in the notion of One Palestine."
Tom Suarez posits
similarly at Mondoweiss, observing that any form of annexation of the West Bank without
giving Palestinians equal rights would basically make Israeli apartheid so visible and
unacceptable to world opinion that the Jewish state would become a complete pariah
internationally and would be forced to adopt some kind of one state formula.
Nevertheless, even if a one state solution with equal citizenship status for everyone would
appear to be both desirable and compliant with modern notions of human rights, it is not
necessarily inevitable. The chosen-by-God Israeli state is quite capable of ethnic cleansing or
even genocide on a massive scale, as it did originally in 1947-8 when it was founded and also
later after it occupied the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. The Jewish state's leaders have
repeatedly asserted that there is no such thing as a Palestinian, that Jordan is actually
Palestine. They have become skilled at making the lives of Palestinians so miserable by
destroying their farms, other livelihood and even their homes while also controlling their
infrastructure, killing them if they resist, that they emigrate. Christians in Palestine, the
original followers of Jesus Christ, constituted close to 8 percent of
the population in 1946 but now number less than 2 percent. Most have chosen to leave rather
than submit to Israel.
There is no reason to doubt that the Israelis could continue their creeping annexation of
the West Bank for ten more years or so while also deliberately driving the remaining Arabs out.
I have little doubt that that is precisely what they will do and they will be empowered to do
so by the United States, which will never develop either the integrity or the courage to push
back against "America's closest ally and best friend in the entire world."
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest,
a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a
more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and
its email is [email protected] .
Well, what the heck, why not? It's not like the Palestinians were doing anything with the
West Bank. They might as well pass it on off to a more ambitious property developer. Call it
the Middle East's version of Eminent Domain. If you can't develop it, it's going to end up in
the hands of someone who will, and they'll gentrify it in the process. The Palestinians will
be redlined right out of their old neighborhoods, and since the Palestinians are more hoods
than neighbors, good riddance.
@Anon
"Why not? It's not like Jews were doing anything with Lebensraum in the first place. They
might as well pass it to more ambitious Reich developers. Call it 'Adolfian Domain'! If you
can't develop it, Shlomo, give it to those who will. In any case, Juden will be rothlined out
of their old shtetls. And since the Tribe is filled with hoods, not good neighbors, the world
will say, 'Good auschwitzriddance'!"
@Anon' The Palestinians will be redlined right out of their old neighborhoods, and since the
Palestinians are more hoods than neighbors, good riddance.'
More or less what Hitler said about inferior races.
@Colin
Wright Yeah, we certainly have reached 'peak grovel,' however, there's a long way down to
the nadir, because Israel is not done digesting its pray, nor with expanding its territory.
As in their attack of southern Lebanon in 2006, where they were stopped by Hesbollah, that
expansion is still in the plans. All the ME wars we've been involved with since 911 have had
as a strategic goal to destroy Iran in order to weaken Hesbollah, in order to, among other
things, take southern Lebanon.
We're being lowered into hell in a hand-basket and are probably only 1/3 of the way down,
so we're going to reach many more 'peak grovel' milestones on the way to John McCain's
resting place.
"[Pompeo's latest statement] ignores the fact that the status quo of expanding [Jewish]
settlements has only taken place because of Washington's refusal to do anything about
it."
Actually, it's even worse than that, Philip.
The US–as a deeply-compromised, long-term 'peace broker' between Israel and the
Palestinians–has in fact been an active and willing partner with the Jewish
State vis-a-vis it's race-centered, biblically-inspired objective of acquiring East
Jerusalem, Syria's Golan Heights, conquering Gaza, and colonizing the West Bank.
With the possible exception of Jimmy Carter, the construction of Israeli 'settlements' (as
well as the confiscation of land adjacent to Israel) has occurred under the watch of each and
every US administration and Congress since 1967. This deliberate process amounts to
incremental warfare.
Despite these facts, every Israeli transgression has been followed up by the delivery of
billions more in US aid to Israel along with additional billions in state-of-the-art US
weaponry. This is an extremely sweet deal. And it is incredibly one-sided.
At the UN, Zio-Washington has also provided diplomatic cover for the rogue Zionist state
every time Israel has violated international law or UN protocols since LBJ.
Over the past 50 years, scores of UN resolutions that sought to censure Israel for its
lawlessness have been vetoed by top US officials. These actions are unparalleled.
Despite the feeble attempt of a few US Presidents to push back (Ford and Bush Sr.)
Zio-Washington has never decisively withheld aid to the Jewish state, no matter
what–(this acquiescence by Washington even includes the 'unfortunate accident' that
occurred in 1967 in international waters involving US-made Israeli fighter jets and one
American intelligence-gathering vessel.)
What kind of a 'relationship' is this?
Not only is American aid to the Zionist state more lavish than the amount of aid received
by any other country in US history, it is also awarded to Israel unconditionally.
Actual US states don't have a relationship this deliciously one-sided with our Federal
government.
This one-way 'relationship' renders Zio-Washington a working (junior) partner in Israel's
slow-motion genocide of its native gentiles.
Ironically, modern Israel has displaced a culture in Palestine that was relatively
peaceful, tolerant, and integrated.
Stranger still: secular, 'multicultural' America has unwittingly signed on to this
colonial, supremacist agenda with nary a peep of protest.
Some breathed a sigh of relief when Nutty Nikki Haley left that spot, only to be replaced by
someone just as deluded, if not crazier.
I'm sure President Jared will find another clueless and irrational, Israeli-Firster to
appoint to that position, one who has been blessed by Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban.
Where is Europe on all of this? Can't they sanction the United States to prevent this? Or
maybe openly endorse sanctions on Israel? It's time for the world to step up and act.
Israel is headed for difficult times. The BDS movement is gaining steam at a pace that's
outstripped that of the anti-apartheid movement, and anti-BDS legislation in America is
collapsing in the courts. Demographically, Israel's military service-resistant Haredim will
soon become their largest constituency and Arabs on both sides of the wire will outnumber
Jews throughout the region.
It won't happen overnight, but it isn't too far away.
Nasty bit of work, that Trump. I think it's a shame that nationalists all across the Western
world see him as their figurehead because it doesn't look good at all.
I`m always wary of trying to get into people`s heads and declaring what they think
How about :-
Pompeo, who claims to be driven by his Christian Zionist beliefs,
Or something like that instead?
After all, I`m sure Pompeo would prefer to claim "I`m doing this due to my (perhaps a bit
wacky) beliefs, and I am also clearly a Christian" rather than say "I`m doing this for
Israeli Benjamins and not just the Netanyahu type."
Factoid: Balfour had buyer's remorse very shortly after having been cornered into
giving to Jews that which they did not have. His remorse was heightened by Jewish terrorists
who killed the British soldiers and diplomats who secured Palestine for Jews.
His preference was for Britain to wash its hands of 'the Jewish state,' as the British
ultimately did. "The sins of the father are visited on their children."
Mr. A. J. Balfour to the Secretary of State
Washington, January 13, 1922 .
My Dear Mr. Hughes: You will remember that some days ago I mentioned my great anxiety to
get the agreements in regard to the Mandate for Palestine advanced a stage in order that
the Council of the League of Nations might give it their blessing at the meeting which is
now, I think, going on at Geneva. . . .
The task which the British Government have undertaken in Palestine is one of extreme
difficulty and delicacy. At Paris I always warmly advocated that it should be
undertaken, not by Britain, but by the U.S.A. ; and though subsequent events have
shewn me that such a policy would never have commended itself to the American people I
still think that, so far as the Middle East is concerned, it would have been the best.
@mark
green Wisely, and I place emphasis on the word "possible," Mark Green wrote: "With the
possible exception of Jimmy Carter, the construction of Israeli 'settlements' (as well as the
confiscation of land adjacent to Israel) has occurred under the watch of each and every US
administration and Congress since 1967."
Hey Mark!
As you know, President Carter brokered the 1979 Camp David Agreement with Begin and Sadat.
Such is considered the former president's greatest achievement.
A question. Who do you think most benefited from this agreement?
As reminder, in October 1981, Anwar Sadat was assassinated by presumably the Muslim
Brotherhood, and the murder soon elevated the authoritarian & ruthless Hosni Mubarak as
Egypt president. Of course, Israel and the US were comfortable with Mubarak.
If no response comment, Mark, I understand. Thank you.
@mark
green I go into detail here folks, and will offer a justification as to why. So, kindly
bear with me.
What kind of a 'relationship' is this?
Master/Slave.
Or, since many of the same people are the purveyors of porn,
Sado-Masochistic.
Their Master/Sadism can be seen, quoting from Mark's comment,
expanding [Jewish] settlements
race-centered colonizing
Israeli confiscation of land
deliberate incremental warfare
Israeli transgression
the rogue Zionist state violated international law
Israel lawlessness
colonial, supremacist
deliciously one-sided
one-way 'relationship'
incredibly one-sided
The last three work both ways, of course, and provide a nice segue into the
Slave/Masochist role played by the US (and not just the US).
The US–deeply-compromised
an active and willing partner
US aid to Israel
diplomatic cover for the rogue Zionist state
feeble attempt to push back
acquiescence – no matter what
unconditionally
There's a reason many sites have dropped their comment sections. As the comment section at
TUR, and not just TUR, has made perfectly clear, commenters can help amplify and extend the
ideas covered in any article, thereby driving the point home.
The point here is that human beings have but one task – to adapt to their
environment, which is the same thing as saying, to adapt the environment to themselves.
Humans have the power to manipulate the environment to their advantage. But, they also
have the power to manipulate the environment to their disadvantage, if they're stupid enough,
as they must necessarily be, since they can see the environment only under the pressure of
their needs.
The more people do this, the more the single-mindedness of purpose emerges, the less
flexibility they demonstrate, the more Either/Or (Master/Slave, S & M) the world becomes,
the more psychotic the behavior, the more the crazy comes out.
When enough people can see this to form a critical mass, then a culture crisis inevitably
breaks out.
And that is the position we're in today.
No wonder they're cracking down on the Internet.
If there's one thing psychotics fear above all else, it's exposure.
Jewish Supremacy Inc. has rendered the USA powerless and reduced it to the status of a
domesticated animal, a pet. And therein lies their stupidity and the world's dilema.
JSI routinely violates that which it is dependent on. By killing its Proxy, it kills
itself.
And there's no question that the USA is dying. But then, so to is JSI.
That's what is really going on. What we're witnessing is The Pyrrhic Victory of JSI.
This explains why, now that they've sucked all of the blood out of the West in general and
the USA in particular, they're currently engaged in a Fire Sale, where everything must go,
and with only one buyer – China.
All Master/Slave, S & M relations are a degrading Dance of Death, which is how it
ends, for both.
1. According to our Bible, it was Jews who were responsible for falsely accusing Jesus
(pbuh), deceiving the masses about his true mission and causing him to be crucified by the
Romans. It is also true that in the Bible Jesus called Jews murderers, children of the devil,
vipers, liars and other vile things. Jesus did not pull any punches in describing them. I
guess in today's world he would have been arrested for Antisemitism. He realized the truth
and exposed them for what they really were. You Christian Zionists and far right Christians
should go study your Bible. You may either learn something or come back denouncing Jesus as
an anti-Semite.
2. According to many respected WW1 historians it was Jews who tricked Britain into agreeing
to give them Palestine in exchange for getting the U.S. into WW1. Benjamin Freedman, a friend
of some of the major leaders in our time and who is also a Jew, admitted this during a major
speech given to patriots in 1961. The Neturei Karta, a devoutly Jewish religious group also
admits the same. There are numerous scholars, historians and Jews who describe in detail how
WW1 was started and fought with one of the main goals being securing Palestine for Jews. Here
is a link to more information about that:
A Jewish Defector Warns America
3. It was Jews who caused the pogroms of their own people in Russia around the 1890s, so that
the world will hate the regime of the Czar and cause millions of Jews to flee to the U.S. for
political gain. Under the orders of Jacob Schiff in New York and the Rothschilds, they
massacred hundreds of fellow Jews to have Russians blamed for this act and cause the
immigration of thousands of other Jews to the US. Among other things, this resulted in world
opinion turned against the Czar and his government and set up the bloody overthrow of his
regime by the Bolsheviks.
The Illuminati and the Council on Foreign Relations
4. As admitted to by many historians and even by the ultra Israeli religious group, the
Neturei Karta, WW2 was engineered by Jews and the leadership of the Jews made an alliance
with Hitler causing thousands of German Jews to be killed so that others will flee en mass to
Israel. They also forced the U.S. president Roosevelt to get into WW2 by embargoing Japanese
oil causing them to attack the U.S. at Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt went along with this plan, all
the while knowing ahead of time about the Japanese attack and the murder of thousands of
Americans. See the following for more:
Stranger Than Fiction
5. The Iraqi Jew Naeem Giladi wrote a book detailing how Israelis performed terrorist
actions and caused the deaths of many Jewish Iraqis during the 1950s so that Arab Iraqis can
be blamed for it. The purpose of these terrorist actions was to cause Jews to migrate to
Israel from Iraq. All but 6,000 of the 125,000 Jews in Iraq fled to Israel. http://www.savethemales.ca/030203.html
6. A few years after the end of World War II, the Zionist plan to establish the nation of
Israel in Palestine was finally realized. But not before the British protectors of Palestine
were chased out by acts of terror carried out by ungrateful Zionist terrorists. It was
British troops who unwittingly sacrificed their lives in order to steal Palestine away from
Arab control and allowed the Jews of Europe to immigrate there. But with Great Britain left
weakened and in debt from World War II, the ungrateful Zionists saw their opportunity to now
chase the British out of Palestine by committing acts of terrorism against them. The most
notorious of the Zionist terror groups was the Irgun, whose leader Menachem Begin would one
day go on to become the Prime Minister of Israel and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.
On the morning of July 22, 1946, a group of 15-20 Irgun terrorists dressed as Arabs entered
the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. They unloaded 225 kilograms of explosives hidden in milk
churns. The King David Hotel housed the Secretariat of the Government of Palestine and
Headquarters of the British Forces in Palestine. When a British officer became suspicious, a
shootout took place and the Irgun lit the fuses and fled. The explosion destroyed part of the
hotel and killed 91 people. Most of the victims were British but 15 innocent Jews also died.
Menachem Begin was not merely suspected of being behind these murderous deeds. Begin admitted
that the Irgun committed these acts and that they were necessary for the establishment of a
Jewish state.
Stranger Than Fiction
7. In 1956, as reported by the Times Of London, during one of Israel's perpetual wars with
its neighbors, the Israeli Mossad tried to trick the United States into siding with Israel
against Egypt by blowing up a US facility in Cairo and blaming the Egyptians for it. The plot
was wrecked when the operatives were caught and confessed, creating a huge scandal. This
event was referred to as the Lavon Affair named after the Israeli Defense Minister, Pinhas
Lavon, at that time. http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=6854 http://www.the7thfire.com/new_world_order/zionism/mossad/lavon_affair.htm
8. According to Victor Ostrovski, a defector from the Israeli Mossad, the US was tricked into
bombing Libya when the Israeli Mossad planted a radio transmitter in Tripoli which sent out
fake orders to "terrorists" which the US could intercept. The faked orders caused Libya to be
blamed for a German disco bombing. As a result of this fake transmission, Reagan used it as
evidence to bomb Libya killing 30 innocent people including Qaddhafi's baby daughter. http://100777.com/node/101
9. On June 8, 1967 Israel used unmarked fighters and torpedo boats to launch an hour and
one-half long attack on the American Navy ship the USS Liberty, costing 34 American sailors
their lives and 171 wounded. The Israelis first attacked the Liberty's radio towers in an
attempt to stop the Sixth Fleet from learning that the Israelis were the attackers. After
unmarked Israeli fighters horrendously bombed and strafed the Liberty, Israel sent in torpedo
boats to finish the job. They even machine gunned the deployed life rafts in an effort to
ensure that there would be no survivors (witnesses) who could expose them. Just as in the
Lavon Affair, Israel hoped to blame this act of war on their enemy, the Egyptians. This time,
only the courage and resourcefulness of the Liberty's crew prevented a further compounding of
the travesty. http://home.cfl.rr.com/gidusko/liberty/
9. It was Israelis who were armed with 9mm pistols, nine grenades, explosives, three
detonators and 58 bullets and caught in Mexico in an attempt to blow the Mexican Congress up
on October 10, 2001, one month after 9/11. Curiously these Israelis were found not with
Israeli passports in their possession but with Pakistani passports. The Israelis were booked
for conspiracy to destroy a building by means of an explosive by the Mexican police. If they
were successful in blowing up the Mexican Congress, then like 9/11, it would have been blamed
on Muslim terrorists, especially if Pakistani passports were found at the scene of the crime.
They got caught red-handed here and only God knows how many other incidents that innocent
Muslims are being blamed for that was really done by Israelis. See the following link for
more on this:
"America's only ally in the Middle East, Israel, has been responsible for more acts of
terror, sabotage, and murder of American citizens than the Muslims ever were. By her
duplicity, she has put Americans in more danger than they have ever known or will know. She
has bombed hotels, American government buildings, deliberately allowed hundreds of US Marines
to be killed in their barracks in Lebanon, assaulted a US intelligence gathering ship, the
USS Liberty (for the purposes of blaming the Arabs and thus drawing America into her war
against them) stole and then sold America's most sensitive nuclear weapons technology to her
enemies, (Russia and China) and by all indicators most certainly was involved in the 9/11
attacks. Whether it was the testimony given by the Israeli pilots who bombed and machine
gunned the USS Liberty (killing 34 American sailors and wounding almost 200 more) or whether
it was the Israeli intelligence officers who were arrested on 9/11 (while videotaping the
destruction and cheering for a job well done) so much evidence exists which leaves no doubt
as to who America's real enemy is, and yet short of one individual's conviction and prison
sentence, Jonathon Pollard, nothing has been done with Israel with respect to justice or the
interests of America's security. By contrast, year after year she is rewarded with more and
more money and even more in terms of immunity and insulation from public scrutiny. The
American people, supposedly a Christian people, have displayed not an ounce of the same
concern for this obvious danger against their physical well-being which they attempt to
display now over the supposed danger posed by Islamic extremism. Through the eyes of a Muslim
therefore, the picture of the modern day Western Christian is one of an intellectually
compliant, politically and religiously complacent individual who cannot think for himself or
act in his own best interests outside of the programming which he receives from his Zionist
puppet masters. Even today, as the headlines are blaring out the obvious vindication of this
image by virtue of the fact that the war in Iraq was fought on completely false pretenses,
the average conservative Christian in America who has adopted this irrational fear of Islam
has taken no note of this nor does he appear to have been affected in the least."
Through the Eyes of a Muslim
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank
The name West Bank is a translation of the Arabic term ad-Diffah I-Garbiyyah, given to the
territory west of the Jordan River that fell, in 1948, under occupation and
administration by Jordan, which subsequently annexed it in 1950. This annexation was
considered illegal and was recognized only by Britain, Iraq and Pakistan .[14] The term
was chosen to differentiate the west bank of the River Jordan from the "east bank" of this
river
America never recognised Jordan as having sovereignty over the West Bank, so when it lost
it the position was not obviously the same as one country occupying another's territory.
There was a legal opinion of how international law applied, that is all.
The chosen-by-God Israeli state is quite capable of ethnic cleansing or even genocide on
a massive scale, as it did originally in 1947-8 when it was founded and also later after it
occupied the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. The Jewish state's leaders have repeatedly
asserted that there is no such thing as a Palestinian, that Jordan is actually Palestine.
They have become skilled at making the lives of Palestinians so miserable by destroying
their farms, other livelihood and even their homes while also controlling their
infrastructure, killing them if they resist,
The above is the Heart of Giraldi's article. Add to that, one of today's headlines,
below, where the leader of Britain's Labor Party, Jeremy Corbyn , is routinely
attacked in the Zionist owned American and British Mainstream Media. In the Zionist diatribe,
there is not a mention of the complaints of the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine. Not an
ounce of honesty is allowed by the Zionist New World Order's propaganda machine. If you
oppose them, they will assassinate you, one way, or another.
The Turkish flag still flies over Constantinople, after having killed millions and forcefully
converting or mistreating the Christians who lived there. In fact, the now Muslim countries
of N Africa as well as Lebanon and Syria were also Christian lands. The tortures and
degradations suffered by the formerly Christian people in this region are well documented.
Where is the outrage? When does Mr Giraldi write an article about what Muslims have done to
the original Christians who lived in this region?
The Israelis aren't leaving. The Palestinians, as a defeated peaple, have to find a way to
make peace with their conqueror. Their Muslim ancestors were much less kind to the Christians
who lived there, than the Israelis have been to them.
Pompeo was clearly rotated through the DCI billet just long enough to get him briefed for his
focal point job at CIA's Foggy Bottom site. A rare non-tendentious question: What was the
line he was getting on Israel policy? "International law has not advanced the cause of peace"
is CIA boilerplate for everyplace. Is it CIA's stated policy to repudiate international law
for the benefit of Israel? Or did Pompeo go off the reservation?
The ZUS Executive Branch and cohort Knesset Congress West gave the West Bank to Israel.
Pompeo merely conveyed the done-deal to Amerikans.
Fyi, as the Crusades have become topical on this article thread, it's good to recall how
ZUS "War President" G.W. Bush slipped up (as usual ) and announced his administration's
Crusade.
@Durruti
I agree with your comment overall, but would like to point out the flaw in your Giraldi quote
that no one addresses.
If the Jews claim Jordan is the real Palestine, then why do the Jews want Jerusalem as their
capital, and claim the Golan Heights, West Bank and the rest of "Israel"?
The Balfour Declaration supported the resettlement of Jews in Palestine therefore Jordan, not
all of the other territory they claim. As poster Sean has observed, the West Bank is not
universally recognized as part of Jordan. Neither the Golan Heights nor Jerusalem have ever
been part of Palestine – Jordan.
While it may piss off the King of Jordan, perhaps the question needs to be put to the
Zionists, suggesting strongly that the Balfour Declaration has been misinterpreted, and the
US recognition of Israel was wrong and will be withdrawn.
Jeremy Hammond : "Why Israel has no right to exist " writing in the Foreign Policy Journal
:
" There is a popular belief that Israel was founded through some kind of legitimate political
process . This is absurd .when they declared Israel's independence Jews owned less than 7% of
the land of Palestine The Zionist leadership relied on the UN's Resolution 181 for their
claim of legitimate authority . The truth is that the resolution did no such thing . The UN
General Assembly had no authority to partition the land against the will of the majority of
its inhabitants . Nor did it claim to ."
The "problem" with Trump, is that his thought processes were developed for different
circumstances. His statements are often confusing, giving opposite affirmatives or negatives.
They are likely perfect for the business world. I think it is too soon to discard his
sometimes bizarre actions.
He has stated many times that he's the best thing ever for Israel. He has made decisions
regarding Israel that have been ridiculed at home and abroad. In Trump's drain the undefined
swamp world, Israel could well be part of his swamp. There is an old adage, keep your friends
close and your enemies closer.
His seemingly bizarre actions have made more people than ever acutely aware of the poisonous
effects of the Israeli lobby. The attack on his Presidency is dominated by Jews, and the
public sees that.
"If music be the food of love, play on,
Give me excess of it; that surfeiting,
The appetite may sicken, and so die."
@Rich
/When does Mr Giraldi write an article about what Muslims have done to the original
Christians who lived in this region?/
Don't like what Mr. Giraldi has to say, eh?
There are an astounding number of blogs throughout cyberspace devoted to your perspective.
You're more than welcome to part company with us and join your fellow hasbaraites there.
On your way out the door, a little perspective for you, courtesy of Moshe Sharett:
Israeli documents have revealed that the Israeli army deliberately adopted a policy
based on the destruction, vandalism and harm of the sanctity of churches in Palestine,
during and after the 1948 war. An Israeli book, which will be published next month,
explains how the Israeli army carried out seizure and destruction operations against
churches located in the Palestinian cities, towns and villages the army took control off
after expelling their people.
According to the protocol, Sharett described the army's violations of the church saying,
"the officers and soldiers deliberately harmed the Christian sanctities; their behaviour is
that of beasts, not human beings." Sharett also said, "The attacks suffered by the churches
at the hands of the soldiers and officers are a shameful page in Israel's history."
This book also revealed that Sharett compared Israel, which allowed such acts, to "an
evil and brutal Caesar that promotes nothing but destruction." He added: "The soldiers and
officers turned the churches to toilets where they would tend to their needs." The book
also goes on to reveal that Sharett told members of the Mapai party, in a meeting in July
1949, that Israel deliberately declared the areas containing churches as military zones in
order to justify its refusal to allow foreign visitors and tourists to enter these areas
and churches in an attempt to prevent them from witnessing the army's heinous
violations.
Sharett also said that the soldiers stole a very valuable crown made of precious stones
from one of the churches. He also noted another incident where the soldiers broke the hand
off a sculpture of Jesus in one of the churches in order to steal the gold bracelets that
were on it, as an example of the systematic looting and stealing from the churches which
lasted for months. He stressed that the Israeli officers and soldiers also intentionally
harmed the sanctity of the churches and tore holy books, mentioning that the acts of
destruction committed against the churches were not only committed by the officers and
soldiers, but also by many settlers, especially those who newly immigrated.
@SolontoCroesus
So Balfour announced his sordid scheme, and then expected someone else to get their hands
dirty by putting it into effect. It took a little time though, but effectively that is just
what has happened. Much of the filth has now washed off Britain's grubby hands and has
floated its way across the North Atlantic, where it now seems very much at home. Balfour
would be well pleased.
Orthodox leaders say they've embraced Trump because of his pro-Israel policies,
including voiding the Iran nuclear deal. Some pointed to Trump's commuting of Hasidic
meatpacking boss Sholom Rubashkin's 27-year-sentence for bank fraud and money laundering in
2017.
Trump has always been a shabbos goy just like his Dad and Brother.
His wives and kids are all Jews, so you see, he was never one to care about the goyim.
It is worse than that, they attacked the USS Liberty and the WTC on 911, they have free
rein to do anything , they are the untouchables, killers and wreckers of nations including
America.
It is worse than that. Today the whole world hates the USA. Until the Jews went on their
genocidal rampage in 1948 the whole world loved the USA. Even the Iranians loved the USA
then, but not for long, not after the USA, the worst enemy of Democracy the world has ever
known, turned their constitutional monarch into a particularly vicious, obedient
dictator.
So that's Israel's (and the CIA's) greatest achievement, making everyone in the whole
world hate the USA, making the final demise of the USA a total certainty.
Yet it would be so, so easy for the USA to make the whole world love it again. Step one,
force an immediate One State Solution, with equal rights for all, on Israel.
@anarchyst
Montesquiou pointed out that every nation is founded on a crime. A known truth for historical
times, and a likely supposition about pre-historical change of rulership. True of the US,
Canada, NZ, Australia in recent times.
The jews are merely the most recent example of that principle. Most of the Arab
inhabitants of Israel's slice of Palestine were driven into exile, into the West Bank,
Jordan, Lebanon.
The jews have no right to their territory, no more than any other nation. They hold their
territory by force of arms. Selective arm-chair moralizing about injustice to the
Palestinians may be judged to be nothing more than hot air plus an atavistic hatred, possibly
religiously based, of the jews.
The 75 year long existence of Israel has culminated in a high-class civilization,
materially and professionally impressive, socially unified by majority army conscription,
with efficient governance chosen democratically.
Their Ungluck is to have colonized in the wrong area surrounded by religiously
based enemies. The Spartans in antiquity is an approximate parallel.
They prevailed over their enemies for centuries until they didn't. Why? One possible
explanation is that their fertility rate dwindled with a concommitant loss of military
supremacy. Happily, the Israeli birthrate is extremely high among the 20% religious and among
the secular as well.
According to Wikipedia, "With an average of three children per woman, Israel also has the
highest fertility rate in the OECD by a considerable margin and much higher than the OECD
average of 1.7."
Well trumps campaign promise was to get rid of NATO and while it looks like he reneged on
that promise his actions in forcing nato countries to pay their fair share is effectively
dismantling nato. Maybe in his recognition of things in Israel which he has no authority to
recognize is causing Israel to act in a way to create the one state scenario as the author
suggests. Maybe trump is not as dumb as he looks or maybe someone above has his hand on the
throttle
@ChuckOrloski
Hi Chuck. Who benefited most from the Camp David? As you may recall, there were a series of
agreements and accords that began with Camp David (which was primarily just an overrated
peace deal between Israel and Egypt) but it set the stage (allegedly) for a comprehensive
peace settlement involving the Palestinians as well as the larger Arab world.
But this vaunted peace process finally failed. The 'two state' solution has been dumped.
Israel is now in conquest mode.
As for Camp David, Israel got Egypt to accept Greater Israel and to break away from the
rest of the Arab League. This marked one of the first significant cracks in the Arab wall of
anti-Zionist solidarity. It looks as if this was Israel's game plan all along. Jewish Henry
Kissinger made this happen. Very clever. Very duplicitous.
The crypto-Israelis among us continue to dominate this multi-decade chess match, with
Washington still carrying their bags. So we're left with this:
The expanding Jewish state continues to gain more territory while bringing its divided
foes to heel.
US aid to nuclear Israel remains unconditional.
Israel's native non-Jews are still being crushed.
Looking back, the US squandered vast amounts of time, money and prestige on a peace
process that went nowhere. The Palestinians continue to suffer and die. And Israel isn't done
yet.
The Zions want 'regime change' in Iran and the alliance between Russia, Assad's Syria and
Iran smashed. More conflict ahead.
With the possible exception of Jimmy Carter, the construction of Israeli 'settlements'
(as well as the confiscation of land adjacent to Israel) has occurred under the watch of
each and every US administration and Congress since 1967. This deliberate process amounts
to incremental warfare.
Carter is no saint. He covered up Israel's nuclear test just to preserve his legacy as
international peacemaker.
According to the US Census there are 3031 counties in the US.
If we redirected the $3.8 billion plus the 500,000,000 for missile defense that we give
Israel to US counties budgets each county would receive about
$ 1.3 million.
If we included the $1.2 billion each we give to Egypt and Jordon for signing the Carter
peace treaty with Israel that figure increases to $2.3 million for each county.
While $2.3 million may be a small figure for counties with metro cities, it would be a
large amount for the majority of counties across the nation.
Since aid to Israel alone accounts for 50% of US foreign aid who would oppose this re
direct of taxpayers money...besides the politicians...and how would the politicians explain
their opposition to the districts they supposedly represent?
"... The anti-Semitism smear campaign is being revived in the corporate media for good reason. The stakes could not be higher for Britain's ruling class. As worried as many of them are by Brexit, Corbyn is seen as a bigger threat. He might call time on the banquet they have been gorging on for four decades uninterrupted. ..."
"... A Corbyn government, by contrast, is an unknown quantity. The free-lunch might end, or at least start to feel more like an unsatisfying snack. ..."
"... Or, more likely, the right-wingers and centrists who conflate Israel and Jews -- as a proportion appear to do -- are equally indulgent of a particularist and regressive approach to rights. Instead of committing to universal human rights, shared by all alike, the particularists assign superior rights to those they think of as more like themselves. Right-wingers, it seems, tend to exclude Jews from this category, while centrists have a greater tendency to include them. ..."
"... It is OK to say that financial elite is largely Jewish. Especially if you are happy about it. But if you do not cherish those most productive members of the society for the oodles of money they produce every minute, then you make them insecure, and thus you are an anti-Semite. Perhaps of self-hating variety, although at that points perhaps even Mr. Pollard would feel some strain, a middle class Socialist Jew is not in this "most productive" elite. ..."
"... The attack on Corbyn is just the elite seeking to smear him, in defense of their own interests. They have stolen so much, that they need now above all to stop anyone who would prevent them from keeping it all. ..."
"... That Israel can be used in this turns on the fear that good government in Britain would not support what Israel has been doing for so long. No doubt. No principled government could, nor does any such government anywhere in the world. ..."
"... With z-list celebrities like Rachel Riley adding to the 'anti-semite' debate routinely on twitter this story will not ever go away until Corbyn does. One way and another the media elites under the tutalage of the upper classes in the UK Corbyn is depicted as everything that is 'evil' with the world. It is of course all fake news. There's no more anti-semitism in labour as any other part of the country. But it suits those in fear of change. ..."
"... Aww, the parasitic financial elite (of ALL religio-ethnic backgrounds) doesn't like Corbyn's policy proposals so they're going to resort to Alan Dershowitz style mud-slinging. What's new? They will resort to any tactic, no matter how vile and pernicious, in order to hold onto their class privileges. That 40% of working folks can't come up with $500 for an emergency car repair or medical bill simply does not matter. ..."
With the election nearing, the British corporate media is once again running smears of the
Labour leader. And for good reason, says Jonathan Cook. The stakes could not be higher for
Britain's ruling class.
In the coming elections, Prime Minister Boris Johnson on left, is facing off against Labour
Leader Jeremy Corbyn.
F or a few months over the summer the British corporate media largely lost interest in
smearing Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-Semite. Maybe they had begun to worry that the
constant drum-beat of the past three years was deadening the public's sensitivity to such
claims.
But an election is now weeks away, and the anti-Semitism smear bandwagon is being rolled out
once again.
Stephen Pollard, editor of The Jewish Chronicle (who also writes for the Tory-loving
Mail , Express , Sun and Telegraph newspapers) has yet again been
terrifying readers as best he can, implying not so subtly that voting for Labour might risk a
genocide of British Jews. After several years of painting Corbyn – preposterously –
as some kind of unkempt, gray-bearded leader of a British Gestapo-in-the-making, Pollard spent
a few recent days
highlighting in the corporate media the predictable results of the latest survey of Jewish
public opinion. It suggests that a growing number of Jews are considering leaving Britain if
Corbyn manages to oust Boris Johnson from power.
That we have reached the point where so many British Jews have been persuaded that Corbyn's
vocal criticism of Israel's oppression of Palestinians means his entire party is infected with
a supposed hatred of Jews needs some explaining. It is something I have been trying to do
regularly, and in real time, as life has been breathed into these various slurs , both by a corporate
media that detests the fairer society a Corbyn party promises and by an Israel lobby that
identifies so closely with Israel that it has completely dehumanized Palestinians, to the
extent that the crimes against them can be entirely overlooked -- treated as no more
significant than stepping on an ant.
In the figure of Pollard, we have a journalist who merges both outlooks, typified in this
extraordinary tweet last year that at the time stunned even some of his followers but has now
become a staple of the campaign against Corbyn and his democratic socialist politics. Efforts
by the left to highlight the class war waged by an elite that's been sucking the life out of
the British economy to enrich itself have been maliciously recharacterised by Pollard and other
rightwing journalists (some of whom ensconced themselves in the Labour party during Tony
Blair's rule) as an attack on Jews. But it is not the left that conflates the corporate elite
with Jews, it is rightwing journalists like Pollard.
We shall return to this issue later in the post.
Jonathan Freedland's Libel
A recent incident helped to illustrate just how organized and malevolent the anti-Semitism
smears against Corbyn truly are.
Jonathan Freedland, a supposedly liberal columnist at The Guardian newspaper and a
BBC regular, again proved how he has been a key figure in weaponizing this allegation against a
Corbyn-led party. So eager is he to damage Labour and make sure it is no position to end a
decade of Tory-imposed austerity that he threw aside all normal journalistic caution and
published a libelous claim of anti-Semitism against a potential Labour candidate in the coming
general election.
There were several revealing aspects to this incident. Freedland defamed Majid Mahmood, a
Labour local councilor in Birmingham, without making even the most rudimentary factual checks
that the highly damaging claim was actually true -- a basic journalistic duty. He simply relied
on the word of a "previously reliable Labour source" -- in other words, one of the many
Blairite enemies of Corbyn within the Labour parliamentary faction and party bureaucracy who
have been briefing against the leader for the past four years.
(It is worth recalling that a prominent anti-racism activist, Marc Wadsworth, was hounded
from the party last year, accused of anti-Semitism, for warning that Blairite MPs like Ruth
Smeeth were briefing against their own leader to journalists in the rightwing press. Smeeth
accused Wadsworth of anti-Semitism because she is Jewish, though Wadsworth says he did not know
that -- and, of course, her Jewishness is irrelevant to the issue of whether she was seeking to
malign her own party's leader through the media. Wadsworth's mistake, it seems, was to assume
that corporate "liberal" journalists like Freedland were not also part of those smear
efforts.)
In Mahmood's case, it was an egregious example of mistaken identity. Freedland and his
"source" had
confused the Birmingham councilor with a London lawyer of the same name who was fined over
anti-Semitic comments four years ago. Such confusion was clearly neither accidental nor
innocent. Mahmood's case highlighted something that was already patently obvious: that
anti-Corbyn groups have been trawling the histories and social media posts of Labour members in
an organized effort to weaponize anything they can find against the Labour leader. The
defamation of Mahmood was simply the latest smear to emerge from this campaign.
Smears from Within Labour
Freedland's "defense" was itself telling. The person relaying the smear to him was, he said,
from inside Labour and had been "previously reliable." That meant someone fairly senior in the
party -- thereby explaining Freedland's readiness to believe him uncritically -- and someone
who had passed on similar damaging information before. It was irrefutable confirmation that
Corbyn's most venomous opponents are not in the Conservative Party but drawn from Labour's own
top ranks. They want a Corbyn-led party destroyed even if it means keeping the Brexit-backing,
austerity-loving, racism-indulgent Tories in power.
There was another ugly aspect to the behavior of Freedland and his "source." It looked
suspiciously like both had uncritically accepted the unfounded claim against Mahmood because he
had a Muslim name. They both appeared to have assumed that Muslims are more likely to be racist
towards Jews and therefore accepted the claim with a much lower standard of evidence than would
have been expected in the case of anyone else.
In fact, the councilor's name is a Muslim equivalent of "David Brown" or "George Smith." Can
we really imagine Freedland libeling someone with either of those names so casually, without
making even cursory checks to be sure he had identified the right David Brown or George
Smith?
This kind of behavior has a name: it is called racism. And it is quite extraordinary to see
Freedland so susceptible, after he has made a journalistic career out of exploring the
intricacies of racism when it applies to Jews. It almost leaves one suspecting that this
paragon of liberal journalism is really a hypocrite.
Fears the Free Lunch Will End
The anti-Semitism smear campaign is being revived in the corporate media for good reason.
The stakes could not be higher for Britain's ruling class. As worried as many of them are by
Brexit, Corbyn is seen as a bigger threat. He might call time on the banquet they have been
gorging on for four decades uninterrupted.
If Corbyn shunts Prime Minister Boris Johnson and the Tories out of power, the millionaires
and billionaires who control both the British print and broadcast media, including the BBC,
fear the good times could come to an abrupt end. The Brexit threat pales in comparison. That
would simply shift our primary economic allegiance from Europe to the United States, leaving
the predatory capitalism on which the corporate class has grown unimaginably rich as strong as
ever.
A Corbyn government, by contrast, is an unknown quantity. The free-lunch might end, or at
least start to feel more like an unsatisfying snack.
In truth, given the bitter divisions tearing apart his own party -- between most of the mass
membership, who are behind him, and the holdouts from the Blair-Brown era that still dominate
the parliamentary party -- it is hard to imagine Corbyn being able to do as much as his critics
fear.
He may manage to curb the worst excesses of the neoliberal financial system; he may block
further privatization of the National Health Service, even reverse it a little; and he may
bring a few vital national industries back into public ownership. He may manage too to redirect
some of the cream the fat cats have been lapping up back into the public coffers for a New
Green Deal. All of that would be a relief after so many years of Tory-designed austerity for
the many and state socialism for the few.
But the corporate class are now so greedy, so used to getting their way, that even the
smallest diminishment of their power and wealth is seen as an unbearable offence against what
they divine as the natural order.
Tool of Class War
They are not about to leave anything to chance. Corbyn must be tarred and feathered again.
Four years of experimenting with various smears have selected anti-Semitism as the weapon of
choice. That false accusation can most easily be disguised to ensure it does not look like what
it is intended to be when used against Corbyn and Labour: a tool of class war.
Claims of anti-Semitism have worked ideally in damaging Corbyn because no real evidence has
been needed. In fact, such claims succeed even when opposed to the known evidence (as we shall
see). They work chiefly by innuendo and emotion. And better still, they work even when those
accused like Corbyn and his allies deny the accusation. As in all good witch-hunts, denial is
proof of guilt, as an ally of Corbyn's, the MP Chris Williamson, has repeatedly found out. He
has been barred from standing in the election, and has now
resigned from the party, after correctly
noting that Labour had in effect made the anti-Semitism smears appear more credible by
constantly apologizing over evidence-free claims of anti-Semitism from those seeking to harm
the party's image with voters.
This is a winning formula for the ruling class because anyone who tries to argue that
Corbyn's opponents are weaponizing anti-Semitism through the corporate media is thereby proved
to be an anti-Semite. The smears are entirely resistant to all evidence that they are
smears.
Survey: Little Anti-Semitism on Left
That the anti-Semitism claims are slurs has been demonstrated over and over again. But
paradoxically the latest refutation came last week from the corporate elite's house journal,
The Economist -- though, of course, it was not presented that way .
The magazine published a
new survey of British public opinion showing that an ideological group it labelled as "very
left wing" -- presumably the people who share Corbyn's views -- were among the least likely to
hold anti-Semitic opinions, even though they also had by far the most critical views of Israel
(an outlook The Economist mischievously termed "highly anti-Israel").
In other words, those people on the left who firmly oppose Israel's oppression of the
Palestinians were unlikely also to harbor anti-Jewish views. The great majority could clearly
distinguish between Israel and Jews, and did not hold Jews responsible for the crimes committed
by the state of Israel.
The same could not be said, however, of either the center or the right. Supporters of the
right were less than half as likely to adopt critical views of Israel as the left but were
three and a half times more likely to hold anti-Semitic views. Meanwhile, only a small number
of centrists were critical of Israel, and an almost identical number held anti-Semitic
views.
What the figures reveal is the very opposite of the Labour anti-Semitism narrative -- unless
we wish to argue improbably that Labour and its 500,000 members (the largest party in Europe)
are entirely unrepresentative of the wider public that shares their ideological worldview. The
left overwhelmingly opposes Israeli colonial oppression of Palestinians but very few blame Jews
for Israel's behavior. Israel is seen as a political project, one driven by an ugly ideology of
settler colonialism, not a project representing all Jews. The latter is an anti-Semitic
position that, paradoxically, is supported and promoted by Israel itself.
Conversely, the same figures suggest that there is an identifiable problem of racism and
anti-Semitism on the right, and a potential one among centrists too. Whereas the left
understands that Israel and Jews are entirely separate and distinct categories, both the center
and right appear to share a tendency of conflating Israel and Jews.
Racism Rife on the Right
In the case of the right, the figures show a close correlation between opposition to Israel
and anti-Jewish feeling. A significant portion of the right either blame Jews collectively for
Israel's crimes or dislike Jews and so oppose the state that claims to represent them. Even
though you would never know it from the media coverage, which concentrates exclusively on a
supposed problem within the Labour Party, anti-Semitism is rife on the right in a way that
simply isn't true on the left.
The survey also hints at the possibility of a more veiled problem of racism and latent
anti-Semitism among "centrists," a group presumably represented politically by the Lib Dems and
the Blairite wing of the Labour Party. Very few in this group express anti-Jewish sentiments
– in fact, exactly the same small proportion as on the left. (Tellingly, despite these
identical results, the Labour Party has been smeared as "institutionally anti-Semitic", whereas
the centrist Lib Dems have not.)
Nonetheless, there is a significant difference between the two political blocs -- and one
that could reflect much less well on the centrists than the left.
A much larger proportion of the centrist group appear to harbor sympathies for Israel, or at
least view it uncritically, despite the ever-mounting evidence of Israel's record of human
rights abuses and intensifying oppression of Palestinians.
Remember that large numbers of the centrist Blairite faction of Labour MPs (though not the
wider Labour membership) belong to Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) and have proudly maintained
their association with that organization. They have continued to do so even after the LFI at
first vigorously defended, then fell silent on Israel's repeated massacres over the past 18
months of Palestinians protesters at the Gaza perimeter fence that encages them.
More than 220 Palestinians, including women, children, journalists, and medical staff, have
been killed by Israeli snipers at the protests, while tens of thousands more have been maimed.
But in a blatant example of anti-Arab racism, the LFI has blamed Hamas for these deaths, as
though ordinary Palestinians in Gaza are simply pawns of Hamas and lack the volition to demand
for themselves an end to an Israeli blockade that has imprisoned them for 12 years.
Centrists Conflate Jews & Israel
Only a quarter as many centrists as leftists are critical of Israel, according to The
Economist survey. In other words, a proportion of centrists appear to identify with
Israel's colonial oppression of Palestinians -- possibly because they favor Jews over Arabs and
Muslims (presumably as part of a "clash of civilizations" worldview) or maybe because they have
positive feelings about Jews that translate into uncritical support for Israel, whatever it
does to the Palestinians it rules over.
That could indicate a significant problem of anti-Arab or anti-Muslim prejudice among
centrists, similar to the ugly assumptions made by Jonathan Freedland and his "source."
However, we can do little more than speculate on this point because the survey is concerned
exclusively with Jews and Israel.
Nonetheless, the figures also allude to a potential anti-Semitism problem in the ranks of
the centrist camp. The stark lack of criticism of Israel among centrists, combined with little
anti-Semitism, suggests that a significant proportion of centrists, like right-wingers,
consider Jews and Israel to be intimately connected -- that they struggle to disentangle a
political project (Israel) from an ethnic or cultural group (Jews).
There is only a narrow distinction between a right-winger who conflates Israel and Jews in a
way that vilifies Jews and a centrist who conflates Israel and Jews in a way that venerates
Israel.
Rejecting Universal Rights
The difference in the respective outcomes of this conflation could reflect differing
understandings of what Israel does. Israel's treatment of Palestinians – whether seen as
justified or not – is then projected on to Jews. Once the conflation is accepted, Jews
unfairly receive either credit (from centrists) or blame (from the right) for Israel's
actions.
Or, more likely, the right-wingers and centrists who conflate Israel and Jews -- as a
proportion appear to do -- are equally indulgent of a particularist and regressive approach to
rights. Instead of committing to universal human rights, shared by all alike, the
particularists assign superior rights to those they think of as more like themselves.
Right-wingers, it seems, tend to exclude Jews from this category, while centrists have a
greater tendency to include them.
But the danger is that, if these centrists can be persuaded that Jews are not part of their
in-group -- for example, by undermining the idea of a supposed Judeo-Christian West, embodying
the supposed values of "civilization" -- then they could be as susceptible as the right to a
generalized Jew hatred. It is a commitment to universal human rights -- a doctrine to which
most on the left subscribe but which some on the right and the center appear to reject -- that
provides the only sure-fire political inoculation against racism in general and anti-Semitism
in particular.
The Economist , of course, wishes to avoid drawing this very obvious conclusion, one
implied by its findings, because that would wreck the narrative it and the rest of the
corporate media have been constructing to damage Corbyn. In fact, The Economist poll
echoes earlier research ignored by the corporate media, such as figures
showing that instances of anti-Semitism in Labour amount to 0.08 percent of the membership,
and surveys demonstrating that the Tory party -- and its "watermelon smiles" leader Boris
Johnson -- have a far bigger problem with racism, towards both Muslims and Jews
.
'Not a Whiff of Anti-Semitism'
Not everyone in the political and media class is ready to dance to the same tune, as was
made clear in an interview that gently turned the tables on Alastair Campbell, chief adviser to
Tony Blair when he was Labour prime minister. Campbell helped Blair distort the intelligence in
the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003 that gave superficial credence to a different but equally
confected story: both that Saddam Hussein's Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that those
weapons were just a hair's-trigger away from being fired at the U.K. Up to 1 million Iraqis
were killed as a result of that illegal war, and many millions more were driven from their
homes.
Campbell, a man whose anti-Muslim, anti-Arab prejudices permitted him to help lay waste to
another country on an entirely bogus pretext, and whose reputation in the corporate media
suffered not a whit as a result, decided to use the interview to try to revive the Corbyn
anti-Semitism smears and undermine Labour's chances of winning the election. Like other
Blairites, Campbell has been an outspoken critic of Corbyn, even going public with the fact
that he has started voting for the Lib Dems.
He asked his interviewee, John Bercow, the outgoing speaker of the House of Commons and a
Jewish member of the Conservative Party, to comment on Corbyn and the anti-Semitism
allegations. Campbell's transparent aim was to recruit Bercow to the smear campaign –
both as a Jew and as someone who has come to be widely trusted since becoming house speaker as
an arbiter of an even-handed politics.
Bercow's response was not what Campbell hoped for. The former speaker answered cautiously,
but observed: "I myself have never experienced anti-Semitism from a member of the Labour Party
I do not myself believe Jeremy Corbyn is anti-Semitic I have known him for the 22 years I have
been in parliament and I have never detected so much as a whiff of anti-Semitism from him."
Campbell's face could barely conceal his disappointment.
The interview was another reminder that those leading the anti-Semitism smear campaign often
have, given their own histories, precisely zero credibility on the issue of racism, let alone
class politics. Whatever they may think they believe, it is not racism that truly concerns
Campbell or Freedland; it is their fear of a different kind of politics, one that requires from
them an entirely different way of understanding British colonial history, of interpreting
Britain's role in the world, and of ending the U.K.'s gaping class divide. They, like so many
others in the media and political elite, are frightened that a different kind of politics might
force them to look in the mirror – and finally understand that long ago they chose to
stand with the oppressors rather than the oppressed.
"But it is not the left that conflates the corporate elite with Jews, it is rightwing
journalists like Pollard."
The author does not understand what is (New) anti-Semitism. One of the un-enumerated
symptoms is begrudging. It is OK to say that financial elite is largely Jewish. Especially if
you are happy about it. But if you do not cherish those most productive members of the
society for the oodles of money they produce every minute, then you make them insecure, and
thus you are an anti-Semite. Perhaps of self-hating variety, although at that points perhaps
even Mr. Pollard would feel some strain, a middle class Socialist Jew is not in this "most
productive" elite.
Corbyn is vile in so many ways that the responsible forces in UK had to try all methods.
The first I have read was that he is a bicyclist who uses a CHEAP (!!!) bike to go to work. A
template from Maoist China. The second thing, he does not like Trident. How can Britannia
rule the waves without Tridents, rented for the occasion from Colonials. Without Tridents,
Russians would overrun Norway and than, in quick succession, Scotland and Isle of Man. Then I
read that Corbyn is inept, so inept that he cannot be sufficiently snide during the question
period in Parliament. And so on. (Everything from The Guardian.) I still do not understand
why "anti-Semitism" is sticks so much better than this other stuff.
Cara MariAnna , November 18, 2019 at 14:48
Thank you Jonathan Cook (and CN) for this excellent in-depth analysis of how and why the
predatory elite deploy false accusations of anti-semitism in their ongoing campaign to horde
wealth, resources and power.
Joe Bien , November 18, 2019 at 10:48
Thank you, CN. Very good analysis/observation. That this is only one of countless cases of
the same merry-go-round, of the same flaccid (yet effective) tactic(s) employed by the
lobbies and individuals perpetuating the quashing of dissent, is, as ever, truly shocking and
compelling.
Excellent article.
Mark Thomason , November 16, 2019 at 14:56
The attack on Corbyn is just the elite seeking to smear him, in defense of their own
interests. They have stolen so much, that they need now above all to stop anyone who would
prevent them from keeping it all.
That Israel can be used in this turns on the fear that good government in Britain would
not support what Israel has been doing for so long. No doubt. No principled government could,
nor does any such government anywhere in the world.
The use of Israel in this way is just one more cost, one more burden borne, by the West.
It is the price of doing the wrong that is the Israel Project today.
Israel could have been done better. It has not been. Especially under Netanyahu, it is an
exercise in "How low can you go?" It has found deep depths, and has not yet ended its
plunge.
bob , November 16, 2019 at 03:41
With z-list celebrities like Rachel Riley adding to the 'anti-semite' debate routinely on
twitter this story will not ever go away until Corbyn does. One way and another the media
elites under the tutalage of the upper classes in the UK Corbyn is depicted as everything
that is 'evil' with the world. It is of course all fake news. There's no more anti-semitism
in labour as any other part of the country. But it suits those in fear of change.
Drew Hunkins , November 15, 2019 at 17:24
Aww, the parasitic financial elite (of ALL religio-ethnic backgrounds) doesn't like
Corbyn's policy proposals so they're going to resort to Alan Dershowitz style mud-slinging.
What's new? They will resort to any tactic, no matter how vile and pernicious, in order to
hold onto their class privileges. That 40% of working folks can't come up with $500 for an
emergency car repair or medical bill simply does not matter.
Israel's champions owe us an explanation. First, they insist that Israel is and always must
be a Jewish state, by which most of them mean not religiously Jewish but of the "Jewish
People" everywhere, including Jews who are citizens of other states and not looking for a new
country. To be Jewish, according to the prevailing view, it is enough to have a Jewish mother
(or to have been converted by an approved Orthodox rabbi). Belief in one supreme creator of the
universe, in the Torah as the word of God, and in Jewish ritual need have nothing whatever to
do with Jewishness. (We ignore here the many problems with this conception , such
as: how can there be a secular Judaism?)
The definition of Jew has been bitterly controversial inside and outside of Israel
since its founding. The point is, as anthropologist Roselle Tekiner wrote, "When the central
task of a state is to import persons of a select religious/ethnic group -- and to develop the
country for their benefit alone -- it is crucially important to be officially recognized as a
bona fide member of that group." (This is from the anthology Anti-Zionism:
Analytical Reflections , which is not online and is apparently out of print. But see
Tekiner's article,
"Israel's Two-Tiered Citizenship Law Bars Non-Jews From 93 Percent of Its Lands." )
Second, Israel's champions insist that Israel is a democracy -- indeed, the only democracy
in the Middle East. They vehemently object whenever someone demonstrates how
Israel-as-the-state-of-the-Jewish-People must harm the 25 percent of Israeli citizens who are
not Jewish, most of whom are Arabs.
Israeli law uniquely distinguishes
citizenship from nationality . The nationality of an Israeli Arab citizen is "Arab" not
Israeli, while the nationality of a Jewish citizen is "Jewish" not Israeli. Are citizens of any
other country distinguished in law like that? The prohibition on marriage between Jews and
non-Jews is not the result of political bargaining with religious parties but of a desire
to protect the Jewish people from impurity. These contortions are required by Israel's
self-declared status as something other than the land of all its citizens. Early
Zionists said they wanted Palestine to be as Jewish as Britain is British and France is French
-- a flagrant category mistake that has had horrific consequences for the Palestinians.
The insistence by Israel's supporters -- that Israel can be both Jewish and democratic --
thus is puzzling. What does it mean for Israel to be a Jewish state if that status has no real
consequences for non-Jews? If all it meant was that the Star of David was on the flag, we might
hear far fewer objections to Israel. But of course it means much more.
To see what it means, one has to look beyond Israel's Declaration of Independence, Basic Law
(its de facto constitution), and specific statutes, which contain language that on its face
forbids discrimination against non-Jews. We should know better than to take official documents
at face value. What matters in any society is the "real constitution," the principles that
underlie commonly accepted behavior. The old Soviet Union's constitution listed freedom of the
press among the "rights" of Soviet citizens, and the U.S. Constitution says that only Congress
may declare war and that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed."
More pertinent, the 1917 Balfour Declaration, wherein the British government "view[ed] with
favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people," also stated
that "it [was] clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and
religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political
status enjoyed by Jews in any other country." We know how that worked out.
So what's the story inside Israel? (I'm not talking about the West Bank and Gaza Strip,
which Israel has occupied for 52 years and where Palestinians have no rights whatever.)
After doing an interview recently
about my new book, Coming
to Palestine , I was challenged by a listener over my statements that the Israeli
government treats Arab and Jewish criminals differently depending on whether they shed "Jewish
blood" or "Arab blood" (no such distinction actually exists) and that political parties can't
call for changing Israel from a Jewish state to a state of all its citizens.
Who is right?
Regarding criminal justice, Ha'aretz columnist Gideon Levy shows
anecdotally that Arab Israeli citizens who kill Jews can spend more time in prison than Israeli
Jewish citizens who kill Arabs. "Arab blood is cheaper in Israel," Levy wrote in 2014, "and
Jewish blood is thicker." He says things are the same today. Over the years, many articles have
been published documenting this de facto, though not de jure, disparity. Indeed,
Ha'aretzreported in
2011 that
Arab Israelis who have been charged with certain types of crime are more likely than their
Jewish counterparts to be convicted, and once convicted they are more likely to be sent to
prison, and for a longer time. These disparities were found in a recent statistical study
commissioned by Israels Courts Administration and the Israel Bar Association . The
[unpublished preliminary] study is unique in that it is the first of its kind to be
commissioned and funded in part by the courts administration, and in that it sought to
examine claims by attorneys that Israeli judges deal more harshly with Arab criminals than
with Jews.
Note that government discrimination against non-Jews across the spectrum of issues is not
usually written into the law, although it may be . Mostly flagrantly, discrimination is
legally applied to the "right of return." People defined as Jews, no matter where they were
born or live, can become Israeli
citizens/nationals virtually on arrival, while Arabs driven from their ancestral homes in
1947-48 and 1967 may not go back, much less become full-rights citizens/nationals. Put
concretely, I, an atheist born in Philadelphia to Jewish parents born in Philadelphia (with
roots likely in the vicinity of the Black Sea), can "return" [sic] to Israel and become an
Israeli citizen at once, while my friend Raouf Halaby, a naturalized American citizen born to
Arab Christian parents in west Jerusalem three years before Israel was founded, may not. The
only difference is that my mother was Jewish, making me, a Spinozist, a Jewish national in
Israel's eyes, and Raouf's mother was not.
Regarding restrictions on political parties, the Basic Law: The Knesset states :
A candidates' list [party] shall not participate in elections to the Knesset, and a person
shall not be a candidate for election to the Knesset, if the objects or actions of the list
or the actions of the person, expressly or by implication, include :
1. negation of the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state;
Before proceeding, let us note a conundrum. The issue I'm raising here is whether a state be
both Jewish and democratic. The root of the word democracy is demos ,
people. So if the raison d'être of Israel is the welfare of only some of
its citizens and millions of certain others who are citizens and residents of other countries,
how can Israel be a real democracy? Strictly speaking, considering that word and , the
law's language legitimizes a party that "negat[es] the existence of the State of Israel as a
Jewish state" but not as a democratic state. Would the Israeli election authorities accept that
distinction? I don't think so.
In the past the Israeli Supreme Court has reversed
government bans on a party's or candidate's inclusion in an election. Particular cases will
revolve around the exact wording of a party's mission statement or candidate's platform, and
legal language is subject to endless, unpredictable, and political interpretation. But,
regardless, the government has the power to ban at its disposal, and future Supreme Courts may
not be so liberal. So the threat of a ban always looms. Incidentally, a party or candidate that
engages in "incitement to racism" is also ineligible to participate in elections, yet this
provision has yet to be applied to Jewish parties and politicians, such as Likud and Benjamin
Netanyahu, that routinely spout racist rhetoric.
Israel's champions also deny that Arab Israelis -- citizens, mind you -- have grossly
inferior access to land, most of which is owned by a "public" authority and the Jewish National
Fund (very little is privately owned); building and village permits; public utilities;
education; roads; and other government-controlled services and resources. The Israeli
government has carried out programs in the Galilee and Negev, known as Judaization, from which
Arab Israelis, especially Bedouins, have been cleared to make way for Jewish Israelis. Such
restrictions inside Israel have the stink of apartheid.
In his book Palestinians in
Israel: Segregation, Discrimination, and Democracy , Ben White
documents that the Israeli government allocates resources -- unsurprisingly -- just as one
would expect, considering that Israel by its founding doctrine is not the land of all of its
citizens but only of some. This doctrine was reinforced last year in the Nation-State Law ,
which declares
that "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the
Jewish people."
So, as Israel's champions say, all Israeli citizens are indeed equal. It's just that some --
those whose nationality is "Jewish" -- are
more equal than others -- those whose nationality is "Arab" or anything else but
"Jewish." Join the debate on
Facebook More articles by: Sheldon Richman
Equally unsustainable is the implication that Big Capital and the establishment ruling class
is not, and has not been, significantly Jewish over historical time. Žižek simplifies
and caricatures the Middle Ages as a time when "the Jew emerged as the enemy, a parasitic
intruder who disturbs the harmonious social edifice." Žižek obviously employs the
term "harmonious social edifice" with skepticism and disdain, seeing the pre-existing order
(that before the arrival of the Jews) as fraught with exploitation, tensions, and
contradictions. In Žižek's framework then, Jews may be a chaotic capitalist force
that enters Europe, but this was a Europe already experiencing chaotic capitalist forces, and
therefore it would be irrational to blame Jews for anything arising from their emergence and
expansion in Europe. What needs to be distinguished here is the distinction between what might
be termed the organic development of finance in Europe, [18]
For an excellent summary in relation to this process in feudalism, see R. Allen Brown,
Origins of English Feudalism, (New York: Barnes and Noble Books, 1973). and the
exorbitant and often extremely negative developments ushered in by the arrival of the Jews and
their subsequent special relationship with European elites and with capitalism itself.
The organic development of finance and class divisions in Europe is demonstrated in the
evolution of feudalism as a result of the adoption of heavy cavalry by the Franks in the eighth
century, with other, non-military, aspects of continental feudalism arising as the inevitable
social repercussions of this change in military organization. [19]
Ibid .
(For an excellent summary in relation to this process in feudalism, see R. Allen Brown,
Origins of English Feudalism, (New York: Barnes and Noble Books, 1973).) Since
knights needed money, horses, servants, attendants, and freedom from all other non-military
occupations, like tilling the soil, knighthood gradually became an upper-class affair.
Increasing technological sophistication then made mounted warfare more and more expensive and
caused knights to become more sharply distinguished from the ordinary peasant. It also caused
free peasants to become less and less valuable as soldiers, and they therefore declined towards
mere servitude. It was, therefore, in a sense inevitable that the new class of knights should
become a landed aristocracy, and its members were thus in a sense destined to low-level
jurisdiction of a semi-agricultural kind over their peasants. This situation really was, in a
sense, a "harmonious social edifice" to the extent that it followed a clear logic and permitted
these communities and their territories to be competitive in a rapidly changing military and
geopolitical context. The ruling classes were obliged to adopt paternalistic practices in
relation to the peasantry, and outright exploitation was rare since it could be dangerous and
counterproductive in that it could provoke a mass uprising and thus damage militarily-valuable
social cohesion. The social edifice was thus indeed "harmonious" in the sense that it was
coordinated and balanced, and was generally beneficial to the organic national community.
The arrival of Jews in Europe undoubtedly created an imbalance in these class relations, and
between the ruling class and the lower orders. Evidence of this imbalance in medieval Europe
can be obtained both from surviving documentation and artefacts, and from analogous modern
situations such as the the Great Romanian Peasant Revolt of 1907, during which Jewish intrusion
into the existing quasi-feudal social arrangement ended in widespread rebellion and societal
collapse due to the specific excesses of Jewish exploitation. The arrival of the Jews in
Western Europe as a financial and geopolitical power can be dated to their ascent under the
Carolingians in the ninth century, and possibly earlier in the Narbonne where they were noted
as an extraordinarily wealthy class. In this development, the birth of formal, symbiotic
relationships between Jews and self-interested European elites, we see a crucial fissure in
European class relations. Jewish financiers entered into the harmonious social edifice as
privileged and protected outsiders whose sole purpose was to accelerate and distort resource
transfer between European classes, rendering internal class division less about communal
efficiency than about personal gain. In this system, paternalism gave way to such situations as
the permitted Jewish trade in Christian slaves (a key reason for the agitations for Agobard of
Lyons) and widespread exploitative tax farming.
One of the great modern myths, a stroke of Jewish revisionist genius, is that Jews were
forced into such practices by restrictive laws on the ownership of land, and certain other
local contexts. This is historicist relativism at its most bankrupt and, thankfully, modern
scholarship is slowly eroding such misrepresentations and outright falsehoods. Take, for
example, the most recent edition of The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion ,
which states the "remarkable" fact that Jews
whether in Narbonne in 899 or Gironne in 922, in Trier in 919 or Worms in 1090, in
Barcelona in 1053 or Toledo in 1222, or in early medieval England, were permitted to acquire
and own land if they wished. Not only were Jews legally permitted to own land, they could
acquire significant amounts (especially in Italy, southern Spain, southern and east-central
France, and Germany); possessed fields, gardens, and vineyards; and owned, transferred, and
mortgaged land holdings. They preferred to hire tenants, sharecroppers, and wage laborers to
work their lands. For themselves, they chose the most skilled and profitable occupations,
foremost money lending. [20]
R. M. McCleary (ed), The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2011, 68.
Essentially then, we see the immediate and deliberate entrance of the Jews into European
society at the level of knight, if not higher, but without any of the logic or benefits of the
position of knight within the organic social edifice. The Jew in this new social order existed
for no logical reason other than the personal enrichment of certain elites and the communal
enrichment of the Jews themselves. This may be regarded as the first perversion of capitalism
and the first true exploitation (excessive or unfair use of workers with no reason other than
greed) of the serving class within this system.
Again, dispensing with historicist relativism, we can demonstrate the pattern of Jewish
disruptive behaviors within capitalism with reference to analogous modern conditions. For
example, the arenda system of late nineteenth- and early twentieth century-eastern
Europe (especially Poland, Ukraine, and Romania) was remarkably similar to the feudal system of
medieval Western Europe. The arenda system can be regarded as broadly harmonious until
the mass influx of Jewish arendasi during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which
saw the Jews increasingly operate as tax farmers, property agents, customs agents, and loan
merchants. Jewish monopoly in these roles prompted both the rapid commercialization of land and
the expansion of Big Capital, both of which were intended by Jews to exclusively benefit their
in-group. Since the existence of entire Jewish communities depended on exploitative capitalism,
Jews fiercely contended for monopolies in key areas. For example , The Va'ad
Medinat Lita (Lithuanian Jewish Council) twice passed a resolution supporting the lease of
customs and taxes by Jews, stating: "We have openly seen the great danger deriving from the
operation of customs in Gentile hands; for the customs to be in Jewish hands is a pivot on
which everything (in commerce) turns, since thereby Jews may exert control."
Crucially, high Jewish position in the social hierarchy was not accompanied by paternalism
of any kind. In fact, Jews are notable throughout history for their incredibly hostile and
exploitative behaviors towards non-elite Europeans. Philip Eidelberg, a historian of the Great
Romanian Peasant Revolt of 1907, describes how Jewish arendasi " exploited the estates
more ruthlessly than the native Rumanian arendasi ." He continues by explaining that
Jews were not interested in the long-term prosperity of estates or their workers, and often
hiked rents to breaking point "even at the risk of eventually exhausting the available land and
inventory." [21] P.
G. Eidelberg, The Great Rumanian Peasant Revolt of 1907: Origins of a Modern Jacquerie
(), 39. In Rumania, Jews enjoyed monopolies, with Eidelberg demonstrating that Jewish
bankers would decline to grant capital to any non-Jew wanting to enter this form of finance.
[22]
Ibid , 120.
(P. G. Eidelberg, The Great Rumanian Peasant Revolt of 1907: Origins of a Modern
Jacquerie (), 39.) Thus, the Jews competed for profit solely with each other,
ever-increasing the chokehold on their European peasantries. Eidelberg writes that "the result
was a bidding spiral in which the peasant was the loser. In fact, it was just such a
competition between the two greatest Jewish arendas families -- the Fischers and the
Justers -- which was to help spark the 1907 revolt." [23]
Ibid, 39.
(P. G. Eidelberg, The Great Rumanian Peasant Revolt of 1907: Origins of a Modern
Jacquerie (), 39.)
Jews, of course, continue to occupy conspicuous roles in the worst and most exploitative
aspects of capitalism. Jews have also continued to acquire land for exploitative purposes, the
most interesting example being the
Argentinian activities of the British Jewish oligarch Joe Lewis , a tax avoider
and currency speculator who made his billions alongside George Soros when both gambled on the
British pound sterling crashing out of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1992. As one
commentator explains, "Soros' and Lewis' bet against the pound actually led to the pound
crashing, after Soros ordered his hedge fund to " go for the
jugular " and aggressively trade against the currency, thereby prompting its sharp
devaluation. Though Soros is often called "the man who broke the Bank of England" as a result
of the $1 billion in profits he made on that fateful day, Lewis is said to have
made an even larger profit than Soros." While these Jews made billions, the British public
suffered a rapid economic recession. Lewis didn't mind. He repeated the experiment in Mexico,
causing the Mexican
peso crisis , which "led to a massive jump in poverty, unemployment and inequality in
Mexico and left its government beholden to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) through a loan
package arranged by then-U.S. President Bill Clinton."
Growing extravagantly rich from parasitic currency speculation, Jewish oligarchs Soros and
Lewis, together with co-ethnic Big Capitalists Eduardo Elsztain and Marcelo Mindlin, started
buying massive tracts of Argentine real estate, particularly in Patagonia, where they pooled
resources to take over local banks, the regional water supply, oil and gas wealth, and the
area's largest energy supplier. Lewis then set about buying tens of thousands of hectares,
declaring his wish to create "his own state in Patagonia." Some locals were willing to sell
their land. One, Irineo Montero, had refused, and he, along with his wife María Ortiz
and their employee José Matamala, were all found dead under mysterious
circumstances. Lewis' land consolidation was then made complete, and paved the way for a
Zionist enclave that has exploited locals so thoroughly that there have been regular massive
demonstrations ("March for Sovereignty) against this new Jewish ruling class, attracting 80
percent of the local population. According to the research of former French intelligence
officer turned journalist Thierry Meyssan, Lewis is much more amenable to his fellow Jews, and
has been inviting thousands of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers to his territory annually.
In late 2017, former French intelligence officer turned journalist Thierry Meyssan alleged : "Since the
Falklands War, the Israeli army has been organizing 'holiday camps' in Patagonia for its
soldiers. Between 8,000 and 10,000 of them now come every year to spend two weeks on Joe Lewis'
land."
What we see here is just a very modern example of the millennia-old Jewish pattern of
establishing full-scale operations for extracting a nation's riches and exploiting its people.
We must earnestly ask of Slavoj Žižek: Has Big Capital and the establishment
ruling class not been, and does it not remain, significantly Jewish
Another ringer from Andrew Joyce! We are so lucky to have him. He is helping us all to
recover our collective racial memory (as Jung might call it) as White Gentiles.
In April 2019, Žižek and Jordan Peterson sold out the Sony Centre in Toronto
for their debate titled "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism"
And who, pray tell, was invited to defend the honor of National Socialism?
In a 2009 lecture at the European Graduate School titled "Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semite and
Jew," Žižek argued that anti-Semitism places Jews in "impossible Otherness"
Judaism places Jews in "impossible Otherness." Their bizarre 'chosenness' is the
root of their collective pathology. (Notice how all their theories concerning our
supposed ethno-centrism are just so much projection!)
It is a matter of special irony that Marxists should present their own contradictions in
relation to anti-Semitism and the supposed psychosocial aspects of the anti-Semite.
Have these self-described Marxists never read Karl Marx's own scathing treatment of the
Jews in Zur
Judenfrage ? Here's a well-known passage:
"Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew – not the Sabbath Jew but the everyday
Jew. Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the
secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical
need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his
worldly God? Money. Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may
exist. Money degrades all the gods of man – and turns them into commodities . The
bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange .
The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of
money in general.[ ] The Jew has emancipated himself in a Jewish manner, not only because
he has acquired financial power, but also because, through him and also apart from him,
money has become a world power and the practical Jewish spirit has become the practical
spirit of the Christian nations. The Jews have emancipated themselves insofar as the
Christians have become Jews. [ ] In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the
emancipation of mankind from Judaism."
Pretty frickin' harsh, eh! I guess if old Karl were still around to hear the pathetic
maunderings of post-modern Communists like Žižek, he would just shake his head and
say, 'I am not a Marxist.'
According to the research of former French intelligence officer turned journalist
Thierry Meyssan
That's interesting, Dr. Joyce. I've been following him over at Voltaire-net on and off for nearly a decade, and I had
no idea that Meyssan had been an intelligence officer. Neither Wikipedia nor Infogalatic ever
mention it. Good to know
Slavoj Zizek went "full Monty" during his recent visit to Tel Aviv at the invitation of
some sincerely dissident Israelis. They expected words of encouragement, but instead he
informed them that fighting anti-Semitism is more important than defending Palestinians. The
Slovenian philosopher spoke kindly of the swindler Bernie Madoff, who was "a scapegoat who
was easy to blame, when in fact the real problem is the system that allowed and even pushed
Madoff to commit his crimes." Indeed, it must have been 'the system' that pushed poor Mr.
Madoff into crime, just as it was 'the system' that pushed Shylock to enter into
money-lending and Jack the Ripper into the business of carving.
Some of the above are correct but there's a much more succinct and accurate description.
There's one idea that describes the Jews perfectly. It describes their parasitism, their
lying, their chameleon like behavior, their sense of superiority and belief that they are
different from everyone else. There's a simple explanation for why the Jews are hated so much
that also explains their behavior and success. The Jews are a tribe of psychopaths. Not all,
maybe not even the majority, but a large number. All of the Jews ancient writings are nothing
more than a manual for psychopaths to live by. The Talmud is nothing but one psychopathic
thought after another. The Talmud "great enlightenment" basically says that everyone not
Jewish is there to serve Jews. All their property is really the Jews. No one is really human
unless they're Jews and their lives don't matter. A psychopathic religion for a psychopathic
people.
Even if I'm wrong thousands of years of history show a bunch of Jews moving into your
territory in in no way distinguishable from a tribe of psychopaths moving into your
country
They've been thrown out of every single country that they've been to in any numbers.
Psychopaths having no empathy themselves can only go by the feedback they get from the
people they are exploiting. So they push and push to see what they can get away with. The
normal people build up resentment towards them. Thinking "surely they will reform or repent"
like a normal person who does wrong. Of course the Jews do not. They don't have the mental
process for reform. Then in a huge mass outpouring of hate for the Jews, fed up with the
refusal to reform their behavior, they attack and/or deport them. In this stage of the cycle
the Big/Rich Jews escape and the little Jews are attacked.
Start over.
Even if it's wrong if you assume the Jews are a tribe of psychopaths you will never be
surprised and Jew's behavior will make sense.
In order to predict Jews behavior read the great book on Psychopaths by Hervey Cleckley,
"The Mask of Sanity". Here's a chapter you should read. It's about the psychopath Stanley.
Who does all kinds of manic bullshit and spends all his time feeding people the most
outrageous lies. Look at the astounding array of things he's able to get away with. Maybe it
will remind you of a certain tribe. New meme. "They're pulling a Stanley". The whole book is
on the web and worth reading.
" In the course of his European Graduate School lecture, Žižek comments that
"the real mystery of anti-Semitism is why it is a constant "
This is not a mystery at all. NO ONE can stand psychopaths over the long term. They're
fucked up. You even hear Jews leaving Israel because the culture is so fucked up. Even
psychopaths don't want to live with psychopaths.
The only know recipe to living with psychopaths recommended by psychiatrist is don't live
with them at all. The sooner we realize that the Jews are a damaged, evil, twisted tribe of
psychopaths and there's no reasoning, dealing, co-opting or living with them the better we
will be. The only 100%. guaranteed, tried and true, tested with 100% satisfaction of dealing
with the Jews is to get rid of them. Peacefully if we can get it but by any means necessary
get them away from you and leave them no control of any sort over your country or any other
aspect of your and your countrymen's lives.
Žižek copying, almost verbatim, a review of MacDonald's book by Stanley
Hornbeck that appeared in the March 1999 issue of The American Renaissance.
What a damning indictment of American Renaissance!
Slavoj Zizek, the uttermost dregs of human intellectual depravity, agrees so utterly with
an Amren article he feels comfortable copying it word for word as it it were his own!
Have these self-described Marxists never read Karl Marx's own scathing treatment of the
Jews in "Zur Judenfrage"?
This "well-known (pretty frickin' harsh) passage" is permanently cited by anti-marxists to
denunciate "Karl" as "antisemite" and with the intention to subsequently ignore his analysis
of capital (for being founded in his "antisemitism").
By the way, it is not necessary to imagine "old Karl" to be "still around" or "to turn in his
grave" to enlighten us with the word "I am not a Marxist". If we can trust in the words of
Engels he said it in reality: "What is certain is that I myself am not a Marxist" (a remark
cited by Engels in his letter to Bernstein of 2-3 November 1882).
Regarding this whole "jews are both for communism and capitalism, and thus anti semites are
full of contradictory nonsense", one needs to point the obvious fact that these jewish
inventions are meant for consumption for the gentiles and not the jews.
Some will think that Ayn Rand and Karl Marx are polar opposites, but this is not true,
both preached a universal ideology, and both would not think it is problem at the same time
that jews are immune from this ideology (because Marx would no doubt support Israel if it
existed at his time).
A car-wreck of logic indeed. What absolute rubbish Zizek comes up with. JM Keynes observed
that economics exists only to give astrology a good name. Judging by today's 'philosophers'
the same could be said about them.
@israel
shamir It's the system that has allowed Slavoj Zizek to showcase his theory . System
works with usual laziness who knows who and not what .
If Maddoff were a victim may be Epstein was , then so were Hitler and Polpot
System around them allowed them to reach mass appeal and inflict severe damages .
Abusing system is not self-victimization . Prince Andrew did not hurt self .
It's the system one works to prevent undesirable products . We undermine the system .
When you side with proponents of right for Palestinian or the victims of usury banking ,
financialization or against penchant for military budget or eternal war you bring normal
perspective , you restore balance between cause and effect and you remove artificial false
intellectual reasoning g like existence of antisemitism or American responsibility or America
being the beacon to humanity or America being a mystic abstract concept of higher values
.
Allowing and worshipping these kinds of ideas
we make inroads by the parasites possible
Abstract concept is easy target for corruption distortion emotional manipulation .
Antisemitidm should be described and that description should be applied to other anti -ism
( anti black anti Arab anti Iran anti Chinese anti Vietnamese anti Russian etc )
epidemiological survey should be conducted along those detailed descriptive points not like
-the way ADL puts out questionnaires .
It is time for Slavoj Zizek. to go to a library and get hold of the books by Herzl just to
get started .
@anon
masonry is clear example of this they tricked british and french people that let jews play an
important paper in the ideological foundation ,germans understanding the danger but
recon¡gnizing that the ilustration was the way of the future adapted his own version of
masonry with greek symbols and pure european myths and of course mantaining jews out of the
inner circle of power more or less like in scandinavia .
spanish people simply banned the masonry .
its curious how italian and iberians and their colonies were able to crush any jewish
resistance and asimilate the rest of them in the new world even if they arent the smartest
europeans .
i think we need a fusion of german and latin character to face this new era
There's around 200 nations in the world and if I may be so bold–since this is going
against the Cultural Marxists agenda that race is a social construct–4 main races that
contain around 30 subgroups.
In other words, lots of stories to pick from for the MSM.
Yet, day after day after day, we usually only hear about ONE nation and ONE race, Israel
and the Jews.
It's gotten all so tiresome to have these human peacocks constantly parading around,
demanding that us Goyim worship them or else.
And if we fail–in their minds–to show them the proper adoration, we get accused
of anti-Semitism.
@HammerJack
Andrew Joyce's work would never appear in American Renaissance. Taylor and his cohorts
prevent any criticism of Jewish involvement in White dispossession.
Herzl did not like Jews , celebrated possible future conversion of his son , thought en
masse conversion to Christianity , did not think of allowing Hebrew as state language and did
not conceive Shabbat a holiday
But also thought sneak attack on local Arab , planned deceptive discussions and ploys to
make them leave Palestine without arousing immediate large scale protests , he offered the
service of new state to be a barrier between uncivilized Asia and developed Europe , he
promised Balfour of protecting British interest
He wanted no Arab in the midst and eagerly and glowingly promised his visions of equal
democratic society .
Above all he can't pull it off himself . He needed help . He needed money that he by
threat and persuasion got from rich Jew . What about other nations shedding their non Jews
blood to erect a pure Jews nation ????
His minions got there also by lying false promising misrepresenting and bribing They also
used religious hatred of Christianity to Islam and racial hatred of European to Arab and
Turkey .
Britain pod in blood and money Now its Germany and USA .
-- -- --
But there are antisemite thinking or musing that. A-gentile never be able to get rid of ,
so said the Slovenian
The paradoxes Mr Slovenian sees in antisemite argument is what litter the philosophy of
Zionism .
@Digital
Samizdat Meyssan is a leftist of North African origin. Earlier in his career, he was
involved in harassing the National Front and other parties of the right.
From 1996 to 1999, he worked as substitute coordinator of the National Committee of
Surveillance against the extreme right, which held weekly meetings with the 45 major
political parties, unions and associations belonging to the French left-wing in order to
draw up a common response to escalating intolerance
I think Dr Joyce mistakes Meyssan's involvement in the above committee with that of
performing intelligence functions. Meyssan was an enthusiastic supporter of Hate Speech laws
to be used against the Right. Except later he fell foul of them himself and no longer lives
in France.
Indeed, for an anti-segregation organization, the early NAACP was essentially divided between
the Jews who ran it, and the Blacks who went along for the ride. As Hasia Diner puts it in In
the Almost Promised Land: American Jews and Blacks, 1915–1935, many in the NAACP's
Jewish leadership "worked most intensely with other Jews."[7]"
Muslim has replaced Blacks . Muslim "leaders " seek in Israel the conduit to power or
pipeline to something ( usually end up getting less scornful hateful mutterings in Fox and
WSJ ) . In return they attend interfaith meeting to be lectured ,open up discussing Koran
with ideas of dropping some pages ,and agreeing to hate Shia ,agreeing to start propaganda
against Iran Syria and Muslim Brotherhood ,spreading the FDD orchestrated fear of Iran,
imbibing hook line and slinkier the narrative against Iran Syria Hizbullah Libya Houthi and
Taliban or Qatar . Add to that Russia and china also. And they start discussing direct flight
from Tel Aviv to Medina from where their prophet once banned the Jews after decades of
deceptive behaviors of the Jewish clan.
What does muslim get ? The same stuff the blacks got- violence drugs sex trafiiciking,
destruction of community, shuttering down of school college and enrichment of few who sing
Hosana to the Jews .
For the time it is ;limited mostly to ME S Asia and N Africa . But I won't be supposed to see
it get into a more permanent footing in USA ,Canada,Australia. For a back on the back Muslim
will hurt themselves the way Afroamerican were taken for a ride.
Nice, that the Oxford Handbook cited sells for $429 over at Amazon. I hadn't liked Joyce's
articles particularly, but this one is helpful because it shows not just history, but the
link to current events. Particularly useful the info about Joe Lewis, (never heard about him
before). Doubly so in view of the fact that South America seems very unstable now, with a
migrant expulsion towards Mexico/US that is as bad as the Syria-to-Europe a few years back.
But much more under the radar.. no "color this" or "spring that" hashtags this time.
@neutral
Capitalism and communism have materialism in common. Various schemes based on religious
principles vary from both.
Secondly, a capitalist can favor communism so long as it doesn't damage his own
interests.
1) He may be able to make money trading with a foreign communist government e.g. Kaiser,
Ford.
2) He may favor communism as a means of destroying the old Christian order, which was the
case with US capitalists who funded the Bolsheviks e.g. Schiff, Warburg, Hammer.
3) A corrupt communist regime may allow selected friendly capitalists to flourish with in
effect a state subsidy. Most regimes of any kind are corrupt.
The idea that a capitalist can't be a communist is childishly simplistic, really just a
slogan.
@israel
shamir [Slavoj Zizek went "full Monty" during his recent visit to Tel Aviv at the
invitation of some sincerely dissident Israelis. They expected words of encouragement, but
instead he informed them that fighting anti-Semitism is more important than defending
Palestinians. ]
Who were these 'sincerely dissident Israelis' who didnot' know Zizek is a zionist
charlatan?
They are not 'sincere' but they are like him zionist jews.
This fact is obvious many years now and he showed himself as a zionist racist anti
Palestinians and non Jew many years ago in Israel. Who are these dummies that they don't know
who is Zizek.
Zizek like Trump is a charlatan zionist racist. He is a fraud like Henry Bernard Levy
You should see the video when he appeared at 'charlie Rose program' – a womanizer
and racist American exceptionalism, to see how this 'communist' clown was admiring Jewish
capitalism to please another clown charlie rose.
...Avigdor Liberman, leader of Israael's far right secular party Yisrael Beytenu has failed
in his attempts to form a government of national unity and is now denouncing the ultra
orthodox parties as "anti-semitic!"
At about 3 minutes into the TeeVee show tape linked below. the news host lets Hannah begin
to talk about Iraq and then Iran. Hannah was Cheney's foreign policy staffer during the run up
to Desert Storm. He worked for Libby who worked for Cheney. He was one of the architects of the
war hungry strategy that led to that endless war, a war that has never really ended. Someone
urged me to go talk to Hannah before Desert Storm. I went. We met in his closet sized office in
the OEB. I am usually annoyed by people who talk to you from behind their desks but this space
was tiny. He clearly had his mind made up about the wonderfulness of an invasion and wanted to
talk about the size force to be used.
Our deliberate destruction of the existing social order in Iraq unleashed the forces of
Sunni rebellion against the occupation and the Shia government that we created through our
farcical purple thumb elections. These were held in the aftermath of the occupation government
having openly stated to Sunni leaders that their time had ended. Now we have the Shia fighting
each other over the division of power in Iraq. John Hannah said on this program that this is
because some Shia (the "good" Shia?) are resisting the "control" of Iraq by the government of
Iran.
Iran is the major theme of the rest of Hannah's statements to the interviewer. Hannah is
upset at the prospect of "a land bridge" (road connection) from Iran to a Syrian port. To
prevent such a connection the US keeps troops in Syria at al-Tanf just where Israel wants them.
Hannah is upset because Iran "seeks regional hegemony" (to frustrate Israeli ambitions for the
same thing?), etc., etc, ad nauseam. IMO this is tribalism at its worst.
IMO Hannah is merely a mouthpiece for Israeli policy. He is taken seriously as an AMERICAN
policy talking head? He was one of the leading architects of the disastrous Iraq policy and
war. This interview should call into question the basis for his advocacy of that war, a war
which the Israelis urged the US to fight. pl
The Fifth Column controls the MSM, the think tanks and most of the press.
The public and the politicos are only going to see and hear Zionist Neocon propaganda for
Israel.
Senator Fulbright 1963 Senate Hearings on ZOA propaganda in US.
FINDING: Israel's payments to US academics, new media, and Israel lobby operatives in the
three month sample filing were classified and not made available in the FARA section public
files. This violated FARA's disclosure mandate.
FINDING: During Senate investigations the American Zionist Council was found to be investing
heavily in US media outreach and "think tanks" with Israeli government funding. This think
tank and media influence effort has been renewed outside the purview of FARA from the AZC's
new shell organization, the AIPAC.
FINDING: AIPAC's influence with the establishment media means that warranted law enforcement
efforts or investigations are often quickly whipped into spurious allegations of
anti‐Semitism, threats against freedom of speech, or any number of well framed public
relations campaigns. The capability has been
built with clandestine Jewish Agency/Israeli government funding in the 1960's and has reached
maturity.
''Between 1962-1963 the Senate Foreign Relations Committee subpoenaed internal reports of the
American Zionist Council during its investigation into the activities of registered agents of
foreign principals. They discovered that more than $5 million in tax exempt (and possibly
overseas donations) had been laundered through the Jewish Agency's American Section into the
American Zionist Council. The Jewish Agency functioned as a quasi-branch of the Israeli
government, received Israeli government funding, and was able to review legislation before it
went to the Knesset under its Covenant Agreement.
The following reports detail how the American Zionist Council used the funding in a
sophisticated campaign to cajole and intimidate news media, subvert open debate about Israel
and undermine reporting about key issues of the day such as Israel's Dimona nuclear weapons
facility, operation Susannah terror attacks on the United States, and the return of Arab
refugees to their homes. The AZC tracked and targeted professors and engaged in covert
operations obliquely referred to in the following internal reports.
After the Justice Department ordered the American Zionist Council to register as a foreign
agent in late 1962, it transferred responsibilities to the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee, which refuses to register as a foreign agent of the Israeli government.''
Thanks for these links. They don't make 'em like Sen. Fulbright any more. Republic now
defended by the old with memories, & young with eyes to see, & skin in the game.
Found an old interview where you said that what was needed in Iraq, to amend the disaster
created by the erroneous US intervention in the country, was a huge diplomatic effort to
bring in all the factions and political players in Iraqi society together to build a project
for peace and development which could please all major players in the region...which seems
similar to the effort the Russians and SAA are trying in Syria...after US erroneous
intervention...
Now, Elora wonders whether the Russians read you too...
MJ: What do you think a prudent course of action in Iraq would be?
WPL: I tend to believe on the military side we're doing the right thing. I have
advocated what we're doing in Anbar and Diyala for the last two or three years. That is to
strip off the non-jihadi insurgents from the Al Qaeda ones and get them to fight the
jihadis. They have every reason to do so because the AQ guys come in and they want to
disrupt your entire way of life and make you live differently, by a form of Islam that is a
pain in the ass. What I've advocated is to go around and solve this thing diplomatically,
seeking a political solution that is agreed upon by the major players in the region. The
administration seeks a solution based on its own image of peace, which is of a region
waiting to be westernized, which it is not. History says their vision of the Middle East is
incorrect, but they still insist that they're going to change the whole place instead of
trying to bring these people together so that everyone can live in relative peace and calm.
I think they're presenting the wrong goal. You need to push the military thing the way
they're doing now while at the same time conducting a massive diplomatic offensive.
P.S: Elora got greatly surprised to know...although she regrets you did not publish her
anthropological comparative compilation of characters from Caucassus, Hunza Valley and the
Basque Country...Well, the links were way too long....Elora guesses....
I am afraid that connecting the dots between why US foreign policy is run for the benefit of
an alien nation, how it got that way, and what is to be done about it is a bridge way WAY too
far for most Americans, at least anyone over 50.
Yet I have been told repeatedly that the leadership of China and Russia (among others) see
it clearly and pursue their own interests accordingly.
Yes, its a huge problem and Trump (or his handlers) made it worse with his appointment of
Kenneth Marcus, who is a raging, fanatical Zionist He has promised to defund all universities
and schools that don't teach about the holocaust and expel students guilty of anti semitism.
He is reopening past cases against schools that Zionist lawsuits lost and retrying them.
Sep 11, 2018 - Kenneth L. Marcus, the Education Department official who reopened the ... a
definition of anti-Semitism that targets opponents of Zionism, and it explicitly ... And it
comes after the Trump administration moved the American
While here is raining as if there was no tomorrow, after this article and just discovered
interview, Elora felt you should be awarded at least a song...with Portuguese subtitles....
to celebrate Lula´s liberation...
I never meant to cause you any sorrow I never meant to cause you any pain I only wanted to
one time to see you laughing I only wanted to see you Laughing in the purple rain....
Honey, I know, I know
I know times are changing
It's time we all reach out
For something new, that means you too...
John Hannah outside his NEOCON roles in the U.S. Government (i.e. Cheney, et. al.), Hannah
used to be with Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), now he's a 'Senior
Counselor' with The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
Hannah claims to be an xzert in Arab Politics, Gulf States, Iran, Iran Global Threat
Network, Iran-backed Terrorism, Israel, Jihadism, Kurds, Military and Political Power, Syria,
The Long War, Turkey, U.S. Defense Policy and Strategy. Hannah's 'projects' are Turkey
Program, Center on Military and Political Power.
As the White House seems to turn its back on the Neocons' immoral interventionism, some Jews
may be discomfited by the fact that the Neocon war mongering doctrine has been largely a Jewish
project. As Haartez writer Ari
Shavit wrote back in 2003: "The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative
intellectuals, most of them Jewish " Maybe some Jews now understand that the Zionist shift from
a 'promised land' to the Neocon 'promised planet' doesn't reflect well on the Jews as a
group.
I am trying to point out the possibility that the overwhelming fear of 'anti-Semitism,'
documented however poorly by the AJC, might well be the expression of guilt. American Jews may
feel communal guilt over the disastrous politics and culture of some sections of their
corrupted elite. They might even feel guilty as Americans about the brutal sacrifice of one of
America's prime values, that of freedom of speech as guaranteed by the 1st Amendment, on the
altar of
'antisemitsm.' .
Obviously, I would welcome AJC's further investigation of this. It would be interesting to
learn about the correlation between the Jewish fear of anti Semitsm and Jewish guilt. It would
also be fascinating to find out how Jewish anxiety translates into self-reflection. In that
regard, I suggest that instead of blaming the American people, Jews try introspection. US Jews
may want to follow the early Zionists, such as Theodor Herzl, who turned guilt into
self-examination. Herzl was deeply disturbed by anti Semitism but this didn't stop him from
digging into its causes. "The wealthy Jews control the world, in their hands lies the fate
of governments and nations,"Herzl wrote. He continued, "
They set governments one against the other. When the wealthy Jews play, the nations and the
rulers dance. One way or the other, they get rich." Herzl, like other early Zionists,
believed that Jews could be emancipated from their conditions and even be loved globally by
means of a cultural, ideological and spiritual metamorphosis with the aspiration of
'homecoming.' Herzl and his fellow early Zionists were clearly wrong in their proposed remedy
for the Jewish question, but were absolutely spot on in their adherence to self-reflection and
harsh self-criticism.
American Jews have much to learn from Herzl and other early Zionists. They should ask
themselves how their American 'Golden Medina' their Jewish land of opportunities, has
turned into a 'threatening' realm. What happened, what has changed in the last few years? Was
it the constant cries over anti-Semitism and the desperate and institutional attempts to
silence critics that turned their Golden Medina into a daunting space?
Anti-Semitism is a subset of class warfare, and thus perfectly natural in any society with
high inequality and large numbers of Jews. Because Jews always ally themselves with the
rulers and higher classes, as a survival strategy, and also because their talents naturally
place them in the higher classes.
The intelligent anti-Semitism of people like Chesterton and Belloc are of this type. These
people are perfectly capable of having honorable respect for Jews and deep appreciation for
Jewish culture while believing Jews may not be a good fit for their host society. Its nothing
personal. Just realism.
Unlike Gilad Atzmon, who sees no problem with other groups who compete and pursue self
interest but finds Jews doing so uniquely unacceptable and a cause for "guilt", they are
generally self-aware and honest enough to not blame Jews for competing on the world stage
– for being human – and realize Europeans were far harsher towards those foreign
peoples they competed against.
There is another kind of anti-Semitism that just reflects mankind's propensity to hate
anyone who is different, and comes from the same place as the vicious cruelties against all
manner of heretics and dissenters, including genocides, that was such a pronounced
characteristic of Christian Europe, and the racism of European society.
This generally has to do with pent up frustrations and resentments, which because of
special aspects of European culture, were uniquely intense in that part of the world (
Europeans were/are uniquely frustrated and unhappy with existence). Most anti-Semites on Unz
are of this kind, like commenters Colin Wright and utu, for instance, and authors Linh Dinh
and Kevin Barrett, Andrew Joyce, and Guyenot, and others.
These kinds of anti-Semites despise Jewish culture and anything Jewish, and often feel
compelled to invent elaborate grotesque mythologies using selective sources and distorted
interpretations to "prove" that Jewish culture and religion is unlike any other and uniquely
evil. Completely un-selfaware and lacking in introspection or historical perspective, they
are are not honest enough and emotionally stable enough to see group competition as the
historic norm, and their own group as no angels in this regard.
In their reading of history, no group competes except Jews, and the whole world would be a
paradise of harmony if not for these devilishly evil Jews.
Needless to say, this kind of infantile anti-Semitism is more of an emotional cri de ceour
of personal anguish, from an unbalanced mind, than anything to be taken seriously. And these
people today are effectively marginalized.
The Jewish "problem" in Europe is simply that of normal group competition among a host
population that by world standards, has always been uniquely intolerant of other ways of life
and thought, and uniquely imperialistic about its own values and standards, and uniquely
addicted to trying to control its environment (which ended up in science and technology).
Jews in China, India, and to some extent the Muslim world, hardly posed a comparable
"problem".
Zionism has obviously been an almost complete success in shifting Jewish group competition
away from within societies more towards the more normal pattern of national competition, as
Gilad Atzmon prefers as "healthy".
Jewish influence today outside of Israel is primarily directed to the current Imperial
center, America. Empires, by nature, always have foreign factions vying for favor and
influence. Rome was of course the same way. This is quite natural for empires. So Jewish
attempts to influence America – the self-designated policeman of the world – is
quite naturally a part of any imperial system, as the world policeman, one naturally needs to
have him on your side, of course.
So the Jewish "problem" has largely been solved through Zionism – but of course, as
more Jews move to Israel, the situation will get even better. And if imperial power shifts
away from America, the new imperial center will, obviously, become the site for various
foreign factions to vie for influence.
@AaronB no one
has a problem with Jews being gifted or being part of the elite,, but ppl do have problems
with Madoffs, Binary options, Weinstein, Epstein, Aipac, ADL interfering with elementary
freedoms do you really need me to explain all of that? for the record, by the time the Jewish
problem was solved by Zionism, Zionism was defeated by Jewishness and Israel became the
Jewish State ,,, my next book is all about that
' So the Jewish "problem" has largely been solved through Zionism – but of course,
as more Jews move to Israel, the situation will get even better. And if imperial power shifts
away from America, the new imperial center will, obviously, become the site for various
foreign factions to vie for influence.'
but as power shifts away from America, she becomes less able to nurture Israel and shield
her from the consequences of her actions, and then what?
You talk about moving back there. Would you do that if your standard of living there would
be, say, a quarter of what it is now, and if, to please the world, you had to accept that the
judge you were going to appear before might well be Muslim?
I doubt it. As US power declines, Israel will be abandoned. So we won't have gotten
anywhere at all.
Antisemitism is useful component of the rabbinate to generate internal group cohesion. It
forms a separation barrier, like an eruv, between goyim and Jew.
@Gilad Atzmon
imo your essay misses the point of why Jews should feel guilt, therefore AaronB's
comment also fails to address a critical issue.
I can't cite chapter and verse, but it has to be the case in the course of human events
that plenty of individuals and even groups have engaged in behavior as objectionable as
Madoff, Weinstein, Epstein, and the the numerous swindles Israel engages in.
I don't think those offenses are exclusive to Jews. Atzmon's essay here may amount to a
limited hangout.
AaronB's comment is braggadocio; Although I agree w/ AaronB that the power-center will shift
from USA to the East, and that if Jews follow the pattern of their ancient myths and last 120
years of history, they will destroy USA on their way out; nevertheless Jews will have to
share power with Russia and China, Arabs/Muslims will have a say, and Iran should not be
counted out -- they've dealt with Jews longer than any other people and know well their
treachery. It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings , AaronB, and there's a whole cast of divas just
warming up.
I do believe that the creation of zionist Israel may be unique in the known history of the
world: Jews not only dispossessed a native people in Palestine -- USAians did pretty much the
same -- Jews got other nation-states to do their killing for them.
But even more significantly, Jews killed -- genocided, really -- non-Jews in the countries
that had hosted them -- American colonists did not genocide the British in British homeland
-- once again, Jews arranged for the killing to be carried out by another state, in the case
of the genocide of Germany, American and British Christians became Jewish weapons to kill
their own fellow-Christians.
At the same time, Jews needed to cull their own herd: the elite that Atzmon and AaronB
gloat over -- the "remnant," is a relatively recent phenomenon; it may be that the vaunted 6
million were dead wood; impoverished, filthy, inbred: Jabotinsky found them disgusting and
Nordau called them "Degenerate." Worse: they were a drag on the mean. Russia and Poland were
crawling with Jews of "unsuitable human material" for the "new Jew" that was to populate the
zionist utopia. They had to be got rid of; just as Moses delegated Levites to kill fellow
Jews at Mt. Sinai, so Louis Brandeis, Frankfurter etc. fell upon Hitler, Churchill, Stalin
and FDR to kill surplus, degenerate Jews. Saddam & el Baghdadi are minor replicas of a
similar mold employed to kill inconvenient challengers or competitors to zionist Jews.
Jews killed -- or arranged for the killing -- of their own undesireables. In addition,
Jews killed or arranged for the killing of "the best gentiles;" and then, the master stroke:
Jews proclaimed themselves the victims and psychologically manipulated those shattered
peoples -- Germans and other Western Europeans– to the extent that those populations
paid and continue to pay Jews for "Jewish suffering," while also punishing themselves out of
existence with their own Jewish-induced, psychologically-manipulated guilt.
This systemic program -- patterned on the mythic flight from Egypt, and conquest of Canaan
but worked out in real time, is, I believe, unique in all the world.
Jewish holocaustism is why Jews are hated.
Maybe some Jews realize what they have done.
Jews are correct to feel "guilty" and fearful of a "rise in antisemitism."
No statistics or polls to cite, just hazarding a guess: "antisemitism" will rise in
lockstep with realization among non-Jews that the holocaust is a hoax.
I am not sure the possibility exists for Jews to be forgiven for what they have done.
Even with activist groups trying to spook Jews and cajole them into making aliyah ,
fuck-all of them do – and an almost-offsetting number leave.
The net migration rate (all religions) for Occupied Palestine is 0.2%/yr – a
rounding error – and inwards-migration is overwhelmingly 'economic refugee' in
character (almost half of annual Jewish in-migration is from former Soviet countries).
As guys like Sassoon, Shlomo Sand, and others have noted: Western European Jews have every
opportunity to go live in Palestine, but have always exhibited fuck-all interest in doing so.
In this they echo Maimonides: after the Almohad conquest of Cordoba and the abolition of
dhimmi status for non-Muslims, the Rambam spent almost all of his life in Egypt and
Morocco – he had every opportunity to settle in Palestine but chose to live and work
elsewhere.
And so it is to this day: affluent, educated Western Jews would rather eat their own dicks
that move to Palestine. And that's even true of arch-Zionists like Adelson and Dershowitz
– neither of whom are 'Western' in any real sense (they're pretty obvious of Lithuanian
or other- Osteuropäische ). descent.
Given the Exodus (LOL) of secular Jews, and the pattern of in-migration and reproduction,
it's pretty clear that Palestine will become a third-world nation in a couple of generations:
having emerged from the hovels of Eastern Europe, the Ashkenazim are remaking Palestine in
its image.
There are good signs though: the huge-and-rising proportion of datlashim among the
children of "box-heads" (Ultra-Orthodox), for a start. Even when everyone around them is
trying to fill their heads with primitive supremacist tribal drivel, almost a third of
children of box-heads are secular by the time they finish high school.
There is a well-understood (outside the US) bifurcation of Jewish communities into "
People Like Us " and Eastern Europeans.
In Australia the dividing line can be drawn at around 1920: "People Like Us" are
integrated, and for the most part they politely and quietly ignore the rabbit-eaters –
those are the ones howling all the time about how at-risk they are, but who somehow can't
find a way to get to the Jewish 'safe space' in Palestine unless there is a warrant out for
their arrest, in which case it's " Tomorrow Morning in Jerusalem! ".
@Gilad Atzmon
But that's ridiculous. Every group has its criminals and the more ambitious and talented, the
worse. You can't have the talented Jews who contribute to science, technology, culture, and
philanthropy without some of that energy getting corrupted.
It's like that will all groups. When Europe was very energetic and vital it produced
tremendous sinners and corruption while also people of tremendous benefit to society and the
world.
Saints go along with sinners. Its because when you have a certain quantum of energy, you
cannot control where all of it goes. Some of it had to get corrupted. Only way to avoid this
is to neuter people.
So again .what does this have to do with Jewishness specifically? How this is different
from the Robber Barons of the 19th century, the rapacious and deceptive imperialists, the
current day Chinese oligarchs, etc? Umm, European and world history is littered with bad
actors a million times worse than, wet, Bernie Madoff and the ADL, lol
That Jews also produce bad actors proves that there is something uniquely wrong with
Jewishness per se? Are you nuts? This is what I mean by complete lack of self awarness and
historical literacy
Pick up a history book. You are so self absorbed in your fantasy world its as if no other
people produces bad actors or have ever, and we must search for the utterly mysterious fact
that some Jews act in the unique characteristics of Jewishness
@Colin Wright US
support has always acted as much as a restraint as a benefit. Israel's most contested wars
were won without US support, and in fact the US only became heavily involved with Israel only
after it firmly established itself and demonstrated its capacity for self reliance, and it
thought it could use it as an ally in the Cold War.
While certainly appreciated, US support is hardly crucial to Israel's survival lol. Your
historical illiteracy and wishful thinking causes you to completely misunderstand it and
vastly overrate it.
@Colin Wright
Bullshit –accept your own stupidity if you like but dont deign to speak for anyone else
!! Take any large city bedevilled by organised crime -- are the ORGANISED criminals
successful at least temporarily –yes ! Are they smarter than anyone else –NO !!
If the Jews are so smart why do they eventually always eff up??
They are organised with rat like cunning no doubt but seem to create misery wherever they
go and are so effin smart they are astounded that they are hated !! What could have caused it
–we are so smart why cant we figure it out !!
@Colin Wright
What are you talking about. I just said there is a perfectly reasonable type of anti-Semitism
that is a natural response to group competition – the actions of Jews themselves.
Obviously no ones hands are clean when it comes to group competition. This is an
"innocent" phenomenon of history that characterizes all groups without exception.
What Jews object to is not normal criticism, which we engage in ourselves in a very
spirited manner, but the singling out of Jewish competitive behavior in the struggle for life
as somehow uniquely evil and bad. I won't even go into the horrific crimes Europeans and
Asians have committed in this struggle and compare them to, err, Bernie Maddow, but accept
for the sake of argument all groups are equally guilty.
So a sane criticism of Jews that places it in the normal context of group competition,
which is always horrific, is perfectly ok. But the kind of singling out for special stigma
and opprobrium the Jewish part in the universal human struggle for survival – when if
anything it is milder than that of other groups which are truly horrific – is indeed
sinister and justifies terms like anti-Semitism.
Now because so many people single out Jews for special criticism, as if they alone are not
allowed to compete to live, some Jews have become hypersensitive and see in even innocent and
justified criticism the seeds of the kind of sinister anti-Semitism that so often rears its
ugly head. Thats perfectly understandable, although I condemn it.
I, for one, can't think of another people who invest so much energy in measuring their
unpopularity.
This is perfectly logical. No other group sees their hosts as dangerous cattle which has
to be exploited and undermined at every opportunity. Feeling the pulse of the herd –
before these actions create another blowback – is just part of the chosenite's job.
I don't see much guilt among the Jews. It's mostly (justified) fear that certain elements
of the Tribe are moving too aggressively and spoiling it for the rest.
@SolontoCroesus
This is what you have wrought Gilad. A philosophy of yours about Judaism and Jews and this is
where it ends up. With guys like this writing about.
But even more significantly, Jews killed -- genocided, really -- non-Jews in the
countries that had hosted them -- American colonists did not genocide the British in
British homeland -- once again, Jews arranged for the killing to be carried out by another
state, in the case of the genocide of Germany, American and British Christians became
Jewish weapons to kill their own fellow-Christians.
@AaronB If you
knew your history you would know about Operation Nickel Grass: 22,325 tons of tanks,
artillery, ammunition per Wikipedia. This was US aid during one of Israel's most contested
wars (Yom Kippur) and unsurprisingly, we don't get any appreciation for it. I bet I could
find an article criticizing the US for not doing it fast enough.
@Colin Wright I
have no doubt you're smarter than me, Colin. Your'e a pretty smart dude. I don't know about
Fran Taubman, though.
Statistically, there are far more smart whites than Jews by a huge margin. And I am not
even sure Jews are smarter than whites – I think the advantage in Jewish ways of
thinking are cultural. We don't buy into simple binary thinking like whites do, so remain
more intellectually supple and dextrous.
Anyways, one of the great things about Israel is that we can be more physical and don't
have to be so smart anymore. Oh sure, Israeli Jews are smart. They make good technology and
produce lots of great army officers and tactics and techniques, great conpanies, etc. But the
kind of cunning needed by diaspora Jews isn't so necessary anymore, and I've always been
struck by how maladroit and clumsy Israelis seemed on tv presenting defending Israel and the
like.
Hopefully, when I move to Israel ill lose another 10 IQ points or so, if I'm lucky.
Bliss.
@cyrusthevirus'What are you talking about. I just said there is a perfectly reasonable type of
anti-Semitism that is a natural response to group competition – the actions of Jews
themselves '
virtually all of said actions being perfectly reasonable -- according to you. Just group
competition.
Oh wait, you mentioned Bernie Madoff. How about, say, those actions that drove the
previously rather amiable Lithuanian peasantry into a murderous frenzy in the summer of
1941?
@AaronB'
It's like that will all groups. When Europe was very energetic and vital it produced
tremendous sinners and corruption while also people of tremendous benefit to society and the
world '
This is your typical glib generalization -- upon inspection, it seems to have absolutely
no basis in fact.
Several small communities have managed to produce people who notably helped mankind
without any concomitant output of villains. Norway comes to mind; how about Switzerland.
Conversely, other groups notoriously produce bad actors in abundance without ever offering
much of anything good at all in compensation -- Gypsies, for example.
So it's the purest nonsense to assert that Jewish villains are the necessary flip side to
Jewish saints. There's no rational reason to accept this statement.
That's one of the things that irritates me about you. You simply dream up and write
whatever sounds good -- without any apparent concern as to whether it's actually so or not.
It's like you could announce that in Israel, Jews grow to be an average of seven feet tall.
If it sounded good to you, you'd say it. It would never occur to you to check.
Truth Jihad / Kevin
Barrett October 27, 2019
7 Comments Reply Dr. Cynthia McKinney
got elected to Congress six times -- and soon found herself under attack by the Israel lobby
when she refused to sign the "pledge of allegiance to Israel" demanded of all
representatives!
The Lobby was able to eject Rep. McKinney from Congress twice, once in 2002 and again in
2006, by fabricating a primary opponent backed by the vast fortunes of the Zionist oligarchs
and the tireless energy of the 500,000-footsoldier "Zionist Power Configuration" or ZPC. (For
information about the ZPC, read Dr. James Petras's The Power of Israel
in the United States alongside Walt and Mearsheimer
, and then check out the documentary film
The Lobby .)
So are we allowed to discuss what "Jewish state" means? Can we explore the historical,
psychological, and cultural factors that led to the Zionist colonization of Palestine? The
Zionist Power Configuration says "no way!"
According to the ZPC and its attack-dog ADL, anyone who talks about such things is an
"anti-Semite" and should muzzled, deplatformed, and persecuted.
In this interview Dr. McKinney bravely goes where few if any former Congressional
representatives have gone before, speaking frankly about Israel's control of the US Congress
and other centers of power, and raising the taboo issue of the so-called
"Jewish question."
if motives can signal the future, the present convulsions in the US government signal that
America has been taken over by the Zionists who populate all avenues of US power structures.
It is inconceivable that Trump who has been up to now catering to AIPAC and the Israeli
lobbies and actors would be subjected to ignominy because he seems to want to abandon Syria.
But. let's face it, Israel wants mayhem to engulf Syria, an ally of Iran and the
Hezbollah.
American troops' withdrawal from Syria is seen as anathema by Zionists and Israeli
likewise.
The Jewish interests can pull numerous strings in America to prevent this from happening.
Trump is caught between a hammer and a nail. He wants to be reelected so he has to fulfill
his promises
to his bases. Bring the troops home and all this nice stuff.
But his Israeli masters will make life difficult for him as long as he is not pandering to
Israel's wishes.
There is a subtle game whereas the MSM assaults Trump but his actions are all in favor of
his MSM detractors. Actor or puppet remains to be elucidated. No tax on the rich, Jerusalem,
Golan Heights, the West Bank,, the Jordan Valley, all gifts to the criminal state of
Israel.
And then, sanctions on China? If Trump wants to return the industrial jobs to America, he
has to put tariffs on all imported goods, regardless of origin. Not only from Germany and
China because they are successful exporters to America.
He would also have to put a stop on the expatriation of capital to other countries in view
of reducing the ability of Wall Street to export jobs.
We do not see any of these actions from the WH so DJT is not the angel he wants to project
himself to be.
For the time being, his orders of withdrawal are freeing some of the Syrian territories
recently under US watch. The best thing for Syria is that it now has control over most of its
territory. Much to the disgust of Israel.
I can see that Israel's greatest wish is to see a conflagration between Iran and the USA.
There will be more false flags until one is so painful that Israel will be destroyed.
The Samson option is anti-Jewish. Will Israel bomb The City, New York and other great
congregations of Zionists?
"... Whilst the are absorbing that part of their country the battle of Iblib will restart. After that they can move their attention south and southeast, al-Tanf and the oilfields. I can't see how the US will be able to stop them but at least they will have time to plan their exit. ..."
"... At the moment the Syrian Government has enough oil, it is getting it from Iran via a steady stream of SUEZMAX tankers. The cost, either in terms of money or quid pro quo, is unknown. ..."
"... For those who have wondered as to why the DC FedRegime would fight over the tiny relative-to-FUKUS's-needs amount of oil in the Syrian oilfields. It is clearly to keep the SAR hobbled, crippled and too impoverished to retake all its territory or even to restore social, civic and economic functionality to the parts it retains. FUKUS is still committed to the policy of FUKUSing Syria. ..."
"... This President appears at times to recognize the reality of nation states and the meaning of national sovereignty. He needs to understand that on principle, not merely on gut instinct. President Trump's press conference today focused in one section on a simple fact -- saving the lives of Americans. Gen. Jack Keane, Sen. Lindsay Graham, and other gamers who think they are running an imperial chessboard where they can use living soldiers as American pawns, are a menace. Thanks Col. Lang for calling out these lunatics. ..."
"... During the 2016 election, Jack Keane and John Bolton were the two people Trump mentioned when asked who he listens to on foreign affairs/military policy. ..."
"... The crumbling apart is apparent. I don't know in what delusional world can conceive that 200 soldiers in the middle of the desert can deny Syria possession of their oil fields or keep the road between Bagdad and Damascus cut. All the West's Decision Makers can do is threaten to blow up the world. ..."
"... Corporate Overlords imposed austerity, outsourced industry and cut taxes to get richer, but the one thing for certain is that they can't keep their wealth without laws, the police and the military to protect them. ..."
"... Latin America is burning too - although the elites here have plundered and imposed structural plunder for too long. No matter where you are it .. Chile poster of the right, or Ecuador, Peru, etc ..."
"... Did you notice the Middle East Monitor article on October 21 reporting that the UAE has released to Iran $700 million in previously frozen funds? ..."
"... Yet in early September, Sigal Mandelker, a senior US Treasury official, was in the UAE pressing CEOs there to tighten the financial screws on Iran. The visit was deemed a success. During this visit she was quoted as saying that the Treasury has issued over 30 rounds of curbs targeting Iran-related entities. That would include targeting shipping companies and banks. ..."
"... It depends on who will be the democratic ticket .. will it mobilize the basis? I think the compromise candidate is Warren, but she looks to me a lot like John Kerry, Al Gore.. representing the professional, college educated segment of society, and that doesn't cut it. ..."
"... Trump is far from consistent. This is the man who attacked Syria twice on the basis of lies so transparent that my youngest housecat would have seen through them, and who tried and failed to leave Syria twice, then said he was "100%" for the continued occupation of Syria. ..."
"... He could have given the order to leave Syria this month, but Trump did not. Instead, he simply ordered withdrawal to a smaller zone of occupation, and that under duress. ..."
"... The Great Trumpian Mystery. I don't pretend to understand but I'm intrigued by his inconsistent inconsistencies. https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/03/17/trump-mysteries-inconsistent-inconsistencies/ ..."
"... It probably should come as no surprise to us that Trump is having small, but not no, success in getting the ship to alter course - too many deeply entrenched interests with no incentive to recognize their failures and every incentive to stay the course by removing, or at least handicapping the President who was elected on a platform of change. ..."
"... Whether the country elected the right man for the job remains to be seen. At times he appears to be his own worst enemy and his appointments are frequently topsy-- turvy to the platform he ran on but he does have his moments of success. He called off the dumb plan to go to war with Iran, albeit at 20 minutes to mid night and he is trying hard against the full might of the Borg to withdraw from Syria in accord with our actual interests. Trumps, alas, assumed office with no political friends, only enemies with varying degrees of Trump hate depending on how they define their political interests. ..."
"... Keane manipulated Trump by aggravating his animosity towards Iran, more specifically, his animosity towards Obama's JCPOA. I doubt Trump can see beyond his personal animus towards Obama and his legacy. He doesn't care about Iran, the Shia Crescent, the oil or even the jihadis any more than he cares about ditching the Kurds. This administration doesn't need a national security advisor, it needs a psychiatrist. ..."
"... IMO Trump cares about what Sheldon Adelson wants and Adelson wants to destroy Iran: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sCW4IasWXc Note the audience applause ..."
"... The difference between the reality that we perceive and the way it is portrayed in the media is so stark that sometimes I am not sure whether it is me who is insane or the world - the MSM and the cool-aid drinking libtards whose animosity against Trump won't let them distinguish black from white. Not that they were ever able to understand the real state of affairs. Discussions with them have always been about them regurgitating the MSM talking points without understanding any of it. ..."
"... "This administration doesn't need a national security advisor, it needs a psychiatrist." I think TTG speaks the truth. ..."
"... On Monday, 21 October, president Trump "authorized $4.5 million in direct support to the Syria Civil Defense (SCD)", a/k/a the White Helmets, who have been discussed here on SST before-- https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-press-secretary-89/ ..."
"... TTG IMO you and the other NEVER Trumpers are confused about the presence in both the permanent and appointed government of people who while they are not loyal to him nevertheless covet access to power. A lot of neocons and Zionists are among them. ..."
"... ANDREW BACEVICH: First of all, I think we should avoid taking anything that he says at any particular moment too seriously. Clearly, he is all over the map on almost any issue that you can name. I found his comment about taking the oil in that part of Syria, as if we are going to decide how to dispose of it, to be striking. And yet of course it sort of harkens back to his campaign statement about the Iraq war, that we ought to have taken Iraq's oil is a way of paying for that war. So I just caution against taking anything he says that seriously. ..."
"... That said, clearly a recurring theme to which he returns over and over and over again, is his determination to end what he calls endless wars. He clearly has no particular strategy or plan for how to do that, but he does seem to be insistent on pursuing that objective. And here I think we begin to get to the real significance of the controversy over Syria in our abandonment of the Kurds ..."
"... the controversy has gotten as big as it is in part because members of the foreign policy establishment in both parties are concerned about what an effort to end endless wars would mean for the larger architecture of U.S. national security policy, which has been based on keeping U.S. troops in hundreds of bases around the world, maintaining the huge military budget, a pattern of interventionism. Trump seems to think that that has been a mistake, particularly in the Middle East. I happen to agree with that critique. And I think that it is a fear that he could somehow engineer a fundamental change in U.S. policy is what really has the foreign policy establishment nervous. ..."
"... we created the problems that exist today through our reckless use of American military power. ..."
"... He let them roll him, just like Obama and so many others. Just a different set of rollers. ..."
"Joltin" Jack Keane, General (ret.), Fox Business Senior Strategery Analyst, Chairman of the
Board of the Kagan run neocon "Institute for the Study of War" (ISW) and Graduate
Extraordinaire of Fordham University, was on with Lou Dobbs last night. Dobbs appears to have
developed a deep suspicion of this paladin. He stood up to Keane remarkably well. This was
refreshing in light of the fawning deference paid to Keane by all the rest of the Fox crew.
In the course of this dialogue Keane let slip the slightly disguised truth that he and the
other warmongers want to keep something like 200 US soldiers and airmen in Syria east of the
Euphrates so that they can keep Iran or any other "Iranian proxy forces" from crossing the
Euphrates from SAG controlled territory to take control of Syrian sovereign territory and the
oil and gas deposits that are rightly the property of the Syrian people and their government
owned oil company. The map above shows how many of these resources are east of the Euphrates.
Pilgrims! It is not a lot of oil and gas judged by global needs and markets, but to Syria and
its prospects for reconstruction it is a hell of a lot!
Keane was clear that what he means by "Iranian proxy forces" is the Syrian Arab Army, the
national army of that country. If they dare cross the river, to rest in the shade of their own
palm trees, then in his opinion the air forces of FUKUS should attack them and any 3rd party
air forces (Russia) who support them
This morning, on said Fox Business News with Charles Payne, Keane was even clearer and
stated specifically that if "Syria" tries to cross the river they must be fought.
IMO he and Lindsey Graham are raving lunatics brainwashed for years with the Iran obsession
and they are a danger to us all. pl
If only General Keane was as willing to defend America and America's oil on the Texas-Mexico
border. Or hasn't anyone noticed that Mexico just a lost a battle with the Sinaloa drug
cartel?
I view them as selling their Soul for a dollar. Keane comes across as dense enough to believe
his bile but Graham comes across as an opportunist without any real ideology except power.
Its probably one step at a time for the Syrians, although the sudden move over the past
couple of weeks must have been a bit of a God given opportunity for them.
Whilst the are absorbing that part of their country the battle of Iblib will restart.
After that they can move their attention south and southeast, al-Tanf and the oilfields. I
can't see how the US will be able to stop them but at least they will have time to plan their
exit.
As I posted in the other thread, the Syrian Government is the only real customer for their
oil and the Kurds already have a profit share agreement in place, so the US, if they allow
any oil out, will effectively be protecting the fields on behalf of Assad. Surely not what
Congress wants?
At the moment the Syrian Government has enough oil, it is getting it from Iran via a
steady stream of SUEZMAX tankers. The cost, either in terms of money or quid pro quo, is
unknown.
I think this might be President Putin's next problem to solve. As far as I know, there is no
legal reason for us to be there, not humanitarian, not strategic not even tactical. We simply
are playing dog-in-the-manger.
My guess is that we will receive an offer to good to refuse from Putin.
For those who have wondered as to why the DC FedRegime would fight over the tiny
relative-to-FUKUS's-needs amount of oil in the Syrian oilfields. It is clearly to keep the
SAR hobbled, crippled and too impoverished to retake all its territory or even to restore
social, civic and economic functionality to the parts it retains. FUKUS is still committed to
the policy of FUKUSing Syria.
Why is the Champs Elise' Regime still committed to putting the F in UKUS?
(I can understand why UKUS would want to keep France involved. Without France, certain nasty
people might re-brand UKUS as USUK. And that would be very not nice.)
Because France wants to be on the good side of the United States, and as you indicate, the
United States is in Syria to turn that country into a failed state and for no other reason.
A good antidote for Joltin' Jack Keane's madness would be for Lou Dobbs and other mainstream
media (MSM) to have Col Pat Lang as the commentator for analysis of the Syrian situation.
Readers of this blog are undoubtedly aware that Col. Lang's knowledge of the peoples of the
region and their customs is a national treasure.
This President appears at times to recognize the reality of nation states and the meaning
of national sovereignty. He needs to understand that on principle, not merely on gut
instinct. President Trump's press conference today focused in one section on a simple fact --
saving the lives of Americans. Gen. Jack Keane,
Sen. Lindsay Graham, and other gamers who think they are running an imperial chessboard where
they can use living soldiers as American pawns, are a menace. Thanks Col. Lang for calling out these lunatics.
In WWI millions of soldiers died fighting for imperial designs. They did not know it. They
thought they were fighting for democracy, or to stop the spread of evil, or save their
country. They were not. Secret treaties signed before the war started stated explicitly what
the war was about.
Now "representatives" of the military, up to and including the Commander in Chief say it's
about conquest, oil. The cards of the elite are on the table. How do you account for this?
During the 2016 election, Jack Keane and John Bolton were the two people Trump mentioned when
asked who he listens to on foreign affairs/military policy.
The crumbling apart is apparent. I don't know in what delusional world can conceive that
200 soldiers in the middle of the desert can deny Syria possession of their oil fields or
keep the road between Bagdad and Damascus cut. All the West's Decision Makers can do is
threaten to blow up the world.
Justin Trudeau was elected Monday in Canada with a minority in Parliament joining the
United Kingdom and Israel with governments without a majority's mandate. Donald Trump's
impeachment escalates. MbS is nearing a meat hook in Saudi Arabia. This is not a coincidence.
The Elites' flushing government down the drain succeeded.
Corporate Overlords imposed austerity, outsourced industry and cut taxes to get richer,
but the one thing for certain is that they can't keep their wealth without laws, the police
and the military to protect them. Already California electricity is being cut off for a
second time due to wildfires and PG&E's corporate looting. The Sinaloa shootout reminds
me of the firefight in the first season of "True Detectives" when the outgunned LA cops tried
to go after the Cartel. The writing is on the wall, California is next. Who will the lawmen
serve and protect? Their people or the rich? Without the law, justice and order, there is
chaos.
Latin America is burning too - although the elites here have plundered and imposed structural
plunder for too long. No matter where you are it .. Chile poster of the right, or Ecuador,
Peru, etc
No doubt that Keane and his ilk want endless war and view Trump as a growing obstacle. Trump
is consistent: He wanted out of JCPOA, and after being stalled by his national security
advisors, he finally reached the boiling point and left. The advisors who counseled against
this are all gone. With Pompeo, Enders and O'Brien as the new key security advisors, I doubt
Trump got as much push back. He wanted out of Syria in December 2018 and was slow-walked.
Didn't anyone think he'd come back at some point and revive the order to pull out? The talk
with Erdogan, the continuing Trump view that Russia, Turkey, Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia
should bear the burden of sorting out what is left of the Syria war, so long as ISIS does not
see a revival, all have been clear for a long time.
My concern is with Lindsey Graham, who is smarter and nastier than Jack Keane. He is also
Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and may hold some blackmail leverage over the
President. If the House votes up impeachment articles, Graham will be overseeing the Senate
trial. A break from Trump by Graham could lead to a GOP Senate stampede for conviction. No
one will say this openly, as I am, but it cannot be ignored as a factor for "controlling"
Trump and keeping as much of the permanent war machine running as possible.
Trump has committed the United States to a long war against the Shia Crescent. He has ceded
to Turkey on Syrian Kurds, but has continued with his operations against SAR. US needs
Turkey, Erdogan knows that. Likewise in regards to Russia, EU, and Iran. Turkey, as is said
in Persian, has grown a tail.
Did you notice the Middle East Monitor article on October 21 reporting that the UAE has
released to Iran $700 million in previously frozen funds?
Yet in early September, Sigal Mandelker, a senior US Treasury official, was in the UAE
pressing CEOs there to tighten the financial screws on Iran. The visit was deemed a success.
During this visit she was quoted as saying that the Treasury has issued over 30 rounds of
curbs targeting Iran-related entities. That would include targeting shipping companies and
banks.
It was also reported in September that in Dubai that recent US Treasury sanctions were
beginning to have a devastating effect. Iranian businessmen were being squeezed out. Even
leaving the Emirates. Yet only a few days ago--a month later-- there are now reports that
Iranian exchange bureaus have suddenly reopened in Dubai after a long period of closure.
Also, billions of dollars in contracts were signed between Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE
during Putin's recent visit to the region. It seems to me that this is real news. Something
big seems to be happening. It looks to me as if there could be a serious confrontation
between the Trump administration and MBZ in the offing.
Do you have an opinion on the Iranian situation in Dubai at the moment?
I have my doubt that Sen. Graham will lead any revolt, but if it starts to look like Trump
will lose big next year, there will be a stampede looking like the Nile getting through a
cataract.
They will not want to go down the tube with Trump. I still maintain that there is a good
reason for him to resign before he loses an election or an impeachment. It will come down to
the price.
Lose big to whom in the next election? Biden got 300 people to show up for his rally in his hometown of Scranton and he is
supposedly the front runner. Bernie got 20,000 to show up at his rally in NY when he was
endorsed by The Squad and Michael Moore. Do you think the Dem establishment will allow him to
be the nominee?
Trump in contrast routinely can fill up stadiums with 30,000 people. That was the
indicator in the last election, not the polls. Recall the NY Times forecasting Hillary with a
95% probability of winning the day before the election.
As Rep. Al Green noted , the only way the Democrats can stop him is for the Senate to
convict him in an impeachment trial. Who do you believe are the 20 Republican senators that
will vote to convict?
Trump barely won the last time and while he currently has wide support in the GOP, it is not
nearly as deep as his cultists believe. When half the country, and growing, want him removed,
there is trouble ahead. Republicans are largely herd animals and if spooked, will create a
stampede.
You can tell that there are problems when his congressional enablers are not defending him
on facts and just using gripes about processes that they themselves have used in the past. In
addition to circus acts.
I realize that many do not want to admit that they made a mistake by voting for him. I am
not so sure they want to repeat that mistake.
It depends on who will be the democratic ticket .. will it mobilize the basis? I think the
compromise candidate is Warren, but she looks to me a lot like John Kerry, Al Gore..
representing the professional, college educated segment of society, and that doesn't cut it.
It's not a question if he barely won. The fact is he competed with many other Republican
candidates including governors and senators and even one with the name Bush. He was 1% in the
polls in the summer of 2016 and went on to win the Republican nomination despite the intense
opposition of the Republican establishment. He then goes on to win the general election
defeating a well funded Hillary with all her credentials and the full backing of the vast
majority of the media. That is an amazing achievement for someone running for public office
for the first time. Like him or hate him, you have to give credit where it's due. Winning an
election for the presidency is no small feat.
There only two ways to defeat him. First, the Senate convicts him in an impeachment trial
which will require at least 20 Republican senators. Who are they? Second, a Democrat in the
general election. Who? I can see Bernie with a possibility since he has enthusiastic
supporters. But will the Democrat establishment allow him to win the nomination?
We're no longer having to listen to Yosemite Sam Bolton. His BFF Graham is left to fight on
his own. I don't think Trump feels the need to pay that much attention to Graham. He didn't
worry about him during the primary when Graham always seemed to be on the verge of crying
when he was asked questions.
Trump is far from consistent. This is the man who attacked Syria twice on the basis of lies
so transparent that my youngest housecat would have seen through them, and who tried and
failed to leave Syria twice, then said he was "100%" for the continued occupation of Syria.
He could have given the order to leave Syria this month, but Trump did not. Instead, he
simply ordered withdrawal to a smaller zone of occupation, and that under duress.
What the Colonel calls the Borg is akin to an aircraft carrier that has been steaming at near
flank speed for many years too long, gathering mass and momentum since the end of Cold War I.
With the exception of Gulf War I, none of our interventions have gone well, and even the
putative peace at the end of GUlf War I wasn't managed well because it eventuated in Gulf War
Ii which has been worst than a disaster because the disaster taught the Borg nothing and
became midwife to additional disasters.
It probably should come as no surprise to us that
Trump is having small, but not no, success in getting the ship to alter course - too many
deeply entrenched interests with no incentive to recognize their failures and every incentive
to stay the course by removing, or at least handicapping the President who was elected on a
platform of change.
Whether the country elected the right man for the job remains to be seen.
At times he appears to be his own worst enemy and his appointments are frequently topsy--
turvy to the platform he ran on but he does have his moments of success. He called off the
dumb plan to go to war with Iran, albeit at 20 minutes to mid night and he is trying hard
against the full might of the Borg to withdraw from Syria in accord with our actual
interests. Trumps, alas, assumed office with no political friends, only enemies with varying
degrees of Trump hate depending on how they define their political interests.
With that said, I doubt very much whether the Republicans in the Senate will abandon Trump in
an impeachment trial. Trump's argument that the process is a political coup is arguably
completely true, or certainly true enough that his political base in the electorate will not
tolerate his abandonment by Republican politicians inside the Beltway. I think there is even
some chance that Trump, were he to be removed from office by what could be credibly portrayed
as a political coup, would consider running in 2020 as an independent. The damage that would
cause to the Republican Party would be severe, pervasive, and possibly fatal to the Party as
such. I doubt Beltway pols would be willing to take that chance.
I don't think Keane or Trump are focused on the oil. Keane just used that as a lens to focus
Trump on Iran. That's the true sickness. Keane manipulated Trump by aggravating his animosity
towards Iran, more specifically, his animosity towards Obama's JCPOA. I doubt Trump can see
beyond his personal animus towards Obama and his legacy. He doesn't care about Iran, the Shia
Crescent, the oil or even the jihadis any more than he cares about ditching the Kurds. This
administration doesn't need a national security advisor, it needs a psychiatrist.
And in response, Russia killed and captured hundreds of US Special forces and PMC's alongside
SAS in East Ghouta . It is said that the abrupt russian op on East Ghouta was a response to
the Battle of Khasham.
The difference between the reality that we perceive and the way it is portrayed in the media
is so stark that sometimes I am not sure whether it is me who is insane or the world - the
MSM and the cool-aid drinking libtards whose animosity against Trump won't let them
distinguish black from white. Not that they were ever able to understand the real state of
affairs. Discussions with them have always been about them regurgitating the MSM talking
points without understanding any of it.
While it will always be mystifying to me why so many people on the street blindly support
America fighting and dying in the middle east, the support of the MSM and the paid hacks for
eternal war is no surprise. I hope they get to send their children and grandchildren to these
wars. More than that, I hope we get out of these wars. Trump might be able to put an end to
it, and not just in Syria, if he wins a second term, which he will if he is allowed to
contest the next election. There is however a chance that the borg will pull the rug from
under him and bar him from the elections. Hope that doesn't come to pass.
No, they just have to sit there and be an excuse to fly Coalition CAPs that would effectively
prevent SAA from crossing the Euphrates in strength. Feasible until the SAA finishes with
Idlib and moves some of its new Russian anti-aircraft toys down to Deir Ezzor.
TTG IMO you and the other NEVER Trumpers are confused about the presence in both the
permanent and appointed government of people who while they are not loyal to him nevertheless
covet access to power. A lot of neocons and Zionists are among them.
Colonel Lang, I am well aware of the power seekers who gravitate towards Trump or whoever
holds power not out of loyalty, but because they covet access to power. The neocons and
Zionists flock to Trump because they can manipulate him to do their bidding. That fact
certainly doesn't make me feel any better about Trump as President. The man needs help.
you are an experienced clan case officer. You do not know that most people are more than a
little mad? Hillary is more than a little nuts. Obama was so desperately neurotically in need
of White approval that he let the WP COIN generals talk him into a COIN war in Afghanistan. I
was part of that discussion. All that mattered to him was their approval. FDR could not be
trusted with SIGINT product and so Marshall never gave him any, etc., George Bush 41 told me
that he deliberately mis-pronounced Saddam's name to hurt his feelings. Georgie Junior let
the lunatic neocons invade a country that had not attacked us. Trump is no worse than many of
our politicians, or politicians anywhere. Britain? The Brexit disaster speaks for itself, And
then there is the British monarchy in which a princeling devastated by the sure DNA proof
that he is illegitimate is acting like a fool. The list is endless.
CK, the people surrounding Trump are largely appointees. Keane doesn't have to be let into
the WH. His problem is that those who would appeal to his non-neocon tendencies are not
people he wants to have around him. Gabbard, for instance, would be perfect for helping Trump
get ourselves out of the ME, is a progressive. Non-interventionists are hard to come by.
Those who he does surround himself with are using him for their own ideologies, mostly neocon
and Zionist.
Bacevich interview:
> Andrew Bacevich, can you respond to President Trump pulling the U.S. troops away from
this area of northern Syria, though saying he will keep them to guard oil fields?
> ANDREW BACEVICH: First of all, I think we should avoid taking anything that he says at
any particular moment too seriously. Clearly, he is all over the map on almost any issue that
you can name. I found his comment about taking the oil in that part of Syria, as if we are
going to decide how to dispose of it, to be striking. And yet of course it sort of harkens
back to his campaign statement about the Iraq war, that we ought to have taken Iraq's oil is
a way of paying for that war. So I just caution against taking anything he says that
seriously.
> That said, clearly a recurring theme to which he returns over and over and over again,
is his determination to end what he calls endless wars. He clearly has no particular strategy
or plan for how to do that, but he does seem to be insistent on pursuing that objective. And
here I think we begin to get to the real significance of the controversy over Syria in our
abandonment of the Kurds.
> Let's stipulate. U.S. abandonment of the Kurds was wrong, it was callous, it was
immoral. It was not the first betrayal by the United States in our history, but the fact that
there were others certainly doesn't excuse this one. But apart from those concerned about the
humanitarian aspect of this crisis -- and not for a second do I question the sincerity of
people who are worried about the Kurds -- it seems to me that the controversy has gotten as
big as it is in part because members of the foreign policy establishment in both parties are
concerned about what an effort to end endless wars would mean for the larger architecture of
U.S. national security policy, which has been based on keeping U.S. troops in hundreds of
bases around the world, maintaining the huge military budget, a pattern of interventionism.
Trump seems to think that that has been a mistake, particularly in the Middle East. I happen
to agree with that critique. And I think that it is a fear that he could somehow engineer a
fundamental change in U.S. policy is what really has the foreign policy establishment
nervous.
> NERMEEN SHAIKH: As you mentioned, Professor Bacevich, Trump has come under bipartisan
criticism for this decision to withdraw troops from northern Syria. Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell was one of the many Republicans to criticize Trump for his decision. In an
opinion piece in The Washington Post McConnell writes, quote, "We saw humanitarian disaster
and a terrorist free-for-all after we abandoned Afghanistan in the 1990s, laying the
groundwork for 9/11. We saw the Islamic State flourish in Iraq after President Barack Obama's
retreat. We will see these things anew in Syria and Afghanistan if we abandon our partners
and retreat from these conflicts before they are won." He also writes, quote, "As
neo-isolationism rears its head on both the left and the right, we can expect to hear more
talk of 'endless wars.' But rhetoric cannot change the fact that wars do not just end; wars
are won or lost." So Professor Bacevich, could you respond to that, and how accurate you
think an assessment of that is? Both what he says about Afghanistan and what is likely to
happen now with U.S. withdrawal.
> ANDREW BACEVICH: I think in any discussion of our wars, ongoing wars, it is important to
set them in some broader historical context than Senator McConnell will probably entertain. I
mean, to a very great extent -- not entirely, but to a very great extent -- we created the
problems that exist today through our reckless use of American military power.
> People like McConnell, and I think other members of the political establishment, even
members of the mainstream media -- _The New York Times_, The Washington Post -- have yet to
reckon with the catastrophic consequences of the U.S. invasion of Iraq back in 2003. And if
you focus your attention at that start point -- you could choose another start point, but if
you focus your attention at that start point, then it seems to me that leads you to a
different conclusion about the crisis that we are dealing with right now. That is to say,
people like McConnell want to stay the course. They want to maintain the U.S. presence in
Syria. U.S. military presence. But if we look at what the U.S. military presence in that
region, not simply Syria, has produced over the course of almost two decades, then you have
to ask yourself, how is it that we think that simply staying the course is going to produce
any more positive results?
> It is appalling what Turkey has done to Syrian Kurds and the casualties they have
inflicted and the number of people that have been displaced. But guess what? The casualties
that we inflicted and the number of people that we displaced far outnumbers what Turkey has
done over the last week or so. So I think that we need to push back against this tendency to
oversimplify the circumstance, because oversimplifying the circumstance doesn't help us fully
appreciate the causes of this mess that we're in.
In addition to oil from Iran, Assad also gets oil from the SDF and the Kurds. Supposedly a
profit sharing arrangement as commented on by JohninMK in a previous post.
This oil sharing deal was also mentioned by Global Research and Southfront back in June of
2018:
Colonel Lang, the only way to "overthrow" Trump is through impeachment in the House and
conviction in the Senate. That is a Constitutional process, not a coup. The process is
intentionally difficult. Was the impeachment of Clinton an attempted coup?
In the first place isn't the dissolution of Ukraine and Syria and Iraq and Libya and Yemen
exactly what we have wished to achieve, and wouldn't an intelligent observer, such as
Vladimir Putin, want to do exactly the same thing to us, and hasn't he come very close to
witnessing the achievement of this aim whether he is personally involved or not? What goes
around comes around?
But that is relatively unimportant compared to the question whether dissolution of the
Union is a bad thing or a good thing. Preserving it cost 600,000 lives the first time. One
additional life would be one additional life too many. Ukraine is an excellent example.
Western Ukraine has a long history support for Nazi's. Eastern Ukraine is Russian. Must a war
be fought to bring them together? Or should they be permitted to go their separate ways?
As Hector said of Helen of Troy, "She is not worth what she doth cost the keeping."
After hanging up from a call to Putin, thanking him for Russia's help with the Turks, YPG
leader Mazloum Kobane returned to the Senate hearings in which he alternately reminded his
flecless American allies of their failure, not only to protect Rojava from the Turks, but
didn't even give them a heads up about what was about to happen and begged an already angry
[at Trump] Senate about their urgent need for a continued American presence in the territory.
It seems that some in the USG do not understand that all the land on the east bank of the
Euphrates is "Rojava" or somehow is the mandate of the Kurds to continue to control. For a
long time, now, the mainly Arab population of that region have been chafing under what is
actually Kurdish rule. This could be a a trigger for ISIS or some other jihadis to launch
another insurgency, or at the least, low level attacks, especially in Rojava to the
north.
To remind, the USG is not using military personnel, but also contracts, about 200 troops in
one field and 400 contractors in the other.
There is video of the SAA escorting the Americans to the Iraqi border. PM Abdel Hadi has
reiterated that the US cannot keep these troops in Iraq, as they go beyond the agreed upon
number. It is quite likely that the anti-Iranian aspect of the border region is NOT something
they wish to see.
"Iranian proxies" refers to Hezbollah, the various Shia militia groups from Pakistan and
Afghanistan, and of course, others, not the SAA.
Objectively this should be a death sentence for Trump reelection -- war criminals should
never be reelected: he proved to be yet another MIC stooge. And his government is not that
different form Hillarie's: it is the same government of lies by lies for liars (from MIC)...
"... "Based on the whistleblower's extensive presentation, including internal emails, text exchanges and suppressed draft reports, we are unanimous in expressing our alarm over unacceptable practices in the investigation of the alleged chemical attack in Douma," the experts pointed out. ..."
"... Bustani was quoted as saying he had long held doubts about the alleged attack in Douma, on the outskirts of Damascus. "I could make no sense of what I was reading in the international press. Even official reports of investigations seemed incoherent at best." ..."
"... Some dissenting officials as well as countries like Russia have accused the international chemical watchdog body, which operations in coordination with the UN, of being politically compromised when it comes to Syria. ..."
A whistleblower with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW),
responsible for conducting an independent investigation into the alleged chemical attack in the
Syrian town of Douma on April 7, 2018, has presented WikiLeaks with a body of evidence
suggesting the chemical weapons watchdog agency manipulated and suppressed evidence .
A prior official OPCW
report of the investigation issued last March found "reasonable grounds" for believing a
toxic chemical was used against civilians, likely chlorine. Long prior to any independent
investigators reaching the site, however, Washington had launched major tomahawk airstrikes
against Damascus in retribution for "Assad gassing his own people" .
WikiLeaks published documents based on evidence presented by the internal OPCW whistleblower
to an expert review panel on Wednesday. "The panel was presented with evidence that casts doubt
on the integrity of the OPCW," WikiLeaks editor Kristinn Hrafnsson wrote.
An official WikiLeaks press release said as follows :
Kristinn Hrafnsson took part in the panel to review the testimony and documents from the
OPCW whistleblower. He says: "The panel was presented with evidence that casts doubt on the
integrity of the OPCW. Although the whistleblower was not ready to step forward and/or
present documents to the public, WikiLeaks believes it is now of utmost interest for the
public to see everything that was collected by the Fact Finding Mission on Douma and all
scientific reports written in relation to the investigation."
"Based on the whistleblower's extensive presentation, including internal emails, text
exchanges and suppressed draft reports, we are unanimous in expressing our alarm over
unacceptable practices in the investigation of the alleged chemical attack in Douma," the
experts pointed out.
"We became convinced by the testimony that key information about chemical analyses,
toxicology consultations, ballistics studies, and witness testimonies was suppressed,
ostensibly to favor a preordained conclusion ."
The testimony further revealed "disquieting efforts to exclude some inspectors from the
investigation whilst thwarting their attempts to raise legitimate concerns , highlight
irregular practices or even to express their differing observations and assessments."
The new information was enough to convince José Bustani, former director-general of
the OPCW to conclude there is now "convincing evidence" of irregularities .
According to a summary of the latest controversy to cast doubt on the dominant mainstream
narrative related to Douma, Middle East analysis site Al-Bab noted Bustain
harbored prior doubts :
Bustani was quoted as saying he had long held doubts about the alleged attack in
Douma, on the outskirts of Damascus. "I could make no sense of what I was reading in the
international press. Even official reports of investigations seemed incoherent at
best."
Some dissenting officials as well as countries like Russia have accused the
international chemical watchdog body, which operations in coordination with the UN, of being
politically compromised when it comes to Syria.
"Because of my great wisdom as a stable genius, i launched major tomahawk airstrikes
against Damascus in retribution for Assad gassing his own people" .
I am Ironman!
Has he lost his mind?
Can he see or is he blind?
Can he walk at all
Or if he moves will he fall?
Tell that to the Syrians who were killed, both soldiers and civilians, as well as those
having to pay for the lost property that was destroyed. It was thrown out there, purely out
of thin air, that nothing of substance was hit and it was just a show by Trump, despite
reports by those terrorized by the attacks.
It's the same lying neocon **** that cried out "Darfur!"..."Donbass!"...the exact same
lying ****. **** them all to hell, I wish I could exterminate their voices forever.
The Gas Lighting, PsyOp & False Flags will continue until the masses are completely
Frightened & Brainwashed.
US Interference and Regime Change PsyOp
"Secret cables and reports by the U.S., Saudi and Israeli intelligence agencies indicate
that the moment Assad rejected the Qatari pipeline, military and intelligence planners
quickly arrived at the consensus that fomenting a Sunni uprising in Syria to overthrow the
uncooperative Bashar Assad was a feasible path to achieving the shared objective of
completing the Qatar/Turkey gas link. In 2009, according to WikiLeaks, soon after Bashar
Assad rejected the Qatar pipeline, the CIA began funding opposition groups in Syria."
Regime change is the only reason we or any of our proxies are there. We have NO GOOD
REASON being there other than this BS.
The US Congress has not approved the US being in Syria.
The UN Security Council has not approved the US presence in Syria.
President Assad of Syria did not invite the US or approve the US presence in
Syria.
Only the US deep state neocons have approved the US presence in the context of "regime
change".
I mean C'mon now? These Pure Evil War Criminal Treasonous Seditious Deep State CIA, MI6,
Mossad Psychopaths couldn't write up a different Scripted False Narrative PsyOp to sell to
the World & American People.
CHEM ATTACK PART III RETURN OF THE ASSAD.
The Lack of creativity among those in the Pentagram & Deep Staters is downright
pathetic.
Bolton was nothing more than a mere Agent of Chaos with his mission the for continuation
of the Yinon Plan.
I'd respect them more if they'd just said, "we seeking regime change to secure the better
interests of Israel, the US & World Community."
Wink, wink, nod, nod...those better interest are the Qatari Pipeline to provide continued
SA & Petro Dollar Hegemony among Vassel States. While simultaneously eliminating Russia's
& Gasprom's ability to supply European Oil.
Trump announced the withdrawal of US troops who had been protecting the SDF (Syrian
democratic forces) in the northeast of Syria, prompting Kurdish leadership and the Damascus
governed to strike a deal allowing Syrian Arab Army to retake control of the border with Turkey
after nearly six years.
... ... ..
Given that the deep state retains ultimate control of US foreign policy, Trump
is allowed to do and say what he wants – provided it is only within the confines of his
media playpen, safe in the knowledge that his motivations are purely electoral and not really
aimed and upending the foreign-policy consensus of the US establishment.
If we look beyond Trump's histrionics, we can see that the US deep state continues its
illegal stay in Syria, with Trump in reality having no intention of opposing the
military-industrial complex (indeed often appointing its members to serve in his
administration), with these two parties finding a common point of agreement in the alleged
threat posed by Iran.
US troops will only shift near Iraq, looking at disrupting any form of cooperation between
Baghdad, Damascus and Tehran.
Trump's Saudi and Israeli allies in the region have long been conspiring with the Pentagon
to bring down the Islamic Republic of Iran.
That said, the possibility of war with Iran does not align well with Trump's focus on
securing a second term. In any such war, Israel and Saudi Arabia would bear the brunt of
hostilities, making pointless their support for Trump. The price of oil would rise sharply,
throwing the financial markets into chaos; and all this would conspire to ensure that Trump
lost the 2020 election. Trump, therefore, has nothing to gain from war and will prefer dialogue
and negotiation with the likes of North Korea, even if it does not bear much fruit.
Trump's main problem lies in the long-term damage his actions and statements may do to the
credibility of the US empire. The photo-op with Kim was criticized by many in mainstream media
for giving credibility to a "dictator". But the anger of the military and intelligence
community really lay in leaving Washington with nowhere to go after Trump's threats of
annihilation only led to negotiations that did not go anywhere.
I have previously written about the effectiveness of Pyongyang's nuclear and conventional
deterrence, something well known to US policy makers, making them careful to avoid exposing
themselves too much such that Pyongyang calls their bluff, thereby revealing to the world that
Washington's bark is worse than its bite. To avoid such an embarrassing situation, Obama and
his predecessors were always careful to refuse to meet with the North Korean leader.
The United States bases much of its military strength on the display of power, advertising
its theoretical ability to annihilate anyone anywhere. By North Korea calling its bluff and
revealing that the most powerful country in the world cannot in actual fact attack it, the
projected image of American invincibility is thus punctured.
Similarly, when Trump announced the withdrawal of US troops from the northeast of Syria
(quickly downsized by the Pentagon), and above all gave the green light to Turkey to occupy the
area vacated, the political establishment and mainstream media swung into action to dissuade
Trump from communicating to the world that America does not stick with its allies. Even Fox
News, now siding with the Democrats, started giving wide coverage to Trump's impeachment story,
inviting in the process an angry Twitter response from Trump.
Trump is of course more than aware that a complete US withdrawal from Syria would go against
the interests of Riyadh and Tel Aviv, those who actually have an influence on him.
Turkey's aspirations to occupy the northeast Syria are part of Erdogan's strategy to improve
negotiating positions with Damascus and Moscow with regard to the jihadists in Idlib. Erdogan
hopes to be able to annex Syrian territory and fill them with the jihadists and their families
who lost the war in Syria and who otherwise pose the security risk of invading Turkey from
Idlib. Erdogan seems to have come to some kind of understanding with the US, which has hitherto
been the protector of the SDF.
Erdogan and Trump didn't seem to consider the possibility of the SDF and Damascus finding
common ground, but this is exactly what happened.
The Syrian Arab Army is now in the North East of the country, protecting its borders against
an invading army. Russia and Iran will try and convince Erdogan to downplay the operation in
exchange for some sort of arrangement regarding Idlib. The Syrian government in the near future
should be able to take back the rich oil fields, boosting its economy.
Turkey and the US have have for years armed and financed terrorism in the region, as have
Qatar and Saudi Arabia (in spite of their ideological differences). Even the Syrian Democratic
Forces (SDF) were involved in the destabilization of Syria.
All this chaos is ultimately supervised and directed by the United States, which has for
years been coordinating in the region color revolutions, the Arab Spring, and proxy wars. Any
other interpretation of events would be disingenuous and untruthful.
The withdrawal of US troops from Syria simply reinforces Damascus's position as the only
legitimate authority in Syria, undermines confidence of European allies in the US, and
emphasizes the consistency of Moscow's actions, which has always been opposed to Washington's
chaotic actions in the region.
Amidst this generalized chaos and confusion, Russia, Iran and Syria are trying to put the
house back in order again, which includes the international system where sovereign states are
respected.
The unipolarists have been suffering pronounced setbacks of late. The expensive air-defense
systems of the United States were shown by the Houthis in the last month to be rather
ineffectual; Saudi troops soon after this suffered a humiliating defeat in the south of their
own country; Washington saw its high-tech drone shot down by Iran; and numerous European and
Middle Eastern allies have lost faith in the US, as they watch factions fighting with each
other over control for US foreign policy
The US is the victim of a unipolar world order onto which it desperately hangs without any
thought of letting go, even as the rest of the world inexorably moves towards a multipolar
world order, one that becomes ever more difficult to subdue with every waking day.
75% of it is actually defending us from Israel's enemies. The rest is just the war/money
machine momentum.
Remember how back in the 70-80s they used to say we were the imperial oil power and all
this was for oil? that old saw doesn't work anymore because now we have the oil and we can
see through it. Back then we weren't fighting the enemies of Israel, we were fighting their
pals, the communists.
It's all about Israel. You know how you can tell? The old urban liberal jewish
intelligentsia war protesters (Abby Hoffman), the Hollywood liberal war
protesters......silent. The silence is deafening. They all know this is all about protecting
Israel and they don't lift a finger to stop it....they cheer it.
"... Liz Warren is a lecturer and scolder. While she polls well with college educated white women she does not have a great deal of appeal to minority and non-college white women. Her appeal to male voters is not good across the board. She does not produce the emotional appeal necessary to drive turnout. ..."
"... Also, her false claims of American Indian background makes her an easy mark for Trump's tactics. ..."
@renfro
I believe that the Israeli /Anglo Zionist goal was to either 1) destroy Iran or 2) being Iran
back into the Western orbit as a vassal state tied to the dollar.
Those two goals which once may have been attainable are no longer so.
Even Pentagon war planners know that their children would have to fight Iran and that war
with Iran would prove 100x tougher than Iraq.
China's Silk Road Offers seems to offer economic growth without vassal state status
@Counterinsurgency
I understand, and I am aware that you operate at a higher level of intelligence than most
here (including myself). I look forward to your insight's, although at times it takes me a
bit to comprehend your message. Keep up the good fight.
@jack
daniels Cutting Israel lose to feel morally pure, would would be nice, but cost plenty
and in my opinion too much. Feeling good about oneself is hardly worth destruction of the
anti China alliance before it even got off the launch pad . The Israel Lobby are a pain, but
we need them, because we need everyone all pulling together for the fight that is coming. Yes
it makes you feel dirty, but we are down here with the filth and worms not in an ivory tower
I believe that the Israeli /Anglo Zionist goal was to either 1) destroy Iran or 2) being
Iran back into the Western orbit as a vassal state tied to the dollar. Those two goals
which once may have been attainable are no longer so.
The goal of the civilized world is stop Iran from destabilizing and threatening the world.
Iranian al'Hezbollah occupies Lebanon and undermines the legitimate government. Iran is
trying to infiltrate Syria so it can be driven into failure like Lebanon. Iran is developing
nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to deliver them.
Iran can easily rejoin the civilized world of of it stops the violence against its
neighbors. Alas, Ayatollah Khameni is a sociopath. He does not care about the suffering of
the Iranian workers trying to survive in a collapsing economy. (1)
The Iranian rial official rate is set at 42,000 rials to the U.S. dollar, but its market
rate stood at around 115,000 against the dollar on Tuesday, according to foreign exchange
website Bonbast.com.
Iran's economy is expected to shrink by 9.5% this year, the International Monetary Fund
(IMF) said, down from a previous estimate of a 6% contraction, as the country feels the
impact of tighter U.S. sanctions.
@Daniel
Rich Thanks for your reply! Africans and Black people from the Caribbean can be kind,
respectful, and warm as long as their societies are intact.
I'd imagine that Donald Rich is familiar with these works and more, but here's a brief
popular literature / internet search for material concerning trading in sub-Saharan Africa
and the Third World in general:
and the Africans (indeed, third world countries worldwide) seem to have only one way of
coping. Looking at it from that angle, the Vietnam War was about throwing out the Chinese
businessmen and the French/Americans who were supporting them. See Chua's discussion of this
in _The World on Fire_
The universal group preference seems to be living in a society that the group has developed
for itself over a society that produces more goods and longer lives but is run by
foreigners.
@Counterinsurgency
A kick-off observation: Counterinsurgency's "screen name" is intriguing, and it suggests, to
me, a fellowship beyond that of a single commenter.
Broken Scranton greetings, Counterinsurgency!
Your following words make ominous sense but I cannot place my arms around what you
precisely mean when zeroing in upon "The current US system / world order."
Questions sprout from even keen ambiguity, so I politely ask you to provide an improved
definition of, "The current US system / world order." Hm. Is it in part the "US" maintaining
it's shaky reserve currency distinction, and it's attack/sanction every country that deserves
such?
And regarding the "US world order," one pauses to recognize that such is now become a
downsized & disputed residual of President G.H.W. Bush's "New World Order"
proclamation.
And then, a reader (like me!) becomes rather dazzled by a quasi-Nostradamus/Protocols of
Zion style prediction that all "will end within the next decade no matter what Trump does.
Trump is trying to shut it down with minimal casualties, and replace it with something
viable." Hm. Something "viable," eh, like City of Scranton's position, in the E.R.? Haha,
(Zigh)
No doubt alluring & as Johnny Walker Read attested in comment #229, "I am aware that
you (Counterintelligence) operate at a higher level of intelligence than most here (including
myself)." In addition, you comment as if operating with greater awareness & confidence of
what the hell is really going down. Impressive, !
But regarding noble & brotherly Amerikans who are willing to work toward a semblance
of national unity & salvation, there's a problem, Counterinsurgency.
The awesome ZUS government "system" prioritizes feeding the wealthy; for easy examples,
themselves, friends, oligarchs, multinational corporations, and of course Israel & the
M.I.C. (Zigh) Consequently, employed but oft still struggling average Amerikan subjects get
scraps which fall from off the national budget's indebted banquet table.
The USA population now endures an advanced engineered-experiment where a nation becomes
characterized by Haves & Have Not; in parable language, a "Rich Man & Lazarus"
divide.
Agreed, you're spot-on correct on Trump's main Executive job as limitation of casualties
during "the transition." Nonetheless, I respectfully suggest a crystal ball tune-up because,
& very regrettably, "the wind at Trump's back" blows from Tel Aviv, London, and AIPAC
headquarters.
Thanks, Counterinsurgency, and can you please offer a sunshine response?
@Counterinsurgency
Reasonably, and to Daniel Rich, Counterintelligence explained: "Africans and Black people
from the Caribbean can be kind, respectful, and warm as long as their societies are intact."
Above, & as you're aware, "societies" originate in packs/tribes." * In general, &
for lack of a better word, such entities permit themselves to be governed.
In the America where I grew up, there was a saying that "fish rot from the head."
Now, Counterintelligence, I indulge the word "fish" as a metaphor for submerged Amerikan
human beings. Okay? Fyi, haha, Jews are fisherman for consumable pools of 'Merikan Shabbos
goy carp.
When either packs/tribes or nations become governed by distorted & selfish leaders,
the collective entity rots & such process typically starts from the "head."
Now we arrive at Amerika's dreaded fate, and one which you described as President tRump's
managing a gradual engineered "transition." (Zigh) No doubt, the throwaway fish rots from the
head? Thanks, Counterintelligence!
P.S.: Sometimes during particularly glum "Homeland" moments, & instead of the tribe's
actual imposed governance, , I wish my country was ruled by the first ten (10) "kind" people
who are listed in Somalia's Yellow Pages.
* Try Jewish author, Elias Canetti's remarkable book, "Packs and Tribes."
Andrew Zimmern, the Jewish chef and celebrity who does a TV program called "bizarre foods,"
visited Syria in 2011 (season 6, episode 1) before the start of the civil war. Zimmern was
pretty apprehensive about the visit and says so at the beginning but he was won over by the
kindness and humanity of the Syrian people and the beauty of the country. It is a tragedy
what has happened there. I don't know how long the link below will be available, but see the
show for yourself.
I did not study US constitution.
I do have a question:
When Trump will be impeached, and Trump loose support in Senate and so he will be removed
from presidency, will he still be entitled to run in next election?
I did not study US constitution. I do have a question: When Trump will be impeached, and
Trump loose support in Senate and so he will be removed from presidency, will he still be
entitled to run in next election?
Your hypothetical will not happen. There is no chance of a Senate Conviction & Removal
during an election year. Then resulting internal fight would also wipe out the Republicans in
the House and Senate.
_____
That being said. The answer to your constitutional question is, "Yes". Neither House
impeachment nor Senate conviction is a bar to serving as President.
The only requirements to serve as U.S. President are found in two places:
Article II, Section I, Clause 5
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time
of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither
shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of
thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.
Amendment 22
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person
who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a
term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the
President more than once.
"Let's see what he actually does " , it appears that he's shuffling forces around and even
adding to them as John Feffer describes in his article : " Trump's Endless Wars" which
appears in the most recent edition of Informed Comment .
Feffer : " In fact , the Trump administration has deployed an additional 14,000 US forces to
the Middle East since the Spring , compare that to the 1000 troops he is withdrawing from
Northern
Syria . The President seems more intent on starting fires than ending them ."
@ChuckOrloski"the wind at Trump's back" blows from Tel Aviv, London, and AIPAC
headquarters.
Chuck -- thanks for the AIPAC mention.
AIPAC is a small but powerful political tribe within our nation. Clearly, we cannot leave
Syria because of AIPAC. When it comes to foreign policy – it rules America. Only 60
members of congress voted to leave Syria. Some 375 members voted with AIPAC, while most
Americans want us to leave. Is that not stunning? What political power.
No informed American can like AIPAC. It is time that we pacifically target AIPAC as a
coercive organization. Clearly, it is in the wrong – it is vulnerable. Those in
congress who support it like lemmings – also need condemnation.
p.s. Going after AIPAC has the added benefit of not attacking all Jews.
@TGDZimmern was pretty apprehensive about the visit and says so at the beginning but he was
won over by the kindness and humanity of the Syrian people and the beauty of the country.
The same is said by people who visit Iran. Rick Steves Travels Program – did a Iran
video – he had the same generous reaction about Iran.
Interestingly, Art recommended: "Going after AIPAC has the added benefit of not attacking all
Jews."
Agreed, Art, but with one major caveat.
As you know, the late-President JFK and Attorney General RFK wanted AIPAC's predecessor to
register as a foreign agent. ! Fyi, the young Illinois Congressman, Donald Rumsfeld,
articulated his opposition in writing to Bobby.
These days, invulnerable AIPAC must simply remind all standing ZUS presidents &
members of our Knesset Congress West about the severe risks involved in attacking AIPAC.
(Note: Regrettably, AIPAC doesn't hesitate to expel even Jewish Senators; for one example,
groping Al Franken, who also non amusingly "spilled the beans" about his family's having
received Odigo warning messages just prior to the 9/11 Manhattan-based attacks)
Thanks & my respect, Art!
P.S.: Sincerely wish RobinG was around so that I could be bitten, badgered, & charged
with defeatism.
So Democrats so jealously protecting Biden and whitewashing him they are only spinning
their wheels.
Slow wit Biden has no chance in hell to beat Trump. Trump will demolish him in every
debate.
Only Elizabeth Warren has a good chance to beat Trump. She is intelligent and authority
personality not like Biden, and she has clean record not like Hillary. Some of her ideas are
not worked out in detail, but they are of right direction. So I would assume that majority of
women will be voting for her. And that could make a difference
Only Elizabeth Warren has a good chance to beat Trump.
I would assume that majority of women will be voting for her. And that could make a
difference
Liz Warren is a lecturer and scolder. While she polls well with college educated white
women she does not have a great deal of appeal to minority and non-college white women. Her
appeal to male voters is not good across the board. She does not produce the emotional appeal
necessary to drive turnout.
Also, her false claims of American Indian background makes her an easy mark for Trump's
tactics.
IMHO, If the Dems want to beat Trump, their only option is Tulsi Gabbard. However the DNC
establishment hates her. It is hard seeing how she gets the nomination.
@Ilyana_Rozumova
On the presidential campaign prospects of Elizabeth Warren, Ilyana_Rozumova offered: "Some of
her ideas are not worked out in detail, but they are of right direction."
Hello, Ms. _Rozumova.
(Zigh) Re, above; So long as Elizabeth's evolving "ideas" continue to lean toward the
direction of the Western Wall, she might beat Likud's Chosen One, Trump.
Thanks for offering such a well worked out and "decent" delusion!
Selah, Former - unclean but authoritative DNC Chairman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, bolts after
having corralled The Bern's 2016 votes.
@Art
When congress claps its hands off, in a naked admiration for the leader of Occupied
Palestine, during 29 standing ovations, it was like a 'When do we leave Stalin's deathbed'
moment to me.
In most foreign countries MAGA = Make America Go Away.
I'd say, 'Take the country back and fly one flag."
@A123
In a country where celebrity status and showmanship are placed on the altar of normalcy,
people who actually make sense are not very well understood [not referring to Warren here].
So the ADL banned Red Ice & The Blue & White Gulag Roundup, Inc. is comin' to my
hometown soon, eh?
Da, Rodnoy brat geokat! Am delighted that "we," who regularly assemble here at U.R.
Comment-Department, have an ancillary threat warning system. Thank you, geo.
P.S.: Were Ron Unz whimsically responsive & less civilized, I would lobby for a
color-coded Zionist threat-level banner that constantly flashes atop the daily U.R. article
masthead, and flexibly changes according to dire political circumstance; i.e., fluctuates
from a pale Zion Red to a flaming Zion Red. One color needed, (Zigh)
@Cloak And
Dagger It is interesting that it has been a one way street. What could be happening is
that we are witnessing the growing great divide between American and Israeli Jewry. In
America the white man is the racist. Trump is associated with white nationalist in America.
Jews believe people of European descent can't be nationalist but the Israelis are going past
the American Jews' comfort zone with their openly racist policies. American Jewish kids don't
get conscripted in order to shoot brown kids and to help take their homes from them. In
Israel they do. In Israel the Jews are racist and are proud of it. There is a disconnect.
They encourage American Jews to visit and to feel connected with Israel but they don't have
them take up arms and shoot Palestinian kids as a right of passage. Jews in America are a
minority with a lot of political power but in Israel they rule and everyone else is a second
class citizen. What we are seeing on the left is the effects of this growing divide in the
experiences of the two populations. If Trump was Jewish they'd make him King of Israel.
Also many American Jews who are fine with Israeli racialism value the bipartisan
consensus. Trump will come and go but they hope that will last a very longtime. Netanyahu has
ruffled feathers by throwing his lot with Trump. Now that he maybe is down for the count they
hope that the new Israeli leader can project the right image and use the right rhetoric to
quell the rebellion on the American Left while continuing Israel's racist policies. They use
Trump's troop removal as proof that Netanyahu was wrong to support Trump regardless of all
the gifts Trump has bestowed onto Israel. Israel loves all those gifts but what they really
want is for Americans to die fighting Iran for them in order to weaken Hezbollah. Trump has
yet to do that but even if he did they'd still try to remove him from office.
@barr
What do you think of this? Pepe correctly identifies the "cultural misunderstanding" by
US/NATO. I just have a hard time believing that the Turks, right next door and with a forever
history, could be so deluded about Syria. Oh well, human folly.
Christians United for Israel hosted a summit on July 8, 2019 in Washington D.C. The summit
hosted the founder John Hagee, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and US Vice
President Mike Pence as speakers. However during the event, the Christians United for Israel
were confronted with over 100 Christian, Muslim, and leaders due to CUFI supporting the cause
of Israel occupation.
While holding banners, protesters retaliated against the cause by shouting "Zionism is
racism!" One of the main protesters that caught a lot of attention was Tarek Abuata, director
of Friends of Sabeel North American (FOSNA). Tarek Abuta shouted, "People of God, wake up!
Protect the Palestinian people." Other chants that were heard during the protest were ""Israel
kills children. Jews and Christians say no to Zionism."
Outside of the summit, many protesters blocked the entrance ways as well as some
intersections along the street by singing hymns, and reading the names of children killed by
Israel policies. [19]
"... "I'm getting us out of unnecessary foreign wars"......by appointmentIng the most pro-Israel, rabid Yosemite Sam lookalike warmonger ever! Makes perfect sense. 4D chess at its finest. Nobody is asking for perfection, but John ******* Bolton? The guy who was part of Project for a New American Century, John Bolton?.... the same guy who is buddies with all Bushites responsible for Iraq part one, part two and Afghanistan? **** me thats dumb. ..."
Message to Don: Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas. See what you get for playing nice
with neocon deep state shitbags like Bolton. Stop draining the swamp into your
administration.
I await the "trust the plan" and "keep your enemies closer" comments.
"I'm getting us out of unnecessary foreign wars"......by appointmentIng the most
pro-Israel, rabid Yosemite Sam lookalike warmonger ever! Makes perfect sense. 4D chess at its
finest. Nobody is asking for perfection, but John ******* Bolton? The guy who was part of
Project for a New American Century, John Bolton?.... the same guy who is buddies with all
Bushites responsible for Iraq part one, part two and Afghanistan? **** me thats dumb.
And how many wars has he gotten us into? And how many times has he been attacked for even
suggesting getting us out of wars?
Never-Trumpers want to pretend that Trump is a failure because he is NOT a dictator, which
only PROVES they are not conservative, as conservatives recoil at the thought of a
dictatorial unconstitutional monarchy.
Trump is fighting fort his life in this ******* swamp, a swamp we can see and smell from
our own living rooms. Only the retarded and ******* LIARS would attempt to condemn him for
not doing more. Retards who have done NOTHING more with their lives than BITCH about other's
failures.
Again, why did he hire him in the first place? WHY? Bolton is a VERY well known commodity.
You can keep making excuses for Trump all you want, but there's a pattern emerging here where
he hires horrible people, then tries to act like he's surprised when they **** him over.
To satiate those who demand war. Trump is in the ******* SWAMP. They are trying to impeach
him AGAIN. Do you really think he can do everything as hew wishes...especially when easily
half the republicans would throw him to the wolves tomorrow if there was self preservation or
gain in it for them?
Democrats don't want to know as it could impede their agenda, the ends fully justifying
the means.
Republicans don't want to know as they fear being tarred by the progressive assassin
media, their futures put at risk.
Ultimately Trump will be thrown to the wolves the moment republicans perceive him weak.
Thieves, assassins and cowards. Hell of group we have "leading" us.
The difference IS that Obama fulfilled his every banker's dream, whereas Bolton left
defeated, and now he and every other rat out there is gunning for Trump for ******* up their
dreams of eternal war.
Yes brilliant 4d move to invite the fox into the hen house. The real brilliant move
would've been to tear up his resume when came across his desk so he couldn't cause any
mischief. I get it though.... The diehard Trump people refuse except reality. It was
dumb....full stop.
Look at what they have done to virtually every true conservative Trump has nominated to
any position. They have destroyed every single one. Trump, given his choices, has put certain
people into the light for all to see exactly WHO they are. Trump is simply the most
illuminating president in history, exciting those around him to glow, to feel empowered and
allowed to show themselves without fear of consequence or accountability.
Progressives are conflicted horribly as they have always known that their true intents
were best left in secret, but with Trump, they simply cannot help themselves.
Simply LOOK at the 2020 democratic lineup. Who could have imagined just a few short years
ago that democrats would be finally coming out of the closet?
Looks like Us politicians adopted the stance: if you can't win against Israel lobby,
join... And yea we should talk about Zionists as a flavor of far right nationalism, nit about Jews, per se. The latter smells with
anti-Semitism as it accuses the ethnic group as a whole. Which is not only false, but also self-defeating stance:
Russophobia is "politically correct" anti-Semitism in the USA.
Notable quotes:
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is ..."
"... I would suggest to Phil Giraldi to talk about Zionists instead of Jews doing Israel's bidding. These Zionists adhere to the most racist and Apartheid ideology under the sun; Zionism. Not every Jew is a Zionist. Therefore it's an insult to those Jews who do not adhere to this wicked ideology and resist it. The notion of the right-wing Zionist regime in Israel to speak in the name of world Jewry should be rejected not only by the Jewish citizens of each country but by the public in general. It's amount to the hijacking of Jews in the name of a vile racist and occupation regime. Such a claim puts the local Jewish population in a precarious position, which could reproach in "dual loyalty." As Giraldi has pointed out numerous times, the majority of Americans have lost control of their Middle Eastern policy. A group of people whose loyalty to the US can cautiously describe as vague are in charge. ..."
"... I read in a sidebar on Antiwar.com that Sigal Mandelker was one of the attorneys representing Jeffrey Epstein in 2008. ..."
"... Mandelker was one of the DOJ officials who signed off on Epstein's sweetheart nonprosecution agreement. One suspects she was the superior of Alexander Acosta who told him that Epstein belonged to intelligence and was above Acosta's pay grade. ..."
Given Israel's clearly demonstrated ability to manipulate and manage American government at
all levels, there is inevitably considerable speculation about the presence of actual Israeli
citizens in the federal and state bureaucracies. Very often, lists that appear on the internet
focus on Jewish legislators, but in reality, few of them are likely to have Israeli citizenship
even if they regularly exhibit what amounts to "dual loyalty" sympathy for the Jewish state.
Nevertheless, Jews who are Zionists are
vastly overrepresented in all government agencies that have anything at all to do with the
Middle East.
There are, of course, some Jews who flaunt their identification with Israel, to include
current Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer who describes himself as "protector" of Israel and
former Senator Frank Lautenberg, frequently referred to as "Israel's Senator." One might also
include Rahm Emanuel, former White House Chief of Staff and mayor of Chicago, who reportedly
served as a
volunteer in the Israeli Army, and Doug Feith, who caused so much mischief from his perch
at the Pentagon in the lead-up to the Iraq War. Feith had a law office in Jerusalem, suggesting
that he might have obtained Israeli citizenship.
To be sure there are many non-Jews in the American government who have hitched their star to
the Israeli wagon because they know it to be career enhancing. One only has to observe in
action Senator Lindsay Graham, former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley and perhaps the most
revolting of all, Florida governor Ron DeSantis, who ran for office proclaiming that he would
be the most pro-Israel governor in the United States. After being elected he traveled to
Jerusalem with a large entourage of Zionist supporters to hold the first meeting of the Florida
state government cabinet. According to some authorities in Florida, the meeting was supposed to
be held in the state capitol Tallahassee and was therefore illegal, but DeSantis was undaunted
and made clear to observers where his loyalty lies.
Part of the problem is that Israeli citizenship is obtained virtually automatically upon
application by any Jew and once obtained it is permanent, only revocable by petitioning the
Israeli government. Nor is there anything equating to a list of citizens, so it is possible to
be an Israeli citizen while also holding American citizenship and no one would be the wiser. As
the United States permits American citizens to have multiple passports and therefore
nationalities there is, in fact, nothing in U.S. law that prohibits being both Israeli and
American.
Having dual nationality only a real issue when the policies of one citizenship conflict with
the other, and that is precisely where the problem comes in with Israeli dual nationals in the
United States, particularly if they wind up in the government. Frank Lautenberg, for example,
was responsible for the "Lautenberg amendment" of 1990 which brought many thousands of Russian
Jews into the United States as refugees, even though they were not in any danger and were
therefore ineligible for that status. As refugees, they received significant taxpayer provided
housing, subsistence and educational benefits.
Some other current officials in the government who may or may not have dual nationality and
are in policy making positions might include U.S. (sic) Ambassador to Israel David Friedman and
the recently resigned international negotiator Jason Greenblatt. Both have long histories of
pro-Israel advocacy to include supporting illegal settlements on the West Bank. And there is
also someone named Jared Kushner, whose ties to Israel are so close that Benjamin Netanyahu
once slept in his father and mother's apartment. If the metric to judge the actions – and
loyalty – of these individuals is their willingness to place American interests ahead of
those of Israel, they all would fail the test.
That said, there was one individual dual national who truly stood out when it came to
serving Israeli interests from inside the United States government. She might be worthy of the
nickname "Queen of Sanctions" because she was the Department of the Treasury's Under Secretary
for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (OTFI), who handed the punishment out and had her hand
on the throttle to crank the pain up. She is our own, unfortunately, and also Israel's own
Sigal Pearl Mandelker, and is its wonderful to be able to say that she
finally resigned last week!
OFTI's
website proclaims that it is responsible for "safeguarding the financial system against
illicit use and combating rogue nations, terrorist facilitators, weapons of mass destruction
(WMD) proliferators, money launderers, drug kingpins, and other national security threats," but
it has from its founding been really all about safeguarding Israel's perceived interests.
Grant Smith notes how "the secretive office has a special blind spot for major terrorism
generators, such as tax-exempt money laundering from the United States into illegal Israeli
settlements and proliferation financing and weapons technology smuggling into Israel's
clandestine nuclear weapons complex."
To be sure, sanctions have been the key weapon in the ongoing unending war against perceived
"enemies" like Russia and Venezuela, but they have been laid on most promiscuously in the case
of Iran, Israel's number one enemy du jour, which has also been demonized by Washington even
though it is no threat to the United States. And it should be recognized that sanctions are not
a bloodless exercise used to pressure a recalcitrant government. They disproportionately affect
the poor and powerless, who starve and are denied access to medicines, but they rarely have any
impact on those who run the government. Five-hundred thousand Iraqi children died from
sanctions imposed by President Bill Clinton and his vulturine Secretary of State Madeleine
Albright. Currently, Iranians and Venezuelans are dying, by some estimates in their tens of
thousands.
Once on a sanctions list administered by the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control
(OFAC) , there is no actual appeal process and no getting off the hook unless Mandelker
said so. And anyone who has any contact with the sanctioned entity can be in for trouble,
including American citizens who will find themselves no longer having rights to free speech and
association. The terms for violation of sanctions used by OFAC are "transaction" and "dealing
in transactions," broadly construed to include not only monetary dealings or exchanges, but
also "providing any sort of service" and "non-monetary service," including giving a
presentation at a conference or speaking or writing in support of a sanctioned group or
individual.
OFAC has a broad mandate to punish anyone who has anything to do with any Iranian group or
even any individual as Iran is considered a country that is "comprehensively sanctioned." To
cite just one example of how indiscriminately the sanctions regime works, Max Blumenthal
has
described how the FBI recently, acting under Mandelker's orders, warned a number of
Americans who had planned on speaking at an Iranian organized conference in Beirut that they
might be arrested upon their return.
Mandelker was born in Israel and largely educated in the United States. She is predictably a
lawyer. She has never stated how many citizenships she holds while repeated inquiries as to
whether she retains her Israeli citizenship have been ignored by the Treasury Department. It is
not clear how she managed to obtain a security clearance given her evident affinity to a
foreign country. The position that she held until last Wednesday was created in 2004 by George
W. Bush and is something of a "no Gentiles need apply" fiefdom. Its officials travel regularly
on the taxpayer's dime to Israel for consultations and also collaborate with pro-Israel
organizations like AIPAC, WINEP and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD).
Mandelker's predecessor was Adam Szubin and he was preceded by David Cohen and, before that, by
the office's founder Stuart Levey, who is currently Group Legal Manager and Group Managing
Director for global bank HSBC. Since its creation, OFTI has not surprisingly focused on what
might be described as Israel's enemies, most notably among them being Iran.
Mandelker was clear about her role, citing her personal and business relationship with "our
great partner, Israel." Referring to sanctions on Iran, she has said that "Bad actors need
money to do bad things. That is why we have this massive sanctions regime Every time we apply
that pressure, that crunch on them, we deny them the ability to get that kind of revenue, we
make the world a safer place." In support of the pain she is inflicting to no real purpose
other than to force complete Iranian capitulation, she cites alleged Iranian misdeeds, foremost
of which is its alleged threatening of Israel. She also condemns Iran's support for Syria's
Bashar al-Assad, who she claims has killed his own people with chemical weapons, an assertion
that has proven to be untrue.
Mandelker touted her personal history as a claimed child of the seemingly ubiquitous
"holocaust survivors." In a speech at the Holocaust Museum in April she claimed that her
parents went underground in Eastern Europe: "They were hiding underground, in forests, in
ditches and under haystacks. I grew up hearing their stories, including about moments of great
courage, some of which resulted in survival and others that ended in death."
To be sure, Mandelker and her predecessors have been going after Iran's money since the 1979
Islamic Revolution, constantly devising new restrictions and rules to make it hard for Tehran
to do business with any other country. In 2006 Levey's office began to focus on cutting off
Iran from the global financial system. Currently the Trump administration is applying what it
describes as "maximum pressure" in seeking to sink Iran's economy by blocking all oil exports.
Since May, any country buying Iranian oil has been vulnerable to secondary sanctions by
Washington, all set up and choreographed by Mandelker.
That Mandelker and company have been engaging in economic warfare with a country with which
the United States is not at war seems to have escaped the notice of the media and Washington's
chattering class, not surprisingly as Israel is a beneficiary of the policy. And the fact that
the way sanctions are being enforced against American citizens is clearly unconstitutional has
also slipped by the usual watchdogs. Sigal Mandelker was a prime example of why anyone who is
either an actual dual national or plausibly possesses dual loyalty should not hold high office
in the United States government and is a blessing that she is gone, though one imagines she
will be replaced by another Zionist fanatic. If anyone wonders why Israel gets away with what
it does the simple answer would be that there are just too many people at the federal level who
think that serving Israel is the same as serving the United States. That is just not so and it
is past time that the American public should wake up to that fact.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that
seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is[email protected] .
As refugees, they received significant taxpayer provided housing, subsistence and
educational benefits.
Including free Social Security, even though they never paid any money into that fund.
And it's not merely thousands, but hundreds and hundreds of thousands, all living off the
generosity of the American taxpayer. But Shhh, don't say anything, why that would be
anti-Semitic!
Talk about welfare Queens.
Those covered by the Lautenberg Amendment are eligible for Special Cash Assistance and
for Federal Public Assistance Programs including, but not limited to, Social Security,
Medicaid, Food Stamps, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
CRS statistics indicate that over 370,000 refugees were admitted from the Former
Soviet Union in the first ten years of the Lautenberg Amendment. In October 2002 the
Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported that "The Lautenberg Amendment allowed some 350,000 to
400,000 Jews from the former Soviet Union to gain entry into the United States without
having to prove they were individually persecuted." In 2010 the Hebrew Immigrant Aid
Society cited Eric Rubin, Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow stating
that the amendment had resulted in almost 440,000 refugees from the former Soviet Union
and other regions of the world.
*Eric Alterman made extended remarks in 2009 at the 92d Y, celebrating his dual loyalty:
"You know, one of the touchiest words you can say when you're discussing Jews and Israel
is the word dual loyalty. It's sort of one of those words that American Jewish officialdom
has ruled out of the discourse. If you say dual loyalty, you're playing into the hands of
anti-semites, because it's been a consistent trope among anti-Semites that you can't trust
Jews. etc. etc. And I find this very confusing because I was raised dually loyal my whole
life. When I went to Hebrew school, the content of my Hebrew school was all about supporting
Israel. When my parents who I think are here tonight sent me to Israel when I was 14, on a
ZOA [Zionist Organization of America]-sponsored trip it was drummed into me that I should do
what's best for Israel.
I was at the Center for Jewish History not long ago where I heard Ruth Wisse, the Yiddishist
professor at Harvard instruct a group of young Jewish journalists that they should think of
themselves as members of the Israeli army.
I am a dual loyal Jew and sometimes I'm going to actually go with Israel, because the United
States can take an awful lot of hits and come up standing. Whereas if Israel takes one
serious bad hit it could disappear. So there's going to be some cases where when Israel and
the United States conflict I'm going to support what's best for Israel rather than what I
think is best for the United States.
Then-editor of the Forward Jane Eisner: Can you imagine a time where you would feel that dual
loyalty and go with Israel?
Alterman: I just said, there are many occasions.
Eisner: Can you give us an example?
Alterman: I think that bin Laden and 9/11 were to some degree inspired by U.S. support of
Israel. I think a great deal of the terrorist attacks and the sort of pool of potential
terrorists who want to attack the United States are inspired by the United States support for
Israel. I'm not saying we shouldn't support Israel for that reason. I'm saying, Dammit if
that's the price we have to pay, then I'm willing to pay it. I'm just saying Let's be honest
about it.".>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Just think that what Alterman said is not condemned ..he suffers nothing for admitting
that he is basically a traitor who would sacrifice Americans for the Jewish state.
Unbelievable ..staggers the mind how this kind of Jew treason is so accepted in America
..just staggering.
How did this kind of treason come to be O.K. for the Jews?
It came from this kind of treason .. Nancy Pelosi Addressing AIPAC in December of last
year:
"I have said to people when they ask me, if this Capitol crumbled to the ground, the
one thing that would remain would be our commitment to our aid, I don't even call it our aid,
our cooperation with Israel. That's fundamental to who we are.""
If there was a terrorist out there worth a damn he would be bombing congress instead of
Wal-Mart's.
"'You can assume that these terrorists are fighting for Israel. If they aren't part of the
regular Israeli army, they're fighting for Israel. Israel has common goals with Turkey, the
United States, France, Britain, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other countries,' Assad was quoted by
Ynet" – https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4946010,00.html
Dammit if that's the price we have to pay, then I'm willing to pay it
Altermann is being slippery here, saying HE would be willing to pay the price of some
neoCONs or Zionists dragging the USA into another war for Israel.
What he should of said is that as a member of the Jewish dominated MSM, they are more than
willing to trick, deceive, bamboozle and pull us by our Star of David shaped nose ring into
endless wars for the glory of Apartheid Israel and if you disagree, why you're just a mouth
breathing, knuckle-dragging anti-Semite.
They need to live for 3 months in Israel (after attaining the correct visa) to attain the
citizenship, or a year of living in Israel for the passport (unless they changed this
recently or accelerated it).
What you are confused with is obtaining the repatriation visa and the temporary card. The
visa they can issue before people arrive in Israel, and the temporary identity card at the
airport. But those are only useful if you will live for the following months in Israel.
I would suggest to Phil Giraldi to talk about Zionists instead of Jews doing Israel's
bidding. These Zionists adhere to the most racist and Apartheid ideology under the sun;
Zionism. Not every Jew is a Zionist. Therefore it's an insult to those Jews who do not adhere
to this wicked ideology and resist it. The notion of the right-wing Zionist regime in Israel
to speak in the name of world Jewry should be rejected not only by the Jewish citizens of
each country but by the public in general. It's amount to the hijacking of Jews in the name
of a vile racist and occupation regime. Such a claim puts the local Jewish population in a
precarious position, which could reproach in "dual loyalty." As Giraldi has pointed out
numerous times, the majority of Americans have lost control of their Middle Eastern policy. A
group of people whose loyalty to the US can cautiously describe as vague are in charge.
"As the United States permits American citizens to have multiple passports and therefore
nationalities there is, in fact, nothing in U.S. law that prohibits being both Israeli and
American".
Although I have not checked recently, I am fairly sure that is not the whole story by any
means.
It is quite true that ordinary citizens can go a lifetime with dual nationality and feel
no pain. I am one such, as my parents were British by birth but I was born in Argentina. Like
the USA, Argentina grants nationality to everyone born there (or, perhaps more accurately,
claims such people as its citizens).
However I think you will find that US law forbids anyone with dual US-anything nationality
to serve as an officer (or perhaps in any rank) in the other nation's armed forces, or to
accept political office in the other nation's government. There may well be other
restrictions.
The exceptions I have pointed out are very relevant indeed to the dual US-Israeli citizens
mentioned in the article, as many of them have served in the Israeli armed forces. Indeed is
that not compulsory for any Israeli citizen resident in Israel)? Some of them have also held
political office, had civil service jobs, etc.
For such people to remain anonymous is a scandal and, frankly, a serious national security
risk for the USA.
"Israeli citizenship is obtained virtually automatically upon application by any Jew and once
obtained it is permanent, only revocable by petitioning the Israeli government".
Neat and effective. "It's a kopeck to get in, but a ruble to get out".
'OFTI's website proclaims that it is responsible for "safeguarding the financial system
against illicit use and combating rogue nations, terrorist facilitators, weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) proliferators, money launderers, drug kingpins, and other national security
threats" '
Doesn't the US government mind this office setting itself up against the power of
Washington?
Illicit use of funds – check.
Rogue nation – check.
Terrorist facilitators – check in CAPITAL LETTERS. (Also actual terrorists).
WMD – check. (No other nation's government still maintains nuclear, chemical and
biological weapons).
Money launderers – Hell, Washington is the world's biggest counterfeiter.
Drug kingpins – check, although that is mostly delegated to the CIA.
Other national security threats – check, Washington is a national security threat to
every other nation in the world except Israel.
To be sure there are many non-Jews in the American government who have hitched their
star to the Israeli wagon because they know it to be career enhancing.
It can only be career enhancing if whites allow it.
One only has to observe in action Senator Lindsay Graham, former U.N. Ambassador Nikki
Haley and perhaps the most revolting of all, Florida governor Ron DeSantis, who ran for
office proclaiming that he would be the most pro-Israel governor in the United States.
With the exception of Nikki Haley, who was appointed by an elected official, the other two
were elected by the majority white electorate. Jews have inordinate power in our country
because whites allow it.
To be clear any problems caused by Jews are the result of white insouciance.
I read in a sidebar on Antiwar.com that Sigal Mandelker was one of the attorneys
representing Jeffrey Epstein in 2008.
If it is true, then she,like Alexander Acosta, is guilty of breaking the law by entering
into judgement a plea deal without first notifying the plaintiffs of what that deal was, and
whether or not it met to their satisfaction.
The fact that it was MORE important to Mandelker to reward a child rapist/ pedophile with
a super sweet, totally cush deal , than to seek justice for his numerous victims , indicates
, with extreme clarity , she has no business working in our treasury department, let alone
our OFAC.
Individuals, who breach our laws and rules of ethics to ensure pedophiles and child
rapists are free to roam our streets, have no business working in the United States
Government, in any capacity.
The fact that both Mendaker AND Acosta were given prominent positions of power , with the
full awareness of their actions by those who appointed them, is very, very troubling.
It is simply NOT acceptable to the American People that there may be pedophiles and/or
child rapists serving within, and/ or influencing , our representative bodies.
The fact there has been no investigation into any of this, as well as Mandelkers
connection, is an absolute disgrace.
It seems to me, that until all the facts are clear, President Trump should order a "clean
sweep protocol" As soon as possible.
Child rapists , and their enablers , belong in only one place .and that is Federal Prison.
.
It is not just a matter of ethics it is a matter of National Security.
Zionists have thoroughly infiltrated and compromised the US Treasury. This is news. Watch
it be ignored.
Crypto-Israelis have captured (and partly converted) a US Federal agency for the purpose
of crippling the economies of any state that interferes with the far-flung agenda of global
Zionism. Their duplicitous mission borders on treason.
Using American resources to target Israel's far-away foes has nothing to do with advancing
the interests of the American people. To the contrary. It damages us economically and
strategically. It also undermines us domestically since these actions allow a foreign-based
faction to seize and exploit US power for its own nefarious ends.
Crypto-Zionist penetration of Washington is a backdoor assault on US sovereignty. We are
being parasitized.
Incredibly, Israeli influence over Washington has become so embedded that's it's now taken
for granted by Jews and acquiescing gentiles alike. Success in Washington now requires one to
A) fully understand (and respect) Jewish privilege, while B) never transgressing upon the
taboos that protect this indomitable group.
Indeed, just examining the range and depth of Jewish power in America is a forbidden topic
(except by Jewish scholars for a Jewish audience).
But for the rest of us, just noticing Jewish power is a risky enterprise. (So say
nothing.)
Officially, there's no such thing. Only Jewish victims.
Hapless Americans are confused. For Diaspora Jews however these artful deceptions
constitute a familiar gameplan. Organized Jewish subversion dates back to ancient Persia.
Jews celebrate it. (See: Purim)
Today, Israeli operatives are all over Washington, Wall Street, Hollywood and beyond. And
they're not the least bit ashamed about it. No siree. It's what they do.
Activist Jews are deeply committed to weaving Israel's economic and political needs into
the very fabric of American life. They are succeeding.
When Zio-America's corrupt, bloodthirsty, and over-extended empire finally collapses,
Diaspora Jews can simply cash in their chips and migrate to Israel. America's demise will
mark a new chapter in their glorious, wandering, drama-filled history.
Unfortunately, we goyim are expected to go down with the American ship.
To see just how 'entitled' the Jewish State thinks it is read these two articles. They
are aflame over Trump decision not to interfere in the Turkey Kurd dispute on the Turkey
Syrian border.
Speaking of aflame, I would recommend a third. It's an article by Yossi Alpher, who is a
former Mossad official and former director of Tel Aviv University's Jaffee Center for
Strategic Studies.
Concluding paragraphs from, What Trump's Withdrawal From Syria Means For The Kurds
– And For Israel :
At the end of the day, there are two basic lessons here for Israel and its supporters.
For anyone who has entertained doubts about the need for a state for the Jewish people, the
Kurds represent a tragic reminder. They are consistently being abandoned to an ugly fate
because they don't have a country.
The second lesson is that Israel cannot and must not depend on Trump. The cries of alarm
in Israel in recent days about a looming security threat do not only reflect lessons drawn
from Iran's (or one of its proxy's) spectacular attack on Saudi Arabia's energy
infrastructure. The alarms also reflect concern over the precedent set by Trump's refusal
to get involved militarily after Washington's Saudi ally was the victim of naked aggression
from Iran.
From that standpoint, America abandoning the Syrian Kurds is just icing on the cake of
Trump's Middle East non-strategy.
@alexanderMandelker was one of the DOJ officials who signed off on Epstein's sweetheart
nonprosecution agreement. One suspects she was the superior of Alexander Acosta who told him
that Epstein belonged to intelligence and was above Acosta's pay grade.
http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/how-israel-controls-its-narrative/
Email This Page to Someone
Remember My
Information
=>
List of Bookmarks
◄
►
◄
►
▲
▼
Remove from Library
B
Show
Comment
Next New Comment
Next
New Reply
Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc.
More...
This Commenter
This Thread
Hide Thread
Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They
are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My
Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Email Comment
Ignore
Commenter
Follow Commenter
Add to
Library
Bookmark
Toggle
All
ToC
▲
▼
Search Text
Case
Sensitive
Exact Words
Include Comments
Search
Clear
Cancel
It is interesting to note how the Israel
Lobby is able to manage and contain the commentary of groups in America that might normally be critical of
Israeli policies vis-à-vis the United States.
A recent article
by Professor Andrew Bacevich entitled "President Trump, Please End the American Era in
the Middle East" is a good example of how self-censorship by authors works. The piece appeared as one of
Bacevich's regular weekly contributions to
The American Conservative
website under the rubric
"Realism and Restraint."
The article particularly focused on the
foreign policy pronouncements of Bret Stephens, the resident neocon who writes for
The New York Times
.
Stephens, per Bacevich, has been urging constant war in the Middle East and
worrying lest
"we may be witnessing the beginning of the end of the American era in the Middle East."
Bacevich, unlike Stephens, is a genuine foreign policy expert, a realist, an Army veteran, and always quite
sensible. He correctly described how "in the Middle East, the military power of the United States has played
a large part in exacerbating problems rather than contributing to their solution."
The overall message is sound, but in
this case, it is interesting to note what Bacevich left out rather than what he included. It is easy to
understand the "realism" part when he writes and it is sometimes also possible to perceive the "restraint."
He cited Iran seven times as well as Saudi Arabia, but, strangely enough, he never mentioned Israel at all,
which a number of commenters on the piece noted. It rather suggests that there is a line that Bacevich is
reluctant to cross. The omission is particularly odd as Israel is absolutely central to and might even be
described as driving American policy in the Middle East and Bret Stephens, whom Bacevich excoriates, is a
notable Israel-firster who once worked as the editor of the
Jerusalem Post.
Almost everything
Stephens writes is basically a promotion of Israel and its interests coupled with a call for the United
States to do what it must to attack and destroy the Jewish state's principal perceived enemy Iran.
The reticence is perhaps understandable
as Bacevich is president of a newly organized group called the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft,
which
I have written about previously
, that will have its official launch in November. It claims to promote
"ideas that move U.S. foreign policy away from endless war and toward vigorous diplomacy in the pursuit of
international peace" and further takes some pride in being non-partisan though bipartisan might be a better
description. To be sure, Quincy's two major donors are the highly controversial George Soros on the
globalist left and the equally notorious Koch Foundation on the libertarian-lite right, which leads one to
wonder who is ordering the restraint when it comes to Israel. Or is it both of them as neither organization,
though very active in foreign policy, has indicated any desire to seriously criticize the many crimes of the
Jewish state. I appear to have accurately predicted in my earlier article on Quincy that " there will
inevitably be major issues that Quincy will be afraid to confront, including the significant role played by
Israel and its friends in driving America's interventionist foreign policy."
Indeed, anyone who wants to be a player
in Washington DC has to avoid the Israel hot wire. That it should be so is a tribute to the power of the
Jewish lobby coupled with the bulk support and Bible-belt votes of its brain-dead Christian Zionist spear
carriers. Congress, once described by Pat Buchanan as "Israeli-occupied territory," likewise knows whom not
to offend lest one be unemployed in the next electoral cycle. That is why criminalizing criticism of Israel
or support of a non-violent boycott of the country are regularly introduced in Congress and find themselves
with more than one hundred sponsors and co-sponsors. Nearly two dozen such pro-Israel bills are currently at
certain points in the legislative process,
including one
that will enable aggrieved Israelis to sue the Palestinian Authority (PA) in sympathetic
U.S. courts for damages, a move that will potentially bankrupt the PA.
And the colleges and universities have
not been immune from pressure to conform to the pro-Israel narrative. The White House acting through the
Department of Education is functioning as thought police on behalf of the Jewish state. It is currently
planning on withholding
some federal funding of the University of North Carolina and Duke because their
joint Middle Eastern studies program does not meet alleged government standards. The standards involved
relate to the fact that the program has had speakers and course content that can be construed as critical of
Israel and friendly to Muslims. The message clearly being sent to the schools by the Trump Administration is
that if you criticize the Jewish state you will be punished.
The drive to eliminate any pushback
against Israeli actions at colleges has been spearheaded by leading Zionist Kenneth L. Marcus, who was
appointed the Education Department's Assistant Secretary of Civil Rights. Marcus, who has worked as a paid
pro-Israel activist, has been urging the government to define the BDS movement as anti-Semitic and has used
his office to designate any Palestinian advocacy as a violation of Jewish students' civil rights.
The federal action to enforce
educational conformity on Israel is not exactly new as universities have long since been self-censoring,
just like Bacevich, normally in response to complaints by Jewish groups. To cite only one example, in 2013,
at nominally Catholic Fordham University in New York City,
a student group sought
to form a Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) club. Their paperwork advised
that their goal was to "build support in the Fordham community among people of all ethnic and religious
backgrounds for the promotion of justice, human rights, liberation and self-determination for the indigenous
Palestinian people." The applicants also revealed that they would support the Boycott, Divestment and
Sanctions (BDS) movement. Three years later, Fordham's Dean of Education denied the application because of
the support for BDS. The students took Fordham to court and in August of this year, three years later, a New
York judge finally struck down the decision as "
arbitrary
and capricious
."
So it took six years and a lawsuit to
enable a group of students to form a club that was admittedly political in nature but non-violent and
welcoming of everyone. So much for freedom of speech and association at America's colleges and universities
when they run up against the Israel wall.
What is less observed is how Israel's
message is promoted at the state and local levels. At the state level, anti-BDS legislation is now the rule
in 26 states, with some requiring government employees to sign a pledge not to boycott Israel. And the same
thing is happening among Boards of Education. Fourteen states now require holocaust education, where
students are compelled to read fiction like Eli Wiesel's "Night" while also consuming the established and
standard, largely fabricated, account of what the so-called holocaust was all about. In Virginia, for
example,
a shadowy
group
called the Institute for Curriculum Services (ICS), which is actually a "partisan group with
backing by state and local Israel advocacy organizations,"
is seeking to
change the information conveyed by the history and social studies textbooks used in K-12
classrooms across the state. ICS recommended changes include: "1. Emphasizing Arab culpability for crisis
initiation leading to military action and failure of peace efforts -- and never Israeli culpability, even when
it is undisputed historic fact. 2. Replacing the commonly used words of "settlers" with "communities,"
"occupation" with "control of," "wall" with "security fence," and "militant" with "terrorist." 3.
Referencing Israeli claims such as "Israel annexed East Jerusalem" and the Golan Heights as accepted facts
without referencing lack of official recognition by the United Nations and most member nation states."
The ICS is only one example of the
persistent Israel Lobby brainwashing of the American public on behalf of the Jewish state to completely
alter the narrative about what is going on in the Middle East. Taken all together, the self-censorship of
groups and individuals that wish to remain viable by ignoring the Israel problem, the criminalization of
non-violent movements like BDS, and the pressure on universities and schools to conform with positive
narratives about Israel means that any genuine understanding of that nation's war crimes and crimes against
humanity will, unfortunately, remain on the margins.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is
Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation
(Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
Website is
https://councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA
20134 and its email is
[email protected].
Academic freedom is a relatively simple principle. It refers to the "liberty to teach,
pursue, and discuss knowledge without restriction or interference, as by school or public
officials."
This principle seems to be under attack in America. The American administration has openly
interfered with the liberty to freely teach, pursue and discuss knowledge.
The New
York Times writes : "in a rare instance of federal intervention in college course content,
the department asserted that the universities' Middle East program violated the standards of a
federal program that awards funding to international studies and foreign language
programs."
According to the NYT the focus on 'anti Israeli bias' "appears to reflect the views of an
agency leadership that includes a civil rights chief, Kenneth L. Marcus, who has made a career
of pro-Israel advocacy and has waged a years long campaign to delegitimize and defund Middle
East studies programs that he has criticized as rife with anti-Israel bias."
One may wonder why America is willing to sacrifice its liberal ethos on the pro Israel
altar? Miriam Elman provides a possible answer. Elman is an associate professor at Syracuse
University and executive director of the Academic Engagement Network, which opposes BDS. Elman
told the NYT that this "should be a wake-up call what they're (the Federal government
presumably) saying is, 'If you want to be biased and show an unbalanced view of the Middle
East, you can do that, but you're not going to get federal and taxpayer money."
In Elman's view academic freedom has stayed intact, it is just the dollars that will
be withheld unless a university adheres to pro Israel politics.
Those who follow the history of Zionism, Israeli politics and Jewish nationalism find
this latest development unsurprising. Zionism, once dedicated to the concept of a "promised
land," morphed decades ago into an aspiration toward a 'promised planet.' Zionism is a global
project operating in most, if not all, Western states. Jewish pressure groups, Zionist think
tanks and Pro Israel lobbies work intensively to suppress elementary freedoms and reshape the
public, political and cultural discourse all to achieve Zionism's ambitious goal. After all,
Jewish power, as I define it, is the power to suppress criticism of Jewish power.
ORDER
IT NOW
This authoritarian symptom is not at all new. It is apparently a wandering phenomenon. It
has popped out in different forms at different times. What happened in the USSR provides a
perfect illustration of this symptom. In the early days of Soviet Russia, anti-Semitism was met
with the death penalty as stated by Joseph Stalin in
answer to an inquiry made by the Jewish News Agency: "In the U.S.S.R. anti-semitism is
punishable with the utmost severity of the law as a phenomenon deeply hostile to the Soviet
system. Under U.S.S.R. law active anti-semites are liable to the death penalty."
Germany saw the formation of Jewish anti defamation leagues attempted to suppress the rise
in anti Jewish sentiments.* There's no need to elaborate on the dramatic failure of these
efforts in Germany. And despite Stalin's early pro-Jewish stance, the Soviet leader turned
against the so- called " rootless cosmopolitan s." This
campaign led to the 1950s Doctors' plot , in which a group of doctors
(mostly Jewish) were subjected to a show trial for supposedly having plotted to
assassinate the Soviet leader.
In Britain and other Western nations we have seen fierce pro Israel campaigns waged to
suppress criticism of Israel and Jewish politics. Different lobbies have been utilizing
different means amongst them the adoption of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism by
governments and institutions. In Britain, France, Germany and other European countries,
intellectuals, artists, politicians, party members and ordinary citizens are constantly
harassed by a few powerful Jewish pressure groups. In dark Orwellian Britain 2019, critics of
Israel have yet to face the death sentence, but they are subjected to severe reprisals ranging
from personal intimidation to police actions and criminal prosecution. People have lost their
jobs for supporting Palestine, others have been expelled from Corbyn's compromised Labour Party
for making truthful statements. Some have even been jailed for satirical content. And as you
might guess, none of this has made Israel, its supporters or its stooges popular. Quite the
opposite.
I learned from the NYT that the administration "ordered" the universities' consortium to
submit a revised schedule of events it planned to support, a full list of the courses it offers
and the professors working in its Middle East studies program. I wonder who in the
administration possesses the scholarly credentials to assess the academic level of university
courses or professors? Professor Trump himself, or maybe Kushner & Ivanka or Kushner's
coffee boy Avi Berkovitch , or
maybe recently retired 'peace maker'
Jason Greenblat t?
It takes years to build academic institutions, departments, libraries and research
facilities. Apparently, it takes one determined lobby to ruin the future of American
scholarship.
*In his book Final Solution David Cesarani brings the story of the Centralverein deutscher
Staatsbürger jüdischen Glaubens (Central Association of German Citizens of Jewish
Faith) that operated in Germany since the late 19th century "suing rabble rousers for
defamation, funding candidates pledging to contest antisemitism " You can read about the
association and its activity here
' 'Those who follow the history of Zionism, Israeli politics and Jewish nationalism find
this latest development unsurprising. Zionism, once dedicated to the concept of a "promised
land," morphed decades ago into an aspiration toward a 'promised planet.' '
It is quite clear that this legislation is in breach of the U.S. Constitution and that it
sets a new standard for legislation designed to prevent any type of negative speech against
Israel.
You are flat out wrong Gilad.
There is a difference between criticism of Israel and racist talk. There has been a lot of
racist behavior towards Jews going on college campuses. Students have been thrown off student
boards just because they went to Israel on a birthright trip. University of California has a
Israel Apartheid week, where Jewish students face physical abusive. Three is a curriculum
course on called "How to eliminate Israel".
You have not followed American Universities closely and are taking one incident out of
context see below what happened at a pro Gaza conference at UNC, when a Palestinian rapper
got really racist.
Just fill in Jews for Black, Muslim, gays, etc. There is a big difference you refuse to
acknowledge because a lot of your followers are racist. Isn't that what we are talking about?
American Universities have trustees that donate tons of money. Here in NY. NYU lost a lot of
trustee money from Alumni because of harassment by the SJP of Jewish students. In California
Jewish students are routinely harass and bullied. Racism is racism, not about Jews.
Columbia University had Edward Sayed and now Rashid Kaledi. Both who were outspoken critics
of Israel, and continue uninterrupted. L
This is what the rapper sang:
"Let's try it together. I need your help. I cannot be "anti-Semitic" alone," Nafar said
before singing, "don't think of Rihanna when you sing this, don't think of Beyonce –
think of Mel Gibson. I'm in love with a Jew/Oh/I fell in love with a Jew/Oh/Her skin is
white and my skin is brown, she was going up, up and I was going down."
@Sean The Palestinians are losers, who do not want their own state but rather they want
the Jews gone. That is their entire raison d'être, not national sovereignty.
It is you who need to come out of the trees.
Every left winger wants to make the Pals out to be the natives who got kicked out. Not true,
there were always Jews in Palestine, which belonged to no one and was a province of the
Ottomans.
It is a stupid story. 70% of Israelis come from Arab countries not Europe. The Pals are not
the Native Americans, with a distinct culture and identity who were replaced by colonizers.
It is a bogus story.
Their leaders are Jihadist who want to murder Jews, if they wanted a state the whole thing
would have been over like 50 years ago. Look at those corrupt leaders, keeping the entire
population prisoners of their greed and lust for destruction. They care little for national
sovereignty if it involves sharing land with the Jews.
The Jews figured it out a long time ago, it is just a matter of weaning the global
community from the propaganda and showing people what a scam the Palestinian cause is. The
arabs have abandoned them a long time ago, because their cause was not sincere.
Do no blame the Jews for all the death and destruction in the ME. Muslims have their own
porblems.
Prior to 9/11 the consensus of experts on the Middle East, Islam, Comparative Religion, etc.
was that MI6 Zionist Bernard Lewis was an ignorant, extremist lunatic. When Lewis feuded with
Edward Said, the whole academy sided with Said, who was elected president of MLA in a
landslide.
The 9/11 neocon-Zionist coup terrorized the academy and made Lewis a mainstream guru,
advisor to Bush Jr. and bestselling author. Since then the insane Zionist party line, which
has always dominated in both liberal and conservative media as well as politics, has been
forced on the academy, whose experts are smart enough and knowledgable enough to know how
insane it is but what can they do?
Atzmon tips his hand when mentioning the so called "Doctors plot" by citing Zionist dominated
Wikipedia on the subject.
Wikipedia is certainly not a reasonable, unbiased source for anything of special interest to
Jews.
@MarkU Yes, "Sean's" comment is illustrative of an emerging tendency among sophistic,
pilpul-pushing Jews (and some shabbosgoyim) in comment strings.
One key feature that we see here is the traditional Jew resort to claims of inevitability
for whatever goal the Jew is pursuing. The Jew is on the "right side of history." And those
in opposition are sure to be on the losing side. Note also the employment of Trump-like
winner/loser dichotomy. The Jew looks at what "sells" to any particular slice of goyim.
"Sean" figures that Trump-style language and phraseology will have some appeal here and so he
uses these terms in his comment.
Of course, the Jew has been thrown out of every place he has every infested. He first
alienated the Greeks of the Hellenistic Eastern Mediterranean, then the Western Europeans,
then the Eastern Europeans, and ultimately in the 20th century, the Muslim world. So over the
longer historical term, the Jews doesn't really look like much of a winner. The things he
does to "win" get him expelled or exterminated. But he is counting on the short historical
memory of the goyim to render that reality moot.
The Jew's first inclination is to make a moralistic appeal. His sense of his own morality
is a dominant characteristic of the Jew psyche. But here, "Sean" appeals explicitly to Jewish
power–"the strongest power." The Jew understands that the destructive obsessions of the
Jew left (really, pseudo-left) and Jew Neocons have exhausted and alienated American goyim.
So now he is trying to jump off that train and onto the MAGA or nationalist train. This is
absolutely typical of how the Jew thinks and operates. He doesn't really believe in anything
except what happens to be "good for the Jews" at the moment and in the foreseeable future.
The Jew observes that MAGA Goyim who think this way are inclined to accept power realities,
so the Jew wants to appeal to that by asserting the overwhelming power of the Jew in the US,
which, he informs us for our edification, is the most powerful country in the world. The
message is that whether you like the Jew or not, his position is unassailable, so you might
as well give in to it.
Another characteristic feature of the contemporary faux-conservative scheming Jew is the
inclination to co-opt anti-immigration sentiment. Notice how he links the British Labor
Party, one of the Jew's current bogeymen, with immigration, which he assumes is an emotive
topic for MAGA goyim, in an attempt to make his enemy everyone else's enemy. Again,
this is typical Jew behavior.
The Jews would go berserk if Israel came to an end. Sorry but its not worth it, and we
have responsibilities to our own that come first.
"Sean" concludes with a final warning that Jew power must be accommodated and projects an
air of resignation. He also strangely appends two quotes from former Italian PM Giulio
Andreotti:
"We learn from the Gospel that when they asked Jesus what truth was, he did not reply.
"Power wears out those who don't have it"
Now who would know or take the time to come up with these pessimistic, even nihilistic
comments from an old, Italian politician? It could be an utterly dejected and morally
defeated Catholic–in theory. But it's much more likely that this is all a Jew's notion
of how to promote the idea of the power of Jewry and the powerlessness of those who oppose
Jewry's global scheming. The Jew says to himself, "Well if the goyim are focused on the
scheming of the Jews, then I will co-opt that focus to impress on the goy the idea that
resistance is futile–that Jew schemes are destined to succeed no matter what the goy
does."
TUR is clearly a place where a good deal of experimentation goes on–including Jew
experimentation in how to anti-Jewish sentiments–judo-like–for use on behalf of
the Jew.
This sort of conniving–double and triple games–is at the very heart of how the
Jew sees and behaves towards the goyim.
@Oscar Peterson Woha there bucaroo!
Sean does not represent classic Hasbara thought or ideas. Not. He is not a classic Jew a
phobic in his thoughts, and often strays from the message, so much so that we Hasbara Jews
scratch out heads.
Zionist Jews do not think the Palestinians got treated badly. They believe that the entire
story is a Jihad against the Jews in an attempt to wipe them out as a religion. Nothing to do
with land and or peace. That is the beginning middle and end of the story, and we care little
about the Palestinians and their cause, talk to the Jihadist and stop them from trying to
eradicate us.
The rest of your story is pure speculation and bullshit and Jews have little time to ponder
such far out thoughts as they are facing constant threats of annihilation from Islam.
You may disagree with my points, but lets at least stay on track.
Thoughts like this:
Yes the Palestinian got badly treated and are had their rights violated, I consider
myself under any obligation to be on their side, I am on the side of the traditional people
of the West in their own countries. For helping other peoples I need to see some benefit to
my people, who cannot afford altruism. The Palestinians bring nothing to the table and are
helpless. As someone pointed out to Giraldi the other day on RT one of the main reasons the
Palestinians are helpless is because the other Muslims of the Middle East have lost
interest in them. Now they are left with Iran.
"Sean" is clearly using standard Jew techniques of sophistic argumentation: Inevitability,
selling Israel with different pitches to different goy audiences, attempting to sell pro-Jew
intellectual schlock as a "package deal" with memes assumed to be favorably received by the
targeted goyim.
These are absolutely indicators of the Jew rhetorical style.
Now, whether Sean is ultimately a classically conniving, dishonest Jew or an
unconventionally conniving, dishonest Jew or a shabbosgoy who has learned at the knee of the
conniving, dishonest Jew or a hapless goy whom the conniving, dishonest Jew has succeeded via
his propagandistic efforts in demoralizing to the point of a Stockholm-Syndrome-style
recitation is not a fully resolved issue. But clearly, we can see that the Jew or his
influence has been at work here one way or another.
Beyond that, you have said nothing except that you don't like the post, which is not a
concern for me in any case.
"... The conservative movement's unwholesome obsession with Israel is not an entirely organic obsession to be sure. There is a whole lot of dark kosher oligarch money lurking behind the neoconservative cause, Christian Zionism, and the Reagan/Zioboomer battalion ..."
"... there is something awfully peculiar, almost disturbing about the old guard's infatuation with Israel. I mean, why are American boomers so concerned about the Jewish state and its survival? How exactly does a tiny apartheidesque ethnostate half-way around the world affect their everyday lives? Are they simply mind-slaves to a mainstream media dominated by powerful Jews and powerful Jewish interest groups? Is this all really about scripture as Christian radio likes to contend? Or is there something else afoot here? Well, in short, there is. ..."
"... White Westerners, white Americans in particular, are a thoroughly vassalized, deracinated people. We aren't allowed to celebrate our own race's host of historic accomplishments anymore. That would be racist. We aren't allowed to put our own people first either, as all other peoples do. That would likewise be racist. White Western peoples aren't even allowed to have nations of our own any longer, nations which exist to advance our interests, and which are populated by and overseen by people like us, who share our interests and our attitudes. That also would be, you guessed it, racist. Our very existence is increasingly little more than an unfortunate, racist obstacle to a brighter, more diverse future, in the eyes of the Cultural Marxist sociopaths who rule the Western World. Needless to say, most white Americans would rather be dead than racist, and so we are naturally, quite literally dying as a result. ..."
"... The white American psyche has been tamed, broken as it were. Ziocucking is a symptom of that psychic injury. ..."
"... White Americans can not, they must not, stake claim to an identity or a future of their own, so they have essentially committed themselves to another people's identity and future instead of their own. ..."
"... Actually, Donald Trump's electoral victory is at least partially attributable to a very similar psychological phenomenon. White Americans, who have largely lost the self-confidence to stand behind their traditions and convictions, still had the gumption to vote for a man who possesses in oodles and cringy oodles, the self-same self-confidence they lack. White Americans are thus engaged in an almost unstated, indirect, vicarious defiance of Cultural Marxism via Trump/Trumpism, a tangible, albeit somewhat incoherent, symbol of open revolt against Western elites. The repressed group will of whites is longing for an authentic medium of civilizational expression, but can only find two-bit demagoguery and Israel worship. The weather is not fair in the white, Western mind. ..."
"... After all, the birthrates of Jews in Israel are at well above replacement level . Israelis are optimistic about the future. As whites in the West fall on their proverbial sword to atone for their racist past, Jews in Israel are thriving. ..."
"... that unwholesome obsession will not dissipate until whites reclaim their own history, rediscover their roots, learn to take their own side, and demand a place in the planet's future (yes, I said demand , ..."
"... Until whites have a story and a spirit of their own, they will only, and can only, live through the identities and triumphs of other races. And perhaps most critically, they will continue to be a ghost people on the march to extinction. ..."
The conservative movement's unwholesome obsession with Israel is not an entirely organic
obsession to be sure. There is a whole lot of dark kosher oligarch money lurking behind the
neoconservative cause, Christian Zionism, and the Reagan/Zioboomer battalion. Nevertheless,
whether organic or not, the boomer generation's excessive regard for Israel is today authentic
and undeniable. A strong fealty to Israel is deeply entrenched amongst boomer-generation
conservatives. Indeed, when it comes to defending Israel and its conduct, many of these types
are like samurais on meth. They don't seem to care at all if their entire state or city should
devolve into a semi-anarchic New Somalia, but god forbid some Somali congresswoman should
lambaste the sacred Jewish state. That simply can't be countenanced here in the land of the
free!
Mind you, this article is not meant to constitute a polemic against Israel, or Jewish
ethnopolitics for that matter. The BDS movement is just as wrongheaded as Ziocuckoldry, in my
humble opinion. Although there is much wrong with Israel, there is plenty right with it as
well. Despite what the modern left may believe, there is nothing inherently illegitimate about
a state like Israel, one rooted in history, in genes, in religion, and in race. States built
around a shared ethnicity or a shared religion (or, as in Israel's case, an ample helping of
both) are generally more stable and successful than diverse societies erected upon propositions
most people and peoples don't really accept, or leftist values that have ideological quicksand
for their foundations.
With that said, there is something awfully peculiar, almost disturbing about the old guard's infatuation with Israel. I
mean, why are American boomers so concerned about the Jewish state and its survival? How exactly does a tiny apartheidesque ethnostate half-way around the world
affect their everyday lives? Are they simply mind-slaves to a mainstream media dominated by
powerful Jews and powerful Jewish interest groups? Is this all really about scripture as
Christian radio likes to contend? Or is there something else afoot here? Well, in short, there
is.
White Westerners, white Americans in particular, are a thoroughly vassalized, deracinated
people. We aren't allowed to celebrate our own race's host of historic accomplishments anymore.
That would be racist. We aren't allowed to put our own people first either, as all other
peoples do. That would likewise be racist. White Western peoples aren't even allowed to have
nations of our own any longer, nations which exist to advance our interests, and which are
populated by and overseen by people like us, who share our interests and our attitudes. That
also would be, you guessed it, racist. Our very existence is increasingly little more than an
unfortunate, racist obstacle to a brighter, more diverse future, in the eyes of the Cultural
Marxist sociopaths who rule the Western World. Needless to say, most white Americans would
rather be dead than racist, and so we are naturally, quite literally dying as a result.
The white American psyche has been tamed, broken as it were. Ziocucking is a symptom of that
psychic injury. Because white boomers possess no group/tribal identity any longer, or
collective will, or sense of race pride, or civilizational prospects, because they have been enserfed by a viciously anti-white Cultural Marxist overclass, they have opted to live
vicariously through another race. White Americans can not, they must not, stake claim to an
identity or a future of their own, so they have essentially committed themselves to another
people's identity and future instead of their own. Indeed, just as the cuckold doesn't
merely permit another man to penetrate his wife, but actually takes a kind of perverse pleasure
in the pleasure of that other man, in large measure by fetishizing his dominance and sexual
prowess, the Ziocuck likewise doesn't merely allow his civilization to be debased, he takes an
equally perverse pleasure in the triumphs of other peoples and nations, and by so doing
imagines, mistakenly of course, that America itself is still as free and proud a nation as
those foreign nations he fetishizes.
Actually, Donald Trump's electoral victory is at least partially attributable to a very
similar psychological phenomenon. White Americans, who have largely lost the self-confidence to
stand behind their traditions and convictions, still had the gumption to vote for a man who
possesses in oodles and cringy oodles, the self-same self-confidence they lack. White Americans
are thus engaged in an almost unstated, indirect, vicarious defiance of Cultural Marxism via
Trump/Trumpism, a tangible, albeit somewhat incoherent, symbol of open revolt against Western
elites. The repressed group will of whites is longing for an authentic medium of civilizational
expression, but can only find two-bit demagoguery and Israel worship. The weather is not fair
in the white, Western mind.
Through this sordid, vicarious identitarianism, threats to Jewish lives become threats to
their own white lives. Jewish interests become tantamount to their own interests. It is a sad
sight to behold anyhow, a people with no sense of dignity or shame, too cowed by political
correctness to stand up for their own group interests, too brainwashed to love themselves, too
reprogrammed to be themselves, idolizing alien peoples. Nevertheless, the need for belonging in
place, time, and history, and for collective purpose, doesn't just go away because Western
elites say being white signifies nothing but "hate". As white civilization aborts and hedonizes
itself into extinction, as whites practice suicidal altruism and absolute racial denialism,
atomized white individuals seek out other histories, other stories, other peoples to attach
themselves to and project themselves onto.
White Americans have thus foolishly come to see their own destiny as inseparable from the
destiny of a people whose destiny they don't really share.
After all, the birthrates of Jews in Israel are at well above replacement level .
Israelis are optimistic
about the future. As whites in the West fall on their proverbial sword to atone for their
racist past, Jews in Israel are thriving.
As whites in America suffer from various epidemics of despair , their fellow white
Americans seem more interested in the imaginary plight of Israelis who can't stop winning
military skirmishes, embarrassing their Arab enemies, and unlawfully acquiring land and
resources in the Levant. The actual, visceral plight of their own people seems almost an
afterthought to most white Americans. The whole affair is frankly bizarre and shameful.
This peculiar psychological phenomenon of vicarious identitarianism is at least partially
responsible for the Zioboomer's undying devotion to Israel. Furthermore, that unwholesome
obsession will not dissipate until whites reclaim their own history, rediscover their roots,
learn to take their own side, and demand a place in the planet's future (yes, I said
demand , since the white race's many enemies have no intention of saving a place for
them or willingly handing them a say in that future). Until whites have a story and a spirit of
their own, they will only, and can only, live through the identities and triumphs of other
races. And perhaps most critically, they will continue to be a ghost people on the march to
extinction.
A related phenomenon is Russia-cucking. White American conservatives who have seen through
Jewish bullshit often seem to conclude that the racial predicament in America is hopeless, so
they switch to Russia-cucking. Being pro-Russia is obviously more sensible than being
pro-Israel, but it's nationalism by proxy all the same.
Your work concentrates on Jewish guilt. There is another side of it that should be
considered: Jewish strategy has, at least since the end of the Napoleonic Wars, been good for
the Jewish financial oligarchy.
The current position of Jewish financial oligarchy worldwide is highly precarious. The
only Jewish state is small and surrounded on all sides by either sea or states that range
from hostile to at best neutral. States with nuclear weapons are among its fairly close
adversaries. Stability of the area depends on the United States, a Christian power (even yet)
that is severely weakened by two decades of war [1]. Jewish populations in the Middle East
are gone, and Christian populations in the area have been severely diminished in number.
Further, the population expansion that has been required to retain control of the Israeli
government by equaling the Arab birth rate has resulted in a very large highly religious
Jewish population that apparently is supported by welfare and believes so strongly in the
power of God that it relies on divine intervention for physical security and won't join the
IDF.
The only society that tolerates Judaism, Christianity, has been severely weakened
worldwide. It is being replaced by societies that in some cases do not tolerate Judaism and
in other cases treat Judaism as one of a number of competitors for foreign market dominant
minority.
During many years of writing about or describing the terrible damage that the "special
relationship" with Israel has done to the United States the question occasionally comes up
"Given the enormous power of the Zionist lobby, what can we do to bring about change?"
It is a simple question, though one that begs for multiple answers, but it also requires
some thinking about how the Establishment, better known as the Deep State, operates in America.
The American Deep State, which has as one of its dearest principles eternal nurturing of
Israel's interests, is actually a bundle of individual enterprises that together operate to
sustain policies that are mutually beneficial. Its epicenters include financial services and
faux news media in New York and the political hub in Washington, but it also is served by
Hollywood's entertainment plus propaganda machine.
And the three parts of the Deep State are essentially interchangeable, with generals and
intelligence figures ignorant of finance winding up in the KKR Global investment firm as has
General David Petraeus and Michael Morell in Beacon Global Strategies, while leading
representatives from Wall Street do a turn in government, particularly at the Treasury
Department. Television news and entertainment also feature celebrities from across the
Establishment while Hollywood draws on all of the above and works hard to make sure the
contrived narrative about American democracy and its wonderful "allies" is promoted at every
opportunity.
Which brings us to the Israel Lobby which is an integral part of the Deep State and in some
ways one of its most powerful elements as it has a foot in all the other components plus depth
that enables it to interfere in American government at the federal, state and local levels. It
is indisputably the driving force behind U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East and even beyond
as it enforces standards on alleged anti-Semitism and engages in Lawfare and other shady
practices to protect the Jewish state. It differs somewhat from other parts of the
Establishment in that it pretends to have no such power at all, a fiction that it preserves by
pretending that its actions are all in defense of U.S. national security against evil nations
like Iran. From the Lobby's expressed point of view, Israeli and American interests just happen
to coincide.
By some estimates, there are 600 Jewish organizations active in the United States that have
at least as part of their raison d'etre the defense of Israel and Israeli interests.
They are supplemented by Christian Zionist groups like Christians United for Israel (CUFI) that
claims seven million supporters. The leading predominantly Jewish organizations like the
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
(FDD) are largely funded by Jewish oligarchs and exist to promote Israeli interests, to include
pressuring the United States into attacking Iran.
The Israel Lobby groups are awash in money, with AIPAC alone having an annual budget of more
than $100 million and 200 employees, who are able to blanket Capitol Hill and actually write
legislation for lazy congressmen. The salary and benefits of its Executive Director Howard Kohr
exceed $1 million. Against that, no organization critical of the Israeli relationship has
resources sufficient to do anything beyond surviving at a basic level and trying to get the
message out.
So what to do? First of all, there is Congress. Pat Buchanan once referred to Congress as
"enemy occupied territory." He was referring to the Israel Lobby's ability not only to control
the discussion on the Middle East but also to focus its efforts to defeat any congressman who
dared criticize the Jewish state. Politicians like Paul Findley, Chuck Percy, William
Fulbright, Pete McCloskey, James Traficant and Cynthia McKinney, who were brave enough to stand
up against Israel, found themselves out of a job after confronting well-funded and media
supported opponents at reelection time, sending the message that it was career ending to do
so.
That would suggest that it must be regarded as a given that congressmen and women will be
terrified of saying the wrong thing about Israel, but the reality is not quite so simple. I
have had numerous contacts with congressmen through the years, first by way of government
Congressional Delegations (CODELS) when I was overseas with CIA, and more recently in
Washington at various conferences and meetings. A quite surprising percentage of legislators
were privately quite willing to express their dislike of Israel and its policies, though none
of them were brave enough to go public with such sentiments. Some of them even expressed their
desire to see the Israel Lobby effectively destroyed because of its corruption of America's
institutions, surely an admirable viewpoint.
That means that there is an audience in Congress even if it is essentially passive. American
citizens who wish to become involved but are disdainful of getting active in political
campaigns or in even dealing with congressmen should recall Plato's warning that "Those who are
too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber." A good
friend of mine from California who has worked the congressional circuit on Palestinian issues,
most recently in backing the
Congresswoman Betty McCollum bill opposing Israel's military detention of children,
believes that it is necessary to be persistent to get through. She calls her congressman and
tries to set up an appointment to discuss the Middle East, saying that she is available
whenever there is an opening in the schedule and is even willing to fly to Washington if that
works best. When she is predictably put off, she persists, calling again and again until she
gets an appointment. The appointment itself is usually with a staffer, but when she gets to the
office she pushes again for another meeting, this time with the congressman. She repeats the
process as necessary.
One might argue that one woman meeting with one congressman has virtually no impact, which
may on the surface be true, but it reflects a failure to understand how congress works. If that
same congressman gets twenty-five calls on one issue, it is highlighted by the staff and the
congressional office begins to pay attention. If there are a hundred calls it is treated
seriously. Surely in every congressional district in the U.S. there are one hundred activists
willing to bug congress on the issue of the Israel relationship and the wars and devastation
that it has brought. If everyone angry about Israel were to call his or her congressmen there
would be a panic on Capitol Hill to be sure, but major unrest over the lopsided and dangerous
relationship is exactly what is needed.One particular subject to raise with congressmen is the
issue of Zionist foundations' apparent immunity from having to register as foreign agents under
the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) of 1938. Russian media outlets have been forced to
comply even though they are in no position to advance policies favorable to Moscow. The Israel
Lobby, which even writes legislation favorable to its most favored nation, is only exempted
because congress and the White House fear confronting Jewish power.
For activists who identify with the political parties, in a like fashion putting pressure on
delegates to next year's nominating conventions would also be desirable. While the Republican
Party's hawkish representatives would almost certainly be difficult to approach in that
fashion, the Democrats could prove to be much more susceptible. There has been considerable
criticism of Israel surfacing among the Democratic base, not just from the "Squad in Congress,"
most of which is now more sympathetic to the Palestinians than to the Israeli occupiers. An
uprising by the party faithful demanding an open discussion of the blank check support for
Israel is not inconceivable and it would really shake up the status quo .
The same basic formula works with the media. Send in one letter-to-the-editor criticizing
Israel and you will be ignored. Send in letter after letter and one piece might eventually
appear. If one hundred newspaper subscribers are sending in letters, the editorial staff will
begin to take notice. This has, in fact, been a development in the mainstream media over the
past five years. Disenchantment with Benjamin Netanyahu and the horror that he represents has
been growing, so much so that the genie is out of the bottle regarding Israeli "democracy." As
a result, it is now possible to read op-eds and editorials highly critical of Israel even in
Jewish-owned Establishment pillars like The New York Times . But much, much more of the
same is needed.
Finally, people who want to be freed from the Israeli yoke should support organizations that
are seeking to do just that and have been in the front line of the struggle. There is my own
Council for the National
Interest as well as If Americans
Knew , The Washington Report and
IRMEP just for starters, supplementing the
activity of a number of groups that focus on Palestinian rights. Sites like the Ron Paul Institute and Antiwar are also excellent sources of information.
All such organizations do benefit from the support of activists who are willing to speak up
and protest over the brutal behavior of the Israeli government, particularly as the Israel
Lobby has turned the United States into a co-conspirator for the Jewish state's war crimes. All
the groups are active in holding seminars and speaking events nationwide, information which can
be obtained from their websites.
So, the message is that the Israel Lobby is powerful but it is not invulnerable. We have to
keep pounding on congress, the political parties and the media if we are ever to be unshackled
from the Israeli monster. We have to do it and even more because the very future of our country
and what kind of nation we will be is at stake.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest,
a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a
more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is[email protected] .
"... Under international law, a state is accountable for the unlawful actions of a proxy only if an organ of the state ordered the proxy to commit the act. It is not sufficient simply to have provided material support or even encouraged the unlawful act. For example, in the 1980s, the International Court of Justice found the United States not liable for Contra violations of international humanitarian law, even after concluding that the United States had "financed, organized, trained, supplied, equipped and armed" the Contras, even to the point of providing training materials that discussed "shoot civilians attempting to leave a town, neutralize local judges and officials, hire professional criminals to carry out 'jobs,' and provoke violence at mass demonstrations to create 'martyrs'." ..."
It's become standard procedure for the US and its MSM to consider that Iran is totally
responsible for all anti-US events in the Middle East because of actions by Iran's "proxy
forces" in other countries. While these events usually have more diverse objectives, it's
often Iran did this and Iran did that. But there's no legal basis for that.
Here's some words on proxy relationships from DefenseOne: (excerpts)
Iran's proxy relationships have given it an extraordinary ability to impose costs on its
adversaries while obscuring its role. Doing so allows it to manage its risks while
politically constraining its adversaries' response. It might seem intuitive to simply
declare Iran responsible, and satisfying to retaliate against it directly. But
international law sets a high bar for holding a proxy's benefactor responsible for the
actions of its proxy, making it difficult to build the kind of international consensus
necessary to the legitimacy for any retaliation.
Under international law, a state is accountable for the unlawful actions of a proxy
only if an organ of the state ordered the proxy to commit the act. It is not sufficient
simply to have provided material support or even encouraged the unlawful act. For example,
in the 1980s, the International Court of Justice found the United States not liable for
Contra violations of international humanitarian law, even after concluding that the United
States had "financed, organized, trained, supplied, equipped and armed" the Contras, even
to the point of providing training materials that discussed "shoot civilians attempting to
leave a town, neutralize local judges and officials, hire professional criminals to carry
out 'jobs,' and provoke violence at mass demonstrations to create 'martyrs'."
Setting the bar so high establishes perverse incentives. A state that employs proxies is
discouraged from moderating their behavior, since any attempt at moderation could imply
effective control, and even from acknowledging the proxy relationships. So without proof
that the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, which typically manages Iran's proxy
relationships, ordered or participated in the attacks, there is little for which Saudi
Arabia or the United States can hold Iran legally accountable.. .
here
In 2001, drones were just a distant dream. It also involves a chain of once in a lifetime
of human errors by at least three governmental institutions (CIA, FBI and Pentagon).
What the Houthi did in 2019 is not that far fetched. Drones are a much more developed and
cheap technology, and Saudi Arabia is a basket case of a country. Surprise is how much soft
power they did enjoy in the West, since many commenters here still insist Saudi Arabia is
some kind of fascist utopia that couldn't be tricked by a bunch of stone age cave dwellers
(which the Houthi aren't any way). Looks like the USA's aura of invincibility is
contagious.
Jackrabbit #16. Perhaps increased tensions are enough to get Nuttyahoo elected (which I think
fits with the supposition that this attack is false flag). However My guess is that the
Houthis will prosecute this war to the very doorsteps of the holy mosques in KSA and exact
immense retribution if they can. They are responding to 5 years of geocidal assault and
cannot but fight to the death.
Trump and his immaculate surrounds of holy zionists and pentecostal towel boys are in
thrall. Mesmerised by their inspired service to the holy writ. No doubt they consult daily
with their personal rabbi who talks through his fedora as O would have it. But they are
beholden to something evil and beneath the dignity of humankind.
Perhaps war will be avoided by dithering and too elaborate plotting but I still consider
that justice might manifest in a meteor strike on their heads.
Bacevich is wrong: it is all about the control of oil producing nations in the Middle East and the preservation "oil for
dollars only" regime (with the help of Israel as the forward base of the US imperialism in the Middle East)
Notable quotes:
"... In this piece, I want to draw attention to the systemic problem of "Iran expertise" in Washington, which is neither new nor limited to the hawkish political factions now running this country's foreign policy. ..."
"... I assert that the US foreign policy establishment[i] has collectively created a culture of expert impunity when it comes to Iran, which has contributed in no small part to the unstable and dangerous policy conditions we see under Trump today. ..."
"... Supporting Iraq in its foolhardy war with Iran in the 1980s proved to be strategically shortsighted in the extreme. It yielded vastly more problems than it solved. It set in train a series of costly wars that have produced negligible benefits. Supporting Saudi Arabia today in its misbegotten war in Yemen is no less shortsighted. ..."
"... Power confers choice, and the United States should exercise it. We can begin to do so by recognizing that Saudi Arabia's folly need not be our problem." ..."
"... Iran has a much longer history of managing pawns and vassal states than the USA. So too has Russia. Now replace 'Iran' with 'Israel' and you can recognise the belligerent initiator/opponent of the conflict. Trouble is that Trump is captive of the Israelis (and his petty ego) while being tormented and impoverished by all those countries that the USA invaded at the Israeli's behest. ..."
"... The dumb oafish response of the USA giant with its five eyes as it stomps about the planet enthralled by prospect of egomaniacle rapture is what endagers humanity. Leave the middle east and everyone else to their own conflict resolution I say. ..."
In this piece, I want to draw attention to the systemic problem of "Iran expertise" in
Washington, which is neither new nor limited to the hawkish political factions now running
this country's foreign policy.
I assert that the US foreign policy establishment[i] has
collectively created a culture of expert impunity when it comes to Iran, which has
contributed in no small part to the unstable and dangerous policy conditions we see under
Trump today.
"I am not suggesting that Washington is supporting the wrong side in Yemen. I am
suggesting, however, that neither side deserves support. Iran may well qualify as America's
"enemy." But Saudi Arabia is not a "friend," regardless of how many billions Riyadh spends
purchasing American-manufactured weaponry and how much effort Crown Prince Mohammed bin
Salman invests in courting President Trump and members of his family.
The conviction, apparently widespread in American policy circles, that in the Persian Gulf
(and elsewhere) the United States is compelled to take sides, has been a source of recurring
mischief. No doubt the escalating rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran poses a danger of
further destabilizing the gulf. But the United States is under no obligation to underwrite
the folly of one side or the other.
Supporting Iraq in its foolhardy war with Iran in the 1980s proved to be strategically
shortsighted in the extreme. It yielded vastly more problems than it solved. It set in train
a series of costly wars that have produced negligible benefits. Supporting Saudi Arabia today
in its misbegotten war in Yemen is no less shortsighted.
Power confers choice, and the United States should exercise it. We can begin to do so
by recognizing that Saudi Arabia's folly need not be our problem."
Iran has a much longer history of managing
pawns and vassal states than the USA. So too has Russia. Now replace 'Iran' with 'Israel' and
you can recognise the belligerent initiator/opponent of the conflict. Trouble is that Trump is
captive of the Israelis (and his petty ego) while being tormented and impoverished by all
those countries that the USA invaded at the Israeli's behest.
The dumb oafish response of the USA giant with its five eyes as it stomps about the planet
enthralled by prospect of egomaniacle rapture is what endagers humanity. Leave the middle
east and everyone else to their own conflict resolution I say.
Yeah, I'm reminded--again--of Milo Mindbender's racket in Catch-22 , which was 100%
greed driven. But we mustn't forget the vaunted Vietnam Syndrome assorted POTUS have set out
to quell. Trump just played on that theme today in a portion of his speech I cited. As
psychohistorian reported on the open thread, the next round of QE has commenced in an effort
to bolster Trump's electability--lots of that money just went to shorting oil. Tomorrow will
surely bring forth new revelations, accusations, and denials.
For any barflies in the vicinity, Iran opens "an exhibition of
hunted/captured drones in #Tehran from September 22 to October 7" that will draw more than
the curious. I'm sure pics will get tweeted.
https://english.almasirah.net/details.php?es_id=8810&cat_id=1
"Air Force of the Yemeni Army and Popular Committees, Saturday morning carried out a
large-scale operation with 10 drones, targeting Abqaiq and Khurais refineries east of Saudi
Arabia. The operation is called the 2nd Operation of Balanced Deterrence."
I've noticed many commenters here (probably Americans) have some kind of obsession cum
admiration with Israel. Like if it was some kind of super-State, a State above the States,
which controls the USA from behind the curtains and can never fail. Well, if this Aramco
attack was an Israeli deep state false flag operation to get Netanyahu re-elected, then it
didn't work out:
Even if Netanyahu nominally wins, he won't be able to form a government. For all its sui
generis history, Israel is still susceptible to the laws that govern the dynamics of the
traditional nation-State; it still has contradictions -- both domestic and foreign. It has a
demographic bomb, extremely high inequality, a high proportion of Arab population (most of
them assimilated Palestinians), etc. etc.
Yes, it punches above its weight thanks to the serendipity of having many Jewish
billionaires in -- of all countries -- the USA, who constantly lobby to align both countries
national interests. But the same is true for all the Western European countries, which, if
not for its colonial past/inheritance, would be insignificant micro-nations nowadays.
--//--
And now, an ally that doesn't have a dog in this fight doesn't appear to be that
interested in dancing to the American tune:
"We are not aware of any information that points to Iran," Japan's Defense Minister Taro
Kono told reporters at a briefing on Wednesday.
"We believe the Houthis carried out the attack based on the statement claiming
responsibility," he added, referring to the Yemeni group incorporated into the armed forces
fighting back a Saudi-led war on Yemen.
This is Japan's Defense Minister talking -- not some obscure, anonymous "inside officer"
or advisor without any legal power (e.g. Pompeo). The USA will have to negotiate Japan's
opinion on the matter. Wouldn't be surprised if some anti-South Korea and harsher measures
against North Korea comes from the USA in the next days if it really cares at this point
about what the Japanese think.
This attack on Saudi oil facilities has been perfectly timed for maximum benefit to impact
yesterday´s Israeli election result hopefully swaying voters towards the safest pair of
hands they know in times of war, poll struggler PM Bibi with his new US mutual defense pact
on the table.
10 Houti drones launched from the direction of Yemen plus an unknown number of likely
zionist owned cruise missiles adding muscle to guarantee success by piggy backing on that
attack.
If results differ from polls then it will have been a worthwhile deceptive action. Saudis
& US Frackers get the higher oil prices they need for their budget and perhaps Lloyds of
London the 9-11 big losers are also on the hook for rebuilding Saudi´s ruined
plant.
Russia gets to sell Saudis defensive systems and America gets a recession with higher oil
prices and Trump´s chances of re-election take a nose dive just days after Bolton
resigned.
The Israelis did it! Way too many intentionally unanswered questions about launch and
incoming direction. We have capability to find and examine a knat from outer space. But do
not know origin or position of launch? A few reasons for event.
1. Reelect Satanyahu. And keep him out of jail.
2. Continue the Yinon plan -- conquer the territory from the brook of Egypt (the Nile
River) to the Euphrates River, and NEVER allow the peace word to be uttered.
3. Every time Iran makes any suggestion of negotiations with the US, create an event that
snuffs out any peace effort.
4. Mollify the criminals of Saudis and Israelis who believe that the iron is hot, and this
may be their last good chance to take out Iran.
The only buffer against the warmongering Israeli Zionist faction that is restraining war
now is the overpowering side of Judaism (the Rothschild Group) who do not want war that will
blow up their world assets. And they still control most of the Israeli intelligence.
after nearly everybody converges in agreeing the attack came from the ragtag houthis... let s
see the overal fall out of the episode.
1- Saudi Arabia's country is vulnerable, the king s assets are very vulnerable from now
on...
2-the US protection, US weapons and promises are close to a monstrous pile of shit;
3-Leaders all along the ME, Africa and else where are learning how to evaluate the
American friendship and alliances
4-If and to the extent where the Salman's entourage manages to quickly recover the Saudi
oil supply... Iran and Houthis will can quietly and accordingly assess and improve their
weapons and strategies for the future.
While early Zionism was a desperate attempt to divorce the Jews from the ghetto and
their tribal obsession and make them "people like all other people,"
Zionist wanting to make Jews 'like all other people' by giving them a Jew ruled only
state to get away from non Jews is as contradictory as 'Israel is Jewish and
Democratic.'
You're never going to find logical thinking in Jews.
I'm afraid you've lost me with this one. Let's start with this:
' While early Zionism was a desperate attempt to divorce the Jews from the ghetto and
their tribal obsession and make them "people like all other people," the present adherence
to Jewishness and kinship induces a return to Judeo-centric chauvinism '
I'm afraid I don't see the distinction. As I mentioned a while back, I see Zionism as the
Jewish response to the racial nationalism that dominated thinking in Europe in the second
half of the nineteenth century. There were Frenchmen, and they had France. There were
Germans, and they had Germany. There were Greeks, and they had Greece. There were Jews, and
they should have a Jewish state.
In all of these, the nation, its land, and the ethnic entity that was its people were
perceived as indivisible -- and in point of fact, many previously amiably accepted ethnic
minorities found themselves persecuted in consequence. The Poles under Prussian rule are an
example: perfectly welcome in Frederick the Great's Prussia, but repeatedly targeted in
Wilhelmine Germany.
It had become nonsense to speak of a 'German' who wasn't German by birth, a Turk who
wasn't Turkish, etc, etc. So how would Zionism -- the Jewish equivalent of all this -- be
distinct from 'Judeo-centric chauvinism'? And indeed, in the new dispensation, Jews were
forced to choose between assimilation and Zionism; they could be 'Hungarians (or whatever) of
the Mosaic faith' or they could be Zionists -- the traditional Jewish identity had become
obsolete.
What form could 'Judeo-centric chauvinism' have taken but Zionism? Aren't the two one and
the same?
Thanks Gilad for your courageous work. I think we should always remember the ordinary Jews,
the grocers, the tailors, and all the others who have lived ordinary lives and suffered due
to the activities of their elites. We should remember the radical Jews and the artists like
Cohen, Dylan and Lou Reid to mention just a few. I could make a case that the English
elites have caused just as much trouble as elite Jews. In fact, it was the meeting of English
and Jewish elites that created the British empire.
@Iron
Lion Zion "The dichotomy of Israeli vs Jew is rhetoric from the Israeli radical-left."
well, perhaps the survey cited was invalid -- the one concerning how Jews/Israelis
self-identified.
ASAIK the original Zionist idea, or the most powerful version of it in the 20th century,
was Jabotinsky's Revisionist Zionism, which was a secular movement.
If no one in Israel any longer gives even lip service to this concept, then that is indeed
a big change. And, we have read at this site and elsewhere of the takeover of the Israeli
state by the orthodox. Pushback on this explains the stance of Avigdor Liberman and his party
members. Many of which are Russian jews who do not want to support their orthodox countrymen
and -women, who are becoming demographically overrepresented but will not serve in the armed
forces, etc.These issues were written about at this site recently. I think under the title
"the End of Israel."
Certainly that contributoin suggests that what it means to be a Jew/Israeli is changing
and that it is the Israeli "left" that is trying to maintain some kind of image of a secular
Jew who is an Israeli citizen, but is going against the contemporary flow in this effort.
@Colin
Wright The Greeks, French, Germans (etc.) that you cite were people who lived within
national borders, spoke Greek, French, German etc., were educated in these countries and
voted and fought for them (including jews) – but had many different backgrounds and a
variety of religions, though of course predominately Christian. In Europe a country define
themselves by their culture, not by 'race'. i.e. their history, language, philosophy, arts
etc.
'Race' is a jewish divide-and-rule political tool to make up for the fact that:
Judaism is simply a belief (or, rather lifestyle) system – literally a set of life
style proscriptions they call 'laws' and not technically a religion since it contains no
universal, philosophic or transcendental content.
The problem for jews is what is now called judaism, which was born after Christ and
born out of opposition to Christi anity. It is in fact not a religion but a
political movement, anti-faith and anti-religion and anti-love of humankind.
Driven by oppositionalism, they were great proselytisers. People of many different
backgrounds converted to judaism, from Ethiopians to Turkic tribes. Thus there is no "jewish
nation". There is no jewish culture either as is evidenced by jews' meagre contribution to
the arts, philosophy. There wasn't even a jewish language until hebrew was revived /
re-invented all too recently and for political reasons.
Yiddish is a true language of jews if there is one – but it is merely a dialect, not a
standalone.
The Germans destroyed themselves by falling into the jewish anti-Christian, 'racialist'
trap. To aid the Germans in WW2 you had to agree to be an unter-menschen and recognise
Germans as your uber-menschen ..how self-defeating is that?
And why should anyone be surprised that the exact same mentality rules in Israel today, since
it is the delusional heart of judaism? A fake "Racial" Supremacy is the raison
d'être of "judaism".
All of this adds up to a tragic, self-defeating and ultimately stupid (un-intelligent)
position.
Peoples tend to want their own nation state presumably because it it the most
satisfying, protective and benevolent context for individuals to mediate their lives in the
world. Unfortunately German Jews lived in a state while being of a different nation to the
majority, and had their rights suddenly taken away. In the Jewish state of Israel Jews are
having their need for imprescriptible rights met. Palestinians want their own state and those
rights that go with it.
"... The results showed that on average people believed that a third of Labour Party members had been reported for antisemitism. A key part of the authors' investigation was to examine how it could be that so many people came to believe this when the actual figure was far less than 1%. ..."
"... What is clear is that for Ukania's Joe and Jill Normal, who don't often go beyond the newspaper headlines to look at news source ..."
"... The crucial factor here is that no matter what steps Labour's left leadership takes to deal with the party's antisemitism problems (and these steps have been taken, unevenly and somewhat slowly), those bent on ousting Corbyn as leader for reasons internal to the party's politics will not cease their efforts no matter what Labour does to address antisemitism within its membership. ..."
"... The perfect example here is Tom Watson, Labour's deputy leader, who is on the payroll of the UK's Zionist lobby. Watson did his utmost to stoke the fires of the antisemitism crisis. Sensing now he has played his full hand on this issue, he is currently using Brexit as his foil for attacking Corbyn. ..."
I've just finished reading the uncorrected proof copy an excellent study of the manufactured
Labour "antisemitism crisis". [Greg Philo, Mike Berry, Antony Lerman, Justin Schlossberg and
David Miller, Bad News for Labour: Antisemitism, the Party & Public Belief
(London: Pluto Press, 2019)]
The launching point for the book's analysis is a national poll, accompanied by the use of
focus groups, on how people make judgments and form opinions.
The results showed that on average people believed that a third of Labour Party members
had been reported for antisemitism. A key part of the authors' investigation was to examine how
it could be that so many people came to believe this when the actual figure was far less than
1%.
The book focuses on how this chasm between (mis)perception came to exist. The authors
used questionnaires as part of their survey, and the anonymous written answers show just how
ignorant and poorly informed many Brits are -- a significant percentage believe what they read
in the trashy rightwing tabloids or what they see on TV!
Some focus group members even believed Corbyn would bring in Sharia Law if elected.
Bad News for Labour begins with an overview of the focus group discussions. Several
participants in the focus groups who came believing that a third of Labour Party members had
been reported for antisemitism revised this number downwards, sensibly, as the group
discussions went on and participants took to educating each other.
At the same time focus group members believed the controversy has done serious damage to the
party.
What is clear is that for Ukania's Joe and Jill Normal, who don't often go beyond the
newspaper headlines to look at news sources, etc., it is the case that
MASSIVE MEDIA COVEREAGE OF X = X MUST BE A BIG PROBLEM.
Bad News for Labour then looks at the plethora of competing positions and interests
within Labour which created a confusing context for dealing with the antisemitism controversy.
The authors identify 3 main areas:
1) the argument that there was a significant and widespread problem regarding antisemitism
within the Labour Party;
2) that the issue was being used to undermine Labour's left leadership, and specifically
Jeremy Corbyn, as part of the internal politics of the Party;
3) that the controversy was linked to the defence of Israel and attempts to change Labour
policy with regard to that state.
The crucial factor here is that no matter what steps Labour's left leadership takes to deal
with the party's antisemitism problems (and these steps have been taken, unevenly and somewhat
slowly), those bent on ousting Corbyn as leader for reasons internal to the party's politics
will not cease their efforts no matter what Labour does to address antisemitism within its
membership.
The perfect example here is Tom Watson, Labour's deputy leader, who is on the payroll of the
UK's Zionist lobby. Watson did his utmost to stoke the fires of the antisemitism crisis.
Sensing now he has played his full hand on this issue, he is currently using Brexit as his foil
for attacking Corbyn.
Labour has edged its way towards a fragile truce within itself on Brexit, by making the
ridding of Johnson and the Tories its priority, so that having a general election is the first
objective, and only after that can such matters as a second EU referendum with options of a
viable deal and remain be contemplated.
Watson is now trying to upset this arrangement by saying a second Brexit referendum has to
come before a general election (echoing a position taken by Blair a few days before) -- a
ridiculous proposition, because having a referendum first will simply reopen divisions within
Labour that existed during and after the first Brexit referendum. Far better to win an
election, which will leave Labour more in control of events (and probably more united by virtue
of electoral success), and then tackle the thorny matter of a second EU referendum.
Watson was promptly slapped down by Corbyn.
Bad News for Labour sensibly suggests that the best way for Corbyn and the party's
left to overcome these attempts by Labour's mainly Blairite rightwing to undermine the Left is
for the Blairites to be deselected by their local Labour parties as candidates in the next
election.
Several Blairites, knowing they face deselection, have already jumped ship and joined the
centrist Lib Dems while a couple went on to be Independents. Other Blairites, knowing which way
the wind is blowing, have announced they won't be standing in the next election.
The outrage of the Labour Zionists making life difficult for Corbyn is highly selective. It
is certainly true that some of these Labour MPs received antisemitic abuse (though mainly from
people who were not party members).
At the same time, the Labour politician Diane Abbott, a Corbyn ally who is shadow home
secretary/interior minister, was targetted by racists, though this has received much less media
attention. Amnesty International's research showed that Abbott received 45% of all abusive
tweets sent to female MPs in the 6 weeks before the 2017 election.
The crux of Labour's antisemitism controversy is the bruhaha over its grudging acceptance of
the flawed International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of "antisemitism".
The media's coverage of this controversy was framed by 2 assumptions: that under Corbyn
antisemitism in Labour had become "institutionalized", and that Corbyn and his associates had
failed to counter this.
The IHRA definition is deeply flawed, so much so that it is deemed not fit to be given any
legal standing.
Media coverage of Labour's disputes with this definition cloak this fact by referring to it
as "the widely accepted IHRA definition", "the widely accepted definition put forward by the
IHRA", "the IHRA's widely accepted definition", "the global definition of antisemitism", "the
globally recognized definition", "the near universally accepted definition", and so on, in
effect suggesting that Labour was completely out of line in its reluctance to accept the
38-word definition, despite the fact that a powerful body of legal opinion saw it as a
hopelessly vague statement accompanied by a rag-bag of "examples".
The IHRA examples in effect make it automatic that any characterization of Israel as
"racist" is perforce "antisemitic", in this way placing Israel's apartheid policy towards
Palestinians beyond criticism.
Under immense pressure Labour alas caved-in and accepted the definition and all its
examples.
Perhaps the fact that the Equalities and Human Rights Commission's announcement in May that
it was investigating Labour's handling of antisemitism complaints following submissions from
the Jewish Labour Movement and the Campaign Against Antisemitism had something to do with
Labour's capitulation on this score.
Bad News for Labour therefore trades on a double entendre -- news that is bad for
Labour, but also "faux news" that itself is bad precisely because of its all-too-common
distortions, biases, and underlying malicious intent. It's no surprise that two Murdoch papers, The Times and Sun , have been at the forefront of this campaign against
Labour.
Perhaps more surprising are the outfits that kept company with Murdoch newspapers in this
campaign against Corbyn, namely, the supposedly objective BBC and the "progressive" Guardian , both of which matched the Murdoch rags step for step in a rush for the
gutter.
Bad News for Labour presents a flood of evidence detailing how this campaign was
confected and what its effects on the party have been.
Since I'm a British citizen I'll be in the UK next week attending the Labour Party annual
conference as a member-delegate. Testing the waters on this issue will be interesting to say
the least.
Meanwhile the media say nary a word about the rampant Islamophobia in the Conservative Party
(starting with its leader, BoJo, and his insouciantly feeble jokes about burka-wearing women
looking like "letter boxes" and "bank robbers", and so on), and the fact that surveys show
antisemitism to be more prevalent in the Tories than it is in Labour.
Israel lobby is really strong political force. Lobby is important not only in foreign In
thinks like Congress, especially in terrorism, in publish, shaping the public debase via creating
think tanks, credentialing the expect is lobby main task, relentlessly working in campus, growing
leaders. Especially establishing an expectation for any aspiring politician that Interests of
Israel and USA are identical. Establishing that in publish mind and in US political
discourse.
Abusing the language in Orwell way, corrupting thought, Framing process as "honest broker"
while sucking or Israel.
Two recent presidents. Diaspora is typically politically are more extreme unsecure, much more
nationalistic then the home country. Issue of dual loyalty is a red herring, interests of Israel
and USA are merged in their minds, some codependency between two countries. Israel conspires to
distort US vision of Middle East. Anti-Israelis equal to Anti-Semitism. That's the biggest
achievement as one Israeli ambassador tell on his departure.
Notable quotes:
"... John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt published an article in the London Review of Books "The Israel Lobby: Does it Have too Much Influence on US Foreign Policy". ..."
The debate took place at Cooper Union in New York City and was captured by ScribeMedia on
behalf of the London Review of Books.
John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt published an article in the London Review of Books
"The Israel Lobby: Does it Have too Much Influence on US Foreign Policy".
US has no obligation for israel. let them get their hell out of US politics! Americans
lost enough money and blood for them already. Enough is enough. Don't let our whole country
turn into "anti-semites". You remember what happened in germany!
Many native Israeli's especially the youth is exhausted by there politics there tired of
there two party rhetoric of a constant hostility is the name of the Terrorist racket and
collection of the US gravy train
article"> At around minute 35, when he describes the "shared cultural values" of the US
and Israel, he says that the US does not legally discriminate by virtue of race etc. and
Israel does. However, the "shared cultural values" that the US and Israel do have relate to
the colonization of a native people. The "Palestinians" are of the same category as the
"Native Americans." Which is to say that they are both loose coalitions of tribes that are
viewed by the colonizing force as homogenous. In other words, the shared cultural heritage
nonsense is equally applicable to all of the last 500 years worth of colonial empires. I'd
also like to add that Mearsheimer specifically says that the Israeli lobby does not "control"
US policy, but that the lobbies efforts were "extremely effective." Hilarious stuff, that
obligatory political correctness.
> I listen to Dr Mearsheimer with great attention, because he is very persuasive. One
consideration of paramount importance he seems to omit from his considerations: global
over-heating. It is, I think, paramount, because it trumps all other security matters. If
average temperature continues to rise beyond the rate for moderate change, then not millions
but billions of people will be impoverished, displaced, and will die. The petroleum of the
Middle East that makes it second in strategic important to Asia for the US will no longer be
of strategic importance. Arable agricultural lands will be worth more than oil-rich deserts,
which will be worth nothing. Yet, the articulate Doctor does not seem to take the global
over-heating threat into consideration.
role="article"> Who would have guessed these seven years ago that the Israel lobby
would today not only restrict speech, but that legislation would be introduced in Congress to
allow the firing of government employees for exercising their Constitutional right to boycott
Israel because of their personal beliefs that what is being done to the Palistinean people
and elsewhere in the world by and in behalf of Israel is wrong?
All about big OIL with Lukid members rubbing there whiskers in offshore Shell corporate
profit making and taking.They failed in Fragmenting Russia with there Oligarch cells of
exploitation in both Energy & Media and now the CZARIST NATIONALISTS looking out on what
ever is left of there trading terf
If you are a Zionist, then you cannot possibly be a true Christian - Zionism is based on
racism, nationalism and the oppression of the non-Jewish population in Israel = including
Christians! They will take your money and still treat you like garbage in Israel.
Sep 16, 2019 Welcome
to the world where things don't add up. For instance, some people did some things to
the Saudi Arabian oil refinery at Abqaiq over the weekend. Like, sent over a salvo of cruise
missiles and armed drone aircraft to blow it up. They did a pretty good job of disabling the
works. It is Saudi Arabia's largest oil processing facility, and for now, perhaps months, a
fair amount of the world's oil supply will be cut off. President Trump said "[we] are waiting
to hear from the Kingdom as to who they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what
terms we would proceed!" Exclamation mark his.
How many times the past few years has our government declared that "we have the finest
intelligence services in the world." Very well, then, why are we waiting for the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia to tell us who fired all that stuff into Abqaiq? Whoever did it, it was
unquestionably an act of war. And, of course, what are we going to do about it? (And what will
some people do about it?)
Let's face it: the USA has had a hard-on for Iran for forty years, ever since they overthrew
their shah, invaded the US embassy in Tehran, and took fifty-two American diplomats and staff
hostage for 444 days. On the other hand, the Arabians and Iranians have had a mutual hard-on
for centuries, long before the Saud family was in charge of things, and back when Iran was
known as Persia, a land of genies, fragrant spices, and a glorious antiquity (while Arabia was
a wasteland of sand populated by nomads and their camels). The beef was formerly just about
which brand of Islam would prevail, Sunni or Shia. Lately (the past fifty years) it has been
more about the politics of oil and hegemony over the Middle East. Since the US invaded Iraq and
busted up the joint, the threat has existed that Iran would take over Iraq, with its majority
Shia population, especially the oil-rich Basra region at the head of the Persian Gulf. The
presence of Israel greatly complicates things, since Iran has a hard-on for that nation, too,
and for Jews especially, often expressed in the most belligerent and opprobrious terms, such as
"wiping Israel off the map." No ambiguity there. The catch being that Israel has the capability
of turning Iran into an ashtray.
The world has been waiting for a major war in the Middle east for decades, and it might have
one by close of business today. Or perhaps some people will do nothing . The
Iran-backed Houthi rebels of Yemen supposedly claimed responsibility for the attack. That's
rich. As if that rag-tag outfit has a whole bunch of million-dollar missiles and the knowledge
and capacity to launch them successfully, not to mention the satellite guidance mojo. A
correspondent suggests that the missiles were fired from a pro-Iranian military base in Iraq,
with the Houthis brought in on flying carpets to push the launch buttons.
President Trump is trumpeting America's "energy independence," meaning whatever happens over
there won't affect us. Well, none of that is true. We still import millions of barrels of oil a
day, though much less from Saudi Arabia than before 2008. The shale oil "miracle" is hitting
the skids these days. Shale oil production has gone flat, the rig-count is down, companies are
going bankrupt, and financing for the debt-dependent operations is dwindling since the
producers have demonstrated that they can't make a profit at it. They're trapped in the
quandary of diminishing returns, frontloading production, while failing to overcome steep
decline curves in wells that only produce for a couple of years.
It's also the case that shale oil is ultra-light crude, containing little heavier
distillates such as diesel and aviation fuel (basically kerosene). Alas, American refineries
were all built before shale oil came along. They were designed to crack heavier oil and can't
handle the lighter shale. The "majors" don't want to invest their remaining capital in new
refineries, and the many smaller companies don't have the ability. So, this makes necessary a
high volume of oil swapping around the world. Without diesel and aviation fuel, US trucking and
commercial aviation has a big problem, meaning the US economy has a big problem.
With the new crisis in the Middle East, benchmark West Texas Intermediate oil is up from
around $55-a-barrel to just over $60 at the market open (European Brent crude is just above
$70). That's a pop, but not a spectacular one, considering that a whole lot more damage might
ensue in the days ahead. China, Korea, and Japan stand to lose bigly if the players in the
Middle East really go at it and bust up each other's assets. If that happens, the world will
never be the same. You can kiss the global economy goodbye for good. Let's hope some people
don't do something.
Not just the Saudi's. The Houthis support Palestine, and the Muslim Brotherhood.
They also control the Straits of Mandeb where most of Israel's oil transits to Asia.
Hence the war in Yemen an the problems in the Sudan. So its no wonder its not just
the Saudi's who are fighting the Houthis. The Houthis are fighting against the U.K.,
Germany, the U.S., Israel and the UAE, who are all supporting the Saudi's. Yemen, one
of the worlds oldest civilizations
Iran never said "wiping Israel off the map."It was Ahmadinejad that said "..wipe
the Zionist entity off the map".
This author should know better than to repeat Zionist lies.
Kunstler has some huge holes in his game. He seems to take many of the US MSM
talking points as good coin. Like, exhibit A, the "wipe Israel off the map" quote
which has long since been shown to be a mis-translation. Often his bigotry also slips
like when he dismisses Houthi capabilities and gets wrong what actually hit the
refineries. These were DRONES not missiles. That is why they were able to evade the
Saudi air defenses. But Houthis are to uncouth to pull of such an operation and
moreover how dare they defend themselves or accept assistance from Iran even if it
were true they are supplying the Houthis with weapons and intelligence. Of course, he
also fails to explain, following like a dog on a leash the US media, why Iran would
launch such an attack considering it may provoke the Israelis or the US. Sure they
may hate the Saudis but they certainly do not want a war where, though they would not
technically lose, would see their society destroyed. Again Cui Bono.
Kunstlers's roots are definitely showing here. His usual barbed wit has simply
disappeared and he seems to have bitten off and swallowed whole the officialbullshit , very unwise at this stage.
"A correspondent suggests" just doesn't cut it. Correspondents have suggested all
sorts of things and he should learn to ignore these voices and rely on facts
instead.
He forgets the fact that Saudi Arabia has been waging war on Yemen since 2015 and
that the damage inflicted upon the Saudi oil installations is only a tiny fraction of
the retribution that the Saudis deserve.
Kunstler predictably forgets the fact that Israel has been illegally attacking
Iranian interests in Syria for several years and that as a result many Iranians have
been killed by Israel in recent times. The fact is that these illegal forays are also
acts of war, which of course Kunstler forgets to tell us.
One other fact pertains to his boasting that Israel could wipe Iran off the map,
which is not just bad taste, but ignores the fact that Iran has enough conventional
power to do the same to its postage stamp sized and bellicose neighbour.
We now know that when the chips are down, Kunstler will simply revert to type and
tow the crooked official zio line. We don't need Kunstler for that, we all ready have
a zionist media, a craven Congress and Trump's government of crazies, very important
facts.
If the Yemenis are being assisted by Iran I say that's a good thing. The Saudi
beasts are being assisted by our jew rulers. If I was a Yemeni blowing up that oil
infrastructure would have been on top of my list. And Israel is the country that
would be turned into an ashtray. The US is gone, over run invaded, already lost.
"Let's face it:" says Kunstler. Iran started it forty years ago, "ever since they
overthrew their shah ..." Bad Iranians attacking the USA.
But if we go back a few decades further, we find USUKisrael smashing the elected
government of Iran and installing The Shah! So Kunstler is lying when he says "their
shah"; he should say OUR shah. I think he probably knows this. He's not accidentally
mixing things up.
Catastrophic or not the neocons are itching for a big confrontation and Iran fits
the bill.
Keep in mind that most collateral damage will be suffered by the Saudis.
The US is now the biggest producer of oil, just imagine the boost that the US shale
investors will get in an industry that was about to have its bubble burst.
No longer will it struggle to break even, no it will make a good profit, more
importantly the bubble will not hit the financial sector hard.
Now KSA will suffer a blow, but that will only serve the US - new loans and new
contracts will reverse the money stream and tie the Saudi regime even more to
Washington.
As a bonus it will please the Israelis when finally Iran will be taken out and
Hezbollah isolated.
Wild cards - how hard can Iran retaliate beyond KSA, is it able and willing to
strike against Israel? How hard can it strike US targets in the region? And finally
will they go full on against the Arabian energy infrastructure. If a couple of Houthi
cruise missiles in a single strike can drop total oil production by 5% and raise
prices by 20%, imagine what kind of havoc a real Iranian campaign can cause (again
ignoring the oil bonanza the US oil industry will score).
I really believe there is now a 50/50% that Washington will gamble a full blown
war against Iran, its perceived benefits outweighing the dangers.
If anything Israel will be the deciding factor, if Tel Aviv does not fear Iranian
retribution and gives the go ahead, we'll have a war on our hands,
The US is certainly stretched thin defending the national and security interest
across the globe - aka defending and expanding the empire.
However there is enough fire power to defeat the Iranian military as an organized
force and Teheran as a government, it all depends on the US rules of engagement and
how far they are willing to push this war.
But afterwards it will be no better than Iraq or Afghanistan.
That may actually be the excuse to do what some strategists have been itching to
do since the Korean war, that is to use a couple of tactical nukes - the ultimate
terror weapon of state.
The current NPR is a strong sign in favor of nuclear weapons in conflict as it
greatly reduces the threshold. Iran's perceived threat to global oil production could
be used to set an example.
In what condition will Saudi Arabia be in, after Iran has been subdued? Also the
plethora of US bases in the area will also be fat juicy targets for Iranian
missiles.
Did the condition of South East Asia other than the ubiquitous Domino Theory,
worry many when they went to war in Viet Nam, what about Iraq?
Oil and Israel are key.
Oil prices and Israel's safety.
They want to take out Iran, but this small attack shows how vulnerable the
regional energy infrastructure really is. That can be a temporary advantage, in
boosting US oil income, but that can be easily off set by the impact of rising oil
prices on all other sectors and the public.
That's why I think it is 50/50 at best, and slowly leaning to less likely we'll
see a major escalation.
Otoh, if I were the Houthis, I'd launch a couple of additional strikes to press
the message.
Saudi Arabia supplies oil to China, so to believe Iran was behind the drone attack
on Saudi oil is a bit of a stretch. The question is was it the U.S. and Israel
coordinating that attack? Israel's influence on the U.S. in the middle east is what
is getting America running in circles
The recent attacks on Saudi oil facilities by Yemeni Houthi forces demonstrate once again
that an aggressive foreign policy often brings unintended consequences and can result in
blowback. In 2015 Saudi Arabia attacked its neighbor, Yemen, because a coup in that country
ousted the Saudi-backed dictator. Four years later Yemen is in ruins, with nearly 100,000
Yemenis killed and millions more facing death by starvation. It has been rightly called the
worst humanitarian catastrophe on the planet.
But rich and powerful Saudi Arabia did not defeat Yemen. In fact, the Saudis last month
asked the Trump Administration to help facilitate talks with the Houthis in hopes that the war,
which has cost Saudi Arabia tens of billions of dollars, could finally end without Saudi crown
prince Mohammad bin Salman losing too much face. Washington admitted earlier this month that
those talks had begun.
The surprise Houthi attack on Saturday disrupted half of Saudi Arabia's oil and gas
production and shocked Washington. Predictably, however, the neocons are using the attack to
call for war with Iran!
Sen. Lindsay Graham, one of the few people in Washington who makes John Bolton look like a
dove, Tweeted yesterday that, "It is now time for the US to put on the table an attack on
Iranian oil refineries " Graham is the perfect embodiment of the saying, "when all you have is
a hammer, everything looks like a nail." No matter what the problem, for Graham the solution is
war.
Likewise, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo – who is supposed to represent US diplomacy
– jumped to blame Iran for the attack on Saudi Arabia, Tweeting that, "Iran has now
launched an unprecedented attack on the world's energy supply." Of course, he provided no
evidence even as the Houthis themselves took responsibility for the bombing.
What is remarkable is that all of Washington's warmongers are ready for war over what is
actually a retaliatory strike by a country that is the victim of Saudi aggression, not the
aggressor itself. Yemen did not attack Saudi Arabia in 2015. It was the other way around. If
you start a war and the other country fights back, you should not be entitled to complain about
how unfair the whole thing is.
The establishment reaction to the Yemeni oilfield strike reminds me of a hearing in the
House Foreign Affairs Committee just before the US launched the 2003 Iraq war. As I was arguing
against the authorization for that war, I pointed out that Iraq had never attacked the United
States. One of my colleagues stopped me in mid-sentence, saying, "let me remind the gentleman
that the Iraqis have been shooting at our planes for years." True, but those planes were
bombing Iraq!
The neocons want a US war on Iran at any cost. They may feel temporarily at a disadvantage
with the departure of their ally in the Trump Administration, John Bolton. However, the sad
truth is that there are plenty more John Boltons in the Administration. And they have allies in
the Lindsay Grahams in Congress.
Yemen has demonstrated that it can fight back against Saudi aggression. The only sensible
way forward is for a rapid end to this four-year travesty, and the Saudis would be wise to wake
up to the mess they've created for themselves. Whatever the case, US participation in Saudi
Arabia's war on Yemen must end immediately and neocon lies about Iran's role in the war must be
refuted and resisted.
@Anonymous
At some point when an foreign intelligence service has a critical mass of politicians
blackmailed it becomes "domestic intelligence" or "domesticated intelligence". :-)
It's amazing how little coverage this story got. Can you imagine if Russian devices had been
found? It would be on CNN, etc. hour after hour and they'd be interviewing Nancy Pelosi non
stop.
@Cloak And
Dagger I think you are correct there maybe many Americans in the USA.. It may take the
few Americans who have been allowed to see the big picture at the USA
While the Trump Administration seems to be cozying up to America's Jewish voters, here is an
article that outlines what American Jews really think of Donald Trump and his leadership:
"... Only President Donald Trump, predictably, had something so say in his usual personalized fashion, which was that the report was "hard to believe," that "I don't think the Israelis were spying on us. My relationship with Israel has been great Anything is possible but I don't believe it." ..."
"... So Trump is stupid, a liar and an Israeli sycophant what's the solution? ..."
Just bewildering to read the Left's continuing insistence that Israel is best understood as
'just another outpost of the American empire'. This is probably the most damaging idea in
circulation right now, as its diversionary effect is only matched by its absurdity.
The Left simply cannot 'go there' though, no matter how much factual evidence is stacked up.
(On top of the spying and theft we have 'The Lobby' documentary, the defence pact, party
funding, etc. etc.). They have to avoid the reality, one which can only be explained through
cross border tribal allegiances and religious history going back many centuries. These, of
course, lay outside the Left's purview, and any consideration of them is dogmatically
opposed. It is getting to be a kind of insanity.
Tulsi can allege that Saudi Arabia was behind the 9/11 attacks and that they pull the
strings in Washington, (and many on the Left will applaud) but she cannot point out the
rather more glaring 9/11 connections to Israel and the whole machinery of control that lies
at the centre of American empire.
As she votes against BDS, has there ever been a more ridiculous double standard ?
Only President Donald Trump, predictably, had something so say in his usual
personalized fashion, which was that the report was "hard to believe," that "I don't think
the Israelis were spying on us. My relationship with Israel has been great Anything is
possible but I don't believe it."
So Trump is stupid, a liar and an Israeli sycophant what's the solution?
It's amazing how little coverage this story got. Can you imagine if Russian devices had been
found? It would be on CNN, etc. hour after hour and they'd be interviewing Nancy Pelosi non
stop.
@Cloak And
Dagger I think you are correct there maybe many Americans in the USA.. It may take the
few Americans who have been allowed to see the big picture at the USA
"I've never seen a President -- I don't care who he is -- stand up to them. It just
boggles the mind. They always get what they want. The Israelis know what is going on all
the time. I got to the point where I wasn't writing anything down. If the American people
understood what a grip these people have on our government, they would RISE UP IN ARMS.
Our citizens certainly don't have any idea what goes on." – Admiral Thomas Moorer, head
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, interview, 24 Aug. 1983
Admiral Moorer, "the dirty anti-semite," was one of the few people with influence to call
out Israel for their deliberate attack on the USS Liberty – https://www.erasingtheliberty.com/
The American Legion continues to wet its pants apparently believing that kissing (((ass)))
is more patriotic than standing up for America and members of the Navy.
Whats new about Israeli spying against the zio/US, hell the government is full of zionists in
every facet of the government, they run every department, including and especially the CIA ,
which would be better named the Mossad West, in fact the Mossad is so embedded in the CIA
that the only way to end this would be to as JFK said to scatter it to the winds aka abolish
the Mossad infested CIA.
the placement of technical surveillance devices by Israel was clearly intended to target
cellphone communications to and from the Trump White House. As the president frequently chats
with top aides and friends on non-secure phones, the operation sought to pick up conversations
involving Trump with the expectation that the security-averse president would say things off
the record that might be considered top secret.
The Politicoreport
, which is sourced to top intelligence and security officials, details how "miniature
surveillance devices" referred to as "Stingrays" imitate regular cell phone towers to fool
phones being used nearby into providing information on their locations and identities.
According to the article, the devices are referred to by technicians as "international mobile
subscriber identity-catchers or IMSI-catchers, they also can capture the contents of calls and
data use."
Over one year ago, government security agencies discovered the electronic footprints that
indicated the presence of the surveillance devices around Washington including near the White
House. Forensic analysis involved dismantling the devices to let them "tell you a little about
their history, where the parts and pieces come from, how old are they, who had access to them,
and that will help get you to what the origins are." One source observed afterwards that "It
was pretty clear that the Israelis were responsible."
The Israeli Embassy denied any involvement in the espionage and Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu adroitly and predictably lied regarding the report, saying "We have a directive, I
have a directive: No intelligence work in the United States, no spies. And it's vigorously
implemented, without any exception. It is a complete fabrication, a complete fabrication."
The Israelis are characteristically extremely aggressive in their intelligence gathering
operations, particularly in targeting the United States, even though Trump has done the
Netanyahu government many favors. These have included moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem,
withdrawing from the nuclear deal and sanctioning Iran, recognizing Israeli sovereignty over
the Golan Heights, and looking the other way as Israel expands its settlements and regularly
bombs Syria and Lebanon.
Israel's high-risk spying is legendary, but the notion that it is particularly good at it
is, like everything having to do with the Jewish state, much overrated. Mossad has been caught
in flagrante numerous times. In 2010, an undercover Mossad hit team was caught on 30
minutes of surveillance video as it wandered through a luxury Dubai hotel where it had gone
to kill a leading Hamas official. And the notion that Mossad and CIA work hand-in-hand is also
a fiction. Working level Agency officers dislike their reckless Mossad counterparts.
Newsweek magazine's "Spy Talk" once cited
a poll of CIA officers that ranked Israel "dead last" among friendly countries in actual
intelligence cooperation with Washington.
The fact is that Israel conducts espionage and influence operations against the United
States more aggressively than any other "friendly" country, including tapping White House
phones used by Bill Clinton to speak with Monica Lewinski. Israeli "experts" regularly provide
alarmist and inaccurate private
briefings for American Senators on Capitol Hill. Israel also constantly manufactures
pretexts to draw the U.S. into new conflicts in the Middle East, starting with the Lavon Affair in Alexandria Egypt
in 1954 and including the false flag attack on the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967. In short,
Israel has no reluctance to use its enormous political and media clout in the U.S. to pressure
successive administrations to conform to its own foreign and security policy views.
The persistent spying, no matter what Netanyahu claims, is a very good reason why Israel
should not receive billions of dollars in military assistance annually. Starting in 1957,
Israel's friends stole enriched uranium from a
Pennsylvania refinery to create a nuclear arsenal. More recently we
have learned how Arnon Milchan, a Hollywood producer/billionaire born in Israel, arranged
the illegal purchase of 800 krytron triggers to use in the production of nuclear weapons. The
operation also involved current Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.
The existence of a large scale Israeli spying effort at the time of 9/11 has been
widely reported, incorporating Israeli companies in New Jersey and Florida as well as hundreds
of "art students" nationwide. Five "dancing" Israelis from one of the companies were observed
celebrating against the backdrop of the twin towers going down.
While it is often observed that everyone spies on everyone else, espionage is a high-risk
business, particularly when spying on friends. Israel, relying on Washington for billions of
dollars and also for political cover in international fora like the United Nations, does not
spy discreetly, largely because it knows that few in Washington will seek to hold it
accountable. There were, for example, no consequences for the Israelis when Israeli
Mossad intelligence officers using U.S. passports and pretending to be Americans recruited
terrorists to carry out attacks inside Iran. Israelis using U.S. passports in that fashion put
every American traveler at risk.
Israel, where government and business work hand in hand, has obtained significant advantage
by systematically stealing American
technology with both military and civilian applications. The U.S. developed technology is
then reverse engineered and used by the Israelis to support their own exports. Sometimes, when
the technology is military in nature and winds up in the hands of an adversary, the
consequences can be serious. Israel has sold advanced weapons systems to China that incorporate
technology developed by American companies.
The reality of Israeli large-scale spying in the United States is indisputable. One might
cite Jonathan Pollard, who stole more highly classified information than any spy in history.
And then there were Ben-Ami Kadish, Stuart Nozette and Larry Franklin, other spies for Israel
who have been caught and tried, but they are only the tip of the iceberg. Israel always
features prominently in the annual FBI report called "Foreign Economic Collection and
Industrial Espionage." The 2005 report states "Israel has
an active program to gather proprietary information within the United States. These collection
activities are primarily directed at obtaining information on military systems and advanced
computing applications that can be used in Israel's sizable armaments industry." It adds that
Israel recruits spies, uses electronic methods, and carries out computer intrusion to gain the
information.
A 1996 Defense Investigative Service report noted that Israel
has great success stealing technology by exploiting the numerous co-production projects that it
has with the Pentagon. It says "Placing Israeli nationals in key industries is a technique
utilized with great success." A General Accounting Office (GAO) examination of espionage
directed against American defense and security industries described how Israeli citizens
residing in the U.S. had stolen sensitive technology to manufacture artillery gun tubes,
obtained classified plans for reconnaissance systems, and passed sensitive aerospace designs to
unauthorized users.
The GAO has concluded that
Israel "conducts the most aggressive espionage operation against the United States of any U.S.
ally." In June 2006, a Pentagon administrative judge ruled against a difficult to even imagine
appeal by an Israeli denied a security clearance, saying that "The Israeli government is
actively engaged in military and industrial espionage in the United States." FBI counter
intelligence officer John Cole has also reported how many
cases of Israeli espionage are dropped under orders from the Justice Department., making the
Jewish state's spying consequence free. He provides a "conservative estimate" of 125 viable
investigations into Israeli espionage involving both American citizens and Israelis that were
stopped due to political pressure.
So, did Israel really spy on Donald Trump? Sure it did. And Netanyahu is, metaphorically
speaking, thumbing his nose at the American president and asking with a grin, "What are you
going to do about it?"
For those who have not heard of Israeli startup Carbyne911 (partly owned by Ehud Barak, run
by former Israeli officers of the unit 8200, and to which Jeffrey Epstein donated to) here is
an interview TruNews with Whitney Webb:
Carbyne911: Israeli Tech Scheme to Weaponize 911 Emergency Call System
(Interview starts at 11:16 mark)
The rarest occurrence was when Epstein would fly without any of his usual entourage and
just one other passenger. There was only one name that jumped out from the flight manifest
as a good example of when Epstein alternated from his routine. His second meeting with
Nicole Junkermann.
The link between Nicole Junkermann, the Israeli state intelligence services and the
Israeli Defence Force is not a tenuous one. The ominously named "Reporty Homeland Security"
was the first incarnation of what is now called "Carbyne911" and is referred to as simply
"Carbyne." Described as a "global leader in public safety technology," Carbyne is a call
handling platform app that allows you to, amongst other things, stream any ongoing
emergency directly to the responding emergency services. It claims, in the information
section of a promotional video on YouTube entitled "Nicole Junkermann presents Carbyne,
They promise to combine the use of personal data, location data, live video, data from
surrounding wearable tech, and even information from parked smart cars, to deliver more
information to the emergency services who should be responding. They can pinpoint your
location, even indoors, to within three feet, and they claim that they can even collect
data from dropped calls. However, they fail to mention how they'll get the permission to
use such masses of available data. Who are these angels behind this revolutionary
technology which aims to get between a victim and the emergency services?
One of the directors of Carbyne is Nicole Junkermann. The chairman of the board of
directors is Ehud Barak, the 10th Prime Minister of Israel, the 14th Chief of Staff of the
Israel Defense Forces, former Minister of Defense and former Head of Military Intelligence
for Israel.
Another of Carbyne's directors and board members is Brigadier Pinchas Buchris, the
former Deputy Commander of an elite IDF operations unit and former Commander of the IDF
8200 Cyber Intelligence Unit. Amir Elichai is the Founder and CEO of Carbyne, he is
also a former Israeli Army officer who served in various positions in the special elite
forces and the intelligence corps. Alex Dizengof is Carbyne's Co-Founder & CTO. He's
described as a Software Architect and Algorithms Developer. Dizengof had previously
developed machine learning algorithms for robots and mobile platforms, as well as cyber
security software for the Israeli Prime Minister's Office.
The GAO has concluded that Israel "conducts the most aggressive espionage operation
against the United States of any U.S. ally."
Even a statement like this from the GAO is misleading in that it implies that the next
friendly country spying on the US (the UK, presumably) to be out-edged by Israel, when in
fact the difference is probably one of order (if not of kind) in magnitude.
FBI counter intelligence officer John Cole has also reported how many cases of Israeli
espionage are dropped under orders from the Justice Department ., making the Jewish
state's spying consequence free.
Wow.
So when Paul Craig Roberts says "US Justice Department (sic)" we now have Giraldi's total
confirmation. If fact, Roberts is being too much of a gentleman about it.
Maybe call it (((Justice Department))) from now on and get it over with.
The Israelis are characteristically extremely aggressive in their intelligence gathering
operations, particularly in targeting the United States, even though Trump has done the
Netanyahu government many favors. These have included moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem,
withdrawing from the nuclear deal and sanctioning Iran, recognizing Israeli sovereignty
over the Golan Heights, and looking the other way as Israel expands its settlements and
regularly bombs Syria and Lebanon.
I'm sure that the Israelis don't regard these as favours...
A False Accusation of Antisemitism from Where You Would Least Expect It
by Jeff Blankfort / September 12th, 2019
I know what America is. America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right
direction.
-- Benjamin Netayahu, 2001, quoted in Ha'aretz , July 15, 2010
It is not uncommon, of course, to be labeled "anti-Semitic" for calling attention to the
inordinate power of the Israel Lobby over our political processes or suggesting that the Iraq
War was launched on Israel's behalf. The last place that I would expect to find such an
allegation, however, was on the CounterPunch website to which I have contributed a
number of articles on the subject over the years.
On August 2nd in an opinion
piece by Ron Jacobs, headlined, "Israel -- The Largest US Aircraft Carrier in the World,"
those, like myself, who have described, in detail, on CounterPunch and elsewhere, the
manner in which the Israel Lobby controls both Congress and the White House on issues relating
to Israel, were accused of propagating "what is an essentially anti-Semitic argument concerning
the nature of the Washington-Tel Aviv alliance."
That Jacobs, a veteran of the Sixties as long of tooth as myself, a prolific writer and
frequent contributor to Left publications, would make such an allegation, after what we have
learned about the role of pro-Israel Jewish neocons in fomenting the Iraq War and following
that, implementing crippling sanctions on Iran while agitating against the nuclear agreement
with Tehran, is as mind boggling as it is insulting.
Jacobs did this under the cover of what purports to be a review of a new book by historian
Stephen Gowans, Israel: A Beachhead in the
Middle East , which Jacobs contends is "a necessary and forceful rebuke of those on the
left and right who insist that Washington is Israeli-occupied territory."
First, a book review it is not. One cannot do justice to any serious book in just 764 words
which is the length of Jacobs' piece, although whether Gowans' book which amplifies the charge
of antisemitism can be taken seriously is open to question.
If not a book review then, what is it? Let's start with the title, a quote from the late
general and Secretary of State Alexander Haig whose very sanity came into question following
the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan when Vice-President George HW Bush was
away from the capital. At that point, as the New York Timesdescribed it , Haig "raced
upstairs [to the press room] and went directly to the lectern before a television audience of
millions. His knuckles whitening, his arms shaking, Mr. Haig declared to the world, 'I am in
control here, in the White House.' He did not give that appearance."
In any case, Gowans use of Haig's quote in his book turned out to be hearsay from a dubious
source.
From Jacobs' opening sentence, it seems clear that his intention was to provide "damage
control" for the plethora of predominantly Jewish organizations whose primary raison
d'etre is pushing the agenda of the Netanyahu government on Capitol Hill whose activities,
not to mention, existence, have been largely ignored or dismissed by others on the "Left" who
share Jacobs' aversion to blaming even a segment of American Jews for anything. (Think Noam
Chomsky, Phyllis Bennis, Stephen Zunes).
"The Israeli government does not control the foreign policy of the United States.," is how
Jacobs began his article. True, but none of those he is criticizing argue that it is and Jacobs
must surely know this. They affirm, with considerable evidence to back it up, that supporters
of the Israeli government are largely responsible for shaping US policies in the Middle East
and nowhere else. In other words, Jacobs has created a straw man.
If we restrict ourselves to this millennium, one only has to look at the appointees from the
Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and the Jewish Institute for National Security
Affairs (JINSA) that George W Bush brought into his administration, and particularly to the
Pentagon and who became activated, like sleeper cells, after the events of September 11.
From PNAC, came a troop of 20, foremost among them, Dick Cheney, Dubya's Vice-President,
Donald Rumsfeld, (Secretary of Defense), Paul Wolfowitz, (Deputy Secretary of Defense), Richard
Perle, (Defense Advisory Board), Doug Feith, (Under Secretary of Defense for Policy), Lewis
(Scooter) Libby (Cheney's Chief of Staff), and John Bolton who received a recess appointment as
UN ambassador when it was clear he wouldn't get Senate approval. (Bolton would later be hailed
by Israel's UN ambassador, Dan Gillerman, as "the sixth man in our office" and last year, after
replacing H.R. McMaster as Trump's National Security Adviser, he received the "Defender of
Israel" award from the Zionist Organization of America).
Launched in 1997 by neocons Robert Kagan and Bill Kristol, (son of Irving Kristol, the
neocon movement's co-founder), PNAC drew attention on Capitol Hill the following year when it
sent a letter to then President Bill Clinton, calling on him to overthrow Saddam. Among its
signatories were Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz. Legislation was passed, the Iraq Liberation
Act, in 1998, which stated that it was US policy to oust Saddam but no action was taken or
contemplated.
What makes the Israeli connection indisputable was that PNAC was preceded a year earlier by
a policy paper prepared for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, entitled, "A Clean
Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm." Its authors were a study group led by Perle which included Feith,
David Wurmser and his Israeli wife Meyrav Wurmser and called for the removal of Saddam Hussein , highlighting
Iraq's possession of "weapons of mass destruction." Wurmser would go on to become a Middle East
Advisor for Vice President Cheney and with Feith, help set up the Office of Special Plans to
produce evidence of Iraq's WMDs when the CIA failed to come up with it.
What those who insist that the 2003 war on Iraq was just a continuation of traditional US
imperialist policies refuse to acknowledge is that the invasion of Iraq marked a 180 degree
break with what US Middle Eastern policy had been up to that point, namely, to maintain
stability in that oil rich region.
That is why former president George HW Bush, his Secretary of State, James Baker and his
National Security Advisor, former general, Brent Scowcroft, publicly opposed the war and why
Bush Sr resisted demands from the neocons and Israel's allies in the media, to have US troops
march to Baghdad and remove Saddam from power after ousting Iraqi troops from Kuwait a decade
earlier.
When this fact was pointed out to George W Bush by Tim Russert on NBC's Meet the
Press , Dubya responded, "I answer to a higher father."
Before the war went south, Perle and Wolfowitz were competing in the media for credit for
the great victory over Saddam. Both men, along with Cheney, Feith, and Bolton, were also
members of JINSA's Advisory Board, an influential but little known neocon operation that came
into existence in 1976, apparently in response to President Gerald Ford having suspended a
shipment of US jet fighters to Israel for six months upon Israel's refusal to give up land in
the Egyptian Sinai that it had captured in the October 1973 war.
Moreover, Ford sent a private letter to Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin warning him about a
likely re-evaluation of US-Israel relations, hinting that he might call for Israel to return to
its pre-1967 borders. Rabin made the letter public which alerted AIPAC to respond. It struck
back against Ford by getting 76 senators, three-quarters of that body, to sign a letter to the
president, warning him that the US-Israeli bond was sacrosanct and should not be meddled with.
Ford quickly backed off and over the years, many more such letters, drafted by AIPAC, would
reach the desk of our presidents.
JINSA saw its goal as making sure that the US and Israeli militaries would become so
entwined that no future president would ever contemplate or be able to disentangle the armed
forces of both countries. To ensure that, it created a large advisory board composed of former
generals and admirals and a few police chiefs while arranging programs to take newly retiring
generals and admirals on all expense paid trips to Israel. There are currently 57 former
generals and admirals on the JINSA advisory board. The first and last article about JINSA in a
national publication appeared in The Nation in 2002 and like PNAC, its existence has been
ignored by those engaged in damage control on Israel's behalf.
Even Colin Powell's attribution of the war to Donald Rumsfeld's embrace by "the JINSA
crowd," in Karen DeYoung's biography of Powell, Soldier , did not
stir any of the latter to reconsider their positions.
Going back to the first US war on Iraq, all of the sanctions put in place against
governments viewed by Israel as its enemies, have largely been the work of AIPAC and its sister
organizations such as the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. WINEP or TWI (its current
acronym) was spawned by AIPAC in 1985 in order to make the step from lobbying for Israel to
actually making policy itself. It has become arguably the most influential of the Beltway think
tanks whose "experts" routinely appear before Congressional committees and whose op-ed pieces
invariably find their way into the opinion sections of our leading newspapers and the inboxes
of members of Congress.
To enforce the sanctions, after 9/11, President Bush set up a special department in the
Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence which, beginning with the appointment of
pro-Israel zealot, Stuart Levey, became the exclusive provenance of pro-Israel Jews, the latest
of whom, Sigal Mandelker, is actually an Israeli. It is this department, in essence, an arm of
the Israeli government, that determines what countries and companies are adhering to or
breaking sanctions on Iran and Syria and which organizations should be placed on the terrorist
watch list.
When Obama took office, the Israeli press reported that Levey had made a special trip to
Israel to assure Netanyahu that under the new president, nothing would change.
Were there not sanctions on Iraq and on Iran, the major US oil companies would have been
more than happy to do business with both countries. The last company that tried, Conoco, was
obliged to cancel a deal it had made with Tehran in March, 1995.
The only way the Obama Administration was able to sign the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan
of Action) with Iran and the other members of the UN Security Council plus Germany was to
declare it to be an agreement, not a treaty, thus avoiding having a vote on it by the Senate
where it would surely have been defeated. Not to be denied, Israel's friends in Washington had
the Senate pass a bill requiring Obama and succeeding presidents to ratify US participation in
the agreement every 90 days. This was the equivalent of a poison pill and a perfect set-up for
Donald Trump.
There is far too much evidence of Israel's control of Washington to include in this short
article but two more items should seal the debate.
The first begins in 2015 in Las Vegas when Jewish multi billionaire Sheldon Adelson held two
auditions for prospective Republican presidential candidates at his Venetian Hotel to determine
which one would be the best for Israel. Adelson was at the time and still is the owner of the
most widely read newspaper in Israel, Israel Hayom , which is provided free and has been
seen, until recently, as a mouthpiece for Netanyahu. On the day he opened his newspaper, he
apologized to his Israeli audience for having "worn the uniform of the US army and not the
Israeli Defense Forces," a clip of which can still be seen on You Tube.
Adelson's choices after the auditions were first Ted Cruz and then Marco Rubio. When both
failed to attract the voters, Adelson switched to Trump, pumping tens of millions of dollars
into his campaign and, judging from Trump's gifts to Israel, not the least of which was moving
the US embassy to Jerusalem and recognizing Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights, it is
safe to say that Adelson bought himself a president.
Cut now to last December, in Florida, at the annual convention of the relatively new Israeli
American Council, the major funder of which happens to be Adelson. On the stage as the host was
Israeli-American Haim Saban, one of the Democratic Party's major funders who once boasted to a
New Yorker writer that he was a "one issue man and that issue is Israel."
It was shortly after the November mid-term elections and Saban was interviewing the
returning House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Charles Schumer, the Senate's top ranking Democrat. As
Ron Kampeas of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) described it on Dec. 2:
Nancy Pelosi, the Democrat who likely will be speaker of the new US House of
Representatives, listed pro-Israel lawmakers she plans to name to key committee positions and
said her party remained fundamentally pro-Israel.
'We have people very well placed to share our values,' Pelosi, a California Democrat, said
in addressing the final event Sunday of the annual Israeli-American Council conference, after
listing planned assignments.
Pelosi said she would name Rep. Nita Lowey, D-New York, to chair the Appropriations
Committee; Eliot Engel, D-New York, to chair the Foreign Affairs Committee; Ted Deutch,
D-Florida, to chair the Middle East subcommittee; Adam Schiff, D-California, to chair the
Intelligence Committee; Alcee Hastings, D-Florida, to chair the human rights-monitoring
Helsinki Committee; Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Florida, to a key Appropriations Committee
position; and Lois Frankel, D-Florida, to a key Foreign Affairs Committee position.
All have longstanding pro-Israel records and all but Hastings are Jewish."
1
Pelosi's exchange with Saban can still be viewed on You Tube but don't look for any report
on that conference outside of the Jewish press. The corporate media, like Congress, is under
the thumb of the Israel Lobby.
Wasserman-Schultz had been the chair of the DNC who was forced to resign after the
release by WikiLeaks of the DNC's emails exposed the DNC's efforts to sabotage Bernie Sanders
on Hillary Clinton's behalf. Obviously, that did not hurt her in Pelosi's eyes. [
↩ ]
"It gets more and more embarrassing to call myself a Canadian..." reader responds to this
tweet. The recipients of the compensations include the family of Marla Bennett, a US exchange
student killed in the bombing of the Hebrew University in Jerusale m back in 2002, as well as
Edward Tracy and Joseph Cicippio, who were held hostage in Lebanon from 1986 to 1991. These
attacks have been blamed either on Hezbollah or Hamas, two organizations allegedly supported by
Iran. -- Among other things, the law paved the way for last
year's Ontario Court of Appeal ruling that upheld the seizure of $1.7 billion US in private
Iranian assets by a group of American plaintiffs whose loved ones were killed in terrorist
attacks allegedly sponsored by the Iranian regime. This law made it
impossible for Justine Trudeau-Castro to fulfill a 2015 promise to recognize Iran again. Tony
Hall: " Trudeau's half-hearted attempt to resume diplomatic relations with Muslim-majority
country ran into the concerted opposition of his handlers in Canada's Israel Lobby." Justin Trudeau's Subordination to Israel, USA and Saudi in Joining the
Attack on Iran and China By Tony Hall(Abridged by henrymakow.com) The US and Israeli governors of occupied Canada have authorized their current puppet,
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, to complete an anti-Iranian initiative commenced by former
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The Trudeau government completed the process of selling
off about $28 million in property seized from the government from which the Harper government
withdrew the Canadian embassy in 2012.
The seizure and redistribution of Iranian assets in Canada has beneath it a ruling by
Judge Glenn Hainey of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Judge Hainey's heavily politicized
ruling in this case in 2016 has been deemed "an embarrassment both to Canada and the legal
profession."
The enactment that helped set in motion this fiasco is Canada's Justice for Victims of
Terrorism Act passed into law in 2012 (JVTA). This legislation of the Harper government
together with the ruling by Judge Hainey have imported into Canada the results of a series of
US court rulings. These US rulings gave a green light to sue Iran on the basis of the Foreign
Sovereign immunities Act.
By following the US lead in the treatment of Iran Canada became the second state in the world
to proclaim predatory jurisdictions against states that it lists on the basis of ideological
criteria, contrary to the established international-law principles of state sovereignty, state
immunity, and equality of states. Canada's list contains solely Iran and Syria, two states
opposing the ongoing US geopolitical machination for "regime change" by a covertly supported
mercenary war against Syria.
Ottawa's Prof. Denis Rancourt has explained that the 2012 legislation, including amendments to
Canada's own Sovereign Immunity Act, has been used as a pretext to enforce the US rulings,
while additionally making absurd interpretations of the text of the JVTA in order to enforce
rulings that have nothing to do with Canada and that are limitation barred. There was not even
a civil cause of action for "terrorism" in Canada at the distant time when the claimed acts
occurred. Judge Hainey did not consider and misrepresented valid legal arguments of Iran.
Dr. Rancourt goes further, pointing out the joint Canada-US initiative in mounting economic
warfare against Iran violated a UN Convention in a fashion that has become tragically common in
the era of the Global War on Terror. Dr. Rancourt indicates, "Canada's new laws are explicit
violations of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism
(ICSFT)." The UN Convention was ratified by Canada in 2002. The Conventiondelimits the
conditions under which domestic-court jurisdiction can be established, defines the types of
funds that can be seized, and constrains the state parties to carry out their obligations "in a
manner consistent with the principles of sovereign equality and territorial integrity of States
and that of non-intervention in the domestic affairs of other States"
https://www.sott.net/article/328006-Canadian-activist-Canada-and-the-US-have-no-right-to-preach-about-human-rights
... ... ...
Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in
1982. He welcomes your comments at [email protected]
Theocratic of neo-theocratic states do not last long. So Gilad Atzmon is probably right. The writing for theocratic Israel
might well be on the wall, much like it was for the USSR. At some point the majority of population just became sick
and tied of the theocratic elite and stops believing the official propaganda. .
Trump strong connecting and deference to Zionists means that he will lose certain strata of voters that previously voted for
him. Will money form Zionist billionaire donors outweigh this factor is difficult to say.
This conflict at the heart of Israeli politics is a window into the Jewish state and its
fears. Israel is rapidly becoming an Orthodox Jewish state. Israel's Orthodox Jews are the
fastest growing group in the country. They are also the country's poorest population,
45 percent live below the poverty line in segregated communities. Ordinarily, one would
expect the poor to support the left, but Israeli Torah Jews are rabid nationalists and openly
lend their support to Benjamin Netanyahu and his party.
Prof. Dan
Ben-David of Tel Aviv University warned recently that Israel could cease to exist in a
couple of generations. He pointed to the astonishingly high birth rate among ultra Orthodox
Jews and predicted that, based on current trends, they will comprise 49% of Israel's population
by 2065. The ultra Orthodox parties are destined to dominate the Knesset within a generation or
less. Ben David predicts that their dependence on Israel's welfare system will lead to a rapid
decline is Israel's economy. This is economically damaging enough and is made worse by the
refusal of most rabbinical schools to incorporate standard Western subjects such as
mathematics, science and English into their core curriculum. Consequently, Israel is educating
a growing percentage of its population in a fashion that fails to equip them to contribute to
the needs of a hi-tech society that is immersed in a conflict for survival.
The picture that comes across is peculiar. As Israel becomes increasingly Jewish and
fundamentalist in its nationalist and religious ethos, it has also become more divided on
everything else. The Russian immigrants find it impossible to live alongside the ultra Orthodox
and vice versa. The secular enclave in Tel Aviv is committed to seeing their metropolis as an
extension of NY.
The Israeli Left has morphed into an LGBT hasbara unit. It has practically removed itself
from the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Jewish settlers adhere to the concept of a 'Two Jewish
States Solution.' They want to see the West Bank become a Jewish land. Orthodox Jews are barely
concerned with any of these political issues. They well know that the future of the Jewish
state belongs to them. All they need to do is sustain a productive secular Jewish minority to
serve as their milk cow. On top of all of that we face Bibi's survival wars that threaten to
escalate any minute into a world conflict.
This is why I'm more optimistic the more Trump embraces Israel. He seems to have clearly
decided not to get caught in Syria and so has to keep them off his back in some other way,
moving the embassy and presumably giving Netanyahu the greenlight for annexation of more of
the West Bank is a good thing.
It means Israel incorporates more and more Palestinians that it can't disengage from by
keeping within it's existing borders and it means damaging the bi-partisan consensus with
Trump's polarising association.
Everything Netanyahu does is just pulling back the sinews for the final reckoning. Instead
of staying within reasonable borders and seeking a reconciliation with neighbours, Israel
just gets more demanding, more unreasonable, breaks more promises and makes itself impossible
to negotiate with and runs headlong into more and more Palestinian citizens.
What's unfortunate is that Europe and the US will be forced to put up with the millions of
vagrant Sabras when it all goes kaput. Instead of becoming less anti-social, the Sabra became
a magnificent compilation of every annoying and anti-social habit of the nations. Israelis
make Sicilians look like Swedes.
@Altai I agree Altai .
at the end of the day this entire mess will fall on Europe and The USA but if I read the map
correctly the tolerance and empathy to the primacy of Jewish suffering is running out..the
situation is getting complicated
@Altai I agree Altai .
at the end of the day this entire mess will fall on Europe and The USA but if I read the map
correctly the tolerance and empathy to the primacy of Jewish suffering is running out..the
situation is getting complicated
@Robert Dolan
Absolutely correct. If not for the US and it's Jewish Controlled Congress that never met a
money bill for the Magic Jews Israel would be under water already. Our infrastructure is
collapsing but we continue to find money for Israel no matter that we have cities with
thousands of homeless people with the threat of disease and Middle Age plagues on our door
step. Orthodox Jews are like Muslims in many ways because they love the "Welfare State" and
they stay on it forever. Sections of New York are saturated with these Orthodox Welfare Jews
and idiots like DeBlasio caters to them.
There is now a backlash by both blacks who hate them and want to kill them for their
business practices in real estate and upper middle class residents that refuse to allow them
to build their so called "Jewish Orthodox Communes" and take over the areas.
Israel may have overplayed their hand but that doesn't mean they will just disappear. They
are sick enough to take mankind with them with their eternal wars. Hopefully Netanyahu is
crazy enough to start a conflict with Iran who will bomb the shit out of them and then
Hezabollah will destroy the wimp military the IDF.
We can only hope and perhaps mankind will have a chance .
It is more accurate to call them Talmudists. They are not "Jews". Jew is a recent
abbreviation of Judean. The Ashkenazi came from Asia. They don't follow the Old Testament.
They follow the Talmud, which is Maciavellian to the core. Pure evil. Since God made the man
Jesus to be Lord, eventually, their works will be judged, they are headed for destruction
morally, you reap what you sew. Israel is the most anti-Semitic country on earth. Which makes
them hypocrites. The Arabs and Palestinians are a Semitic people and no one hates and kills
them more that Israel.
@Colin Wright As you
may know Zionism was born as a reaction to antisemitsm and this fact alone suggests that
people including Jews were aware of the problem before Israel was formed
I don't want to ruin the party but as far as I can tell Israel is not the problem it is
just a symptom of the problem peculiarly, Israel was born to fix the problem
Interesting point of view, actually, one of the most profound things I have ever read. If
this is their calling, and I too somehow believe it is, they need to turn around, because
they are kind of falling down on the job. So I look forward to that great day of turning.
However, when they call you names, anti-Semite, self-hating Jew, or whatever else they might
dig up, they greatly err, because you are a watchman on the wall.
@Saggy Gilad has
expressed his views on this topic many, many times. The early Zionists desired a Jewish State
to make Jews human. By this, I mean that they were well aware of the Jewish Question and the
repeated bad behavior of Jews in host societies, both Muslim and Christian. They were
conscious of the economic role of powerful Jews, particularly with their usurious financial
practices, but also as tax collectors and enforcers for the aristocracy. This, along with
their tilted ethnocentric business practices, favoring their own while fleecing the goyim,
invariably led to their control of what were traditionally local businesses, creating a
growing resentment in local societies that reached critical mass. What followed were pogroms
and expulsion. This occurred in both Muslim and Christian lands, but were especially
pronouncrd in Christian Europe, which took more aggressive protective actions to shield
itself.
The early Zionists wanted to be the midwives of a Jewish State that would solve the JQ by
making a nation of Jews, in which Jews carried out all of the work, took all the jobs, from
garbage collecting to farming, from street cleaner to bank president. They wanted to stop the
pogroms and expulsions, but at the same time they were keenly aware that these were effects
of Jewish behavior and actions, not senseless anti-Semitism of the goyim. So, yes Israel was
conceived and born to solve the problem.
As you may know Zionism was born as a reaction to antisemitsm and this fact alone
suggests that people including Jews were aware of the problem before Israel was formed
Was it? Or was antisemitism the solution by the jewish leadership to the dissolution of
their community in modern arreligious society? Was antisemitism the virtual ghetto wall?
Tell the people within that those outside want to kill them, at the same time having a small
faction of very cunning Jews who go outside and produce trouble that then by necessity falls
back on the whole community?
I find it quite astonishing when I read how privileged certain Jews were in European
states, compared to what was the norm for regular Christian folks.
And indeed, also Christians were butchered, expelled etc in more religious times.
I have heard you say this before and remain surprised that you seem to believe this. The
whole " people like any other people" hasbara may have been a sales approach tailored to a
particular audience at some point, but any sincerity behind it has been demonstrably beside
the point. Israel has been a projection of raw power from the start.
@niteranger Are you
sure => "we continue to find money for Israel" <=unless you are among the elected 527
that run the USA you probably are not included in the WE.. did you vote (either yes or no) to
send money to Israel?
Three votes (one to select a person to fill one of (1/425) jobs in the house of
representatives, and 1 vote to select each of 2 persons to fill two senate jobs (2/100) does
not make most Americans into deciding members of the USA. Not only that, at election time,
American votes for President or VP do not count, because the electoral college vote decides
who shall be President or vice President? So why do the candidates spend billions on the
presidential elections?
350,000,000 Americans are governed by 527 salaried persons, who are elected to work at the
USA.
Israel is a product of the bankers and their corporations; it began in earnest in 1897 in
Switzerland.
The great success of Zionism (not racially or religiously connected) has been its
networking ability. It can identify and intercept opposing forces, transport resources($, and
people) in invisible ways, to/from multi many places, to focus on and to support a target
project (local, regional, national or international) . The network that facilitates this
"always win intention" works like a newspaper on one side, keeping all elements informed, and
on the other side, like a powerful, but invisible government; seeking or willing to invade,
protect or promote a place, project or person on the other side.
The network can concentrate fire power, vote power, impose political pressure, control the
media, and develop the means to take advantage of, or put down, situation or opportunity or
it can protect a friend in need. In a few days, a local situation or a massive opportunity
can be "crowd funded" or "petition protected" via the network. For hypothetical example, say
the NYT comes up for sale, in a short while a person with meager credit, tenders a
multi-billion dollar offer backed with financing sufficient to acquire the opportunity? So
how did the credit come to make this possible?
Its not Israel per se..that the USA congress supports: its the banking establishments and
their powerful multi nation corporations, seeking to control the middle east, seeking to use
"in the course of commerce" as their excuse for invisible weapon, mind control, and spy
technology development. Its Economic Zionism that explains the foreign nation state support
for Israel. IMO except for the propaganda value, race or religion has little to do with
it.
@Gilad Atzmon Why not
infuse Israel with the tons of fanatical leftist(godless) Jews we have in Germany and Europe?
They could counter the orthodox leeching by providing work force, and could additionally work
their bottoms off on "racism", transform settlements in gay discos and do all the other
professional complaints they make in Europe, like open borders.
The Jews in Europe are always scared, if Netanyahu calls them to Israel due to
"anti-semitism". If a non Jew says something similar, its evil and "anti-semitic" of course.
It is quite interesting to note, that Israel develops in a theocracy(always has been in my
view), while the Jews outside Israel seek to disprove/kill god and are in rebellion against
god, nature, more or less play god.
@FvS"It is the
patriotic duty of all American Jews to relocate to Israel and help their nation thrive.
Remember the holocaust. Also, democracy is garbage."
You could be an American patriot who doesn't want to pay 3.8 billion per year.
@Gilad Atzmon The issue
is that regular Europeans have diminishing rates of sympathy for Jews and the only reason
European politics don't trash Israel is largely vassalage to America and not having an
independent foreign policy.
With Americans ruining their relations with everyone, this will most likely change since
there's no real reason for Europeans to source military equipment from outside the EU, have
sanctions on Iran or Russia instead of backing their infrastructure projects, not back China
in the Pacific if it offers a better deal etc.
Essentially, Jews will be America's problem and rightfully so considering right wing
Americans can't seem to stop sucking Jewish dick.
@A123 The only
realistic plan would probably involve Israel not violating the fourth Geneva convention
anymore which would mean the Jewish settlements on territories outside the pre-1967 borders
will cease to exist as Jewish in any way.
Once you reject international law, you can't appeal to it anymore, but you must be Jewish
if you think you can pick and choose what suits you. Lol
The loonie Avi Lieberman is salivating at the thought being Israeli PM, and the loonie
Nuttyahoo is salivating at the thought of staying PM and using that power to keep his sorry
ass out of prison.
Presented with those two choices is like a robber asking its victim, "Do you want to be
stabbed with a knife or shot with a gun?"
@Robert Dolan America
will never be shed of this parasite until the fundamentalist Christian Zionist/NeoCons are
swept from power. They are every bit as insane as the radicalized Muslims. You tell me which
country this clown truly servers!!
Few goyim will make the leap to figure out the modern implications of the Moses
mythology.
You should discuss that with @ Dennis Gannon, who
appears to be tangled in a ball of misunderstanding or ignorance, especially of Machiavelli,
evident when he wrote:
The Ashkenazi came from Asia. They don't follow the Old Testament. They follow the
Talmud, which is Maciavellian to the core. Pure evil.
Crack open The Prince: Machiavelli "figured out the modern implications of the
Moses mythology." Of three candidates Machiavelli considered, he selected Moses as the model
Prince. Certain "evil" behavior that became necessary to save his beloved city, Florence, and
make it a Republic of and for the people of Florence, was acceptable, inasmuch as Moses,
whose chief counselor was god himself, used whatever means necessary to achieve the wellbeing
of the conquerors of Canaan.
If only the people of the USA had a Prince as evil, and as dedicated to the
wellbeing of the American people, as Machiavelli was to Florence.
@Brewer "Zionism was
born as a reaction to antisemitism." Gilad is correct, but I believe that implicit in his
statement is the understanding that the "antisemitism" is reactionary: it is born out of the
anti gentile behavior and actions of Jews in gentile host societies. Gilad, please correct me
if I've misrepresented you.
Israel is a terrorist state ran by terrorists for terrorists and its goal is to destroy the
mideast for its greater Israel agenda and with the help of the zionist controlled zio/US
government and the American taxpayers funding of these wars and providing the military muscle
the zionists are now their way to armageddon!
Israel is not an ally of the United States of America.
Israel is a client-state millstone of the American Empire that uses diasporan Jews such as
Shelly Adelson to buy off politicians such as President Trump.
Andrew Jackson and George Washington would immediately sever all ties to Israel and they
would make sure that diasporan Jews that put the interests of Israel over and ahead of the
interests of the USA were strongly encouraged to permanently leave the USA. Those Jews who
put the interests of Israel over and ahead of the interests of the USA should be disallowed
from gaining entry into any other European Christian nation such as Canada, Australia,
Germany, France, England, Italy, Spain etc.
It would also be a no-go Blavatsky for these diasporan Jews who put the interests of
Israel ahead of the interests of the USA to go to South America or Asia or anywhere else.
Israel must be made into a receptacle that will contain and constrain the ability of
diasporan Jews and Israeli Jews from interfering in the governmental affairs of any other
nation.
One of the reasons I will not vote for Trump and the Republican Party is that Trump and
the Republicans put the interests of Israel over and ahead of the interests of the United
States of America.
Trump seems to get the fact that the American Empire is a completely and totally separate
entity from the United States of America. Trump seems to understand that resistance to Shelly
Adelson's demands about foreign policy decisions regarding Israel is the best way to show
patriotism to the USA.
The JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire is a clear and present threat to the
safety, security and sovereignty of the United States of America
Jew billionaire Shelly Adelson puts the interests of Israel ahead of the interests of the
USA.
Jew billionaire Shelly Adelson has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to President
Trump and the Republican Party over the years.
What has all that loot bought for diasporan Jew Adelson?
Is Adelson buying the foreign policy of the USA?
How come that dumb boob Chris Christie
used the word "occupied" in front of Adelson when Christie was trying to pry some loot out of
Adelson's checkbook? DUMMY!
The ruling class in Israel wants to continue to use the US military as muscle to fight wars
on behalf of Israel.
The ADL puts the interests of Israel ahead of the interests of the United States of
America.
The ADL is an evil and immoral JEW PRESSURE GROUP that pushes mass legal immigration and
mass illegal immigration and REFUGEE OVERLOAD and ASYLUM SEEKER INUNDATION and multicultural
mayhem and all manner of other anti-White crud.
@Charles Pewitt Agree,
the zionists have controlled the American people since 1913 when they fastened their
privately owned central bank aka the FED and IRS on to the American people and then came the
foreign wars and debt and total control of the American people by the zionists and their
banking kabal.
Nathan Rothschild infamously said; I care not what puppet is place on the throne of
England for the man who controls the money supply controls the British Empire, and I am that
man!
The same holds true here in the zio/US the zionists have control of the money supply via
the FED and we are slaves on the zionist plantation aka America, and a central bank and the
income tax are 2 of the 10 planks of the communist manifesto, and zionism = communism!
So the Orthodox will turn Israel into a big shtetl within the span of next fifty years with
the financial help of the "secular" Jews in the West and then they would want to do away with
the LGBTQ crowd out of Tel Aviv you reap what you sow!
Then having very (unsafely) gone off the Gaderene cliff deep end, you opined, "Trump
seems to understand that resistance to Shelly Adelson's demands about foreign policy
decisions regarding Israel is the best way to show patriotism to the USA."
Let me elaborate further on that sentence.
Trump has acceded to 2 of the 4 demands of Republican Party donor and Jew billionaire
Shelly Adelson in regards to Israel:
1) Trump has killed the Iran nuclear deal and 2) Trump has moved the US embassy to
Jerusalem.
But,
3) Trump has refused to invade Iran or start a war with Iran and 4) Trump has not dropped
a nuclear bomb on Iran.
Shelly Adelson wants the US military to invade Iran and Shelly Adelson wants the US
military to drop a nuclear bomb on Iran.
Trump knows that there is a difference between the American Empire and the United States
of America. Trump pushes military Keynesianism for the jobs and the loot for the American
people, but Trump doesn't think that the American Empire must continually be at war to
justify the war expenditures. Trump gave an interview where he spoke of the
military-industrial complex and Trump is a baby boomer who remembers Ike and his warnings
about the profiteers and scoundrels who would use the American Empire to profit off the
USA.
Trump made the wise decision to not go to war against Iran with that drone incident, and
that is a good thing. Trump may have thought about oil at two hundred dollars a barrel or he
might have thought it's better to pop the Iranians surreptitiously rather than televised on
CNN with air strikes and the like.
I do think that Trump puts the interests of Israel ahead of the interests of the USA, but
a lot of the ruling class slobs who run the American Empire don't even think that the USA
exists anymore. A lot of us voted for Trump to reclaim the sovereignty and independence of
the USA from the American Empire.
So I think Trump is in his own way being patriotic to a certain extent by giving Shelly
Adelson some of what Adelson wanted but not all.
Trump may also understand that German American women and other American women in the Great
Lakes states don't want their sons or husbands or uncles or fathers getting killed or
horribly wounded in endless wars that only benefit Israel. The German Americans, bless them,
have historically shown great reluctance to get caught up in all the endless war crud that
the JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire cooks up.
I won't vote for Trump because of his backstab on immigration, but I think Trump knows
that he is the government leader of a big monster and that big monster is the creature that
encompasses both the American Empire and the United States of America.
I was long winded, but there's a point in there somewhere!
" My relationship with Israel has been great," Trump said, listing some of his pro-Israel
accomplishments. "Anything is possible," he conceded, "but I don't believe it."
"Yesterday you heard the lies that Israel tried to spy on the White House, a complete
lie," Netanyahu said in a Hebrew-language video.
He then quoted Mark Levin as saying on his show that "this is exactly like the tricks
carried out by Joel Benenson. He was an adviser to Obama and now he is the adviser to [Blue
and White leaders Benny] Gantz and [Yair] Lapid."
@Charles Pewitt Trump
certainly deserves criticism for his ME policies.
However, it's pure folly to think that the alternatives to Trump would be any better, in
fact I suggest that most would be worse.
It's always interesting to see those here who are so quick to bash Trump never tell us
which of the alternative candidates they are willing to endorse and why.
While we can't ascertain with enough confidence the role of mossad in 9/11, all signs shows
that they did have foreknowledge of the event. To the extent comments of UNZ reflects the
attitude of common American toward the real culprits of 9/11 it spells troubles for Israel lobby
and by extension to the state of Israel in a long run. The pendulum start moving back from high
pro-Israel point it reached during Bush administration, when neocons actually run the USA foreign
policy.
Based on the impressions of the French website Panamza and subsequently
MintPress , three of these photos -- despite the heavy redaction and poor quality --
appear damning. Since 2001, even though the photos were never released until now, it had been
known that one of the Israelis arrested -- Sivan Kurzberg -- was seen in a photo "holding a
lighted lighter in the foreground, with the smoldering wreckage [of the twin towers] in the
background," according to Steven Noah Gordon, then-lawyer for the five Israelis, as cited in
a New York Times report from November 2001.
The picture of Kurzberg with the lit lighter appears to be photo #5 in the new FOIA release.
Yet, the picture released includes a visible date of September 10, 2001, the day before the
attacks, as do two other photos -- images #7 and #8 in the collection -- whereas all other
photos with dates show only the month and the year (9 '01). The FOIA release did not provide
any information as to the apparent discrepancy in dates.
While this could be explained away as the camera in question being programmed with a
slightly inaccurate date, that doesn't seem to be the case for two reasons. First, only three
out of the 14 pictures appear to carry that date and, second, previously declassified FBI
reports report an eyewitness adamantly stating that Sivan Kurzberg had visited the
Doric Apartments on September 10, 2001 at around 3 p.m. with at least one other man, with whom
he was conversing in a foreign language, and had identified himself as a "construction worker"
to a tenant (page 61 of declassified FBI report
).
In addition, the FBI report noted that a van from Urban Moving Systems, the company that
employed the five Israelis at the time of their arrest, was present and was involved in moving
a tenant out of the complex on September 10 and that the movers all had foreign accents. Thus,
images 5, 7 and 8 may have been taken at the same complex a day before the attacks.
This raises two possibilities. First, that there are two images of Kurzberg with a lit
lighter in front of the towers, one taken before the attack and one taken at the time of the
attack, and that the FBI released only one of them. Second, that Kurzberg took the picture with
the lighter only the day before the attack and his lawyer misrepresented the contents of the
photo to the New York Times. Given that the background of the photo -- particularly the
state of the towers -- is indiscernible in the recently released photo, it is difficult to
determine which is the case.
... ... ...
One report from ABC News dated June 2002 suggests that the Bush administration
intervened in the investigation. That report
states that "Israeli and U.S. government officials worked out a deal -- and after 71 days,
the five Israelis were taken out of jail, put on a plane, and deported back home [to Israel]."
If the Bush administration had cut a deal with Israel's government to cover up the incident, it
certainly would not have been
the first time a U.S. presidential administration had done so on Israel's behalf.
Further evidence that higher-ups in the administration intervened is the fact that
then-Attorney General John Ashcroft personally
signed off on the detainees' release. Upon his entering the private sector as a lobbyist
and consultant in 2005, the Israeli government became one of Ashcroft's first clients .
A cover-up certainly seems to have happened to some extent, between the destruction of
records of the investigation and the fact that official conclusions of the investigation do not
add up. In the latter case, the FBI -- in a file dated September 24, 2001–
officially stated that they "determined that none of the Israelis were actively engaged in
clandestine intelligence activities in the United States." However, that conclusion was
directly contradicted by U.S. officials a year later and by the fact that Israel's own
government
subsequently acknowledged that the five Israelis had indeed been involved in "clandestine
intelligence activities in the United States."
In addition, the new FOIA release of the photos suggests that another FBI conclusion -- that
"none of the pictures developed from the film found inside the 35-mm camera depicted the twin
towers prior to the attack" -- was inaccurate. This may explain why the images released via the
recent FOIA request were heavily edited leaving details in the background greatly obscured,
making it impossible to determine whether the photos were taken prior to or during the attacks
based solely on the state of the towers.
... ... ...
The FBI returned to search the premises of Urban Moving Systems a month later, but by that
time found:
The building and all of its contents had been abandoned by the owner of Urban Moving
Systems. This [was] apparently being done to avoid criminal prosecution after the 09/11/2001
arrest of five of his employees and subsequent seizure of his office computer systems by
members of the FBI-NK on or around 09/13/2001."
The company's owner -- Dominik Otto Suter, an Israeli citizen --
had fled to Israel on September 14, 2001, two days after he had been questioned by the FBI.
The FBI
told ABC News that "Urban Moving may have been providing cover for an Israeli
intelligence operation." Surprisingly, since at least 2016, Suter has been living in the San Francisco Bay Area,
where he works for a contractor
for major tech companies like Google and Microsoft. According to the public records database
Intelius , in 2006 and 2007 Suter also worked for a telecommunications company --
Granite Telecommunications -- that
works for the U.S. military and several other U.S. government agencies.
In addition to Urban Moving Systems, another moving company, Classic International Movers,
became of interest in connection with the investigation into the "Dancing Israelis," which led
to the arrest and detention of four Israeli nationals who worked for this separate moving
company. The FBI's Miami Division had alerted the Newark Division that Classic International
Movers was believed to have been used by one of the 19 alleged 9/11 hijackers before the
attack, and one of the "Dancing Israelis" had the number for Classic International Movers
written in a notebook that was seized at the time of his arrest. The report further states that
one of the Israelis of Classic International Movers who was arrested "was visibly disturbed by
the Agents' questioning regarding his personal email account."
While the case of the "Dancing Israelis" has long been treated as an outlier in the
aftermath of September 11, what is often overlooked is the fact that hundreds of Israeli
nationals were arrested in the aftermath of the attacks.
According to a FOX
News report from December 2001, 60 Israelis were apprehended or detained after
September 11, with most deported, and a total of 140 Israelis were arrested and detained in all
of 2001 by federal authorities. That report claimed that the arrests, ostensibly including the
"Dancing Israelis," were in relation to an investigation of "an organized [Israeli]
intelligence gathering operation designed to 'penetrate government facilities.'"
The report also added that most of those arrested, in addition to having served in the IDF,
had "intelligence expertise" and worked for Israeli companies that specialized in wiretapping.
Some of those detained were also active members of the Israeli military; and several detainees,
including the "Dancing Israelis," had failed polygraph tests when asked if they had been
surveilling the U.S. government.
A key aspect of that report, compiled by journalist Carl Cameron, also states that federal
investigators widely suspected that Israeli intelligence had prior knowledge of the September
11 attacks. In the report, Cameron stated:
The Israelis may have gathered intelligence about the attacks in advance and not shared
it. A highly placed investigator said there are 'tie-ins' but when asked for details he
flatly refused to describe them saying: 'Evidence linking these Israelis to 9-11 is
classified. I cannot tell you about the evidence that has been gathered. It is classified
information.'"
One exchange between Cameron and host Brit Hume included in the report is particularly
telling:
HUME : "Carl, what about this question of advanced knowledge of what was going to
happen on 9/11? How clear are investigators that some Israeli agents may have known
something?"
CAMERON : "Well it's very explosive information obviously and there is a great deal
of evidence that they say they have collected. None of it necessarily conclusive. It's more
when they put it all together a big question they say is, 'How could they have not known?' --
almost a direct quote, Brit."
However, it is essential to note that Israeli intelligence did attempt to warn
the U.S. government at least twice beginning in August 2001 as did the intelligence agencies of
many other countries, including France, the UK, Egypt, Russia and Jordan. Yet, no people
connected to any other intelligence agency other than Israel were caught celebrating the
attacks as they took place in the area nor were accused by mainstream media of operating a
large spy ring within the U.S. at the time. One theory to explain this discrepancy is that the
Mossad elements of which the "Dancing Israelis" and other alleged Israeli spies could have been
part of a specific section of Israeli intelligence that were acting independently as a rogue
agency. Such a possibility is not unusual given that divisions of or groups within the CIA have
been known to "
go rogue " on several occasions.
If the "Dancing Israelis", and more broadly the Mossad and the Israeli government, had
foreknowledge of September 11, why would they remain silent and not attempt to warn the
American government or public of the coming attacks? In the case of the "Dancing Israelis," why
would Israelis celebrate such an attack?
One of the detained "Dancing Israelis," Omer Marmari, told police the following about why he
viewed the September 11 attacks in a positive light:
Israel now has hope that the world will now understand us. Americans are naïve and
America is easy to get inside. There are not a lot of checks in America. And now America will
be tougher about who gets into their country."
While Marmari's statement may suggest one reason some of the "Dancing Israelis" were so
"visibly happy" in their photographs, there are also other statements made by top Israeli
politicians that suggest why the Israeli government and its intelligence agency declined to act
on apparent foreknowledge of the attack.
When asked, on the day of the 9/11 attacks, how the attacks would affect American-Israeli
relations, Benjamin Netanyahu -- the current Israeli prime minister --
told the New York Times that "It's very good," before quickly adding "Well, not very
good, but it will generate immediate sympathy." He then predicted, much as Marmari had, that
the attacks would "strengthen the bond between our two peoples, because we've experienced
terror over so many decades, but the United States has now experienced a massive hemorrhaging
of terror."
Netanyahu, in a candid conversation recorded in 2001, also echoed Marmari's claim that
Americans are naïve. In that recording, Netanyahu said :
I know what America is. America is something that can easily be moved. Moved to the right
direction. They won't get in our way. They won't get in our way 80 percent of the Americans
support us. It's absurd."
In addition, also on the day of the September 11 attacks, Netanyahu -- who at the time was
not in political office -- held
a press conference in which he claimed that he had predicted the attacks on the World Trade
Center by "militant Islam" in his 1995 book, Fighting Terrorism: How Democracies Can Defeat
Domestic and International Terrorism. In that book, Netanyahu had posited that
Iranian-linked "militants" would set off a nuclear bomb in the basement of the World Trade
Center.
During his press conference on the day of the attacks, Netanyahu also asserted that the 9/11
attacks would be a turning point for America and compared them to the 1941 attack on Pearl
Harbor. Netanyahu's statement echoes the infamous line from the " Rebuilding America's
Defenses " document authored by the neoconservative think tank, the Project for a New
Ameican Century (PNAC). That line reads. "Further, the process of transformation [towards a
neo-Reaganite foreign policy and hyper-militarism], even if it brings revolutionary change, is
likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl
Harbor."
Then again, years later In 2008, the Israeli newspaper Maariv reported that Netanyahu
had stated that the September 11 attacks had greatly benefited Israel. He was quoted as saying : "We are
benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the
American struggle in Iraq."
Indeed, it goes without saying that the aftermath of 9/11 -- which involved the U.S. leading
a destructive effort throughout the Middle East -- has indeed benefited Israel. Many of the
U.S.' post-9/11 "nation-building" efforts have notably mirrored the policy paper " A
Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm ," which was authored by American
neoconservatives -- PNAC members among them -- for Netanyahu's first term as prime
minister.
That document calls for the creation of a "New Middle East" by, among other things,
"weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria" and "removing Saddam Hussein from power in
Iraq -- an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right." As is known now, both of
those main objectives have since come to pass, each withstrong
Israeli involvement .
Update |This article was updated to include and accommodate alternative
analyses of the newly released photos as well information on Israeli intelligence warnings to
the U.S. prior to September 11, 2001 that came to the attention of MintPress after initial its
publication.
Feature photo | Four of the Israeli nationals arrested for "puzzling behavior" during the
September 11 attacks are seen casually posing together in front of the Manhattan skyline while
the September 11 attacks were in progress | Photo #1
Whitney Webb is a MintPress News journalist based in Chile. She has contributed to
several independent media outlets including Global Research, EcoWatch, the Ron Paul Institute
and 21st Century Wire, among others. She has made several radio and television appearances and
is the 2019 winner of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in
Journalism.
18 years later, an important question once asked by Pat Buchanan still rings true: "Cui
bono-who benefits? – is ever the question that must be asked about Middle Eastern
terror"
Without Saudi funding, 9/11 could not have occurred. Yet Trump is seeking to cover up for
the Saudis who might be implicated in an upcoming report about 9/11.
The more that time goes by, the more it's revealed the cozy relationship between Israel
and the house of Saud, the more it is seems likely that Israel participated in 9/11.
Was it a joint venture between the two countries? One funded and provided the hijackers,
and one rigged the buildings with thermite so that they'd fall? All in an effort to get
America to take out the common threats to both Israel and Saudi Arabia (ex. Saddam, Iran,
Bashar Al Assad)?
If so, some at the highest levels of our government know, and they know that there's not
much that can be done about it.
In any event, and strangely, America did not attack Saudi Arabia in the years after 9/11,
as one would have expected given their involvement in that incident.
Instead, we are providing them with weapons, and they are now seeking to acquire nuclear
energy.
Does that really make sense?
It would if the US was being cowed into it by some form of blackmail.
Such as getting away wtih gunning down untold amounts of people in a large and popular
city and having a patsy to take the fall, no video footage evidence ever provided of the
patsy going to and from his hotel room, despite it being one of the most surveiled cities in
America.
In fact, in the hours after this mass shooting, Trump met with Sheldon Adelson, staunch
Israel-supporter and campaign financier.
And then Trump within weeks declared that the US will move its embassy to Jerusalem.
Just a strange collection of events, isn't it? Almost like being told that Epstein
actually killing himself .
I always refer to 11 September as National Reichstag Fire Day. However it happened it was
certainly used opportunistically by the yankee regime (and the zionists) to bolster the
dictatorial and authoritarian elements of the regime. I am certain that the Israelis, at the
least, were aware of the conspiracy as it occurred.
" One theory to explain this discrepancy is that the Mossad elements of which the
"Dancing Israelis" and other alleged Israeli spies could have been part of a specific
section of Israeli intelligence that were acting independently as a rogue agency .
Such a possibility is not unusual given that divisions of or groups within the CIA have
been known to "go rogue" on several occasions "
Such an explanation is wholly unnecessary. Not only is the Mossad "rogue" enough, Israel
itself is a rogue state engaged in false flag terrorism all the time. Heck, the state
itself was created by terrorism. Rogue state, rogue secret service, rogue operation,
it's all par for the course.
Whenever and wherever strange murders, government problems, assassinations, and evil presents
itself there is a good chance that Israel is involved in one way or another. From the Anthrax
letters to the 9/11 attacks who benefits and follow the money are all you need to know.
There is no other group, nation, tribe, or country that has destroyed more of mankind in
one way or another than Israel. And the worst thing about all of it is they never pay for it
and just laugh in face of the weak goy.
as early as 8:00 a.m. that day, more than 40 minutes prior to the attack.
There has been some controversy about the exact time the schlomos arrived. I would think
there are ways of finding out and not depending on the one eye witness (who came forward).
The FBI almost certainly knows. It would be significant to find that out.
Either Mossad was incredibly careless in their celebration or they wanted to be
caught. I haven't made up my mind yet as to which it was. I lean towards the latter. In
either case we've never been given an adequate explanation and deserve much better. So
naturally we are not going to get it.
And it's great to know the manager of Urban Moving Systems who had fled to Israel
within 24 hours of the attack is now back in the USA working in the Bay Area. No doubt
spying, for someone?
This foreknowledge was already blatantly apparent early on, while events were just
beginning to unfold during that fateful morning in Manhattan because alleged co-conspirator
Ehud Barak was kind enough to make a personal appearance, concurrently, directly at BBC News
headquarters in London (oh so "coincidentally", for coincidence theorists), playing the role
of spontaneous "anchor", to proclaim his scripted interpretation of what this major incident
supposedly meant and suggest future policy guidelines that the US government should adopt in
response. After years of planning for the big event he just couldn't resist putting himself
into the spotlight, very eager to lay out the intended narrative – just too
revealing!
Ehud Barak interview at BBC in London during the 9-11 attack:
Basically, they botched their operation, which was far too complex to carry out without
making tell-tale mistakes, but the media, FBI, and many others zealously covered up for them,
after the fact, with a multitude of transparent lies and distortions. However, too many
people were not fooled.
"Saudi funding" is Fake News used to deflect attention away from the real perpetrator of the
crime, the Jewish State of Israel. Overwhelming evidence shows the Israelis were deeply
involved in the attacks. where as there is NO (zilch) evidence to imolicate Saudi Arabia
IMO, 9/11 was an Israeli masterminded False Flag, with help from traitors in the WH, the FBI,
CIA, NSA and Pentagon. With lots of help from the MSM, including that 'paper of record,' the
New York Times, which has a distinguished track record of lying to Americans.
The Times lied about their good friend Uncle Joe Stalin, starving millions of Ukrainians
to death and they lied about Saddam having WMD's.
Until Americans get off their lazy asses and start raising hell about 9/11, demanding the
truth be told, we'll just keep circling the bowl, right into the cesspit of
totalitarianism.
Of course, the Israelis knew of this in advance–they participated in the planning and
carrying out of the event. This was a false flag event. The Israelis after the Levon Affair
and the attack on the USS Liberty realized they can do anything because they literally own
the news media and the own the Congress of the United States. And yes, it's about the
"Benjamins"
Israel is the classic bully that is backed up by its big brother America. Both countries
need a good bloody nose to come into line with civilized society. That bloody nose will
come.
The only discussion of 9/11 should be of the evidence in the Southern District of NY NY and
the new Grand Jury. Much of the new evidence, from real professionals including nuclear
scientists has been presented. It's a Homerun, yet the corrupt judicial system has been
sitting on it for over a year. Of course , what would one expect – from the City that
financed and sent all those Trotskyites to Saint Petersburg, Russia.There should be thousands
awaiting trials by now, but we see – nothing. America will not recover until Washington
and NY is over run by the people – similiar to the Nam protests but 10xs larger. Thanks
Unz Rev.
Israel/AIPAC run the United States government. AIPAC is the most powerful lobby in
Washington. Israel got 38 billion dollars, while we get more mexicans.
Israel takes part of that money (from our taxpayers) to buy off our leaders so they
provide more support for Israel.
The company's owner -- Dominik Otto Suter, an Israeli citizen -- had fled to Israel on
September 14, 2001, two days after he had been questioned by the FBI. The FBI told ABC News
that "Urban Moving may have been providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation."
Surprisingly, since at least 2016, Suter has been living in the San Francisco Bay Area,
where he works for a contractor for major tech companies like Google and Microsoft.
According to the public records database Intelius, in 2006 and 2007 Suter also worked for a
telecommunications company -- Granite Telecommunications -- that works for the U.S.
military and several other U.S. government agencies.
Lol! They don't even care about optics anymore. The US is a proper Banana Republic
now.
@JimDandy LOL. They're working double overtime these days. Give em a break. The clown car
got out of the blocks fast with the first comment but then went into the ditch.
This is one of the great ones: Mossad Juval Aviv: "It's easy to put a truck bomb as we did
in London" –
It would if the US was being cowed into it by some form of blackmail.
People get blackmailed, not nations.
The people in the intelligence communities of the US, Israel, Saudi, and many other
countries are all implicated in a wide variety of crimes that the others know
about–think of it as a circle of blackmail.
At some point the members in the circle internalize the reality of the situation and start
acting as allies.
If they stick around long enough they become friends.
Of course the Mossad had foreknowledge of some kind. But so did the CIA and the Brit
SIS. And probably so did the Saudi General Intelligence Presidency.
At least the first named 3, and probably the Saudis as well, were behind long range
planning to stage such an event to justify war foreign policy.
It's plainly obvious that they were foreign agents complicit in the murder of 3000 Americans.
A normal result would be their execution or lifetime imprisonment, with their
collaborators in the US administration (who covered for them, tampered with evidence and
released them) getting the same. The threads of treason are followed through US society to
the end (the office of President), carrying the same penalties.
US society is probably building up to do this, likely illegally, given the prospects for
chaos and the hopeless state of American "justice".
@ChuckOrloski Chuck, why the hell were our "good buddies" and "best friends" the Israelis
posing for pictures with cigarette lighters during the attack? My guess it's some deep
Talmudic holy practice that is too subtle and holy for the cattle to grasp.
"The five aroused attention in New Jersey after people noticed them going to unusual
lengths to photograph the World Trade Center ruins and making light of the situation. One
photograph developed by the F.B.I. showed Sivan Kurzberg holding a lighted lighter in the
foreground, with the smoldering wreckage in the background , said Steven Noah Gordon, a
lawyer for the five."
I'd love to be chosen enough to see what the other photos contained if the NY Slimes is
willing to admit this much. You have to wade thru a lot of oy veys and tears of "A Nation
Challenged" to get to the scraps of truth:
Thanks for the informative exposé of one more crime committed against America
(9/11), by the Zionist/Jewish/Rothschild & other Financial Oligarchs,' New World
Order.
We Americans have the Moral Duty and Physical Necessity of regaining our Sovereignty
and our Honor, by Restoring Our Republic
First of all, thank you, Ron Unz, for allowing this article to be published on your site.
Secondly, does anyone on this site remember the messages workers at Odigo, the Israeli
instant messaging company, received *two hours* before the attacks. These messages seem to
have warned about the attacks. Yet, even though Israeli *civilians* know the content of the
messages, this content has never been made public to the American people.
Perhaps the next FOIA request should be for these messages.
I have long suspected that a few people in Israeli intelligence, perhaps the children of
Jews from Arab lands who grew up speaking Arabic as a first language, located an al-Qaeda
cell and encouraged the attack, perhaps offering practical assistance as well.
This kind of cause means that only a few people knew about it. Perhaps most Knesset
members had no clue whatsoever. This sort of action would be easier to conceal and would have
the additional advantage of plausible deniability as the Arabs who knew would mostly be
dead.
Not convincing. If Mossad had been involved in this operation, it would have sent serious
people as masterminds or as observers. So would have done any agency worth its salt (BND,
CIA, KGB/FSB, former Bulgarian & Romanian assassins ).
And what Mossad is supposed to have done?
Sending some guys who are overwhelmed by joy because of their machinations and . dance.
High five. Yaaay
These guys, if they had been the right stuff, would have invisibly blended into the crowd
& no one would have noticed them. They wouldn't even have blinked at the sight of
collapsing towers. Or would feign horror & astonishment.
And they dance, high fiving.
You seriously want me to believe these guys were not some neurotic looneys, but Mossad
pros?
I know a couple hundred people personally and talk to them throughout the year. Though I see
many people doubting the official story of 9/11 online, none of them are brave enough to
doubt it out loud, nor do I ever hear of others doing so. I understand the fear, of course,
but c'mon. This isn't about one's personal opinion of the O.J. Simpson trial. This is far
more important.
Will the majority of Americans ever wake up and speak up? If and when they do, what will
happen to the dollar?
"However, it is essential to note that Israeli intelligence did attempt to warn the U.S.
government at least twice beginning in August 2001 as did the intelligence agencies of many
other countries, including France, the UK, Egypt, Russia and Jordan."
However, it is even more essential to note that these "warnings" were not detailed,
actionable warnings, but a calculatedly deceptive inculpation; part of a psyop whereby the
"government" could pin the blame for 9/11 on "al Qaeda" without any kind of an
investigation.
"Even if these agents were "rogue" Mossad, there was plenty of other remote angles
from which they could have documented & celebrated the evil event."
They were inexperienced and did not take into account that the woman who called the police
noticed their suspicious behavior with the aid of strong binoculars. They were there to do
more than take some pictures and celebrate, more importantly to stage another spectacular
event, namely to set off their van, filled with explosives, at the middle of the Washington
Bridge, which, like the three World Trade buildings, would have been prepared with micro
thermite, during prior work that was done there.
To say that they were documenting the event is to downplay what they were surely up to,
which can be inferred from a contemporaneous report. Note the following quote embedded in the
link referred to in Comment #4 above:
American security services overnight stopped a car bomb on the George Washington
Bridge. The van, packed with explosives, was stopped on an approach ramp to the bridge.
Authorities suspect the terrorists intended to blow up the main crossing between New Jersey
and New York, Army Radio reported. (Jerusalem Post 09/12/01)
Media in the U.S. subsequently referred merely to explosive "residue", which is
technically correct but grossly misleading. According to reports at the time, three of the
five initial dancers were in the van, dressed in Islamic garments, with plane tickets to fly
away in different directions. A likely scenario, which was thwarted by their apprehension, is
not difficult to image in light of the Jerusalem Post report, and could have played
out like this:
Perpetrators stall van at the side of the road near the double cable at its lowest point,
flip up the front hood, as if to signal engine trouble, be seen by other drivers in their
conspicuous clothing, then escape by hailing taxis driven by accomplices, leaving the Islamic
clothes in the taxis, rendezvous with the other two dancers in Manhattan driving a different
van, then head for the airport. Authorities would soon close off the bridge to traffic, based
on reports of the suspicious vehicle, possibly set to be blown up. Helicopters with TV crews
focus on the van from above, keeping viewers in suspense until dusk, and suddenly there is a
bright flash and fireball rising from the van, as the right side of the bridge is ripped
apart, assisted by the thermite charges at the cables; both halves of the roadway fall into
the water, very spectacular, right during prime time, perhaps the cables on the northern side
might remain intact. Millions of people watching live are then led to think that Arabs not
only blew up the World Trade Center buildings but also the Washington Bridge.
The time these amateur dancers spent in custody, followed by deportation, was indeed very
lenient punishment for having presumably participated in blowing up the only bridge that
connects Manhattan with New Jersey.
@Mark JamesThere are undoubtedly agents still living and documents still unshredded
that connect the dancing schlomos from Urban Moving with the dancing schlomos in the FBI,
FAA, etc. who oversaw the destruction of the evidence under Chertoff and Mueller. Virtually
everything in the massive NFPA Code 921 Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations was
disregarded without that evidence of criminal conspiracy itself being investigated. The plain
facts of the matter will also eventually prove that the elaborate efforts at concealment by
the owners of the msm provide powerful evidence of their guilt as co-conspirators complicit
from day one in pulling off 9/11.
The msm cover up of the truth I saw from watching some of the news yesterday is so absurd
that a prize should be awarded for coining a name for it. Something to neutralize the fifth
column and their wholly owned msm's combining the words "conspiracy," which best describes
themselves, and "theory," now incredibly meaning an automatic falsification of observation,
measurement, and the laws of physics if any of it disagrees with what amounts to an official
fairytale for children about naughty Arabs who magically flew airplanes into buildings
because they hate us for our freedoms.
I caught a few minutes of Fox News yesterday. Appalling that anyone with half a brain
would swallow that bilge about 19 Arabs who couldn't handle a Cessna 150, etc. They're still
using flag-waving jingoism and country music to encapsulate the Israeli-first meme as more
American than apple pie and insinuating that pointing out absurdities with the 9/11 fairytale
is tantamount to collaboration with the enemy. I had to laugh out loud watching Sean Hannity
pretend to be so genuine in his patriotism it causes him to slip into lisping baby talk, like
he's now aping Trish Regan and Shep Smith. The conservative movement's come a long way, from
political rationalism to one of their hero's talking baby talk overnight. No wonder the left
is already doing victory laps.
Isn't that the point. Whether or not 9/11 was a conspiracy or allowed to happen, the
response to it was an actual conspiracy. The response would have been the same in either
situation, that's the point, that's the conspiracy.
In the event that an attack like 9/11 could have ever been motivated by actual terrorists,
the motivation also derives from the US slavish backing of Israel.
You seriously want me to believe these guys were not some neurotic looneys, but Mossad
pros?
You raise some intelligent points for us.
I will raise a few for you.
1. The Dancing Scum behaved quite rationally & soberly during their TV interviews in
the Entity.
They displayed no nuttiness or neurosis of any kind.
Their dress & comportment in the USA – was as swarthy scruffy Semites (Arabs). On
Entity TV, they were well shaven, washed, & 'white as the driven snow.'
2. Acting neurotic & loonyish is a good cover – in itself. Apparently, only one
witness noticed them (enough) to bother to call the police.
3. They did their job. They took their pictures. Which is not to say that other (higher
definition & more Professional pictures were not taken elsewhere). That is what happened.
We have seen some of those higher definition videos, and pictures – taken by Film Crews
& other Media employees.
4. It is difficult to take photos of a Huge Tragedy/Assault & "blended into the crowd
& no one would have noticed them. " They almost succeeded in "blended into the
crowd."
5. These Dancers might have served as a distraction. Might-Might Distract from what?
6. The Dancers reception in the Entity was quite friendly. They were treated as heroes.
Why?
Yes, there is much We-The-American-People do not know about this Assault. We agree on
that.
former Bulgarian & Romanian assassins
? Are they worth their salt?
The buildings came down. One was not even hit by a bird, let alone a plane.
Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former Director of Studies at the US Army War College , on Israel's
Attack on America on 9/11 –
"Until we demand an independent, honest, and thorough investigation and accountability for
those whose action and inaction led to those events and the cover-up, our republic and our
Constitution remain in the gravest danger." – Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, U.S. Marine
Corps (ret) – Retired U.S. Marine Corps fighter pilot with over 300 combat missions
flown. Decorations include the Distinguished Flying Cross and 32 awards of the Air Medal.
"The government story is total B.S. plain and simple." – Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S.
Air Force, Flew for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years. Had previously flown the actual
two United Airlines aircraft that were hijacked on 9/11. Former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot
with over 100 combat missions.
"No Arab hijacker, ever in a million years, ever flew into the World Trade Center. And if
you got 30 minutes I'll tell you exactly why Maybe if I had a couple tries to line up a few
building, I could have done it. But certainly not the first time and certainly not at 500 or
600 miles an hour." – John Lear, over 19,000+ total hours flown in over 100 different
types of planes for 10 different airlines in 60 different countries around the world. Holds
every certificate ever offered by the FAA and has 23 different FAA type ratings. Held 17
world records including speed around the world in a Lear Jet Model 24. More at
patriotsquestion911.com
Israel accused of planting spy devices near the White House.
The miniature surveillance devices, colloquially known as "StingRays," mimic regular
cell towers to fool cellphones into giving them their locations and identity information.
Formally called international mobile subscriber identity-catchers or IMSI-catchers, they
also can capture the contents of calls and data use.
Your "argument" dear (((Sean))) Your arrogance will be your undoing.
There are quite a few longtime commenters on this website whom I've always strongly
suspected of being pro-Israeli activists operating under "deep cover."
One of the more amusing aspects of articles like this one is that it has naturally drawn a
few of them out and forced them to permanently unmask and reveal themselves
@ValmMond Don't forget the Israeli kiosks selling sunglasses key rings and hair ribbons
that littered every shopping mall. Those tiny corporations were used for a lot of HI B fraud,
SBA loan fraud importation of prostitutes, money laundering mail box drops all sorts of
things useful for both spying and crime. It was as much a cliche of Israeli immigrant small
business as manicurists are for Asian women.
@Bardon Kaldian They had foreknowledge. Foreknowledge indicates complicity. It's obvious
even for the dumbest of official version supporters. That's why the incident and the
israelis' subsequent arrest were scrubbed from most mainstream news outlets.
The high-fiving dancers' exact role in the 9/11 events is irrelevant. All 5 knew on that
morning why they were on that NJ hill overlooking lower Manhattan and what was coming to the
twin towers. Conspicuous celebration must have not been part of their job description, but
hey, it was mission accomplished and the goyim were not looking. As it turned out, they were.
But in the end, it didn't really matter. They'll keep seeing the Trees for the Forest (Gump?)
and when one of these trees falls, it shall make no noise in the zionized informational
vacuum.
Ron, Pastor Chuck Baldwin, who was a confirmed Zionist until after a Damascus moment, posted
on his site this piece about a book that names names, and provides facts. It's worth reading.
It's ironic when not just Christians–real Christians–should venerate the
truth, that anyone of conscience seeking the truth is attacked and called a truther.
As Orlov wrote about conspiracies, we don't have to get to the details on how they're
done. Let those who push the fake narrative explain all the failures on 911 and why Bush,
Cheney, the Joint Chiefs, the heads of CIA and FBI didn't resign if the perpetrators were
Muslims with box-cutters.
@Durruti "Zionist/Jewish/Rothschild & other Financial Oligarchs,' New World Order."
-- Perhaps the focus should be on the "local" organizers and yes-men, beginning with
Cheney the Traitor, Bush the lesser, Rice the Mushroom Cloud, Tenant, Mueller, and the
opportunistic higherups among the US brass -- all those who put their comfort (money and
power) before the well-being of their country. They allowed the "event" to happen (some
perhaps were actively involved in preparation for the "event"), and they made the financial
killing and literal killing of great numbers of humans in the aftermath.
At least, Israelis have been destroying the US (by pushing the US resources towards the
wars of aggression in the Middle East) to protect and promote their myth-based ideological
toy of Eretz Israel. In comparison, the US government/Pentagon have solidified into a bunch
of traitors and become engaged in the pornography of betrayal at home and mass slaughter
abroad for ba$e profiteering. The US Congress of corrupt cowards has been stinking like
rotten fish.
Until the local rot and poisoning continues, the country will be open to deadly infections
and diseases.
Because people do not understand Mathematics, particularly the sciences of Physics and
Statistics & Probability, they are susceptible to believing completely improbable and
impossible explanations that are utterly false, yet widely accepted.
It appears you were/are looking for a way to exculpate the Zionist Oligarchs from one of
their many crimes against humanity (and against my Country, America), the crime of 9/11
& the attacks on the Arab Nations – that followed. You will have to debate with
Webb, Unz, and some others to effect that denial; although the New York Times, or Haaretz
might be interested and easier pickings.
Sorry, but- get a shrink. If you seriously think that "Zionist Oligarchs" exist as some
sinister organization or actual Jewish group masterminding or controlling most of US foreign
policy- there is not anything to discuss. True: a) in the US, Jews as an ethnic group are way
over-represented in the corridors of power, constituting perhaps ~20% of American power
elites; b) Zionist Jews, and by that I mean not Jewish supporters of Israel, but "Israeli
firsters" who are Jews first & Americans second (or hardly at all) are a clear minority
in that ethnic (sub)group, no more than 20% of them (and that would be, I think,
overestimate). Israeli firsters & similar ilk are well described in Walt &
Mearsheimer's book on the Israeli lobby; just, apart from Jonathan Pollard & probably a
few other spies, there is not enough evidence to pinpoint the great pro-Israeli plot and
especially anything convincing re twin towers collapse.
The article has not shown what those dancing Israelis did actually do , except for
taking pictures & behaving like neurotics under stress. Woody Allen would have been more
persuasive as an Israeli spy.
9/11 or 11/9? When someone points gleefully to the typos, it is a sure sign he has nothing
to say or argue.
These dancers were not obviously complicit in anything & much more important –
it is not obvious that it, the twin towers collapse, was something planned or executed at
higher levels than the official version says.
The whole conspiratorial mindset is, when I think of it, similar to the later phases of
German classical philosophy, Hegel in particular. These guys (Hegel, Schelling) had built
immense, gigantic philosophical superstructures (history, metaphysics, philosophy of law,
Naturphilosophie ..) based on slim empirical evidence & tried to fit those vast
structures in the Procrustean bed of their narrow world-view. For instance Hegel refused to
acknowledge that Uranus existed because that would mean that Pythagorean structures, with
sacred number 7, were inadequate as explanatory paradigms of nature.
The same goes, on a significantly lower level, with many conspiracy theories, including
9/11 truthers. There are some info, data & events that are somehow shady, dubious or hard
to explain. Also, some data are questionable- or not, I don't know.
What better than to accept some grand & all-encompassing quasi-explanation ?
@Alfred Spooks can be divided in a few classes, at least two: masterminds &
operatives. Masterminds are rare (Wild Bill Donovan, Dulles, Canaris, Schellenberg, Heydrich,
J.J. Angleton, Beria, ). Great operatives are also rare (Rudolf Abel, Richard Sorge, Sydney
Reilly, Elie Cohen the fake Syrian ). Clumsy operatives are more frequent (the Rosenberg
couple), while some are hard to classify (Klaus Fuchs) & others are numbskulls who just
got lucky for some time (Jonathan Pollard).
If Mossad (or any other agency, Israeli, American or any combination of all spooks in the
world combined) tried to to plan & execute such a vast, breathtaking operation that would
change history, far surpassing JFK assassination or nuclear weapons secrets theft -they would
have employed qualified people & not someone worse than agent Piglet.
:See for example their clumsy Dubai operation (Google : Assassination of Mahmoud
Al-Mabhouh
also see the failed 1997 assassination attempt of Khaled Mashal in Amman,Jordan. Mossad
agents put a fast acting poison into his ear. However they were soon captured. King Hussein
of Jordan demanded that Israel turn over the antidote of the poison or Jordan would cut
diplomatic relations.
PM Netanyahu at first refused but he later agreed to send the antidote and the head of
Mossad flew to Amman with it
Respectful of your presumed experience, I am unclear with your mental mechanics upon which
you concluded that, "They were there to do more than take some pictures and celebrate, more
importantly to stage another spectacular event, namely to set off their van, filled with
explosives, at the middle of the Washington Bridge ,"
So to reiterate my point, I believe the "dancing Israelis" were Mossad pros, who had they
any concern/fears for getting caught & charged with having extremely suspicious 9/11
foreknowledge, they would not have ritually celebrated & danced in public view.
Point taken: Indeed, the weird "dancing Israelis" might have been Jewish "amateur
dancers," haha, but in no way were they amateur Mossad men.
Thanks and 'dat 'gonna be my done 'dat respect, Been_there_done_that!
@Bardon Kaldian The dancing Israelis were only caught because one of the thousands
watching the destruction of the towers had binoculars and caught them. It's often tiny things
like that that catch criminals spies whatever.
Serial killer Son of Sam was caught because one of the detectives thought to check all
parking tickets issued in each neighborhood around the time of the murder. He reasoned that
the killer didn't live in the neighborhoods where he killed and had to park in the street.
Sure enough the killer got a parking ticket near the site of the killing right date right
time.
Russian spy Colonel Abel was caught because he used fake quarters and nickels to conceal
his microdot information. The coins had too and bottom sections that unscrewed. He had his
newspaper delivered. One day he paid the paper boy using one of the 2 piece nickels. The boy
noticed. He showed it to his Dad who notified the FBI.
Had Abel bought his paper from a store or newsstand it would have been difficult or
impossible to trace. But paperboys know their customers.
Jonathan Pollard was caught because he spent so much time away from his desk working for
Israel he didn't get any work done. So his supervisor decided to fire him.
Government employees aren't at will. They can only be fired for cause. So the supervisor
set about documenting causes to fire Pollard. That investigation led to the supervisor's
discovery Pollard was working for Israel.
Had Pollard worked for an at will government contractor he might have been fired, but he
wouldn't have been caught. It was only the for cause investigation that caught him.
The dancing Israelis were caught because one woman used binoculars.
They didn't manage to keep, high profile criminal, Jeffrey Epstein alive. The prime witness
to alleged crimes of many others and the key to bring them to justice. Keeping Epstein alive
was too difficult for the nation that sent men on the moon half a century ago, and spends
billions of dollars each year on intelligence.
Now, after FOIA request made by a private citizen the FBI releases few of the photos in
very bad quality and heavily redacted. Basically worthless. Is there any reasoning behind
this as to why so few, so bad and so redacted or is this just to show the FBI is beyond and
above and does what it pleases. TPTB are just mocking us. The message is clear.
It's best to forget 9/11. They want us to remember it. Let's rather remember what happened
after, there are no mysteries about that story. We even know part of it was written before
9/11. And the results speak for themselves; hundreds of thousands killed and millions on the
run, trillions wasted. A crime much worse than 9/11 ever was – and we, more or less,
know the culprits.
While the case of the “Dancing Israelis” has long been treated as an outlier
in the aftermath of September 11, what is often overlooked is the fact that hundreds of
Israeli nationals were arrested in the aftermath of the attacks.
According to a FOX
News report from December 2001, 60 Israelis were apprehended or detained after September
11, with most deported, and a total of 140 Israelis were arrested and detained in all of 2001
by federal authorities. That report claimed that the arrests, ostensibly including the
“Dancing Israelis,” were in relation to an investigation of “an organized
[Israeli] intelligence gathering operation designed to ‘penetrate government
facilities.’”
The report also added that most of those arrested, in addition to having served in the
IDF, had “intelligence expertise” and worked for Israeli companies that
specialized in wiretapping. Some of those detained were also active members of the Israeli
military; and several detainees, including the “Dancing Israelis,” had failed
polygraph tests when asked if they had been surveilling the U.S. government.
note the head of urban moving systems fled to Israel on Sept. 14, when all airspace was
shut down over CONUS., Did he cross the border into Canada to flee?
The FBI presence at the Urban Moving Systems search site drew the attention of the local
media and was later reported on both television and in the local press. A former Urban Moving
Systems employee later contacted the Newark Division with information indicating that he had
quit his employment with Urban Moving Systems as a result of the high amount of anti-American
sentiment present among Urban’s employees. The former employee stated that an Israeli
employee of Urban had even once remarked, “Give us twenty years and we’ll take
over your media and destroy your country” (page 37 of the FBI report ).
The FBI returned to search the premises of Urban Moving Systems a month later, but by that
time found:
The building and all of its contents had been abandoned by…the owner of Urban
Moving Systems. This [was] apparently being done to avoid criminal prosecution after the
09/11/2001 arrest of five of his employees and subsequent seizure of his office computer
systems by members of the FBI-NK on or around 09/13/2001.”
The company’s owner — Dominik Otto Suter, an Israeli citizen —
had fled to Israel on September 14, 2001, two days after he had been questioned by the
FBI. The FBI
told ABC News that “Urban Moving may have been providing cover for an Israeli
intelligence operation.” Surprisingly, since at least 2016, Suter has been living in the San Francisco Bay
Area, where he works for a
contractor for major tech companies like Google and Microsoft. According to the public
records database Intelius, in 2006 and 2007 Suter also worked for a telecommunications
company — Granite Telecommunications — that works for the U.S. military and several other U.S.
government agencies.
They did it. And if the American people do understand that, israel's going to disappear.
israel will flat-*** disappear from this Earth.
- Dr. Alan Sabrosky
"... According to a FOX News report from December 2001, 60 Israelis were apprehended or detained after September 11, with most deported, and a total of 140 Israelis were arrested and detained in all of 2001 by federal authorities. That report claimed that the arrests, ostensibly including the “Dancing Israelis,” were in relation to an investigation of “an organized [Israeli] intelligence gathering operation designed to ‘penetrate government facilities.’” ..."
"... The report also added that most of those arrested, in addition to having served in the IDF, had “intelligence expertise” and worked for Israeli companies that specialized in wiretapping. Some of those detained were also active members of the Israeli military; and several detainees, including the “Dancing Israelis,” had failed polygraph tests when asked if they had been surveilling the U.S. government. ..."
"... The FBI presence at the Urban Moving Systems search site drew the attention of the local media and was later reported on both television and in the local press. A former Urban Moving Systems employee later contacted the Newark Division with information indicating that he had quit his employment with Urban Moving Systems as a result of the high amount of anti-American sentiment present among Urban’s employees. The former employee stated that an Israeli employee of Urban had even once remarked, “Give us twenty years and we’ll take over your media and destroy your country” (page 37 of the FBI report ). ..."
"... The company’s owner — Dominik Otto Suter, an Israeli citizen — had fled to Israel on September 14, 2001, two days after he had been questioned by the FBI. The FBI told ABC News that “Urban Moving may have been providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation.” Surprisingly, since at least 2016, Suter has been living in the San Francisco Bay Area, where he works for a contractor for major tech companies like Google and Microsoft. According to the public records database Intelius, in 2006 and 2007 Suter also worked for a telecommunications company — Granite Telecommunications — that works for the U.S. military and several other U.S. government agencies. ..."
Quote memorialized by Jean Patrice in "Communism Unmasked" first edition in the 1940s:
The author used the following quote in the referenced book at pp. 257-258 because the
topic of Appendix II on p. 257 was "Jews and Vatican II." The author was questioning why the
Jews would have been invited to Vatican II as if anyone invites a corporate adversary to a
board meeting. Appendix II beginning on p. 257 is a worthwhile read.
Author's prefacing statement:
Let me here quote the warning issued by Benjamin Franklin. He is reported as being
very hostile to the Jews. According to the diaries of Charles Pinckney of South Carolina,
one of the framers of the American Constitution, Franklin protested very strongly against
the Jews. He is reported as saying at the Constitutional Convention:
In whatever country Jews have settled in any great numbers, they have lowered its
moral tone, depreciated its commercial integrity, and segregated themselves and not been
assimilated; have sneered at and tried to undermine the Christian religion and upon which
that nation is founded, by objecting to its restrictions; have built up a State within a
State, and, when opposed, have tried to strangle that country to death financially, as in
the case of Spain and Portugal. . .
If you do not exclude them from the United States in this Constitution, in less than
200 years they will have swarmed in such great numbers that they will dominate and devour
the land and change our form of Government for which we Americans have shed our blood,
given our life and substance and jeopardised our liberty. If you do not exclude them, in
less than 200 years our descendants will be working in the fields to furnish them
substance, while they will be in the counting houses rubbing their hands. I warn you,
gentlemen, that if you do not exclude the Jews for all time, your children will curse you
in your grave, Jews, gentlemen, are Asiatics. Let them be born where they will never be
otherwise.
Interesting how Franklin mentioned "a State within a State" just like today's "the Deep
State."
History has been significantly veiled to hide these truths.
While the case of the “Dancing Israelis” has long been treated as an outlier
in the aftermath of September 11, what is often overlooked is the fact that hundreds of
Israeli nationals were arrested in the aftermath of the attacks.
According to a FOX
News report from December 2001, 60 Israelis were apprehended or detained after September
11, with most deported, and a total of 140 Israelis were arrested and detained in all of 2001
by federal authorities. That report claimed that the arrests, ostensibly including the
“Dancing Israelis,” were in relation to an investigation of “an organized
[Israeli] intelligence gathering operation designed to ‘penetrate government
facilities.’”
The report also added that most of those arrested, in addition to having served in the
IDF, had “intelligence expertise” and worked for Israeli companies that
specialized in wiretapping. Some of those detained were also active members of the Israeli
military; and several detainees, including the “Dancing Israelis,” had failed
polygraph tests when asked if they had been surveilling the U.S. government.
note the head of urban moving systems fled to Israel on Sept. 14, when all airspace was
shut down over CONUS., Did he cross the border into Canada to flee?
The FBI presence at the Urban Moving Systems search site drew the attention of the local
media and was later reported on both television and in the local press. A former Urban Moving
Systems employee later contacted the Newark Division with information indicating that he had
quit his employment with Urban Moving Systems as a result of the high amount of anti-American
sentiment present among Urban’s employees. The former employee stated that an Israeli
employee of Urban had even once remarked, “Give us twenty years and we’ll take
over your media and destroy your country” (page 37 of the FBI report ).
The FBI returned to search the premises of Urban Moving Systems a month later, but by that
time found:
The building and all of its contents had been abandoned by…the owner of Urban
Moving Systems. This [was] apparently being done to avoid criminal prosecution after the
09/11/2001 arrest of five of his employees and subsequent seizure of his office computer
systems by members of the FBI-NK on or around 09/13/2001.”
The company’s owner — Dominik Otto Suter, an Israeli citizen —
had fled to Israel on September 14, 2001, two days after he had been questioned by the
FBI. The FBI
told ABC News that “Urban Moving may have been providing cover for an Israeli
intelligence operation.” Surprisingly, since at least 2016, Suter has been living in the San Francisco Bay
Area, where he works for a
contractor for major tech companies like Google and Microsoft. According to the public
records database Intelius, in 2006 and 2007 Suter also worked for a telecommunications
company — Granite Telecommunications — that works for the U.S. military and several other U.S.
government agencies.
They did it. And if the American people do understand that, israel's going to disappear.
israel will flat-*** disappear from this Earth.
- Dr. Alan Sabrosky
How about another peacemaker and lady in waiting for the GOP 2024 nomination - Nimrata
"Nikki" Haley. She will immediately call for a Peace & Friendship Treaty with that evil
thug Vladimir Putin.
I'm sure the Administration will give the matter much thought and due deliberation and using
the same selection process as before, choose the candidate most highly
qualified recommended by the Adelsons. Tell me it ain't so.
Lyttennburgh said... Reply 11 September 2019 at 07:05 AM
Subhān Allāh! Sultan Danuld at-Trumphoon al-Quincy dismissed his wazir Yahya al-Boltoni, for verily it’s said to all
Faithful: mustache is Shaitan’s brush. /s
This is a bit like rearranging the chairs on the deck of Titanic.
The problem is we do not know who pressed Trump to appoint Bolton., Rumors were that it was Abelson. In this case nothing
changed.
The other problem with making Bolton firing a significant move is the presence in White House other neocon warmongers. So one
less doe not change the picture. For example Pompeo remains and he is no less warmongering neocon, MIC stooge, and no less
subservant to Israel then Bolton.
Notable quotes:
"... Firing National Security Advisor John Bolton gives US President Donald Trump a chance to move foreign policy in a more peaceful direction – as long as he's not replaced with another hawk, former congressman Ron Paul told RT ..."
"... Bolton has "been a monkey-wrench in Donald Trump's policies of trying to back away from some of these conflicts around the world," Paul observed on Tuesday ..."
"... "Every time I think Trump is making progress, Bolton butts in and ruins it," Paul added. Negotiations with Afghanistan and talks with North Korea and Iran have reportedly been scuttled by his aggressive tendencies, with Pyongyang declaring him a "defective human product." ..."
"... "A lot of people here didn't even want his appointment, because he was only able to take a position that did not require Senate approval," Paul said, suggesting that perhaps the "Deep State" pressure had forced the president to keep Bolton around long past his sell-by date. ..."
"... As for whether Bolton's departure would change the White House's policy line significantly, though, Paul was less certain. "I don't think it will change a whole lot," he said, pointing out that "we have no idea" who will replace Bolton. Trump said he would make an announcement next week. ..."
Firing National Security Advisor John Bolton gives US President Donald Trump a chance to
move foreign policy in a more peaceful direction – as long as he's not replaced with
another hawk, former congressman Ron Paul told RT.
Bolton has "been a monkey-wrench in Donald Trump's policies of trying to back away from some
of these conflicts around the world," Paul observed on Tuesday, after news of Bolton's
dismissal from the White House.
Also on rt.com Bolton out: Trump ditches hawkish adviser he kept for 18 months despite
'disagreements'
"Every time I think Trump is making progress, Bolton butts in and ruins it," Paul added.
Negotiations with Afghanistan and talks with North Korea and Iran have reportedly been scuttled
by his aggressive tendencies, with Pyongyang declaring him a "defective human product."
Foreign leaders weren't the only ones who had a problem with Trump's notoriously belligerent
advisor, either.
"A lot of people here didn't even want his appointment, because he was only able to take a
position that did not require Senate approval," Paul said, suggesting that perhaps the "Deep
State" pressure had forced the president to keep Bolton around long past his sell-by date.
While the uber-hawk's firing came "later than it should be," Paul hoped it would clear the
way for Trump to follow through on the America First, end-the-wars promises that won him so
much support in 2016. "Those of us who would like less intervention, we're very happy with
it."
Also on rt.com War and whiskers: Freshly-resigned John Bolton gets meme-roasting
As for whether Bolton's departure would change the White House's policy line
significantly, though, Paul was less certain. "I don't think it will change a whole lot," he
said, pointing out that "we have no idea" who will replace Bolton. Trump said he would make an
announcement next week.
"... He said that, "The point that I want this panel to make is that anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel is soaring on the left and this is a real danger for this country." ..."
"... The Pennsylvania Congressman said that "there's one democratic nation in the Middle East that believes in Western values, and it's Israel." He described the Jewish State as a "little oasis of freedom" in the region. ..."
The Center for Security Policy hosted a panel at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) titled
"Why Anti-Zionism is a Form of Anti-Semitism and a Threat to National Security."
Speakers included Center
President Fred Fleitz, Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA), Rabbi Yechezkel Moskowitz of the National Council of Young Israel,
Dan Pollak of the Zionist Organization of America and investigative journalist and author James Simpson.
During his opening remarks Fleitz noted that, "There is an effort right now to dress up supposed criticisms of
the Israeli government and Prime Minister Netanyahu as just criticisms of their policies, that there's nothing
against the state of Israel. This is not right. This is repackaged anti-Semitism. It is repackaged Israel hatred
to delegitimize the state of Israel and the state of Israel's very right to exist."
He said that, "The point that I want this panel to make is that anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel is soaring
on the left and this is a real danger for this country."
Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) noted that the U.S. reaps tangible benefits from its relationship with Israel. Citing
an example from his own experience, he said that when he served as an Apache helicopter pilot he utilized
Israeli-developed technology.
The Pennsylvania Congressman said that "there's one democratic nation in the Middle East that believes in
Western values, and it's Israel." He described the Jewish State as a "little oasis of freedom" in the region.
During his remarks, Rabbi Yechezkel Moskowitz stated:
From my perspective the greatest existential threat to the Jewish people in this
country is the liberal progressive Jewish community. I think that what they've done is that they've replaced
Judaism with liberal progressivism. It's become practically speaking a religion for them," he explained, saying
that "in order to push forward their liberal progressive agenda, they are willing to throw Israel under the bus.
"... An increasingly international campaign to tar the BDS movement as "anti-Semitic" comes as Israel's staunchest global defenders are increasingly anti-Semites themselves. ..."
"... More broadly, measures like these protect the Israeli government from facing any economic consequences for isolating and discriminating against its Palestinian population. And the German measure shows that the campaign to ensure this impunity is going global, particularly as Israel makes common cause with far-right governments around the world (even, in some cases, those with well documented anti-Semitic sympathies). ..."
"... Netanyahu, who is facing charges of corruption, has been prime minister for the past 10 years. During his tenure, he has moved Israel increasingly to the right politically , with severe consequences for Palestinian rights. Under his leadership, the expansion of Israeli settlements has led to what many have called the death of a two-state solution . Meanwhile, his government has instituted policies that legalize discrimination against non-Jews and strengthen Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. ..."
An increasingly
international campaign to tar the BDS movement as "anti-Semitic" comes as Israel's staunchest
global defenders are increasingly anti-Semites themselves.
People gathered in front of the Chamber of Commerce and
Industry of Toulouse to protest Israel's ambassador in France, Aliza Ben-Noun. May 23th 2018. ,
(Photo by Alain Pitton/NurPhoto via Getty Images) Israeli politics have moved into uncharted
territory over the past several months, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu found himself
unable to
form a coalition large enough to claim victory in last spring's elections. However, even as
the Israeli state enters into political turmoil at home, it is becoming increasingly immune to
criticism from the international community abroad.
In May, Germany's government passed an
anti-BDS resolution condemning the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement, a
nonviolent campaign to protest Israel's military occupation of Palestine, as anti-Semitic, and
vowed that the country would not participate in any boycotts of Israeli products. The law is
similar to an anti-BDS resolution that was just passed
by the U.S. House of Representatives, and to several even more severe laws previously passed by
U.S. states.
More broadly, measures like these protect the Israeli government from facing any economic
consequences for isolating and discriminating against its Palestinian population. And the
German measure shows that the campaign to ensure this impunity is going global, particularly as
Israel makes common cause with far-right governments around the world (even, in some cases,
those with well documented anti-Semitic sympathies).
Netanyahu, who is facing charges of corruption, has been prime minister for the past 10
years. During his tenure, he has moved Israel increasingly to the
right politically , with severe consequences for Palestinian rights. Under his leadership,
the expansion of Israeli settlements has led to what many have called the death
of a two-state solution . Meanwhile, his government has instituted policies that legalize
discrimination against non-Jews and
strengthen Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.
I, for one, am scared of a world where the Israeli government can continue to advance these
discriminatory policies -- especially as it goes unquestioned by the international powers that
provide it with ongoing financial and ideological support. And as a Jew dedicated to fighting
for Palestinian rights, I'm scared of a world where dissenting movements are silenced, and
accusations of anti-Semitism overwhelm critiques of a powerful government.
Finally, I'm scared of a world where the attitudes of a United States headed by Donald Trump
can worm their way into the international community -- and I'm scared to watch as the
uncritical U.S. support for Israel is exported to Germany, the rest of Europe, and around the
world.
In reality, supporters of Israel and anti-BDS legislation are often those who do the least
to advocate for Jewish safety. In a striking example, white nationalist Richard Spencer has
self-identified as a "white Zionist."
Steve Bannon's appearance at a Zionist Organization of America event seems out of place as
well, given that his tenure as an editor at the alt-right Breitbart News was marked by
the use of anti-Semitic language . Most recently, President Trump justified his racist
attack on Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) with his support for Israel. However, his 2016 campaign
was also marked by the use of anti-Semitic
rhetoric , from campaign ads referencing "global special interests" to the invocation of
stereotypes that portray Jews as greedy and money-obsessed. In Europe, Hungary's right-wing
government has undergone
scrutiny for the seeming contradiction between its close relationship with Israel and its
denial of Hungary's role in the Holocaust.
Instances like these make it clear that the voices most ardently in favor of Israel are
often the same voices that make their careers preaching hate against Jews and people of color.
We should all be concerned when the U.S. government aligns itself with authoritarian or fascist
ideologues on any issue -- and Israel is no exception.
Germany's anti-BDS legislation offers yet another example of seemingly incongruous support
of Israel from notorious anti-Semites. The far-right party Alternative for Germany, whose
sympathy for the Nazi party has led to its denunciation by German Jewish leaders,
proposed the strictest version of the bill -- a total ban on BDS-related actions within
Germany. Contradictions like these make it clear that, unlike far-right politicians would have
you believe, support for Israel has no connection to solidarity with Jewish people.
Instead of a genuine rejection of anti-Semitism, the right's championing of Israel stems
from its love of nationalist
rhetoric . To these figures, support for Israel acts as a convenient pass to continue
espousing hate. Instead of defending the Jewish people, members of the right are embracing
something altogether different: ethno-nationalism, whether it involves the removal of
immigrants at America's southern border or the colonization of Palestinians in Israel.
The question then becomes whether we, as Jewish communities, want to align ourselves with
these ideologies -- ideologies held by people who have open disgust for our beliefs and our
humanity, not to mention the humanity of Muslims, immigrants and people of color around the
world.
Meanwhile, the BDS movement, which was launched in 2005 by a coalition of 170 organizations
representing Palestinian civil society, has never advocated for anti-Semitism. Instead, it is
brave enough to call the Israeli state what it is: a perpetuation of apartheid in a country
that has a segregated road system to
facilitate the separation of Israelis and Palestinians. Instead of opposing BDS, Jewish leaders
and their allies should be focusing on the real threat to Jewish communities: white nationalism
in all its forms.
If the international community wants to advocate for Jewish safety, the solution does not
lie in wholesale support of the Israeli state. In fact, the violent actions of Israel make us
all less safe.
It's time for the United States to acknowledge the global consequences of our uncritical
endorsement of the Israeli state, which includes everything from unchecked violence against
Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank to anti-BDS laws like Germany's. And it's time for
Germany to hold itself accountable for the white supremacy still present within its political
landscape, rather than leveling vitriol at human rights campaigns like BDS.
And it's time for everyone, from the U.S. to Germany to members of Israel's own government,
to stand against injustice in Palestine wherever and whenever it occurs.
"... You may recall that in March, Omar landed in a raging controversy after she was caught on tape saying that Israel's backers were demanding "allegiance" to a foreign country. In response, conservatives and some liberals accused her of peddling what's known as the "dual loyalty smear" -- the old trope that says Jews can't be trusted because of their treacherous foreign loyalties. ..."
"... pro-Zionist and anti-Zionist Jews have been lobbing accusations of self-hatred and abetting anti-Semitism at one another quite literally since Zionism was born . It's an old story. ..."
"... Republicans, on the other hand, have become monomaniacally obsessed with Israel and its security. To many conservatives today, the Jewish state is not just an important ally -- it is our most important ally. National defense hawks, rightly or wrongly, see it as our bulwark against Iranian aggression in the Middle East. Islamophobes see it as part of a struggle over civilization itself. ..."
"... When you mix in Trump's personal affinity for the Jewish state -- Israel literally named a settlement after him -- you reach the absurd yet logical conclusion of contemporary U.S.-Israel politics: Prominent, non-Jewish Republicans now feel free to censure American Jews for being insufficiently supportive of another country. They've divided us into camps of good Jews and bad Jews. So what happens to the bad ones? ..."
Originally
from:
Slate Prominent, non-Jewish Republicans now feel free to censure American Jews for being
insufficiently supportive of another country. They've divided us into camps of good Jews and
bad Jews. So what happens to the bad ones?
Speaking before a group of Jewish Republicans in April, the president referred to Benjamin
Netanyahu as "your prime minister.", Jack Guez/Getty Images Anti-Semitism is really a wonder to
behold, because of how it manages to adapt to the times. Back in the good old days, the line
was that Jews couldn't be trusted because they were loyal to a foreign power. In 2019, we can't
be trusted because we're disloyal to a foreign power.
That is the viewpoint Donald Trump decided to lay out this week. On Tuesday, while talking
to reporters about Israel's decision to bar two Muslim American congresswomen, Reps. Rashida
Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, he said: "I can't believe we're even having this conversation. Where has
the Democratic Party gone? Where have they gone where they are defending these two people over
the state of Israel? I think any Jewish people that vote for a Democrat, I think it shows
either a total lack of knowledge or great disloyalty."
At first, there was a bit of confusion over whether Trump was accusing Jewish Democrats of
disloyalty to Israel or the United States. On Wednesday, he clarified . "If you vote for a
Democrat, you're being disloyal to Jewish people and you're being very disloyal to Israel,"
Trump said. (About 70 percent of Jews broke for Hillary Clinton in 2016.)
This is not the first time Trump voiced such sentiments, though in the past he hasn't been
quite so explicit. Speaking before a group of Jewish Republicans in April, the president
referred to Benjamin Netanyahu, the leader of Israel, as "
your prime minister ," as if he were talking to a room full of foreigners. Nor is Trump the
first right-winger to suggest that Jewish Democrats are somehow selling out their kin. The
conservative writer and vlogger Ben Shapiro once memorably tweeted that, "The
Jewish People has always been plagued by Bad Jews, who undermine it from within. In America,
those Bad Jews largely vote Democrat." Iowa congressman Steve King
told an interviewer a few years back that he didn't "understand how Jews in America can be
Democrats first and Jewish second. " And in the wake of the president's comments on Tuesday, a
number of supporters rushed to back him up, from
his friend and lawyer Rudy Giuliani , who seemed to think that the disloyalty charge was OK
because Trump was talking about Israel, to popular conspiracy theorist Wayne Allyn
Root and
troubled pastor Greg Locke.*
You may recall that in March, Omar landed in a raging controversy after she was caught on
tape saying that Israel's backers were demanding "allegiance" to a foreign country. In
response, conservatives and some liberals accused her of peddling what's known as the "dual
loyalty smear" -- the old trope that says Jews can't be trusted because of their treacherous
foreign loyalties.
Many, myself included, thought the outrage
was unfair . And in light of recent events, some progressives
have now accused Trump and the Republicans of perpetuating the real dual loyalty
smear. But in some sense, that's not quite right either. Conservatives have actually inverted
the old libel. Instead of accusing Jews of being overly loyal to a foreign nation, Trump has
turned centuries of anti-Semitism on its head by accusing them of not being loyal enough to one
-- and his followers are happy to echo the charge.
How has this come to pass?
One obvious part of the answer is that Trump and other conservatives are just parroting the
sorts of things they hear from Jewish Republicans, who -- let's be blunt -- tend to see
Israel's Jewish critics as a bunch of self-
hating secularists who've bought in to leftist
anti-Semitism . Not all of them are quite as forthright about their feelings as Shapiro,
who charmingly likes to dismiss his opponents as "Jews In Name Only." But the sentiment that liberal Jews are bad Jews is real. And
Republicans outside the tribe have clearly picked up on it.
But pro-Zionist and anti-Zionist Jews have been lobbing accusations of self-hatred and
abetting anti-Semitism at one another quite literally since Zionism was
born . It's an old story. What we're seeing now is also the result of a recent shift in
America's political alignment. While there have almost always been critics of Israel on the
left, there used to be a rock solid bipartisan consensus on the Jewish state among mainstream
Washington politicians, so that accusing Jewish Democrats of "disloyalty" for merely voting for
Democrats wouldn't have made a drop of sense. (Those
71 percent of Jews who voted for Hillary were voting for a very pro-Israel candidate.) But
in recent years, that consensus has begun to crack, in part because of tensions between
Netanyahu and the Obama administration that turned supporting Bibi, at the very least, into a
more partisan issue.
Plenty of Democrats, like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, are still
old-line liberal Zionists. But outside of its top leadership in Congress, the party and
its voters as a whole have become
less unconditionally supportive of Israel, and more tolerant of radically critical voices
like Omar and Tlaib.
Republicans, on the other hand, have become monomaniacally obsessed with Israel and its
security. To many conservatives today, the Jewish state is not just an important ally -- it is
our most important ally. National defense hawks, rightly or wrongly, see it as our
bulwark against Iranian aggression in the Middle East. Islamophobes see it as part of a
struggle over civilization itself.
And an entire generation of evangelical Christian Zionists
-- like Locke -- believe that Israel is part of a divine plan, God's instrument on earth. And
to almost all of them, supporting Israel in practice means supporting Netanyahu's conservative
Likud government. The devotion is so strong that
in a 2015 Bloomberg poll , 67 percent percent of Republicans said they believed that
"Israel is an important ally, the only democracy in the region, and we should support it even
if our interests diverge." Nobody would say that last part about, like, Great Britain.
When you mix in Trump's personal affinity for the Jewish state -- Israel literally named a
settlement after him
-- you reach the absurd yet logical conclusion of contemporary U.S.-Israel politics: Prominent,
non-Jewish Republicans now feel free to censure American Jews for being insufficiently
supportive of another country. They've divided us into camps of good Jews and bad Jews. So what
happens to the bad ones?
That's what makes this whole thing so worrisome. It's not that Trump and his buddies are
reviving the old dual loyalty smear, exactly. It's not simply that they are treating Jews as an
other, whose politics can only be judged in relation to a foreign nation and who are not
really completely American (though that's worrisome too). It's frightening because when
conservatives say that Jews who vote for Democrats are disloyal to Israel, they are implying
that they are disloyal to their own ethnic interests, American interests, and even the
almighty's. It's the 2019 version of calling liberal Jews a bunch of heretics. And we all know
what happens to heretics in the end.
"... in the seven days after Omar's "Benjamins" tweet, "Fox News mentioned her during 21 shows, CNN in 53, and five on MSNBC." The freshman Democrat's name, according to a Lexis search, was also mentioned in a whopping 479 newspaper articles. ..."
"... And in the seven days since Brooks's remarks? Zero mentions of him in the national press. Zero coverage of him on network and cable news. Not one story; not one report. ..."
"... Can you imagine the reaction if Ilhan Omar had said that Jews had become the "dominant influence" within the Republican Party, or if she had decried the "growing influence" of the Jewish religion in the GOP? Or if she had spoken about Jews gaining "greater and greater influence" in elections? ..."
"... We would now be embarking on another seven (or even 70!) days of nonstop coverage, and condemnation, of what would be (rightly) described as her brazen and shocking anti-Semitism. It would be front-page news; the subject of almost every panel discussion on cable. ..."
"... The net result? Omar is hung out to dry while Brooks gets a pass. Omar is now a household name, and the subject of multiple death threats , while Brooks gets to carry on making offensive and conspiratorial claims about Islam, Muslims, and the Democratic Party without any sanction or censure. ..."
When Ilhan Omar Is Accused of Anti-Semitism, It's News. When a Republican Smears Muslims,
There's Silence. The difference in coverage is startling and disturbing. August 28, 2019
Mehdi Hasan
The Interceptprinter friendly
Rep. Ilhan Omar participates in a panel discussion during
the Muslim Collective for Equitable Democracy Conference and Presidential Forum at the National
Housing Center in Washington, D.C., on July 23, 2019. , Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
"IT'S ALL ABOUT the Benjamins, baby."
That is, of course, what Rep. Ilhan Omar famously tweeted on February 10, in response to a
tweet from my colleague
Glenn Greenwald decrying "how much time U.S. political leaders spend defending a foreign
nation" -- namely, the state of Israel. Then, when a journalist followed up by asking Omar who
she believed was "paying American politicians to be pro-Israel," the congresswoman tweeted:
"AIPAC!"
The freshman Democrat from Minnesota
"unequivocally" apologized the very next day, saying that she was grateful to Jewish allies
and colleagues who were educating her "on the painful history of anti-Semitic tropes" and
insisting that she never intended to "offend my constituents or Jewish Americans as a
whole."
Now, fast forward to last week, specifically August 21. Rep. Mo Brooks, a right-wing
Republican congressperson from Alabama with a long history of controversial
and offensive remarks,
was interviewed on WVNN, a radio station in Huntsville, about the decision by Israel's
government to deny entry to Omar and her fellow Muslim Democrat Rashida Tlaib.
"Usually, there is not much controversy with respect to Israel," Brooks
told host Jeff Poor. "Usually, the United States Congress is overwhelmingly close to 100%,
if not 100%, in support of recognizing Israel as a long-term American ally, and that we have a
mutual defense relationship. Unfortunately, we now have people in the United States Congress
who view Israel as an enemy, and that makes for an entirely different mix of conversation."
Which "people" would that be? Brooks didn't hold back.
"There is, and I think it's based on the growing influence of the Islamic religion in the
Democratic Party ranks," he continued. "Keep in mind: Muslims more so than most people have
great animosity toward Israel and the Jewish faith. And as you have more and more Muslims in
the United States, as they gain greater and greater influence in elections, particularly in
Democratic Party primaries, then you're going to see more and more people like Ilhan Omar,
Rashida Tlaib, and company that are anti-Israel, and that brings an entirely different
viewpoint into the United States Congress."
"I think you're going to see this influence in the Democratic Party grow and grow and grow
over time, but ultimately become the dominant influence within the Democratic Party, where the
Democratic Party will become very strongly anti-Jewish and anti-Israel," Brooks added. (These
comments start at about the two-minute mark of
this recording of the show ).
Wow. I have been reporting on Islamophobia in U.S. politics for more than a decade, and I
honestly cannot remember coming across a more brazenly Islamophobic statement from an elected
member of Congress. "Growing influence of the Islamic religion" among Democrats? "More and more
Muslims" winning elections? The "dominant influence"? "Anti-Jewish"? In an age of rising white
nationalism, in which Muslims have been
gunneddown in
mosques by domestic terrorists who believe such conspiracy theories about Islam, these remarks
aren't just offensive, they're downright dangerous.
So you might think the media -- and the Democrats -- would be all over Brooks and the
Republicans, right?
Right?
Not quite. I asked Parker Molloy, of Media Matters for America, to check the numbers. In
terms of cable news, Molloy found that in the seven days after Omar's "Benjamins" tweet, "Fox
News mentioned her during 21 shows, CNN in 53, and five on MSNBC." The freshman Democrat's
name, according to a Lexis search, was also mentioned in a whopping 479 newspaper articles.
And in the seven days since Brooks's remarks? Zero mentions of him in the national press.
Zero coverage of him on network and cable news. Not one story; not one report.
On Tuesday, Waleed Shahid, communications director for Justice Democrats, tweeted out a clip of
Brooks's remarks, pointing out that it had received "nearly half a million views" on Twitter,
yet had received "virtually no coverage" in the mainstream press.
Shahid told me that he had shared the clip with a number of reporters and
producers last week, but none of them had followed up with a story on it. "No bite," he said.
Can you imagine the reaction if Ilhan Omar had said that Jews had become the "dominant
influence" within the Republican Party, or if she had decried the "growing influence" of the
Jewish religion in the GOP? Or if she had spoken about Jews gaining "greater and greater
influence" in elections?
We would now be embarking on another seven (or even 70!) days of nonstop coverage, and
condemnation, of what would be (rightly) described as her brazen and shocking anti-Semitism. It
would be front-page news; the subject of almost every panel discussion on cable.
Yet Brooks makes these outrageous and bigoted claims about Muslims and Islam and ? Silence.
A shameful and very deafening silence. No headlines. No op-eds. No panels. No reporters chasing
down House Republicans and demanding a condemnation or disavowal from them.
Look, I expect nothing from the likes of House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy or House
Minority Whip Steve Scalise. They're bad-faith actors who, incidentally, have their own issues
with racism and anti-Semitism: McCarthy
accused Jewish billionaires of trying to "buy" the midterm elections for the Democrats,
while Scalise once
described himself as "David Duke without the baggage."
But what about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi? Why isn't she drafting a congressional resolution to
condemn Brooks, as she did for Omar? Where are the statements of
outrage from Chuck Schumer and
Steny Hoyer, who were so quick to go after one of their own? Why aren't MSNBC and CNN rolling
on this? How come the Washington Post and the New York Times aren't publishing long
pieces about the GOP's Islamophobia problem? Why aren't the liberalcolumnists who lined up
to slam Omar now writing op-eds denouncing this blatant and undeniable racism from Brooks?
As I pointed out last week ,
anti-Muslim bigotry has been normalized in liberal and Democratic Party circles. Meanwhile,
anti-Semitism has been
weaponized by Republicans eager to smear their Democratic opponents (while simultaneously
turning a blind eye to the anti-Semites
and white nationalists in their own ranks).
The net result? Omar is hung out to dry while Brooks gets a pass. Omar is now a household
name, and the subject of multiple
death
threats , while Brooks gets to carry on making offensive and conspiratorial claims about
Islam, Muslims, and the Democratic Party without any sanction or censure.
This week, ironically, Omar's alleged anti-Semitism was back in the news. Again. Media
organizations that studiously ignored Brooks' bigotry for seven straight days managed to
find time, and column inches, to cover the Alabama Republican Party's ridiculous call for Omar
to be expelled from Congress.
Yes, you read that correctly: the Alabama GOP. The state party of Rep. Mo Brooks.
You can't make this stuff up.
Mehdi Hasan is a columnist and senior contributor at The Intercept. He is the host of The
Intercept podcast "Deconstructed." Hasan is also the host of Al Jazeera English's
"UpFront."
"... I personally suspect that Trump has a negative net worth, and hopes that if he marches to Adelson's orders, he might get a nice pay-off at the end. It's the only thing that explains all this. ..."
I think it is highly unlikely Trump can pull off detente with the Chinese or anyone else before the next election. He has, unfortunately,
shown himself to be completely untrustworthy on the international stage. Under what circumstance are the Chinese going to sign
some agreement with him, when he might just throw out new tariffs a week later?
What are the Taliban going to agree to when the US wants to leave thousands of troops in Afghanistan?
I personally suspect that Trump has a negative net worth, and hopes that if he marches to Adelson's orders, he might get
a nice pay-off at the end. It's the only thing that explains all this.
Probably an important factor here in the gamesmanship between Trump and Iran is Trump's
re-election campaign next year. Consider – Trump probably realizes that if he is no
longer President by 2021, then the democrats and a host of others will have the knives out
for him and seek to drag him through a series of courts to convict him of something,
anything. It sounds so Roman that. Proof of this was the Meuller investigation which went
nowhere but which was used to beat him over the head with for nearly three years. Another
four more years of Presidency will keep him safe from these attacks.
If a war breaks out then at a minimum Saudi Arabia's oil fields and water filtration
installations along with their capital is toast! The oil route through the Straits of Hormuz
are blocked and the war may spread to other countries as well, including Israel. I would
guess that this would result in more economic turmoil than the 2008 crash at a minimum
. And there would go Donald's chances of re-election. I know that some people may be
surprised that Trump may put his personal interests ahead of that of the country but there it
is. So, irony of irony, Trump may be the one factor stopping the trouble here from breaking
out into a full blown war.
"... Twice in the same sentence we get told what that assumption is: "America's technology leadership" which so clearly no longer exists in weaponry, electronics, nuclear engineering, rocketry, high speed rail and mass transportation, low energy building techniques, and a host of other realms. This same sort of thinking pervades every defense doctrine paper produced during Trump's administration--the planners have eaten and all too well digested their own propaganda about the backwardness of Russia, China and Iran. ..."
"... This does not imply some rabid anti-Americanism, but simply the experience that that path is pointless. If there is a 'clock being played out', it is that of the tic-toc of western political and economic hegemony in the Middle East is running down ..."
"... [with] Iran repeating the same old routines, whilst expecting different outcomes is, of course, one definition of madness. A new US Administration will inherit the same genes as the last. ..."
"... "And in any case, the US is institutionally incapable of making a substantive deal with Iran. A US President – any President – cannot lift Congressional sanctions on Iran. The American multitudinous sanctions on Iran have become a decades' long knot of interpenetrating legislation: a vast rhizome of tangled, root-legislation that not even Alexander the Great might disentangle: that is why the JCPOA was constructed around a core of US Presidential 'waivers' needing to be renewed each six months. Whatever might be agreed in the future, the sanctions – 'waived' or not – are, as it were, 'forever'. ..."
"... "If recent history has taught the Iranians anything, it is that such flimsy 'process' in the hands of a mercurial US President can simply be blown away like old dead leaves. Yes, the US has a systemic problem: US sanctions are a one-way valve: so easy to flow out, but once poured forth, there is no return inlet (beyond uncertain waivers issued at the pleasure of an incumbent President)." ..."
Speculation's abounded about the political loyalty of the head of Russia's central bank
Elvira Nabullina. Luongo simply explains:
"Nabullina has always been a controversial figure because she is western trained and because
the banking system in Russia is still staffed by those who operate along IMF prescriptions on
how to deal with crises.
"But those IMF rules are there to protect the IMF making the loans to the troubled nation,
not to assist the troubled nation actually recover....
"The fundamental problem is a miseducation about what interest rates are, and how they
interact with inflation and capital flow. Because of this, the medicine for saving an economy
in trouble is, more often than not, worse than the disease itself.
"If Argentina's fourth default in twenty years doesn't prove that to you, nothing will."
It sounds like he's been reading Hudson's J is for Junk Economics !
The real rescue is Putin's aggressive de-dollarization policy that's finally rid Russia of
"dollar-dependency":
"She [Nabullina] keeps jumping at the shadows of a dollar-induced crisis. But the Russian
economy of 2019 is not the Russian economy of 2015. Dollar lending has all but evaporated and
the major source of demand for dollars domestically are legacy corporate loans not converted to
rubles or euros."
The key for me is to weave the content emphasis of Putin's Eastern Economic Conference speech with
his increasing pressure on Nabullina for the bank to support this very important development
policy direction and show China and other nations that Russia's extremely serious about the
direction being taken. Just Putin's language about mortgage rate reductions as an attracter
ought to be a huge message for Nabullina to respond properly. And a further kick in the pants
was provided by the massive deal announced between China and Iran. Luongo briefly alludes to
foreign policy in his article, its regional economic aspects, while omitting aspects hidden by
the US-China Trade War, specifically Russia's now very clear technological supremacy to the
Outlaw US Empire.
This brings us to Crooke's article in which he inadvertently tells us the #1 false
assumption in Trump's Trade War policy with China:
"To defend America's technology leadership , policymakers must upgrade their toolkit
to ensure that US technology leadership can withstand the aftershocks." [My
Emphasis]
Twice in the same sentence we get told what that assumption is: "America's technology
leadership" which so clearly no longer exists in weaponry, electronics, nuclear engineering,
rocketry, high speed rail and mass transportation, low energy building techniques, and a host
of other realms. This same sort of thinking pervades every defense doctrine paper produced
during Trump's administration--the planners have eaten and all too well digested their own
propaganda about the backwardness of Russia, China and Iran.
I could write further about the supposed handcuffing of POTUS by the unconstitutional and
illegal sanction regime "imposed" by the US Congress. Crooke mentions as a significant
hindrance--but if it was indeed a hindrance, any POTUS could break it by suing to prove its
unconstitutional, illegal standing, yet no effort is put into that, begging the question Why?
Crooke spends lots of space about this but fails to see the above solution:
"The pages to that chapter have been shut. This does not imply some rabid
anti-Americanism, but simply the experience that that path is pointless. If there is a 'clock
being played out', it is that of the tic-toc of western political and economic hegemony in the
Middle East is running down , and not the 'clock' of US domestic politics. The old adage
that the 'sea is always the sea' holds true for US foreign policy.
And [with] Iran repeating the same old routines, whilst expecting different outcomes is,
of course, one definition of madness. A new US Administration will inherit the same genes as
the last.
"And in any case, the US is institutionally incapable of making a substantive deal with
Iran. A US President – any President – cannot lift Congressional sanctions on Iran.
The American multitudinous sanctions on Iran have become a decades' long knot of
interpenetrating legislation: a vast rhizome of tangled, root-legislation that not even
Alexander the Great might disentangle: that is why the JCPOA was constructed around a core of
US Presidential 'waivers' needing to be renewed each six months. Whatever might be agreed in
the future, the sanctions – 'waived' or not – are, as it were, 'forever'.
"If recent history has taught the Iranians anything, it is that such flimsy 'process' in
the hands of a mercurial US President can simply be blown away like old dead leaves. Yes, the
US has a systemic problem: US sanctions are a one-way valve: so easy to flow out, but once
poured forth, there is no return inlet (beyond uncertain waivers issued at the pleasure of an
incumbent President)."
Being British, we should excuse Crooke for not knowing about the crucial Supremacy Clause
within the US Constitution, but that doesn't absolve any POTUS if that person is really intent
on talking with Iran--or any other sanctioned nation. IMO, the Iranians know what I know and
have finally decided the Outlaw US Empire's marriage to Occupied Palestine won't suffer a
divorce anytime soon. The result is the recent very active change in policy direction aimed at
solidifying the Arc of Resistance and establishing a Persian Gulf Collective Security Pact that
will end in check mating the Empire's King thus causing further economic problems for the
Empire.
Crooke does a good job of summarizing my comment and many more made over the year regarding
the reasons for the utter failure of Outlaw US Empire policy:
"Well, here is the key point: Washington seems to have lost the ability to summon the
resources to try to fathom either China, or the Iranian 'closed book', let alone a 'Byzantine'
Russia. It is a colossal attenuation of consciousness in Washington; a loss of conscious
'vitality' to the grip of some 'irrefutable logic' that allows no empathy, no outreach, to
'otherness'. Washington (and some European élites) have retreated into their 'niche'
consciousness, their mental enclave, gated and protected, from having to understand – or
engage – with wider human experience."
The only real way for the Outlaw US Empire to regain its competitive "niche" with the rest
of the world is to mount a massive program of internal reform verging on a revolution in its
outcome. It's patently obvious that more of the same will yield more of the same--FAILURE--and
the chorus of inane caterwauling by BigLie Media over where to place the blame.
"... Shortly after 8:46 a.m. on the day of the attacks, just minutes after the first plane struck the World Trade Center, five men -- later revealed to be Israeli nationals -- had positioned themselves in the parking lot of the Doric Apartment Complex in Union City, New Jersey ..."
"... At least one eyewitness interviewed by the FBI had seen the Israelis' van in the parking lot as early as 8:00 a.m. that day, more than 40 minutes prior to the attack. ..."
"... The men -- Sivan Kurzberg, Paul Kurzberg, Oded Ellner, Yaron Shimuel and Omar Marmari -- were subsequently apprehended by law enforcement and claimed to be Israeli tourists on a "working holiday" in the United States where they were employed by a moving company, Urban Moving Systems. Upon his arrest, Sivan Kurzberg told the arresting officer, "We are Israeli; we are not your problem. Your problems are our problems, The Palestinians are the problem." ..."
"... newly released FBI copies of the photos taken by the five Israelis strongly suggest that these individuals had prior knowledge of the attacks on the World Trade Center. The copies of the photos were obtained via a FOIA request made by a private citizen . ..."
"... In addition, the FBI report noted that a van from Urban Moving Systems, the company that employed the five Israelis at the time of their arrest, was present and was involved in moving a tenant out of the complex on September 10 and that the movers all had foreign accents. Thus, images 5, 7 and 8 strongly appear to have been taken at the same complex a day before the attacks. Kurzberg is seen in both images that display the visible date of September 10, 2001. ..."
"... A cover-up certainly seems to have happened to some extent, between the destruction of records of the investigation and the fact that official conclusions of the investigation do not add up. In the latter case, the FBI -- in a file dated September 24, 2001– officially stated that they "determined that none of the Israelis were actively engaged in clandestine intelligence activities in the United States." However, that conclusion was directly contradicted by U.S. officials a year later and by the fact that Israel's own government subsequently acknowledged that the five Israelis had indeed been involved in "clandestine intelligence activities in the United States." ..."
"... the van in which the Israelis were arrested was "oddly" lacking "equipment typically used in a moving company's daily duties," according to the FBI, and residue of explosives was found in the van. ..."
"... In total, the FBI reported that four items related to explosives were found in the ban and are labeled in the report as "Fabric Sample (Explosive Residue)," "Control Swabs – SA [ – ] Gloves," "Control Swabs – (Bomb Suits)," and "Blanket Samples For Explosive Residue." In addition, a VHS tape and some still photographs found in the van "were sent to Laboratory Examiner [ redacted ] (Explosives Unit)." ..."
"... In addition to the strange nature of some of the Israelis' possessions in the van and on their person, the company that employed them -- Urban Moving Systems -- was of special interest to the FBI, which concluded that the company was likely a "fraudulent operation." Upon a search of the company's premises, the FBI noted that "little evidence of a legitimate business operation was found." ..."
"... The FBI report also noted that there were an "unusually large number of computers relative to the number of employees for such a fairly small business" and that "further investigation identified several pseudo-names or aliases associated with Urban Moving Systems and its operations." ..."
NEW YORK -- For nearly two decades, one of the most overlooked and little known
arrests made in
the aftermath of the September 11 attacks was that of the so-called "High Fivers," or the
"Dancing Israelis." However, new information released by the FBI on May 7 has brought fresh
scrutiny to the possibility that the "Dancing Israelis," at least two of whom were known Mossad
operatives, had prior knowledge of the attacks on the World Trade Center.
Shortly after 8:46 a.m. on the day of the attacks, just minutes after the first plane struck
the World Trade Center, five men -- later revealed to be Israeli nationals -- had positioned
themselves in the parking lot of the Doric Apartment Complex in Union City, New Jersey, where
they were seen taking pictures and filming the attacks while also celebrating the destruction
of the towers and "high fiving" each other. At least one eyewitness interviewed
by the FBI had seen the Israelis' van in the parking lot as early as 8:00 a.m. that day, more
than 40 minutes prior to the attack. The story received
coverage in U.S.
mainstream media at the time but has since been largely forgotten.
The men -- Sivan Kurzberg, Paul Kurzberg, Oded Ellner, Yaron Shimuel and Omar Marmari --
were
subsequently apprehended by law enforcement and claimed to be Israeli tourists on a
"working holiday" in the United States where they were employed by a moving company, Urban
Moving Systems. Upon his arrest, Sivan Kurzberg told the arresting officer, "We are Israeli; we
are not your problem. Your problems are our problems, The Palestinians are the problem."
For years, the official story has been that these individuals, while they had engaged in
"immature" behavior by celebrating and being "visibly happy" in their documenting of the
attacks, had no prior knowledge of the attack. However, newly
released FBI copies of the photos taken by the five Israelis strongly suggest that these
individuals had prior knowledge of the attacks on the World Trade Center. The copies of the
photos were obtained via a FOIA request made by a private citizen .
According to a former high-ranking American intelligence official who spoke to the Jewish
DailyForward in 2002, the FBI concluded in its investigation that the five Israelis
arrested "were conducting a Mossad surveillance mission and that their employer, Urban Moving
Systems of Weehawken, NJ, served as a front." At least two of the men arrested
were determined to have direct links to the Mossad after their names appeared in a CIA-FBI
database of foreign intelligence operatives. According to one of their lawyers, one of the men,
Paul Kurzberg, had previously worked for the Mossad in another country prior to arriving in the
United States. Another of those arrested, Oded Ellner,
subsequently stated on Israeli TV that the five Israelis had been in New York at the time
"to document the event," meaning the attack on the World Trade Center.
The FOIA release of the
photos is notable because responses to prior FOIA requests to the Department of Justice,
which oversees the FBI, had previously claimed that all of the photos taken by the Israeli
nationals had been destroyed in January 2014. The photos themselves are heavily redacted,
making it impossible to see the Israelis' facial expressions. However, previously declassified yet
heavily redacted FBI reports state that the Israelis are "visibly happy" in nearly every
photo, even when the burning towers are in the background. The photos released are also not
original copies and instead appear to be photocopies of photocopies of the original pictures.
In addition, of the original 76 pictures developed by authorities from the camera in the
Israelis' possession, only 14 were released.
However, three of these photos -- despite the heavy redaction and poor quality -- are
damning. Since 2001, even though the photos were never released until now, it had been known
that one of the Israelis arrested -- Sivan Kurzberg -- was seen in a photo "holding a lighted
lighter in the foreground, with the smoldering wreckage [of the twin towers] in the
background," according to Steven Noah Gordon, then-lawyer for the five Israelis, as cited in
a New York Times report from November 2001.
The picture of Kurzberg with the lit lighter appears to be photo #5 in the new FOIA release.
Yet, the picture released includes a visible date of September 10, 2001, the day before the
attacks, as do two other photos -- images #7 and #8 in the collection -- whereas all other
photos with dates show only the month and the year (9 '01). The FOIA release did not provide
any information as to the apparent discrepancy in dates.
While this could be explained away as the camera in question being programmed with a
slightly inaccurate date, that doesn't seem to be the case for two reasons. First, only two out
of the 14 pictures carry that date and, second, previously declassified FBI reports report an
eyewitness adamantly stating that Sivan Kurzberg had visited the
Doric Apartments on September 10, 2001 at around 3 p.m. with at least one other man, with whom
he was conversing in a foreign language, and had identified himself as a "construction worker"
to a tenant (page 61 of declassified FBI report
).
Sivan Kurzberg holds a lit lighter with the Manhattan skyline in the background. The date
September 10, 2001 visible in the bottom right corner | Photo #5
In addition, the FBI report noted that a van from Urban Moving Systems, the company that
employed the five Israelis at the time of their arrest, was present and was involved in moving
a tenant out of the complex on September 10 and that the movers all had foreign accents. Thus,
images 5, 7 and 8 strongly appear to have been taken at the same complex a day before the
attacks. Kurzberg is seen in both images that display the visible date of September 10,
2001.
This raises two possibilities. First, that there are two images of Kurzberg with a lit
lighter in front of the towers, one taken before the attack and one taken at the time of the
attack, and that the FBI released only one of them. Second, that Kurzberg took the picture with
the lighter only the day before the attack and his lawyer misrepresented the contents of the
photo to the New York Times. Given that the background of the photo -- particularly the
state of the towers -- is indiscernible in the recently released photo, it is difficult to
determine which is the case.
One of the Israelis points to what is presumably the World Trade Center, in Manhattan on
September 11, 2001 | Photo #2
Yet, in either scenario, Kurzberg had simulated the burning of the World Trade Center the
day before the attacks took place. That the FBI concluded that Kurzberg was party to a Mossad
surveillance operation at the time of his arrest would then suggest that Israeli intelligence
also had foreknowledge of the attacks.
Notably, the relevant section of the FBI report that asks "1. Did the Israeli nationals have
foreknowledge of the events at WTC and were they filming the events prior to and in
anticipation of the explosion?" is redacted in its entirety, suggesting that the FBI did not
determine the answer to that question to be an emphatic "no."
One of the 9/11 loose-ends
coverups?
If images 5 and 7 were indeed taken the day prior to the attack, the question then becomes
why the FBI officially concluded that the arrested Israelis had no prior knowledge of the
attacks? One report from ABC News dated June 2002 suggests that the Bush administration
intervened in the investigation. That report
states that "Israeli and U.S. government officials worked out a deal -- and after 71 days,
the five Israelis were taken out of jail, put on a plane, and deported back home [to Israel]."
If the Bush administration had cut a deal with Israel's government to cover up the incident, it
certainly would not have been
the first time a U.S. presidential administration had done so on Israel's behalf.
Further evidence that higher-ups in the administration intervened is the fact that
then-Attorney General John Ashcroft personally
signed off on the detainees' release. Upon his entering the private sector as a lobbyist
and consultant in 2005, the Israeli government became one of Ashcroft's first clients .
A cover-up certainly seems to have happened to some extent, between the destruction of
records of the investigation and the fact that official conclusions of the investigation do not
add up. In the latter case, the FBI -- in a file dated September 24, 2001–
officially stated that they "determined that none of the Israelis were actively engaged in
clandestine intelligence activities in the United States." However, that conclusion was
directly contradicted by U.S. officials a year later and by the fact that Israel's own
government
subsequently acknowledged that the five Israelis had indeed been involved in "clandestine
intelligence activities in the United States."
In addition, the new FOIA release of the photos suggests that another FBI conclusion -- that
"none of the pictures developed from the film found inside the 35-mm camera depicted the twin
towers prior to the attack" -- was inaccurate. This may explain why the images released via the
recent FOIA request were heavily edited leaving details in the background greatly obscured,
making it impossible to determine whether the photos were taken prior to or during the attacks
based solely on the state of the towers.
"Tourists" with cash-stuffed socks, box cutters,
and explosives?
Beyond the photos and observed activities of the so-called "Dancing Israelis," it is worth
revisiting several other suspicious circumstances linked to their arrest that clearly show that
the men in question were hardly the "tourists" they had claimed to be. One often cited example
is the fact that one of the men, Oded Ellner, had a "white sock-like sack filled with
$4,700 in cash ,"
as well as maps of the city with certain places highlighted, and box cutters. In addition, the
van in which the Israelis were arrested was "oddly" lacking "equipment typically used in a
moving company's daily duties," according to the FBI, and residue of explosives was found in
the van.
Of the explosive residue, the declassified FBI report states:
A search of the van and individuals was conducted at the time of the vehicle stop. The
vehicle was also searched by a trained bomb-sniffing dog which yielded a positive result for
the presence of explosive traces. Swabs of the vehicle's interior were taken, and those
samples were sent to the FBI laboratory for further analysis. Final results are still
pending."
In total, the FBI reported that four items related to explosives were found in the ban and
are labeled in the report as "Fabric Sample (Explosive Residue)," "Control Swabs – SA [
– ] Gloves," "Control Swabs – (Bomb Suits)," and "Blanket Samples For Explosive
Residue." In addition, a VHS tape and some still photographs found in the van "were sent to
Laboratory Examiner [ redacted ] (Explosives Unit)."
In addition to the strange nature of some of the Israelis' possessions in the van and on
their person, the company that employed them -- Urban Moving Systems -- was of special interest
to the FBI, which concluded that the company was likely a "fraudulent operation." Upon a search
of the company's premises, the FBI noted that "little evidence of a legitimate business
operation was found."
The FBI report also noted that there were an "unusually large number of
computers relative to the number of employees for such a fairly small business" and that
"further investigation identified several pseudo-names or aliases associated with Urban Moving
Systems and its operations."
Beyond the question of Jared's omnipresence is his apparent knack for political survival.
Although Trump tends to go through officials as rapidly as he tweets, Jared has managed thus
far to ride out the storm. Of course, firing Jared – husband of Trump's daughter, Ivanka
– would be more than your average political decision, which is probably why Trump should
never have dabbled in nepotism to begin with. Or perhaps Jared Kushner remains in his top-level
position not because he is the son-in-law of Donald Trump, or because he is so politically
astute (thus far it would seem he is not), but precisely because the Deep State wants him
there.
Whatever the case may be, it is notable that while Trump's main allies – guys like
Mike Flynn, Steve Bannon and Reince Priebus (all of whom were loathed by the Deep State,
incidentally) – fell to the wayside one after another, Kushner alone remains from the
original Trump lineup. And his popularity among the establishment elite remains high.
Reminiscent of the day when Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize without ever
negotiating a single peace deal, Time magazine just named Jared Kushner among its '100 Most
Influential People'. And it was none other than Henry Kissinger, 93, the fiercely criticized
former US statesman, who penned the blurb that accompanied Jared's honorable mention.
Kissinger, expert practitioner of the "strategic lie", says he first met Kushner "about 18
months ago, when he introduced himself after a foreign policy lecture I had given." The very
next line strongly suggests that Kissinger
is lurking in the shadows of the Trump administration. "We have sporadically exchanged views
since."
Really? That short sentence should have set alarms ringing. What exactly does Kissinger mean
by "sporadically," and what is it that he and Jared discuss? Somehow I doubt the weather. And
is Trump aware of the content of these "sporadic" conversations, or is he content to get the
Cliff Notes courtesy of Kushner?
Considering Henry Kissinger's extremely checkered past – for starters, he convinced
Nixon to bomb Cambodia and Laos, and replace the democratically elected government of Chile
with a brutal military dictatorship – these are no idle questions. And as it turns out,
there is already some whiff of mischief in the air that directly involves Jared Kushner, and,
indirectly or otherwise, Henry Kissinger.
The Art of The Dumb
To date, President Trump has made two critical decisions that, for many analysts, defied
logic and even common sense and were, in short, disastrous. The first involved the firing of
Michael Flynn less than a month after he was named national security adviser. The stated reason
for that decision was due to conversations Flynn had with former Russian Ambassador Sergey
Kislyak a month before Trump formally took office. However, Flynn was doing nothing more
'subversive' than attempting to tamp down Russia's understandable fury at being treated so
brusquely by the Obama administration.
In the tidal wave of Russophobia that swept through Washington following Hillary Clinton's
dramatic defeat, Barack Obama – after originally acknowledging the election to have been
fair – suddenly changed his tune. Apparently somebody had a talk with him, and on
December 29, based on the groundless claims of Russian tampering the elections, Obama expelled
35 Russian embassy staff, as well as imposing sanctions – all just days before the New
Year.
It was in the course of this dramatic diplomatic meltdown between the world's two nuclear
powers that Flynn and Kislyak spoke on the telephone on several occasions in an effort to
repair the damage (It should be noted that Jared Kushner also participated in an earlier
meeting at Trump Tower with Michael Flynn and Sergey Kislyak. The purpose of that meeting was
to "establish a line of communication" between the soon-to-be Trump administration and the
Kremlin, the White House told the New York Times). All things considered, it was the honorable
thing to do. Others, of course, saw things differently. Yet Flynn got the sack, while Kushner
continues in his post relatively unscathed.
When the wolves in the Democratic Party came a knocking, Trump probably thought he could
satisfy the Deep State, obviously hell-bent on sabotaging US-Russia relations, by sacrificing
Flynn like an easily disposable pawn. The maverick of Manhattan gambled wrong. Trump now
reportedly "
regrets " firing Flynn, who he says got a "very bad deal" from the media.
The second even more mysterious event involved the firing of James Comey, the FBI Director
who was in the process of investigating claims of collusion between Trump and Russia in the
course of the 2016 presidential election. It did not take a political genius to understand that
firing Comey while he was investigating claims of "Russian collusion" would only serve to
fortify that very myth – and worse, appear as an attempt at a Trump cover-up. The US
president, understandably at wits end over the ongoing witch-hunt, now seemed guilty of
attempting to 'disappear' the nosy Comey. What he got instead was just more barbarians at the
gate.
Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, yet another dedicated Trump loyalist who
got served a pink slip,
told Charlie Rose in an interview that President Trump's decision to fire James Comey was
"the biggest mistake in modern political history."
So who gave Trump such horrible advice? Some reports point to Kushner.
According to a Vanity Fair
report , "Trump blamed Jared Kushner for his role in decisions, specifically the firings of
Mike Flynn and James Comey, that led to Mueller's appointment." That comment was allegedly
based on a phone call between Bannon and Trump. In another conversation, political analyst
Roger Stone supposedly told Trump that Kushner was giving him bad political advice, and Trump
agreed.
"Jared is the worst political adviser in the White House in modern history," former Trump
campaign aide Sam Nunberg told the magazine. "I'm only saying publicly what everyone says
behind the scenes at Fox News, in conservative media, and the Senate and Congress."
However, Nunberg's judgment is only true if we assume that Kushner is really dedicated to
faithfully serving Donald Trump, but is just awful at his job. Or, alternatively, if he is
instead accepting the demands and advice being given to him from people like Henry Kissinger,
representatives of the Deep State. In that case, it could be argued he is doing a remarkable
job.
Welcome back, Henry Kissinger
Keeping in mind Mark Twain's observation that "history does not repeat itself, but it does
rhyme," it was impossible to miss the historical coincidence of Kissinger appearing next to
Donald Trump in May shortly after the latter unceremoniously canned Comey. Why was it a
coincidence?
Because decades earlier, Henry Kissinger, while serving under Richard Nixon as National
Security Adviser and Secretary of State, played a major role in the so-called 'Saturday Night
Massacre,' which saw Nixon fire Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox, who was attempting
to retrieve telephone recordings connected to the case.
What followed from that disastrous decision was Nixon being eventually forced to resign in
disgrace, a political calamity that some experts say could eventually happen to Trump if
'Russiagate' gets any more out of control.
"The unexpected firing of a high-profile investigator looking into potential political
malfeasance connected to the White House, followed by a visit by Henry Kissinger to the Oval
Office. No, this is not October 1973," began an ABC News
report detailing Kissinger's strangely timed invitation to the White House.
Trump said the meeting with Kissinger, now 93, focused on Russia, Syria and "various other
matters," calling Kissinger a "friend for a long time."
Coincidence or otherwise, Kissinger was one of Nixon's closest confidants and also met with
him after the Saturday Night Massacre.
"I don't think we can read too much into that, but it would be interesting if they were
consulting him on troubleshooting, in which case, Kissinger wouldn't be the first person I
would turn to," David Greenberg, a professor of history and journalism and media studies at
Rutgers University in New Jersey, told ABC News.
In any case, if it really was Jared Kushner who advised Trump to dump both Flynn and Comey,
as many analysts suggest, then the sudden appearance of geopolitical guru Kissinger in the
White House shortly afterwards is peculiar to say the least.
1001 Arabian arrests
Just this month, we may have witnessed, albeit from second-hand accounts, Jared Kushner
taking his first steps as a Kissinger geopolitical protégé.
On November 3rd, Saudi Arabia placed a call to Lebanon's then Prime Minister Saad Hariri,
demanding that he pay a visit to Riyadh. Hariri wasted no time at all, reportedly flying to
Saudi Arabia without his regular staff. The next day, Hariri did something completely out of
the ordinary: In a televised appearance, from the Saudi capital, he announced that he was
resigning from his post as prime minister.
Western media greatly played down the fact that Hariri made his announcement on foreign
soil, not least of all Saudi soil, while giving extra attention to Hariri's explanation for his
sudden retirement: Iran and Hezbollah, which just helped Syria liberate itself from ISIS
terrorists.
"Wherever Iran settles, it sows discord, devastation and destruction, proven by its
interference in the internal affairs of Arab countries," he said in his prepared statement. He
also said he feared for his life.
That evening, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman arrested 11 Saudi princes, 4 government
officials and dozens of businessmen, while also claiming that Saudi Arabia had intercepted a
ballistic missile launched by Houthi rebels in Yemen. The blame for that unconfirmed event
naturally went to Iran as well.
Iran's Foreign Ministry said Hariri's resignation was a ploy to "create tension in Lebanon
and the region."
"Hariri's resignation was done with planning by Donald Trump, the president of America, and
Mohammed bin Salman (MbS), the crown prince of Saudi Arabia,"
said Hussein Sheikh al-Islam, adviser to Iran's supreme leader.
However, Iran's foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif took the blame game one step further,
pointing to Jared Kushner as the cause of the spectacle.
"Visits by Kushner & Lebanese PM led to [Saad] Hariri's bizarre resignation while
abroad," Mohammad Javad Zarif tweeted
. "Of course, Iran is accused of interference."
Indeed, Kushner paid a visit to Saudi Arabia in October as part of a four-day trip that also
included stops in Israel, Jordan and Egypt.
The Washington Post
provided some scant details on Kushner's secretive meeting with MbS: "MBS is emboldened by
strong support from President Trump and his inner circle It was probably no accident that last
month, Jared Kushner, Trump's senior adviser and son-in-law, made a personal visit to Riyadh.
The two princes are said to have stayed up until nearly 4 a.m. several nights, swapping stories
and planning strategy."
Meanwhile, Israel's interest in what transpires between Saudi Arabia and Lebanon is also of
no small concern, given its wariness of Iranian moves in the region,
as noted by The Spectator : "The Jewish state is hardly a natural ally for Saudi Arabia,
but they have long shared a common enemy: Iran. Both fear the latter is exploiting the opening
created by the fall of Isis, and the triumph of the Assad regime in Syria, to dominate the
region "
The question, however, comes down to what role Jared Kushner has been playing in all of
this, and to what end? Is he loyally and dutifully serving the interests of Donald Trump, while
being groomed as the next Henry Kissinger, possibly eventually moving seamlessly between
consecutive administrations, as Kissinger did when he survived the downfall of Nixon and went
on to serve under Gerald Ford?
Or is Jared Kushner, despite being the son-in-law and top adviser of Donald Trump, heeding
the demands of a different master?
"... I was the head of DoD liaison with Israeli general staff intelligence for seven years. During that time and in subsequent decades I have had many discussions with active and retired Israeli officers on the subject of whether or not they wanted a Defense Treaty of Alliance with the United States. The answer is always the same. "No." The reason for that is simple. A treaty is normally reciprocal and they do not want to be obliged to defend the territory or interests of the United State to whatever extent the treaty's text would require. ..."
"... Graham has been acting as a
front man for both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and also for The Jewish
Institute for the National Security of America (JINSA), which wrote the basic document t
hat is being used to promote the treaty and then enlisted Graham to obtain congressional
support.
Speaking to the press on a JINSA conference call, Graham said the proposed agreement would
be a treaty that would protect Israel in case of an attack that constituted an "existential
threat". Citing Iran as an example, Graham said the pact would be an attempt to deter hostile
neighbors like the Iranians who might use weapons of mass destruction against Israel. JINSA
President Michael Makovsky elaborated on this, saying, "A mutual defense pact has a value in
not only deterring but might also mitigate a retaliatory strike by an adversary of Israel, so
it might mitigate an Iranian response (to an attack on its nuclear facilities)."
JINSA director of foreign policy Jonathan Ruhe added that "An Israeli strike on Iran's
nuclear program would not activate this pact, but a major Iranian retaliation might. – An
Israeli unilateral attack is not what the treaty covers, but rather massive Iranian retaliation
is what we are addressing."
Israel has long been reluctant to enter into any actual treaty arrangement with the United
States because it might limit its options and restrain its aggressive pattern of military
incursions. In that regard, the Graham-JINSA proposal is particularly dangerous as it
effectively permits Israel to be interventionist with a guarantee that Washington will not seek
to limit Netanyahu's "options." And, even though the treaty is reciprocal, there is no chance
that Israel will ever be called upon to do anything to defend the United States, so it is as
one-sided as most arrangements with the Jewish state tend to be." Unz
-------------
I was the head of DoD liaison with Israeli general staff intelligence for seven years.
During that time and in subsequent decades I have had many discussions with active and retired
Israeli officers on the subject of whether or not they wanted a Defense Treaty of Alliance with
the United States. The answer is always the same. "No." The reason for that is simple. A treaty
is normally reciprocal and they do not want to be obliged to defend the territory or interests
of the United State to whatever extent the treaty's text would require.
If JINSA wants this treaty, then the Jewish Agency and the Israeli government want it. Why
do they want it? IMO the answer is hidden in plain sight in the text of the "floated" document.
The treaty would be activated in the event of physical attacks on Israel but also in the event
of PERCEIVED existential threats.
IOW, if the Israelis were to claim that they feared an onslaught by Syria and Hizbullah they
could legally claim that the US is obligated to go to war against Syria and Hizbullah.
What a good deal for Israel! Not only would they continue to receive the present river of
largess in defense grants and credits but they would also under the treaty have the means with
which to order the US armed forces into action against their enemies of choice whenever they
wished to do so.
The problem here is that if you point out the obvious you get called an anti-Semitic
conspiracy theorist, and smear merchants pour from the woodwork to ruin your name and wreck
your livelihood.
Our true enemies are inside the wire and history will be very kind to Pat
Buchanan.
I would hope that all here would appreciate the tremendous professional and personal
sacrifice you have made as a result of calling out malign neocon and Zionist influences
within the USG. As a patriot & honorable man you will say you had no choice, but I for
one would like to express my gratitude nevertheless. Many lesser men have taken the easier
path.
We should all speak out. Traitor trumps anti Semite in every country in the world and
'imo' applies to some politicians.
I wrote a letter to Rep Joe Wilson in SC (even though he wasn't my rep)during the run up the
Iraq invasion because of his disgusting salivating for war and called him a traitor. I got
back a two page letter explaining how he wasn't a traitor and I was wrong about the Iraq
"threat",
Only time I ever gotten more than a form letter from a politician....LOL
Could this be a sign of desperation on the side of the Israelis? That they would completely
throw out their previous position, which they clearly had a self-preserving reason for
holding, in order to "force" the hand of the United States?
Because in that scenario, the American public would be 100% certain that their youth are
dying for a foreign country. An inconvenient truth that Israel has tactfully avoided until
now.
Opposing the policies of the governments of Israel or Saudi Arabia does not make you
anti-Semitic. I don't consider either, due to government policies, to be worthy of any
treaties with the US. I would even urge limiting any military or economic support until such
time that they show that they deserve it.
As I have said before, they inhabitants of that area have been fighting for about 10
thousand years and it is naive to think the US can end that. It may be contained, but a
sizable segment of the political class resist even that.
There seems to be some movement away from uncritical support for Israel and I welcome
that.
PROsemitism ------- what is it?
If there is an "antisemitism" you must ask: "What is PROsemitism?"
PROsemitism must be a supporter of "semitism", which really means Judaism (though most
Moslems are SEMITIC and most JEWS are NOT). So what are you supporting if you are a
PROsemite? Well first of all we must define Judaism:
Judaism is neither a race or a religion, it is Xenophobic Tribalism.
XENOPHOBIC: n.
A person unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or
foreign peoples.
TRIBALISM: n.
1. The organization, culture, or beliefs of a tribe.
2. A strong feeling of identity with and loyalty to one's tribe or group.
So right off the get-go you hate all NON-Jews, NON-members of YOUR group(TRIBE).
You "bundle together" for support and safety, the very definition of Fascism
THAT means, that if I am not one of the TRIBE, you do not like me.
Let's say that the US DOES go to war to defend Israel. Let's say, Israel fires missiles
into south Lebanon and Hezbollah responds in force. Netanyahu then sends his armored
divisions northward where they are immediately bogged down taking heavy casualties...
Netanyahu then implores Trump to send in the troops, and Trump obliges. (Grovelling
Congress of course offers their complete support.)
Then what??
Then American troops are killed and wounded in a war that does NOT involve US interests at
all.
Imagine how that changes the consciousness of Americans across the country. Imagine how
all the taboos about criticizing Israel get flushed down the toilet overnight. Imagine how
our relationship with Israel fundamentally changes as the price in blood and treasure becomes
unavoidably obvious to every american with access to a TV set or newspaper.
Any war in which even one american soldier dies to defend Israel will fundamentally change
the "special relationship" forever. And that could be a very positive development indeed.
''Let's say, Israel fires missiles into south Lebanon and Hezbollah responds in force. ""
Israel has that covered already. They will claim Americans were also attacked by
Hezbollah....if they have to blow up our new US base there themselves. Say Thank You to our
Traitors in congress.
_____________________
US opens first permanent military base in Israel | TheHill
https://thehill.com › policy
› defense › 351274-us-opens-first-permanent-...
Sep 18, 2017 - Israel and U.S. officials on Monday inaugurated the first permanent American
military base in the country, which will house dozens of U.S. troops and a missile defense
system. The base will be located within the Israel Defense Forces Air Defense School in
southern Israel, near Beersheba, Defense News reported. The facility will include a barracks
and several other buildings for U.S. troops to be stationed in the country, as well as
systems to identify and intercept various aerial threats. It will operate under Israeli
military directives
''It all started at the end of the past decade: Sen. Mark Kirk, one of Israel's biggest
supporters in the US Congress, suggested situating in Israel the sophisticated X Band Radar,
a defensive system that gives early warnings of missile strikes. To the surprise of
decision-makers in Jerusalem, the US administration's Secretary of Defense Robert Gates
quickly authorized the exceptional request and within two months, by September 2008, the huge
radar system was built in the Negev. It includes two towers of sophisticated sensors, the
tallest of their kind in the world''
Review of 1973 Israel/Syria/Egypt War may be instructive here. Israeli-occupied territory in
Egyptian Sinai and Syrian Golan was attacked and overrun by those Arab armies.
"We were determined to resist by force if necessary the introduction of Soviet forces into
the Middle East regardless of the pretext under which they arrived," then-Secretary of State
Henry Kissinger wrote in his memoir.
President Obama/Secretaries Clinton and Kerry diplomacy, whatever else it was, resulted in
Russian Federation firmly not only reasserting herself in the Arab world, but in a way more
directly at odds with whatever it is that can now be called US middle east "policy" in that
region.
Though to many US middle east "experts" UNO Security Council resolution 338 may be a thing
of the past, Russian President Vladimir Putin has publicly re-stated support for that as the
means to address the Golan problem.
338 states as follows: "The Security Council
1. Calls upon all parties to the present fighting to cease all firing and terminate all
military activity immediately, no later than 12 hours after the moment of the adoption of
this decision, in the positions they now occupy;
2. Calls upon the parties concerned to start immediately after the cease-fire the
implementation of Security Council resolution 242 (1967) in all of its parts;
3. Decides that, immediately and concurrently with the cease-fire, negotiations shall
start between the parties concerned under appropriate auspices aimed at establishing a just
and durable peace in the Middle East."
And 242 requires Israel to vacate Golan. Camp David Accords resulted in Israel vacating
Sinai.
In practical terms what would a Defense Treaty of Alliance with the United States and
Israel accomplish?
President Obama's complete diplomatic failure by which Russia returned to Syria is as big
a part of this issue as any.
Obama's "feckless" foreign policy, as stated by the late, reckless, Sen. John McCain in
2014, referenced Russia actions in Ukraine and Syria.
The fecklessness one may have resulted in direct Russian intervention in Syria, a year
later. The reckless one's answer, as espoused now by Sen. Graham, will not remove them.
The Palestine issue, an unsolved matter from World War I, in fact, also remains at the
heart of this conflict.
Henry Churchill King and Charles R. Crane, among others, knew that in 1919, and say so in
their report to President Woodrow Wilson.
pl it won't matter if we sign it or not. the great bulk of useful israel is confined to a
narrow band of land within range of a massive precision conventionally armed missile attack.
in the event of a real shootout by the time washington rode in to help much of useful israel
would be in ruins and i think it improbable washington will destroy lebanaon,syria and iran
BEFORE any of them launch a first strike against israel.
the treaty seems to me more of a realization how screwed the israelis now think they are
against implacable foes who can now deliver as good as they get. in the world of geopolitics
this treaties existence and public discussion is an open admission of israels already baked
in the cake military defeat should they start a real war.
which is why the israelis will try to maintain for peace despite all their usual 'you're
gonna get it.... threats'
In another sphere this 'mutual' defense treaty would be a joke. It is carefully worded to
permit Israel to continue to mow the regional grass as it sees fit (Natanz?) with a cast iron
guarantee that any sizeable response will trigger war with the US. Sen. Graham may as well be
suggesting that the command structure of US Forces be folded into the IDF.
Article 3 includes the following, which to me sounds like wording to cover a cyber
attack:
An attack against Israel achieving technological or strategic surprise that destabilizes
the military balance and threatens Israel's Qualitative Military Edge
It also includes a catch-all that the treaty can be activated by an "urgent
request" by either Power. Article 4 says Israel gets any Five Eyes intel concerning its
security. I was surprised by this, as I had assumed this was the case already.
Bibi is iching to attack Iran - it fits the image he has of himself. It is probable that Bibi
will take advantage of this proposed treaty. I can see a scenerio where the IAF bombs Iranian
nuclear facilities (the IAF has already flown a number of missions to the Iranian border to
test Iranian defense responses). When Iran and Hezballah respond with missiles into Israel,
Bibi will run to Trump and try to get the U.S. to take over bombing of Iran proper as well as
the ground operation to rout out Hezballah from Lebanon. This could get ugly fast and spark a
much wider Mideast War as Iraqi and Syrian shite militias join the fight and I can see the
possibility that the Iraqi government will declare war against Iran's enemies.
I think Israel will be making a major mistake is provoking a wide ranging mideast war.
Hezballah's missiles alone will cause major panic in Israel leading a portion of the millions
of dual passport holders to leave, perhaps permanently.
I read Mr. Giraldi's piece on this issue shortly after it was posted on the Unz Review last
month. I immediately began drafting a letter for both of my U.S. Senators. Coincidently, I
put the finishing touches on the letters this evening and prepared them for the USPS, and I
will drop them into the box tomorrow morning.
I ended my two page effort with the following paragraph:
"How about, for a change, we put the national security interests of the United States
ahead of those of a foreign power. Our country is already overcommitted around the world. The
defense of Israel is not a compelling United States national security concern. Let's consign
Senator Graham's proposed treaty to the dustbin, where it belongs."
I expect to receive a response from Pat Roberts (R-KS); he has always been courteous about
responding to my communications, even when he disagrees (he was not happy when I wrote a
couple years ago about the USS Liberty incident).
Long answer: The same No. We already give them a huge chest of treasure every year, why
would we want to give our blood to defend them. The IAF is the aggressor in the region,
conducting pre-emptive attacks on Iranian positions in Syria and Iraq. Yet Iran is not going
to attack them unless they attack Iranian soil. Iran and China are working on a strtegic
partnership of their own. An economic pact and not a mutual defense pact, but it would put
5,000 Chinese in Iran. They don't want to upset that applecart, and neither should we. But
unfortunately there are plenty of hardliner hotheads in both Israel and Iran.
And why should we upgrade Israel from their current status as a Major Non-NATO Ally? That
already gives them the same standing as Japan and South Korea and was put in effect by Papa
Bush and his congress. Then a few years ago we advanced them to a so-called strategic partner
through the US-Izzie Strategic Partnership Act. No further alliances are needed.
Graham should stop stirring the pot, drop his US citizenship, and enlist in the IDF. He
could then lie about his military service there like his spurious claim that he was a veteran
of both Desert Shield and Desert Storm.
Pat,
I think the formulation "enemies of choice" is sadly very accurate.
Netanyahu just visited Boris Johnson in London and he pretty much demanded flatly that the
UK has to stop talking with Iran about keeping the 2015 agreement with Iran over nuclear
things alive (despite Trump), for Israel (and against the rest of Europe).
Odds that Johnson will obey are IMO great. I read Johnson wants to move the UK embassy to
Jerusalem too.
In its own way it reminds me of Brazil Bolsonaro's son Eduardo.
That man is iirc currently under investigation for apparently hiring a murderer who shot a
left critic of dad (now, who isn't left of Bolsonaro?). Daddy Jair Bolsonaro apparently wants
to make Eduardo ambassador to the US. Probably ... overqualified.
Eduardo Bolsonaro very recently said that Brazil wouldn't, quote, "prostitute itself" to
get foreign money to fix the damage of the massive amazonas fires.
I'm willing to wager that Trump will order the US military to enter that war on the side
of Bibi.
IMO, Bibi knows Trump is weak to zionist & neocon instigated media hysteria. This will
be his "war president" moment. He'll have the full backing of Chuckie and Nancy and the rest
of the Congressional crew as AIPAC calls in their check. I recall well in the heat of the
Russia Collusion media hysteria when he ordered the missile strike in Syria how the media
were calling it his presidential moment.
I believe Bibi for his own domestic political reasons as well as knowing that Trump is a
fully bought and paid for Zionist asset has been probing what he can instigate that will
cause the US to do his work. My question to this committee of military experts is what will
this war look like? How will Syria and Iran respond, since both have an obligation to
Hezbollah? And what will Putin do with his forces in the middle of a war zone?
I wonder if the Israeli Government has decided that time is not on their side, leading to a
decision to act now?
The game changer for Israel would be the resolution of the Syrian civil war.
That would result in a battle hardened and capable SAA being free to operate along the
Southern border and on the flank of any Israeli incursion into Lebanon.
Then there is the possibility of Syria extending its air defense network to include
Lebanon.
Then there is the question of money to be made in reconstructing Syria, building transport
infrastructure for the Iran to Mediterranean leg of OBOR as well as perhaps other projects-
this economic activity increases the political power of Syria, Iran, Lebanon and China.
Is there any circumstance that you see where the US will not get militarily involved if
thousands are killed in Israel even if it is in response to an Israeli provocation?
It would seem that the pressure on any US president would be immense. Hezbollah after all
has been demonized for so long as an Islamic terrorist organization. The support for military
intervention here would be universal and bipartisan. And the ziocon media would be in full on
escalation propaganda mode showing images of Israeli kids in rubble and malevolent images of
the evil Nasrallah.
The likely only opposition voices would be Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan and Tulsi Gabbard and
they will be maligned quickly as irrelevant.
Universal means the majority across all geographies from the two coasts to the mid-west and
south. The people have been conditioned for decades that Hezbollah is a terrorist
organization.
The only way to judge a person is how they acted in the past under similar conditions.
Tulsi has shown courage of conviction in the past in opposing the very popular Obama's Syria
policy of supporting & arming Al Qaeda when it was not popular to do that and she's
paying for it by being labeled an Assad apologist among the establishment. And resigning from
the DNC to endorse Bernie.
Now of course you are entitled to your own opinion which doesn't have to be based on any
facts.
If the IDF general command has any say in the matter they are telling Bibi - DO NOT wage a
total war in Lebanon. The only way Israel can keep Hezballah defanged is to occupy most of
Lebanon - something the IDF and it reliance on reserve soldiers is NOT equiped to do except
for a very short time. Southern Lebanon is crisscrossed with hundreds of tunnels, an issue
where IAF saturation bombing proved to be ineffective. The IDF and their tanks were hit with
withering fire from the rear and IDF operational discipline broke down quickly. There is no
cohesion between the Professional soldiers in the IDF and the reservists and this makes large
scale operations very difficult. Among the professional IDF, you would be hard pressed to
find a single soldier who wants to fight Hezballah again.
I think Trump would gladly join Israel in a war in Lebanon and that would turn the tide in
Israel's favor temporarily. However, Hezballah would not give a moments peace to any Israeli
or U.S. soldier on the ground in Lebanon and the entire population of Lebanon would support
Hezballah to throw the invaders out of the country. It would be a bloody occupation for
however long it lasted.
One of my nephews is an F-16 pilot in the IAF and there is significant concerns about
Hezballah's limited air defense capabilities. Israeli intelligence on Hezballah's
capabililiies and location is very poor. The IAF has lost several planes in Syria in recent
years and are loath to fly over Lebanon proper. The usual tactic is for the IAF planes to fly
out to sea and fire missiles from there. Without good intelligence the IAF bombing runs
usually end up churning up a lot of dirt.
So the IDF has to penetrate the first line, which they barely managed the first time, then
they face a second line of prepared defenses? How much recent combat experience do they have?
If I recall correctly at least some of the Lebanese have served in Syria in one capacity or
another. It certainly wasn't West Bank occupation duty.
It seems as if Israel is ready to re-fight the last war, and Hezbollah has prepared for
the next. More importantly, if war is politics by other means, I see no clear Israeli
political objectives nor any indication as to why they think a do over of 2006 will lead to a
better outcome.
Absent contributing an occupation force for Lebanon, what would US contribute? Bombing
targets in Lebanon? Israel will have taken out all significant targets in a few days and long
term bombing changes little. I am sure Bolton is whispering in Trumps ear that Hezbollah will
surrender once the might of the US enters the fray.
Given this discussion, it throws a bit more weight on the side of the recent air strikes by
IAF in Iraq and Lebanon as an initial nibble, weighing responses from various parties in
order to adjust course.
I'm quite confident that there are enough munitions that are deliverable from unmanned
systems to waste Hizbulla's defenses.
The question to be weighed is whether Hizbullah can count on Israel's uncertainty as a
deterrent to a massive attack against Lebanon. The Samson effect cuts both ways if Iran jumps
in. Unless tptb decide to go with theatre-level weaponry, what is left of Israel even if Iran
and Lebanon are squashed?
Even more interesting, if Trump jumps in with his typically flaccid braggadocio, does his
action endanger Israel by falling short of the killer punch?
stumpy, If Israeli saturation bombing of Lebanon achieved nothing in 2006 (except defeat),
why exactly do you argue it will have an effect this time?
Moreover, there likely will be a highly complex EW environment, with which Israel has no
experience. Did you notice at all what happened to the US Tomahawk volley? Those missiles you
admire or worship (missiles - what a novel idea), without IDF on the ground for spotters and
to consolidate gains (and die) will push dirt.
Try and name ANY case where air power has been decisive politically without ground forces.
You cant for a reason.
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is ..."
Pat Buchanan continues to be one of the few publicly visible political analysts currently
active who dares to tell it like it is when it comes to Israel's power in America. His
article
last week "Will Israel's War Become America's War" as always gets to the heart of the
problem, i.e. that the completely contrived "special relationship" with Israel could easily
lead the United States into another totally unnecessary war or even a series of wars in the
Middle East.
Pat starts with "President Donald Trump, who canceled a missile strike on Iran after the
shoot-down of a U.S. Predator drone to avoid killing Iranians, may not want a war. But the same
cannot be said of Bibi Netanyahu." He observes that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is facing
re-election on September 17 th , and though most polls indicate that he will win,
the opposition to him is strong based on his personal corruption and his pandering to the
country's most extreme right-wing parties. So Bibi is concerned that he might lose and even go
to jail and there is nothing like a little war to make a leader look strong and righteous, so
he is lashing out at all his neighbors in hopes that one or more of them will be drawn into
what would be for Israel, given its massive military superiority, a manageable
confrontation.
Buchanan sums up Netanyahu's recent escalation, writing that on "Saturday, Israel launched a
night attack on a village south of Damascus to abort what Israel claims was a plot by Iran's
Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force Sunday, two Israeli drones crashed outside the media offices
of Hezbollah in Beirut. Israel then attacked a base camp of the Popular Front for the
Liberation of Palestine-General Command in north Lebanon. Monday, Israel admitted to a strike
on Iranian-backed militias of the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq. And Israel does not deny
responsibility for last month's attacks on munitions dumps and bases of pro-Iran militias
[also] in Iraq. Israel has also confirmed that, during Syria's civil war, it conducted hundreds
of strikes against pro-Iranian militias and ammunition depots to prevent the transfer of
missiles to Hezbollah in Lebanon."
So, Israel has staged literally hundreds of attacks against targets in Lebanon, Syria and
now Iraq while it is also at the same time shooting scores of unarmed demonstrators inside Gaza
every Friday. Netanyahu has also threatened both perennial foe Iran and the Houthi rebels in
Yemen. As the Jewish state is not at war with any of those countries it is engaging in war
crimes. Both Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Force are vowing
revenge.
Pat Buchanan goes on to make the case that Netanyahu is willy-nilly pulling the United
States into a situation from which there is no exit. Indeed, one might well conclude that the
trap has already been sprung as the Trump Administration is reflexively blaming Israel's
actions on Iran. The Jewish state's escalation produced a telephone call to Bibi by American
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo promising that the United States would unconditionally support
Israel. Vice President Mike Pence
also joined in , boasting of a "great conversation" with Netanyahu and tweeting that "The
United State fully supports Israel's right to defend itself from imminent threats. Under
President @realDonaldTrump, America will always stand with Israel!"
So, if a war in the Middle East does begin one can count on a number of developments in
Washington, all of which favor Netanyahu. As Pompeo and Pence have made clear, the Trump
Administration already accepts that whatever Israel does is fully justified and there are even
reports that the White House will endorse Israeli
annexation of all the illegal settlements on the West Bank at some point either before
or
immediately after the upcoming Knesset election to help Bibi. And don't look for any
dissent from even the most extreme views developing inside the White House or the State
Department. The president has completely surrendered to the Israel Lobby while National
Security Adviser John Bolton, Pence and Pompeo are all outspoken supporters of war with Iran.
And nearly all the important government posts dealing with the Middle East are staffed by
Jewish Zionists, to include the president's son-in-law and two Donald Trump lawyers. The most
recent addition to that sorry line-up is Peter Berkowitz, who has been appointed head of the
Policy Planning Staff at State. Berkowitz studied at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and is
co-founder and director of
the "Israel Program on Constitutional Government."
And Congress would also be singing the "amen" chorus in support of U.S. intervention to help
the country it has ridiculously but nevertheless repeatedly described as America's "best friend
and closest ally." The occupied mainstream media would echo that line, as would the millions of
Christian Zionists and every one of the more than 600 American Jewish organizations that in one
way, shape or form support Israel.
Buchanan warns that the U.S. could find itself in real trouble, particularly given the
attacks on Iraq, where Washington still has 5,000 troops, hugely outnumbered by the local
pro-Iranian militias. And American aircraft carriers could find themselves vulnerable if they
dare to enter the Straits of Hormuz or Persian Gulf, where they would be in range of the
Iranian batteries of anti-ship missiles. He concludes that a war for Israel that goes badly
could cost Trump the election in 2020, asking " have we ceded to Netanyahu something no nation
should ever cede to another, even an ally: the right to take our country into a war of their
choosing but not of ours?"
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that
seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its
email is[email protected] .
The president has completely surrendered to the Israel Lobby while National Security
Adviser John Bolton
To be fair, Trump never promised to curb Israeli aggression during his campaign. He promised
to back them and that's what he's doing. So this suggestion that "he's letting us all down"
is just silly. Now, on other stuff, yeah, you can make a case. And let's be real, if Jeb Bush
or Bernie Sanders or Hillary were in office they'd be backing "our ally in the Middle East"
too.
@Lot Iran was invited by
Syrian legit gov. Lebanon was prevented from total rout by Hezbollah from the actions of the
evil Zionist .Hezbollah sought and received help to confront evil Zionist. Who ever asked the
Jews to show up in ME anywhere in the ME? Who? Yemen is a war that ahs been fought by Houthis
. Houthis has been there for centuries They are fighting a war instigated by Israeli vassal
Saudi . Iraq has been turned into dust by Jew run USA attack It is slowly coming to life.
Now don't read the script from the middle Start from the beginning . Start from the
beginning ad be ready for the end . End will not be written by devious Jewish country .
"'But there is an even more important reason to give two cheers for Israel and to think of
it, despite its excesses, as exemplary: Israel is nationalist."'
Maybe McConnell is paid to praise Israel or maybe he just your typical simple minded
tunnel vision conservative. I gotta say my kind of conservative values, or maybe they should
be called traditional values will likely stay the same but what wont stay the same is my
voting for any of these conservative stupids.
I'm a registered Independent voter independent because I believed Americans should be
independent of 'political parties' and not follow them like sheep, but vote for the closest
thing they can get to a candidate of good character, some brains and a sense of fairness for
the people. I voted for the actual America first GOP presidents, the elder Bush I and Nixon,
otoh I also voted for the Dem America first presidents Kennedy and Carter.
Independent voters like myself make up 37% of registered voters in the US .that makes both
the dems and repubs 'minority parties' ..neither of them can win without us.
Independent voters got to be independent because they paid more attention to the big picture
and issues in politics overall than the followers of the parties .most of them are more
'traditional', including objecting to US entanglement with foreign nations. .the exact
opposite of current GOP conservatism.
So it is absolute nitwittery to try and attract traditional voters by championing Israel as a
model for US nationalism. Israel gives nationalism a bad name. It is asking us to step in a
pile of steaming cow shit to pattern the US after Israel.
A lot of these Israeli provocations are, as noted, Netanyahu electioneering. Hence, they are
likely to stop or be diminished (the Gaza border massacres excepted) if Bibi either wins the
election and can form a new government or loses and is driven from power with the opposition
forming a new government. Worst case scenario is a continuation of the present situation with
Bibi unable to form a government and having to fight yet another election. This would result
in still further Israeli escalation until finally Iran or Hezbollah retaliates and the US is
dragged in. Or he might just formally annex the West Bank and drive out the Palestinians to
the applause of Trump and his supporters.
There are other dangers as well, especially the collapse of Saudi Arabia and the UAE as a
result of their defeat in Yemen. The US is sending 5,000 troops to SA just in time to defend
the House of Saud from a possible overthrow or to fight on behalf of one part of that
sociopathic family against another part.
"President Donald Trump, who canceled a missile strike on Iran after the shoot-down of a
U.S. Predator drone to avoid killing Iranians, may not want a war. But the same cannot be
said of Bibi Netanyahu." He observes that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is facing
re-election on September 17th, and though most polls indicate that he will win, the
opposition to him is strong based on his personal corruption and his pandering to the
country's most extreme right-wing parties. So Bibi is concerned that he might lose and even
go to jail and there is nothing like a little war to make a leader look strong and
righteous, so he is lashing out at all his neighbors in hopes that one or more of them will
be drawn into what would be for Israel, given its massive military superiority, a
manageable confrontation.
It's a good analysis, but a little different to the subjugation of US interests to Israeli
ones that is normally talked about inasmuch Netanyahu personal advantage is the key factor. I
don't think many people in Israel would approve of Netanyahu doing something so obvious as
getting Israel into an inconclusive war just before an election. Especially as the war is one
that might bring the US in but would be unlikely to motive the US to destroy the Iranian
regime, wiche had time to make their facilities (nuclear) too duplicated and dispersed for
airstrikes to work.
The Palestinians are the ones Israelis are happy to get tough with, even the supposedly
leftist Ehud Barak has said the Palestinians of Gaza must be deterred more. Talk of war with
Iran is just that, it really is, unless they do something stupid.
For Israel, getting the US to totally crush Iran would be great, but that will require
America to be provoked by Iran, which is something they are loath to do. Iran is not going to
fight a war they cannot possibly hope to win if they can help it, and they have said there
will not be one. I don't think Bolton is any influence on Trump, and Pompeo is a
never-Trumper turned Trump boot licker rather that a force in the administration in his own
right.
He concludes that a war for Israel that goes badly could cost Trump the election in
2020, asking " have we ceded to Netanyahu something no nation should ever cede to another,
even an ally: the right to take our country into a war of their choosing but not of
ours?"
Trump never loses sight of his own self interest. A war before the Israeli election is not
going to help Trump win reelection, and he did say recently he was open to talks with Iran,
which left a distraught Netanyahu unsuccessfully trying to get through to Trump and gave Ehud
Barack one of his few opportunities to criticise the utility for Israel of Netanyahu's
relationship with Trump.
"... As for the Israelis, they don't want the man who thinks he might be "King of Israel" talking to the Hitlerite Persians. They suddenly sprayed Iran's local Middle East proxies with drone-fired rockets – in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon – just in case the wretched, financially broken and inflation-doomed Iranians were tempted to chat to the crackpot in the White House. But the Israelis wasted their ammunition. Rouhani is not mad. America has to drop its sanctions against Iran if Trump wants to talk, he said. ..."
"... And when Rouhani made it clear that he was not interested in "photo-ops" – an obvious allusion to the pictures of Trump and Little Rocket Man – what did the po-faced Washington Post ..."
"... Indeed, had Ahmadinejad's further political ambitions not been firmly crushed by his country's "supreme leader", Ayatollah Khamenei, we might just have witnessed a meeting between two of the world's leading political nutcases. Ahmadinejad, it may be recalled, was the Iranian who claimed that a holy cloud was suspended over his head for 20 minutes when he addressed the United Nations in New York. Now that is a phenomenon which Trump may also have experienced – although at least he had the good sense not to tell us of it. ..."
"... In the first eight months after Rouhani became president in 2013, the Iranian state hanged at least 537 people. In January of 2014, he had, according to a report in the Arabic daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat ..."
"... When the shah of Iran wanted to acquire nuclear technology in 1974, according to documents in the US National Security Archive, he said that Iran had an "inalienable right" to the nuclear cycle and that it would not accept obligations "dictated by the nuclear-have nations". ..."
"... In theory, what Macron is trying to do, if Le Monde ..."
"... But what Macron is really doing – which is what almost every EU leader is doing – is trying to preserve the peace of the Middle East long enough for the Americans to elect a serious, intelligent, boring and moderately honest political leader to replace the mentally unbalanced and very dangerous current holder of the highest office in the US. ..."
"... Robert Fisk writes for the Independent , where this column originally appeared. ..."
History in the Middle East is unkind to us westerners. Just when we thought we were the good
guys and the Iranians were the bad guys, here comes the ghostly, hopeless possibility of a
Trump-Rouhani summit to remind us that the apparent lunatic is the US president and the
rational, sane leader who is supposed to talk to him is the president of the Islamic Republic
of Iran . All these
shenanigans are fantasy, of course – like the "imminent" war between America and Iran
– of which more later.
As for the Israelis, they don't want the man who thinks he might be "King of Israel"
talking to the Hitlerite Persians. They suddenly sprayed Iran's local Middle East proxies with
drone-fired rockets – in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon – just in case the wretched,
financially broken and inflation-doomed Iranians were tempted to chat to the crackpot in the
White House. But the Israelis wasted their ammunition. Rouhani is not mad. America has to drop
its sanctions against Iran if Trump wants to talk, he said.
It still amazes me that we have to take all this stuff at face value. No sooner had Trump
waffled on about Rouhani being "the great negotiator" than we saw all the White House
correspondents dutifully taking this nonsense down in their notebooks – as if the
American president was presidential, as if the old dream-bag was real, as if what he was saying
had the slightest bearing on reality.
And when Rouhani made it clear that he was not interested in "photo-ops" – an
obvious allusion to the pictures of Trump and Little Rocket Man – what did the po-faced
Washington Post tell us in its subsequent report? Why, that Rouhani had "dashed hopes
of a potential meeting with his US counterpart". Ye Gods! What "hopes" do they still have in
their homegrown crackpot president after these two and a half years of his threats and lies and
racism? Have they learned nothing?
It's as if – for the American media – Trump is unhinged in Washington but a
Kissinger the moment he lands in Biarritz (or London or Riyadh or Panmunjom or a Scottish golf
course, or perhaps, one day, Greenland). And Rouhani – who may be a "great negotiator"
but is also a very ruthless man – is therefore supposed to play the role of Iran's
previous president, the raving, crazed, Holocaust-denying Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Indeed, had Ahmadinejad's further political ambitions not been firmly crushed by his
country's "supreme leader", Ayatollah Khamenei, we might just have witnessed a meeting between
two of the world's leading political nutcases. Ahmadinejad, it may be recalled, was the Iranian
who claimed that a holy cloud was suspended over his head for 20 minutes when he addressed the
United Nations in New York. Now that is a phenomenon which Trump may also have experienced
– although at least he had the good sense not to tell us of it.
Ahmadinejad, you may also remember, was the president whose claim to have won the 2009
presidential elections brought millions of protestors onto the streets of Iranian cities until
they were brutalised and imprisoned into submission. His cheeky smile, chipmunk eyes and
Spanish armada beard could not persuade Iranians that the "alternative facts" of his
presidential victory were real.
Everyone knew that Ahmadinejad would never be given a finger on any nuclear button –
many doubted if he knew the difference between nuclear physics and electricity – but he
provided at the time a hate figure to rival Gaddafi or any other of the ravers of the Middle
East.
But now Trump wears Ahmadinejad's international mantle of insanity and the Iranian
presidential seat is today held by a far more pragmatic individual. For let's not be romantic
about Hassan
Rouhani . Back in 1999, when he was a humble deputy chief of Iran's Supreme National
Security Council, Rouhani condemned pro-democracy demonstrators as " muhareb " and "
mofsad " (corrupt on earth) – opponents of the Islamic Republic, whose
punishment would be death.
In the first eight months after Rouhani became president in 2013, the Iranian state
hanged at least 537 people. In January of 2014, he had, according to a report in the Arabic
daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat , visited Ahwaz to deal with "a number of sensitive files"
left untouched by Ahmadinejad. These included Hashem Shaabani and Hadi Rashedi – both
human rights activists in the minority Arab community in southwest Iran – who had been
condemned to death for "waging war on God", "spreading corruption on earth" and "questioning
the principle of velayat-e faqih" (guardianship of the jurist).
Shaabani's poetry, in both Persian and Arabic, was famous; he was a founder of an institute
which encouraged Arabic literature and culture among Iranians. Rouhani signed off on the
executions; Shaabani and Rashedi were hanged in a still-unidentified prison.
But it is Rouhani's negotiating skill which has apparently impressed Trump, who also has
little time for minorities. And when you recall that one of Trump's Republican predecessors in
the White House, Ronald Reagan, arranged for the Israelis to deliver missiles to Iran in 1985
in return for the release of US hostages in Beirut, you can see why Trump might think it
strange that Rouhani would turn down a meeting with him. After all, during the Iran-Contra
affair the then Iranian speaker of parliament, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, was deeply involved in
the enterprise.
But even if Rouhani was fool enough to flirt with Trump's offer – which he was not
– his fate would have been similar to the poet Shaabani's if he had dared to talk to the
US president without the full restoration of the nuclear treaty.
It doesn't take much spreading of "corruption on earth" in Iran – let alone disavowing
the views of the Supreme Leader Khamanei – to catapult a learned cleric into prison.
Having learned from his foreign minister in Biarritz what the American deal was supposed to be,
Rouhani wisely did not touch it. The US had broken the nuclear treaty and reimposed sanctions
– so Trump would have to rejoin the treaty signatories and lift sanctions for any hope of
a meeting with the president of the Islamic Republic.
Of course, the Iranians will no more go to war with America than America will go to war with
Iran. We all know that – except for those who blast us all with "brink-of-war" scenarios
in the Gulf. We've been through Iranian ship-minings in 1987 without declarations of war.
Besides, what's so new about an Iran insisting on its "sovereign" right to peaceful nuclear
power?
When the shah of Iran wanted to acquire nuclear technology in 1974, according to
documents in the US National Security Archive, he said that Iran had an "inalienable right" to
the nuclear cycle and that it would not accept obligations "dictated by the nuclear-have
nations".
Which is pretty much what Iran did accept in the nuclear agreement which Trump tore
up on behalf of the United States. And I still have a clipping from The Times of
November 1972, in which my then colleague David Housego was reporting from Tehran that the shah
had declared that Iran's defensive frontiers extended beyond the Persian Gulf into the Indian
Ocean!
In five years, the shah calculated, his arms build-up would make Iran the largest military
power in the Middle East. The shah ruled with torture and executions, was crazed about the
dangers of communism, and power-mad to the extent of celebrating his empire's rule in 1971 with
what he called "the biggest party on earth" in the ruins of Persepolis. How Trump would love to
have been there.
Well, Macron may be able to turn himself into the "Great G7 Intermediary", although all
others who have tangled with Iran have been brought low by the experience. Think poor old Jimmy
Carter, destroyed by the hostage-takers at the US embassy in Tehran. Think Reagan, almost
brought low by Irangate. Think Colonel Oliver North. Or envoy Robert McFarlane. Or Terry Waite.
Or Barack Obama, for that matter, his Iranian policy torn up by Trump.
In theory, what Macron is trying to do, if Le Monde has got it right, is
persuade Trump to allow Iran's principal petroleum importers to continue buying oil from the
Islamic Republic. This includes Turkey, China, Japan, India and South Korea. In return, Iran
would itself return to the original nuclear agreement. That's the message Macron sent back to
Tehran with Iran's foreign minister, who airbussed into Biarritz for his briefest of meetings
with the French president.
But what Macron is really doing – which is what almost every EU leader is doing
– is trying to preserve the peace of the Middle East long enough for the Americans to
elect a serious, intelligent, boring and moderately honest political leader to replace the
mentally unbalanced and very dangerous current holder of the highest office in the US.
Well, good luck to the Americans. For at present, they are confronting not the lunatic rogue
state which Messers Bolton and Pompeo have nightmared up for Trump, but a nation governed by
bravely defiant, ruthless, and – yes – devious men. For Iranians understand America
far better than Americans will ever understand Iran.
I am not sure that the three names mentioned means anything to most Americans. But the name
Abelson probably is better known. And now Wexner and his Meta group were added.
Primitive anti-Semitism lost attraction in the USA as people are better educated now and
generally are able to distinguish between bankers and particular tribe (inability to see the
difference was one factor that fueled anti-Semitism in Europe in the past). If you wish
anti-Semitism was displaced by Russophobia, which now is a politically correct
anti-Semitism.
Haaretz
delivered a warning today to American Jewry. "If Trump falls, the testimonies of Cohen, Pecker
and Weisselberg could spark an anti-Semitic Backlash."
Many have passed through the Trump Administration's revolving door and faded away quietly
but those who may bring the president down are "the lawyer-fixer (Michael Cohen), the
smut-dealing publisher (David Pecker) and the numbers whiz who knows it all (Alan
Weisselberg)." Prominent Haaretz correspondent Chemi Shalev is honest enough to openly
acknowledge that "the trio's public profile is a Jewish stereotype."
Shalev dared to write the article every other political analyst has dreaded putting into
words let alone text. "The name of the lawyer who implicated Donald Trump in the commission of
federal crimes is Cohen. The name of the publisher who has agreed to tell investigators how he
turned his newspaper into a clearinghouse for Cohen's payments to women is Pecker. And the name
of the accountant who has been granted immunity in order to testify about the role played by
the Trump Organization in Cohen's endeavors is Weisselberg. The common denominators of
Cohen, Pecker and Weisselberg, beside their willingness to do whatever it takes for Trump in
the past and their apparent willingness to inform on him now , is that all three are
indisputably and recognizably Jewish."
If you wonder why no one in America was courageous enough to write about Trump being
betrayed by his closest Jewish aids, Shalev's answer is "anyone who does so risks being accused
of generalizing, if not actively encouraging anti-Semitism." But this is just the first stage
in this saga according to Haaretz 's correspondent. "Somewhere down the line. The
racist, supremacist and neo-Nazi element of Trump's base is already drooling at the impending
opportunity of enlisting disgruntled rank and file Trump fans in a battle against the Jewish
conspiracy aimed at their idol."
Shalev realises that Trump's days are numbered. And he believes the actions of Cohen, Pecker
and Wiesselberg make Trump's political survival unlikely. "Cohen's admissions in a New York
courtroom last week that his payments to porn's Stormy Daniels and Playboy's Karen MacDougal
were made in accordance with Trump's instructions have cast the President as a criminal who
violated campaign finance laws. Pecker's testimony could reportedly make clear that the two
payments were part of a nefarious system. And Weisselberg's account, though currently limited
to Cohen's payments, could pave the way to exposure of the long line of alleged misdeeds
carried out by Trump as real estate mogul, franchising czar, reality star, presidential
candidate and commander in chief."
When Trump was elected some saw him as the "First Jewish President," At the moment it looks
as if it his Trump's closest Jewish aides who may provide the final nails in his presidential
coffin. Enacting astute Jewish pre traumatic instinct, Shalev notes that "Trump repeatedly and
profusely praises Paul Manafort, who isn't Jewish, for remaining loyal despite the past and
future convictions awaiting him. Cohen, Pecker and Weisselberg, who sound like a stand-up's
Jewish law firm, are, by implication, part of the vast conspiracy that seeks to bring the
President down and to undermine the voters' verdict."
Shalev uses the clearest possible language. "If Trump emerges unscathed, a scenario that
seems increasingly unlikely, fears of anti-Semitic backlash could recede. If Trump is
impeached, or forced to resign, or impaired in any other way, shape or form, the outrage
against his incriminators and their common heritage could turn into a clear and present danger
for American Jews." You ask, 'what about Israel?' Shalev doesn't shy away from the question.
"The American right's adoration of Israel won't be an obstacle: Many of Trump's constituents,
like Netanyahu's, can easily ignore the common bonds between Israel and its greatest Diaspora.
Israel is the country of proud and nationalistic Jew-heroes that man the West's forward outpost
against radical Islam and who play a critical role in advancing the End of Days."
Maybe the above explains the Trump administration's indication yesterday that it is set to
announce it rejects Palestinian 'right of return.' If Shalev is correct then the message here
could be interpreted as follows -- we are still supporting Israel, Zionism, we are totally anti
Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims but we don't trust Jews either. This is, in fact, a common
Zionist anti Semitic position. I.e., 'We like and support Jews as long as they are somewhere
else, preferably Zion.'
According to Shalev, "from the moment Cohen turned his back on Trump, and more so since
Pecker and Weisselberg apparently joined him, the neo-Nazi network is busy preparing the flip
side of the coin, the analogy that could impress Trump's followers, if he falters: The three
are portrayed as successors to Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Jesus to authorities." I guess that
you have noticed that while Shalev seems to be comfortable pointing at the ethnicity of Cohen,
Pecker and Weisselberg he seems to refer to Goyim who do the same as 'neo-Nazis' and
'supremacists.'
Shalev writes that before Trump's elections, "American Jewish organizations were quick to
call out Trump for the suspected anti-Semitic messages in his statements and campaign." But
their voices receded "with the prodding of Netanyahu and the vouching of Sheldon Adelson
Trump's disturbing words were swept under the carpet of his decidedly pro-Israeli
polices."Trump's allegedly Jew-hating supporters were somehow ignored by the American
media.
However, this may change very soon. "The Jewishness of the three former Trump aides who have
now decided to testify against him could mar the artificial tranquility and, in a worst-case
scenario, spark a dangerous wave of anti-Semitism. American Jewish leaders would do well to
prepare for such a stormy day, as would Netanyahu, who has placed all of his prestige on Trump
and the American right."
Shalev sarcastically suggests that "if Netanyahu is forced to choose between the
administration's pro-settler, anti-Palestinian policies and his duty to fight anti-Semitism and
stand up for beleaguered American Jews, they (America Jews) would do well to start seeking
their salvation elsewhere."
@anonymous The Christian Zionists, exemplified by John Hagee and his "Christians United
for Israel." for years, from the pulpi has pleaded for the bombing of Iran. He is Netanyahu's
Useful Idiot.
The 60-70 million strong Christian Zionists are Trump's base. He has no hope of being
re-elected without them. Thus, Trump is just as beholden to these dispensationalists as he is
to Adelson and Netanyahu. The same can be said for the entire republican party.
"... Remember how "rich" Trump was "self funded" and therefore could not be influenced by contributions?"! Well $259 million bought him. ..."
"... Adelson, who alongside his wife Miriam are the biggest donors to Trump and the GOP, contributed $205 million to Republicans in the past two cycles and reportedly sent $35 million Trump's presidential bid. ..."
It is the ADELSON Administration . .... Bought and PAID FOR.
Remember how "rich" Trump was "self funded" and therefore could not be influenced by
contributions?"! Well $259 million bought him.
Those funds came from Sheldon and Miriam Adelson, Paul Singer and Bernard Marcus, donors who have made no secret of their desire for
the United States to destroy the Islamic Republic.
Adelson, who alongside his wife Miriam are
the biggest donors to Trump and the GOP, contributed $205 million to Republicans in the past
two cycles and reportedly sent $35 million Trump's presidential bid.
Sheldon Adelson BRIBED Trump and the Republicans .... This does not include the "favorable
and unusual" so-called loans granted Kushner and ?Trump?
Who is notorious for being in financial difficulty and is desperately hiding his taxes.
Trump has lots of energy for defending his tax returns but very little for defending Our
borders.
Trump's lawyers will appeal and fight this tooth and nail for his Taxes. But when some
P.O.S. "judge" treasonously rules against defending this Nation's borders from Invaders Trump
just shruggs and submits. Makes empty threats about where to put the Invaders, and goes back
to putting ISRAEL FIRST.
I've always had the suspicion that Mossad always carries out the hit jobs that the
Americans and the British won't do, if only because the more practice and experience Mossad
has, the better it gets, while the Americans and British lose practice, knowledge and skill.
Plus if the hitjob goes wrong or people get suspicious, Mossad (and by association, Israel)
can always be blamed.
The idea that Israel controls Washington or at the very least directs its agenda - and
Satanyahu of all people does like to crow about telling the US government what to do, or
about insinuating himself or his government as a mediator in matters involving the Middle
East and a non-ME nation - may be one deliberately played up by Deep State / The Powers That
Be, to fool and confuse the public, at the same time that the opposite view (that any
criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic) is being promoted.
The truth may very well be akin to two or three (or more) psychopaths co-operating and
working together as long as their separate goals are being met - but when the situation
changes and things that used to work in the past no longer do so, they'll fall out in a big
way and start blaming one another, and one putting the other out to hang.
You may be familiar with the history of Bogdan Khmelnitski and the uprising he led in 1648
that led to the formation of a Cossack state in territory that is now part of the Ukraine.
The uprising originally began when Cossack soldiers in the Polish army rebelled for a number
of reasons (they wanted better pay, they resented being treated as hicks because of their
Orthodox religion, among other things) and the rebellion spread to Orthodox peasants who had
long resentments against their Polish Catholic overlords. Much of the Polish nobility fled
and the anger of the Orthodox peasants was directed against Jewish stewards who managed their
Polish employers' estates. Several of those people scarpered off as well so the peasants
ended up walloping impoverished Jewish communities in towns and cities instead.
It seems that your story of Bohdan Chmielnicki uprising in 1648 is more fantasy than
history. Bohdan Chmielnicki's uprising against the Jews and Polish overlords was the result
of the policy " vodka on credit" that caused the Ukrainian peasants to loose land. Alexander
Solzhenitsyn in " 200 Years Together" writes about it. Unfortunately it is not translated
into English for obcvious reasons.
Does Israel Interfere in American Elections? Ask Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib Philip Giraldi August 27, 2019
1,800 Words 89
CommentsReply
Email This Page to Someone
Remember My Information
=>
List of Bookmarks
◄►◄►▲▼ Remove
from Library B Show Comment
Next New Comment Next New Reply Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This
Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public
Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to
recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information'
checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour. Email Comment Ignore Commenter Follow
Commenter
Bookmark Toggle All ToC ▲▼
Add to Library Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments
Search Clear Cancel
Does anyone remember what the Mueller investigation was all about? It was to determine
whether the team surrounding candidate and then president-elect Donald Trump had colluded with
a foreign power, presumed to be Russia. It did not discover any such collaboration to get Trump
elected president, but it did discover a foreign nation that had directly intervened with key
players surrounding president-elect Trump to get them to do it a favor. That country was
Israel, but somehow the media never quite managed to pull it all together even if leading
public intellectual Noam Chomsky was able to,
saying " if you're interested in foreign interference in our elections, whatever the
Russians may have done barely counts or weighs in the balance as compared with what another
state does, openly, brazenly and with enormous support. Israeli intervention in US elections
vastly overwhelms anything the Russians may have done, I mean, even to the point where the
prime minister of Israel, Netanyahu, goes directly to Congress, without even informing the
president, and speaks to Congress, with overwhelming applause, to try to undermine the
president's policies "
This is how Jewish power works on behalf of the Jewish state. It is done right out in the
open, at least if one knows where to look, and it operates by what the intelligence community
would refer to as misdirection. That means that you never talk about Israel itself, except in a
positive, laudatory fashion, you never mention Jewish power in America, and, finally, you have
in reserve some fabricated threats that can be surfaced to dominate discussion and render
Israel's malign activity invisible.
Currently, the Russian threat is the enemy du jour . Even though we now know that
"Russiagate" never existed in any serious form, it continues to be hyped by both the Democratic
Party and by the accommodating media as the over-the-horizon threat to American democracy. It
is now being claimed, minus any real evidence, that the Kremlin has a plan to ruin the upcoming
2020 election by way of nationwide tampering with the voting machines and the electronic
tallying procedures. Oddly enough, the states, where the voting actually takes place,
have not noticed any attempted Russian interference. As the story goes, if the Russians are
successful, no one will have any confidence in the results and the American republican
experiment will collapse in ruins.
No one is, of course, asking why Moscow would want to change a United States that, for all
its power, is so politically inept and corrupt from top to bottom that it found itself unable
to stage a coup in Venezuela. If the U.S. government collapses, it might well be replaced by
something more authoritarian and, dare I say, more efficient, that would certainly pose a
greater threat to Russia, so why would Putin want that?
Nevertheless, many people who should know better are hyping the threat. I sometimes peruse
the Defense One website, a warmhearted place funded by defense contractors where all
those people who want to blow up the world can share bon mots and grin about all the
money they are making.
Last week I noted a
particularly loathesome article on the site "Here's what foreign interference will look
like in 2020," written by one Uri Friedman, who I presume to be – inevitably – an
Israeli. Uri is very upset about all those evil countries that will be/might be interfering in
the election, to include Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, North Korea and
the United Arab Emirates – though he does exclude the one country that is most likely to
interfere, which is, of course, Israel. Uri is described as a "a senior associate editor at The
Atlantic, where he oversees the Global Channel." The Atlantic is in fact a media black hole,
where all semi-literate journos of a globalist persuasion go to die.
Uri begins with the sub-headline, "The incentives for foreign countries to meddle are much
greater than in 2016, and the tactics could look dramatically different" followed by:
"Russia is 'doing it as we sit here.' This stray line, buried in seven hours of
testimony on Capitol Hill, wasn't just Robert Mueller's way of rebutting the charge that
his investigation into the Kremlin's interference in the 2016 presidential election amounted to
a two-year, $32 million witch hunt. It was also a blunt message to the lawmakers arrayed before
him, the journalists hunting for a bombshell, and the millions of Americans monitoring the
proceedings: We're all here fighting the last war, when we really should be bracing ourselves
for the coming one. The Russians 'expect to do it during the next campaign,' the special
counsel continued, and 'many more countries are developing capability to replicate' Moscow's
model."
Friedman states that "It's unclear whether the Russian government will reprise most infamous
and innovative act in 2016: the hacking and leaking of emails from the Democratic Party and
Hillary Clinton's campaign" before moving on to the details of Moscow's alleged subversion. He
considers all allegations about Russia to be truthful even when they were never proven. The
Democratic National Committee never cooperated with the FBI after their supposed hack, but
instead used their own very suspect firm to do the investigation. And the Mueller investigation
took that report at face value in spite of the company's very clear conflict of interest.
That about sums up Friedman's rather lengthy and convoluted argument, though he does omit
any consideration of how many foreign elections the United States government acting through its
intelligence agencies interferes in each year. Or indeed how much CIA Director John Brennan and
the FBI's James Comey themselves interfered in the 2016 election on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
But he does speculate that "This is the shoe that didn't drop in 2016. A Senate Intelligence
Committee
report released in July found that while there's no evidence that votes were altered or
vote tallies manipulated during the past U.S. presidential election, the Russians likely
targeted election systems in all 50 U.S. states, including research on 'election-related web
pages, voter ID information, election system software, and election service companies.' In a
couple of cases, the Russians succeeded in breaching state election infrastructure. Among the
theories aired in the report about Moscow's motivations is that it was cataloging 'options or
clandestine actions, holding them for use at a later date.'"
In other words, Friedman actually concedes that Russia didn't do anything and the evidence
that it is planning an attack for 2020 is thin to non-existent. But here in the United States,
other foreign agents are hard at work to remove the two Muslim women elected to the House of
Representatives in 2018 "for Jewish reasons."
Philip Weiss of Mondoweiss reports how the tale
of powerful Detroit region-based Jews raising money and pulling in political markers to try to
defeat Rep. Rashida Tlaib has been circulating on the web. Per Weiss, Ron Kampeas of the Jewish
Telegraphic Agency
reported on a gathering of Jewish power brokers in Detroit three weeks ago, arranged by a
leading Jewish organization, at which they vowed to raise money to get rid of Tlaib because she
supports a boycott of Israel. Tlaib is a Muslim woman and is a U.S. born and raised
Palestinian-American.
Tlaib responded to the story on twitter: "This type of hate
never succeeds when the truth is on our side. Palestinians *are* dehumanized. Those who want to
suppress the truth by trying to discredit me can #bringit . My sidy [grandmother in
Palestine] taught me of the days where everyone lived side by side in peace & that is what
I will fight for."
The meeting was held at Bloomfield Hills Michigan branch office of the Jewish Federation,
the largest Jewish group in the United States. It included many local Jewish leaders and
potential political donors who are clearly not bothered by dual loyalty, but it did not appear
to include anyone who actually lives in Tlaib's district. Nevertheless, consensus was quickly
established that "the Palestinian-American freshman in the 13th District [Tlaib] has got to
go."
One participant declared "We in this community will go against Rashida Tlaib" while another
described how there had already been an approach to Brenda Jones, the Detroit City Council
president, who had been defeated in 2018 by Tlaib. Money was being raised for her campaign,
according to another participant.
The thinking in the room was that the African-American community in the 13th Congressional
District would support a single black candidate -- likely Jones -- and that candidate would
also be able to draw on considerable pro-Israel support for funding and favorable media
coverage.
There was some pushback, with a rabbi telling Kampeas that a Jewish organized effort to
remove Tlaib would be "catastrophic." He observed that it would be such an open and blatant
demonstration of Jewish power that it would be a major setback to the effort to keep younger,
more liberal Jews, who are suspicious of power politics, engaged.
The rabbi was being naïve. Removing politicians who are not fully on board with the
Israel agenda is normal practice and has been for many years. Just ask Senators William
Fulbright and Chuck Percy or Congressmen Paul Findley, Pete McCloskey, and Cynthia McKinney.
Criticizing Israel means not being reelected to Congress next time around, and it is not
because Israel is greatly loved by voters. It is because Jewish-American citizens who are
protective of Israel are willing to organize and collect money to support alternative
candidates in any congressional district in the country, even where they do not reside, just as
they plan on doing to Tlaib. Their goal is to defeat anyone who dares to say anything against
Benjamin Netanyahu and his gang of war criminals or, even worse, suggest that Palestinians just
might be human beings and might actually have rights.
Israel has the most powerful foreign policy lobby in Washington but it operates as freely as
it does by pretending that it has no power at all, that American involvement in the Middle East
is driven by U.S. interests. That is complete nonsense and has been so for over fifty years as
the Lobby has tightened its grip. Until more congressmen like Rashida Tlaib get elected and
begin to speak out, the corrupt status quo will, unfortunately, continue to prevail.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest,
a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a
more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its
email is[email protected] .
As much as I despise Tlaib and Omar's politics, they are doing the USA a valuable service by
exposing the "elephant in the room" and the loyalty oaths to israel that most of their
compatriot congress critters sign. Being "people of color" they can get away with offending
our jewish zionist masters.
Signing ANY "loyalty oath" to a foreign country should be grounds for immediate loss of
united States citizenship and mandatory permanent deportation. This should also apply to any
united States citizen who serves in a foreign country's military
I don't know enough about Tlaib's politics –which I would think are pretty much
standard Dem– to worry about her career as a Rep. I would imagine she's Israel's #1
target for defeat for obvious reasons. It may be poor strategy in MI for Ms Tlaib to mention
this. But she may have no choice.
It appears to me that Trump –not Tlaib– will be the cause of Israeli
participation in the 2020 election with the Pres making it clear that (Jewish) support for
Democrats demonstrates disloyalty towards Israel. Likud will be happy to take up that
charge from Trump. Even though they probably understand it would look bad. I don't think they
can resist.
Can you imagine Netanyahu making a case for attacking Iran to Liz Warren (ha)? I don't
think so.
Does Israel interfere in American elections? This is an important question, though seldom
(publicly) asked.
This steady omission goes to demonstrate the distorting influence enjoyed by Israel and
its domestic lobbies. Americans are simply not free to ask questions that make Jews feel
uncomfortable or 'threatened'.
For those who dare to look however, 'Israeli influence' in America is very tangible,
extremely vast, and highly destructive. It must therefore be examined. Here are four
additional reasons why:
1) Jews of the world are not only spread out far and wide, but they are all
automatically eligible for Israeli citizenship. This is the Israel's 'Law of Return'.
This Zionist pact imparts every Jew with dual-loyalties.
Meanwhile, non-Jews born inside Israel have a lower status there and fewer rights. These
official disparities speak volumes about how Jews see themselves in relation to non-Jews.
It's a warning to us all.
2) Israeli-Americans also tend to be highly-placed as well as exceptionally active, both
politically and culturally. Often they coalesce as a distinct and separate group
inside host nations around the advancement of specifically Jewish objectives. This
includes the elevation of Israel over all other concerns.
3) Jews openly and shamelessly use their positions of power inside America to harness US
military, diplomatic, and economic power for the benefit of Israel. This is dual loyalty in
action. Zionist nepotism has caused numerous and unnecessary foreign wars, a stream of
American fatalities, and immense civilian suffering.
Israel has the most powerful foreign policy lobby in Washington but it operates as
freely as it does by pretending that it has no power at all, that American involvement in
the Middle East is driven by U.S. interests. That is complete nonsense and has been so for
over fifty years as the Lobby has tightened its grip. Until more congressmen like Rashida
Tlaib get elected and begin to speak out, the corrupt status quo will, unfortunately,
continue to prevail.
@Mark
James Obama team did Libya. Biden worked on coups in Ukraine and Brazil.
Hillary worked on the coup in Honduras in 2009. Obama's got soft coups in Argentina and
Paraguay.
If Obama's team could do all this in his Dem time. No doubt Liz Warren if elected could do
the same.
She might get away with it more than Trump would, since with her in "power" the "free"
Zion press could twist words easier to make it look "good" to attack Iran.
It is harder to "twist" words for attacks on Iran or any place with Trump in "power".
Trump is "hated" by our Zion free press yet he does all can for Israel uber alles.
Israel through AIPAC certainly influences Congress . Eric Gallagher , a top official with
AIPAC from 2010 to 2015 is said to have informed a reporter that " Getting $38 billion in
security aid matters to Israel, which is what AIPAC just did."
Who owns the computers which count the votes ?
I think "Jewish State" is a misnomer. Israel is a Zionist state, which has nothing to do with
Judaism. Zionism is the antithesis to Judaism and an insult to Jewish believers. There are
hundreds of thousands of Jews who despise the Zionist regime; for them, its anathema.
It's an open secret that the Zionist control the US Congress, the Trump administration,
the Media, what have you (Ariel Sharon). The Russian hoax was made up by the
Zionist-controlled New York Times, CNN, MSNBC and the rest of mainstream media-crowd. Not
Russia colluded, but the Zionist regime and their lobbies run the show by intervening openly
in US elections and the American political process. I remember the disgraceful behavior of
both Houses of Congress jumping from their seats 29 times listening to Netanyahu's rant
against President Obama. What a shame, but these bought representatives thought they acted
usually. Just recently, the Freshmen in Congress came back from a brainwashing mission to
Israel. Now they are all for the Zionist regime.
I'm still wondering why even Phil Geraldi repeats the same old story about meddling and
collusion again and again. Right from the start, it has been a conspiracy by crooks such as
Brennan, Clapper, Comey and a bunch of subordinate Hillary Clinton sycophants to topple a
sitting US President. Thank God, the senile Robert Mueller testified before Congress to clear
Trump finally from all that smear. Firstly the New York Times realizes that with the Russian
hoax nobody could be drawn from the woodwork any longer; they quickly switched Trump's
apparent racism.
Rashida Tlaib's freshman-term in the House may also be her last one if she further
"insults" US Zionists with the truth about the Zionist regime and their power in the US. The
way of the Zionist lobby is paved with political dead. A prominent one was the just deceased
courageous and exceptional Paul Findley.
@Wizard
of Oz None of what you cite is actually a crime but Congress has chosen to believe that
Trump's alleged collusion with Russia is sufficient grounds for impeachment when combined
with allegations of obstruction of justice and violation of the emoluments issue. Note that
all those issues are alleged, not demonstrated, except possibly for the emoluments .
There seems to be no lack of U.S. DOD money concerning the perpetual wars for Israel, but
there sure is a shocking shortage of U.S. HUD funds for a growing number of indigent
Americans seeking some affordable housing.
Netanyahu policies toward Palestinians are actually a threat to Israel. Having implacable
enemy, completely alienated population within the borders is not that any state desires.
Notable quotes:
"... Israel is the largest recipient of U.S. military aid: $3.8 billion annually. AIPAC is the chief Israel lobby in the United States and a consistent apologist for Israel's oppressive policies toward the Palestinians. ..."
"... Sen. Bernie Sanders said , "The idea that a member of the United States Congress cannot visit a nation which, by the way, we support to the tune of billions and billions of dollars is clearly an outrage," adding, "And if Israel doesn't want members of the United States Congress to visit their country to get a firsthand look at what's going on maybe [Netanyahu] can respectfully decline the billions of dollars that we give to Israel." ..."
"... Israel had approved the Tlaib/Omar trip last month. Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Ron Dermer said , "Out of respect for the U.S. Congress and the great alliance between Israel and America," Israel would not deny entry "to any member of Congress." ..."
"... But Donald Trump reportedly told several of his advisers that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should bar Tlaib and Omar because they supported BDS. Hours after Israel cancelled the trip, Trump tweeted , "It would show great weakness if Israel allowed Rep. Omar and Rep. Tlaib to visit. They hate Israel & all Jewish people." ..."
"... In These Times. ..."
"... UN Security Council Resolution 242 describes "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" and calls for the "withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the [1967] conflict." ..."
"... Tampa Bay Times ..."
"... "The absence of chatter from the Democrats obviously reflects the misgivings that the Democratic base has about the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel," Philip Weiss and Michael Arria wrote at Mondoweiss ..."
"... The outrageous exclusion of members of Congress from Israel-Palestine has focused unprecedented attention on the Israeli occupation and the BDS movement. This is the time to pressure congressional representatives to rethink their uncritical support for Israel and the $3.8 billion annually the United States provides to Israel. ..."
Trump and Netanyahu thought they were pulling a fast one on two U.S. congresswoman, but it
has blown up in their faces, as Marjorie Cohn explains.
By Marjorie CohnTruthout
D uring Congress's August recess, a group of 41 Democratic and 31 Republican congressmembers
traveled to Israel on a delegation sponsored by American Israel Public Affairs Committee
(AIPAC). AIPAC subsidizes congressional trips to Israel in order to further the "special
relationship" between Israel and the United States.
Israel is the largest recipient of U.S. military aid: $3.8 billion annually. AIPAC is
the chief Israel lobby in the United States and a consistent apologist for Israel's oppressive
policies toward the Palestinians.
Reps. Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, the first two Muslim women elected to Congress, had
planned their own "Delegation to Palestine," scheduled to begin on August 17. Tlaib, who was
born in the U.S., planned to travel to the West Bank to visit her 90-year old Palestinian
grandmother, whom she hasn't seen for a decade. But, aided and abetted by Donald Trump, Israel
withdrew permission for the trip unless Tlaib agreed to remain silent about Israel's
mistreatment of the Palestinians. She refused to abide by the gag order and the trip was
cancelled.
Tlaib
said in a statement , "Visiting my grandmother under these oppressive conditions meant to
humiliate me would break my grandmother's heart. Silencing me with treatment to make me feel
less-than is not what she wants for me – it would kill a piece of me that always stands
up against racism and injustice." She added, "Being silent and not condemning the human rights
violations of the Israeli government is a disservice to all who live there, including my
incredibly strong and loving grandmother."
Tlaib during her campaign. (Wikimedia)
Omar, who
expressed "strength and solidarity" with Tlaib in a tweet,
told reporters, "[Israeli Prime Minister] Netanyahu's decision to deny us entry might be
unprecedented for members of Congress. But it is the policy of his government when it comes to
Palestinians. This is the policy of his government when it comes to anyone who holds views that
threaten the occupation." She tweeted, "We cannot let Trump and Netanyahu succeed in hiding the
cruel reality of the occupation from us."
Israel's refusal to allow members of the U.S. Congress entry into Israel-Palestine without
muzzling them backfired. It has
garnered widespread criticism, even
by AIPAC , and focused the national
discourse on the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement (BDS), which Tlaib and Omar
support.
Omar, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee,
said , "It is my belief that as legislators, we have an obligation to see the reality there
for ourselves. We have a responsibility to conduct oversight over our government's foreign
policy and what happens with the millions of dollars we send in aid." She says the
U.S. must ask Netanyahu's government to "stop the expansion of settlements on Palestinian land
and ensure full rights for Palestinians if we are to give them aid."
Sen. Bernie Sanders
said , "The idea that a member of the United States Congress cannot visit a nation which,
by the way, we support to the tune of billions and billions of dollars is clearly an outrage,"
adding, "And if Israel doesn't want members of the United States Congress to visit their
country to get a firsthand look at what's going on maybe [Netanyahu] can respectfully decline
the billions of dollars that we give to Israel."
Tlaib and Omar Planned to Witness
Occupation
Tlaib and Omar were scheduled to meet with members of the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) and
Palestinian and leftist Israeli activists and nonprofits, as well as international human rights
organizations in Jerusalem and the West Bank. They were also set to confer with members of
Breaking the Silence, a group of former members of the Israel Defense Forces who now actively
oppose Israel's occupation of Palestinian lands. Omar
tweeted that the goal of the delegation "was to witness firsthand what is happening on the
ground in Palestine and hear from stakeholders -- our job as Members of Congress."
The visit by Tlaib and Omar "was to be something else" in contrast to the AIPAC delegation,
James Zogby, co-founder and president of the Arab American Institute ,
wrote in the Forward. Tlaib and Omar "weren't going to focus on officials,"
according to Zogby. "They were going to expose the
reality of Palestinian daily life under occupation. They were going to visit the Wall that
separates Palestinians from their lands. They were going to refugee camps now cut off from US
funding. They were going to see how Hebron has been horridly deformed by a settler invasion and
military occupation."
Israel had approved the Tlaib/Omar trip last month. Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Ron
Dermer said
, "Out of respect for the U.S. Congress and the great alliance between Israel and America,"
Israel would not deny entry "to any member of Congress."
But Donald Trump reportedly told several of his advisers that Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu should bar Tlaib and Omar because they supported BDS. Hours after Israel cancelled
the trip, Trump
tweeted , "It would show great weakness if Israel allowed Rep. Omar and Rep. Tlaib to
visit. They hate Israel & all Jewish people."
The Israeli government agreed to allow Tlaib to visit her grandmother, provided she agree in
writing not to discuss her support for BDS. But after emotional conversations with her family,
Tlaib refused to submit to the condition that she not discuss the Israeli occupation.
Tlaib "was forced to make a choice between her right to visit her grandmother and her right
to political speech against Israeli oppression," Sandra Tamari
wrote at In These Times. Tamari has been barred from seeing her family in
Palestine for more than 10 years because of her advocacy for Palestinian freedom and justice.
Tlaib "ultimately chose the collective over the personal: She refused Israel's demeaning
conditions that would have granted her a 'humanitarian' exception to enter Palestine, so long
as she refrained from advocating for a boycott of Israel during her visit," Tamari
added.
What Is the BDS Movement?
In 2005, Palestinian civil society -- including 170 Palestinian unions, political parties,
refugee networks, women's organizations, professional associations, popular resistance
committees and other Palestinian civil society bodies -- issued a call for Boycott, Divestment
and Sanctions.
BDS is a nonviolent movement for social change in the tradition of boycotts of South Africa
and the southern United States. It is aimed at ending Israel's illegal occupation. In 1967,
Israel took control of Gaza, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights by military
force.UN Security
Council Resolution 242 describes "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by
war" and calls for the "withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the
[1967] conflict."
Security Council adopts Res. 242, Nov. 1967 (Getty)
But Israel continues its illegal occupation and exercises total control over the lives of
Palestinians in the occupied territories. Israel regulates the ingress and egress of the
people, as well as the borders, airspace, seashore and waters off the coast of Gaza. Israel
expels Palestinians from their homes and builds illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied
Palestinian territories.
Israel's 2014 massacre in Gaza led to the deaths of 2,251 Palestinians, including 1,462
civilians, and the wounding of 11,231 Palestinians. These actions likely constituted war
crimes, according
to the UN Human Rights Council's independent, international commission of inquiry.
Former UN deputy high commissioner for human rights, Flavia Pansieri,
said that human rights violations "fuel and shape the conflict" in the occupied Palestinian
territories and "[h]uman rights violations in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, are both
cause and consequence of the military occupation and ongoing violence, in a bitter cyclical
process with wider implications for peace and security in the region."
Nobel Peace Prize winner Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa,
writing in the Tampa Bay Times , cited the 2010 Human Rights Watch report which
"describes the two-tier system of laws, rules, and services that Israel operates for the two
populations in areas in the West Bank under its exclusive control, which provide preferential
services, development, and benefits for Jewish settlers while imposing harsh conditions on
Palestinians." Tutu wrote, "This, in my book, is apartheid. It is untenable."
The call for BDS describes boycotts, divestment and sanctions as "non-violent punitive
measures" that should last until Israel fully complies with international law by (1) ending its
occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the barrier wall; (2) recognizing
the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and (3)
respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their land
as stipulated in United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194.
What Are Boycotts,
Divestment and Sanctions?
Boycotts encompass the withdrawal of support for Israel and Israeli and
international companies which are violating Palestinian human rights, including Israeli
sporting, cultural and academic institutions.
Divestment campaigns urge churches, banks, local councils, pension funds and
universities to withdraw investments from all Israeli companies and international companies
involved in the violation of Palestinian rights.
Sanctions campaigns pressure governments to hold Israel legally accountable by
ending military trade and free-trade agreements and expelling Israel from international
fora.
The BDS movement has had a major impact on Israel. BDS was a critical factor in the 46
percent reduction in foreign direct investment in Israel in 2014, according to
the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Individuals and entities who have
heeded the call for divestment include George Soros, the Bill Gates Foundation, TIAA-CREF
public sector pension fund, Dutch pension giant PGGM and Norwegian bank Nordea.
Several churches, including the United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church USA, the
United Church of Christ and many Quaker meetings, have divested from companies the BDS movement
has targeted. The security services company G4S is planning to sell its subsidiary in Israel
because the Stop G4S campaign resulted in a loss of millions of dollars in contracts. The
withdrawal of French multinational utility company Veolia from Israel led to billions of
dollars in lost contracts.
Tutu, who finds striking parallels between apartheid South Africa and Israel's oppression of
the Palestinians, supports BDS. He has
called on "people and organizations of conscience to divest from Caterpillar, Motorola
Solutions and Hewlett Packard," which profit "from the occupation and subjugation of
Palestinians."
Twenty-seven
states have enacted legislation targeting boycotts of Israel, but activists have
successfully defeated anti-boycott laws in several states. These bills are unconstitutional
infringements on protected First Amendment activity.
In banning Tlaib and Omar, Israel relied on its
2017 law prohibiting entry to any non-Israeli citizen who "has knowingly published a public
call to engage in a boycott" against Israel "or has made a commitment to participate in such a
boycott."
And the United States' overwhelming support for Israel is reflected in a resolution the
House of Representatives adopted on July 23. H. Res. 246 , which
passed easily on a 398-17 vote, opposes the BDS movement. Tlaib and Omar voted against the
resolution.
Questioning U.S. Aid to Israel
Interestingly, although the Republicans on the AIPAC trip tweeted vociferously about their
visit, there was near silence on Twitter from the Democratic members of the delegation,
although the group had given Netanyahu a standing ovation. "The absence of chatter from the
Democrats obviously reflects the misgivings that the Democratic base has about the special
relationship between the U.S. and Israel," Philip Weiss and Michael Arria wrote at
Mondoweiss . "A recent survey shows that a
majority of Democrats support sanctions against Israel over settlements, even as the House
votes overwhelmingly to condemn the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign."
The outrageous exclusion of members of Congress from Israel-Palestine has focused
unprecedented attention on the Israeli occupation and the BDS movement. This is the time to
pressure congressional representatives to rethink their uncritical
support for Israel and the $3.8 billion annually the United States provides to Israel.
Copyright Truthout
. Reprinted with permission. Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School
of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild, deputy secretary general of the
International Association of Democratic Lawyers and a member of the advisory board of Veterans
for Peace. She is a contributor to the new book,
Reclaiming Judaism From Zionism: Stories of Personal Transformation .
"... According to the Times of Israel newspaper, Netanyahu is now officially lobbying for a public statement by US President Donald Trump to back Israel's annexation of the West Bank. ..."
"... Although the White House refused to comment on the story, and an official in Netanyahu's office claimed that it was "incorrect", the Israeli right is on the fast track of making that annexation possible. ..."
"... Netanyahu had, himself, hinted at that possibility in August during a visit to the illegal settlement of Beit El. "We come to build. Our hands will reach out and we will deepen our roots in our homeland – in all parts of it," Netanyahu said, during a ceremony celebrating the expansion of the illegal settlements to include 650 more housing units. ..."
According to the Times of Israel newspaper, Netanyahu is now officially lobbying for a
public statement by US President Donald Trump to back Israel's annexation of the West Bank.
Although the White House refused to comment on the story, and an official in Netanyahu's
office claimed that it was "incorrect", the Israeli right is on the fast track of making that
annexation possible.
Encouraged by US Ambassador David Friedman's comment that "Israel has the right to retain
some of the West Bank", more Israeli officials are speaking boldly and openly regarding their
intentions of making that annexation possible.
Netanyahu had, himself, hinted at that possibility in August during a visit to the illegal
settlement of Beit El. "We come to build. Our hands will reach out and we will deepen our roots
in our homeland – in all parts of it," Netanyahu said, during a ceremony celebrating the
expansion of the illegal settlements to include 650 more housing units.
Unlike Netanyahu, former Israeli justice minister and leader of the newly-formed United
Right, Ayelet Shaked, didn't speak in code. In an interview with The Jerusalem Post, she called
for the full annexation of Area C, which constitutes nearly 60 percent of the West Bank. "We
have to apply sovereignty to Judea and Samaria," she said, referring to the Palestinian land
using biblical designations.
Public Security, Strategic Affairs and Information Minister Gilad Erdan, however, wants to
go the extra mile. According to Arutz Sheva and The Jerusalem Post, Erdan has called for the
annexation of all illegal settlements in the West Bank and the ouster of Palestinian Authority
(PA) President Mahmoud Abbas as well.
Now situated at the center of Israeli politics, Jewish settlers are enjoying the spectacle
as they are being courted by all major political parties. Their increased violence in the West
Bank is a form of political muscle-flexing, an expression of dominance and a brutish display of
political priorities.
"There's only one flag from the Jordan to the sea – the flag of Israel," was the
slogan of a rally involving over 1,200 Jewish settlers who roamed the streets of the
Palestinian city of Hebron (Al-Khalil) on August 14. The settlers, together with Israeli
soldiers, stormed al-Shuhada street and harassed Palestinians and international activists in
the beleaguered Palestinian city
... ... ...
Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of Palestine Chronicle. His latest
book is The Last Earth: A Palestinian Story (Pluto Press, London, 2018). He earned a Ph.D. in
Palestine Studies from the University of Exeter and is a Non-Resident Scholar at Orfalea Center
for Global and International Studies, UCSB.
"It is virtually impossible to think of any country, powerful or weak ..that exercises such
complete control over any other country, powerful or weak, rich or poor as Zionist Israel
does over our country, the US of A."
Much of this has to do with American Capitalism. If the US was NOT oligarchic, or mired in
trillions of $$ for The Elite, you wouldn't have these Zionist Jews obviscating, manipulating
and "pulling the wool over our eyes" the way they do now.
Frankly, I am sickened by folks like Alan Dershowitz & most of the MEDIA Jewish bosses
that run Hollywood and MSM.
I know, personally, there are wonderfully creative, intelligent, insightful Jewish people
out there. I want all the Giliad Atzmon's, Max Blumenthal's, Norman Finklestein's and
thousands more to radiate their special gifts upon this sordid, illiterate and greedy nation
called America.
The Chosen Folk are so "chosen" and clever they have Lucky Larry as their 911 made billionaire poster boy bragging he
gave the order to pull 7. Not to mention Epstein, flaunting his sexcapades in the so called "news" like he's some kind
of Charles in Charge. No, the one in charge is the Superior General. And the one who claims it all (you included) by
Papal Bull enjoys his duper's delight and the inquisition continues unimpeded. Of course the owner of 3/4's of Jerusalem
is never mentioned. The ruse (and who benefits) is plain as day.
Admin
The 'chosen folk' is a reductionist racist term. As is the ridiculous suggestion that an entire ethnicity can be
blamed for the crimes of a few individuals who share that ethnicity. We're fairly sure you don't believe all white
Anglo Saxons are responsible for every crime of the British empire. Please extend the same courtesy to Jewish people,
many of whom deplore Zionism and Israel's own racism.
crank
@Admin
I don't think this is a coherent intervention.
Ethnicity is not racial; it describes cultural, linguistic and national associations. Race is generally
understood as a reference to common biological ancestry.
Jewishness might, by some be accurately described as an ethnicity, but not as a race, as there are Jews from
different 'racial groups' (-if one subscribes to such a notion at all).
If you are going to intervene with a response like the one above, I would suggest that you go the full mile and
explore in an article or three which aspects of Jewishness which relate to ethnicity and which to ideology.
'Fins Mcgee' denotes 'chosenness' as a defining ideological characteristic of those who self identify as
'Jewish'. Writers and thinkers like Gilad Atzmon, Israel Shamir and others would be in agreement. If that is a
fair summation, then anyone who strongly identifies as 'Jewish' is, in truth, self identifying as somehow 'chosen'
or special or superior to non Jews.
If that is unfair or wrong, then explain yourself and explain why. Explain what is 'Jewishness' ?
Taking your comment as it stands as the extent of your view would mean that all criticism of Jewish ideology
is, in essence, 'racist'.
"All of the pro-Israel groups taken together constitute a veritable political juggernaut that
seeks to advantage Israel and benefit it directly without regard for the damage done to American democracy and to actual U.S.
interests. They should rightly be seen as organizations that regard their loyalty to the United States as negotiable, but they
try to obfuscate the issue by claiming, wrongly, that there exist compelling reasons why Israel and the U.S. should continue to
be best friends.
As Americans increasingly begin to appreciate how Israel is in fact a serious liability, that line will not continue to sell
very well, no matter how many congressmen and tame journalists are bought and no matter how many new groups pop up like mushrooms
funded by Jewish billionaires. Change is coming."
President Trump and much of his Republican Party have denounced first-term Representatives
Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib as "anti-Semites" and for "hating Israel" -- labels that Mr. Trump
will likely apply to varying degree to Democrats during the 2020 campaign.
Both Democratic congresswomen endorse boycotts, divestment, and sanctions -- as well as UN
censures of Israel -- to support Palestinian rights. The American Israel Public Affairs
Committee, among other interest groups, insists that BDS "intends to delegitimize" if not
"destroy" Israel, and many politicians in Washington agree.
Yet interestingly, Omar and Tlaib are echoing the Republican Party's support of censures and
repeated threats to apply economic sanctions against the Jewish state from the days of
President Dwight Eisenhower.
Eisenhower tightly controlled U.S. foreign policy and was pivotal to the UN Security
Council's censuring of Israel in November 1953, March 1955, and in January 1956. The reasons
for each rebukes were similar, as they all involved what Eisenhower believed to be illegal
aggression and violence against Israel's Arab neighbors.
Advertisement
The first Arab-Israeli war had ended in 1949 along shaky armistice lines. The censures
thereafter enacted were seeded by Israeli attacks on Jordan, Egypt and Syria. The U.S.
threatened sanctions if the aggression continued. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles warned
Israel's ambassador, Abba Eban, against any further attacks while Eisenhower spoke darkly of
Israeli "expansion." He was supported in his position by the UK governments of Winston
Churchill and Anthony Eden.
The first U.S.-backed censure in October 1953 followed an Israeli Defense Force attack on the village of
Qibya, near Jerusalem on the Jordanian-controlled West Bank. "They shot every man, woman
and child they could find," reported Time magazine, "then turned their fire on the
cattle," while dynamiting houses, a school, and a mosque. Sixty-nine Palestinians lay dead,
with no Israeli casualties. Prime Minister Churchill was repulsed by the atrocity and supported
Eisenhower's decision.
In July 1954, a self-described Israeli "terror unit" embedded in Egypt's still-vibrant
Jewish community bombed two U.S. consulate libraries as well as British civilian targets in
Cairo and Alexandria. Israel's goal was to destabilize Egyptian strongman Gamal Abdel Nasser's
government and to pin blame for the attacks on the Muslim Brotherhood. After authorities hanged
two of the terrorists in January 1955, Israel retaliated by staging an IDF night attack on Gaza
that killed 38 Egyptian soldiers.
The Americans didn't believe Tel Aviv's cries of self-defense. Following the incidents in
Egypt, the U.S. again led a UN censure of Israel and warned that sanctions were imminent.
Subsequently, Egyptian commandos -- who had been busy skirmishing with British troops in the
Suez Canal zone -- responded with their own systematic raids.
In December 1955, an IDF assault against Syrian positions caused Eisenhower and Dulles to
react swiftly with another censure resolution. At the United Nations, U.S. Ambassador Henry
Cabot Lodge charged that "previous representations by the Council and the United States
government have failed to halt the mass of Israeli attacks on its Arab neighbors and the whole
Palestine situation has deteriorated as a result."
Abba Eban insisted that Israel was retaliating, and he asserted that terrorists had killed
or wounded 880 Israelis since 1951. The Americans were unpersuaded, and for good reason. The
body count that resulted from Israel's actions included "upward of 2,700 Arab infiltrators, and
perhaps as many as 5,000, [who] were killed by the IDF, police, and civilians along Israel's
borders between 1949 and 1956,"
writes the eminent Israeli historian Benny Morris, "the vast majority of those killed were
unarmed." He describes the dead as shepherds, farmers, Bedouins, and refugees trying to return
to their villages. Within Israel, meanwhile, Palestinians lived under martial law -- as they
would until 1966.
Moscow then raised the stakes in the Middle East by delivering large numbers of arms during
the period 1955-1956 with other, but fewer, arms being transported to Syria. Israel felt
threatened by Moscow's actions, although Dulles concluded that it was "difficult to be
critical" of the Egyptians for buying the arms, which (as he said), "they sincerely need for
defense." He hadn't imagined that Egypt would also need to defend itself against Britain and
France.
Nasser's takeover of the Suez Canal Company in July 1956 was just one of the reasons why
Britain, France, and Israel invaded Egypt three months later. Prime Minister Eden, who had
finally pulled his soldiers, ships, and planes out of Suez, was determined to "teach Nasser a
lesson." France, in turn, expected that ousting Nasser would end Algeria's war of independence
which Nasser was aiding with money, small arms, and propaganda.
Crushing Algeria's rebels was an Israeli priority too, in addition to halting the border
violence with Egypt and the flow of Soviet-supplied weapons into the port of Alexandria.
Unlike Arabs, who composed nine-tenths of Algeria's population, Jews in Algeria were French
citizens. The Israelis armed and trained Jewish-Algerian militias, shared intelligence with
French officials, and helped break codes between the rebels and Cairo. Furthermore, Israel
received its jets, tanks, artillery, ammunition, and napalm-drop equipment from France.
Eisenhower wanted the United States to remain neutral in the Arab-Israeli conflict and he
therefore pledged that America would side with the victim of aggression should all-out war
erupt.
Leaders of the three nations that invaded Egypt, starting on October 29, didn't believe him:
Britain presumed a special relationship; France concluded he was bluffing; and the Israelis
expected Eisenhower to flinch because he faced reelection on November 6. Surely he'd succumb to
pressure from Jewish voters. Instead he cut off oil and loans to Britain, among other measures
which torpedoed the offensive. In tandem with Dulles, he compelled Anglo-French forces to leave
Egypt in December.
Despite U.S. protests, however, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion declared that Israel had
overriding defense priorities and refused to withdraw IDF units from Egyptian terrain.
A curious leak then occurred in Washington on February 17, 1957. It concerned classified
details about the war of 1948-1949. At that time, a defense pact still existed between Britain
and Egypt. Once Israeli forces had pushed into Egypt in late 1948, London had issued a secret
ultimatum for Israel to retreat. Ben-Gurion had regarded it as "a declaration of war."
The ultimatum had been handed to him on New Years' Eve 1948-49 by the U.S. ambassador to
Israel, James MacDonald, as instructed by Harry Truman. Moreover, Truman, on December 30, had
just issued America's own demand that Israel pull out. Israel did so within a week.
Nearly eight years later, Eisenhower used this incident to show his country that Washington,
under the Democrats, had already acted tough indeed toward Ben-Gurion and Israel.
Then came Eisenhower's promise to go beyond mere UN censures.
On February 20, 1957, President Eisenhower spoke from the Oval Office about U.S.
difficulties with Israel. "Should a nation," he asked, "which attacks and occupies foreign
territory in the face of United Nations disapproval be allowed to impose conditions on its own
withdrawal?" He was set to push UN sanctions and to halt private U.S. business dealings with
Israel, which included the purchase of Israeli bonds. In response, on March 1, Foreign Minister
Golda Meir announced a prompt withdrawal from all Egyptian territory.
There's a myth that Eisenhower lamented his decisions during the Suez invasion and its
aftermath. Yet as a soldier and a president, Eisenhower was known for not second-guessing
himself. His apparent remark in 1965 that "I never should have pressured Israel to evacuate the
Sinai" was made to a Republican Party stalwart who was also chairman of the United Jewish
Appeal. And any regrets about Suez that former vice president Richard Nixon may have heard
around the same time are best explained by the fact that Eisenhower was always a minimalist. A
decade after Suez, Eisenhower would have seen 1956–1957 as the dreadful moment when the
United States got irrevocably entangled in the Middle East.
The last time that Washington placed "the Palestine Question" on the UN Security Council
agenda in order to censure Israel was in 1966. On November 12, three Israeli soldiers were
killed by a mine along the Jordanian-controlled West Bank border, and three days later Israel
launched the largest military operation since Suez. "In hitting Jordan," concluded President
Lyndon Johnson's national security adviser, Walt Rostow, "the Israelis have done a great deal
of damage to our interests and to their own: They've wrecked a good system of tacit
cooperation." The Americans again weighed sanctions, yet "antisemitism" and "delegitimization"
were no more to be found among Rostow and his NSC staff than under Eisenhower and Dulles.
The 1967 Arab-Israeli war would alter the landscape. The result is today's predicament:
first, a half-century long military occupation with conditions in the West Bank that South
African Nobel laureate Bishop Desmond Tutu describes as "worse than apartheid"; second,
Israel's recurring violations of international law, and of seven decades of U.S. policy, as its
settlements expand into occupied territory; and, third, another open-ended body count of
Palestinians. Once more, "the vast majority of those killed [have been] unarmed," such as the
214 shot within Gaza by Israeli snipers throughout the 2018 protests.
In the absence of U.S. leadership, pressures for sanctioning Israel are this time coming
from below, as from the two Congresswomen. Like other proponents of BDS and censures, they
claim to be inspired by U.S. civil rights campaigns of the 1960s as well as by the boycott of
apartheid South Africa in the 1980s. If they cared to, they could also cite inspiration from
Eisenhower and his fellow Republicans when they argue for more even-handed policies on
Israel.
Derek Leebaert is an American technology executive, a military historian, and a
co-founder of the National Museum of the United States Army. His most recent book, Grand
Improvisation: America Confronts the British Superpower, 1945–1957, was released in
2018.
GG: Sure. And the success with
which they have done that, the skill with which they have done that shows me that they do have a
bigger lock than I thought that they did. Not even Israel has a bigger--not even in Israel does
the Zionist movement have a bigger lock than it does in the United States. So nothing compares to
that. But it does, and it's a trick, I know it's a trick because an Israeli Cabinet minister Shulamit Aloni giving me dinner in her house in Tel Aviv, literally told me that it was, it's a
trick she said, we always do it. And they do it obviously because it works. If someone stands up
for Palestinian rights, the first, the default position is to call them an anti-Semite. The fact
that someone like me with my politics and the basis of my politics so heavily Jewish from Marx
through Trotsky, through Chomsky, through, you know, half the Bolshevik Party's Central Committee
were Jewish. It was, according to the right wing, a Judeo-Bolshevik conspiracy, that's what I was
involved, and the idea that I can be described as an anti-Semite is patently absurd [INDISTINCT]
Jeremy Corbyn who comes out of the same stable as me more or less. So, I like to think it doesn't
work but obviously to some extent it does. My own wife who's a person of color, an Indonesian
woman was abused in the street the other day as the--as the wife of an anti-Semite, as the wife
of a racist. It's absurd but effective but less effective I think than before, on the principle
that if you call everybody an anti-Semite then eventually nobody is an anti-Semite. The boy who
cried wolf is a parable of note for a reason.
CH: Well, the poison is that, you know, the real anti-Semites, the Christian right in the
United States who's become an ally, a political ally of Israel, you know, it's the equation of
anti-Semitism with the State of Israel, that's what's so dangerous and one of the biggest
racists in the Middle East is named Bibi Netanyahu. What do you...
GG: And there's worse than him waiting in the wings.
CH: And there is, Avigdor Lieberman and others. So, but let's talk about where we're going
because we may be going in a very frightening direction if things don't go right. What are
those forces out there that frighten you and what does the left have to do? How do we have to
wake up to make sure those forces, we don't end up like Hungary with Viktor Orban?
This so-called mutual 'defense alliance' pact is not only extremely dangerous, but it
clearly serves only one of the parties.
Notable quotes:
"... As the old joke goes: Israel would never want to become the 51st state because then it would only have 1 senator instead of controlling all 100. ..."
"... It is painfully clear that the US is a jewish-controlled oligarchy in all but name and no other explanation can sufficiently explain the fact that Israel can do almost whatever it wants without ever having to face any pushback, instead it just gets more. This includes middle-eastern wars for which the goyim should sacrifice their sons. ..."
"... Mossad must have some serious dirt on Graham, maybe videos of him with little boys. ..."
"... SC politicians are the best to coerce/blackmail because they are a one party state. Any idiot with an (R) after his name is sure to get elected and re-elected no matter what they do. ..."
"... Now its true Israel could not 'occupy' Iran but that does not mean Israel could not destroy Iranian military capability but the cost could be higher than in 67 or 73 unless Israel has some way to neutralize Hebollah's missile arsenal in Lebanon. ..."
"... The Democraps support the Iranian People? Traitor Sen. Shumer will give up his Zionist Entity citizenship and become a loyal American? Ms Pelosi, Biden, Booker, Ms. Maxwell ..."
"... Casino Trump this. Casino Trump that! He is an Actor/crook. He is part of that Hologram/Matrix/make believe/Professional 'Wrestling' entertainment for an imprisoned and daily looted Nation. A Nation that once was Free. ..."
"... Casino Trump is another of the post (un) constitutional Hollywood Presidents. Trump, Hollywood Obomber, Bill (that wasn't sex) Clinton ..."
"... None of these have/had any power. They are actors, and crooks. Do not look for power here. The power that controls us is hidden from our view. ..."
"... According to the Times of Israel, Graham says that the [proposed] pact would show the international community that "an attack against Israel would be considered an attack against the United States." ..."
As the agreement between the two countries would be a treaty ratified by the Senate, it
would be much more difficult to scrap by subsequent administrations than was the Iran nuclear
deal, which was an executive action by President Obama. And clearly the statements by Graham,
Makovsky and Ruhe reveal this treaty would serve as a green light for an Israeli attack on
Iran, should they opt to do so, while also serving as a red light to Tehran vis-à-vis an
ironclad US commitment to "defend" Israel that would serve to discourage any serious Iranian
retaliation. Given that dynamic, the treaty would be little more than a one-way security
guarantee from Washington to Jerusalem.
Furthermore, in outlining what circumstances would trigger US intervention on Israel's
behalf, the JINSA/Graham document cites, inter alia , "the threat or use of weapons of
mass destruction." It also allows Netanyahu to call for assistance after defining as
threatening any incident or development "that gives rise to an urgent request from the
Government of Israel." It appears then that Netanyahu could demand that the US attack Iran
should he only perceive a threat, however vague that threat might in reality be.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been claiming Iran is "
three to five years " and "possibly weeks" away from a nuclear weapons capability since
1992 and pushing Washington to attack Iran so he obviously would welcome such a treaty for
strategic reasons as well as to shore up his upcoming re-election bid. President Trump, with
whom Graham has discussed how the agreement would work, has a similar interest in appearing
strong for Israel to help his own campaign in 2020.
It is worth noting that in 2010 Netanyahu ordered the Israel Defense Force (IDF) to prepare
to strike Iran but 'Israel's security chiefs refused: Gabi Ashkenazi, the head of the IDF, and
Meir Dagan, the head of the Mossad at the time, believed that Netanyahu and the Defense
Minister Ehud Barak were trying to "steal a war" and the order was not carried out. The attacks
were also rejected by two ministers, Moshe Yaalon and Yuval Steinitz, which left Netanyahu
without the necessary majority to proceed.
Ashkenazi claimed in a 2012 interview about the episode that he was convinced that an attack
would be have been a major strategic mistake. Meir Dagan said in 2012, after leaving his role
as Mossad chief, that a strike
would be "a stupid thing" as the entire region would undoubtedly be destabilized, requiring
repeated Israeli and American interventions.
And there are other issues arising from a "defense treaty." Defense means just that and
treaties are generally designed to protect a country within its own borders. Israel has no
defined borders as it is both expansionistic and illegally occupying Palestinian land, so the
United States would in effect be obligated to defend space that Israel defines as its own. That
could mean almost anything. Israel is currently bombing Syria almost daily even though it is
not at war with Damascus. If Syria were to strike back and Graham's treaty were in place,
Washington would technically be obligated to come to Israel's assistance. A similar situation
prevails with Lebanon and there are
also reports that Israel is bombing alleged Iranian supply lines in Iraq, where the US has
5,000 troops stationed.
The real problem is that the Trump administration is obsessed with regime change in Iran,
but it has so far been unable to provoke Iran into starting a conflict. Graham's proposed
treaty just might be part of a White House plan to end-run Congress and public opinion by
enabling Israel to start the desired war, whereupon the US would quickly follow in to "defend
Israel," obliged by treaty to do so. What could possibly go wrong? The correct answer is
"everything."
Two world wars began because of unconditional pledges made by one country to come to
assistance of another. On July 5, 1914, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany
pledged his country's complete support for whatever response Austria-Hungary would choose to
make against Serbia after the June 28 th assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand
of Austria by a Serbian nationalist during an official visit to Sarajevo, Bosnia. This fatal
error went down in history as Germany's carte blanche or "blank check," assurance to
Austria that led directly to WW I.
In September 1939, World War II began when Great Britain and France came to the assistance
of Poland after the German Army invaded, fulfilling a "guarantee" made in March of that year.
What was a regional war, and one that might have been resolved through diplomacy, became
global.
One would think that after such commitments were assessed by historians as the immediate
causes of two world wars, no one would ever consider going down that road again. But that would
be reckoning without Republican Senator Lindsey Graham who has been calling for a "defense
treaty" with Israel since last April. In his most recent foray, Graham announced late in
July that
he is seeking bipartisan support for providing "blank check" assurances to Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and is hoping to be able to push a complete defense treaty through
the Senate by next year.
In making his several announcements on the subject, Graham has been acting as a
front man for both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and also for The Jewish
Institute for the National Security of America (JINSA), which wrote the basic document that
is being used to promote the treaty and then enlisted Graham to obtain congressional
support.
Speaking to the press on a JINSA conference call, Graham said the proposed agreement would
be a treaty that would protect Israel in case of an attack that constituted an "existential
threat". Citing Iran as an example, Graham said the pact would be an attempt to deter hostile
neighbors like the Iranians who might use weapons of mass destruction against Israel. JINSA
President Michael Makovsky elaborated on this, saying, "A mutual defense pact has a value in
not only deterring but might also mitigate a retaliatory strike by an adversary of Israel, so
it might mitigate an Iranian response (to an attack on its nuclear facilities)."
JINSA director of foreign policy Jonathan Ruhe added that "An Israeli strike on Iran's
nuclear program would not activate this pact, but a major Iranian retaliation might. – An
Israeli unilateral attack is not what the treaty covers, but rather massive Iranian retaliation
is what we are addressing."
Israel has long been reluctant to enter into any actual treaty arrangement with the United
States because it might limit its options and restrain its aggressive pattern of military
incursions. In that regard, the Graham-JINSA proposal is particularly dangerous as it
effectively permits Israel to be interventionist with a guarantee that Washington will not seek
to limit Netanyahu's "options." And, even though the treaty is reciprocal, there is no chance
that Israel will ever be called upon to do anything to defend the United States, so it is as
one-sided as most arrangements with the Jewish state tend to be.
The treaty talk is just more psychological warfare on Iran . Iran is too big for Israel to
start a fight that the US might not join in. If the Israeli armed forces can refuse (although
I don't believe that actually happened) so could the US. No, Israel is going to have to put
up with an Iranian bomb. Nothing is going to happen.
As the old joke goes: Israel would never want to become the 51st state because then it would
only have 1 senator instead of controlling all 100.
It is painfully clear that the US is a jewish-controlled oligarchy in all but name and no
other explanation can sufficiently explain the fact that Israel can do almost whatever it
wants without ever having to face any pushback, instead it just gets more. This includes
middle-eastern wars for which the goyim should sacrifice their sons.
Sadly it would not surprise me at all if they go through with this.
What a complete abomination America has become. Shameful.
I wonder what the american population of the 1760s would have done were they alive today?
However, the so-called patriots of today are so easily duped that they believe the utter joke
of a creature currently occupying The White House actually has any interest other than his
own in mind every time he opens his mouth
Lets see, you have an Administration, a Senate, a Congress, a Supreme Court that all, for
decades, obviously have been completely compromised. Your two political party system works
like a charm controlling you all.
Any time something a little too fishy is going down, something that just might be a little
too obvious and there is a chance a few too many might actually react in some meaningful way,
well, then they won`t even break a sweat distracting you throwing some trivial Right vs. Left
stick that quickly becomes The Only Issue in your whole world. Man the cannons, for Christ`s
sake! It`s The Stick! The Stick!
It is kind of funny, but only when one forgets what is actually at stake.
People today have become so stupid, so easily manipulated, so emasculated that the traitorous
vermin that are supposed to represent you don`t even bother coming up with a half-decent
excuse anymore whenever they feel like penetrating you.
This mutual defense treaty is just one more up the collective behind of "we the people."
Mossad must have some serious dirt on Graham, maybe videos of him with little boys.
SC politicians are the best to coerce/blackmail because they are a one party state. Any
idiot with an (R) after his name is sure to get elected and re-elected no matter what they
do.
As most one party states it produces the most idiotic/corrupt politicians, like Mark
Sanford. Nikki Haley the Zionist moron was greatly compromised with her known affairs and
today tweeted a rumor no one has heard of but her about her alleged affair with Mike Pence --
a tweet to end a rumor started by herself, such is her idiocy.
Other one party states are mostly (D) and they are protected by a colluding media, no
matter how idiotic or corrupt.
Mutual defense? Sure, like Israel is going to defend the US.
Any idiot who votes for this bill doesn't just need to be voted out of office, they need to
be hung from the nearest lamp-post; preferably in their district or home state.
Iran is no bigger than Egypt and Israel took on Egypt in 1967 and 1973 and
prevailed despite Egypt then being a client state of the USSR. Egypt was also able to bring
the full strength of its army to bear on Israel in the Sinai something Iran could not
possibly do for the foreseeable future.
Now its true Israel could not 'occupy' Iran but that does not mean Israel could not
destroy Iranian military capability but the cost could be higher than in 67 or 73 unless
Israel has some way to neutralize Hebollah's missile arsenal in Lebanon.
Despite all efforts of the MSM and our government to align the USA with Israel, Trump would
be making a major mistake to support such a treacherous alliance.
Many of us do not want an alliance with Israel and see those who seek such alliances as
our enemy.
Graham may be able to get away with his treachery down in South Carolina, filled as it is
with brain-dead evangelical Christians, but I am hoping that there are enough patriotic
Americans left with an ounce of brains who would not support this perfidious alliance and any
supporting politician such as Trump.
The pro-Israel crowd in the USA is large but among the alt right crowd I would think they
would comprise a distinct and deluded minority.
Iran is a big place that has been given time to hide the nuclear facilities
(which is what I presume we are talking about) and duplicate them. The Israeli Air Force are
not going to to get landed with such a difficult mission by exaggerating the odds for
success.
I suspect their supposed 'refusal' was merely saying not having the element of
surprise an air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities might well not work And why would the
current Israeli PM take the risk of ordering it knowing if there was a failure those generals
would loudly proclaim they told him it would not work? I wonder if Israel does not wonder if
Saudi Arabian leadership with its lack of political constraints is behind a lot of this
agitation against Iran.
The real problem is that the Trump administration is obsessed with regime change in
Iran,
And the Democrap Gang no longer exists? You do not mention them in your entire
article.
The Democraps support the Iranian People? Traitor Sen. Shumer will give up his Zionist
Entity citizenship and become a loyal American? Ms Pelosi, Biden, Booker, Ms. Maxwell, some
Gay Transvestite? eh!I wish I could make the Democrap gang disappear. Nicely done. I get it;
you are concentrating on the Repub gang.
What's up? Have you been given a different assignment? A threat? Were you the recipient of
a Massage in one of Epstein's Pleasure Palaces? Now you pump for the Democraps?
Casino Trump this. Casino Trump that! He is an Actor/crook. He is part of that
Hologram/Matrix/make believe/Professional 'Wrestling' entertainment for an imprisoned and
daily looted Nation. A Nation that once was Free.
Think Power. Think how a Puppet -Nation and its people are controlled.
Most likely Jeffrey Epstein has been controlling the United States for the last 30 years.
There has been a Regime Change; Epstein is Retired (one way or other), and you direct
attention to Casino Trump, as if he makes any decisions in America, or anywhere else.
Concluding Repetition:
Casino Trump is another of the post (un) constitutional Hollywood Presidents.
Trump, Hollywood Obomber, Bill (that wasn't sex) Clinton – Do I need a verb? None of
these have/had any power. They are actors, and crooks. Do not look for power here. The power
that controls us is hidden from our view.
We know who our rulers are: they are our enemy: They murdered JFK and many other
Americans. They are coming for us!
When Jews served Wasps, they were merely playing a game to gain more power for themselves.
When Wasps serve Jews, they are total dogs in their subservience.
Jews have stronger identities and personalities than Wasps. For Jews, the dominant power
must ultimately be Jewish. For Anglos, the dominance of power matters most, and ultimately it
doesn't matter who holds it. Anglos will suck up to any group with the most power. Since Jews
now have the most power, Anglos are total toadies their servility to Jews.
Jews vs Wasps:
Jews: WE must have the power.
Wasps: We must serve the POWER.
Thus, even when Jews didn't have top power, they did everything to get it. In contrast,
once top power went over to Jews, Anglos were perfectly content to serve Jews as the new
boss.
@lavoisier CUFI (Christians United for Israel ) alone claims 7 million members, roughly equal to total number of Jews in
U.S., and by definition Hagee's flock is more pro-Israel than the average Jew.
In defense of the Kaiser, Germany had had a long defensive alliance with Austria-Hungary.
Many Germans lived there and German was a major language spoken there as well. The two
countries shared a border that ran for hundreds of miles across central Europe. The Kaiser
was close personal friends with both the Archduke and his wife. He had just returned from a
visit to them when he heard of the cruel assignation. Eye-witnesses said he turned as white as
a ghost. The Kaiser envisioned swift action against Serbia and never imagined a wider war. In
any case he had a real and large army to back up his pledge.
Chamberlain in contrast was an idiot. The pledge to Poland was sheer insanity. There was
absolutely nothing Britain could have done in 1939 to have saved Poland from German
(and also Soviet) invasion.
The Poles were – incredibly – even more stupid in believing in the pledge and
actually expecting serious military aid. Dumb and dumber.
According to the Times of Israel, Graham says that the [proposed] pact would show the
international community that "an attack against Israel would be considered an attack against
the United States."
This so-called mutual 'defense alliance' pact is not only extremely dangerous, but it
clearly serves only one of the parties.
We don't need tiny, distant, belligerent Israel to defend Empire America. How utterly
absurd.
The US is already a far-flung, rogue, military colossus. It's Zio-Washington that needs to
be restained–not burdened with additional, extra-national obligations that serve a
rogue, supremacist state.
As crazy as they are, Graham's unbalanced, pro-Israel bona fides are now
mainstream. This bizarre political zeitgeist speaks volumes.
Virtually all of Congress, as well as America's vaunted Fourth Estate, have been captured.
And the zombie majority who live amongst us have barely noticed.
What Americans need desperately is a viable defence against the malign and overpowering
influence of Israel and its army of highly-placed, pro-Zionist influencers. Their domestic
impact is the core problem that we are facing.
Waterboy Graham is merely one contaminated mind-body among countess others. He is infected
with a disease without a name. It continues to spread.
The US has lost its independence. We have fallen low. We are still dropping.
In other words, if, say Israel actually goes ahead and openly attacks Iran (as opposed to
merely conducting assassinations and terrorist bombings there as she does now) and Iran does
the unthinkable and retaliates, then we would attack Iran.
Isn't this a great idea? We can let Israel decide if we should go to war with Iran.
@unit472 Egypt is 386,662 sq mi and except for the Sinai is mostly flat with its
population centers close to Israel. Iran is 636,374 square miles of mostly mountain ranges
and deep valleys with its major population center Tehran remote from Israel or the sea.
Tehran is also close to Russia. Egypt was easy to attack with tanks while Iran would need to
be hit with aircraft only. Getting an aircraft carrier near Iran would be a nightmare as Iran
has Russian Sunburn missiles which could hit any American ship from hundreds of miles away
and they travel so close to water they can't be detected on radar.
@Just a thought without being compromised one cannot access to "significant" political
representation in the USA: the hidden "conditionality" of the Judeo-Zionist master. the
latter should be sure to "pilot" every step of the eventual political action of the former.
just have a look around you.
Israel is said to have about 150 nukes ready to go and a good percentage of that arsenal is
pointed towards Iran. I guess this isn't enough for them. They want the certainty of a US
threat of overwhelming force to intimidate Iran into non-action should the IDF hit
them with a surgical strike of bunker-buster bombs to hit underground facilities.
So would the signing of a mutual defense pact work? Maybe. I just don't think Sen. Graham is
representative of his fellow members of congress no matter how allied they are with
AIPAC. I think this goes to far even for them. I don't think it would be approved of,
it's a fantasy.
* Phil I noticed Iran did some pr work last week on NBC news (with L.Holt). They should do
more of it and stay away from the International shipping lanes. I doubt the country will ever
be thought well of by Americans –nor should they really– but that doesn't mean
they should be treated like the next likely targets of the US military.
They may be to proud to beg not to be attacked but sending some rep out in front of a TV
camera to say that they really don't want it to happen, I think can work well when done
correctly. Smile a bit and say 'let's not do this.'
"An Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear program would not activate this pact, but a major
Iranian retaliation might".
Ah yes – the usual Western attitude.
For us to attack them is normal and quite justified (even with nuclear weapons, even if we
kill literally millions of them and destroy their infrastructure).
But for them to defend themselves is wicked aggression.
"Cet animal est tres mechant.
Quand on l'attaque, il se defend".
On July 5, 1914, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany pledged his country's complete support for
whatever response Austria-Hungary would choose to make against Serbia after the June 28th
assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria by a Serbian nationalist during an
official visit to Sarajevo, Bosnia. This fatal error went down in history as Germany's carte
blanche or "blank check," assurance to Austria that led directly to WW I.
An often overlooked treaty was the one between Belgium and the United Kingdom. Without
that treaty WW I would have remained a fire in the backyard. Belgium would never have engaged
the fight against Germany without Britain's assurances. The skirmish between the Germans and
the French would have lasted for less than two months.
The situation with Israel is however different. The US can't do anything without pulling
of a greater war that they will finally loose. Personally, I can't wait to see the American
fleet reduced like the Russian one in the war of 1904-1905. (The grudge is not against
Americans but against their war hawks with their jingoism and imperialism.) Actually I think
that this would be the event that splits the world in pro and anti Zionism.
y idiot who votes for this bill doesn't just need to be voted out of office, they need
to be hung from the nearest lamp-post; preferably in their district or home state.
Agreed, but who is going to vote them out? Many Americans are idiots too. Most Americans
would rather watch America's Got Talent or Dancing With The Stars than be informed about
important issues.
Graham may be able to get away with his treachery down in South Carolina, filled as it
is with brain-dead evangelical Christians, but I am hoping that there are enough patriotic
Americans left with an ounce of brains who would not support this perfidious alliance and
any supporting politician such as Trump.
I doubt there are enough Americans that are not brain dead.
The pro-Israel crowd in the USA is large but among the alt right crowd I would think
they would comprise a distinct and deluded minority.
But the alt-right crowd is a minority of a minority not going to happen. This countries
problems will not be solved with elections.
One od these days Mexico is going to make an offer to Trump to buy Texas ,New Mexico ,
Arizona and California . And Cuba will make an offer for Florida .
Sounds like some of the more realistic military guys, told the Jewboys in Congress , that
Hezbollah can do some serious damage to Israel. Especially when they get some help from the
Iranians and others – sitting in Syria. Might even even take back " TrumpLand in the
Golan. Israel could be in deep shit if everyone gets POd and fed up. If we see this as
informed commenters – they have seen it – even longer. Thanks Unz Rev.
Before i really began researching the issue the historical persecution of Jews used to be a
source of amazement to me as the small number of them I knew were fine. A bit grasping and
pushy but smart and humourous as well. What emerged from my research could be summarised as
'they never know when to stop pushing irrespective of the wealth and control they achieve'.
Eventually the goyim
revolt and we know the rest.
I get a sense that we're seeing the beginnings of this in the West today but instead of
pulling back 'our' Jews are rubbing salt in the wound. In many ways Jews would be better off
if their proportion of the host population were minuscule even though this would result in
less tribal power. Chaim Weizman identified this when he said "[w]henever the quantity of
Jews in any country reaches the saturation point, that country reacts against them. [This]
reaction cannot be looked upon as anti-Semitism in the ordinary or vulgar sense of that word;
it is a universal social and economic concomitant of Jewish immigration, and we cannot shake
it off."
All you anti-Christian Unz commenters need to realize that the Jews, being Chosen by God,
have a monopoly on spiritual blessings. No American is capable of conjuring his own spiritual
blessings, they must come from the Jews. And in gratitude for those spiritual blessings,
Christian America owes it to the Jews to give them material wealth in return.
"For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews' spiritual blessings, they owe it to the
Jews to share with them their material blessings." (Romans 15:27)
Right there, in plain and simple terms, is God's Will for America's foreign policy.
"Gentiles owe it to the Jews." Cough up that cash or burn in hell! DEUS VULT!
You anti-Christian heathen are going to burn in hell because you can't accept that God has
made the Jews his Chosen ones to market Salvation services to Whites who cannot provide
Salvation for themselves.
" We worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews ." John
4:22
Sure, if Whites could find another Salvation provider, then they wouldn't have to worship
the Jews. But until then, you're risking your eternal life if you don't worship God's will
that the Jews are Supreme. "The Jew First!" (Romans 1:16) DEUS VULT!
The USA and all western countries, which all have good relations with Israel and many
strongly support Israel, all pay a heavy price for that. According to the US gov't., Osama
Bin Laden led Al-Qaeda's attack on the USA in September 2001. As is typical with the USA's
media, it didn't want the US public to know why Osama Bin Laden did this, so it's hard to
find his communication with the US where he laid out his complaints. He had several,
including US troops in Saudi Arabia and US strong support for Israel against Arabs. I
remember the first "terrorist attack". I put it in quotes only because the US is only opposed
to terrorism when it or one of its allies is attacked. It was the 1972 attack on Israeli
athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972. From that point on, there were several other attacks
against Israel including a hijacked Israeli airline at Entebbe and there were allegations
against various Arab countries, including Libya of conducting terrorist attacks against
"American interests". Reagan bombed Libya (and killed Gaddafi's daughter) to retaliate
against Libya's supposed attack on a Berlin disco and I believe he was accused of other
attacks as well. I doubt the accuracy of those claims, but it's unmistakable that the US and
the west were soon Arab targets for their strong support of Israel. At some point Israel may
have carried out, or at least supported attacks on the west so Arabs could be blamed. That is
where the idea Israel carried out the Sept. 11 attacks comes from.
As someone on a podcast commented a while back, years ago travel was such a pleasure,
until probably September 2001 when the US began the heavy security precautions every time you
take a flight. Stripping down (belt, shoes, watch, and anything else necessary to pass the
security checks) as well as unpacking your luggage to pass their test. These checks are all
necessary because of the west's strong support of Israel. East European and Asian countries
have no such terrorism problem, but they are probably pulled into the airport mess because
travel is international. Airline travel used to be a pleasure, but its now very unpleasant
thanks to our ties to Israel. Until around September 2001, we had to listen to the constant
backslapping of Israel by our Jewish media about their great security precautions and their
glorious military (that's new for the Jews who for centuries had a poor reputation as
soldiers) with the often repeated "let the Israelis do it" when the US was contemplating
revenge for something the Arabs supposedly did.
As with air travel, any alliance with Israel is no benefit to anyone except Israel. No
Arab country likes them and would only ally with them if they are useful. Meanwhile, the
world is made miserable with things like travel, high gas prices and other discomforts for
its support of Israel. Most people don't even know the world's oil prices took a huge jump in
1973 for the US support for Israel in the 1973 Arab-Israeli war when OPEC announced its
worldwide embargo against the USA and its allies for the USA's interference in that war on
Israel's behalf. Oil prices never went back to their normal level after that.
"Speaking to the press on a JINSA conference call, Graham said the proposed agreement would
be a treaty that would protect Israel in case of an attack that constituted an "existential
threat".
We already provide this level of support.
Signing onto something as fluid as "existentialist threat" sounds a tad dicey. And just to
be clear, I think the US should exercise caution on these types of treaties. The agreements
with the Phillipines and Japan may already be causing some tension.
An often overlooked treaty was the one between Belgium and the United Kingdom. Without
that treaty WW I would have remained a fire in the backyard. Belgium would never have
engaged the fight against Germany without Britain's assurances. The skirmish between the
Germans and the French would have lasted for less than two months.
I don't know from what planet you hail, but Belgium did NOT "engage a fight against
Germany", rather the other way around. And the Germans were nasty fuckers too, not all of the
"atrocity stories" were fake news.
Also, that treaty could either be interpreted as "The British Empire will not attack
Belgium in the case of an European War" (likely) or "The British Empire will defend Belgium
in case it is attacked" (unlikely). The second interpretation was upheld in parliament by a
tiny margin – the political goal was to uphold continental balance of power and the
secret and privately made assurances about French/Imperial mutual support.
@Nik Here you go Nik, straight from the horses ass. Bolshevism was founded by the "Cabal"
for the purpose of enslaving the entire world in a one world government communist
dictatorship.
"Nobody knows that Zionism
appeared as a Marxist movement,
a socialist one Zionism is actually a revolution."
Sergei Lezov, scientist at the Soviet Academy of Science,
Institute for Scientific Information.
Strana i Mir magazine (Munich), No. 3, 1988, p. 94.
"The ideals of Bolshevism
at many points are consonant with
the finest ideals of Judaism."
Jewish Chronicle, 4th April 1919 (London).
Graham proves once again that congress is the lower house of the knesset and that they will
do anything that zionists that rule the zio/US want and by the way the zionists have had the
zio/US in a virtual mutual defense agreement since JFK's assassination, when the zionists had
JFK shot in front of America and sealed the deal about who was really running the country!
Read these books to see who runs America, JFK the CIA and Vietnam by Col. L. Fletcher
Prouty and Blood in the Water by Joan Mellen and The Secret Team by Col. L. Fletcher Prouty ,
and The Committee of 300 by John Coleman, all can be had on amazon.
@anon Hagee has seven million followers? We should call his and his followers' religion
something like CUFI-ism because of its radical departure from anything resembling
Christianity, and not least because CUFI-ism has no sixth or seventh commandments. With a
wife and two little kids at home, Reverend Hagee was apparently in church snortin' his
alleluias between the legs of another woman who he then married, mocking sin with brazen
scandal.
I gather these delusional CUFI's cheer when Israel and its American surrogate mass murder
hundreds of thousands of God's innocent children in Arab lands by aerial incineration and
point-blank shooting on street patrols. Such are America's "heroes in uniform," who,
incredibly, just yesterday were being labeled baby killers by the kosher msm, back when their
chief objective was overthrowing the government of the United States. As a Vietnam combat vet
I can vouch for the seething, almost spluttering hatred spewed in my and my wife's face in
the early 70's at a Jewish party we attended in our building in NYC. Now that the Army is
doing International Jewry's bidding, its flacks like Sean Hannity tell us you're all of a
sudden a hero for being in uniform in service to Israel.
If America's culture and so its destiny is essentially a reflection of its religion, we
can reasonably judge our prospects by the CUFI's and their evangelical preachers who've
turned Christianity into a mass-murdering cult that'd make Moloch blush, where God's favor is
judged by the SUV or pick up you drive to the Sunday rock concert at some modernistic temple
of statolatry. The pride and smugness of these CUFI's and evangelicals is by itself enough to
ensure we're doomed, assuming there's any cosmic justice left. If you haven't seen it, I
recommend having a look at the video of Kenneth Copeland and Jesse Duplantis defending their
private jets. As Brother Copeland put it, they can't fly on commercial airlines because they
can't talk to God in them tubes filled with demons.
@A.R A.R. piqued my interest when having commented: "What a complete abomination America
has become. Shameful. I wonder what the american population of the 1760s would have done were
they alive today?"
Apparently, the percentage of colonial settler Jews in "The New World" Injun' lands was
small.
Nonetheless, and according to
Norman H. Finkelstein's short article, (linked down below), "The Revolutionary War & The
Jews," a sizeable majority of Jews favored the "Patriot" vision of a new & free Homeland,
but ambitious Jew businessmen had mixed feelings, given the advantageous mercantile freedoms
they enjoyed under British rule.
Haha. Today's Shabbos goy, Senator Lindsey Graham, would have been the Moneychanger Jews
main-Southern Man spokesman. (Zigh)
Would not surprise me had sneaky pro-King George Jews lobbied London to do a False Flag
attack upon Independence Hall, & blame the terror attack on extremist French "Yellow
& Black Robed Vests."
Even without this blank-check Treaty, the Jewish State has been a disaster for America and
the world. "Brain dead" Carolinians who keep Graham in the Senate? How about brain dead New
Yorkers who keep Israel-first Chuck Schumer there? Or our brain dead servile Congressmen, who
jumped to their feet 26 times to give the liar Netanyahu standing ovations? Who vote for
every Neocon war-for-Israel in the Middle East? Or brain dead Boobus Americanus, who has been
lobotomized by Zionist control of Congress, White House, Supreme Court, CIA, FBI, the Justice
Department, Media, Pentagon, Academe, NPR, daily newspapers and monthly magazines?
This defense contract will most definitely be Trump's "excuse" for war with Iran. Iran was
slated for war back in 2001.
The author is incredibly astute.
Trump is sounding more unhinged as the days go on. Imagine telling Jews that they are bad
Jews if they don't support Israel.
Some Jews disagreed with the statement and called him "anti-semetic". I frankly don't know
how they got to "anti-semetic" with that statement, but they managed. It was convoluted
reasoning. Notice that while they called it "anti-semetic", appearing to take issue with it
on that basis, none of them disagreed that they are "loyal" to Israel.
I personally feel no loyalty to Ireland or France because of my background and have no
problem at all saying it.
@Mark James I beg to differ on your assertion that israel has "delivery systems" for its
nuclear weapons.
I hope I am wrong, BUT fear that I am right
If a nuclear device is "lit off" in an American or European city, it will have Israel's
fingerprints all over it. Israel is desperate to keep the American money spigot running, as
well as sabotaging the Palestinian "peace process" that the world wants it to take
seriously.
In fact, if a nuclear device is "lit off" anywhere in the world, it will have come from
Israel's secret nuclear "stockpile".
The "power outage" in Atlanta was a convenient excuse for Israel to perform a logistical
"sleight of hand", as an Israeli plane was allowed to land and take off during the "power
outage" without receiving customs clearance or inspection. This is one of many Israeli
companies that possesses a "special exemption" granted by the U S government that frees it
from customs inspections.
Just maybe another one of Israel's nukes was just being pre-positioned or nuclear triggers
(tritium) were being renewed, getting ready for "the big one".
As most Americans are tired of all of the foreign wars being fought for Israel's benefit,
another "incident" on American soil would be enough to galvanize the American public, once
again, (just like WTC 9-11) to support another war for Israel's benefit. Israel's "samson
option" is a real threat to "light one off" in a European or American city, if Israel's
interests are not taken seriously.
Israel refuses to abide by IAEA guidelines concerning its nukes as they are already
distributed around the world. Israel would not be able to produce all of them as most of them
are not in Israel, proper.
No "delivery systems" are needed as Israel's nukes are already in place. Look for another
false flag operation with the blame being put on Iran or Syria. You can bet that some Iranian
or Syrian passports will be found in the rubble.
Israel has also threatened to detonate nuclear devices in several US cities. Talk about
total INSANITY; the so-called Samson Option is it.
Well!
Jews! Jews! and again Jews!
Anywhere you turn your head you will see ONLY Jews and .what is best for israel.
Former Malaysian Prime Minister, Mohamed Mahathir said:
"The Europeans killed six????? million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this
world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them."
Of course they rule the world by proxy.
They are capable to murder a barefoot Palestinian kid and nothing else. Which they are doing
it daily.
And then we have this traitor Lindsey Graham. I remember him a few years ago, walking in
arms with lunatic John McCain and the other guy, jew Joe Lieberman.
Remember this trio?
Now this flaming faggot [Patti LuPone ask Lindsey Graham to "come out"] wants American kids
to go fight and die for israel. Why he does not do it by himself?
The Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran will take care of him.
Finally Mr. Giraldi is missing something in his article.
How about ..if Iran has the same defense agreement, with Mr. Putin?
Then what?
@anastasia The MSM in the zio/US and in zio/Britain and zio/Europe is controlled by
zionists and so Israel is the golden calf and can bomb the hell out of Syria and Iraq and
Yemen and Palestine and shoot Palestinian men, women and children almost daily and not a word
is heard!
However when Israel and the zio/US finally attack Iran , that will be a bridge too far,
and Russia will come in on the side of Iran, and finally these satanic zionists will have the
nuclear hell they have been wanting!
I have a feeling that the Zionist are going to get their Iran war.
The US public are idiotic enough to vote for Graham, and Trump is a turncoat with his "No
ME wars " pledge. And they're both probably being blackmailed. The Russians aren't going to
get into a war with the US over Iran, and Europe won't do anything as usual.
There is however, a question mark over the Chinese. Iran is their main source of oil
imports and they have been making big investments in the country. Also they're very irritated
by the ongoing Hong Kong colour revolution (the US trying to do to China what they did to
Russia with the Ukraine) and the arrest in Canada of a top Huawei executive (on a US
warrant).
The Chinese in combination with the Russians, are trying to exit from the US dollar, so
between them they would likely make an Iran war very messy, even without being directly
involved. The Iraq war was vastly expensive for the US and an Iran war could be more of the
same, especially when oil traffic through the Gulf is halted.
So this "defence" agreement with Israel could turn out very badly for the US public.
@Patrikios Stetsonis The overwhelming question, Patrikios Stetsonis asked: "What bout
..if Iran has the same defense agreement, with Mr. Putin? Then what?"
Then the American-Israeli must hesitate and hope for President Putin's government to
change & ideally throw the Islamic Republic "under the bus."
Thanks for projecting such intelligent foresight into Supremacist Jew planning, Patrikios!
Maybe even the pathetic Lindsey Graham, is party to the obstacle?
Rich: Abundant possessions, especially material wealth.
Selfish: Unquiet with one's own well-being without regard for others.
Beggar: One who lives by asking for gifts or charity.
"... President Trump said Wednesday that Jewish Americans who vote for Democratic candidates are "very disloyal to Israel," expanding on his remarks from the previous day and dismissing criticism that his remarks were anti-Semitic. ..."
"... "I think if you vote for a Democrat, you are very, very disloyal to Israel and to the Jewish people," Trump said in an exchange with reporters outside the White House before departing for an event in Kentucky. ..."
"... The president is using explicit anti-Semitic rhetoric here, and he is attacking most American Jews because they are not loyal to a foreign country. ..."
"... Because Trump has made a habit of indulging the Israeli government and giving Netanyahu everything he wants regardless of the consequences for the U.S., he apparently assumes that this is the attitude everyone else should have. ..."
"... Trump's attacks are the latest example of how Israel and U.S. policy towards Israel have been made into part of the domestic culture war where being a "pro-Israel" hard-liner is associated with nationalism at home. "Pro-Israel" nationalists imagine that they have more in common with hard-liners in other countries than they do with their fellow citizens, and they see no contradiction in being aggressively nationalist here while also subordinating U.S. interests overseas to the preferences of a small client state. ..."
President Trump said Wednesday that Jewish Americans who vote for Democratic candidates are "very disloyal to Israel," expanding
on his remarks from the previous day and dismissing criticism that his remarks were anti-Semitic.
"I think if you vote for a Democrat, you are very, very disloyal to Israel and to the Jewish people," Trump said in an exchange
with reporters outside the White House before departing for an event in Kentucky.
There wasn't really any doubt about what Trump meant the first time when he launched this attack on the vast majority of American
Jews, and now he has removed any doubt that might have remained. The president is using explicit anti-Semitic rhetoric here, and
he is attacking most American Jews because they are not loyal to a foreign country.
Because Trump has made a habit of indulging
the Israeli government and giving Netanyahu everything he wants regardless of the consequences for the U.S., he apparently assumes
that this is the attitude everyone else should have. This is the twisted logic of the "pro-Israel" hawk who assumes that Jewish people
everywhere should be "loyal" to Israel and should be condemned if they are deemed not to be. It turns the old anti-Semitic attack
upside down, but retains the same ugly core of singling out fellow citizens as disloyal because of their identity and vilifying them
for political purposes. In one of the more disgraceful episodes of Trump's presidency, he once again denounces Jewish Americans for
putting America and our values first.
Trump's attacks are the latest example of how Israel and U.S. policy towards Israel have been made into part of the domestic culture
war where being a "pro-Israel" hard-liner is associated with nationalism at home. "Pro-Israel" nationalists imagine that they have
more in common with hard-liners in other countries than they do with their fellow citizens, and they see no contradiction in being
aggressively nationalist here while also subordinating U.S. interests overseas to the preferences of a small client state.
Paul Pillar touched on some of this in his
recent article :
First, viewpoints that do not prevail in domestic political competition are seen not just as losing arguments regarding the
best way to pursue the national interest but rather as not a worthy part of the nation at all. Second, some foreign interests
are seen not just as allies or means that can be used to pursue the U.S. national interest but rather as objects of affection
or identity in their own right. These two developments are two sides of the same coin. The more that the concept of a national
interest breaks down domestically into a sharp division between one viewpoint to be cherished and an opposing one to be scorned,
the more natural a step it is to identify with like-minded elements overseas rather than with one's own fellow citizens.
It isn't possible to put America and Americans first when the president and his allies are determined to take the side of a foreign
government against American citizens and members of Congress. If we want a foreign policy that actually serves the American interest,
we can't tolerate political leaders that attack fellow Americans to score points with foreign leaders and cast hateful aspersions
against minorities in the name of promoting a relationship with another country. Trump is incapable of conducting such a foreign
policy, and these anti-Semitic outbursts are the latest reminder of why he can't.
It has become common knowledge that some American politicians and officials cater to Israel for the money and votes, but it's
still shocking to have Trump lay it all out so starkly. Nonetheless, at least now we know how things are, and we can decide where
we stand.
I've voted Republican most of my adult life, for Tea Party candidates in 2010, and Trump in 2016, but all I want now is to
get this disgusting freak out of the White House. Him and his establishment GOP enablers.
The key questions here is: Is ethno-religious state with national-neoliberalism overtones
(that's probably why Trump loves Israel so much, san his financing by Zionist billionaires) like
Israel represents the future, or the past? Does Zionism represents a viable ideology for the USA,
or it should be suppressed as a dangerous flavor as far right nationalism?
Controlling oil producing middle East states is the essence of Carter doctrine. And Israel is
in this sense is just an instrument, a tool of this this policy.
Notable quotes:
"... For decades now, support for Israel in Washington has transcended politics. Along with raising military pay, it has been one of the few issues on which Republicans and Democrats, with a few brave exceptions, routinely agree. On an annual basis, Congress reaffirms that commitment by mailing another $3 billion check to Jerusalem. ..."
"... What exactly is the rationale for this largesse? Israel possesses easily the most potent and effective armed forces in the Middle East. ..."
"... do subsidies provided to this strong and affluent nation benefit the United States? Why are they necessary? And with the Israeli government dissing Democratic House members, why should they continue? ..."
"... The Times thereby posits a correlation between Israeli strength (military? economic?) and the strength (viability? sustainability?) of the U.S. position in the Middle East, which is reinforced even further when both American political parties profess their fealty to Israel. Or more succinctly: s upporting them is good for us. The U.S.-Israeli relationship is win-win. ..."
"... But is it? Let me suggest that this claim is on a par with the endlessly repeated and misleading notion that "diversity makes us stronger." It's a dodge, a way of concealing the actual purpose. The aim of the diversity project is not to make the United States stronger but to redress a history of discrimination (a perfectly legitimate motivation, by the way). So too with the assertion that the U.S. position in the Middle East hinges on having a strong Israel: i t too is a dodge. ..."
"... I have no doubt that American government agencies benefit from shared Israeli intelligence and technological exchanges. ..."
"... George W. Bush did not invade Iraq in 2003 to please Mr. Netanyahu, but in response to a bout of neo-imperial hubris laced with missionary fanaticism not seen since the days of Woodrow Wilson. ..."
"... Today, Israel is very strong indeed -- so strong that Netanyahu feels free to deep-six the two-state solution and accelerate colonization of the West Bank. Critics complain, but their complaints are without practical effect. The government of Israel does whatever it sees as necessary to ensure its national security. I personally find much to admire in this single-mindedness, even if I find fault with the policy specifics. ..."
"... I have absolutely no doubt that the U.S.-Israeli relationship is good for Israel. Perhaps it's time to consider whether it's actually good for us. Now there's an issue worthy of examination by the nation's newspaper of record. ..."
President Trump, despised by the Times, professes undying love for Israel. Talib and
Omar also despise Trump, but don't even pretend to love Israel. For the nation's leading
newspaper, this poses a serious problem.
The necessary solution to that problem is to prevent the U.S.-Israeli relationship from
becoming a partisan issue. For decades now, support for Israel in Washington has
transcended politics. Along with raising military pay, it has been one of the few issues on
which Republicans and Democrats, with a few brave exceptions, routinely agree. On an annual
basis, Congress reaffirms that commitment by mailing another $3 billion check to
Jerusalem.
What exactly is the rationale for this largesse? Israel possesses easily the most potent
and effective armed forces in the Middle East. The Jewish state has become a powerhouse of
technological innovation. Annual per capita income there now exceeds $40,000. In sum, the
success of the Israeli experiment in nation building, launched just a few decades ago, is
nothing short of dazzling. In regional terms, David has indeed become Goliath.
Yet how, one might ask, do subsidies provided to this strong and affluent nation benefit
the United States? Why are they necessary? And with the Israeli government dissing Democratic
House members, why should they continue?
Grannygate threatens to revive these questions, which virtually the entire American
political establishment prefers to ignore -- as does the Times. So in a piece of
putative "news analysis," the paper has sought to defuse the situation by offering up this
pithy assertion: "if Israel is weakened, so too is the United States' position in the Middle
East, which is always stronger when both parties are behind it."
Let's take a moment to parse this sentence. It presumably refers to Israel. The
Times thereby posits a correlation between Israeli strength (military? economic?) and
the strength (viability? sustainability?) of the U.S. position in the Middle East, which is
reinforced even further when both American political parties profess their fealty to
Israel. Or more succinctly: s upporting them is good for us. The U.S.-Israeli relationship is
win-win.
But is it? Let me suggest that this claim is on a par with the endlessly repeated and
misleading notion that "diversity makes us stronger." It's a dodge, a way of concealing the
actual purpose. The aim of the diversity project is not to make the United States stronger but
to redress a history of discrimination (a perfectly legitimate motivation, by the way). So too
with the assertion that the U.S. position in the Middle East hinges on having a strong Israel:
i t too is a dodge.
I have no doubt that American government agencies benefit from shared Israeli
intelligence and technological exchanges. Yet what determines the strength or weakness of
the U.S. position in the Middle East is not our connection with Israel but the wisdom or folly
of decisions made in Washington. While some Americans -- more than a handful, far fewer than a
majority -- believe that those decisions are made at Israel's behest, little evidence exists to
support that charge. George W. Bush did not invade Iraq in 2003 to please Mr. Netanyahu,
but in response to a bout of neo-imperial hubris laced with missionary fanaticism not seen
since the days of Woodrow Wilson.
Today, Israel is very strong indeed -- so strong that Netanyahu feels free to deep-six
the two-state solution and accelerate colonization of the West Bank. Critics complain, but
their complaints are without practical effect. The government of Israel does whatever it sees
as necessary to ensure its national security. I personally find much to admire in this
single-mindedness, even if I find fault with the policy specifics.
Meanwhile, American policies in the Middle East are in a complete muddle. Recent U.S.
administrations, not excluding Trump's, have demonstrated an astonishing inability to discern
interests in the region and to act on them. In other words, a strong Israel has not prevented
the United States from exhibiting terminally stupid behavior. For evidence, examine recent U.S.
policies toward Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Libya, and Yemen.
Here's an alternative interpretation of what the U.S.-Israeli relationship signifies.
Maintaining the pretense that the partnership is mutually beneficial provides American
politicians of both parties -- and The New York Times-- an excuse to avoid
critically reassessing what it is the United States thinks it's doing in the Middle East and
whether ongoing expenditures of blood and treasure will yield real success any time soon.
I have absolutely no doubt that the U.S.-Israeli relationship is good for Israel.
Perhaps it's time to consider whether it's actually good for us. Now there's an issue worthy of
examination by the nation's newspaper of record.
Andrew Bacevich, TAC's writer-at-large, is co-founder of the Quincy Institute for
Responsible Statecraft, a new Washington think tank opposed to needless "forever
wars."
And not likely ever to be asked, since the paper demographics represent a deeply ingrained
ethnic and religious favoritism, as the statement quoted clearly reveals. Ironically, every
story now from the Times is to be about the premise that America is unforgivably and
single-mindedly based on racism. The cognitive dissonance is, Israel itself is an
ethno-religious state. Why is that OK, while American Gentiles are mischaracterized as
hateful white supremacists?
The Zionists decided they had to move to that particular piece of real estate, and have since
made it worse. If it turns out that they chose the wrong neighborhood, then why are we
duty-bound to assist Israel in assaulting their rivals?
"Right off hand, I'm not sure how many countries in the world suffer existential threat.
Israel is one of them. It's strong and rich. And has a population of say 6 million and is
within mid-range missile range of open or potential enemies. Nor has there been a single
moment since 1948 that the Palestinian leadership has shown genuine interest in a two state
solution. "
Entirely false. But if I were going to guage one's genuiness, then Israel gobbling up
territory in violation of agreements is hardly a sign of integrity in negotiating a two state
solution. despite Isareli amd jewish backlash --- your comment is simply incorrect.
No one poses an existential threat to Israel. She is loaded to bear. She has the
protection of:
Great Britain, France, Germany, Denmark, the US and others. Her military and financial
support is unquestionably one of the most generous any nation could hope for. The 24 hour
press maching around the globe overwhelms her opponents by the billions. Further demonstrated
by US interventions on her behalf ---
And from a totally scriptural standing: anything established by god --- Whom shall she
fear. Now I am treading where i should not -- but give me a break. She has violated
territorial agreements without consequence ---
If, like you say, Israel is rich and strong, why does it need billions upon billions of US
tax funds every year? AIPAC and other Israel lobbies supporting campaigns is the reason.
This is what passes for logic these days? This is the best logical defense you can come up
with for why American should keep the albatross around its neck?
I think most normal people would agree that the American soul was in better shape before we
started hanging around with Israel. And that makes sense, because it can't be good for the
soul to hang with a country made up mostly of
former Commies who like to rip off the American taxpayer while
watching American soldiers fight, can it?
The Israeli lobby in this country is on par with the NRA in terms of political power and
reach. Which accounts for that American check for $3 billion a year to a nation that is
prosperous in its own right.
In November 2020 Trump may wish that he paid as much attention to the working-class
Americans of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania -- the ones who put him in the White House
-- as to the needs of Israel.
To be clear: Israel is a strong American ally and worthy of support in our own interests.
The question is how much support and how to balance it against our other interests.
Unfortunately, the concept of balancing national interests has become outdated with a
government of elected officials who now spend their careers selling out to moneyed powers
right and left. Their main priority is not their own country or its citizenry -- but rather
themselves.
The Israel lobby is far beyond the NRA. It's supported by both parties and factions in Wash.
And, as far as being an ally, what about the attempted sinking of the USS Liberty and
strafing of US sailors by Israel in the 6 Day War?? And, Israel was caught secretly American
nuclear weapons and nuclear technology to other states inn breach of a long-established
agreement. The joke is, these are American weapons paid for by American tax-payers who paid
for them. That's not how a real ally should behave.
The vast majority of Jewish-Americans strongly support Israel for obvious reasons. And
historically that enthusiastic support was parlayed into enthusiastic financial support for
the Democratic Party.
Somewhere along the way a number of evangelical pastors were enticed to tell the rubes
that the founding of Israel meant that Jesus was coming back and they would all be whisked
into heaven. And of course, that translated into enthusiastic support among right-wing
Christians for the Republican Party.
So it's obvious why the politicians support Israel. I certainly don't see how we get to a
place where we can evaluate whether the rest of us get any value from a relationship with
Israel.
Your biblical assessment is incorrect about what Israel represents in scripture. I have to
tread lightly here -- but, the establishment of Israel is built on a promise in scripture.
Jesus is coming back regardless of what Israel does in responding to Christ.
The re-establishment of Israel is an important marker of the signs of the times -- not a
stepping stone requirement.
If Col. W. Patrick Lang, former head of DIA is to be believed, the "Israeli contribution" to
US intelligence gathering is hugely overstated. In other words, when it comes to
intelligence, we give, the Israelis take.
After all, didn't Israeli intelligence and Netanyahu personally assure us that Iraq was
simply chock-a-block with WMDs and we needed to invade, like, right away?
Were these much hyped Israeli superspies wrong then, or were they just lying?
I have absolutely no doubt that the U.S.-Israeli relationship is good for Israel. Perhaps
it's time to consider whether it's actually good for us.
Mr. Bacevich I'm sure George Washington would 100% agree with your statement for in his
Farewell Address to the nation he warned us of entangling alliances:
The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an
habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave.It is a slave to its animosity or to its
affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its
interest....
And it gives to ambitious,corrupted, or deluded citizens, (who devote themselves to the
favorite nation,) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without
odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of
obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good,
the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation....
My humble opinion is that Trump's support of Israel is political strategy. He gets key
important powerful establishment people on his side that will use that power to protect his
presidency. Without that support, he may very well have been put out of office by now in some
extra-electoral way, whether by impeachment or some other way.
I have no doubt that the NY Times uncritical stovepiping of Cheney's WMD fantasies was
motivated in large part by Israel's (justifiable) antipathy towards Saddam.
And in 2016, they seemed happy to participate in the kneecapping of Hillary via obsessive
focus on the e-mail saga, and sensationalist headlines re: the Clinton Foundation even when
their articles demonstrated the controversy was without merit. That may have been a
reflection of the Obama Administration's insufficient deference to Israel (and Trump's
wholehearted embrace of whatever Bibi wanted to do) ... although I suspect that the NYTimes
owners were also looking forward to their big tax breaks.
The US should not support Israel for the simple reason that they do not support our values of
freedom, equality and self determination. It is abundantly clear that they intend to never
give the Palestinians their freedom. Israel values land over peace and is acting accordingly
in its continued land theft and building of illegal Jewish-only settlements in the occupied
lands. The apartheid system continues to grow, but Israel doesn't care because it continues
to receive amoral and unconditional support from our Congress and Evangelical Christians.
Israel has created her own threats by her behavior. But I am going to push back against any
one who suggest that a US president engage in attacking his fellows on behalf of any state.
That is a bridge too far.
We can debate about what our position on Israel should be - and there's [plenty to
discuss. but a president who uses his office to undermine the ability of members of his
country to make assessments as all others is clearly colluding to undermine the US.
I may not agree with the positions of these congress members, but their constituents foot
Israel's sizeable bill and they are entitled as all others to make that assessment in person.
The fact they Israel nor the president appreciates their point of view does not entitle this
president to use his office to engage in this kind of behavior.
It is beyond the pale and the pail. Absolutely. Israel may disagree. The president can
disagree -- but the president does not represent Israelis. He represents the US and those
congress members are entitled to his support regardless of whether he agrees.
Quite the contrary --- Israel is as other state. Her position on issues in the region has
been to the detriment of the US. And it has been so in all ways. If an ally her intelligence
on the matters of regime has been woefully lacking. Now either she simply is not as astute on
intel as she claims or she deliberately misled the US to expend life and resources on states
that are nonthreats to her or the US. Iraq is a prime example. Israel led the charge in
toppling Pres Hussein based on Iraq as a threat -- yet in every aspect the information was
wrong. How is it that our ally in the region Israel - got that information wrong. Not only
was the effort a complete failure. It has actually empowered the state of Iran back firing
the matter of reducing supposed Israeli threats.
That makes Israel's strategic partnership something to be seriously questioned. Now Israel
wants to go after Syria and in part because Iran and Syria are allies . . . it begs the
obvioius strategic question. The complete stupidity of removing Iraq the best buffer to
Iranian revolution ambition s and then empowering a Shia controlled state in Iraq. Frankly,
Israel has proven of little value strategically in the region. Her violations of Syrian
sovereignty is breeding discontent and triggering the issue of hostility toward Israel.
Hostility Israel fostered in less than five years in existence when she joined France and
Great Britain in a failed attempt to retake the Suez Canal. That after Israel repeatedly
assured the Muslim states in the region she had no military ambitions of expansion.
Israel portrayed as then innocent red riding hood threatened by wolves does not have much
sustainable evidence, despite the press -- in reality Israel has been the aggressor fostering
hostiliity. If integrity matters in foreign policy and I think it does the commentary that
"poor Israel -- is almost pure nonsense in reality.
Pining for an alternative here ya go. Israel should be forced to deal her neighbors as her
neighbors and that minus the big stick of military support from:
France, Grerat Britain, Germany, Denmark, the US and a host of others who billions into the
economy, alleviating Israel of filling those gaps.
In so doing Israel will have negotiate from a a position of self as a member of the
international community at large. I support Israel, but not everything good for Israel is
good for the US and anyone who makes that case is either woefully ignorant or so agenda bound
for Israel, they see the US as a mere tool for her ambitions -- I disagree.
And I am well aware of the scriptural implications of Israel, but the Israel that God is
calling in scripture is not the Israel of today and it is unlikely she will be so, if enable
every choice Israel makes. It is a mistake to conclude Israeli success is God in play. People
engage in unhealthy behavior all the time and get away with it -- it would be folly to
consider their supposed escape is the mind of God.
Note anyone claiming my comments represent some manner of anti-semitism would be wrong.
Anyone claiming that I hate jews or Israel because I choose to examine that relationship
through a lens that is both scriptural and secular would be wrong. I have plenty of jews that
I appreciate. I am very fond of my housemate, but i would be loathe to support behavior that
runs counter to sound judgement. Should we support Israel -- I think so. That does not mean
Israel is above reproach. And she certainly can dis-invite whom she chooses. But that the
president would not be engaged in fostering discussion between his countrymen and those of a
foreign state because of disagreement, much less in spite of the same ---
The writer must realize that it's the Palestinian leadership that has consistently rejected a
"two state" solution. To the main point, there might be advantages in abandoning a supposedly
strong Israel in preference to allying with Israel's enemies. Our ties with Iran and the Shia
crescent would improve. Maybe we could take part in the Belt and Road initiative on more
favorable terms. The idea is that an isolated, friendless Israel would have no choice but to
knuckle under to the world's demands. But what exactly are those demands and how might these
demands adversely affect "American interests?" A pariah with nukes, if banished from traffic
with the world, has nothing to lose. The Palestinians do. The writer doesn't address the
issue and perhaps hasn't given it much thought.
Every American should remember the USS Liberty atrocity during the Six Day War in 1967, and
the subsequent coverup by Wash. which proves the Power of the Israel lobby. 34 sailors were
killed and 174 wounded in Israel's unprovoked, outrageous attack. Israel also got caught
selling US intelligence and nuclear secrets and maybe some nukes to foreign states. Besides
that, Israel is an apartheid state that has gone way beyond what So. Africa did when that
country became an international pariah. It all goes back to Israel lobbies bribing Wash. with
campaign funds.
It's very sad to the see the United States support the racist, supremacist Israel and its
illegal and awful concentration camp for Brown people who don't speak Spanish, known as Gaza.
The West Bank is also terrible.
Every South Africa human rights organization I've seen which investigates the occupation
of Palestine mentions the occupation is worse than the apartheid of South Africa.
From the worldwide known Jewish, Institute Professor Emeritus at MIT, Noam Chomsky:
"In the Occupied Territories, what Israel is doing is much worse than apartheid," Chomsky
says. "To call it apartheid is a gift to Israel, at least if by 'apartheid' you mean South
African-style apartheid. What's happening in the Occupied Territories is much worse. There's
a crucial difference. The South African Nationalists needed the black population. That was
their workforce. The Israeli relationship to the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories is
totally different. They just don't want them. They want them out, or at least in prison."
From the United Nations website:
Israel's Settlements Have No Legal Validity, Constitute Flagrant Violation of
International Law, Security Council Reaffirms.
There is no conflict of interest for the NYTimes IF the newspapers loyalty were to truth and
objectivity BUT it is a problem for the NYTimes because the newspaper is a biased partisan
leftist propaganda machine for the democratic party.
The aim of the diversity project is not to make the United States stronger but to redress
a history of discrimination (a perfectly legitimate motivation, by the way).
??? The greatest sin of imperialism was Diversity. Why did the New World become diverse?
Because white people conquered the land from the browns. Thus, an all-brown nation became a
white-brown nation. And then, it got further diverse because white imperialists imported
black slaves. Thus, diversity increased to white-brown-black. And then, to fill up factories
and to build railroads, white imperialists let in more immigrants. The result was the once
homogeneous browns losing their ancestral lands forever to Diversity engineered by white
imperialists. Diversity has been the product of imperialism. And America's greatest 'sin' of
the 'genocide' of the brown natives. So, if US wants to redress past wrongs, it must end
immigration, apologize for diversity, and try to restore more land to the brown natives(and
the red man). .
This is a very weak article full of emotion but does not clarifing anything. Zionisn is just
far right Jewish nationalism colored by the occupation of Palestine. Nothing special about it and
in a sense critique of Israel for Zionism falls short. whether Zionists control the USA via fifth
column or the USA elite thinks that Zionist policies in Middle East are perfectly compatible with
the USA geopolitical goals in the region remains to be seen. I suspect the latter.
In this case calling Trump Zionist puppet completely misses the point. The USA and Israel
currently are fellow travelers. That might change in the future.
Incident with Representative [Ilhan] Omar and Representative [Rashida] Tlaib is just a minor
insident and should be trated as such.
Notable quotes:
"... The likelihood that Donald Trump will be impeached (and it's the House of Representatives that impeaches, not the Senate) for any action that pleases Israel is zero. ..."
"... "Why not just support a Gabbard campaign?" Because we've been swindled by two "antiwar" candidates in a row already. We don't want to be slow learners, do we? ..."
"... If the Zionist Enterprise and Uncle Sam (and their apologists) are resentful about the strategic depth Iran has created in Syria they should not have supported a bunch of whack job head choppers like HTS, Al Qaeda, ISIL, etc., etc. Blow back pure and simple like 9/11 and US intervention in Afghanistan. ..."
"... On November 22, 1963, our last Constitutional Government was overthrown in a Coup D'état, with our last Constitutional President, John F. Kennedy , assassinated in a hail of bullets. ..."
"... You really have to have a lot of chutzpah to claim that Trump isn't presidential. After 32 years of Clinton, Bush II, Obama? What is wrong with you, Phil? ..."
"... I like Giraldi generally, that said the whole "acting Presidential" thing is way, way overrated -- that's what we've had for decades an "actor" reading a teleprompter, part of the Uniparty team selected to screw average normal Americans of all races ..."
"... As though the ziostate is a separate country from the Imperialist States of Amerikastan, instead of a parasitic twin. And as though the Imperialist States of Amerikastan is in any way innocent of the crimes of the ziostate. ..."
"... Old pensioners , even younger are political, pathetic amateurs.. Amateurs or worse. Daily declarations of never ending and growing up and up "Uber Love" for Israel means what ? Emptiness , absence of any ability ? ..."
"... Looks like President and administrations become more and more lost and lost their way in our world ? Can not USA acts and even understand, on its own, what is going on around?? ..."
"... They push Iran and Russia together,after they did the same with China, Venezuela /with 6 millions of Columbians in there/, and Turkey, before.. USA lost Syria ..."
"... And if you need a good reason to not impeach Trump here it is: Mike Pence would become President. ..."
"... Mega Group, Maxwells and Mossad: The Spy Story at the Heart of the Jeffrey Epstein Scandal ..."
"... The picture painted by the evidence is not a direct Epstein tie to a single intelligence agency but a web linking key members of the Mega Group, politicians, and officials in both the U.S. and Israel, and an organized-crime network with deep business and intelligence ties in both nations. ..."
"... "Hey, let's buy Greenland!", "Let's send a guy to Mars!". Swear to God, every day's a new adventure with this guy. ..."
"... Ignoring someone is the strongest form of bullying. BDS is this stupid path that will lead to violence just like picking up a stick in the first place. The way to deal with Israel and the Empire is by demanding the declassification of all historical secrets, and having an open conversation. We haven't done this for a century as a society. ..."
"... When that happens, it will become clear Israel has always been a colonial project of European and Jewish elites (at the top the %es warrant the statement), that human rights interventions have been designed with neo-colonial intentions in mind from the get-go (after all the creation of Israel was the first such neo-colony), and that the only way to solve this issue is through full on decolonisation. ..."
"... Trump is an idiot and a puppet of Israel. Our Congress is controlled by Israel. Trump isn't Presidential is true. But Giraldi once again seems to be clueless of all the underhanded foreign policy games Obama played. Obama is a cool Crime Lord if there ever was one. ..."
"... The CIA and the other Intelligence agencies protected Obama because he let them do whatever they wanted. Obama's fiasco in Libya was covered up and according to my friends in the CIA is one the greatest foreign policy failures in American history. But Giraldi once again ignores this type of stuff. ..."
"... Pence is also an idiot and nutbag ZioChristian. What Giraldi doesn't seem to understand is that even though Trump is an idiot etc. look at the Democrats and what does the populace see? For many they see that he is less evil than all the Democrats running. ..."
"... First I was glad to see Tlaib had the smarts to tell the Likudniks to pound sand with their new invitation. It would to me, quickly evolve into a fiasco (probably as soon as she got off her flight). Good move by the Rep. If this is a zero-sum game, she wins not Trump/Netanyahu. ..."
"... I see no stomach for impeachment during the election cycle. As well as no chance for a senate conviction. Vile crook that he is, he was elected. Now it's up to voters to make that decision again. Yes on a personal level he's terrible but if we are lucky he won't do catastrophic damage. Like Bush. ..."
"... I agree with Mr. Giraldi entirely on this matter. Unfortunately, given that the Democratic Party is determined to present voters with less than reasonable alternatives, I am fully confident that we will be enjoying another four-year term with this imbecilic, Zionist bootlick as our head-of-state ..."
"... But it is true that Trump -- like every President since LBJ -- has become an obsequious waterboy for the Zionist mafia. For me, this marks Trump's greatest failure. Wasn't he going to 'Make America Great Again'? How can a nation be great if it is not sovereign? ..."
"... A guy with interesting views about the end of the world probably shouldn't be put in a position where he could actually end it. ..."
"... Business as usual for US Presidents for at least 70 years, perhaps at least 120 years. Under the principles of equity, these would not justify impeachment. ..."
"... I really hate to admit this but you may be correct. I do think Trump is anti-war. But he's too erratic and nobody should trust him. Netanyahu is gaming him but I don't think he trusts Trump either. ..."
"... Impeachment is inherently political and there are plenty of good reasons to impeach Trump as there were to impeach Obama, Bush II, Clinton and for that matter such all time greats as Lincoln and FDR. There are better reasons not to impeach him. If impeachment fails it paves the way for a backlash that would lead to Trump's re-election by a landslide and more subservience to Israel than ever. ..."
"... If it succeeds, he is followed by Pence and more subservience to Israel than ever. And if a Democrat other than Tulsi Gabbard gets elected in 2020, keep in mind that the Democratic establishment is solidly pro-Israel as well. Only among some of the Democratic rank-and-file is there any opposition to doing the bidding of the Israeli government. ..."
"... Haven't you Bush-Cheney-Trump Republicans noticed that every four years Americans rent a pig in a poke for the next four years. ..."
It is astonishing to observe some Americans twisting themselves into pretzels so they can
continue to make excuses to explain the bizarre behavior of President Donald Trump on the world
stage. The line most commonly heard is that he has "kept us out of new wars." The reality is
somewhat different. He has kept us in old wars in Afghanistan and Syria that he could have
ended while also needlessly ratcheting up tension with countries like Russia, Venezuela, Iran
and China that could easily escalate into armed conflict. The situation with Moscow is
particularly dangerous as President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly warned that his country's
defense doctrine includes going nuclear if there is an attack on Russia by a superior
force.
But the most frightening aspect of the current situation is the feeling that the man whose
finger is on America's nuclear trigger is not quite sane. The steady stream of insulting and
vulgar tweets that seem to serve as a substitute for more substantial mental activity reveals a
man who is profoundly ignorant, completely narcissistic and hopelessly insecure. To say the
least, Trump is not presidential. He is not even rational except in a conniving, manipulative
fashion intended to embarrass his adversaries and place them on the defensive. And his enemies
list appears to include all Americans who are not "with him."
The Constitution of the United States in Articles I and II details the procedure for
impeachment by the Senate of a president who commits "treason, bribery, or other high crimes
and misdemeanors." I believe that threshold has finally been crossed. It was crossed last
Thursday when
President Trump telephoned either Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or some other senior
Israeli government official before, one hour later, tweeting the following: "It would show
great weakness if Israel allowed Representative [Ilhan] Omar and Representative [Rashida] Tlaib
to visit. They hate Israel and all Jewish people. And there is nothing that can be said or done
to change their minds. Minnesota and Michigan will have a hard time putting them back in
office. They are a disgrace!"
Netanyahu then followed Trump's lead with a series of tweets of his own,
banning the visit of the two congresswomen because "Only a few days ago, we received their
itinerary for their visit in Israel, which revealed that they planned a visit whose sole
objective is to strengthen the boycott against us and deny Israel's legitimacy. For instance:
they listed the destination of their trip as Palestine and not Israel the itinerary of the two
Congresswomen reveals that the sole purpose of their visit is to harm Israel and increase
incitement against it."
The two women are in fact the only two congressional supporters of the non-violent Boycott,
Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement that seeks to use economic pressure to convince Israel
to end its brutal occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, meaning that the other 533
members of congress are not so inclined. BDS supporters have been blocked from travel to Israel
under an anti-boycott law passed by the Knesset in March 2017, suggesting that free speech in
Israel is conditional.
Even though BDS is a non-violent protest movement, it has been condemned by the U.S.
Congress and also by nearly all Jewish groups in America, quite possibly because it is having a
real impact in an environment where legitimate criticism of Israel is effectively forbidden.
There is considerable irony in the fact that Jewish groups have in the past used boycotts to
advance their own tribal interests while condemning the use of the same tactic when it is
employed against Israeli oppression.
The Israeli ban was subsequently partially lifted to allow Tlaib to travel to the occupied
West Bank to visit her 90 year old grandmother, but the congresswoman indicated that
she has refused the offer as she is being treated "like a criminal." Clearly, Netanyahu and
Trump saw political benefit coming out of the exchange. Netanyahu is facing re-election in two
weeks and will be able to boast of his demonstrated ability as a "strong leader" to obtain
maximum support for anything he does from the White House. Trump is also already running for
re-election next year and is working hard to make Israel an issue, labeling the Democrats as
the party that is anti-Israel and anti-Semitic. He will also expect Netanyahu to do him favors
as appropriate closer to the actual U.S. election.
So much for the view from the two heads of government. The other perspective, and why the
president should be impeached, is that Trump's decision was, as usual, to propagate a
disgusting and deliberate lie that is also extremely damaging to actual United States interests
as well as to our form of government.
To put it in simplest terms, President Trump is conniving with a foreign government headed
by a war criminal to block the entry of and also demonize two congresswomen whose political
views differ from his own. He is endangering the women, who have already received death
threats, by expanding on the lies that are being circulated about them due to their criticism
of Israel's appalling human rights record.
Netanyahu, for his part, would prefer that prominent observers not be able to report on the
actual conditions prevailing on the West Bank and in Gaza. Indeed, Israel's occupation of much
of the West Bank is an ongoing crime that is carefully hidden from most foreign visitors.
Netanyahu's government already carefully manages the summer recess annual pilgrimage by members
of Congress, such as the one that ended last week where 31 Republicans and 41 Democrats made
the journey to kiss the prime minister's ring. And it should be noted that as Omar and Tlaib
are only two of a handful of Democratic lawmakers who dare to criticize Israel, their impact on
party policy is decidedly limited, rendering even more incomprehensible the panic over their
travels.
There are a number of other things wrong with what took place between Trump and Netanyahu
vis-à-vis the two congresswomen. First of all, Israel is the top recipient of U.S.
military aid at more than $3 billion each year. It also profits from trade arrangements,
co-production projects and charitable contributions from American Jews and Christian Zionists
that amount to an estimated three times that much annually. That members of Congress should
have the right, even the obligation, to visit Israel to see where all that money goes should be
unquestioned and it has, indeed, been unchallenged prior to this incident. Tlaib and Omar are
the first congressmen to be denied entry to Israel. That Trump apparently orchestrated the
entire incident in connivance with a foreign government in support of his own political
ambitions and that foreign power's narrow interests is a clear abuse of executive power.
To be sure, numerous Democrats have decried the Israeli decision, but they have tended to
frame it in such a way as to praise Israel while also slamming Trump. They note, in a friendly
way, that it will hurt Israel's otherwise pristine image as an upstanding democracy and close
ally, both of which assertions are in any event demonstrably false. Speaker of the House Nancy
Pelosi issued a statement
that was typical, saying "As one who loves Israel, I am deeply saddened by the news that Israel
has decided to prevent Members of Congress from entering the country. Last month, Israeli
Ambassador Dermer stated that, 'Out of respect for the U.S. Congress and the great alliance
between Israel and America, we would not deny entry to any Member of Congress into Israel.'
This is a sad reversal and is deeply disappointing. I pray that the Government of Israel will
reverse that denial. Israel's denial of entry to Congresswomen Tlaib and Omar is a sign of
weakness, and beneath the dignity of the great State of Israel. The President's statements
about the Congresswomen are a sign of ignorance and disrespect, and beneath the dignity of the
Office of the President."
Senator Bernie Sanders was one of the few legislators to actually approach the heart of the
matter,
saying "The idea that a member of the United States Congress cannot visit a nation which,
by the way, we support to the tune of billions and billions of dollars is clearly an outrage.
And if Israel doesn't want members of the United States Congress to visit their country to get
a firsthand look at what's going on -- and I've been there many, many times -- but if he
doesn't want members to visit, maybe [Netanyahu] can respectfully decline the billions of
dollars that we give to Israel."
Even the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) disapproved of the decision,
stating in a tweet that "We disagree with Reps. Omar and Tlaib's support for the
anti-Israel and anti-peace BDS movement, along with Rep. Tlaib's calls for a one-state
solution. We also believe every member of Congress should be able to visit and experience our
democratic ally Israel firsthand."
One of the few Republicans to enter into the discussion was Senator Marco Rubio of Florida,
who
characteristically tweeted what amounted to an attack on the congresswomen, stating that it
was a mistake for the Israeli government to deny them entry because "Being blocked is what they
really hoped for all along in order to bolster their attacks against the Jewish state."
Trump's attack on the two congresswomen comes on top of another bizarre foreign policy
related intervention. It involved
sending his official hostage negotiator Robert O'Brien to Stockholm on the taxpayers' dime
to obtain freedom for an American rap musician ASAP Rocky who was in jail after having gotten
into a fight with some local boys. Trump did not actually know Rocky, but he was vouched for by
the likes of Kim Kardashian and Kanye West, both of whom have had nice things to say about the
president. Trump also exercised his usual disregard for standard diplomatic courtesy by
tweeting
furiously against Sweden's prime minister, Stefan Lofven, over Rocky's detention. The
negotiator was instructed to threaten Sweden that if they did not release Rocky there would be
"negative consequences" for the bilateral relationship.
And if you need more good reasons to impeach Donald Trump, here they are:
Trump has twice
attacked Syria with cruise missiles based on flawed intelligence without a declaration of war
and without Damascus representing an actual threat. That is a war crime and the stationing of
American soldiers in Syria without the consent of that country's government is also illegal.
The Trump administration's "Justice" Department is seeking to extradite truth-teller Julian
Assange of WikiLeaks so he can be locked up for life or killed in prison like Jeffrey Epstein.
America's Secretary of State and National Security Advisors are implementing policies that
impose punitive sanctions that have served to starve or otherwise kill thousands of
Venezuelans, Iranians and Yemenis. Far from being Russian President Vladimir Putin's patsy,
Trump has unnecessarily escalated tensions with Moscow more than any American president since
the end of the cold war by moving NATO troops up to the Russian border and arming Ukraine,
putting our nation and much of the world at risk of a nuclear exchange whether by accident or
design. Trump has unnecessarily withdrawn from an Iranian nuclear agreement and from two arms
treaties with Russia, all of which enhanced the national security of the United States. The
Trump administration has continued to lavish support on the Middle East's two kleptocracies
Saudi Arabia and Israel, endorsing everything they do. The tilt towards Israel, including U.S.
recognition of sovereignty over illegally occupied East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, has
been particularly unfortunate as it could lead to a major war in the region with the U.S.
placed right in the middle of the conflict.
Finally, there are certainly some who oppose getting rid of Trump because it would give us
Mike Pence as acting president. True enough, and Mike certainly has some interesting Christian
Zionist views about the end of the world, but how could he possibly be worse than Donald
Trump?
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that
seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its
email is [email protected] .
Let me help. What you are actually advocating is better represented by this:
GIRALDI Endorses MIKE PENCE for President
Did you forget that the VP takes the Presidency if the sitting President is impeached?
Do you really believe that PENCE would be better than Trump on foreign policy?
__________
He has kept us in old wars in Afghanistan and Syria that he could have ended
Trump has drawn down troops from Afghanistan.
The primary issue with pulling troops out of Syria is Iran, although Turkey and the deep
state bureaucracy are also complicating factors. Hopefully, Iran's impending exit from Syria
will allow Trump to also exit.
Iranian troops are in conflict with Assad and they are rapidly wearing out its welcome in
Syria (1):
the Iranian Revolutionary Guards "took over the al-Nurain Mosque and houses around it on
Korniche Street in the city, where they prevented civilians, members of regime forces, and
NDF from entering or passing through the area, without orders from the command forces
located in al-Mayadin."
Iran is also intentionally provoking Russia and undermining Putin's credibility (2):
due to the permanent infiltration efforts conducted by Iran and Hizbullah, a very unique
situation has unfolded on the ground. Hizbullah and pro-Iranian proxies' checkpoints,
coordinated by the regime's Fourth Division deployed in the area, have been erected almost
adjacent to the Russian checkpoints. Pro-Iranian patrols have been patrolling the area in
the very same axis patrolled by the Russians. As a result, frictions between the Russian
and the pro-Iranian proxies occur from time to time, creating tensions between Moscow and
Tehran.
It is now a test of wills between Ayatollah Khamenei and Putin, and it is pretty clear
that Putin is going to win.
It's not saying much but Trump seems to be the sanest of the bunch. Even Sanders wants more
militarism. His support for Israel, though less overtly obnoxious, achieves the same end
result. I could possibly exclude Gabbard. Why not just support a Gabbard campaign?
The likelihood that Donald Trump will be impeached (and it's the House of Representatives
that impeaches, not the Senate) for any action that pleases Israel is zero.
Tulsi Gabbard should embrace the BDS movement and move ahead of the other candidates. This is
in spite of her ill-advised vote recently to condemn BDS. It would be a dramatic about face
-- she will be vilified no matter what she does, but she will please a large and growing
segment of the electorate, not unlike Ross Perot's Independence Party.
"Mike certainly has some interesting Christian Zionist views about the end of the world, but
how could he possibly be worse than Donald Trump?"
Mike Pence could be worse than Hillary Clinton without half trying. For that matter, he
could be worse than GW Bush without breaking a sweat. You underestimate him, Phil.
"Why not just support a Gabbard campaign?" Because we've been swindled by two
"antiwar" candidates in a row already. We don't want to be slow learners, do we?
If the Zionist Enterprise and Uncle Sam (and their apologists) are resentful about the
strategic depth Iran has created in Syria they should not have supported a bunch of whack job
head choppers like HTS, Al Qaeda, ISIL, etc., etc. Blow back pure and simple like 9/11 and US
intervention in Afghanistan.
Yes, The entire post November 22, 1963 American Government, with only a few exceptions
should be Impeached.
On November 22, 1963, our last Constitutional Government was overthrown in a Coup
D'état, with our last Constitutional President, John F. Kennedy , assassinated in a
hail of bullets.
If you (Giraldi), read Unz' article on the subject of the Coup, and just who performed the
Coup, or a dozen other articles to the point, you should understand that our
post-constitutional government has been increasingly controlled by Foreign Zionist Banking
Oligarchs. Our so-called 'elected Representatives' function as bought Minions of the
Rothschilds , and live in fear of their MOSSAD and puppet CIA police.
I assume you have read your own articles on the subject of just who controls the USA. Or
do I have to cite them for you?
You advocate an Impeachment Process to be brought against Casino Trump . And who,
pray tell, will do the impeaching? You are advocating an effort that lends a certain
Legitimacy to a pathetic Puppet government, long at the service of the Zionist World Order.
Do you dream that the pathetic band of almost 537 Traitors are up to the task?
You expect a Congress, perhaps led by the Democrap Gangers, to begin the process of
removing the current Hollywood actor ("You're Fired"), in a pretend Constitutional Process
performed by a Pretend Constitutional Government.
Ron Unz -- er. Philip Giraldi, our Yellow Brick Road to Liberty involves, of
necessity, a Restoration of Our Republic, with a restoration of our Constitution, with a
restoration of our honor, and a restoration of our Beloved Nation's Sovereignty.
But I will deal with you as a well meaning and brave American, a friend. If you have a way
to trigger, or begin the process of impeachment of Casino Trump, even in the Pretend World we
will have to live in to swallow the Show, I and my friends will do all we can to follow your
lead.
This is your article and your lead. Hell! We might get lucky. On with the show. You will
not fight alone.
Now. if your article is just an intellectual appeal to the powers that be (whomever they
are), to advance an impeachment show for us to passively observe, a show where nothing
essential will change, and nothing will be learned, then our Citizens will have no option but
to continue following the Foreign Zionist controlled Democrap & Republicant Gangs to
Hell.
You really have to have a lot of chutzpah to claim that Trump isn't presidential. After
32 years of Clinton, Bush II, Obama? What is wrong with you, Phil?
You evidently are a one-issue guy with a hitherto serious case of Trump Derangement
Syndrome.
You've know joined the ranks of The Mooch and that lunatic Kristol.
I like Giraldi generally, that said the whole "acting Presidential" thing is way, way
overrated -- that's what we've had for decades an "actor" reading a teleprompter, part of the
Uniparty team selected to screw average normal Americans of all races
Ppersonally not having been a Trump fan ever -- I like the fact that he doesn't act like
an actor teleprompter reading robot and that he swings back at the lying Propagandist
Mainslime Media and Dems who are complete insane lunatics at this point (I was a Dem myself
for 40 years and even voted for Obama the first time -- no more.
They are actively plotting to destroy the country by importing "replacement" illegal
aliens to vote for them as sane people won't and Identity "hate whitey" politics -- why would
any sane "white" person vote for them?).
Do I like all Trump is doing? No. His Israel "love" and Javanka etc .But who exactly would
Mr. Giraldi recommend we support/vote for that has any possible chance of getting elected who
is not a pre-selected Uniparty stooge/traitor? Trump is all we got, and by his wide range of
obvious enemies we can tell he is also obviously not fully "on board" with the cretins of the
Deep State -- and those who "run" things view him as a threat, gotta like that .
If I have to choose between Trump and those two harpies then Trump is in. Those two women are
fake Americans who should go back to where they came from.
As though the ziostate is a separate country from the Imperialist States of Amerikastan,
instead of a parasitic twin. And as though the Imperialist States of Amerikastan is in any
way innocent of the crimes of the ziostate.
@getaclue Elites do not
let anybody from the younger generation up , through filter. Old pensioners , even
younger are political, pathetic amateurs.. Amateurs or worse. Daily declarations of never
ending and growing up and up "Uber Love" for Israel means what ? Emptiness , absence of any
ability ?
Looks like President and administrations become more and more lost and lost their way
in our world ? Can not USA acts and even understand, on its own, what is going on
around??
They push Iran and Russia together,after they did the same with China, Venezuela /with
6 millions of Columbians in there/, and Turkey, before.. USA lost Syria ..And what about
Yemen ? At the same time they expose Israel, towards many dangerous developments in that area
around .And in the whole world.. Negativity against Israel is growing..
They/together/ never solve and end, this horrible situation with Palestine.. Sanction are
deadly weapon against all children and their future everywhere..Are the they blind ? As well
? Have They declared sanctions on their own sights ??
Your ridiculous, TDS-fueled list of President Trump's alleged sins does not include a
single high crime or misdemeanor. It merely states your despicable preference for a world run
by Mohammedans and a country run by the likes of those Mohammedan Congress-snakes.
Repeat these words in front of your local imam -- hopefully as the blood spurts from a
camel's throat on Eid; it earns you extra points and a delicious camel steak.
"There is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet."
Until you do that, we will know that you lack the courage of your convictions.
Would changing potus or any puppet make any real difference, at all, when the clear
cancerous origin of the decline of the usa, and in fact, the entire western world is not
completely eliminated?
With US Liberty, JFK, and 911 in mind, here is an opportunity to expose and eliminate.
Mega Group, Maxwells and Mossad: The Spy Story at the Heart of the Jeffrey Epstein
Scandal
The picture painted by the evidence is not a direct Epstein tie to a single
intelligence agency but a web linking key members of the Mega Group, politicians, and
officials in both the U.S. and Israel, and an organized-crime network with deep business and
intelligence ties in both nations.
"Hey, let's buy Greenland!", "Let's send a guy to Mars!". Swear to God, every day's a new
adventure with this guy. The Gonzo Presidency, like going to Vegas with Hunter S.
Thompson.
Ignoring someone is the strongest form of bullying. BDS is this stupid path that will
lead to violence just like picking up a stick in the first place. The way to deal with Israel
and the Empire is by demanding the declassification of all historical secrets, and having an
open conversation. We haven't done this for a century as a society.
When that happens, it will become clear Israel has always been a colonial project of
European and Jewish elites (at the top the %es warrant the statement), that human rights
interventions have been designed with neo-colonial intentions in mind from the get-go (after
all the creation of Israel was the first such neo-colony), and that the only way to solve
this issue is through full on decolonisation.
Trump is an idiot and a puppet of Israel. Our Congress is controlled by Israel. Trump
isn't Presidential is true. But Giraldi once again seems to be clueless of all the
underhanded foreign policy games Obama played. Obama is a cool Crime Lord if there ever was
one.
He is most likely a product of his mother and other relatives being in the CIA chain if
you investigate thoroughly. The CIA and the other Intelligence agencies protected Obama
because he let them do whatever they wanted. Obama's fiasco in Libya was covered up and
according to my friends in the CIA is one the greatest foreign policy failures in American
history. But Giraldi once again ignores this type of stuff.
America is a Military Industrial-Intelligence Police State. Our leaders are just players
in the game. Trump realizes he is not in charge of the foreign policy and most of the
Intelligence Agencies have gone rogue. They answer to the Corporations of the World not to
Nations. Just look at the debacle of the FBI and the Trump investigation. Who was in charge
and what were they trying to do? They were trying to prevent Trump from becoming president
and the NSA who were monitoring everything did what? Just like William Binney former NSA
intelligence officer stated how far they have gone in their own game plan against the
citizens of the USA.
Pence is also an idiot and nutbag ZioChristian. What Giraldi doesn't seem to
understand is that even though Trump is an idiot etc. look at the Democrats and what does the
populace see? For many they see that he is less evil than all the Democrats running.
Once again this seems like a rather naive analysis from someone with the credentials of
Giraldi.
@obwandiyag I wonder why
Obama, the Clintons, Bush 1&2, etc. get no "good reasons to impeach" list.
Trump is small beer in comparison. Generally you do good work, Phil Giraldi, but this time
your avoiding the big picture . while you ignore the 2016 alternative, Hillary.
First I was glad to see Tlaib had the smarts to tell the Likudniks to pound sand with
their new invitation. It would to me, quickly evolve into a fiasco (probably as soon as she
got off her flight). Good move by the Rep. If this is a zero-sum game, she wins not
Trump/Netanyahu.
I see no stomach for impeachment during the election cycle. As well as no chance for a
senate conviction. Vile crook that he is, he was elected. Now it's up to voters to make that
decision again. Yes on a personal level he's terrible but if we are lucky he won't do
catastrophic damage. Like Bush.
# As an aside just a note on Sen. Gillibrand calling for forgiveness in the cases of Al
Franken and Mark Halperin. The NY'er is a skilled politician but this is a bit too obvious.
Would she be calling for second chances if their surnames were Smith and Jones? I don't think
so. Not in the current atmosphere of 'me to.'
She was doing this to make amends for damage done to her among liberals and Jews. Not
because she has second thoughts, about whether she was wrong about them initially.
I agree with Mr. Giraldi entirely on this matter. Unfortunately, given that the
Democratic Party is determined to present voters with less than reasonable alternatives, I am
fully confident that we will be enjoying another four-year term with this imbecilic, Zionist
bootlick as our head-of-state .
My take on Trump is that he knows something that not every politician knows: to bring down
those who are the greatest threat to your country, you sometimes have to give them all they
want and more, after which you'll shed crocodile tears at the news of their demise. Just give
them more rope!
Interesting article (as usual) by Philip Giraldi. I'm not sure that I'm ready to throw in the
towel on Trump however -- though I'm getting close.
As for Trump, he is far more of a leader and independent thinker than his VP, so the idea
of having Zio-devout, 'end-of-times' Pence take over for Trump seems rash.
But it is true that Trump -- like every President since LBJ -- has become an
obsequious waterboy for the Zionist mafia. For me, this marks Trump's greatest failure.
Wasn't he going to 'Make America Great Again'? How can a nation be great if it is not
sovereign?
Trump is manifesting some of the usual, toxic symptoms and embracing some of the bizarre,
extra-national 'values' that make a politician 'mainstream' in America.
These values include 1) eager capitulation to the Zionist community involving all 'matters
of concern' to World Jewry, and 2) don't forget the first part.
These crypto-Zionist 'values' however cause immense and toxic distortions in US policies,
our nation's intellectual climate, and American culture in general. This is no small matter.
As a consequence, the issue of oversized Jewish influence in the West is not supposed to be
addressed -- much less critically examined and dealt with.
If a problem cannot be addressed, how can it be understood and contained?
It can't.
... ... ...
Exhibiting a 'hostility' towards Israel or discharging a virulent 'whiff' of anti-Semitism
can easily become a political death sentence. This is power. This is Jewish-Israeli
power.
Americans exist in a heavily monitored, strategically censored, post-Holocaust,
pro-Zionist, white-guilt-tripping, fabricated kosher wonderland. Therefore, do say the
right thing. Never say the wrong thing. Never. Indelicate speech has how been
criminalized. That's BAD.
Preemptive bombing and wholesale annihilation on the other hand has been sanctified.
Democracy! It's all very strange and twisted. But perfectly normal now.
If nothing else, 'reckless and insane' Trump's steady and deliberate subservience
to the Zionist establishment proves how astonishingly powerful they are.
Mike certainly has some interesting Christian Zionist views about the end of the world,
but how could he possibly be worse than Donald Trump?
You've answered your own question. A guy with interesting views about the end of the
world probably shouldn't be put in a position where he could actually end it.
I believe that threshold has finally been crossed. It was crossed last Thursday when
President Trump telephoned either Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or some other senior
Israeli government official before, one hour later, tweeting the following .
Not a crime, not an impeachable offence.
The other perspective, and why the president should be impeached, is that Trump's
decision was, as usual, to propagate a disgusting and deliberate lie
Impeaching a politician for lying; now that's rich!
that is also extremely damaging to actual United States interests as well as to our form
of government.
Trump would be at the end of a very long line if you are talking about his collaboration
with Israel.
beneath the dignity of the Office of the President.
Still no crime or impeachable offence there. Dignity of the Office of the President? The
Rubicon was crossed a long time ago.
And if you need more good reasons to impeach Donald Trump, here they are .
Business as usual for US Presidents for at least 70 years, perhaps at least 120 years.
Under the principles of equity, these would not justify impeachment.
I must disagree with Mr. Giraldi on this one. Trump is smart like a fox. He KNOWS the
machinations and dirty dealings of the jews as he has had to deal with jews all of his life.
There is a saying: "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer". It is possible that
Trump is doing just that.
Trump KNOWS that the "deep state" is real and has "eliminated" those who do not "toe the
line" and is smart enough to know that. Trump's "weak spot" is the appointment of his
son-in-law Kushner to handle his "foreign policy" arrangements. All in all, Trump IS "getting
things done".
With any other president but Trump, you would be doing Israel's fighting
I really hate to admit this but you may be correct. I do think Trump is anti-war. But
he's too erratic and nobody should trust him. Netanyahu is gaming him but I don't think he
trusts Trump either. Bottom line is Trump doesn't think spending the money is worth it
and not even the Israel lobby can convince him (we hope). Bottom line is everyone who deals
with him thinks he's nuts. Sooner or later that's going to catch up and bite us.
@Olifant So that's how
44D chess is played? You give the enemy so much support and resources that they just seize up
from all the goodies? Sounds legit.
Man, I wish I was smart enough to play on that level.
@Rich Yes I agree, it's
all about the Benjamin's. Neither of the two women are anti-white or anti-American but it
sounds like you in fact are a racist, just like Trump.
Holy smokes is there a lot of MAGA boomers railing in defence of Trump. The orange clown
should have been booted out of office on the very day he invited the swamp to infest his
government.
@Olifant It is this
idiotic hope that puts you on equal footing with any Clintonista, Bushie, Obama Maniac or
Drumpfter.
They are all the same idiotic "believers". No. Trump is owned lock, stock and barrel by
Chabad sect. To suggest anything different is foolish or obvious deception.
-- France wants cooperation with Russia.
-- Germany wants cooperation with Russia.
-- Russia should rejoin G8, according to these European countries.
-- American's hubris is now plain to see for everyone.
-- Israel's hubris is now plain to see for everyone.
-- We are not going to buy expensive American LNG.
-- Our gas will not flow through Ukraine.
Before Trump this was unthinkable! I don't know how that would work out with Pence.
Changing foolishness for pure evil is risky. Please let us hate Trump but don't get rid of
him!
@Wally What is the point
of giving reasons to impeach the Clintons and Bushes, when it is Trump who is the incumbent
of the White House? Your post makes absolutely no sense and seems little more than a feeble
attempt at giving cover in regard to Trump's erratic behaviour.
Trump letting the neocons back into the White House, particularly giving the egregious Bolton
the NSA chair, was a much more momentous event than mean tweets or interference in the Squad
Qwainz travel plans. Syria and Iran sabre-rattling and ham-fisted destabilization efforts in
Venezuela and Hong Kong are a lot worse than this as well. None of it is impeachment-worthy.
Phil's venting here. No one's more critical of Trump's Zio-cucking than I am, but talking
about impeachment over this or any of the other aggregate offenses he lists isn't serious.
Phil's not writing a Hopkins Russiagate /sarc piece but it comes across like one.
The entire US Congress is Israeli-occupied territory (h/t Pat Buchanan). Mossad's latest
blackmailer of America's Davos-tier was just strangled to death in custody. If Zio-cuckery is
impeachable, we might as well call a new constitutional convention and send all three
branches packing. That's the ugly truth and worrying over the Qwainz is just a trivial
sideshow distraction for the cucks and anti-cucks alike.
November 2020 is roughly 15 months away. I watched a Trump rally on Fox the other night. He
was sharp as a razor. Even when speaking impromptu on a few subjects, he didn't misspeak or
struggle for or with words. One might not like a great deal of what he does, but he is quite
in control of his faculties.
@Kelso Agreed. Tulsi
needs to get off the fence and make a clear statement regarding Israel and her own plans, if
any, to deal with Zionist influence on the US gov.
It's not President Trump that needs impeaching, it's the entire Federal Government that
should be excised from the planet. It's the system, not any particular individual that's the
real problem. It's the concentration of power and the usurpation of control by unelected
bureaucrats commonly referred to as the 'deep state' that threatens the entire world.
"The way to get rid of corruption in high places is to get rid of high places." -- Frank
Chodorov
Get rid of Trump and a new moron will take his place. We need to get rid of the Nancy
Pelosi's and the Chuck Shumer's along with the monstrosities like the NSA, CIA, Air Force,
Army, Raytheon, etc so the people of the 50 states can separately decide on how they want to
proceed. It is the monopoly of the Fed Gov that's the real problem not any particular
pinhead.
Impeachment is inherently political and there are plenty of good reasons to impeach Trump
as there were to impeach Obama, Bush II, Clinton and for that matter such all time greats as
Lincoln and FDR. There are better reasons not to impeach him. If impeachment fails it paves
the way for a backlash that would lead to Trump's re-election by a landslide and more
subservience to Israel than ever.
If it succeeds, he is followed by Pence and more subservience to Israel than ever. And
if a Democrat other than Tulsi Gabbard gets elected in 2020, keep in mind that the Democratic
establishment is solidly pro-Israel as well. Only among some of the Democratic rank-and-file
is there any opposition to doing the bidding of the Israeli government.
Pence could be much worse than Trump; he could be Trump unleashed to do what Trump only
threatened. Trump is just the tail of the dog anyway. It is the power of the deep state that
needs to be diminished, and there are many peaceful ways to accomplish that.
Trump is a wholly owned promoter of zionism and a puppet of the zionists who has sold out
America and Americans who thought they were getting a change from the warmongers and the MIC
and the zionist control over the zio/US government only to find they elected a Trojan Horse
of zionism who will do anything his zionist overlords tell him to do.
JFK was the last patriot POTUS and that is why he was shot in full view of the American
people, shot as an example that the satanic overlords of America were still in charge!
If interested read the book JFK, the CIA and Vietnam by Col. L. Fletcher Prouty, can be
had on amazon.
@Lot Attacking Israel
involves attacking the system which supports Israel. It is 1 pragmatic . It is 2 moral and 3
ethical to do so when it is found out that these forces have been lassoed roped penned and
put into serving parasitic Israel 24/7 . At least the offspring of the skates will have a
better future .
@Charles Martel I told
you not to read that Scofield Bible again but you didn't listen . Not only that you also sat
down bowed head listening to fat misshaped Hagee in your local CUFI outlet . Don't do that .
Get some crayons and start drawing Star of David on your viagra worked dick . There is
Canadian nurse who I knew in Detroit , used to talk a lot about My Brothers Keeper . May be
she also knew the real keeper Epstein . Lot of kept .
No one (who I ever hear or read) who claims Trump should be impeached knows what that even
means. Similarly to being indicted, being impeached means a political figure stands trial.
Being impeached guarantees nothing -- Bill Clinton was impeached and naturally it turned into
a farce, whether he was provably guilty of what he was accused or not. Even more importantly
there's the little matter of having a REASON to impeach. Hating an individual -- even when
that person is an oddball, as is certainly the case with Trump -- because that person behaves
eccentrically in your eyes is not and never will be "impeachable".
Phil, here's the thing: on the evil scale of 1 to 10 Trump is a 9.5, but everyone else around
him is a 9.9 or 10. So we are stuck with the fool for now.
Accidental war is possible but the trend is towards more shouting and screaming followed by
climb down. Unless Pompeo fat or Bolton walrus drown accidentally or intentionally in some
Israeli supplied water , war remains a possibility , Even the frowning might not help . It
can be blamed on Iran . Israel might supply the water if it feels Pomeo might get tired of
being told what to do and start telling the truth behind war against Iran .
The real concern is recession . If that hurts Trump's re-election , he might do something
stupid . He might buy the water from Israel with trillions of dollars ( just the advice on
how to initiate the war against Iran but AIPAC-Likud charges for that ) and drown the USA .
There is no climbdown. Iran will be in ruins . Trump will be the president . America has seen
it's last president .
Another ' Richard Pearle ' will say to Americans "Pompeo and Bolton didn't do the job and
Neither Trump did as was told . They didn't listen . We tried to help but they couldn't carry
out . They are not Roosevelt Churchill or Reagan . We were mistaken , "
Trump has not broken any laws, even though his behavior is inappropriate. Even if he colluded
with Russia during the 2016 presidential campaign, he did not break any laws in doing so.
Even though his collaboration with Israel is inappropriate, he did not break any laws in
collaborating. Neither in the case of collaborating with Russia nor with Israel did he commit
treason against the USA or accept illegal campaign contributions from their governments,
which would be the only way the collaboration would be illegal. So there is no legal basis on
which to impeach him. Additionally, there is a principle of sovereign immunity that, in fact
if not in theory, has some limited application to the president, it would not be possible to
successfully remove a president from office, even if he was guilty of a crime, unless it was
an extremely serious one. So trying to impeach Trump would be a complete waste of time.
Impeaching Trump would be even more ridiculous than impeaching Clinton was.
And the CANNON FODDER occupation of the shithole Afghanistan will continue apace during the
reign of the OLD FARTING BOOMER GRANNY POTUS Elizabeth Warren .on the advice of Irish Skank
Samantha Powers and the midget mulato negro Susan Rice .
Sorry you Goys are all doomed. The next president ,Democrat or the orangegutan will continue
to bow before the real emperor, Netanyahu.
The only way to get rid of virus of Zionism is to implement a real American constitutional
government where loyalty will be 100% to the US and not to foriegn governments. Best of luck
to all of you Goys.
@Wally I concur, Wally,
exept for your use of the term "small beer." Love him or hate him, there's nothing small beer
about Mr. Trump.
It seems to me that those advocating for Trump's impeachment could, unwittingly, guarantee
his re-election. Most, I think, don't like a legally elected president to be impeached over
policy differences. Using that criteria, every president could be impeached.
Mr. Giraldi asks if VP Pence could "possibly be worse than Donald Trump." Emphatically I
say that he not only COULD be, but quite likely WOULD be. One example: Trump should have
never sent such a huge naval presence into the Persian Gulf, but, who knows, Pence may have
done so even sooner. And, after that Iranian shoot down of the US drone, would Pence, an
Israel-first neocon in good standing, have held back from retaliating?
Lastly, I find it a little odd that Mr. Giraldi uses the Omar/Tlaib incident as grounds
for impeachment. Trump was ill-advised to say what he did (sadly a nearly daily occurrence),
but that seems like a minor incident, similar in severity to the republicans ridiculous
attempt to impeach Clinton over lying about Lewinsky's semen stained blue dress. The easy way
to get rid of Trump is the way this country usually does it -- vote him out of office at the
ballot box, not make him a martyr by trying to get rid of him a few months before next
November's election. Besides, the Senate will never convict.
In regards to impeachment, we patriots are screwed, Pence is just as bad as Trump , and in
regards to the elections for POTUS , the demon-rats and the republi-cons are the same zionist
controlled bullshit, until Americans wake up to that fact, nothing will change. The
demon-rats are the zio/US version of the bolsheviks and the republi-cons are a farce!
rich: abundant possessions, especially material wealth.
selfish: unquiet with one's own well-being without regard for others.
beggar: one who lives by asking for gifts or charity.
Now Trump has done more for Israel as per request of Israel, US media and some in Israeli
media are blaming Trump for wrecking"bipartisan support" to Israel and for endangering
"special relationship"
Thats the way Zionist work . They prod they force they bribe or blackmail and get the
things done .Then they blame the perpetrator for doing what Israel has been asking them them
do.
Iran war will be another example of 'wrecking bipartisan relationship" or "special
relationship being endangered " by the Zionist media because of the danger of Israel would be
pointed out correctly to be the mastermind to be the payer to be the controller to be the
open and only figure forcing some corrupt lawmakers do it
@anon Warning: prions in
camel steaks have an adverse effect on peoples' brains to the extent that they can't frame a
coherent thought. Lay off the steaks!
Haven't you Bush-Cheney-Trump Republicans noticed that every four years Americans rent a
pig in a poke for the next four years.
Four years later, the voters can extend the rental or rent a new pig.
No accountability, other than impeachment, which like the presidential election, is
political.
By impeaching Sheldon Adelson's pet pig, Americans hold the Bitter Twitter accountable for
risking an accidental or insane nuclear exchange with Russia. Hold him accountable for
exploding the national debt to create an asset bubble for the finance racket. And hold him
accountable for flooding the country with legal and illegal immigrants and prisoners released
to keep up with the Kardashians.
That's why Philip Giraldi is right about impeachment. Where his critics show their
ignorance is their certainty that the process automatically leads to Pence. It could easily
lead to the Nixon alternative. The bipartisan impeachment of Nixon was the last step of a
negotiated deal as Watergate unfolded. First Agnew resigned. Then Nixon and the House made
Gerald Ford vice president. "We gave Nixon no choice but Ford," House Speaker Carl Albert
recalled later (Ford's Wikipedia page).
In the last act, Tricky Dick resigned in return for a pardon. The danger of Pence begs for
a similar outcome.
-- Comparatively speaking, Trump is indeed small beer next to the warmongering of Hillary
'forcefully ending the Russian presense in Syria' Clinton, for example.
-- And while Trump blusters about places like Iran, he's nowhere close to McCain school of
'attack now, ask questions later'.
-- Trump's "sending" of naval forces is hardly the same as actually attacking with those
forces.
-- BTW, the impeachment of Clinton was based upon his lying under oath concerning his
sexual abuse of Gennifer Flowers, not about his semen on Lewinsky.
-- Trump's re-election is guaranteed. Hell, he now has a +50% rating with Hispanics and
there are more & more some blacks who are tired of being on the neo-Marxist plantation
and are seeing through their game.
Well Doc Giraldi, as an outsider, I understand your disgust and change of tack. However,
although I don't know about Tlaib, she seems rather sensible, unlike her three insane allies.
Also, Omar is a multiple violator of your U.S. immigration law. That is a fact. Easy to
ascertain. It is only by many others of the same stripe being dumped in the same area, many
also liars, and I would not doubt, many voters intimidated by people with whom she is
conected (the large Somali population dumped there and/or brainwashing, from mainly Jewish
sources) other voters had no say in her election.
So. impeach Trump on the grounds you state, it would be great for your USA. It would never
be permitted. He is the greatest dupe of your colonial masters in Israel to date. You would
know that. Likewise, ejection of Omar from her seat and deportation for immigration fraud are
perfectly legal and sane, and will never happen.
I must have missed the part where Giraldi offered up a list of replacement politicians who,
as President, who could be relied upon to put illegal immigration on the front burner (until
Trump, that was a grand total of ZERO) ..rework the insane, suicidal sweetheart deal we had
previously arranged with China .and could credibly give Israel and its countless agents,
apologists and apparatchiks throughout the West, what-for.
All things considered, two out of three ain't bad.
Hey, nobody (except the neverTrumpers who intend to shit all over him and his family the
very moment he's out of office, the same as any michaelmoore would) is happy about
Trump's kowtowing to Team Shmuel certainly nobody in his "base" is crazy about this setup
.but I have the oddest feeling that Trump assiduously licks those Hebraic hindquarters as the
Cost of Doing Business (ie, the only reliable Assassination Insurance an American President
can hope to purchase).
In the end, it's all about the art of the deal; and from Robert Maxwell to Jeffrey Epstein
and all points between, history tells us that the greatest ability any power-broker can
demonstrate is survivability . Ask Bubba.
Trump and his opponents are all scum. Trump is a 'racist' in the sense that he favors Zionist
supremacism over the much-oppressed Palestinians. He also praises criminal blacks while
having done nothing for whites. But of course, NYT is okay with Trump's pro-Zionist bigotry.
@Buzz
Baldrin As I type this I am listening to Mike Pence lead an all-star cast to discuss the
Trump-PENCE space initiative (s), including the 6th branch of DoD, the Space Force.
It should be excitin g but it is terrifying: DoD is "unified" with the intelligence
agencies & space force -- to ensure a total, space-based surveillance state.
US will collaborate "with its allies" -- i.e. Israel. Pence's quasi-religious delusions,
and the broadly shared Abrahamic ideology: that Abrahamics possess the RIGHT idea, and have
not only the RIGHT but the obligation to impose that ideology on all mankind -- will have at
his ready access the most powerful & intrusive technology.
Those technologies will be militarized.
It would be a mistake to misunderestimate the ambition, cunning, and delusional vision of
Mike Pence.
@Realist "Trump
like most elected officials serves at the pleasure of the Deep State." If that were true,
there would have been no Spygate coup. The Deep State doesn't quite have the lock on US
elections you think it does.
I am actually thinking, Trump is a true gift. He keeps showing the US unmasked, raw, vile and
criminal as it is, and in good company with the criminal jewish entity.
What has been done for decades, masked and filtered away as democracy BS, freedom defending
BS, "american values" aka corruption, intimidation and threats, is becoming under Trump just
blatantly obvious for every one to see. The US administration are a mafia, a crime syndicate
that spreads tumors with its military.
With television cameras rolling, on February 12, 1999 the whole world watched as the
senators stood up to vote inside the chamber. 55 Senators voted "not guilty" on the charge
of perjury. The Senate split 50/50 against Clinton when it came to the charge of
obstruction of justice. This meant that the 2/3 majority was not achieved, the President
was acquitted and allowed to serve out the rest of his term of office up until January
2001.
A month later and twelve days after his get of Dodge card was given to him, the war on
Yugoslavia was put in place.
Twenty years ago in the early hours of March 24, 1999, NATO began the bombing of the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. "The operation was code-named "Allied Force " -- a cold,
uninspired and perfectly descriptive moniker" according to Nebosja Malic.
Impeachment is the branding rode for Z Puppet Presidents by the our warmongering ZUS
rulers. Our "presidents" are treated like cattle too, just like us little people.
"... Liberal use of the word "conspiracy" simply distorts reality. For instance, were founding fathers of America conspirators? They certainly worked against the established order; they must have been secretive, at least in the beginning-otherwise they would have been hanged; British crown surely looked on their activities as something malign, from their perspective. ..."
"... In American jurisprudence a "conspiracy" is a common felony charge, legally defined as collusion between at least two people to commit a criminal act – which could in itself merely constitute a misdemeanor. Just because people may openly indulge in such actions, presumably because they feel immune to prosecution, does not mean that they are not engaging in conspiratorial behavior. ..."
"... "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." – Voltaire ..."
The 'Enemy Outside' could be a legitimate American patriotic/nationalist reaction to foreign
domination of American foreign policy. This kind of argument is supported by well-researched
academic studies such as that of Mearshehimer and Walt as well as that of
James Petras who studied the Israel Lobby and its impact. Such hostile foreign domination
has been explored by various media outlets including Al Jazeera's exposé of the Israel
Lobby in both Britain and the USA . The current American
administration and its biased policy in favour of Israeli positions gives credence to those who
see Israel as the 'enemy outside.' Yet, none of the above has 'conspired' behind the scenes.
All is done in the open. You just can't discuss it in the open.
... ... ...
In my recent book Being in Time
, I argue that Jews tend to dominate the discourses that are relevant to their existence and
interests. I refer to it as Jewish survival instinct. Jewish activists and intellectuals also
tend to dominate the dissent to problematic symptoms associated with their group identity: Jews
are often, for instance, associated with capitalism, banking and wealth in general, and Jews
are also equated with Marxist and socialist opposition to capitalism, banking and wealth.
Obviously, many Jews are associated with the Jewish State and the Zionist project but it is no
secret that Leftist Jews also dominate the anti Zionist discourse and politics. Jews, at least
in the eyes of some, are leading pro immigration advocates. But some of the most vocal anti
immigration and anti Muslim campaigners are also
Jewish. In Being in Time I argue that the fact that Jews dominate both polls of pretty much
every topic relevant to their existence isn't necessarily 'conspiratorial.' It is only natural
for ethical and humanist Jews to oppose Zionism, or Wall Street. It is also natural based on
their history, for Jews as a group to simultaneously oppose and support immigration. Natural as
it may be, the presence of Jews in key ideological, political, cultural and financial positions
is undeniable. It is more than likely that their domination on both sides of so many crucial
political debates invites conspiratorial thoughts.
Jewish economist Murray Rothbard contrasts "deep" conspiracy theories with "shallow" ones.
According to Rothbard, a shallow theorist observes an event and asks, who benefits? He or she
then jumps to the conclusion that the posited beneficiary is responsible for covertly
influencing events. Under this theory, Israel benefiting from the events of 9/11 made it into a
prime suspect. This is often a completely legitimate strategy and is exactly how detective and
investigative researchers operate. In order to identify the culprit, they may well ask who
would benefit from the crime. Of course this is only a first step towards substantiation.
According to Rothbard the "deep" conspiracy theorist begins with a hunch and then seeks out
evidence. Rothbard describes deep conspiracy theory as the result of confirming whether certain
facts actual fit one's initial 'paranoia.' This explanation pretty much describes a lot of how
science works. Any given scientific theory defines the realm of facts that may support or
refute its validity. Science is a deductive reasoning process, so that in science, it is the
theory that defines the relevance of the evidence. Would Rothbard describe Newtonian physics as
'deeply conspiratorial'? I doubt it. My guess is that, bearing Rothbard in mind, attributing a
'conspiratorial nature' to a theory is an attempt the deny the relevance of the evidence it
brings to light.
If for instance, the theory that Epstein was a Mossad agent is 'conspiratorial,' then the
facts that he was a business partner of Ehud Barak and
involved in a company that uses Israeli military intelligence tactics become irrelevant. The
same applies to former Federal Prosecutor Alex Acosta's admission that Epstein belonged to
intelligence and that was why he was the beneficiary of a laughable plea deal. If, for
example, the theory that it was the Jews who led the 1917 Bolshevik revolution is
'conspiratorial,' then the facts regarding the demography that led
the revolution and its criminal nature are of no
consequence. The labelling of a theory as conspiratorial is an attempt to erase uncomfortable
evidence by reprioritising the relevance of certain facts.
It seems that Rothbard and others have failed to produce categorical criteria to identify or
define Conspiracy Theories. We may have to accept that as of now, there is no categorical
standard to define a conspiracy theory. We may have to learn to live with the fact that some
theories are superior; simpler and more elegant than others. We will have to accept that some
of these theories make a few people pretty uncomfortable and they will explore every avenue to
discredit such theories and their authors. Attributing a conspiratorial nature to an
explanatory theory is just one of these methods.
Another great article by Gilad which shines a much-needed light on why people who question
the official version of reality must be demonized. Group think must be imposed on all the
wayward sheep if they are to be herded off to market.
Reminds me of a quip "The Jews definitely don't run the media, banking system, or dominate
politics; and don't you dare argue they do or they'll deplatform you, lock you out of payment
systems, and get legislation passed against you."
It is only natural for ethical and humanist Jews to oppose Zionism, or Wall Street.
How are Zionism and the Wall Street banker Jews connected? Does the author understand that
Zionism is the opposite to internationalism? That Zionism is the call to resettle all Jews in
Palestine?
All these neo-Nazi thinkers using the word Zionism for something else disturb me. Zionism
is a natural ally to White supremacy, can't you see? Zionists literally support cleansing
White countries out of all Jews!
Another boon to that strategy is that it would be incredibly easy to enact the Final
Solution when their entire race lives on a few square kilometres of a far-away desert. Just
choose the appropriate weather conditions when the wind blows to another desert.
Disclaimer: I use the words "neo-Nazi", "racism" and "White supremacy" with an obviously
positive meaning. Modern kids understand far more things than in the late previous century,
but these words (including "Zionism") still scare and escape them.
Zionism is the call to resettle all Jews in Palestine
Wrong on several accounts. Zionism is the political wing of international finance. That is
why the Jewish embezzlers send all of the money there, and flee there.
Zionism is not about Palestine, it is about Eretz Israel – from the Nile to the
Euphrates, and South into Jordan and Saudi Arabia. It is about controlling the oil reserves
in that area, which, at the time Zionism was formed, was the world's largest known oil
reserves. That is why Israel has never declared its borders, and refuses to do so.
Gilad, surely you know that the "theory conspiracy" is the most sinister conspiracy of them
all. Once consigned to theory, an explanation of events becomes an easy target for any party
threatened by its potential influence.
Last I checked, the CIA doesn't hold any copyright for it.
@j2 I hope you realize that when Jewish people read your post they are thinking you are
from another planet, that is the conspiracy. They scratch their collective heads.
Most Jews are trying to get thru the day like you, figuring out how to earn a living and
maybe go on vacation. Personally I have not been on one in 15 years I am so stressed about
supporting myself in the arts.
You do realize you are mentally ill? Jews do not have time to conspirer against anyone. Would
you have time to create intentional chaos in the world to take it over?
I like the Neo Nazis more then the conspiracy crazies, they just hate Jews for no reason. Not
like you with your invasion of the body snatchers scenario.
@Gilad Atzmon The mentioned Murray Rothbard said of Revisonism:
"Revisionism has the general function of bringing historical truth to a public that had
been drugged by wartime lies and propaganda.
Now revisionism teaches us that this entire myth, so prevalent then and even now about
Hitler, and about the Japanese, is a tissue of fallacies from beginning to end. Every plank
in this nightmare evidence is either completely untrue or not entirely the truth. If people
should learn this intellectual fraud about Hitler's Germany, then they will begin to ask
questions, and searching questions, about the current World War III version of the same
myth. Nothing would stop the current headlong flight to war faster, or more surely cause
people to begin to reason about foreign affairs once again, after a long orgy of emotion
and cliché.
For the same myth is now based on the same old fallacies. And this is seen by the
increasing use that the Cold Warriors have been making of the "Munich myth": the
continually repeated charge that it was the "appeasement" of the "aggressor" at Munich that
"fed" his "aggression" (again, the Fu Manchu, or Wild Beast, comparison), and that caused
the "aggressor," drunk with his conquests, to launch World War II. This Munich myth has
been used as one of the leading arguments against any sort of rational negotiations with
the Communist nations, and the stigmatizing of even the most harmless search for agreement
as "appeasement." It is for this reason that A.J.P. Taylor's magnificent Origins of the
Second World War received probably its most distorted and frenetic review in the pages of
National Review.
The task of revisionism has been to penetrate beneath these superficialities and
appearances to the stark realities underneath -- realities which show, certainly in this
century, the United States, Great Britain, and France -- the three great "democracies" --
to be worse than any other three countries in fomenting and waging aggressive war.
Realization of this truth would be of incalculable importance on the current scene.
For revisionism, in the final analysis, is based on truth and rationality. Truth and
rationality are always the first victims in any war frenzy; and they are, therefore, once
again an extremely rare commodity on today's "market." Revisionism brings to the artificial
frenzy of daily events and day-to-day propaganda, the cool but in the last analysis
glorious light of historical truth. Such truth is almost desperately needed in today's
world."
– Righteous Jew, Murray Rothbard, Review of The Origins of the Second World War,
1966 http://mises.org/daily/2592
Yes, there's considerable truth to your point. But, I it ignores the issue
of "organised jewry/zionism". This minority within a minority basically exists to push the
Israel/Jewish interest.
AIPAC is a good example. Soros, the gambling billionaire & the
Power Rangers guy are also examples.
"Average" Jew's may or may not give support to such entities.
@Adûnâi "That Zionism is the call to resettle all Jews in Palestine?"
The goals of zionism included the establishment of a nation, but it doesn't follow that
resettling all jews there is another goal. The primary goal is the establishment of control
over all other nations by this one nation established supposedly as a homeland for jews.
That would seem to involve keeping the diaspora jews in place in other countries.
I hate the word "conspire." It only takes people acting in consensus to
cause harm, and while acting only in consensus, instead of conspiracy, may remove moral
culpability, harm may still be inflicted.
The angry wasps who sting you are not conspiring, only acting in consensus to fulfill the
biologic imperative to protect the nest, but they can nonetheless cause harm.
As usual, interesting, but not quite satisfactory article.
I don't find Walker's 5 points convincing at all. Simply, this is a bad model. As for
Rothbard's "deep conspiracy"- this is a word-juggling, nothing more. It is better to stick to
usual definitions one can find in ordinary media, for instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory
To be a conspiracy, you have to have:
* small group of conspirators, some kind of secret society (whether an individual would
qualify?)
* their activity being illegal or against the law
* sinister motives & goals
Liberal use of the word "conspiracy" simply distorts reality. For instance, were founding
fathers of America conspirators? They certainly worked against the established order; they
must have been secretive, at least in the beginning-otherwise they would have been hanged;
British crown surely looked on their activities as something malign, from their
perspective.
But all revolutionary movements & most social activities share these traits simply
because such are human nature & societies.
Hardcore conspiratorial world-view is something else. It posits at least two dogmas: a)
everything is not as it looks like, the consensus social reality is, somehow, appearance, b)
everything that happens has a cause, nothing is coincidental, random etc.
GA has enumerated many so called conspiracies (fake Moon landing, 9/11, Protocols of
Elders, Jewish activism in human rights era ..). I doubt those historical (non)events have
much in common.
So was Epstein's case some kind of conspiracy?
Secrecy? Well, he was quite open about many things, but evidently Lolita express was not
publicized. The fact is that he had hidden those underage prostitution activity, not to speak
about possible money laundering & perhaps Mossad connection. So- check.
Against the law & illegal ? Check.
Sinister? Check.
So, I would say that Epstein case, as is usual with prostitution rings & shady
financial deals & all other dirt was a conspiracy. But it is not a conspiracy theory yet.
Such sleazeball activity has been with us from the beginning. It would be much bigger if it
really involved spying, intelligence, blackmail or something similar.
Most so called conspiracy theories are nothing like "conspiracy", but reflect trends in
societies which ruling classes, from their own interests, try to manipulate with. Unz has
written extensively about that (McCain & Vietnam prisoners silence; FBI & Sibel
Edmonds,..)- see http://www.unz.com/article/our-american-pravda/
I think we need a more precise term, otherwise it is not more than a world-view of an
obscurantist paranoiac.
For obvious reasons Jews are alarmed by theories that focus on their politics, culture,
religion, folklore etc. It seems that Jewish bodies have been sufficiently forceful to
silence most attempts to criticise Jewish and Israeli politics. That leads to the question
of why Jews, Zionism, Judaism and Jewishness are so often the subject of conspiratorial
theories.
Not very obvious to someone like you, who fits every concoction you can think of, then
wraps it into a philosophy or mathematical theorem to help you sell it to the pseudo
intelligent Jew haters, allowing you to escape the Neo Nazi racists. You use your
intellectual prowess to hide your sadistic joy at watching the destruction of the Jewish
people, which proves your theory:
Behold the set up of the world and its non Jews (by the Jews) for their own gain thru an
elaborate plot created by their god who chose them. Everything in the world is set in motion
by this plot of the chosen.
The Jews were involved in the greatest conspiracy the world has ever known. The killing
of the savior of the world, the son of god . I think you can cut to the chase scene by
saying that all conspiracy theories from that time on involving the Jews were based on a
version of that plot, which also involved the Romans as co conspirators.
So the conspiracy is baked into the cake of the Jewish story. That is why it is forbidden
to discuss Jewish conspiracy theories. It took Vatican 2 to finally let go of the Roman
Catholic conspiracy of the Jews killing Christ, and put the blame on the Romans.
Zionism was an attempt to center the Jewish existence to a land and their own political
universe, so as to be able to control their own narrative, removing them from Christian
Europe.
Your conspiracy is hyper conspiratorial as only Jewish conspiracies interest you, nothing
tangential or counter conspiratorial to the Jews will ever work. You manipulate to come to
the same conclusion over and over. Ever wonder what an Islamic conspiracy theory would look
like?
Your one conspiracy theory regarding the Jews is tainted with craziness.
I suspect that one is allowed to deviate from the official narrative and speculate on
hidden plots on any given topic except probably the Jewish related ones.
Hello that is all anyone talks about!!. This site is dedicated to Jewish conspiracy
theories.
What fucking planet do you live on?
It is all a locked and loaded emotional story for you. Your writings contain no logic like
your Athens model. To me you are a total nut job.
Even us little nobodies have to be careful regarding "conspiracies". When i started my
current job 3 yrs ago i made the mistake of taking a book on 9/11 out of my bag and it was
sitting on my desk. The little jerk who sat in front of me saw it and immediately typed the
author and title into a search engine .and BaMB! There it was the author was a hollowcost
denier, he informed me!! After that he was colder than he had been before and other
co-workers gave me dirty looks so I know the little jerk went off and gossiped on me. The guy
is christian zionist although he looks jewish and has a jewish last name.
Needless to say, I had a rocky first year and didn't quite fit in, which actually makes me
feel good. Who'd want to fit in with a place like that. Luckily, my stats were good enough to
qualify to work at home so I at least escaped that little butcher market of a workplace.
You never know how quickly you can be accused of being a Conspiracy theorist or worse. It
sneaks up on you when you least expect it.
@Wally Back in 1966 many Jews saw revisionism as a valid and even necessary outlook,,,
this changed when holocaust revisionism pointed at cracks in the Zionist H narrative .
@animalogic This is why I recommend to differentiate between Jews (the ppl), Judaism (the
religion) and Jewishness (ideology, politics and culture) I made a conscious choice not to
talk about 'the Jews' as I do not posses the means to study them as a group. I hardly speak
about Judaism as I am not an expert but i do criticise Jewishness: the culture, the politics,
the identity, the ideology Once we pass this stage we can also move forward and look into
'self identifying Jews' and examine what this means i.e. what exactly they identify with
however, the suggestion that 'Israel did 911' will get you
the following message at the link you provided:
" This account has been terminated due to multiple or severe violations of YouTube's
policy prohibiting hate speech. "
He operated in the open. I am afraid that there is not much evidence of Jewish
conspiracies.
In American jurisprudence a "conspiracy" is a common felony charge, legally defined as
collusion between at least two people to commit a criminal act – which could in itself
merely constitute a misdemeanor. Just because people may openly indulge in such actions,
presumably because they feel immune to prosecution, does not mean that they are not engaging
in conspiratorial behavior.
Maybe you could expand your limited (circular) definition of " Jewish Power "
– paraphrasing: the ability to prevent open discussion of Jewish power – to
include the ability to openly engage in conspiratorial acts without fear of legal
retribution.
"The Jews were involved in the greatest conspiracy the world has ever known. The killing of
the savior of the world, the son of god. I think you can cut to the chase scene by saying
that all conspiracy theories from that time on involving the Jews were based on a version of
that plot, which also involved the Romans as co conspirators. "
and concerning Atzmon:
"Your one conspiracy theory regarding the Jews is tainted with craziness."
You are sadly ignorant of the history of Jewish messianism. If you want to find crazy
people, you should study them and see how mentally ill some of your own people were. I give
you another lesson of the history of Jewish messianism, you will see that killing Jesus has
not been the source of the conspiracy theories of Jews.
Jews conspired against Rome for 600 years. Three times they started a war (66, 115 and
132), once they tried to build a temple (363) and once they joined Parsians in a war (614),
later they helped Muslims to conquer Spain in a conspiratoral manner, and also Levant. But
after they had lost to Heracleios, Jewish leaders considered having made a pact with gentile
kings (not only the Emperor of Byzantium) that Jews will not rebel against the king before
the time the Messiah comes. To justify this pact they referred to the Song of Songs, a
messianic text of the love of the Messiah and Israel, to the verse that the bride must not
wake up love before it is its time. That is, Jews never made any permanent promise to be
loyal to the king, it was just for the time. But there was to be the end of the times, the
time when the Messiah arrives. Many Messiah aspirants arrived, but none got wide support,
most were either magicians (David Alroy) or kabbalists (Abraham ben Abulafia). So up to the
time when British puritans got the crazy idea that American Indians are a Lost Tribe of
Israel. Finding the lost tribes meant the end of the times. Manesseh ben Israel supported
this interpretation and under British and Dutch Jewish influence Shabbatai Zevi started
preaching that he is the Messiah, the year was 1648. Over half of Jews believed in him, but
the mission failed. But it did not stop, it continued in two fronts. The less important was
Donmeh. Jacob Frank got his crazy idea of being the Messiah from Donmeh. The important front
was that European occultists, later to be Fremasons, accepted this idea. Some Jews joined
Freemasons. Some were converted Frankists, some were assimilated Jews. Some were powerful,
like Cremieux and Rothschild. This started the pre-Zionist conspiracy for creating Israel and
gaining world power.
I perfectly well understand that a secular Jew, who has rudimentary understanding of
Kabbalah and no knowledge of the history of Jewish messianism, like you, Fran Taubman, does
not know anything about this. But why do you write your nonsense comments and accuse other
people of crazyness when it is you who are remarkably ignorant of the religion and history of
your people?
My dear Fran, try to concentrate. I actually argue repeatedly in the piece above and through
my entire body of work that there are NO Jewish conspiracies! All is done in the open, from
AIPAC, to ADL, to Israeli criminality, to Epstein and the organised crime apparatus he was
part of the only thing we see evidence of is an orchestrated relentless attempts to suppress
the discussion of these topics. Far from being a great surprise, all you do on this thread
and others is just that, desperately trying to supress the discussion the J political,
cultural and identitarian symptoms
The impression one gets after watching the routine interviewing and watching the targeted
questions by the interviewers of those potentially guilty of a crime either in a police head
quarter or in s court are nothing but a conspiracy theory built around loose connections ,
possibilities, absence of better explanations and presence of reasons of economic, religious,
identity -based reasons , or based on emotions .
Often those who deride the ' conspiracy theorist' use the argument that no direct evidence
is seen or shown to exist .
With that argument a killer can also challenge the accuser "did you see me killing "
Conspiracy theory is also a theory that explains entirely or partly certain crimes .
Dismissing them is the best defense the criminal minds and their apologist can unfortunately
can employ often successfully.
@Gilad Atzmon Politely & patiently, and to Fran Taubman, Gilad Atzmon tried to (in
futility) explain:
" there are NO Jewish conspiracies! All is done in the open, from AIPAC, to ADL, to Israeli
criminality, to Epstein and the organised crime apparatus he was part of the only thing we
see evidence of is an orchestrated relentless attempts to suppress the discussion of these
topics."
Dear Gilad Atzmon,
Re; above, In my Amerika, the only example of Israeli accountability for evident
commitment of high (political) espionage crimes was Jonathan Pollard's arrest &
imprisonment.
Of course, contemporary Jewish lesser criminals, for examples, the (temporarily punished)
Marc Rich, Bernie Madoff, and Harvey Weinstein were held accountable to flexible & unjust
US law. Haha. Jeffrey Epstein almost had his day in US court.
The great elite Jewish advantage in western nations is unaccountability for their
crimes.
In my "Homeland," those routinely committed by AIPAC & the ADL are enshrined as
virtues.
Unaccountable to conscience, the ideologically blind & evangelical Fran Taubman, has
no need to "concentrate" on what intellectual advantage you try to give her.
Very sad because ever objective international Elders of Zion even recognize the fact of
prized-Jewish unaccountablity for the worst crimes ever committed against mankind. They are
likely grateful for having such "Crime & Punishment" exemption
The issue is the Jewish mind's 'unwillingness to consider criticism'. I
dated a woman like that. It was an impossible task to come to consensus. In her case it was
narcissism, in the Jewish case it is the Avodah Zarah of chosenness. After all – if you
are God chosen, why look inside for fault? All fault naturally is external to your blessed
self.
This is the problem. And this is where the downfall of the Jewish faith will come from.
After all, the only reform Judaism recognises is prophetic or messianic – entities
external to current Judaism that would force change on the unwilling. And given Christ's end,
and the prophets before – not sure many want to try this predictable path!
Most Jews I have ever met have been profoundly profoundly paranoid people
driven to bizzare behaviours by their covert animus against the people they live in the same
country with. They also without exception viewed the world as being us against them and this
was a world view over time that they were decidedly not capable of hiding even with their
best efforts.
By the way hasbara when you are going to point out that you are an ordinary Jewish person
who is so financially stressed she does not have the time to go on vacation you might want to
consider the fact that you have all the time in the world to get into paragraphs long
arguments in the comment section of *every single Gilad Atzmon article* . Kind of makes a
nonsense of your pretentions of being poor and stressed no? (An ordinary Jew lol-what even is
that, you yourself admit that they "scratch their collective heads' i.e that they are a
collective).
Anyway you should reconsider your piss poor defence of Jews. Just look at the comment
sections on Unz to see rampant Jewish ethnocentrism.
It is my belief that Epstein is alive and is in Israel, and since the zio/US is under the
control of zionists this fits the picture, and since the zionists got away with the attack on
the WTC on 911, they can get away with anything!
Zionism is not about Palestine, it is about Eretz Israel – from the Nile to the
Euphrates, and South into Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
I'd go one further, and state that Zionism is an agenda of global domination. Not just the Greater Levant, but N. America and Europe and everything else.
Whom, if not Zionists, are in control of the ZUSA in actual terms? Does the world's
remaining 'super-power' bomb nations all over the globe, sending myriad nations reeling into
the stone age, on behalf of Americans, or Zionists?
Ditto England and France and all the 'Five Eyes' nations.
Whom, if not Zionists, are the ones demanding that Germans (and many others) be imprisoned
for questioning any idiotic trope about WWII?
Is the West saber-rattling at Iran because Iran threatens the West? Or because Zionists
consider Iran to be inconvenient to their global hegemony and rapine?
One of the things that has amused me of late, is the hysteria over 'climate change'.
(((They)) soooo wanted their 'carbon tax', because that would have given them the
pretext to tax every last backwater on the planet. Power over everyone –
everywhere (in order to "save" the planet!)
Anyone who defied ((their)) power, would come under the global police force NATO (for the
sake of the planet!) and by force would be reminded who's in charge.
Who can doubt such is what happened to Gadhafi? He, (like Saddam) tried to defy their
power with his Gold Dinar, and was made an example of.
Such is the nefarious force (fiend) that Putin and Assad and the few remaining free
nations face daily.
They don't want to define their borders, because as they see it, the planet belongs
to them.
Very interesting. But take an example : Unz article on meritocracy showed how Jewish game the
system by having a strong over-représentation compared to merit and flooding the place
with ethnic so that at the end, they represent half of the whites.
But the reaction to that was far from " wide in the open ". They both tried to reduce
drastically the number of people counted as Jews – thanks to the polymorphic definition
of a jew – while reminding everyone they are just white.
And Harvard crimson has statistics about freshman about everything – SAT by race,
sexual orientation, being an athlete or being a legacy, but there is nothing about Jewish.
Wich is really not very " operating in the open " when you know the crowd there .
So Jews are perfectly able to operate in secret and distill theories to advance their
genetic interest while pretending it is done for other noble purposes. Take Ginsburg as a
paroxistic example : all life on minorities business. Only 1 black clerk out of 150 and two
third or more Jewish. She hasn't being bragging about that either .
I read an amusing Sorbonne master thesis from the 1910' written by a Jewish guy who
explained how The Jews – because of their universalism, kindness, and open heart
– helped the Indian during the far west against the Whites in all matters related to
trade and peace treaties. The Indian trusted them because they were amazed at their ability
to speak so many Indian languages (more than the Indian did) and understand their culture and
even make jokes and pronounce very profound and sacred sentences that would touch their
Indian heart and soul.
It didn't end well for them. I don't believe their were that stupid that the Jewish could
have tell them what was going to happen
One of the more interesting ironies is Fox News' and Conservatism Inc's use of "conspiracy
theory" to neutralize evidence revealing the deep state conspiracies that both Fox News and
Conservatism Inc claim to oppose.
They rule out unassailable evidence, regarding 911 for example, solely because it points
directly to Israeli and American deep state complicity, and in so doing they overturn Western
Civilization's thousand years' advance in reaching correct conclusions based on the evidence.
So much for their "conservatism."
They also constantly "poison the well," tarring unfavorable evidence by associating it
with with fringe insanity. And, not least, their elaborate efforts at concealing the truth of
911 provide powerful evidence of their guilt as co-conspirators of the deep state they
pretend to oppose.
The little jerk who sat in front of me saw it and immediately typed the author and title
into a search engine .and BaMB! There it was the author was a hollowcost denier, he
informed me!!..You never know how quickly you can be accused of being a Conspiracy theorist
or worse. It sneaks up on you when you least expect it.
Sorry to hear that happened to you.
Gotta wonder what the response might of been like if you'd had Orwell's 1984 openly
sitting on your desk instead.
Seriously, I wouldn't be half surprised if we don't see 1984 banned someday as hate
literature, ie 'hate lit', as it strikes too close to home.
'Thoughtcrime is a dreadful thing, old man,' he said sententiously. 'It's insidious. It
can get hold of you without your even knowing it..'
'Of course I'm guilty!' cried Parsons with a servile glance at the telescreen. 'You
don't think the Party would arrest an innocent man, do you?' His frog-like face grew
calmer, and even took on a slightly sanctimonious expression.
'Thoughtcrime is a dreadful thing, old man,' he said sententiously. 'It's insidious. It
can get hold of you without your even knowing it. Do you know how it got hold of me? In my
sleep! Yes, that's a fact. There I was, working away, trying to do my bit -- never knew I
had any bad stuff in my mind at all. And then I started talking in my sleep. Do you know
what they heard me saying?'
He sank his voice, like someone who is obliged for medical reasons to utter an
obscenity.
"Down with Big Brother!" Yes, I said that! Said it over and over again, it seems.
Between you and me, old man, I'm glad they got me before it went any further. Do you know
what I'm going to say to them when I go up before the tribunal? "Thank you," I'm going to
say, "thank you for saving me before it was too late."
@Sean McBride This may be obvious, but don't forget that the "official" narrative of 911
was itself a conspiracy theory.
In such cases it is the job of the intelligence community to provide "evidence" to support
_their_ conspiracy theory and to attack any other analysis as a "crazy conspiracy
theory".
Another example is the Oklahoma City bombing. The "official" theory was supported by the
intelligence community and their Mockingbird media. Anyone who attempted to question the
official narrative was denounced as a kook.
The intelligence community uses "events" to brainwash the public to accept their narrative
and accuse those who question it as conspiracy nuts.
I was personally involved in a close look at the Vince Foster "suicide" many years ago and
it fit the pattern. Witnesses were ridiculed and intimidated, researchers were attacked by
the major media, and the official narrative was passed into the history books.
The big picture "conspiracy" is simply intelligence community tradecraft. They have a
template and they use it over and over again:
–Create the "event" to eliminate enemies (or for other objectives like increasing
their budget and/or power)
–Use agents in the federal, state and local government, the law enforcement and
judicial agencies to control the "investigation"
–Use the mass media to disseminate the official narrative
–Use intimidation of non-official investigators (harassment to start, murder if
necessary)
–Use slander and arguments from authority to suppress dissenting views
Other examples of "events" include:
–Assassinations of JFK, RFK, MLK, attempted assassination of Reagan
–Mass shootings (including school shootings)
"I'd go one further, and state that Zionism is an agenda of global domination. Not
just the Greater Levant, but N. America and Europe and everything else."
Assuming it to be true,
Sounds like a concession to me. Well done. You're improving with your time spent here,
which lead us to this:
what are you doing to actively stop it other than commenting on a blog? Do you not have
a patriotic duty to head it off at the pass, even if it means making sacrifices? Is it not
about the cause? Are you not a true believer?
You see Corvy, I'm convinced that I've already done a great deal to heal your wounded
soul, and foster in you a newfound introspection that you've been sorely lacking.
So even tho I'm not Him, and willing to sacrifice myself to save humanity, I am
willing to do my part to be a light unto the world, so that, like a lighthouse in the storm,
lost souls like yourself can navigate their way to truth, which means beauty, which brings
meaning and love to a persons otherwise wretched and self-loathing existence.
Just seeing your progress here, is all the proof I need to know that I'm not wasting my
time here, and have done good works.
Soon you will be like a disciple, and go forth and spread the truth yourself. The
beautiful, often enigmatic, but always wondrous and miraculous.. truth.
And given Christ's end, and the prophets before – not sure many want to try this
predictable path!
In The
Poppy War R F Kuang explores power from numerous perspectives; in one insightful
conversation Rin is forced to realize that there is no power without pain.
In The Wondering Who, Atzmon focused on Esther as the model zionist. The Esther story
touches -- or introduces! -- several characteristics of Jewish power in USA / the world
today:
– alleged or pre-emptive victimhood
– working in secret to spy- controlling information in and information out : :
knowledge is power– Mordecai was able to insert Esther into the royal household based
on information gained by spying/snooping
– use of sexual activity in a perverted way, i.e. Esther used sexual attraction to gain
power but not to procreate (Rin had herself sterilized in order to become the perfect
'soldier'– gain power, which meant avoiding her fate if she did not acquire power:
marriage & sexual relations with an unpleasant man, in order to bear his children)
– decapitating the leadership of the Target and destroying their population, ability to
reproduce, and their culture
– religious or spiritual sentiments and even demands are cast aside in the pursuit of
political power
How current prices correlate with Pompeo statement that "We have taken over 95 percent of the
crude oil that was being shipped by Iran all around the world, and we have taken it off the
market." ? Something really strange is happening here.
Notable quotes:
"... Given these statements, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that Pompeo is not being entirely honest when he claims the maximum pressure campaign is succeeding. Rather than leveling with the American people and making an argument about why the administration is persisting with the policy in spite of the lack of progress, he has chosen to deceive the public in order to defend a dangerous policy. ..."
"... Pompeo has made a habit of deceiving the public as Secretary of State on a range of issues from Yemen to North Korea, but for the most part he has been allowed to get away with that. ..."
"... When Pompeo has been asked for proof that the sanctions are "working," he cannot point to any positive change in the Iranian government's behavior, and instead he boasts about the harm that has been done to Iran's economy and its people: ..."
"... We have taken over 95 percent of the crude oil that was being shipped by Iran all around the world, and we have taken it off the market. ..."
"... Pompeo is deception, lies, absolute dishonesty. But of course that is the mark of the trump regime in general terms. ..."
Given these statements, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that Pompeo is not
being entirely honest when he claims the maximum pressure campaign is succeeding. Rather than
leveling with the American people and making an argument about why the administration is
persisting with the policy in spite of the lack of progress, he has chosen to deceive the
public in order to defend a dangerous policy.
Pompeo has made a habit of deceiving the public as Secretary of State on a range of
issues from Yemen to North Korea, but for the most part he has been allowed to get away with
that. He probably thinks that there is no price to be paid for constantly lying and
misrepresenting things to the public and Congress, and so he keeps doing it.
The more important reason why Pompeo keeps deceiving the public is that he is also eager to
please the president, and so he has to keep claiming success for failing policies because
reports of success are what the president wants to hear. When Pompeo's ridiculous op-ed came
out last week, one of the common questions that many people asked was, "Who is the audience for
this?" The point these people were making was that the "argument" in the op-ed was so facile
and nonsensical that it can't possibly have been intended to persuade anyone, so the purpose of
it had to be to placate Trump and reassure him that the policy "works."
Miller does an outstanding job picking apart Pompeo's various claims and using Pompeo's
previous contradictory claims against him, and he shows that the Secretary's defense of
"maximum pressure" is a joke to any minimally informed person. But as far as Pompeo is
concerned, all that matters is that Trump sticks with the policy. When Pompeo has been
asked for proof that the sanctions are "working," he cannot point to any positive change in the
Iranian government's behavior, and instead he
boasts about the harm that has been done to Iran's economy and its people:
I remember, David – I'm sure no one in this room, but many here in Washington
said that American sanctions alone won't work. Well, they've worked.We have taken
over 95 percent of the crude oil that was being shipped by Iran all around the world, and we
have taken it off the market.
Miller addressed Pompeo's use of economic damage as proof of the policy's success this
way:
Using economic damage to gauge the success of sanctions is like using body counts to
measure success in counter-insurgency -- it's an indicator that your policy is having an
effect, but does not necessarily imply you're any closer to achieving strategic
objectives.
For a hard-liner like Pompeo, continuing with a destructive and bankrupt policy is a matter
of ideology and an expression of hostility towards the targeted country. It doesn't matter to
hard-liners if the policy actually achieves anything as long as it does damage, and so they
take pride in the damage that they cause without any concern for the consequences for the U.S.
and Iran. Rational critics of this policy rightfully object that this is just aimless
destruction, but the destruction is the point of the policy.
It only appears incompetent until you discover who benefits, and it isn't the majority of
Americans. Who has benefited so far? The Plutocrats, oligarchs, Israel, Saudi, MIC, Big Oil,
Big Rx, immigration related services. This is just a partial list, but guess who it doesn't
include?
Any nation that allows "freedom of speech" has made the assumption that either everyone is
honest or everyone is smart enough to know bull sh !t when they hear it.
It attests inventiveness and vicious amorality of neoliberals, who now promote the idea that criticizing neoliberalism and removing
Democratic party in the USA and Labor Party in the UK from clutches of Clintonism//Brairism is inherently Anti-Semitic ;-)
Israel lobby wants to extent the anti-Semitism smear to any critique of Israel. which is of course standard dirty trick in witch
hunts like neo-McCarthyism.
Notable quotes:
"... This, of course, is compounded by the over-amplifying of anti-Semitism by the media and the alacrity with which it has been taken up by Corbyn opponents, including hypocrites who floated "rootless cosmopolitan" criticisms of Ed Miliband when it suited just a few years ago. ..."
"... The resolution of the anti-Semitism crisis then is not a matter of compromise -- for each side the issue will only go away with the complete crushing and driving out of the party of the other. ..."
"... A good analysis. But, it emphasizes the point I made in the previous post, which is that, the right are currently engaged in an all out push to remove Corbyn and crush the left with the same old bureaucratic means. Whatever else Williamson may or may not be guilty of, his point that the leadership have facilitated this situation by their continual appeasement of the right is absolutely valid. Its that he is being attacked for, not anti-Semitism. ..."
"... Coming on the day when the FT have a column seriously positing that criticizing capitalism is inherently anti-Semitic, it seems to me that dancing on the head of a pin ..."
"... As many of the comments on your blog on Williamson attest, the salient feature of this - well, call it witch-hunt for the sake of argument - is the double standards where we have to be whiter than white, whilst no account whatsoever is taken of the most egregious racism elsewhere. ..."
"... The other nonsense that has grown up is that it is only those that suffer any form of discrimination who can define what that discrimination is, i.e. only Jews can define anti-Semitism, only black people can define racism against them, only women can define discrimination against women. ..."
"... That then assumes that the members of each of these groups are themselves homogeneous, and agreed in such definitions. In reality, it means that dominant elements, i.e. those connected to the ruling class and ruling ideas get to make those determinations. ..."
"... If we look at anti-Semitism, for example, it is quite clear that there is no agreement amongst Jews on what constitutes anti-Semitism. The JVL, certainly have a different definition than the JLM. ..."
"... Secker wrote a piece in the Morning Star last year comparing claims of anti-Semitism within Labour to the story of the emperor's new clothes. ..."
"... Given that the actual data, even allowing for all of the spurious and mischievous accusations of anti-Semitism in the party, made by right-wing enemies of the the party, and particularly of Corbyn and his supporters, amounts to only 0.1% of the membership, and given that of these, 40% were straight away found to be accusations against people who were not even LP members, with a further 20%, being found to have absolutely no evidence to back them, its quite possible that individual members of the LP, have never seen any instance of it. ..."
"... Take out all those mischievous and malicious allegations made in order to whip up the hysteria, so as to to damage the party, by its enemies, and you arrive at a figure of only 400 potential cases, out of a membership of 600,000, which is 1 member in 1500. ..."
"... In fact, based upon the actual facts, as opposed to the fiction and factional hysteria that is being whipped up by right-wing opponents of Corbyn and the party, and by supporters of Zionism for their own narrow political reasons, the chances are about 14: that you will never see any even potential instance of anti-Semitism, even on the narrow definition that the party has now imposed upon itself, which comes pretty close if not entirely to identifying anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism, or even just criticism of the current Bonapartist regime of Netanyahu. ..."
"... In the US, Jewish groups that have long been ardent defenders of Israel have more recently come out to criticize the regime of Netanyahu, and the actions of the Israeli state. The main defenders of Zionism, besides the actual Zionists themselves, appear to be people like the AWL, who for whatever reason hitched their wagon to Zionist ideology some time ago, ..."
"... Just because the only case of stabbing I have witnessed was more than 50 years ago, does not, and should not lead me to think that knife crime was worse 50 years ago than it is today. The actual data would seem to suggest that cases of anti-Semitism were greater in the LP in previous times than they are currently, contrary to what the media and those with factional motives would have us believe. ..."
"... The apparent level of anti-semitism in Labour is a modern phenomenon turbo-charged and amplified by social media. People have their views reinforced within their bunkers where anti-Israeli memes become anti-Zionist and then become anti-Semitic. It is much easier to send an anonymous email than a letter. ..."
"... I wouldn't trust Lansman on this issue, any more than on many others. Lansman abolished democracy, to the extent it existed to begin with, by turning it into his personal fiefdom, reminiscent of the activities of Hyndman and the SDF. His position on anti-Semitism, and fighting the witch-hunt, and of appeasing the Blair-right's as they attacked Corbyn, has been appalling throughout. ..."
"... Having abolished any democracy in Momentum, which he now runs as its CEO, he also appears to want Corbyn to do the same thing with the Labour Party, abolishing its internal democratic procedures, and putting himself personally in charge of those disciplinary measures ..."
"... Its notable that, yesterday, when the Welsh Labour Grass Roots organisation came out to call for Williamson's suspension to be reversed, Kinnock and other Blair-rights immediately called for an investigation into them, ..."
"... This truly is reaching into the realms of McCarthyism, where you are found guilty not just of witchcraft, but of consorting with witches, or even having an opinion as to whether an individual charged with witchcraft is guilty, or even the extent to which the number of witches amongst might be exaggerated. ..."
"... It's not a factually accurate description of global political realities, because Israel does not control the US, if that is what the image is intended to imply. But, the message, is thereby anti-Israeli state, not anti-Semitic. It could only be considered anti-Semitic, if in fact you are a Zionist and claim that Israel and Jews are are interchangeable terms, which they are not. ..."
"... If we replace Zionism with Toryism, and Jew with British, the situation becomes fairly clear. If the we show the British state as being controlled by Tories, who implement their ideology of Toryism, in what way would criticism of the British state, under the control of such Tories, or criticism of Tories be the equivalent of British people as a whole? ..."
"... The hope of a Two-State Solution disappeared long ago, and was never credible. It simply allows Zionists to proclaim they are in favour of it, whilst doing everything to make it practically impossible, such as extending West Bank Settlements. The solution must flow from a struggle for democratic rights for Israeli Arabs, and for a right for all Arabs in occupied territories to be extended the same rights as any other Israeli, including the right to vote, and send representatives to the Knesset. As I argued thirty years ago, the longer-term solution is a Federal Republic of Israel and Palestine, guaranteeing democratic rights to all, as part of building a wider Federal Republic of MENA. ..."
"... Jim Denham: imperialist lackey and sycophant turned Witch hunter in chief ..."
"... Let us be very clear about what this witch hunt is about, it is about purging from public life any credible and effective opposition to Israel in particular and more generally opposition to the imperialist barbarians of the imperialist core. It is about driving from universities, social media and intellectual life any form of opposition to the interests of the imperialists. ..."
"... A UN report has concluded that Israel deliberately targeted and killed hundreds of protesting civilians, including children and disabled people and it shot 20,000+ people (yes 20,000+!). The UN says this likely a war crime. Why are the noble defenders of the Palestinian cause in the dock and not notorious Palestinian haters like Jim Denham? ..."
"... These attacks on Corbyn and his supporters, repeated in all of the most aggressive imperialist countries, are simply a proxy attack on the Palestinian people themselves. ..."
"... Jim Denham's comment here illustrates the problem entirely. The picture he has linked to shows an alien symbiote having attached itself to the face of the statue of liberty. The statue of liberty here represents the US. The symbiote has on its back the Israeli Flag, and likewise, thereby represents the state of Israel. The picture therefore, represents the well-worn, and clearly factually wrong meme that Israel controls the US. ..."
"... But, as a Zionist organisation, the AWL and its members cannot distinguish between the state of Israel and Jews, so they cannot distinguish between criticism of the state of Israel, and criticism if Jews. For them, as for the Zionist ideology of the state of Israel, which is most clearly manifest in the ideology of its current political leadership, in the form of the Bonapartist regime of Netanyahu, with the recent introduction of blatantly racist laws that discriminate even more openly against not Jewish Israeli citizens, and with his willingness to try to keep his corrupt regime in office by going into coalition with an avowedly Neo-Nazi party that until recent times was considered beyond the pale, even by most Zionists, the term Zionism is synonymous with the term Jew. So, any criticism of Zionism, or of Israel is for them immediately equated with anti-Semitism. ..."
"... Once again Jim Denham reefuses to engage in rational debate, and again resorts instead to his assumption that Israel = Jews, as well as his crude attempts at a typical Stalinist amalgam, to conflate the views of his opponents with some hate figure. ..."
"... Again Jim Denham makes the conflation of Israel and Jews explicit when he says, "This image also plays on the tired and disgraceful antisemitic 'conspiracy theory' trope of undue Israeli (Jewish) influence on world affairs." ..."
"... The way that the right are using anti-Zionism as the equivalent for anti-Semitism, and the appeasement of that attack has led them to widen the scope of that attack. As Labour List reports , right-wing Labour MP Siobhan McDonagh, is now claiming that to be anti-capitalist is also to be "anti-Semitic". The idea was put forward also by former Blair-right spin doctor, John McTernan, who wrote an article in the FT to that same effect ..."
"... As the right-wing extend their witch-hunt against socialists in the LP to claim that Marxists are necessarily misogynist, as well as anti-Semitic – and the same logic presented by McDonagh, McTernon, and Phillips would presumably mean that the Left must also be xenophobic, homophobic, anti- Green, and many other charges they want to throw into the mix – it will be interesting to see whether and to what extent the AWL, join them in that assault, in the same way they have done in their promotion of Zionism. ..."
The problem, however, is because this is overlaid by factional struggle ...
This, of course, is compounded by the over-amplifying of anti-Semitism by the media and the alacrity with which it has been taken
up by Corbyn opponents, including hypocrites who floated "rootless cosmopolitan" criticisms of Ed Miliband when it suited just a
few years ago.
Here's the thing. Just because your opponents take up an issue, some times cynically and in bad faith. and use it to inflict as
much damage as they can does not mean the problem is fictitious.
Precisely because they can point to Facebook groups full of useful fools, and Twitter accounts with Corbyn-supporting hashtags
acting as if the Israel lobby and "Zionists" are the only active force in British politics, this is the stuff that makes the attacks
effective and trashes the standing of the party in the eyes of many Jews and the community's allies and friends.
The institutional anti-Semitism in the Labour Party is, therefore, somewhat different to the kind you find in other institutions.
It is sustained by the battle for the party, a grim battlefront in a zero sum game of entrenched position vs entrenched position.
As such, whatever the leadership do, whatever new processes the General Secretary introduces for one side it will never be enough
because, as far as many of them concerned, the leadership are politically illegitimate; and for the other it's a sop and capitulation.
The resolution of the anti-Semitism crisis then is not a matter of compromise -- for each side the issue will only go away
with the complete crushing and driving out of the party of the other. A situation that can only poison the well further, and
guarantee anti-Semitism won't honestly and comprehensively be confronted.
A good analysis. But, it emphasizes the point I made in the previous post, which is that, the right are currently engaged
in an all out push to remove Corbyn and crush the left with the same old bureaucratic means. Whatever else Williamson may or may
not be guilty of, his point that the leadership have facilitated this situation by their continual appeasement of the right is
absolutely valid. Its that he is being attacked for, not anti-Semitism.
It is first necessary to close ranks, and defeat the assault of the Right. As Marr said to Blair this morning, had Prescott
announced he was forming a separate group, and was establishing his own witch-hunting bureaucratic apparatus in the party, Blair
would have sacked him immediately - actually not so easy as the Deputy is elected. But the thrust is valid. Unless Corbyn deals
with Watson, the Right will roll over the Left, despite the huge disparity in numbers.
Again it comes down to whether Corbyn is up for that task, or whether we need a leadership of the left with a bit more backbone
to see it through.
I'm afraid this IS due to the "intersectionality" cult, whereby certain groups are always privileged and wrong, and some are always
oppressed and right. Jews are, according to this "analysis", the uber-privileged and uber-white.
We've heard several times that according to "intersectionality" that it's impossible to be racist against white people because
racism requires both prejudice and power, and white people are by definition powerful. Therefore, anti-Semitism is dismissed because
it can't be a thing because Jews are all-powerful and even more oppressive than other whites.
Those who don't subscribe to all of these beliefs are nevertheless tinged with them, which is why people who aren't staunch
antisemites will nevertheless fail to take anti-Semitism seriously.
Coming on the day when the FT have a column seriously positing that criticizing capitalism is inherently anti-Semitic, it
seems to me that dancing on the head of a pin about whether the 'careless' anti-Semitism you've described means the party
is institutionally anti-Semitic is rather missing the point. (OK, the column is by John McTernan, but the FT gave him column inches
to argue that case, and I guess they didn't mean it as the satire it most certainly is.)
As many of the comments on your
blog on Williamson attest, the salient feature of this - well, call it witch-hunt for the sake of argument - is the double standards
where we have to be whiter than white, whilst no account whatsoever is taken of the most egregious racism elsewhere. We live
in society: we can never, ever be that whiter than white - especially when it comes to Israel/Palestine, which is so full of contradictions
and traps for the unwary (e.g. the position of the Israeli state claiming to speak for all Jewry around the world, in the way
that the Board of Deputies position themselves as speaking for all British Jews - neither close to being true, but small wonder
that opponents of what they do and stand for take that universality at face value.)
The fight we need to take up is to compare and contrast just how pro-active the current party is against anti-Semitism in its
constitution and machinery with the glaring absence of such elsewhere, and to present a positive picture of what we are doing,
rather than mumbling apologetically into our beards. We need to take the fight to the rigged system at the same time as being
unstinting in rooting out the troubling stuff.
The other nonsense that has grown up is that it is only those that suffer any form of discrimination who can define what that
discrimination is, i.e. only Jews can define anti-Semitism, only black people can define racism against them, only women can define
discrimination against women.
That then assumes that the members of each of these groups are themselves homogeneous, and agreed in such definitions.
In reality, it means that dominant elements, i.e. those connected to the ruling class and ruling ideas get to make those determinations.
If we look at anti-Semitism, for example, it is quite clear that there is no agreement amongst Jews on what constitutes
anti-Semitism. The JVL, certainly have a different definition than the JLM.
But, just rationally, the concept that only those discriminated against get to define the discrimination is bonkers. Suppose
you come from Somalia or some other country that practices FGM, you could argue that it is part of your cultural heritage, and
that anyone seeking to prevent you from undertaking this barbaric practice was thereby racist, on your self-definition of what
that discrimination against you amounts to. Or Saudis might argue that it is racist to argue against their practice of lopping
off women's heads, or stoning them to death for adultery, including having been raped, etc.
The JVL come pretty close to arguing that there is *no* anti-Semitism in the Labour party (Jenny Manson, for instance, says she's
never witnessed any)and Glyn Secker wrote a piece in the Morning Star last year comparing claims of anti-Semitism within Labour
to the story of the emperor's new clothes.
Given that the actual data, even allowing for all of the spurious and mischievous accusations of anti-Semitism in the party,
made by right-wing enemies of the the party, and particularly of Corbyn and his supporters, amounts to only 0.1% of the membership,
and given that of these, 40% were straight away found to be accusations against people who were not even LP members, with a further
20%, being found to have absolutely no evidence to back them, its quite possible that individual members of the LP, have never
seen any instance of it.
Take out all those mischievous and malicious allegations made in order to whip up the hysteria, so as to to damage the
party, by its enemies, and you arrive at a figure of only 400 potential cases, out of a membership of 600,000, which is 1 member
in 1500. If the average branch size if 100 active members, it means on average there is one potential case of anti-Semitism
in every 15 branches. So, if you are a member in any of the other 14 branches, you would never see that one potential case of
anti-Semitism.
In fact, based upon the actual facts, as opposed to the fiction and factional hysteria that is being whipped up by right-wing
opponents of Corbyn and the party, and by supporters of Zionism for their own narrow political reasons, the chances are about
14: that you will never see any even potential instance of anti-Semitism, even on the narrow definition that the party has now
imposed upon itself, which comes pretty close if not entirely to identifying anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism, or even just criticism
of the current Bonapartist regime of Netanyahu.
In the US, Jewish groups that have long been ardent defenders of Israel have more recently come out to criticize the regime
of Netanyahu, and the actions of the Israeli state. The main defenders of Zionism, besides the actual Zionists themselves, appear
to be people like the AWL, who for whatever reason hitched their wagon to Zionist ideology some time ago, probably in their
usual knee-jerk reaction of putting a plus sign wherever the SWP put a minus. Having done so, and as a result of the bureaucratic
centrist nature of the sect, they find themselves now having to follow through on the position they adopted on the basis of the
"practical politics" - opportunism - as it dictated itself to them at the time.
If, and probably more likely when, they change position, it will come as with all their previous changes of position with the
assertion that "nothing has changed", as when after claiming a few years ago that the LP was a stinking corpse - as they ridiculously
stood their own candidates in elections with the inevitable result - and the next minute proclaimed themselves as its most ardent
militants, as they sought to use their sharp elbows to gain positions on Momentum's leading bodies!
Incidentally, on the question of "observance", the only time I have seen someone get stabbed, is more than 50 years ago, when
I was at school. I've seen plenty of other violent stuff in the intervening period, for example, people getting glassed, people
having wrought iron tables smashed over their heads. My sister, who is several years older than me, and was out bopping during
the days of the Teddy Boys, saw more people getting slashed, in the 1950's, because the flick knife was the Ted's favoured weapon.
But, that doesn't mean that I disbelieve the media when it talks about the current spate of knife crimes. Its just that, however,
terrible such crimes are for those that suffer or witness them, and no matter how much the media that has to sensationalise every
story, for its own commercial purposes, talks about an epidemic or a knife crime crisis, the number of knife crimes per head of
population is extremely small.
The chances that 999 out of 1,000 of us will never be the victim of, or witness knife crime does not mean it doesn't exist.
But, those that then claim that the 999 out of 1,000 of us who say we have not seen it, must be somehow being dishonest, are not
dealing with the facts, and are simply fuelling a moral panic.
When some phenomena is statistically insignificant, which 1 in 1,500 cases, is, and when as with many such phenomena there
is no normal distribution of the occurrence of such cases - for example, knife crime will tend to be concentrated in particular
areas - trying to present any kind of rational analysis based upon personal observation is a mug's game.
Just because the only case of stabbing I have witnessed was more than 50 years ago, does not, and should not lead me to
think that knife crime was worse 50 years ago than it is today. The actual data would seem to suggest that cases of anti-Semitism
were greater in the LP in previous times than they are currently, contrary to what the media and those with factional motives
would have us believe. It is certainly thec ase that anti-Semitism is a bigger problem in the Tory party, and other right-wing
organisations than it is in the LP, again not that you would know that from the reporting of it, or from the attitude of certain
factional sects, such as the AWL.
Labour has 'much larger' group of antisemitic members which Corbyn has failed to deal with, Momentum founder warns
By Rob Merrick Deputy Political Editor The Independent, Monday 25 February 2019 16:10 |
Labour has "a much larger" group of antisemitic members than it recognises which Jeremy Corbyn has failed to "deal with", Momentum
founder Jon Lansman has warned.
The Labour leader's long-standing ally said "conspiracy theorists" had infiltrated the party – a consequence of its huge surge
in membership in recent years.
Mr Lansman stopped short of backing the call from Tom Watson, Labour's deputy leader, for Mr Corbyn to take personal charge
of the antisemitism complaints dogging Labour.
But he said: "I do think we have a major problem and it always seems to me that we underestimate the scale of it. I think it
is a widespread problem.
"I think it is now obvious that we have a much larger number of people with hardcore antisemitic opinions which, unfortunately,
is polluting the atmosphere in a lot of constituency parties and in particular online. We have to deal with these people."
The apparent level of anti-semitism in Labour is a modern phenomenon turbo-charged and amplified by social media. People
have their views reinforced within their bunkers where anti-Israeli memes become anti-Zionist and then become anti-Semitic. It
is much easier to send an anonymous email than a letter.
History is very much the tale of new technology transforming the potential of human behaviour and beliefs, and one of the oldest
beliefs ("the blood libel") is anti-Semitism.
This is how Labour has changed - ie, the rise of Corbyn has coincided with the ubiquity of this technology. In fact, arguably
the rise of Corbyn was aided by it.
Corbyn's nuanced position on Israel/Palestine gives permission to social media extremists.
The rest is history.
Incidentally, this is why you are less likely to confront anti-Semitism in real-life while the internet may be awash with it
- there are the real and virtual identities which only occasionally bleed into each other.
Which is true and which is not? We might wonder if technology has evolved ahead of human adaptation - the "real world" filters
that govern apparently "real" behaviour missing.
I'm sure even certain posters here are less bananas in "real life" than their online comments might suggest!
I wouldn't trust Lansman on this issue, any more than on many others. Lansman abolished democracy, to the extent it existed
to begin with, by turning it into his personal fiefdom, reminiscent of the activities of Hyndman and the SDF. His position on
anti-Semitism, and fighting the witch-hunt, and of appeasing the Blair-right's as they attacked Corbyn, has been appalling throughout.
Having abolished any democracy in Momentum, which he now runs as its CEO, he also appears to want Corbyn to do the same thing
with the Labour Party, abolishing its internal democratic procedures, and putting himself personally in charge of those disciplinary
measures. That truly would be the actions of a Bonapartist. That Tom Watson is prepared to do that, as he sets himself up in a
situation of dual power, to confront Corbyn is no surprise that anyone who even remotely considers themselves a part of the Left
should support should a move is a disgrace. Perhaps no surprise that the AWL supporters of Zionism, and the witch-hunt, appear
to be doing so, then.
Its notable that, yesterday, when the Welsh Labour Grass Roots organisation came out to call for Williamson's suspension to
be reversed, Kinnock and other Blair-rights immediately called for an investigation into them, and for its Secretary who sits
on Labour's NEC to also be suspended, for interfering in an ongoing investigation! So, why did those same Blair-rights not call
for the suspension of Watson, who immediately demanded Williamson's suspension, and withdrawal of the whip, before any investigation,
or indeed of Hodge and others who on a daily basis go to the media to sally forth about cases that are under investigation, or
waiting for investigation.
This truly is reaching into the realms of McCarthyism, where you are found guilty not just of witchcraft, but of consorting
with witches, or even having an opinion as to whether an individual charged with witchcraft is guilty, or even the extent to which
the number of witches amongst might be exaggerated.
Jim Denham's comment is a case in point. How much more "anti-Semitism" exists? What is the factual basis of the statement,
as opposed to click bait headline. Even if the actual extent is 100% more than the data so far presented, that would mean that
potentially 1 in 750 LP members might be guilty of some form of anti-Semitism. Its hardly an epidemic, or institutional anti-Semitism,
and far less than exists in the Tory Party, which is also infected by Islamaphobia, misogyny, homophobia and xenophobia.
In fact, its probably much less than you would find in the BBC, Sky or other establishment institutions. Anti-Semitism exists,
and is a problem, but that does not mean it is not being used by Labour's enemies or the proponents of Zionism for their own political
ends. The real conspiracy theorists are those that try to present anti-Semitism as a conspiracy based upon infiltration of the
LP, the same people who presented the support for Corbyn from 300,000 new members as really just being a case of far left entryism,
by Trots.
This is a meme, taken from Incog Man, a far-right site. It was posted with positive endorsement by a Labour member, Kayla Bibby,
a delegate to conference in fact:
Bibby subsequently received only a formal warning, with Thomas Gardiner of Labour's Governance and Legal Unit (what used to
be the Compliance Unit), saying it was only anti-Israel, and not anti-Semitic.
Not only could a Labour member post something obviously anti-Semitic, it was not deemed to be so by the Compliance Unit. I
bet we all know people who would agree.
It's not a factually accurate description of global political realities, because Israel does not control the US, if that is
what the image is intended to imply. But, the message, is thereby anti-Israeli state, not anti-Semitic. It could only be considered
anti-Semitic, if in fact you are a Zionist and claim that Israel and Jews are are interchangeable terms, which they are not.
In fact, there are probably not an inconsiderable number of Jews, who think that the state of Israel does exercise undue influence
over US policy, and certainly it seems to be the case that, in the US, more liberal Jewish groups, seem to think that one reason
that the Bonapartist regime of Netanyahu, in Israel, was so supportive of Trump, and we see the same support for Trump amongst
Zionists in Britain, is at least in part due to the fact that Obama had been distancing the US from its historical uncritical
support for Israel.
If we replace Zionism with Toryism, and Jew with British, the situation becomes fairly clear. If the we show the British
state as being controlled by Tories, who implement their ideology of Toryism, in what way would criticism of the British state,
under the control of such Tories, or criticism of Tories be the equivalent of British people as a whole?
Clearly it wouldn't, because there are a majority of British people who oppose Toryism, and thereby oppose the actions of the
British state under the control of the Tories. A nationalist, or racist might want to equate the nation state with the whole of
its people, but the people who are doing that here, by interpreting criticism of the Israeli state with anti-Semitism, are the
Zionists themselves, and their apologists, because they seek thereby to delegitimize any criticism of the state of Israel and
Zionism by equating it with anti-Semitism.
That in effect makes the Zionists themselves, and their apologists anti-Semites, because in adopting this equation of Jewishness
with being Zionist, and with Israel, they make all Jews thereby responsible for the actions of Zionism and of the state of Israel!
The problem for the AWL, and its members like Jim Denham, on this issue comes down to this. Until thirty years ago, the organisation,
under its previous names, was an ardent defender of the ideas and traditions of Jim Cannon. Cannon's "The Struggle for a Proletarian
Party" was required reading for all of its members. Then, in an about face, the organisation overnight collapsed into what Trotsky
called "the petit-bourgeois Third Camp", and so became ardent defenders of the enemies of Cannon, the petit-bourgeois Third Camp
of Burnham- Shachtman. That kind of wild zig-zag is typical of bureaucratic-centrist organisations, which is what the AWL is.
As part of this collapse into the petit-bourgeois Third Camp, and the moralistic politics it is based upon, the AWL also adopted
the ideas of Third Campists like Al Glotzer, in relation to Israel and Zionism, as opposed to the position of Mandel, which represented
a continuation of the ideas of Cannon and Trotsky. I set this out in a short blog post 12 years ago
Glotzer and the Jews as Special
, after the AWL had repeatedly censored it appearing on their website in response to an article setting out Glotzer's position.
Having committed themselves to the reactionary Zionist ideology that essentially underpins Glotzer's stance - the same thing
idea of having lost faith in the working-class, and so having to rely on the bourgeois state, or "progressive imperialism" to
accomplish the tasks of the working-class, is behind the AWL's support for NATo's war against Serbia, Iraq, Libya etc., but is
also behind the politics of other Third Campists such as the SWP, that instead look to other larger forces, such as reactionary
"anti-imperialist" states to carry forward its moral agenda - the AWL are left now trying to defend their position of support
for the creation of a racist, expansionist state in Israel, as the inevitable consequences of that venture unfold.
For a Marxist, it is not at all difficult to say that the establishment of the state of Israel is one that we should not have
supported at the time, because it would lead to the kind of consequences we see today, and yet, to say, 75 years on from the creation
of that state, it is an established fact, and trying to unwind history, by calling for the destruction of that state would have
even more calamitous consequences for the global working-class. It is quite easy for a Marx to say that the current nature of
the Israeli state, as a racist Zionist state, based, like almost no other state in the world on a confessional basis, i.e. of
being a Jewish state, a state for Jews in preference to every other ethnic/religious group flows from the ideology, and nature
of its creation. But, then to argue that the answer to that is not a destruction of the state of Israel, which could only be done
on the bones of millions of Israeli citizens, Jews and Arabs alike, but is to wage a working-class based struggle against that
racist foundation upon which the state has been founded, and that struggle is one that must unite Jews and Arabs alike. In fact,
the position of palestinians today is a mirror image of that of the Jews 75 years ago.
The hope of a Two-State Solution disappeared long ago, and was never credible. It simply allows Zionists to proclaim they are
in favour of it, whilst doing everything to make it practically impossible, such as extending West Bank Settlements. The solution
must flow from a struggle for democratic rights for Israeli Arabs, and for a right for all Arabs in occupied territories to be
extended the same rights as any other Israeli, including the right to vote, and send representatives to the Knesset. As I argued
thirty years ago, the longer-term solution is a Federal Republic of Israel and Palestine, guaranteeing democratic rights to all,
as part of building a wider Federal Republic of MENA.
Jim Denham: imperialist lackey and sycophant turned Witch hunter in chief
Let us be very clear about what this witch hunt is about, it is about purging from public life any credible and effective
opposition to Israel in particular and more generally opposition to the imperialist barbarians of the imperialist core. It is
about driving from universities, social media and intellectual life any form of opposition to the interests of the imperialists.
This is nothing but authoritarianism in action, censorship of political opponents and the closing down of any credible definition
of free speech.
In other words this is something any leftist worth half an atom would be fighting against with all their energies.
But what do we find, pathetic pro war pro imperialists leftists and post modern liberals joining the witch hunt.
Meanwhile in the real world:
A UN report has concluded that Israel deliberately targeted and killed hundreds of protesting civilians, including children
and disabled people and it shot 20,000+ people (yes 20,000+!). The UN says this likely a war crime. Why are the noble defenders
of the Palestinian cause in the dock and not notorious Palestinian haters like Jim Denham?
How can anyone on the left get away with supporting and providing ideological cover for Israel How can any leftist allow a
socialist movement to be sabotaged by the Israel state and its army of appalling immoral apologists?
These attacks on Corbyn and his supporters, repeated in all of the most aggressive imperialist countries, are simply a
proxy attack on the Palestinian people themselves.
Jim Denham's comment here illustrates the problem entirely. The picture he has linked to shows an alien symbiote having attached
itself to the face of the statue of liberty. The statue of liberty here represents the US. The symbiote has on its back the Israeli
Flag, and likewise, thereby represents the state of Israel. The picture therefore, represents the well-worn, and clearly factually
wrong meme that Israel controls the US.
But, as a Zionist organisation, the AWL and its members cannot distinguish between the state of Israel and Jews, so they
cannot distinguish between criticism of the state of Israel, and criticism if Jews. For them, as for the Zionist ideology of the
state of Israel, which is most clearly manifest in the ideology of its current political leadership, in the form of the Bonapartist
regime of Netanyahu, with the recent introduction of blatantly racist laws that discriminate even more openly against not Jewish
Israeli citizens, and with his willingness to try to keep his corrupt regime in office by going into coalition with an avowedly
Neo-Nazi party that until recent times was considered beyond the pale, even by most Zionists, the term Zionism is synonymous with
the term Jew. So, any criticism of Zionism, or of Israel is for them immediately equated with anti-Semitism.
It is what leads such Zionists to then also insist on their right to determine who is a Jew or not. The AWL do that with all
those Jews, such as the JVL, who refuse to accept the AWL's definition of anti-Zionism = Anti-Semitism. Its like the old saw that
the definition of a Scot is someone who wears a kilt, and when asked about Jock McTavish, from Arbroath, who does not wear a kilt,
the reply comes back, then he cannot really be a Scot!
The Zionists insists on defining anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism, and thereby closing down debate. Jim Denham does that most
clearly here, in his refusal to debate the actual substantive points. It is typical of the attitude of the AWL, in general which
long since gave up trying to defend its bourgeois liberal, opportunist politics by rational debate, and instead turned to bureaucratic
censorship, and ill-tempered invective.
Once again Jim Denham reefuses to engage in rational debate, and again resorts instead to his assumption that Israel = Jews,
as well as his crude attempts at a typical Stalinist amalgam, to conflate the views of his opponents with some hate figure.
Again Jim Denham makes the conflation of Israel and Jews explicit when he says, "This image also plays on the tired and
disgraceful antisemitic 'conspiracy theory' trope of undue Israeli (Jewish) influence on world affairs."
The conflation of equating Israel with the term Jew flows directly from the Zionist ideology that underpins the Israeli State,
but which also adopted by the AWL, and its members like Jim Denham. It thereby effectively denies statehood to non-Jewish Israeli
citizens, making them non-persons, erasing them from history, in the same way that Jim Denham has sought to do in diminishing
if not entirely denying the genocides against other ethnic groups such as Native North Americans, Australian and New Zealand aboriginals
etc., as a result of his Zionist privileging of the specific genocide against Jews in the Holocaust.
It is the same kind of racism, of course, that is applied by the BNP and other white nationalists, who seek to portray Britain
as being a nation for white Britons, and thereby deny other Britons the right to consider themselves really British. Every socialist,
can understand the racist nature of that ideology when it is applied to Britain, and elsewhere, but the AWL, and its members,
like Jim Denham, deny it when it is applied to Israel, which they want to treat as being different to every other state on the
planet, in defence of their Zionist ideology that privileges Israeli Jews over others, and by extension equates the term Jew with
the term Israel.
Its most extreme version comes with the fascists that Netanyahu has now gone into alliance with, whose ideology states that
God only put gentiels on the Earth to be slaves and serve the needs of Jews, as the chosen people! It means that they see the
place of non-Jewish Israelis in those terms, as being allowed to remain in Israel only on that subservient basis. This is the
ideology that the AWL is now logically tied to, in having adopted Zionism as the answer to the problems of Jewish workers rather
than socialism.
And, of course, the extension of that principle for other Zionists is illustrated in their support for fascists like Orban
in Hungary, who wants to adopt a similar nationalist ideology of keeping Hungary, and other "white" European nations exclusively
for "whites", in the same way that Zionists want to keep Israel exclusively for Jews.
It is a sorry state when socialists have degenerated to such an extent that not only do they fail to distinguish between nationalist
ideology and socialist ideology by adopting nationalist solutions to workers problems such as "nationalisation", by the capitalist
state, but where, in adopting such reactionary nationalist ideology, the logic of their position drives them to supporting the
idea that nation states should be exclusively for particular ethnic groups, such as Israel for the Jews, Hungary for white Christians
and so on.
The way that the right are using anti-Zionism as the equivalent for anti-Semitism, and the appeasement of that attack has
led them to widen the scope of that attack. As
Labour
List reports , right-wing Labour MP Siobhan McDonagh, is now claiming that to be anti-capitalist is also to be "anti-Semitic".
The idea was put forward also by former Blair-right spin doctor, John McTernan,
who wrote an article in the FT to that
same effect
Channelling Jim Denham, McTernan writes,
"As the historian Deborah Lipstadt points out, anti-Semitic tropes share three elements: money or finance is always in the
mix; an acknowledged cleverness that is also seen as conniving; and, power -- particularly a power to manipulate more powerful
entities.
All of these feature in the criticism of Israel and the so-called Israel lobby. They can be easily moulded into a critique
of capitalism, too."
The line of argument was illustrated to me some weeks ago, in a comment I received in relation to an article I wrote about
Marx's analysis of fictitious capital,
as part of my critique of Paul Mason's Postcapitalism . The commenter, argued that Marx's analysis of fictitious capital appeared
to be simply Marx blaming bankers and money lenders, for which read Jews, for the world's ills, and was thereby simply an expression
of the well-known fact that Marx was a self-hating Jew, much as the AWL, describe all those other Jews that do not share their
commitment to |Zionism. The commenter as evidence of this provided a link to a literary critique of Marx's
On The Jewish Question
, which is cited as proving that Marx was an anti-semite.
In fact, I pointed out that in nothing that Marx had written about fictitious capital, or what I had written describing Marx's
analysis of fictitious capital are bankers discussed, let alone Jewish bankers. The anonymous commenter, has, in fact, since deleted
their comments, meaning that my responses to them were also deleted.
But, this is the way this right-wing witch-hunt proceeds, by throwing a net to catch whatever they can trawl in, and at the very
least sowing the seeds of doubt as they require those being attacked to respond to their wild accusations. It means that any statement
can be framed to mean that there is some subtext beneath the actual words and pictures that is somehow anti-Semitic, if only you
know the relevant coda to unlock the true meaning, and anyone who doubts the meaning being placed upon it, is thereby a defender
of the anti-Semitic message. As with the attacks on Momentum, and the initial surge of membership supporting Corbyn, it is always
phrased in dark conspiratorial language, about unseen forces being behind what is seen on the surface. So, we were supposed to
believe that a few hundred Trots in Britain somehow morphed into 300,000 new LP members! But, Momentum now having shown that it
is a tame part of the establishment, is even able to recruit McTernan himself as a member.
The appeasement as with all witch-hunts only provokes the witch-hunters to widen the scope of their activities. The AWL, which
was at the forefront of helping the witch-hunters with their shameful support for the witch-hunting of Jackie Walker, was repaid
by having their own members expelled too, and having right-wing Labour MP's appear on TV, to characterise the AWL themselves as
"anti-Semites", despite their well-known Zionist politics. Yet, oddly, the AWL seem to consider that a price worth paying, as
their advocacy of Zionism seems to trump any other consideration for them in their politics.
It didn't take long for my comment of yesterday to be proved correct. Today we learn that Jess Phillips has claimed that Marxism
is necessarily misogynist, because it places class oppression above all else, and so now claims that as well as the Left in the
party being anti-Semitic, it is also misogynist. The attack of the Right, as I said yesterday will spread ever wider on this irrational
basis, using all of the usual conspiratorial language that such witch-hunts have always adopted. Rather like a Dan Brown novel,
it will imply that there are dark (Marxist) forces at work, of which Corbyn is the head of the coven (or even worse that some
unseen Dark Overlord is really standing behind Corbyn, who is only its representative on Earth (i.e. in the LP).
It will suggest that these dark forces do not speak openly, but only in codes and symbols that have to be unlocked by the forces
of Light, who like Jim Denham, can look into the minds of men and women, and see what is really going inside.
I actually found that despite the anonymous Zionist commenter to my article on Medium having deleted their comments, my replies
to them, were in fact still floating around
here
,
here , and
here .
As the right-wing extend their witch-hunt against socialists in the LP to claim that Marxists are necessarily misogynist,
as well as anti-Semitic – and the same logic presented by McDonagh, McTernon, and Phillips would presumably mean that the Left
must also be xenophobic, homophobic, anti- Green, and many other charges they want to throw into the mix – it will be interesting
to see whether and to what extent the AWL, join them in that assault, in the same way they have done in their promotion of Zionism.
I do not understand complain in the comments. Actually why not travel to Israel if you view
it as yet another US state as well as the state from which you were elected? Only logical
;-)
There is also more complex dynamics in place here if we assume the Israel lobby now controls
several major US MSM. It's kind of self-preservation instinct in politicians to ensure major MSM
support.
Notable quotes:
"... At his most recent appearance this past spring his keynote speech included "I stand with Israel, proudly and unapologetically. So, when someone accuses American supporters of Israel of dual loyalty, I say: accuse me. I am part of a large, bipartisan coalition in Congress supporting Israel. I tell Israel's detractors: accuse us." Well, he got that right. He and many other congressmen do suffer from dual or even singular loyalty when it comes to Israel. ..."
"... In 2007 Hoyer notably called out fellow Democrat Representative Jim Moran for stating correctly that AIPAC "has pushed (the Iraq) war from the beginning." Hoyer called the statement "factually inaccurate," which was not the case. He is a supporter of the Israeli illegal settlements, which up until recently was contrary to both U.S. official policy and a number of United Nations resolutions. ..."
Steny Hoyer's foreign policy votes in Congress have not surprisingly mirrored positions
taken by the Israeli government. He supported the attack on Iraq and was in fact very possibly
the most prominent promoter of the war among Democrats. When the war became a foreign policy
disaster, he muted his approval of it but has continued to vote for funding of U.S. military
involvement in both Iraq and neighboring Syria.
At his most recent appearance this past spring his keynote
speech included "I stand with Israel, proudly and unapologetically. So, when someone
accuses American supporters of Israel of dual loyalty, I say: accuse me. I am part of a large,
bipartisan coalition in Congress supporting Israel. I tell Israel's detractors: accuse us."
Well, he got that right. He and many other congressmen do suffer from dual or even singular
loyalty when it comes to Israel.
In 2007 Hoyer notably called out fellow Democrat Representative Jim Moran for stating
correctly that AIPAC "has pushed (the Iraq) war from the beginning." Hoyer called the statement "factually
inaccurate," which was not the case. He is a supporter of the Israeli illegal settlements,
which up until recently was contrary to both U.S. official policy and a number of United
Nations resolutions.
In January 2017, he was a leading advocate of a House of Representatives resolution
condemning the U.N. Security
Council Resolution 2334 , which called both the settlements and the continued Israeli
occupation of Palestinian land as a "flagrant violation of international law and a major
obstacle to peace."
"A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for
the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where
no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the
former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate
inducement or justification."
More than 16% of all of the U.S. Congress is in this room at the King David Hotel right
now.
31 Republican members of Congress are now in Israel for an AIEF mission. They will spend the
next two days with 41 Democratic MOCs who arrived on Sunday. They will experience Israel
together, learning and engaging on the most important issues affecting the US-Israel
relationship
How ironic they are are at the King David Hotel -- the site of one of the Jews first false
flag bombings.
The Bombing of the King David Hotel'
"On July 22 1946 an armed Jewish group opposed to British rule in Palestine dressed up as
arabs, hoping to throw the blame on them, and bombed the hotel in Jerusalem where the British
had their headquarters.
Ninety-one people were killed in the bombing and dozens of others were injured"
Apparently, AIPAC is bragging that 72 Members of Congress, the largest group ever and nearly
half of them Democrats, are currently visiting Israel to pledge their personal loyalty.
And I think a few months ago, the Governor of Florida took his whole Cabinet to Israel to
publicly sign some sort of state bill trying to make it illegal to criticize Israel.
Offhand, this sort of thing seems rather "odd" to me
Back fifty-odd years ago, Guatemala was obviously an American client-state, weak and poor
while the U.S. was powerful and rich.
But if seems to me that if the Guatemalan leaders had all traveled to DC to publicly
pledge their loyalty to America, the result would have been such national outrage, they would
have been overthrown in a popular uprising or a military coup.
America really is a pretty peculiar sort of country
No Dr. Giraldi this is nothing more than a reminder on who controls America and Congress.
You'll never get AIPAC or any other Jewish group to register as lobbyist. This is the country
where Mossad agents act with impunity and do whatever they want while American intelligence
agencies cover for them. The Congressmen and women who went to Israel are just telling
Americans: "F..K You We Work for Israel." This is the country where Johnathan Pollard the
worst spy in the history of America who should have been executed is now free. And Israel is
our ally? We give Israel billions of dollars while our infrastructure is crumbling and you --
Dr. Giraldi find this upsetting? Jews contribute over 50% of all political money to the
Democrats. Actually they contribute a lot more in the form of payments for speeches, special
deals and a host of underground activities. This doesn't include all the money Soros spends
for all his favorite little political groups and media he funds. The Repubs get over 25%
There is nothing to see here. You are a former intelligence agent why does any of this
surprise you? It has been happening for the last 50 years in one form or another
@Ron Unz I
forgot who said this ..but would add its much easier to subvert a democracy than any other
form of government.
In a democracy every group that effects public policy must be accountable to the public
citizenry. A democracy cannot survive if iron curtains are placed around groups, secular or
religious that intervene in public affairs
Start worrying more about Israel and the Fifth Column
How NeoCon Billionaire Paul Singer Is Driving The Outsourcing of U.S. Tech Jobs to
Israel
(And putting Israeli intelligence officials into management of US Goggle, Facebook,
Microsoft)
excerpts
Particularly troubling is the fact that since SUNC's founding, the number of former Unit
8200 members in top positions in American tech companies has skyrocketed. Based on a
non-exhaustive analysis conducted by MintPress of over 200 LinkedIn accounts of former
Israeli military intelligence and intelligence officers in three major tech companies,
numerous former Unit 8200 alumni were found to currently hold top managerial or executive
positions in Microsoft, Google and Facebook.
To sum up, a powerful American billionaire has built an influential organization with deep
connections to AIPAC, with an Israeli company that has been repeatedly investigated for
spying on the U.S. government (Amdocs), and with the elite Israeli military intelligence Unit
8200 that has used its influential connections to the U.S. government and the private sector
to dramatically shift the operations and make-up of major companies in a critical sector of
the American economy.
Further consider that U.S. government documents leaked by Edward Snowden have flagged Israel
as a "leading threat" to the infrastructure of U.S. financial and banking institutions, which
use much of the software produced by these top tech companies, and have also flagged Israel
as a top espionage threat. One U.S. government document cited Israel as the third most
aggressive intelligence service against the U.S. behind Russia and China. Thus, Paul Singer's
pet project in Start-Up Nation Central has undermined not only the U.S. economy but arguably
national security as well.
This concern is further exacerbated by the deep ties connecting top tech companies like
Microsoft and Google to the U.S. military. Microsoft and Google are both key military
contractors. Microsoft is set to win a lucrative contract for the Pentagon's cloud management
and has partnered with the Department of Defense to produce a "secure" election system known
as ElectionGuard that is set to be implemented in some U.S. states for the 2020 general
election.
Top U.S. tech companies have filled executive positions with former members of Israeli
military intelligence and moved strategic and critical operations to Israel, boosting
Israel's economy at the expense of America's. SUNC's role in this marked shift merits the
deepest scrutiny.
https://www.wrmea.org/2019-august-september/how-neocon-billionaire-paul-singer-is-driving-the-outsourcing-of-u.s.-tech-jobs-to-israel.html
"I am pleased to join so many House Democrats in traveling to Israel to reaffirm our
support for a critical U.S. ally and to continue learning about the opportunities and the
challenges facing Israel and the Middle East,"
Translation: How can Israel extort, blackmail and seduce even more money from the
US...
@niteranger I
woke up when Vicky Nuland blessed our Kiev coup in 2014 with "F..k the EU".
She as a J Supremacist would say the same thing about the US, Australia, New Zealand,
Canada, and Britain. The only place she would never say "F..K to" is Israel.
@anon Trips
like this are easy to understand–a meet and greet with their handlers–it is
always better when you get a periodic opportunity to see your contacts face to face.
Humans have an amazing capacity to consider evil normal–as long as their friends and
associates are fine with it:
It's well known that the US Congress is Israeli Occupied Territory. Like the Palestinian
Occupied Territory, with one exception, the Zionist regime doesn't shoot these US brown
noosers. They buy them off and blackmail them if they disobey or mob them out of Congress.
The examples are many.
To solve the problem of AIPAC and the other pro-Israel PACs is to make them register as
foreign agents what they are. For their pro-Israel and anti-American propaganda, the American
taxpayer pays their share. Giraldi offers the solution to this problem. "Tighten up the
Congressional travel rules to eliminate the "AIPAC exemption" while at the same time
requiring AIPAC and the other prominent organizations that are part of the Israel Lobby to
register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, which would open up their
finances and lobbying to more intense scrutiny. But, of course, Steny Hoyer and his friends
will never allow that to happen." Giraldi forgot to mention Benjamin Netanyahu, who tells
President Donald Trump and his Zionist acolytes what to do.
The late Kenneth N. Waltz called for a nuclear Iran to balance the aggression and the
hegemony of the Zionist regime across the whole Middle East. http://between-the-lines-ludwig-watzal.blogspot.com/2012/06/why-iran-should-get-bomb.html
I forgot who said this ..but would add its much easier to subvert a democracy than any
other form of government.
Actually, Democracy – Democratic Republics (there is no such thing as
"Democracy" government), are quite difficult to overthrow , and even small Republics
are surprisingly resiliant, (Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Venezuela, Bolivia, and a few others).
It is more certain that a Centralized Dictatorship may be undermined, and their
centralized narrow leadership base makes them vulnerable to making poor uninformed decisions
– that ultimately destroy them.
Italy invading Greece, & declaring war on the USA?
Germany declaring war on Russia (against the advice of its senior generals), Hell, they
had control of center Europe by 1939. There was no need to attempt further grabs. The
American puppet government has done NOTHING positive for its economy or its people since
November 22, 1963.
Japan invading China-Japanese butchering Chinese.
Democratic Republics, while far from perfect (in their construction they are
imperfect-human- mixes), are the finest system of Governing, especially large countries, yet
invented.
Republics enjoy – Separation of Powers, varying degrees of democracy (citizen
participation), much access to information-because of the presence of unbowed opposition-
(for the leaders as well as the rest of the citizenry).
Be careful what you wish for. Wish for the beauty, what exalts the human. The Spirit is
not appreciated in Totalitarian Governments.
@Rurik Germany
was always under the control of the zionist banking kabal, read the book Wall Street and the
Rise of Hitler by Anthony Sutton and Hitlers Secret Bankers by Sidney Warburg, the zionists
banking kabal funded Hitler so that the ensuing war would destroy Germany and this is what it
did.
The late Kenneth N. Waltz called for a nuclear Iran to balance the aggression and the
hegemony of the Zionist regime across the whole Middle East.
Sometimes I think the US should give nukes to every country on earth. Then the whole world
will truly be MAD and it may be the best way to eliminate wars.
Their all Israel's men.
"Every year the United States gives Israel several billion dollars and they use that money to
purchase our elections." – Paul Craig Roberts
BTW, the i-Sreali papers are claiming that it was Nut&Yahoo who put particular pressure
on t-Rump to drop Turkey from the F-35 program because Turkey was 'no longer reliable and too
close to the Russians'.
This is curious because Nut&Yahoo (and others) valued Russian links but in the last
few years others have spoken openly that Russia was more of a hindrance than a help. So it
looks like the desperate 'election/no-election/election' Nut&Yahoo has shifted
significantly his ground – or should that be burning his bridges . After all, if
he and others cannot be bothered, then the calculation in Moscow changes too.
Which leads us to a stragtegic shift/realignment, i.e. heading in to the unknown which is
quite a risky bet more so Tel Aviv/Washington than Moscow.
If you are interested in reading history, looking for clear events marking big shi(f)ts in
international relations is part of the sothsaying and speculation. Is this one of them?
That might well be true, but only a fucking retard would have listened to him unless he was
proposing some kind of deal in which Israel would either buy another 100 F-35's (a joke in
itself, since it buys most of its American-made 'defense' equipment with American taxpayers'
money), or somehow otherwise make up for the financial loss. Not to mention that every F-35
cancellation – for whatever reason – increases the pressure on other uncertain
buyers who have heard whispers about what a flying Coke machine it is to drop out. This is
supposed to be America's front-line fighter for the next thirty years, allowing for upgrades.
And they just lost a couple of Billion in sales, and made the undelivered future airframes
more expensive, because the money realized from sold aircraft is supposed to go straight back
into production.
"... "It would represent something to my knowledge unique in history. It is common for great powers to try to fight wars by proxy, getting smaller powers to fight for their interests. This would be the first instance I know where a great power (in fact, a superpower) would do the fighting as the proxy of a small client state." ..."
"... That "small client state" is, of course, Israel, a nation that makes up for its smallness in a geographic sense for the large-scale heft and reach of its American lobby. And, in the age of "democratic" imperialism, it helps a great deal to have an American lobby. ..."
"... The old-line Zionist organizations in America are one component of Israel's amen corner in the US, naturally enough, but these are probably by far the least influential and are certainly not a decisive factor. Traditionally liberal, Democratic, and pro-secular, these groups have very little influence in the Republican party. However, the two other principal tendencies that make up the pro-Israel lobby, the neoconservatives and the Christian conservatives, are both deeply ensconced in the GOP. Acting in tandem, and playing complementary roles, they have co-opted American foreign policy and made it the instrument of Israel's right-wing Likud party. ..."
"... Neoconservatism is a political tendency that grew out of the American left: its initial cadres came out of the Communist movement and especially the Trotskyist tradition. ..."
"... When the cold war ended, the great enemy the neocons had railed against for half a century was suddenly gone – along with the rationale for a foreign policy of global interventionism. The energizing factor that had fueled American interventionism since the end of World War II, an implacable enemy, disappeared overnight – and did not reappear until 9/11/01. From the fall of the Berlin wall until the fall of the twin towers we had a blessed interregnum of quasi-peace, and the possibility that American conservatives would return to the problem of how to shrink the size and power of Big Government here at home. ..."
"... For that whole decade, the neoconservatives had pined away for lack of an enemy, and had fought off the natural inclination of their fellow conservatives to concern themselves with domestic issues. But when the twin towers fell, the neoconservative movement was energized as never before. With its number one platform plank a policy of global empire-building, the movement was in a perfect position within the Republican party to finally implement its idea of exercising what Bill Kristol calls " benevolent global hegemony ." We must become global hegemons for our own protection, they aver, starting with the Middle East. ..."
"... The special place that Israel enjoys in the heart of every neoconservative is due to its nature as a self-created entity: that is, one that reflects their concept of America itself as a country founded on an abstract idea rather than an allegiance to a certain place with a definite history. Israel, also, was America's staunchest ally during the cold war, and represents all the values that stand in such stark contrast to its neighbors: modernity, democracy, Western culture, all the things that neocons fervently believe must be spread over the entire earth, by force if need be. ..."
"... The Christian Century ..."
"... "When Israel captured Jerusalem in the 1967 war; dispensationalists were certain that the end was near. L. Nelson Bell, Billy Graham's father-in-law and editor of Christianity Today , wrote in July 1967: 'That for the first time in more than 2,000 years Jerusalem is now completely in the hands of the Jews gives the student of the Bible a thrill and a renewed faith in the accuracy and validity of the Bible.'" ..."
"... Why is the United States embarked on a war that cannot possibly benefit us? Don't let them tell you it's all about oil. The price of oil will go down ..."
"... The war against Iraq will be the first shot of that war. ..."
"... For the neocons, this implements and validates both their desire to protect and expand the Israeli state and their theories of American hegemonism; for the dispensationalists, it fulfills their prophecies of the "end times" and gives existential reality to the idea of Armageddon as an actual battle. These are the two pillars that hold up our irrational and dangerous policy in the Middle East, and we cannot even think of changing that policy until their foundations are weakened, and, after the exertion of Samson-like efforts on our part, they come tumbling down. ..."
As
we remember Justin Raimondo, we present a piece based on a speech he gave to the Palestine
Center conference at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, on January 23, 2003.
How is it that U.S. policy in the Middle East has essentially nothing to do with vital
American interests? How is it that, in the midst of a war against Osama bin Laden and his
terrorist network, the United States is about to launch a war on the entire Arab-Muslim world,
pursuing a policy that pleases the Evil Imam to no end? What is behind the relentless drive to
war with Iraq – a country that has never attacked us, and represents no military threat
to US territory or forces?
Foreign policy is supposed to be about an abstract concept that goes under the rubric of
"the national interest." But since I am a libertarian – that is, someone who believes in
the primacy of the individual – this kind of rhetoric doesn't impress me. Since only
individuals can have interests and the means to pursue them, such a concept as the "national
interest" is highly suspicious, to say the least. So the question, when it comes to foreign
affairs, is really whose interests are being served by a given policy. The idea that
some noble, disinterested goal is being achieved, like the growth of "democracy" or the
protection of the legitimate rights of our allies, is an illusion perpetrated by the
beneficiaries of those policies.
Likewise, the conceptual theory of foreign policy, that traces the origin of a given
government's actions in the international arena to abstract ideas and official ideologies, is
utter nonsense. This confuses the rationalization with the motivation. Ideals, noble and
ignoble, are the masks behind which governments conceal their real goals, which can be boiled
down to a single purpose: the maintenance and expansion of the ruling elite's power on the home
front.
This dynamic is built in to the nature of all governments everywhere, no matter what form
they take. A fascist dictator, a democratically-elected President or Prime Minister, the
hereditary tribal chief – all must constantly reinforce their own legitimacy in the eyes
of the public, or at least some significant portion of it, in order to retain their positions.
The dictator of a one-party state cannot base his rule solely on keeping the population
terrorized: he must devote an awful lot of resources to propaganda directed at his own
subjects. He isn't all-powerful, not really, and he knows it. If, one day, the majority (or
even a significant minority) of his subjects decide to withhold their sanction from the system,
and simply cease cooperating, the dictator's goose is cooked. The Soviets, to their great
chagrin, learned this lesson too late.
In a democracy, the process of obtaining popular consent for government action involves
elections, in some form, but in all other respects is essentially similar, albeit vastly more
complicated. Foreign policy gets made like every other policy: as part of the horse-trading and
mutual back-scratching that characterizes the political process.
Having said this, we can now at least begin to imagine the answer to our initial question,
and yet it still seems quite mysterious that our policy is not only morally misguided but also
so directly opposed to our own interests, objectively understood. Why are we alienating the
entire Middle East at such a crucial conjuncture? As Professor Paul W. Schroeder of the
University of Illinois pointed out in regard to the upcoming invasion of Iraq:
"It would represent something to my knowledge unique in history. It is common for great
powers to try to fight wars by proxy, getting smaller powers to fight for their interests. This
would be the first instance I know where a great power (in fact, a superpower) would do the
fighting as the proxy of a small client state."
That "small client state" is, of course, Israel, a nation that makes up for its
smallness in a geographic sense for the large-scale heft and reach of its American lobby. And,
in the age of "democratic" imperialism, it helps a great deal to have an American
lobby.
The old-line Zionist organizations in America are one component of Israel's amen corner
in the US, naturally enough, but these are probably by far the least influential and are
certainly not a decisive factor. Traditionally liberal, Democratic, and pro-secular, these
groups have very little influence in the Republican party. However, the two other principal
tendencies that make up the pro-Israel lobby, the neoconservatives and the Christian
conservatives, are both deeply ensconced in the GOP. Acting in tandem, and playing
complementary roles, they have co-opted American foreign policy and made it the instrument of
Israel's right-wing Likud party.
Of these two groups, the neoconservatives are dominant, not numerically – there are
only a few dozen of them, after all – but ideologically. Half of them are newspaper
columnists, and the other half are influential writers and academics, who shuttle between jobs
in government and cushy niches at influential Washington thinktanks. The neocons are the
generals and the Christian conservatives of Jerry Falwell's ilk are the spear-carriers –
and naturally it is the former who are far more interesting, so we'll start with them.
Neoconservatism is a political tendency that grew out of the American left: its initial
cadres came out of the Communist movement and especially the Trotskyist tradition. These were
high-powered Marxist intellectuals who lost their faith in socialism, hated the Kremlin, and
down through the years retained little of their original ideology except a monomaniacal hatred
of Stalin and his heirs, and an overriding belligerence. Whatever stand they took on domestic
issues shifted with the political winds, but the neocons were consistent about one thing: the
need for an aggressive foreign policy. Back when they were Trotskyists, they insisted on the
necessity of "permanent revolution" and attacked the Stalinists for not doing enough to export
the Revolution abroad. Now that they are conservatives, of a sort, they insist that we must
export "democracy" abroad, and criticize the White House whenever it fails to display the
proper crusading spirit. The career of Christopher Hitchens demonstrates this syndrome in its
purest form.
When the cold war ended, the great enemy the neocons had railed against for half a century
was suddenly gone – along with the rationale for a foreign policy of global
interventionism. The energizing factor that had fueled American interventionism since the end
of World War II, an implacable enemy, disappeared overnight – and did not reappear until
9/11/01. From the fall of the Berlin wall until the fall of the twin towers we had a blessed
interregnum of quasi-peace, and the possibility that American conservatives would return to the
problem of how to shrink the size and power of Big Government here at home.
But it was not to be.
For that whole decade, the neoconservatives had pined away for lack of an enemy, and had
fought off the natural inclination of their fellow conservatives to concern themselves with
domestic issues. But when the twin towers fell, the neoconservative movement was energized as
never before. With its number one platform plank a policy of global empire-building, the
movement was in a perfect position within the Republican party to finally implement its idea of
exercising what Bill Kristol calls " benevolent global hegemony ." We must become
global hegemons for our own protection, they aver, starting with the Middle East.
Much has been said and written about the neoconservative attachment to Israel, but it is a
mistake to attribute this fealty entirely or even primarily to ethnic and religious
allegiances. It is true that many neoconservatives are of the Jewish faith, but neoconservatism
is a set of ideas, not an ethnic but an ideological construction, which explains why there is
such a creature as a non Jewish neocon: Bill Bennett and Michael Novak come immediately to
mind. To say nothing of Michael Barone. The idea that neocon is a synonym for something else is
a vicious canard meant to
deflect criticism .
The special place that Israel enjoys in the heart of every neoconservative is due to its
nature as a self-created entity: that is, one that reflects their concept of America itself as
a country founded on an abstract idea rather than an allegiance to a certain place with a
definite history. Israel, also, was America's staunchest ally during the cold war, and
represents all the values that stand in such stark contrast to its neighbors: modernity,
democracy, Western culture, all the things that neocons fervently believe must be spread over
the entire earth, by force if need be.
So how does this tie in to the "born again" Christians, who make up such an integral part of
the Republican party machinery? The interface of these two disparate groups, with their wildly
different histories, is the contemporary conservative movement, where support for Israel is
unconditional. The neocons insinuated themselves into the traditional institutions of that
movement over the years – the thinktanks, the magazines, the grassroots organizations
– and slowly co-opted the leadership from the more traditional right-wing types. The
Christian conservatives, however, came from another place altogether, since their interest in
Israel is entirely theological.
In the first chapter of The Acts of the Apostles, the disciples ask the ascending Jesus,
"Lord, is this the time when you will restore the Kingdom to Israel?" This quote from the New
Testament encapsulates the fascination with Israel and its key role in the "end times" that
characterizes the Protestant tendency known as " dispensationalism ," which came to such
prominence in the late nineteenth century and is now enjoying a revival.
The idea that Jesus will return, one day, and establish an eternal Kingdom on earth is a
central tenet of Christianity. The millennial spirit is endemic to Christian doctrine. But the
dispensationalists deviate from the traditional Christian idea that the Kingdom of God will be
established after Christ's return. Indeed, they reverse it: according to them, the actions of
human beings, and not God, are enough to bring the Kingdom into being, and, what's more, can
provide the catalyst for the Second Coming.
Reading the Bible literally, and seeing in it all sorts of predictions, the
dispensationalists see evidence that the "end times" are upon us based on their interpretation
of certain key passages in the Bible. As the dispensationalists see it, the future will be a
time of turmoil, but true Bible-believing Christians will be "raptured" away (literally,
carried up into heaven) before it begins. This is known as the period of tribulation, which
will culminate in a valley northwest of Jerusalem known as Armageddon. When the Christians are
"raptured" away, then Israel will take the place of the Church on earth, and, according to the
dispensationalists, this will mark the beginning of another theological period or
"dispensation" supposedly foreseen in the Bible.
This variant of Protestant fundamentalist doctrine is the root of what is known as
"Christian Zionism," a movement that preceded the formal establishment of the Jewish variety by
some years. As related by Professor Donald Wagner in article in The Christian Century
, " Evangelicals
and Israel: Theological Roots of a Political Alliance ":
"When Israel captured Jerusalem in the 1967 war; dispensationalists were certain that
the end was near. L. Nelson Bell, Billy Graham's father-in-law and editor of Christianity
Today , wrote in July 1967: 'That for the first time in more than 2,000 years Jerusalem is
now completely in the hands of the Jews gives the student of the Bible a thrill and a renewed
faith in the accuracy and validity of the Bible.'"
The political alliance of Zionism and dispensationalist Christianity set down roots early in
the century, here and in Britain, and these have grown stronger over the years, finally
culminating in an effective, well-funded political machine that forms the base of the
present-day Republican party. With neoconservative theoreticians at the head of the column, and
a "born again" army of spear carriers standing behind them, the Neocon-"born again" alliance,
working in tandem with mainstream Zionist organizations, has become a pervasive force in
American politics. Having won the White House, and established a veritable stranglehold on
Congress, Israel's amen corner in the U.S. has infiltrated the national security and diplomatic
apparatus via the GOP and effectively controls US policy in the Middle East.
Why is the United States embarked on a war that cannot possibly benefit us? Don't let them
tell you it's all about oil. The price of oil will go down once Saddam's supply is
unleashed on the open market. If oil is a factor, it is a minor one: it is Israel, not oil,
that energizes the drive to war. And we are not just talking about war with Iraq, but a
regional war, one in which Iran, Syria, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia will all be counted as our
enemies. What the neocons – and the dispensationalists – want (each for their own
reasons) is what Norman
Podhoretz , a leading neocon, calls " World War IV ." World
War III, you understand, was the cold war. The fourth world war will be, as Poddy puts it,
George W. Bush's "war against militant Islam."
The war against Iraq will be the first shot of that war.
Here, in the scenario of World War IV and the subsequent conquest of the Middle East by
American armies, the ideas that motivate the neocons and the dispensationalists come together.
For the neocons, this implements and validates both their desire to protect and expand the
Israeli state and their theories of American hegemonism; for the dispensationalists, it
fulfills their prophecies of the "end times" and gives existential reality to the idea of
Armageddon as an actual battle. These are the two pillars that hold up our irrational and
dangerous policy in the Middle East, and we cannot even think of changing that policy until
their foundations are weakened, and, after the exertion of Samson-like efforts on our part,
they come tumbling down.
Justin Raimondo passed away on June 27, 2019. He was the co-founder and editorial director
of Antiwar.com, and was a senior fellow at the Randolph Bourne Institute. He was a contributing
editor at The American Conservative , and wrote a monthly column for
Chronicles . He was the author of Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy
of the Conservative Movement [Center for Libertarian Studies, 1993; Intercollegiate
Studies Institute, 2000], and An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard
[Prometheus Books, 2000]. View all posts by Justin Raimondo
Thank you for that and I would add that India has no doubt studied Israel government
methodology in Palestine and will likely apply same with rigorous abandon against any non
hindu, pro independence Kashmiri.
With the UN reduced to a whimpering gecko the chauvinist nationalists will be out and
about with BIG sticks.
If you have been wondering when the twenty Democratic aspirants for the presidency will
begin a serious discussion of American foreign policy in the Middle East, where Washington has
been bogged down in both current and impending wars, you are not alone. With the honorable
exception of Tulsi Gabbard, no one seems keen to touch that particular live wire.
Part of the problem is the journalists who are asking the questions in the debates. To be
sure, the publication of "The Israel Lobby and
U.S. Foreign Policy" by professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt back in 2007
opened the door to a frank discussion of why the United States is involved in unresolvable
conflicts on behalf of a tiny client state. But unfortunately, while it is now possible to find
in the mainstream media some honest analysis of Israel's ability to corrupt policy formulation
in Washington, in general the Jewish state continues to get a pass from both the press and
politicians on all issues that matter.
And then there is the problem of Congress itself, which is precisely the institution that
has been most corrupted by Israel and Jewish money. Almost thirty years ago, American
politician Pat Buchanan described Congress as "Israeli occupied territory." As a result, he was
viciously attacked by the mainstream media and the political leadership of both parties,
demonstrating beyond all doubt that he was correct in his observation. Today the Israel Lobby
in the United States is far more powerful than it was in 1990, so much so that Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu actually boasts to his voters that he directs U.S. policy.
The hypocrisy inherent in the Israel-philia of America's political leadership is such that
it sometimes produces comic results. The whiney head of the House Intelligence Committee
Congressman Adam Schiff, Democrat of California, was beside himself prior to the Robert Mueller
testimony before Congress on July 24 th , denouncing Russia and President Donald
Trump,
saying that the president's actions amounted to "Disloyalty to country Those are strong
words But disloyalty to country violates the very obligation of citizenship, our devotion to a
core principle on which our nation was founded, that we, the people, not some foreign power
that wishes us ill, we decide, who shall govern, us."
Strong words indeed, but Adam Schiff knows perfectly well that Moscow's alleged involvement
in the 2016 election, which was relatively insignificant, had no measurable impact on the
result. And both he and Mueller have been coy about presenting any real evidence that Russia is
gearing up to do major damage in 2020, which is what they claim to be the case. By way of
contrast, everyone in Washington knows very clearly but will never admit that Israel has
seriously corrupted the United States government and its elected officials at all levels. But
Schiff did not mention Israel, nor did he express concern that Israel's clearly unsavory
involvement with Trump transition team members General Michael Flynn and Jared Kushner was
never thoroughly investigated or included in the final Mueller report. One might assume that a
deliberate decision was made by some parties in power to avoid embarrassing Israel. Those
parties almost certainly included Schiff.
Schiff, who is Jewish, frequently tells audiences about his love for Israel, sometimes
complaining that it is treated unfairly. It might be suggested that if anyone in the
government is partial to a foreign power it is Schiff, and that foreign power is Israel, not
Russia.
Unfortunately, Schiff is far from unique. Perhaps he and a number of other Congressmen
should register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as required by law.
Congressmen are not exempt when they work to benefit a foreign nation, though they frequently
believe themselves to be not subject to the very laws that they pass. In May
a letter was sent to the White House with the signatures of 400 congressmen, purely to
express America's legislature's solidarity with Israel and to give it a green light to do
whatever it wishes vis-à-vis its neighbors. The letter cites some questionable American
interests relating to Syria, but it also mentions Israel no less than 13 times.
If that does not convince one that Congress has always been and continues to be Israeli
occupied territory, check out some bills that have been working their way through the
legislature. The House
voted overwhelmingly on July 23 rd to formally oppose the Palestinian-backed
nonviolent movement to boycott Israel. The measure,
H.Res.246 opposes "efforts to delegitimize the State of Israel and the Global Boycott,
Divestment, and Sanctions Movement [BDS] targeting Israel." The bill had 349 co-sponsors and
passed by a 398–17 vote. Sixteen Democrats and only one Republican opposed the bill. The
bill is not a law but is rather intended to express the will of congress, which is perhaps the
only good thing to say about it.
Other bills have not yet been voted on, presumably because friends of the Jewish state are
looking for more goodies to add in. The pending legislative action includes the aid to Israel
bill
H.R.1837 the "United States-Israel Cooperation Enhancement and Regional Security Act" ,
which has
279 cosponsors . When the bill is approved, which it will be, it will increase the amount
of aid given to Israel over ten years to $38 billion, though this is now regarded as a minimum
figure which will be supplemented to meet the Jewish state's expressed needs. And the
aid is now unconditional, meaning that Israel will receive the money no matter how it
behaves, while the Jewish state will also be able to use the U.S. taxpayer provided money to
buy weapons from its own arms industry, cutting American defense contractors out of the loop
and costing jobs in the United States.
Another bill to benefit Israel is also pending:
H.R. 1850 , the "Palestinian International Terrorism Support Prevention Act of 2019," a law
that would authorize and encourage financially sanctioning any foreign organization or
individual that provides "support" to any group, organization or individual considered to be
part of the Palestinian resistance. Interestingly, the bill does not even pretend to be based
on U.S. national security: it is all about and for Israel. It could mean that foreign
supporters of BDS, which is now considered a hostile entity by "the will of" Congress, could be
subject to sanctions even though they are non-violent and threaten no one.
One final bit of bipartisan legislation best described as a pander to both Israel and the
Jewish community is a bill that has appeared
recently in the Senate that will prioritize and pay for health care and nutrition services
for those who claim to be holocaust survivors. The bill is entitled the "Trauma-Informed
Modernization of Eldercare for Holocaust Survivors Act" or "TIME for Holocaust Survivors Act."
It is intended to "increase the chances that survivors could age in their own homes" and also
"to ensure that holocaust survivors have care and services tailored to their needs."
Sponsor Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, who is of course Jewish, elaborated: "Holocaust
survivors came to the United States seeking refuge from unimaginable horrors. They have lived
their lives here and enriched our nation. With an average age of 85, we have an obligation to
provide Holocaust survivors the community support and special services they need to live out
their final days,"
WE have an obligation? How about you and your co-religionists Ben as you seem to have
a lot of money to spend on lobbying for Israel and corrupting our government? Special services?
Why do they need help? Because, the bill states, "institutionalized settings, with confined
spaces or restrictions on food, can induce panic, anxiety, and re-traumatization due to their
holocaust experiences."
What about other elderly American who have problems with "institutionalized settings" or
"confined spaces" or "restrictions on food?" How the Senate will justify special benefits for a
small group of self-described victims drawn from the wealthiest demographic in the U.S. remains
to be seen. If there is anyone who actually needs help, it is the U.S. taxpayer, who has to
bear the burden of this utter nonsense, which sets up Jews as a special privileged group within
our social services network. So-called holocaust survivors are identified in the bill's "Findings"
as "(2) More than 200,000 Jews fleeing from Nazi occupied territory found refuge in the
United States from 1933 through 1945, and approximately 137,000 additional Jewish refugees
settled in the United States from 1945 through 1952. (3) Hundreds of thousands of additional
Jewish refugees continued to immigrate to the United States from Europe and countries of the
former Soviet Union during the subsequent decades. (4) The number of Holocaust survivors living
in the United States at the end of 2018 was approximately 80,000 individuals, down from an
estimated 13 127,000 in 2010."
Thus, holocaust survivors who will benefit from the bill are inevitably and by intention
only Jews – no Christians who went through 1933-1945 in Europe need apply. That one
highly privileged group should deserve special benefits from government that other retirees
cannot have is a disgrace. So, is the United States Congress Israeli and also, by extension,
Jewish occupied territory? I think the question answers itself.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest,
a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a
more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its
email is[email protected]
' To be sure, the publication of "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" by professors
John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt back in 2007 opened the door to a frank discussion of why
the United States is involved in unresolvable conflicts on behalf of a tiny client state. But
unfortunately '
But unfortunately, the door was firmly slammed shut again.
@Dan Hayes I
remember years ago seeing annoying ads on cable TV (particularly on FoxNews) by Rabbi Yechiel
Eckstein (who died earlier this year) begging and pleading to donate money to his
"International Fellowship of Christians and Jews" so he and his daughter Yael could get
"Emergency Food Boxes" to elderly Russian Jews living in poverty that had survived living in
concentration camps.
Christian evangelist goyim suckers
Eckstein's trademark – tapping poor evangelical Christians in America's South by
showing them tear-jerking videos about poverty in Israel – is well-known. What is
less well-known is that Eckstein himself is well compensated by the fund, taking in about a
million dollars a year, including pension provisions.
That Israel gets a credit line for purchasing weapons from the US is nothing more than pork
barrel politics from Congress.
The billions in weapon aid is part of the Camp David Peace Agreement between Israel and
Egypt, but I hear no whinging about Egypt having the same deal and getting the same amount of
weapons as Israel does.
Why in the heck the US should furnish these two countries with a lot of weapons? Bringing
the pork back to the local constituencies is it. Pork barrel.
@Colin Wright'To be a Zionist, you have to either believe in the racial supremacy of Jews, be a liar,
or be very badly misinformed, since Israel is otherwise indefensible.'
Whoops. Missed one.
It's possible to be a Zionist if you're a really rabid Islamophobe. This last seems to
motivate some of our gentile Israel-lovers.
I wonder how many of our resident Zionists can actually be bothered to live in Israel
themselves?
It's one of the things that irritates me about Zionists. For most of them, Israel is
ultimately a hobby; I mean, Jews in general should go there, but not them. Too much
trouble.
But for their victims, the suffering is real. It's not a hobby.
If US leaders were being truly Machiavellian, they would double down on their support for
Netanyahu, while simultaneously arming Israel with conventional weapons.
Netanyahu gets a large portion of his support from backward, ultra orthodox Jews, who have
exceptionally high birth rates (around 7 children per woman) and are extremely politically
active. They are expected to be around 1/4th of the Israeli population in twenty years. If
this continues, it will turn Israel into a 3rd world country by mid-century, since secular
Jews only have slightly-above-replacement birth rates and the ultra orthodox do not have the
human capital to support a modern economy.
By arming Israel, it allows their leadership to procrastinate on the issue of Orthodox
Jews (who do not serve in the military), allowing the problem to metastasize demographically.
Israel has around 30 years to solve the issue before it's too late, and they are reduced to a
regional, third world nation.
Thank you, Philip. The Jewish-Israeli takeover of the US Congress is not only a flat out
disgrace, it is an organized attack on US sovereignty.
In America, pro-Zionist organizations are generally in charge of manufacturing news,
headlines, 'history', and dubious information (hasbara) for national consumption....
@Bubba I saw that
ad today on television. Him and his wife still being used for funds for
non-existent"survivors" in Russia. It's so obviously a scam. I wouldn't buy a car from that
scumbag
Trump wasn't their candidate (which suggests that he's clean), and (so far) he hasn't
enabled a war with Iran, so what happens with him is an open question.
I wonder what makes you (or anyone) so sure that "Trump wasn't their candidate". From the
time that he announced his candidacy in 2015 to the present moment, I have never found
implausible the possibility that the President may be controlled opposition. Or, more
mundanely, simply the self-promoting carnival barker that just about all evidence strongly
suggests that he always was. How closely have you looked at Mr. Trump's actual record,
starting from before he announced?
And, to what extent, since becoming President, has Mr. Trump actually opposed the
Globo-Homo agenda?
Trump wasn't their candidate (which suggests that he's clean), and (so far) he hasn't
enabled a war with Iran, so what happens with him is an open question.
I wonder what makes you (or anyone) so sure that "Trump wasn't their candidate".
The Deep State, Empire, Zio-Glob, or whatever you want to call it, was obviously 100%
behind Hillary Clinton. She and her husband were totally blackmailable, and the media fury
when she lost was something to see.
For his part, Trump looked surprised (and not too happy) that he won. It's clear that he
has links to the Deep State, but he was set up to lose (the media from the start presenting
him as the joke candidate – the irrelevant clown). The script was for serious, boring
and ineffectual Jeb Bush to lose to the heroic champion of Social Justice, and first woman
President Hillary Clinton.
When Trump actually found himself President (and could see the trouble he was in) –
for survival, he fully committed to Israel and the Zionists. The idea was that they would
defend him , against their Cultural Bolshevik cousins in the US. The Adelsons and the
Israelis love him while the US Cultural Bolshevik Jews hate him.
The US public are just extras in this show. If he cared about them he would do something
about 9/11 – which he won't. He's a high rise developer from New York and knows better
than anyone that 9/11 was all fakery. Here's his first public reaction (on the day):
Where there are many who wish and hope that the Epstein scandal will roll up Trump and
everybody with him I must warn you to be careful of what you wish and hope for. It is
starting to appear that this de Rothschild purveyor of underage girls may have had way more
contact with certain Democrats than Epstein ever had with President I'm terrifically Red,
White, & Orange.
Here's a hint Democrats start talking up progressive political issues and quit with these
bogus attacks against Trump without sufficient evidence. Trump could be beat but he can't
lose to trivial or made up accusations which don't exist. It's long overdue to confront the
many hard issues we struggle with and time for the Democrats to let go of this corporate
conspired nonsense.
Gregory Herr , July 25, 2019 at 21:36
It is long overdue Joe. Thanks for the link.
"In the media the Epstein story died almost immediately, submerged in the tale of Donald
Trump telling several congresswomen to go back where they came from." Philip Giraldi
Gregory your link is an excellent article for my comment to jump off from. I too think
that collusion in US politics is far from just any curious Russians trying to flip an
election. Actually the culprits to watch out for interfering into our so called democracy are
the Saudi's and the Israeli's. In fact look no further than the Middle East if you don't
believe me. I mean who's wars are Americans fighting anyway certainly not any Russian wars
but, a ton of support is given to both Israel and Saudi Arabian this field of destruction.
The American public is being driven in car with hardly any brakes while the driver drives us
in the dark to creepy unknown destinations who needs headlights anyway?
Gregory Herr , July 26, 2019 at 21:29
Good to hear from you Joe. It's such a sad state of affairs that our nation's people are
bamboozled to such an extent that the demonization of Russia and the canard of Russian state
"interference" in our election gained widespread traction. But the government of Israel and
their agents of "influence" can mount all manner of coercion and bribery (obvious and well
documented) to the extent that nearly the entire representative structure of our "democracy"
is affected. Our people turn a blind eye to the horrific injustices cast upon Palestinians
while Congress, including Tulsi Gabbard, "condemns" non-violent First Amendment rights of
boycott.
I'll leave a link to a discussion. Be sure to catch Rashida Tlaib's stirring speech in
Congress embedded in the video.
It's obvious to any American that still has a functioning brain that this nation is under
Israeli occupation, with various American Financial moguls acting as Gauleiters.
Whether it's Arnon Milchan on the West Coast, bragging about stealing some of our nuclear
triggers and shipping them to Israel, or Lex Wexner on the East Coast, helping the Israeli
spy Epstein lure, seduce and entrap American politico types in his honey-traps, the Zionist
control of our nation is right in front of our faces.
But most either refuse to see, or they're too busy cheering on the latest batch of Trump's
idiotic tweets, filled with hate and belligerence and slavish loyalty to Israel.
My guess is there's many more Epstein's out there, still running their honey-traps. After
all, Epstein is just one, and when one adds in the 535 members of Congress, the untold number
of possible targets in the WH, the Treasury Dept, the Pentagon and the rest, plus the 50
states, like the Florida guv more than willing to do whatever Israel wants, that points to
more than just Jeffrey running a honey-trap.
@Germanicus
Australia prohibits double citizenship for members of parliament. It has not significantly
diminished the strength of the Israel lobby in that country.
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is ..."
"... You're overspecializing. Epstein, like all of the characters in the Mueller mess, is an international fixer and blackmailer. All of these dudes work for EVERY nation and mob at one time or another, and betray EVERY nation and mob at other times. Israel is just one of the nations that hire these creatures. The only difference is that the fixers are less likely to betray Israel. Mossad is more serious and competent than MI6 or CIA. ..."
"... I suggest that everyone half intelligent exercise some common sense when it comes to Epstein. Only an (anti-Israel) idiot believes that Epstein/Mossad were running blackmail operations for years with American intelligence cowed into turning a blind eye. ..."
"... While it will certainly be a hard row to hoe due to many factors, not the least of which is that the Zionists have taken the long-view on many matters and this approach has given them the upper hand, it is imperative for the prosperity and well-being of the non-Zionist U.S. citizens. ..."
"... By the way, amid all this Maxwell=Mossad business, both Maxwell and Trump procured their opulent yachting yachts from the Khashoggi brothers. And Khashoggi, whoever else he works for, is a big skin on the wall at CIA... ..."
Some journalists in the Jewish media are
starting to complain that President Donald Trump is "loving Israel" just a little too much
since he keeps citing his concern for the Jewish state as the driving force behind some of his
erratic behavior. It is a viewpoint that I most definitely share, though I would describe the
apparent White House lovefest with the Israel as a "lot too much." When the President of the
United States calls a congresswoman an anti-Semite and
demands that she apologize to him personally and also to Israel it is definitely a lot too
much.
So Israel is always in the news, or so it seems, though it is often not in the news when the
story might be derogatory. The story disappears from sight as soon as it is determined that
Israel might be involved, as is currently the case with Jeffrey Epstein, or Israeli activity is
excised completely as was the case with the Mueller investigation where Russiagate should have
really been called Israelgate as it was Israel that was seeking favors from the incoming Trump
Administration, not Russia. As Noam Chomsky
put it , Israeli interference in American politics "vastly overwhelms" anything Russia has
done.
I have recently written about how the Jewish state works hard to brainwash the American
people and limit the foreign policy options of the U.S. government, to include aggressive
efforts to obtain what the intelligence agencies would call "agents of influence." Agents
of influence live and work in one country while simultaneously and treacherously advancing the
interests of another nation. It is what George Washington warned about in his Farewell Address
when he counseled "Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe
me, fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history
and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican
government."
Foreign influence as a potential national security threat is also a status defined in legal
terms by the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (FARA), which requires anyone working on
behalf of a foreign government to register and make transparent sources of income.
Uniquely, no foundation or individual working in America to advance the interests of the
Jewish state has ever been required to register under FARA even though many, like the odious
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), boast unambiguously on their websites that they are "America's pro-Israel Lobby."
Many of the foundations are regarded as educational or charitable 501(c)3 tax exempt
non-profits, which means the U.S. taxpayer is helping support their activity. But being a
non-profit charity does not necessarily mean austerity, as the salaries of top employees are
generous. Canadian Jew Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), a
501(c)3, is paid $560,000 in salary and benefits. FDD has for many years been calling for war
against Iran.
The most recent foundation being set up by Israel's friends to promote the interests of the
Jewish state is the Edmund Burke Foundation, which hosted a conference on "Nationalism" last
week. The conference was interesting in that the Burke Foundation is headed by an Israeli and an
American Jew who has served as Executive Director of the Christians United For Israel (CUFI).
The event was held at the Washington D.C. Ritz-Carlton, suggesting that the Burkeans are not
short of cash. Pro-Israel groups always seem to have plenty of Benjamins.
A number of traditional conservatives and even some organizations were
fooled by the promotional material and speakers' list into thinking that the program was
legitimate and would focus on supporting national interests as well as foreign policy
restraint, but some at least had their eyes opened when John Bolton, as featured speaker, was
vigorously applauded by at least half of the audience .
Some potential critics of the agenda were not invited or even
deliberately
denied tickets to limit dissent, and several attendees were appalled by what they had
witnessed, which was essentially an affirmation of status quo foreign policy, to the benefit
of the hawks in Washington and Israel. Inevitably, some delusional dimwits were unable to
understand that they were being used and were oddly entranced by what they were seeing and hearing . And don't
worry if you are among those who missed the event. It will probably be replayed in a few months
under a different name and with a slightly different cast of characters.
The most visible Israeli tool for generating contacts with Americans that might prove useful
is the all- expenses-paid VIP junkets that are arranged for Congressmen. New Congressmen
routinely travel to Israel for a dog-and-pony show within months of their taking office. One of
Congress's leading cheerleaders for Israel, Maryland's Steny Hoyer has visited the Jewish state
many times and can be relied on
to pressure freshman congressmen to make the trip. Other Americans who might be influential in
the future are also feted by the Israeli hospitality machine. American military cadets from the
service academies and colleges are now being brought to Israel to
learn a fictional version of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Undoubtedly, some of them are
set up for intelligence approaches after they are commissioned.
Which brings us to the pedophile Jeffrey Epstein story and how it is being handled by
government and covered in the media since the story exploded two weeks ago. No one outside the
alternative media seems to be interested in the possibility, or rather likelihood, that Epstein
was working for a foreign intelligence service, which would most likely be Israel. In the media
the Epstein story died almost immediately, submerged in the tale of Donald Trump telling
several congresswomen to go back where they came from.
It is unlikely that the spying aspect of Epstein's alleged crimes will even be investigated
both because it involves the Jewish state and also becomes it appears to include participation
by leading politicians from both parties and other public figures. The Deep State will make the
story die, which just might also be what happens to Epstein in jail.
The evidence that Epstein was involved in intelligence work most likely bribing or
blackmailing prominent individuals to act on behalf of Israel, derives both from the statement
made by former U.S. Attorney for Miami Alexander Acosta
that "I was told Epstein 'belonged to intelligence' and to leave it alone" and from other
external evidence. Epstein was making videos of his guests having sex with his young girls,
which is a version of a classic intelligence entrapment technique referred to as a "honey trap"
that is employed by every major spy agency worldwide. And the Acosta quote – will it ever
be fully investigated? Who told him that Epstein was "intelligence" and what were the
circumstances?
Jeffrey's sources of income have also been questioned. Epstein's sole identified business
connection was Ohio billionaire Les Wexner, who maintained very close ties to the upper echelons of the
Israeli diplomatic and intelligence establishment .
Epstein served as Wexner's trustee when the latter was forming the Mega Group, created by
Wexner and Edgar Bronfman to generate positive views of Israel as a
cover for Israeli propaganda dissemination in America.
Epstein's lack of an identifiable income stream rather suggests that he might have been
supported by a government agency of some kind. He had hidden in his Manhattan house a great
deal of cash, diamonds and an Austrian passport. The diamonds might have represented payment in
kind from Israel, which is capital of the world diamond trade, and the existence of the
passport is intriguing. It has been described in the media as "fake" but that can mean
anything. The passport, dating from the 1980s, was
apparently authentic with a photo of Epstein and a fake name inserted in it, but it might
plausibly be the product of a government document forgery lab. Why Austria? Because Austria was
at the time politically neutral and the passport would be a good one for traveling anywhere. It
would be much preferred by spy agencies or by agents who wanted to travel anonymously.
That Epstein would be linked to Israel rather than to some other intelligence service is due
to his relationship with Ghislaine Maxwell ,
whose father Robert, a Czech Jew who became a naturalized British citizen, was believed by
C.I.A. and other intelligence services to be a long-time agent of Mossad. After he died under
mysterious circumstances, he was given a state funeral in Israel that was attended by every
current and former head of the Jewish state's intelligence service as well as by the country's
prime minister Yitzhak Shamir. Ghislaine was reportedly Epstein's close friend and a procurer
of his young girl victims.
As most of Israel's agents of influence are now on Martha's Vineyard where they gather in
July and August, it would be wonderful to cut off all transportation and communication with the
island and leave them there, but that would be unfair to the genuine year-round residents.
Alternatively, I would be happy just to see Israel's dire influence over the United States
exposed by the media and discussed in public fora by the more than 20 Democratic Party
presidential wannabes. As that is not likely to happen, I would settle for a real honest-to-God
investigation of Epstein and what he was doing coupled with a move by the Treasury and Justice
departments against all the hundreds of pro-Israel groups that have never registered under
FARA. It's a big job to uncover Israeli subversion, but somebody needs to start doing it.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that
seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its
email is[email protected]
I would settle for a real honest-to-God investigation of Epstein
Dershowitz "would publish an online essay preemptively attacking Bruck's (Connie)
unpublished article and accusing New Yorker editor David Remnick of ordering up a "hit
piece" aimed at "silencing my defense of President Trump , Prime Minister
Netanyahu , and the State of Israel ." (Remnick declined to comment.)
Rice,NYM 7/19
Dersh' is claiming this forthcoming Bruck piece -in particular- will do permanent damage
to his career. We can only hope it will be that effective. Yes, forces are out there trying
to quash investigations.
I think there will be some significant efforts to do the job that many had badly fell
short on. But there should be much more. Like 60 Mins and Frontline to name
two. As for the prosecutors, that question has to be answered too. This is a very big story.
As serious as the crimes against the young girls are, the Epstein case is about much
more.
Are you kidding? The truth will never come out. You were supposedly a counterintelligence
expert at the CIA? Epstein's links to Maxwell, Israel, the Mossad, MI5 and the USA's own CIA
are so blatant that Acosta was told that he was part of the Intelligence Network and to leave
him alone. All Jewish organizations (they do not have to register as lobbying groups) are
nothing more that money launders for various illegal Jewish activities and form pathways for
Jews to do anything they want in America.
Yeah. Vanity Fair is reporting that some "prominent Republicans" believe that Epstein is a
Mossad agent. And so it begins. The Narrative: the only people that believe THAT tinfoil hat
blood libel about Epstein-Israel are the Nazi Alt-right-wingers. It's basically the Birthers
all over again. Nothing to see here. Move along.
You're overspecializing. Epstein, like all of the characters in the Mueller mess, is an
international fixer and blackmailer. All of these dudes work for EVERY nation and mob at one
time or another, and betray EVERY nation and mob at other times. Israel is just one of the
nations that hire these creatures. The only difference is that the fixers are less likely to
betray Israel. Mossad is more serious and competent than MI6 or CIA.
Thank you, Philip Giraldi, for an important and insightful article.
Another major hurdle blocking a genuine investigation of Israeli influence and its
highly-paid and deeply-embedded agents of influence, is that Israel just happens to have
'friends' at all levels of elite American media. Israelis and crypto-Israelis dominate
America's Fourth Estate.
Pro-Israel infiltration of US news institutions, social media organs, search engines, and
entertainment media cannot be overestimated. Yet it's ignored. Deliberately. Certain facts
may not be noticed.
But it is a fact that hard-core Zionists own/manage/influence most American news and
entertainment media; from Hollywood to Chicago to DC to NYC–and most everything in
between.
In the rare instance when an independent news outlet does do its job and pursues a story
that upsets organized Jewry, it is commonly met with threats of boycott (economic warfare)
and/or Zionist-friendly lawsuits ('lawfare'). As Gilad Atzmon has noted (I paraphrase):
'Jewish power is the power to make unacceptable the close examination of Jewish power'.
Isn't the main problem double citizenship, the rotten US empire has enforced all over its
vassal states?
You can't serve two masters, double citizenship has to be removed.
Giraldi appears to be speaking truth to (Jewish) power but don't believe it.
It ain't coincidental that he's engaged in this distracting arm-waving, mentioning the
previously obscure and notoriously unenforced FARA twice.
the DOJ National Security Division, intentionally never prosecuted for FARA violations
because they used the appearance of FARA violations to get FISA electronic surveillance
warrants against any DC entity they wanted to watch.
I suggest that everyone half intelligent exercise some common sense when it comes to
Epstein. Only an (anti-Israel) idiot believes that Epstein/Mossad were running blackmail
operations for years with American intelligence cowed into turning a blind eye.
It's positively depressing to see Giraldi, someone I thought honorable, deployed to
distract attention from seditious filth like Brennan. Will Giraldi even mention his name
anymore? I half expect Giraldi one of these days to tell us Brennan et. al. "were keeping us
safe." Which is why Epstein and Mossad were molesting minors right under their honorable
noses.
Am I the only one (mostly) noting the pitch perfect similarity of Epstein to the Dennis
Hastert scandal 13 years ago?
I encourage you to continue to write pieces exposing the Israeli connection to much of
what ails us here in the U.S. (and the rest of the world, too).
While it will certainly be a hard row to hoe due to many factors, not the least of which
is that the Zionists have taken the long-view on many matters and this approach has given
them the upper hand, it is imperative for the prosperity and well-being of the non-Zionist
U.S. citizens.
As an aside, when I hear our rulers utter the phrase "National Security" I have to wonder
which nations security they are referring to because it sure doesn't seem to be mine.
By the way, amid all this Maxwell=Mossad business, both Maxwell and Trump procured their
opulent yachting yachts from the Khashoggi brothers. And Khashoggi, whoever else he works
for, is a big skin on the wall at CIA...
"... What Epstein has been up to is so obscene that it is now toxic to be associated with him. Everyone who claimed to be his friend are now running a mile from him. ..."
"... But what if it is revealed that he had created this cesspool at the direction of Israel i.e. that the main motivation for this honey-pot was to provide Israel with blackmail material. ..."
"... If that happened then a politician would run a mile at the mere sight of a lobby bag-man, because to be associated with them is to be tarred in a way that no amount of money could ever overcome. ..."
"... I am certain that there are still honest people in the US intelligence community, and I would bet very good money that they are looking very closely at this as a chance to stab the Israel lobby through the heart with a wooden stake. ..."
The thing I find most intriguing about the Epstein affair is possibility that it provides a
"hook" for the US intelligence community to really go after the Israeli lobby.
After all, going up against the *money* of the lobby is a forlorn hope - there is no way
to fight them on that battlefield.
But this? No, this is different.
What Epstein has been up to is so obscene that it is now toxic to be associated with
him. Everyone who claimed to be his friend are now running a mile from him.
But what if it is revealed that he had created this cesspool at the direction of Israel
i.e. that the main motivation for this honey-pot was to provide Israel with blackmail
material.
If that happened then a politician would run a mile at the mere sight of a lobby
bag-man, because to be associated with them is to be tarred in a way that no amount of
money could ever overcome.
I am certain that there are still honest people in the US intelligence community, and I
would bet very good money that they are looking very closely at this as a chance to stab
the Israel lobby through the heart with a wooden stake.
Trump is a zionist puppet and pretends to be doing something about illegal immigration but he
has all the authority under the Constitution to close the border and stop the illegal
immigration and since the zionists want open borders , Trump is not doing jackshit about
stopping illegal immigration!
The zionists in control of the zio/US want open borders so that they can merge the zio/US
with Mexico and zio/Canada into the North American Union similar to the European Union with a
new currency the Amero similar to the Euro, and so the borders are going to remain a sieve
!
Trump and Helliary and all the politicians , be they demonrats or republicons are all
under zionist AIPAC control and the borders will remain a pathway to the destruction of
America!
@follyofwar In case you did not hear it, Philip Giraldi is informing us:
25 Senators in Secret Meeting With Jewish Leaders to Plot Strategy Against Growing Anger
Over Influence of Jewish Elites
"On June 5, 16 heads of Jewish organizations joined 25 Democratic senators in a private
meeting, which, according to the Times of Israel, is an annual event.
As with last year, the meeting was chaired by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and included Sens.
Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Chris Coons (D-DE), Bob Menendez
(D-NJ), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Ed Markey (D-MA), Michael Bennet (D-CO),
Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Tom Carper (D-DE), Bob Casey (PA),
Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Mazie Hirono (D-HI),
Chris Murphy (D-CT), Patty Murray (D-CT), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Tom
Udall (D-NM), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Ron Wyden (D-OR)".
We do not know why Epstein resurfaced, there was no need to re-open the case unless 'they'
wanted it to be reopened. Thus, there is definitely a deeper political purpose behind this.
As I know the higher ups in both Democrat and Republican Party are in one way or another
involved in this (both Clinton and Trump visited his island and I am sure many more prominent
high ranking US career politicians), this could indeed be equally dangerous for either
political party.
However, I don't think Trump needs convincing with regard to Iran he has been all in on
that from day 1 of his presidency and never hesitated a moment to tear up the JCPOA. Bibi was
right when he said there was never a US president as friendly towards Israel than Donald
Trump. His actions have spoken louder than words. So for this case, we will just have to wait
and see what pieces of information they allow the MSM to publish and we will know who they
are after or what bigger political goal is at play.
Something does not smell right about this.
It's not like Epstein was some obscure issue or that Trump was uninformed about the case.
Who would allow a person with such baggage on the team?
And the issue was raised so no possibility it was over-looked.
Congress (including the now concerned repubs) had their shot at him, where was the
indignation?
Looks like people were told to disregard the issue, until now.
Now like good soldiers they are all barking alert.
Looks like this guy was a plant, an insurance policy maybe.
Now that policy has been triggered - has Trump failed in playing his role?
Trumps ex-pal Epstein linked to intelligence. Makes sense given he has Robert Maxwell's
daughter doing the procuring. His was likely a black mail operation run by the intelligence
agency
Trumps other ex-pal (partner) was also linked to intelligence. Bayrocks Felix Sater. I
imagine some of their business practices could have landed Trump in jail unless like Felix he
cooperated
Could Trump himself be a an intelligent asset? Perhaps under duress through his activities
with Jeffrey and Felix.
If so, indeed the question is if its Israels or the US agency, or is there any difference
now.
I don't pretend to know the answers.
Whats the end game?. Comeys daughter is one of the NY prosecutors.Dershowitz is an Israeli
puppet and was behind getting the sealed files opened. Is Clinton and the Dems the target or
is it meant to pressure Trump to go hard on Iran or risk something coming out? Something
else?
I cant help but wonder why nobody choses to remind us about the case filed against Trump
in 2016, where a woman claimed rape at age 13 at Epstein's apartment. Is wasn't covered much
at the time either. Apparently silently withdrawn. Curious no? Not even the so called Deep
State Media that everyone believes was against Trump. Theydon't seem to want to touch it now
either. Maybe its just BS.
Of course, maybe just more distraction as they continue fleecing the bottom 90%
Billionaire, $6 B, Les Wexner, L Brands, Victoria's Secret.
from Wiki
Wexner had a close relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, who managed Wexner's financial
assets. Wexner and Epstein parted when Epstein went to prison.[25] Wexner was believed to be
the primary source of Epstein's wealth. [26]
I am trying to link Wexner with the Bronfman's (Seagrams Liquor Family) via a source other
than the Mega Group (which may not be credible, IDK).Clare Bronfman and NEXIVM.
Looks like Epstein was running a high powered honey trap to ensnare Politicians, Lawyers,
Government employees for the express purpose of promoting the "Greater Israel Project".
@fastfreddy - While I hesitate to engage in the ubiquitous Israel is at the root of all
debacles conjecture, I think you might be onto something there. Sure would be interesting
(now or when whatever shakes out of this) to compare the record on votes of importance to
Israeli interests of any politician who gets implicated or indicted with who doesn't.
Protecting Epstein and his clients is secondary. The main goal is to protect his
billionaire, Jewish, sponsors and whatever state sponsored him. The pleabs cannot know that
their gov is corrupt but the bigger secret that must be kept is who is pulling the strings
and how they are doing it.
Regarding questions on Acosta by Jared at #27, here's a 2017 article showing that the
facts were out about Acosta when the Senate confirmed him: "Did Trump Labor Pick Protect
Trump, Rich Rapists, Tax Cheats, Crooked Bankers? Do We Find Out Wednesday?" March 14, 2017.
http://ow.ly/hk8b309Uerm
Regarding MSM reluctance to mention rape of 12 and 13 year olds by Trump, as several
commentators noted, here's a January 2017 wrap up of those matters with leading to other
links: "Welcome To Waterbury: The city that holds secrets that could bring down Trump," Jan.
9, 2018.
http://www.justice-integrity.org/1445-welcome-to-waterbury-the-city-that-holds-secrets-that-could-bring-down-trump.
My colleague Wayne Madsen and I filed a FOIA action today at the U.S. Justice Department
seeking further records.
Our view is that this is an intelligence / foreign policy operation and it's likely that
Epstein's time has run out, an occupational hazard in that field. Further, Madsen and I have
written separate books years ago documenting that all U.S. presidents after Carter -- but not
yet Trump as proven -- have been covert assets of the CIA or FBI before -- stress that --
they entered politics. That's the way it is, and helps explain a lot of the complaints in
comments above. Trump is in his own category of a corrupt stooge -- that's not necessarily
better.
Can recommend excellent 2008 book "Flat Earth News" by longtime UK journalist Nick Davies
that describes the deeply flawed nature of MSM from his perspective as a Guardian and other
UK journalist, who aptly describes why lies and quarter-truths get printed. That's a longer
story but the gist is what many here are suggesting.
After years of study and many many books I believe the Mossad and CIA are one and the
same. The Mossad is very useful when leaving sovereign footprints is verboten--and vice
versa.
"...'Belongs to intelligence' makes a lot of sense. The question is to which one. A lot
of people will says "Mossad" but I don't believe that to be the (full) truth ..."
At the level that Jeffrey Epstein is operating, he is loyal primarily to himself but
happily takes his reward from whichever intel agency at any time offers him the most or whose
interests might prove the most lucrative for him.
And the interests of American, British, Israeli and other nations' intelligence agencies
are surely so entwined that picking them apart is impossible. One thing for sure though: none
of them serve the interests of the nations they supposedly work for.
The function of the CIA/Mossad is to make sure the agenda and the narrative of the Deep
State gets served. In that case one could truly blame Epstein's actions on individuals, or
groups of individuals who dictate orders to the Mossad/CIA.
Epstein reminds me of the Bill Browder affair. And the statement: To know who are the
rulers not which are the ones you are not permitted to criticize. Or somethinh like that.
If indeed they are after Trump as he failed them on 'Iran', then it makes absolute sense that
Dershowitz and Cernovich had the records unsealed as both are strong, strong Zionists and
supporters of Israel. Getting a judge do the thing they need is just a formality. I agree
with some writer above who asked, why the publicity if pressure can be applied in secret
without the media being involved? But this may be the stated goal to bring Trump either
completely in line now or publicly topple his presidency.
I get why @94 Really? and others would be sceptical at this stage but I know strong
powers in the Zionist/Neo-con deep state want a direct confrontation with Iran for myriad
number of reasons (stop the BRI, deal a blow to Syria and Hizbollah, take out Israel's No 1
enemy etc, shore up the Petrodollar), and Trump was still the most likely candidate to follow
through with this, given his proximity to Zionism. So far he also has dully followed through
with everything imaginable, except for actually attacking Iran.
Interesting development indeed. B. Clinton could be collateral damage, at this stage their
power is overestimated in my opinion.
Okay, An "intelligence op," but which one? The Epstein/Mueller link was made several
months ago. I don't see any irregularities in the court judgement to order the unsealing as
it's been ongoing for almost 2.5 years and involves odd bedfellows. Was Mueller even aware of
the attempt to unseal Epstein's case? So many questions!
Arnon Milchan? He was Israeli. Should he be punished, absolutely. But you know who should
be hung? Robert DeNiro. He knew Arnon Milchan was a spy and kept his mouth shut for decades.
He is a POS of epic proportions.
Insofar as Epstein is concerned. It is all about timing. Mueller is set to testify and
probably has skeletons in his closet with regards to Epstein's case. He is likely being told
implicitly via the Epstein arrest to be on his best behavior by Barr, and Barr at this age
probably can care less that Epstein is being sacrificed so he can make his point,
particularly since Barr is probably the 2nd most powerful person in the USA right now.
Epstein was extremely likely an Israeli asset. The Israelis have through political power
and force convinced many in the US IC that their ship is sailing in the same direction, and
that they should be allowed to serve as the US's dog on a leash, and once in a while be
unleashed to do what the US won't. So while he was an Israeli asset, his resources (that is
compromising material) was often made available to the CIA, and thus Acosta was told that he
is an intelligence asset.
The fireworks will start to fly if and when Epstein realizes he is being hung out to dry
and won't be saved. But like almost every other case involving such rich and powerful people,
don't hold your breath for justice to be served in the US.
What does protecting adolescent teenagers from predatory adults have to do with
puritanism? Am I understanding this correctly that you advocate sex with minors as long as
they have reached biological puberty? Never mind their mental maturity? So sexual relations
involving young women is ok what about sexual relations with young men? This has nothing to
do with a false pretentious morality but with the fact that teenagers have not yet reached
the level of mental maturity that protects them from sexual exploitation that will haunt them
for the rest of their lives, never mind their biological functions and ability to conceive or
sire children. It is really puzzling that I even need to make these elaborations in here!
In many ways this thread is as sickening as the subject it discusses. All sorts of types left
and right competing to show that they have the most insight into the forces behind the anal
rape of a 12 year old girl See Andrew Kreig's excellent piece which does consider the horror
of the acts, rather than just whether or not it plays into the particular vision of 'power
politics' each poster invokes). In no instance does anyone express disgust at the actions of
these low life scum other than for the corruption of the pols such as Acosta.
The glee which so many have displayed jumping into this horror story because it can be
twisted and forced into their own particular theory about "how the world really works" while
totally ignoring that these humans who were abducted at age eleven or twelve & then sold
like cattle, now inhabit the netherworld of 'the great society' living in the fringes of
prosperous cities in a ramshackle 'double wide', reveals a psychic corruption not a million
miles away from that of the rapists.
This story is those young boys & girls, anyone who claims to want to use it to force
the greedy rapists and warmongering grubs to face justice, will not succeed as long as they
waste time speculating who works for who and who is really in control.
Prince Andrew still bludges off taxpayers despite being photographed with his arm around
one of his victims, if you're english & really care about stopping this scum, instead of
speculating on which shadowy 'palace spokesman suggested that the
Daily Mail include the line "There is no suggestion that the duke had any sexual contact
at the house, or knew what was allegedly going on there" you will find out how the at the
time 17 y.o. Virginia Roberts feels about her public destruction now (A child the Mail
described as an erotic masseuse - presumably to reduce the horror a normal human reacts to
that pic whilst ensuring the victim is so humiliated she causes no further problem for "the
royal family's" number one arms salesman). This victim first hung out with the andrew sleaze
when she was 17 at the pimp's Florida hell hole where the age of consent is 18.
Concentrating on the effect on victims while protecting them from further harm will bring
the creeps undone - nothing else will. It was only once people began to see past the priests
claims that "the victims led me on" and considered the huge power imbalance that the catholic
church came unstuck.
Most of all without humanity, there is no difference between any of us and the scum we
criticise.
Now, to be on topic, why the insistence that Epstein finally getting outed for real is
some mysterious intel op? The CIA has been screwing up left, right and center for years, so
is it any surprise that one of their major kompromat operations is getting exposed? Their
foolproof plan to install their tool Clinton in the White House in 2016 failed spectacularly
and blew up in their faces, so tell me again how great they are at running covert ops? The
CIA's own version of James Bond gets snuffed by the CIA's own death squads in Benghazi, but
people still think the CIA has a clue what they're doing? The CIA's operatives in multiple
embassies are being incapacitated by freakin' crickets and people think these clowns
still somehow maintain some vestigial link to reality?
No, this is simply another massive screw-up by the establishment. This blind-sided the
Deep State and so much took them by surprise that they were too late to get it clamped down
in the mass media. If Epstein dies before the real dirt starts getting exposed then it proves
me right and proves wrong all those who worship at the alter of the omnipotent Deep
State.
I think as long as Neoconservatism is the official The USA foreign policy, the policy toward
Israel and its current status will not change. In a way Israel is a one large (and very costly)
military base of the USA in the Middle East and its important has grown due to the peak oil
immensely.
At the same time it is important to understand that Israel completely depends on the
USA for its security and as such is a vassal state. Not the other way around.
Notable quotes:
"... see the book Blood In The Water by Joan Mellen about the joint Israeli ... attack on the USS Liberty. ..."
"... the most heinous acts simply because they are connected in a web of corruption and venality. Maybe this is the moment of Peak Swamp? ..."
"... Have long time interest on how Israeli intelligence service became linked with the CIA. Of course, an easy determination was how CIA Jesus James Angleton became a central facilitator of the anti-American intelligence marriage with Israel.* ..."
"... For your consideration, I link below a video that features Andrew & Leslie Cockburn discussing their book, "Dangerous Liasons," which delved into Mossad & CIA love. ..."
"... Angleton is noted to have searched for Mary Pinchot Myers private diary after she was murdered on scene of a Georgetown canal's walking path. Killer never found. ..."
"... Fyi, Mary was JFK's lover & she suspected CIA involvement with his murder. Her ex-husband was Cord Myer Jr ..."
"... Partisan causes inevitably come under critical examination. And of course, for Israel, to be examined critically by America at large would be the end. So I'm optimistic. How much longer was the Soviet Union figured to last in 1985? ..."
Here is proof that Giraldi is correct regarding treasonous crimes having no consequences.
A commentator from Mondoweiss called in to ask a question on C-Span regarding Israel's nukes.
( Israeli government minister takes credit for 27 U.S. states passing anti-BDS laws –
https://mondoweiss.net/2019/07/israeli-government-minister/
)
Go to the 9:10 mark of the video.
It cannot be more obvious that the media and U.S. politicians are agents for Israel.
What you claim about JFK and Dimona may very well be true it seems like it probably is
true from what I have read about Yuval Neeman ..However, it wouldn't follow that JFK was
assassinated by the Israelies or anyone but Oswald. If the Conspiracy Theorists get the
physics of the JFK assassination wrong .there goes the GRAND CONSPIRACY .
Larger point: JFK CAME WITHIN 60 SECONDS OF NUKING US ALL ..We were saved from a
thermonuclear death by a lone Russian Commie Submarine Commander ..I really do find the JFK
worship disgusting
War-JFK's attempt to shut down the Israeli nuclear program is well documented, but I have
never claimed that they killed the president. It is just one possibility as the investigation
into the killing was bungled deliberately as to lay it all on a dead Oswald.
Have long time interest on how Israeli intelligence service became linked with the CIA. Of course, an easy
determination was how CIA Jesus James Angleton became a central facilitator of the anti-American intelligence marriage with
Israel.*
For your consideration, I link below a video that features Andrew & Leslie Cockburn
discussing their book, "Dangerous Liasons," which delved into Mossad & CIA love. Thank you, my Brothers!
* Angleton is noted to have searched for Mary Pinchot Myers private diary after she was
murdered on scene of a Georgetown canal's walking path. Killer never found.
Fyi, Mary was
JFK's lover & she suspected CIA involvement with his murder. Her ex-husband was Cord Myer
Jr
As soon as Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, the NUMEC operations were approved by the
Johnson Administration. In late 1970s, Congress [Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce] held hearings on the unaccounted uranium supposedly lost during the enrichment
process. A U.S. Government report had been issued concerning the loss. Nevertheless, there
were no further investigations concerning the missing uranium in the NUMEC plant operated by
Zionist Shapiro. President Kennedy was vehemently against Israel developing nuclear weapons
and expressed his dissatisfaction with Israel's efforts to develop a nuclear bomb to Golda
Meier. Moreover, The United States supported the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which
Israel has refused to sign as of today! Congress did nothing to discourage Israel. Indeed,
Congress rewarded Israel by increasing the amount of U.S. tax dollars given to aid
Israel!
It is disheartening that the US government has become a totally owned subsidiary of
Israel. The US government places Israeli interests far above the interests of its own
citizens. The benefits do not flow in both directions, though.
'How have you ass clowns changed anything about Israel???'
Progress is being made. If you go back forty years, Israel's legitimacy was all but
universally taken for granted; it wasn't even controversial.
Then up until Trump's election, support for Israel in American politics was a non-partisan
good; it was like being anti-Communist in 1955. Everyone loved Israel; see the seventeen
standing ovations.
Now, not one of the Democratic candidates agreed to address this year's AIPAC convention.
Kamala Harris has made sure she's the best choice for the Zionists, but even she didn't
appear. Israel has become a partisan cause -- it belongs to Trump and the Evangelical Right
now.
And that's good. Partisan causes inevitably come under critical examination. And of course, for Israel, to be examined critically by America at large would be the
end. So I'm optimistic. How much longer was the Soviet Union figured to last in 1985?
"... With the uranium in hand, the stealing of the advanced technology needed to make a nuclear weapon is where Milchan comes into the story . Arnon Milchan was born in Israel but moved to the United States as a young man and eventually wound up as the founder-owner of a major movie production company, New Regency Films. In a November 25, 2013 interview on Israeli television Milchan admitted that he had spent his many years in Hollywood as an agent for Israeli intelligence, helping obtain embargoed technologies and materials that enabled Israel to develop a nuclear weapon. ..."
"... Milchan, who clearly still has significant business interests in this country as evidenced by Bohemian Rhapsody , explained in his interview that "I did it for my country and I'm proud of it." He also said that "other big Hollywood names were connected to [his] covert affairs." It is, to be sure, astonishing that Milchan should admit to his crimes at a time when he was still traveling regularly to the U.S. and residing in California, but his belief in his own invulnerability stems from the fact that the federal government failed to act against him during the fifty years when he was mostly resident in the United States even though it knew about his spying activity. ..."
"... Among other successes, Milchan obtained through his company Heli Trading 800 krytons, the sophisticated triggers for nuclear weapons. The devices were acquired from the California top secret defense contractor MILCO International. Milchan personally recruited MILCO's president Richard Kelly Smyth as an agent before turning him over to another Heli Trading employee Benjamin Netanyahu for handling. Smyth was eventually arrested in 1985 and cooperated in his interrogation by the FBI before being sentenced to prison, which means that the Federal government knew all about both Milchan and Netanyahu at that time but did not even seek to interview them and ultimately did nothing. ..."
"... So Milchan was an Israeli spy who got away with it and is still making money off of the country that he victimized. ..."
"... Peres claims that he personally recruited Milchan as a spy and, from the age of 21, Milchan used a family chemical business as cover to engage in arms and technology sales. He was from the beginning involved in clandestine purchases in support of Israel's nuclear program. ..."
Back in the spring I wrote about coming
across the name Arnon Milchan by chance on a movie credit while flying from Venice to
Washington. Milchan, some might recall, is a Hollywood billionaire movie producer born in
Israel, well known for such films as Pretty Woman and Bohemian Rhapsody . He is
less well known for his role in arranging for the procurement and illegal transfer of U.S.
technology that enabled the Jewish state to develop its own nuclear arsenal. Far from being
ashamed of his betrayal of the adopted country that helped make him rich and famous, in 2011 he
authorized and contributed to a ghost-written biography, which he boastfully entitled
"Confidential: The Life of Secret Agent Turned Hollywood Tycoon." Parts of the book were in the
first person with Milchan telling his story in his own words.
I had been aware of Milchan's crimes for a number of years, just as I had also speculated on
how a leading Israeli spy working actively and successfully against vital U.S. anti-nuclear
proliferation interests had managed to continue to maintain a home and business in Los Angeles
while also appearing regularly at the Oscar presentation ceremonies. I asked "Why is this
scumbag still making movies in Hollywood? Why isn't he in jail?" before concluding that the
federal government clearly regards spying for Israel as a victimless crime, rarely arresting
anyone and almost never prosecuting any of the numerous easily identifiable Israeli
intelligence agents roaming the country.
Milchan was an active Israeli spy in the U.S., working for the Mossad technology theft
division referred to as LEKEM. The Mossad frequently uses so-called sayanim in its
espionage, which means diaspora Jews that it recruits on the basis of a shared religion or
concern for the security of Israel. The threat coming from Israeli Embassy operatives inside
the United States is such that the Department of Defense once warned
that Jewish Americans in government would likely be the targets of their intelligence
approaches.
President John F. Kennedy had tried to stop the Israeli nuclear weapons program but was
assassinated before he could end it. By 1965, the Jewish state had nevertheless obtained the raw
material for a bomb consisting of U.S. government owned highly enriched weapons grade uranium
obtained from a company in Pennsylvania called NUMEC, which was founded in 1956 and owned by
Zalman Mordecai Shapiro, head of the Pittsburgh chapter of the Zionist Organization of America.
NUMEC was a supplier of enriched uranium for government projects but it was also from the start
a front for the Israeli nuclear program, with its chief funder David Lowenthal, a leading
Zionist, traveling to Israel at least once a month where he would meet with an old friend Meir
Amit, who headed Israeli intelligence.
With the uranium in hand, the stealing of the advanced technology needed to make a
nuclear weapon is where Milchan comes into the
story . Arnon Milchan was born in Israel but moved to the United States as a young man and
eventually wound up as the founder-owner of a major movie production company, New Regency
Films. In a November 25, 2013 interview on Israeli television Milchan admitted that he had
spent his many years in Hollywood as an agent for Israeli intelligence, helping obtain
embargoed technologies and materials that enabled Israel to develop a nuclear weapon.
Milchan, who clearly still has significant business interests in this country as
evidenced by Bohemian Rhapsody , explained in his interview that "I did it for my country and
I'm proud of it." He also said that "other big Hollywood names were connected to [his] covert
affairs." It is, to be sure, astonishing that Milchan should admit to his crimes at a time when
he was still traveling regularly to the U.S. and residing in California, but his belief in his
own invulnerability stems from the fact that the federal government failed to act against him
during the fifty years when he was mostly resident in the United States even though it knew
about his spying activity.
Among other successes, Milchan obtained through his company Heli Trading 800 krytons,
the sophisticated triggers for nuclear weapons. The devices were acquired from the California
top secret defense contractor MILCO International. Milchan personally recruited MILCO's
president Richard Kelly Smyth as an agent before turning him over to another Heli Trading
employee Benjamin Netanyahu for handling. Smyth was eventually arrested in 1985 and cooperated
in his interrogation by the FBI before being sentenced to prison, which means that the Federal
government knew all about both Milchan and Netanyahu at that time but did not even seek to
interview them and ultimately did nothing.
So Milchan was an Israeli spy who got away with it and is still making money off of the
country that he victimized. End of story, or is it? The Israeli liberal leaning newspaper
Haaretz has recently
featured an expose of his involvement in high level political corruption as well as in
nuclear proliferation involving South Africa when that country was under sanctions.
Haaretz observes how " the [Israel]-born [Hollywood] mogul made his real money
elsewhere: in deals for arms including planes, missiles and gear for making nuclear bombs in
which Israel, and later other countries, were parties. To make films there's no need for crony
capitalism, but to succeed in the arms business, government connections are obligatory."
Milchan has been involved in a
bit of controversy in Israel itself, where the police have recommended that he be charged
with bribery connected with the ongoing investigation of corruption by Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu. Milchan, it seems, spent one million shekels ($250,000) on luxury items that he gave
to Bibi as a reported quid pro quo to exempt his substantial U.S. derived income from
taxes when he returned to Israel to live in 2013-4.
Demonstrating that Milchan's corruption was international, the police investigation
determined that in 2014 Netanyahu approached then U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to
intervene and arrange for a long-term American visa for Milchan, who was at the time dealing
with problems relating to his U.S. residency status. Milchan reportedly made the arrangement by
going directly to Netanyahu's home with the customary boxes of expensive cigars and cases of
champagne and waited for the prime minister to come home. When Netanyahu arrived, Milchan
demanded that Bibi immediately contact Kerry to arrange a new visa. And Netanyahu did just
that, picking up the phone and dialing. In the event, the visa was granted and Milchan
continued to make more movies, and money, in Los Angeles.
... ... ...
Peres claims that he personally recruited Milchan as a spy and, from the age of 21,
Milchan used a family chemical business as cover to engage in arms and technology sales. He was
from the beginning involved in clandestine purchases in support of Israel's nuclear
program.
Milchan also became a buyer for weapons in cases where the Israeli government did not want
to have the purchases attributed to it. In all cases, Milchan took a commission on the sales,
hence the claim that his Hollywood fortune constituted only a small part of his wealth. He
sometimes found himself buying U.S. made weapons using Israeli government money that had come
from U.S. taxpayer provided military assistance, taking his 10% along the way.
Starting in the 1970s, Israel, operating covertly through Milchan, sold South Africa
embargoed weapons systems, receiving both money and uranium in return. South Africa knew how to
return a favor, allowing Israel in September 1979 to conduct a nuclear test on an island
administered by Pretoria in the Indian Ocean.
... ... ...
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that
seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its
email is [email protected]
It wasn’t just FBI that got called off. Customs also stumbled on this in-your-face
proliferation ring. The judiciary was utterly gelded. Smyth, ‘Mossad’s’
asset, got bail of a measly $100K for frickin WMD proliferation. Who can exfiltrate a
clandestine dealer in CCL items after the foreign end user refuses cooperation? So after
Smyth skips his derisory $100K bail for 15 years of fun & sun in Spain, he finally gets
parole and NO jail time cause the poor old guy was ever so ollld and frail! Who set all that
up? Peres. And with whom does Perez arrange compacts that suspend the functions of multiple
federal organizations and the courts?
Mossad is CIA’s wholesale source for cutouts because there’s nothing,
absolutely nothing they won’t do to goy cattle. If you want to get beyond mealy-mouthed
euphemisms like “Israel-first thinking within America’s establishment,”
what you need is a Schlesinger to re-inventory the family jewels and find out who in CIA ran
Milchan – because Milchan only did what CIA was scared to do itself. In this case, a
country with no NPT commitments and a clandestine development program is a dandy way to
develop and test the kind of munitions that got used at Baghdad Airport and the WTC. CIA has
a long history of using Israeli assets for its dirtiest work: domestic surveillance,
pedophile blackmail, illegal NBC weapons development and use, systematic and widespread
universal-jurisdiction murder and disappearance.
Bill Barr’s dad hired Epstein to teach nubile ephebes at Dalton with no degree but
oh yeah, Mossad ran him, right. Who at OFAC was the cognizant authority for the accounts at
BOA Huntington Beach and Union Bank? That’s your CIA focal point.
@That
Darn Jew CAV badge the weapon that has corrupted nearly every nation state in the western
world? Politicians make promises, and then within hours for unexplained reasons, reverse
them..Hmmm? Is the CAV Badge the weapon that has corrupted the intelligence services and
stable of politicians in nearly every nation in the world? Did Colin Powell flash a CAV badge
as he spoke to UN focus about the most likely presence of non existent WMDs that led to w__
in Iraq?
How can CAV badge victims be identified and isolated from politics?
Its more than spying its black male maybe?
The CAV badge could explain so many USA positive, American negative events?
Know what? Lot of people are asking how Jeff Epstein got all of his lucre. His Bear
Stearns past doesnt seem to completely “addy up”.
Wonder if he may have been supported financially by a foreign intel service to gather dirt
on billionaire clients, Corporate officers, and politicians for leverage purposes later by
said intel service?
Anyone think that could have been a role for this guy? Like I said……..he had
more properties than he should have been able to afford. The seven story 71st street mansion,
the 72 acre Island and mansions, the Palm beach mansions, the yachts, 727 airliner,
helicopters , other properties and holdings. Where did all his pesos come from?
By prokoking the the Soviets through his reviving Eisenhower’s proposal to give West
Germany nuclear weapons, JFK ‘s reckless desire to nuke up any anti Soviet country took
the world to the brink of nuclear war.
Behind all the “shocked, shocked I tell you!” diplomatic maneuvering, Cold war
America wanted to stop Israel from getting a nuclear weapons as much as it wanted to stop
South Africa from getting them: not at all.
Eisenhower gave Israel a nuclear reactor for goodness sake.
@That
Darn Jew that you had been tried for the Inner Ring and rejected. And then, if you are
drawn in, next week it will be something a little further from the rules, and next year
something further still, but all in the jolliest, friendliest spirit. It may end in a crash,
a scandal, and penal servitude; it may end in millions, a peerage and giving the prizes at
your old school. But you will be a scoundrel .
The more important points: the sine qua non : you must have wanted to be in
the inner ring, and you must have been identified as corruptible by the people who
decide who to suborn.
@niteranger
ordinating information collected abroad for the president. After the United States became
involved in World War II, the COI became the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in June 1942,
with Donovan still in charge.”
OSS was disbanded at war’s end, but, consistent with Donovan’s urgings, in 1946
Harry Truman created its successor organization, the CIA. Allen W. Dulles was the first
civilian and longest serving head of CIA. Thus, men who had the greatest influence on the creation and evolution of the American Central
Intelligence Agency were, first, deeply influenced by Jewish interests and ideologues.
"... Just like Dubya. Just like Obomber. Just like the Orange Baboon. Whilst simultaneously begging for shekels from Adelson, Saban, Singer, Marcus. ..."
Same old, same old, same old, same old. Prospective candidates spewing out the same tired
old hot air about how, this time, it really, really, really, really will be different.
There won't be any more crazy multitrillion wars for Israel. Honest.
Just like Dubya. Just like Obomber. Just like the Orange Baboon. Whilst simultaneously
begging for shekels from Adelson, Saban, Singer, Marcus.
"... But to me, she looks like – among other things – a clever manipulator in her, relatively short radius. Yet, although the US is no.1. as world power, she is no match for any real world politician, anywhere. Not just now; anytime in the future. ..."
"... Her "visibility" is a confluence of a few fleeting influences. Basically, fate has favored her for the time being (I'm not talking about morals etc.). But, to think that she's capable of much more is to entertain the idea that Trump is, all the time, playing 6-dimensional chess. ..."
"... Ivanka took her conversion to Judaism to an almost insane level. This comes from the Rabbi's involved in her conversion. She is an even more hard core Zionist than "daddy dearest", if that is even humanly possible ..."
"... Two days ago I commented on Breitbart that good or bad G20, Trump looked foolish toting Ivanka along. Response: Oh yeah, he should have brought AOC, that would have been much better, you idiot. Me: So Trump's only choice was Ivanka or AOC? None of the hundreds of attorneys or diplomats who have devoted careers to international trade negotiations? ..."
Because however loud the calls for Ivanka's ouster have gotten . Ivanka just digs those stilettoes in. She won't be budged.
She refuses to take a hint.
Amazing how deaf fathers can be when it comes to their daughters. Surprising he didn't dispose of Jared by making him Secy of
Education or some shizzle like that.
Ilana seems to think, referencing Wolff (and arguing with his position), that IKT is a sort of Machiavellian (although inexperienced)
woman greedy for power who, well, should not be underestimated.
Of course no one should be underestimated.
But to me, she looks like – among other things – a clever manipulator in her, relatively short radius. Yet, although the
US is no.1. as world power, she is no match for any real world politician, anywhere. Not just now; anytime in the future.
She seems to be one of those people who are lucky for a period of time, but soon disappear from the scene. Her "visibility"
is a confluence of a few fleeting influences. Basically, fate has favored her for the time being (I'm not talking about morals
etc.). But, to think that she's capable of much more is to entertain the idea that Trump is, all the time, playing 6-dimensional
chess.
Trump's(Ivanka)Hebrew name is "Yael." In the Book of Judges, a woman named Yael came upon the enemy king Sisera, who had
fled from battle with the Isralites. She fed and sheltered him until he fell asleep. Then she killed him by using a mallet to
drive a tent peg into his skull.
Ivanka took her conversion to Judaism to an almost insane level. This comes from the Rabbi's involved in her conversion.
She is an even more hard core Zionist than "daddy dearest", if that is even humanly possible. Ivanka believes she is now a
chosenite of the highest order and is therefore destined to rule over all us insignificant little Goys. Yael's greatest
concern is rising antisemitism here in the US of Israel.
Many of our MAGApedes still think Ivanka's great because Trump is God Emperor.
Two days ago I commented on Breitbart that good or bad G20, Trump looked foolish toting Ivanka along. Response: Oh yeah, he should have brought AOC, that would have been much better, you idiot. Me: So Trump's only choice was Ivanka or AOC? None of the hundreds of attorneys or diplomats who have devoted careers to
international trade negotiations?
Response: I would take Ivanka over any single "professional" negotiator of the past 30 years – hands down.
I think the sage commenters at Unz underestimate just how entrenched God Emperor's fanatic support remains. And apparently
this support extends to Jarvanka.
Let us not forget the words of General George Cornwallis in 1781.
"Your churches will be used to teach the Jew's religion and in less than two hundred years, the whole nation will be working
for divine world government. That government that they believe to be divine will be the British Empire. All religions will be
permeated with Judaism without even being noticed by the masses, and they will all be under the invisible all-seeing eye of
the Grand Architect of Freemasonry."
In the words of a speaker at a secret B'nai Brith meeting in Paris in 1936:
"Yet it remains our secret that those Gentiles who betray their own and most precious interests, by joining us in our
plot should never know that these associations are of our creation and that they serve our purpose
"One of the many triumphs of our Freemasonry is that those Gentiles who become members of our Lodges, should never suspect
that we are using them to build their own jails, upon whose terraces we shall erect the throne of our Universal King of
Israel; and should never know that we are commanding them to forge the chains of their own servility to our future King
of the World."
Cornwallis, apparently not wanting to face Washington, claimed to be ill on the day of the surrender, and sent Brigadier
General Charles O'Hara in his place to surrender his sword formally.
Washington had his second-in-command, Benjamin Lincoln,
accept Cornwallis' sword
...Chabad is interesting. They are a network of independent open chassidist communities,
charities and schools with strong bases in Brooklyn, Chabad Israel and Moscow, and lots of
political and secret service connections. The do not finance themselves via membership fees
but via donations. The founding Rabbi has died, so there is no one in control of this network
except the - diverse - people who donate. There is no legal restriction on who may or may not
call themselves Chabad and there is no controlling within the network. They seem to have a
policy of restricting political interventions on "Jewish issues" and not to interfere in the
politics of the host countries otherwise. So they don't mind
being seen with Viktor Orban .
Abramovich - see non existant Russian oligarchs - funded a lot on the Russian side. On the US
side they encourage
real estate donations" and are connected to Jared Kushner.
In Israel they are close to the government and Netanyahu.
A network like this can be influenced/used by all sides that donate to it. So you can see
Chabad as a CIA tool to get their foot into Eastern Europe/Russia in the 1990's, as a Russian
influence campaign or an Israeli tool.
Should Russia stop its military backing of Iran, and should the US attack Iran against
their interests, I am prepared to believe Israel succeeded. I very much doubt this will be
the case.
"... This is just wanton shit-faced stupidity. We are referring to the Trump Administration's escalation of sanctions on Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei and its foreign minister, and then the Donald's tweet-storm of bluster, threats and implicit redlines when they didn't take too kindly to this latest act of aggression by Washington. ..."
"... That last point can't be emphasized enough. Iran is zero threat to the American homeland and has never engaged in any hostile action on U.S soil or even threatened the same. ..."
"... To the contrary, Washington's massive naval and military arsenal in the middle east is essentially the occupational force of a naked aggressor that has created mayhem through the Persian Gulf and middle eastern region for the past three decades; and has done so in pursuit of the will-o-wisp of oil security and the neocon agenda of demonizing and isolating the Iranian regime. ..."
"... the demonization of the Iranian regime is based on lies and propaganda ginned up by the Bibi Netanyahu branch of the War Party (that has falsely made Iran an "existential" threat in order to win elections in Israel). ..."
"... Likewise, it has presumed to have an independent foreign policy involving Washington proscribed alliances with the sovereign state of Syria, the leading political party of Lebanon (Hezbollah), the ruling authorities in Baghdad and the reining power in the Yemen capital of Sana'a (the Houthis). All these regimes except the puppet state of Iraq are deemed by Washington to be sources of unsanctioned "regional instability" and Iran's alliances with them have been capriciously labeled as acts of state sponsored terrorism. ..."
"... The same goes for Washington's demarche against Iran's modest array of short, medium and intermediate range ballistic missiles. These weapons are palpably instruments of self-defense, but Imperial Washington insists their purpose is aggression – unlike the case of practically every other nation which offers its custom to American arms merchants for like and similar weapons. ..."
"... For example, Iran's arch-rival across the Persian Gulf, Saudi Arabia, has more advanced NATO supplied ballistic missiles with even greater range (2,600 km range). So does Israel, Pakistan, India and a half-dozen other nations, which are either Washington allies or have been given a hall-pass in order to bolster US arms exports. ..."
"... In short, Washington's escalating war on Iran is an exercise in global hegemony, not territorial self-defense ..."
"... When the cold-war officially ended in 1991, in fact, the Cheney/neocon cabal feared the kind of drastic demobilization of the US military-industrial complex that was warranted by the suddenly more pacific strategic environment. In response, they developed an anti-Iranian doctrine that was explicitly described as a way of keeping defense spending at high cold war levels. ..."
"... Iranians had a case is beyond doubt. The open US archives now prove that the CIA overthrew Iran's democratically elected government in 1953 and put the utterly unsuited and megalomaniacal Mohammad Reza Shah on the peacock throne to rule as a puppet in behalf of US security and oil interests. ..."
"... Indeed, in this very context the new Iranian regime proved quite dramatically that it was not hell bent on obtaining nuclear bombs or any other weapons of mass destruction. In the midst of Iraq's unprovoked invasion of Iran in the early 1980s the Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against biological and chemical weapons. ..."
"... Yet at that very time, Saddam was dropping these horrific weapons on Iranian battle forces – some of them barely armed teenage boys – with the spotting help of CIA tracking satellites and the concurrence of Washington. So from the very beginning, the Iranian posture was wholly contrary to the War Party's endless blizzard of false charges about its quest for nukes. ..."
"... However benighted and medieval its religious views, the theocracy which rules Iran does not consist of demented war mongers. In the heat of battle they were willing to sacrifice their own forces rather than violate their religious scruples to counter Saddam's WMDs. ..."
"... Then in 1983 the new Iranian regime decided to complete the Bushehr power plant and some additional elements of the Shah's grand plan. But when they attempted to reactivate the French enrichment services contract and buy necessary power plant equipment from the original German suppliers they were stopped cold by Washington. And when the tried to get their $2 billion deposit back, they were curtly denied that, too. ..."
This is just wanton shit-faced stupidity. We are referring to
the Trump Administration's escalation of sanctions on Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei and its foreign
minister, and then the Donald's tweet-storm of bluster, threats and implicit redlines when they
didn't take too kindly to this latest act of aggression by Washington.
That last point can't be emphasized enough. Iran is zero threat to the American homeland
and has never engaged in any hostile action on U.S soil or even threatened the same.
To the contrary, Washington's massive naval and military arsenal in the middle east is
essentially the occupational force of a naked aggressor that has created mayhem through the
Persian Gulf and middle eastern region for the past three decades; and has done so in pursuit
of the will-o-wisp of oil security and the neocon agenda of demonizing and isolating the
Iranian regime.
But as we have demonstrated previously, the best cure for high oil prices is the global
market, not the Fifth Fleet. And the demonization of the Iranian regime is based on lies
and propaganda ginned up by the Bibi Netanyahu branch of the War Party (that has falsely made
Iran an "existential" threat in order to win elections in Israel).
Stated differently, the American people have no dog in the political hunts of Washington's
so-called allies in the region; and will be no worse for the wear economically if Washington
were to dispense with its idiotic economic warfare against Iran's 4 million barrel per day oil
industry and allow all exporters in the region to produce and sell every single barrel they can
economically extract.
Viewed in the proper context, Iran's response to the new sanctions and intensified efforts
to destroy their economy was readily warranted:
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani called the new sanctions "outrageous and stupid." Mr.
Khamenei, while the political leader of Iran, also is one of the world's leading authorities
for Shia Muslims.
"Would any administration with a bit of wisdom [sanction] the highest authority of a
country? And not only a political authority, a religious, social, spiritual one, and not the
leader of Iran only, the leader of the Islamic revolution all over the world?" Mr. Rouhani said
in a speech broadcast on state television.
He said it was "obvious" that the US was lying about wanting to negotiate with Iran: "You
want us to negotiate with you again?" Mr. Rouhani said, "and at the same time you seek to
sanction the foreign minister too?"
Iran also said these sanctions closed the door on diplomacy and threatened global
stability, as American officials renewed efforts to build a global alliance against
Tehran.
Unfortunately, it didn't take the Donald long to upchuck what amounted to a dangerous
tantrum:
.Iran's very ignorant and insulting statement, put out today, only shows that they do not
understand reality. Any attack by Iran on anything American will be met with great and
overwhelming force. In some areas, overwhelming will mean obliteration. No more John Kerry
& Obama!
Those words are utterly reckless and outrageous. The Donald is carrying water for the
neocons, Bibi and the Saudis without really understanding what he is doing and in the process
is betraying America First and inching closer to an utterly unnecessary conflagration in the
Persian Gulf that will virtually upend the global economy.
Worst of all, as he escalates the confrontation with the Iranian regime, he espouses a pack
of lies and distortions that do no remotely comport with the facts. For instance, the following
tweet is absolutely neocon baloney:
.The wonderful Iranian people are suffering, and for no reason at all. Their leadership
spends all of its money on Terror, and little on anything else. The US has not forgotten Iran's
use of IED's & EFP's (bombs), which killed 2000 Americans, and wounded many
more
The truth of the matter is that the Donald is referring to attacks on US forces by the
Shiite militias in Iraq during Washington's misbegotten invasion and occupation of that
woebegone nation during the last decades. The Shiite live there, constitute the majority of its
electorate, didn't want America there in the first place, and now actually run the government
that Washington placed in power and are totally opposed to Trump's confrontation with their
Shiite compatriots in Iran.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
Better still, it is crucial to understand that this entire dangerous escalation is owing to
the fact that the Donald got into his thick head that utter nonsense that the Iran nuke deal
was some kind of disaster, and from there walked-away from the deal and restarted a brutal
economic war against Iran in the guise of sanctions.
But nothing could be further from the truth. The Donald's action to terminate the Iranian
nuclear deal was a complete triumph for the War Party.
It gutted the very idea of America First because Washington's renewed round of
sanctions constitute economic aggression against a country that is no threat to the US homeland
whatsoever.
In fact, Iran did not violate any term of the nuke deal, and as we demonstrate below,
scrupulously adhered to the letter of it. So the real reasons for Trump's abandonment of the
nuke deal have everything to do with the kind of Imperial interventionism that is the
antithesis of America First.
Trump's action, in fact, is predicated on the decades long neocon-inspired Big Lie that Iran
is an aggressive expansionist and terrorism-supporting rogue state which threatens the security
of not just the region, but America too.
But that's flat out poppycock. As we documented last week, the claim that Iran is the
expansionist leader of the Shiite Crescent is based on nothing more than the fact that Tehran
has an independent foreign policy based on its own interests and confessional affiliations
– legitimate relationships that are demonized by virtue of not being approved by
Washington.
Likewise, the official charge that Iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism is not
remotely warranted by the facts: The listing is essentially a State Department favor to the
Netanyahu branch of the War Party.
The fact is, the Iranian regime with its piddling $14 billion military budget has no means
to attack America militarily and has never threatened to do so. Nor has it invaded any other
country in the region where it was not invited by a sovereign government host.
As Ron Paul cogently observed:
Is Iran really the aggressive one? When you unilaterally pull out of an agreement that
was reducing tensions and boosting trade; when you begin applying sanctions designed to
completely destroy another country's economy; when you position military assets right offshore
of that country; when you threaten to destroy that country on a regular basis, calling it a
campaign of "maximum pressure," to me it seems a stretch to play the victim when that country
retaliates by shooting a spy plane that is likely looking for the best way to attack.
Even if the US spy plane was not in Iranian airspace – but it increasingly looks
like it was – it was just another part of an already-existing US war on Iran. Yes,
sanctions are a form of war, not a substitute for war.
The point is Washington's case is almost entirely bogus. To wit:
Mr. Trump also reiterated his demands Monday at the White House: "We will continue to
increase pressure on Tehran until the regime abandons its dangerous activities and its
aspirations, including the pursuit of nuclear weapons, increased enrichment of uranium,
development of ballistic missiles, engagement in and support for terrorism, fueling of foreign
conflicts, and belligerent acts directed against the United States and its allies."
Let's see about those "dangerous activities and aspirations".
In fact, Iran has no blue water navy that could effectively operate outside of the Persian
Gulf; its longest range warplanes can barely get to Rome without refueling; and its array of
mainly defensive medium and intermediate range missiles cannot strike most of NATO, to say
nothing of the North American continent.
Likewise, it has presumed to have an independent foreign policy involving Washington
proscribed alliances with the sovereign state of Syria, the leading political party of Lebanon
(Hezbollah), the ruling authorities in Baghdad and the reining power in the Yemen capital of
Sana'a (the Houthis). All these regimes except the puppet state of Iraq are deemed by Washington to be sources of
unsanctioned "regional instability" and Iran's alliances with them have been capriciously
labeled as acts of state sponsored terrorism.
The same goes for Washington's demarche against Iran's modest array of short, medium and
intermediate range ballistic missiles. These weapons are palpably instruments of self-defense,
but Imperial Washington insists their purpose is aggression – unlike the case of
practically every other nation which offers its custom to American arms merchants for like and
similar weapons.
For example, Iran's arch-rival across the Persian Gulf, Saudi Arabia, has more advanced NATO
supplied ballistic missiles with even greater range (2,600 km range). So does Israel, Pakistan,
India and a half-dozen other nations, which are either Washington allies or have been given a
hall-pass in order to bolster US arms exports.
In short, Washington's escalating war on Iran is an exercise in global hegemony, not
territorial self-defense. It is a testament to the manner in which the historic notion of
national defense has morphed into Washington's arrogant claim that it constitutes the
"Indispensable Nation" which purportedly stands as mankind's bulwark against global disorder
and chaos among nations.
Likewise, the Shiite theocracy ensconced in Tehran was an unfortunate albatross on the
Persian people, but it was no threat to America's safety and security. The very idea that
Tehran is an expansionist power bent on exporting terrorism to the rest of the world is a giant
fiction and tissue of lies invented by the Washington War Party and its Bibi Netanyahu branch
in order to win political support for their confrontationist policies.
Indeed, the three decade long demonization of Iran has served one overarching purpose.
Namely, it enabled both branches of the War Party to conjure up a fearsome enemy, thereby
justifying aggressive policies that call for a constant state of war and military
mobilization.
When the cold-war officially ended in 1991, in fact, the Cheney/neocon cabal feared the kind
of drastic demobilization of the US military-industrial complex that was warranted by the
suddenly more pacific strategic environment. In response, they developed an anti-Iranian
doctrine that was explicitly described as a way of keeping defense spending at high cold war
levels.
And the narrative they developed to this end is one of the more egregious Big Lies ever to
come out of the beltway. It puts you in mind of the young boy who killed his parents, and then
threw himself on the mercy of the courts on the grounds that he was an orphan!
To wit, during the 1980s the neocons in the Reagan Administration issued their own fatwa
again the Islamic Republic of Iran based on its rhetorical hostility to America. Yet that
enmity was grounded in Washington's 25-year support for the tyrannical and illegitimate regime
of the Shah, and constituted a founding narrative of the Islamic Republic that was not much
different than America's revolutionary castigation of King George.
That the Iranians had a case is beyond doubt. The open US archives now prove that the CIA
overthrew Iran's democratically elected government in 1953 and put the utterly unsuited and
megalomaniacal Mohammad Reza Shah on the peacock throne to rule as a puppet in behalf of US
security and oil interests.
During the subsequent decades the Shah not only massively and baldly plundered the wealth of
the Persian nation. With the help of the CIA and US military, he also created a brutal secret
police force known as the Savak, which made the East German Stasi look civilized by
comparison.
All elements of Iranian society including universities, labor unions, businesses, civic
organizations, peasant farmers and many more were subjected to intense surveillance by the
Savak agents and paid informants. As one critic described it:
Over the years, Savak became a law unto itself, having legal authority to arrest, detain,
brutally interrogate and torture suspected people indefinitely. Savak operated its own prisons
in Tehran, such as Qezel-Qalaeh and Evin facilities and many suspected places throughout the
country as well.
Ironically, among his many grandiose follies, the Shah embarked on a massive civilian
nuclear power campaign in the 1970s, which envisioned literally paving the Iranian landscape
with dozens of nuclear power plants.
He would use Iran's surging oil revenues after 1973 to buy all the equipment required from
Western companies – and also fuel cycle support services such as uranium enrichment
– in order to provide his kingdom with cheap power for centuries.
At the time of the Revolution, the first of these plants at Bushehr was nearly complete, but
the whole grandiose project was put on hold amidst the turmoil of the new regime and the onset
of Saddam Hussein's war against Iran in September 1980. As a consequence, a $2 billion deposit
languished at the French nuclear agency that had originally obtained it from the Shah to fund a
ramp-up of its enrichment capacity to supply his planned battery of reactors.
Indeed, in this very context the new Iranian regime proved quite dramatically that it was
not hell bent on obtaining nuclear bombs or any other weapons of mass destruction. In the midst
of Iraq's unprovoked invasion of Iran in the early 1980s the Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa
against biological and chemical weapons.
Yet at that very time, Saddam was dropping these horrific weapons on Iranian battle forces
– some of them barely armed teenage boys – with the spotting help of CIA tracking
satellites and the concurrence of Washington. So from the very beginning, the Iranian posture
was wholly contrary to the War Party's endless blizzard of false charges about its quest for
nukes.
However benighted and medieval its religious views, the theocracy which rules Iran does not
consist of demented war mongers. In the heat of battle they were willing to sacrifice their own
forces rather than violate their religious scruples to counter Saddam's WMDs.
Then in 1983 the new Iranian regime decided to complete the Bushehr power plant and some
additional elements of the Shah's grand plan. But when they attempted to reactivate the French
enrichment services contract and buy necessary power plant equipment from the original German
suppliers they were stopped cold by Washington. And when the tried to get their $2 billion
deposit back, they were curtly denied that, too.
To make a long story short, the entire subsequent history of off again/on again efforts by
the Iranians to purchase dual use equipment and components on the international market, often
from black market sources like Pakistan, was in response to Washington's relentless efforts to
block its legitimate rights as a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) to
complete some parts of the Shah's civilian nuclear project.
Needless to say, it did not take much effort by the neocon "regime change" fanatics which
inhabited the national security machinery, especially after the 2000 election, to spin every
attempt by Iran to purchase even a lowly pump or pipe fitting as evidence of a secret campaign
to get the bomb.
The exaggerations, lies, distortions and fear-mongering which came out of this neocon
campaign are downright despicable. Yet they incepted way back in the early 1990s when George
H.W. Bush actually did reach out to the newly elected government of Hashemi Rafsanjani to bury
the hatchet after it had cooperated in obtaining the release of American prisoners being held
in Lebanon in 1989.
Rafsanjani was self-evidently a pragmatist who did not want conflict with the United States
and the West; and after the devastation of the eight year war with Iraq was wholly focused on
economic reconstruction and even free market reforms of Iran's faltering economy.
It is one of the great tragedies of history that the neocons managed to squelch even George
Bush's better instincts with respect to rapprochement with Tehran.
The Neocon Big Lie About Iranian Nukes And Terrorism
So the prisoner release opening was short-lived – especially after the top post at the
CIA was assumed in 1991 by Robert Gates. As one of the very worst of the unreconstructed cold
war apparatchiks, it can be well and truly said that Gates looked peace in the eye and then
elected to pervert John Quincy Adams' wise maxim by searching the globe for monsters to
fabricate.
In this case the motivation was especially loathsome. Gates had been Bill Casey's right hand
man during the latter's rogue tenure at the CIA in the Reagan administration. Among the many
untoward projects that Gates shepherded was the Iran-Contra affair that nearly destroyed his
career when it blew-up, and for which he blamed the Iranians for its public disclosure.
From his post as deputy national security director in 1989 and then as CIA head Gates pulled
out all the stops to get even. Almost single-handedly he killed-off the White House goodwill
from the prisoner release, and launched the blatant myth that Iran was both sponsoring
terrorism and seeking to obtain nuclear weapons.
Indeed, it was Gates who was the architect of the demonization of Iran that became a staple
of War Party propaganda after the 1991. In time that morphed into the utterly false claim that
Iran is an aggressive wanna be hegemon that is a fount of terrorism and is dedicated to the
destruction of the state of Israel, among other treacherous purposes.
That giant lie was almost single-handedly fashioned by the neocons and Bibi Netanyahu's
coterie of power-hungry henchman after the mid-1990s. Indeed, the false claim that Iran posses
an "existential threat" to Israel is a product of the pure red meat domestic Israeli politics
that have kept Bibi in power for much of the last two decades.
But the truth is Iran has only a tiny fraction of Israel's conventional military capability.
And compared to the latter's 100 odd nukes, Iran has never had a nuclear weaponization program
after a small scale research program was ended in 2003.
That is not merely our opinion. It's been the sober assessment of the nation's top 17
intelligence agencies in the official National Intelligence Estimates ever since 2007. And now
in conjunction with a further study undertaken pursuant to the 2015 nuke deal, the IAEA has
also concluded the Iran had no secret program after 2003.
On the political and foreign policy front, Iran is no better or worse than any of the other
major powers in the Middle East. In many ways it is far less of a threat to regional peace and
stability than the military butchers who now run Egypt on $1.5 billion per year of US aid.
And it is surely no worse than the royal family tyrants who squander the massive oil
resources of Saudi Arabia in pursuit of unspeakable opulence and decadence to the detriment of
the 30 million citizens which are not part of the regime, and who one day may well reach the
point of revolt.
When it comes to the support of terrorism, the Saudis have funded more jihadists and
terrorists throughout the region than Iran ever even imagined.
In fact, Iran is a nearly bankrupt country that has no capability whatsoever to
threaten the security and safety of the citizens of Spokane WA, Peoria IL or anywhere else in
the USA.
Its $460 billion GDP is the size of Indiana's and its 68,000 man military is only slightly
larger than the national guard of Texas.
It is a land of severe mountains and daunting swamps that are not all that conducive to
rapid economic progress and advanced industrialization. It has no blue water navy, no missiles
with more than a few hundred miles of range, and, we must repeat again, has had no nuclear
weapons program for more than a decade.
Moreover, Donald's incessant charge that the Obama Administration gave away the store during
the nuke deal negotiations that led to the JCPA is just blatant nonsense. In fact, the Iranians
made huge concessions on nearly every issue that made a difference.
That included deep concessions on the number of permitted centrifuges at Natanz; the
dismantlement of the Fordow and Arak nuclear operations; the virtually complete liquidation of
its enriched uranium stockpiles; the intrusiveness and scope of the inspections regime; and the
provisions with respect to Iran's so-called "breakout" capacity.
For instance, while every signatory of the non-proliferation treaty has the right to
civilian enrichment, Iran agreed to reduce the number of centrifuges by 70% from 20,000 to
6,000.
And its effective spinning capacity was reduced by significantly more. That's because the
permitted Natanz centrifuges now consist exclusively of its most rudimentary, outdated
equipment – first-generation IR-1 knockoffs of 1970s European models.
Not only was Iran not be allowed to build or develop newer models, but even those remaining
were permitted to enrich uranium to a limit of only 3.75% purity. That is to say, to the
generation of fissile material that is not remotely capable of reaching bomb grade
concentrations of 90%.
Equally importantly, pursuant to the agreement Iran has eliminated enrichment activity
entirely at its Fordow plant – a facility that had been Iran's one truly advanced,
hardened site that could withstand an onslaught of Israeli or US bunker busters.
Instead, Fordow has become a small time underground science lab devoted to medical isotope
research and crawling with international inspectors. In effectively decommissioning Fordow and
thereby eliminating any capacity to cheat from a secure facility – what Iran got in
return was at best a fig leave of salve for its national pride.
The disposition of the reactor at Arak has been even more dispositive. For years, the War
Party has falsely waved the bloody shirt of "plutonium" because the civilian nuclear reactor
being built there was of Canadian "heavy water" design rather than GE or Westinghouse "light
water" design; and, accordingly, when finished it would have generated plutonium as a waste
product rather than conventional spent nuclear fuel rods.
In truth, the Iranians couldn't have bombed a beehive with the Arak plutonium because you
need a reprocessing plant to convert it into bomb grade material. Needless to say, Iran never
had such a plant – nor any plans to build one, and no prospect for getting the requisite
technology and equipment.
But now even that bogeyman no longer exists. Iran removed and destroyed the reactor core of
its existing Arak plant in 2016 and filled it with cement, as attested to by international
inspectors under the JCPA.
As to its already existing enriched stock piles, including some 20% medical-grade material,
97% has been eliminated as per the agreement. That is, Iran now holds only 300 kilograms of its
10,000 kilogram stockpile in useable or recoverable form. Senator Kirk could store what is left
in his wine cellar.
But where the framework agreement decisively shut down the War Party was with respect to its
provision for a robust, comprehensive and even prophylactic inspections regime. All of the
major provision itemized above are being enforced by continuous IAEA access to existing
facilities including its main centrifuge complex at Natanz – along with Fordow, Arak and
a half dozen other sites.
Indeed, the real breakthrough in the JCPA lies in Iran's agreement to what amounts to a
cradle-to-grave inspection regime. It encompasses the entire nuclear fuel chain.
That means international inspectors can visit Iran's uranium mines and milling and fuel
preparation operations. This encompasses even its enrichment equipment manufacturing and
fabrication plants, including centrifuge rotor and bellows production and storage
facilities.
Beyond that, Iran has also been subject to a robust program of IAEA inspections to prevent
smuggling of materials into the country to illicit sites outside of the named facilities under
the agreement. This encompasses imports of nuclear fuel cycle equipment and materials,
including so-called "dual use" items which are essentially civilian imports that can be
repurposed to nuclear uses, even peaceful domestic power generation.
In short, not even a Houdini could secretly breakout of the control box established by the
JCPA and confront the world with some kind of fait accompli threat to use the bomb.
That's because what it would take to do so is absurdly implausible. That is, Iran would need
to secretly divert thousands of tons of domestically produced or imported uranium and then
illicitly mill and upgrade such material at secret fuel preparation plants.
It would also need to secretly construct new, hidden enrichment operations of such massive
scale that they could house more than 10,000 new centrifuges. Moreover, they would need to
build these massive spinning arrays from millions of component parts smuggled into the country
and transported to remote enrichment operations – all undetected by the massive complex
of spy satellites overhead and covert US ands Israeli intelligence agency operatives on the
ground in Iran.
Finally, it would require the activation from scratch of a weaponization program which has
been dormant according to the National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) for more than a decade.
And then, that the Iranian regime – after cobbling together one or two bombs without
testing them or their launch vehicles – would nevertheless be willing to threaten to use
them sight unseen.
So just stop it!
You need to be a raging, certifiable paranoid boob to believe that the Iranians can break
out of this framework box based on a secret new capacity to enrich the requisite fissile
material and make a bomb.
In the alternative scenario, you have to be a willful know-nothing to think that if it
publicly repudiates the agreement, Iran could get a bomb overnight before the international
community could take action.
To get enough nuclear material to make a bomb from the output of the 5,000 "old and slow"
centrifuges remaining at Natanz would take years, not months. And if subject to an embargo on
imported components, as it would be after a unilateral Iranian repudiation of the JCPA, it
could not rebuild its now dismantled enrichment capacity rapidly, either.
At the end of the day, in fact, what you really have to believe is that Iran is run by
absolutely irrational, suicidal madmen. After all, even if they managed to defy the immensely
prohibitive constraints described above and get one or a even a few nuclear bombs, what in the
world would they do with them?
Drop them on Tel Aviv? That would absolutely insure Israel's navy and air force would
unleash its 100-plus nukes and thereby incinerate the entire industrial base and major
population centers of Iran.
Indeed, the very idea that deterrence would fail even if a future Iranian regime were to
defy all the odds, and also defy the fatwa against nuclear weapons issued by their Supreme
Leader, amounts to one of the most preposterous Big Lies ever concocted.
There is no plausible or rational basis for believing it outside of the axis-of-evil
narrative. So what's really behind Trump's withdrawal from the JCPA is nothing more than the
immense tissue of lies and unwarranted demonization of Iran that the War Party has fabricated
over the last three decades.
Iran Never Wanted the Bomb
At bottom, all the hysteria about the mullahs getting the bomb was based on the wholly
theoretically supposition that they wanted civilian enrichment only as a stepping stone to the
bomb. Yet the entirety of the US intelligence complex as well as the attestation of George W.
Bush himself say it isn't so.
As we have previously indicated, the blinding truth of that proposition first came in the
National Intelligence Estimates of 2007. These NIEs represent a consensus of all 17 US
intelligence agencies on salient issues each year, and on the matter of Iran's nuclear weapons
program they could not have been more unequivocal:
"We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear
weapons program; we also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is
keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons. We assess with moderate confidence Tehran
had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it
currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.
"Our assessment that Iran halted the program in 2003 primarily in response to
international pressure indicates Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach
rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic and military
costs."
Moreover, as former CIA analyst Ray McGovern noted recently, the NIE's have not changed
since then.
An equally important fact ignored by the mainstream media is that the key judgments of
that NIE have been revalidated by the intelligence community every year since.
More crucially, there is the matter of "Dubya's" memoirs. Near the end of his term in office
he was under immense pressure to authorize a bombing campaign against Iran's civilian nuclear
facilities.
But once the 2007 NIEs came out, even the "mission accomplished" President in the bomber
jacket was caught up short. As McGovern further notes,
Bush lets it all hang out in his memoir, Decision Points. Most revealingly, he complains
bitterly that the NIE "tied my hands on the military side" and called its findings
"eye-popping."
A disgruntled Bush writes, "The backlash was immediate ."I don't know why the NIE was
written the way it was. Whatever the explanation, the NIE had a big impact – and not a
good one."
Spelling out how the Estimate had tied his hands "on the military side," Bush included
this (apparently unedited) kicker: "But after the NIE, how could I possibly explain using
the military to destroy the nuclear facilities of a country the intelligence community said had
no active nuclear weapons program?"
So there you have it. How is it possible to believe that the Iranian's were hell-bent on a
nuclear holocaust when they didn't even have a nuclear weapons program?
And why in the world is the Donald taking America and the world to the edge of a utterly
unnecessary war in order to force a better deal when the one he shit-canned was more than
serviceable?
The answer to that momentous questions lies with the Bombzie Twins (Pompeo and Bolton) and
the malign influence of the Donald's son-in-law and Bibi Netanyahu toady, Jared Kushner.
Rarely have a small group of fanatics more dangerously and wantonly jeopardized the
security, blood and treasure of the American people.
And probably, if we just impeach the Walrus of Death nothing will change . Its a freight
train to war. It moves slowly at first but its hell to try and stop.
This awesome demonstration of American resolve was meant to be punishment for the vicious
slaughter of an expensive U.S. military drone, which was peacefully invading Iranian airspace,
and not at all attempting to provoke the Iranians into blowing it out of the sky with a missile
so the U.S. military could "retaliate."
The military-industrial complex would never dream of doing anything like that, not even to
further the destabilization and restructuring of the Greater Middle East that they've been
systematically carrying out the since the collapse of the former Soviet Union, which more on
that in just a moment.
"... For some odd reason, Donald Trump wants to be reelected president in 2020 in spite of the fact that he appears to be uncomfortable in office. A quick, successful war would enhance his chances for a second term, which is probably what Pompeo promised, but any military action that is not immediately decisive would hurt his prospects, quite possibly inflicting fatal damage. ..."
"... Trump apparently had an intercession by Fox news analyst Tucker Carlson, who may have explained that reality to him shortly before he decided to cancel the attack. Tucker is, for what it's worth, a highly respected critic coming from the political right who is skeptical of wars of choice, democracy building and the global liberal order. ..."
"... It is an interesting process to observe how Jewish oligarchs like Sheldon Adelson contribute tens of millions of dollars to the politicians who then in turn give the Jewish state taxpayer generated tens of billions of dollars in return. Bribing corrupt politicians is one of the best investments that one can make in today's America. ..."
The current foreign policy debate centers around what Washington's next moves in the Middle
East might be. The decision-making will inevitably involve the US and its "close allies" Israel
and Saudi Arabia, which should not surprise anyone. While it is clear that President Donald
Trump ordered an attack on Iran before canceling the action at the last minute, exactly how
that played out continues to be unclear. One theory, promoted by the president himself, is that
the attack would have been disproportionate, killing possibly hundreds of Iranian military
personnel in exchange for one admittedly very expensive surveillance drone. Killing the
Iranians would have guaranteed an immediate escalation by Iran, which has both the will and the
capability to hit high value targets in and around the Persian Gulf region, a factor that may
also have figured into the presidential calculus.
Trump's cancelation of the attack immediately produced cries of rage from the usual
neoconservative chickenhawk crowd in Washington as well as a more subdued reiteration of the
Israeli and Saudi demands that Iran be punished, though both are also concerned that a massive
Iranian retaliation would hit them hard. They are both hoping that Washington's immensely
powerful strategic armaments will succeed in knocking Iran out quickly and decisively, but they
have also both learned not to completely trust the White House.
To assuage the beast, the president has initiated a package of "major" new sanctions on
Iran which will no doubt hurt the Iranian people while not changing government decision making
one iota. There has also been a leak of a story relating to US cyber-attacks on Iranian
military and infrastructure targets, yet another attempt to act aggressive to mitigate the
sounds being emitted by the neocon chorus.
To understand the stop-and-go behavior by Trump requires application of the Occam's Razor
principle, i.e. that the simplest explanation is most likely correct. For some odd reason,
Donald Trump wants to be reelected president in 2020 in spite of the fact that he appears to be
uncomfortable in office. A quick, successful war would enhance his chances for a second term,
which is probably what Pompeo promised, but any military action that is not immediately
decisive would hurt his prospects, quite possibly inflicting fatal damage.
Trump apparently had an intercession by Fox news analyst Tucker Carlson, who may have
explained that reality to him shortly before he decided to cancel the attack. Tucker is, for
what it's worth, a highly respected critic coming from the political right who is skeptical of
wars of choice, democracy building and the global liberal order.
The truth is that all of American foreign policy during the upcoming year will be designed
to pander to certain constituencies that will be crucial to the 2020 presidential election. One
can bank on even more concessions being granted to Israel and its murderous thug prime minister
Benjamin Netanyahu to bring in Jewish votes and, more importantly, money. John Bolton was
already in Israel getting his marching orders from Netanyahu on the weekend and Pence was
effusive in his praise of Israel when he spoke at the meeting in Orlando earlier in the week
launching the Trump 2020 campaign, so the game is already afoot.
It is an interesting process to observe how Jewish oligarchs like Sheldon Adelson
contribute tens of millions of dollars to the politicians who then in turn give the Jewish
state taxpayer generated tens of billions of dollars in return. Bribing corrupt politicians is
one of the best investments that one can make in today's America.
Trump will also go easy on Saudi Arabia because he wants to sell them billions of dollars'
worth of weapons which will make the key constituency of the Military Industrial Complex (MIC)
happy. And he will continue to exert "maximum pressure" on Iran and Venezuela to show how tough
he can be for his Make America Great audience, though avoiding war if he possibly can just in
case any of the hapless victims tries to fight back and embarrass him.
So, there it is folks. War with Iran is for the moment on hold, but tune in again next week
as the collective White House memory span runs to only three or four days. By next week we
Americans might be at war with Mongolia.
The Trumpian hyperbole marketing brand had generated unrealistic expectations for the "Deal
of the Century." For over a year and a half, Jared Kushner promised but missed at least three
dates to unveil the "secret" plan.
Assisted by two bono fide Zionists, Special Envoy to the Middle East Jason Greenblatt
and US Ambassador David Friedman, Kushner's lone political experience with Palestine/Israel is
his family's tax deductible contributions to building "Jewish only colonies."
Kushner's predisposed conviction and his parochial bias were palpable in the June 2nd
interview with Axios on HBO. In the interview, he opined that Palestinians were not "capable of
governing" themselves or become free from Israeli occupation.
After more than a year of hyped promotion, Kushner's Zionist team revealed a scaled down
version of Trump's "concrete plan." Evident in the leaked conference agenda, the goal of
Kushner's gathering is not to offer economic support to Palestinians, but rather to provide a
cover-up for opening the doors of Arab capitals to Israeli officials.
Israel gets the reward of the illusionary peace upfront while US tantalizes to Arabs a peace
process that may never materialize. Deferring and circumventing political process is
archetypical Israeli trademark strategy that seeks to harvest fruits before the tree blossoms.
Hence, the fruits of the US proposed miniature workshop in Bahrain.
In the Oslo Accord in 1993, the PLO agreed to recognize Israel, in advance, over 78% of
historical Palestine. There was no reciprocal Israeli obligation toward the PLO on the
remaining 22% (West Bank, Jerusalem and Gaza).
A quarter of a century later, peace did not blossom and the only implemented sections of the
Oslo Accords were the PLO recognition of Israel. In addition, it relieved Israel of
administering the life of five million Palestinians, security coordination and
outsourcing―free of cost―the security services to the Palestinian Authority.
Meanwhile, Israel continued to violate and effectively buried the Oslo Accords under new
expansive "Jewish only colonies" changing the demographics of the population in areas allotted
for the future Palestinian state.
Ten years following the Accord, George W Bush proposed a Road Map for peace. To placate
Israeli reservations, Bush rewarded Israel, in advance, with an official American letter
agreeing to annex "Jewish only colonies" in the West Bank as part of any future peace
agreement.
Israel crushed Bush's Road Map under the bulldozers of yet more "Jewish only colonies." The
American letter remains the sole outcome of the Road Map. Greenblatt and Friedman are using
Bush's letter to advocate Israeli annexation of parts of the West Bank and Jerusalem.
Kushner's economic peace is an age old Israeli contrived gas bubble intends to skirt
compliance with international law and UN resolutions. Shimon Peres floated the idea to
equivocate Israel's commitments under the Oslo Accords. Current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu revived it in 2009 to sidestep the American (Bush and Obama) administration's support
for two-state solution.
Yet, for quarter of a century since the establishment of the Palestinian authority, Israel
had systematically strangled the very economy it (and now Kushner) claims to champion.
Since 1993, the European Union invested billions of dollars in economic infrastructure,
including an airport and seaport in Gaza. In 2002 after the failure of Camp David, Israel
obliterated both facilities denying Palestinians access to trade and fishing.
To further stifle the economy, Israel erected walls separating farmers from their olive
groves and farms, spiked the West Bank with intrusive military checkpoints encumbering the
movement of goods, divided towns and cities and misappropriated tax money held on Palestinian
imports.
Kushner and Israel's invented economic peace is a political shenanigan to sedate the bird
cage (walled) economy, or leverage it in the form of collective punishment to suppress
resistance and subjugate Palestinians.
Like Oslo Accords, the Road Map, and now ahead of rolling the political plan for the "Deal
of Century", Trump conferred on Israel another advanced installment by recognizing Jerusalem as
its capital, cut financial aid to Palestinians including UN organizations, and the annexation
of the Syrian Golan Heights without any Israeli concession.
In addition to normalizing contacts between Arabs attending the Manama workshop and Israel
(another advanced installment), Kushner's plan would relegate the cost of the caged Palestinian
economy to Arab countries, gifting Israel yet more freebies without negotiation.
Kushner economic peace workshop is a false allure to salve Palestinian (and Arab)
capitulation before rolling out the eon of all political disasters. Jamal Kanj was born in a Palestinian
refugee camp in northern Lebanon ten years after the creation of the state of Israel. He moved
to the United States in late 1977, and has been active in various local and national political
organizations. Like so many other Palestinians, the life of Jamal Kanj has been an odyssey of
conflict, displacement and resettlement and Jamal Kanj is expressing a lifetime experience with
the Palestinian diaspora and struggle against and with the occupation through his writings.
Jamal Kanj is columnist at several newspapers and websites.
"... Telling was the 40-page proposal put out earlier this month by the White House, which used the terms "investment" and "financing" dozens of times, yet never once mentioned "occupation." Dan Kurtzer, who previously served as Washington's ambassador to Israel and Egypt and is now a professor of Middle East policy studies at Princeton University, tweeted : "I would give this so-called plan a 'C' from an undergraduate student. The authors of the plan clearly understand nothing." ..."
"... Can anyone explain the complete inappropriateness & Cronyism of Trump's son in law, Jared Kushner, in negotiating this sham of a Deal? This is the "Con of the Century" not the Deal of the Century? Jared Kushner never got out of Bibi's Bed & his flawed Plan is a $50 Billion dollar loan bribe, a LOAN not a Hand out & where this money is coming from, as it's not coming from America but supposedly from non-existent Arabian Financial sources is a mystery? ..."
"... An investor would have to be an utter idiot to put funds into Palestinian infrastructure because the Israelis would promptly destroy it in their next military incursion. Investment without rock solid perpetual peace is just money down the drain. ..."
The U.S.-backed two-day "Peace to Prosperity" summit in Bahrain on Tuesday and Wednesday
was designed to advance the Trump administration's vision for resolving the Palestinian-Israeli
conflict. But without any significant Palestinian representation at the summit, as well as the
absence of any Israeli government officials, the gathering was ultimately little more than a
face-saving effort on the White House's part following two years of the administration's
"futile" peacemaking efforts.
The conference is understood to have laid the foundation for the "Deal of the Century." The
details have yet to be released, although the White House claims it will unveil the plan
following Israel's elections in September. Yet some details have leaked, leading the
Palestinian Authority to declare it dead on arrival. Virtually all Palestinian factions are
united in opposition to it.
Telling was the 40-page proposal put out earlier this month by the
White House, which used the terms "investment" and "financing" dozens of times, yet never once
mentioned "occupation." Dan Kurtzer, who previously served as Washington's ambassador to Israel
and Egypt and is now a professor of Middle East policy studies at Princeton University,
tweeted
: "I would give this so-called plan a 'C' from an undergraduate student. The authors of the
plan clearly understand nothing."
The "workshop" in Bahrain began with President Donald Trump's adviser and son-in-law Jared
Kushner delivering a speech in which he
unveiled a $50 billion economic package intended to "unleash" the Palestinians' potential
as well as help develop neighboring Lebanon and Jordan. Kushner referred to a "bustling tourist
center in Gaza" without acknowledging Israel's siege of the coastal strip and the dire
humanitarian crises in the blockaded enclave. IMF Director Christine Lagarde spoke about applying
lessons from Mozambique to Palestine. Steve Schwarzman, an American billionaire whose personal
wealth exceeds Palestine's annual
GDP, advised the Palestinians to
follow the model of Singapore. The U.S. ambassador to Israel, David Friedman,
hailed the "workshop" as an "attempt to jumpstart the Palestinian economy" and "improve the
quality of life of Palestinians."
Unrealistic and Disingenuous
Undeniably, the White House's plans for resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict are as
unrealistic as they are disingenuous. With an ongoing conflict and no clearly defined borders,
it is at best naïve to imagine the Occupied Palestinian Territories fostering a climate
that is ripe for foreign investment. Building a tourism sector and stimulating vibrant economic
growth under occupation are also unrealistic. Whereas Kushner sought to first discuss the
economic dimensions of the Palestinians' problems while saving meetings over the political ones
for later, he fails to understand how Palestine's economic crises are linked to politics. Put
simply, the Palestinians will not be able to achieve economic development through some
foreign-driven technocratic plan without finding a solution to the political issues at the
heart of the conflict.
The Palestinian view is that the White House is simply trying to liquidate their cause by
buying them off with foreign money. Moreover, no experts believe that the Trump administration
has the political or diplomatic capital to serve as a credible mediator between the
Palestinians and Israel. The White House has absolutely no goodwill among Palestinians,
particularly in the aftermath of the administration formally recognizing
Jerusalem as Israel's capital and
slashing funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency.
As the first U.S. administration to officially reject the two-state solution as the basis
for resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the current White House represents an
opportunity for Israel to cement its colonization of territory in land annexed during 1967. As
such, the "Deal of the Century" is about the consolidation of Israel's occupation of
Palestinian land and a way toward establishing a "second homeland" for Palestinians in Jordan
and/or Egypt. The Israeli UN ambassador's opinion
piece in The New York Times , which called for a Palestinian "surrender" and was
published just before the Bahrain summit kicked off, essentially summed up both the Israeli
government and the Trump administration's views on the Palestinian question.
GCC-Israel Ties
Nonetheless, although the summit did not raise important questions about Palestinian-Israeli
relations, it raised some about Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member-states and Israel's
gradual normalization of ties. That this summit was held in Bahrain was not a major surprise
considering that the archipelago kingdom has led the GCC in terms of moving toward
normalization of relations with Israel.
Indeed, Bahrain's openness to closer relations with the Jewish state was on display in
September 2017 when Prince Nasser bin Hamad al-Khalifa attended a multinational event in Los
Angeles where two American rabbis stated that the king of Bahrain had voiced his opposition to
the Arab League's economic boycott of Israel. As the "Peace to Prosperity" workshop began, the
Bahraini Crown Prince welcomed delegates with a
message that called the Bahraini capital, Manama, the Gulf's most religiously diverse city and
referenced its tiny Jewish community. Notably, Bahrain's former Jewish ambassador to
Washington, Houda Ezra Ebrahim Nonoo,
attended the summit.
Much like the dynamics which have brought other GCC member-states closer to Israel, a mutual
perception of Iran as a threat is at the heart of Bahrain's interest in establishing warmer
ties with Tel Aviv. Yet for Bahrain and other Arabian Peninsula monarchies -- until the
Palestinian issue is resolved -- prospects for moving toward a full normalization of relations
will remain complicated.
Whereas Kuwait stands out as the only country in the GCC that principally rejects this trend
of Gulf states moving in the direction of normalizing ties with Israel, it is the GCC's only
semi-democracy, thus this firm "pro-Palestinian" stance partially reflects pressures from
Kuwaiti public opinion.
... ... ...
Rong Cao , June 27, 2019 at 13:53
Isn't GCC on the brink of the collapse a while ago when the US congress threatened to sue
GCC for manipulate the oil prices? Guess now that the US has become a world major oil
exporter, GCC has stood on its way. So the patriarchy inside GCC, namely Saudi Arabia, has
been colluding with the US and Israel to pay $50 billion to Palestinians authority for the
purchase of Israeli's occupied lands once for all. Indeed a deal of the century for President
Trump.
KiwiAntz , June 27, 2019 at 04:28
Can anyone explain the complete inappropriateness & Cronyism of Trump's son in law,
Jared Kushner, in negotiating this sham of a Deal? This is the "Con of the Century" not the
Deal of the Century? Jared Kushner never got out of Bibi's Bed & his flawed Plan is a $50
Billion dollar loan bribe, a LOAN not a Hand out & where this money is coming from, as
it's not coming from America but supposedly from non-existent Arabian Financial sources is a
mystery?
And in order to receive this blood money, Palestinian's only have to surrender
what's left of their Country & the illegal settlements, any chance of a 2 State solution
& other humiliating concessions to Apartheid Israel, such as any Sovereignty claims to
their own Lands? And I state it's Palestinian's Land," THEIR COUNTRY" not the illegal,
immoral Land Usurper called the Nation of Israel?
This Land of Palestine, illegally occupied
since 1948 by repatriated Jews from a devastated, War ravaged Europe, as a bloodguilt reward
from the Allies, for their failure in preventing the Holocaust & genocide of the Jews
during WW2?The idiotic English came up with the disastrous plan to repatriate these European
Jewish people to a already occupied Land called Palestine? And for the record, the Historical
Jews lost their claims to these Lands, as was prophesied in the Bible following their
rejection & complicity in the Death of the Messiah?
JC stated their "House (or Nation)
would be abandoned to them" as a result of their rejection of him, being the Son of God! This
was confirmed in the year 70 B.C.E when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, destroying all their
records, the Temple & killing one million people with the survivors taken into captivity!
The confirmation of the loss of Divine favour & Gods utter rejection of the Jewish Nation
& people was that God allowed the Roman destruction to occur without any direct
intervention on his part! That was the end of the Nation State of Ancient Israel! When this
happened, it became inhabited by Arab Tribes & gradually became Palestine?
This Modern
Day interpretation of a Nation State of Israel is a monstrosity, a human construct not a
Theocratic Nation created by God!
This Plan is a utter waste of Time & other peoples
money as Palestinian's want a Political solution as mandated by the UN, not a blood money,
loan bribe by Trumps crony Capitalist, son in law, in league with Uncle Bibi Netanyahu!
Moi , June 27, 2019 at 02:40
An investor would have to be an utter idiot to put funds into Palestinian infrastructure
because the Israelis would promptly destroy it in their next military incursion. Investment
without rock solid perpetual peace is just money down the drain.
"... The possibility that the United States might be committing an act of war under false pretenses apparently did little to discourage the president's principal foreign policy advisers, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton, from pushing a military response. Tehran's action was presented as raw aggression, an act of war that deserved retaliation. ..."
"... The president apparently complained to a close associate, "These people want to push us into a war, and it's so disgusting." According to The Wall Street Journal , he further opined, "We don't need any more wars." He's right. But then why has Trump chosen to surround himself with advisers apparently so at variance with his views? ..."
"... Iran is preparing to breach the limits established by the agreement because Washington repudiated it . It is evident that the president doesn't understand the JCPOA or the nuclear issue more generally. ..."
"... Moreover, though he is focused on nuclear issues, his appointees have been demanding far more of Tehran, forestalling negotiations. For instance, last year, Pompeo ordered Iran to abandon its independent foreign policy and dismantle its missile deterrent, while accepting Saudi and American domination of the region. ..."
"... Pompeo's demands look a bit like the ultimatum to Serbia in June 1914 after a nationalist backed by Serbian military intelligence assassinated the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne. The Austrians set only 10, rather than 12, requirements, but they also were intended to be rejected. Vienna explained to its ally Germany that "the possibility of its acceptance is practically excluded." ..."
"... They were living out what Hermann Goering, on trial at Nuremberg, described in a private conversation to an American officer: "voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." Tragically, he's probably right. ..."
Iran predictably claimed that the drone was within its airspace. American officials asserted
that it was in international airspace. Reported by The New York Times :
"a
senior Trump administration official said there was concern inside the United States government
about whether the drone, or another American surveillance aircraft, or even the P-8A manned
aircraft flown by a military aircrew, actually did violate Iranian airspace at some point. The
official said the doubt was one of the reasons Mr. Trump called off the strike."
The point is worth repeating. The military was prepared to blast away when it wasn't even
certain whether America was in the right. The episode brings to mind the 1988 shootdown of an
Iranian airliner in the Persian Gulf by the guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes .
Initially the U.S. Navy justified its action, making a series of false claims about Iran Air
Flight 655, which carried 290 passengers and crew members. Eventually Washington did admit that
it had made a horrific mistake, though the Vincennes captain was later decorated.
The possibility that the United States might be committing an act of war under false
pretenses apparently did little to discourage the president's principal foreign policy
advisers, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton, from
pushing a military response. Tehran's action was presented as raw aggression, an act of war
that deserved retaliation.
The president apparently complained to a close associate, "These people want to push us into
a war, and it's so disgusting." According to The Wall Street Journal , he
further opined, "We don't need any more wars." He's right. But then why has Trump chosen to
surround himself with advisers apparently so at variance with his views?
Presumably the president believes that he can control his war-happy subordinates, using them
as he sees fit. However, his overweening hubris ignores their power to set the agenda and
influence his choices. Consider the basic question of objectives regarding Iran. Trump now says
all he wants to do is keep nukes out of Tehran's hands: "Never can Iran have a nuclear weapon,"
he intoned after halting the proposed reprisal, adding that "restraint" has its limits. But the
nuclear accord was drafted to forestall an Iranian nuclear weapon. Iran is preparing to breach
the limits established by the agreement because Washington repudiated it . It is
evident that the president doesn't understand the JCPOA or the nuclear issue more
generally.
Moreover, though he is focused on nuclear issues, his appointees have been demanding far
more of Tehran, forestalling negotiations. For instance, last year, Pompeo ordered Iran to
abandon its independent foreign policy and dismantle its missile deterrent, while accepting
Saudi and American domination of the region.
These mandates were an obvious non-starter -- what
sovereign nation voluntarily accepts puppet status? In fact, Pompeo admitted that he didn't
expect Iran to surrender, but instead hoped for a popular revolution. In recently stating that
the administration would negotiate without preconditions, he added that Washington expected
Iran to act like "a normal nation," meaning behaving just as he'd demanded last year. (Notably,
there was no offer for America to act like a normal country.)
Pompeo's demands look a bit like the ultimatum to Serbia in June 1914 after a nationalist
backed by Serbian military intelligence assassinated the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne.
The Austrians set only 10, rather than 12, requirements, but they also were intended to be
rejected. Vienna explained to its ally Germany that "the possibility of its acceptance is
practically excluded."
Once it became evident that no one would willingly back down and conflict was likely,
Germany's Kaiser and Russia's Tsar tried to halt the rush to war. However, they found
themselves hemmed in by the war plans created by their nominal subordinates. With
Austria-Hungary mobilizing against Serbia, Russia had to act to protect the latter. Germany
then faced a two-front war. Thus, to aid its ally in Vienna, the Germans had to mobilize
quickly in an attempt to defeat France before Russia could put its massive army into the field.
No one had sufficient time for diplomacy.
However, cousins Kaiser Wilhelm and Tsar Nicholas did engage in a last minute "Willy-Nicky"
exchange of telegrams. Wilhelm warned Nicholas that general Russian mobilization would require
Germany to act, with war the result. In response, the tsar switched from general to partial
mobilization. But he was soon besieged by his top officials who insisted that the entire army
had to be called up.
Understanding that general mobilization meant war, the tsar observed: "Think of the
responsibility you are asking me to take! Think of the thousands and thousands of men who will
be sent to their deaths." But he gave in, approving mobilization on the evening of July 30.
Nicholas's concern was warranted. More than 1.7 million Russian soldiers, along with hundreds
of thousands of civilians, died in the conflict. The ensuing Russian Civil War was even more
deadly, indeed far more so for noncombatants, among them the tsar and his family.
Kaiser Wilhelm was equally at the mercy of the "France-first" Schlieffen Plan. To wait would
be to invite destruction between the French and Russians, so he approved German mobilization on
August 1. He predicted the war would lead to "endless misery," and so it did. In 1918, he was
forced to abdicate and he lived out his life in exile.
Pompeo, Bolton, and like-minded officials tried and failed to force another war last week.
Next time they may succeed in leaving the president with no practical choice but the one they
favor. In which case he will find himself starting the very conflict that he had declared
against.
Ongoing administration machinations -- exacerbated by the opportunity to manipulate a
president -- offer an important reminder as to the Founders' wisdom. Delegates to the
Constitutional Convention made clear their intention to break with monarchical practice,
minimizing the president's authority. Congress was assigned the powers to raise armies, decide
on the rules of war, issue letters of marque and reprisal, and ratify treaties. Most
importantly, the legislative branch alone could declare war.
As commander-in-chief, the president could defend against attack, but he could not even
order a retaliatory strike without congressional authority. Wrote James Madison to Thomas
Jefferson: "The Constitution supposes, what the History of all Governments demonstrates, that
the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has
accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature." Delegate James
Wilson insisted that the Constitution was intended to "guard against" being hurried into war:
"It will not be in the power of a single man, or a single body of men, to involve us in such
distress, for the important power of declaring war is vested in the legislature at large."
Most important, placing the war power with Congress ensured that the people would be heard.
Of course, even that is not enough today. Presidents have adeptly concocted "evidence" and
misled the public, such as during the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq.
They were living out what Hermann Goering, on trial at Nuremberg, described in a private
conversation to an American officer: "voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to
the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being
attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.
It works the same way in any country." Tragically, he's probably right.
However, the Iraq debacle has resulted in greater skepticism of presidential claims. The
Trump administration's unsupported judgment that Iran was behind attacks on oil tankers was
greeted at home and abroad with a demand for more evidence. People were conscious of having
been repeatedly played by Washington and did not want a repeat. Many found the U.S. government
no more trustworthy than Iranian authorities, a humbling equivalence. And given the doubts
apparently voiced by Pentagon officials out of public view, such skepticism was
well-founded.
Last week, Donald Trump declared, "I want to get out of these endless wars." Unlike his
predecessors, the president apparently recognizes the temptation to sacrifice lives for
political gain. However, alone he will find it nearly impossible to face down the bipartisan
War Party. The best way to get out of endless wars is to not get in them in the first place.
And that requires changing personnel and respecting the constitutional limits established by
the nation's Founders.
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a former special assistant to
President Ronald Reagan. He is the author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global
Empire
Unfortunately, the President is attempting to walk a tight-rope between peace and the most
prominent funders of the GOP. Sheldon Adelson and his ilk are bent on the destruction of any
nation that stands in the way of Israeli expansion. And of course military contractors need
constant growth in tax-payer funding to support their margins and shareholder value. Hence
the blustering to appease the aforementioned and keep the bribes flowing, while backing down
to appease the base.
It would of course be in the interests of the base to oppose the bribe-taking to begin
with, but I assume that must be beyond their intellectual capacity. Or perhaps they're simply
in favor of it for ideological reasons.
We might as well be honest about it. All politicians over simplify, shade the truth, and
occasionally lie. But Trump's falsehoods are so continuous and extensive that there is no
reason to believe anything he says - everything needs to be validated against external
authorities - which is why he is so intent on tearing down all authorities that could
contradict him.
This is another in the long line of stories we are reading here (and in other places) that
Trump really doesn't want to get involved in a war but is being manipulated by Bolton, Pompeo
and the national security apparatus. Sorry, but I don't buy it.
Trump hired Bolton and Pompeo. Even somebody as apparently dimwitted as Trump could not
possibly have failed to notice that they were warmongers. Indeed, Bolton is probably the most
extreme warmonger around: he has an extensive public record of advocating war with Iran for
about two decades now. I cannot believe that even Trump was unaware of this. And even if he
was, why hasn't he fired them? He doesn't need anybody's permission to do that. Let's get
real: Trump is every bit the warmonger as the people he hires. His statements to the contrary
are just more additions to his endless string of lies.
What's more, he has another way to avoid being cornered into starting a war. All he has to
do in that circumstance is acknowledge that the constitution doesn't grant him that authority
and toss the decision making to Congerss, where it legally belongs. But he has done nothing
that suggests he acknowledges that constitutional delegation of authority--even though it
could provide him a way out if he felt he needed one.
So, no. I don't believe for a minute that Trump wants to avoid war. Actions speak louder
than words, especially Trump's words.
You're falling for the "official" report that he called off the attack merely because 150
lives were at stake? Since when did he all of a sudden grow a conscious after the inexcusable
defense he gave for our irresponsible military and intelligence ventures? He even bypasses
Congress itself by his illegal presidential will to give weapons to the SAUDIS. The
tyrannical, radical, scourge of humanity tribal savages turned psychopathic oligarchs that is
the House of Saud.
Let's be perfectly honest with ourselves, Tucker Carson (a f*cking tv show host of all
people) convinced a US president to not commit to another illegal war. Not because lives were
at stake, heavens no. It's because going into a disastrous war with Iran would gauruntee his
chances of not getting re-elected.
The American government is a living parody with no hope of redemption.
The President's almost daily outpouring of gibberish gives one little confidence that the
notion of 'the truth' holds any importance for him or his crew. Who needs historical
precedents to establish a feeling of mistrust when even the simplest statements from the
White House are so often needlessly loaded with misapprehensions, distortions and out right
BS?
" He's right. But then why has Trump chosen to surround himself with advisers apparently so
at variance with his views?"
I get this, position. You present an incredibly tough front as you press an entirely
different goal. The problem is that the president has presented a very tough front himself.
So when it appears to to actually be tough, he comes across as "not so much". It even
provides opportunity to grand him fearful. In the scenario that I think is being played out
or made to appear to play out --- the good cop, the reasonable cop has to sound reasonable
all the time. He has to claim to be holding back the forces of evil that threaten to consume
the target. But the president has been leading the way as "bad cop" so in the mind the
targets, there are no good cops.
But in my view, all of this hoollla baaaloooey about Iran is a distraction to the real
threat
the border. And the only common ground to be had is to enforce the law. That is why I
think the president is weak. For all of the tough talk --- he folded -- again on immigration.
Pretending to get concessions that is by agreement already expected from Mexico is the such
naked weakness that launching hypersonic missiles obliterating Tehran would just give him
sandals.
Uhhhh, no. I don't regret my vote. And and I still want the wall built and the laws
enforced and the sovereignty of the US respected by guests and citizens alike,.
"... Should such a war really happen, the stakes would be very high, so there is every reason to assume that Iran's missiles would not only be equipped with conventional high explosive fragmentation warheads, but would also carry toxic agents and dirty bombs. ..."
"... even a handful of Tehran's missiles reaching critical infrastructure in the Persian Gulf region would be enough to cause devastation. ..."
"... On top of that, there are more questions than answers regarding the reliability of the antimissile and air defense systems that the Persian Gulf monarchies deployed to defend their hydrocarbon terminals and other oil and gas infrastructure. ..."
"... To solve the problem of Iran once and for all, the US would need to mount a large-scale ground operation, with the US Army invading the country. America would have to wipe out both regular Iranian forces and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, unseat the current leadership of Iran, and have a military presence in every major city for the next 10 to 15 years, keeping tight control over the entire country at the same time. ..."
Iran's downing of a US military surveillance drone last week predictably led to another
flare-up in tense relations between Tehran and Washington. What could be the implications of a
potential conflict between the two nations? Right after the Global Hawk UAV was shot down, the
New York Times reported that US President Donald Trump approved military strikes against Iran,
but then changed his mind.
Let's start by saying that the decision to launch a military operation against Iran (which
is what this is really about), including the specific time and place, would have to be taken by
a very small group of top US political and military officials. At such meetings, no leaks could
possibly occur by definition.
Now, let's take a look at some of the details. The difference between a 'strike' and an
'operation' is quite significant, at the very least in terms of duration, and forces and
equipment involved. It would be nice to know if the NYT actually meant a single airstrike or an
entire air operation.
Amusingly enough, the publication reported that the strikes were scheduled for early morning
to minimize the potential death toll among the Iranian military and civilians. It's worth
pointing out that the US has never cared about the number of victims either among the military
personnel or the civilian population of its adversaries.
Moreover, the purpose of any military conflict is to do as much damage to your enemy as
possible in terms of personnel, military hardware and other equipment. This is how the goals of
any armed conflict are achieved. Of course, it would be best if civilian losses are kept to a
minimum, but for the US it's more of a secondary rather than a primary objective.
The US Navy and Air Force traditionally strike before dawn with one purpose alone – to
avoid the antiaircraft artillery (both small and medium-caliber), as well as a number of air
defense systems with optical tracking, firing at them. Besides, a strike in the dark hours of
the day affects the morale of the enemy personnel.
Here we need to understand that Iran would instantly retaliate, and Tehran has no small
capabilities for that. In other words, it would be a full-scale war. For the US, it wouldn't
end with one surgical airstrike without consequences, like in Syria. And the US seems to have a
very vague idea on what a military victory over Iran would look like.
There is no doubt that a prolonged air campaign by the US will greatly undermine Iran's
military and economic potential and reduce the country to the likes of Afghanistan, completely
destroying its hydrocarbon production and exports industries.
To say how long such a campaign could last would be too much of a wild guess, but we have
the examples of Operation Desert Storm in 1991 when airstrikes lasted for 38 days, and
Yugoslavia in 1991 when the bombing continued for 78 days. So, theoretically, the US could bomb
Iran for, say, 100 days, wrecking the country's economy and infrastructure step by step.
However, the price the US would have to pay for starting such a military conflict may turn
out to be too high.
For instance, Iran can respond to US aggression by launching intermediate and shorter-range
ballistic missiles to target oil and gas fields and terminals in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait,
and the UAE.
Should such a war really happen, the stakes would be very high, so there is every reason to
assume that Iran's missiles would not only be equipped with conventional high explosive
fragmentation warheads, but would also carry toxic agents and dirty bombs.
Firstly, it should be pointed out that even though the capabilities of US intelligence
agencies are almost limitless, quite a few Iranian missile launching sites remain undiscovered.
Secondly, US air defense systems in the Persian Gulf, no matter how effective, would not shoot
down every last Iranian missile. And even a handful of Tehran's missiles reaching critical
infrastructure in the Persian Gulf region would be enough to cause devastation.
On top of that, there are more questions than answers regarding the reliability of the
antimissile and air defense systems that the Persian Gulf monarchies deployed to defend their
hydrocarbon terminals and other oil and gas infrastructure.
If such a scenario came true, that would bring inconceivable chaos to the global economy and
would immediately drive up oil prices to $200-250 per barrel – and that's the lowest
estimate. It is these implications that are most likely keeping the US from attacking Iran.
To solve the problem of Iran once and for all, the US would need to mount a large-scale
ground operation, with the US Army invading the country. America would have to wipe out both
regular Iranian forces and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, unseat the current leadership
of Iran, and have a military presence in every major city for the next 10 to 15 years, keeping
tight control over the entire country at the same time.
For the record, the US failed to do that even in Afghanistan, which is several times smaller
than Iran in terms of both territory and population. And almost 18 years of fighting later, the
US has achieved next to nothing.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
Looks like Bolton is dyed-in-the-wool imperialist. He believes the United States can do what wants without regard to
international law, treaties or the роlitical commitments of previous administrations.
Notable quotes:
"... Israel is an Anglo American aircraft carrier to control the Eastern Mediterranean ..."
...Zionists know what they want, are willing to work together towards their goals, and put their money where their mouth
is. In contrast, for a few pennies the goyim will renounce any principle they pretend to cherish, and go on happily proclaiming
the opposite even if a short while down the road it'll get their own children killed.
The real sad part about this notion of the goy as a mere beast in human form is maybe not that it got codified for eternity
in the Talmud, but rather that there may be some truth to it? Another way of saying this is raising the question whether the goyim
deserve better, given what we see around us.
Israel is an Anglo American aircraft carrier to control the Eastern Mediterranean and prevent a Turko Egyptian and possibly Persian
invasion of Greece & the West
"... Are you saying that if AIPAC and the other Zionist lobbies decided overnight to stop lobbying and influencing the American government, American imperial aggression would also cease and the United States would be a peaceful country and only deploy its military in genuine self-defense? Were the Zionists behind the atomic bomb drops on Japan, the Korean War, the war on Vietnam, the expansion of NATO, antagonizing Russia and every other case of US imperial aggression? By all means, present your evidence. ..."
"... Israeli and Zionist propaganda has long played up the supposed threat of global anti-Semitism to justify their colonial state's existence ..."
"... People like you who see "Zionists" in every shadow help their cause by playing into their propaganda. ..."
"... If you're looking for a culprit to pin the empire's imperialist tendencies on, try global capitalism. ..."
Since the American people refuse to overthrow their Zionist occupied gov, maybe Iran will
bravely do what we cannot.
Are you saying that if AIPAC and the other Zionist lobbies decided overnight to stop
lobbying and influencing the American government, American imperial aggression would also
cease and the United States would be a peaceful country and only deploy its military in
genuine self-defense? Were the Zionists behind the atomic bomb drops on Japan, the Korean
War, the war on Vietnam, the expansion of NATO, antagonizing Russia and every other case of
US imperial aggression? By all means, present your evidence.
It seems to me the only people who would believe this are
extremely naive and gullible
fools, perhaps duped by far-right propaganda,
Americans who want to evade responsibility
for their country's ongoing imperial legacy,
a combination of a & b, and
someone
who has an unhealthy obsession with Zionists and/or Jews.
Israeli and Zionist propaganda has long played up the supposed threat of global
anti-Semitism to justify their colonial state's existence and savage repression of the Palestinians. People like you who see "Zionists" in every shadow help their cause by playing
into their propaganda.
If you're looking for a culprit to pin the empire's imperialist tendencies on, try global
capitalism. (Or maybe you think that's controlled by "Zionists", too?)
"... This is how the USA hypocrisy looks like: Punish Iran because one day in the far off future they may develop an atomic bomb but gift Israel $3 billion a year while it harbors hundreds of nukes. ..."
"... Meanwhile, pat head choppers like Saudi Arabia on the head -- As long as they buys billions in US weapons and force nations to use US dollars to buy oil. ..."
This is how the USA hypocrisy looks like: Punish Iran because one day in the far off
future they may develop an atomic bomb but gift Israel $3 billion a year while it harbors
hundreds of nukes.
Meanwhile, pat head choppers like Saudi Arabia on the head -- As long as they buys
billions in US weapons and force nations to use US dollars to buy oil.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said it is "possible" that President Donald Trump
was sent by God to save Israel from Iran.
In an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network during a high-profile trip to
Israel, he said it was his faith that made him believe that.
He also praised US efforts to "make sure that this democracy in the Middle East, that this
Jewish state, remains".
The comments came on a Jewish holiday celebrating rescue from genocide.
The holiday, Purim, commemorates the biblical rescue of the Jewish people by Queen Esther
from the Persians, as the interviewer noted to Mr Pompeo.
What did Pompeo say?
He was asked if "President Trump right now has been sort of raised for such a time as
this, just like Queen Esther, to help save the Jewish people from an Iranian menace".
"As a Christian, I certainly believe that's possible," said Mr Pompeo, a former member of
Congress for Kansas and CIA director.
"I am confident that the Lord is at work here," he added.
I continue to believe this is all theater, with DJT continuing his role as "carnival barker".
I just can't believe the elites will sacrifice the world's economy with a wider war, but
then, I've always heard, the big rollers make money whether the market is up, or down.
thanks Bernard.... especially good reporting / analysis on all of this the past week or two.
I expect no good to come of any of this sanction bs.
we all know that the Saudi Arabian and UAE militaries are next to useless without the US,
so that's a real coalition of the reckless and worthless for ya.... I expect that kiss ass
trudeau and Canada are already on board..... I doubt if any Europeans except the colonialist
Brits will take that poisoned bait
zero hedge reports today that military build up in that area continues:
".....The US Navy confirmed early Monday that more military ships have arrived in the US
5th Fleet area of responsibility, which includes the Persian Gulf and Middle East waters.
Though not pinpointing their exact location, the additional deployment which comes in the
wake of last week's US drone shoot down by Iran, that saw Washington coming very close to
launching major strikes in response, is described in Navy statements as including a major
amphibious assault ship and two support vessels....
Israel Lobbyist - We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran!
Patrick Clawson of the influential neo-con Washington Institute for Near East Studies
OPENLY suggests that the US should provoke Iran into taking the first shot.
Israel Lobbyist suggests False Flag attack to start war with Iran. Just like 911 in New
York causing the deaths of American civilians and soldiers, a million dead Iraqis and for
what?
This recent 19 May piece from Ha'aretz documents precisely the manipulation of
American policy by Israeli charlatans and their agents of influence in the US. The title says
it all just by itself: "Netanyahu's Iran Dilemma: Getting Trump to Act Without Putting
Israel on the Front Line." It goes on to assess that:
"In this conflict, Israel is hoping to have its cake and eat it too. Ever since Trump
was elected president two and a half years ago, Netanyahu has been urging him to take a
more aggressive line toward Iran, in order to force it to make additional concessions on
its nuclear program and disrupt its support for militant organizations.
"Trump acceded to this urging a year ago when he withdrew America from the nuclear
agreement with Iran. That was followed by tighter sanctions on Iran, as well as publication
of a plan by U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo detailing 12 steps Tehran must take to
satisfy Washington.
"But Israel isn't interested in being part of the front. That is why Jerusalem has
issued so few official statements on the Iranian issue, and why Netanyahu has urged
ministers to be cautious in what they say."
I'd say that passage captures the situation perfectly, and it just goes to show that when
you want to know about what chicanery Israel and its lobby are up to in the US, you have to
go and look at what Israelis are saying when they aren't particularly careful about who's
observing. That sort of truth is sanitized from any MSM accounts in the US.
Iran's envoy to the United Nations has called on the international community to end "unlawful destabilizing measures" by the US,
declaring that while Iran does not seek war, it "reserves the right to counter any hostile act."
Iranian envoy to the UN Majid Takht Ravanchi has condemned continuing US provocations that culminated Thursday morning in the
downing of an American surveillance drone by the Iranian air force over Hormozgan province.
The drone "had turned off its identification equipment and [was] engaged in a clear spying operation," Ravanchi confirmed in a
letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, adding that the aircraft had ignored "repeated radio warnings" in order to enter
Iranian airspace near the Strait of Hormuz.
President Donald Trump likes to think of himself as a statesman, an author, an A-level negotiator, but at heart, he's one thing:
an insult comic.
Every day in D.C. is a roast, the insults and belittling nicknames wielded like tiny comedy bullets. And if you haven't seen enough
of the fusillade on Twitter, all you need to do is turn on late night TV. Television comedy has a strange, symbiotic relationship
with the real political world, something between a feedback loop and a funhouse mirror....
Thank you Helen for your bravery and honesty against the evil, stupid, hypocritical
Zionists... Zionists don't want us to know the truth and steal our tax dollars for Israel. NO!
Israel is just another 'settlers" country. It might be successful or it might fail like South
Africa and Rhodesia. The survival of Israel as the settler country hinges on the USA
unconditional support as yet another (stealth) USA state, and the continuation of the role of the
USA as the world hegemon and the center of the global neoliberal empire. . The USA position as
for Israel might eventually change with the collapse of neoliberalism.
One problem that creates negative attitude to Israel around the world (according to
BBC data
only the USA and a couple of African countries having the majority of population that views
Israel positively) is, as one commenter observed, the situation in which "The Children of the
Holocaust survivors, born into Israel, have now become the "Holocaust-ers of Palestine"
When Israeli prime ministers are in trouble, facing difficult elections or a corruption
scandal, the temptation has typically been for them to unleash a military operation to bolster
their standing. In recent years, Gaza has served as a favourite punching bag.
Benjamin Netanyahu is confronting both difficulties at once: a second round of elections in
September that he may struggle to win; and an attorney general who is widely expected to indict
him on corruption charges shortly afterwards.
Netanyahu is in an unusually tight spot, even by the standards of an often chaotic and
fractious Israeli political system. After a decade in power, his electoral magic may be
deserting him. There are already rumblings of discontent among his allies on the far right.
Given his desperate straits, some observers fear that he may need to pull a new kind of
rabbit out of the hat.
In the past two elections, Netanyahu rode to success after issuing dramatic last-minute
statements. In 2015, he agitated against the fifth of Israel's citizens who are Palestinian
asserting their democratic rights, warning that they were "coming out in droves to vote".
Back in April, he declared his intention to annex large chunks of the occupied West Bank, in
violation of international law, during the next parliament.
Amos Harel, a veteran military analyst with Haaretz newspaper, observed last week that
Netanyahu may decide words are no longer enough to win. Action is needed, possibly in the form
of an announcement on the eve of September's ballot that as much as two-thirds of the West Bank
is to be annexed.
Washington does not look like it will stand in his way.
Shortly before April's election, the Trump administration offered Netanyahu a campaign
fillip by recognising Israel's illegal annexation of the Golan Heights, territory Israel seized
from Syria in 1967.
This month David Friedman, US ambassador to Israel and one of the chief architects of Donald
Trump's long-delayed "deal of the century" peace plan, appeared to offer a similar, early
election boost.
In interviews, he claimed Israel was "on the side of God" – unlike, or so it was
implied, the Palestinians. He further argued that Israel had the "right to retain" much of the
West Bank.
Both statements suggest that the Trump administration will not object to any Israeli moves
towards annexation, especially if it ensures their favoured candidate returns to power.
Whatever Friedman suggests, it is not God who has intervened on Israel's behalf. The hands
that have carefully cleared a path over many decades to the West Bank's annexation are all too
human.
Israeli officials have been preparing for this moment for more than half a century, since
the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza were seized back in 1967.
That point is underscored by an innovative interactive map of the occupied territories. This
valuable new resource is a joint project of the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem and
Forensic Architecture, a London-based team that uses new technology to visualise and map
political violence and environmental destruction.
Titled Conquer
and Divide , it reveals in detail how Israel has "torn apart Palestinian space, divided the
Palestinian population into dozens of disconnected enclaves and unravelled its social, cultural
and economic fabric".
The map proves beyond doubt that Israel's colonisation of the West Bank was never
accidental, defensive or reluctant. It was coldly calculated and intricately planned, with one
goal in mind – and the moment to realise that goal is fast approaching.
Annexation is not a right-wing project that has hijacked the benign intentions of Israel's
founding generation. Annexation was on the cards from the occupation's very beginnings in 1967,
when the so-called centre-left – now presented as a peace-loving alternative to Netanyahu
– ran the government.
The map shows how Israeli military planners created a complex web of pretexts to seize
Palestinian land: closed military zones today cover a third of the West Bank; firing ranges
impact 38 Palestinian communities; nature reserves are located on 6 per cent of the territory;
nearly a quarter has been declared Israeli "state" land; some 250 settlements have been
established; dozens of permanent checkpoints severely limit movement; and hundreds of
kilometres of walls and fences have been completed.
These interlocking land seizures seamlessly carved up the territory, establishing the walls
of dozens of tightly contained prisons for Palestinians in their own homeland.
Two Nasa satellite images of the region separated by 30 years – from 1987 and 2017
– reveal how Israel's settlements and transport infrastructure have gradually scarred the
West Bank's landscape, clearing away natural vegetation and replacing it with concrete.
The land grabs were not simply about acquisition of territory. They were a weapon, along
with increasingly draconian movement restrictions, to force the native Palestinian population
to submit, to recognise its defeat, to give up hope.
In the immediate wake of the West Bank's occupation, defence minister Moshe Dayan, Israel's
hero of the hour and one of the architects of the settlement project, observed that
Palestinians should be made "to live like dogs, and whoever wants to can leave – and we
shall see where this process leads".
Although Israel has concentrated Palestinians in 165 disconnected areas across the West
Bank, its actions effectively won the international community's seal of approval in 1995. The
Oslo accords cemented Israel's absolute control over 62 per cent of the West Bank, containing
the Palestinians' key agricultural land and water sources, which was classified as Area C.
Occupations are intended to be temporary – and the Oslo accords promised the same.
Gradually, the Palestinians would be allowed to take back more of their territory to build a
state. But Israel made sure both the occupation and the land thefts sanctioned by Oslo
continued.
The new map reveals more than just the methods Israel used to commandeer the West Bank.
Decades of land seizures highlight a trajectory, plotting a course that indicates the project
is still not complete.
ORDER IT NOW
If Netanyahu partially annexes the West Bank – Area C – it will be simply
another stage in Israel's tireless efforts to immiserate the Palestinian population and bully
them into leaving. This is a war of attrition – what Israelis have long understood as
"creeping annexation", carried out by stealth to avoid a backlash from the international
community.
Ultimately, Israel wants the Palestinians gone entirely, squeezed out into neighbouring Arab
states, such as Egypt and Jordan. That next chapter is likely to begin in earnest if Trump ever
gets the chance to unveil his "deal of the century".
A version of this article first appeared in the National, Abu Dhabi.
This study shows us that the pro-Israel narrative has become so firmly entrenched in the
American mainstream media that it is almost impossible for news consumers to discern the
truth about the situation in Israel and Palestine. This has greatly benefitted Washington
which has made it abundantly clear that it sides with Israel in this fifty year-old
conflict.
If Netanyahu partially annexes the West Bank – Area C – it will be simply
another stage in Israel's tireless efforts to immiserate the Palestinian population and
bully them into leaving. This is a war of attrition – what Israelis have long
understood as "creeping annexation", carried out by stealth to avoid a backlash from the
international community.
Ultimately, Israel wants the Palestinians gone entirely, squeezed out into neighbouring
Arab states, such as Egypt and Jordan. That next chapter is likely to begin in earnest if
Trump ever gets the chance to unveil his "deal of the century".
This is probably true-and? I don't see Palestinians as a real people; they're just a bunch
of Arabs & it is absolutely irrelevant whether they are in Syria, Egypt or Arabia. They
themselves say they're not a "real" people:
On the other hand, real peoples like Uyghurs & Tibetans are swamped by the
Chinese, which is a real tragedy & only, huh, Richard Gere complains.
So, what the big deal with "Palestinians"? Why would they have a "right to exist"on some
shitty piece o land Jews seem to be obsessively addicted to in past 2 millennia?
And then, what with Amazonian Indians, Eskimos, Ostyaks, Okinawans, ..? What about
expulsion of 13 million Germans in what are now parts of Poland, Czechia, Russia .?
Israelis should have expelled all of them in 1967. & there would be peace.
There is one point in the article that is not completely accurate. J. Cook writes: "Israeli
officials have been preparing for this moment for more than half a century, since the West
Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza were seized back in 1967."
In fact, Ilan Pappe shows in his book "The biggest Prison on Earth" (2017) that plans to
occupy the whole land were much older. The plans weren't made because Israel took Palestinian
lands in 1967. Israel took lands in 1967 because of the plans to colonize it. Those plans
were older.
So, Pappe says in a more general way in his book that " . since 1948 and even more since
1956, Israel's military and political elites was looking for the right historical moment to
occupy the West Bank." (p. XIV). He also says more specifically: "The strategy was presented
by the CoGS to the army on 1 May 1963 and was meant to prepare the army for controlling the
West Bank as an occupied military area" (p. XIII).
All talk about "peace", about "coexistence", about a "two state solution" are (and were)
made in bad faith. About Pappe's book: I don't want to reccomend it for a casual reading. It
may be valuable historically because it deals with historical material from archives. But
it's basically a book about the Israeli burocracy, about laws, rules which would make sure
that Israel controls the conquested territory which it never thought of giving back. It's a
dry book. He has other books that which are much more agreeable to read like his short book
"Ten Myths About Israel".
The propagandists for the Israel Lobby, who occupy the Wall Street Journal editorial page
while pretending to be journalists, are determined to remove Helen Thomas from the annals of
journalism. In case you have already forgotten, a few days ago the distinguished career of
Helen Thomas, the 89-year-old doyen of the White House Press Corps, was ended by the Israel
Lobby, which made an issue about her opinion that immigrant Jews should leave Palestine and go
back to their home countries.
The White House Correspondents' Association fell in line with the demands of the Israel
Lobby, and the cowardly president of the organization added the association's disapprobation to
that of the neoconservative cabal.
Having removed Helen Thomas from the journalism scene, the Israel Lobby is now working with
its agents on the Wall Street Journal editorial page to eliminate the Helen Thomas Award for
Lifetime Achievement from the Society of Professional Journalists.
A nonentity in the world of journalism, James Taranto, apparently is associated with the
Wall Street Journal editorial page, although Wikipedia reports that he was incapable of
graduating from journalism school at California State University, Northridge. On a Wall Street
Journal web site, Taranto writes: "We've been calling Thomas 'American journalism's crazy old
aunt in the attic' for years," and he asks who would now accept the Helen Thomas award after
Ms. Thomas revealed she really was crazy by criticizing Israel.
I would for one. Of course the Society of Professional Journalists would never give the
award, assuming the distinguished award survives the assault of the Israel Lobby's assassins,
to a critic of Israel. Helen excepted, American journalists are cowards. With the concentrated
ownership of the corporate media today, no independently-minded journalist can have a career in
print or TV media. You defend the Washington/Tel Aviv line, or you are out of work.
The absence of independently-minded journalists on the Wall Street Journal editorial page is
an extraordinary change from my days as Associate Editor of that page. The editorial page
editor, Robert Bartley was ambitious and forced himself to tolerate talented colleagues. Mere
opinion was not our task. Often we scooped the reporters on the news side of the paper. Our
editorials reported new developments and provided factual analysis.
I was hired as Jude Wanniski's replacement. Jude, Associate Editor of the Wall Street
Journal, was fired, allegedly because the journal's brass caught him handing out election
campaign literature on a train platform, but if you believe American journalism was ever that
pure, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale.
Jude was fired, because the neoconservatives got rid of him by telling Bartley that Wanniski
was over-shadowing him. That was too much for Bob's ego. Jude, of course, being a real
journalist, was objective toward the Palestinians and thus had earned the enmity of the Israel
Lobby.
Once Bob was rapidly declining with prostate cancer, neoconservatives engineered the
takeover of the editorial page. Today the once proud Wall Street Journal editorial page is a
leading apologist for Israeli/American war crimes and police states.
To return to the nonentity, James Taranto, who wants to throw Helen Thomas down the memory
hole: Helen Thomas' opinion that Israelis should stop stealing the villages, homes, and lands
of Palestinians, while confining Palestinians to the equivalent of the Warsaw Ghetto, is
equated by Taranto to the advocacy of "ethnic cleansing" by Helen.
Of course, it is the Israelis who are doing the ethnic cleansing. Many Jews have documented
Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, such as Uri Avnery, a former member of the Israeli
terrorist organization, Irgun, Ilan Pappe, Israel's most distinguished historian and author of
The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, and the Israeli peace group, ICHAD, who have been my house
guests. The Israeli newspaper, Haaratz, is far more critical of Israeli policy than Helen
Thomas, and so is MIT professor Noam Chomsky, the distinguished British journalist and film
maker John Pilger, and the distinguished scholar, Norman Finkelstein, the son of Holocaust
survivors.
But Taranto prefers an 89-year old adversary.
Israel is an unnatural state. It was created by terror that was accommodated by craven
British and US "diplomacy." Israel exists for one reason only: the US government provides the
money, weapons, and diplomatic protection. Any other government that murdered thousands of
civilians in other countries, as Israel does routinely in Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank,
would have its entire government and military on trial before the War Crimes Tribunal at the
Hague. Israelis have no worst enemy than their own government.
Every time the rest of the world tries to hold the Israeli government accountable for its
crimes, the US vetoes the UN resolution. America has become the enabler of the Zionist-hijacked
Israeli government. And the Israeli government knows it. Israeli government leaders have
publicly bragged for decades about their control over the US government. US Admiral Tom Moorer,
Chief of Naval Operations and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff after whom the F-14
"Tomcat" jet fighter was named, declared publicly: "No American President can stand up to
Israel." Apparently no American journalist can either.
I am a critic of Israel's heartless policy toward the Palestinians, but I do not want Israel
destroyed. I want it moved or reformed. Bring the small number of Israelis to America before
there is a nuclear war over the fact that they are where they should not be. To try to claim a
land and dispossess its people on the basis of a spurious two thousand year year old deed is an
audacious act of conquest and dispossession.
My proposal to relocate Israelis in the US is rhetorical, but why not insist that the
Israelis, who are heavily dependent on US largess, reform? Why should Americans support an
apartheid racist state that denies citizenship to the rightful inhabitants? What kind of
morality, if any, does the Wall Street Journal editorial page represent when it defends
Israelis who force Palestinians into ever-shrinking ghettos, deprived of water, food, medical
care and schools? Why must Palestinians live in dread of Israeli bulldozers arriving to flatten
their homes in order to create space for Zionist "settlers."
Allegedly, the US is a superpower, but in fact it is a puppet state of the Israeli
government. Witness, for example (the examples are numerous), the fate of the Goldstone Report
on Israeli war crimes committed in Israel's assault on Gaza during December 2008-January 2009.
Goldstone is a Zionist Jew and a distinguished judge. He was given the task by the United
Nations to investigate the Israeli attack on Gaza. Being an honest person, he provided evidence
of Israeli war crimes.
What was the result? The bought-and-paid-for US Congress voted, on the instructions of their
master, the Israel Lobby, to deep-six the Goldstone Report by a vote of 344 to 36.
Amazing, isn't it, there were only 36 US Representatives who were not owned by the Israel
Lobby.
Of course, James Taranto serves the Israel Lobby. The Wall Street Journal editorial page,
not even a shadow of its former self, when it speaks, speaks for Israel and for the Bush/Cheney
militarist police state.
The Wall Street Journal editorial page has fallen into the low ranks of Brownshirt
propaganda. The fact that management tolerates the continuation of totally nonobjective
journalism shows why print newspapers are failing everywhere.
The hubris of Taranto, a mere propagandist who will never come close to the league in which
Helen Thomas resides, causes him to think that he is fit to pass judgment on a real journalist.
Taranto epitomizes the hubris of the neoconservatives. Not a single one of them has the
smallest accomplishment. Yet, blinded with arrogance, they remain in ignorant bliss of their
status as prostitutes.
PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS was an editor of the Wall Street Journal and an Assistant Secretary
of the U.S. Treasury. His latest book, HOW THE ECONOMY WAS
LOST , has just been published by CounterPunch/AK Press. He can be reached at: [email protected]
"A State Department map shows Palestinian population centers in the West Bank. Obama was surprised to see how 'systematic'
the Israelis had been at cutting them off from one another." (
source
, click to enlarge)
The outcome of this
long process of territorial integration , barring any implementation of an alternative to the "two-state solution," will be as
Mike Gravel says , "horrendous war, the Jordan
foaming with blood." The monomaniacal drive by Israel's leaders to recover the western part of their Iron Age kingdom has now made
peace impossible, sans intervention.
If the two-state idea is dead, what alternatives are left? Just one. Below I list the main points of presidential candidate Mike
Gravel's proposal, offered as the only non-military, non-ethnic-cleansing way forward. Is this solution "practical"? No, it's not,
in the sense that the current leaders of the U.S., Israel and Palestine will not accept it.
But yes, it is practical, in the sense that a bloodbath in the region -- and it will come to that -- a bloodbath that will wash
over all of the Middle East, is the only other alternative. If a war of this magnitude is itself "impractical" in the extreme, Gravel's
solution is imminently practical. I, like Gravel, see this as the only way out.
Here are Gravel's main points, as offered in a recent
Mondoweiss piece :
Move toward creating a secular, democratic binational state -- "Most American diplomats will, in their more candid hours,
admit that the two-state idea is long dead. Prudence dictates that America acknowledge that on the world stage and begin the search
for other solutions. The most obvious and humane path forward is the creation of a secular, democratic, binational state with equal
rights for all. That is the model the U.S. government, with its partners in the region, should work toward and publicly highlight
as the ideal outcome."
Gravel recognizes that the above proposal would disappoint everyone in the region. Yet it's the only peaceful way forward:
"Both visions serve an abstract nationalism rather than the actual needs of Israelis and Palestinians living in the area, and a state
along the lines of the idealized United States model, one with no prized ethnicity or religious character, is the solution all those
seeking a humanitarian alternative should support. There would be no need for the byzantine arrangements (land swaps, dual city ownership,
etc.) upon which most attempts to resolve the conflict have hinged: it would simply be the decision -- an admittedly difficult one
-- to live together, Muslim, Jew, and Christian, in a peaceful, democratic, egalitarian society."
Force AIPAC and similar pro-Israel groups to register as foreign lobbies -- "The first step should be mandating that
AIPAC register as a foreign lobby under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). AIPAC manages to skirt American laws about foreign
lobbying by claiming that it represents Americans who happen to support Israel. But the shockingly close ties between the governing
Likud Party and AIPAC give a lie to this legal fiction; AIPAC will always stand closer to Israeli interests than American ones. Such
an arrangement would prevent AIPAC from influencing American elections, and would require it to report all of its contacts with Congress,
along with details of its spending, to the Department of Justice."
The point about preventing influence in American elections is important -- the present arrangement skirts very close to the line
marked by our present panic over "foreign interference in our democracy," if it doesn't cross well over it. Without Israeli influence
in the U.S. electoral process, a wider world of foreign policy and peace-making options is open to us.
Yes, I know this proposal is anathema in the current environment -- witness the immediate and bipartisan vilification of Rep.
Ilhan Omar -- but Gravel merely says out loud what everyone in D.C. knows, but won't repeat with a microphone nearby. Nevertheless,
we in the "reality-based community" should acknowledge this fact.
End military support for Israel -- "Next, the U.S. should end military aid to Israel, citing the Israeli military's complicity
in crimes against the Palestinian people. It should call for a gradual demilitarization of Israel and Palestine , and should
be clear with the Israeli government that the days of Israel-right-or-wrong are over. Future outrages by either side will receive
an even-handed response without bias. Accordingly, it should demand that Israel bring itself into compliance with international law
and end the harassment of dissidents "
This proposal, actually two proposals in one, is highly controversial to say the least. Cries of "but Israel needs to be able
to defend itself" will be loud enough to cause deafness. In response, I would add to Gravel's call my own proposal that we end
all military support in the region . Note that ending U.S. military aid does not mean immediate disarmament for any of these
nations; far from it. Israel can do quite nicely without U.S. dollars swelling their military coffers -- and besides, as the only
nuclear-tipped army in the region, it still has the deciding advantage.
The region's militarization, in fact, underscores the importance of the second part of his proposal, a "gradual demilitarization
of Israel and Palestine." Recall again the aforementioned atrocities and "crimes against the Palestinian people." Those do have to
stop or be made to stop. If they don't, the region is on the road to ethnic cleansing, and that won't end well for anyone, including
the U.S. and Europe.
It's a simple choice: demilitarize or keep on the current path. There's no middle ground. Once the main goal is shifted to a peaceful
secular state, the need for demilitarization between Israelis and Palestinians is inescapable.
Finally, end U.S. attempts to stifle BDS, the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement -- "the U.S. should refuse
to take unconstitutional steps to stifle BDS. Whatever one's personal thoughts on BDS, an individual or group's decision not to associate
with another group or country is a legitimate exercise of the freedoms of speech and association guaranteed by the Constitution,
and using the power of the government to influence those decisions is wrong.
Senators Amy Klobuchar and
Cory Booker should be ashamed of themselves
for supporting federal laws to restrict BDS. (It is perhaps no coincidence that Booker and the president of AIPAC '
text message back and forth like
teenagers ,' by Booker's own admission.)"
Bottom Line
If peace in the Palestinian region is the goal, and if you're clear-headed about what it will take to get there, these are the
most practical steps, and in fact the only ones, no matter how objectionable they will be to everyone involved in the conflict.
First, the goal must recognized realities on the ground. If a two-state solution is impossible, the only alternatives are an increasingly
cleansed Greater Israel, with intifada after growing intifada revenging within its borders, or a peaceful secular state. One cannot
have a religion-dominated Israel as the only state in the region and still have peace. One may as well want a bird that can fly to
the moon.
Next, if the second alternative, a peaceful secular state, is to be achieved with U.S. leadership, the U.S. political process
much be cleared of the protected intervention of the Israel lobby. If not, its paid politicians will win almost every battle, neutering
every attempt at make peace, until peace itself is a dream of the past and war is the fact on the ground, the "foaming tide of blood"
Gravel seeks to avoid.
Neither of the alternatives, a one-state region dominated by religion and cleansing, or a one-state region of diversity and tolerance,
will be achieved without great pain. But I were the one choosing between them, a road that leads to a foaming tide of blood would
be last on the list, if it even made the list at all.
Great post and Gravel's suggestions make eminent sense (as usual), but we all know absolutely none of this will actually happen.
The US and UK have created and nurtured a great horned beast in Israel and now we all get to live with the consequences. A blood
bath it will most certainly be, and from what we're hearing in the news lately, it will most likely be sooner rather than later.
The one-state solution is not bad in itself (and neither is the two-state solution), the devil is in the details. The issue
with the the proposed solution is that no one can guarantee that even if the purported single state starts as democratic
and secular it will stay this way. In fact all the neighbouring Arab Muslim-majority states are neither democratic nor secular.
And Yazidis and Syrian and Iraqi Christians are good examples what happens with minorities in such states, so bloodbath is likelier
to follow from the implementation this proposal than from the status quo, as bad as it is.
Also that's a fine example of usual double standards. In the same region there is North Cyprus whose Greek population was expelled
less than 50 ago and still cannot return, with mainland Turkish setters moving in. A bit further to the north, and about 10 years
ago ethnic Georgians were cleansed from South Ossetia. But you'd be hard pressed to find a single line about these places and
many others like them.
The US doesn't provide South Ossetia with billions of dollars of arms and other assistance every year. US leaders don't make
a bipartisan show of falling all over themselves to pledge fealty to South Ossetia. They don't hold South Ossetia above reproach
and hail its vicious and corrupt leader as the new Moses or Elijah.
Your comment about Yazidis, Christians and other minorities in US-UK-occupied countries only serves to show that US-UK occupations
are evil and destroy societies. Those minorities had lived for millennia in those countries until the English-speaking barbarians
arrived.
The one country in the Middle East today with strong and stable minority communities is Iran, precisely because it has never
been invaded by the US and the UK.
Ask Native Americans what they think about what happens to ethnic minorities in US-dominated regions.
Thank you for using the words ethnic cleansing, which is well under way. What else can you call taking Palestinian land and
building Israeli settlements on it? In some cases, the only work Palestinians can get is building the settlements that are displacing
them. A grotesque atrocity. This is what has unquestioned bipartisan support among the political class in the US. A country led
by Netanyahu, one of the absolute worst people on the world stage today, should not be the one nation that is above reproach.
In fact, quite the reverse. He has made their bed. The only way forward now is one non-ethnic democratic state.
People who talk about Palestinian ethnic cleansing do not know what they are talking about. Since 1948 Israelis haven't systematically
gotten rid of Palestinians; in fact the Palestinian population in the area has only grown larger. However, since 1948 every Middle
Eastern country has systematically ethnically cleansed itself of Jews. For example, there were about 60,000 Jews in Egypt until
Nasser forced them out after taking their property. Now there are estimated to be 15 people left. In Iraq, there were 150,000
in Bagdad until Saddam Hussein forced them out and confiscated their property. Now there are none. The only country that has any
sizeable Jewish population is Iran; there are about 9000 Jews there, but there used to be 90,000.
You also don't talk about the Palestinian aim, which is the destruction of Israel and the expulsion of almost all Jews. I think
the Hamas charter allows only those Jews to remain whose ancestors lived in the area before 1917; no such conditions exist for
Palestinians. Personally I'm all for Israel taking over the West Bank. P.S. The town of Hebron in the West Bank is the oldest
Jewish community in the world, dating back to Biblical times. Its Jewish population has always been small, around 700 people,
but apparently not small enough for the Arabs. They twice massacred the Jews of Hebron in the 1920s, long before Israel existed.
In the 1948 war, Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem and expelled all the Jews; nobody objected very much. If Muslims
take control of the area, history shows they absolutely will turn it into an ethnic non-democratic state.
North Americans owe their privileged position to a massive taking from and replacement of the native population. What moral
standing do we have to criticise Israel, which is doing exactly the same thing?
It's terrible and sad but tribal war is the story of humanity.
I do object to being lied to 24-7 but the reality is that most people do not want to confront the brutal truth of it.
Sorry, my head exploded. It is beyond absurd to suggest the US government or society is standing aside, shaking its finger.
The US government is helping to pay the bill and provide the weapons and more importantly, the international diplomatic and
military cover to Israel to commit these crimes. And many Americans have donated to prop up the most reactionary elements of Israeli
politics.
I hate to agree with you but I must. The present Israeli State has demonstrated the 'effectiveness' of a campaign of controlled
violence. The above suggestion, though sane and rational is not feasible there now. The well has been poisoned. The only effective
counter measure to Israeli State violence is Palestinian State violence. To get to that point, someone has to supply the 'sinews
of war' to the Palestinians. One regional power is doing so, Iran. Hence, the Israeli fixation on dominating Iran. Iran is the
only state level actor doing something 'effective' on behalf of the Palestinians.
I suggest that this is not going to 'end up' in a bloodbath, but that the bloodbath has already started.
There is not a nation in the world that does not have ethnic cleansing blood on its hands. Some are undoubtedly more blood
stained than others, but mostly it's a question of how recent and well publicized any set of horrors happens to be that determines
which of them are brought to our attention.
That being said, humanity should have choices better than tolerating ethnic cleansing just because all of our hands are dirty.
Even Israel whose crimes are out there for everyone with any shred of objectivity to see could still choose to make amends by
devoting itself to making life better for all the people living under its yoke.
It seems to me that Israel considers the Palestinians to be inferiors to be eliminated, blood enemies. As do the Turks consider
the Armenians and Pontic Greeks (already eliminated), and the Kurds (in process of elimination). As do the Chinese consider the
Uighers and the Tibetans.
Sorry but your suggestion that any of the eliminators do something nice for their targets is a fantasy.
After slaying its own apartheid dragon, my country of SA is bucking the international trend and has downgraded its Israeli
diplomatic mission to that of a liaison representative office only (with the ambassador having officially been recalled), which
is the first step towards a full boycott. We fully expect the Trump threat-generator machine to kick into high gear in response
to this, but our painful history has taught us that the arduous path towards defeating a monster like apartheid is paved with
courageous, seemingly inconsequential actions like this. That this has caused consternation amongst the local Jewish lobby is
par for the course, but the government is resolute and determined forge ahead with this. What has become extremely concerning
is the regularity with which every criticism of Israel, no matter how legitimate, is labelled antisemitic, and the moral outrage
accompanying some of the atrocities associated with the state is thusly quelled using political correctness and the silencing
of dissent.
The "Israel has the right to defend itself" rhetorical smokescreen (notwithstanding its legitimate right to do so apart from
the invoking of this "right" as cover for committing state sanctioned atrocities) and the brandishing of antisemitism sound eerily
similar to how the apartheid government used "the right to defend the republic against treasonous terrorists" to keep the oppressed
black masses huddled and docile, until the system collapsed under the weight of internal and external pressure. With big brother
USA shielding Israel, the Israel-Palestinian situation is orders of magnitude above SA in intractability.
In a pointed critique of President Trump's foreign policy leadership, Senate Minority Leader
Chuck Schumer stated to members of the press Thursday that "the American people deserve a
president who can more credibly justify war with Iran."
"What the American people need is a president who can make a much more convincing case for
going to war with Iran," said Schumer (D-NY), adding that the Trump administration's corruption
and dishonesty have "proven time and time again" that it lacks the conviction necessary to act
as an effective cheerleader for the conflict.
"Donald Trump is completely unfit to assume the mantle of telling the American people what
they need to hear in order to convince them a war with Iran is a good idea.
One of the key duties of the president is to gain the trust of the people so that they feel
comfortable going along with whatever he says. President Trump's failure to serve as a credible
advocate for this war is yet another instance in which he has disappointed not only his
colleagues in Washington, but also the entire nation."
Schumer later concluded his statement with a vow that he and his fellow Democrats will
continue working toward a more palatable case in favor of bombing Iran.
A very good analysis. Trump essentially morphed into Hillary or worse. Essentially the same type of warmonger and
compulsive liar.
Notable quotes:
"... The American people appear largely uninterested in this idea. But unless some real mass pressure is mounted against it, there is a good chance Trump will launch the U.S. into another pointless, disastrous war. ..."
"... At time of writing, the Washington Post has counted 10,796 false or misleading claims from Trump himself since taking office. Abject up-is-down lying is basically the sine qua non of modern conservative politics. ..."
"... Pompeo insists " there is no doubt " that Iran carried out the attacks -- the exact same words that Vice President Dick Cheney said in 2002 about Saddam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction and his intention to use them on the United States, neither of which were true. (This is no doubt why several U.S. allies reacted skeptically to Trump's claims.) ..."
"... What's more, the downside risk here is vastly larger than tax policy. A great big handout to the rich might be socially costly in many ways, but it won't cause tens of thousands of violent deaths in a matter of days. War with Iran could easily do that -- or worse . ..."
"... Who else might have done the attacks? Saudi Arabia springs to mind. ..."
"... At a minimum, anybody with half a brain would want to be extremely certain about what actually happened before taking any rash actions. It's clear that Bolton and company, by contrast, just want a pretext to ratchet up pressure on Iran even further. ..."
"... On the other hand, sinking Iran's navy, as Stephens suggests in his column, would likely be a lot more dangerous than he thinks. Americans have long been fed a lot of hysterical nationalist propaganda from neocons like him about the invincibility of the U.S. military, and the ease with which any possible threat could be defeated. But while U.S. forces are indeed powerful, there is a very real risk that Iran's navy -- which is full of fast-attack boats, mini-subs, and disguised civilian vessels specifically designed to take out large ships with swarm attacks -- could inflict significant damage. Just a few lucky hits could kill thousands of sailors and cause tens of billions of dollars in damage. This is before you even get to the primary lesson of the Iraq War which is that an initial military victory is completely useless and probably counterproductive without a plan for what comes next. ..."
"... Finally, attacking Iran would be illegal. It would violate U.S. treaties , and thus the Constitution. The only justification is the claim that the 2001 authorization to attack Al Qaeda covers an attack on Iran . This is utterly preposterous -- akin to arguing it covers attacking New Zealand to roll back their gun control efforts -- but may explain Pompeo's equally preposterous attempt to blame Iran for a Taliban attack in Afghanistan. ..."
"... Pompeo and Bolton are clearly hell-bent on war. But Trump himself seems somewhat hesitant , sensing (probably accurately) that starting another war of aggression would tank his popularity even further. It's high time for everyone from ordinary citizens up to Nancy Pelosi to demand this rush to war be stopped. ..."
The Trump regime is attempting to gin up a war with Iran. First Trump reneged on Obama's nuclear deal with the country for no
reason, then he slapped them with more economic sanctions for no reason, and then, pushed by National Security Adviser John Bolton
and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, he moved massive military forces onto Iran's doorstep to heighten tensions further. Now, after
a series of attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman -- none of which were American -- that the administration blames on Iran,
Pompeo says the U.S. is "considering a full range of options," including war. (Iran has categorically denied any involvement.)
The American people appear
largely uninterested
in this idea. But unless some real mass pressure is mounted against it, there is a good chance Trump will launch the U.S. into
another pointless, disastrous war.
The New York Times ' Bret Stephens, for all his #NeverTrump pretensions, provides a good window into the
absolute witlessness of the pro-war
argument . He takes largely at face value the Trump administration's accusations against Iran -- "Trump might be a liar, but
the U.S. military isn't," he writes -- and blithely suggests Trump should announce an ultimatum demanding further attacks cease,
then sink Iran's navy if they don't comply.
Let me take these in turn. For one thing, any statement of any kind coming out of a Republican's mouth should be viewed with extreme
suspicion. Two years ago, the party passed a gigantic tax cut for the rich which they swore up and down would "
pay
for itself " with increased growth. To precisely no one's surprise,
this did not happen
. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) was just
one
flagrant example of many who got elected in 2016 while
lying through their teeth about their party's efforts to destroy ObamaCare and its protections for preexisting conditions.
At
time of writing, the Washington Post has counted
10,796 false or misleading claims
from Trump himself since taking office. Abject up-is-down lying is basically the sine qua non of modern conservative politics.
Republican accusations of foreign aggression should be subjected to an even higher burden of proof. The Trump regime has provided
no evidence of Iranian culpability aside from
a video of a ship the Pentagon says is Iranians removing something they say is a mine from an oil tanker -- but a Japanese
ship owner reported at least one attack came from a "
flying object ," not a mine. Pompeo insists "
there is
no doubt " that Iran carried out the attacks -- the
exact same words that Vice President
Dick Cheney said in 2002 about Saddam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction and his intention to use them on the United
States, neither of which were true. (This is no doubt why several U.S. allies
reacted skeptically
to Trump's claims.)
What's more, the downside risk here is vastly larger than tax policy. A great big handout to the rich might be socially costly
in many ways, but it won't cause tens of thousands of violent deaths in a matter of days. War with Iran could easily do that --
or worse .
Who else might have done the attacks? Saudi Arabia springs to mind. False flag attacks on its own oil tankers sound outlandish,
but we're talking about a ruthless dictatorship run by a guy who had a Washington Post columnist
murdered and chopped into pieces because he didn't like
his takes. And the Saudis have already been conducting a years-long war in Yemen with catastrophic humanitarian outcomes in order
to stop an Iran-allied group from coming to power. It's by no means certain, but hardly outside the realm of possibility.
At a minimum, anybody with half a brain would want to be extremely certain about what actually happened before taking any
rash actions. It's clear that Bolton and company, by contrast, just want a pretext to ratchet up pressure on Iran even further.
But let's grant for the sake of argument that some Iranian forces actually did carry out some or all of these attacks. That raises
the immediate question of why. One very plausible reason is that all of Trump's provocations have strengthened the hand of Iran's
conservative hard-liners, who are basically the mirror image of Pompeo and Bolton. "It is sort of a toxic interaction between hard-liners
on both sides because for domestic political reasons they each want greater tension," as Jeremy Shapiro of the European Council on
Foreign Relations told
the New York Times . This faction might have concluded that the U.S. is run by deranged fanatics, and the best way to
protect Iran is to demonstrate they could choke off oil shipping from the Persian Gulf if the U.S. attacks.
This in turn raises the question of the appropriate response if Iran is actually at fault here. It would be one thing if these
attacks came out of a clear blue sky. But America is very obviously the aggressor here. Iran was following its side of the
nuclear deal to the letter before Trump reneged, and
continued to do so as of February . So far the
European Union (which is still party to the deal) has been unwilling to sidestep U.S. sanctions, prompting Iran to
threaten to restart
uranium enrichment . So Iran is a medium-sized country with a faltering economy, hemmed in on all sides by U.S. aggression. Backing
off the threats and chest-thumping might easily strengthen the hand of Iranian moderates, and cause them to respond in kind.
On the other hand, sinking Iran's navy, as Stephens suggests in his column, would likely be a lot more dangerous than he thinks.
Americans have long been fed a lot of hysterical nationalist propaganda from neocons like him about the invincibility of the U.S.
military, and the ease with which any possible threat could be defeated. But while U.S. forces are indeed powerful, there is a very
real risk that Iran's navy -- which is full of fast-attack boats, mini-subs, and disguised civilian vessels
specifically
designed to take out large ships with swarm attacks -- could inflict significant damage. Just a few lucky hits could kill
thousands of sailors and cause tens of billions of dollars in damage. This is before you even get to the primary lesson of the Iraq
War which is that an initial military victory is completely useless and probably counterproductive without a plan for what comes
next.
Taken together, these factors strongly militate towards de-escalation and diplomacy even if Iran did carry out these attacks,
which again, is not at all proven. The current standoff is almost entirely our fault, and Iranian forces are far from defenseless.
America has a lot better things to do than indulge the deluded jingoist fantasies of a handful of armchair generals who want lots
of other people to die in battle.
Finally, attacking Iran would be illegal. It would violate
U.S. treaties , and thus the Constitution. The only justification
is the claim that the 2001 authorization to attack Al Qaeda
covers an attack on Iran .
This is utterly preposterous -- akin to arguing it covers attacking New Zealand to roll back their gun control efforts --
but may explain Pompeo's
equally preposterous attempt to blame Iran for a Taliban attack in Afghanistan.
Pompeo and Bolton are clearly hell-bent on war. But Trump himself seems
somewhat hesitant ,
sensing (probably accurately) that starting another war of aggression would tank his popularity even further. It's high time for
everyone from ordinary citizens up to Nancy Pelosi to demand this rush to war be stopped.
..Trump HAS drained the swamp,,, right into his administration.
Look at what we in the US have to look forward to,,, tyrants on the left,,, tyrants on the
right. I suppose we deserve this but it doesn't do well for my blood pressure.
Neocon donors ask Trump for favors and he can't refuse... Trump foreign policy is a direct continuation of Bush II and Obama
foreign policy and is dominated by neocons, who rule the State Department. Pomeo is a rabid neocon, to the right of
Condoleezza Rice, Hillary and John Kerry. Actually anti-Iranian and pro-Israeli bias was clearly visible even during 2016
campaign, but few voters paid any attention. Now they should.
It is clear that Trump is the most pro-Israel President after Johnson.
Notable quotes:
"... In contrast, in the Middle East the president has been extraordinarily bellicose. In April, the Administration revoked waivers that allowed certain countries to buy oil from Iran without violating U.S. sanctions [ U.S. Won't Renew Sanction Exemptions For Countries Buying Iran's Oil , by Bill Chappell, NPR, April 22, 2019]. In early May, the president imposed new sanctions on Iranian metals, a direct threat to the regime's economic viability. ..."
"... The "maximum pressure campaign," as it has been called, puts Iran in the position of either accepting a humiliating surrender or striking out where it can [ Maximum pressure on Iran Means Maximum Risk of War , by Ilan Goldenberg, Foreign Policy, June 14, 2019]. ..."
"... Why Iran would do this is questionable, unless it's just a move of desperation. ..."
"... But did Iran actually do it? Washington has a credibility gap with the rest of the world and its own people thanks to the disaster of the Iraq War . There were, it turned out, no "Weapons of Mass Destruction." So now many Americans openly question whether Iran attacked these tankers. This includes some MSM reporters who trusted the "intelligence community" when it was attacking Trump but now want an "international investigation of the incident". [ Ben Rhodes, CNN, And Others Purposefully Fuel Pro-Iranian "False Flag Conspiracy Theories After Tanker Attacks , RedState, June 14, 2019] ..."
The most optimistic explanation: Trump intends to use immigration as an election issue in
2020. Yet his fecklessness in office will be as unappealing to many voters as the Democrats'
extremism. [ Trump Is
Vulnerable to Biden on Immigration, by Michael Brendan Dougherty, National
Review, June 11, 2019] After all, Trump
began his campaign vowing to solve the immigration problem almost exactly four years ago --
but essentially nothing has been done.
Later that month, the president said a fight would mean "the official end of Iran" [
Trump threatens Iran With 'Official End' by Kenneth Walsh, US News and World
Report, May 20, 2019].
The "maximum pressure campaign," as it has been called, puts Iran in the position of either
accepting a humiliating surrender or striking out where it can [ Maximum
pressure on Iran Means Maximum Risk of War, by Ilan Goldenberg, Foreign
Policy, June 14, 2019].
Why Iran would do this is questionable, unless it's just a move of desperation.
But did Iran actually do it? Washington has a credibility gap with the rest of the world and
its own people thanks to the disaster of the Iraq War
. There were, it turned out, no "Weapons of Mass Destruction." So now many Americans openly
question whether Iran attacked these tankers. This includes some MSM reporters who trusted the
"intelligence community" when it was attacking Trump but now want an "international
investigation of the incident". [ Ben Rhodes, CNN, And Others Purposefully Fuel Pro-Iranian "False Flag Conspiracy Theories
After Tanker Attacks, RedState, June 14, 2019]
This is not the same country that re-elected George W. Bush in 2004. The trust in
institutions is gone; America is war-weary.
There is also a deeper fundamental question. Our country is crumbling. The border is
non-existent; entire communities are being overrun. There's something perverse about even
entertaining a dangerous and costly military intervention halfway around the world. It's akin
to a Roman emperor declaring he will conquer India while barbarians are crossing the Rhine.
Essentially Sen. Graham is treating Israel as yet another US state. If we make this
assumption, then the USA policy toward Israel at least looks more logical.
"The two generals were referring to the fact that the U.S. already has airmen stationed
permanently at Israel's Mashabim Air Base in spite of the fact that the two countries have
no defense agreement of any kind. The Americans, though few in number, would serve as a
trip wire to guarantee that Washington would become involved in any war that Israel chooses
to start"
Israel will soon get their long sought US-Israel Defense Treaty if Lindsey Graham can pull
it off and congress I am sure will be all for it. There aren't words to describe what such a
treaty would do to the US -- -it's signing up any and all wars Israel wants to create ..it
will be the end of the US.
HEARD YESTERDAY -- Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) confirmed to Jewish Insider a July trip to
Israel to work out details for a U.S.-Israel defense treaty to counter the Iranian
threat. He later elaborated on his plans during a speech at the Endowment for Middle East
Truth in Washington D.C. on Wednesday night.
"So, here's the next thing, here's our marching orders. I'm going to Israel in July. We're
going to sit down and we're going to talk about what a security agreement would look like,"
he said. "But I think it's important to send a signal in the 21st century. If you're
intending to destroy Israel, you have to go through us. And it will not turn out well for
you."
A recent article in the Jerusalem Post demonstrates another aspect of how
extensive Israeli efforts to infiltrate and corrupt American institutions to their benefit
actually are . The article describes how "Close to 40 American cadets and officers wrapped up
a two-week long trip to Poland and Israel on Monday, meeting with high-ranking military
officers to learn about the Jewish State and the reality of its security situation. The trip,
organized by Our Soldiers
Speak (OSS), left a deep impression on the visiting service members who hail from the
West Point Military Academy, the Air Force Academy, and the Virginia Military Institute, with
some even voicing their readiness to fight and if necessary die alongside IDF troops ."
It was the third such visit to Israel by a group of representative military cadets. The
travelers were treated to guilt first with stops at concentration camps in Poland . They then
were subjected to the Israeli point of view through "high-level briefings from current and
former policymakers and commentators from across the spectrum in the areas of security,
strategy, international relations, law, politics, and more."
Make no mistake, the entire exercise was a scarcely concealed bid to set up what one might
regard as the recruitment of future Israeli spies within the U.S. military. Such spies, who
will plausibly be able to promote policies favorable to Israel, are referred to as "agents of
influence." Benjamin Anthony, the Director of OSS, admitted as much , saying that
"This unparalleled experience enables American cadets to learn about hot-button issues
and matters of utmost strategic importance in the Middle East firsthand. By forging bonds
between the cadets and Israeli military officers, we are laying the groundwork for future
understanding and productive interactions. We wanted to impact people who will be in
leaderships positions a short time after the trip to Israel. All of them will be in command
positions two or three years after this trip and they will be better informed about
America's greatest ally in the Middle East and the world."
And now we wait the all-time bad joke, the so-called 'Deal of the Century,' which Trump and
his boys hope will get rich Arabs to buy off poor Palestinians in exchange for giving up lots
more land to Israel.
It's hard to think of a bigger or more shameful betrayal by Arabs of
fellow Arabs, or a more stupid policy by the US. But, of course, it's not a made-in-the-USA
policy at all.
In a TV interview on June 2, on the news docuseries
"Axios" on the HBO channel, Jared Kushner opened up regarding many issues, in which his 'Deal
of the Century' was a prime focus.
The major revelation made by Kushner, President Donald Trump's adviser and son-in-law, was
least surprising. Kushner believes that Palestinians are not capable of governing
themselves.
Not surprising, because Kushner thinks he is capable of arranging the future of the
Palestinian people without the inclusion of the Palestinian leadership. He has been pushing his
so-called 'Deal of the Century' relentlessly, while including in his various meets and
conferences countries such as Poland, Brazil and Croatia, but not Palestine.
Indeed, this is what transpired at the
Warsaw conference on 'peace and security' in the Middle East. The same charade, also led by
Kushner, is expected to be rebooted in
Bahrain on June 25.
Much has been said about the subtle racism in Kushner's words, reeking with the stench of
old colonial discourses where the natives were seen as lesser, incapable of rational thinking
beings who needed the civilized 'whites' of the western hemisphere to help them cope with their
backwardness and inherent incompetence.
Kushner, whose credentials are merely based on his familial connections to Trump and family
friendship with Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is now poised to be the colonial
administrator of old, making and enforcing the law while the hapless natives have no other
option but to either accommodate or receive their due punishment.
This is not an exaggeration. In fact, according to leaked information concerning Kushner's
'Deal of the Century,' and published in the Israeli daily newspaper, Israel Hayom , if
Palestinian groups refuse to accept the US-Israeli diktats, "the US will cancel all financial
support to the Palestinians and ensure that no country transfers funds to them."
In the HBO interview, Kushner offered the Palestinians a lifeline. They could be considered
capable of governing themselves should they manage to achieve the following: "a fair judicial
system freedom of the press, freedom of expression, tolerance for all religions."
The fact that Palestine is an occupied country, subject in every possible way to Israel's
military law, and that Israel has never been held accountable for its 52-year occupation seems
to be of no relevance whatsoever, as far as Kushner is concerned.
On the contrary, the subtext in all of what Kushner has said in the interview is that Israel
is the antithesis to the unquestionable Palestinian failure. Unlike Palestine, Israel needs to
do little to demonstrate its ability to be a worthy peace partner.
While the term 'US bias towards Israel' is as old as the state of Israel itself, what is
hardly discussed are the specifics of that bias, the decidedly condescending, patronizing and,
often, racist view that US political classes have of Palestinians – and all Arabs and
Muslims, for that matter; and the utter infatuation with Israel, which is often cited as a
model for democracy, judicial transparency and successful 'anti-terror' tactics.
According to Kushner a 'fair judicial system' is a conditio sine qua non to determine
a country's ability to govern itself. But is the Israeli judicial system "fair" and
"democratic"?
Israel does not have a single judicial system, but two. This duality has, in fact, defined Israeli courts from the
very inception of Israel in 1948. This de facto apartheid system openly differentiates between
Jews and Arabs, a fact that is true in both civil and criminal law.
"Criminal law is applied separately and unequally in the West Bank, based on nationality
alone (Israeli versus Palestinian), inventively weaving its way around the contours of
international law in order to preserve and develop its '(illegal Jewish) settlement
enterprise'," Israeli scholar, Emily Omer-Man, explained in her essay 'Separate and
Unequal'.
In practice, Palestinians and Israelis who commit the exact same crime will be judged
according to two different systems, with two different procedures: "The settler will be
processed according to the Israeli Penal Code (while) the Palestinian will be processed
according to military order."
This unfairness is constituent of a massively unjust judicial apparatus that has defined the
Israeli legal system from the onset. Take the measure of administrative detention as an example.
Palestinians can be held without trial and without any stated legal justification. Tens of
thousands of Palestinians have been subjected to this undemocratic 'law' and hundreds of them
are currently held in Israeli jails.
It is ironic that Kushner raised the issue of freedom of the press, in particular, as Israel
is being derided for its dismal record in that regard. Israel has reportedly committed
811 violations against Palestinian journalists since the start of the 'March of Return' in
Gaza in March 2018. Two journalists – Yaser Murtaja and Ahmed Abu Hussein –
were killed and 155 were wounded
by Israeli snipers.
Like the imbalanced Israeli judicial system, targeting the press is also a part of a
protracted pattern. According to a press release issued by the Palestinian Journalists Union
last May, Israel
has killed 102 Palestinian journalists since 1972.
The fact that Palestinian intellectuals, poets and activists have been imprisoned for
Facebook and other social media posts should tell us volumes about the limits of Israel's
freedom of press and expression.
It is also worth mentioning that in June 2018, the Israeli Knesset
voted for a bill that prohibits the filming of Israeli soldiers as a way to mask their
crimes and shelter them from any future legal accountability.
As for freedom of religion, despite its many shortcomings, the Palestinian Authority hardly
discriminates against religious minorities. The same cannot be said about Israel.
Although discrimination against non-Jews in Israel has been the raison d'être
of the very idea of Israel, the Nation-State Law of July 2018 further cemented the
superiority of the Jews and inferior status of everyone else.
According to the new Basic Law, Israel is "the national home of the Jewish people" only and
"the right to exercise national self-determination is unique to the Jewish people."
Palestinians do not need to be lectured on how to meet Israeli and American expectations,
nor should they ever aspire to imitate the undemocratic Israeli model. What they urgently need,
instead, is international solidarity to help them win the fight against Israeli occupation,
racism and apartheid.
"... A few years ago, Sheldon Adelson wanted the US to drop a nuke on Iran. Video below. What Sheldon wants, Trump the errand-boy delivers. The fact that the US public is overwhelmingly against a war with Iran is completely irrelevant. ..."
"... Probably a 50/50 chance it was an American-Saudi-Israel false flag. ..."
"... Just like how the Reichstag Fire took place and by pure happenstance, the Nazis had the Enabling Act all ready to go. ..."
"... If I was a betting man I'd put my money on the "actual" culprits being Mossad, CIA, MI6 or any combination of the three. The Neocons and Zionists in Washington are traitors to our Constitutional Republic! Don't let them drag us into another foreign war for Israel! ..."
"... Remember the USS Liberty! Never Forget! ..."
"... This updated post from "Moon of Alabama" is definitely worth reading: "Today's Attacks On Ships In The Gulf Of Oman Are Not In Iran's Interest – Or Are They? (Updated)": https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/06/todays-attacks-on-ships-in-the-gulf-of-oman-are-not-in-irans-interest.html#more ..."
"... Maybe Colin Powell can come out of retirement and deliver the US/neocon presentation at the UN Security Council: https://www.youtube.com/embed/Rp6WuTSTyS8 ..."
"... The only person whom I can recall endlessly deceiving on this is Benjamin Netanyahu, whom I recall making speech after speech claiming that Iran was just about to have nuclear weapons. He's been doing that for over a decade now. ..."
"... As for incentives/disincentives, Mossad doesn't have much disincentive. If they are caught, they and their friends in the USA will scream 'Fake News!'. ..."
"... Who wants war? Saudis to prop up oil prices and get Iran in trouble? Pompeo because he wants to bring on the Rapture and the return of JC? Donald Trump so he can be a "wartime president" stir up his base and please the military contractor donors? Netanyahu to distract from his corruption charges and weaken Iranian Islamists? Some really stupid underground hardliners in Iran? ..."
"... I forgot one more who wants war: Bolton because he is an immoral idiot who wants to strut. ..."
Back in the 1960's as the Cuban missile crisis was brewing, JFK conferred with then French
president Charles DeGaulle and offered to show him the reconnaissance pictures showing the
Russian missiles in Cuba. DeGaulle is said to have replied "No, I do not need to see
pictures. The word of the President of the United States is enough."
It's impossible to imagine anyone saying that today, unless they still believe in the
tooth fairy.
It very well could an act by a state that according to an elite Army warfare college, is
"known to disregard international law to accomplish mission" and also a
"wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a
Palestinian/Arab act."
What state? See "U.S. troops would enforce peace under Army study," Washington Times, September 10,
2001.
A few years ago, Sheldon Adelson wanted the US to drop a nuke on Iran. Video below. What
Sheldon wants, Trump the errand-boy delivers. The fact that the US public is overwhelmingly
against a war with Iran is completely irrelevant.
Yes, Iran is to be blamed! Absolutely true, US President himself said so!
Let's look at some facts and then deductions. So, the US drone was following the Iranian
boat. Iranians saw the drone, fired at it and missed. Regardless, they continued their
"journey" to the tanker, all the while their supreme leader was trying to persuade Abe to
help Iran.
Tump: It was Iran the terrorist nation, not leaders but the nation. Not long ago Trump lauded
Iranians as very nice people. If the drone was there, why don't we see the beginning of the
boat's journey and then where that boat with the mine went? According to Mr Pompeo and Mr
Bolton, the nation of terrorists is not only evil but stupid too. Yet no other actor in the
region has the sophistication to perform such an act (that is stupid act) – according
to Mr.Pompeo.
Hm who else, I wonder would be interested in bringing down Iran? I can't think even of one
such actor.
Lest we forget. Gen. Wesley Clark's revelation. This was first revealed to General Wesley
Clark in 1991 by neo-con Paul Wolfowitz. The seven countries which were to be invaded and
blessed with regime change were Iraq, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia, Sudan, and the big
prize, Iran with its wealth of resources and potential market of over 70 million persons.This
same plan was revealed again to General Clark during a visit to the Pentagon ten days after
9-11, the event that presented the neo-cons, and no doubt others behind the scenes, with
their Pearl Harbor, their justification to proceed with the plan, somewhat conveniently. You
can see Clark say it in person on YouTube if you don't believe it.
The only thing missing is a bunch of Iranian passports "just accidentally found" near the
ships with a big floating arrow pointing towards them, just in case we're clueless. If we get dragged into a bunfight with Iran because of this we deserve all the opprobrium
anyone hurls at us–if only for our outright stupidity.
""This assessment is based on intelligence [I think we already know what the Saudis and
Israelis want us to think], the weapons used [which were what again?], the level of expertise
needed to execute the operation [more than what was needed to prove the existence of fake
WMDs], recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping ['Iranian attacks' according to who,
exactly?], and the fact that no proxy group operating in the area has the resources and
proficiency to act with such a high degree of sophistication [so sophisticated there's no
evidence they did it]," the Secretary said, without taking questions [or citing proof]"
He doesn't even bother with a Colin Powell style PowerPoint to convince us he believes any
of the horsesh!t he's peddling. Real contempt for the American public.
Let's quote that fellow with the little moustache, shortly before he ordered the invasion of
Poland: "I will provide a propagandistic casus belli. Its credibility doesn't matter. The
victor will not be asked whether he told the truth."
To think that the only obstacle between peace and war is a president too stupid to
understand that he brought this on himself.
It's very sad that I trust the word of the Ayatollah Khameni more than the President of the
United States or any of his spokesman. The proxy which had the weapons, level of expertise needed to execute the operation,
resources and proficiency to act with such a high degree of sophistication is called the
Central Intelligence Agency.
How utterly convenient!
Abe is meeting with the Iranian leadership, what better time to attack Japanese tankers
(what better time for Saudi Arabia, Israel and the neocons, that is)? Not 24 hours go by after the supposed attack and Pompeo already knows who did it and has a
response ready. Why, it's almost like his mind were already made up! (But when it comes to,
say, that Saudi prince who chops up journalists, it seems that we can never ever ever really
know what happened!)
Just like how the Reichstag Fire took place and by pure happenstance, the Nazis had the
Enabling Act all ready to go.
Sarcasm aside, everyone knows that Pompeo is lying, looking for an excuse to escalate
tensions. The question is whether anyone will do anything about it.
If I was a betting man I'd put my money on the "actual" culprits being Mossad, CIA, MI6 or
any combination of the three. The Neocons and Zionists in Washington are traitors to our
Constitutional Republic! Don't let them drag us into another foreign war for Israel!
Jason Ditz, the News Editor at Antiwar.com reports: "Pompeo's declaration of Iran's guilt was
based chiefly on similar incidents happening in mid-May. John Bolton and Pompeo blamed Iran
then, and since this was the same sort of thing, they blame Iran now. The problem is, they
have offered no evidence Iran was responsible for the first incidents, let alone today's, and
are just tying them all together. Pompeo rattled off a list of things to blame Iran for,
including multiple incidents that were done by Yemen's Houthis, a rocket fired in Iraq that
was never convincingly blamed on anyone, and an Afghanistan bombing that clearly was nothing
to do with Iran at all."
Jason Ditz goes on to report: "The big questions are, as always, motive. Iran has no
conceivable reason to attack such ships. In this case, one of the ships is even
Japanese-owned. Japan is a very important trading partner of Iran, and Japan's prime minister
Abe Shinzo is visiting Iran right now, trying to reduce tensions. Abe has also declared Iran
to have no intention to make nuclear arms. This would be a preposterous move for Iran to even
consider. Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif declared that 'suspicious doesn't begin to
describe' what happened, noting that the attacks were timed to when Japanese PM Abe Shinzo
was meeting with Iran's Supreme Leader. Abe's meeting was also a subject of Pompeo's
comments, as Pompeo falsely accused Ayatollah Ali Khamenei of having refused the meeting with
Abe. In reality, the meeting took place, and Khamenei simply rejected a proposal to trade
messages with President Trump. Pompeo went on to declare the attack on a Japanese ship during
Abe's Iran visit as an Iranian 'insult to Japan.' This all rests on the US assumption of
Iran's guilt, and as Zarif points out, makes the attack look suspiciously like it might have
been carried out for the benefit of the anti-Iran narrative. "
I read somewhere that the Iranians used weapons of mass destruction given to them by Saddam
to attack the USS Maine in the Gulf of Tonkin, taking American lives on American soil.
I had forgotten that basically all wars are "protected by a bodyguard of lies," according
to the video. Most poignant to me was the Iraqi woman pleading to Congress about Sadam
Hussein's destruction of incubators, which George HW Bush later referenced as the "babies
strewn about the floor like firewood." Except it was all fabricated by a PR firm!
Is anyone really that delusional to believe that Iran is going to attack a Japanese tanker
while the Japanese PM is meeting with the Ayatollah? The ONLY explanation that makes sense is
that it was planned in the White House by Pompeo and Bolton. Whether it was with or without
Trump's knowledge and approval is irrelevant. P & B have been openly salivating for any
excuse to start a war with Iran, and Trump has given them free rein. It is a war crime, and
all three are guilty.
The USS Liberty is spot on. That was our Versailles Treaty and Johnson ceded much of our
foreign policy and intelligence to Israel – we capitulated and have continued to
capitulate to Israel. Things are looking grim and look like a repeat of Iraq. What can stop
this momentum to war?
Well, it seems that just about 100% of those who comment here have this figured out. Once
these things were a bit more sophisticated, but now the Empire doesn't seem to care if its
schemes are blatantly transparent.
Abe has been closely consulting with Trump and the Iranians as a go-between to create the
conditions which can allow Trump to save face now that Bolton's and Pompeo's campaign against
Iran is a big fat failure.
It is clear who hopes to gain by this little stunt, which will not go anywhere. Abe is
certainly not going to be fooled by any of this. Don't expect the WaPo or the NYT to expose
this obvious false flag.
Iran is a rather divided country, and some groups regard USA with as much hatred and
suspicion as the neocons hold towards them. The responsible party might have been IRGC,
intending to raise tensions enough to make their government's current fence-straddling act
unviable and force them to scrap the JCPA.
I'd try to avoid the logic that it must have been
Saudis/Israel/USA, because if it was Iran, the likes of Bolton would somehow be in the right.
They're not. So far, Iran hasn't been the one responsible for the vast majority of
provocations, and even if it elements on their side were did this, the chickenhawks running
USA's national security won't bother to secure proof before escalating. It's not a secret
that they want war and aren't particularly picky about how they get it.
Saudi Arabia.
The other agencies speculated here are off the mark: Israel would fear getting caught, CIA
leaks like a sieve, MI6 has no incentive. But the Saudis? They have the combination of economic incentives, religious hatred,
technical knowledge, advanced (American) weaponry, and who-gives-a-crap-if-we-get-caught
attitude.
Given Iran's history of endless deception in their nuclear weapons development program, might
all these suggestions of these attacks being an American fabrication be a bit premature? How
about even a tiny bit of objectivity? Or did Larsen write all these comments? (:
I have a question about the video footage supposedly showing Iranians removing a mine from a
tanker. The quality of the picture is no better than that we saw back in the 1965 Tonkin Gulf
incident, when N Vietnamese boats allegedly attacked a US Navy ship. But that was 54 years
ago. In video technology today 1080p is a standard resolution, 4k is pretty common. Why is
the US Navy still showing something that looks like it came from my Dad's 8mm home movie
set-up?
"Given Iran's history of endless deception in their nuclear weapons development program,
might all these suggestions of these attacks being an American fabrication be a bit
premature? How about even a tiny bit of objectivity? Or did Larsen write all these comments?
(:"
What "history of endless deception"? Every third party has confirmed that Iran has
complied strictly with the JCPOA.
The United States, on the other hand, has a long track record of blatant lies to get the
wars it seeks ..
Exactly what I am hoping for IF the US attacks Iran. All depends on the Iranian
capabilities to cripple the flow of oil from the ME. So I say: Go Iran, make us pay! And
don't forget to throw some missiles on the royal Saudi palace and Riyad. Make that a few
dozen. Or hundred.
"Given Iran's history of endless deception in their nuclear weapons development program,
might all these suggestions of these attacks being an American fabrication be a bit
premature? How about even a tiny bit of objectivity? Or did Larsen write all these comments?
(:"
The only person whom I can recall endlessly deceiving on this is Benjamin Netanyahu, whom
I recall making speech after speech claiming that Iran was just about to have nuclear
weapons. He's been doing that for over a decade now.
As for incentives/disincentives, Mossad doesn't have much disincentive. If they are
caught, they and their friends in the USA will scream 'Fake News!'.
Mr. Bone Saw has got to be extremely cocky now.
And both of them could reasonably expect that if they succeed in triggering a US-Iran war,
that even later exposure wouldn't matter.
Yesterday (June 13th) Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), a Democratic candidate for President in
2020, was interviewed by the Washington Post's Robert Costa. Here (at 23:58-28:06) is a brief
excerpt of Rep. Gabbard's excellent views on US Iran policy:
Who wants war?
Saudis to prop up oil prices and get Iran in trouble?
Pompeo because he wants to bring on the Rapture and the return of JC?
Donald Trump so he can be a "wartime president" stir up his base and please the military
contractor donors?
Netanyahu to distract from his corruption charges and weaken Iranian Islamists?
Some really stupid underground hardliners in Iran?
There are some plausible choices but none of them is the Iranian government.
I frankly just don't believe anything coming form the US government anymore, especially
warmongering neo-cons in charge of foreign policy, the Pentagon, and Deep State actors.
What on earth would Iran have to gain from attacking a Japanese oil tanker while their
leader is meeting with the Japanese PM? More likely a false-flag CIA operation.
"I have a question about the video footage supposedly showing Iranians removing a mine
from a tanker. The quality of the picture is no better than that we saw back in the 1965
Tonkin Gulf incident, when N Vietnamese boats allegedly attacked a US Navy ship. But that was
54 years ago. In video technology today 1080p is a standard resolution, 4k is pretty common.
Why is the US Navy still showing something that looks like it came from my Dad's 8mm home
movie set-up?"
100%. When I heard on the news this morning that there was video showing Iranians, I
thought "They have them". Then I saw the video. Now I call BS.
Are these the same guys that provided the irrefutable "evidence" of weapons of mass
destruction in Iran?
I am sure that since the Mossad provides us with intelligence in that area of the world, they
are completely objective, and have the best interest of the American military at heart.
@Snark: I tend to agree that the video raises more questions: -what would be the purpose of a
mine above the water line?
-why does it take a group of 10-20 people milling about on the bow to remove a mine?
-does 10-20 people really indicate a clandestine effort to remove a mine, more like a
clusterf____?
As OffGuardian remarked, does the deep state (cia,mi6,mossad) really think we are that
stupid?
Why would Iranians attack their own interests? Because they are "evil". Let's see: Front
Altair is owned by John Frederiksen, the owner of the Frontline Tanker company, who moved
Iranian oil for nearly 40 years including during the "tanker war" with Iraq siding with Iran.
Mr Federiksen was called Khomeini's blood life.
What about the Japanese tanker? While the Supreme Leader of Iran was working on Abe to help
Iran?
Who's evil, who's stupid?
"Outrage on Capitol Hill over 'completely unacceptable' US-funded scheme to shape Iran
debate," The Independent, Wednesday, June 12, 2019:
"United States officials say they are outraged by a government-funded troll campaign that
has targeted American citizens critical of the administration's hardline Iran policy and
accused critics of being loyal to the Tehran regime. State Department officials admitted to
Congressional staff in a closed-door meeting on Monday that a project they had funded to
counter Iranian propaganda had gone off the rails. Critics in Washington have gone further,
saying that the programme resembled the type of troll farms used by autocratic regimes
abroad. 'It's completely unacceptable that American taxpayer dollars supported a project that
attacked Americans and others who are critical of the Trump administration's policy of
escalation and conflict with Iran,' a senior Congressional aide told The Independent, on
condition of anonymity. 'This is something that happens in authoritarian regimes, not
democracies'."
The Independent article by Negar Mortazavi and Borzou Baragahi continues: "One woman
behind the harassment campaign, a longtime Iranian-American activist, has received hundreds
of thousands of dollars from the State Department over the years to promote 'freedom of
expression and free access to information.' The campaign relentlessly attacked critics of the
Iran policy on social media, including Twitter and Telegram messaging app, accusing them
without evidence of being paid operatives of the regime in Tehran. A spokeswoman for the
State Department told reporters on Monday that funding for the 'Iran Disinformation Project'
had been suspended and is under review after it was reported that it went beyond the scope of
its mandate by veering from countering propaganda from Iran to smearing domestic critics of
White House policy. State Department officials disclosed to lawmakers they had granted $1.5
million for Iran Disinfo, which repeatedly targeted, harassed and smeared critics of Trump's
tough stance against Iran on social media.
The Independent article noted: "Among those targeted were American activists, scholars,
and journalists who challenged the Trump administration's 'maximum pressure campaign' against
Iran. The revelation that US taxpayer money was being used to attack administration critics
has now sparked a flurry of queries. 'There are still so many unanswered questions here,'
Congresswoman Ilhan Omar wrote on Twitter. 'What rules are in place to prevent state-funded
organisation from smearing American citizens? If there wasn't public outcry, would the
Administration have suspended funding for Iran Disinfo?' Cold War-era US rules barring the
use of government-funded propaganda against American citizens have been flouted for decades
State Department officials speaking at the closed-door meeting admitted the project was out
of bounds, according to Congressional staffers speaking to The Independent on condition of
anonymity. Both Democratic and Republican Congressional staffers were highly critical of the
project and questioned whether US officials should continue to work with the contractor,
E-Collaborative for Civic Education. The State Department spokeswoman declined to outline
steps to prevent such an operation in the future E-Collaborative for Civic Education,
co-founded by Iranian American activist Mariam Memarsadeghi, is a long-time State Department
contractor "
Foundation for Defence of Democracies and MEK involved in creating fake articles. The
Independent continues:
"Congressional officials also confirmed to The Independent that one individual working for
the Foundation for Defence of Democracies, an influential Washington organisation with
hawkish views on Iran, is part of the E-Collaborative for Civic Education's Iran
Disinformation Project Over the weekend, The Intercept revealed that a purported Iranian
activist, who had published dozens of articles on Iran in prominent outlets such as Forbes
and The Hill, does not exist and is a fake persona run by a team of operatives connected to a
bizarre Iranian political cult. The "Heshmat Alavi" persona had a strong presence on Twitter
and harassed Iranian journalists, academics, and activists who are critical of the
Mujahedin-e-Khalq organisation, a one-time armed guerilla group now holed up in Albania.
There is no known link between the Iran Disinfo programme and the fake persona. At least one
was cited by the Trump administration as proof against the effectiveness of the Obama-era
nuclear deal. Some of the MEK articles were also picked up by US government funded Voice of
America's Persian-language service "
Let's not forget the lies our great-grandparents were told to inveigle us into WWI: "German
troops are raping Belgian nuns" and "German troops are using Belgian babies for bayonet
practice."
100 years from now a future historian, (probably Russian or Chinese), writing about the
collapse of the US, will chronicle how the Americans gullibly believed the war propagandists
asserting that Iran fired on oil tankers, which belonged to it trading partner, with the same
sense of disbelief we now feel upon reading of the crazy assertions made about German
troops.
The Japanese ship's captain came out today and said that there was no way the ship was hit by
a mine as US claimed, it was hit above sea level and sailors saw something hitting the
vessel, like a torpedo.
Why on earth would Iran want to bomb a Japanese ship in the middle of a visit by the
Japanese PM?
This whole thing stinks to high heaven.
The US under the rule of the neocons in the Trump admin, the Pence-Pompeo-Bolton trifecta,
is a menace and a danger to the whole world. From Iran to Venezuela, Ukraine to North Korea,
China to Russia, there isn't a country these neocon stooges don't want to pick a quarrel
with. America has become the greatest threat to world peace.
Sam – When was the last time Iran invaded another country? Why is Israel pushing so
hard for us to fight yet another war on their behalf. As Ron Paul said – if they want
to fight Iran – let them, but we must stand aside as they duke it out. Israel has
created enough Gold Star mothers in the US. Time to do their own fighting. Larsen and Giraldi
make a lot of sense.
"... Of course, AIPAC, Israel's lobbying organization in the US. does exactly that kind of thing every election year, but still, as a matter of decorum and at least the pretense of respect for other nations' sovereignty, one doesn't expect to hear a secretary of state talking about such crude interference in the democratic process in another country, particularly in a nation which is America's closest ally aside from perhaps outright dependencies like Taiwan or Dubai. ..."
"... Yet certainly nothing Russia is accused of doing -- like buying ads allegedly intended to promote division in the US on Facebook, or using bots to promote disharmony on various social media platforms -- comes close to what Pompeo is proposing doing: actually using the full weight of the US government, with its ability to offer gifts of free weapons or conversely to impose punitive tariffs, not to mention making available the nefarious abilities and persuasive powers of the CIA and NSA to prevent the selection of a chosen party leader as prime minister following victory in an election (Pompeo was CIA director before becoming Secretary of State). ..."
"... The hubris of this grotesque Tea Party Congressman-turned "top diplomat" is simply appalling. ..."
"... Pompeo may think he has to "save" the Jews of Britain from Corbyn and Britain from the anti-Brexiters in the Labour Party, but at the rate things are going here in the US, nobody is going to have to come in from the outside to "save" America from a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress in 2020. The Democrats, with their continuing whining about Russiagate, look like they'll manage that all by themselves. ..."
So now we have pompous Mike Pompeo, America's current Secretary of State, on a visit to the
UK, assuring a group of British Jewish leaders in a closed-door meeting that the US would work
to prevent Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn from becoming prime minister if his party were to win
enough votes in the next national parliamentary election to get the opportunity to try and form
a new British government.
In a recording leaked to the Washington Post , Pompeo assured a group of Jewish
leaders in Britain yesterday that the US government would "push back" against Corbyn becoming
prime minister in such a case, working behind the scenes to prevent a victorious Labour party
from voting in Corbyn as Prime Minister.
In the British parliamentary system, the party with the most votes after an election, if it
wins an outright majority, or, as the Conservatives did in the last election, a plurality of
votes and then is able to successfully cobble together a majority by bringing in other parties,
then can use that majority to elect a new prime minister. Normally the new PM is the leader of
the party that won the most votes, but that need not be the case.
A questioner on the tape is heard asking Pompeo, "Would you be willing to work with us to
take on actions if life becomes very difficult for Jews in the UK?" -- an obvious reference to
a rabid ongoing campaign in the largely conservative UK media and among zionist groups in the
UK to tar Corbyn as an anti-semite because of his outspoken defense of Palestinians under
Israeli occupation.
Pompeo, obviously not aware he is being taped, appears to suggest in his answer on the
leaked recording that the US would seek to prevent Corbyn from becoming PM. "It could be that
Mr Corbyn manages to run the gauntlet and get elected," he says. "It's possible. You should
know, we won't wait for him to do those things [presumably making life 'difficult for the Jews
in the UK'] to begin to push back. We will do our level best. It's too risky and too important
and too hard once it's already happened."
This -- an acknowledgment that the US would try to influence the selection of Britain's
parliamentary leader -- is truly an astonishing statement coming from a top US government
official, and particularly a secretary of state. I mean we all know that the US routinely
messes with elections all over the third world, and even in European countries, but our leaders
don't normally admit it, even in private, preferring to tout the US as a paragon of "democratic
values."
Imagine if Corbyn were Prime Minister in 2020, and his foreign minister were caught on tape
in the US telling a group of black leaders or Muslim leaders that his government would try
mightily to prevent Donald Trump from winning re-election?
Oh, I know, he or she would immediately be given a ticker-tape parade in San Francisco, New
York and Boston! But seriously, much of the nation, and the media, would go ballistic.
Of course, AIPAC, Israel's lobbying organization in the US. does exactly that kind of thing
every election year, but still, as a matter of decorum and at least the pretense of respect for
other nations' sovereignty, one doesn't expect to hear a secretary of state talking about such
crude interference in the democratic process in another country, particularly in a nation which
is America's closest ally aside from perhaps outright dependencies like Taiwan or Dubai.
Not surprisingly, the response in the UK has been mostly outrage.
A Labour Party
official told the British Guardian newspaper, "President Trump and his officials'
attempts to decide who will be Britain's next prime minister are an entirely unacceptable
interference in the UK's democracy."
The dust-up over Pompeo's leaked remarks should be recalled as one contemplates the absurd
obsession among Democrats here about alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 US election continues
apace.
Yet certainly nothing Russia is accused of doing -- like buying ads allegedly intended to
promote division in the US on Facebook, or using bots to promote disharmony on various social
media platforms -- comes close to what Pompeo is proposing doing: actually using the full
weight of the US government, with its ability to offer gifts of free weapons or conversely to
impose punitive tariffs, not to mention making available the nefarious abilities and persuasive
powers of the CIA and NSA to prevent the selection of a chosen party leader as prime minister
following victory in an election (Pompeo was CIA director before becoming Secretary of
State).
The hubris of this grotesque Tea Party Congressman-turned "top diplomat" is simply
appalling.
One would have thought any self-respecting British Tory politician would have instantly
denounced Pompeo's suggested intrusion into the workings of the British electoral system, but
so far there hasn't been a peep from any of that party's leaders, who no doubt actually support
the idea of the US preventing their nemesis Corbyn from ever moving into 10 Downing Street.
His comments may, however, have the effect of bolstering support for Corbyn among Labour's
rank-and-file. Corbyn has already survived several concerted attempts from the Blairite faction
of his party to unseat him as party leader, always emerging stronger from those attacks. My
guess is the same thing will happen here, when a clumsy outsider from across the Atlantic
offers to do the same thing.
Meanwhile American liberals should keep this incident in mind as they continue to wallow in
the self-destructive effort to conjure up a fake story line that the Russians "stole" the 2016
election for Trump by undermining Hillary Clinton's campaign, when in fact it was the
Democratic Party leadership and Clinton herself who blew that election. Those leaders are well
on the way to blowing the next one, too, for example by refusing to hold a a presidential
debate focused on the existential issue of climate change.
Pompeo may think he has to "save" the Jews of Britain from Corbyn and Britain from the
anti-Brexiters in the Labour Party, but at the rate things are going here in the US, nobody is
going to have to come in from the outside to "save" America from a Democratic president and a
Democratic Congress in 2020. The Democrats, with their continuing whining about Russiagate,
look like they'll manage that all by themselves.
"... With nearly 6 million Americans unemployed and regular bouts of layoffs in the U.S. tech industry, major American tech companies like Google, Microsoft and Intel Corporation are nonetheless moving key operations, billions in investments, and thousands of jobs to Israel -- a trend that has largely escaped media attention or concern from even "America first" politicians. The fact that this massive transfer of investment and jobs has been so overlooked is particularly striking given that it is largely the work of a single leading neoconservative Republican donor who has given millions of dollars to President Donald Trump. ..."
"... In this report, MintPress identifies dozens of former members of an elite Israeli military intelligence unit who now hold top positions at Microsoft, Google and Facebook. ..."
"... Yet, some of these tech giants, particularly those based in the U.S., are heavily investing in their Israeli branches while laying off thousands of American employees, all while receiving millions of dollars in U.S. government subsidies funded by American taxpayers. ..."
"... Particularly troubling is the fact that, since SUNC's founding, the number of former Unit 8200 members in top positions in American tech companies has skyrocketed. Based on a non-exhaustive analysis conducted by Mintpress of over 200 LinkedIn accounts of former Israeli military intelligence and intelligence officers in three major tech companies, numerous former Unit 8200 alumni were found to currently hold top managerial or executive positions in Microsoft, Google and Facebook. ..."
"... Similarly, at Google, 28 former Unit 8200 members at the company were identified from their LinkedIn accounts. Among them are Google's Engineering Director, its strategic partner manager, two growth marketing leads, its lead technical manager, and six product and program managers, including Google's manager for trust and safety search. ..."
"... Netanyahu further outlined this policy at the 2019 Cybertech conference in Tel Aviv, where he stated that Israel's emergence as one of the top five "cyber powers" had "required allowing this combination of military intelligence, academia and industry to converge in one place" and that this further required allowing "our graduates of our military and intelligence units to merge into companies with local partners and foreign partners." The direct tie-ins of SUNC to Netanyahu and the fact that Paul Singer has also been a long-time political donor and backer of Netanyahu suggest that SUNC is a key part of Netanyahu's policy of placing former military intelligence and intelligence operatives in strategic positions in major technology companies. ..."
"... This concern is further exacerbated by the deep ties connecting top tech companies like Microsoft and Google to the U.S. military. Microsoft and Google are both key military contractors -- Microsoft in particular, given that it is set to win a lucrative contract for the Pentagon's cloud management and has partnered with the Department of Defense to produce a "secure" election system known as ElectionGuard that is set to be implemented in some U.S. states for the 2020 general election. ..."
Several U.S. tech
giants including Google, Microsoft and Intel Corporation have filled top positions with former
members of Israeli military intelligence and are heavily investing in their Israeli branches
while laying off thousands of American employees, all while receiving millions of dollars in
U.S. government subsidies funded by American taxpayers.
With nearly 6
million Americans unemployed and regular bouts of layoffs in the U.S. tech industry, major
American tech companies like Google, Microsoft and Intel Corporation are nonetheless moving key
operations, billions in investments, and thousands of jobs to Israel -- a trend that has
largely escaped media attention or concern from even "America first" politicians. The fact that
this massive transfer of investment and jobs has been so overlooked is particularly striking
given that it is largely the work of a single leading neoconservative Republican donor who has
given millions of dollars to President Donald Trump.
To make matters worse, many of these top tech companies shifting investment and jobs to
Israel at record rates continue to collect sizable U.S. government subsidies for their
operations while they move critical aspects of their business abroad, continue to layoff
thousands of American workers, and struggle to house their growing company branches in Israel.
This is particularly troubling in light of the importance of the tech sector to the overall
U.S. economy, as it
accounts for 7.1 percent of total GDP and 11.6 percent of total private-sector payroll.
Furthermore, many of these companies are hiring members of controversial Israeli companies
-- known to have spied on Americans, American companies, and U.S. federal agencies -- as well
as numerous members of Israeli military intelligence as top managers and executives.
This massive transfer of the American tech industry has largely been the work of one leading
Republican donor -- billionaire hedge fund manager Paul Singer, who also funds the
neoconservative think tank American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the Islamophobic and hawkish
think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC),
and also funded the now-defunct Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI).
Singer's project to bolster Israel's tech economy at the U.S.' expense is known as Start-Up
Nation Central, which he founded in response to the global Boycott, Divest and Sanctions (BDS)
movement that seeks to use nonviolent means to pressure Israel to comply with international law
in relation to its treatment of Palestinians.
This project is directly linked to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who in recent
years has publicly mentioned that it has been his "deliberate policy" to have former members of
Israel's "military and intelligence units merge into companies with local partners and foreign
partners" in order to make it all but impossible for major corporations and foreign governments
to boycott Israel.
In this report, MintPress identifies dozens of former members of an elite Israeli
military intelligence unit who now hold top positions at Microsoft, Google and Facebook.
Singer's nonprofit organization has acted as the vehicle through which Netanyahu's policy
has been realized, via the group's close connections to the Israeli PM and Singer's long-time
support for Netanyahu and the Likud Party. With deep ties to Netanyahu, the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and controversial tech companies -- like Amdocs -- that spied
on the American government, this Singer-funded organization has formed a nexus of connections
between the public and private sectors of both the American and Israeli economies with the
single goal of making Israel the new technology superpower, largely at the expense of
the American economy and government, which currently gives $3.2 billion in aid to Israel annually.
Researched and developed in Israel
In recent years, the top U.S. tech companies have been shifting many of their most critical
operations, particularly research and development, to one country: Israel. A 2016
report in Business Insider noted that Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon and Apple
had all opened up research and development (R&D) centers in recent years, with some of them
having as many as three such centers in Israel, a country roughly the size of New Jersey. Other
major tech companies that have also opened key
operation and research centers in Israel include Sandisk, Nvidia, PayPal, Palantir and Dell.
Forbes noted last year that the world's top 10 tech companies were now "doing
mission-critical work in Israel that's core to their businesses back at HQ."
Yet, some of these tech giants, particularly those based in the U.S., are heavily investing
in their Israeli branches while laying off thousands of American employees, all while receiving
millions of dollars in U.S. government subsidies funded by American taxpayers.
For example, Intel Corporation, which is the world's second largest manufacturer of
semiconductor computer chips and is headquartered in California, has long been a major employer
in Israel, with over 10,000 employees in the Jewish state. However, earlier this year, Intel
announced that it would be
investing $11 billion in a new factory in Israel and would receive around $1 billion in an
Israeli government grant for that investment. Just a matter of months after Intel announced its
major new investment in Israel, it announced a new round of layoffs in
the United States.
Yet this is just one recent example of what has become a trend for Intel. In 2018, Intel
made public its plan to invest
$5 billion in one of its Israeli factories and
had invested an additional $15 billion in Israeli-created autonomous driving technology a
year prior, creating thousands of Intel jobs in Israel. Notably, over that same time frame,
Intel has cut nearly 12,000 jobs in the United
States. While this great transfer of investment and jobs was undermining the U.S. economy and
hurting American workers, particularly in the tech sector, Intel received
over $25 million dollars in subsidies from the U.S. federal government.
A similar phenomenon has been occurring at another U.S.-based tech giant, Microsoft.
Beginning in 2014 and continuing into 2018, Microsoft has laid off
well over 20,000 employees , most of them Americans, in several different rounds of staff
cuts. Over that same time period, Microsoft has been on a hiring spree in Israel, building
new
campuses and investing billions of dollars
annually in its Israel-based research and development center and in
other Israeli start-up companies , creating thousands of jobs abroad. In addition,
Microsoft has been pumping millions of dollars into technology programs at Israeli universities
and institutes, such as the Technion Institute .
Over this same time frame, Microsoft
has received nearly $197 million in subsidies from the state governments of Washington,
Iowa and Virginia.
Though Israeli politicians and tech company executives have praised this dramatic shift as
the result of Israel's tech prowess and growing reputation as a technological innovation hub,
much of this dramatic shift has been the work of the Netanyahu-tied Singer's effort to counter
a global movement aimed at boycotting Israel and to make Israel a global "cyber power."
Start-Up Nation Central and the Neocons
In 2009, a book titled Start Up Nation: The Story of Israel's Economic Miracle ,
written by American neoconservative Dan Senor and Jerusalem Post journalist Saul Singer
(unrelated to Paul), quickly rose to the New York Times bestseller list for its
depiction of Israel as the tech start-up capital of the world. The book -- published by the Council on Foreign Relations,
where Senor was then serving as Adjunct Senior Fellow -- asserts that
Israel's success in producing so many start-up companies resulted from the combination of its
liberal immigration laws and its "leverage of the business talents of young people with
military experience."
"The West needs innovation; Israel's got it," wrote Senor and Singer. In a post-publication
interview with the blog
Freakonomics , Senor asserted that service in the Israeli military was crucial to
Israel's tech sector success, stating that:
"Certain units have become technology boot camps, where 18- to 22-year-olds get thrown
projects and missions that would make the heads spin of their counterparts in universities or
the private sector anywhere else in the world. The Israelis come out of the military not just
with hands-on exposure to next-gen technology, but with training in teamwork, mission
orientation, leadership, and a desire to continue serving their country by contributing to
its tech sector -- a source of pride for just about every Israeli."
The book, in addition to the many accolades it received from the mainstream press, left a
lasting impact on top Republican donor Paul Singer, known for funding the most
influential neoconservative think tanks in America, as noted above. Paul Singer was so inspired
by Senor and Singer's book that he decided to spend
$20 million to fund and create an organization with a similar name. He created the Start-Up
Nation Central (SUNC) just three years after the book's release in 2012 .
To achieve his vision, Singer – who is also a top donor to the Republican Party and
Trump – tapped Israeli economist Eugene Kandel, who
served as Netanyahu's national economic adviser and chaired the Israeli National Economic
Council from 2009 to 2015.
Senor was likely directly involved in the creation of SUNC, as he was
then employed by Paul Singer and, with neoconservatives Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan,
co-founded the FPI, which Singer had long funded before it closed in 2017. In addition, Dan
Senor's sister, Wendy Singer (unrelated to either Paul
or Saul), long-time director of Israel's AIPAC office, became the organization's executive
director.
SUNC's management team, in addition to Eugene Kandel and Wendy Singer, includes Guy Hilton
as the organization's general manager. Hilton is a long-time marketing executive at Israeli
telecommunications company Amdocs, where he "transformed" the company's marketing organization.
Amdocs was once highly controversial in the United States after it was revealed by a 2001 Fox News
investigation that numerous federal agencies had investigated the company, which then had
contracts with the 25 largest telephone companies in the country, for its alleged role in an
aggressive espionage operation that targeted the U.S. government. Hilton worked at Microsoft
prior to joining Amdocs.
Beyond the management team, SUNC's board of directors includes Paul Singer, Dan Senor and
Terry Kassel -- who work for Singer at his hedge fund, Elliott Management -- and Rapheal Ouzan.
Ouzan was
an officer in the elite foreign military intelligence unit of Israel, Unit 8200, who
co-founded BillGuard the day after he left that unit, which is often compared to the U.S.'
National Security Agency (NSA). Within five months of its founding, BillGuard
was backed by funding from PayPal founder Peter Thiel and former CEO of Google, Eric
Schmidt. Ouzan is also connected to U.S. tech companies that have greatly expanded their
Israeli branches since SUNC's founding -- such as Microsoft, Google, PayPal and Intel,
all of which
support Ouzan's non-profit Israel Tech Challenge.
According to reports from the time published in Haaretz and Bloomberg , SUNC
was explicitly founded to serve as "
a foreign ministry for Israel's tech industry " and "
to strength Israel's economy " while also
aiming to counter the Boycott, Divest and Sanctions (BDS) movement that seeks to use a
nonviolent boycott to end the illegal military occupation of the West Bank and Israeli
apartheid, as well as the growth of illegal Jewish-only settlements in occupied Palestinian
territory.
Since its founding, SUNC has sought to transfer tech jobs from foreign companies to Israel
by developing connections and influence with foreign governments and companies so that they
"deepen their relationship with Israel's tech industry." Though SUNC has since expanded to
include other sectors of the Israeli "start-up" economy, its focus has long remained on
Israel's tech, specifically its cybersecurity industry. Foreign investment in this single
Israeli industry has grown from $227 million in
2014 to $815 million in 2018.
In addition to its own activities, SUNC appears to be closely linked to a similar
organization, sponsored by
Coca Cola and Daimler Mercedes Benz, called
The Bridge , which also seeks to connect Israeli start-up companies with large
international corporations. Indeed, SUNC, according to its website , was actually
responsible for Daimler Mercedes Benz's decision to join The Bridge, thanks to a delegation
from the company that SUNC hosted in Israel and the connections made during that visit.
Teaming up with Israel's Unit 8200
Members of Israel's signals intelligence Unit 8200 work under a Saudi flag. Photo | Moti
Milrod
Notably, SUNC has deep ties to Israel's military intelligence unit known as Unit 8200 and,
true to Start Up Nation' s praise of IDF service as key to Israel's success, has been
instrumental in connecting Unit 8200 alumni with key roles in foreign companies, particularly
American tech companies. For instance, Maty Zwaig , a former lieutenant colonel
in Unit 8200, is SUNC's current director of human capital programs, and SUNC's current manager
of strategic programs, Tamar Weiss , is also a former member
of the unit.
One particularly glaring connection between SUNC and Unit 8200 can be seen in Inbal Arieli , who served as
SUNC's Vice President of Strategic Partnerships from 2014 to 2017 and continues to serve as a
senior adviser to the organization. Arieli, a former lieutenant in Unit 8200, is the founder
and head of the 8200 Entrepreneurship and Innovation Support Program (EISP), which was the
first start-up accelerator in Israel aimed at harnessing "the vast network and entrepreneurial
DNA of [Unit] 8200 alumni" and is currently one of the top company accelerators in Israel.
Arieli was the top executive at 8200 EISP while working at SUNC.
Another key connection between SUNC and Unit 8200 is SUNC's promotion of Team8, a
company-creation platform whose CEO and co-founder is Nadav Zafrir, former commander of Unit
8200. In addition to prominently featuring Team8
and Zafrir on the cybersecurity section of its website, SUNC also sponsored a talk
by Zafrir and an Israeli government economist at the World Economic Forum, often referred to as
"Davos," that was attended personally by Paul Singer.
Team8's investors include Google's Eric Schmidt,
Microsoft , and Walmart
-- and it recently hired former head of the NSA and U.S. Cyber Command, retired Admiral Mike
Rogers. Team8 described the decision to hire Rogers as being "instrumental in helping
strategize" Team8's expansion in the United States. However, Jake Williams, a veteran of NSA's
Tailored Access Operations hacking unit, told CyberScoop :
"Rogers is not being brought into this role because of his technical experience. It's
purely because of his knowledge of classified operations and his ability to influence many in
the U.S. government and private-sector contractors."
In addition to connections to Unit 8200-linked groups like Team8 and 8200 EISP, SUNC also
directly collaborates with the IDF in an initiative aimed at preparing young Israeli women to
serve in Unit 8200. That initiative, called the CyberGirlz Club , is jointly
funded by Israel's Defense Ministry, SUNC and the Rashi Foundation, the philanthropic
organization set up by the Leven family of Perrier-brand water, which has close ties to the
Israeli government and IDF.
"Our aim is to bring the girls to this process already skilled, with the knowledge needed to
pass the exams for Unit 8200 and serve in the military as programmers," Zwaig told Israel National
News .
Seeding American tech
The connections between SUNC and Unit 8200 are troubling for more than a few reasons, one of
which being that Unit 8200, often likened to the U.S.' NSA, closely coordinates with Israel's
intelligence agency, the Mossad, and is responsible for 90 percent of the intelligence material
obtained by the Israeli government, according to its former commander Yair Cohen. Cohen
told
Forbes in 2016, that "there isn't a major operation, from the Mossad or any
intelligence security agency, that 8200 is not involved in." For obvious reasons, the fact that
an organization founded by an American billionaire is actively promoting the presence of former
military intelligence officers in foreign companies, specifically American companies, while
also promoting the transfer of jobs and investment to that same country, is very troubling
indeed.
Particularly troubling is the fact that, since SUNC's founding, the number of former Unit
8200 members in top positions in American tech companies has skyrocketed. Based on a
non-exhaustive analysis conducted by Mintpress of over 200 LinkedIn accounts of former
Israeli military intelligence and intelligence officers in three major tech companies, numerous
former Unit 8200 alumni were found to currently hold top managerial or executive positions in
Microsoft, Google and Facebook.
At Microsoft, managers for at least 15 of the company's products and programs -- including
Microsoft's lead managers for engineering, product strategy, threat analytics and cloud
business intelligence -- publicly listed their affiliation with Unit 8200 on their LinkedIn
accounts. In addition, the general manager of Microsoft's Israeli
Research and Development Center is also a former member of Unit 8200. In total, of the 200
accounts analyzed, 50 of them currently worked for Microsoft.
Similarly, at Google, 28 former Unit 8200 members at the company were identified from their
LinkedIn accounts. Among them are Google's Engineering Director, its strategic partner manager,
two growth marketing leads, its lead technical manager, and six product and program managers,
including Google's manager for trust and safety search.
Facebook also has several Unit 8200 members in prominent positions, though fewer than Google
and Microsoft. MintPress identified at least 13 Unit 8200 alumni working for Facebook,
including its director of engineering, lead manager for express wi-fi, and technical program
manager. Notably, Facebook
has spent the last several years collaborating with Israel's government to censor Israel's
critics.
Of course, there is likely much more influence of Unit 8200 on these companies than this
non-exhaustive analysis revealed, given that many of these companies acquired several Israeli
start-ups run by and staffed by many Unit 8200 alumni who subsequently went on to found new
companies and start-ups a few years or shortly after acquisition. Furthermore, due to the
limitations of LinkedIn's set-up, MintPress was not able to access the complete list of
Unit 8200 alumni at these three tech companies, meaning that the eye-opening numbers found were
generated by a relatively small sample.
This jump in Unit 8200 members in top positions in tech companies of global importance is
actually a policy long promoted by Netanyahu, whose long-time economic adviser is the chief
executive at SUNC. During an interview with Fox News last year,
Netanyahu was asked by Fox News host Mark Levin if the large growth seen in recent years
in Israel's technology sector was part of Netanyahu's plan. Netanyahu responded, "That's very
much my plan It's a very deliberate policy." He later added that "Israel had technology because
the military, especially military intelligence, produced a lot of capabilities. These
incredibly gifted young men and women who come out of the military or the Mossad, they want to
start their start-ups."
Netanyahu further
outlined this policy at the 2019 Cybertech conference in Tel Aviv, where he stated that
Israel's emergence as one of the top five "cyber powers" had "required allowing this
combination of military intelligence, academia and industry to converge in one place" and that
this further required allowing "our graduates of our military and intelligence units to merge
into companies with local partners and foreign partners." The direct tie-ins of SUNC to
Netanyahu and the fact that Paul Singer has also been a long-time political donor
and backer of Netanyahu suggest that SUNC is a key part of Netanyahu's policy of placing
former military intelligence and intelligence operatives in strategic positions in major
technology companies.
Notably, just as SUNC was founded to counter the BDS movement, Netanyahu has asserted that
this policy of ensuring Israel's role as a "cyber power" is aimed at
increasing its diplomatic power and
specifically undermining BDS as well as the United Nations, which has repeatedly condemned
Israel's government for war crimes and violations of international law in relation to the
Palestinians.
Building the bi-national surveillance state
Top U.S. tech companies have filled top positions with former members of Israeli military
intelligence and moved strategic and critical operations to Israel, boosting Israel's economy
at the expense of America's, and SUNC's role in this marked shift merits scrutiny.
A powerful American billionaire has built an influential organization with deep connections
to the U.S.-Israel lobby (AIPAC), an Israeli company that has been repeatedly investigated for
spying on the U.S. government (Amdocs), and the elite Israeli military intelligence unit (Unit
8200) that has used its influential connections to the U.S. government and the U.S. private
sector to dramatically shift the operations and make-up of major companies in a critical sector
of the U.S. economy.
Further consider that U.S. government documents leaked by Edward Snowden have flagged Israel
as "leading threat" to the infrastructure of U.S. financial and banking institutions, which use
much of the software produced by these top tech companies, and have also flagged Israel as a
top espionage threat. One U.S. government document cited Israel as the third most aggressive
intelligence service against the U.S. behind Russia and China. Thus, Paul Singer's pet project
in Start-Up Nation Central has undermined not only the U.S. economy but arguably U.S. national
security as well.
This concern is further exacerbated by the deep ties connecting top tech companies like
Microsoft and Google to the U.S. military. Microsoft and Google are both key military
contractors -- Microsoft in particular, given that it is set to win a lucrative contract for
the Pentagon's cloud management and has partnered with the Department of Defense to produce a
"secure" election system
known as ElectionGuard that is set to be implemented in some U.S. states for the 2020
general election.
Obviously, I hope the blood hounds catch up to John Brennan, tear him to pieces and piss
all over the remains.
The question begging for an answer today is what puppet of Washington torpedoed those two
oil tankers near the Strait of Hormuz. Or was it Washington's master, Israel, using one of
its nifty silent German submarines? Bet they were itching to do that. It sure the hell was
not Iran, which is not tired of living and has no desire to end up looking like the
bombed-out skeletal remnants of Iraq, Libya, Syria or Yemen.
DH Fabian , June 13, 2019 at 14:38
With all due respect, your prejudices already tripped you up. Saudi Arabia, which has the
most "say" over Mideast oil sales, has kept the US on a short leash for years. Not Israel.
The lion's share of US aid to the Mideast goes to the Arab states -- not Israel. Over the
last few years, we have seen a surge of anti-Israel propaganda resulting in a surge of
anti-Jewish violence across the US. Israel doesn't have vast oil reserves. (Did I mention
oil?) In fact, it's a tiny country, roughly the size of New Jersey -- some 1% of the Mideast
region, with the remaining 99% of the region consisting of the Arab countries. Draw your own
conclusions about those who claim that Israel is a military mega-power with some sort of
magical control over the US government.
incontinent reader , June 13, 2019 at 19:27
Oh, poor powerless Israel, unsubsidized by Uncle Sam, at the mercy of 99% of the region,
just as it was at the mercy of the owners of 95% of Palestine in 1948, a denialist of its
nuclear weapons and other WMD programs, never provoking, yet always provoked by its
neighbors, lacking political and economic influence in the US and everywhere else. And, an
elephant in the room neither to be rebuked, nor even seen, lest one be attacked as a bigoted
victimizer- and now in some States (Florida, the latest) as well as some nations (Britain,
France Germany, and Austria, to name a few) subject to criminal penalties, including
imprisonment for mere criticism. Thank you DH Fabian for setting the record straight.
Realist , June 13, 2019 at 19:53
It seems to have slipped your mind that Israel and the kingdom are working hand-in-glove
pursuing the same anti-Iranian, anti-Palestinian, anti-Syrian and anti-Hezbollah policies.
Saudi provides the cash, Israel provides the marching orders and Washington provides the
military muscles, whether its own troops or Jihadi mercenaries.
Sorry you think an objective view of the carnage wreaked by Israeli policy and its
"defense" forces against most of its immediate neighbors, especially the Palestinians whom
they keep locked up within outdoor prisons called Gaza and the West Bank and use as live
shooting galleries when the mood strikes them is "prejudice." More to the point, the routine
and unprovoked attacks the IDF mount against, not only Palestinians, but also Syrians,
Lebanese and Iranians within the borders of Syria and Lebanon, is best characterised by the
military expression "with extreme prejudice."
Your contention that the "lion's share of US AID [emphasis mine] to the Mideast goes to
the Arab states–not Israel" is a flat out lie. Egypt's AID is a pittance compared to
Israel's free American taxpayer dollars, and Saudi Arabia is a cash cow paying its own way
for every American armament procured by the kingdom, as is every other paying customer for US
armaments within the Persian Gulf. Washington "gives" them nothing except the massive
military alliance with which to keep Iranian influence and trade down–on a global, not
just regional, level. And since Obomber deliberately rekindled the Cold War, an added
objective of the Washington-Wahabist alliance is to keep Russia as disadvantaged as possible
in every place and in every way. You are a hypocrite of the worst sort if you dare to
consider the "nation building" expenditures Washington has feigned to spend rebuilding Iraq
after first destroying that country as "AID." It wasn't "aid" it was bribe money to recruit
Sunni Jihadis to serve as terrorists and cannon fodder in Washington's further military
escapades in the region. I suppose you are counting it as aid whenever the American military
flattens yet another Arab city, as it recently did to Mosul and Raqqua.
That Israel had no oil fields was certainly not a limiting factor in their attempt to gain
hegemony over the entire region. In fact, it was an incentive. Their oil and gas needs are
taken care of just fine through arrangements with all its Gulf States allies. They've been
brokering the construction of pipelines to Europe through their territory and offshore
carrying Arab gas. Moreover, Israel has been clearly trying to lay claim to both Syrian and
Lebanese territories laden with petroleum deposits–another motivation to create this
"Greater Israel" in a land populated by hardly any Jews. Steal the land and the resources are
just an added bonus, I suppose is all right by both them and you.
Funny thing, Iran has more Jews living peacefully within its territory than you'll find in
any of Israel's Gulf State allies all added together. Yet Israel wants to destroy Iran and
facilitate the Wahabists (until they, like the fundy Christians decide that its time for
scripture to be fulfilled and the Jews to be eradicated). I've no prejudice against Israelis
because they are Jews. Individual Jews have played important roles as mentors and friends
throughout my life, I am firmly against anti-Jewish bigotry, though the "anti-Semitism" card
constantly played by Netayahu and the Zionists is clearly a thoroughly specious canard ginned
up as a propaganda weapon. Israel is no more synonymous with world Jewry than are the
nefarious Protocols of the Elders of Zion. They are both just fabricated rhetorical weapons,
otherwise known as lies.
The real truth is that the Jews of Israel would greatly improve their future and prospects
for survival immensely if they reassessed their foreign policies and choice of allies. Stop
trying to colonise another people's land by persecuting and exterminating them, and stop
exploiting the internecine hatreds among the sundry native clans, tribes and religious
confessions in the area by forming military alliances with some of them and against others
which is destined only to turn the whole region into a tinder box and killing ground. I
cannot respect a people who would arm two opposing sides, encourage them both to fight to the
death and then waltz in and claim the empty lands left behind by the dead. If you don't see
that as an Israeli tactic in acquiring more Lebensraum, you are not being objective. If you
don't see how Israel is exploiting the American government and military in pursuit of such
goals, you are not being objective.
alt media-verse is currently on fire with the news that the US State Dept's answer to Al Capone, Mike Pompeo, has been caught
promising "Jewish leaders" to send the boys round to Jeremy Corbyn if he should get elected and subsequently prove to be uppity and
out of line. According to the
WaPo , who broke the story:
The remarks, which are contained in audio of a private meeting leaked to The Washington Post, make Pompeo the second senior U.S.
official to comment on Britain's turbulent leadership succession in the past week.
During his meeting with Jewish leaders in New York, Pompeo was asked if Corbyn "is elected, would you be willing to work with
us to take on actions if life becomes very difficult for Jews in the U.K.?"
In response, Pompeo said, "It could be that Mr. Corbyn manages to run the gantlet and get elected. It's possible. You should
know, we won't wait for him to do those things to begin to push back. We will do our level best," he said to fervent applause
from attendees.
"It's too risky and too important and too hard once it's already happened," he said.
Of course the idea the "Jewish leaders" harbor any real fear that Jeremy Corbyn (Jeremy Corbyn!) is going to make life "difficult"
for British Jews if elected is simply risible. They know, just as every moderately informed person knows, that that's absurd. They
know Corbyn has no wish to make life difficult for anybody – except possibly the uber wealthy and the profiteer class.
They know the "antisemitism" fear is just a cover for the very very real fear that a Corbyn government will break the unwritten
rules of modern western governance and reject the agenda of austerity, exploitation and perpetual war that has been creating huge
profits and ideological thrills for the blessed few over the last twenty years.
They know that what Pompeo is promising is action to prevent this possibility coming about.
People are up in arms about this, and some seem quite shocked. Apparently the idea the neoliberal elites would try regime change
or regime-control on a relatively prosperous western country was something they didn't previously think possible.
Unfortunately it's more than possible. The state apparatus of the different western nations are a tight bond of mutual regard
and interest, just as likely to foment regime change on their own or their allies' elected representatives as on those of impoverished
or "developing" countries, if they believe those representatives threaten the perceived interests of the state. Of course it
isn't too often necessary, since the same western state apparatus also works to ensure that only governments that don't threaten
perceived state interests manage to get elected. But, when the unthinkable happens, MI5 and the CIA are quite happy to step up
to the plate and throw their own or their allies' democratic governments out the window. It's happened – or nearly happened –
at least twice in the last fifty years.
In the 1960s the UK security agencies, senior military and members of the royal family were apparently
contemplating
a fullblown coup against Labour prime minister Harold Wilson.
In 1975 it was
Australia's turn , when democratically elected reforming prime minister Gough Whitlam was overthrown in a bloodless constitutional
coup organised jointly by the US and UK .
The old empire and the new have form in this regard, and this means no one should take Pompeo's words (spoken in private let's
not forget) lightly.
It's also interesting to look at how the WaPo frames the revelation. There's no sense of outrage or surprise there. In fact it's
an almost matter-of-fact piece, written with no awareness of its potential impact. Even those in the comments who object in some
form are mostly doing it within the permissible current language of dissent – blaming Trump , because in these identity politics-saturated
times, your morality resides in who or what you are NOT in what you do.
To the WaPo – and many of its readers – there's nothing intrinsically either wrong or surprising in the idea a US secretary of
state should be overtly promising to interfere in the democratic governance of another country.
I had concerns about her ties to India and therefore Israel. But I doubt she would let Jews
or Israelis run the US like Trump does.
Trump has gathered the US Jewish vultures to handle his "deal of the century' ..and that
deal will be raping Palestine and as much of the ME as they can. Given the opportunity I
don't know whose throat I'd cut first probably the little girlie fop Kushner.
White House invites key Trump business allies to Bahrain forum in search for a Middle
East 'deal of the century' .. CNBC
[MORE]
The White House has invited some of President Trump's key business allies to an event in
Bahrain intended to kick-start the administration's long-awaited Middle East peace plan. The
Bahrain meeting will focus on the economic part of the "deal of the century," which has been
led by Jared Kushner. Tom Barrack, CEO of real estate investment firm Colony Capital, will be
heading to the event. Blackstone's Steve Schwarzman, BlackRock's Larry Fink and Goldman
Sachs' Dina Powell were also invited.
Tom Barrack, a loyal supporter of the president and the CEO of real estate investment firm
Colony Capital, will be heading to the event slated to start on June 25 at the Four Seasons
in Bahrain's capital, Manama.
"Tom is pleased to be a participant in a well organized forum for the purpose of advancing
the peace process in the Middle East," said his spokesman, Owen Blicksilver. "He has been a
lifelong advocate of economic prosperity being a foundation stone of hope for the entire
region especially its exploding young and largely unemployed population."
Blackstone CEO Steve Schwarzman, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink and Goldman Sachs' Dina Powell
are among the heavy hitters who have been invited to the gathering dubbed "Peace to
Prosperity," according to people familiar with the planning.
Schwarzman is likely to attend, one of the people said, while Fink will not be going due to
previous commitments, a separate source added. It's unclear whether Powell, a former deputy
national security advisor under Trump, will join the group.
Schwarzman is a top donor to Trump's reelection campaign. In 2017, he contributed $344,400
Trump's joint fundraising committee.
Blackstone, BlackRock and Goldman Sachs all have extensive ties to the Middle East, including
offices in Dubai, Riyadh and Tel-Aviv.
A senior administration official did not deny that Schwarzman, Fink and Powell were invited
to the forum.
The Trump White House and its associates have close ties to Bahrain. Reuters previously
reported that the administration was pursuing a nearly $5 billion sale of F-16 fighter jets
to island nation in the Gulf. The president's outside lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, landed a
security consulting contract with the country's Ministry of Interior, The Daily Beast
reported.
A team of White House officials led by Kushner has been attempting to bring Israeli and
Palestinian leaders to the negotiating table since the administration's earliest days. Last
month, the White House announced the Bahrain summit, which was described at the time as a
chance for attendees to "galvanize support for potential economic investments and initiatives
that could be made possible by a peace agreement," with a particular focus on
Palestinians.
Meanwhile, Palestinian business executives are turning down invitations to the event,
which Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has ripped.
"Trump's 'deal of the century' will go to hell, as will the economic workshop in Bahrain
that the Americans intend to hold and present illusions," Abbas said last week.
Kushner, in a recent interview with Axios, fired back at the Palestinian government, and
blamed the leadership for the loss of U.S. aid that was cut from the West Bank and Gaza.
"The actions we've taken were because America's aid is not entitlement. Right, if we make
certain decisions which we're allowed to as a sovereign nation to respect the rights of
another sovereign nation and we get criticized by that government, the response of this
president is not to say, 'Oh, let me give you more aid,'" Kushner said.
Representatives from wealthy Gulf states the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia will be
attending. Officials from Qatar are set to take part as well.
Barrack, who was the chairman of Trump's inaugural committee and is a grandson of Lebanese
immigrants, has a long history of attempting to make inroads in the Middle East, particularly
through advocating for business investments.
While Barrack is not running point on the Trump administration's efforts, he is still
deeply involved in the process. He authored a white paper for the administration titled "The
Trump Middle East Marshall Plan," which specifically mentions expanding U.S. and
international business opportunities there as a way to unite the region.
"... In addition to the strange nature of some of the Israelis' possessions in the van and on their person, the company that employed them -- Urban Moving Systems -- was of special interest to the FBI, which concluded that the company was likely a "fraudulent operation." Upon a search of the company's premises, the FBI noted that "little evidence of a legitimate business operation was found." The FBI report also noted that there were an "unusually large number of computers relative to the number of employees for such a fairly small business" and that "further investigation identified several pseudo-names or aliases associated with Urban Moving Systems and its operations." ..."
"... The FBI presence at the Urban Moving Systems search site drew the attention of the local media and was later reported on both television and in the local press. A former Urban Moving Systems employee later contacted the Newark Division with information indicating that he had quit his employment with Urban Moving Systems as a result of the high amount of anti-American sentiment present among Urban's employees. ..."
"... The former employee stated that an Israeli employee of Urban had even once remarked, "Give us twenty years and we'll take over your media and destroy your country" (page 37 of the FBI report ). ..."
"... This is a long article, but read it all the way through. It's proof that Israel was indeed behind 9/11 and that they had numerous operatives in the country who were gleeful about it, having set up video cameras and celebrated the day before by taking a photo of one of the operatives holding a lit cigarette lighter up to the horizon....right in front of the still-standing WTC twin towers. ..."
Have an idea for you on how to show true leadership and finish what the Orange "six-sided star" liar said he would pick up
( https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/11/14/trump-im-reopening-911-investigation/
) when he began his presidency and then... well... lied to become a treasonous bag of **** just like the ones that preceded him!...
Even Vlad Putin and the rest of the Russian Federation refuse to "touch it". And if you did. You would be the only representative
in the U.S. House and Senate let alone the U.S. Federal, State and local government(s) for that matter to do so.
All you would have to say is "we need an understanding why 2 planes demolished 3 building(s) at "Ground Zero" more then 18
years ago, and why the 9/11 Commission never mentioned the Solomon Brothers Building 7 in it's official report?... I (Congresswoman
Tulsi Gabbard) certainly want to know!... Especially wearing the uniform for what I believed was the reason I was given for invading
Afghanistan and Iraq and murdering over 3 million people?... And I want to tell the American people ultimately "why" Building
7 was omitted along with too many other details that Robert Mueller famously dismissed by saying only that " mistakes were
made " ...
I've written to you several times about showing the courage to be the only politician since Senator Wellstone to pick up where
he left off and support the 13 year endeavors of this organization ( https://www.ae911truth.org/
) to demand an investigation of the fact(s) now that has the backing of a Grand Jury by signing it's petition!...
But you won't. Because you are like every other "200lbs of ****" in a 100lbs bag that walks the halls of the Longworth carrying
the water for the "Tribe"!
Keep telling yourself surfer **** that the job will get both easier and better by lying about that day and what it's done in
it's wake to every institution and business in the United States of America let alone the laws of the land just like your mentor
the Langley Bath House "boy"!...
Yes, Putin knows that an island of sanity and decency in a cesspit of bigotry and firearms is bound to be blown to pieces before
she has a chance to deliver. I fear for Tulsi even now.
Yes, the Russia nonsense is FAKE NEWS. So why is Trump allowing the Israelis, a country that hates the United States, and which
has attacked us at least twice (USS Liberty, 9/11/2001), to dictate our foreign policy? Israel is the real enemy!!
Let's look at a quote from one of the former employees of the Mossad front operation "Urban Moving Systems" (likely also the
same people who planted the explosives at WTC) had to say about his time there:
In addition to the strange nature of some of the Israelis' possessions in the van and on their person, the company that
employed them -- Urban Moving Systems -- was of special interest to the FBI, which concluded that the company was likely a
"fraudulent operation." Upon a search of the company's premises, the FBI noted that "little evidence of a legitimate business
operation was found." The FBI report also noted that there were an "unusually large number of computers relative to the number
of employees for such a fairly small business" and that "further investigation identified several pseudo-names or aliases associated
with Urban Moving Systems and its operations."
The FBI presence at the Urban Moving Systems search site drew the attention of the local media and was later reported on
both television and in the local press. A former Urban Moving Systems employee later contacted the Newark Division with information
indicating that he had quit his employment with Urban Moving Systems as a result of the high amount of anti-American sentiment
present among Urban's employees.
The former employee stated that an Israeli employee of Urban had even once remarked, "Give
us twenty years and we'll take over your media and destroy your country" (page 37 of
the FBI report ).
This kind of thing makes one kind of hope for a war in which Israel is bombed back to the stone age, which is clearly where
these evil, psychopathic Zionist filth belong!
This is a long article, but read it all the way through. It's proof that Israel was indeed behind 9/11 and that they had numerous
operatives in the country who were gleeful about it, having set up video cameras and celebrated the day before by taking a photo
of one of the operatives holding a lit cigarette lighter up to the horizon....right in front of the still-standing WTC twin towers.
And look at this. You won't see this in the MSM any time soon:
In addition to Urban Moving Systems, another moving company, Classic International Movers, became of interest in connection
with the investigation into the "Dancing Israelis," which led to the arrest and detention of four Israeli nationals who worked
for this separate moving company. The FBI's Miami Division had alerted the Newark Division that Classic International Movers
was believed to have been used by one of the 19 alleged 9/11 hijackers before the attack, and one of the "Dancing Israelis"
had the number for Classic International Movers written in a notebook that was seized at the time of his arrest. The report
further states that one of the Israelis of Classic International Movers who was arrested "was visibly disturbed by the Agents'
questioning regarding his personal email account."
Any politician who voted for Iraq war should be voted out of the office and prohibited to hold any public office for life. They
are all bottomfeeders, which conspired to convert the USA into National Security State. Officials in Bush administration
and first of all Cheney need to be put on trial for destruction of evidence...
Notable quotes:
"... The FBI released the, "Five Dancing Israelis," that were arrested by the NYPD on 9-11 for filming and celebrating the attacks on the WTC and driving around in a van that tested positive for explosives. These were admitted Mossad agents working undercover in the USA. ..."
"... Those "idiots" were subsequently determined to be Mossad. The motto of Mossad was, until recently, "By way of deception thou shalt do war." ..."
If you have never heard of the "Five Dancing Israelis," you might be a low-information voter.
The FBI released the, "Five Dancing Israelis," that were arrested by the NYPD on 9-11 for filming and celebrating the attacks
on the WTC and driving around in a van that tested positive for explosives. These were admitted Mossad agents working undercover
in the USA.
So you think that the dancing Israelis did it because a camera, mounted on a tripod, saw some idiots dancing on a roof?
And somebody said that the furniture van was contaminated with explosive?
Those "idiots" were subsequently determined to be Mossad. The motto of Mossad was, until recently, "By way of deception
thou shalt do war."
"... Trump administration is escalating its battle with "European allies" over the fate of the Iran nuclear accord, and is "threatening penalties against the financial body created by Germany, the U.K. and France to shield trade with the Islamic Republic from U.S. sanctions. " ..."
"... While it is obvious that the US ire was sparked by the realization - and alarm - that cracks are appearing in the dollar's reserve status, opponents of Instex argue - at least for public consumption purposes - that the mechanism is flawed because the Iranian institution designated to work with Instex, the Special Trade and Finance Instrument, has shareholders with links to entities already facing sanctions from the U.S ..."
"... "When transactions move beyond that, it doesn't matter what vehicle's out there, if the transaction is sanctionable, we will evaluate it, review it, and if appropriate, levy sanctions against those that were involved in that transaction," Pompeo said. "It's very straightforward." ..."
"... In 2018, Europe made a huge stink about not being bound by Trump's unilateral breach of the Iranian deal, and said it would continue regardless of US threats. But now that the threats have clearly escalated, and Washington has made it clear it won't take no for an answer, it will be interesting to see if Europe's resolve to take on Trump - especially in light of the trade war with China - has fizzled ..."
"... that's too Boltonesque or Pompeonish and would only denigrate Europe for no reason. ..."
"... This is the latest move (in a very long line) by Jewish-freemason banksters to take over the world. The USA is owned and run by them and is used simply for their ends and purposes. ..."
"... Trumpsters cheering on DJT need to be aware that they have as much regard and affection for you and for your country as they do for a mangy dog. ..."
"... The US is starting to act a bit too unhinged now. Even the zombies are starting to wonder what the problem is with the US and the USD. Not very smart to be so loud, aggressive and threatening all the time. ..."
"... What we are witnessing in the US sanctions, threats, and illegal and costly military operations around the globe are the final throes and spasms of a dying, yet still dangerous, wounded animal ..."
"... Global trade in its current form with trade routes stretching all around the world is unsustainable due to rapidly depleting oil/energy. ..."
"... If you cut through all the propaganda and look only at actions taken by the U.S. government, it certainly does look like America is taking numerous intentional steps to disconnect itself from global trade with long-standing international partners in Europe, Asia and the Middle East ..."
"... America acting the big bully and pissing off all our international trade partners is just an act. Don't worry, the long term plan is exactly what you're wishing for, more or less. Though, since the Middle East still has so much oil, chances are America and its military will remain there for quite a while longer -- but that's the only reason. ..."
"... America is on the path of sanctioning itself into isolation. The US is shooting itself someplace much more sensitive with all these sanctions, tariffs, and warmongering. ..."
"... Soon the isolated US will ONLY have Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Canada and Britain to have economic relationship with. I wonder what do these assets of the US and former British colonies can offer to one another in the form of meaningful trade? Oil, maple syrup, weapons, sand, and British tea. ..."
"... In 2018, Europe made a huge stink about not being bound by Trump's unilateral breach of the Iranian deal, and said it would continue regardless of US threats. But now that the threats have clearly escalated, and Washington has made it clear it won't take no for an answer, it will be interesting to see if Europe's resolve to take on Trump - especially in light of the trade war with China - has fizzled. ..."
"... It's easier to replace SWIFT than replace a reserve currency the petro-dollar is today. They've tried at no avail. So long as our economy kicks ***, it will be hard to replace USD as a reserve money. ..."
"... The issue isn't just SWIFT. It's "access to US markets". Sayanim Pompeo is threatening them with the nuclear option: Financial MAD. ..."
"... Trump seems to think he's CEO of the planet and all the countries are just different departments of his corporation. ..."
"... It's worse than that. Thump thinks that Bibi is Chairman of the Board, and Adelson is a Senior Board Member of a small (((Board))) ..."
It's going from bad to worse for Europe, whose currency had
just hit session lows after Brussels confirmed that Italy faces a massive fine over its debt, when the Euro was hit with a double
whammy after Bloomberg reported that the Trump administration is escalating its battle with "European allies" over the fate of
the Iran nuclear accord, and is "threatening penalties against the financial body created by Germany, the U.K. and France to shield
trade with the Islamic Republic from U.S. sanctions. "
According to Bloomberg, the Treasury Department's undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, Sigal Mandelker, sent
a letter on May 7 warning that Instex, the European SPV to sustain trade with Tehran, and anyone associated with it could be barred
from the U.S. financial system if it goes into effect.
As a reminder, last September, in order to maintain a financial relationship with Iran that can not be vetoed by the US, Europe
unveiled a "Special Purpose Vehicle" to bypass SWIFT. Back then
we predicted that Washington would not be too delighted with this development seeking to undermine the dollar's reserve status.
We were right.
"I urge you to carefully consider the potential sanctions exposure of Instex," Mandelker wrote in the letter to Instex President
Per Fischer. "Engaging in activities that run afoul of U.S. sanctions can result in severe consequences, including a loss of access
to the U.S. financial system."
Germany, France and the U.K. finalized the Instex system in January, allowing companies to trade with Iran without the use of
U.S. dollars or American banks, allowing them to get around wide-ranging U.S. sanctions that were imposed after the Trump administration
abandoned the 2015 Iran nuclear deal last year.
Not surprisingly, a senior admin official behind the eltter said the U.S. decided to issue the threat " after concluding that
European officials, who had earlier downplayed the significance of Instex in conversations with the Trump administration, were far
more serious about it than they had initially let on. "
The official, who asked not to be identified discussing internal deliberations, said the letter was intended to serve as a
warning that the U.S. would punish anyone associated with Instex -- including businesses, government officials and staff -- if
they were working to set up a program to help Iran evade U.S. sanctions.
"This is a shot across the bow of a European political establishment committed to using Instex and its sanctions-connected Iranian
counterpart to circumvent U.S. measures, " said Mark Dubowitz, the chief executive officer of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
in Washington.
When asked to comment on the letter, the Treasury Department issued a statement saying "entities that transact in trade with the
Iranian regime through any means may expose themselves to considerable sanctions risk, and Treasury intends to aggressively enforce
our authorities."
At the heart of the latest US move is the argument that Iran and its central bank use deceptive financial practices and haven't
implemented minimum global safeguards against money laundering and terrorism financing, according to Bloomberg.
While it is obvious that the US ire was sparked by the realization - and alarm - that cracks are appearing in the dollar's
reserve status, opponents of Instex argue - at least for public consumption purposes - that the mechanism is flawed because the Iranian
institution designated to work with Instex, the Special Trade and Finance Instrument, has shareholders with links to entities already
facing sanctions from the U.S .
Meanwhile, during a visit to London on May 8, Mike Pompeo also warned that there was no need for Instex because the U.S. allows
for humanitarian and medical products to get into Iran without sanction.
"When transactions move beyond that, it doesn't matter what vehicle's out there, if the transaction is sanctionable, we will
evaluate it, review it, and if appropriate, levy sanctions against those that were involved in that transaction," Pompeo said. "It's
very straightforward."
In 2018, Europe made a huge stink about not being bound by Trump's unilateral breach of the Iranian deal, and said it would
continue regardless of US threats. But now that the threats have clearly escalated, and Washington has made it clear it won't take
no for an answer, it will be interesting to see if Europe's resolve to take on Trump - especially in light of the trade war with
China - has fizzled.
Makes me wonder why year after year China's GDP increases and never decreases while the US GDP does periodically go into the
negative zone and when it is positive, it isn't that much positive.
With our control we try to have over foreign countries coupled
with our antiquated and overpriced education system, we are heading nowhere very fast while China continues to grow.
This is the latest move (in a very long line) by Jewish-freemason banksters to take over the world. The USA is owned and run
by them and is used simply for their ends and purposes.
Trumpsters cheering on DJT need to be aware that they have as much regard and affection for you and for your country as they
do for a mangy dog.
Europe has been servile to the US since the end of WW2. Germany in particular has continually bowed to US pressure and surely
the time has come to kick the US out of Ramstein Air Base which houses over 60,000 personnel including 5000 non US military.
The US also continues to stir its anti Russia interference in compliant countries especially the Ukraine. Europe should dismantle
the EU and the euro and revert to sovereign nations using their own currencies. NATO is US driven and hinders not helps European
cooperation. There is no military threat in Europe full stop.
The US is starting to act a bit too unhinged now. Even the zombies are starting to wonder what the problem is with the US and the USD. Not very smart to be so loud, aggressive and threatening all the time.
What we are witnessing in the US sanctions, threats, and illegal and costly military operations around the globe are the final throes and spasms of a dying, yet still dangerous, wounded animal. The US has been killed by the criminal Satanic
Ashkenazi Bolshevik Khazar filth who did 911. The US and Israel are the two most hated countries on earth.
This is all part of a long term plan intended to rearrange global trade arrangements. The future we are heading into is one
where "global" trade will be much more regional, by necessity. Global trade in its current form with trade routes stretching all
around the world is unsustainable due to rapidly depleting oil/energy.
Europe, Asia and the Middle East need to make their own
financial and trade arrangements -- this manufactured disagreement will force companies and governments to adapt to that reality.
America is intentionally cutting itself off from trade with Europe and Asia to force self-sustainability for the Americas continent
and for American companies, because that's what the future demands -- it is what's sustainable long term.
The Trade War and this
contrived spat with Europe and many other trade-related "conflicts" getting publicity are all part of a multi-pronged action plan
to force painful and politically untenable changes on companies and governments in preparation for a future that will be characterized
by much less oil/energy and by extension, much more localized and regional trade and finance.
America is intentionally cutting itself off from trade with Europe and Asia to force self-sustainability for the Americas
continent and for American companies
I'd love to believe that but you're going to have to take your war machine home with you or what you say means **** all.
If you cut through all the propaganda and look only at actions taken by the U.S. government, it certainly does look like America
is taking numerous intentional steps to disconnect itself from global trade with long-standing international partners in Europe,
Asia and the Middle East.
Actions speak louder than words. The rational for bringing an end to all these energy-intensive trade
and financial arrangements that were created back when oil WAS cheap and plentiful begins to make a lot of sense.
America acting
the big bully and pissing off all our international trade partners is just an act. Don't worry, the long term plan is exactly
what you're wishing for, more or less. Though, since the Middle East still has so much oil, chances are America and its military
will remain there for quite a while longer -- but that's the only reason.
"Iran and its central bank use deceptive financial practices and haven't implemented minimum global safeguards against money
laundering and terrorism financing, according to Bloomberg." This is akin to Stalin telling Mao to be nicer to his citizens.
potkettleblack.
No nation will ever be sovereign until the International Banking Tyrants and their relatives to the third cousin receive a
very public guillotine haircut.
Everyday, a new threat by the rusty meat-grinder known as the Untied State of Israel. Which country will we read a war tweet
about next?
America is on the path of sanctioning itself into isolation. The US is shooting itself someplace much more sensitive with all
these sanctions, tariffs, and warmongering.
Soon the isolated US will ONLY have Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Canada and Britain to have economic relationship with. I wonder
what do these assets of the US and former British colonies can offer to one another in the form of meaningful trade? Oil, maple
syrup, weapons, sand, and British tea.
In 2018, Europe made a huge stink about not being bound by Trump's unilateral breach of the Iranian deal, and said it would
continue regardless of US threats. But now that the threats have clearly escalated, and Washington has made it clear it won't
take no for an answer, it will be interesting to see if Europe's resolve to take on Trump - especially in light of the trade
war with China - has fizzled.
however obsolete the SWIFT system is there isn't any credible alternative to the old bank wire system. It's coming though.
Should be an easy fix in this day and age. US doesn't want to lose control of who's wiring what and to whom, Capisce?
It's easier
to replace SWIFT than replace a reserve currency the petro-dollar is today. They've tried at no avail. So long as our economy
kicks ***, it will be hard to replace USD as a reserve money.
"... From what I have read, including excerpts of JCPOA, it seems that Iran's move to restart some low level enrichment is captured in the agreement as something that Iran could do if the other party(ies) are in breach of the agreement. And at this time, the US is not a party any longer and the EU is in breach by stopping any economic intercourse with Iran. ..."
"... This should be reiterated again and again, because just mentioning that Iran unilaterally is starting enrichment puts a target on their back especially in the United States of Amnesia, while they are still just doing only what is prescribed by the JCPOA. ..."
"... Bolton's lying goes with his broad contempt for the American people. He treats us like contemptible sheep, he lies to us, and then he tries to manipulate Trump into sending our sons and daughters to fight wars for his foreign buddies. ..."
"... It is indeed remarkable in a very bad way that Bolton has any credibility to speak on issues. He has a very long track record of lie after lie after lie, going back to the build up for Iraq war. Indeed, he has never acknowledged that Iraq war a monumental tragedy. ..."
John Bolton
repeats one of the Trump administration's biggest and most important lies:
Donald Trump's national security adviser said Wednesday there was "no reason" for Iran to back out of its nuclear deal with
world powers other than to seek atomic weapons, a year after the U.S. president unilaterally withdrew America from the accord.
Bolton and other administration officials have promoted the lie that Iran seeks nuclear weapons for months. Unfortunately, members
of Congress and the press have largely failed to call out these lies for what they are. There is no evidence to support the administration's
claims, and there is overwhelming evidence that they are wrong, but if they can get away with saying these things without being
challenged they may not need evidence to get the crisis that Bolton and others like him want.
In this case, the AP story just relays Bolton's false and misleading statements as if they should be taken seriously, and their
headline trumpets Bolton's dishonest insinuations as if they were credible. This is an unfortunate case of choosing the sensationalist,
eye-catching headline that misinforms the public on a very important issue. Bolton's latest remarks are especially pernicious because
they use Iran's modest reactions to Trump administration sanctions as evidence of Iran's imaginary intent to acquire weapons. The
U.S. has been trying to push Iran to abandon the deal for more than a year, and at the first sign that Iran begins to reduce its
compliance in order to push back against the administration's outrageous economic warfare Bolton tries to misrepresent it as proof
that they seek nuclear weapons. Don't fall for it, and don't trust anything Bolton says. Not only does he have a record of distorting
and manipulating intelligence to suit his purposes, but his longstanding desire for regime change and his ties to the Mujahideen-e
Khalq (MEK) make him an exceptionally unreliable person when it comes to any and all claims about the Iranian government.
The story provides some context, but still fails to challenge Bolton's assertions:
Bolton said that without more nuclear power plants, it made no sense for Iran to stockpile more low-enriched uranium as it
now plans to do. But the U.S. also earlier cut off Iran's ability to sell its uranium to Russia in exchange for unprocessed
yellow-cake uranium [bold mine-DK].
Iran has set a July 7 deadline for Europe to offer better terms to the unraveling nuclear deal, otherwise it will resume
enrichment closer to weapons level. Bolton declined to say what the U.S. would do in response to that.
"There's no reason for them to do (higher enrichment) unless it is to reduce the breakout time to nuclear weapons," Bolton
said.
Earlier this year, the Trump administration ended the sanctions waivers that enabled Iran to ship its excess low-enriched uranium
out of the country. They made it practically impossible for Iran to do what they have been reliably doing for years, and now Bolton
blames Iran for the consequences of administration actions. The administration has deliberately put Iran in a bind so that they
either give up the enrichment that they are entitled to do under the JCPOA or exceed the restrictions on their stockpile so that
the U.S. can then accuse them of a violation. Left out in all of this is that the U.S. is no longer a party to the deal and violated
all of its commitments more than a year ago. Iran has patiently remained in compliance while the only party to breach the agreement
desperately hunts for a pretext to accuse them of some minor infraction.
Iran's record of full compliance with the JCPOA for more than three years hasn't mattered to Bolton and his allies in the slightest,
and they have had no problem reneging on U.S. commitments, but now the same ideologues that have wanted to destroy the deal from
the start insist on treating the deal's restrictions as sacrosanct. These same people have worked to engineer a situation in which
Iran may end up stockpiling more low-enriched uranium than they are supposed to have, and then seize on the situation they created
to spread lies about Iran's desire for nukes. It's all so obviously being done in bad faith, but then that is what we have come
to expect from Iran hawks and opponents of the nuclear deal. Don't let them get away with it.
The reason that Iran is threatening to enrich its uranium to a higher level is that the U.S. has been relentlessly sanctioning
them despite their total compliance with the terms of the JCPOA. The Trump administration has done all it could to deny Iran the
benefits of the deal, and then Bolton has the gall to say that they have no other reason to reduce their compliance. Of course Iran
does have another reason, and that is to put pressure on the other remaining parties to the deal to find a way to get Iran the benefits
it was promised. It is a small step taken in response to the administration's own destructive policy, and it is not evidence of
anything else. Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons, and it is grossly irresponsible to treat unfounded administration claims about
this as anything other than propaganda and lies.
From what I have read, including excerpts of JCPOA, it seems that Iran's move to restart some low level enrichment is captured
in the agreement as something that Iran could do if the other party(ies) are in breach of the agreement. And at this time, the
US is not a party any longer and the EU is in breach by stopping any economic intercourse with Iran.
This should be reiterated again and again, because just mentioning that Iran unilaterally is starting enrichment puts a target
on their back especially in the United States of Amnesia, while they are still just doing only what is prescribed by the JCPOA.
Bolton's lying goes with his broad contempt for the American people. He treats us like contemptible sheep, he lies to us,
and then he tries to manipulate Trump into sending our sons and daughters to fight wars for his foreign buddies.
It is indeed remarkable in a very bad way that Bolton has any credibility to speak on issues. He has a very long track record of lie after lie after lie, going back to the build up for Iraq war. Indeed, he has never
acknowledged that Iraq war a monumental tragedy.
I think NK has it right to assert that Bolton is a defective human product.
Neocon hawks are destroying US economics very effectively by supersizing military expenses and the costs of foreign wars.
Essentially Trump administration is acting in Israeli and Saudi interests in this case
Notable quotes:
"... Like many other phony administration offers to negotiate, Pompeo's proposal doesn't really include anything new or different. The administration is still insisting on the preposterous demands that the Secretary of State delivered last year. That is what Pompeo's "normal nation" reference means. In other words, the administration still expects Iranian capitulation, and they are willing to meet with Iranian officials to accept their surrender. ..."
"... Of course, this would not be a "conversation," which implies give-and-take between equals who speak to each other with respect. This would amount to something much more like a demarche where the U.S. tells Iran what it must do and then expects Iran's representatives to nod in agreement. ..."
"... Pompeo is an Iran hawk, but he is also a yes-man who seeks to curry favor with the president at all times. If he thinks that the president wants him to make diplomatic-sounding noises, he will make those noises, but it doesn't mean very much in terms of the administration's goals and means. ..."
"... Iran hawks are used to feigning interest in diplomacy while doing everything they can to undermine and poison it. As always, judge the administration by what it does and not what it happens to be saying at the moment. As long as the U.S. keeps its illegitimate sanctions in place and continues to make unrealistic and excessive demands, offers to talk are meaningless because the administration has already rendered negotiations useless. ..."
"... Pompeo is an unskilled purveyor of "smoke & mirrors" diplomacy: he thinks the world is unaware that preconditions with Iran have been in place since May 2018 when Trump unilaterally tore up the JCPOA followed by a slew of unprecedented sanctions against the Iranian people. ..."
"... Of course this statement is not for Iran, it is for the U.S. public to make the case for 'we tried' when in actuality, 'we lied'. ..."
Pompeo
made a statement about talks with Iran that is much less meaningful than it seems:
The United States is prepared to engage with Iran without pre-conditions about its nuclear program but needs to see the country
behaving like "a normal nation", U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Sunday.
Iran dismissed the offer as "word-play".
Like many other phony administration offers to negotiate, Pompeo's proposal doesn't really include anything new or different.
The administration is still insisting on the preposterous demands that the Secretary of State delivered last year. That is what
Pompeo's "normal nation" reference means. In other words, the administration still expects Iranian capitulation, and they are willing
to meet with Iranian officials to accept their surrender. The report continues:
"We are certainly prepared to have that conversation when the Iranians can prove that they want to behave like a normal nation,"
he told a joint news conference with his Swiss counterpart Ignazio Cassis.
Of course, this would not be a "conversation," which implies give-and-take between equals who speak to each other with respect.
This would amount to something much more like a demarche where the U.S. tells Iran what it must do and then expects Iran's representatives
to nod in agreement.
The Iranian government's dismissive response is to be expected. For one thing, the distrust between Washington and Tehran is
immense, so Iran's government is bound to view any offer with suspicion. The Iranian government has already explained what the U.S.
has to do if they want to talk about anything, and the administration has no intention of doing any of those things. As far as Iran
is concerned, their nuclear program isn't up for discussion, so what would be the point of meeting with U.S. officials when the
administration remains committed to its outrageous policy of economic warfare and collective punishment?
Pompeo is an Iran hawk, but he is also a yes-man who seeks to curry favor with the president at all times. If he thinks that
the president wants him to make diplomatic-sounding noises, he will make those noises, but it doesn't mean very much in terms of
the administration's goals and means.
Iran hawks are used to feigning interest in diplomacy while doing everything they can to undermine
and poison it. As always, judge the administration by what it does and not what it happens to be saying at the moment. As long as
the U.S. keeps its illegitimate sanctions in place and continues to make unrealistic and excessive demands, offers to talk are meaningless
because the administration has already rendered negotiations useless.
There is an understandable temptation to seize on comments from administration officials as proof that they are giving up on
a destructive and fruitless policy, but until the administration translates its rhetorical gestures into actions we should assume
that the policy remains unchanged.
Pompeo is an unskilled purveyor of "smoke & mirrors" diplomacy: he thinks the world is unaware that preconditions with Iran
have been in place since May 2018 when Trump unilaterally tore up the JCPOA followed by a slew of unprecedented sanctions against
the Iranian people.
The exodus of qualified State Department careerists can't be plugged by promoting the likes of
Brian Hook.
Trump is trying to create a coalition of China Russia, India Iran and Turkey. That's an
interesting foreign policy strategy,
Are we really trading Britain, Canada, Germany, and Japan for … Israel and Saudi
Arabia ?
Notable quotes:
"... Ever since he embraced the Saudis and Emiratis early in his first year in office, he has been increasingly bound to them and has been eager to cater to their preferences as much as he can. His determination to be even more pro-Saudi than the average president has guaranteed that U.S. foreign policy has had less and less to do with American interests and has instead become a vehicle for promoting the ambitions of regional clients at our expense. ..."
"... He replaced them because they weren't as inclined to do the bidding of Israel and Saudi Arabia as they should have been. If you don't jump when Israel and Saudi Arabia say jump, you don't get the big campaign bucks. Transactional Trump understands that very well. Tillerson and McMaster didn't. Bolton and Pompeo not only understand it, they rely on it. ..."
"... I did not notice the name Sheldon Adelson mentioned and if we are looking for reasons for Trump's antipathy toward Iran, we need to recognize the fact of the large donations made by this ultra-Zionist to Trump's campaign. ..."
Trump speaks at Washington rally against the Iran deal
back in September 2015. Credit: Olivier Douliery/Sipa USA/Newscom
Andrew Bacevich comments
on the recent escalation of tensions with Iran and what it tells us about Trump's
presidency:
Again, the precise numbers are almost beside the point. In effect, Trump has drawn his own
line in the sand, one that says: "We ain't leaving, no sir." His decision -- was it really
his? -- is in effect a capitulation. Trump has deferred to the institutions, interests, and
individuals intent on perpetuating the forever wars. Devious and diabolical and brilliant,
the war party, abetted by its foreign auxiliaries, has prevailed. Trump will now surely
bequeath those wars to his successor -- that's the significance of the Iran war scare.
I agree with all of this. I would just add that this was a predictable outcome for a
president who chose to make antipathy to Iran the centerpiece of his foreign policy. Trump
could not extricate the U.S. from the region while simultaneously pursuing a more aggressive
anti-Iranian policy than his predecessor. The pursuit of that anti-Iranian policy has had a
great deal to do with the failure to bring U.S. involvement in multiple unnecessary wars to an
end. This was not something foisted on him by others, but has been his own doing from the
beginning. When his subordinates disagreed with him about the nuclear deal as Tillerson and
McMaster did, he replaced them sooner or later, and he chose even more bellicose and aggressive
people to take their place. He has signed off on every aggressive anti-Iranian and pro-Saudi
move he could. When faced with unprecedented Congressional opposition over the war on Yemen, he
chose to use his veto for only the second time in his presidency to reject Congress' demand
that he withdraw the U.S. from that war.
Ever since he embraced the Saudis and Emiratis early in his first year in office, he has
been increasingly bound to them and has been eager to cater to their preferences as much as he
can. His determination to be even more pro-Saudi than the average president has guaranteed that
U.S. foreign policy has had less and less to do with American interests and has instead become
a vehicle for promoting the ambitions of regional clients at our expense. It isn't
possible to disentangle the U.S. from ceaseless war in the Middle East when the president
abases himself to such an extent before despotic clients and takes their enemies as ours. The
Iran obsession has defined and wrecked Trump's foreign policy, and it has led him to make most
of the worst foreign policy decisions of his presidency.
Trump knows very little and had no foreign policy experience to speak of, and that made it
extremely easy for hawkish advisers to fill his head with their own terrible ideas. Those
advisers are undoubtedly responsible for egging Trump on to take destructive and aggressive
actions, but ultimately it is Trump's responsibility for surrounding himself with people that
everyone knew would give him such awful advice. No one made Trump choose Pompeo and Bolton. It
was his own vanity and his preference for flattering yes-men that led him to choose such
unworthy and dangerous people for important positions at the highest levels of the government.
Trump doesn't have the wit, knowledge, or conviction to take U.S. foreign policy in a
different, better direction, and to the extent that he occasionally has impulses that point in
that direction they are just as easily canceled out and overwhelmed by even stronger,
contradictory impulses that drive him toward confrontation and escalation. The war party
prevailed because the president sided with them from the beginning, filled his administration
with hard-liners, and fought against every effort in Congress to rein in and end our
government's illegal and unauthorized involvement in the war on Yemen.
Trump is not a Conservative, a Republican, a neo-con, nor even a RINO; he is a grifter,
and belligerence toward Iran is where his greatest profit can be made.
"When his subordinates disagreed with him about the nuclear deal as Tillerson and
McMaster did, he replaced them sooner or later, and he chose even more bellicose and
aggressive people to take their place."
He replaced them because they weren't as inclined to do the bidding of Israel and Saudi
Arabia as they should have been. If you don't jump when Israel and Saudi Arabia say jump, you
don't get the big campaign bucks. Transactional Trump understands that very well. Tillerson
and McMaster didn't. Bolton and Pompeo not only understand it, they rely on it.
@midway: I suspect without any hard evidence that Bolton and Pompeo got and keep their
jobs not because of dollars and sense, but something even more pathetic.
Namely, they flatter Trump and tell him he is "tough" in private, and do nothing to
upstage Trump in public.
midway: The really big campaign bucks were made possible by the Citizens United Supreme
Court decision back in 2010. The conservatives on the court then probably never realized they
were giving a handful of billionaires the power to have more influence on federal politics
than they had ever had before. If the US stumbles into a war with Iran in the next couple of
years, the little people wearing the MAGA caps will be worse off than ever.
"His determination to be even more pro-Saudi than the average president has guaranteed
that U.S. foreign policy has had less and less to do with American interests and has instead
become a vehicle for promoting the ambitions of regional clients at our expense."
Promoting the ambitions of regional clients at our expense it couldn't be put more clearly
than that. An even greater shame: this isn't part of some "great game"; we're led by a man
who wants to be seen as tough by men he sees as tough.
I did not notice the name Sheldon Adelson mentioned and if we are looking for reasons for
Trump's antipathy toward Iran, we need to recognize the fact of the large donations made by
this ultra-Zionist to Trump's campaign.
"... Pompeo has shown some unexpected political savvy by distancing himself from the doomed "peace plan," which appears to be little more than a scheme to buy Palestinian capitulation through a combination of promises of Arab money and political strong-arming from the Gulf States and Israel. ..."
On May 28, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was in New York City for a closed-door meeting with
the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. In remarks that were
covertly recorded and passed along to the Washington Post, Pompeo effectively declared that the
Middle East peace plan conjured by First Son-in-Law Jared Kushner was a non-starter and would
be rejected by most parties.
Instead of the "deal of the century" touted by President Donald
Trump, Pompeo conceded that the peace scheme was a losing proposition. "I get why people think
this is a deal that only Israel could love. I understand the perception of that. I just hope
everyone will give the space to listen and settle in a bit." Pompeo continued his blunt
remarks: "I don't want to call it failing. Call it whatever. I fail a lot, so it's not about
using a word like that."
Pompeo admitted that the State Department is giving a good deal of
attention to what to do next if the Kushner Plan flops.
Until Prime Minister-elect Benjamin Netanyahu failed to put together a majority cabinet this
week and had to call snap elections for September, it had been expected that the long-awaited
Kushner Plan would be rolled out this month. Now the launch date is delayed until late
September or early October after a new Israeli government is formed and sworn in.
Pompeo has shown some unexpected political savvy by distancing himself from the doomed
"peace plan," which appears to be little more than a scheme to buy Palestinian capitulation
through a combination of promises of Arab money and political strong-arming from the Gulf
States and Israel.
"... Trump is Gambino family, Hillary (and Comey, et al) are Genoveses. All of them are sleaze, criminal, deep state. Samo-samo. Just one pile of dirt fighting another pile of dirt. ..."
Trump has always had divided loyalties and has always talked out of two sides of his
mouth. From day one the actual decision has been to be top *** rather than American. Israel
and Goldman Sachs. Israel counts for far more with him than America. If he has to choose
which Jews he has a problem. Then he goes for Zionists over banksters. It's when he can serve
both with the same stroke that he's in his element. Like recognizing Golan as Israel, for
both Bibi and Rothschilds, as land as as oil.
Trump is a *** in everything except the accident of his Scot Presbyterian mother. His
father a Zionist ***. His first two wives and possibly his third, Jews. Possibly all his
children, definitely all but one, Jews. His daughter Ivanka born a *** and then a fake
convert to Judaism. To fake the Deplorables.
Trump is revelling in playing top ***, fighting wars for the Jews, while suckers write
articles like this about his antiwar heart.
Oh please stfu. Poor anti-war Trump being helplessly entangled in wars by the neocons he
doesn't want to. He's the one that picked them lol. He's the one that openly admits he's
beholden to Israel and the Saudis. He's the one that openly vowed during election he'd
increase war machine spending. No one's making him do anything. He acts like he's antiwar
with his words only to make chumps think he's anti-war.
"Has anyone noticed the neat escape-responsibility manoeuvre Trump uses? Past presidents
have always consulted with their advisors and cabinet and presented a united front. Trump now
deflects responsibility by investing his appointees with, evidently, independent powers which
only he curtails. His cabinet apparently works independently from him. In some case, when
necessary, they are directly responsible to him. In other cases, where unnecessary, they go
"off the plantation" and make their own decisions...which, for some reason, he can't
overrule. Pretty nifty."
Classic case of playing good cop/bad cop. Trump is the "good cop" so he can keep pacifying
his idiot cult following, like the author of this article, and get reelected.
So there are two things I agree trump on and this is one of them. But even here his
thought process doesn't make sense. If you're going to fight a war mongering bureaucracy why
in the hell do you appoint war mongers as Sec of state and national security advisor? He's
better off appointing a couple of ***** dems than these assholes. He ensures those agencies
will fight him to the bitter end. He has yet to appoint one person who shares his philosophy
and I'm sure they're out there.
"Who knows?" -- when asked if, as president, he would start a war with China ,
New York Times interview, March 25, 2016
"When Iran, when they circle our beautiful destroyers with their little boats, and they
make gestures at our people that they shouldn't be allowed to make, they will be shot out of
the water." -- threatening to go to war with Iran over rude hand gestures, Pensacola,
Florida, Sept. 9, 2016
"This is the Trump theory on war. But I'm good at war. I've had a lot of wars of my own.
I'm really good at war. I love war in a certain way. But only when we win." Fort Dodge, Iowa,
Nov. 12, 2015
He appointed these three amigos under orders from the only person who supports him. And
now he lets them have enough rope to hang themselves, really make it obvious that they are
incompetent, and then he can fire them and start fresh in 2020. Without alienating his
support/money source.
All the so-called competent people turned up their noses at Trump, declining appointment
to his administration. **** them! They obviously aren't as competent nor as patriotic as they
thought they were. They have disqualified themselves, and good riddance!
The first truly competent, if reluctant appointee is Bill Barr. He does a good job, and
some other, equally competent and country-loving personalities will come out of the
crowd.
The only reason Betsy DeVos, the most incompetent Cabinet official in decades, hasn't been
pink-slipped is her mercenary brother and her husband's Amway fortune. She needs to be
encouraged out of office in 2020, if not before.
Never forget that the Biggest Patriot is the Biggest Idiot . A bit of a malleable fool and
thus a Useful Tool.
It takes more than physical bravery and allegiance to be a "Patriot".
It also takes a certain amount of (1)willful blindness , (2) moral hypocrisy
and (3) need to submit to a well-organised hierarchy . Do you think that this country
is lacking in such people?
Why people keep making excuses for Trump is beyond me.
Evaluate Trump not on hot air, but on action. Based on hot air Trump is completely
inconsistent. Based on actual behavior Trump is a very consistent Israel-First neocon
warmonger, and an extremely crude and corrupt one at that.
You nailed it. BTW, his cult makes excuses for him because it validates their original
vote and all the justifications they've had over time.
As I've always said, had you asked any American 10 years ago if they thought Trump would
be a good president, the answer would have been a unanimous "Are you ******* kidding? He'll
no!"
As a mostly full-fledged member of his "cult", let me explain. Trump has the entirety of
the Democrat party, half the Republican, and 2/3 of the judiciary against him. I'm amazed
he's done as well as he has. He's canned a large number of sleazebags in the FBI, and many
other functionaries in government suddenly decided they want to retire.
Just like an allstar
offensive player lined up against an allstar defensive player will win some and lose some, so
it is with Trump. You're full of ****.
The executive is only to act as Commander in Chief, raising armies and fighting wars, if
the Legislature declares war. As it stands, the executive is a military despot, maintaining a
standing armed force spread across the world and waging war without declaration or
justification.
It's a self insulated circle, where those volunteering swear an oath to uphold
the Constitution and defend it, but in reality they "just follow orders" regardless of how
blatantly unconstitutional the whole process and D.C. regime is.
Most immature comment of the week. Thats the theory in a beautiful ideal world. But the
reality is that very powerful entrenched interests are at play.
He's canned a large number of sleazebags in the FBI
The only deep state sleazebags fired that I can see were FBI execs involved in the coup
against Trump. Trump's motive was not justice, it was vengeance and self-defense. You call
that a house-cleaning?
Trump is Gambino family, Hillary (and Comey, et al) are Genoveses. All of them are sleaze,
criminal, deep state. Samo-samo. Just one pile of dirt fighting another pile of dirt.
Evaluate Trump not on hot air, but on action. Based on hot air Trump is completely
inconsistent. Based on actual behavior Trump is a very consistent Israel-First neocon
warmonger, and an extremely crude and corrupt one at that.
One of the early tells was that he's a philanderer, an adulterer, a cheapskate who doesn't
pay his contractors, but fosters this image of philanthropy, and who found out that you can't
*** Jewish bankers and get away with it. Unless you up the ante and tell them that you'll
further their political agenda if they put him in the WH.
It's not difficult to analyze Trump, if you keep your own emotional needs out of it, and
just look at the facts and behaviors. If you can't, then it says more about you than about
Trump. Maybe people with a specific type of defect in their moral compass identify
with the same defect in Trump's? It would explain a lot.
He pretends that he has a military background, but doesn't . Being shipped off to a Mil
academy doesn't count, even if it's beneficial to a wild child.
He pretended to pay his bills, but doesn't . The list of Gypped/Jewed/Screwed contractors
is a mile long, as is the list of bankers whom he forced into wild refinance, by using
Bankruptcy laws as a weapon.
He pretended to be a faithful husband, but wasn't . Two of his 3 marriages ended because
of adultery. He loves hot sluts who stroke his ego even better than his ****.
He pretended to look after the interests of Main St, but hasn't . Looking after Bibi
& The Likudniks doesn't count, nor should Wall St sharks.
He pretended to seek true Justice, but hasn't . Why is Hillary & The Gang still
free? Why did he disavow Assange?
He pretended to ramp down imperialism , but hasn't. He's ramped it UP.
He pretended to "Build the Wall", but hasn't . The Wall is the Fake Rabbit at the
Greyhound races: Useful to get the stupid dogs to perform on command.
He pretended to mend fences with Russia, but hasn't . "Russiagate" has become a very
useful ploy and cover to satisfy the MIC and Big Oil.
With all this overwhelming evidence, of people can't see him as he truly is, then the ONLY
explanation left is that they are mentally deficient, psychologically defective, and/or in on
(benefit from) his network of scams.
Why we did NOT have ww3 is beyond me in Syria.. Only once the GLOVES came off It happen
the last time I wrote this it was taken OFF immediately.. A peace deal was sign Derazor The
US Air Force came and Slaughter about 100 Syrian Army soldiers Apparentley There were 11
Russians soldiers Kill too.
This is a TRUE story The communication lines WERE OPEN The
Russians were SCREAMING on the HOT phone to STOP. They never responded just kept bombing.
This gets INTERESTING now.. Where are the ORDERS coming from to the US air force to BOMB It
was coming from Allepo. PUTIN order BOMB the HEAD QUARTERS of the COMMAND CENTRE giving these
orders. 3 BUNKER BUSTER BOMBS came a FLYING in.
Under ground head quarters was DESTROY. There
were roughly 30 military officers in that BUNKER EVAPORATED 5 mossad agents 5 US CIA agents
10 Saudi a few from Britan what ever. It was in ALL the NEWS PAPERS in Russia right across
the Middle east Al Jezerra on the NEWS.
Not a word mention in ISRAHELL and JUSA. So if there
was going to be WW3 that would of been the time. Thank God better heads prevail. Look like
PUTIN threw down the gauntlet.
I forgot after the US stop bombing Derazor ******* IMMEDIATELY ISIS attack *******
IMMEDIATELY No that wasn't plan. Just a coinincidence yeah that's it
Trump did not come across as a warmonger during the presidential campaign. When America
put Trump in office many of us were seeking a world where the leadership in Washington would
focus on bringing both jobs and money home rather than squandering it on foreign wars.
What has been happening in Washington is proof that the power of the swamp is very
resilient and may not be able to be drained. A strong case can be made that President Trump
has become a hostage of those occupying the very swamp he promised to drain. More on this in
the article below.
"Who knows?" -- when asked if, as president, he would start a war with China ,
New York Times interview, March 25, 2016
"When Iran, when they circle our beautiful destroyers with their little boats, and they
make gestures at our people that they shouldn't be allowed to make, they will be shot out of
the water." -- threatening to go to war with Iran over rude hand gestures, Pensacola,
Florida, Sept. 9, 2016
"This is the Trump theory on war. But I'm good at war. I've had a lot of wars of my own.
I'm really good at war. I love war in a certain way. But only when we win." Fort Dodge, Iowa,
Nov. 12, 2015
The bureaucrats run the government , not the elected politicians who come and go and spend
more time collecting money to be reelected than ruling. All the democrat bureaucrats are
against him what is he left with? The warmongers republicans of the Bush Reagan era.
Lyndon Johnson ordered rescue planes to abort their rescue mission. He explained that he
"did not want to embarrass an ally."
Evidence has surfaced that at the time of LBJ's stand-down order, Mathilde Krim, wife of a
Hollywood film executive and major Democratic donor, was an overnight guest in LBJ's White
House. According to an article at the time of Krim's death, it was an 'open secret' that LBJ
and Krim were lovers.
LBJ was not impeached for either of these "dishonorable" acts.
Kelly Hall, how does your list of Trump's peccadilloes compare to LBJ abandoning a US
Navy vessel and its crew when they were attacked, killed, life-boats strafed, etc.?
"... Devious and diabolical and brilliant, the war party, abetted by its foreign auxiliaries, has prevailed. Trump will now surely bequeath those wars to his successor -- that's the significance of the Iran war scare. ..."
"... "When his subordinates disagreed with him about the nuclear deal as Tillerson and McMaster did, he replaced them sooner or later, and he chose even more bellicose and aggressive people to take their place." ..."
"... He replaced them because they weren't as inclined to do the bidding of Israel and Saudi Arabia as they should have been. If you don't jump when Israel and Saudi Arabia say jump, you don't get the big campaign bucks. Transactional Trump understands that very well. Tillerson and McMaster didn't. Bolton and Pompeo not only understand it, they rely on it. ..."
"... "His determination to be even more pro-Saudi than the average president has guaranteed that U.S. foreign policy has had less and less to do with American interests and has instead become a vehicle for promoting the ambitions of regional clients at our expense." ..."
"... I did not notice the name Sheldon Adelson mentioned and if we are looking for reasons for Trump's antipathy toward Iran, we need to recognize the fact of the large donations made by this ultra-Zionist to Trump's campaign. ..."
Andrew Bacevich
comments
on
the recent escalation of tensions with Iran and what it tells us about Trump's presidency:
Again, the precise numbers are almost beside the point. In effect, Trump has drawn his own line in the sand, one that says:
"We ain't leaving, no sir." His decision -- was it really his? -- is in effect a capitulation. Trump has deferred to the
institutions, interests, and individuals intent on perpetuating the forever wars. Devious and diabolical and brilliant, the
war party, abetted by its foreign auxiliaries, has prevailed. Trump will now surely bequeath those wars to his
successor -- that's the significance of the Iran war scare.
I agree with all of this. I would just add that this was a predictable outcome for a president who chose to make antipathy to
Iran the centerpiece of his foreign policy. Trump could not extricate the U.S. from the region while simultaneously pursuing a
more aggressive anti-Iranian policy than his predecessor. The pursuit of that anti-Iranian policy has had a great deal to do
with the failure to bring U.S. involvement in multiple unnecessary wars to an end. This was not something foisted on him by
others, but has been his own doing from the beginning. When his subordinates disagreed with him about the nuclear deal as
Tillerson and McMaster did, he replaced them sooner or later, and he chose even more bellicose and aggressive people to take
their place. He has signed off on every aggressive anti-Iranian and pro-Saudi move he could. When faced with unprecedented
Congressional opposition over the war on Yemen, he chose to use his veto for only the second time in his presidency to reject
Congress' demand that he withdraw the U.S. from that war.
Ever since he embraced the Saudis and Emiratis early in his first year in office, he has been increasingly bound to them and has
been eager to cater to their preferences as much as he can. His determination to be even more pro-Saudi than the average
president has guaranteed that U.S. foreign policy has had less and less to do with American interests and has instead become a
vehicle for promoting the ambitions of regional clients at our expense. It isn't possible to disentangle the U.S. from ceaseless
war in the Middle East when the president abases himself to such an extent before despotic clients and takes their enemies as
ours. The Iran obsession has defined and wrecked Trump's foreign policy, and it has led him to make most of the worst foreign
policy decisions of his presidency.
Trump knows very little and had no foreign policy experience to speak of, and that made it extremely easy for hawkish advisers
to fill his head with their own terrible ideas. Those advisers are undoubtedly responsible for egging Trump on to take
destructive and aggressive actions, but ultimately it is Trump's responsibility for surrounding himself with people that
everyone knew would give him such awful advice. No one made Trump choose Pompeo and Bolton. It was his own vanity and his
preference for flattering yes-men that led him to choose such unworthy and dangerous people for important positions at the
highest levels of the government. Trump doesn't have the wit, knowledge, or conviction to take U.S. foreign policy in a
different, better direction, and to the extent that he occasionally has impulses that point in that direction they are just as
easily canceled out and overwhelmed by even stronger, contradictory impulses that drive him toward confrontation and escalation.
The war party prevailed because the president sided with them from the beginning, filled his administration with hard-liners,
and fought against every effort in Congress to rein in and end our government's illegal and unauthorized involvement in the war
on Yemen.
Trump is not a Conservative, a Republican, a neo-con, nor even a RINO; he is a grifter, and belligerence toward Iran
is where his greatest profit can be made.
"When his subordinates disagreed with him about the nuclear deal as Tillerson and McMaster did, he replaced them
sooner or later, and he chose even more bellicose and aggressive people to take their place."
He replaced them because they weren't as inclined to do the bidding of Israel and Saudi Arabia as they should have
been. If you don't jump when Israel and Saudi Arabia say jump, you don't get the big campaign bucks. Transactional
Trump understands that very well. Tillerson and McMaster didn't. Bolton and Pompeo not only understand it, they rely
on it.
@midway: I suspect without any hard evidence that Bolton and Pompeo got and keep their jobs not because of dollars
and sense, but something even more pathetic.
Namely, they flatter Trump and tell him he is "tough" in private, and do nothing to upstage Trump in public.
midway: The really big campaign bucks were made possible by the Citizens United Supreme Court decision back in 2010.
The conservatives on the court then probably never realized they were giving a handful of billionaires the power to
have more influence on federal politics than they had ever had before. If the US stumbles into a war with Iran in
the next couple of years, the little people wearing the MAGA caps will be worse off than ever.
"His determination to be even more pro-Saudi than the average president has guaranteed that U.S. foreign policy has
had less and less to do with American interests and has instead become a vehicle for promoting the ambitions of
regional clients at our expense."
Promoting the ambitions of regional clients at our expense it couldn't be put more clearly than that. An even
greater shame: this isn't part of some "great game"; we're led by a man who wants to be seen as tough by men he sees
as tough.
I did not notice the name Sheldon Adelson mentioned and if we are looking for reasons for Trump's antipathy toward
Iran, we need to recognize the fact of the large donations made by this ultra-Zionist to Trump's campaign.
"... For one, the Arabs know that Ivanka is calling the shots -- and that the president's fashion-focused daughter is behind the branding of the sexually androgynous, intellectually inchoate production that is Jared Kushner. If you think that's something Arabs respect, you don't know Shiite from Shinola . ..."
"... Then there's Bibi Netanyahu's ingenious, Israel First tactics. You have to be a special kind of dumb -- Jared and Ivanka dumb -- to imagine you can present Bibi with a plan to fix his part of the world. The Israeli prime minister will make the right noises and will have Jared for breakfast. ..."
"... As the Economist noted derisively -- its writers, too, are radicals in the mold of Jared and Ivanka -- Netanyahu is no radical. He is a reactionary nationalist. Temperamentally conservative," and "wary of change," as all true conservatives ought to be, Netanyahu "governs as if Israel needs no change." The Israeli prime minister has even passed nation-state legislation consecrating Israel as the home of the Jewish people. ..."
"... In case you're unfamiliar with Bibi's base -- supporters of Likud since the party's inception -- they are, "Voters from conservative religious and working-class backgrounds, Russian-speaking immigrants and Mizrahi Jews (who are descended from immigrants from the Arab world)." The political equivalent of Trump's deplorables. ..."
"... "We will forever live by the sword." Bibi's words in 2015. ..."
Let us begin with our debutant's Middle East peace plan, the thing his father-in-law calls
"the deal of the century."
The notion of Jared solving the Israeli-Palestinian vexation is laughable, perhaps the
dumbest thing ever. You just know this is a vain Ivanka move to brand the region and add it to
her CV. (Ivanka, to those who don't know, is
intent on riding to the presidency herself on her father's coattails.)
The Arabs slated to partake in the Kushner summit, Bahraini, Saudi and Emirati participants,
are likely laughing the hardest.
For one, the Arabs know that Ivanka is calling the shots -- and that the president's
fashion-focused daughter is behind the branding of the sexually androgynous, intellectually
inchoate production that is Jared Kushner. If you think that's something Arabs respect, you
don't know Shiite
from Shinola .
Wily Arabs are hip to White House dynamics. They know who's running the West Wing and who to
flatter. Some in the region have even given Donald Trump a
dubious honorific , Abu Ivanka al-Amriki. Being known as "father of Ivanka the
American" is, of course, no honor in the muscular, manly Middle East.
The timing of the Kushner peace plan is especially asinine. For all the upheaval in the
region, the Palestinian Problem has nevertheless dropped off the geopolitical radar as an
urgent matter to resolve.
For better or for worse, the two sides are locked in a deadly, tightly choreographed dance.
The Palestinians rise in frustration and fury; the Israelis respond with overwhelming force.
The world then offers-up perfunctory sympathy for the Palestinians. Everybody moves on.
It's just the way it is. The world has become desensitized to the plight of the
Palestinians.
Take the Economist -- a liberal, pro-Palestinian, most excellent weekly. Its editors
cogitated but briefly over the Israeli army's last use of excessive force against the
M.O.P.E (Most Oppressed People Ever), concluding nonchalantly that, "Every state has a right to
defend its borders." "It is time for Palestinians to take up genuine non-violence."
Understandably, the Palestinians will have no truck with the Trump administration.
Then there's Bibi Netanyahu's ingenious, Israel First tactics. You have to be a special
kind of dumb -- Jared and Ivanka dumb -- to imagine you can present Bibi with a plan to fix his
part of the world. The Israeli prime minister will make the right noises and will have Jared
for breakfast.
Netanyahu has been busy befriending "
once hostile neighbors and has gained the respect of world leaders ." Like himself, his new
friends (the murderous Saudi regime is among them) don't seem to care much that Israel's
"supposedly temporary occupation [of 4.5 million Palestinians] has become permanent
conquest."
Don't blame me for dishing Middle Eastern realpolitik. These are just the facts and the
deductions therefrom.
By the
Economist's telling , Mr. Netanyahu's strategy toward the Palestinians is a finely honed
"anti-solutionism." Netanyahu "has sought to convince Israelis that the conflict can be
managed, if the right people are put in charge of managing it, and thus need not be
solved."
From experience, Netanyahu knows that an "anti-solutionism" puts his army and him in
control, to better deliver on the security needs of the Israelis. This makes Bibi even more of
a mystery to the self-aggrandizing Kushners. After all, they are not acting in America's
self-interest. A provincial leader who does just that is anathema to the mindset dominant in
America.
Like him or not, the conservative, patriotic Bibi will not allow Jared Kushner to steer
Israel in a radical direction. Instead, Bibi will likely let The American rattle on about
radical change (which he, Jared, will not have to live through), and will quietly ignore him in
favor of maintaining the safer status quo.
You see, the Israeli prime minister is a grizzled old warrior -- and a true populist, the
kind that builds walls to protect his people and passes
laws to safeguard their ancient patrimony.
Netanyahu and his new Sunni partners will make polite noises and then shrug off this
Middle-East plan with a hearty laugh and some good arak , behind Jared's slender, sylphlike
back.
As the Economist noted derisively -- its writers, too, are radicals in the mold of Jared
and Ivanka -- Netanyahu is no radical. He is a reactionary nationalist. Temperamentally
conservative," and "wary of change," as all true conservatives ought to be, Netanyahu "governs
as if Israel needs no change." The Israeli prime minister has even passed nation-state
legislation consecrating Israel as the home of the Jewish people.
But by golly, Bibi will give the first-couple-in-waiting good hospitality -- leading Ivanka
and her poodle to "think" they succeeded in plastering their brand on the region. Then he'll
send Ivanka's emissary packing, to be celebrated by his clueless American fans.
And the region will return to its old ways.
Bibi, moreover, reads his voters well. The appetite for the charade that are the
Israeli-Palestinians peace talks has diminished. "The percentage of Israelis favoring talks
with the Palestinians has dropped from over 70 percent to closer to 50 percent over the past
decade. Among Mr. Netanyahu's supporters it is 30 percent."
In case you're unfamiliar with Bibi's base -- supporters of Likud since the party's
inception -- they are, "Voters from conservative religious and working-class backgrounds,
Russian-speaking immigrants and Mizrahi Jews (who are descended from immigrants from the Arab
world)." The political equivalent of Trump's deplorables.
To sum, "should it ever to arrive," Mr. and Mrs. Kushner's peace plan "will be dead on
arrival."
Americans like Jared and Ivanka don't know the past and show little respect for it.
Netanyahu, however, understands history and what it portends for the future. "Because the
Palestinian issue cannot be solved," Bibi's statecraft entails
preparing his people for a reality they understand all too well:
"We will forever live by the sword." Bibi's words in 2015.
Let us wrap-up on a more mirthful note. Here's some stuff our oracular Mr. Jared has
said
about rainbows and unicorns in the Middle East: "Progress could 'look like a lot of different
things." "Success 'can look like an agreement, it can look like a discussion, it could lead to
closer cooperation, maybe resolve a couple of issues."
Solid assessment. Bibi’s ruthlessness in pursuit of his people’s interests is
something I wish my people’s leaders would emulate. Instead, they buy into the Israeli
gaslighting and flattery and beclown themselves with paens to
“Judeo-Christianity,” “America’s greatest ally,” and “the
ME’s only democracy.”
It’s debatable whether Bibi’s “forever war” is in fact in the best
interests of Israeli Jews, but no one can credibly claim he’s a tool of foreign
powers.
The Empire, on the other hand, is most definitely in thrall to a people whose American
diaspora makes up less than 3% of its population.
I take issue with Mercer’s characterization of The Economist as
“excellent.” It may have been at one time. I dropped my subscription decades ago
when I realized it was a globalist propaganda rag.
I wish Trump would just keep his moron SIL on Israel-Palestinian affairs only. Who cares
if he F’s it all up. It’d be no different from where it was 10, 20, 50 years ago.
But everything Jared touches turns to shite, including his POS prison reform plan and
atrocious immigration bill. Trump’s turned into a POS because he put his POS SIL in
charge of everything, incl. his signature campaign issue, immigration.
Javanka is the worst thing to happen to America. Without these two treasonous rats Trump
might have saved the country, now he’s just another swamp creature.
Netanyahu (and most Israelis) don’t want the problem be resoved, neither does
Mahmoud Abbas (and most Palestinians). Abbas has already explicitly stated that he will not
accept the plan whatever it is. Under such circumstances the only result of Jared’s and
Ivanka’s mission might be that Ivanka will get some lucrative contracts for selling her
designer shoes in the Middle East, like she did in China. God help us if ever this naive and
ignorant woman will run for president!
Shorter Ilana……’the dogs bark, the caravan moves on.’
Meanwhile Netanyahu is in deep doodoo. After winning the election he failed to form a
majority party. So there will be a do over election. This means the PIECE Plan is dead for
the time being.
Here’s the Kushner, Greenblatt, Friedman peace plan. Its not new. Its a transfer
plan.
The Jerusalem Summit
Assessment
1. The conventional-wisdom paradigm for the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
has failed woefully, bringing nothing but misery and despair to both sides – but
particularly to the Palestinians as individual human beings.
[Hide MORE]
2. This conventional paradigm has attempted to solve the conflict by means of a Political
Approach involving the establishment of a self governing Palestinian entity on territories in
Judea Samaria and Gaza which have been under Israeli control since 1967 i.e. on the basis of
a “Land for Peace” approach.
3. Dispassionate assessment of the history of the conflict and its current development
will strongly suggest that persisting with attempts to attain a political solution on the
basis the conventional paradigm are at best futile – and at worse harmful. Accordingly,
alternative modes of resolution must be pursued.
B. Analysis
1. Analysis of Palestinian deeds and declarations over the years make it difficult to
avoid the conclusion that they are in effect both unwilling and incapable of achieving and
maintaining statehood.
(a) Palestinian Unwillingness: This is reflected in the fact that the Palestinians have
rejected every single viable proposal which would have afforded them a state – from the
1947 partition plan to the 2000 Barak proposals.
(b) Palestinian Incapability: The Palestinian national movement has enjoyed conditions far
more favorable than almost any other national independence movement since WW-II –
widespread international endorsement of their cause, unmitigated support of a superpower in
the decades of the Cold War, highly sympathetic coverage by the major media organizations,
and over a decade of Israeli administrations who have acknowledged (and at times even
identified with) the Palestinians declared national aspiration. In spite of this, the
achievements of Palestinian national movement have been more miserable than almost any other
national independence movement – bringing nothing but privation and penury to its
people.
2. It is thus far easier to understand Palestinian conduct if one assumes that it is driven
less by lack of Palestinian self determination and more by the very the existence of Jewish
self determination; less by the aspiration to establish a Palestinian state and more by the
aspiration to dismantle a Jewish state.
3. The latter, and seemingly more plausible, explanation of Palestinian behavior –
i.e. rejection of Jewish self determination and the dismantling of the Jewish nation state
– reflects an agenda totally unacceptable by any international standards and thus must
be branded as devoid of any legitimacy.
4. Accordingly if the accepted version of the Palestinian narrative – i.e. a desire
for Palestinian self determination and the aspiration for Palestinian statehood –
cannot be reconciled with the history of Palestinian behavior, this narrative also must be
branded as devoid of any legitimacy.
5. This issue of legitimacy of narrative is crucial. Indeed the very fuel of the Political
Paradigm involving the establishment of a Palestinian state is the perception – or
rather the misperception – of the presently prevailing Palestinian narrative as
legitimate.
C. Conclusion
1. The establishment of a Palestinian State must removed from the international
agenda.
2. However, removing the issue of a Palestinian state from the international agenda will
not eliminate the humanitarian predicament of Palestinians residing in Israeli-administered
areas.
3. This is clearly an issue that must be addressed and resolved. But it must be addressed
not in political terms but in humanitarian ones.
4. Thus, to successfully resolve the Palestinian problem, the Political Paradigm must be
replaced by a Humanitarian Paradigm. This, however can only be done if the current
Palestinian narrative, which fuels the Political Paradigm, is de-legitimized.
5. Thus, the de-legitimization of the Palestinian narrative becomes a vital prerequisite to
any comprehensive resolution of the Palestinian issue.
D. Proposal
1. A comprehensive Humanitarian Approach to the Palestinian issue would entail three major
elements:
(a) The dissolution of UNRWA – which will end the discriminatory treatment of the
Palestinians with regard to their status as refugees;
(b) The termination of ethnic discrimination against Palestinians , living in the Arab
world – which will end the discriminatory treatment of the Palestinians with regard to
their status as residents;
(c) Generous relocation grants to Palestinians living in Israeli administered territories
on an individual basis and not via any official Palestinian organization.
2. UNRWA is an organization that perpetuates the Palestinian refugee problem. It is an
anomalous organization which exists solely to deal with Palestinian refugees, while all the
other refugees on the face of the globe are dealt with by the UN High Commission for Refugees
(UNHCR).
3. The organizations not only deal differently with the refugees under their auspices,
they each have different definitions for classifying an individual as a
“refugee”.
4. This difference in definition has far-ranging consequences. For in contrast to the
UNHCR definition, which results in a decline in the number of refugees over time, the UNRWA
definition leads to an inflation of the number.
5. In fact, if the UNHCR’s otherwise universal definition were applied to the
Palestinian case, the number of refugees would decline from 4-5 million to 200-300,000 i.e.
by over 90%!!
6. It thus appears that UNWRA is perpetuating the very problem it was designed to
eliminate.
7. Accordingly, the dissolution of UNRWA is an essential prerequisite for any comprehensive,
durable settlement of the Palestinian issue.
8. With the dissolution of UNWRA, the remaining, and drastically reduced, number of
Palestinian refugees, should be placed under the auspices of UNHCR – in accordance with
the accepted practice for all other refugee groups on the face of the globe.
9. Those Palestinians no longer classed as refugees under the new arrangements, must be
offered all the privileges afforded all other peoples resident in their current countries of
domicile in the Arab world — including the right to acquire citizenship.
10. In order to do this, a vigorous diplomatic and media campaign must be mounted to
induce Arab governments to end their harsh discriminatory behavior towards the millions of
Palestinians domiciled in their countries and absorb them into their societies as fully
fledged citizens. After all, even the Palestinians assert (in the opening paragraph of their
National Covenant) that they are “part of the Arab Nation”.
11. As for the Palestinians resident in Israeli administered territory, there is only one
reasonable and feasible alternative that will facilitate:
(a) extricating them from their dire humanitarian plight;
(b) free them from the yoke of generations of misrule by their leadership;
(c) ensure the survival of Israel as the nation-state of the Jews.
12. This is a generous relocation and resettlement package to allow them to build a new
life for themselves and their families in countries preferably, but not necessarily
exclusively, with similar religious and socio-cultural conditions.
13. In order to minimize the ability of organized Palestinian interest groups to impede
the success of such an effort, the offer of financial inducement to emigrate must be
“atomized” – i.e. made to individual Palestinian breadwinners on a one-to
one personal level and not on a communal level via some formal Palestinian entity.
14. A survey conducted among the Palestinians in Nov. 2004 indicates that only about 15% of
the Palestinian population resident in Israeli administered areas would reject such an offer
outright. By contrast, over 70% would accept some form of material compensation as an
inducement to emigrate permanently from the areas currently under Israeli administration (see
http://www.jerusalemsummit.org/eng/news.php?news=102
)
15. The economic cost of such a policy of generously financed humanitarian relocation and
resettlement would be eminently affordable and would compare favorably with almost all other
settlement proposals on the table today. Indeed, its total cost would be around 50% of the
present total US outlay on the War in Iraq!!
16. Indeed, given Israel’s present level of GDP, it is an initiative that it could
well undertake on its own over the next decade to a decade and a half. It should be realized
that this is the period that has elapsed since the initiation of the Oslo process –
which has brought nothing but failure and tragedy at the cost of billions of dollars and
thousands of lives.
17. Of course, if the US, the EU and other developed nations were to contribute to this
effort, it could be implemented in a far shorter space of time and with almost no burden on
the world economy.
18. Quite the opposite, the Palestinians arriving in their new countries of domicile will
not be impoverished refugees but reasonably affluent émigrés. The funds that
they would be bringing with them would provide a considerable boost for the economies of
these nations – most of which would be developing countries with a pressing need for
such a substantial influx of funds.
E. Summary
The proposed initiative constitutes a “win-win” proposal which will:
Alleviate, and even eliminate, the humanitarian plight of individual Palestinians
Ensure the continued security and survival of Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish
people
Provide a Significant Boost to the Economies of the Developing World
Transform poverty stricken refugees into affluent émigrés
How can one write meaningfully about the Kushners without mentioning that they are
Chabadniks? To understand the significance, one must understand Jared’s family
background and the virulent malevolence of supremacist Chabad. http://judaism.is/kushner.html
The Palestinians rise in frustration and fury; the Israelis respond with overwhelming
force. The world then offers-up perfunctory sympathy for the Palestinians. Everybody moves
on
——————————————————————————————————-
Interesting that after getting their butts kicked every time, when the smoke clears,
there’s another Pal. kid is still throwing rocks at israeli soldiers. I don’t
know how it will happen but somehow the Pals are going to win this thing.
So much wrong with this, where to start. The Economist is not excellent, The Economist
only supports Israel to have the right to protect its borders, Kusher is a jewish supremacist
that has given absolute everything to Israel, the Arabs taking part in these ethnic cleansing
talks are all corrupt puppets and how no real support in their countries.
This is all makes sense if one knows that this woman is an anti white jew. Its time to
deport this anti white crusader back to South Africa, she was after all very eager to destroy
the country the whites built, why should she not suffer the consequences of her actions and
beliefs?
What I find curious about Israel is that they are backed by the world’s most
powerful military force, they get infinite money, almost any high-tech military hardware they
want, an international propaganda aparatus that exonerates them regardless of what they do,
and an entire population that is militarized, and yet with all these advantages going on 70
years, these jews CANNOT even colonize a tiny desert strip of the Levant. Unbelievable.
Really, how incompetent are jews? Forget Eretz Israel. That requires conquering people much
more dangerous and resilient than poor Palestinian peasants. It’s like jews are
incapable of building. Destruction is all they know.
Israel will fail.
Like their Soviet Union failed.
Everything a jew touches fails.
Javanka is the worst thing to happen to America. Without these two treasonous rats Trump
might have saved the country, now he’s just another swamp creature.
Trump is a denizen of the swamp….a Deep State sycophant. Javanka is allowed to be
‘treasonous’ by her daddy. You have the cart before the horse.
Can’t have the possibility that a Palestinian genocide bump the Holocaust from the
headlines. As it is now every Jewish holiday, they can celebrate historic bloodshed with
Palestinian bloodshed. Oh and not to forget, all those rock tossing kids have organs to be
harvested for Israel’s growing transplant industry.
Brilliant article, Ilana. I love the term Abu Ivanka al Amriki. If that isn’t
derisive, I don’t know what is. Trump has already turned off a part of his base in
regard that Jared and Ivanka still having too much to say in the administration. The sooner
he gets rid of them (don’t hold your breath), the better off the nation will be. The
only pressure I can see Trump bending to in regard to Bimbo & Boy Bimbo is that of the
military – one of the few institutions that he respects. Since Obama cleared the
military of a lot of its good men, leaving it with career-minded slimeballs, one wonders who
in the military would have to cojonees to put that kind of pressure on Trump? If Ivanka
thinks having her eye on the presidency is realistic, she better think twice. I’d
ALMOST contemplate voting for Ocasio-Cortez for a micro-second before I’d go that
route. Unfortunately, the Palestinians are disposable. They have nothing to offer anyone in
realpolitik. Muslims and Arabs will make all kinds of noise, but not seriously risk a thread
of their wives’ burkhas. Only human compassion motivates activism on behalf of the
Palestinians. Yes, Bibi will have Jared & Ivanka’s heads spinning and dazed by the
time their plane lands back in the US. Ah well, such is realpolitik.
Jews had made a mess of Europe until WWII because they were always treated as the
outsiders, not allowed to own land, etc., so they stuck together as a group for survival and
to thrive. But things are different now, esp. in the US, they are outsiders no more. Why do
Jews continue to stick together as a tribe, still refusing to assimilate, wanting the US to
go to more wars on behalf of Israel, and encouraging open borders and multiculturalism so
that they are not the only out group against a white majority. Why won’t they
assimilate?
I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s all because of Israel. Israel needs for
the diaspora to stay loyal to the tribe to ensure it’s survival. That’s why they
are going out of their way to build the holocaust museum, because Judaism is losing its
appeal as more Jews become secular, they need to keep them loyal to the tribe on a new
religion: Holocaustianity.
As long as there is an Israel, Jews will never assimilate, and the world will always be in
chaos. For the world to achieve peace, Israel Must DIE.
Girly man a.k.a. Lucifer in the flesh’s Mideast Peace Plan is dead on arrival
because China and Russia ain’t drinking his poisonous KoolAid, unlike his dumb FIL who
chugs it by the bucket:
"... There are numerous NGOs that act on behalf of Israel in the U.S., examples being CUFI, JINSA, AIPAC and the Chabad Lubbivitcher sect. ..."
"... For, if the real intention had been to "get" Trump post election -- and not make him a sympathetic character to the average American -- an investigation would have focused on the "Russian" mafia and their banks, Israeli intel, Trump's bankruptcies (and who got him out of them) and the Chabad Lubbavitcher sect. Does anyone really believe that a U.S. legislature that previously violated protocol and invited Bibi Netanyahu to the U.S. on its own -- and then gave him more than 15 standing ovations -- would impeach the man who gave Jerusalem and the Golan Heights to Israel? This is sheer nonsense -- theater intended to sway the gullible public. ..."
"... In fact, Adelson even funds a major newspaper in Israel -- Israel Today -- that has helped keep Netanyahu in power. (The 85-year-old and his wife Miriam gave $82-million+ to Republicans and candidate Trump in 2016.) But, alas, this alone is not enough to account for the election upset (if that was what it was.) ..."
"... In order for Trump to win, it would be necessary to swing a small percentage of disaffected white Americans from both parties. That small percentage (8%-10%) is now referred to as the "Alt Right." ..."
"... It should be remembered that, during the 2016 campaign, Hillary had discussed creating a private non-monitored hotline to Netanyahu when she was elected [12] ) ..."
"... So, the unhinged and unprecedented frothing-at-the-mouth rage towards Trump displayed by the worst of the Neocons (Bill Kristol, Jennifer Rubin, Max Boot, etc.) is all part of the ruse? ..."
"... entire deep state apparatus, with international assistance swung into action with the phony Mueller investigation was a sure sign that Trump's platform was never going to be allowed. ..."
"... "When a public is stressed and confused, a big lie told repeatedly and unchallenged can become accepted truth." ~George Orwell ..."
"... As for Flynn: he knew about many of the misdeeds of the previous administration. They took advantage of a neophyte administration fending off Sally Yates Russian Collusion initiative via a corrupt FBI Director to pressure them to let Flynn go – a terrible newbie mistake telegraphing weakness to all his enemies. ..."
"... So that being said, what's his point. That Trump is exceptionally corrupt despite no collusion with Russia because he's controlled by Izzies? ..."
The Mueller Report is done, and from the digest made public, its conclusion of no collusion to "fix" the last election by the
Russian or "other" foreign governments does not surprise me. I agree with this conclusion. These foreign governments would, presumably,
include Israel. However, in the case of Israel, I believe this may be a question of semantics.There is, I believe, considerable
evidence that non-governmental forces acting on behalf of Israel succeeded in placing an individual in charge of the U.S. who is
currently redirecting the power and financial resources of the nation to almost entirely serve the interests of a foreign power.
(And that entity is not Russia!)
There are numerous NGOs that act on behalf of Israel in the U.S., examples being CUFI, JINSA, AIPAC and the Chabad Lubbivitcher
sect. There are many super-wealthy patrons of Israel and the Netanyahu government, such as Sheldon Adelson, that were involved
in Trump's election. Finally there are shadowy private Israeli contractors, such as those referred to by Cambridge Analytica's Alexander
Nix, and the so-called "Russian" mafia, which is reputedly controlled by individuals loyal to Israel. Trump apparently has had business
proximity in the past to such entities and their bank.
[1]
First indication along these lines can be deduced from special prosecutor Robert Mueller's indictment of General Michael Flynn
[2]
. Flynn admits lying to FBI agents about his conversations with Sergey Kislyak, then-Russian Ambassador to the United States,
in December 2016, when Trump was president-elect. Apparently acting on orders from Jared Kushner, Trump's senior advisor and son-in-law,
Flynn contacted Kislyak to ask if Russia would delay or veto a UN Security Council vote criticizing Israeli settlements. It's certainly
a stretch to see how aiding and abetting actions illegal under international law would benefit the U.S. or Trump's MAGA agenda.
Empirical evidence of the preceding and a good example of the type of Israelocentric policy making that came in with the election
of Mr. Trump can be found in the book Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House .
[2a] There author Michael
Wolff relates an alleged conversation between former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon and Roger Ailes, the former CEO of
Fox News. Bannon reportedly told Ailes that Trump, Bibi Netanyahu and Trump-Netanyahu backer Sheldon Adelson are in agreement with
moving the US embassy to Jerusalem. The national interests of the U.S. and possible international ramifications of this act apparently
were not considered.
Trump's reaction to Bannon's alleged statement: "When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind."
"Donald Trump is the Zionist water boy in the Oval Office. Trump's collusion was never with the Russian government; it was always
with the Bolshevik/Ashkenazi/Zionist mafia (the new Deep State) that has now ousted the old Clinton-Bush mafia (the old Deep State)
from power. And that coup was stunningly successful and swift. Accordingly, Donald Trump has faithfully filled his administration
with quintessential Zionist insiders -- including Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, John Bolton, Nikki Haley, Elliot Abrams, Gary Cohn, Steve
Mnuchin, Wilbur Ross, David Friedman, Jared Kushner, et al.," comments America's most courageous evangelist, Chuck Baldwin, "God
help us." [3]
MAGA -- Make America Great Again -- was widely believed to be a spontaneous outpouring of authentic nationalistic sentiment embodied
by President Donald Trump. Trump's election was initially welcomed by some countries as a government acting in the actual self-interest
of the U.S. because it would be far more predictable than one acting for hidden interests. And Trump's election, promising to reduce
the footprint of the U.S. abroad, offered the hope of rolling back the push toward a world war.
Alas, much as was the case with the so-called "Arab Spring", these hopes did not materialize and U.S. interventions overseas
have grown. Often, these are somehow related to the interests of the Israeli state and its Likud government:
Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Iran nuclear deal and placed new sanctions on Iran, in accordance with the wishes of Netanyahu
and Sheldon Adelson. On April 22 nd , for instance, oil prices jumped 3% as the Trump administration promised to remove
sanction waivers on Iran oil
[4] -- which had allowed
countries such as India to continue buying Iranian oil -- prompting threats from Iran to close the Straits of Hormuz for this violation
of the nuclear disarmament treaty. American consumers could pay soaring prices on all their purchases for this act which demonstrably
is connected to pre-election planning by backers of Israel with the Trump campaign. (Apparently fearing that this would cause a
major rift with India, further alienate Turkey, and scuttle hopes of a trade agreement with China, Trump quietly reversed course
to give these countries another year to comply, further demonstrating the Israelocentric monomania of the Neocon-Zionists vs. the
actual interests of the U.S.) The ongoing negotiations with North Korea appear centered on its "giving up" Iranian nuclear and missile
secrets -- as well as destroying its own offensive missile capabilities -- in return for normalization. Trump recently vetoed a
bill to pull U.S. troops out of Yemen and their support of the Saudi aggression (apparently as part of a deal to have Saudi Arabia
guarantee Arab support for Trump and Jared Kushner's new Mid-East "peace plan".) Trump's promises of reducing involvement in Syria
appear stalled and the U.S. continues the de facto support of he partition of Syria (A future Kurdistan may well become a
part of Eretz Israel in the future -- the Barzani brothers were trained by Israel and articles have appeared linking the Kurds to
the genetics of the Israeli population) as well as the protection of the evacuation of key ISIS operatives. In South America, war
is on the horizon as Neocons move to topple Venezuela -- going so far as to name an alternative president. Venezuela's heavy crude
is key to diesel production and China has substantial claims on it (which might not be honored if they don't play ball with Trump.)
And the restructuring of South America may also play a role in the creation of a "New Israel" in Patagonia -- a potential evacuation
zone of Jews from Israel, the U.S., Canada and elsewhere in the event of war or national chaos -- where Israeli operatives are reported
to be extremely active.
[4a] Meanwhile, President Trump has destroyed the last vestiges of international law relating to conquest of territory by aggressive
warfare, as in the case of the 1967 Mideast War. He has ceded control of territory so seized (recognizing Israeli conquest of East
Jerusalem and Syria's Golan Heights) despite U.S. membership in the U.N., which was created to prevent such events in the future
so as to make war less attractive. Was this done for any specific U.S. benefit? I think not. But it may have something to do with
President Trump's "fabulous" new Mideast peace plan that is similar to Bill Clinton's fabulous new peace plan. Possibly to pressure
Europe to support the redrawing of the Mid East, the Trump administration is expected to launch a tariff war with the EU starting
this May. (This will apparently follow an expected superficial agreement with China during the same period.) And money for Israel
has not been stinted either. Military aid for Israel apparently avoided the budget ax in Trump's 2020 fiscal plan sent to Congress.
It includes the full $3.3-billion in assistance promised under a 10-year memorandum of understanding, despite spending cuts in other
sectors affecting American interests throughout the proposal.
[5]
While the interests of the Israeli ally have been thoroughly protected, in the economic sphere, Trump's MAGA has been something
of a train wreck for Trump's populist supporters on main street. Their indebtedness has soared
[6]
while the interest on savings (for the 40-something percent of those who have any) dropped to near zero. They got tax breaks
that were temporary (as opposed to the massive permanent tax cuts for corporations who are often heavily indebted to large banks)
and then, many learned they wouldn't be getting their usual annual tax refunds due to quirks in the tax law -- something that has
hit the retail economy hard. Wall St. and the big banks have certainly prospered. U.S. Corporations were allowed to repatriate huge
sums of money with no strings attached. And what did they do with this money? Did they invest in infrastructure, job training of
Americans and building/retooling of factories as President Trump should have insisted? No, they used it for stock buybacks and acquisitions
-- mostly paper shuffling -- that has kept the stock market propped up.
Trump's tariff war, meanwhile, has imposed new costs on average Americans -- not on the Chinese -- with industrial production
dropping or remaining flat and U.S. trade deficits soaring. The ham-handed imposition of tariffs without corresponding domestic
industrial capacity may also have destroyed some of America's backbone and staunch Trump supporters -- farmers on small- and mid-sized
farms. Large amounts of corn and soybeans were placed in silos awaiting the end of Trump's "trade war". These have mostly been destroyed
by record flooding and are NOT covered by crop insurance. Many of these farmers will go bankrupt and big agribusiness may ultimately
take over their land. (And the "farm bailouts" announced by Trump will mainly go to large farms and big agribusiness -- including
farms owned by Chinese interests!)
In a nutshell, Trump "jazzed" a brief economic recovery in the U.S. with massive tax cuts for big business and temporary cuts
for voters (more bark than bite variety) while increasing the national debt, which these same overtaxed voters will ultimately be
on the hook for. At the same time Trump "jawboned" the Federal Reserve to ease monetary policy so interest rates wouldn't rise as
a result of the vast increase in national indebtedness. He has laid the groundwork for eventual hyperinflation (or hyper-stagflation)
that may well ruin more of his middle class voters after the 2020 election.
"Manufacturing production ( in March -- Ed. ) was flat after dropping in January and February. In the first three months
of the year, factory output fell at an annual rate of 1.1%. Production of cars, truck and auto parts dropped 2.5% in March and 4.5%
over the past year." [7]
The Cass Freight Index, a measure of truck shipments indicative of overall economic activity is down for the fourth consecutive
month year-over-year. [8]
Sales of Class 8 trucks (18-wheelers) hit the ditch in January, with orders down 58 percent from a year ago hitting a level
not seen since October 2016, near the end of the transportation recession, "when Class-8 truck orders had plunged to the lowest
levels since 2009, and truck and engine manufacturers responded with layoffs," writes Wolf Richter.
[9]
American businesses expanded in April at the slowest pace in 31 months, according to IHS Markit's survey of business executives.
IHS Markit's flash PMI for services slipped to 52.9 from 55.3, while the manufacturing index was flat at 52.4. Any number over 50
signifies expansion. "The U.S. economy started the second quarter with its weakest expansion since mid-2016 as businesses reported
a marked slowing in output, new orders and hiring," said Chris Williamson, chief business economist at IHS Markit "
[10]
"Manufacturing production has pivoted to the downside in the first quarter of the year, showing the revival in factories and
output is sputtering for the first time since the Trump economics team took office," said Chris Rupkey, chief economist at MUFG
in New York. "The trade war and America First policies have not brought factories back home yet."
[11]
What about immigration? While President Trump "talks the talk" he has failed to close the border as previous presidents have
done and seems more interested in expanding the H1B program for large corporate interests instead of retraining Americans to fill
at least some of the gap of necessary skills . He allows American soldiers to be captured and disarmed by the Mexican military
inside U.S. borders (as happened recently without a proportionate response) and the rate of "catch and release" has soared
due to lack of internment facilities. America is filled with unemployed (U6 -- the real unemployment rate -- is 3 times higher than
the publicized rate and many of the real jobs are part time and multiple jobs can be held by a single person), homeless and homeless
camps, yet we need hordes of unskilled labor pouring into the country? Trump proposes to dump refugees in sanctuary cities, which
sounds nice until one realizes that these cities will simply give the refugees tickets to go elsewhere in America. (This already
happens in some places in the U.S. where indigents are given tickets to go elsewhere.)
The empirical evidence is therefore clear. Trump's announced program vs. what he has actually delivered to nationalist voters
who supported him is what a Hollywood Western town is to a real Western town: it is only a facade. (It should be remembered that
Steve Bannon, one of the chief architects of the Trump victory, went from being a Goldman Sachs investment banker to being a Hollywood
movie director!) The only plausible explanation? That the Neocon-Zionist power structure co-opted the authentic nationalist sentiments
of Americans for their own ends and disguised this control with "Pepe": a neo-Nazi green frog "front man" wearing a red "MAGA" ball
cap. It stands to reason that such potent and capable forces are the real source of President Trump's power.
Amazingly, Trump's approval rating remains surprisingly high despite the outcome. Part of this may be the unwillingness of average
people to believe their vote counted for nothing and they are heading for the same outcome as if Hillary Clinton had been elected.
Then there is something called the Galileo gambit (also called the "Galileo fallacy.") This informal logical fallacy is a way to
convince listeners (or viewers) that a questionable leader (or his policies) are good despite evidence to the contrary. I believe
this was accomplished using the Russian meddling meme and having the establishment media -- widely distrusted by Trump supporters
-- pile on Trump. For, if the real intention had been to "get" Trump post election -- and not make him a sympathetic character
to the average American -- an investigation would have focused on the "Russian" mafia and their banks, Israeli intel, Trump's bankruptcies
(and who got him out of them) and the Chabad Lubbavitcher sect. Does anyone really believe that a U.S. legislature that previously
violated protocol and invited Bibi Netanyahu to the U.S. on its own -- and then gave him more than 15 standing ovations -- would
impeach the man who gave Jerusalem and the Golan Heights to Israel? This is sheer nonsense -- theater intended to sway the gullible
public.
To make a case for the election of Trump being a soft takeover of the U.S., it's necessary to examine how this might have been
accomplished. It is child's play to hack Diebold voting machines for which no paper trails exist. But due to the nature of such
rigging it would likely be impossible to prove, say, a hypothesis that Hillary had some machines in key states rigged and "someone's"
black ops unrigged them. We also know one of Trump's major backers, the Zionist Sheldon Adelson, is also the main backer of Netanyahu
in Israel. In fact, Adelson even funds a major newspaper in Israel -- Israel Today -- that has helped keep Netanyahu in power.
(The 85-year-old and his wife Miriam gave $82-million+ to Republicans and candidate Trump in 2016.) But, alas, this alone is not
enough to account for the election upset (if that was what it was.)
America is pretty well divided by party and elections are typically very close. There is a block of Israeli-indoctrinated Pentecostal
and "Christian Zionist" voters that could deliver 20% of votes. But many of these are already on the Republican rolls. In order
for Trump to win, it would be necessary to swing a small percentage of disaffected white Americans from both parties. That small
percentage (8%-10%) is now referred to as the "Alt Right."
And it is the Alt Right -- comprised of voters who might otherwise not have voted in the election -- that swung the election
coupled with the divisive campaign of Hillary Clinton, which many middle class Americans found odious. (It must be remembered how
quickly Trump backed off his "jail Hillary" meme at the conclusion of the election. Was this also play acting? It should be
remembered that, during the 2016 campaign, Hillary had discussed creating a private non-monitored hotline to Netanyahu when she
was elected [12] )
So, we may start with the genesis of this Alt Right movement. Which was in Israel. Breitbart News, the flagship of the Alt Right
movement and a mouthpiece for the Trump campaign (and the eventual nesting place of Steve Bannon) was actually started by a Jewish
lawyer and businessman, Larry Solov.
[13]
In a 2015 post announcing the opening of Breitbart's Jerusalem bureau, Solov wrote that Breitbart News itself was conceived of
in Israel, when Solov traveled to the Israeli state with Andrew Breitbart, the now-deceased founder of Breitbart and met with him
and Bibi Netanyahu in planning sessions. (There are pictures of this event.)
"One thing we specifically discussed that night was our desire to start a site that would be unapologetically pro-freedom and
pro-Israel. We were sick of the anti-Israel bias of the mainstream media and J-Street," he wrote.
[14]
Breitbart's infatuation with Israel is eerily reminiscent of a similar situation in the 1930s. National Socialist propagandist
Josef Goebbels ran a publication called the Algerminer in the 1930s prior to the Second World War. Goebbels was quite sympathetic
to Zionist interests, sponsored a fact-finding trip to Palestine and had a commemorative coin issued in honor of this collaboration
depicting a swastika on one side and a Jewish hexagram ("Mogen David") on the obverse.
[15]
Subsequently, the so-called Transfer Agreement saw German Jews brought to Palestine on German ships.
[16]
Andrew Breitbart subsequently died -- but not before Steve Bannon had him narrate one of his turgid Hollywood conservative documentaries
and got on his and Larry Solov's "good side." Solov then tapped Bannon as Breitbart's successor and brought him on to run the website
-- possibly also due to his links with the wealthy Mercer family. Bannon went on to transform Breitbart into the spearhead of Trump's
campaign to disaffected Americans vis a vis the Alt-Right. (Although Bannon was reputed in a divorce proceeding to have once made
a comment about "whiny Jews," he was given a kosheresque seal of approval by no less than the Israeli ambassador to the U.S.
[17]
)
Bannon's masterful use of Breitbart's ideas and website pale in comparison with the impact of his creation of Cambridge Analytica
in 2013 (with billionaire fund manager Robert Mercer)
[18]
as a spinoff from Strategic Communications Laboratories (SCL.)
[19] SCL is a UK firm
whose niche "specialties" were once described as psychological warfare , public diplomacy and influence operations.
Cambridge's first big success with "behavorial microtargeting" was swinging the Brexit vote in the U.K., a cause also championed
by the Zionist politician Boris Johnson
[20] (The Israeli press,
not surprisingly, now raises the possibility of Israel becoming Britain's "window on the world" in the event of a hard Brexit! No
doubt, Israel may ultimately benefit from the trade wars launched by President Trump as well. It has free trade arrangements with
many nations.) Thanks to what's alleged to have been a massive data breach of some 50-million Facebook users, Cambridge was apparently
able to corral the (private) data on the social media accounts of millions of American voters in swing states
[21]
, allowing development of Trump's talking points and election materials directed at individual voters' "hot buttons" by a sophisticated
AI program allegedly developed by company whistleblower Christopher Wylie with help getting the data from a company, Global Science
Research (GSR), controlled by researcher Aleksandr Kogan of Cambridge University.
[22] Kogan reportedly
gave thousands of volunteers a personality test app (thisisyourdigitallife) and then used the Facebook platform (allegedly in violation
of the terms of use) to find their friends and their friends' friends and so on much like Carnivore to create a relational database
that grew into many tens of millions. In effect, this created the potential for psychological warfare to be used by Cambridge Analytica
on the American voting public in order to "game" the election.
For its part, Cambridge claimed that it believed GSR had abided by the UK Data Protection Act and, as soon as it found out this
was not the case, terminated the data and deleted the information. And that, after being paid $6.2-million by the Trump campaign,
none of the consent-less data was used to elect Trump. (Reuters relates that the N.Y. Times interviewed half a dozen former employees
and contractors and reviewed documents and records and claimed these indicate Cambridge retained the data and did use the data.
Facebook, after receiving information that 270,000 people had downloaded Kogan's app and that data obtained without consent had
not been deleted, then banned Cambridge Analytica and Wylie from using its platform.
[23] )
What is even more disturbing is that foreign players may also have been involved in the 2016 election. While Cambridge Analytica
and its parent SCL ceased operations on May 2nd, 2018 (possibly to stymie investigations as to the extent of its activities for
the Trump campaign and foreign governments)
[24]
that cessation came after its former CEO Alexander Nix had some interesting things to say when recorded by TV Channel
4 with a hidden camera while making a sales presentation.
[25] In addition to
the usual allusions to prostitutes, shady characters, blackmail and the like, Nix carelessly " boasted of his ability to employ
"Israeli companies" to gather intelligence on politicians Nix then went on to praise the ability of "Israeli" intelligence personnel
in what can only be described as a power sales pitch to a would-be client."
[26]
Like Bannon with his revelations to Wolff, Nix had gone too far and was quickly sacked pending an investigation. Had he committed
the unforgivable sin of speaking the truth in an insecure venue??? According to a statement put out by CA at the time:
"In the view of the Board, Mr. Nix's recent comments secretly recorded by Channel 4 and other allegations do not represent
the values or operations of the firm and his suspension reflects the seriousness with which we view this violation. We have asked
Dr. Alexander Tayler to serve as acting CEO while an independent investigation is launched to review those comments and allegations."
[27]
Much like exploding armor on tanks, Trump seemingly uses associates and then fires them to deflect criticism when they become
compromised. In the case of the massive Cambridge data breach and its possible use to swing the election, Steve Bannon fared no
better than General Flynn.
After Bannon's departure from the White House, quoting McClatchy Washington Bureau: " Bannon sold his stake in Cambridge Analytica
-- the controversial data firm Donald Trump's campaign employed to reach voters with hyper-targeted online messaging -- in April,
as required by his ethics requirement. But Bannon only notified the government of the sale in November, three months after he had
left the White House and one month after McClatchy asked him if he still had an interest in the company. He was fined for the late
report about the sale Bannon was supposed to sell his $1 million to $5 million stake in Cambridge Analytica while he served in the
administration as part of his ethics agreement, but it was never clear until now if he had done so Under Federal law, late filers
such as Bannon are fined $200. However, while the fine is small only a tiny percentage of such government-required reports are filed
late. Obviously, most reports are timely filed because tardy filing could be an indication of some misfeasance or malfeasance.
[28]
[2] United States
of America vs. Michael T. Flynn, Violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1001
In a plea agreement, Flynn admitted that he had lied to Justice Dept. investigators, with regard to a resolution submitted by
Egypt to the UNSC concerning sanctions on Israel for illegal settlement construction in Palestinian areas, he contacted the Russian
Ambassador to the U.S. on December 22 nd , 2016 at the behest of a "very senior member of Trump's transition team" (believed
to be Jared Kushner -- Ed.) and requested Russia vote against the resolution or at least delay it. He met again with the Russian
Ambassador on December 23 rd and was informed Russia would not comply if the resolution came to a vote.
https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download
[2a] Wolff, Michael,
Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House, ISBN 978-1-250-15806-2, Henry Holt and Co. (2018)
[3] Baldwin further
adds that (in addition to the Kushners -- Ed.) Trump's association with Jewish mafia billionaires is easily documented. I'm talking
about men such as Alexander Mashkevich, Tevfik Arif (not Jewish by birth but a strong Zionist), Felix Henry Sater and Lev Avnerovich
Leviev. Look them up for yourself. Jewish Zionist Wilbur Ross (Bilderberg), whom Trump appointed as Secretary of Commerce, was one
of the Jewish billionaire Rothschild bankers who bailed Trump out of one of his bankruptcies. "Donald Trump, John Hagee, Zionism
And The Chabad," by Chuck Baldwin, February 14, 2019
[6] Americans'
credit spending was greater than ever in 2018, as debt levels reached record totals. Overall consumer debt reached $13.3 trillion
in the last quarter of 2018, while the total amount of unpaid revolving debt hit $4.1 trillion.
[17] Ron Dermer,
Israel's ambassador to the United States, in 2016 praised President-elect Donald Trump as a "true friend of Israel" and said he
looks forward to working with incoming White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon. "Israel has no doubt that President-elect Trump
is a true friend of Israel "
[18] According
to testimony given to British lawmakers by a company whistle blower, Christopher Wylie, Cambridge Analytica was founded by billionaire
Robert Mercer and Steve Bannon.
In other words, Bannon was likely a kingpin and not just a bit player in what transpired -- and probably the real reason he had
to leave the White House. "Trump and Brexit: Cambridge Analytica Whistleblower Gives Bombshell Testimony to British Lawmakers,"
by Pam and Russ Martens, Wall Street on Parade, 27 March 2018
[24] Are
Cambridge Analytica and SCL Group attempting
to evade recent negative coverage, only to re-form and continue their work as part of a new entity? "The news Wednesday about the
closure of Cambridge Analytica does not mention Emerdata or its subsidiary Firecrest Technologies All of the other UK SCL-related
companies are still listed as active and have no pending filings .
The business purpose of Emerdata is not known, beyond the general description of "data processing, hosting and related activities".
However, in a channel 4 News report, the SCL Group founder, Nigel Oakes, said it was his understanding that Emerdata was set up
to acquire all of Cambridge Analytica and SCL.
"Cambridge Analytica is dead -- but its obscure network is alive and well," by Wendy Siegelman, The Guardian Weekly, 5 May 2018
[26] "The Cambridge
Analytica Scandal Could Provide Hard Evidence of "Israeli" Meddling in Trump Election," by Adam Garrie, Global Policy and Analysis
Think Tank, 20 March 2018
[28] "Bannon Sold
His Stake in Cambridge Analytica, and was Fined for Late Ethics Report," Hamodia-The Daily Newspaper of Torah Jewry, 20 February
2018
menters to Ignore ...to Follow Endorsed Only Trim Comments?
So, the unhinged and unprecedented frothing-at-the-mouth rage towards Trump displayed by the worst of the Neocons (Bill
Kristol, Jennifer Rubin, Max Boot, etc.) is all part of the ruse?
"There is, I believe, considerable evidence that non-governmental forces acting on behalf of Israel succeeded in placing
an individual in charge of the U.S. who is currently redirecting the power and financial resources of the nation to almost
entirely serve the interests of a foreign power. (And that entity is not Russia!)"
Wow, I've been looking for an article with this level of truth since this latest cardboard cutout was ushered into office.
You shills who will be screaming for evidence I suggest you watch the video below and then tell me Israhell is not in charge
of American foreign policy.
Wait! We have had a president in the last 30 years who hasn't been a water boy for Israel? Even the "Muslim" Obama bent over
for that insignificant nation.
I think there are people on the alt-right who are both pro and anti Israel. Obviously the pro ones only love Israel because
Israel likes killing brown people.
14.05.2017 International Cyber Attack: Roots Traced to US National Security Agency
Over 45,000 ransomware attacks have been tracked in large-scale attacks across Europe and Asia - particularly Russia and
China - as well as attacks in the US and South America. There are reports of infections in 99 countries. A string of ransomware
attacks appears to have started in the United Kingdom, Spain and the rest of Europe, before striking Japan, Vietnam and the
Philippines on May 12. According to Kaspersky Laboratory, Russia, Ukraine, India and Taiwan were hit hardest.
and yet many Jews are after Trump. Why is that? Now that you know about Trump's wicked friends, learn about Trump's
wicked enemies Anti-Trump & Pro-Obama, the Pritzkers made Obama. "They're bigshots in Holocaustianity, pioneers of mortgage-backed
derivatives & publish the genocidal Zohar."
It looks to me like the anti-Trump 'cranks' are getting the upper hand here at Unz Review. Tom Mysiewicz is known for writing
articles of this type for Renegade Tribune, which presents the most highly conspiratorial view of world politics possible. Just
because he can create 28 footnotes doesn't mean that any of them are credible or actually provide evidence for what he is proposing.
In this article, most don't. For example, this paragraph:
Breitbart's infatuation with Israel is eerily reminiscent of a similar situation in the 1930s. National Socialist propagandist
Josef Goebbels ran a publication called the Algerminer in the 1930s prior to the Second World War. Goebbels was quite sympathetic
to Zionist interests, sponsored a fact-finding trip to Palestine and had a commemorative coin issued in honor of this collaboration
depicting a swastika on one side and a Jewish hexagram ("Mogen David") on the obverse.[15]
Subsequently, the so-called Transfer Agreement saw German Jews brought to Palestine on German ships.[16]
I can confidently say that this simplified description and 'conclusion' misrepresents the actual situation at the time and
also misrepresents Josef Goebbels intentions. It's the same with many of Mysiewicz's sources intended to back up his argument
that Trump is a bought and paid for Israeli asset, and Israel rules the world. What's really going on is that the Jewish population
in every country acts as Israeli assets, which gives them their power. And who is responsible for that? Let's look first at
the English aristocracy.
Donald Trump is who he is. He has a long history as a public figure and he's been saying the same things for many years.
The idea that he has set out to fool Americans in order to serve the interests of Israel and bring about total Jewish domination
over us is not supported by the overall reality. The reality is that every U.S. president has limited power and is beset by
opposition at all times (including the fierce Jewish Lobby). That is Democracy as we know it. Those who want to sell two-dimensional
comic-book villains to their conspiracy-obsessed readers are doing us all a disservice.
@Carolyn Yeager
Then he shit on his base and became the most insanely pro-Israel zealot we have ever seen. The southern border is wide open
with thousands of invaders pouring in, and they are given WORK PERMITS. Trump was a shill to begin with, or they threatened
him and his family so he caved. I kind of think he was a shill to begin with, that he was always a globalist piece of shit and
he lied to us to get elected.
In any case, Trump actually is a two dimensional comic book villain that hires every neocon he can find and turns his back
on people that believed in him.
" our June 8, 2019 Memorial Service will be held at the Navy Memorial, 701 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington DC 20004
at noon. I admit it would be more moving to have the service at Section 34, Arlington Cemetery, however, because of security,
logistics, and cost issues, the Navy Memorial is the better choice. In any case, prayer and remembrance can occur anywhere the
heart is."
entire deep state apparatus, with international assistance swung into action with the phony Mueller investigation
was a sure sign that Trump's platform was never going to be allowed.
Whether you like Bannon or not, his departure statement – the Trump presidency is dead – has been entirely accurate. The
unanswered question is whether that was the plan all along, or whether Trump received an offer that he couldn't refuse. Until
proof otherwise, my view is the latter. This was confirmed yesterday when I saw Mueller's bullshit political statement which
was essentially, the President can't prove when he stopped beating his wife.
Although the term "Alt Right" has gone out of style these days, the group to which it actually referred is NOT in any way
pro-Israel. Tommy Robinson and his like were never Alt Right. The Alt Right is characterized by many things, and some disagree
on these, but two things on which no one disagrees is regarding race realism and knowledge of the Jewish question, which means
the Alt Right is "anti-semitic" in the eyes of its true enemies. Semitism causes anti-Semitism, and any who refuse to address
the Jewish question, and especially those who shill for Israel are NOT Alt Right.
Again, some here are totally unable to face the truth. This is known as cognitive dissonance. If you suffer from this condition
please seek help. Here is a good place to start.
"When a public is stressed and confused, a big lie told repeatedly and unchallenged can become accepted truth." ~George
Orwell
Trump's tariff war, meanwhile, has imposed new costs on average Americans - not on the Chinese - with industrial production
dropping or remaining flat and U.S. trade deficits soaring.
Not on the Chinese? That is news to them and everyone else
China's economy grew at its slowest pace in 28 years in 2018, with gross domestic product expanding 6.6%, down 0.2 percentage
point from the previous year, according to data released Monday by the country's National Bureau of Statistics.
The last time economic growth was so tepid was 1990, when the economy slumped in the aftermath of the Tiananmen Square
incident. Last year, the economy was hampered by a drive to cut regional government and corporate debt, as well as China's trade
war with the U.S.
In a nutshell, Trump "jazzed" a brief economic recovery in the U.S. with massive tax cuts for big business and temporary
cuts for voters (more bark than bite variety) while increasing the national debt, which these same overtaxed voters will ultimately
be on the hook for. At the same time Trump "jawboned" the Federal Reserve to ease monetary policy so interest rates wouldn't
rise as a result of the vast increase in national indebtedness. He has laid the groundwork for eventual hyperinflation (or hyper-stagflation)
that may well ruin more of his middle class voters after the 2020 election.
There has never been hyperinflation in any Western nation other than the Weimar Republic. This has been going on since the
Bretton Woods agreement. Trump has been dealing with a coup since he took office, when exactly did he have time to reform or
replace our central bank with a new money standard and reform our banking laws? Was he supposed to start a recession the moment
he took office so we could start tightening our belts and paying all our debts?
said:
"Wow, I've been looking for an article with this level of truth since this latest cardboard cutout was ushered into office.
You shills who will be screaming for evidence I suggest you watch the video below and then tell me Israhell is not in charge
of American foreign policy."
Yawn. As if Trump is any different from all the other Presidents who have bowed to Jew / Israeli interests. The alternative
was Hillary.
Quit the strawman arguments. People here realize that Trump yields to Jew interests. The problem you and those like you have
is that none of you have differentiated Trump from other Jew ass kissing Presidents. And given the for-Israel wars of Bush &
Obama, it's fair to say that Trump is actually better in that regard.
You have also not explained why most Jews dislike Trump. Now please sit down.
Israel can be useful to the Alt-Right in two ways.
1. As a destination for Jewish diaspora relocation.
2. The existence of the Jewish ethnostate serves as a talking point for white nationalists.
First, apart from mentioning it's over in first paragraph, it has NOTHING to do with the Mueller report. It's a reasonable
diatribe about how the Izzies have their hands on the American Presidential throat. Name me one President for whom that has
not been the case since the 1950s. One: Obama (maybe). And what a totalitarian, police state disaster he was. Maybe in order
to do all that he had to do an end run around most of the Izzy agents in the USG, or maybe it was a highly principled stand.
But apart from him, nobody. Well, maybe Kennedy, actually, but look what they did to him?
As for Flynn: he knew about many of the misdeeds of the previous administration. They took advantage of a neophyte administration
fending off Sally Yates Russian Collusion initiative via a corrupt FBI Director to pressure them to let Flynn go – a terrible
newbie mistake telegraphing weakness to all his enemies.
So that being said, what's his point. That Trump is exceptionally corrupt despite no collusion with Russia because he's
controlled by Izzies?
Rather feeble if you ask me. I expect better in Unz.
Kusnher and Graham have drafted new immigration legislation for amnesty and higher levels of immigration. Trump SAYS what
we want to hear, then does NOTHING.
Nothing about sanctuary cities. Nothing about E-verify. Nothing about birthright citizenship. Nothing about the Visa lottery.
No wall to speak of, maybe a few miles. His fraud on immigration is handing the democrats permanent power and he has to know
this.
Yes ..the nose has fought him at every turn, you're right about that.
But Israel got 38 billion dollars, while we get more mexicans.
Maybe I'm just tired of seeing the national dept continue to skyrocket.
Maybe I'm just tired of the crumbling infrastructure of my country being ignored while billions upon billions are given to
other countries in the form of foreign aid.
Maybe I'm just tired of never ending wars that drain my country of blood and treasure.
Maybe I'm just tired of putting my faith in some politician promising the world and never delivering.
Maybe I'm just tired of the right/left, Republican/Democrat game.
Just like the vague conclusions of the commission which investigated the 9/11 and didn't reveal the real story, Robert Mueller
did the same by deceiving the people and didn't reveal the real story of his investigation into 2016 election. By announcing
in detail yesterday as how the Russians manipulated the election in 2016 Mueller completely failed to describe that some of
the Russians involved in meddling were Russian Zionists with ties to the Russian mobs! So far this is the 2nd event that they've
gotten away with it. It's so sad to see the extend of their involvement in the US government affairs!!!!
The State of Israel as a Light unto the Nations. In his writings and speeches, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion (1886-1973)
emphasized his vision of the state of Israel as a moral and social beacon to the whole world, and by that, in his view, it shall
implement the vision of the prophets.
@Robert Dolan
come together. If you think any president can just do away with all these things you mention, you are very naive, even childish.
I remember during Trump's campaign, he was speaking to a small rally in the West, maybe California, and one man stood up
and asked his position on Israel as a criminal, enemy nation (not his exact words). Trump seemed genuinely shocked, all he could
say was, 'We all love Israel don't we? Israel is great, Israel is our friend' like that, then went on to someone else's
question. Trump also praised Israel when he spoke to AIPAC and said then he would move the US embassy to Jerusalem. So you are
cherry-picking things he said that fit your "poor me" scenario of being lied to.
The individuals you name are fanatical supporters of the Zionist state. Looking at what Mr. Trump has done to date vis a
vis Israel, how can that not be the case, i.e., that their criticism was a ruse? Suggested reading is the Thomas Friedman book
"From Beirut to Jerusalem" where he recounts how covert Arab assets of the Israelis were deliberately attacked in the Israeli
press to increase their credibility on the Arab "street." If you read my article carefully–especially on the microtargeting
of the disaffected white minority–you will see that such attacks by Neocons were necessary and entirely predictable.
@Carolyn Yeager
sume to know the mind of Josef Goebbels I cannot make a conclusion on the actual, documented events..FACTS? It's documented
that leading members of the Stern Gang (such as Shamir and Begin) were on the Axis side until well into 1942. Admiral Canaris
provided the Jewish Lubbavitcher "Rebbe" Schneerson and his family safe passage in and out of the Warsaw Ghetto. What was he
thinking–have you any telepathic revelations on the subject.
I base my conclusions on facts and observations. You, in light of what you said on tariffs, have another methodology. And,
sadly, I am an "anti-Trump crank" who voted for Trump as the lesser of two evils and now regrets it. Mea culpa!
@Chris Mallory
r grasp of jurisprudence is remarkable. Do you allege Russia rigged voting machines or destroyed ballots? What, precisely
did Russia do to swing the election in favor of Trump? This is nonsense. Except for the U.S., no state player–even Israel–would
be so careless as to risk being implicated in such a scandal. Because that would swing public opinion against the interests
of the offending state.
Trump cannot be prosecuted for any crimes related to this while in office, as Mueller pointed out. So these avenues were
not pursued. Which is what I allude to in my article. A serious question: what is the definition of treason in the U.S. Constitution?
I'm not sure there is one.
I don't think any Unz readers need any more proof that Israel has ruled American foreign policy since Truman. There were
just a couple refusals by Eisenhower and Kennedy to comply with Israel orders. But since November 1963 every president has been
an Israel puppet.
In America, the treasonous act must be done in time of war to aid the enemy.
Since we're not at war with Israel or Russia whatever anyone does to help those countries is not treason. All the Israeli
and in the old days, Russian theft of military information and materials didn't fit the definition of treason since we weren't
at war with those countries.
The constitution is whatever one federal state or even municipal Judge says it is.
I have a book about Abu Nidal. He was a big anti Israel bogeyman for decades. The author claims the evil anti semitic Nidal
was an Israeli operative all along. The purpose was to supply a bogey man to scare gullible American Jews into giving more and
more money and lobby for the American tax payers to give even more to help Israel. He also allegedly gave Israel information
about Palestinian activists.
It's pretty well known that even 100 years ago the Zionists had plenty of spies and operatives in the Arab organizations.
Neither Mueller nor his 3 year investigation came up with one concrete, actual thing the Russians did to influence the election.
So some Russians may might have set up a website that some American voters may, might have looked at. BFD
@Corvinus ment
point of view. You kept writing about collusion. Exactly what did Trump or his associates DO that constitutes collusion? 3 years
of investigation and Mueller has found NOTHING that constitutes collusion.
For your simple minded incoherent self: for example the crime of theft. Something must be taken. Robbery, something must
be taken from the physical person who owns or legally possesses it. Burglary burglar must go inside a building.
So, what exactly was the ACT of collusion? Mueller found nothing. The only people who are interested any more are the same
old same old ultra liberals who hate Whites, Republicans , and Trump/
This investigation is way above your intellectual pay grade. I dumbed down the comment especially for your ilk to understand
what is going on. Just keep putting your hands over your face and say "Nothing to see here, move along".
@Johnny Walker Read
. Yes, even the sainted Tulsi Gabbard has taken her pull on the kosher sausage.
Yes – it is sad.
Israeli security – Israeli security – Israeli security - those two words are part of Washington's DNA. Deny those words and
lightening will strike you dead in DC. The fact is that Gabbard has served against mutual US/Israeli enemies – surly that has
influenced her.
I am for Peace, even for Jews – I also do not want a blood bath in Israel. I still believe that Gabbard is anti war with
Iran. A pure and total anti-Israel stance.
He received the offer on election night. The real-time poll agglomerate I was following simply couldn't update Georgia and
other states.. tv commentators were stuck in a loop.. then tv stations announced .. and the first words out of Trump's mouth
were "sorry to keep you waiting, complicated business".
He had agreed not to prosecute Hillary in exchange for an easy recognition of his triumph. And so the enemy was free to persecute
him..
In 3 years Mueller did not find one administrative, civil or criminal city county state or federal law violation. Some Russians
had a website on which was posted news about the election. BFD!!!!!!!
You're not an attorney are you? If you were,you'd know the difference between unproven allegations and some kind of law breaking,tort,
sharp practice whatever that could be prosecuted or the grounds for a civil suit.
@Monty Ahwazi
us you've never been involved in any kind of litigation. Never heard of cause of action or violation of a law code. You're
so naive you'll believe anything somebody named Mueller talks about on TV.
What exactly did Trump DO. What violation of an administrative civil or criminal code did Trump DO? Trump did nothing wrong
and Mueller and the liberals know they found nothing. so they are just starting from scratch allover again hoping to convince
idiots like you that there is something,anything.
So some Russians posted something on the internet. BFD
@Carolyn Yeager
– he is a total loser on immigration. Our country is going backwards.
Things just get worse – now he is penalizing our neighbor Mexico because he cannot lead America to an immigration solution.
We on our side of the issues, need to begin to see the whole picture of his administration – not just the opposition. He
bears some responsibility for much of the crazed opposition.
He is the president – he needs to lead us to solutions – not spend his time saving his ego.
How much of our country's disfunction – is his personal disfunction?
Referring to Israel during an interview in August 1983, U.S. Navy Admiral and former head of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff Thomas Moorer
said
"I've
never seen a President -- I don't care who he is -- stand up to them. It just boggles the mind. They always get what
they want. The Israelis know what is going on all the time. I got to the point where I wasn't writing anything down.
If the American people understood what a grip these people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms.
Our citizens certainly don't have any idea what goes on."
Moorer was speaking generally but he had something specific in mind, namely the June 8, 1967, Israeli attack on the
American intelligence ship, U.S.S. Liberty, which killed 34 American crewmen and wounded 173 more. The ship was
operating in international waters and was displaying a huge stars and stripes but Israeli warplanes, which had
identified the vessel as American, even strafed the life rafts to kill those who were fleeing the sinking ship. It
was the bloodiest attack on a U.S. Naval vessel ever outside of wartime and the crew deservedly received the most
medals every awarded to a single ship based on one action. Yes, it is one hell of a story of courage under fire, but
don't hold your breath waiting for Hollywood to make a movie out of it.
President Lyndon B. Johnson, may he burn in hell, had ordered the recall of U.S. carrier planes sent to aid the
stricken vessel, saying that he would prefer the ship go to the bottom rather than embarrass his good friend Israel.
Then came the cover-up from inside the U.S. government. A hastily convened and summarily executed board of inquiry
headed by Admiral John McCain, father of the senator, deliberately interviewed only a handful of crewmen before
determining that it was all an accident. The sailors who had survived the attack as well as crewmen from Navy ships
that arrived eventually to provide assistance were held incommunicado in Malta before being threatened and sworn to
secrecy. Since that time, repeated attempts to convene another genuine inquiry have been rebuffed by congress, the
White House and the Pentagon. Recently deceased Senator John McCain was particularly active in rejecting overtures
from the Liberty survivors.
The Liberty story demonstrates how Israel's ability to make the United States government act against its own
interests has been around for a long time. Grant Smith of IRMEP, cites how Israeli spying carried out by AIPAC in
Washington back in the mid-1980s resulted in a
lopsided
trade agreement
that currently benefits Israel by more than $10 billion per year on the top of direct grants
from the U.S. Treasury and billions in tax exempt "charitable" donations by American Jews.
If Admiral Moorer were still alive, I would have to tell him that the situation vis-à-vis Israeli power is much
worse now than it was in 1983. He would be very interested in reading a
remarkable
bit of research
recently completed by Smith demonstrating exactly how Israel and its friends work from inside
the system to corrupt our political process and make the American government work in support of Jewish state
interests. He describes in some detail how the Israel Lobby has been able to manipulate the law enforcement
community to protect and promote Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's agenda.
A key component in the Israeli penetration of the U. S. government has been President George W. Bush's 2004 signing
off on the creation of the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (OTFI) within the Department of the
Treasury. The group's website proclaims that it is responsible for "safeguarding the financial system against
illicit use and combating rogue nations, terrorist facilitators, weapons of mass destruction (WMD) proliferators,
money launderers, drug kingpins, and other national security threats," but it has from its founding been really all
about safeguarding Israel's perceived interests. Grant Smith notes however, how "the secretive office has a special
blind spot for major terrorism generators, such as tax-exempt money laundering from the United States into illegal
Israeli settlements and proliferation financing and weapons technology smuggling into Israel's clandestine nuclear
weapons complex."
The first head of the office was Undersecretary of Treasury Stuart Levey, who operated secretly within the Treasury
itself while also coordinating regularly both with the Israeli government as well as with pro-Israel organizations
like AIPAC, WINEP and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD). Levey also traveled regularly to Israel
on the taxpayer's dime, as did his three successors in office.
Levey left OTFI in 2011 and was replaced by David Cohen.
It
was reported
then and subsequently that counterterrorism position at OTFI were all filled by individuals who
were both Jewish and Zionist. Cohen continued the Levey tradition of resisting any transparency regarding what the
office was up to. Smith reports how, on September 12, 2012, he
refused
to answer reporter questions
"about Israel's possession of nuclear weapons, and whether sanctioning Iran, a
signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, over its internationally-inspected civilian
nuclear program was an example of endemic double standards at OTFI."
Cohen was in turn succeeded in 2015 by Adam Szubin who was then replaced in 2017 by Sigal Pearl Mandelker,
a
former and possibly current Israeli citizen
. All of the heads of OTFI have therefore been Jewish and Zionist.
All work closely with the Israeli government, all travel to Israel frequently on "official business" and they all
are in close liaison with the Jewish groups most often described as part of the Israel Lobby. And the result has
been that many of the victims of OTFI have been generally enemies of Israel, as defined by Israel and America's
Jewish lobbyists. OTFI's
Specially
Designated Nationals And Blocked Persons List (
SDN
),
which
includes sanctions and enforcement options
,
features
many Middle Eastern Muslim and Christian names and companies but nothing in any way comparable relating to Israel
and Israelis, many of whom are well known to law enforcement otherwise as weapons traffickers and money launderers
.
And
once placed on the SDN there is no transparent way to be removed, even if the entry was clearly in error.
Here in the United States, action by OTFI has meant that Islamic charities have been shut down and individuals
exercising their right to free speech through criticism of the Jewish state have been imprisoned. If the Israel
Anti-Boycott Act succeeds in making its way through congress the OTFI model will presumably become the law of the
land when it comes to curtailing free speech whenever Israel is involved.
The OTFI story is outrageous, but it is far from unique. There is a history of American Jews closely attached to
Israel being promoted by powerful and cash rich domestic lobbies to act on behalf of the Jewish state. To be sure,
Jews who are Zionists are
vastly
overrepresented in all government agencies
that have anything at all to do with the Middle East and one can
reasonably argue that the Republican and Democratic Parties are in the pockets of Jewish billionaires named Sheldon
Adelson and Haim Saban.
Neoconservatives, most of whom are Jewish, infiltrated the Pentagon under the Reagan Administration and they and
their heirs in government and media (Doug Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Scooter Libby, Richard Perle, Bill Kristol) were
major players in the catastrophic war with Iraq, which, one of the architects of that war, Philip Zelikow,
described
in 2004
as being all about Israel. The same people are now in the forefront of urging war with Iran.
American policy towards the Middle East is largely being managed by a small circle of Orthodox Jews working for
presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner. One of them, David Friedman, is currently U.S. Ambassador to Israel.
Friedman, a bankruptcy lawyer who has no diplomatic or foreign policy credentials, is a Zionist Jew who is also a
supporter of the illegal settlements on the West Bank and a harsh critic of other Jews who in any way disagree with
the Israeli government. He has contributed money to settlement construction, which would be illegal if OTFI were
doing its job, and has consistently defended the settlers while condemning the Palestinians in speeches in Israel.
He endlessly and ignorantly repeats Israeli government talking points and has
tried
to change the wording
of State Department communications, seeking to delete the word "occupied" when describing
Israel's control of the West Bank. His humanity does not extend beyond his Jewishness, defending the Israeli
shooting thousands of unarmed Gazan protesters and the bombing of schools, hospitals and cultural centers. How he
represents the United States and its citizens who are not dual nationals must be considered a mystery.
Friedman's top adviser is Rabbi Aryeh Lightstone,
who
is described
by the Embassy as an expert in "Jewish education and pro-Israel advocacy." Once upon a time, in an
apparently more enlightened mood, Lightstone described Donald Trump as posing "an existential danger both to the
Republican Party and to the U.S." and even accused him of pandering to Jewish audiences. Apparently when opportunity
knocked he changed his mind about his new boss. Pre-government in 2014, Lightstone founded and headed Silent City, a
Jewish advocacy group supported by extreme right-wing money that opposed the Iran nuclear agreement and also worked
to combat the nonviolent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. He is reportedly still connected
financially with anti BDS groups, which might be construed as a conflict of interest. As the Senior Adviser to
Friedman he is paid in excess of $200,000 plus free housing, additional cash benefits to include a 25% cost of
living allowance and a 10% hardship differential, medical insurance and eligibility for a pension.
So, what's in it all for Joe and Jill American Citizens? Not much. And for Israel? Anything, it wants, apparently.
Sink a U.S. warship? Okay. Tap the U.S. Treasury? Sure, just wait a minute and we'll draft some legislation that
will give you even more money. Create a treasury department agency run exclusively by Jews that operates secretly to
punish critics of the Jewish state? No brainer. Meanwhile a bunch of dudes at the Pentagon are dreaming of new wars
for Israel and the White House sends an ignorant ambassador and top aide overseas to represent the interests of the
foreign government in the country where they are posted. Which just happens to be Israel. Will it ever end?
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible
educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
www.councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address
is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is
[email protected].
Now however, when through the malice of fate a large part of these Jews whom we fought against are alive, I must
concede that fate must have wanted it so. I always claimed that we were fighting against a foe who through
thousands of years of learning and development had become superior to us.
I no longer remember exactly when, but it was even before Rome itself had been founded that the Jews could
already write. It is very depressing for me to think of that people writing laws over 6,000 years of written
history. But it tells me that they must be a people of the first magnitude, for lawgivers have always been
great.
good documentation on several salient aspects of 'Murka's Zionist Occupation Government.
the principal institution remains: the (((Rothschild Central Bank))), alias "Federal Reserve" , a debt-bombing and
money manufacturing racket through which the entire political class and, indeed, much of the population, is trap'd
and bribed into submission.
and it'll end violently when the Jewbuck dies, and
America starting from the time of LBJ has been hijacked by the Deep State, which is 70% Jewish, 20% spineless white
treasonous rats who follow along because they have something to gain, and 10% naive white fools who think they're
really doing something good for the world.
Good thinking Philip Giraldi, it really is time for a movie to be made about the attempted sinking of the USS
Liberty and the wilful killing of so many US sailors. It should be done without any Hollywood backing and
distribution along the lines of Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ. (Hey Mel, do you read The Unz Review? You
should).
It could easily be crowdfunded if necessary, with survivors of the incident serving as consultants. There are loads
of 60s era military surplus items available on the cheap, including aircraft and I would imagine a massive response
to a call for actors and extras. It certainly would help kick open the door to awareness of where the real threat to
America lies.
@FKA Max
/jewish-activists-crowd-funding-breed-red-heifer-third-temple-cow#img-2">
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/10/jewish-activists-crowd-funding-breed-red-heifer-third-temple-cow#img-2
what do you propose we do Phil they control all the media so no one is alamred as to what they are up to. the people
of the USA are stupid and dont care the the zionist control them
I can say "
obviously
didn't
develop a writing system" prior to the 2nd century BCE, because otherwise
we
would be
inundated
with
evidence of it
, as we are for the other regional languages.
For example, we have
13,000
Etruscan
texts (some little more than fragments, but many lengthy, bi-lingual texts) from the period ~700BCE to ~140BCE;
there are
several
hundred
examples of
Etiocypriot
(famously
including a bilingual – with Attic Greek – text on a slab from the Acropolis of Amathus which dates to 600BCE).
It reminds me of that joke from the 1980s when someone from the audience poses a question to a UN panel: "Excuse me,
what is your opinion about the world food shortage?"
The Ethiopian ambassador asks: "What is: 'food'?" The American ambassador asks: "What is: 'shortage'?" The Soviet
ambassador asks: "What is: 'opinion'?" And the Israeli ambassador asks: "What is: 'excuse me'?"
I think your comment was stuck in some infinite loop from the 1960s an got spit out into our present conversation
due to the unusually low number of sun spots.
Since these groups are tax-free entities, gathering in at least 26 billion a year-not including money to
synagogues–that's close to 30 billion a year Americans have to make up for out of their wallets on April 15 of each
year.
26 Billion Bucks: The Jewish Charity Industry Uncovered
The Forward's investigation has uncovered a tax-exempt Jewish communal apparatus that operates on the scale of a
Fortune 500 company and
focuses
the largest share of its donor dollars on Israel.
This analysis doesn't include
synagogues
and other groups
that avoid revealing their financial information by claiming a religious exemption.
The Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence has been run by either American or Israeli Jews since its
inception. Similar to the US Treasury, where five out of the last eight Treasury heads were American Jews. One of
the GOYIM appointed, Hank Paulson, was installed to put an American face on the 2008 MBS generated economic crash,
which enriched Wall Street before AND after, but devastated Main Street.
After Israel realized it could attack the USS Liberty and not only not be held accountable, but the USG would help
them protect their lies, that gave them the incentive to start planning their biggest attack on the USA to date: the
9/11 False Flag. And like the Liberty incident, the USG is protecting Israel by helping with the lies that keep the
Big Lie alive, that Bin Laden and his posse were the attackers, so Israel could use it's MSM buddies to generate an
army of lies about Iraq; Libya, Syria and Iran, three of which we've already destroyed with Iran in the cross-hairs
of unhinged psychos like Bolton and Nutty Nikki.
Drain the Swamp? Hell, Trump and his minions like Shadow President Kushner come from the murkiest depths of that
Swamp.
Bottom line? Either we WTFU and realize that our nation has been taken over by Israel, which is using our military
might, wealth and blood to do their dirty work in the ME, invading and busting up nations Israel wants destroyed, or
we resign ourselves and condemn our offspring to a lifetime of poverty, misery, tyranny and endless wars for the
glory of Apartheid Israel.
@FKA Max
t of academic intellectual standards of any reasonable university permanent staff. Though there are,
and must be, highly intelligent Jews like our host and some others, there are highly intelligent people in all
ethnic groups. I would never write anything like Eichmann because that is utter nonsense. Only members in a party
that was created by a secret society founded by a Mizraim Mason and a Theosophist could write such nonsense, and
people who write such can be expected to have participated to the create Israel project. Just like the people the
author of the article speaks of. Eichmann was a servant of Zionists, admirer, not their enemy.
I wonder at the reference for the claim that LBJ stated his preference that the LIBERTY sink rather than embarass
Israel. I am mindful of LBJ's apparent indifference to the violent deaths of thousands of US servicemen in another
part of the world at that time.
An Israeli journalist stated over 20 years ago that 'the White House, the Senate, and much of the American media
[are] in our hands'. His words were
picked
up
by Joseph Sobran:
'In an essay reprinted in the May 27, 1996, issue of the
New
York Times
Ari Shavit, an Israeli columnist, reflected sorrowfully on the wanton Israeli killing of more than a
hundred Lebanese civilians in April. "We killed them out of a certain naive hubris. Believing with absolute
certitude that now, with the White House, the Senate, and much of the American media in our hands, the lives of
others do not count as much as our own "'
Sobran observes that 'this is interesting less for what it tells us about Israel than for what it tells us about
America. Frank discussion of Israel is permitted in Israel, as Mr Shavit's article illustrates. It's rarely
permitted here. Charges of anti-Semitism and a quiet but very effective boycott will be the reward of any journalist
who calls attention to his own government's -- and his own profession's -- servitude to Israeli interests.'
"Nazis were a creation of Masons through Theosophists, and therefore servants of Zionists with the task of pushing
Jews to Palestine." – Seems highly likely to me
If I may, I'd like to ask you why David Irving never dare to suggest that.
Is it because there isn't enough evidence ?
Irving is the only historian, afaik, that wrote about where the money that put Hitler into power came from. But he
stops there. He sees nothing unnatural in fact that Hitler get into power thanks to zionist bankers.
thank you for your articles but is time for you to explain how and why we get to such ridiculous,caricaturesque
level of control,that cant be explain even if the case we are inferiors to them.
@anonymous
ia and the SU) died about 1M and in Auschwitz
died only registered inmates, in the SU of 1940 died unknown number between 3.3 and 1.3, most likely about 2M and in
Romania 0.2M. And that most sent to Operation Reinhard cams did not die there. Here Irvin could have found all the
evidence needed, yet he did not write about it. So, it is not lack of evidence, it is common sense: do not touch
certain issues if you want to sell your books. But you can write and publish books of occult connections of Nazis
even though there is not much evidence of their occult nature. Some things you can write, somethings not. Evidence
has little to do with it.
Will it ever end? Frankly I see no end in sight. Their grip gets stronger, the goy public gets stupider and more
indoctrinated, and the politicians get more owned, every year. But there is a danger for these zionist Jews with
this. As their power and influence gets greater and greater, so will their demands for the masses. Eventually the
masses will wake up, and the dam of pent up resentment may break with a tidal wave. This is how things have played
out in the past.
@Johnny Rottenborough
Brett Kavanaugh.
Despite the Trump administration's near complete servitude to Israel evidenced by his staffing of Jews in vital
government positions, including son-in-law Jared Kushner & Steve Mnuchin, please consider the video (below) which
makes clear how Zionist Jew organizations, for example the ADL, demand their prejudiced & extreme left-wing law
become the LAW of the, uh (gag/choke!), "Homeland."
Let's see how many GOP Senators cast a cold Israeli eye upon parts of Brett Kavanaugh's ideology?
Post scriptum: Thanks, Philip Giraldi, for your perpetual "heroic" service!
The bastards have the whole system wired. Their tenures at the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (OTFI)
provided a springboard to critical posititions within the architecture of 'the system'.
From Wikipedia:
In January 2012, Levey joined HSBC as the bank's Chief Legal Officer.
(trivia : In 2014 HSBC closed North London Central Mosque's account and some Muslim clients' and groups' accounts.
Several sources report that HSBC closed them because they donated their money to Palestine during the recent
conflict)
and
In 2015 Cohen was appointed
Deputy
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency
. At the time of his appointment, some speculated that Cohen's
selection was due to the Obama administration's reluctance in picking someone with ties to past incidences of CIA
torture and extraordinary rendition. The post of deputy director has traditionally been filled by military officers
or intelligence community veterans.
(note the whitewashing of Cohen's appointment. No mention of the jewish/zionist angle.)
I always appreciate Giraldi's articles because in spite of my own research on Israel's (negative, crippling and
cancerous) influence on America he invariably imparts some incisive information I haven't yet encountered.
Once again, a suggestion to Ron Unz to use this website to host a Solution Week (not that this site isn't already
part of the solution!) , but I would love to see specifically what others think in that regard.
So far, Brother Nathan had one of the more substantive lists of solutions (registering AIPAC as foreign agents,
getting the 'dual citizens' out of US government positions, etc).
As people become more informed on the Israeli/influence issue, the common refrain I see on forums across America is
the question:
what
exactly can I do to change this situation?
British immigrants are required to RENOUNCE UK Citizenship, to become US Citizens.
This is entirely proper.
Mexicans & Jews retain dual citizenship, without any problem. This is so wrong. Jews routinely serve in IDF &
Mossad, but seldom in the US Military. This is a GLARING form of disloyalty. Such 'citizenship' should be revoked,
and the holders deported. IMHPO.
I suspect that Jews & Mexicans on SCOTUS, are at the bottom of this.
Will it ever end? Mr. Giraldi asks (rhetorically). Trump got something right when he said that Media was the enemy,
but he didn't say who owned Media. "Masters of Discourse" Israel Shamir calls Jews who control what we see and hear.
Since Media lies to us 24/7, and since Congress is scared to death of AIPAC's power and money (Netanyahu's 29
standing ovations before that group of pathetic whores), nothing will change until Media changes ownership and
Congress is subjected to campaign finance reform. No more "campaign contributions" (bribes).
Glad to see you put Homeland in quotes. That's a Bush/Cheney construction I've never used in conversation, evokes
images of jackboots and NSA surveillance.
It is terrifying but both US warmongering and Israeli control will only end when the dollar system collapses. That's
a very sad thing to say but Israel will abandon the US like a used condom if the US fails economically.
Zionists took over the U.S. government on December 23, 1913 with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act which took
the money creation power away from the U.S. gov and gave it to the Zionist privately owned banking cabal the FED,
and this was totally unconstitutional and created money out of thin air and thus began the wars and ensuing debt and
enslavement of America.
Along with the FED the Zionists got the IRS through congress also in 1913 and thus had the power to create money out
of thin air plus the power to tax the American people to pay for the Zionist banker created wars which they were
soon to create in Europe starting with WWI and continuing down through the years to the Mideast wars all for the
Zionist bankers NWO.
The Zionists control America lock stock and gun barrel and have been the agent provocateur in every war the U.S. has
been involved in since 1913 and the Zionists also attacked America on 911 when Israel and the Zionist controlled
deep state attack on 911 killed some 3000 Americans and got away with it and every thinking American knows Israel
did it.
When LBJ ordered the recall of the fighters that were flying to the rescue of the Liberty, he said that he didn't
want to embarrass his ally. This was at a time when the sailors on the Liberty had not yet identified the
nationality of the attackers. People in the White House knew it was Israel before the sailors on the Liberty knew.
Think about the implications of that.
Any time a political system can be hijacked by a foreign power and forced to do the bidding of that foreign power
that political system has to be replaced.
The American political system based on republican and constitutional government has collapsed, largely because the
Jewish people have made a total, complete and utter mockery out of that system. The so-called American "democracy"
is a code word for plutocracy. Wherever you have a "democracy" what you have in practice is a plutocracy.
The Jews love plutocracies because with their money they can literally buy politicians. Furthermore, the non-Jewish
populations cannot defend themselves from the Jewish power in these so-called "democracies".
It will take the proverbial man on the white horse to remedy this situation, i.e., a Caesar, Napoleon, Mussolini or
Hitler. If any of you reading this think that this collapsed political system can be resurrected, well then you are
living in la-la land.
OTFI's Specially Designated Nationals And Blocked Persons List (SDN), which includes sanctions and enforcement
options , features many Middle Eastern Muslim and Christian names and companies but nothing in any way
comparable relating to Israel and Israelis, many of whom are well known to law enforcement otherwise as weapons
traffickers and money launderers .
OTFI SDN features names only, of those individuals/businesses/organisations which are engaged in illegal activities
against the United States and her interests.
Your well-known bias clouds your vision.
Went through the list cursorily and looked for names I knew to be criminally engaged and thus under U.S.
surveillance and sanctions. Names with a Jewish ethnicity, that is. Lo behold, they are indeed there:
Mikhail Abramov
Valerii Abramov
Nicolai Shusanshvili a.k.a Moshe Israel
Arkadevic Rotenberg
Roman Rotenberg
I am sure there are more.
Don't suppose any clarification, let alone a retraction, of your demonstrated hatred of Jews and the resulting bias
would be forthcoming?
I am deeply sorry.
I just cannot agree with introduction. Most of the US presidents at the end of their term and after become critical
of Israel.
Typical examples are Carter and Obama.
Don't forget that Jewish Power is a staunch enemy of the freedom of information. Zionists and their Arab cousins are
not able to grasp the tenets of western civilization. Unlike the Arabs, Jewish power has been very effective in
capturing the rotten head of the US/UK governments and imposing the rule of parasitism on westerners.
Ex-chief of Israel's national intelligence agency Meir Dagan had an interesting answer to
the question if Lubavitchers serve in the Mossad.
By COLlive reporter
Are there Lubavitcher chassidim serving in the Mossad?
This candid question was presented to Meir Dagan , the former director of the national
intelligence agency of Israel, during a private meeting in Jerusalem, on Tuesday.
Dagan, who served under 3 prime ministers and was an officer in the Israel Defense Forces
(IDF), was chatting with donors following the inauguration of a new career development center
for frum Jews.
During the conversation about the employment of haredi Jews in the country's many security
branches, Dagan was asked whether Lubavitchers serve in the Mossad.
His reply: "You will be surprised to know how many haredim serve in the Mossad."
Dagan added that aside from the employment of chassidim in a professional capacity, the
Chabad organization provides spiritual assistance at Mossad's central commend in Tel Aviv.
"Chabad gets a Yashar Koach (kudos) because thanks to them the synagogue at the Mossad
command was renovated and we now have a luxurious shul."
As reported in the past, Dagan had a friendly relationship with a Shluchim couple in Belarus
when he underwent a successful liver transplant in 2012.
"The Chabad House in Minsk, (a city which) its Jewish history is known to all, became my
home," said Dagan who was born on a train between the Soviet Union and Poland during the
Holocaust. "Rabbi Schneur Deitsch and his wife will remain forever engraved in my heart."
The Rebbe's unknown ties to the head of the Mossad and their assistance to Chabad's
educational and outreach activities in the Former Soviet Union were mapped out in the Hebrew
book "The Rebbe and the Mossad," published in 1998.
The inside story of the Rebbe's involvement in Israel's security, as told by its defense and
government leaders, is told in JEM's documentary film Faithful and Fortified – Volume
1.
Trump is
sign of degeneration of the US political elite. Much like Pompeo and Bolton.
But his hostility to Iran is just desire to please people who control him and finance his re-election bid .
Notable quotes:
"... ran sees no prospect of negotiations with the United States, a foreign ministry spokesman said on Tuesday ..."
"... Iranian officials have repeatedly stated that there won't be any talks with the U.S. until our government rejoins the JCPOA. ..."
"... I don't see how Iranians could view Trump as anything other than a menace when one of his first acts as president was to declare all of them to be potential security threats with the unnecessary and cruel travel ban. His hostility to and contempt for Iran and its people have been intense and consistent for more than two years. ..."
"... When the president veers between "genocidal tweets" and disingenuous offers to talk, this doesn't come across as the work of a master negotiator but rather the impulsive babbling of a leader who can be easily enraged by the smallest and most inconsequential things that he happens to see on television ..."
"... Trump is not talking to Iran but his lackies in the U.S. MSM. They are seeing Iran as being fanatic and unreasonable in refusing to talk. This will be one of the justifications for war and permanent hostilities. ..."
"... I think you're wrong here. Trump doesn't hate or have contempt for Iranians. He's supremely indifferent to them. The hostility and contempt he has shown Iran and Iranians is meant to keep his major Israel and Saudi Arabia donors happy. That's been true from the beginning. Scores of millions in campaign contributions are riding on it. ..."
"... Increasingly, Donaldius Iohannes Trumpius reminds me of some latter day Roman emperor like Caligula or Nero. Absolute power, depravity, insatiable appetites for everything from power to money and women, a pathological lack of empathy, fawning courtiers – it's all there. ..."
In case there was any doubt, the Iranian government
made clear that they were not interested in talking to Trump:
I ran sees no prospect of negotiations with the United States, a foreign ministry
spokesman said on Tuesday , a day after U.S. President Donald Trump said a deal with
Tehran on its nuclear program was possible.
Iranian officials have repeatedly stated that there won't be any talks with the U.S.
until our government rejoins the JCPOA. That definitely won't happen under the current
administration, so there has never been a realistic chance of starting up U.S.-Iranian
negotiations in the near term. Everyone understands that, and that makes the president's random
"offers" to talk all the more ridiculous. Iran has already been burned by Trump's decision to
renege on the nuclear deal and wage economic war on the entire country, so there would have to
be a major effort on the U.S. side to regain Iranian trust. The Trump administration would have
to reverse course and undo every anti-Iranian thing that it has done over the last two years,
and even then that would barely get the U.S. and Iran back to where they had been in 2017.
Trump wouldn't ever do that because it would require him to admit being completely wrong.
Najmeh Bozorgmehr reports on how Iranians
are adapting to life under U.S. economic warfare against them:
Iranian analysts tell me the US made one big mistake this time. It used almost all its
non-military leverage against Iran over the wrong issue, because the country was not
violating the 2015 nuclear accord. Iranians may despise their rulers but they are aware that
the US is not righteous, either. How can they see Mr Trump as a saviour when he calls Iran "a
nation of terror" and promises "the official end of Iran"?
I don't see how Iranians could view Trump as anything other than a menace when one of
his first acts as president was to declare all of them to be potential security threats with
the unnecessary and cruel travel ban. His hostility to and contempt for Iran and its people
have been intense and consistent for more than two years. The complete lack of respect
that Trump has shown to Iranian leaders and the Iranian people alike stands in sharp contrast
to his fawning praise for the North Korean leader, and they cannot help but take that as an
insult. It also isn't lost on the people being strangled by Trump's sanctions that they are
being punished for abiding by an international agreement backed by the world's major powers
while North Korea is celebrated after successfully defying the rest of the world by building up
their nuclear arsenal and long-range missiles. Iran is being penalized because they trusted the
U.S., and Trump has proven to them that this was a foolish thing for them to do. Why would they
reward Trump's aggression and make the same mistake twice?
When the president veers between "genocidal tweets" and disingenuous offers to talk,
this doesn't come across as the work of a master negotiator but rather the impulsive babbling
of a leader who can be easily enraged by the smallest and most inconsequential things that he
happens to see on television . As the North Koreans have also learned, no one can
successfully negotiate with a person as unreliable and moody as Trump. No one in Iran's
government is going to go out on a limb and take the political risk of engaging with the U.S.
again after the last effort blew up in their faces, and Trump's mercurial instability
guarantees that it would be a waste of everyone's time.
Trump is not talking to Iran but his lackies in the U.S. MSM. They are seeing Iran as
being fanatic and unreasonable in refusing to talk. This will be one of the justifications
for war and permanent hostilities.
Our own acts of aggression are completely ignored.
"His hostility to and contempt for Iran and its people have been intense and consistent
for more than two years. "
I think you're wrong here. Trump doesn't hate or have contempt for Iranians. He's
supremely indifferent to them. The hostility and contempt he has shown Iran and Iranians is
meant to keep his major Israel and Saudi Arabia donors happy. That's been true from the
beginning. Scores of millions in campaign contributions are riding on it.
Increasingly, Donaldius Iohannes Trumpius reminds me of some latter day Roman emperor like
Caligula or Nero. Absolute power, depravity, insatiable appetites for everything from power
to money and women, a pathological lack of empathy, fawning courtiers – it's all
there.
Bolton is the distillation of the pathology of the pro-Israel Lobby, which recruits
American power diplomatically and militarily to "secure the realm" for Israel.
Bolton may be unique only in the purity of this pathology, but the Trump's administration
is positively seething with creatures of the pro-Israel Lobby.
The pro-Israel Lobby must be stopped before it gets its next war.
It is indeed beyond troubling that the man we have to count on to do it is "1000 percent"
Israel-firster Donald Trump.
At a 2015 gala hosted by the Algemeiner Journal, Trump declared "We love Israel. We will
fight for Israel 100 percent, 1000 percent." His bid for the presidency was announced soon
after. Trump's whole "insurgent" campaign, his purported break with GOP orthodoxy,
questioning of Israel's commitment to peace, calls for even treatment in Israeli-Palestinian
deal-making, and refusal to call for Jerusalem to be Israel's undivided capital, were an
elaborate propaganda scam engineered by the Israel Lobby from the very beginning.
Trump's efforts on behalf of Israel began immediately after the election, prior to his
taking the oath of office.
Jared Kushner, Donald Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser on Middle East/Israel issues,
gave his first on-the-record appearance at the Saban Forum at the Brookings Institution on 3
December 2017. Saban praised Kushner for attempting to derail a vote at the United Nations
Security Council about Israeli settlements during the Obama administration.
Kushner reportedly dispatched former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn to make
secret contact with the Russian ambassador in December 2016 in an effort to undermine or
delay the resolution, which condemned Israel for settlement construction. Saban told Kushner
that "this crowd and myself want to thank you for making that effort, so thank you very
much." Kushner thanked the audience at Brookings, a leading pro-Israel Lobby think tank,
"It's really an honor to be able to talk about this topic with so many people who I respect
so much, who have given so much to this issue."
During the keynote conversation, Kushner and Saban framed Middle East peace as a "real
estate issue". Kushner acknowledged that "We've solicited a lot of ideas from a lot of
places." Trump's understanding of "regional dynamics" in the Middle East clearly manifests "a
lot of ideas" from pro-Israel war hawks from the Saban Center at the Brookings
Institution.
It is clear that the pro-Israel Lobby pathology has thoroughly infected both major
political parties in the US. In fact, both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, and all their
rivals from the 2016 presidential campaign, are deep in the pockets of the pro-Israel Lobby.
Trump's current policies are not significantly at variance from Clinton's equally pro-Israel
foreign policy agenda.
The fracture between the Trump and Clinton contingents of the pro-Israel Lobby is rooted
in the personal predilections of their major American oligarch donors. Billionaires Sheldon
Adelson and Haim Saban are the Koch Brothers of the pro-Israel Lobby, and both are obsessed
about starting war with Iran.
When Adelson and Saban shared the stage at the Israeli American Council's inaugural
conference in Washington, D.C. in 2014, Saban quipped, "There's no right or left when it
comes to Israel". Despite their shared pro-Israel Lobby objectives, Adelson and Saban had a
fracas in 2015 over political tactics. The Republican Party and Democratic Party campaign
platforms in 2016 reflected right and left pro-Israel Lobby orientations. Even the Sanders
sheepdog campaign was a far-left pro-Israel Lobby iteration.
It's all too easy to focus on the "unique" pathology of Bolton or Mike Pompeo, or
congressional creatures like Lindsey Graham, not to mention faux "insurgent" President Trump,
while ignoring the wider extent of pro-Israel Lobby pathology in the US government.
It is also extremely dangerous to refer to these figures generically as mere
"neoconservatives" or "warhawks". They are unquestionably pro-Israel warhawks, and regardless
of "liberal" or "conservative" leanings, all are paid to advance a pro-Israel Lobby agenda
for US foreign policy.
In a video discussion based on his March 22, 2016 Consortium News article, Consortium News
founding editor Robert Parry addressed pro-Israel Lobby influence during the 2016
presidential election:
"... Newsweek unearthed another clue as to the provenance of the claims. The magazine said that it learned from one Pentagon official that the satellite imagery of loading missiles into fishing dhows was not produced by U.S. intelligence but rather had been provided by Israel. ..."
"... Ravid's Israeli sources acknowledged that it wasn't hard intelligence or even an intelligence assessment based on evidence. Instead, as one Israeli official acknowledged, Mossad "drew several scenarios for what Iran might be planning." Ravid's sources ultimately admitted that Israel's Mossad doesn't really know "what the Iranians are trying to do." ..."
"... That April 15 meeting was only the most recent one between top U.S. and Israeli national security officials over the past year, according to Ravid. These meetings were conducted under a still-secret U.S.-Israeli agreement on a joint plan of action against Iran reached after two days of unannounced meetings at the White House between Ben Shabbat and then-national security advisor H.R. McMaster on December 12, 2017. ..."
"... It also creates a new incentive for the Israelis and Saudis to provoke military responses by Hamas in Gaza or the Houthis in Yemen. ..."
@renfro Remember
Iraq .with visions of WMDs, yellow cake and dancing Israelis in your head.
"In meetings in Washington and Tel Aviv in the past few weeks," the paper's Jerusalem
correspondent wrote, "Israeli intelligence warned" U.S. officials that "Iran or its proxies
were planning to strike American targets in Iraq." The report cited a "senior Middle Eastern
intelligence official" -- the term traditionally used to describe an Israeli intelligence
official–as the source.
Newsweek unearthed another clue as to the provenance of the claims. The magazine said that
it learned from one Pentagon official that the satellite imagery of loading missiles into
fishing dhows was not produced by U.S. intelligence but rather had been provided by
Israel.
Reporting by the leading Israeli diplomatic correspondent Barak Ravid, now of Channel 13
but also filing for Axios, provides more detailed evidence that Israel was the original
source of all three alleged Iranian threats. Ravid's story reports that an Israeli
delegation, led by national advisor Meir Ben Shabbat, met with Bolton and other U.S. national
security officials in the White House on April 15 and passed on to them "information about
possible Iranian plots against the U.S. or its allies in the Gulf," according to "senior
Israeli officials."
Bolton confirmed the meeting with Ben Shabbat in a tweet after it happened, but revealed
nothing about what was discussed.
Ravid's Israeli sources acknowledged that it wasn't hard intelligence or even an
intelligence assessment based on evidence. Instead, as one Israeli official acknowledged,
Mossad "drew several scenarios for what Iran might be planning." Ravid's sources ultimately
admitted that Israel's Mossad doesn't really know "what the Iranians are trying to do."
This is the obvious explanation for why U.S. officials were so unwilling to reveal the
provenance of what has loosely been called "intelligence." It also tallies with one Pentagon
official's revelation to Newsweek that the satellite imagery cited as evidence of missiles in
fishing boats had been "provided to U.S. officials by Israel ."
That April 15 meeting was only the most recent one between top U.S. and Israeli national
security officials over the past year, according to Ravid. These meetings were conducted
under a still-secret U.S.-Israeli agreement on a joint plan of action against Iran reached
after two days of unannounced meetings at the White House between Ben Shabbat and
then-national security advisor H.R. McMaster on December 12, 2017. Ravid reported the
details of that agreement in late December based on information from a "senior U.S. official"
and confirmation from senior Israeli officials.
Ravid's story provided details on the four working groups that were formed under the
agreement, including one on "Joint U.S.-Israeli preparation for different escalation
scenarios in the region, concerning Iran, Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza." The
Mossad "scenarios" apparently provided the central ideas with which to justify the Trump
administration's subsequent escalatory moves against Iran, including ostentatiously moving an
aircraft carrier and a B-52 bomber group into the region.
Bolton's May 5 statement warning of "unrelenting force" against Iran in response to any
attack by either Iranian or "proxy" forces added a very significant new element to America's
retaliatory threats. It referred to an attack "on United States interests or on those of our
allies." That broadening of the range of scenarios that could be cited to justify a U.S.
strike against Iran, which has so far been studiously ignored by major news media, represents
a major concession to the Israelis and Saudi Arabia.
It also creates a new incentive for the Israelis and Saudis to provoke military responses by
Hamas in Gaza or the Houthis in Yemen. And it poses the problem of incidents that could be
blamed on Iran or a "proxy" but for which actual responsibility is ambiguous, such as the
apparent "limpet mine" attack on oil tankers on May 12 -- or the rocket fired into Baghdad's
Green Zone within a mile of the U.S. embassy there Sunday night.
These deceptions are part of a dangerous game being run by Bolton in which Israel is
apparently playing a crucial role. That should prompt some serious questioning as to Bolton's
claims and the role of the alleged secret U.S.-Israeli understandings.
I think you mean who needs the CIA when you have the Mossad ..don't you? Its the Mossad
that is currently supplying Bolton and Co. with intel on Iran. So induce the folks to
disregard US agencies and rely on Israel.
"The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday rejected a Democratic proposal to
require congressional approval before the U.S. can take military action against Iran. The
panel voted 13-9 against a proposal blocking the administration from using funding to carry
out a military strike in or against Iran without congressional signoff, according to Sen.
Chris Murphy "
During the 2012 Republican presidential primaries, Mitt Romney claimed that he would not
make any significant policy decisions about Israel without consulting Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu.
Romney blatantly pandered to the pro-Israel Lobby, including both Jewish Zionists and
evangelical Christian Zionists.
In a telling exchange during a debate in December 2011, Romney criticized Newt Gingrich
for making a disparaging remark about Palestinians, declaring: "Before I made a statement of
that nature, I'd get on the phone to my friend Bibi Netanyahu and say: 'Would it help if I
say this? What would you like me to do?' "
Netanyahu met with Romney in 2011. The two men had worked together in the 1970s.
Martin S. Indyk, a leading figure in the pro-Israel Lobby who served as United States
ambassador to Israel in the Clinton administration, said that whether intentional or not,
Romney's statement implied that he would "subcontract Middle East policy to Israel."
"That, of course, would be inappropriate," added Indyk, a former director for the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), who also served eight years as the founding
Executive Director of the notorious pro-Israel warhawk "think tank" Washington Institute for
Near East Policy (WINEP).
For years, Netanyahu has mobilized pro-Israel Lobby groups and Congressional Republicans
to pressure successive US administrations into taking a more confrontational approach against
Iran.
"To the extent that their personal relationship would give Netanyahu entree to the Romney
White House in a way that he doesn't now have to the Obama White House," Indyk said, "the
prime minister would certainly consider that to be a significant advantage."
In March 2012, Romney spoke via satellite to a meeting of the AIPAC. Like other
politicians backed by the pro-Israel Lobby, Romney vehemently criticized the Obama
administration over its policies toward Israel.
Romney worked at at Boston Consulting Group from 1975 to 1977; Mr. Netanyahu was involved
from 1976 to 1978. But a month after Netanyahu arrived, he returned to Israel to start an
antiterrorism foundation in memory of his brother, an officer killed while leading the
hostage rescue force at Entebbe, Uganda. An aide said he sporadically returned to the company
over the rest of that two-year period.
Romney later decamped to Bain & Company, a rival of Boston Consulting. They did,
however, maintain a significant link: at Bain, Mr. Romney worked closely with Fleur Cates,
Netanyahu's second wife. (Cates and Netanyahu divorced in the mid-1980s, but she remained in
touch with Romney.)
Netanyahu paid him a visit to Romney when the latter became the governor of Massachusetts.
Netanyahu, who had recently stepped down as Israel's finance minister, regaled Romney with
stories of how he had challenged unionized workers over control of their pensions and
privatized formerly government-run industries. He encouraged Romney to look for ways to do
the same.
"Government," Romney recalled Netanyahu saying, "is the guy on your shoulders."
As governor, Mr. Romney said, he frequently repeated the story to the heads of various
agencies.
A few years later, Romney had dinner with Mr. Netanyahu at a private home in central
Jerusalem. Before he left Israel, Romney set up several meetings with government officials in
the United States for his old colleague. "I immediately saw the wisdom of his thinking,"
Romney claimed. Back in Massachusetts, Mr. Romney sent out letters to legislators requesting
that the public pension funds they controlled sell off investments from corporations doing
business with Iran.
Netanyahu maintained contact with Romney during the presidential campaign. When Newt
Gingrich leaped to the top of the polls, an article in January 2012 explored why billionaire
oligarch Sheldon Adelson was devoting millions of dollars to back Gingrich. It described
Netanyahu and Adelson as close friends. Netanyahu's office quickly relayed a message to a
senior Romney adviser, Dan Senor claiming that the Israeli prime minister had played no role
in Adelson's decision to bankroll a Romney rival.
Fast forward to the 2016 US presidential election.
Trump's purported deviation from US foreign policy orthodoxy was a propaganda scam
engineered by the pro-Israel Lobby from the very beginning.
Trump received the "Liberty Award" for his contributions to US-Israel relations at a 3
February 2015 gala hosted by The Algemeiner Journal, a New York-based newspaper, covering
American and international Jewish and Israel-related news.
After the event, Trump did not renew his television contract for The Apprentice, which
raised speculation about a Trump bid for the presidency. Trump announced his candidacy in
June 2015.
Trump's questioning of Israel's commitment to peace, calls for even treatment in
Israeli-Palestinian deal-making, and refusal to call for Jerusalem to be Israel's undivided
capital, were all stage-managed for the campaign.
Stage management of both the Trump administration and its Republican and Democratic
"opposition" continues apace.
The Israeli government, via the machinations of the pro-Israel Lobby, is an ever more
aggressively warmongering "guy on your shoulders".
"Russia-gate" really is about an immense conspiracy to "do things".
The primary "thing", the key pretext that Lazare and other CN contributors steadfastly
ignore:
The "Russia-gate" fiction was specifically designed to divert attention from the reality
of "Israel-gate".
Trump Administration Withholds Information That Could Debunk Russian Interference
Claims
Lavrov responded first to the question. He said that there is no evidence that shows any
Russian interference in the U.S. elections. He continued:
Speaking about the most recent US presidential campaign in particular, we have had in
place an information exchange channel about potential unintended risks arising in cyberspace
since 2013. From October 2016 (when the US Democratic Administration first raised this issue)
until January 2017 (before Donald Trump's inauguration), this channel was used to handle
requests and responses. Not so long ago, when the attacks on Russia in connection with the
alleged interference in the elections reached their high point, we proposed publishing this
exchange of messages between these two entities, which engage in staving off cyberspace
incidents. I reminded Mr Pompeo about this today. The administration, now led by President
Trump, refused to do so. I'm not sure who was behind this decision, but the idea to publish
this data was blocked by the United States. However, we believe that publishing it would
remove many currently circulating fabrications. Of course, we will not unilaterally make
these exchanges public, but I would still like to make this fact known.
The communication channel about cyber issues did indeed exist. In June 2013 the Presidents
of the United States and Russia issued a Joint Statement about "Information and
Communications Technologies (ICTs)". The parties agreed to establishing communication
channels between each other computer emergency response teams, to use the direct
communication link of the Nuclear Risk Reduction Centers for cyber issue exchanges, and to
have direct communication links between high-level officials in the White House and Kremlin
for such matter. A Fact Sheet published by the Obama White House detailed the implementation
of these three channels.
One inference from Lavrov's statement is that the "fundamental understanding on this
matter" between the two presidents that has "not been fully implemented" is the release of
the communications about cyberspace incidents. The Russians clearly think that a release of
the communications with the Obama administration would exculpate them. That would also
exculpate Trump from any further collusion allegations. Why then does the Trump
administration reject the release? Who is blocking it?
Cont. reading: Trump Administration Withholds Information That Could Debunk Russian
Interference Claims
"... In 2018, Bahia Amawi, a Palestinian-American speech pathologist, filed a lawsuit against the Pflugerville Independent School District in Austin, Texas, and the Texas state attorney general, after she had been forced out of the job she had for 9 years for refusing to sign a pro-Israel pledge in her contract. ..."
"... Amawi said in a radio interview that she didn't "want to support [Israel's] ongoing occupation and aggression and subhumane treatment of the Palestinians, that's making me kind of like a silent participant complicit with the whole occupation". ..."
The late Uri Avnery (1923-2018), the doughty Israeli seeker of peace with the Palestinian
people, posted almost weekly on CounterPunch .
Avnery was savvy enough to know that the Zionist failure to achieve peace with the
Palestinians meant that Israel could never be a "normal" state, no matter how much it
pretended, hypocritically, to be a "democracy" adhering to "Western values".
Avnery would have been aghast, but not surprised, at the turn of events taking place shortly
before or after his death– Trump recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital (both
Palestine and Israel claim Jerusalem as their capital, and it will take a peace deal, and not
unilateral action on Israel's part, in order resolve this dispute); closing down the Palestine
Liberation Organisation office in Washington; reducing direct aid and aid to the UN agency
aiding Palestinian refugees; recognizing Israel's illegal annexation of the Golan Heights; and
supporting Netanyahu in his recent pledge to begin annexing Israel's illegal settlements in the
West Bank.
The aid reductions involved cutting $200 million in direct aid to Gaza and the West Bank and
the freezing of another $300 million dollars provided annually to the UN agency for Palestinian
refugees (UNRWA).
After Ramadan, taking place currently, Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, will announce
what Trump, with characteristic carnival-barker hyperbole, calls the "deal of the
century".
... ... ...
In 2018, Bahia Amawi, a Palestinian-American speech pathologist, filed a lawsuit against
the Pflugerville Independent School District in Austin, Texas, and the Texas state attorney
general, after she had been forced out of the job she had for 9 years for refusing to sign a
pro-Israel pledge in her contract.
Amawi said in a
radio interview that she didn't "want to support [Israel's] ongoing occupation and aggression
and subhumane treatment of the Palestinians, that's making me kind of like a silent participant
complicit with the whole occupation".
Amawi's lawyer said in the same radio interview: "Bahia would be disqualified from working
for any school district in the state that's following this law, simply because she chooses not
to buy, for instance, Sabra hummus. So her grocery store decision to not buy Sabra hummus and
to buy instead another kind of hummus automatically, under this law, disqualifies her from all
public employees -- all public employment of all kinds".
Trump and Kushner clearly believe their "deal of the century" will help "normalize"
dealings between the Palestinians and their ethnocidal colonial occupier, even though nothing
is "normal" when it comes to Israel's treatment of the Palestinian people.
... ... ...
Kenneth Surin teaches at Duke University, North Carolina. He lives in Blacksburg,
Virginia.
"... While promoting pluralism and diversity and encouraging the dissolution of the racial and ethnic identification of Europeans, Jews have simultaneously endeavored to maintain precisely the kind of intense group solidarity they decry as immoral in others and the great majority support an ethno-nationalist Israel. They have initiated and led movements that have discredited the traditional foundations of Western society: patriotism, the Christian basis for morality, social homogeneity, and sexual restraint. At the same time, within their own communities, they have supported the very institutions they have attacked in Western societies. This is ruthless, uncompromising Darwinian group competition played out in the human cultural arena. ..."
"... Jewish writer David Cole recently questioned the wisdom of this strategy of using non-Whites as “golem” to protect the Jews from a recrudescence of National Socialism. He notes that many of the Jews’ non-White pets (like Ilhan Omar) have a disconcerting tendency to turn on their Jewish masters ..."
"... In the minds of Jewish leaders and activists nurtured since birth on the cult of “the Holocaust,” White nationalism is still the most ominous threat to Jewish survival. This is reflected in the unquestioning commitment of the vast majority of Jewish activists and intellectuals (Cole excepted) to mass non-White immigration and multiculturalism in all historically White nations. ..."
Despite the Jewish domination of the American Left in the post-War period, Mendes notes that "most Americans do not appear to
have adhered to the same anti-Semitic assumptions about Jewish links with communism that dominated public opinion in parts of Europe."
[80] Ibid .,
229.
(Philip Mendes, Jews and the Left: The Rise and Fall of a Political Alliance (Melbourne, Victoria; Palgrave MacMillian, 2014),
250.) As evidence of this, Mendes cites the decidedly muted public response to the conviction and execution of Julius and Ethel
Rosenberg for selling atomic secrets to the Soviet Union. Despite the recognizably Jewish identity of the couple (given their name)
and of all of their co-conspirators (David Greenglass, Ruth Greenglass, and Morton Sobell), and the fact the Rosenberg spy network
consisted almost exclusively of Jews from the Lower East Side of Manhattan, the case "provoked remarkably little overt anti-Semitism."
[81] Ibid .,
230. Nor, he observes, did the "significant number of Jews -- including teachers and Hollywood actors -- who were victims of anti-communist
purges" and the prominence of Jews amongst those subpoenaed by the House Committee on Un-American Activities, lead to a significant
reaction. All public opinion polls conducted during this period showed a consistent decline in "anti-Semitism," and only a small
minority of those surveyed (about 5 percent) identified Jews with communism.
[82] Ibid .
The lack of any real backlash to Jewish prominence in the New Left is ascribed to various factors: that many members of the public
were not aware of the Jewish background of many of the radical leaders; that these Jewish radicals were ostensibly "not campaigning
about any specifically Jewish issues that would have focused attention on Jews per se;" and to the "general decline in anti-Semitism
since World War Two."
[83] Ibid .,
257. This latter shift in public opinion (unsurprisingly) coincided with the Jewish seizure of the commanding heights of American
(and Western) culture in the 1960s, and the growing emergence of the culture of "the Holocaust." The combined effect was to banish
overt critical discussion of Jewish power to the margins of public discourse. While Americans rejected communist activities during
the Cold War, unlike in Europe, they did not widely equate communism with Jews (at least publicly), or view Jewish participation
in leftist politics with particular concern.
Neoconservatism
Neoconservative leaders were among those who feared that the Jewish prominence in the New Left of the late 1960s and early 1970s
would fuel a conservative backlash against Jewish radicalism. For example, Norman Podhoretz, the editor of
Commentary magazine, attacked leading Jewish
leftists as alleged self-hating Jews and completely unrepresentative of the Jewish community.
[84] Ibid .,
22.
Mendes ascribes the defection of many Jews from the radical left to neoconservatism in the 1970s to a growing misalignment between
modern Leftist politics and Jewish ethnic interests: the key factor being "the creation of the State of Israel which transformed
Jewish dependence from international to national forces."
[85] Ibid .,
viii. With the advent of the state of Israel, Jewish interests were no longer exclusively represented by the universalistic agendas
of the Left. According to Mendes: "Most Jews have lost their faith in universalistic causes because they do not perceive the Left
as supportive of Jewish interests, and have turned instead to nationalist solutions."
[86] Ibid .,
235.
The creation of a Jewish national entity featuring (thanks to US taxpayers) a strong and powerful army meant that Jews all over
the world could look to the Zionist state to safeguard their interests, rather than depending on internationalist movements and ideologies
(i.e. communism and the Soviet Union) which had often proven to be unreliable allies. Even many left-wing Jews, who might have been
anti-Zionist prior to World War Two, shifted their position after the birth of Israel. For example, the long-time Austrian Jewish
leftist Jean Amery commented in 1976:
There is a very deep tie and existential bond between every Jew and the State of Israel Jews feel bound to the fortunes and
misfortunes of Israel, whether they are religious Jews or not, whether they adhere to Zionism or reject it, whether they are newly
arrived in their host countries or deeply rooted there The Jewish State has taught all the Jews of the world to walk with their
head high once more Israel is the virtual shelter for all of the insulted and injured Jews of the earth.
[87] Ibid
., 236-37
The perceived anti-Zionism of the New Left from the 1967 onwards served to alienate many Jews and confirm their commitment to nationalist,
rather than internationalist solutions. An additional factor was the 1967 Six Day War in the Middle East, which provoked fears of
"another Holocaust," and galvanized even non-Zionist Jews in support of Israel. There were rallies in support of Israel throughout
the Western world accompanied by large donations. American Jews held massive fundraising campaigns and reportedly raised 180 million
dollars. Numerous volunteers travelled to Israel to support the Jewish State. In Australia, more than 20 per cent of a total Jewish
population of 34,000 in Melbourne -- attended a public rally to express their support for Israel, and 2500 attended a youth rally.
750 young Jews volunteered to go to Israel. According to Taft,
there was a widespread, almost universal, absorption in the Middle East Crisis of June among the Jews of Melbourne. This absorption
took the form of extreme concern about the safety of Israel, emotional upsets, obsessive seeking of news, constant discussion
of events and taking spontaneous actions to support Israel's cause.
[88] Ibid
., 238.
The rise of left-wing anti-Zionism after the Six Day War furthered alienated sections of Western Jewry from the social democratic
Left. Another factor that pushed American Jews in a neoconservative direction, identified by Mendes, was the decline in Black–Jewish
relations. The emergence of the Black Power movement in the mid-1960s led to the removal of Jews from the leadership of organizations
like the NAACP. Black hostility was viewed by some Jews as evidence of the failure of the strategy of courting non-White groups to
advance Jewish interests. This ostensible failure prompted many Jews to concentrate on a narrower ethnic self-interest in the future.
[89] Ibid .,
243.
This, in turn, contributed to the creation of "pragmatic alliances" with conservative political parties such as the Republicans
and evangelical groups such as Christians United for Israel which "have been consistent supporters of Israel in the USA." An associated
factor was that pro-Israel perspectives within Western countries increasingly emanated from mainstream conservatives, rather than
from the moderate or radical Left. This occurred despite "many in these groups hold socially conservative views on issues such as
abortion, homosexuality, the environment, multiculturalism, state support for the poor and disadvantaged, and refugees, which are
anathema to many Jews."
[90] Ibid .,
287.
Mendes makes the point that "These alliances were based solely on the latter's position of support for Israel, irrespective of
their conservative views on social issues such as abortion, homosexuality and the welfare state, which were often sharply at odds
with the more liberal opinions of most Jews."
[91] Ibid .,
239.
Despite the defection on many Jews from the radical left to neoconservatism, the great majority of American Jews still see their
ethnic interests as basically aligning with the Democratic Party. Their willingness to prioritize their ethnic interests over their
personal economic interests is reflected in the fact that "high numbers of affluent Jews compared to others of the same socioeconomic
status still vote for moderate left parties that do not seem to favor their economic interests." Today, the structural factors which
historically drew many Jews to the Left no longer exist. Most Jews sit comfortably in middle- or even higher-income categories. This
"middle-classing" of Jews throughout the West has meant that the "Jewish proletariat that motivated Jewish identification with left-wing
beliefs no longer exists."
[92] Ibid .,
239. Consequently, "the specific link between Jewish experience of class oppression and adherence to left-wing ideology has ended."
[93] Ibid .,
241.
Most Western Jews still support parties on the Left
Despite the widespread break with the radical Left over support for Israel, Jews nevertheless remain
a “massively significant presence” in the Left in terms of their numbers and fundraising, their organizational capacity, and their
impact on popular culture.[94]Ibid.,
287. It was estimated that about a quarter of the world’s leading Marxist and radical intellectuals in the 1980s
were still Jews, including Ernest Mandel, Nathan Weinstock, Maxime Rodinson, Noam Chomsky, Marcel Liebman, Ralph Miliband, and the
founder of deconstructionism, Jacques Derrida. Despite continuing to comprise much of the intellectual and financial backbone of
the Left, today’s Jews, “an influential and sometimes powerful group, with substantial access to politics, academia and the media,”
no longer must “rely on the Left to defend their interests and wellbeing.”[95]Ibid.,
286.
The primary reason most Western Jews still vote overwhelmingly
for parties on the left is the perceived threat posed by the “social conservatism” of parties further to the right of the political
spectrum in nations whose majorities are European-derived and nominally at least Christian:
With the possible exception of ultra-orthodox groups, Jews
seem to prefer social liberal positions on issues such as religious pluralism, abortion, feminism, illicit drugs, same-sex marriage,
the science of climate change and euthanasia. Another significant factor is the long history of Christian anti-Semitism has led
Jews to remain suspicious of any attempts by Christian religious groups to undermine the separation of church and state. This
fear of organized religion [and of the White people who practice it] seems to explain the continued strong support of American
Jews for the Democratic Party in presidential elections. A further complicating factor is the growing universalization of Jewish
teachings and values, including the lessons of the Holocaust, in support of social liberal perspectives. … For example, Berman
(2006) presents evidence that the younger Jewish generation in Australia have been influenced by the experience of the Holocaust
into taking a strong stand against any forms of racial or religious discrimination. Many are active in campaigns for indigenous
rights, and to support refugees from Afghanistan, Sudan, and Middle Eastern countries seeking asylum in Australia.[96]Ibid.,
288-89.
This advocacy is, of course, entirely hypocritical and cynical.
While promoting pluralism and diversity and encouraging the dissolution of the racial and ethnic identification of Europeans, Jews
have simultaneously endeavored to maintain precisely the kind of intense group solidarity they decry as immoral in others and the
great majority support an ethno-nationalist Israel. They have initiated and led movements that have discredited the traditional foundations
of Western society: patriotism, the Christian basis for morality, social homogeneity, and sexual restraint. At the same time, within
their own communities, they have supported the very institutions they have attacked in Western societies. This is ruthless, uncompromising
Darwinian group competition played out in the human cultural arena.
The ideological preoccupations of organized Jewry today are
reflected in comments by
Boston Globe writer, S.I. Rosenbaum, who insisted the main lesson of “the Holocaust” is “that white supremacy could
turn on us at any moment,” and the strategy of appealing to the White majority “has never worked for us. It didn’t protect us in
Spain, or England, or France, or Germany. There’s no reason to think it will work now.” The central question of Jewish political
engagement in Western societies, she insists, is “how we survive as a minority population,” where the one great advantage American
Jewry enjoys is that “unlike other places where ethno-nationalism has flourished, the U.S. is fast approaching a plurality of minorities.”
Presiding over a coalition of non-Whites groups to actively oppose White interests is the Jewish ethno-political imperative: “If
Jews are going to survive in the future, we will have to stand with people of color for our mutual benefit.”
Jewish writer David Cole recently
questioned the wisdom of this strategy of using non-Whites as “golem” to protect the Jews from a recrudescence of National Socialism.
He notes that many of the Jews’ non-White pets (like Ilhan Omar) have a disconcerting tendency to turn on their Jewish masters:
For decades, leftist Jews have been flooding the West with
Third World immigrants, “Hey here’s a plan—lets dump a hundred thousand Somalis in the whitest parts of the U.S.
That’ll
save us from Fargo Hitler!” Inundating the West with non-White immigrants is seen by Jews as an insurance policy against “white
supremacy.” The idea is that these immigrants will act as a wedge, diluting “white power” while remaining small enough to be manageable.
Jews have done this everywhere—playing two groups against
each other as a way of assuring Jewish security. Let’s play Hamas against the Palestinian authority. Let’s play ISIS against Assad.
… But today we live in a world in which even the lowliest bark-eater in the Kalahari can have internet access. It’s not as easy
to fool entire groups anymore (individuals, sure, but not an entire race, ethnicity or faction). …
And now we Jews, so worried that Minnesota might become the
Frozen Fourth Reich if left in the hands of evil whites, have created for ourselves a good old-fashioned golem in Ilhan Omar (and
a bunch of the other Third World freshman congressthingies). Yeah, Omar hates whites. Yeah, she thinks white supremacy lurks behind
every glass of milk and “OK” finger sign. But she hates Jews a hell of a lot more…
In a perfect world, the Rabbinical Rain Men would finally
get the fuck over the Holocaust and end their war of hostility against the West. They’d see that whites are no longer the enemy,
but indeed the opposite. They’d see that importing foreign mud to mold golem in traditionally white regions of the U.S is bad
strategy.
In the minds of Jewish leaders and activists nurtured since birth on the cult of “the Holocaust,” White nationalism
is still the most ominous threat to Jewish survival. This is reflected in the unquestioning commitment of the vast majority of Jewish
activists and intellectuals (Cole excepted) to mass non-White immigration and multiculturalism in all historically White nations.
Conclusion
While Jews and the Left offers a useful catalogue
of Jewish involvement in radical political movements throughout the world over the last two centuries, it recycles many of the same
apologetic tropes that permeate the work of other Jewish historians and intellectuals. Mendes mischaracterizes the Jewish identity
and affiliations of important Jewish communist leaders (like Lazar Kaganovich), and offers no examination of their often-murderous
actions. He provides feeble apologies for the Jewish practices that engendered hostility among the native peasantry in the Pale of
Settlement. The inherent weakness of his position necessitates specious argumentation and desperate resort to that evergreen of Jewish
apologetic historiography: the innate irrationality and malevolence of the European mind and character. This is the invariable fallback
position in any quest to exculpate Jews from responsibility for the crimes of communism in the Soviet Union and throughout Eastern
Europe. Though less inclined than Brossat and Klingberg in Revolutionary Yiddishland to glorify Jewish communist militants,
Mendes is equally keen to evade, whitewash and excuse disproportionate Jewish involvement in some of the worst crimes of the twentieth
century.
Javier Fernandez2 years
ago The men were detained by NYPD. The police and FBI field agents became suspicious when
they found maps of the city with certain places highlighted, box cutters (the same items that
the hijackers allegedly used), $4,700 cash stuffed in a sock, and foreign passports. Police
also told a New Jersey local paper, The Bergen Record, that bomb sniffing dogs were brought to
the van and that they reacted as if they had smelled explosives. According to the Jewish Weekly
Forward the FBI later determined that at least two of the Israelis were Mossad agents.
Sivan Kurzberg & Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Schmuel, Oded Ellner &Omer Marmari. "We are
not your problem"?
According to ABC News 20/20, after these five Israelis were detained, the driver of the van
- Sivan Kurzberg - told the officers: "We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems
are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem." BananaRepublican4 years
ago To be sort of honest, The amount of stories for conspiracy leading to the twin tower
collapse doesn't mean we can singly pin it on the jews, Technically there would have to be U.S.
involvement. Paul Abbott4 years ago
Suspicious??? -documenting a supposedly unpredictable event
An analysis of the history, size, scope and activities of Israel affinity organizations and
their increasingly negative -- but little known -- impact on all Americans.
Israel moved US to destroy the middle east, slaughter millions, destroyed economies, put
people in their worst spot of living, ... Well Bibi said it right, they are moving USA based
on their own evil goals. ...
Before 1949 Israel did not exist. President Truman took a $2million bribe to recognize
Israel as a Country. Ironically Trump just recognized Jerusalem as it's Capital. How much did
he get?
Palestine ought to be recognized as a sovereign nation. Israel the biggest terrorist
state:A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing. But ain't Britain and America are the guilty culprits of
this great injustice?? Let justice prevail for Palestine.
THE JEW does NOTHING if, somehow it doesn't benefit the JEW. The JEW a true parasite,
loyal only to themselves, has no 'friends' just VICTIMS the JEW CALLS "FRIEND'. Joe
Magnets
"Is the Israel lobby good or bad for the USA?" Bad! VERY bad! And not just for the USA,
but for the whole of the rest of the world. The Zionists are a danger to ALL the Goyim (ie,
anyone who is NOT a 'Jew'), whom they are taught by their Talmud (their execrable so-called
'book of law'; a book which actually renders the whole concept of law meaningless!) exist
ONLY to serve the Jews.
The Zionist banksters have effectively ensured that this is true by
using their fraudulent method of money-creation, fractional reserve lending, to enslave the
entire populations of any and all countries which have a 'Federal Reserve' or 'Central Bank';
which, btw, are a) privately owned, and b) neither 'federal' nor a 'reserve'...
The clever
bit is that most people in said countries understand somehow that they are being turned into
slaves; they just can't understand quite how, or by whom. This is due to the almost total
nature of Jewish media ownership as these are constantly and consistently used to
propagandize Israeli-generated perceptions of a 'reality' which is in fact far removed from
what is presented to 'We the People' (of the world). The truth is that Israel is a
nuclear-armed, rogue, terrorist state, whose ruling party is comprised entirely of
terrorists, and whose prime monster - I mean 'minister' - is also a known terrorist who
recently celebrated the 70th anniversary of the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem,
PALESTINE, in 1946. (Typically, a false flag operation by the Jewish terrorist organization, Irgun, against the British, without whose help Israel would not exist...)
We also know that
the ZIONAZI NWO have an agenda to depopulate the planet (Agenda 21) AND IT HAS ALREADY BEGUN!
Is the world just going to sit on its ass and wait until the Zionists complete their plans
for a global JEWISH empire? It's virtually complete already... but I don't think they'll
announce their global empire until they have first completed the borders of their prophesied
(read 'planned') 'Eretz Yishrael'... "From the Nile to the Euphrates..." and that's also very
near to completion.
We also know that Israel's modus operandi is to use not only
'pre-emptive' strikes but also false flag attacks... so are we going to just sit around and
wait until they start treating the rest of the world like the Syrians and Palestinians.
"Today 'Eretz Yishrael'... tomorrow THE WORLD!" FFS WAKE UP WORLD, AND BE WARNED!
Salute to these great brave honest caring people, for these great presentations.
Joe Magnets, 1 year ago
The 'dept of justice' should have a name change to 'dept of JUST US JEWS'.
Joe Magnets
T he1 year ago
The US GIVES $1.9 billion every year. Not loan we GIVE that plus a total of other assistance that is classified.
What is the true nature of our relationship with Israel?
A Zambrano, 4 months ago
Here is a social experiment anyone can carry out via twitter, tweet a war crime carried out by Israel, don't use the word
Jew or Jewish, just Israel, I can guarantee someone will tweet a very vulgar antisemitic remark, I obviously block such
accounts but one day I checked the person who posted the ant Jewish comments and it was anonymous but if you click on the
likes you will see that person is a Zionist from Israel who wants to change the topic from Israeli war crimes to the Jewish
faith just so they can switch accounts and call you an antisemite
Velvet M, 2 months ago
35 billion a year to Israel
American taxpayers pay
35 billion a year
Steve dell, 2 months ago
Trump approves the allocation of $38 billion to Israel in 2018. Israel has the largest lobbyist group in the US to
continue the
US spending million on them. What Israel is doing to Palestine’s is the same as what Saudi Arabia is doing to Yemen.
Why do humans die, 1 month ago
It's the other way.. Colonialists are promoting Israel.. And the reason in very clear.. That's the only way they can
occupy the middle East....
Israel is actually a command and control centre of Americans... Every kids knows it..
The middle East is Full of highly valuable natural resources such as crude oil.. and fuels are the backbone of all vehicles,
factories, manufacturing, transport, electricity etc.. control over it is control over the world... Guys in America realized
it.. After all we know colonialists are highly interested in ruling the world.. Cunning guys..
Claus Bohm, 2 months ago (edited)
Survival of Israel should be important ... but that is not the problem! They have played on the David vs Goliath until NOW
they are Goliath!
Cheryl Brandon, 3 months ago
Thank you Grant E Smith; I have your book.Spytrade
Keep it Reel Fishing, 2 months ago (edited)
Israel is a cancer. They are also the ones behind 9-11 . All evidence points to It
Jewish lobby does not represent the views of the US Jewish population. They represent a small number of rich donors
(concentration is just staggering) and of course Israeli government. Those organization are non-representative authoritarian
bodies with a lot of functionaries serving for life or extremly long tenures.
Notable quotes:
"... One stunning example of this influence occurred recently. At one time during the nominating process for the Republican candidate for President in the current election, every single aspirant to the nomination made a pilgrimage to Las Vegas to kiss the money ring of Sheldon Adelson, whose only declared interests are Israel and online gambling. This is the same super-patriot Sheldon Adelson who wanted Mitt Romney to pardon Jonathan Pollard, should Romney become President with Adelson's financial backing. ..."
The latest in the powerful series of titles written by
Grant Smith. Highly recommended factual, documented and accessible data that should
be required reading for high school students as well as their parents.!
Superb compilation of organizations that receive tax exempt status in the US that work
exclusively on behave of a foreign nation, Israel,often to the pronounced determent of the US
interests and policies. Would have been a tedious read for someone well acquainted with
Israeli machinations, but for someone new to the subject the anger that the revelations
produce makes the reading of this book a disquietening breeze. Read more
This is an important book, the latest from Grant F. Smith in the line of his previous
investigations into what was referred to as, the "Zionist Occupied Government", an earlier,
intuitive, non-systematic conjecture about Zionism's amazing insider access to, and influence
of, U.S. foreign policy. It is interesting that Wikipedia describes the "ZOG" exclusively as
an anti-semitic conspiracy theory attributed to a list of unsavory persons and racist
organizations.
On the one hand, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee puts on a very
public celebration every spring, the "policy conference", that is a pep rally of mandatory
attendance by national Administration and Congressional people to celebrate Zionism. That
event is public. But on the other hand, as Grant Smith analyzes, the "Israel Affinity
Organizations" of the United States are a different archipelago.
As to what extent these
organizations are legitimate lobbies, versus being mis-identified agents of a foreign power,
I won't attempt to summarize, or, "give away" the content of the book; it is for people to
read for themselves, to be informed, and to think for themselves.
Grant Smith presents
numbers, names, and dates, to be reviewed and challenged by anyone who wants to. There is
precedent for that. The USS Liberty attack by Israel was defended as a tragic mistake by
author A. Jay Cristol, in his book, "The Liberty Incident". The Wiesenthal Center
commissioned the author, Harold Brackman, to write, "Ministry of Lies, the Truth Behind the
'Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews' ". That referenced book was by the Nation of
Islam. With facts in hand, the Electorate is empowered to make informed decisions about the
US national interest, relative to Zionism.
Another good book is by Alison Weir on essentially the same subject, "Against Our Better
Judgement, the Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel". The Amazon servers,
for that book review are loaded with discussions, which can be seen under that title. The
Amazon book reviews are a valuable national resource that can be a place to survey public
opinion, even with the factor that positives have less motivation than negatives to inspire
writing an essay.
It is obvious why there is no middle ground in the reviews here, at least at this time-
Wonderful, informative and important book. Read more One
person found this helpful
No matter what your values -- Christian, Enlightenment, social justice, international law,
natural law, the Kantian imperative, crimes against humanity, Judaism's own values (Israel "a
light unto the nations" Isaiah 49:6) -- what Israel has done and is doing to the Palestinians
is morally wrong.
Sure. People have done bad things to other people forever, but this evil is orchestrated by a
large Zionist organization from all over the world. And the US is being made complicit in
this immoral undertaking in the numerous ways Grant Smith explores in his book.
Exposing America's unfortunate entanglement is why he wrote this excellent book: 300 pages
and 483 footnotes of support for the claims he makes.
The American democratic process is being corrupted at every level in the interests of Israel,
and Smith gives chapter and verse on how this is being done.
One stunning example of this influence occurred recently. At one time during the nominating
process for the Republican candidate for President in the current election, every single
aspirant to the nomination made a pilgrimage to Las Vegas to kiss the money ring of Sheldon
Adelson, whose only declared interests are Israel and online gambling. This is the same
super-patriot Sheldon Adelson who wanted Mitt Romney to pardon Jonathan Pollard, should
Romney become President with Adelson's financial backing.
In addition, Haim Saban of the Brookings Institution plays a similar role in the Democratic
party. He has said: "I'm a one-issue guy, and my issue is Israel." He has promised to
contribute as much money as needed to elect Hillary Clinton, someone who believes that Israel
has a right to exist as a "Jewish state," with Jerusalem (an international city for millenia)
as its capital (something no country in the world approves of, not even the USA).
Is this the American democratic process in action?
Is this what the Constitution intends?
Is this our America?
Grant discusses in supported detail the areas of dual citizenship and dual loyalties
(American citizens in the Israeli Defense Force); espionage (industrial and military); yearly
billions to Israel with no benefit to the US; media control (no debating the facts of
history; no Palestinians allowed to articulate and disseminate their narrative); tax
exemption for money which goes to Jewish interests as well as the illegal settlements in
Israel; perversion of education (forced Holocaust information but no discussion;
anti-assimilation); foreign policy (the war with Iraq for the benefit of Israel; the
demonization of Iran; no condemnation of Israel's nuclear capability in spite of the
Non-Proliferation Treaty; use of the veto in the UN in Israel's interests; Middle East
"regime change" wars); Israeli and Jewish influence in Congress (money, intense lobbying by
AIPAC and free trips to Israel), and financial contributions only to candidates who are
unequivocally pro-Israel, in some cases very large sums of money.
The point is that all of this is being done in spite of the wishes and best interests of the American people and even of
Israel. It's not as though the American people voted to do bad things to the Palestinians: kill them, starve them, imprison
them, steal from them, and control them. Quite the opposite: as Grant Smith explains, unbiased polls indicate that most
Americans show no such support for Israel's mistreatment of the Palestinians and believe that if both sides would abide by
international law, the Geneva Conventions, and the UN resolutions relating to Palestine, peace could be achieved between Jews
and Arabs in Palestine.
But Zionism has a different agenda, an agenda that will use any means legal and illegal to
promote its interests by getting the United States to back it up.
And that agenda is the problem because it is built on non-negotiable beliefs.
What can you say to someone who believes that the Bible mandates the establishment of a
Jewish homeland in Palestine to the exclusion of the indigenous inhabitants?
Or, as Rabbi Ovaida Yosef said in 2010, that "The Goyim [non-Jews] are born only in order to
serve us. Besides this, they have no place on earth -- only to serve the people Israel."
Not surprisingly, the never-ending "peace process" goes on and on, with no peace in
sight.
The US, in spite of itself, continues to support this cruel charade against its own interests
and at the expense of neighbors, friends, allies and innocent parties in Palestine and
elsewhere in the world.
Grant Smith's excellent book is an attempt to raise America's awareness to the point that
something might be done.
"... Those who have been following the Trump administration drama since the beginning might remember that, after initially welcoming Kelly as a "steady hand" and "adult in the room" who would bring order to a chaotic West Wing, Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump swiftly turned on the former general, and their months-long power struggle become fodder for endless anonymously sourced reports and reprisals. ..."
"... That feud apparently left a bad taste in Kelly's mouth that just won't go away. Which is probably why, five months after being 'liberated' from the West Wing, Kelly felt comfortable publicly expressing his distaste for the two - in his own reserved way, not mentioning the couple by name - Trump Administration senior advisors during an interview with David Rubenstein on Bloomberg TV . ..."
"... And in what sounded suspiciously like ingratitude toward his host, Kelly said he had removed a few "very disruptive" people from the administration after arriving in the West Wing, and was struck by the "intense personal ambition" of some of his staffers. ..."
by Tyler Durden
Wed, 05/08/2019 - 20:00 0 SHARES TwitterFacebookRedditEmailPrint John Kelly has had a few months to reflect on his
tumultuous tenure as White House Chief of Staff. And though he's apparently forgiven the
president for the angry tweets and public rebukes, which helped fuel persistent rumors about
his impending firing, the former general still holds a grudge against his former West Wing
antagonist: Javanka. Those who have been following the Trump administration drama since the
beginning might remember that, after initially welcoming Kelly as a "steady hand" and "adult in
the room" who would bring order to a chaotic West Wing, Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump swiftly
turned on the former general, and their months-long power struggle become fodder for endless
anonymously sourced reports and reprisals.
That feud apparently left a bad taste in Kelly's mouth that just won't go away. Which is
probably why, five months after being 'liberated' from the West Wing, Kelly felt comfortable
publicly expressing his distaste for the two - in his own reserved way, not mentioning the
couple by name - Trump Administration senior advisors during an interview with
David Rubenstein on Bloomberg TV .
Kelly told Rubenstein that members of the Trump family serving in the administration needed
to be "dealt with" - even if Kelly wasn't the one to do it.
"They were an influence that has to be dealt with," Kelly said Tuesday during an interview
on Bloomberg Television's "The David Rubenstein Show," when asked whether it was complicated
to have the president's family working at the White House. "By no means do I mean Mrs. Trump
- the first lady's a wonderful person."
The Marine general sat for the interview in Las Vegas, where he was attending Anthony
Scaramucci's SALT conference (ironic because one of the first things Kelly did after arriving
in the West Wing was fire Scaramucci over an unhinged rant published in the New Yorker where
Scaramucci accused Steve Bannon of trying to "suck his own c*ck").
And in what sounded
suspiciously like ingratitude toward his host, Kelly said he had removed a few "very
disruptive" people from the administration after arriving in the West Wing, and was struck by
the "intense personal ambition" of some of his staffers.
I would have more respect for Kelly, if he bayoneted both Bolton and Pompeo on his way out
the door. That would have been the "Marine" thing to do, and would have been a greater
service to the country and the world.
"... War is likely to start in the Middle East as Iran, Lebanon and Syria are relatively soft targets with only limited capability to strike back. As neocon pundit Michael Ledeen put it , " Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business ." ..."
With the appointment of leading neoconservative John Bolton as National Security Advisor,
the Zionist war-party takeover of
the White House is nearly complete. With Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State, Nikki Haley at the U.N.
and now Bolton whispering in the President's ear, we have a fully endowed war cabinet that will
make sure the Mullahs, Russkies and Rocket Man begin to pay attention. As Haley laid down the
law in the United Nations recently, "Our patience is not unlimited."
Bolton, the point man for Israeli-American
casino billionaire and GOP kingmaker Sheldon Adelson , will be the spark plug that ignites
a new round of warfare on behalf of Israel. Bolton has long been planning to attack Iran. He
secretly and illegally met with Israel's Mossad intelligence service in 2003-4 when he was
in the State Department under George W. Bush to lay the groundwork for such a conflict. Today,
right-wing Israelis are certainly cheering his appointment. Naftali Bennett, a member of Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's security cabinet,
has already praised the move, calling Bolton "an extraordinary security expert, experienced
diplomat and a stalwart friend of Israel".
War is likely to start in the Middle East as Iran, Lebanon and Syria are relatively soft
targets with only limited capability to strike back. As neocon pundit Michael Ledeen put it , " Every ten years
or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against
the wall, just to show the world we mean business ." There have been numerous indications
that Israel is preparing for war. Its planning clearly includes deliberately involving the
United States in the conflict, turning American soldiers into de facto hostages, with U.S.
casualties guaranteeing Washington's direct and immediate involvement in the fighting.
Largely unknown to the American public, the United States
has just completed the largest ever joint military exercises with Israel even though it has
no defense agreement or treaty with Tel Aviv. That is, in part, because military alliances are
dependent on an attack on one partner mandating support from all parties to the agreement.
Israel has balked at such an arrangement because it cannot define its own borders, which are
constantly expanding.
The recent maneuvers featured scenarios in which U.S. troops fought Syrians, Lebanese and
Palestinians in a mock-up Arab village to defend Israel. Washington's particularly
vulnerability vis-à-vis Israel derives from the recent
opening of a U.S. permanent facility at Mashabim Air Base in the Negev Desert.
It is described as a base within a base, completely contained by an Israeli air force
installation and operating "under Israeli military directives," meaning that if the facility is
attacked Americans will likely die. It has no function in support of U.S. regional interests
but is instead a shell facility with a few dozen airmen that can be ramped up considerably if
Israel goes to war and calls for American assistance. Together with billions of dollars-worth
of U.S. military equipment that is pre-positioned in Israel and can be used by the Israelis as
needed, it is all about supporting Israeli war-making and has nothing to do with American
security or defense interests except as a tripwire to bring about U.S. involvement.
For that reason, all of the above is something more than just the latest "we have to support
Israel" gimmick. The American soldiers and airmen who are now based in Israel are the
sacrificial lambs that will guarantee U.S. entry into a war that Israel intends to start, make
no mistake about that.
When Israel attacks Syria and/or Lebanon, as it clearly intends to do, Hezbollah will
retaliate with its missiles, some of which will surely be directed towards the Mashabim Air
Base, which will be targeted to inhibit the base's ability to bomb Lebanon. And once Washington
is well and truly engaged in what is referred to as "force protection," Israel will undoubtedly
widen the conflict by drawing Iran in through attacks on that country's identified bases in
Syria that are supporting the al-Assad government. The bigger war will suddenly become
America's responsibility after Israel inevitably proves itself incapable of handling the
escalation.
Israel was
, according to the Congressional Research Service, "the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign
assistance since World War II." In many ways, Wednesday's deal seemed predestined.
Yet, it's also ironic. Barack Obama has a notoriously cold relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu -- as my colleague Jeffrey Goldberg wrote in
The Atlantic
's April
cover story
, "Obama has long believed that Netanyahu could bring about a two-state solution" to the Israel-Palestine
conflict "that would protect Israel's status as a Jewish-majority democracy, but is too fearful and politically
paralyzed to do so." Nonetheless, Obama will leave office having out-pledged all of his predecessors in military support
to the country Netanyahu now runs.
Aid to Israel is among
the only static issues of this U.S. election season. While the Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has made
somewhat mixed statements
on the Israel-Palestine conflict, he has also made strongly worded promises to strengthen
the relationship between the United States and Israel. For her part, the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, has
consistently
touted
her support for Israel, including during her time as secretary of state.
Voters, however, have more mixed views on this kind of support. While more than 60 percent of Americans
were more sympathetic
to Israel than the Palestinians in a 2016 Gallup poll, sympathies differed along partisan
lines, with around half of Democrats being more sympathetic to Israelis versus nearly 80 percent of Republicans. In a
separate Brookings
poll
, roughly half of Democrats who responded said Israel has too much influence on the United States government.
Boycott, divest, and sanction movements, which call on organizations in the United States and abroad to cut their
financial ties with Israel, have long been popular on college campuses, although somewhat marginal; this year, however,
they got a boost from the Black Lives Matter movement, which
included
statements against Israel's treatment of Palestinians in its recently released policy platform.
In general, young Americans are far less sympathetic toward Israel than their older peers: A 2014 Gallup poll
found
that only half of those aged 18 to 34 favored Israel in the Israel-Palestine conflict, "compared with 58
percent of 35- to 54-year-olds and 74 percent of those 55 and older." Bernie Sanders, who was extremely popular among
young people during the Democratic primary season, controversially
criticized
Israel, winning "applause and cheers" from the audience at one debate for saying, "If we pursue justice
and peace, we are going to have to say that Netanyahu is not right all of the time."
All of this creates an odd backdrop for a historic military-spending deal. No matter how bad the relationship between
the two countries' top leaders, no matter who gets elected to the White House, no matter how loudly some voters voice
their opposition or how charged the underlying ideological debate: The United States has pragmatic reasons to keep
providing large sums of money for Israel's military.
There are straightforward explanations for why this particular deal got done. Politically, the spending package was
partly a response to the nuclear deal that the United States and other world powers
finalized
with Iran in July of last year, and which Obama hailed as cutting off Iran's pathway to nuclear weapons
for more than a decade. Netanyahu was harshly critical of that agreement, which
he called
a "historic mistake" that would ease sanctions on Iran while leaving it with the ability to one day get
the bomb. "Even with the deal in place, and taking the nuclear-weapon capability of Iran off the table at least for the
next 10 to 15 years, there are still considerable destabilizing activities that Iranians are pursuing in the region that
are not consistent with U.S. or Israeli interests or objectives," said Melissa Dalton, a senior fellow at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies. The new money is an attempt to pacify Israeli concerns about continued threats from
Iran, she added.
The money is also an attempt to satisfy congressional Republicans. The Obama administration
reportedly
asked Netanyahu to get Lindsey Graham, the head of the Senate foreign-affairs appropriations committee,
to agree to the deal. After it was signed, though, Graham released a statement indicating that Congress would not
necessarily adhere to the pre-determined funding levels. "I find it odd the [Memorandum] only allocates $500 million for
missile defense starting in 2018," he wrote, especially "given provocative Iranian behavior [and] improved Iranian
missile technology." While this may be the U.S.'s biggest-ever military-aid deal, the GOP has pushed for even greater
spending.
Defenders of the deal would say it's necessary. Dalton described the uptick in spending as a natural extension of the
long-standing relationship between the United States and Israel, "as well as close ties between those countries and
their peoples." She described the "fraught neighborhood" surrounding Israel: war-torn Syria to the northeast,
Hezbollah-influenced Lebanon to the north, and an Islamist insurgency in Egypt's Sinai to the south, all of which help
explain the historically high promise of $5 billion in missile funding over the next 10 years. As National Security
Advisor Susan Rice
said
at the signing ceremony for the deal, "This MOU is not just good for Israel, it's good for the United States.
Our security is linked. When allies and partners like Israel are more secure, the United States is more secure."
The deal also directs more money back toward the United States. It eliminates a provision in the previous aid
agreement that allowed Israel to spend 26 percent of its Foreign Military Financing on weaponry and other resources
produced within Israel, rather than in the United States -- a provision
intended to help
Israel build its own defense industry. Now that Israel's defense industry has developed, Dalton
said, that money will go toward purchases benefitting the defense industry in the United States.
While the United States's new Memorandum of Understanding with Israel is historic in its own right, it's most
remarkable in its apparent inevitability: It is a foreign-policy move seemingly immune to the electoral politics around
it. "At the end of the day, we're electing people to make judgments based on the information and the advice that the
receive," Dalton said. "One of the inputs to that process, certainly, is popular opinion. But I don't think it should be
the sole determinant of foreign policy." In its own way, that's a good explanation of why America's aid to Israel is so
big: Military spending does not go up or down in direct relationship to votes or even the news cycle. In this case, it
was a record set as if it were on an unstoppable trend line.
Jimmy Dore is a stand-up comedian, political commentator, host of "The Jimmy Dore Show"
available on YouTube ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3M7...
) and as a podcast available on iTunes.
this is an incredibly undervalued episode. I learned more about american and international
politics in this show than any other 3-hour span in my entire life. Very informative and
important episode.
Trump does not touch their foreign policy: appointment of Bolton and Pompeo means complete
and humiliating capitulation to neocons and globalists.
Trump was instrumental in reelecting Netanyahu and give several gifts to Israel.
Despite Hillary fiasco Pelosi managed to cling to power. Thanks to Mueller shenanigans which
put deep suspicion on the results of 2016 election which were a crushing defeat of Clinton
democrats (DemoRats - or neoliberal wing of Democratic Party) this neoliberal who most probably
outlived her political usefulness was not replaced.
Why they are still attacking Trump. What is the logic behind this sustained effort to impeach
him not matter what are the costs and with full understanding that President Pence is much worse
?
This is a real mystery of the US political life.
Notable quotes:
"... "What we've seen is a meltdown, an absolute meltdown, an inability to accept the bottom-line conclusion on Russian interference from the special counsel's report," he said. ..."
Republican pollster Conor Maguire said in an interview that aired Tuesday on "What America's
Thinking" that the divide over special counsel Robert Mueller 's report into Russia's election
meddling is an example of American political tribalism.
"It is really tribalism," Maguire, a senior strategist at WPA Intelligence, told Hill.TV's
Jamal Simmons on Monday.
"You are either supporting or you're not based on your party," he continued. "Interesting to
see independents really split pretty much 50-50 as well."
Democrats have continued to dive deeper into Mueller's probe into Moscow's election
interference, demanding the full, unredacted report from Attorney General William Barr , and have called to hear from
Mueller himself.
The rift has led to a growing gulf between House Democrats and the Justice Department, with
House Judiciary Committee Democrats scheduling a vote to hold Barr in contempt.
"What we've seen is a meltdown, an absolute meltdown, an inability to accept the bottom-line
conclusion on Russian interference from the special counsel's report," he said.
Israel and its friends in Washington and New York never miss the opportunity to exploit the
news cycle to tighten the screws a bit more, rendering any criticism of the Jewish state
unacceptable or even illegal. Israel's Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon has been
persistently
demanding that what he describes as anti-Semitic speech be criminalized. Danon declared
that "The time for talking and having a conversation is over. What Israel and the Jewish
community around the world demand is action – and now."
How exactly Danon would enforce his definition of acceptable speech is not clear, but the
demands to eliminate any negative commentary regarding the holocaust or on Israel and/or the
behavior of diaspora Jews have been promoted for some time, resulting in laws in Europe that
inflict harsh punish on those who dare to speak out. The latest incident in the campaign to
eliminate the First Amendment in America took place oddly enough on the pages of the New
York Times , which, in its international edition, ran a cartoon by a Portuguese cartoonist
showing a dog with the face of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on a leash leading a
caricature of Donald Trump wearing a yarmulke and a blind man's glasses. The Netanyahu-dog had
a tag on its collar featuring a Star of David.
There are several ways to interpret the cartoon. It is, of course, an insult to dogs to have
them depicted in such a fashion as to suggest that they might behave like the monstrous Israeli
Prime Minister. No dog would sink so low. One
observer , commenting from a dog's point of view, noted that "We canines share that saying
that 'the eyes are the window to the soul.' Look into our eyes and you'll see love and trust.
Look into Netanyahu's eyes you see cunning and deceit so why stick his head on our body?"
On the other hand, one might see in the cartoon a serious message, that Netanyahu has been
able to "wag the dog" with an ignorant and impulsive United States president who is so desirous
of pandering to Jews both in Israel and in the U.S. that he is blind to his obligation to do
what is best for the American people. Trump, who is the first president within memory not to
own a dog, would rather stroke the head of the disgusting casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson
than an intelligent and loyal Labrador retriever.
This is nothing new. In communist country Czechoslovakia 1948-1989 media every day wrote,
several times and they repeated it in TV about "with USSR all the time and never otherwise"
And any criticism od the state and the Party was crime.
The editorial cartoon was well within the usual and acceptable traditions of political
comment. It depicted with the usual license for caricature a political figure being led down
the garden path by another, and mocking him for it. What's the big deal?
Trump has not built a wall.
We have more immigrants coming in than at any time in American history.
We experienced a record number of opioid deaths in 2018 and the drugs still flow freely.
Trump is attempting to force the US into multiple wars that are of no benefit to us.
Trump bumped stocks.
Trump is allowing all of his supporters (many of them now former supporters) to be banned
from the internet.
Trump is allowing his supporters to be arrested and imprisoned for supporting him.
Trump is escalating tensions with Russia for no reason.
Trump has not pulled out of NATO.
Trump's replacement of NAFTA is the same thing as NAFTA.
Meanwhile, he has done more for Israel than any president ever in history.
Trump ended the Iran deal.
Trump attacked Assad over fake gassings.
Trump stopped aid to Palestine.
Trump hired John Bolton as his national security advisor.
Trump turned the US ambassador to the UN into a second Israeli ambassador to the UN.
Trump closed off all official communications and diplomatic relations with Palestine.
Trump sent $38 billion in US taxpayer money to Israel.
Trump made a $110 billion dollar arms deal with Saudi Arabia.
Trump moved the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Israel.
Trump refuses to pull troops out of Syria.
Trump somehow transferred the Syrian Golan Heights to Israel.
Trump is now apparently planning a war with Iran.
Would those knee-jerk critics have considered the political cartoon less outrageous or
offensive if The Master was not blind and the head of the dog on the leash had the features
of Donald Trump instead?
Actually the cartoon is somewhat misleading, IMO. It's unjustifiably generous to the orange
clown, because what the orange clown does, he does knowingly and willingly, not because he's
ignorant and impressionable. IOW, orange clown is evil, not blind.
@JoaoAlfaiate Correct.
I just posted this over on Facebook: Game over. The U.S. will now base its foreign policy,
not on national interests, but on the interests of Israel and its cabal in the United States.
This was an inevitable progression when you equate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism and
then appoint a high government official to punish countries on that basis. And, one might
add, the First Amendment is also under attack by the same folks to make illegal even the
mildest criticism of Israel here at home. Will this ever end?
Over the past few years, Israel's ongoing military occupation of Palestinian territory and
repeated invasions of the Gaza strip have triggered a fierce backlash against Israeli
policies virtually everywhere in the world -- except the United States.
United Christians for Israel, founded and led by pastor John Hagee, have millions of
members and call themselves "the largest pro-Israel charity in the United States." The
organization was an important factor in the decision of US President Donald Trump in 2017 to
recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and to transfer the US embassy there.
Gabbard sponsored the resolution of the Congress criticizing Amnesty International for
revealing Israeli atrocities against civilians in his blitzkrieg in Gaza in 2014. The
resolution stated that Israel "focuses on terrorist targets" and "goes to extraordinary
efforts to attack only terrorist actors". https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/10/22/gaza-and-the-bi-partisan-war-on-human-rights/
Zionism and Islamophobia Gabbard have gained recognition and support from all kinds of
unpalatable characters -- like right-wing billionaire and Zionist Sheldon Adelson, who loudly
declared that "all Muslims are terrorists".
In addition to Israel's loyal defender, Gabbard has also proved to be a credible servant
of Adelson's business interests. Introduced regulations against online gambling to protect
the casino's empire from competition on the Internet. Adelson thanked her, giving her the
Champion of Freedom award. http://time.com/3695948/sheldon-adelson-online-gambling/
Her prejudices against Islam directly stem from her Hindu fundamentalism. Gabbard became
one of the main American political supporters of Narendra Modi, the leader of the Hindu
sectarian party Bharatiya Janata (BJP) and the current Prime Minister of India.
Being the main minister of the Indian state of Gujarat in 2002, Modi helped spark a pogrom
against Muslims, in which they killed 2,000 people and displaced over 200,000 people in the
ethnic cleansing campaign. Since his victory in the 2014 elections, Modi has been a decidedly
pro-Israeli Indian politician and has strong relations with Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu.
At the invitation of Modi, Gabbard traveled through India for three weeks during which
various Hindu fundamentalists greeted her as their American master. In probably the worst
part of the tour, the India Foundation, a formation tuned to the Hindu fascist group
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), hosted Gabbard to discuss the future of Indian-American
relations. After the reactionary lovefest, the Indian newspaper Telegraph called it "the
American Sangha mascot"
After returning to the USA, Gabbard defended Modi against any criticism. She was one of
the few democrats who spoke against the federal government's decision to refuse a Modi visa
in 2014 because of his abolition of religious freedom
As with other leading liberal democrats, Gabbard's alleged progressive values
do not extend to the Palestinian struggle for freedom. While she may support the
resistance of Indian Native at Standing Rock, she will not support the indigenous people of
Palestine and her struggle for self-determination against Israeli colonialism. http://socialistworker.org/2014/08/13/liberal-champions-of-apartheid
johny conspiranoid
Tulsi Gabard is a member of the Council for Foreign Relations. She’s a phony radical
"... Jews in Israel support politicians and policies that I reject as abhorrent. That is a personal tragedy for me. The larger tragedy is that there appears to be no solution at all to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. ..."
"... The Zionist ideology is the DNA of every Israeli governmental act and institution, and is at the root of the Israeli colonial settler state in toto. It is very very simple: Jew are the only valuable human beings and anyone else is defined as either an enemy or someone who cares nothing about Jews ..."
"... Every synagogue I've ever been in has an Israeli flag in it, so their complicity has been bought by Israel for nothing. To oppose Israeli policy or Zionism is to be harassed and hounded out of Jewish institutional life. Israel gets congress to pass laws against political action against Israeli apartheid, which by the way, doesn't " in some ways resembles the former South African apartheid system." No, it surpasses S. African Apartheid and the resemblances far outnumber the differences in principle. Bishop Desmond Tutu clearly said it was than the S. African brand. ..."
"... There is an Israel Lobby, and it has, as Noam Chomsky has just pointed out, and it has been very powerful in American politics. It has interfered with U.S. elections 1,000 times more effectively than any Russian interference, but the corporate media will not allow that be said ..."
The drifting apart of American Jews and Israelis is a tragic development, but perhaps an
inevitable one. As Jews gradually assimilated into American democracy, they congregated at the
liberal end of the political spectrum, feeling kinship with other minorities which experienced
discrimination. American Jewish religious politics affirmed the traditional Jewish
ethical ideas of justice, truth, peace, and compassion. Israeli Jews have faced a radically
different environment. Although many of the early Israeli settlers and leaders came from the
leftist European labor tradition, decades of conflict with Arab neighbors, in which both sides
perpetrated countless atrocities, have led to hardening attitudes of self-defense and hatred
for the other.
Jews in Israel support politicians and policies that I reject as abhorrent. That is a
personal tragedy for me. The larger tragedy is that there appears to be no solution at all to
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
This article is written in good faith falls into the error of complexity, which is the
object of deliberate efforts of the Israeli government. . Yes, there is all the above
complexity, but if the simplicity is not made clear, the complexity paralyzes the body politic.
Therefore, what progressives need to know are a few simple things.
1) The Zionist ideology is
the DNA of every Israeli governmental act and institution, and is at the root of the Israeli
colonial settler state in toto. It is very very simple: Jew are the only valuable human beings
and anyone else is defined as either an enemy or someone who cares nothing about Jews, so any
and all means of securing Jewish life are justified, be that the continued ethnic cleansing of
the Palestinian people, en masse, or the simple deception of all other people, including
Americans and American Jews, into acceptance or acquiescence of Israeli ethnic cleansing.
2)
The so-called 2 State Solution so dear to American Liberal Zionists is a total lie and ruse,
designed to make the medicine go down, yet save the liberal facade and vanity of non-Israeli
Jews. Israelis don't care a wit about it and only did for a couple of years until the Israeli
Right wiped it out. As ruse, it has worked well.
Every synagogue I've ever been in has an Israeli flag in it, so their complicity has been
bought by Israel for nothing. To oppose Israeli policy or Zionism is to be harassed and hounded
out of Jewish institutional life. Israel gets congress to pass laws against political action
against Israeli apartheid, which by the way, doesn't " in some ways resembles the former South
African apartheid system." No, it surpasses S. African Apartheid and the resemblances far
outnumber the differences in principle. Bishop Desmond Tutu clearly said it was than the S.
African brand.
3) There is an Israel Lobby, and it has, as Noam Chomsky has just pointed out, and it has
been very powerful in American politics. It has interfered with U.S. elections 1,000 times more
effectively than any Russian interference, but the corporate media will not allow that be said,
and especially not by an African Muslim woman in Hijab .but, she said it.
Although there is an over-arching design and simplicity to Israeli Apartheid, which is that
it is an re-iteration of all Colonial Settler States, sinking into complexities that occlude
that dampens creative resistance, such as the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement, which
of course goes unmentioned in this article. It's too direct a resistance and, well, too simple.
It is growing and mighty, and is of profound significance to this historical moment.
"... Is there a significant difference between "leftist" megadonor Saban and "conservative" megadonor Adelson when it comes to issues like Zionism/ Greater Israel/ destroying Iran? Or are they both acting primarily as ethnic activists, rather than as ideologically-driven "philanthropists?" ..."
Are any of these 3 individuals "evangelical Christians?"
Or is there some other aspect of their identity/ heritage that they have in common?
Some might even go so far as to characterize the common leftist claim that fanatical GOP
Israeli-Firstism is driven by evangelical Christians as a "long-debunked semitic canard."
Note also the alternative. Hillary's top donor was that notorious "evangelical Christian,"
Haim Saban.
Is there a significant difference between "leftist" megadonor Saban and "conservative"
megadonor Adelson when it comes to issues like Zionism/ Greater Israel/ destroying Iran? Or are
they both acting primarily as ethnic activists, rather than as ideologically-driven
"philanthropists?"
A lot of other "evangelical Christians" among Hillary's top donors, too.
The State Department's special envoy for monitoring and combating anti-Semitism, Elan
Carr, said this U.S. position could spell reviews of ties with foreign governments or
leaders."
.....
This comes after the Israeli attack on Gaza. I have put it here rather than the Gaza
Israel thread as nothing can be done there until US power is destroyed. Same with the
Wahhabi's of KSA and the Nazi's of Eastern Europe.
"... Pompeo, Bolton and Abrams are Trumps hires and only a moron could fail to recognise that they are neocons stuck in the regime change model of US foreign policy. Venezuela hasn't gone away and if history is any clue, they're going to double down on their initial stupidity. ..."
"... There is only one party, the Pentagon Party, and judging from their $750B budget, $20T 'accounting error', 60% of federal discretionary spend, zero audits and successful scare campaigns that are building up to another Cold War, I'd say they are doing just fine thank you very much. ..."
The key for him now is to undo a lot of the damage that's been done by his staff,
disloyal cabinet members and recalcitrant bureaucracy who are all wedded deeply to the old
way things are done.
Pompeo, Bolton and Abrams are Trumps hires and only a moron could fail to recognise that
they are neocons stuck in the regime change model of US foreign policy. Venezuela hasn't gone
away and if history is any clue, they're going to double down on their initial stupidity.
There is only one party, the Pentagon Party, and judging from their $750B budget, $20T
'accounting error', 60% of federal discretionary spend, zero audits and successful scare
campaigns that are building up to another Cold War, I'd say they are doing just fine thank
you very much.
As for Sheldon Adelson's pet chihuahua telling him to get stuffed? Well that would make
for a very cold day in hell.
"... Patrick Lawrence avers that "Trump may not have chosen his foreign policy team so much as its members have been imposed upon him". There is absolutely no evidence for this assertion. Both Trump and Hillary Clinton (and all their rivals from the 2016 presidential campaign) are Israel-Firsters deep in the pockets of the pro-Israel Lobby. Trump's current policies are not significantly at variance from Clinton's equally pro-Israel policy agenda. At a 2015 gala hosted by the Algemeiner Journal, Trump declared "We love Israel. We will fight for Israel 100 percent, 1000 percent." His bid for the presidency was announced soon after. ..."
"... Trump's whole "insurgent" campaign, including his purported break with GOP orthodoxy, questioning of Israel's commitment to peace, calls for even treatment in Israeli-Palestinian deal-making, and refusal to call for Jerusalem to be Israel's undivided capital, were an elaborate propaganda scam engineered by the Israel Lobby from the very beginning. ..."
"... Jared Kushner, Donald Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser on Middle East/Israel issues, gave his first on-the-record appearance at the Saban Forum at the Brookings Institution on 3 December 2017. Saban praised Kushner for attempting to derail a vote at the United Nations Security Council about Israeli settlements during the Obama administration. ..."
"... Make no mistake, Israel and the pro-Israel Lobby exploit Trump and the GOP, as well as Clinton and the Democrats. ..."
"... The Russia-gate conspiracy theory, eagerly promoted by both key right and left pro-Israel Lobby figures (including Jewish and Christian Zionists, as well as sheepdog Sanders), is partly an effort to distract attention from the pro-Israel Lobby meddling in American electoral politics and its pernicious influence on US foreign policy. ..."
Patrick Lawrence avers that "Trump may not have chosen his foreign policy team so much
as its members have been imposed upon him". There is absolutely no evidence for this
assertion. Both Trump and Hillary Clinton (and all their rivals from the 2016 presidential
campaign) are Israel-Firsters deep in the pockets of the pro-Israel Lobby. Trump's current
policies are not significantly at variance from Clinton's equally pro-Israel policy agenda.
At a 2015 gala hosted by the Algemeiner Journal, Trump declared "We love Israel. We will
fight for Israel 100 percent, 1000 percent." His bid for the presidency was announced soon
after.
Trump's whole "insurgent" campaign, including his purported break with GOP orthodoxy,
questioning of Israel's commitment to peace, calls for even treatment in Israeli-Palestinian
deal-making, and refusal to call for Jerusalem to be Israel's undivided capital, were an
elaborate propaganda scam engineered by the Israel Lobby from the very beginning.
Trump's "1000 percent" efforts on behalf of Israel began immediately after the election,
prior to his taking the oath of office.
Jared Kushner, Donald Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser on Middle East/Israel
issues, gave his first on-the-record appearance at the Saban Forum at the Brookings
Institution on 3 December 2017. Saban praised Kushner for attempting to derail a vote at the
United Nations Security Council about Israeli settlements during the Obama
administration.
Kushner reportedly dispatched former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn to make
secret contact with the Russian ambassador in December 2016 in an effort to undermine or
delay the resolution, which condemned Israel for settlement construction. Saban told Kushner
that "this crowd and myself want to thank you for making that effort, so thank you very
much." Kushner thanked the audience at Brookings, a leading pro-Israel Lobby think tank,
"It's really an honor to be able to talk about this topic with so many people who I respect
so much, who have given so much to this issue."
During the keynote conversation, Kushner and Saban framed Middle East peace as a "real
estate issue". Kushner acknowledged that "We've solicited a lot of ideas from a lot of
places." Trump's understanding of "regional dynamics" in the Middle East clearly manifests "a
lot of ideas" from pro-Israel war hawks from the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution. Make no mistake, Israel and the pro-Israel Lobby exploit Trump and the GOP, as well as
Clinton and the Democrats.
The fracture between the Trump and Clinton contingents of the pro-Israel Lobby is rooted
in the personal predilections of their major American Jewish oligarch donors. Billionaires
Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban are the Koch Brothers of the pro-Israel Lobby.
Both Adelson and Saban are staunch supporters of the Israeli military, vehemently opposed
to the global BDS movement against Israeli apartheid, and obsessed about starting war with
Iran.
When Adelson and Saban shared the stage at the Israeli American Council's inaugural
conference in Washington, D.C. in 2014, Saban quipped, "There's no right or left when it
comes to Israel". Despite their shared pro-Israel Lobby objectives, Adelson and Saban had a
fracas in 2015 over political tactics.
The Republican Party and Democratic Party campaign platforms in 2016 reflected right and
left pro-Israel Lobby orientations. Even the Sanders sheepdog campaign was a far-left
pro-Israel Lobby iteration.
The Russia-gate conspiracy theory, eagerly promoted by both key right and left
pro-Israel Lobby figures (including Jewish and Christian Zionists, as well as sheepdog
Sanders), is partly an effort to distract attention from the pro-Israel Lobby meddling in
American electoral politics and its pernicious influence on US foreign policy.
Trump's "foreign policy team", the Pompeo-Bolton axis and myriad minions, precisely
represent the pro-Israel Lobby signature "toxic combination of neoconservatives, many drawn
from the Heritage Foundation [and other decidedly pro-Israel policy think tanks], and
evangelical Christians".
Trump surrounded himself with pro-Israel Lobby "foreign policy Manicheans" devoted to an
aggressive, militaristic agenda aimed at "securing the realm" for Israel.
The results are entirely predictable.
The Trump administration's foreign policies are not so much "shambolic", "amateurish and
discombobulated" as monomaniacally pro-Israel, no matter how much damage is done to key US
interests.
michael , April 30, 2019 at 18:57
Blaming Trump for moving the Embassy to Jerusalem seems disingenuous since Congress passed
a law moving the Embassy to Jerusalem in 1995 (the Senate voted (93–5), and the House
voted (374–37 in favor of the move).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_Embassy_Act
Clinton started a charade, justified by "National Security" and signed a waiver every six
months to stall the move; the game continued under Bush II and Obama and even Trump, his
first turn. But then "on June 5, 2017, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed a resolution
commemorating the 50th anniversary of reunification of Jerusalem by 90-0. The resolution
reaffirmed the Jerusalem Embassy Act and called upon the President and all United States
officials to abide by its provisions." Trump abided.
Absolutely JohnP is right, Kushner should be scrutinized for his pro-Israel positions. The
ball should be on AIPAC and Israel but instead is on Russia even now. Trump is just the
frontman for the activity of Adelson, Bibi, Bolton, Pompeo, Kushner: Bolton pushes for the
neocons post Bush II; Pompeo for evangelicals in US who know nothing, as well as for neocons;
Kushner for Israel Netanyahu politics. Trump is their foolish pawn. Iran is in crosshairs
because of Israel.
dean 1000 , April 30, 2019 at 07:56
Trump got elected by running against the empire. What he is doing in the mid-east won't
last. The demography and need for oil is against it. The birth pangs of a new mid-east
started when Russia came to the aid of Syria.
Does Bolton and Pompeo mean that Trump has been completely co-opted by the duopoly he ran
against?
His supporters say wait till 2020. Fat chance.
I agree with Joe Tedesky. Washington is going to sanction itself out of its empire. The end
of empire is hardly the end of the US. The Brits didn't get single payer healthcare until the
empire was gone. Will Washington make the same mistake? A country the size of the US will not become obscure.
Usually a search will turn up part or all the
text of a paywalled article. In my opinion the original folks don't mind so long as only
the "right" people know about the bypass.
Here is a quote from the Haartz piece:
Everything is completely disconnected from context and reality, intentionally and
willfully. Half a week after Holocaust Remembrance Day, the knowledge that 2 million people
have been locked up more than 12 years behind barbed wire in a giant cage doesn't remind
Israel of anything and doesn't arouse anything. Half a week before Independence Day,
the struggle for freedom and independence of another people is perceived as murderous
terror for no reason.
Even the desperate attempt to prevent the brink of starvation is perceived as greed; the
effort to somehow impart the appearance of a holiday in the holiest month of the year is
depicted as extortion. That's how low the brainwashing goes and no one protests. Everyone
accepts it with a shrug. Anyone who doubts how hollow and destructive the inculcation of
the Holocaust is in Israel should look at the responses in Israel to this Gaza Ghetto
Uprising. Anyone who ignores the reality in Gaza or tries to deny its disaster has learned
nothing.
Note to the smug JoeG at #7: the Zionists use the Hitler comparison routinely, but us
goyim aren't supposed to do that. Some of them are a bit contrite about it, but others wave
it around and bray like the holy jackasses they really are.
Two rabbis at a pre-military religious academy in a West Bank settlement were recorded
making derogatory and racist comments about Arabs, defending Adolf Hitler's worldview, and
openly promoting Jewish supremacy.
In a series of undated recordings published by Channel 13 news on Monday, Rabbi Eliezer
Kashtiel, the head of the Bnei David academy in Eli, can be heard calling for the
enslavement of the "stupid and violent" non-Jews due to their genetic inferiority.
"The gentiles will want to be our slaves. Being a slave to a Jew is the best. They're
glad to be slaves, they want to be slaves," he told a class in one of the video clips.
"Instead of just walking the streets and being stupid and violent and harming each other,
once they're slaves, their lives can begin to take shape."
The Nazis were Aryan Supermen, and their Heirs in Holy Israel are 'Yahwehan' Supermen.
Chosen, select, and all head-and-shoulders above the common drek.
Neither of these groups give a damn what anybody thinks about their self-declared
Superhuman status. Who cares what subhumans think about anything?
What has troubled me is the way "Christians" have developed moral systems as flexible as a
limp rope. They embrace Trump of the Seven Deadly Sins. His pride, greed, lust, envy,
gluttony, wrath and sloth are OK, and he's their man!
Never mind that they have thrown every single teaching of Jesus into the trash bin. Their
insane desire is to build a fire under the reluctant Jesus and get him back to Earth smashing
all their enemies (including the Jews they pretend to love at the moment). In their fantasies
they'll be the Numero Uno types, and for that destroying the Earth is well worth it.
They'll become the Final Supermen, forever and ever and ever! We're in a hell of a
mess, especially when the ignorant and indifferent Orange Potus has become the tool of such
end-timers as Pompeo and Pence.
"... "What if you substituted 'Israel' for 'Russia'?" (The moderator, who apparently knows me, had to look right at me with my hand raised whenever he called on someone but never called on me). ..."
"... "Has there ever been an investigation on the scale of the Mueller investigation into possible collusion with Israel?" ..."
"... The surprising thing about the Mueller report is that he found nothing. That’s impossible because when the government wants to find something, they find it. Why Mueller pulled the plug, I can’t say. ..."
Second hour: Journalist and TV host Ken Meyercord (also based in Washington, DC)
writes:
"I attended an event at the Brookings Institution yesterday on the Mueller Report. As is
sadly customary at DC think tanks, the panelists and the moderator were all of one mind.
Nevertheless, one panelist, a former US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia (a
court notorious for rubber-stamping any charge the government brings against those who
disrupt the smooth functioning of our foreign policy apparatus), made a curious analogy,
arguing that the contacts Trump and his associates had with Russians would be culpable even
if the contacts were with some other, less hostile country:
His remark got me to thinking, so in the Q & A I sought to ask him "What if you
substituted 'Israel' for 'Russia'?" (The moderator, who apparently knows me, had to look
right at me with my hand raised whenever he called on someone but never called on me).
I don't know what his response would have been; but if he said it would still apply, I
would have followed up with "Has there ever been an investigation on the scale of the Mueller
investigation into possible collusion with Israel?"
"The more I think about it, the more intriguing I find Mr. Rosenberg's remark. He seemed
to think the sheer number of contacts by Trump folks with Russians proved culpability. It
might be interesting to compare Trump's contacts with the Russians during the campaign with
his contacts with Israelis. I suspect the latter were more numerous and of greater
significance. Certainly, Trump's acts as President would seem to indicate he's more
Netanyahu's puppet than Putin's: moving the embassy to Jerusalem, cutting off aid to the
Palestinians, recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. Imagine if Putin
proposed naming a village in Russia after Trump in appreciation, as Netanyahu has proposed
doing in the Golan Heights!
"P.S. Ueli Maurer is the President of the Swiss Confederation."
The entire Western media is the enemy of the people. The Demogangsters and the mediocrats,
Public Enemy #1, were angry that Trump won the election, so they fabricated a scam called
contacts with Russians.
They are saying that Trump and his people talked to the Russians as private citizens
before the election, so it is illegal.
What? Talking to Russians is illegal? Really? Says who?
They will not tell you the law that was allegedly broken, because the law that was
allegedly broken itself is illegal.
It is the Logan Act which “criminalizes negotiations by unauthorized persons with
foreign governments having a dispute with the United States.”
Only in America—the criminal Democrats have investigated an innocent man for a
non-existent crime of violating an unconstitutional law.
While I would not say this happens only in America, this sort of thing is actually
long-standing policy in the US. As long ago as 1944 in Wickard vs. Filburn, the Democrat
Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a man for not merely raising food on his own land, but
for failing to offer the food for sale, on the rationale that the non-sale affected
Interstate Commerce as much as if he had offered it for sale. Since then it has been
‘constitutional’ to find federal jurisdiction over even private vegetable gardens
grown exclusively for domestic consumption. Under this theory, even breathing oxygen places
one under federal jurisdiction because it is followed by exhaling CO2.
One of the most surprising things I discovered when I began to practice law was the fact
that no one is ‘innocent’. I.e, there is always some law somewhere that is being
‘broken’ no matter what one does, which means that if the government wants
someone, they can always convict him because the government can always find some law he has
broken. I’m speaking ironically, of course. Many of these laws should be
unconstitutional. Just don’t bet that SCOTUS will ever rule that way because, as
Gorsuch recently pronounced, “that’s all been settled.”
The surprising thing about the Mueller report is that he found nothing. That’s
impossible because when the government wants to find something, they find it. Why Mueller
pulled the plug, I can’t say.
I'm surprised Italy that gets much coverage, given that it is not really a major European
power anymore. The EU is controlled by France and Germany and the UK is the strongest ally of
the US, though that came under question during the Obama years. I don't buy the argument that
a lot of dysfunctional politics is the reason (so a lot to write about). You can say that
about many countries.
Israel arguably gets some amount of 'undue' coverage given its size and location, but
it's not nearly as predominant as "ZOG"-types probably assume to be the case.
Naïve analysis, it's not so much how often Israel is being mentioned but under
what conditions . The coverage the NYT gives it is massively favourable compared to a
counter-factual if Israel had been a White christian-majority country trying to keep itself
that way by instituting a White christian-only immigration policy etc. Judaism is an ethnic
religion after all. It also continues to define it as a democracy despite being a de facto
apartheid state etc. How often it is mentioned is not a debunking of the NYT's special
treatment of Israel.
Australia is probably a better candidate for that title. The UK sat out Vietnam, and the
US turned a blind eye to IRA fundraising for decades.
It also continues to define it as a democracy despite being a de facto apartheid state
etc
Apartheid was democratically enacted. That most people couldn't vote doesn't make it any
less democratic. Democracy is not the same as universal suffrage.
In the corporate media, Russia is routinely described as a dictatorship because there is
no change in party governance. By that standard, South Africa post-1994 is also a
dictatorship.
Whites were never the majority in South Africa, only in the cities (most of which carry
Western names, some rebadged with convoluted local names post-1994). The goal of apartheid
was to keep blacks in rural areas.
Jews have been the supermajority in Israel since the ethnic cleansing in the 1948 war. The
apartheid comparison only makes sense wrt to the West Bank and the Golan Heights. In the West
Bank, Jews are a minority that overrides the self-determination of the Arab majority. In the
Golan, IIRC its 50-50, where the Druze Arabs could become Israeli citizens but don't do so
out of support for Assad.
The South African parliament had no black MPs (1948-1994), the Knesset has had Arab MPs
for the entirety of its existence.
@mark green
Over the same time period, "Holocaust" gets 5,168 and "anti-Semitic" gets 2,187. If we add
those to the total (which seems like quite a stretch), it bumps Israel up a couple of spots,
still behind Mexico.
I suspect the high ranking for Russia is due to the NYT coverage of the Russia-gate hoax.
Otherwise, who in Manhattan cares about Russia? (Okay, maybe in Brooklyn).
As for Israel, well, you know Probably ranks #1 if you do the list on a per capita
basis.
This story would be more important if the NYT hadn't fallen into the Prog-Left black hole,
where if you don't agree with their Party Line nothing in that paper makes any sense. And no
intellectual illumination can escape.
As another has pointed out, a per capita analysis would shift Israel comfortably to the top.
Sure, population is in a sense already factored into the question of what makes a country
newsworthy, but every other country above Israel on the list has a far larger population,
even Canada, which is also one of only two US border countries, of course. And all the
Mid-East countries not far below Israel interest NYT readers primarily because of wars and
enmities fomented by the 'Pow-ah Brokers' within their readership, if you get my drift. Much
larger, wealthier and religiously more important Saudi Arabia is way down the list because
they were comfortably sidelined with Judeo-Muslim values decades ago. (Right, Anthony and
Huma?) I'd say the list substantially strengthens the case of us 'ZOG types', not weakens it.
@216Apartheid was democratically enacted. That most people couldn't vote doesn't make it any
less democratic. Democracy is not the same as universal suffrage.
Kind of depends on how you define democracy, doesn't it?
Ancient Athens is routinely classified as a democracy despite perhaps at most 30% of the
adult population having the franchise.
Democracy is rule by the demos, so who you include and exclude from the demos is pretty
important.
Jews have been the supermajority in Israel since the ethnic cleansing
But that makes it worse, not better, than the South African Apartheid. Most people surely
would choose to be oppressed (while living standards would keep slightly improving and their
population and ethnic majority in the area growing) over being booted out with a few
suitcases and without compensation for their possessions (including land, houses,
animals).
"... Trump *escalated* US-Iran and US-Venezuela conflicts and intensified the sabre rattling towards both countries, according to all analysts. For the first time a POTUS openly said direct US invasion to Venezuela "is on the table" and his Adelson bought appointment for USNSA Bolton publicly showed in a notebook the writing "5000 troops to Colombia" openly suggesting a direct invasion was imminent. For the first time the White House asked the Pentagon to draw up options for military strikes against Iran. ..."
"... Trump's administration declared a whole branch of the Iran armed forces (IRGC) as a terrorist organisation. This is an escalation and according to most analysts, considered an act of war. ..."
"... Trump administration heavily increased sanctions to Iran, Russia and Venezuela and in the latter case even instigated a failed uprising and coup d'etat, going as far as to declare a virtual political Venezuelan nobody the "official" president of the country, which is in itself unbelievable and has no historic precedent. Another act of war actually. ..."
"... Trump administration also escalated the tensions with China, ordered the arrest and de facto kidnapping of Chinese corporate executives and openly used the US legal apparatus to attack and hinder a foreign corporation. ..."
"... Trump has been, objectively, the most neocon Israel-firster POTUS in US history. ..."
"... Friendly reminder that voting for Republicans and expecting US Jewish lobby/Corporate America promoted policies such as open borders and US imperialist interventions to stop is moronic beyond belief. Republicans are the most pro corporate pro US Jewish lobby of the two parties by far. At least there is talk and critique about how the Israel Lobby owns the USG in the Dem party. Nothing of the sort going on in the GOP. ..."
The U.S. missile strike on Shayrat Airbase on 7 April 2017 was the first time the U.S.
became a deliberate, direct combatant against the Syrian government and marked the start of
a series of deliberate direct military actions by U.S. forces against the Syrian government
and its allies in May -- June 2017 and February 2018.
Trump *escalated* the war from covert support to insurgents to direct intervention and
official *invasion* in Syria. This is the equivalent of going from financing and supporting a
faction in a so called proxy war in say Vietnam to leading the US to go full Iraq WMD and
become a warring and invading faction in the conflict. Again, this is an escalation.
The number of boots on the ground vs Obama's is data you just took out of your bottom.
Sources for your cheap PR shilling? You don't have any because this statement of yours is a
blatant lie.
Trump *escalated* US-Iran and US-Venezuela conflicts and intensified the sabre rattling
towards both countries, according to all analysts. For the first time a POTUS openly said
direct US invasion to Venezuela "is on the table" and his Adelson bought appointment for
USNSA Bolton publicly showed in a notebook the writing "5000 troops to Colombia" openly
suggesting a direct invasion was imminent. For the first time the White House asked the
Pentagon to draw up options for military strikes against Iran.
Trump's administration declared a whole branch of the Iran armed forces (IRGC) as a
terrorist organisation. This is an escalation and according to most analysts, considered an
act of war.
Trump's administration ended the Iran deal without any objective reasons, ie Obama's
effort to deescalate the Israel firsters driven Iran-US conflict
Trump administration heavily increased sanctions to Iran, Russia and Venezuela and in
the latter case even instigated a failed uprising and coup d'etat, going as far as to declare
a virtual political Venezuelan nobody the "official" president of the country, which is in
itself unbelievable and has no historic precedent. Another act of war actually.
Trump administration declared Golan Heights part of Israel brought US embassy to
Jerusalem, increasing the tensions and animosity towards the US in the ME.
Trump administration will declare Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organisation, increasing
the animosity from Arab countries in the ME to unbelievable levels. This includes non Arab
country Turkey also, a traditional ally until neocon Trump took power.
Trump administration also escalated the tensions with China, ordered the arrest and de
facto kidnapping of Chinese corporate executives and openly used the US legal apparatus to
attack and hinder a foreign corporation.
Trump has been, objectively, the most neocon Israel-firster POTUS in US history.
Friendly reminder that voting for Republicans and expecting US Jewish lobby/Corporate
America promoted policies such as open borders and US imperialist interventions to stop is
moronic beyond belief. Republicans are the most pro corporate pro US Jewish lobby of the two
parties by far. At least there is talk and critique about how the Israel Lobby owns the USG
in the Dem party. Nothing of the sort going on in the GOP.
Immigration restrictionism is a traditional pro working class, leftist policy.
Non intervention and "pacifist" policies the same. How many GOP supporters were against
the Vietnam and Iraq war? Not many yeah.
Trump has dropped more bombs and missiles on Middle Eastern countries in a comparable
period of time than any modern U.S. President. Presidents Bush, Obama and now [2017] Trump
have dropped nearly 200,000 bombs and missiles on Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Pakistan,
Yemen and Somalia. Trump's rate of bombing eclipses both Bush and Obama; and Trump is on a
pace to drop over 100,000 [180,000 to be precise] bombs and missiles on Middle Eastern
countries during his first term of office -- which would equal the number of bombs and
missiles dropped by Obama during his entire eight-year presidency.
Here's more perspective:
The United States Government, under the Trump administration, reportedly drops a bomb
every 12 minutes, which means that 121 bombs are dropped in a day, and 44,096 bombs per year.
The Pentagon's data show that during George W. Bush's eight years he averaged 24 bombs
dropped per day, that is, 8,750 per year. Over the course of Obama's time in office, his
military dropped 34 bombs per day, 12,500 per year. This shows that even though American
presidents are all war criminals, Trump is the most vicious of them all.
Yes, Trump is dropping almost FOUR TIMES MORE BOMBS than Barack Obama and over FIVE TIMES
MORE BOMBS than G.W. Bush -- which included military invasions of two countries.
We also know that Trump expanded America's wars in Afghanistan and Syria (and, no, he is
NOT bringing U.S. troops home from Syria) and is ramping up America's war machine against
Venezuela, Iran, China and Russia. And this does not even take into account the way Trump has
given Benjamin Netanyahu's raunchy racist regime the green light to expand its wars against
the Palestinians, Lebanon, Syria and Iran or the U.S./Israeli proxy war (with Saudi Arabia
taking the lead) in Yemen.
Then there is Somalia:
In the age of Donald Trump, wasn't that [the Battle of Mogadishu -- Black Hawk Down] a
million presidencies ago? Honestly, can you even tell me anymore what in the world it was all
about? I couldn't have, not without looking it up again. A warlord, starvation, U.S.
intervention, 18 dead American soldiers (and hundreds of dead Somalis, but that hardly
mattered) in a country that was shattering. President Clinton did, however, pull out those
troops and end the disastrous mission -- and that was that, right? I mean, lessons learned.
Somalia? Africa? What in the world did it all have to do with us? So Washington washed its
hands of the whole thing.
And now, on a planet of outrageous tweets and murderously angry white men, you probably
didn't even notice, but more than two years into the era of Donald Trump, a quarter-century
after that incident, American airstrikes in yep, Somalia, are precipitously on the rise.
Last year's 47 strikes, aimed at the leaders and fighters of al-Shabaab, an Islamist
terror outfit, more than tripled the ones carried out by the Obama administration in 2016
(themselves a modest increase from previous years). And in 2019, they're already on pace to
double again, while Somali civilians -- not that anyone (other than Somali civilians) notices
or cares -- are dying in significant and rising numbers.
And with 500 troops back on the ground there and Pentagon estimates that they will remain
for at least another seven years, the U.S. military is increasingly Somalia-bound, Congress
hasn't uttered a peep on the subject, and few in this country are paying the slightest
attention.
So consider this a simple fact of the never-ending Global War on Terror (as it was once
called): the U.S. military just can't get enough of Somalia. And if that isn't off the
charts, what is? Maybe it's even worth a future book (with a very small print run) called not
Black Hawk Down II but U.S. Down Forever and a Day.
And now that I've started on the subject (if you still happen to be reading), when it
comes to the U.S. military, it's not faintly just Somalia. It's all of Africa.
After all, this country's military uniquely has a continent-wide Africa Command (aka
AFRICOM), founded in 2007. As Nick Turse has often written for TomDispatch, that command now
has its troops, thousands of them, its planes, and other equipment spread across the
continent, north to south, east to west -- air bases, drone bases, garrisons, outposts,
staging areas, you name it. Meanwhile, AFRICOM's outgoing commanding general, Thomas
Waldhauser, only recently told Congress why it's bound to be a forever outfit -- because,
shades of the Cold War, the Ruskies are coming! ("Russia is also a growing challenge and has
taken a more militaristic approach in Africa.")
And honestly, 600-odd words in, this wasn't meant to be a piece about either Somalia or
Africa. It was meant to be about those U.S. wars being off the charts, about how the Pentagon
now feeds eternally at the terror trough, al-Shabaab being only a tiny part of the slop it
regularly digests.
And, while America's wars are way up, according to Gallup, church attendance in America is
way down:
As Christian and Jewish Americans prepare to celebrate Easter and Passover, respectively,
Gallup finds the percentage of Americans who report belonging to a church, synagogue or
mosque at an all-time low, averaging 50% in 2018.
U.S. church membership was 70% or higher from 1937 through 1976, falling modestly to an
average of 68% in the 1970s through the 1990s. The past 20 years have seen an acceleration in
the drop-off, with a 20-percentage-point decline since 1999 and more than half of that change
occurring since the start of the current decade.
Most interesting is this Gallup observation:
Although the United States is one of the more religious countries, particularly among
Western nations, it is far less religious than it used to be. Barely three-quarters of
Americans now identify with a religion and only about half claim membership in a church,
synagogue or mosque.
The rate of U.S. church membership has declined sharply in the past two decades after
being relatively stable in the six decades before that. A sharp increase in the proportion of
the population with no religious affiliation, a decline in church membership among those who
do have a religious preference, and low levels of church membership among millennials are all
contributing to the accelerating trend.
Obviously, America's Jewish and Muslim populations pale compared to its Christian
population. The vast decline of attendance to religious services, therefore, primarily means
church attendance. Notice, also, that this steep decline commenced at the beginning of this
century (2000) -- when G.W. Bush became President of the United States.
I tried to warn readers -- and listeners to my nationwide radio talk show -- that due to
his insatiable war fever, G.W. Bush was going to forever warp the perception in people's
minds of Christianity. And, sadly, I was absolutely right. After eight years of the
warmongering G.W. Bush in the White House, millions of Americans came to associate
Christianity with wars of aggression. As a result, the exodus out of America's churches began
in earnest.
Enter Donald Trump.
As noted above, Trump has expanded Bush's war fever exponentially. But Trump has done more
than that: He has aggressively put the United States smack dab in the middle of Israel's
wars. It could even be argued that Donald Trump has turned the U.S. military into a proxy
army for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).
Don't get me wrong: I am very cognizant of the fact that G.W. Bush's "war on terror" was
nothing more than a proxy war for Israel. But the Israeli connection was covert and
completely covered up. Not anymore. Donald Trump is unabashedly and explicitly partnering the
mission of the U.S. military with that of the IDF. No wonder Benjamin Netanyahu promises to
name a community in the Israel-seized, Israel-occupied Golan Heights after Donald Trump.
(Trumplinka would fit Netanyahu's concentration-style occupation nicely.)
So, not only are millions of Americans now associating Christianity with G.W. Bush's wars
of aggression, they are associating Christianity with Donald Trump's wars of aggression for
the racist apartheid State of Israel. The result: the steepest decline in church attendance
and church affiliation in U.S. history.
The longer evangelical Christians continue to support Donald Trump's radical pro-Israel,
pro-war agenda, the deeper America will plunge into an anti-Christian country.
The good news is that all over America, people are waking up to the Israel deception.
Support for the erroneous doctrine of dispensational eschatology is in a giant free fall; the
myth of Zionist Israel being a resurrected Old Testament Israel is being repeatedly exposed;
the attempts by Israel's toadies to characterize people whose eyes are open to the truth of
Zionism as being "anti-Semitic" is losing more and more credibility by the day; and more and
more people are becoming aware of the utter wickedness of the Zionist government in Israel.
Plus, more and more people are beginning to understand the plight of the persecuted people
(including Christian people) in the Israeli-occupied territories of Palestine.
Ron, maybe your shipmates on the USS LIBERTY didn't die in vain after all.
From an historical perspective, overextended wars are the downfall of any empire; from a
financial perspective, warfarism is the precursor to an economically depressed middle class;
and from a Scriptural/spiritual perspective, God cannot and will not bless a warmongering
nation.
Let's be clear: God is not building a "Greater Israel." God is not building a third Jewish
temple. God is not speaking through phony prophets who are attributing some sort of divine
calling to Trump's pro-Israel warmongering. God is not blessing America because we are
blessing Zionist Israel. Just the opposite: The more America aligns itself with Israel's
belligerence, bullying and bombing of innocent people, the more God will deliver us over to
becoming an antichrist country. After all, one cannot idolize and partner with antichrists
without becoming one himself.
Burning down the house. Driving like a madman on the road to nowhere has put the nation on a
path to its own demise. Our foreign policy is a disaster that does nothing to promote
democracy anywhere in the world. Our military has provided nothing but instability in the
world since the end of world war 2. Ask yourself, why are we involved in so many useless wars
that don't make the world a better place?
Don't you feel like we are being used by war hawks who see every skirmish as a threat to our
national security? Why can't we cut out all the military BS and just trade with with nations
that want to trade, and ignore those who want to kill each other. Let them figure it out on
their own. Social Capitalism is the only policy we should be supporting.
"All statements of Trump do not count. All Trump statements are results from stress of
torture by Democrats, and deep state."
When this president stated during the campaign,
that christians don't have to forgive their enemies, I rolled my eyes stated he wrong, and
understood well he doesn't know what christianity means and supported him anyway
that he supported same sex marriage, I rolled my eyes, rebuffed the the silliness of his
comments and understood, he is not a conservative and beyond that he doesn't know what
christianity means
when it was uncovered that he had in fact had relations outside of marriage, I rolled my
eyes, and understood that alone could be a disqualifying factor in light of the competition
and supported him anyway
when some of the most respected departments of government leaders said he colluded with
Russians, based on the evidence, I said "poppycock" and supported him anyway
when media swirled with tales of Russian bath houses and carousings abounded, I thought
nonsense and supported hum anyway
when the rumors of underage girls and same sex parties and orgies seped into the main, I
rolled my eyes and supported him anyway . . .
when he spouted off about Charlottesville prematurely, I supported him anyway . . .
when became clear he actually advocated torture, I choked, spat and supported him anyway,
afterall he's not schooled in international relations and the consequences for our service
personnel, much less apparently the basics of tortures effectiveness, especially in large
scale strategies such as the US is engaged in
when it came to light he was completely ignorant of how our criminal justice system gets
it wrong as exampled by the Cen 5 case, I supported him anyway . . .
I supported him in spite of his comments about the poor and people like me who supported
him
There's a long list of tolerance is support of this president based on his advocacy
regarding turning the attention to the US welfare . . .
And when he actually agreed that the Russians had sabotaged the US elections and even
engaged in murder in the states of our European allies -- I knew, that in all liklihood the
turn inward was dead.
Here' a man who beat all the odds because of stalwart support of people like me, who
repeatedly bit the sides of our cheeks in the understanding that the returns would exceed the
price only to discover that the man who beat the odds doesn't seem to have a spine to stand
on ideologically which were the foundations of my advocacy: national security, less reckless
spending, holding business and financial organizations accountable for misbehavior, investing
in the US citizen, restructuring our trade deals to benefit the US, not merely shooting up
tarrifs that would in turn be priced to the citizens the supposed tarrifs were intended to
protect, tax cuts that actually gave middle americans less, no evidence of a draw down in our
careless ME behaviors, i even gave him some room to deal with israel as perhaps a new way
forward -- it's a new way alright – no pretense of acting as honest brokers –
that's new, Immigration is worse and by worse he might as well be serving tea and crumpets at
the border welcoming illegals . . .
If the man you elected to turn the corner actually becomes the vehicle for of what you
elected him to reject and change, eventually one has to acknowledge that fact. he beat the
deep state, he just either had not the courage, the integrity, or the ability, perhaps all
three to withstand the victory and do the work. Of course he had opposition and not much of
it very fair and nearly all of it damaging to the country. But he had support to stand
against it -- he chose an easier path.
And while I support him still, I have no intention of pretending that he is fulfilling the
mandate for which he was elected. I would be lying to myself and doing a disservice to
him.
I have not changed, I knew he was a situational leader, I knew what that meant, but I
voted for a particular agenda, he left the reservation on his own accord and the "deep
state", the establishment", the democrats, the liberals, the libertarians, can only be held
to blame for so much --
But several weeks ago, on top of a complete failure to ensure US order security, the armed
forces paid homage to Mexicans on US territory by relinquishing their weapons and
surrendering -- and given the tenure thus far -- - it devastatingly fitting that this
occurred under this admin.
And in the midst of all this, he is pandering to those engaged in same sex behavior --
– deep state my eye . . .
the path of least resistance. I cling to the belief that having voting for any of the
other candidates -- matters would have been far worse.
I make no apologies for being a conservative and Christian and holding a loyalty to the
US.
I reject your whine, it had legs and even some salience still, but at this stage, very
little.
Now he is bed with Sen. Rubio, Sen. Cruz and others on mucking around in SA -- I can only
consider your comments as an attempt at humor.
The JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire is using the US military as muscle to fight
wars on behalf of Israel and to keep the dollar-based global financial system operating to
their benefit.
Republican Party politician whores are led by the Jew-controlled Neo-Conservative foreign
policy faction and the Democrat Party is led by the Jew-controlled Humanitarian
Interventionist Harpy foreign policy faction.
Debt-based fiat currency systems must always expand or they implode.
Empires must expand or they implode.
The JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire is stuck with a federal funds rate of
2.50 percent or so when the normal level is 6 percent.
Yellen was talking about 4 percent being the new normal level, but she was off by 1.5
percent.
Tucker Carlson is another charlatan who still refuse to hold the Jewish mafia servant, Trump,
responsible for the massacre in Venezuela. He is trying to please both sides to collect his
$$$.
He is complicit in Trumps' crimes against Venezuelan people. Trump is a terrorist and mass
murderer who tried to assassinate Maduro few months ago unsuccessfully. This does not dilute
the fact that TRUMP IS AN ASSASSIN. All these criminals must be arrested and put on trial to
be executed, if not possible then people must assassinate these scums who have no shame to
starve millions of people to death by violating international laws to grab their land and
resources. The world cannot wait. Their complicit, like Tucker Carlson, should be exposed all
over the world. We are fed up with these criminals who received $$$$$ for their lies,
continue to help the criminals at the Pentagon and WH.
Those criminals who spread the lies that Venezuela is Maduro's fault. Carlson and other
CHARLATANS refuse to see the role of the US criminals against Venezuelan people for over 20
years, attacking the population, country's infrastructure well being, economic system and
engaging in assassination , staging riot using their traitor pawns in the country to topple a
legitimate government in order to steal Venezuela's RESOURCES where pays for the liars like
Carlson's salary to spread his propaganda. The US criminals who have assassinated many
leaders to bring down the governments around the world should be assassinated themselves
along with their propagandists.
You criminals have been exposed all over the world and soon should go into your graves,
one by one. These criminals including trump and Carlson, hold Chavez responsible for the
chaos in the country and now Maduro, but ignore the US criminals acts even assassination of
the leaders.
Carlson should stop supporting the Jewish mafia illiterate and mass murderer Trump and
shut up on blaming Maduro, a victim of US brutality and its complicit media like Carlson.
@Thulean
Friend The NYT cartoon showing a blind, yarmulked Trump being led by Nuttinyahoo should
have put Kushner's face on the seeing-eye dog instead.
"... In fact, Trump gave the Democrats his theme for peace by 2020 ..."
"... If Sanders emerged as the nominee, we would have an election with a Democrat running with the catchphrase “no more wars” that Trump had promoted in 2016. Thus, Trump would be defending the bombing of Yemeni rebels and civilians by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia. ..."
"... None of the main candidates for the 2020 Democratic nomination — Joe Biden, Sanders, Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker– seems as aggressive as Trump has become. ..."
"... Trump pulled the United States out of the nuclear agreement with Iran, negotiated by Secretary of State John Kerry, and re-imposed severe sanctions against the Iranians. He declared the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran a terrorist organization, to which Tehran responded with the same action against the U.S. Central Command. ..."
"... Trump has recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, moved the U.S. embassy there, closed the consulate that was in charge of Palestinian affairs, cut off aid to Palestinians, recognized the annexation by Israel of the Golan Heights snatched from Syria in 1967 and kept silent about Netanyahu’s threat to annex the Jewish settlements in the West Bank. ..."
"The president has said he doesn't want to see this country wrapped up in endless wars and I agree with that," Bernie Sanders
said to the Fox News audience last week at Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. Then, looking directly at the camera, he added: "Mr. President,
tonight you have the opportunity to do something extraordinary: sign that resolution. Saudi Arabia must not determine the military
or foreign policy of this country."
Sanders was talking about a resolution on the War Powers Act that would put an end to U.S. involvement in the 5-year civil war
in Yemen. This war has created one of the biggest humanitarian crises in the world of our time, with thousands of children dead in
the middle of a cholera epidemic and famine.
Supported by a Democratic Party united in Congress, and an anti-interventionist faction of the Republican Party headed by Senators
Rand Paul and Mike Lee of Utah, the War Powers resolution had passed both houses of Congress.
But 24 hours after Sanders urged the President to sign it, Trump vetoed the resolution, describing it as a "dangerous attempt
to undermine my constitutional authority."
According to journalist Buchanan J. Buchanan, “with enough Republican votes in both chambers to resist Trump’s veto, this could
have been the end of the matter; but it wasn’t. In fact, Trump gave the Democrats his theme for peace by 2020.”
If Sanders emerged as the nominee, we would have an election with a Democrat running with the catchphrase “no more wars” that
Trump had promoted in 2016. Thus, Trump would be defending the bombing of Yemeni rebels and civilians by Crown Prince Mohammed bin
Salman of Saudi Arabia.
In 2008, John McCain, hawk leader in the Senate, was defeated by the progressive Illinois Senator Barack Obama, who had won his
nomination by defeating the bellicose Hillary Clinton who had voted for authorizing the war in Iraq. In 2012, the Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, who was much more aggressive than Obama in his approach to Russia lost.
However, in 2016, Trump presented himself as a different kind of Republican, an opponent of the Iraq war, an anti-interventionist,
and promising to get along with Russian Vladimir Putin and getting out of the Middle East wars.
None of the main candidates for the 2020 Democratic nomination — Joe Biden, Sanders, Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg,
Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker– seems as aggressive as Trump has become.
Trump pulled the United States out of the nuclear agreement with Iran, negotiated by Secretary of State John Kerry, and re-imposed
severe sanctions against the Iranians. He declared the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran a terrorist organization, to which
Tehran responded with the same action against the U.S. Central Command.
Trump has recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, moved the U.S. embassy there, closed the consulate that was in charge
of Palestinian affairs, cut off aid to Palestinians, recognized the annexation by Israel of the Golan Heights snatched from Syria
in 1967 and kept silent about Netanyahu’s threat to annex the Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
Trump has spoken of getting all U.S. troops out of Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. However, they are still there.
Although Sanders supports Israel, he says he is looking for a two-state solution, and criticizes Netanyahu’s regime.
Trump came to power promising to get along with Moscow, but he sent Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine and announced the US
withdrawal of the 1987 Treaty of Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) subscribed by Ronald Reagan, who banned all ground-based
nuclear intermediate range missiles.
When Putin sent a hundred Russian soldiers to Venezuela to repair the S-400 anti-aircraft and anti-missile system that was damaged
in the recent blackouts, Trump provocatively ordered the Russians to “get out” of the Bolivarian and Chavista country. According
to Buchanan, the gravity center of U.S. policy is shifting towards Trump’s position in 2016. And the anti-interventionist wing of
the Republican Party is growing.
The anti-interventionist wing of the Republican Party together with the anti-war wing of the Democratic Party in Congress are
capable — as they were War Powers Act resolution on Yemen– to produce a new bipartisan majority.
Buchanan predicts that in the 2020 primaries, foreign policy will be in the center and the Democratic Party would have captured
the ground with the catchphrase “no more wars” that candidate Donald Trump exploited in 2016.
If you continue making outrageous false equivalence arguments, mister, you'll have have to
spend time in a reeducation camp, I'm afraid.
It's been explained to you a million times already:
"Earlier, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that the situation with recognizing
Crimea as part of Russia differed from acknowledging Israel's sovereignty over the Golan
Heights.
According to him, what US President Donald Trump did is to "recognize the reality on
the ground." Pompeo stressed that Washington seeks to work on Middle East stability, noting
that "America is a force for good in the region" and its intentions are noble."
"I say enough! If Israel wants to be the only superpower in the Middle East then they can
put their own asses on the line and do it themselves. I want to continue to eat." -- snoopydawg
Worth reading, as are most things Jonathan Cook writes.
But I'm not sure I accept his notion of The Lobby's hold in the United States weakening
in any way. Yes, there finally are a few people in Congress who speak truth for the first
time ever. But look at the choke-hold Israel has on the county, despite those minor
influences. Many of Trump's most senior appointments are people serving Israeli interests to
a record degree -- Bolton, Pompeo, Abrahams, Kushner, and others.
And look at the things, not his to legally dispose of at all, that Trump has "given"
Israel. It's shocking, but there are almost no voices in the United States saying so.
And by all accounts, Trump's big "peace plan" could have been written by members of
Netanyahu's staff. There is no pretense of working with two sides to solve a problem
involving two sides.
We have matters like Trump's "Syria withdrawal" reduced to dust under Israeli influence,
for there is no other serious known interest keeping American military, illegally, in
northwestern Syria.
Israel just wants instability for Syria and to deprive that state of the use of its own
resources. It's just gangsterism, but America fully goes along.
And the steady drumbeat against law-abiding Iran is becoming deafening.
There is only one interest pushing this pointlessly destructive policy, Israel with its
intense desire to dominate its region and benefit from all the favor of the United States in
doing so.
America's own long-term interests all dictate that it should work to establish good
relations with Iran, a major and peaceful state with many things to offer in trade and
friendship, but America cannot do so under Israel's withering influence. America just keeps
flagellating itself to exhibit its reverence towards one small and extremely belligerent
state.
Israel is under absolutely no threat from Iran. It's just empty rhetoric, an excuse for
itself promoting threats and belligerence.
Imagine a non-nuclear state attacking a nuclear state such as Israel, one with a sizable
arsenal? One, moreover, doubly protected by America's nuclear arsenal. It's a darkly
laughable idea, but it is never laughed at by anyone in Washington, it is only
ritualistically honored and repeated.
Israel's destructive viewpoint prevails in almost all important matters. Even much of
America's intense Russophobia reflects stoking by Israeli interests. Israel simply views
Russia, without saying so publicly, as a big stumbling block to the kind of American
international dominance Israel would be very happy seeing.
There is not much to be hopeful about that I see. Perhaps, if Israel keeps so grotesquely
over-playing its hand, there will be a backlash in the United States. But that's only a
"perhaps." Americans, on the whole, just go right along with things, much resembling a herd
of cattle quietly grazing in a pasture while just over the distant hills, vicious armies
clash and threaten their future.
"... For decades it was all but taboo to suggest that pro-Israel lobbies in the United States such as AIPAC used their money and influence to keep lawmakers firmly in check on Israel-related issues -- even if one had to be blind not to notice that that was exactly what they were up to. When back in February U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar pointed out the obvious – that U.S. lawmakers were routinely expected to submit to the lobby's dictates on Israel, a foreign country – her colleagues clamored to distance themselves from her, just as one might have expected were the pro-Israel lobby to wield the very power Omar claimed ..."
"... Omar found herself in the firing line in February when she noted that what mattered in U.S. politics was "It's all about the Benjamins" – an apparent reference to the 1997 Puff Daddy song of the same name in which Benjamins refer to $100 bills. She later clarified that AIPAC leverages funds over congressional and presidential candidates. ..."
"... The claim that the pro-Israel lobby isn't really in the persuasion business can only be sustained on the preposterous basis that Israeli and U.S. interests are so in tune that AIPAC and other organizations serve as little more than cheerleaders for the two countries' "unbreakable bond." Presumably on this view, the enormous sums of money raised are needed only to fund the celebrations. ..."
"... Casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson, a key backer of Republican candidates for the presidency, has never hidden his passion not only for Israel but specifically for the ultra-nationalist governments of Benjamin Netanyahu. ..."
"... In fact, he is so committed to Netanyahu's survival that he spent nearly $200 million propping up an Israeli newspaper over its first seven years – all so he could assist the prime minister of a foreign country. ..."
"... Similarly, Haim Saban, one of the main donors to Democratic presidential candidates, including Hillary Clinton, has made no secret of his commitment to Israel. He has said : "I'm a one-issue guy and my issue is Israel." ..."
"... This point really should be beyond doubt by now. This month The New York Times published an unprecedented essay in which author Nathan Thrall quoted political insiders and lobbyists making plain that, as one would expect, the pro-Israel lobby uses its money to pressure congressional candidates to toe the lobby's line on Israel. ..."
"... Ben Rhodes, a former confidant of Barack Obama, says the lobby effectively tied Obama's hand's domestically on efforts to promote peace. "The Washington view of Israel-Palestine is still shaped by the donor class," he told Thrall, adding: "The donor class is profoundly to the right of where the activists are, and frankly, where the majority of the Jewish community is." ..."
"... Joel Rubin, a former political director at lobby group J Street and a founding board member of the centrist Jewish Democratic Council of America, concurred: "The fight over Israel used to be about voters. It's more about donors now." ..."
"... For that reason, the U.S.-Cuban lobby has an obvious dual loyalty problem too. It's just that, given the Cuban lobby's priority is overthrowing the Cuban government – a desire shared in Washington – the issue is largely moot. ..."
"... Vice-President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo – can be accused of dual loyalty too. They regard Israel's role in Biblical prophecy as far more important than the future of the U.S., or mankind for that matter. ..."
"... I'm often reminded of a scene in "The Brothers Karamotsov" where the lecherous old curmudgeon Karamotsov tells one of his sons about a former business associate – "I once played a dirty trick on that man, and I have hated him ever since." These are the terms of the relationship of AIPAC with the American people. ..."
"... I'm not sure I accept his notion of The Lobby's hold in the United States weakening in any way. Yes, there finally are a few people in Congress who speak truth for the first time ever. But look at the choke-hold Israel has on the county, despite those minor influences. Many of Trump's most senior appointments are people serving Israeli interests to a record degree – Bolton, Pompeo, Abrahams, Kushner, and others. ..."
"... And look at the things, not his to legally dispose of at all, that Trump has "given" Israel. It's shocking, but there are almost no voices in the United States saying so. ..."
"... And by all accounts, Trump's big "peace plan" could have been written by members of Netanyahu's staff. There is no pretense of working with two sides to solve a problem involving two sides. ..."
"... Gilens and Page in 2014 showed that the "ordinary citizen" in the USA had hardly any chance of getting legislation benefiting him or her, while the rich get many of the laws which help them. The laws are drafted by the lobbies-no surprise there. ..."
"... Israelis are themselves anti-semitic – toward the Palestinians, viewing them as inferior, speaking of them as "snakes," "vermin," (what on earth does this remind one of??) and treating them as lesser, unworthy beings. ..."
"... It is important, however, to recognize that the pro-Israel Lobby is not limited to what are conventionally described as "pro-Israel lobbyists". Significant elements of the pro-Israel Lobby thrive in plain sight and open publication, supported by generous attention from the media. In their book, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (2007), John Mearsheimer, Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, Professor of International Relations at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University addressed the "coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction". ..."
"... Mearsheimer and Walt argue that although "the boundaries of the Israel lobby cannot be identified precisely", it "has a core consisting of organizations whose declared purpose is to encourage the U.S. government and the American public to provide material aid to Israel and to support its government's policies, as well as influential individuals for whom these goals are also a top priority". ..."
"... Beyond the identified organizations (from AIPAC to J Street) and high-profile hyper-partisan individuals (from Adelson to Saban, from Graham to Lieberman, from Bolton to Pompeo, from Clinton to Trump), the pro-Israel Lobby "coalition" includes foreign policy think tanks, so-called "journalists", and purported "analysts" all vigorously promoted by media in the US and UK. ..."
UK Israel Lobby Adds Muscle as US Lobby Weakens April 25, 2019 •
38 Comments
British politics are being plunged into a stifling silence on the longest example of mass
human rights abuses sanctioned by the West in modern history, writes Jonathan Cook.
For decades it was all but taboo to suggest
that pro-Israel lobbies in the United States such as AIPAC used their money and influence to
keep lawmakers firmly in check on Israel-related issues -- even if one had to be blind not to
notice that that was exactly what they were up to. When back in February U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar pointed out the obvious – that U.S.
lawmakers were routinely expected to submit to the lobby's dictates on Israel, a foreign
country – her colleagues
clamored to distance themselves from her, just as one might have expected were the
pro-Israel lobby to wield the very power Omar claimed.
But surprisingly Omar did not – at least immediately – suffer the crushing fate
of those who previously tried to raise this issue. Although she was
pressured into apologizing , she was not battered into complete submission for her
honesty.
She received support on social media, as well as a wavering,
muted defense from Democratic grandee Nancy Pelosi, and even a relatively sympathetic
hearing from a few prominent figures in the U.S. Jewish community.
The Benjamins Do Matter
Omar's comments have confronted – and started to expose – one of the most
enduring absurdities in debates about U.S. politics. Traditionally it has been treated as
anti-Semitic to argue that the pro-Israel lobby actually lobbies for its chosen cause –
exactly as other major lobbies do, from the financial services industries to the health and gun
lobbies – and that, as with other lobbies enjoying significant financial clout, it
usually gets its way.
Omar found herself in the firing line in February
when she noted that what mattered in U.S. politics was "It's all about the Benjamins" –
an apparent reference to the 1997 Puff Daddy song of the same name in which
Benjamins refer to $100 bills. She later clarified that AIPAC leverages funds over
congressional and presidential candidates.
The claim that the pro-Israel lobby isn't really in the persuasion business can only be
sustained on the preposterous basis that Israeli and U.S. interests are so in tune that AIPAC
and other organizations serve as little more than cheerleaders for the two countries'
"unbreakable bond." Presumably on this view, the enormous sums of money raised are needed only
to fund the celebrations.
Making the irrefutable observation that the pro-Israel lobby does actually lobby on Israel's
behalf, and very successfully, is typically denounced as anti-Semitism. Omar's comments were
perceived as anti-Semitic on the grounds that she pointed to the canard that Jews wield
outsized influence using money to sway policymaking.
Allegations of anti-Semitism against her deepened days later when she gave
a talk in Washington, D.C., and questioned why it was that she could talk about the
influence of the National Rifle Association and Big Pharma but not the pro-Israel lobby –
or "the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for
allegiance to a foreign country."
That pro-Israel lobbyists – as opposed to Jews generally – do have dual loyalty
seems a peculiar thing to deny, given that the purpose of groups like AIPAC is to rally support
for Israel in Congress.
Casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson, a key backer of Republican candidates for the
presidency, has never hidden his passion not only for Israel but specifically for the
ultra-nationalist governments of Benjamin Netanyahu.
In fact, he is so committed to Netanyahu's survival that he spent
nearly $200 million propping up an Israeli newspaper over its first seven years – all
so he could assist the prime minister of a foreign country.
Similarly, Haim Saban, one of the main donors to Democratic presidential candidates,
including Hillary Clinton, has made no secret of his commitment to Israel. He has said : "I'm a one-issue guy
and my issue is Israel."
Saban honors U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry at Brooking Institution's 2016 Saban Forum.
(State Department via Wikimedia Commons)
Might Saban and Adelson's "Benjamins" have influenced the very pro-Israel – and very
anti-Palestinian – positions of Democratic and Republican presidential candidates? You
would have to be supremely naïve or dishonest to claim not.
'No Bernie-Like Approach'
This point really should be beyond doubt by now. This month The New York Times
published an unprecedented essay in which author Nathan Thrall quoted political insiders
and lobbyists making plain that, as one would expect, the pro-Israel lobby uses its money to
pressure congressional candidates to toe the lobby's line on Israel.
Some of the lobby's power operates at the level of assumption about what Jewish donors
expect in return for their money. According to the Times , some three-quarters of all
donations over $500,000 to the major political action committee supporting Democratic nominees
for the U.S. Senate race in 2018 were made by Jews.
Though many of those donors may not rate Israel as their main cause, a former Clinton
campaign aide noted that the recipients of this largesse necessarily tailor their foreign
policy positions so as not to antagonize such donors. As a result, candidates avoid even the
mild criticism of Israel adopted by Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Democratic party's challenger to
Clinton in the 2016 presidential race and a primary contender for 2020.
"There's no major donor that I can think of who is looking for someone to take a Bernie-like
approach," said the aide. Sanders raised his campaign funds from small donations rather these
major funders, leaving him freer to speak openly about Israel.
Other insiders are more explicit still. Ben Rhodes, a former confidant of Barack Obama, says
the lobby effectively tied Obama's hand's domestically on efforts to promote peace. "The
Washington view of Israel-Palestine is still shaped by the donor class," he told Thrall,
adding: "The donor class is profoundly to the right of where the activists are, and frankly,
where the majority of the Jewish community is."
Obama: Hands tied by AIPAC.
Joel Rubin, a former political director at lobby group J Street and a founding board member
of the centrist Jewish Democratic Council of America, concurred: "The fight over Israel used to
be about voters. It's more about donors now."
All of these insiders are stating that the expectations of major donors align candidates'
U.S. foreign policy positions with Israel's interests, not necessarily those of the U.S. It is
hard not to interpret that as reformulation of "dual loyalty."
What's so significant about the Times article is that it signals, as did the muted
furor over Omar's comments, that the pro-Israel lobby is weakening. No powerful lobby,
including the Israel one, wants to be forced out of the shadows. It wants to remain in the
darkness, where it can most comfortably exercise its influence without scrutiny or
criticism.
The pro-Israel lobby's loyalty to Israel is no longer unmentionable. But it is also not
unique.
As Mondoweiss recently noted, Hannah Arendt, the Jewish scholar and fugitive from
Nazi Germany, pointed to the inevitability of the "double loyalty conflict" in her 1944 essay
"Zionism Reconsidered," where she foreshadowed the rise of a pro-Israel lobby and its potential
negative impacts on American Jews. It was, she wrote , "an unavoidable problem of
every national movement of a people living within the boundaries of other states and unwilling
to resign their civil and political rights therein."
For that reason, the U.S.-Cuban lobby has an obvious dual loyalty problem too. It's just
that, given the Cuban lobby's priority is overthrowing the Cuban government – a desire
shared in Washington – the issue is largely moot.
In Israel's case, however, there is a big and growing gap between image and reality. On the
one hand, Washington professes a commitment to peace-making and a promise to act as an honest
broker between Israel and the Palestinians. And on the other, the reality is it has offered
full-throated support for a series of ultra-nationalist Israeli governments determined to
destroy any hope of peace and swallow up the last vestiges of a potential Palestinian
state.
The Lord's Work
It's important to point out that advocates for Israel are not only Jews. While the
pro-Israel lobby represents the views of a proportion of Jewish Americans, it is also
significantly comprised of Christians, evangelicals in particular.
Millions of these Christians – including Vice-President Mike Pence and Secretary of
State Mike Pompeo – can be accused of dual loyalty too. They regard Israel's role in
Biblical prophecy as far more important than the future of the U.S., or mankind for that
matter.
For many of these evangelicals, bringing about the end of the world by ensuring Jews return
to their Biblical homeland – triggering a final reckoning at the Battle of Armageddon
– is the fulfillment of God's will. And if it's a choice between support for Washington's
largely secular elites and support for God, they know very definitely where they stand.
Again, the Times has started to shine a light on the strange role of Israel in the
U.S. political constellation. Another recent article reminded readers that in 2015 Pompeo spoke
of the end-times struggle phrophesied to take place in Israel, or what is often termed by
evangelicals as "The Rapture." He said : "We
will continue to fight these battles."
During his visit last month to Israel, he announced that the Trump administration's work was
"to make sure that this democracy in the Middle East, that this Jewish state, remains. I am
confident that the Lord is at work here."
... ... ...
Jonathan Cook is a freelance journalist based in Nazareth. He blogs at Jonathan Cook.net .
vinnieoh , April 27, 2019 at 10:57
I'm often reminded of a scene in "The Brothers Karamotsov" where the lecherous old
curmudgeon Karamotsov tells one of his sons about a former business associate – "I once
played a dirty trick on that man, and I have hated him ever since." These are the terms of
the relationship of AIPAC with the American people.
But please let us all remember that all Jews are not racists, and neither are all
Israelis. The same power relationships as hold sway here in the US – any dissenting
voices, whether they are majority or not, are ignored, vilified, and harassed. Also, the
stifling propaganda and fear-mongering in Israel is identical to that in the US, but on
steroids.
I only have broadcast TV, not cable or satellite, so I don't know if those platforms are
running the ads I'm seeing on broadcast. For many months now the "American Alliance of
Christians and Jews" have been airing lengthy ads begging for money for the poor elderly
forgotten Jewish Holocaust survivors in Europe. More recently they've been airing similarly
lengthy ads begging for money for the poor beleaguered Jewish residents of Israel, "who
desperately need our help" because the fine upstanding Israeli government has its hands full
defending the realm against all of Israel's wicked enemies, and they will not or can not take
care of their own poor.
These ads make me physically ill. Where is Sheldon Adelson and all his billions, or Saban
or Lieberman, or Schumer and Mendez, or a whole long list of wealthy Jews that could
alleviate this "suffering"? Where are all the US tax billions already given to Israel, oh
wait, that was for arms and munitions to "Secure the Realm." What about the trillion (at
least) and counting (again, of the US tax tithe) expended to pummel into failed states
Israel's neighbors in that same effort? What about the several thousand US service personnel
that have died for the cause of Israeli expansionism? Or the tens of thousands of wounded and
disabled that the US public will be paying for, for decades? If a loved one returns from
these wars for Zionist aggression, ETS's, and then takes their own life, their abused remains
should likewise be laid at Netanyahu's and AIPAC's doorstep. Not that they would care; they'd
probably just snicker and go through their pockets.
The "success" of those ads is probably not measured in how much pension or SS money they
can fleece from aging Christian marks, but in whatever sympathy they might be able to
grass-roots generate, should any more in the halls of Imperial power even slightly break
ranks. AIPAC and the fanatical right in Israel have no morals, ethics, principles or
humanity. For these they have substituted purpose: eliminate all those that would stand
against them, in any capacity and on any front, by whatever means necessary, and to whatever
end.
Should the propaganda fail to keep the fleas close to its mangy hide, as the tail wags the
dog, expect more active measures to be deployed.
SRH , April 28, 2019 at 05:12
"all Jews are not racists"
In this case, I don't think I'm being a grammar pedant in pointing out that the position
of 'not' in your sentence changes the meaning significantly. I suspect you meant, "not all
Jews are racists".
vinnieoh , April 28, 2019 at 12:43
SRH: I regret that whole post, and spent a miserable evening reflecting on what I had
said. I don't mean to say that I didn't honestly express my feelings, but rather if it was
wise, or helpful, or responsible to go on such a rant. And to take a cheap shot, which
absolutely reinforces a trope that is despicable and fundamental to "Jew hatred." Especially
in light of another attack on another synagogue.
The article was about hard right Israeli machinations in UK and US politics and consent
manufacturing. So, left out of this context is the fact that the US destruction of the
greater ME is also in coordination with Saudi wishes. They wanted Sadam gone just as much as
the Israelis, and are equally united in their desire to crush Iran. While Jewish-Israeli
motivations are complicated, the Saudi's motivations are not. I'll just leave it at that.
Been struggling of late, and should just have kept my fingers off the keyboard.
Monte George Jr. , April 28, 2019 at 17:19
vinnieoh – never a need to apologize for speaking the truth. More of that is needed,
not less.
Alois Mueller , April 27, 2019 at 04:13
Who really controlles the USA:
From the mouth of Netanjahu in his "Invective speach in Finks Bar" 1990:
"If we are caught, we are only replaced by persons of the same kind. So do not be
interested in what you are doing. America is a golden calf, and we will suck it, chop and
sell it bit by bit until there is nothing left but the greatest welfare state in the world
that we create and control. Why? Because that is the will of God and America is big enough to
cope with the blow and we can do it again and again. This is what we do to the countries we
hate. We are destroying them very slowly and let them suffer for refusing to be our slaves.
"(Credit to the Defense Intelligence Agency of the United States Department of Defense)
Jeff Harrison , April 26, 2019 at 12:57
Excellent piece Mr. Cook. A couple of observations. One, using the term Benjamins to refer
to $100 bills is quite a bit older than you realize. Bing Crosby and Mildred Bailey were
using it in the 30's. Two, of course the Israeli's are racists. The Jews are the descendants
of a couple of tribes in the Middle East. As they have said many times – God's chosen
people. Everybody else is a child of a lesser God.
Yes. Although, as I pointed out above, not all Israeli Jews are racist. The Old Testament
gives explicit authority for the Children of Israel to regard the inhabitants of Canaan as
lesser human beings because of their worshipping other gods and therefore to be killed to
allow the Children to take over their land. That is, in essence, the basis for the Israeli
government's claim to sole ownership of the land of Israel today. Is there another basis?
M Awan , April 28, 2019 at 19:18
At least the pioneers of Zionism didn't think so. These pioneers of Zionism were crystal
clear they were going to colonise Palestine and converting it from an Arab country to a
Jewish majority country. They also predicted that native Palestinians will resist to the end.
Look at these historic quotes from the Iron Wall written by Za'ev Jabotinski in 1923:
"The native populations, civilised or uncivilised, have always stubbornly resisted the
colonists, irrespective of whether they were civilised or savage."
"Every native population, civilised or not, regards its lands as its national home, of which
it is the sole master, and it wants to retain that mastery always; it will refuse to admit
not only new masters but, even new partners or collaborators."
" Every native population in the world resists colonists as long as it has the slightest hope
of being able to rid itself of the danger of being colonised." –
http://en.jabotinsky.org/media/9747/the-iron-wall.pdf
"There can be no voluntary agreement between ourselves and the Palestine Arabs. Not now, nor
in the prospective future. I say this with such conviction, not because I want to hurt the
moderate Zionists. I do not believe that they will be hurt. Except for those who were born
blind, they realised long ago that it is utterly impossible to obtain the voluntary consent
of the Palestine Arabs for converting "Palestine" from an Arab country into a country with a
Jewish majority." – http://en.jabotinsky.org/media/9747/the-iron-wall.pdf
Similarly, the father of Zionism Theodore Herzel wrote in his diary:
"When we occupy the land, we shall bring immediate benefits to the state that receives us. We
must expropriate gently the private property on the estates assigned to us. We shall try to
spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the
transit countries, while denying it any employment in our country. The property owners will
come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be
carried out discretely and circumspectly " – The Complete Diaries of Theodor Herzl',
vol. 1 (New York: Herzl Press and Thomas Yoseloff, 1960), pp. 88, 90 hereafter Herzl
diaries.
Worth reading, as are most things Jonathan Cook writes.
But I'm not sure I accept his notion of The Lobby's hold in the United States weakening in
any way. Yes, there finally are a few people in Congress who speak truth for the first time
ever. But look at the choke-hold Israel has on the county, despite those minor influences. Many of Trump's most senior appointments are people serving Israeli interests to a record
degree – Bolton, Pompeo, Abrahams, Kushner, and others.
And look at the things, not his to legally dispose of at all, that Trump has "given"
Israel. It's shocking, but there are almost no voices in the United States saying so.
And by all accounts, Trump's big "peace plan" could have been written by members of
Netanyahu's staff. There is no pretense of working with two sides to solve a problem
involving two sides.
We have matters like Trump's "Syria withdrawal" reduced to dust under Israeli influence,
for there is no other serious known interest keeping American military, illegally, in
northwestern Syria.
Israel just wants instability for Syria and to deprive that state of the use of its own
resources. It's just gangsterism, but America fully goes along.
And the steady drumbeat against law-abiding Iran is becoming deafening.
There is only one interest pushing this pointlessly destructive policy, Israel with its
intense desire to dominate its region and benefit from all the favor of the United States in
doing so.
America's own long-term interests all dictate that it should work to establish good
relations with Iran, a major and peaceful state with many things to offer in trade and
friendship, but America cannot do so under Israel's withering influence. America just keeps
flagellating itself to exhibit its reverence towards one small and extremely belligerent
state.
Israel is under absolutely no threat from Iran. It's just empty rhetoric, an excuse for
itself promoting threats and belligerence.
Imagine a non-nuclear state attacking a nuclear state such as Israel, one with a sizable
arsenal? One, moreover, doubly protected by America's nuclear arsenal. It's a darkly
laughable idea, but it is never laughed at by anyone in Washington, it is only
ritualistically honored and repeated.
Israel's destructive viewpoint prevails in almost all important matters. Even much of
America's intense Russophobia reflects stoking by Israeli interests. Israel simply views
Russia, without saying so publicly, as a big stumbling block to the kind of American
international dominance Israel would be very happy seeing.
There is not much to be hopeful about that I see. Perhaps, if Israel keeps so grotesquely
over-playing its hand, there will be a backlash in the United States. But that's only a
"perhaps." Americans, on the whole, just go right along with things, much resembling a herd
of cattle quietly grazing in a pasture while just over the distant hills, vicious armies
clash and threaten their future.
Garrett Connelly , April 26, 2019 at 11:54
My eyes grew exhausted reading the small grey text used for comments. Regrettably, I was
unable to read them all.
It seems to me the crux of the problem for Jews is evolution accelerating at an
accelerating rate. It is difficult enough for all of us to keep up under the obfuscation of
national elite but Jews seem doubly veiled as they attempt to make sense of the real world,
where we are all cosmic powered biology manifest as human.
JoeB , April 26, 2019 at 10:49
Excellent article. Considering the reams of work on the subject matter, exposing the
zionist/pro-israel intentions and machinations, the guilty parties still look you in the eye
and tell you that you are crazy; such is the chutzpah, if you will, of these people and their
malfeasance. The smear campaigns are still as strong as the bribery, er, donation campaigns.
Yet, the morning veil of morning cloudiness of the concerned eye might be clearing. Props to
Omar for bringing this to the forefront (for now). Personally, I have not yet dismissed her
presence as one of controlled opposition; this is a very clever, sneaky, nefarious lot that
we are dealing with.
mike k , April 26, 2019 at 07:51
All of this pro Israel conspiracy is totally obvious to anyone not wearing thick blinders
to reality.
Camber Jo Bentwagon , April 25, 2019 at 23:53
Really interesting and informative article.
One thing I was reminded of reading through the Christian evangelical motivations for
supporting Israel–they have the same goal as ISIS: Judgement Day and victory for their
side over the other. And both only want Jews to exist as long as it means their nihilistic
prophecies come true. At that point both would like all Jews to be killed or go to Hell, or
wander the earth in pain after the Apocalypse.
For Israel, that at least assures survival for the moment. Neither ISIS nor Christians
want Jews to be exterminated (or moved away from their current ideal place), at least not
until their super sky heroes are ready for the final battle.
SRH , April 28, 2019 at 05:22
I'm an atheist who was brought up as an evangelical Christian in a church that preached
about the Rapture and such like. It seems incredible to me now that I believed what you
write, but I and many others in that church in northern England did (and probably they still
do) in complete seriousness, as much as we believed in the reality of anything we could see
and touch. These dangerously foolish delusions of God's judgement need to be shown for what
they are.
rosemerry , April 26, 2019 at 17:35
As a non-American, I am disgusted by the whole "election" fantasy paid for by people with
an axe to grind, with no democratic input at all. Benjamins, Sabin, Adelson, Koch Bros,
MIC,fossil fuels lobby, NRA-how can any of this find a real leader?
Gilens and Page in 2014
showed that the "ordinary citizen" in the USA had hardly any chance of getting legislation
benefiting him or her, while the rich get many of the laws which help them. The laws are
drafted by the lobbies-no surprise there.
Tiu , April 27, 2019 at 07:01
I had to chuckle at the concept of "democratic input". With the exception of perhaps
Iceland, all other so-called "democracies" are in fact kakistocracies, with the US being the
biggest kakistocracy of the lot.
Jacob , April 25, 2019 at 19:50
One sided, biased propaganda. So according to the author, Israelis are racist and evil,
and Palestinians are angels. While Palestinian terrorists organizations have killed Israeli
civilians, including children, kidnapped Israeli planes, carried out attacks against Israeli
national sports team, murdered rabbis and synagogues, etc.
But the worst thing, that killers of Jews are considered "heroes" among the Palestinians.
They name streets after them, glorify them in their history books.
But the author chooses to fully blame and dehumanize one side, completely ignoring crimes of
the other.
With that approach, Israelis will continue to vote right because they feel that the world is
holding a prejudice against them and won't like them – and they are completely true
Nathan Mulcahy , April 26, 2019 at 03:23
The Israel is indeed a racist, apartheid state that illegally occupies native Palestinian
land and continues to displace native people to create a greater Israel. That makes it a
colonial state as well.
Native Palestinians, both Muslims and Christians, are fighting against for their occupier
and oppressed. I don't consider them to be angels – but just human beings.
If anybody thinks that I am an antisemite then it is his/her problem.
JW , April 26, 2019 at 05:30
One sided, biased propaganda. So according to the author, Palestinians are racist and
evil, and Israelis are angels. While Zionist terrorists organizations have killed Palestinian
civilians, including children, carried out attacks against Israeli Palestinian athletes,
murdered imams and mosques, etc.
But the worst thing, that killers of Palestinians are considered "heroes" among the Jews.
They name streets after them, glorify them in their history books.
But the author chooses to fully blame and dehumanize one side, completely ignoring crimes of
the other.
Get a life.
Sam F , April 26, 2019 at 06:44
No, Jacob, those wrongs are inevitable responses to mass discrimination and wrongdoing by
the zionists. Tribalists always pretend that the wrongs they deliberately provoke were
unprovoked, the oldest lie in history. While there is always some tribalist wrongdoing in
response to tribalist aggression, it does not excuse the aggression, and it is
inevitable.
The answer is in seeking peace and justice for all, which is not within the capacity of
radicalized factions. External peacemaking force is necessary. The zionists are such
extremely selfish and racist tribal tyrants, conspiring to control US policy, that they have
prevented the US and the UN from working for justice in the ME. They are the initial and
primary causes of the problem, not the sole cause. They have destroyed democracy in the US,
and should be recognized as enemies of their tribe, and enemies of humanity, like all
tyrants. Working together without tribal loyalties, we can achieve justice for all.
Skip Scott , April 26, 2019 at 11:49
Great reply, Sam. The notion of separation of Church and State is one of our fundamental
principals, as is equal justice under the Law. Both are anathema to the State of Israel as it
exists today. To expect that some Palestinians will not respond in kind to the violence that
is visited upon them daily by the IDF is unrealistic. Jacob seeks to blame the victim.
Sam F , April 27, 2019 at 16:14
Good points. We should consider amendments to the Constitution prohibiting most
interactions with countries that do not implement those principles.
AnneR , April 26, 2019 at 09:47
Could you explain how a people – deliberately, violently thrown off their land and
out of their homes by well armed forces in order for the religious compatriots of those armed
forces could grab said lands and homes – should behave toward such an colonizing,
ethnically cleansing invasion? By meekly bowing before their conquerors and permanently
disappearing from view?
Could explain how a people, deprived of their rightful homes and lands by this invading
religiously linked other people, should react to the military forces of the invaders (the
real terrorists) when the ethnically cleansed people do NOT have an air force, an army, a
navy because they have been prevented, at every turn from either establishing their own state
(i.e. Palestine – all of it) from the British Mandate onward, or even a tiny statelet
along side its former homeland "Israel"?
Could you explain the equivalence of the small, home-made rockets fired from Gaza (the
world's largest prison) – barely more than fireworks – which have yet to kill
more than a handful of people in toto are the equivalent of the bombs (including white
phosphorus ones) dropped by the Israeli (terrorist) airforce, from heights that none of those
home-made rockets could reach, in terror, death and injury and destruction tolls?
Perhaps you could explain the equivalence of stone-throwing by children to IDF snipers
using high-powered rifles stood well away from any danger (from those stones) in terms of
injuries and death tolls?
So – the Palestinians have (the Intifadas) used suicide bombings. Who in their
position would not? And indeed international law is in fact on their side.
Palestinians have the right to return to their homes, their lands stolen brutally from
them by the present residents of Palestine (called Israel). Palestinians have the right to be
treated equally, in every way, with Israeli Jews.
Anti-semitism is, like racism more generally, an ugly tribal viewpoint, often leading to
even uglier actions. Israelis are themselves anti-semitic – toward the Palestinians,
viewing them as inferior, speaking of them as "snakes," "vermin," (what on earth does this
remind one of??) and treating them as lesser, unworthy beings.
Dr. Ip , April 26, 2019 at 12:42
Sorry Jaakov, but you interpret incorrectly.
No one is saying bad things about Jews here, it's the politicians and their policies that are
being shown to be unfair. If you can remember that when Israel began to be populated by
exiles from Europe and other places around the world after the Holocaust, it was a socialist
in its policies, like the Kibbutzim, which began as utopian communities, a combination of
socialism and Zionism. Only later, as the politics went further and further toward the right,
as politics have done also in the USA and now slowly in Europe as well, did things change
drastically from socialism to anti-social. The wars did not help of course, but no nation
anywhere near Israel can possibly be an existential threat to the country, especially since
its nuclear arsenal is many times greater than that of Pakistan and India.
And now, to have a working relationship with the head-choppers from Saudi Arabia and to give
shelter to Daesh is really not acceptable policy.
The most dedicated humanitarians in history have to a great extend been Jewish. The greatest
philosophers (Baruch Spinoza is one my personal favorites) as well. Look up the names.
Don't let your fear and anger cloud your mind to the validity of the path toward peace and
well-being for humanity.
rosemerry , April 26, 2019 at 17:39
Poor Jacob. All the usual "arguments" you have been fed, because here you do NOT have the
overwhelming support of the MSM in every other place you look. Look up some of the figures of
the killings by Palestinians compared with the Israeli murders if you have any interest in
truth.
Tiu , April 27, 2019 at 07:07
No Jacob, the Israelis are racist and evil because of their collective actions and
government policies, not because the author says so.
mark , April 27, 2019 at 17:36
The ratio of Zionist to Palestinian terror, of Zionist to Palestinian murders, is of the
order of 1,000 to 1.
IDF kiddie killers are currently gunning down hundreds of Palestinian kids in Gaza with
British sniper rifles and dum dum bullets.
Killers of Arabs, like Baruch Goldstein, who murdered 37 worshippers in a mosque, are turned
into national heroes and their graves into shrines, with people naming children after him.
And lionising the settler thugs who kidnap and burn to death young Palestinian children, with
gangs of Zionist filth taunting the bereaved families about the "barbecue." Or the Zionist
families taking picnics to watch all the fun of the latest Warsaw Ghetto style pogrom in
Gaza. Say what you like about the Nazis, but you didn't get German families having weekend
picnics to watch the gassings at Auschwitz.
Though hand join in hand . The wicked shall not be unpunished. Bible says?
Sam F , April 25, 2019 at 19:10
Compliments to Mr. Cook, who has written very well on this. But note that:
1. No argument is made that the US Israel lobby is weakening;
2. Evangelical politicians do not have biblical beliefs or any other values: they are purely
tribal opportunists seeking money and power.
The fact that "three-quarters of all donations over $500,000 to Democratic nominees were
made by Jews" shows that zionism is not weakening. Very likely most of that was fed back
directly or indirectly from US "aid" to Israel.
However humanity is divided into national/ethnic/religious tribes, the development of
economic and social dependency upon the tribe makes its members fear to criticize tribal
leaders. That is the opportunity sought by tyrants, who invent enemies of the tribe to demand
power as false protectors, and to accuse their opponents of disloyalty. Zionism adds the
opportunity for tyrants of all groups to profit as they demonize to gain power.
Abe , April 25, 2019 at 18:52
Jonathan Cook notes that "Lobbies of all kinds thrive in the dark, growing more powerful
and less accountable when they are out of view and immune from scrutiny."
It is important, however, to recognize that the pro-Israel Lobby is not limited to what
are conventionally described as "pro-Israel lobbyists". Significant elements of the pro-Israel Lobby thrive in plain sight and open publication,
supported by generous attention from the media. In their book, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (2007), John Mearsheimer,
Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, Professor of
International Relations at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University addressed
the "coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer U.S. foreign
policy in a pro-Israel direction".
Mearsheimer and Walt argue that although "the boundaries of the Israel lobby cannot be
identified precisely", it "has a core consisting of organizations whose declared purpose is
to encourage the U.S. government and the American public to provide material aid to Israel
and to support its government's policies, as well as influential individuals for whom these
goals are also a top priority".
Beyond the identified organizations (from AIPAC to J Street) and high-profile
hyper-partisan individuals (from Adelson to Saban, from Graham to Lieberman, from Bolton to
Pompeo, from Clinton to Trump), the pro-Israel Lobby "coalition" includes foreign policy
think tanks, so-called "journalists", and purported "analysts" all vigorously promoted by
media in the US and UK.
Hasbara propaganda 'splainers' try to deflect attention from pro-Israel Lobby agency and
obfuscate the question of cui bono by screaming about "anti-Semitism" (conventional Hasbara),
posting fake anti-Semitic rants (inverted Hasbara), or griping about "mono-causality".
In the US, "Russia-gate" is a major deflection/obfuscation operation to re-direct
attention from pro-Israel Lobby influence/Israeli interference in the 2016 elections.
Escalating US-Saudi-Israeli Axis aggression involves a complex interplay of sometimes
contradictory political forces, including waning US economic and military dominance.
Nevertheless, the pro-Israel Lobby in the US, and its counterpart in the UK, continue to
play a primary role in the perpetual drive to war in the Middle East.
Regardless of the degree to which certain lobby organizations have been "weakened" by the
infrequent "nod to truth", the pro-Israel Lobby occupation of the Trump war cabinet, and its
UK counterpart, must not remain "immune from scrutiny" if the next catastrophic war is to be
averted.
There is no further need for "debate". The pernicious influence of the pro-Israel Lobby in
the US and UK has been sufficiently verified.
What is immediately required is vigorous exposure of the pro-Israel Lobby by what remains
of true independent critical journalism in the west. 'Cause we're sure not gonna to get any
from the "First Draft" war propaganda coalition.
Note an interesting statement of a pro-Isreally lobbyist: "Jewish exceptionalism and the
exceptionalist nature of Jewish civilization require an unconditional space for the continued
evolution of their civilization. What's good for Jewish civilization is good for humanity at
large. Jewish civilization is an international treasure trove that must be protected." ~ by
Jason D. Hill, professor of philosophy at DePaul University in Chicago. If this not a descript on
neofascist mentality I do not know what is. just replace Jewish with German.
You will get "German exceptionalism and the exceptionalist nature of German civilization
require an unconditional space for the continued evolution of their civilization. What's good for
German civilization is good for humanity at large. German civilization is an international
treasure trove that must be protected."
Notable quotes:
"... In his essay, Hill insisted that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should faithfully keep his campaign promise to incorporate West Bank settlements. In fact, according to Hill, the Israeli leader has a "moral right to annex all of the West Bank for a plethora of reasons." ..."
"... First, the Israelis were too "altruistic" in dealing with the Palestinians whom they conquered in 1967. It would been better if the Israelis had regarded the Palestinians as "enemies of the state ..."
"... Second, he implies that Palestinian authority doesn't deserve any better ..."
"... "Jewish exceptionalism and the exceptionalist nature of Jewish civilization require an unconditional space for the continued evolution of their civilization. What's good for Jewish civilization is good for humanity at large. Jewish civilization is an international treasure trove that must be protected." ..."
"... Third, Israel has "every moral right to wage a ruthless and unrelenting war against Hamas and to re-settle the land if it ever so desires." On top of that, the United States is morally obligated to pay "political and financial reparations" to Israel, supplying it with "more advanced military capabilities" so that it can maintain its "unrivaled military status in the Middle East." ..."
"... Finally, Hill solemnly arrives at his last point. The Palestinians have no moral authority "because they have never explicitly held a philosophy that can support freedom, the basic principles of individual rights, and a free market economy." ..."
"... Hill's extravagant description of "Jewish civilization" in language that recalls the extreme, belligerent nationalists of an earlier age ..."
"... Finally, I'm wondering whether any government that Hill judges to be "better" than another one has a moral right to overthrow the offending regime and then expel its inhabitants. Or is this a one-time deal only for Israelis? By the way, "reparations" are the things that the Germans paid Nazi victims, not the support a nation gives to a weaker ally. Perhaps Hill is telling us more about what should be the servile U.S. relationship to Israel than he intends. ..."
"... This commentary has made me think of an unpleasant experience in my own life. In 1987 I lost the chance for a graduate professorship at a large university in Washington, D.C. after several noted neoconservatives called my prospective employer and insisted passionately that "I was not quite reliable on Israel." If Professor Hill has established the standard of who is "reliable on Israel," then perhaps my accusers were correct. ..."
published
an opinion piece by Jason D. Hill, professor of philosophy at DePaul University in Chicago.
As I read this commentary, I had to wonder whether it was some kind of spoof. It seems to have
been written to poke fun at over-the-top Zionists; and this may indeed be the case -- or so one
can hope.
In his essay, Hill insisted that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should
faithfully keep his campaign
promise to incorporate West Bank settlements. In fact, according to Hill, the Israeli
leader has a "moral right to annex all of the West Bank for a plethora of reasons."
This "plethora of reasons" comes down basically to four.
First, the Israelis were too "altruistic" in dealing with the Palestinians whom they
conquered in 1967. It would been better if the Israelis had regarded the Palestinians as
"enemies of the state : supporters of the Fatah (Palestinian Liberation Organization)
Charter, which basically calls for the end of Jewry in the region." Jewish conquerors should
have immediately annexed the land and made "the people there [who should have been expelled]
the responsibility of their original homeland: Jordan."
Second, he implies that Palestinian authority doesn't deserve any better , in part
because it fails to recognize the inherent inferiority of their people in relation to the
Jewish masters of the West Bank: "Jewish exceptionalism and the exceptionalist nature of
Jewish civilization require an unconditional space for the continued evolution of their
civilization. What's good for Jewish civilization is good for humanity at large. Jewish
civilization is an international treasure trove that must be protected."
Third, Israel has "every moral right to wage a ruthless and unrelenting war against Hamas
and to re-settle the land if it ever so desires." On top of that, the United States is morally
obligated to pay "political and financial reparations" to Israel, supplying it with "more
advanced military capabilities" so that it can maintain its "unrivaled military status in the
Middle East."
Finally, Hill solemnly arrives at his last point. The Palestinians have no moral
authority "because they have never explicitly held a philosophy that can support freedom, the
basic principles of individual rights, and a free market economy." Additionally, they vote
for terrorist organizations like Hamas to represent them. In short, they are a "security threat
to Israel because a core feature of their identity is a commitment to destroying Israel as a
Jewish state." It is therefore immoral to accept "anti-Semitics devoted to the destruction of
Israel into the domain of Jewish civilization."
Hill does make two serious points: one, that Israelis face an immense security problem and
two, that the Palestinians on the West Bank (and let's not forget Gaza) are angry because of
both the cramped conditions and military control/occupation they've had to endure for decades.
Right and wrong can be found on both sides of this protracted conflict: Palestinians were
defeated and expelled from what is now Israel, while Israelis are being threatened by violence
from the descendants of those whom they defeated and their terrorist allies.
But Hill's extravagant description of "Jewish civilization" in language that recalls the
extreme, belligerent nationalists of an earlier age does nothing to help his cause, nor for
that matter, the credibility of The Federalist. And why exactly should I suppose that every
Palestinian is a terrorist or theocratic fanatic? Understandably, desperate people vote for
extremist parties. I too wish that West Bank Palestinians were more reasonable and more
compromising but I can understand their frustration as an occupied population.
Finally, I'm wondering whether any government that Hill judges to be "better" than another
one has a moral right to overthrow the offending regime and then expel its inhabitants. Or is
this a one-time deal only for Israelis? By the way, "reparations" are the things that the
Germans paid Nazi victims, not the support a nation gives to a weaker ally. Perhaps Hill is
telling us more about what should be the servile U.S. relationship to Israel than he
intends.
But the most childish piece of advice Hill offers, which the Israelis fortunately never
took, is sending West Bank Palestinians to neighboring Jordan. Is Hill aware that Jordan has
over two million
Palestinians , some of whom have been there since 1948, and has taken in a total of 657,628
Syrian refugees as of
early 2018 ? King Abdullah of Jordan has maintained generally friendly relations with both
the United States and Israel, and the last thing he needs is the turmoil and political unrest
that would result from sticking more irate Palestinians, who had been kicked out of their
homes, into his country.
This commentary has made me think of an unpleasant experience in my own life. In 1987 I lost
the chance for a graduate professorship at a large university in Washington, D.C. after several
noted neoconservatives called my prospective employer and insisted passionately that "I was not
quite reliable on Israel." If Professor Hill has established the standard of who is "reliable
on Israel," then perhaps my accusers were correct.
Paul Gottfried is Raffensperger Professor of Humanities Emeritus at Elizabethtown
College, where he taught for 25 years. He is a Guggenheim recipient and a Yale Ph.D. He is the
author of 13 books, most recently Fascism: Career of a Concept and Revisions and Dissents
.
Considering that this 'study' is an overblown version of the Real Men Go to Tehran
delusion (which is STILL in the pondering phase) it's hard to ignore the trepidation revealed
in an assessment divided into pseudo business-like categories of...
1. Likelihood of Success
2. Benefits
3. Costs & Risks
...when there are sufficient unresolved uncertainties to be fine-tuned to keep this plan
bogged down in the pondering phase for even longer than the unconsummated Real Men Go To Iran
nothing-burger.
Wake up, the Trump (Drumpf) family are crypto Jews, Drumpf women have been marrying Jews
for generations. Well worth your time to read Miles Mathis on the family history, I found the
photo of Fred Trump gifting New York real estate for a Torah study center particularly
interesting as good Lutherans do that with such regularity.
It may well be that Earnest read the New York Times.
Probably not. This character probably reads the Neocon York Times about as much as I do,
which is not at all. The connection between the awful surge of "antisemitism" and violence by
the rightwingnutters is already being made.
Dani Dayan, Consul General of Israel in New York, reached out to the Times to express his
outrage regarding the cartoon. An Israeli official told The Jerusalem Post that Dayan in
his conversations made it clear that the cartoon was unacceptable, and that the fact it
appeared on the paper is an escalation of the latest trend of displaying antisemitic
tropes in the American public sphere.
The horror of it all! It's time for Congress to get off its fat duff and pass those laws
outlawing BDS in all shapes and forms! Time to crack down on forums like this one where
criticism of Holy Israel is allowed to pollute the Internet Tubes. From our lard-ass
End-Times Secretary of State:
"Friends, let me go on record: Anti-Zionism IS anti-Semitism. The Trump
administration opposes it unequivocally and we will fight for it relentlessly," he made
clear.
Writing anything except glowing hugs-and-kisses about God's Favorite Thieves and Murderers
ought to be illegal. This site owner would quickly get his act together if he was given the
"Galileo Treatment" of being shown videos from the Cuban Concentration Camp with scenes of
the evildoers there being waterboarded.
One more thing to consider:
The New York Times retraction, however, was not an apology. It also left many questions
unanswered as to how such an obviously anti-Semitic cartoon, not even associated with the
story on the page it appeared on, could have passed the gauntlet of editors.
All those editors have cushy nice-paying jobs. When it's time to keep their mouths shut,
they keep them shut. My tight-fitting tinfoil hat causes me to suspect the publication of
this obviously factual cartoon was a cold-blooded business decision. Its mere existence will
give the Neocon York Times a long spell of 'deniability' that it is always in bed with the
the pissant Apartheid state in every way imaginable. I'd imagine this flea-bite of momentary
discomfort will be very useful in the next two or so years as it shills for Trump's Deal of
the Century as well as any other horrors advanced by the Wag-The-Dog state.
The Trump administration once again has graphically demonstrated that "international law" and "national sovereignty" already belong to the Realm
of the Walking Dead.
Notable quotes:
"... The full – frontal attack on Iran reveals how the Trump administration bets on breaking Eurasia integration via what would be its weakeast node; the three key nodes are China, Russia and Iran. These three actors interconnect the whole spectrum; Belt and Road Initiative; the Eurasia Economic Union; the Shanghai Cooperation Organization; the International North-South Transportation Corridor; the expansion of BRICS Plus. ..."
"... A plausible scenario involves Moscow acting to defuse the extremely volatile U.S.-Iran confrontation, with the Kremlin and the Ministry of Defense trying to persuade President Donald Trump and the Pentagon from any direct attack against the IRGC. The inevitable counterpart is the rise of covert ops, the possible staging of false flags and all manner of shady Hybrid War techniques deployed not only against the IRGC, directly and indirectly, but against Iranian interests everywhere. For all practical purposes, the U . S . and Iran are at war. ..."
As if a deluge of sanctions against a great deal of the planet was not enough, the latest
"offer you can't refuse" conveyed by a gangster posing as diplomat, Consul Minimus Mike Pompeo
, now essentially orders the whole planet to submit to the one and only arbiter of world trade:
Washington.
First the Trump administration unilaterally smashed a multinational, UN-endorsed agreement,
the JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal. Now the waivers that magnanimously allowed eight nations to
import oil from Iran without incurring imperial wrath in the form of sanctions will expire on
May 2 and won't be renewed. The eight nations are a mix of Eurasian powers: China, India,
Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Turkey, Italy and Greece.
Apart from the trademark toxic cocktail of hubris, illegality, arrogance/ignorance and
geopolitical/geo – economic infantilism inbuilt in this foreign policy decision, the
notion that Washington can decide who's allowed to be an energy provider to emerging superpower
China does not even qualify as laughable. Much more alarming is the fact that imposing a total
embargo of Iranian oil exports is no less than an act of war.
Ultimate Neocon Wet Dream
Those subscribing to the ultimate U.S, neocon and Zionist wet dream – regime change in
Iran – may rejoice at this declaration of war. But as Professor
Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran has elegantly argued,
"If the Trump regime miscalculates, the house can easily come crashing down on its
head."
Reflecting the fact Tehran seems to have no illusions regarding the utter folly ahead, the
Iranian leadership -- if provoked to a point of no return, Marandi additionally told me -- can
get as far as "destroying everything on the other side of the Persian Gulf and chasing the U.S.
out of Iraq and Afghanistan. When the U.S. escalates, Iran escalates. Now it depends on the
U.S. how far things go."
This red alert from a sensible academic perfectly dovetails with what's happening with the
structure of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) -- recently branded a "terrorist
organization" by the United States. In perfect symmetry, Iran's Supreme National Security
Council also branded the U.S. Central Command -- CENTCOM -- and "all the forces connected to
it" as a terrorist group .
The new IRGC commander-in-chief is Brigadier General Hossein Salami, 58. Since 2009 he was
the deputy of previous commander Mohamamd al-Jafari , a soft spoken but tough as nails
gentleman I met in Tehran two years ago. Salami, as well as Jafari, is a veteran of the
Iran-Iraq war; that is, he has actual combat experience. And Tehran sources assure me that he
can be even tougher than Jafari.
In tandem, IRGC Navy Commander Rear Admiral Alireza
Tangsiri has evoked the unthinkable in terms of what might develop out of the U.S. total
embargo on Iran oil exports; Tehran could block the Strait of Hormuz.
Western Oblivion
Vast swathes of the ruling classes across the West seem to be oblivious to the reality that
if Hormuz is shut down, the result will be an absolutely cataclysmic global economic
depression.
Warren Buffett, among other investors, has routinely qualified the 2.5 quadrillion
derivatives market as a weapon of financial mass destruction. As it stands, these derivatives
are used -- illegally -- to drain no less than a trillion U.S. dollars a year out of the market
in manipulated profits.
Considering historical precedents, Washington may eventually be able to set up a Persian
Gulf of Tonkin false flag. But what next?
If Tehran were totally cornered by Washington, with no way out, the de facto nuclear option
of shutting down the Strait of Hormuz would instantly cut off 25 percent of the global oil
supply. Oil prices could rise to over $500 a barrel, to even $1000 a barrel. The 2.5
quadrillion of derivatives would start a chain reaction of destruction.
Unlike the shortage of credit during the 2008 financial crisis, the shortage of oil could
not be made up by fiat instruments. Simply because the oil is not there . Not even Russia would
be able to re-stabilize the market.
It's an open secret in private conversations at the Harvard Club – or at Pentagon
war-games for that matter – that in case of a war on Iran, the U.S. Navy would not be
able to keep the Strait of Hormuz open.
Russian SS-NX-26
Yakhont missiles -- with a top speed of Mach 2.9 -- are lining up the Iranian northern
shore of the Strait of Hormuz. There's no way U . S . aircraft carriers can defend a barrage of
Yakhont missiles.
Then there are the
SS-N-22 Sunburn supersonic anti-ship missiles -- already exported to China and India --
flying ultra-low at 1,500 miles an hour with dodging capacity, and extremely mobile; they can
be fired from a flatbed truck, and were designed to defeat the U . S . Aegis radar defense
system.
What Will China Do?
The full – frontal attack on Iran reveals how the Trump administration bets on
breaking Eurasia integration via what would be its weakeast node; the three key nodes are
China, Russia and Iran. These three actors interconnect the whole spectrum; Belt and Road
Initiative; the Eurasia Economic Union; the Shanghai Cooperation Organization; the
International North-South Transportation Corridor; the expansion of BRICS Plus.
So there's no question the Russia-China strategic partnership will be watching Iran's back.
It's no accident that the trio is among the top existential "threats" to the U.S., according to
the Pentagon. Beijing knows how the U . S . Navy is able to cut it off from its energy sources.
And that's why Beijing is strategically increasing imports of oil and natural gas from Russia;
engineering the "escape from Malacca" also must take into account a hypothetical U . S .
takeover of the Strait of Hormuz.
A plausible scenario involves Moscow acting to defuse the extremely volatile U.S.-Iran
confrontation, with the Kremlin and the Ministry of Defense trying to persuade President Donald
Trump and the Pentagon from any direct attack against the IRGC. The inevitable counterpart is
the rise of covert ops, the possible staging of false flags and all manner of shady Hybrid War
techniques deployed not only against the IRGC, directly and indirectly, but against Iranian
interests everywhere. For all practical purposes, the U . S . and Iran are at war.
Within the framework of the larger Eurasia break-up scenario, the Trump administration does
profit from Wahhabi and Zionist psychopathic hatred of Shi'ites. The "maximum pressure" on Iran
counts on Jared of Arabia Kushner's close WhatsApp pal Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) in Riyadh and
MbS's mentor in Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Zayed , to replace the shortfall of Iranian oil in the
market. Bu that's nonsense -- as quite a few wily Persian Gulf traders are adamant Riyadh won't
"absorb Iran's market share" because the extra oil is not there.
Much of what lies ahead in the oil embargo saga depends on the reaction of assorted vassals
and semi-vassals. Japan won't have the guts to go against Washington. Turkey will put up a
fight. Italy, via Salvini, will lobby for a waiver. India is very complicated; New Delhi is
investing in Iran's Chabahar port as the key hub of its own Silk Road, and closely cooperates
with Tehran within the INSTC framework. Would a shameful betrayal be in the cards?
China, it goes without saying, will simply ignore Washington.
Iran will find ways to get the oil flowing because the demand won't simply vanish with a
magic wave of an American hand. It's time for creative solutions. Why not, for instance, refuel
ships in international waters, accepting gold, all sorts of cash, debit cards, bank transfers
in rubles, yuan, rupees and rials -- and everything bookable on a website?
Now that's a way Iran can use its tanker fleet to make a killing. Some of the tankers could
be parked in -- you got it -- the Strait of Hormuz, with an eye on the price at Jebel Ali in
the UAE to make sure this is the real deal. Add to it a duty free for the ships crews. What's
not to like? Ship owners will save fortunes on fuel bills, and crews will get all sorts of
stuff at 90 percent discount in the duty free.
And let's see whether the EU has grown a spine -- and really turbo-charge their
Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) alternative payment network conceived after the Trump
administration ditched the JCPOA. Because more than breaking up Eurasia integration and
implementing neocon regime change, this is about the ultimate anathema; Iran is being
mercilessly punished because it has bypassed the U.S. dollar on energy trade.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email
lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Pepe Escobar , a veteran Brazilian journalist, is the correspondent-at-large for Hong
Kong-based Asia Times . His latest book is
"
2030 ." Follow him on Facebook .
Indeed, this looks like a potentially much more dangerous situation. If these major nations
obey Trump (I suspect some will not), Iran might be tempted to take more aggressive action,
with blocking the Straits of Hormuz among the more serious. This would really spike the price
of oil, and quite possibly trigger a war. This may be what the Trump people want, with their
real policy apparently being "regime change." However, so far the only regime change seems to
be rising influence of hardliners, with a new hardline commander for the now sanctioned
Revolutionary Guards being appointed. He has been talking about missiles getting fired on
Israel from Lebanon by Hezbollah. Is this what Netanyahu really wants?
I think those who think the Iranian regime will easily be overthrown are more deluded than
those who advocated invading Iraq (and some of them are the same people, see John Bolton
especially). This has the potential of really seriously distracting people from the Mueller
Report, but not at all in a good way.
... ... ...
Another Addendum: In WaPo
this morning they report that the other three nations are Greece, Italy, and Taiwan, and that
they have already stopped buying Iranian oil under US pressure. Also, apparently Japan has been
stockpiling oil from there and has stopped further purchases already in anticipation of just
this move by the US. OTOH, both China and Turkey are talking about not obeying the US order. No
word out of either India or South Korea so far.
Bolton says that this is all designed to make Iran be a "normal country," as if Saudi Arabia
were such. As it is, indeed the hawkish new leader of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards has
spoken publicly of possibly blocking the Straits of Hormuz, as I suggested they may well be
contemplating.
"... Russia is preparing for war and I know the mood there. If it starts, it will start conventionally with strikes on US forces in Europe, especially naval assets in Med. Russia has a control of escalation there. US military knows this and already calculated the "weight" of the first salvo from Russian side on US Navy assets. ..."
"... Nothing would be gained for US interests in such a thing. It would merely be an example of the domination of the US by Zionist fantasies. ..."
"... IMO you are right in thinking that the present inhabitants of the leadership of the BORG are a sub-species of the classic Straussian ideology driven race. The Old Ones were driven by their madcap exotericism and were entertaining. These are merely imperialists. ..."
What is gained for US interests to start a war that puts the entire middle east in flames?
That causes oil prices to spike to over $200 a barrel? That kills probably hundreds of
thousands and immiserates millions?
DO these guys see a massive depression coming and think the only way out is to go to war
as in WW2? Is it population control? Surely there is a better way to get rid of surplus male
population than total war - can't they figure out a way to game it so that warriors fight
warriors and total populations are not destroyed?
This thing looks so wrong and counter-productive to me, stupid and evil and needing
massive amounts of lies and propaganda to get people onboard. WHo benefits? I say no one but
obviously I am wrong - the people who are prosecuting this thing seem to think that they and
their sponsors will benefit mightily.....
Russia would have to choose between acceptance and the risk of utter destruction. The US
neocons would have already chosen for us if they were able to persuade Trump.
Russia would have to choose between acceptance and the risk of utter destruction. The US
neocons would have already chosen for us if they were able to persuade Trump.
Russia is preparing for war and I know the mood there. If it starts, it will start
conventionally with strikes on US forces in Europe, especially naval assets in Med. Russia
has a control of escalation there. US military knows this and already calculated the "weight"
of the first salvo from Russian side on US Navy assets.
IMO you are right in thinking that the present inhabitants of the leadership of the BORG
are a sub-species of the classic Straussian ideology driven race. The Old Ones were driven by
their madcap exotericism and were entertaining. These are merely imperialists.
Unless you want to live in fantasy you must have the ability to think outside the box
created by what you want rather than what is or is likely to be.
The Israelis live in such a box. In their box the world is filled with gentile monsters who
must be dominated and manipulated. The manipulation part of that illusion is reinforced in
their minds by their incredible success in forming public opinion in the US.
The Lebanese live in a different box in which they, in their collective mind's eye, are far
more important to the rest of the world than they really are. A Lebanese I knew well often told
other Lebanese that they mistaken was in thinking that Bill and Hillary woke up every morning
and asked each other " I wonder what is happening in Beirut today?" The truth is that Lebanon
is only important to the Lebanese and that has always been true. It is particularly true now in
the age of neo-neocon domination of US foreign policy. The cartoon like simplicity with which
Bolton, Pompeo and Trump misunderstand realities on the ground in places like Lebanon is
striking.
In service to Israeli ambitions for hegemony throughout the ME, these people have no
interest whatever in the welfare of the Lebanese. In particular they are incapable of seeing
Hizbullah as anything like an integral part of Lebanese society. No, they see these Lebanese
Shia as nothing more than a threat to Israel. As I have pointed out, war against Hizbullah is
already authorized under American law by their designation as a terrorist group and the AUMF
against terrorism.
The Lebanese in Lebanon should understand that US Embassy Beirut has no policy influence in
Washington. None! The true believer neo-neocons have no interest whatever in the opinions of
State Department career bureaucrats who usually do not share their imperialist faith in the
global destiny and mission of the US. Remember that truth when you are tempted to shower praise
and attention on the inhabitants of Fort America in east Beirut. They are in exile among
you.
Does any of this mean that I favor the aggressive and disrespectful bullying that emanates
from Washington in the era of the neo-neocons? It does not, but I can recognize reality and
this attitude toward Lebanon is real and must be recognized. The neo-neocons would not shrink
from devastating southern Lebanon in order to wreck Hizbullah. pl
Part of the problem with truth is that we live in an ideals based culture, in what amounts to
a binary based reality. As some physicist, whom I've forgot put it; "The opposite of small
truths are false. The opposite of large truths are also true.'
Take the premise of materialism, for example. It assumes there is some physical base state,
yet the reality we experience is more a positive and negative tension, balance and friction
of opposing forces.
Galaxies are energy radiating out, as form coalesces in. As biological organisms, we have the
digestive, respiratory and circulatory systems, processing the energy driving us on, along
with a nervous system to process all the form and signal condensing out of this dynamic.
Motor and steering.
Our primary social tension is between organic social energies pushing out, as civil and
cultural forms coalesce in. Necessarily there are more emotional desires, than is possible,
so the function of rationality is to preference some over others. Not every acorn gets to be
an oak tree.
When our decision making process breaks down, it's anarchy, while when it overwhelms the
organic impulses, it's tyranny.
So the truth we seek is more a balancing act, than any ideal state.
And in that, we can't iron out all the ups and downs, or it's its own flatline.
After a million years of going forth and multiplying, we are reaching the edges of the petri
dish and need a more feedback oriented philosophy.
Sir;
But wouldn't "devastating southern Lebanon" result in a similar devastation of northern
Israel? What about this do the, as you describe them, "neo-neocons" not understand? Has the
magical thinking in the 'neo-neocon' community blinded the neo-neocons to the physical
realities of the Hizbullah rocket forces stationed in Southern Lebanon?
At the least, I would expect the Israeli military to have a more realistic appreciation of
the Hizbullah's potential. Are they pushing back against this warmongering in Tel Aviv and
Washington? How much 'real' support does Netanayhu have in the 'working' Israeli armed
forces?
Thanks for your indulgence.
IMO targeting would be good enough that a lot of the Hizbullah missile/rocket capability
could be destroyed in the firsr set of strikes. The question to be weighed by the Izzies is -
how much?
As you've pointed out if Trump in his service to Bibi, orders the bombing of South
Lebanon, then that tract of land will be devastated. I also agree with your analysis that
both Putin & Xi will not attempt to take down USAF bombers or USN vessels. At best they
may provide Syria and Iran more advanced air defense systems.
My question is, do you believe that Trump will need politically to first manufacture a
casus belli and then ramp up the associated media hysteria before he orders the devastation?
George W. Bush felt he needed that to invade Iraq and the military build up took several
months. If Trump has to manufacture the hysteria, would Syed Nasrallah recognize the writing
on the wall and unleash all he's got preemptively on Israel knowing it won't be long before
his goose is cooked? What lesson would Nasrallah have learned from behavior of past US
President beholden to Israeli hegemony in the ME?
BTW By my back of the envelope USAF has around 150 B-1, B=2 and B-52. That is enough. The age
of the aircraft means nothing. The B-52s have been rebuilt many times and are "like new" with
the latest electronics. They can fly all these aircraft all the way from CONUS for these
strikes and that might be better because the campaign would consume ordnance like a river.
There would of course be a lot of anti air defense strikes by US and Israeli fighters to
suppress fire against the heavies but there probably would still be losses. There were 16
bombers lost in Linebacker 2. I had to go see the 7th AF CG at Tan Son Nhut AFB in the midst
of that. He flew into a rage screaming and yelling in his office. He couldn't cope with the
event of B-52s limping back to bases shot full of holes. I remember one case in which the
crew bailed out over their home airfield in Thailand, but they did the job.
I would never want to be on the receiving end of a B-52 carpet bombing or "Arc Light" as they
were called in VN.
I was a helo pilot at Quang Tri, 13 miles south of the DMZ. In the fall of 1968 we
conducted a battalion troop lift into the DMZ. The mission was to capture a NVA soldier in
the DMZ so that Henry K would have a visual aid for the Paris talks.
Our LZ was to be prep'd by 3 Arc Lights. Each strike would consist a cell of 3 B-52's. We
were standing on the tarmac at Quang Tri watching the 1st Arc Light. Even though it was 13
miles away, the ground trembled under our feet. We manned our aircraft & loaded our
troops & launched toward the DMZ. North of Dong Ha we dropped to tree top level. I could
hear the tree tops hitting the belly of the aircraft. We approached the LZ just after the 3d
Arc Light. There was red dust & smoke in the air. The ground was a moonscape of 20'
craters & uprooted, splintered trees. Occasional I'd catch a glimpse of NVA soldiers in a
crater lying flat on their backs firing their AK's straight up into the air. Other aircrew
reported seeing stunned NVA staggering about bleeding from their noses & ears. The only
organized resistance that we had was NVA artillery from the north impacting in the LZ. The
only damage to my aircraft was a broken landing light & twigs in the landing gear.
The B-52 is an old aircraft; but, in a benign environment it is an awesome weapon of
destruction.
As I have posted previously, the Marine company I was assigned to as artillery FO had to move
quickly (leaving our gear and only carrying ammunition and weapons) to get far enough away
from an incoming Arc Lite strike. We were on flat ground (GoNoi island) not far from Danang.
The Arc Lite strike was across the river from us and probably only about ten miles from the
Danang air base. When the strike came in we were all flat on the ground and would very much
like to have been much further away - it was pretty terrifying.
I recently read Jim Webb's book "I Heard my Country Calling", which has an extensive
treatment of this event in the chapter covering his time in RVN - "Hell in a Very Small
Place".
Col. Lang, while I have to agree with your conclusions, we have not discussed the
consequences of such actions on the part of the Neo-neocons.
My personal view is that the Neoconservatives may unleash a new wave of anti semitism. I
am already noticing an increasing use of the term "jewish" to describe unethical business
behavior even down here in Australia. This among educated middle class people it's a new
development and it's liable to spread and be followed by behavior changes. I am sensitive to
anti semitic behaviors for family reasons.
"a new wave of anti semitism."
If only people cared about Christians the same way.
"This among educated middle class people it's a new development and it's liable to spread and
be followed by behavior changes"
Sorry to hear about the first ever bouts of anti-semitism in Australia. I sure hope the
educated elite class of people get out in front of this. Not to include Australian neocons,
or don't you have any of those?
I agree with you, Walrus. Although I think there's more contributing to it than just the
Neocons. Specifically, there's the drip, drip, drip effect of the Israeli sociopathy toward
the Palestinians, both official and unofficial, in spite of their extensive efforts
suppressing the escape of such information. That seems to be having an effect on young USA
Jewish people, many of whom, now that they are several generations past ancestors and
relatives who were victims of the holocaust, are turning away from Zionist activism.
We can and would execute a ruthless bombing campaign for the reason you stated and to some
extent even worse. Our MSM would make it sound like we were acting in self-defense or say
whatever spin their handlers tell them to day. With no accountability we are capable of doing
and believing anything.
Come to think of it, now that Wikileaks is out of the way that avenue is now gone to
release any embarrassing info about our govt. We can drop thermobaric bombs or whatever, the
floodgates are open. The Pentagon will say ... 5 civilians killed like they did in Raqqa.
Since Bibi is in the catbird's seat, the most important question to ask is what does Bibi
want? Is it annihilation of Iran, Lebanon, & Syria? If that is the case can the US
military deliver without using nukes?
Sir:
It is possible that Russia would take a dim view, and attempt to stop this US adventure. At
present Russia believes that Syria and Iran with a reluctant wavering Turkey is the safety
defense area from the jihadist hordes against Russia's vulnerable south Muslim are.
Once again, how would Russia stop this possible air campaign? By shooting down US aircraft?
You think so? The US is a thermonuclear power. I think not.
I agree that Russia will not stop a massive US air attack or shoot at US aircraft unless we
started taking out Russian assets. I do believe Russia will use all surveillance and REC
assets to give Lebanon and Syria as much early warning as possible and to muffle the effect
of a US assault. I would not be surprised if Syria shot at US aircraft over Lebanon. As far
as US forces hesitating about attacking Lebanon, they will not. Our Navy and Air Force will
carry out these orders, if they come, immediately and with all the force they can muster.
Could I ask about the situation within Syria as it concerns operations against the Jihadis
there?
There seem to be two views on the increased pressure being exerted on Syria itself. 1,
that these are merely spoiling tactics and will not affect the security situation much, 2,
that it is the prelude to further military action against Syria. There do seem to be
suggestions that further PR gas attacks are on the cards.
Might I also ask whether statements that Jihadis are using Al-Tanf as a secure base for
operations against the SAA are accurate? If so, is this related to the increased pressure
elsewhere?
You state " - unless we started taking out Russian assets." Presumably these are still
performing, among their other functions, a tripwire function?
The jihadis, including IS, are still there and have not given up. I've seen comments that
they want to retake Palmyra. Some regional paper claimed the jihadis trained by the US at
Tanf were planning to go for Bukamal to cut the highway. I think that is more of a wild
rumor, but who knows. And then there's the Idlib jihadis. They still have to be dealt with.
Sounds like the Russians are lending a strong aerospace hand with that lot.
I don't think the Russians want to be a tripwire. It's more like they are maintaining a
cop on the corner status, hoping to dissuade a US attack on Lebanon or Syria. They're
conducting naval exercises in the Med just as we're steaming two carrier groups into the same
sea.
"As far as US forces hesitating about attacking Lebanon, they will not. Our Navy and Air
Force will carry out these orders, if they come, immediately and with all the force they can
muster."
Of course they will. Although before the course of action was decided on and orders
passed, there would be some serious discussion on other, perhaps softer options. If not,
their leadership would be derelict in their duty.
I agree it's unlikely the Russians would attempt to counter a massive USAF raid on south
Lebanon. However isn't it likely they have sufficient visibility from satellites and assets
in Syria, etc., that they could prevent Hezbollah and Lebanon from being tactically
surprised? If not, why?
Replying to this thread in general. It looks like Russia sees that it is in their vital
national interest to oppose externally imposed regime change anywhere in the world.
If they let the U.S. run amok, then it's only a matter of time before the sharp knives are
again at (or inside) their door. The weaker countries see a need to assist each other to
avoid being picked off one at a time.
Is it worth Russia going to war? No. Today's Russia would never do that without a security
agreement. Giving military aid, I think so.
To people like Fareed Zakaria and other Neocons, Russia opposes regime change just to
insult the U.S. In his view, we better take out a country they like to prove that we can. The
idea that countries only consider how much they can get away with insulting us rather than
their own survival needs sounds rather narcissistic but this is popular among Neocons.
[BTW I miss the disquis like feature as a non-noisy way to acknowledge someone's post but
Col. I am fine with however you want to manage your site.]
However isn't it likely they have sufficient visibility from satellites and assets in
Syria, etc., that they could prevent Hezbollah and Lebanon from being tactically surprised?
If not, why?
Russia is not going to "defend" Lebanon. Syria, is a completely different issue here. It
is a vastly different dynamics. Per CISR--Russia deploys currently enough assets in the area
(well, globally, really) to be fully situationally aware. From Liana, to other space and
airborne, and ground based systems. Iran, is altogether a different story here. Per
Hezbollah, I am not sure Russia is that deeply involved with it, plus Iran is not exactly a
convenient ally for Russia in Syria.
Do you believe a war with Iran is going to happen soon? And can Iran withstand United
States' air campaign? Can they hurt the US interest in the middle East?
Hmm. Seems like Shoigu and Co. flat-out defeated the FUKUS hybrid war on Syria without
downing a single "coalition" plane, and now the FUKUS folks and Li'l Jeff at UN are pulling
every dirty trick in the psychopath playbook to prevent the rebuilding of Syria.
I believe this is Trump's re-election strategy to ensure he win's a second term. A U.S.
president always has sky-high poll numbers during a war or military action. Bush 41 was above
90% in the Gulf War in spite of the economic downturn. And a war against Israel's enemies
would mean zero real criticism from major media and the other organs of control. The only
criticism might be if Trump doesn't go as genocidal as possible in Lebanon, Syria, and Iran.
I'm sure at the same time as this U.S. attack many neocons (which now has every person
speaking on major media) will implore Trump to confront Russia.
Related or not, I think we will see a nuclear war sometime in the next 10 years. The
nuclear war I envision will be more like the movie 'The Day After' ( https://youtu.be/Iyy9n8r16hs) than anything else.
"In an open letter, more than 50 former senior U.S. government officials have dismissed these
U.S. demands as leaving Iran the option of either capitulation or war."
You insiders in the imperial city still don't get it.
Those "former senior US government officials" are likely part and parcel of the continuing
FAILURE of US foreign policy.
These "experts" have royally f***ed up - 9/11, Iraq, Afghanistan/Pakistan, Iran, China,
Russia, Libya.
As for the JCPOA with Iran, these "negotiators" are the dimwits that car salesmen make their
money from.
How many more failures from these pompous, self-important, swamp parasites can we survive?
In June 2010 the UN security council placed an embargo on the export of most major
conventional weapons to Iran. My understanding is that this embargo is due to be lifted in
2020 (this was one of the things that Iran got as part of the JCPOA). I think Iran is going
to play nice until then, and then stock up on all the advanced weaponry she can buy from
China and Russia.
Maybe the Chinese will sell the Persians some DF-21Ds. That could get interesting.
I agree with your assessment. Unfortunately, I fear that for many in the Trump
administration, policies that make open conflict with Iran more likely may be seen as a
feature, not a bug.
One is given to wonder whether Trump would have selected the same failed war mongers for his
Foreign Policy team that he has demonstrably done if the Hildabeast, her disappointed
acolytes in the entrenched deep state, and the lunatic left in its political and media
manifestations had not kneecapped him with "Russiagate" even before he took office. Was there
any depth at all to his campaign rhetoric that might have survived the tsunami of bad faith
accusations that crippled him? As the kids say, 'whatever.'
But if a regard for the value of diplomacy in the pursuit of peace, or for that matter, a
mere historical awareness, has been playing a role in his conduct of FP, it's escaped my
notice. We're living in dangerous times: who gives every appearance of being a FP lightweight
and a cripple in the presidency; and debased lunatics arrayed against him in everything and
anything he says or does. In the words of the immortal Casey Stengel: does anybody down there
know how to play this game?
Who do you talk to for military advice right now? ... is there a go-to for you?
DONALD TRUMP:
Yeah, probably there are two or three. I mean, I like Bolton. I think he's, you know, a
tough cookie, knows what he's talking about... I think he's terrific.
You wrote this in 2011 about Saudi Arabia. "It's the world's biggest funder of terrorism.
Saudi Arabia funnels our petro dollars, our very own money, to fund the terrorists that seek
to destroy our people while the Saudis rely on us to protect them." What are U.S.-Saudi
relations going to look like under a Trump administration?
I wonder where that Donald Trump guy disappeared to.
Nice post from a strategic theory perspective. Well-reasoned argument using Schelling's
concepts regarding suasion within a larger Clausewitzian model . . . applied to current US
policy regarding Iran.
Mad Max - Are you trying to say that it is the Democrats fault that Trump hired John Bolton
and other neo-cons for his Foreign Policy team? Good Grief, Trump is the most powerful person
on Earth and it is ridiculous to excuse his poor hiring practices on other people. Trump is
either the Man, or he is not. Hiring John Bolton is 100% on Trump's shoulders - no one else.
"... FARA requires all individuals and organizations acting on behalf of foreign governments to registered with the Department of Justice and to report their sources of income and contacts. Federal prosecutors have claimed that Butina was reporting back to a Russian official while deliberating cultivating influential figures in the United States as potential resources to advance Russian interests, a process that is described in intelligence circles as "spotting and assessing." ..."
"... Selective enforcement of FARA was, ironically, revealed through evidence collected and included in the Mueller Report relating to the only foreign country that actually sought to obtain favors from the incoming Trump Administration. That country was Israel and the individual who drove the process and should have been fined and required to register with FARA was President Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner. As Kushner also had considerable "flight risk" to Israel, which has no extradition treaty with the United States, he should also have been imprisoned. ..."
"... Kushner reportedly aggressively pressured members of the Trump transition team to contact foreign ambassadors at the United Nations to convince them to vote against or abstain from voting on the December 2016 United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 condemning Israeli settlements. The resolution passed when the US, acting under direction of President Barack Obama, abstained, but incoming National Security Adviser Michael Flynn did indeed contact the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak twice and asked for Moscow's cooperation, which was refused. Kushner, who is so close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the latter has slept at the Kushner apartment in New York City, was clearly acting in response to direction coming from the Israeli government. ..."
"... Another interesting tidbit revealed by Mueller relates to Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos's ties to Israel over an oil development scheme. Mueller "ultimately determined that the evidence was not sufficient to obtain or sustain a conviction" that Papadopoulos "committed a crime or crimes by acting as an unregistered agent of the Israeli government." Mueller went looking for a Russian connection but found only Israel and decided to do nothing about it. ..."
The Mueller Special Counsel inquiry is far from over even though a
final report on its findings has been issued. Although the investigation had a mandate to
explore all aspects of the alleged Russian interference in the 2016 US election, from the start
the focus was on the possibility that some members of the Trump campaign had colluded with the
Kremlin to influence the outcome of the election to favor the GOP candidate. Even though that
could not be demonstrated, many prominent Trump critics, to include Laurence Tribe of the
Harvard Law School,
are demanding that the investigation continue until Congress has discovered "the full facts
of Russia's interference [to include] the ways in which that interference is continuing in
anticipation of 2020, and the full story of how the president and his team welcomed, benefited
from, repaid, and obstructed lawful investigation into that interference and the president's
cooperation with it."
Tribe should perhaps read the report more carefully. While it does indeed confirm some
Russian meddling, it does not demonstrate that anyone in the Trump circle benefited from it or
cooperated with it. The objective currently being promoted by dedicated Trump critics like
Tribe is to make a case to impeach the president based on the alleged enormity of the Russian
activity, which is not borne out by the facts: the Russian role was intermittent, small scale
and basically ineffective.
One interesting aspect of the Mueller inquiry and the ongoing Russophobia that it has
generated is the essential hypocrisy of the Washington Establishment. It is generally agreed
that whatever Russia actually did, it did not affect the outcome of the election. That the
Kremlin was using intelligence resources to act against Hillary Clinton should surprise no one
as she described Russian President Vladimir Putin as Hitler and also made clear that she would
be taking a very hard line against Moscow.
The anti-Russia frenzy in Washington generated by the vengeful Democrats and an
Establishment fearful of a loss of privilege and entitlement claimed a number of victims. Among
them was Russian citizen Maria Butina, who has a court date and will very likely be
sentenced tomorrow .
Regarding Butina, the United States Department of Justice would apparently have you believe
that the Kremlin sought to subvert the five-million-member strong National Rifle Association
(NRA) by having a Russian citizen take out a life membership in the organization with the
intention of corrupting it and turning it into an instrument for subverting American democracy.
Maria Butina has, by the way, a long and well documented history as an advocate for gun
ownership and was a co-founder in Russia of Right to Bear Arms, which is not an intelligence
front organization of some kind. It is rather a genuine lobbying group with an active
membership and agenda. Contrary to what has been reported in the mainstream media, Russians can
own guns but the licensing and registration procedures are long and complicated, which Right to
Bear Arms, modeling itself on the NRA, is seeking to change.
Butina, a graduate student at American University, is now in a federal prison, having been
charged with collusion and failure to register as an agent of the Russian Federation. She was
arrested on July 15, 2018. It is decidedly unusual to arrest and confine someone who has failed
to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (FARA) , but she has not been granted bail because, as a
Russian citizen, she is considered to be a "flight risk," likely to try to flee the US and
return home.
FARA requires all individuals and organizations acting on behalf of foreign governments to
registered with the Department of Justice and to report their sources of income and contacts.
Federal prosecutors have claimed that Butina was reporting back to a Russian official while
deliberating cultivating influential figures in the United States as potential resources to
advance Russian interests, a process that is described in intelligence circles as "spotting and
assessing."
Maria eventually pleaded guilty of not registering under FARA to mitigate any punishment,
hoping that she would be allowed to return to Russia after a few months in prison on top of the
nine months she has already served. She has reportedly fully cooperated the US authorities,
turning over documents, answering questions and undergoing hours of interrogation by federal
investigators before and after her guilty plea.
Maria Butina basically did nothing that damaged US security and it is difficult to see where
her behavior was even criminal, but the prosecution is asking for 18 months in prison for her
in addition to the time served. She would be, in fact, one of only a handful of individuals
ever to be imprisoned over FARA, and they all come from countries that Washington considers to
be unfriendly, to include Cuba, Saddam's Iraq and Russia. Normally the failure to comply with
FARA is handled with a fine and compulsory registration.
Butina was essentially convicted of the crime of being Russian at the wrong time and in the
wrong place and she is paying for it with prison. Selective enforcement of FARA was,
ironically, revealed through evidence collected and included in the Mueller Report relating to
the only foreign country that actually sought to obtain favors from the incoming Trump
Administration. That country was Israel and the individual who drove the process and should
have been fined and required to register with FARA was President Donald Trump's son-in-law
Jared Kushner. As Kushner also had considerable "flight risk" to Israel, which has no
extradition treaty with the United States, he should also have been imprisoned.
Kushner reportedly aggressively
pressured members of the Trump transition team to contact foreign ambassadors at the United
Nations to convince them to vote against or abstain from voting on the December 2016 United
Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 condemning Israeli settlements. The resolution passed
when the US, acting under direction of President Barack Obama, abstained, but incoming National
Security Adviser Michael Flynn did indeed contact the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak twice
and asked for Moscow's cooperation, which was refused. Kushner, who is so close to Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the latter has slept at the Kushner apartment in New York
City, was clearly acting in response to direction coming from the Israeli government.
Another interesting tidbit revealed by Mueller relates to Trump foreign policy adviser
George Papadopoulos's ties to Israel over an oil development scheme. Mueller "ultimately
determined that the evidence was not sufficient to obtain or sustain a conviction" that
Papadopoulos "committed a crime or crimes by acting as an unregistered agent of the Israeli
government." Mueller went looking for a Russian connection but found only Israel and decided to
do nothing about it.
As so often is the case, inquiries that begin by looking for foreign interference in
American politics start by focusing on Washington's adversaries but then comes up with Israel.
Noam Chomsky
described it best "First of all, if you're interested in foreign interference in our
elections, whatever the Russians may have done barely counts or weighs in the balance as
compared with what another state does, openly, brazenly and with enormous support. Netanyahu
goes directly to Congress, without even informing the president, and speaks to Congress, with
overwhelming applause, to try to undermine the president's policies -- what happened with Obama
and Netanyahu in 2015. Did Putin come to give an address to the joint sessions of Congress
trying to -- calling on them to reverse US policy, without even informing the president? And
that's just a tiny bit of this overwhelming influence."
Maria Butina is in jail for doing nothing while Jared Kushner, who needed a godfathered
security clearance due to his close Israeli ties, struts through the White House as senior
advisor to the president in spite of the fact that he used his nepotistically obtained access
to openly promote the interests of a foreign government. Mueller knows all about it but
recommended nothing, as if it didn't happen. The media is silent. Congress will do nothing. As
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi put it "We in Congress stand by
Israel. In Congress, we speak with one voice on the subject of Israel." Indeed.
Bibi's best bet to solve his intractable Hezbollah problem is when his bitch Trump is in
office. Nothing like getting for free the USAF to do the work his IAF can't do. Of course
Trump can follow Dubya's footsteps and become the war president. Nothing like a
neocon-inspired war to shore his support is what Bolton & Pompeo will advise and Adelson
will be crooning too.
How do you think Hezbollah will react when the die is cast and the casus belli is
manufactured? Would they preempt and launch all they have knowing they would have to go down
when the tens of thousands of sorties of the USAF commence? Syed Nasrallah apparently has
warned his commanders to expect an Israeli war this summer.
Would Putin & Xi sit it out & let Hezbollah go down in flames?
"Would Putin & Xi sit it out & let Hezbollah go down in flames?"
That is almost certain. What the Russians have demonstrated is there absolute weakness in
the face of US economic dominance and military might. These Chinese have demonstrated their
inability to show any sort of political backbone, but suck in as much world capital as they
possibly can in silence.
BP - If a massive heavy bomber strike is made on Hizbullah it may cripple Hizbullah's ability
to lay down a lot of fire in Israel. This Hizbullahis must have figured this out. That
creates a hair trigger possibility for a preemptive strike on Israel. This is a very
dangerous situation. my crystal ball is cloudy. I have no idea what Putin and Xi might do.
"Best in Show" is a great film depicting a wonderful breed.
How likely is it that the US could surprise Hizbullah with a massive strategic bombing
strike?
Would not Russia see this coming and probably warn Hizbullah?
And does anyone her have a sense of the extent of area that would need to be covered and
the density of Hizbullah fortifications within this area? Would it be plausible to cover the
full extent of the threat to Israel in one strike?
Also, I recently read an article by an air force officer assigned to the MACV combat
operations center during the siege of Khe Sanh. He indicated that intelligence was received
that the NVA were going to try to tunnel under the Marine defense lines. This officer vaguely
remembered that a bunker-busting/deep penetration weapon for B-52s was somewhere "in the
inventory". It turned out some were in stock in Okinawa, so were relatively immediately
available to use at Khe Sanh. So if these weapons (or something similar) remain available,
their impact could potentially be greater on Hizbullah fortifications than what Col. Lang
observed on his BDA.
The US is very good at OPSEC and IMO Hizbullah would have no warning at all until the
bombs started to fall from way up in the sky. And unlike a lot of target system the Tabbouleh
line cannot be moved without a lot of trouble. How big a target set? Essentially the width of
Lebanon and three or four miles wide against what by now must be a fully developed picture of
the arrray of targets. This will have been developed in full by now by DIA and the USAF
targeting people. You people are living in Cloud Cuckoo Land. And since Hizbullah is
designated as a terrorist organization the AUMF would apply. The only thing protecting
Hizbullah in Tabbouleh Line is fear of the reaction of the American people and that can be
overcome by a supposed attack on Israel.
An incident at a Corydon Avenue cafe that was originally reported as one of Winnipeg's worst-ever hate crimes was apparently staged,
said police.
Three owners of the BerMax Caffé were arrested Wednesday and charged with public mischief, which involves intent to mislead and
causing an officer to investigate an incident based on false information.
The cafe was allegedly robbed, the interior trashed and the walls spray-painted with anti-Semitic graffiti on April 18, although
investigators now say that was all staged by the owners.
At the time, Winnipeg police Const. Rob Carver told media the attack was one of the "worst" hate crimes he had seen as a police
officer.
Police chief Danny Smyth said Wednesday the investigation has been a significant waste of police resources.
"Over 25 officers have invested nearly 1,000 hours through a busy holiday weekend trying to bring this investigation to a close,"
he said.
"In the end, we found evidence of a crime. It just wasn't a hate crime."
The incident sparked a large outpouring of support from people in Winnipeg's Jewish community and the city at large, including
an interfaith prayer vigil planned by a local church for Thursday night.
"There have been some new developments in the BerMax Caffé situation," said a spokesperson for Westworth United Church. "These
are being reviewed, and an announcement on the status of the interfaith prayer vigil will follow."
Alexander, Oxana and Maxim Berent are all facing charges and have reportedly been released on a promise to appear.
"We are shocked and deeply disturbed by today's news," said the Winnipeg Jewish Federation in a statement Wednesday afternoon.
"It is deplorable that anyone would make false allegations of anti-Semitism, especially claims of such a serious nature, for any
kind of gain," the organization continued.
"Filing false complaints of criminal acts of anti-Semitism (is) not only illegal, they undermine the important work necessary
to counter anti-Semitism and hate in all forms."
A GoFundMe page had been set up to support the café after a previous incident last month. Robbie Kfir Mulder-Kiesman, who set up the fundraiser, said in a statement that fundraising efforts have been suspended until
more information is available.
"We are aware of the announcements made and have been taken completely off guard by the information," said Mulder-Kiesman.
"We took on this effort with the best intentions and hope that further information comes to light that provides the much needed
answers we need in this situation."
You sir are delusional. Trump was dead set against taking down Iran and Venezuela from day
one. Trump is a Zionist. I wish people would get that through their thick skulls.
There is no surprise here. Everything is rolling along on schedule according to plan. The
Empire can now call the shots unilaterally. You have all allowed for this domination by
trying to ridicule and shut down the discussion of Zionism's role in this outcome. We are not
free! Millions of people around the world marched against the proposed invasion of Iraq and
the Empire's vassals came running to help (I'm pointing especially to you, U.K., trying to
take Corbyn down while welcoming the Orange Oaf for an official visit!). The WMD's were a
hoax. Bolton admitted that regime change was always the goal, and same goes for Venezuela and
Iran.
Trump is not a Zionist hostage suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Let me spell out the
writing that has been on the wall from day one: TRUMP IS A ZIONIST. Trump is accelerating the
ZEmpire's domination in every way imaginable. Trump die-hard supporters are Zionists of all
stripes even if the more liberal ones try desperately to conceal that fact, and the rest are
loyal donkeys with blinders on.
>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't expect Russia to come to Iran's rescue. a) Iran is a gas competitor. And b)
Zionist Russian oligarchs are deep in Trump's corner.
Israel has been attacking Iran on Syrian soil with Putin's blessing.
I don't know what Putin's game is, but muti-polarity doesn't seem to be at the top of his
list as it is with some of us here.
There is only one way to deal with ZUSA aggression: DETERRENCE.
Iran should stop being so prudish regarding nukes. Iran could have had a stockpile by now.
Maybe North Korea can start doing business.
Peaceful means of resistance to Zionism do not work! Zionists are only satisfied with
total domination and they are proving it.
We are not free. We are powerless. We have already been muzzled left an right and they are
trying to legitimize restraint on our rights. We have no democracy. This has been happening
while you were all sleeping.
Trump is an enforcer of Zionism and many of you are drunk uncle toms high on his
neutralizing moonshine or stealth Zionists still peddling his Zionist bullshet as 4D
chess.
Trump is a Zionist enforcer and is accelerating ZEmpire domination. They know the jig is
up and time is of the essence. The goal is to make all resistance futile. Some of you here
have been helping them achieve this goal, and now your 11th-hour shock and awe and armchair
musings ring cheap and hollow.
You are chamberlains unable to call what is steering the Empire's domination by its name:
ZIONISM.
How can you fight the enemy you refuse to acknowledge? So here we are, NEXT STOP: IRAN AND
WAR.
What a joke. Trump is a Zionist. The "deep state" is Zionist. The trillionaires are Zionists.
Trump moved the US embassy to Jerusalem. Continues the illegal wars in Syria and Yemen.
Unilaterally declares the Golan Heights to be Israeli territory.
Kushner is Genie Energy. Cheney, et al. Stealing Syrian national wealth.
Trump is a tool.
Those who supported Trump are fools. Those who thought Mueller would find impeachable
offenses are fools. We are all either fools or tools.
@Wallbanger Of
course, Trump is pro-Zionist, and he hardly needed any pressure for this. Kushner is a close
friend of Netanyahu, and we don't know anything about conflicts between Trump and Kushner.
But I think the Russiagate conspiracy theory still may have served important foreign policy
goals.
I think it is important to distinguish between Israeli foreign policy and US neocon foreign
policy, even though they are close allies. At least superficially, these are two rather
different things, and to me, it is an open question to what degree these differences are only
superficial.
US neocons follow the doctrine of „full spectrum dominance". This leads them to having
military bases all over the world, stoking up conflicts, and destabilizing countries that have
or want good relations with rivals like China and Russia. The idea that such „full
spectrum dominance" will be used for the benefit of Israel certainly goes a long way for
explaining why neocons think it is worth the price – after all, many US neocons are
Jewish Zionists, and many of their lower-rank supporters are Christian Zionists. But their goal
of „full spectrum dominance" goes beyond matters related to Israel, it leads to conflicts
and tensions all over the world, Israel is just one of the motivating factors.
Israeli foreign policy is very different. It does not share the US' hostility towards other
great powers. Israel has good relations with Russia and China. It refused to follow the US and
the EU in sanctioning Russia, Netanyahu meets Putin regularly, and, like Trump with the Golan
recognition, Putin also gave Netanyahu a present a short time before the elections (retrieving
remains of an Israeli soldier who was missing since 1982 from Syria). Of course, Russia and
Israel supported different sides in Syria, but they still seem to take into account each
other's interest to some degree. Israel also has good relations and a strong economic
partnership with China and participates in the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative. The general
principle seems to be that whenever there is a conflict and rivalry, Israel wants to have good
relations and influence on both sides. There are some exceptions, in the Sunni-Shia conflict,
Israel only has behind-the-scenes influence on the Sunni-Wahhabi side, but that is probably one
of the reasons why good relations with Russia, which has closer contacts with Iran, are
important to Israel. In the case of the conflict in Ukraine (which is quite relevant for Israel
because many Israeli citizens are from Russia or Ukraine), Israel remained neutral and has
strong connections to both sides. Such a policy of keeping good relations with as many powerful
nations as possible obviously seems smart for a smaller (albeit in many respects very strong)
country in a difficult part of the world.
Of course, the Israeli government is very much aware that there could hardly ever be a
powerful country where Israel is as influential as it is in the US. Israel has some significant
influence in Western Europe and Russia, criticizing Israel can be risky, and overall, these
countries have rather pro-Israeli policies (as does, as far as I know, China). But they will
never be as extremely pro-Israeli as the US. There are many votes in the UN were there is just
Israel and the US on one side (sometimes together with some tiny micronations that depend on
the US). Therefore, it is in Israel's interest that the US tries at all cost to gain influence
relative to other great powers that are less extremely pro-Israeli. Thus, US neocons who drive
the US towards a costly „full spectrum dominance" policy are unequivocally positive and
worthy of support from the perspective of the Israeli government. But for Israeli foreign
policy itself, due to risk management considerations, the priorities are different. The
best-case scenario for them is that a) Israeli influence in the US remains strong and b) the US
can achieve and maintain „full-spectrum dominance" for a long time. But they also know
that this best-case scenario is far from assured, and therefore, they also consider good
relations between Israel and potentially powerful countries like China and Russia
important.
I think Trump's foreign policy ideas (before any pressure was applied to him) was quite
close to the Israeli ideas (rather than the positions of the US neocons). Unlike Israel, he had
some ideas about confronting China (mainly on trade), and certainly, he wanted pro-Israeli
policies, but it seems he also wanted to have a general policy of „getting along" with
relatively important countries rather than pursuing „full-spectrum dominance" wherever
possible and stoking up proxy conflicts at every occasion. On the whole, it seems Trump wanted
a US foreign policy that is closer to the Israeli one than to the one of US neocons. If Israel
can „get along" with Russia, why shouldn't the US? The Israeli and international press
does not scream „treason" every time Netanyahu and Putin meet (which they do quite
often).
This idea of a normalization of US-Russian relations is what led to such strong opposition
from US neocons. I think they all knew that it would never be in doubt that Trump's policies
would be pro-Israeli. But that was not enough for them. According to them, the US, unlike
Israel, has to have a strongly anti-Russian stance.
I think there are two plausible explanations, one that does involve Israel and one that does
not. They may both be partially be true (probably, for some US neocons, it is more the one,
while for others, it is more the other).
The first explanation is that US neocons who strongly identify with Israel, as I argued
above, recognize that Israel should have good relations with Russia and China because of risk
management considerations, but at the same time, Israel wants to have the US to have as much
power as possible because it will never have as much influence in Russia and China as it has in
the US. The Russia hysteria has helped increasing military spending (and Democrats going along
with this), which may increase the chances of "full spectrum dominance" – and this
dominance will, among other things, be used on behalf of Israel. In that case, it may have been
a kind of misunderstanding. Trump may have thought that for neocons, it would be enough if he
is pro-Israeli and anti-Iranian and has normal, non-hostile relations with Russia, as Israel
has – ignoring that the roles Israel and the US should play according to the neocons are
very different.
But I am not so sure if Israel would really have minded much if the US had normalized its
relations with Russia. Netanyahu hardly ever was hostile towards Trump, he knew he was a
reliable ally. Some may even think it weakens the ability of the US to support Israel if it
gets entangled in conflicts and confrontations all over the world. So, I suppose that for many
true Israel-firsters, Trump was hardly seen as a problem (as long as he is pro-Israeli and
anti-Iranian, and there had hardly been any doubt that he is).
There also do not seem to be strong indications about Israeli involvement in
Russiagate/Spygate. Some Israelis seem to have been involved in the entrapment of Papadopoulos,
but it was not necessarily the Israeli government as a whole that was behind this (they may
just have been needed because Israeli energy policy is one of the main specializations of
Papadopoulos), and I think there are at least as strong indications of an Israeli involvement
on the pro-Trump side.
Russiagate/Spygate mainly seems to be an affair of US and British intelligence services, not
so much of Israel. Certainly, in the US, many neocons were strongly involved, but it may not
have so much to do with Israel. While support of Israel is one of the reasons why some neocons
passionately pursue „full-spectrum dominance", for many of them, this has probably become
a goal in itself, even in cases in which it is not needed for Israel – partially for
ideological reasons, partially because many of them profit from increased military
spending.
The right ((neocons)), on the other hand, see Trump as a quisling to rally the hated white
men into dying for greater Israel. The perfect Commander and Chief of the Janissaries for
Zion.
i agree that initially it was always a possibility he was a neocon plant i.e. neocons
couldn't get a war in Syria so decided to put up a candidate who'd promise stuff on trade and
immigration to get into office but then ignore it all afterwards and just do neocon stuff
but
1) if so he didn't need to say the anti-war stuff
and
2) neocons like Kristol hated him and did everything they could to stop him.
You might call them the Alan Dershowitz wing of the Jewish supremacists. I see that mug on
Tucker Carlson defending Trump, and he's positively beaming.
right but he'd be beaming like that even more if he knew Trump was originally isolationist
but now is compromised and compliant.
too early to tell for sure but my take is if neocons and the media now start going easier on
him i think that will prove they got him and want to keep him in office.
(nb it doesn't change anything if he was always a shill or he wasn't but they got him
– the end result is the same)
1) if so he didn't need to say the anti-war stuff
and
the only reason I was duped into voting for Dubya his first term, was because I was appalled
at Clinton's flouting of international law when he bombed Serbia, and Dubya said specifically
said he wasn't a "nation builder". Boy oh boy was I chumped by that one.
And we were all chumped by Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, and serial war pig.
But what choice do we have but to at least vote for the peace candidate, and then
wait until, on cue, we're all betrayed once again by the Jewish supremacist deepstate.
So far, Trump hasn't started any new wars. So as Mr. Giraldi says, "one hopes"
if neocons and the media now start going easier on him
then we're toast
it seems the only metric we have for determining whether or not a person is rotten to the
core, or not, is whether the media likes them, or not.
If the media likes them, then they're as rotten as they come.
If the media hates them, (Ron Paul, Julian Assange
others..)
then there is likely at least something redeeming about them.
The main reason for (pathetically) clinging to some tiny, gossamer wisp of hope for Trump,
is that ((they)) continue to be unhinged in their hysterical enmity for all things Trump.
But considering that he's basically giving them everything they want, (sans an all out war
on Iran), it seems the main reason they still hate his guts, is because the despised rubes in
flyover country still like him. And I suppose because of a few good judges and justices.
But as long as Bubba continues to proudly wear the hat, they're going to hate Donald Trump
with a seething malevolence.
And I have to confess to getting great satisfaction by seeing these rats going apoplectic
over Trump.
a guilty secret of mine is that everyday that this sick, twisted bitch
@Rurik the
other potentially relevant thing about Trump imo is he made some comments on 9/11 at the time
about how strong the twin towers were (i forget the exact details) which could be construed as
walking the edge of disbelief.
this may be related to Brennan in particular having such a hysterical reaction to Trump's
candidacy.
it seems the only metric we have for determining whether or not a person is rotten to the
core, or not, is whether the media likes them, or not.
I would contend, this is not a reliable indicator. If they really dislike someone, they will
simply not report anything at all. It would be a declared and enforced taboo to report.
Negative publicity is also publicity, and the guys behind the curtain know this.
But what choice do we have but to at least vote for the peace candidate, and then wait
until, on cue, we're all betrayed once again by the Jewish supremacist deepstate.
It won't change anything, but you won't feel betrayed.
To think that any indictments will come of this is naïve, and an understatement of the
power of the deep state. The only thing that keeps Trump alive is his usefulness to Netanyahu,
also known as Benji the NutnYahoo.
While
many people have heard about America-Israel Public Affairs Committee better known as AIPAC,
Israel's most influential lobbyist in Washington, a new pro-Israel lobbyist is currently being
launched that is appealing to Main Street America rather than America's pro-Israel
oligarchs. According to Jewish
Currents , senior figures affiliated with AIPAC are set to launch a new political group
called Pro-Israel America or PIA, a political group that will deal with smaller-dollar
political donations that are designated for pro-Israel candidates. Here is the lead page for the group's website: Here is a video
outlining the group's objectives:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/3XNFisuMsYk
Note the comment that " most Americans support a close relationship for our countries
."
Here is the group's mission statement:
Here are the group's core beliefs: "1.) We have a moral and humanitarian imperative to strengthen the U.S.–Israel
relationship. Israel is the sovereign homeland of the Jewish people, providing both a refuge
from persecution and the sole opportunity for Jewish national self-determination. 2.) We have an economic and strategic imperative to bolster the alliance between America and
Israel. America's close alliance with Israel, built over decades on the bedrock of shared
values, provides significant benefits to both countries. 3.) The U.S.–Israel relationship should never be taken for granted. Electing
pro-Israel candidates to the United States Congress plays an essential role in strengthening
the dynamic bond between our countries. 4.) Israel is a force for good in the world, providing humanitarian aid globally and
developing new technologies to heal the sick, feed the poor, and protect the environment, among
many others. 5.) Israel is a functioning democracy, where diverse opinions compete actively in the
marketplace of ideas. Our role is not to determine the outcome of such debates nor impose
solutions on Israel, but rather to ensure Israel remains safe so its people can make the
often-tough decisions about peace and security. 6.) Israelis, Palestinians and the countries of the region should negotiate directly with
each other to find both short- and long-term solutions to conflict, recognizing each other as
essential partners in a future peace." (my bold)
According to a document obtained by Jewish Currents, PIA is aiming to recruit 10,000 donors who
will give $200 each with the goal of raising $2 million for pro-Israel candidates from both
political parties during the 2020 Presidential election cycle. Currently, on its membership
page, members have the option to donate $50, $100 or $200, a clear difference from the
highly-funded AIPAC as shown here : Here are the leaders of the newly minted
pro-Israel organization:
Note that the group's Executive Director, Jeff Mendelson, spent more than ten years at AIPAC
and management the group's outreach program which engaged non-Jewish people groups in
pro-Israel activism, particularly evangelical Christians. Tony Davis is a former president of
AIPAC. Michelle Lobel and her husband are substantial financial supporters of AIPAC as shown
here and Emil Pitkin is the
CEO of the political research firm GovPredict which has AIPAC as a client.
In case you are already contemplating who to vote for, let's look at which candidates Pro-Israel America
supports for 2020. Here are the Senate candidates:
Here are the House candidates:
Let's close with this quote from PIA that clearly tells us what is at stake for PIA and Israel
in the upcoming 2020 election:
" The 2020 elections will be held on Tuesday, November 3, 2020. Each of the 435 United
States House of Representatives seats and 34 of the 100 seats in the United States Senate will
be up for election. We know Congress is rapidly changing– more than 20 percent of current
House members are new to Congress, and more than two-thirds of House and Senate members were
elected after 2008. Challenges to the U.S. – Israel relationship have grown, and will
continue to grow, in the years to come. We must be poised to use every tool at our disposal to
educate and engage members of Congress politically.
The 2020 U.S. elections have the potential to drastically change the political landscape
and could swing the balance of support for a number of important issues. So much is at
stake. We need pro-Israel voices like yours to help protect our strong U.S.-Israel relationship.
That's why Pro-Israel America makes it easy for members to support the election of pro-Israel
candidates on both sides of the aisle. " (their bolds)
While the narrative since the 2016 election has been Russian meddling in America's political
affairs, we can pretty clearly see that Israel is right up there when it comes to influencing
America's political landscape in its own favour. Somehow that seems to be palatable to
Washington's bought and paid for insiders. Pro-Israel America is just another player in the
business-as-usual Congress.
Posted by A Political Junkie at
8:30 AM Labels: Israel , pro-Israel lobby ,
United States2
comments:
Of course, if any one were to suggest that better relationships with the Russian
Federation were important, we would be hearing accusations of traitor at the very
least.
Let me try this.
"The Russian Federation, as an emerging democracy, needs support and encouragement".
"Russia's willingness and ability to cooperate with NATO needs to be supported by
concerned members of Congress".
"As a strong democratic player in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, we must support
Russia's peacemaking attempts in Syria".
The really unfortunate thing about the above statements is that they are, more or less,
true. Or were, before being violently rejected by the USA.
Heard in passing:
There are two political parties in America. There is the Adelson Zionist Republican Party
and the Saban Zionist Democratic Party. "American" politics is a competition between two
groups of indistinguishable Zionist stooges as to who can offer the most ludicrous,
extravagant tribute to the Zionist Apartheid Regime in Israel. The US president is just a
trained monkey rattling its tin cup for its AIPAC organ grinder. You can have an African
american,a carrot top,and in the future you can probably have a female, or gay, or even a
trannie. But whatever version is on offer, the trained monkey in question will carry on
rattling its AIPAC tin cup just as loudly. A minimum baseline of $3.8 billion a year,
$23,000 for every household in Israel. Plus all the F35s, Arrow missiles, Merkava tanks,
and nuclear warheads Nitwityahoo demands, all completely free/ gratis/ buckshee, courtesy
of the US taxpayer.
says: April 23, 2019 at
6:15 pm GMT 100 Words What a joke. Trump is a Zionist. The "deep state" is Zionist. The
trillionaires are Zionists.
Trump moved the US embassy to Jerusalem. Continues the illegal wars in Syria and Yemen.
Unilaterally declares the Golan Heights to be Israeli territory.
Kushner is Genie Energy. Cheney, et al. Stealing Syrian national wealth.
Trump is a tool.
Those who supported Trump are fools. Those who thought Mueller would find impeachable
offenses are fools. We are all either fools or tools.
@Wallbanger
Of course, Trump is pro-Zionist, and he hardly needed any pressure for this. Kushner is a
close friend of Netanyahu, and we don't know anything about conflicts between Trump and
Kushner.
But I think the Russiagate conspiracy theory still may have served important foreign
policy goals.
I think it is important to distinguish between Israeli foreign policy and US neocon
foreign policy, even though they are close allies. At least superficially, these are two
rather different things, and to me, it is an open question to what degree these differences
are only superficial.
US neocons follow the doctrine of „full spectrum dominance". This leads them to
having military bases all over the world, stoking up conflicts, and destabilizing countries
that have or want good relations with rivals like China and Russia. The idea that such
„full spectrum dominance" will be used for the benefit of Israel certainly goes a long
way for explaining why neocons think it is worth the price – after all, many US neocons
are Jewish Zionists, and many of their lower-rank supporters are Christian Zionists. But
their goal of „full spectrum dominance" goes beyond matters related to Israel, it leads
to conflicts and tensions all over the world, Israel is just one of the motivating
factors.
Israeli foreign policy is very different. It does not share the US' hostility towards
other great powers. Israel has good relations with Russia and China. It refused to follow the
US and the EU in sanctioning Russia, Netanyahu meets Putin regularly, and, like Trump with
the Golan recognition, Putin also gave Netanyahu a present a short time before the elections
(retrieving remains of an Israeli soldier who was missing since 1982 from Syria). Of course,
Russia and Israel supported different sides in Syria, but they still seem to take into
account each other's interest to some degree. Israel also has good relations and a strong
economic partnership with China and participates in the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative. The
general principle seems to be that whenever there is a conflict and rivalry, Israel wants to
have good relations and influence on both sides. There are some exceptions, in the Sunni-Shia
conflict, Israel only has behind-the-scenes influence on the Sunni-Wahhabi side, but that is
probably one of the reasons why good relations with Russia, which has closer contacts with
Iran, are important to Israel. In the case of the conflict in Ukraine (which is quite
relevant for Israel because many Israeli citizens are from Russia or Ukraine), Israel
remained neutral and has strong connections to both sides. Such a policy of keeping good
relations with as many powerful nations as possible obviously seems smart for a smaller
(albeit in many respects very strong) country in a difficult part of the world.
Of course, the Israeli government is very much aware that there could hardly ever be a
powerful country where Israel is as influential as it is in the US. Israel has some
significant influence in Western Europe and Russia, criticizing Israel can be risky, and
overall, these countries have rather pro-Israeli policies (as does, as far as I know, China).
But they will never be as extremely pro-Israeli as the US. There are many votes in the UN
were there is just Israel and the US on one side (sometimes together with some tiny
micronations that depend on the US). Therefore, it is in Israel's interest that the US tries
at all cost to gain influence relative to other great powers that are less extremely
pro-Israeli. Thus, US neocons who drive the US towards a costly „full spectrum
dominance" policy are unequivocally positive and worthy of support from the perspective of
the Israeli government. But for Israeli foreign policy itself, due to risk management
considerations, the priorities are different. The best-case scenario for them is that a)
Israeli influence in the US remains strong and b) the US can achieve and maintain
„full-spectrum dominance" for a long time. But they also know that this best-case
scenario is far from assured, and therefore, they also consider good relations between Israel
and potentially powerful countries like China and Russia important.
I think Trump's foreign policy ideas (before any pressure was applied to him) was quite
close to the Israeli ideas (rather than the positions of the US neocons). Unlike Israel, he
had some ideas about confronting China (mainly on trade), and certainly, he wanted
pro-Israeli policies, but it seems he also wanted to have a general policy of „getting
along" with relatively important countries rather than pursuing „full-spectrum
dominance" wherever possible and stoking up proxy conflicts at every occasion. On the whole,
it seems Trump wanted a US foreign policy that is closer to the Israeli one than to the one
of US neocons. If Israel can „get along" with Russia, why shouldn't the US? The Israeli
and international press does not scream „treason" every time Netanyahu and Putin meet
(which they do quite often).
This idea of a normalization of US-Russian relations is what led to such strong opposition
from US neocons. I think they all knew that it would never be in doubt that Trump's policies
would be pro-Israeli. But that was not enough for them. According to them, the US, unlike
Israel, has to have a strongly anti-Russian stance.
I think there are two plausible explanations, one that does involve Israel and one that
does not. They may both be partially be true (probably, for some US neocons, it is more the
one, while for others, it is more the other).
The first explanation is that US neocons who strongly identify with Israel, as I argued
above, recognize that Israel should have good relations with Russia and China because of risk
management considerations, but at the same time, Israel wants to have the US to have as much
power as possible because it will never have as much influence in Russia and China as it has
in the US. The Russia hysteria has helped increasing military spending (and Democrats going
along with this), which may increase the chances of "full spectrum dominance" – and
this dominance will, among other things, be used on behalf of Israel. In that case, it may
have been a kind of misunderstanding. Trump may have thought that for neocons, it would be
enough if he is pro-Israeli and anti-Iranian and has normal, non-hostile relations with
Russia, as Israel has – ignoring that the roles Israel and the US should play according
to the neocons are very different.
But I am not so sure if Israel would really have minded much if the US had normalized its
relations with Russia. Netanyahu hardly ever was hostile towards Trump, he knew he was a
reliable ally. Some may even think it weakens the ability of the US to support Israel if it
gets entangled in conflicts and confrontations all over the world. So, I suppose that for
many true Israel-firsters, Trump was hardly seen as a problem (as long as he is pro-Israeli
and anti-Iranian, and there had hardly been any doubt that he is). There also do not seem to
be strong indications about Israeli involvement in Russiagate/Spygate. Some Israelis seem to
have been involved in the entrapment of Papadopoulos, but it was not necessarily the Israeli
government as a whole that was behind this (they may just have been needed because Israeli
energy policy is one of the main specializations of Papadopoulos), and I think there are at
least as strong indications of an Israeli involvement on the pro-Trump side.
Russiagate/Spygate mainly seems to be an affair of US and British intelligence services, not
so much of Israel. Certainly, in the US, many neocons were strongly involved, but it may not
have so much to do with Israel. While support of Israel is one of the reasons why some
neocons passionately pursue „full-spectrum dominance", for many of them, this has
probably become a goal in itself, even in cases in which it is not needed for Israel –
partially for ideological reasons, partially because many of them profit from increased
military spending.
The right ((neocons)), on the other hand, see Trump as a quisling to rally the hated
white men into dying for greater Israel. The perfect Commander and Chief of the Janissaries
for Zion.
i agree that initially it was always a possibility he was a neocon plant i.e. neocons
couldn't get a war in Syria so decided to put up a candidate who'd promise stuff on trade and
immigration to get into office but then ignore it all afterwards and just do neocon stuff
but
1) if so he didn't need to say the anti-war stuff
and
2) neocons like Kristol hated him and did everything they could to stop him.
You might call them the Alan Dershowitz wing of the Jewish supremacists. I see that mug
on Tucker Carlson defending Trump, and he's positively beaming.
right but he'd be beaming like that even more if he knew Trump was originally isolationist
but now is compromised and compliant.
too early to tell for sure but my take is if neocons and the media now start going easier
on him i think that will prove they got him and want to keep him in office.
(nb it doesn't change anything if he was always a shill or he wasn't but they got him
– the end result is the same)
1) if so he didn't need to say the anti-war stuff
and
the only reason I was duped into voting for Dubya his first term, was because I was
appalled at Clinton's flouting of international law when he bombed Serbia, and Dubya said
specifically said he wasn't a "nation builder". Boy oh boy was I chumped by that one.
And we were all chumped by Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, and serial war pig.
But what choice do we have but to at least vote for the peace candidate, and then
wait until, on cue, we're all betrayed once again by the Jewish supremacist deepstate.
So far, Trump hasn't started any new wars. So as Mr. Giraldi says, "one hopes"
if neocons and the media now start going easier on him
then we're toast
it seems the only metric we have for determining whether or not a person is rotten to the
core, or not, is whether the media likes them, or not.
If the media likes them, then they're as rotten as they come.
If the media hates them, (Ron Paul, Julian Assange
others..)
then there is likely at least something redeeming about them.
The main reason for (pathetically) clinging to some tiny, gossamer wisp of hope for Trump,
is that ((they)) continue to be unhinged in their hysterical enmity for all things Trump.
But considering that he's basically giving them everything they want, (sans an all out war
on Iran), it seems the main reason they still hate his guts, is because the despised rubes in
flyover country still like him. And I suppose because of a few good judges and justices.
But as long as Bubba continues to proudly wear the hat, they're going to hate Donald Trump
with a seething malevolence.
And I have to confess to getting great satisfaction by seeing these rats going apoplectic
over Trump.
a guilty secret of mine is that everyday that this sick, twisted bitch
@Rurik the
other potentially relevant thing about Trump imo is he made some comments on 9/11 at the time
about how strong the twin towers were (i forget the exact details) which could be construed
as walking the edge of disbelief.
this may be related to Brennan in particular having such a hysterical reaction to Trump's
candidacy.
it seems the only metric we have for determining whether or not a person is rotten to
the core, or not, is whether the media likes them, or not.
I would contend, this is not a reliable indicator. If they really dislike someone, they
will simply not report anything at all. It would be a declared and enforced taboo to
report.
Negative publicity is also publicity, and the guys behind the curtain know this.
But what choice do we have but to at least vote for the peace candidate, and then wait
until, on cue, we're all betrayed once again by the Jewish supremacist deepstate.
It won't change anything, but you won't feel betrayed.
While it clear anti-Seminissm to hate Jews as the ethnic groups, it is quite different about
Zionism -- Jewish nationalism with the elements of supremacist ideology that puts Israel as the
central symbol of "jeweshnessh"
In the eyes of Spokoiny, the three types of contemporary anti-Semitism, be it Left, Right
or Islamic ("which is not only fascistic but outright genocidal," according to Spokoiny) are
in fact one by nature: "there's just one type of anti-Semitism that simply dresses its ugly
persona in different ideological garments." So it isn't just the Jews that should be
reunited; the Goyim, or shall we say the rest humanity, aren't diverse either, their
oppositions to Jewish politics, Israel or Zionism are only a matter of "different ideological
garments."
In Spokoiny's universe, the Jews are hated for being Jews. It is not that some oppose
Israel for being racist, expansionist and genocidal. It is not because some may be upset that
the Israeli Lobby dominates Western foreign affairs in the open. It is not because American
and British boys and girls are sent to fight and die in Zio-con wars, it is not because some
have noticed that it was a bunch of prominent Jewish intellectuals who have managed to
reshape the Western ethos by means of so-called progressive ideologies. It is not because the
media seems to be biased in favour of a criminal state, which happens to be a Jewish one. In
Spokoiny, reasoning and self-reflection are pushed aside. In his universe some just hate Jews
blindly, irrationally and for no reason.
But Spokoiny may as well be right. There is a common element in the Left-wing, Right-wing,
Christian and Islamic opposition to Jewish politics, culture and ideology: opposition to
choseness is how Bernard Lazare described it in his 1894 Zionist text Antisemitism:
Its History and Causes . There is a shared common ground that unites all those so-called
'anti-Semites.' The alleged 'enemies of the Jews' are people who want the Jewish past to be
subject to scrutiny like all other historical chapters, Israeli barbarism to be curtailed,
Wall Street to be restricted, Palestine to be free. They want globalisation to be halted,
immoral interventionism to die out. The so-called 'anti-Semites' actually follow the Zionist
promise, they want Jews to finally assimilate and become 'people like all other people.' The
so-called 'enemies of the Jews' are upholding the most enlightened rational universalist
ethical positions. They treat Jews as ordinary people and expect their state and institutions
to subscribe to ethical standards.
Spokoiny hates Alain Soral, the French intellectual who was sentenced this week to one
year in prison by a French court for "negationisme" (history revisionism).
In the eyes of French Jewish institutes and Spokoiny, Soral is the ultimate enemy. He has
managed to present a unifying message that appeals to the Left, the Right and Muslim
immigrants. Soral calls for a universal reconciliation, between them all under a French
nationalist egalitarian ethos. The French Jewish institutions see Soral's call as a vile
anti-Semitic message as it doesn't seem to accommodate Jewish exceptionalism. However, some
Jews have joined Soral's movement. But they clearly demoted themselves to French patriots.
They left chosenism behind, they see themselves primarily as French.
"We in the Jewish community need to believe him (Soral)." Spokoiny writes, "We need to
stop participating in the divide-and-conquer game of those who hate us." In other words,
Spokoiny wants to see Jews as one monolithic identity. One that sticks together and exercises
its power. If Spokoiny or anyone else thinks that such politics may eradicate anti-Semitism,
he or she must be either naïve or just stupid . What Jews need to do is to self-reflect,
to ask themselves why anti-Semitism is rising again. Jews must identify their own role in
this emerging reality. Rather than constantly blaming their so called 'haters,' Jews may want
to repeat the early Zionist exercise and ask what is exactly in Jewish culture, identity and
politics that makes Jewish history into a chain of disasters.
The conclusion of Chapter
1 of Jewish History, Jewish Religion by Israel Shahak:
There are two choices which face Israeli-Jewish society. It can become a fully closed
and warlike ghetto, a Jewish Sparta, supported by the labour of Arab helots, kept in
existence by its influence on the US political establishment and by threats to use its
nuclear power, or it can try to become an open society. The second choice is dependent on
an honest examination of its Jewish past, on the admission that Jewish chauvinism and
exclusivism exist, and on an honest examination of the attitudes of Judaism towards the
non-Jews.
The second choice would require Jews to 'demote themselves' to mere humanity. There
seems to be no hope of that.
Jews do seem to be incapable or completely unwilling to self-reflect on their behavior
and its effects. Instead, they pathologize the goyim saying its somehow inherent.
Zionism is despised all over the political spectrum. So called anti-semitism is not just
some far right nazi ideology. Leftists, muslims, blacks etc. are all seeing Jewish behavior
as a real threat.
The hostility and destructive, subversive behavior to western culture and institutions
is despised by the right. The left hates the racist and hostile murderous behavior to the
Palestinians. Both hate the zio-con wars.
Jews are not in a good situation. However, most of them are completely unwilling to
change their behavior. In fact, they seem to be pushing even harder and faster. It is not
looking like there is going to be a good outcome for the Jews at the rate they're currently
going.
' what is exactly in Jewish culture, identity and politics that makes Jewish history
into a chain of disasters '
One wonders to what extent exactly this characterization is accurate. Even if it is true
to some extent, can't the history of all peoples be characterized as a 'chain of
disasters'?
Take the Jews of any particular region: the Ukraine, say. Okay, fine -- they suffered
the pogroms associated with Khmelnitsky's uprising and the Holocaust. Some would add the
pogroms of late Tsarist Russia, but here's an unpleasant fact: those weren't all that big a
deal
Meantime, what about the gentiles? Well, first off, I don't think anyone did well
out of Khmelnitsky's uprising: gentiles were being slaughtered in job lots as well. Then
there were the artificial famines of Stalin's regime, which were inflicted primarily --
exclusively? -- on the Christian peasantry. The Nazis weren't nice to Ukrainian gentiles
either. There was the holocaust of the Mongol invasions.
Etc. Things are tough all over. We could engage in the same compare and contrast for
Spanish Jews and gentiles, French Jews and gentiles, German Jews and gentiles, and so on.
Some evils were inflicted mostly on the Jews, some mainly on the gentiles, some
indifferently on both.
Even if one could establish that Jews have come in for more than their fair share
of abuse, it's obviously a wild distortion of the past to see Jews alone as victims. The
Thirty Years War was catastrophic for German gentiles as well as German Jews. 75% of the
German gentile civilians trapped in Konigsberg when it fell to the Russians wound up being
murdered, starved to death, or otherwise done in. Was it better to be a Jew or a gentile
then?
Jews don't have a monopoly on victimhood, and to assume otherwise is to indulge in a
pernicious fantasy. We wind up agreeing that Jews are uniquely entitled to misbehave,
because they alone have been abused. Neither end of that proposition is valid.
"Anti-semite" has lost its sting, because every justified criticism of the Zionist Israeli
government is declared to be anti-semitism. The word is so overused and misapplied as to be
useless. Indeed, to be declared "anti-semite" by the Israel Lobby is to be declared a
person of high moral conscience.
[There is an assumption among the financialized left that any mention of George Soros or the
Rothschild family is based in anti-Semitism regardless of the facts of any such statement. In
part it is because so much anti-Semitism exists and is gratuitously directed at the rich in
general, but particularly the rich that are well known for their ruthless securities trading
techniques, principally market moving short-sales. The other part of course is that there is
so much loyalty gratuitously directed towards rich patrons of mainstream liberalism that it
needs to self-justify behind accusations of reactionary bias. Perhaps liberals learned guilty
until proven innocent from Jim Crow. In any case, accusations of anti-Semitism or racism are
a powerful antidote to criticism wherever that they can be applied.
My solution to this conundrum is just to give up. I am doing fine on my own and the rest
of these people are just not worth the effort, particularly given that any attempt to open
and honest discussion is just so much pissing into the wind.
I got weeds to pull and bulbs to plant. Happy Easter.]
...unless that would be considered anti-Semitism by association since the Rockefeller family
and Rothschild family are now business partners in global finance.
So, you have a very odd circumstance where we have a lot of discussion about Russia's
influence here. They have got nothing. They have sanctions, nothing. As a journalist, I find it
quite amazing that there's no question raised with Pelosi, with Schumer, with any of the
leading Democrats. What is going on? You attack Trump for everything. How come you don't attack
him for giving Netanyahu a blank check to do what he wants? It must be frustrating to an
observer like yourself, no?
"... In their 2007 book, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, John Mearsheimer, Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, Professor of International Relations at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University address the "coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction" and "its negative effect on American interests". ..."
"... although "the boundaries of the Israel lobby cannot be identified precisely", it "has a core consisting of organizations whose declared purpose is to encourage the U.S. government and the American public to provide material aid to Israel and to support its government's policies, as well as influential individuals for whom these goals are also a top priority". They note that "not every American with a favorable attitude to Israel is part of the lobby", and that although "the bulk of the lobby is comprised of Jewish Americans", there are many American Jews who are not part of the lobby, and the lobby also includes Christian Zionists. ..."
"... To the accusation that they "see the lobby as a well-organised Jewish conspiracy" they refer to their description of the lobby "a loose coalition of individuals and organisations without a central headquarters." To the accusation of mono-causality, they remark "pointed out that support for Israel is hardly the only reason America's standing in the Middle East is so low." To the complaint that they "'catalog Israel's moral flaws,' while paying little attention to the shortcomings of other states," they refer to the "high levels of material and diplomatic support" given by the United States especially to Israel as a reason to focus on it. To the claim that U.S. support for Israel reflects "genuine support among the American public" they agree, but argue that "this popularity is substantially due to the lobby's success at portraying Israel in a favourable light and effectively limiting public awareness and discussion of Israel's less savory actions." To the claim that there are countervailing forces "such as 'paleo-conservatives, Arab and Islamic advocacy groups and the diplomatic establishment,'" they argue that these are no match for the pro-Israel lobby. To the argument that oil rather than Israel drives Middle East policy, they claim that the United States would favor the Palestinians instead of Israel, and would not have gone to war in Iraq or be threatening Iran if that were so. They accuse various critics of smearing them by linking them to racists, and dispute various claims by Alan Dershowitz and others that their facts and references or quotations are mistaken. ..."
"... The framing of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy assigns primary emphasis and agency to Israel, its representatives and the Israeli Lobby whilst assigning lesser emphasis and agency to The United States of America, thereby obfuscating levels of co-operation, mutual interests and strategic partnerships amongst the parties, and in some regards why the door of The United States of America is regularly left ajar to The Israeli Lobby, the state of Israel and some of its representatives. ..."
All the post-9/11 US savagery (from Afghanistan to "shock and awe" in Iraq, from Libya and Syria to the Iran sanctions) was
directly managed by a pro-Israel Lobby manufactured "consensus" in the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations, US Senate and Congress,
mainstream media, and numerous pro-Israel foreign policy policy think tanks.
In their 2007 book, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, John Mearsheimer, Professor of Political Science at the University
of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, Professor of International Relations at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University address
the "coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction" and
"its negative effect on American interests".
Both Mearsheimer and Walt argue that although "the boundaries of the Israel lobby cannot be identified precisely", it "has
a core consisting of organizations whose declared purpose is to encourage the U.S. government and the American public to provide
material aid to Israel and to support its government's policies, as well as influential individuals for whom these goals are also
a top priority". They note that "not every American with a favorable attitude to Israel is part of the lobby", and that although
"the bulk of the lobby is comprised of Jewish Americans", there are many American Jews who are not part of the lobby, and the
lobby also includes Christian Zionists.
In response to criticism of the 2006 publication of Mearsheimer and Walt's original essay, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign
Policy", Mearsheimer said, "[w]e fully recognised that the lobby would retaliate against us" and "[w]e expected the story we told
in the piece would apply to us after it was published. We are not surprised that we've come under attack by the lobby." He also
stated "we expected to be called anti-semites, even though both of us are philo-semites and strongly support the existence of
Israel."
In a letter to the London Review of Books in May 2006, Mearsheimer and Walt responded to their critics:
To the accusation that they "see the lobby as a well-organised Jewish conspiracy" they refer to their description of the lobby
"a loose coalition of individuals and organisations without a central headquarters." To the accusation of mono-causality, they
remark "pointed out that support for Israel is hardly the only reason America's standing in the Middle East is so low." To the
complaint that they "'catalog Israel's moral flaws,' while paying little attention to the shortcomings of other states," they
refer to the "high levels of material and diplomatic support" given by the United States especially to Israel as a reason to focus
on it. To the claim that U.S. support for Israel reflects "genuine support among the American public" they agree, but argue that
"this popularity is substantially due to the lobby's success at portraying Israel in a favourable light and effectively limiting
public awareness and discussion of Israel's less savory actions." To the claim that there are countervailing forces "such as 'paleo-conservatives,
Arab and Islamic advocacy groups and the diplomatic establishment,'" they argue that these are no match for the pro-Israel lobby.
To the argument that oil rather than Israel drives Middle East policy, they claim that the United States would favor the Palestinians
instead of Israel, and would not have gone to war in Iraq or be threatening Iran if that were so. They accuse various critics
of smearing them by linking them to racists, and dispute various claims by Alan Dershowitz and others that their facts and references
or quotations are mistaken.
In the 2007 book, Mearsheimer and Walt note that the vast majority of charges leveled against the original 2006 article were
unfounded, but some critiques raised issues of interpretation and emphasis, which they addressed in the The Israel Lobby and U.S.
Foreign Policy.
In a February 2019 article in Foreign Policy, Walt discussed Omar's Twitter criticisms of the conduct of Israel's government
and its U.S. supporters:
"here's the kicker: [ ] being aware of, sensitive to, and deeply opposed to anti-Semitism and offering an informed, factual
picture of the lobby's activities affords little or no protection to anyone who is critical of Israel's actions, is concerned
about the one-sided nature of the U.S.-Israel relationship, and disagrees with the policy positions that groups like AIPAC
endorse.
"How do I know? Let's just say I have some experience with this phenomenon."
OlyaPola , April 19, 2019 at 05:23
“To the accusation of mono-causality, they remark “pointed out that support for Israel is hardly the only reason America’s
standing in the Middle East is so low.”
Mono-causality is a tool of deflection/obfuscation given that mono-causality can never exist in any interaction.
However instead of using that notion in reply to assertion of reliance on mono-causality, the authors chose to “point out that
support of Israel is hardly the only reason America’s standing in the Middle East is so low.”
The framing of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy assigns primary emphasis and agency to Israel, its representatives
and the Israeli Lobby whilst assigning lesser emphasis and agency to The United States of America, thereby obfuscating levels
of co-operation, mutual interests and strategic partnerships amongst the parties, and in some regards why the door of The United
States of America is regularly left ajar to The Israeli Lobby, the state of Israel and some of its representatives.
Another tool of deflection/obfuscation is providing an answer that others can conflate with the answer.
The Okhrana offered an answer to conflate by production of “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” which still enjoys a half-life,
whilst some others offered an answer of “Corruption of our democratic system through contributions/bribes”, both of which like
” The framing of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy assigns primary emphasis and agency to Israel, its representatives and
the Israeli Lobby whilst assigning lesser emphasis and agency to The United States of America, thereby obfuscating levels of co-operation,
mutual interests and strategic partnerships amongst the parties, and in some regards why the door of The United States of America
is regularly left ajar to The Israeli Lobby, the state of Israel and some of its representatives. ”
This then poses some interesting questions including but not restricted to “For what purposes did the authors, editors and
publishers choose to frame, write and publish the original and subsequently amended version of “The Israeli Lobby and US Foreign
Policy ?”
Perhaps a useful entry point would be through considering the purposes of Mr. Mearscheimer’s activities in evangelising detente
with Russia in the 1960/70’s?
This was a component part of the reasons why in respect of “American” propaganda Mr. Putin quipped “They are now blaming the
Jews”.
All the post-9/11 US savagery (from Afghanistan to "shock and awe" in Iraq, from Libya and
Syria to the Iran sanctions) was directly managed by a pro-Israel Lobby manufactured
"consensus" in the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations, US Senate and Congress, mainstream
media, and numerous pro-Israel foreign policy policy think tanks.
In their 2007 book, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, John Mearsheimer, Professor
of Political Science at the University of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, Professor of
International Relations at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University address the
"coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer U.S. foreign policy in
a pro-Israel direction" and "its negative effect on American interests".
Both Mearsheimer and Walt argue that although "the boundaries of the Israel lobby cannot
be identified precisely", it "has a core consisting of organizations whose declared purpose
is to encourage the U.S. government and the American public to provide material aid to Israel
and to support its government's policies, as well as influential individuals for whom these
goals are also a top priority". They note that "not every American with a favorable attitude
to Israel is part of the lobby", and that although "the bulk of the lobby is comprised of
Jewish Americans", there are many American Jews who are not part of the lobby, and the lobby
also includes Christian Zionists.
In response to criticism of the 2006 publication of Mearsheimer and Walt's original essay,
"The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy", Mearsheimer said, "[w]e fully recognised that the
lobby would retaliate against us" and "[w]e expected the story we told in the piece would
apply to us after it was published. We are not surprised that we've come under attack by the
lobby." He also stated "we expected to be called anti-semites, even though both of us are
philo-semites and strongly support the existence of Israel."
In a letter to the London Review of Books in May 2006, Mearsheimer and Walt responded to
their critics:
To the accusation that they "see the lobby as a well-organised Jewish
conspiracy" they refer to their description of the lobby "a loose coalition of individuals
and organisations without a central headquarters." To the accusation of mono-causality, they
remark "pointed out that support for Israel is hardly the only reason America's standing in
the Middle East is so low." To the complaint that they "'catalog Israel's moral flaws,' while
paying little attention to the shortcomings of other states," they refer to the "high levels
of material and diplomatic support" given by the United States especially to Israel as a
reason to focus on it. To the claim that U.S. support for Israel reflects "genuine support
among the American public" they agree, but argue that "this popularity is substantially due
to the lobby's success at portraying Israel in a favourable light and effectively limiting
public awareness and discussion of Israel's less savory actions." To the claim that there are
countervailing forces "such as 'paleo-conservatives, Arab and Islamic advocacy groups and the
diplomatic establishment,'" they argue that these are no match for the pro-Israel lobby. To
the argument that oil rather than Israel drives Middle East policy, they claim that the
United States would favor the Palestinians instead of Israel, and would not have gone to war
in Iraq or be threatening Iran if that were so. They accuse various critics of smearing them
by linking them to racists, and dispute various claims by Alan Dershowitz and others that
their facts and references or quotations are mistaken.
In the 2007 book, Mearsheimer and Walt note that the vast majority of charges leveled
against the original 2006 article were unfounded, but some critiques raised issues of
interpretation and emphasis, which they addressed in the The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign
Policy.
In a February 2019 article in Foreign Policy, Walt discussed Omar's Twitter criticisms of
the conduct of Israel's government and its U.S. supporters:
"here's the kicker: [ ] being aware of, sensitive to, and deeply opposed to
anti-Semitism and offering an informed, factual picture of the lobby's activities affords
little or no protection to anyone who is critical of Israel's actions, is concerned about
the one-sided nature of the U.S.-Israel relationship, and disagrees with the policy
positions that groups like AIPAC endorse.
"How do I know? Let's just say I have some experience with this phenomenon."
OlyaPola , April 19, 2019 at 05:23
“To the accusation of mono-causality, they remark “pointed out that support
for Israel is hardly the only reason America’s standing in the Middle East is so
low.”
Mono-causality is a tool of deflection/obfuscation given that mono-causality can never
exist in any interaction.
However instead of using that notion in reply to assertion of reliance on mono-causality,
the authors chose to “point out that support of Israel is hardly the only reason
America’s standing in the Middle East is so low.”
The framing of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy assigns primary emphasis and
agency to Israel, its representatives and the Israeli Lobby whilst assigning lesser emphasis
and agency to The United States of America, thereby obfuscating levels of co-operation,
mutual interests and strategic partnerships amongst the parties, and in some regards why the
door of The United States of America is regularly left ajar to The Israeli Lobby, the state
of Israel and some of its representatives.
Another tool of deflection/obfuscation is providing an answer that others can conflate
with the answer.
The Okhrana offered an answer to conflate by production of “The Protocols of the
Elders of Zion” which still enjoys a half-life, whilst some others offered an answer of
“Corruption of our democratic system through contributions/bribes”, both of which
like ” The framing of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy assigns primary emphasis
and agency to Israel, its representatives and the Israeli Lobby whilst assigning lesser
emphasis and agency to The United States of America, thereby obfuscating levels of
co-operation, mutual interests and strategic partnerships amongst the parties, and in some
regards why the door of The United States of America is regularly left ajar to The Israeli
Lobby, the state of Israel and some of its representatives. ”
This then poses some interesting questions including but not restricted to “For what
purposes did the authors, editors and publishers choose to frame, write and publish the
original and subsequently amended version of “The Israeli Lobby and US Foreign Policy
?”
Perhaps a useful entry point would be through considering the purposes of Mr.
Mearscheimer’s activities in evangelising detente with Russia in the
1960/70’s?
This was a component part of the reasons why in respect of “American”
propaganda Mr. Putin quipped “They are now blaming the Jews”.
"... Blumenthal does chronicle a decades-long panoply of active measures by numerous pro-Israel Lobby figures, groups and think tanks. Yet he fails to explicitly recognize the connection between pro-Israel Lobby efforts and the covert operations and overt invasions of America's national security state. ..."
"... Julian Assange of Wikileaks was more explicit. Assange named the "country that has interfered in U.S. elections, has endangered Americans living or working overseas and has corrupted America's legislative and executive branches. It has exploited that corruption to initiate legislation favorable to itself, has promoted unnecessary and unwinnable wars and has stolen American technology and military secrets. Its ready access to the mainstream media to spread its own propaganda provides it with cover for its actions and it accomplishes all that and more through the agency of a powerful and well-funded domestic lobby [ ] That country is, of course, Israel." ..."
Behind the Omar Outrage: Suppressed History of the pro-Israel Lobby
Max Blumenthal's article and his 2019 book, The Management of Savagery: How America's
National Security State Fueled the Rise of Al Qaeda, ISIS, and Donald Trump (2019), is an
impressive exercise in burying the lede.
Blumenthal does chronicle a decades-long panoply of active measures by numerous pro-Israel
Lobby figures, groups and think tanks. Yet he fails to explicitly recognize the connection
between pro-Israel Lobby efforts and the covert operations and overt invasions of America's
national security state.
Julian Assange of Wikileaks was more explicit. Assange named the "country that has
interfered in U.S. elections, has endangered Americans living or working overseas and has
corrupted America's legislative and executive branches. It has exploited that corruption to
initiate legislation favorable to itself, has promoted unnecessary and unwinnable wars and
has stolen American technology and military secrets. Its ready access to the mainstream media
to spread its own propaganda provides it with cover for its actions and it accomplishes all
that and more through the agency of a powerful and well-funded domestic lobby [ ] That
country is, of course, Israel."
"... I was pleasantly surprised to see that Team Trump not only had an intoxicating dream, but also a very logical and disciplined strategy to win the election. Trump kept up a cracking pace and worked tirelessly to the end of the campaign season. It's no wonder that his supporters are reluctant to desert such an inspirational candidate. ..."
I've suggested Trump has "elevated" Pompeo and Bolton and Pence because he was forced
to do so. It's even scarier if the old (soon-to-be-73) fart has drunk the kool-aid and wants
to be a prime mover in the End Times. From all I've read of late the man is gullible enough
to buy into such a scheme.
Opinions vary. I beg to differ about Trump being gullible.
I neither knew nor cared who "Donald Trump" was until he became a candidate for POTUS, and I
never watched The Apprentice for more than 3 seconds, and then only by accident.
But I liked his campaign antics right from the start. And I wasn't alone. To me, he came
across as the sharpest knife in the drawer, by a big margin. Putting himself forward as the
Drain the Swamp candidate was worthy of close attention for two reasons:
It took balls to stick his neck out so defiantly
Of far greater significance was the fact that here was an AmeriKKKan Presidential
candidate claiming to have an MLK-ish dream and a PLAN to achieve it.
I was pleasantly surprised to see that Team Trump not only had an intoxicating dream, but
also a very logical and disciplined strategy to win the election. Trump kept up a cracking
pace and worked tirelessly to the end of the campaign season. It's no wonder that his
supporters are reluctant to desert such an inspirational candidate.
Given that he entered the race with an undisclosed plan to win the election and won it,
it's quite likely that his undisclosed plan to Drain The Swamp has a good chance of being
equally successful.
-------
Talking about undisclosed plans, Trump is the only person in the Known Universe with a Drain
The Swamp plan so it's only sensible to assume that he's the best person to decide how to
achieve it. 3D Chess sounds cute but reverse psychology sounds far more practical. It's been
apparent for some time that the individuals who pop their heads above the parapet to promote
and justify the Swamp's insanely counter-intuitive plans, have scornfully rejected the Human
concepts of decency and morality. They also believe too much of their own bullshit.
Trump has already given them several opportunities to spout their drivel publicly and they've
enthusiastically grabbed each one with indecent haste, despite the obvious idiocy and
illegality.
John Bolton was interviewed on PBS Newshour on March 17. Look it up and watch it and ask
yourself "Is this creature sane or rational?"
So then you want Trump to win, because you can't honestly compare Trump to Sanders! It's
just not intellectually honest!
Hoarsewhisperer @73
Pure Trumpjuice swilling rubbish, as usual. I guess you sleep all day and miss the news
because after all the shet Trump has pulled, he couldn't be better for maintaining the Swamp
than he is. Reversse pyschology, my ass! You must think you have the power to make others see
what even you don't see. News flash, you sound more ridiculous every day. I ask myself why I
bother to engage such nonsense. I think it's because I know ONLY Zionists still support Trump
the way you do and I just can't let you push that kind of dishonest crap and let you dream
you're getting away with it. People whose perception I respect 100 times more than you are
now knocking that Trump excuse bullset you're peddling: like reverse psychology and
dimensional chess. Honestly? You think anyone but the Zionist West Bank choir you're
preaching to buys that kind of dishonest garbage?
"... This is a humiliation for the US in that it demonstrates the waning power and influence of the US in the region and most especially of Donald Trump who has demonstrated his indifference to the interests of the Arabs in repeated slavish support of Israel against the Palestinians, Lebanese and Syrians. pl ..."
It surprises me that Egypt has rather brazenly walked away from the Boltonesque fantasy of
an "Arab NATO." I would have thought that the paychecks Egypt receives every year from the
American taxpayer and the Saudis would have kept Sisi in line, but apparently the prospect of
other sources of funding affected the decision to defy the Amiirkaan.
With the exception of Jordan's small but competent armed forces, Egypt is the only country
among the members that possesses significant military power, The armed forces of the other
countries are mere playthings for princes. Egypt's withdrawal from this alliance makes the
farcical nature of the plan quite clear.
This is a humiliation for the US in that it
demonstrates the waning power and influence of the US in the region and most especially of
Donald Trump who has demonstrated his indifference to the interests of the Arabs in repeated
slavish support of Israel against the Palestinians, Lebanese and Syrians. pl
Victory in Yemen! Victory in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan and everywhere else! Our $trillon military, led by genius generals, will bring home slaves and loot to
replenish our bankrupt treasury. We shall crush our enemies and hear the lamentations of their women.
ClickNLook, 44 minutes ago
MAKE YEMEN SHITHOLE AGAIN!
warsev
I guess we now know fully where President Trump stands on reining in executive warmongering.
Look on the bright side, Trump's overt pandering to Israel has disgusted the Europeans so
much that Macron is at the lowest point in his popularity as Rothschild's puppet, and there
is rising support for the AfD in Germany.
The NYT reported that 40% of Germans now think it's right to blame Jews for Israel's
policy in the Mideast, German youth couldn't care less about the holocaust, and Merkel is
pivoting to Russia.
It is now (America + Israel) vs. (the rest of the world led by Russia, China, Iran, Syria,
with increasing pivot from Germany and India)
Even the rest of the Five Eyes a.k.a. America's lap dogs are casting a wary eye towards
this unholy alliance, and avoid outright support for Israel. Netanyahu has let his new found
power, i.e. America's muscles, gone to his head. He's digging a grave for himself, turning
Israel more and more into a pariah state with each passing day.
I'm guessing chess is not Trump's strong suit, nor any of the Israel Firsters (incl. Pence
& Pompeo) hanging around him. They're all letting their new found power go to their
collective heads. Things are going to backfire on them sooner or later.
@wayfarer
"Trump panders to his base at the Republican Jewish Coalition."
The trouble is, the Republican Jewish Coalition was never his base. These people were the
biggest Trump haters until he got elected. Now they're just holding their noses to buy power
through him.
Meanwhile, the real Trump's base could care less about Israel, and are frankly disgusted
with his foreign policy and complete failure on immigration.
So newly reelected Israeli monster-in-chief Benjamin Netanyahu
has boasted , with a grin, that America's President Donald J. Trump followed through on his
proposal to declare the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) a terrorist group. Bibi was
smiling because the timing of the move, one day before the Israeli election, strongly suggests
it was done to assist him against what had become a very strong opposition challenge. That
Trump likely colluded with Netanyahu to blatantly interfere in the election has apparently
bothered no one in Israel or in the tame American media.
The gift from Washington came on top of recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan
Heights, threatening members of the International Criminal Court if they try to prosecute
Israel for war crimes, moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, removing the word "occupation"
from the State Department's assessments of human rights infringements on the West Bank,
eliminating relief funding for Palestinian refugees, leaving the U.N. Human Rights Council
because it was too critical of Israel, and looking the other way as Israel declared itself a
state only for Jews. Washington also ignored the bombing of hospitals, schools and water
treatment infrastructure in Gaza while Israeli army snipers were shooting unarmed demonstrators
demanding their freedom.
The labeling of the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group is particularly disturbing as
it means that the United States military by virtue of the Authorization to Use Military Force
(AUMF) now has a mandate to attack the IRGC wherever it appears, including in Syria or even in
the waterway the Straits of Hormuz, where the guard has regular patrols in small boats. It is a
de facto declaration of war and it comes on top of a number of deliberate provocations
directed against Iran starting with the withdrawal from the nuclear agreement Joint
Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA) one year ago, which led to the unilateral imposition of
harsh sanctions directed against the Iranian economy to bring about a popular uprising as well
as regularly repeated false claims that Iran is the leading "state sponsor of terrorism." Next
month, the U.S. will begin enforcing a unilaterally declared worldwide sanction on any and all
Iranian oil sales.
Netanyahu pledged to annex Israeli settlements on the largely Palestinian West Bank if
elected, which is undoubtedly a move cleared in advance with the Trump team of foreign policy
sociopaths as it de facto puts an end to any delusional speculation over a possible
two-state negotiated solution for the Israel-Palestine conflict. It will also lead to a massive
upsurge in violence as the Palestinians object, which is neither a concern for the White House
or Netanyahu, as they are assuming that it can be suppressed by overwhelming force directed
against an almost completely unarmed civilian population.
And Trump will no doubt expect Bibi to return the favor when he is running for reelection in
2020 by encouraging American Jews who care about Israel to support the Republicans. Trump is
focused on his own electability and is absolutely shameless about his betrayal of actual
American interests in the Middle East, possibly because he has no inkling of the actual damage
that he is doing.
His speech last week before the casino multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson-hosted Jewish
Republican Coalition Annual Leadership Meeting in Las Vegas was a disgusting pander to a group
that includes many key players who have little or no concern for what happens to the United
States as long as Israel flourishes. The only good news that came out of the meeting was that
Adelson himself appears to be "gravely ill."
Trump at times appeared to be speaking to what he thought was a group of Israelis,
referring to "your prime minister" when mentioning Benjamin Netanyahu and several times
describing Israel as "yours," suggesting that deep down he understands that many American Jews
are more loyal to Israel than to the United States. At another point, Trump declared that "The
Democrats have even allowed the terrible scourge of anti-Semitism to take root
in their party and their country," apparently part of a White House plan to keep playing that
card to turn American Jews and their political donations in a Republican direction before
elections in 2020.
Trump also told the Republican Coalition audience how he came to a decision on recognizing
Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights. He described how
"he'd been speaking to his son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, as well as U.S.
ambassador to Israel David Friedman and his Israel adviser, Jason Greenblatt, over the phone
about an unrelated issue when he suddenly brought up the Golan Heights." Trump shared how "I
said, 'Fellows, do me a favor. Give me a little history, quick. Want to go fast. I got a lot of
things I'm working on: China, North Korea. Give me a quickie.' After the advisers filled him
in, Trump said he asked Friedman: 'David, what do you think about me recognizing Israel and the
Golan Heights?' Friedman, apparently surprised by the suggestion, reacted like a 'wonderful,
beautiful baby,' Trump said, and asked if he would 'really do that.' 'Yeah, I think I'm doing
it right now. Let's write something up,' Trump said he responded, prompting applause and cheers
from his audience in Las Vegas. 'We make fast decisions and we make good decisions.'"
Putting the Trump story about the Golan Heights in some kind of context is not really
that difficult. He wanted an answer to please Netanyahu and he went to three Orthodox Jews who
support the illegal Israeli settlements and have also individually contributed financially to
their growth so he was expecting the response that he got. That he was establishing a
precedent by his moves on Jerusalem and the Golan apparently did not occur to him as his
administration prides itself on having a foreign policy vision that extends no longer than the
beginning of next week, which is why he hired Mike Pompeo, John Bolton and Elliott Abrams. And
then there is always the doleful Stephen Miller lurking in the background as well as the three
musketeers of Kushner, Greenblatt and Friedman for really serious questions relating to why
acceding to the wishes of parasite state Israel should continue to be the apparent number one
priority of the government of the United States.
Donald Trump neither poses nor answers the question why he feels compelled to fulfill all
of the campaign pledges he made to the Jewish community, which by and large did not vote for
him, while failing to carry out the promises made to those who actually did support him .
The absurd Jewish Republican Coalition narrative about how Trump gave Israel the Golan Heights
should have resulted in a flood of opprobrium in the U.S. media about his profound ignorance
and fundamental hypocrisy, but there was largely silence.
The nonsense going on in Las Vegas in front of a lot of fat cats who regard the United
States as little more than a cash cow that they control as well as in the White House itself
unfortunately has real world consequences. America is being led by the nose by a
well-entrenched and powerful group of Israeli loyalists and this will not end well. The
U.S. doesn't even have a Middle Eastern foreign policy anymore – it has a "to do" list
handed by Netanyahu to whomever is president. The fact that the current man in charge in
Washington is either so ignorant or so deluded as to allow the process to escalate until the
U.S. is drawn into yet more catastrophic wars is beyond regrettable. U.S. foreign policy should
not depend on the perceptions of Kushner and company. It should be based on real, tangible
American interests, not those of Israel. Someone should explain that to the president.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based
U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address
is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected].
The gift from Washington came on top of recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan
Heights, threatening members of the International Criminal Court if they try to prosecute
Israel for war crimes
It reminds me of the following agreements concluded during the Bush era:
US Bilateral Exemption Agreements
"The Bush Administration is actively opposed to the International Criminal Court. Its
insistence on placing all Americans above international law risks undermining the ICC in its
earliest and most fragile years. Currently, the State Department is pushing individual
countries to conclude bilateral agreements with the US, exempting all Americans (and even
some non-nationals) from accountability for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war
crimes . These proposed agreements, in the form requested by the US government, are
illegal under the Rome Statute and are not required by US law.
· The European Union has concluded that "Entering into US agreements – as
presently drafted would be inconsistent with ICC States Parties' obligations with regard to
the ICC Statute and may be inconsistent with other international agreements."
To bring the US proposal back within the legal scope of Article 98(2), the EU would
require four modifications:
· No impunity: A guarantee that the US would investigate and potentially prosecute
the accused in its domestic courts.
· No reciprocity: Nationals of ICC States Parties must be excluded from
coverage.
· No universal scope: These agreements can only cover persons officially sent on
government business by a State.
· Ratification: The agreement must be approved according to the constitutional
procedures of each individual state.
Soon after WWII, U.S. statesman Dean Acheson warned that creating Israel on land already
inhabited by Palestinians would "imperil" both American and all Western interests in the
region. Despite warnings such as this one, President Truman supported establishing a Jewish
state on land primarily inhabited by Muslims and Christians.
Few Americans today are aware that U.S. support enabled the creation of modern Israel.
Even fewer know that U.S. politicians pushed this policy over the forceful objections of top
diplomatic and military experts.
As this work demonstrates, these politicians were bombarded by a massive pro-Israel
lobbying effort that ranged from well-funded and very public Zionist organizations to an
"elitist secret society" whose members included Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis.
Against Our Better Judgment brings together meticulously sourced evidence to illuminate a
reality that differs starkly from the prevailing narrative. It provides a clear view of the
history that is key to understanding one of the most critically important political issues of
our day.
Interview with Scholar and Journalist, Mark Bruzonsky. Mark Bruzonsky, a Jewish, American
Scholar and Journalist, has been a key member behind the scenes of the Israeli Palestinian
peace initiative in the 1980s, meeting with Former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and with
Palestinian officials. In this exclusive interview with Press TV's Autograph, Mr. Bruzonsky
talks about the challenges and missed opportunities he witnessed first-hand, and how Zionist
groups infiltrated American politics, US institutions and organizations. He goes further to
explain the specific time and day Obama sold out to the AIPAC lobby, and how President Obama
would never dare oppose the stronghold of the Zionist, Israeli Lobby in the US.
You're right. I see people like Robert Kagan's opinions being respectfully asked on foreign affairs, John Bolton and Elliott Abrams
being hired to direct our foreign policy.
The incompetent, the corrupt, the treacherous -- not just walking free, but with reputations intact, fat bank balances, and
flourishing careers. Now they're angling for war with Iran.
It's preposterous and sickening. And it can't be allowed to stand, so you can't just stand off and say you're "wrecked". Keep
fighting, as you're doing. I will fight it until I can't fight anymore.
Fact-bedeviled JohnT: “McCain was a problem for this nation? Sweet Jesus! There quite simply is no rational adult on the planet
who buys that nonsense.”
McCain had close ties to the military-industrial complex. He was a backer of post-Cold War NATO. He was a neoconservative darling.
He never heard of a dictator that he didn’t want to depose with boots on the ground, with the possible exception of various Saudi
dictators (the oil-weaponry-torture nexus). He promoted pseudo-accountability of government in campaign finance but blocked accountability
for the Pentagon and State Department when he co-chaired the United States Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs with John
Kerry.
And, perhaps partly because of the head trauma and/or emotional wounds he suffered at the hands of Chinese-backed Commies,
it’s plausible to think he was regarded by the willy-nilly plotters of the deep state as a manipulable, and thus useful, conduit
of domestic subversion via the bogus Steele dossier.
Unfortunately, the episode that most defines McCain’s life is the very last one–his being a pawn of M-16 in the the deep state’s
years-long attempt to derail the presidency of Donald Trump.
Measuring success means determining goals. The goals of most wars is to enrich the people in charge. So, by this metric, the war
was a success. The rest of it is just props and propaganda.
“Pyrrhic Victory” look it up the Roman Empire Won but lost if the US is invaded and the government does not defend it I would
like to start my own defense: But the knee jerk politics that stirs America’s cannon fodder citizens is a painful reminder of
a history of jingoist lies where at times some left and right agree at least for a short moment before the rich and powerful push
their weight to have their way.
If All politics is relative Right wingers are the the left of what? Nuclear destruction? or Slavery?
My goodness! I am also a veteran, but of the Vietnam war, and my father was a career officer from 1939-1961 as a paratrooper first,
and later as an intelligence officer. He argued vigorously against our Vietnam involvement, and was cashiered for his intellectual
honesty. A combat veteran’s views are meaningless when the political winds are blowing.
Simply put, we have killed thousands of our kids in service of the colonial empires left to us by the British and the French
after WWII. More practice at incompetent strategies and tactics does not make us more competent–it merely extends the blunders
and pain; viz the French for two CENTURIES against the Britsh during the battles over Normandy while the Planagenet kings worked
to hold their viking-won inheritance.
At least then, kings risked their own lives. Generals fight because the LIKE it…a lot. Prior failures are only practice to
the, regardless of the cost in lives of the kids we tried to raise well, and who were slaughtered for no gain.
We don’t need the empire, and we certainly shouldn’t fight for the corrupt businessmen who have profited from the never-ending
conflicts. Let’s spend those trillions at home, so long as we also police our government to keep both Democrat and Republican
politicians from feathering their own nests. Term limits and prosecutions will help us, but only if we are vigilant. Wars distract
our attention while corruption is rampant at home.
Thanks, I appreciate this article.
I’ll make two points, my own opinion:
it’s the same story as Vietnam, the bull about how the politicians or anti-war demonstrators tied the military ‘hand,’ blah, blah.
Nonsense. Invading a nation and slaughtering people in their towns, houses…gee…what’s wrong with that, eh?
The average American has a primitive mind when it comes to such matters.
Second point I have, is that both Bushes, Clinton, Obama, Hillary and Trump should be dragged to a world court, given a fair trial
and locked up for life with hard labor… oh, and Cheney too,for all those families, in half a dozen nations, especially the children
overseas that suffered/died from these creeps.
And, the families of dead or maimed American troops should be apologized to and compensation paid by several million dollars to
each.
The people I named above make me sick, because I have feelings and a conscience. Can you dig?
Though there is a worldly justification for killing to obtain or maintain freedoms, there is no Christian justification for it.
Which suggests that Christians who die while doing it, die in vain.
America’s wars are prosecuted by a military that includes Christians. They seldom question the killing their country orders
them to do, as though the will of the government is that of the will of God. Is that a safe assumption for them to make? German
Christian soldiers made that assumption regarding their government in 1939. Who was there to tell them otherwise? The Church failed,
including the chaplains. (The Southern Baptist Convention declared the invasion of Iraq a just war in 2003.) These wars need to
be assessed by Just War criteria. Christian soldiers need to know when to exercise selective conscientious objection, for it is
better to go to prison than to kill without God’s approval. If Just War theory is irrelevant, the default response is Christian
Pacifism.
“Iraq Wrecked” a lot of innocent people. Millions are dead, cities reduced to rubble, homes and businesses destroyed and it was
all a damned lie. And the perpetrators are Free.
Now there is sectarian violence too, where once there was a semblance of harmony amongst various denominations. See article link
below.
“Are The Christians Slaughtered in The Middle East Victims of the Actions of Western War Criminals and Their Terrorist Supporting
NATO ‘Allies’”?
We are a globalist open borders and mass immigration nation. We stand for nothing. To serve in this nation’s military is very
stupid. You aren’t defending anything. You are just a tool of globalism. Again, we don’t secure our borders. That’s a very big
give away to what’s going on.
If our nation’s military really was an American military concerned with our security we would have secured our border after 9/11,
reduced all immigration, deported ALL muslims, and that’s it. Just secure the borders and expel Muslims! That’s all we needed
to do.
Instead we killed so many people and imported many many more Muslims! And we call this compassion. Its insane.
Maybe if Talibans get back in power they will destroy the opium. You know, like they did when they were first in power…. It seems
that wherever Americans get involved, drugs follow…
“Yet, we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very
structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether
sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.” In Eisenhower’s televised farewell address January 17, 1961.
Rational thought would lead one to believe such words from a fellow with his credentials would have had a useful effect. But it
didn’t. In point of fact, in the likes of Eric Prince and his supporters the notion of war as a profit center is quite literally
a family affair.
The military-industrial complex couldn’t accomplish this all by its lonesome self. The deep state was doing its thing. The two
things overlap but aren’t the same. The deep state is not only or mainly about business profits, but about power. Power in the
world means empire, which requires a military-industrial complex but is not reducible to it.
We now have a rare opportunity to unveil the workings of the deep state, but it will require a special counsel, and a lengthy
written report, on the doings in the 2016 election of the FBI (Comey, Strzok, et. al.), and collaterally the CIA and DIA (Brennan
and Clapper). Also the British government (M-16), John McCain, and maybe Bush and Obama judges on the FISA courts.
House Oversight Committee members will decide Tuesday whether to subpoena senior Trump
administration officials over a whistleblower's claim. The issue is top-level security
clearances, including those for the president's daughter, Ivanka, and her husband, Jared
Kushner, who are both presidential advisers. Paula Reid reports.
The issuance of security clearances is an executive agency function controlled by
executive order and entirely within the discretion of the president. Trump isn't violating
anything if he overrides a lower level determination on a security clearance since the entire
function of issuing a security clearance stems from his own constitutional authority. The
whole idea around security clearances is that the president has people in executive agencies
that he can trust. He can trust his own daughter and son-in-law, even if some woman in the
clearance department thinks otherwise.
I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a
man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's. Mark Twain
Jared Kushner is the in-law that Trump calls "his son," he's has a similar back story to the
President elect. But who is the man touted for a big role in the new administration? Subscribe
to us and get more videos from Channel 4 News Subscribe for more: bit.ly/LtASif.
Jared Kushner has allegedly been peddling his Trump White House credentials to influence
foreign policy in an attempt to save his sinking real estate business.
Former Watergate prosecutor Richard Ben-Veniste tells CBC The Weekly's Wendy Mesley the
Trump administration seems to lack any 'normative behaviour.'
US neocons motto as expressed by Ledeen, who was involved with CIA & overthrow of Allende : "Every ten years or so, the United States
needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business". ..."
The US foreign policy is defined by interests of neoliberals and neocons, or to be exact by interests of multinational corporations,
who are not necessary led by Jews ;-). The whole discussion of the US foreign policy via the lens of Jew/non-Jew dichotomy is far from
the best approach to this problem.
While it is true that a large number of neocons end even some "economic nationalists" like Steve Bannon identify with Israel. But
the real allegiance of neocons is not to Israel. It is to many from American MIC. In this sense, neither chickenhawk Michael
Ledeen (a second rate figure at best, without much political influence), no chickenhawk Bill Kristol (third rate figure, with little
or no political influence at all), but Senator McCain and Dick Cheney are proper examples of really dangerous neocons.
Yes, neocons has a large, sometimes decisive influence on the US foreign policy. But this is because they are neoliberals with the
gun, political prostitutes serving MIC interests, not so much because some of them are "Israel-firsters"
(this term is not without problems,
although it denotes Jewish nationalists pretty well, see an interesting discussion in
The Volokh Conspiracy )
Notable quotes:
"... Netanyahu is making an alliance with even the anti-Semitic Western alt-right, with the instinct to show all other Jews that Israel is their only home & safe haven ..."
"... I suppose Ledeen still believes what he said fifteen years ago, when the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were still young and dewy-fresh: "Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business". ..."
"... This even became known as "The Ledeen Doctrine"; I am sure he is very proud. ..."
"... Perhaps today he thinks Iran is a suitable "small crappy little country". If so, he is very badly mistaken. Ledeen was involved with CIA & overthrow of Allende, I believe. I refer you to Louis Wolfe's "Counterspy," the magazine of the 1970′s. ..."
"... Hostility toward Iran (and imperialism generally) is deeply rooted in the American foreign policy establishment (which isn't close to being all or mostly Jewish), and can't be explained by naive WASPs being manipulated by clever Jews. ..."
"... Of course, the Israel Lobby is much bigger than just jews, and stupid American Christians manipulated by their church leaders into believing fatuous ideas about Israel based upon dubiously interpreted biblical nonsense has historically provided a lot of its political clout. ..."
"... The Jewish individuals named by Giraldi still massively disproportionately dominate the foreign policy media and political debate on ME wars, and the wealthy Jewish Israel supporters mentioned by him still massively disproportionately influence who gets heard and which opinions are suppressed and which promoted. ..."
"... I think solidarity and internationalism are the best weapons against militarism and imperialism. ..."
"... You'd be on the right track if you started paying attention to the central American goal since 1945 of keeping Middle Eastern oil in the hands of obedient governments within the American orbit, so it can serve as a non-Russian/non-Soviet, American-controlled source of energy for American allies (and economic competitors) in Europe and Japan. ..."
"... Anyway, the American public has shown many times that it really doesn't give a rat's ass about foreigners being killed or maimed - not three of them, not three million of them. Foreigners might as well be bugs. What really matters is that feeling of power and superiority: their country is Top Nation and can whip anyone else, yes sir. Politicians continually rely on that undercurrent of nationalist chuavinism, and it never lets them down. ..."
"... A courageous article and spot on. Once again I'm thankful for Ron Unz and the Unz Review. You would never read such an article in the MSM. ..."
"... So now US troops are suddenly bombing "ISIS" in Syria while supplying "rebels" with arms, even though by the CIA's own admission most of the arms supplied have fallen into the hands of ISIS since the rebels joined forces with them. ..."
"... Nikki Haley might as well be renamed Israel's ambassador to the UN. Every time that daft woman opens her mouth the US is in danger of going to war with somebody, usually on behalf of Israel. ..."
"... There's a place for using the term "Zionist" and a place for using the term "Jew" (the two are most certainly not interchangeable). The wider Zionist Israel Lobby in the US is certainly a big problem, but there is also the problem of Jewish nationalists being disproportionately represented in the US foreign policy, media and political elites, while their likely nationalist ulterior motives are not mentioned and are largely unnoticed because of the prevailing taboo against mentioning it.. ..."
"... Bill Kristol appearing on c-span to push, agitate for the 2nd Iraq war was asked by a caller if he had served in the (U.S.) military. Kristol said he had not served but had a friend(s) who had and that he served in other ways. When a country drafts into the military, can one get out of service by saying, "My friend served"? ..."
"... I supported and voted for Trump as well. I don't like his neocon turn now, but which candidate in that election (save for Rand Paul and possibly Jill Stein) wouldn't have declared a non-fly zone in Syria and actively supported the overthrow of Assad? ..."
"... Bernie Sanders (a scary Jew!) wasn't nearly as anti-imperialist as I would have liked him to be, but I doubt he would have attacked Assad regime forces 6 times like Trump has by this point, and certainly not without Congressional approval (which he probably wouldn't have gotten, even if he had wanted it). ..."
"... Even under Hillary, the Iran deal would have stood a better chance, since she was at least verbally committed to it (unlike even Rand Paul), and there would have been Obama loyalists within the Clinton administration who would have been desperate to preserve Obama's signature foreign policy achievement (and one of the only worthwhile ones, in my opinion, along with restoration of diplomatic ties with Cuba). ..."
"... How is the article's factual content fundamentally different from the similar content of the Haaretz article linked by Greg Bacon in post 21 above? Is the Haaretz piece "unhinged and bigoted"? ..."
"... "The USA is a colony of Israel". Fake News Story. Now, let us assume that to be true. What are personally doing about this situation? What active measures are you taking to free yourself from the shackles of your oppressor? Or, are simply impotent while taking it good and hard? ..."
@Brabantian
Yet, in a classic, paradox-tinged pro-Israel loop-back, the 'alt-Right' and 'white nationalist' movement, is increasing positive
links with security-fence-building, also-ethnic-nationalist Israel:
US alt-right leader, Richard Spencer, appeared on Israeli TV last month to call himself a "white Zionist"
The above from an interesting
article by British activist and Nazareth, Palestine resident Jonathan Cook , speaking of how Israel's Netanyahu is making
an alliance with even the anti-Semitic Western alt-right, with the instinct to show all other Jews that Israel is their only home
& safe haven ... and hence the 'progressive' Jews should abandon any support for boycott of Israel or for Palestinian rights:
The Israeli prime minister has repeatedly called on all Jews to come to Israel, claiming it as the only safe haven from an
immutable global anti-semitism. And yet, Mr Netanyahu is also introducing a political test before he opens the door.
Jews supporting a boycott of Israel are already barred. Now, liberal Jews and critics of the occupation like Mr Soros are
increasingly not welcome either. Israel is rapidly redefining the extent of the sanctuary it offers – for Jewish supremacists
only.
For Mr Netanyahu may believe he has much to gain by abandoning liberal Jews to their fate, as the alt-right asserts its
power in western capitals.
The "white Zionists" are committed to making life ever harder for minorities in the West in a bid to be rid of them. Sooner
or later, on Mr Netanyahu's logic, liberal Jews will face a reckoning. They will have to accept that Israel's ultra-nationalists
were right all along, and that Israel is their only sanctuary.
Guided by this cynical convergence of interests, Jewish and white supremacists are counting on a revival of anti-Semitism
that will benefit them both.
Yet, in a classic, paradox-tinged pro-Israel loop-back, the 'alt-Right' and 'white nationalist' movement, is increasing
positive links with security-fence-building, also-ethnic-nationalist Israel
Steve Bannon and his supposed alt-right rag Breitbart are incredibly pro-Israel. I supposed it has something to do with its
founder Andrew Breitbart being a Jew. Every time Trump or Nikki Haley says something nasty about Iran, you'll get plenty of Breitbart
commenters echoing their sentiment egging them on, you can tell by their inane comments many have no idea why they should hate
Iran, other than Breitbart told them to.
They've fully bought into the Breitbart narrative that Iran is evil and must be destroyed. The Trump fan boys/girls who continue
to blindly support him despite all his betrayals are every bit as stupid as the libtards they claim to hate.
@Tom Welsh
"And I would add a few more names, Mark Dubowitz, Michael Ledeen and Reuel Marc Gerecht..."
I suppose Ledeen still believes what he said fifteen years ago, when the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were still young
and dewy-fresh: "Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against
the wall, just to show the world we mean business".
This even became known as "The Ledeen Doctrine"; I am sure he is very proud.
Perhaps today he thinks Iran is a suitable "small crappy little country". If so, he is very badly mistaken. Ledeen was
involved with CIA & overthrow of Allende, I believe. I refer you to Louis Wolfe's "Counterspy," the magazine of the 1970′s.
I didn't say there weren't any Jews pushing for a war with Iran, I said there are plenty of non-Jews pushing for one too, including
Trump himself.
Which certainly doesn't mean there isn't a particular problem, exactly as Giraldi describes it with plenty of sound supporting
examples, of dual loyalty jews pushing wars that favour Israel.
In fact, the reality is that Giraldi might be guilty of, at most, overstatement, but since a large part of the problem is precisely
that any reference at all to the problem is suppressed, one might expect an honest opponent of the US's military interventionism
to temper his criticism of Giraldi's piece appropriately. For whatever reason, instead, you seem to feel the need to hysterically
accuse it as though it contains no truth whatsoever.
What gives?
Hostility toward Iran (and imperialism generally) is deeply rooted in the American foreign policy establishment (which
isn't close to being all or mostly Jewish), and can't be explained by naive WASPs being manipulated by clever Jews.
Of course, the Israel Lobby
is much bigger than just jews, and stupid American Christians manipulated by their church leaders into believing fatuous ideas
about Israel based upon dubiously interpreted biblical nonsense has historically provided a lot of its political clout.
That's another problem, but it doesn't make the problem highlighted by Giraldi not a problem. The Jewish individuals named
by Giraldi still massively disproportionately dominate the foreign policy media and political debate on ME wars, and the wealthy
Jewish Israel supporters mentioned by him still massively disproportionately influence who gets heard and which opinions are suppressed
and which promoted.
"What gives" is that I think lunatic screeds about "America's Jews" (like Noam Chomsky?) manipulating foreign policy do damage
to the anti-war cause. I think solidarity and internationalism are the best weapons against militarism and imperialism.
Of course, the Israel Lobby is much bigger than just Jews, and stupid American Christians manipulated by their church leaders
into believing fatuous ideas about Israel based upon dubiously interpreted biblical nonsense has historically provided a lot
of its political clout.
That's slightly better than the 1-dimensional Joo-paranoia, but it doesn't begin to describe the problem.
You'd be on the right track if you started paying attention to the central American goal since 1945 of keeping Middle Eastern
oil in the hands of obedient governments within the American orbit, so it can serve as a non-Russian/non-Soviet, American-controlled
source of energy for American allies (and economic competitors) in Europe and Japan.
I am glad you think Iran isn't stupid or suicidal. Yet it doesn't square with your earlier statement which reads " I'm glad
they have the capability, if need be, to destroy the hostile military bases that encircle them ". There are no scenarios in
which Iran could destroy US bases without changing the meaning of the word "suicidal", is there?
Before you decide to label as sociopath, anyone who proposes a worldview grounded in reality, you might think long and hard
about the multitude of paths this world can take under the scenario of a wholesale withdrawal of U.S. presence in the Gulf. Most
one hears on this forum, including your own, reduce to precious nothing over virtue signaling.
Like it or not the world is never going to assume the shape of a collection of nations equal in power, interests and endowments.
Hoping for that is to live in a state of delusion.
U.S. does not wish to go on an offensive mission against Iran . Far from it; yet facilitating her allies' aspirations
to join the American vision isn't one we are about to walk away from. That is not chest beating. It is eminently in evidence from
the number of nations wishing to join the Western economic and cultural model. I am keenly aware of the lunatics on this forum
who believe they'd be perfectly happy to embrace other cultures, I can only invite them to make haste.
Spare me the rest of your sanctimony.
"I'm glad they have the capability, if need be, to destroy the hostile military bases that encircle them". There are no
scenarios in which Iran could destroy US bases without changing the meaning of the word "suicidal", is there?
In the case of a defensive war with United States, there sure would be. At that point Iran would not have much hope but to
inflict as much damage as possible on the aggressor. Although Iran does not nearly have the ability to fully reciprocate the harm
the US can inflict on it, it hopefully has the capability to inflict enough damage so that an offensive war against it would be
intolerable to the US. That's how deterrence works.
U.S. does not wish to go on an offensive mission against Iran.
If that's true, and I sincerely hope it is, it's because Iran has sufficient deterrent capacity, which includes not only the
anti-ship missiles in the Gulf, but also Hezbollah's arsenal of ~130,000 short, medium and long-range rockets capable of reaching
every square inch of Israeli territory.
Believe me, I'm a realist. You don't have to lecture me on the reality of aggressive rogue nations.
@Tom Welsh
Nope. As far as I know, he was being perfectly serious.
And that is exactly the way the power elite think - although they are usually much more cautious about speaking their mind
in public.
Anyway, the American public has shown many times that it really doesn't give a rat's ass about foreigners being killed
or maimed - not three of them, not three million of them. Foreigners might as well be bugs. What really matters is that feeling
of power and superiority: their country is Top Nation and can whip anyone else, yes sir. Politicians continually rely on that
undercurrent of nationalist chuavinism, and it never lets them down.
Anyway, the American public has shown many times that it really doesn't give a rat's ass about foreigners being killed or
maimed – not three of them, not three million of them. Foreigners might as well be bugs. What really matters is that feeling
of power and superiority: their country is Top Nation and can whip anyone else, yes sir.
True words sir!
The evil empire sustains itself primarily through this attitude of its people. It does not matter how the Jews connive to shape
it. Only thing that matters is that they buy into it without exercising their conscience.
Americans, remember, such glory has a cost. You will find soon enough that a cancerous soul is too high a price to be "Top
Nation," for essentially a blink in cosmic time.
A courageous article and spot on. Once again I'm thankful for Ron Unz and the Unz Review. You would never read such an
article in the MSM.
The late Samuel Huntington said in his amazing book Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order that Saudi
Arabia and Iran are fighting for supremacy in the Islamic world. Syria is a proxy war between the two countries. Now Israel has
become BFF with Saudi Arabia because they too want a piece of Syria, for the oil reserve in the Golan Heights. So now US troops
are suddenly bombing "ISIS" in Syria while supplying "rebels" with arms, even though by the CIA's own admission most of the arms
supplied have fallen into the hands of ISIS since the rebels joined forces with them.
Make no mistake Jews and Arabs run this country. That is why Trump went to Israel and SA for his first foreign trip, he knows
who America's daddy is, even if most Americans are still in the dark.
His entire administration is crawling with Israel loving Jews, starting with his son-in-law the most loyal son of Israel. Even
Steve Bannon and Breitbart are crazy gung ho pro-Israel. Nikki Haley might as well be renamed Israel's ambassador to the UN.
Every time that daft woman opens her mouth the US is in danger of going to war with somebody, usually on behalf of Israel.
When was the last time Iran conducted a jihad against the west? All the Muslim terrorists now attacking the west are Sunnis,
funded by Saudi Arabia. The only time Iran had direct armed conflict with the US was when they kicked us out of Tehran, for trying
to steal their oil. All their beef is with Israel, not with the US. Why are we taking up Israel's cause? Trump is a moron of the
first order and has no understanding of what really goes on in the mideast. He surrounds himself with pro-Israel neocons and Jews
and is easily manipulated. He's stupid and dangerous. I voted for him because he presented himself as someone completely different,
someone anti-war and anti-immigration, now he's a neocon globalist libtard, the worst of all worlds. Someone needs to primary
him out in 2020.
Speaking of unhinged I'd say the sentiment that America has the right to threaten and/or attack other countries to maintain
its "economic interests" is sociopathic. What would you call it? And I didn't say that he personally was in charge of US/Israeli/Saudi
policy towards Iran, if that's what you thought I meant. That would be unhinged. I just said that sociopaths like him
are.
@KBRO [In
comments, allcaps is shouting. Stop shouting or your comments will be trashed.]
RE:
BUSH-CHENEY-CLINTON-TRUMP--MCMASTER--KELLY---AND THE LOT OF THEM ALL AIN'T JEWS:
WELL PUT. GIRALDI IS A MIXED BAG, WRITES SOME GOOD STUFF, BUT IT MISIDENTIFIES THE PROBLEM--THE ENEMY-- BY LABELING IT AS "THE
JEWS". THE NEO-CONS--AND NEO-LIBERALS--WHO DRIVE U.S. FOREIGN POLICY IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND THROUGHOUT THE WORLD COME IN MANY
FLAVORS.
I'M AN ANTI-ZIONIST, AND IT'S CRUCIAL TO MAKE THAT DISTINCTION AND I DON'T QUITE GET WHY GIRALDI DOESN'T USE THE TERM ZIONIST.
IT'S CRUCIAL TO MAKE THAT DISTINCTION AND I DON'T QUITE GET WHY GIRALDI DOESN'T USE THE TERM ZIONIST
There's a place for using the term "Zionist" and a place for using the term "Jew" (the two are most certainly not interchangeable).
The wider Zionist Israel Lobby in the US is certainly a big problem, but there is also the problem of Jewish nationalists being
disproportionately represented in the US foreign policy, media and political elites, while their likely nationalist ulterior motives
are not mentioned and are largely unnoticed because of the prevailing taboo against mentioning it..
Giraldi is discussing the latter and not the former, and doing a service to the American nation by his taboo-busting.
I wonder where Mr. Giraldi would put David Horowitz on the list? Although Horowitz is not a public policy maker, but rather
an author and blogger, but definitely is a known Jewish voice. I respect Horowitz tremendously because of his background as an
ex-Communist and his dead-on criticism of the American Left, both historically and currently. Although rather knee-jerk in his
defense of Israel, I would not doubt his loyalty to this country one iota.
I do not know if David Horowitz is a dual Israeli-American citizen, but he is not a legislator nor a government policy maker,
so as far as I am concerned, the issue is moot. If one questions the loyalty to America, of Jews or any other group for that matter,
the issue of holding dual citizenship while holding certain government offices should be something of concern. Once out of public
office or service, then they can resume their dual citizenship. It makes the issue of loyalty less questionable.
Bill Kristol appearing on c-span to push, agitate for the 2nd Iraq war was asked by a caller if he had served in the (U.S.)
military. Kristol said he had not served but had a friend(s) who had and that he served in other ways. When a country drafts into
the military, can one get out of service by saying, "My friend served"?
reckon his serving in other ways was/is lying and pushing for wars for his real country israel. Truth hurts, America.
Of the 58,220 Americans who were sacrificed during the Vietnam War, 270 were Jewish. That's approximately 0.46 percent or less
than a half of one-percent.
Guess they were too busy partying in college, while pursuing their law degrees.
During the Vietnam war the U.S. selective service system gave deferments to those attending college, which delayed their eligibility
for conscription.
"Among partners of the top law firms in New York, I estimate that at least 25% are Jews."
@matt I
didn't say there weren't any Jews pushing for a war with Iran, I said there are plenty of non-Jews pushing for one too, including
Trump himself. Hostility toward Iran (and imperialism generally) is deeply rooted in the American foreign policy establishment
(which isn't close to being all or mostly Jewish), and can't be explained by naive WASPs being manipulated by clever Jews. It's
not just bigoted, it's a cartoonishly stupid "explanation".
I didn't say there weren't any Jews pushing for a war with Iran, I said there are plenty of non-Jews pushing for one too,
including Trump himself.
Which certainly doesn't mean there isn't a particular problem, exactly as Giraldi describes it with plenty of sound supporting
examples, of dual loyalty jews pushing wars that favour Israel.
In fact, the reality is that Giraldi might be guilty of, at most, overstatement, but since a large part of the problem is precisely
that any reference at all to the problem is suppressed, one might expect an honest opponent of the US's military interventionism
to temper his criticism of Giraldi's piece appropriately. For whatever reason, instead, you seem to feel the need to hysterically
accuse it as though it contains no truth whatsoever.
What gives?
Hostility toward Iran (and imperialism generally) is deeply rooted in the American foreign policy establishment (which isn't
close to being all or mostly Jewish), and can't be explained by naive WASPs being manipulated by clever Jews.
Of course, the Israel Lobby is
much bigger than just jews, and stupid American Christians manipulated by their church leaders into believing fatuous ideas about
Israel based upon dubiously interpreted biblical nonsense has historically provided a lot of its political clout.
That's another problem, but it doesn't make the problem highlighted by Giraldi not a problem. The jewish individuals named
by Giraldi still massively disproportionately dominate the foreign policy media and political debate on ME wars, and the wealthy
jewish Israel supporters mentioned by him still massively disproportionately influence who gets heard and which opinions are suppressed
and which promoted.
@matt I'm
strongly against any war with Iran, but this comes of as an unhinged and bigoted rant. Not nearly everyone who is pushing for
war with Iran is Jewish, and this narrative perpetuates the myth, beloved by alt-right types and paleocons, of a well-intentioned
but naive Trump administration that was hijacked by Jewish neocons. In reality, despite differences within the administration,
Iran was always something they could all agree on. H.R. McMaster and James Mattis are well known Iran hawks, and neither are Jewish.
Nikki Haley isn't Jewish, nor is Rex Tillerson. Steve Bannon and Michael Flynn wouldn't have stopped Trump from going to war if
they hadn't been forced out of the administration, as both, especially the latter, were absolute lunatics when it came to Iran.
On that subject, they were worse than neocons. And of course there's Trump himself, whose bloodlust regarding Iran has always
been on full display from the beginning, if you were paying attention. Hostility toward Iran might in fact be the most consistent
theme of the Trump administration and of Trump himself, who has been known to vacillate on virtually every issue, except this
one.
If you supported Trump because you thought he might be some sort of isolationist dove, you have only yourself to blame. Evil
Jewish neocons didn't force you to ignore the massive evidence that was always right in front of your face. The fact that there
are so many who profess to the Christian faith, who are as evil as those Joo neocons, such as those you mentioned, simply cannot
be denied. Even if hypothetically speaking the Joos were to vanish overnight, the wars of aggression by the Evil Empire will continue
unabated.
The Evil Empire and its Evil b!tch both share the same satanic vision of world domination. Two evil nations, made for each
other, in a match made in Hell.
Btw, the orange scumbag was hilariously evil at the UN.
Both N.Korea and Iran should simply call this bastard's bluff, by literally giving him the finger. I say, let the chips fall
where they may. Let's see how the American, Japanese, S.Korean, Israeli & "Royal" pussies like the consequences.
To you N.Koreans, its been written that you will target the thousands of American Terrorists stationed in the south. I am counting
on that, so don't you miss chaps.
They should. If Raimondo starts blaming the Jews, he can avoid taking responsibility for his idiotic and embarrassing cheerleading
for the current warmonger-in-chief.
I supported and voted for Trump as well. I don't like his neocon turn now, but which candidate in that election (save for
Rand Paul and possibly Jill Stein) wouldn't have declared a non-fly zone in Syria and actively supported the overthrow of Assad?
And started plans for attacking Iran? Who? Hillary? Hahahaha. Ted Cruz? Hahahaha. Etc.
Bernie Sanders (a scary Jew!) wasn't nearly as anti-imperialist as I would have liked him to be, but I doubt he would have
attacked Assad regime forces 6 times like Trump has by this point, and certainly not without Congressional approval (which he
probably wouldn't have gotten, even if he had wanted it).
Even under Hillary, the Iran deal would have stood a better chance, since she was at least verbally committed to it (unlike
even Rand Paul), and there would have been Obama loyalists within the Clinton administration who would have been desperate to
preserve Obama's signature foreign policy achievement (and one of the only worthwhile ones, in my opinion, along with restoration
of diplomatic ties with Cuba).
If an article titled "America's Jews are Behind America's Wars" isn't unhinged and bigoted, I'd like you to tell me what
is.
How is the article's factual content fundamentally different from the similar content of the Haaretz article linked by Greg
Bacon in post 21 above? Is the Haaretz piece "unhinged and bigoted"?
Or is it not the statement of the facts that you are outraged by, but merely the proposed solutions? If so, then what solutions
to the problem identified by Giraldi and by Haaretz would you propose?
If Trump's insane rhetoric on Iran and push for war isn't an example of bloodlust, why don't you tell me what it is?
Good examples might be the desperate attempts to prevent the deal with Iran that hopefully will prove to have cauterised the longstanding
efforts to use the spurious nuclear weapons issue to push the US towards confrontation and war with Iran:
Or when Israel's primary agents of political influence in the US went "all out" to try to get the US to attack Syria and hand
yet another country to (even more) jihadist-ridden chaos:
But hey, I suppose for you those are just more examples of "unhingedness" and "bigotedness".
It must be strange living in the world you inhabit, so far removed from basic reality by a desperate need to avoid being seen
as any kind of badwhite. I didn't say there weren't any Jews pushing for a war with Iran, I said there are plenty of non-Jews
pushing for one too, including Trump himself. Hostility toward Iran (and imperialism generally) is deeply rooted in the American
foreign policy establishment (which isn't close to being all or mostly Jewish), and can't be explained by naive WASPs being manipulated
by clever Jews. It's not just bigoted, it's a cartoonishly stupid "explanation".
@Sam Shama
They can certainly try, and, I suppose you'd require the U.S. to stay her hand as a matter of fair principle while watching said
bases destroyed. Nice idea, but I'd stick to reality. U.S. has vast interests, including economic ones; those which benefit every
U.S. citizen, and, to be practical, all her allies. Iran isn't stupid or suicidal. Its anti-ship missiles are for deterrence,
which Iran has plenty of need for, as sociopaths like you populate the American, Israeli, and Saudi governments and are itching
to attack.
@WJ Outside
of an almost symbolic launch of cruise missiles into Syria in April, how has Trump been a warmonger?
I remember the debate between Pence and the hideous Tim Kaine where the Democrat vowed that there would be No Fly Zone over
Syria which would certainly have allowed the head chopping rebels to gain a stronger foothold.
In addition to all that, Trump has also cut off aid to the Syrian rebels. His Afghanistan policy /escalation is also symbolic.
US troops won't be in direct combat and there will only be 15000 there anyway.
Outside of an almost symbolic launch of cruise missiles into Syria in April, how has Trump been a warmonger?
You haven't been paying attention. Since the initial strike in April, the Trump administration has deliberately attacked regime
or allied forces an additional five times. (
one
,
two ,
three , four ,
five ).
Including the Tomahawks in April, that's a total of 6 deliberate attacks on the Syrian Arab Republic or its allies (so far),
which is already 6 more than Obama carried out during his entire presidency. And it's not like this is the end of Trump's tenure,
either; it's the 9th goddamn month since he's been in office. I'm sure the war hawks in Wahington are quite pleased with his progress,
as they should be.
In addition to all that, Trump has also cut off aid to the Syrian rebels. His Afghanistan policy /escalation is also symbolic.
Anyone could tell by that point that Assad isn't going to be overthrown. The aim now is to limit the Assad regime's territorial
gains as much as possible, and the "rebels" proved they were useless at doing that when Shia militia reached the Iraqi border
at al-Tanf, and cut them off from reaching Deir ez-Zor back in May (which was what one of the attacks mentioned above was about).
After that, the Trump administration put all its eggs in the "Syrian Democratic Forces/People's Protection Units (SDF/YPG)
basket, the mainly Kurdish (with some Arab fighters) militia that the US has been using to fight ISIS since 2015 (it's also, ironically,
a hard left socialist organization. Think Kurdish Antifa. Though I doubt Trump knows or cares or could do anything about it even
if he did). Trump has given the SDF <a title=""
https://sputniknews.com/amp/middleeast/201709141057402885-america-weaponry-deir-ez-zor/"
; https://sputniknews.com/amp/middleeast/201709141057402885-america-weaponry-deir-ez-zor/"
;heavy weaponry with the aim of confronting Assad and limiting his territorial gains. They've also been pressuring the rebel groups
they formerly supported to join the SDF.
I have sympathy for the SDF/YPG and the Syrian Kurds, and it made sense to support them when they were under direct assault
from ISIS (though US motives were hardly altruistic even then). But ISIS is all but beaten now, and this is a dangerous game the
US is playing, which could readily lead to a military confrontation betweeen the US and Russia and/or Iran. In fact, just a few
days ago, the SDF seized part of Deir ez-Zor after SAA forces reached the city, and the Pentagon is now accusing Russia
(which has in the past at least had
good
relations with the SDF/YPG), of deliberately bombing SDF fighters, in close proximity to American special forces.
US troops won't be in direct combat and there will only be 15000 there anyway.
Only 15,000! I guess you wouldn't mind, then, if they Taliban, or the Afghan Army for that matter, or any other country,
put 15,000 troops on American soil, as a "symbolic" gesture.
Trump has also accelerated US collaboration in the sadistic torture of Yemen by the Saudis, past the levels under even Obama,
which was already shameful.
And again, we should also keep in mind that it's only been 9 months. For his next act, Trump might be thinking about
ending the Iran deal in October.
@Thomm Jews
are white. Ashkenazi Jews, and those are the ones we are mainly dealing with, are an endogamous caste of bankers, progressive
journalists, lawyers, and social scientists (including, now, education), that have migrated all over Europe, but never identifying
as European, with exceptions that prove the rule.
As a tribe, once can read Kevin MacDonald's work to see how they work in remarkable ethnic cohesion–not necessarily as an "organized
conspiracy" (though that certainly happens), but as an ethnic drive.
Being neither European as such, nor Christian, and although their skin is white, they are not White.
Dual loyalty is an avoided and career-ending subject for a couple reasons. One must never, ever, criticize Jews (a third rail
at complete odds with) and one may not criticize immigrants' behavior.
The obvious problem is Treason. Just how much Treason is the result of so-called "dual loyalty"? And isn't Treason subject
to some rather serious legal sanctions?
I just want to point out, being a (fake) "news" consumer, I hear about Israel all the time, all while not hearing a lot of
follow-up detail about Israel and its interests. Isn't that a clever sleight of hand? According to the pro-Israel (by extension
jews) propaganda I'm required to care about, despite it having nothing to do with my life, my family's life, my neighbors' lives,
and my community's lives Israel is that big of a deal. Actually, I hear more about Israel in the media than I hear about my home
state of Michigan. Michigan is probably a lot more important to the US economy, US security, US tourism industry, Midwestern industrial
technology industry, US engineering industry, and the Midwestern Farming economy, than Israel is. Then there are the people who
live here, who are Americans. Israel first, then Americans? Okay, got it.
If the public were exposed to as much emotionally captivating propaganda about Michigan as they were about Israel, I'd posit
the public would see a far better investment in Michigan than they would in Israel. That includes an emotional investment.
I don't know what can be politely said or how it would shape up, but Midwesterners desperately need to understand the Israel
(by extension jewish) problem. They're bleeding us and getting away with it, all while getting away with incessantly calling us
racists and anti-semites. Because again, caring about Michigan and its people first is just morally irreprehensible. Israel first,
then Israel second, etc Got it bigot? That sleight of hand, it's just always there. I don't fully grasp how this large scale agit-prop
psychology works. I do understand jewish solidarity. I'll hand it to jews, they have the strongest ethnic/religious/cultural solidarity
I've ever seen. If Midwesterners realized the value of this level of solidarity, they wouldn't enlist their sons in the military
to serve jewish interests overseas.
From Money Manipulation And Social Order (Dublin: Browne and Nolan, 1944) by Fr. Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp., Professor of
Philosophy and Church History, Holy Ghost Missionary College, Dublin:
When the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States, created in 1913 by Mr. Paul Warburg, a German Jew belonging to the
Banking Firm of Kuhn, Loeb and Company, had been a few years in existence, in 1916 to be precise, President Woodrow Wilson
thus summed up the situation in U.S.A.: "A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit
is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. . .
We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized
world!no longer a Government by conviction and the free vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of
small groups of dominant men." From the similar testimonies quoted by Christopher Hollis in The Two Nations, let us take one.
"Behind the ostensible government," ran Roosevelt's policy, " sits enthroned an invisible government owning no allegiance and
acknowledging no responsibility to the people."
Anyone who reads knows that Israel (and its agents, where not dual citizens, the Jewish ones effectively all are, and the
goyim dupes and toadies, who are not, 'cept sometimes with marriage) have been the tail that wags the US dog for many years,
starting over a century ago, in finance, commerce, and law in NYC, in a small way the scope is ever wider and the effects more
and more blatant.
The USA is a colony of Israel, everybody is knowing it, but some lie and deny.
From my reading of history, I would placing the tipping point from 'excessive power' to 'colonial masters' at the 1967 war
of Israel and its neighbours.
Others may dating it to the end of the Third Reich, with all sorts of Jewish DPs and US Jews who had never seen combat running
around in US military and MP uniforms to persecuting and killing Germans, under the command of Eisenhauer, the Morgenthau plan,
etc.
Others may picking a different time.
It is funny that you are posting as Anonymous on this, can only mean that you are a more subtle pro-Israel troll with your
usual u-name. "So it is safe to say that much of the agitation to do something about Iran comes from Israel and from American
Jews."
Certainly SOME Israelis and American Jews are involved in developing policy designed to generate hostility to the point of
potential war.
But Dick Cheney and Erik Prince, among other prominent non-Jews, bear mentioning.
Regardless, the Jew fixation here is duly noted. Boo! Goes the Joo!
"The USA is a colony of Israel". Fake News Story. Now, let us assume that to be true. What are personally doing about this
situation? What active measures are you taking to free yourself from the shackles of your oppressor? Or, are simply impotent while
taking it good and hard?
It's somehow absurd and trivial to use the word Israel and the expression 60 th birthday
in the same sentence or the same breath. (What is this, some candle-bedecked ceremony in Miami?) The questions before us are
somewhat more antique, and also a little more pressingly and urgently modern, than that. Has Zionism made Jews more safe or less
safe? Has it cured the age-old problem of anti-Semitism or not? Is it part of the tikkun olam -the mandate for the healing and repair of
the human world-or is it another rent and tear in the fabric? Jewish people are on all sides of this argument, as always. There are
Hasidic rabbis who declare the Jewish state to be a blasphemy, but only because there can be no such state until the arrival of the
Messiah (who may yet tarry). There are Jewish leftists who feel shame that a settler state was erected on the ruins of so many Palestinian
villages. There are also Jews who collaborate with extreme-conservative Christians in an effort to bring on the day of Armageddon,
when all these other questions will necessarily become moot. And, of course, there are Jews who simply continue to live in, or to
support from a distance, a nerve-racked and high-tech little state that absorbs a lot of violence and cruelty and that has also shown
itself very capable of inflicting the same.
I find that no other question so much reminds me of F. Scott Fitzgerald and his
aphorism about the necessity of living with flat-out contradiction
. Do I sometimes wish that Theodor Herzl and Chaim Weizmann had never persuaded either the Jews or the gentiles to create a quasi-utopian
farmer-and-worker state at the eastern end of the Mediterranean? Yes. Do I wish that the Israeli air force could find and destroy
all the arsenals of Hezbollah and Hamas and Islamic Jihad? Yes. Do I think it ridiculous that Viennese and Russian and German scholars
and doctors should have vibrated to the mad rhythms of ancient so-called prophecies rather than helping to secularize and reform
their own societies? Definitely. Do I feel horror and disgust at the thought that a whole new generation of Arab Palestinians is
being born into the dispossession and/or occupation already suffered by their grandparents and even great-grandparents? Absolutely,
I do. The questions of principle and the matters of brute realism have a tendency (especially for one who does not think that heaven
plays any part in the game) to converge. Without God on your side, what the hell are you doing in the greater Jerusalem area in the
first place? Israel may not be the rogue state that so many people say it is-including so many people who will excuse the crimes
of Syria and Iran-but what if it runs the much worse risk of being a failed state? Here I must stop asking questions and simply and
honestly answer one. In many visits to the so-called Holy Land, I have never quite been able to imagine that a Jewish state in Palestine
will still be in existence a hundred years from now. A state for Jews, possibly. But a Jewish state Israeli propaganda for a long
time obscured this crucial distinction. If all that was wanted was a belt of Jewish territory on the coast and plains, such as that
which was occupied by the yishuv in pre-state
days, the international community could easily have agreed to place it within the defense perimeter of "the West" or the United Nations
or, later, NATO. Aha, say the Zionists, the bad old days are gone when we were so naive as to rely on gentiles to defend us. Very
well. But also mark the sequel. Israel is now incredibly dependent upon non-Jews for its own defense and, moreover, rules over millions
of other non-Jews who loathe and detest it from the bottom of their hearts. How long do you think the first set of non-Jews will
go on defending Israel from the second lot and from their very wealthy and numerous kinsmen? In other words, Zionism has only replaced
and repositioned the question of anti-Semitism. For me, the Israeli family is not the alternative to the diaspora. It is part
of the diaspora. To speak roughly, there are three groups of 6 million Jews. The first 6 million live in what the Zionist movement
used to call Palestine. The second 6 million live in the United States. The third 6 million are distributed mainly among Russia,
France, Britain, and Argentina. Only the first group lives daily in range of missiles that can be (and are) launched by people who
hate Jews. Well, irony is supposed to be a Jewish specialty. That last point, however, brings me to my own closing observation. It
is a moral idiot who thinks that anti-Semitism is a threat only to Jews. The history of civilization demonstrates something rather
different: Judaeophobia is an unfailing prognosis of barbarism and collapse, and the states and movements that promulgate it are
doomed to suicide as well as homicide, as was demonstrated by Catholic Spain as well as Nazi Germany. Today's Iranian "Islamic republic"
is a nightmare for its own citizens as well as a pestilential nuisance and menace to its neighbors. And the most depressing and wretched
spectacle of the past decade, for all those who care about democracy and secularism, has been the degeneration of Palestinian Arab
nationalism into the theocratic and thanatocratic hell of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, where the Web site of Gaza's ruling faction blazons
an endorsement of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion . This obscenity is not to be explained away by glib terms like
despair or occupation , as other religious fools like Jimmy Carter-who managed to meet the Hamas gangsters without
mentioning their racist manifesto-would have you believe. (Is Muslim-on-Muslim massacre in Darfur or Iraq or Pakistan or Lebanon
to be justified by conditions in Gaza?) Instead, this crux forces non-Zionists like me to ask whether, in spite of everything, Israel
should be defended as if it were a part of the democratic West. This is a question to which Israelis themselves have not yet returned
a completely convincing answer, and if they truly desire a 60 th , let alone a 70 th , birthday celebration,
they had better lose no time in coming up with one.
"... Central to the ideology of Zionism is the tale -- familiar to all Jewish families -- of exile, oppression, redemption and return. Booted from their kingdom, the "Jewish people" -- sons and daughters of ancient Judea -- wandered the earth, rootless, where they faced cruel suppression from all corners -- from being forced to toil in slavery under the Egyptians, to the Spanish massacres of the 14th century and Russian pogroms of the 19th, through to the horrors of the Third Reich. ..."
"... This view of history animates all Zionists, but none more so than the influential but reactionary minority -- in the United States as well as Israel -- who believe that God bestowed a "Greater Israel" -- one that encompasses the modern state as well as the Occupied Territories -- on the Jewish people, and who resist any effort to create a Palestinian state on biblical grounds. ..."
"... This narrative has huge significance in terms of Israel's national identity. If Judaism is a religion, rather than "a people" descended from a dispersed nation, then it brings into question the central justification for the state of Israel remaining a "Jewish state." ..."
What if the Palestinian Arabs who have lived for decades under the heel of the modern Israeli state are in fact descended from
the very same "children of Israel" described in the Old Testament?
And what if most modern Israelis aren't descended from the ancient Israelites at all, but are actually a mix of Europeans, North
Africans and others who didn't "return" to the scrap of land we now call Israel and establish a new state following the attempt to
exterminate them during World War II, but came in and forcefully displaced people whose ancestors had lived there for millennia?
What if the entire tale of the Jewish Diaspora -- the story recounted at Passover tables by Jews around the world every year detailing
the ancient Jews' exile from Judea, the years spent wandering through the desert, their escape from the Pharaoh's clutches -- is
all wrong?
That's the explosive thesis of When and How Was the Jewish People Invented? , a book by Tel Aviv University scholar Shlomo
Zand (or Sand) that sent shockwaves across Israeli society when it was published last year. After 19 weeks on the Israeli best-seller
list, the book is being translated into a dozen languages and will be published in the United States this year by Verso.
Its thesis has ramifications that go far beyond some antediluvian academic debate. Few modern conflicts are as attached to ancient
history as that decades-long cycle of bloodletting between Israelis and Palestinians. Each group lays claim to the same scrap of
land -- holy in all three of the world's major Abrahamic religions -- based on long-standing ties to that chunk of earth and national
identities formed over long periods of time. There's probably no other place on Earth where the present is as intimately tied to
the ancient.
Central to the ideology of Zionism is the tale -- familiar to all Jewish families -- of exile, oppression, redemption and return.
Booted from their kingdom, the "Jewish people" -- sons and daughters of ancient Judea -- wandered the earth, rootless, where they
faced cruel suppression from all corners -- from being forced to toil in slavery under the Egyptians, to the Spanish massacres of
the 14th century and Russian pogroms of the 19th, through to the horrors of the Third Reich.
This view of history animates all Zionists, but none more so than the influential but reactionary minority -- in the United States
as well as Israel -- who believe that God bestowed a "Greater Israel" -- one that encompasses the modern state as well as the Occupied
Territories -- on the Jewish people, and who resist any effort to create a Palestinian state on biblical grounds.
Inventing a People?
Zand's central argument is that the Romans didn't expel whole nations from their territories. Zand estimates that perhaps 10,000
ancient Judeans were vanquished during the Roman wars, and the remaining inhabitants of ancient Judea remained, converting to Islam
and assimilating with their conquerors when Arabs subjugated the area. They became the progenitors of today's Palestinian Arabs,
many of whom now live as refugees who were exiled from their homeland during the 20th century.
As Israeli journalist Tom Segev summarized, in a review of the book in Ha'aretz :
There never was a Jewish people, only a Jewish religion, and the exile also never happened -- hence there was no return. Zand
rejects most of the stories of national-identity formation in the Bible, including the exodus from Egypt and, most satisfactorily,
the horrors of the conquest under Joshua.
But this begs the question: if the ancient people of Judea weren't expelled en masse, then how did it come to pass that Jewish
people are scattered across the world? According to Zand, who offers detailed histories of several groups within what is conventionally
known as the Jewish Diaspora, some were Jews who emigrated of their own volition, and many more were later converts to Judaism. Contrary
to popular belief, Zand argues that Judaism was an evangelical religion that actively sought out new adherents during its formative
period.
This narrative has huge significance in terms of Israel's national identity. If Judaism is a religion, rather than "a people"
descended from a dispersed nation, then it brings into question the central justification for the state of Israel remaining a "Jewish
state."
And that brings us to Zand's second assertion. He argues that the story of the Jewish nation -- the transformation of the Jewish
people from a group with a shared cultural identity and religious faith into a vanquished "people" -- was a relatively recent invention,
hatched in the 19th century by Zionist scholars and advanced by the Israeli academic establishment. It was, argues Zand, an intellectual
conspiracy of sorts. Segev says, "It's all fiction and myth that served as an excuse for the establishment of the State of Israel."
Zand Gets Slammed; Do His Arguments Stand Up?
The ramifications of Zand's argument are far-reaching; "the chances that the Palestinians are descendants of the ancient Judaic
people are much greater than the chances that you or I are its descendants," he told Ha'aretz . Zand argues that Israel should
be a state in which all of the inhabitants of what was once "British Palestine" share the full rights and responsibilities of citizenship,
rather than maintaining it as a "Jewish and democratic" state, as it's now identified.
Predictably, Zand was pilloried according to the time-tested formula. Ami Isseroff,
writing on ZioNation , the Zionism-Israel
blog, invoked the customary Holocaust imagery, accusing Zand of offering a "final solution to the Jewish problem," one in which "No
auto da fe is required, no charging Cossacks are needed, no gas chambers, no smelly crematoria." Another
feverish ideologue called Zand's work "another manifestation
of mental disorder in the extreme academic Left in Israel."
Is this Dementia? Or arrogance? Or incompetence? Or all of them ?
Notable quotes:
"... "I said, 'Fellows, do me a favor. Give me a little history, quick. Want to go fast. I got a lot of things I'm working on: China, North Korea. Give me a quickie," Trump said to laughter from the Las Vegas crowd, Reuters reported. ..."
"... "I went - 'BING!' - it was done," Trump said on Saturday, describing the swiftness of his decision. "We make fast decisions. And we make good decisions." ..."
Speaking at the Republican Jewish Coalition gathering in Las Vegas, Trump said he made the
snap decision during a discussion with his top Middle East peace advisers, including the US
ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, and son-in-law Jared Kushner.
"I said, 'Fellows, do me a favor. Give me a little history, quick. Want to go fast. I got a
lot of things I'm working on: China, North Korea. Give me a quickie," Trump said to laughter
from the Las Vegas crowd, Reuters reported.
"'How do you like the idea of me recognizing exactly what we're discussing?'" said Trump,
recounting the conversation.
Trump said Friedman was shocked, "like a wonderful, beautiful baby," and asked the president
if he would actually do it.
"I went - 'BING!' - it was done," Trump said on Saturday, describing the swiftness of his
decision. "We make fast decisions. And we make good decisions."
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Trump last month. At their March 25
meeting, Trump signed a proclamation officially granting US recognition of the Golan as Israeli
territory.
Golan is a border area the Tel Aviv regime seized from Syria in 1967.
It will be interesting to see if Ocasio-Cortez-if elected–sticks to her principles
or succumbs to the shekel storm headed her way.
Radical Jews of the Hasidic type are also acting thuggish on American streets, like in
Brooklyn where they committed assault, battery and kidnapping on a bicyclist.
These kind of fanatics are growing in numbers all over the USA.
If you think Trump is spineless towards Israel, wait until Israel's next choice for
POTUS, Nutty Nikky Haley steals the WH.
"... Seven years ago, John Mearsheimer and I published a controversial article and subsequent book examining the impact of the "Israel lobby" -- that is, a loose coalition of pro-Israel individuals and organizations like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Anti-Defamation League, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and Christians United for Israel, just to name a few. ..."
"... The result, we also argued, does more harm than good to both the United States and Israel. For the United States, the "special relationship" undermines America's standing in the Arab and Islamic worlds, has encouraged a more confrontational approach with Iran and Syria, and contributes significantly both to America's terrorism problem and to needless and costly debacles like the 2003 invasion of Iraq. For Israel, unquestioning U.S. support for almost all its actions has allowed the decades-long subjugation of the Palestinians to continue unchecked, undermining the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and threatening Israel's future as a democratic and/or Jewish state. ..."
"... Unfortunately for Israel as well as the United States, the past 10 years provide ample evidence that our core argument is still correct. Nevertheless, shifts inside the pro-Israel community and in Israel itself may yet lead to positive shifts in U.S. Middle East policy and to a healthier relationship between the two countries. ..."
"... There is little question the lobby remains a potent political force today. The "special relationship" is firmly intact: An increasingly prosperous Israel continues to receive billions of dollars in U.S. assistance, and it is still largely immune from criticism by top U.S. officials, members of Congress or contenders for public office. ..."
"... Stephen M. Walt is the Robert and Renee Belfer Professor of International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School and the co-author (with John J. Mearsheimer) of "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2007). ..."
Seven years ago, John Mearsheimer and I published a controversial article and subsequent book
examining the impact of the "Israel lobby" -- that is, a loose coalition of pro-Israel
individuals and organizations like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the
Anti-Defamation League, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and Christians United for
Israel, just to name a few. We argued that decades of unconditional U.S. support for Israel --
the so-called "special relationship" -- is not explained by U.S. strategic interests or by
shared values, as is often claimed, but is due primarily to the political efforts and
activities of the lobby.
The result, we also argued, does more harm than good to both the United States and Israel.
For the United States, the "special relationship" undermines America's standing in the Arab and
Islamic worlds, has encouraged a more confrontational approach with Iran and Syria, and
contributes significantly both to America's terrorism problem and to needless and costly
debacles like the 2003 invasion of Iraq. For Israel, unquestioning U.S. support for almost all
its actions has allowed the decades-long subjugation of the Palestinians to continue unchecked,
undermining the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and threatening Israel's future as a
democratic and/or Jewish state.
We made it clear that the lobby was not a monolith controlling every aspect of U.S. Middle
East policy, but rather a collection of disparate groups and individuals united by the aim of
defending Israel's actions and deepening the special relationship. We explicitly rejected the
idea that anything nefarious was going on, explaining that AIPAC and related organizations were
simply part of a powerful interest group like the farm lobby or the National Rifle Association.
Their efforts to influence U.S. policy are "as American as apple pie." And we used the term
"Israel lobby" to highlight that not all American Jews support these policies and that some key
members of the lobby (such as Christian Zionists) aren't Jewish. The book also emphasizes that
none of these groups or individuals is solely responsible for the choices U.S. leaders
make.
As the article and book predicted, a firestorm of criticism followed their publication,
including more than a few accusations that we are anti-Israel or anti-Semitic. Nothing could be
further from the truth. Our aim was to elicit a debate that would help move America's foreign
policy in a wiser direction and increase Israel's chances of achieving a durable, peaceful
two-state solution with the Palestinians. By successfully squelching any criticism of Israel in
almost any form, and by encouraging military action against Israel's foes, the lobby -- in our
view -- had led us away from both.
Unfortunately for Israel as well as the United States, the past 10 years provide ample
evidence that our core argument is still correct. Nevertheless, shifts inside the pro-Israel
community and in Israel itself may yet lead to positive shifts in U.S. Middle East policy and
to a healthier relationship between the two countries.
There is little question the lobby remains a potent political force today. The "special
relationship" is firmly intact: An increasingly prosperous Israel continues to receive billions
of dollars in U.S. assistance, and it is still largely immune from criticism by top U.S.
officials, members of Congress or contenders for public office. Being perceived as
insufficiently "pro-Israel" can disqualify nominees for important government positions; one
need look no further than Chuck Hagel's contentious
confirmation hearings -- and the
178 times Israel came up -- to see how crucial a role being pro-Israel plays in achieving
political success in this country.
People who criticize Israel too pointedly can still lose their jobs. Wealthy defenders of
Israel such as Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban play
outsize roles in American politics, especially on Israel-related issues. A number of
hard-line individuals and groups in the lobby remain staunch opponents of the sensible 2016
nuclear deal with Iran and may eventually help convince President Trump or the Congress to
overturn it.
The clearest illustration of the lobby's enduring power, however, is the Obama
administration's failure to make any progress on settling the Israel-Palestinian conflict.
President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry were strong supporters of Israel, and both
believe a two-state solution is, as Obama put it, "in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest,
America's interest and the world's interest." But even with backing from pro-peace, pro-Israel
organizations such as J Street, their efforts to achieve "two states for two peoples" were
rebuffed by Israel, working hand in hand with AIPAC and other hard-line groups. So instead of
seriously pursuing peace, Israel expanded its settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories,
making it more difficult than ever to create a viable Palestinian state.
Given AIPAC's enduring influence in Congress and its unyielding opposition to any meaningful
compromise with the Palestinians, Obama and Kerry ultimately could offer Israel only additional
carrots (such as increased military aid) to try to win their cooperation. Like their
predecessors, they could not put pressure on Israel to compromise by threatening to reduce U.S.
support significantly. As a result, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had little
incentive to make a deal. So, the two-state solution, which the United States has long sought
and Netanyahu has long opposed, is now further away than ever. This outcome is bad for the
United States and for Israel.
Despite the lobby's continuing influence, however, there is a more open discussion of
Israel-related issues today than there was before we wrote our article and book. Together with
long-term trends in the region and the United States, the ability to speak more openly about
Israel is likely to diminish the lobby's impact on U.S. foreign policy in the future.
For starters, despite joining forces with Netanyahu to oppose the Iran deal, AIPAC was
unable to convince Congress to reject the agreement. This failure signaled a rare defeat for the
lobbying group, and a triumph for J Street and other groups that had backed the deal.
Furthermore, the taboo of publicly criticizing Israel, the lobby or the special relationship
has been broken. In recent years, writers such as Peter Beinart, John Judis, Dan Fleshler and
others have written important works examining the role of pro-Israel groups in American
politics and criticizing their impact on U.S. foreign policy. Prominent journalists such as
Thomas Friedman, Andrew Sullivan and Roger Cohen have penned their own criticisms of Israel's
policies and the lobby's activities. More Americans have become aware of the complexities of
life in Israel-Palestine and are more sympathetic to the needs and desires of both
populations.
There is also a growing divide within the American Jewish community over what is best for
Israel itself. Scholars like Dov Waxman, Steven Simon and Dana Allin have documented that
American Jews today are less reluctant to criticize Israel's policies or the actions of the
Israeli government. The creation of the pro-peace lobby J Street, the rapid growth of
progressive groups like Jewish Voice for Peace, and the success of controversial online
journals critical of Zionism, such as Mondoweiss, show that attitudes about Israel are more
complicated than in the past. Reflexive support for whatever Israel does is no longer the
default condition for many American Jews.
These developments are especially evident among young people, and as Waxman emphasizes in
his 2016 book "Trouble in the Tribe," they have amplified divisions between the Orthodox and
more liberal branches of Judaism. One sees this trend in a recent poll conducted by the
American Jewish Committee, which found that nearly 80% of American Jews disapprove of the job
President Trump is doing but 71% of Orthodox Jews support Trump. The main reason? Orthodox Jews
tend to see Trump as more supportive of Israel. Yet even among the Orthodox, a
recent survey by Nishma Research found that only 43% of those between 18 and 34 "actively
support" the Jewish state, compared with 71% of those over 55.
These trends stem from a core tension: The vast majority of American Jews remain deeply
committed to liberal values, while Israel has been moving away from them for many years now.
There is a certain tension between liberalism and Zionism, because liberalism assumes that all
humans possess the same set of basic rights and it emphasizes mutual tolerance, while Zionism
is a nationalist movement that in its current iteration privileges one people at the expense of
another. Until 1967, however, that tension between liberal and Zionist values was muted because
most Israelis were Jewish and the second-class status of Israel's Arab minority did not receive
much attention.
When Israel gained control of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, the resulting subjugation of
millions of Palestinians brought that tension to the fore. The occupation of the Palestinian
territories has endured for half a century, and today, certain sections of Israel's government
are openly committed to retaining the West Bank in perpetuity and creating a "Greater Israel."
This policy not only involves denying the Palestinian subjects meaningful political rights, but
also leads Israel to react harshly whenever the Palestinians respond with violence and
terrorism (as happened in response to the two intifadas and in Israel's repeated assaults on
Gaza), further tarnishing its image in the United States and elsewhere.
But as former prime ministers Ehud Barak
and
Ehud Olmert each warned, in the long run, denying the Palestinians a viable state of their
own will turn Israel into a state akin to apartheid South Africa. Such a state will be
increasingly difficult for Israel's supporters -- and especially liberal American Jews -- to
embrace and defend against the inevitable criticism that will be directed at it. Furthermore,
the steady rightward drift of Israeli politics -- exemplified by the
2016 "transparency law" marginalizing Israeli human rights organizations, as well as by
Netanyahu's decision to
renege on a plan to allow non-Orthodox Jewish men and women to pray together at the Western
Wall -- also clashes with the political values of most American Jews.
Even more disturbing, the Israeli government has begun to turn a blind eye to incidents of
genuine anti-Semitism, when doing so is seen as safeguarding other priorities. Netanyahu was
slow to condemn the anti-Jewish and neo-Nazi demonstrations in Charlottesville, Virginia,
in August, for example, and he declined to criticize Trump's waffling response to these
disturbing events. Netanyahu also remains
on good terms with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban despite Orban's anti-Semitic
campaign against financier George Soros. Indeed, Netanyahu's son Yair Netanyahu
recently posted to Facebook an explicitly anti-Semitic meme about Soros, thereby earning a
swift condemnation from the ADL.
These and other events have accelerated what Waxman
describes as a "splintering" among pro-Israel organizations. Past depictions of a weak
Israeli David surrounded by a hostile Arab Goliath no longer ring true against the reality of a
prosperous, nuclear-armed Israel that denies millions of Palestinian Arabs basic rights and
uses its vast military power to keep those disenfranchised subjects powerless and afraid.
Israel still faces a number of security challenges, but, contrary to what used to be the
conventional wisdom, it is not weak, isolated or vulnerable to conventional attack. Instead, it
has become a fiercely nationalistic state pursuing increasingly illiberal policies, which makes
it increasingly hard for liberals to defend with enthusiasm.
These trends, however, have yet to affect Israel's most ardent defenders here in the United
States. If anything, their efforts to silence criticism of Israel have reached new heights. How
else can one explain the
AIPAC-sponsored Senate bill that would make it a crime in the United States to participate
in the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, legislation that the American Civil
Liberties Union, Amnesty International and the Center for Constitutional Rights have rightly
denounced as a direct threat to free speech?
Even if they succeed in muzzling some criticism in the short term, over time these tactics
will turn off many Americans, including large numbers of American Jews who prize freedom of
speech, tolerance and human rights, and who understand how important those values are for
preserving the security of minority populations everywhere.
Barring a major shift in Israel's political trajectory, therefore, the fissures within the
lobby -- and in the American Jewish community more broadly -- are likely to widen. If the
balance of power in that community shifts in favor of more moderate and pro-peace groups, then
there may be a glimmer of hope. "Two states for two peoples" will be harder to achieve today
than it would have been under either President Clinton or President Obama, but political
pressure from a powerful, pro-Israel and pro-peace lobby in the United States is probably the
only development that would convince U.S. leaders to act as fair-minded mediators and persuade
the Israeli government to grant the Palestinians a viable state of their own. Over the long
term, that may also be the only way to preserve a secure Israel and the strong bonds of the
U.S.- Israel relationship.
Stephen M. Walt is the Robert and Renee Belfer Professor of International Affairs at the
Harvard Kennedy School and the co-author (with John J. Mearsheimer) of "The Israel Lobby and
U.S. Foreign Policy" (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2007). The views and opinions expressed
in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Forward.
"... I like Trump's ambiguity. Acknowledging Jerusalem as the capital of "Israel" was a silly idea with no basis in law. But when they slipped into Full Spectrum Vampire mode and started slaughtering/ maiming Palestinians like there was no tomorrow, it became obvious that he knew exactly what he was doing, and why. ..."
I like Trump's ambiguity. Acknowledging Jerusalem as the capital of "Israel" was a silly idea
with no basis in law. But when they slipped into Full Spectrum Vampire mode and started
slaughtering/ maiming Palestinians like there was no tomorrow, it became obvious that he knew
exactly what he was doing, and why.
Now the whole world has been reminded, again, what a bunch of self-worshipping ratbags
they are. Passing an Only Jews Are People law in "The M.E's only democracy" merely added to
the farce.
It's 'interesting' that:
(a) they didn't thank him.
(b) he was too busy to attend the celebrations in "Israel".
Yes. I think Israel is rapidly losing support and that of Hezbollah is growing. I think
history will soon be on the side of the Palestinians and Syrian Golan.
I also see Russia as getting fed up with the Palestinian debacle. If Israel overreaches
and gets a Hezbollah response they may find themselves without friends.
let the US give itself back to the Indians, and then ask Israel to act the same way
Give the US back to the amerindians! Give Aus back to the abos! This does not work; it's
called 'moral relativism' and/or the 'tu quoque' [appeal to hypocrisy] fallacy.
Then ask Israel to act err, hello? Israel has been 'asked,' over 100 times by some
counts, to 'get legal' under UN resolutions. Israel is an outlaw.
Kindly consider the I/J/Z-plex's 10 steps to utter, criminal ignominy:
Herzl; coveting, expropriation (1897+)
Balfour; aid Zs, no consult Ps
Jabotinsky; colonise by force
Ben-Gurion: "we are the attackers and the Arabs own the land" [points 1 - 4 all
pre-WW2]
UNGA181: "an area shall be evacuated" (invalid + no UNSC action = not law)
Meir; $US50mio for arms + Plan Dalet&Co = premeditated, murdering to steal
aggression
When immigrants (=aliens) attack natives, it's *not* civil war but Nuremberg-class
crime
Z-terrorism; down to today; alien invaders' highest-tech vs. besieged & blockaded,
basically unarmed natives
US-support incl. UNSC vetoes; also down to 'current moment'
Z-hasbarah = mostly lies, designed and deployed to deceive
More: Post-WW2, Nuremberg trials, hanging perpetrators for murdering invasions for
Lebensraum predate King David Hotel bombing, Plan Dalet with outrages like the Deir
Yassin massacre, etc.. Similar outrages continue to be perpetrated by the illegitimate
entity, into 'the current moment.'
Lemma: At any crime-scene, there are one or more perpetrators, possibly accessories,
apologists and/or 'idle' bystanders. It is incumbent upon *all* witnesses to attempt to a)
restrain malefactors and where possible b) rescue victims from harm. *All* present and not in
active resistance to the crime attract proportional guilt.
Addendum: Any person profiting from crime also makes him/herself an accessory, like all
residents in the 'illegitimate entity,' say.
Also post WW2, we got the post-colonial era; the illegitimate entity fulfils the
'premeditated supreme international crime' criteria. RoR+R*3 NOW! QED
PS Showing 'support' for criminals adopts part guilt for those criminals' crimes via the
accessory process; why would anyone in their 'right' = correct mind do that?
If a nuclear device is "lit off" in an American or European city, it will have Israel's
fingerprints all over it. Israel is desperate to keep the American money spigot running, as
well as sabotaging the Palestinian "peace process" that the world wants it to take seriously.
In fact, if a nuclear device is "lit off" anywhere in the world, it will have come from
Israel's secret nuclear "stockpile".
The "power outage" in Atlanta was a convenient excuse for Israel to perform a logistical
"sleight of hand", as an Israeli plane was allowed to land and take off during the "power
outage" without receiving customs clearance or inspection. This is one of many Israeli
companies that possesses a "special exemption" granted by the U S government that frees it
from customs inspections. Just maybe another one of Israel's nukes was just being
pre-positioned or nuclear triggers (tritium) were being renewed, getting ready for "the big
one". As most Americans are tired of all of the foreign wars being fought for Israel's
benefit, another "incident" on American soil would be enough to galvanize the American
public, once again, (just like WTC 9-11) to support another war for Israel's benefit.
Israel's "samson option" is a real threat to "light one off" in a European or American city,
if Israel's interests are not taken seriously.
Israel refuses to abide by IAEA guidelines concerning its nukes as they are already
distributed around the world. Israel would not be able to produce all of them as most of them
are not in Israel, proper. No delivery systems are needed as Israel's nukes are already "in
place". Look for another "false flag" operation with the blame being put on Iran or Syria.
You can bet that some Iranian or Syrian passports will be found in the rubble.
Israel also threatens to detonate nuclear devices in several US cities. Talk about total
INSANITY; the so-called "Samson Option" is it.
As an aside, American "foreign aid" is prohibited from being given to any country that has
not signed the "Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty" or refuses to abide by "International
Atomic Energy Agency" (IAEA) guidelines regarding its nuclear devices. Guess what?? Israel
does not abide by EITHER and still gets the majority of American "foreign aid". This
prohibition also applies to countries that do not register their "agents of a foreign
government" with the U S State Department. Guess what?? Israel (again) with its "American
Israel Political Action Committee" (AIPAC) still gets "foreign aid" in contravention of
American law..
There are forty or so congressmen, senators and thousands of high-level policy "wonks"
infecting the U S government who hold "dual citizenship" with Israel. Such dual citizenship
must be strictly prohibited. Those holding dual citizenship must be required to renounce said
foreign citizenship. Refusal to do so should result in immediate deportation with loss of
American citizenship. Present and former holders of dual citizenship should never be allowed
to serve in any American governmental capacity.
When Netanyahu addressed both houses of congress, it was sickening to see our politicians
slobber all over themselves to PROVE that they were unconditional supporters of Israel just
who the hell do they work for? Certainly not for the interests of the American people and the
United States they should renounce their United States citizenship and be deported to
Israel
Giraldi is here-unlike in most of his regularly anti-Semitic texts- right about one crucial
thing: American Gentile cow-towing to (real or imagined) Jewish power in the US, as
illustrated by absurd Baron Cohen's episode.
However, I don't blame most of US Jews for that. Jewish ethnocentrists are to be suspect,
sure, but the main question for US gentile politicians & public figures remains: why are
you such suckers, anyway?
Between Jessica at #23, and Anon at #45 lay two paramount pieces of instruction which Phil
Giraldi ought to heed.
Ordinary Jews are no more required to register their objections over AIPAC's actions than
are Christians over the actions of their top leaders including the POTUS, domestic MIC
lobbies, the Gun Lobby and the Oil lobby; no more that is, beyond what each citizen expresses
through her vote. Individuals may choose; to go beyond, into political activism; yet
choice is the operative notion.
And no, Geokat, Power isn't listening to Phil over the sound of crickets for the simple
reason that Power does not read the UR, couldn't care less if they did, as the Review quite
rapidly degenerates to the station of an unrelenting hate rag frequented by dubious IQ
cultists, antisemites and White Nationalism apologists.
"Many in the intelligence and law enforcement communities suspect that it (Israel) had
considerable prior intelligence regarding the 9/11 plot but did not share it with
Washington."
And according to Jimmy Carter Israeli intelligence had advance information of the suicide
attack on the US barracks in Beirut in 1983 that killed 243 US servicemen (one of whom was a
member of my family). The Israelis decided to not inform US intelligence in the hope that a
major attack on US personnel would precipitate a commitment of US troops and arms into the
region. So much for our Israeli "ally".
You are, of course, correct that the US committed either genocide or near-genocide
(depending on your definition of the term) against Native Americans. However, NOW, in the
21st century, any Native American who is a US citizen is free to buy property in any part of
America and live where he chooses. Native Americans are no longer confined to reservations.
While poverty is a fact of life for many Native Americans, some tribes have profited
substantially from gambling. In Florida, Seminoles may receive upward of 40,000 a year (each
man, woman, and child) as their share of the gambling revenues. They can certainly afford to
buy property just about anywhere.
(Note that I am not denying that much discrimination and inequality still persist and that
most reservations with gambling offer very little to tribal members.)
In Israel, however, Palestinians cannot return to their home towns and buy property. They
are not free to live where they choose. Many are still confined to refugee camps. Housing
discrimination continues to persist for Israeli Arabs. Yes, the High Court ruled it illegal,
but few remedies are in place, which means the practice continues largely unabated.
If you want to use historical analogies, I believe you should use them in full.
Cohen's performance is instructive. A man shows up in Israeli uniform, claims to be a
terrorism expert or even a Mossad agent, and he gains access to powerful Americans who are
willing to do anything he says.
It is very telling about the human material on the right in America. Complete morons. Now
think about it. It was a prank, right? But I can imagine that real negotiations with Israelis
are very similar and produce similar positive outcomes for Israelis. Israelis play Americans
anyway they want on all levels of federal and local administrations. They have the same
attitude towards Americans as Jack Abramoff had towards his counterparts at Indian
reservations. Why shouldn't they? It works.
he called his Indian clients "troglodytes" and "morons" and "monkeys," "the stupidest
idiots in the land." In one particularly damning e-mail he counseled Scanlon, "The key
thing to remember with all these clients is that they are annoying, but that the
annoying losers are the only ones which have this kind of money and part with it so
quickly . So, we have to put up with this stuff."
At best American are annoying losers who part with their money quickly.
Mr. Giraldi, why do you bother with your articles? You still have illusions that you can
educate the monkeys?
It smacks of supremacism, doesn't it? It means the US must favor Zionist occupiers in West
Bank over Palestinians, the very people who are being occupied.
It means the US must favor Israel, a nation that stole uranium from US and has 300 nukes,
over Iran, a nation that passed all inspections and has no nukes.
This special relationship is a form of worship. It is never discussed rationally
WHY Israel is so crucial to us. Instead, politicians and pundits gush about it with fanatical
devotion, as if it's a sacred truth. Anyone who questions it even slightly is marginalized or
destroyed. Some might Giraldi has been too strident, but even mild criticism of Israel or
Zionism can get you banned from media or politics.
I find it odd that Jews always remind us that Old America was 'racist' because it favored
Europeans over non-whites, especially in immigration and foreign policy. After all, the US
often sided with European imperialists over non-white subjects of colonialism.
In New America, there is supposed to no Special Treatment for any group, but Jews and
Israel get it all the time. In asylum(Save Soviet Jews), in immigration, in college
admission, in foreign policy -- not just in supporting Israel at every turn but in waging
Wars for Israel and hating on any nation hated by Jews, esp Russia, Iran, and Syria.
While secular "cultural nationalism" is probably essential to the survival of the nation, far right nationalism is a
cancer.
There is a vicious spiral: Israel actions, which are essentially American-style colonization of the territory, radicalize
Palestinians, and their actions in turn radicalize Jews feeling far right nationalism.
The early Zionists were mostly atheist. Zionists quoting the Bible for legitimacy of their land claims I'd take with a pinch of
salt regarding their sincerity.
Notable quotes:
"... "No state or entity is absolved of mass shootings of protesters. There is no justification. Palestinian people deserve basic human dignity, as anyone else. Democrats can't be silent about this anymore. I think I was primarily compelled [to speak out] on moral grounds because I could only imagine if 60 people were shot and killed in Ferguson. Or if 60 people were shot and killed in the West Virginia teachers' strikes. The idea that we are not supposed to talk about people dying when they are engaging in political expression just really moved me." ..."
"... I personally would have liked to see Ocasio-Cortez go farther, a lot farther. Israel is a place where conventional morality has been replaced by a theocratically and culturally driven sense of entitlement which has meant that anything goes when it comes to the treatment of inferior Christian and Muslim Arabs. It also means that the United States is being played for a patsy by people who believe themselves to be superior in every way to Americans. ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected]. ..."
"... I personally would have liked to see Ocasio-Cortez go farther, a lot farther. Israel is a place where conventional morality has been replaced by a theocratically and culturally driven sense of entitlement which has meant that anything goes when it comes to the treatment of inferior Christian and Muslim Arabs ..."
"... As Kevin Macdonald would point out Middle Eastern peoples are extreme in their ethnocentricism, explaining the chronic instability in the region, but Jews are at the extreme end of that extremism. The media does a good job of covering up the hypoethnocentricism evident in Jewish life in Israel and the West. ..."
One paragraph in particular in the
article I read was highly suggestive, the claim that Ocasio-Cortez had been strongly opposed to the
Israelis' routine slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza, which has by now become of such little import that it
is not even reported any more in the U.S. media. She is also allegedly a supporter of the Boycott,
Divestment and Sanction movement (BDS), which pressures Israel to end its theft and occupation of
Palestinian land. The article expressed some surprise that anyone in New York City would dare to say
anything unpleasant about Israel and still expect to get elected.
This is what Ocasio-Cortez, who called the shooting of more than 130
Gazans a "massacre," actually
said
and
wrote
:
"No state or entity is absolved of
mass shootings of protesters. There is no justification. Palestinian people deserve basic human dignity,
as anyone else. Democrats can't be silent about this anymore. I think I was primarily compelled [to speak
out] on moral grounds because I could only imagine if 60 people were shot and killed in Ferguson. Or if
60 people were shot and killed in the West Virginia teachers' strikes. The idea that we are not supposed
to talk about people dying when they are engaging in political expression just really moved me."
Five hours later, when I arrived home in
Virginia I went to pull up
the article
I had read in the morning to possibly use it in a piece of my own and was somewhat surprised
to discover that the bit about Israel had been excised from the text. It was clearly yet another example of
how the media self-censors when there is anything negative to say about Israel and it underlines the
significance of the emergence of recent international media reporting
in The Guardian
and elsewhere regarding how Jewish billionaire Sheldon Adelson largely dictates U.S.
foreign policy in the Middle East. That means that the conspiracy of silence over Israel's manipulation of
the United States government is beginning to break down and journalists have become bold enough to challenge
what occurs when pro-Israel Jews obtain real power over the political process. Adelson, for what it's worth,
wants war with Iran and has even suggested detonating a nuclear device on its soil to "send a message."
I personally would have liked to see
Ocasio-Cortez go farther, a lot farther. Israel is a place where conventional morality has been replaced by
a theocratically and culturally driven sense of entitlement which has meant that anything goes when it comes
to the treatment of inferior Christian and Muslim Arabs. It also means that the United States is being
played for a patsy by people who believe themselves to be superior in every way to Americans.
The question of the relationship with
Israel comes at a time when everyone in America, so it seems, is concerned about children being separated
from their parents who have illegally crossed the border from Mexico into the United States. The concern is
legitimate given the coarse and sometimes violent justifications coming out of the White House, but it's a
funny thing that Israeli abuse and even killing of Arab children is not met with the same opprobrium. When a
Jewish fanatic/Israel settler kills Palestinian children and is protected by his government in so doing,
where is the outrage in the U.S. media? Settlers and soldiers kill Palestinians, young and old, with
impunity and are almost never punished. They destroy their orchards and livestock to eliminate their
livelihoods to drive them out. They bulldoze their homes and villages. The Immigration and Customs
Enforcement agency does none of that and is yet subject to nonstop abuse in the mainstream media, so what
about Israel?
A recent story illustrates just how
horrible the Israelis can be without any pushback whatsoever coming from Washington objecting to their
behavior. As the United States is the only force that can in any way compel Israel to come to its senses and
chooses not to do so, that makes U.S. policymakers and by extension the American people complicit in
Israel's crimes.
The particularly horrible
recent account
that I am referring to describes how fanatical Jewish settlers burned alive a Palestinian
family on the West Bank, including a baby, and then celebrated the deaths while taunting the victims'
surviving family when they subsequently appeared in court. The story was covered in Israel and Europe but
insofar as I could determine did not appear in any detail in the U.S. mainstream media.
Israeli Jewish settlers carried out
their shameful deed outside a court in the city of Lod,
chanting
"'Ali was burned, where is Ali? There is no Ali. Ali is burned. On the fire. Ali is on the
grill!" referring to the 18-month old baby Ali Dawabsheh, who was
burnt alive
in 2015 by Jewish settlers hurling Molotov cocktails into a house in the West Bank town of
Duma. Ali's mother Riham and father Saad also died of their burns and were included in the chanting "Where
is Ali? Where is Riham? Where is Saad? It's too bad Ahmed didn't burn as well." Five year-old Ahmed, who
alone survived the attack with severe burns, will have scars for the rest of his life.
The settlers were taunting Ali's
grandfather Hussein Dawabsheh, who accompanied Ahmed, at a preliminary hearing where the court
indicted
a man who confessed to the murders and a minor who acted as an accomplice. A video of the
chanting shows Israeli policemen standing by and doing nothing. The court appearance also revealed that
there have been another Molotov cocktail attack by settlers on another Dawabsheh family house in May that
may have been an attempt to silence testimony relating to the first attack. Fortunately, the family managed
to escape.
And by all accounts this outrage was
not the first incident in which the burning of the Palestinian baby was celebrated. A December 15
th
wedding video
showed
settlers engaged in an uproarious party that featured dances with Molotov cocktails and waving
knives and guns. A photo of baby Ali was on display and was repeatedly stabbed. A year later, 13 people from
what became known as the "murder wedding" were
indicted
for incitement to terrorism, but as of today no one has actually been punished. Israelis who
kill Arabs are rarely indicted or tried. If it is a soldier or policeman that is involved, which occurs all
too often, the penalty is frequently either nothing at all a slap on the wrist. Indeed, the snipers who
fired on Gazans recently were actually ordered to shoot the unarmed civilians and directed to take out
anyone who appeared to be a "leader," which included medical personnel.
The Trump Administration could, of
course, stop the Israeli brutality if it chooses to do so, but it does not think Benjamin Netanyahu's crimes
against humanity are on the agenda. Nor did Clinton, Bush and Obama dare to confront the power of Israel's
lobby, though Obama tried a little pushback in a feeble way.
Someone in Washington should be asking
why the United States should be fighting unnecessary wars and becoming an international pariah defending a
country and people that believe they are "chosen" by God? One can only hope that the shift in perceptions on
the Middle East by liberal Democrats like Ocasio-Cortez has some legs and will lead to some real change in
U.S. foreign policy. To succeed the liberal Democrats will need to push against some formidable obstacles
within their own party, most notably the Clinton wing and people like Senator Chuck Schumer, Minority leader
in the Senate, who describes himself as Israel's "shomer" or defender in the Upper House. Perhaps someone on
the
New York Times
editorial board should publicly suggest to Schumer that he go and run for office
in Israel since he seems to prefer it to the country that has made him rich and powerful. But of course, the
Times
and all the other mainstream media, which is responsible for what we are not allowed to know
about Israel and its American mouthpieces, will never entertain that suggestion or anything like it.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is
Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation
that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is
[email protected].
I personally would have liked to see Ocasio-Cortez go farther, a lot farther. Israel is a place where
conventional morality has been replaced by a theocratically and culturally driven sense of entitlement which
has meant that anything goes when it comes to the treatment of inferior Christian and Muslim Arabs
Better to be a minority in Israel than any other Middle Eastern country. The two settlers guilty of arson
are disgusting zealots. But their type is exponentially more common in Iraq, Syria, Iran and so on.
The criticism of Israel in Western media is disproportionately
extremely
high given the much higher
rates of this type of thing in the majority of the rest of the world.
As for sniping the leaders of a huge mob trying to invade your country/storm your borders, doesn't that seem
like the most humane way to
deal
with it? What does Giraldi suggest they do?
I suppose Western anti-Semites see Western countries going down because they are unable to deal with this
type of thing and get jealous and want to drag Israel down with them. I prefer that America follow the example
of Matteo Salvini. Giraldi prefers 'abolish borders' Cortez. Indeed, he'd like her to "go a lot farther".
Washington is not spineless. Washington is bought and paid for. In America, the general rule is that money
rules, and the people (and their political representatives!) follow.
" I could only imagine if 60 people were shot and killed in Ferguson. Or if 60 people were shot and
killed in the West Virginia teachers' strikes."
Only 60? We really have become a nation of p
*****
s. If we're going to be an empire that
pushes the rest of the world around, we need to act like one. The Byzantine General Belisaurius, under
Justinian I, put down the Nika riots by killing as many as 30,000 people, and the Byzantine empire went on for
another 900 years. If we dither over 60 people, we won't last another 50 years.
As for the Israelis, they are sowing the seeds of their own destruction, but given the number of nukes they
are reputed to have and the global reach they seem to have, they are going to take the rest of us with them if
the US simply walks away from them and leaves them on their own.
As Kevin Macdonald would point out Middle Eastern peoples are extreme in their ethnocentricism, explaining
the chronic instability in the region, but Jews are at the extreme end of that extremism. The media does a good
job of covering up the hypoethnocentricism evident in Jewish life in Israel and the West.
That crazed looking group of young fanatical Zionists taunting a Palestinian mother and child is a classic. ZOG
has got to be defeated!
However , speaking of that 'Latina' who beat a political hack in Queens and the Bronx, she's already started to
edit some of her internet posts. She knows who rules and will get in line with the 'mainstream' Zionist party
line. She's also an 'open borders' radical which doesn't sit well with the likes of me and most Americans.
She's also a 'Bronx girl' by way of suburban Westchester county, lol. As phony as phony gets.
The verse in question was specifically regarding the
church
in Jerusalem. In other words, financial help
by gentile believers for Jewish followers of Jesus who were impoverished at that time.
It is not to be
interpreted as a general charity for Jews, most of whom are hostile to Christianity both then and today. Bible
verses have to be read within the context of the surrounding text.
Better to be a minority in Israel than any other Middle Eastern country.
Better yet to be a Jewish minority in any place but Israel.
It's weird how the vast majority of Jews themselves can't be persuaded into moving to Israel, but would
rather be a minority elsewhere. Why is that so? Not so great a place as you purport?
The total number of people who hold or are eligible for Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return is
estimated at around 23 million, of which 6.6 million were living in Israel as of 2015. wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population_by_country
Well, where do the people get their ideas anyway? The mass media.
In Germany there was recently a bad case of antisemitism which was reported widely in the media. A large
newspaper had a long article telling how a Jewish pupil in an elite school in Berlin was harassed or bullyed
for months and that the school didn't do enough to protect him. It's a school to which the sons of ambassators,
of diplomatic personal and of the international high class community in Berlin go. The article brought many
details about the case: how they told the pupil that Ausschwitz wasn't far away (or something similar) and so
on. The case even came in the television news of the main German channel (I only watched the late news, but I
think that the case also came in the absolutely main news of German television at 8 o'clock P.M.). The media
spoke of "antisemitism in Berlin." A pupil was harassed and told a few unpleasant things in a school in Berlin
and this came in the main tv news of the country! The most important weekly magazine had also an article about
"antisemitism in Berlin". At the end of the long article they told something that the other midia hadn't told.
The pupil had been harassed because he favoured the Palestinians! The colleagues who bullyed him were probably
American Jews.
but it's a funny thing that Israeli abuse and even killing of Arab children is not met with the same
opprobrium.
Also the intentional starving of children in Yemen. And the huge pile of dead babies in Iraq, Libya and
Syria. All of them murdered by Imperial Washington.
I much prefer President Trump to any of the candidates he defeated in the primaries and general election.
But I regret that he is a Jew.
Newly popular Democratic politician hero and nominee for a seat in the U.S. Congress Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez used to have these words on her website:
A Peace Economy
"Since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the United States has entangled itself in war and occupation
throughout the Middle East and North Africa. As of 2018, we are currently involved in military action in
Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. According to the Constitution, the right to
declare war belongs to the Legislative body, not the President. Yet, most of these acts of aggression have
never once been voted on by Congress. Alex believes that we must end the forever war by bringing our troops
home and ending the air strikes and bombings that perpetuate the cycle of terrorism and occupation
throughout the world."
Now they're gone. Asked about it on Twitter, she replied:
"Hey! Looking into this. Nothing malicious! Site is supporter-run so things happen -we'll get to the
bottom of it."
It will be interesting to see if Ocasio-Cortez will/can maintain her position on Israeli crimes. Public figures
have a long history of backpedaling after getting the riot act read to them from the hebrew masters.
"The two settlers guilty of arson are disgusting zealots."
Correction. They're unrepentant
murderers, empowered by disgusting zealots tolerated (if not pampered) by Likud.
"But their type is exponentially more common in Iraq, Syria, Iran and so on"
The 'they do it too' defense? So what? How many F-35s is the US giving Iraq, Syria, Iran?
Why should Likud conduct be excused by comparing it to those Israel routinely condemns?
"As for sniping the leaders of a huge mob trying to invade your country/storm your borders, doesn't
that seem like the most humane way to deal with it?"
Does "sniping" mean shooting/killing/maiming unarmed people from a safe distance? Without risk to the
sniper?
That's "more humane" than water-cannon, tear gas, and other non-lethal restraint? For the sniper, perhaps,
but for the victim?
Sounds like the same rationalization murderers used at Babi-Yar.
"The criticism of Israel in Western media is disproportionately extremely high given the much higher
rates of this type of thing in the majority of the rest of the world."
American media is disproportionately silent in criticism of Likud compared with Israeli media. Why?
"I suppose Western anti-Semites see Western countries going down because they are unable to deal with
this type of thing and get jealous and want to drag Israel down with them."
In other words, Trump should use snipers and live fire on illegal immigrants crossing borders? Wow!
These people used to be called Judeonazis by Hebrew University chemistry professor Israel Shahak and by the
noted "radio rabbi", Rabbi Yeshayahu Leibowitz. Both predicted that the occupation would be Israel's downfall.
Likely it is the downfall of the Palestinian people and possibly the rest of us. (Note that Israel has nuclear
weapons and its policy of "nishtagea" – pulling down the temple around Sampson-type threat – is meant to
guarantee its hegemony in the region. That suits the US down to the ground, where the oil is.
What are we to expect from a criminal state, founded by international terrorists like Ben Gurion, Begin,
Yitzakh Shamir, etc.?
If it had been Palestinian terrorists who had blown up the King David Hotel, murdered Lord Moyne and Count
Folke Bernadotte, and Jewish women and children in Deir Yassin, you would see monuments to these victims all
over the western world, Hollywood films by the score, and the kvetching from the usual suspects would only have
been amplified over time. If it had been Palestinian terrorists who concocted the Lavon Affair false flag plan,
or Palestinian naval and air forces which attacked an American naval vessel in broad daylight, flying a large
American flag and attempted to murder the entire crew, likewise. There would be memorials in Arlington, and all
over the U.S., to the brave crew members and their captain, whose actions saved the vessel. Instead all we get
are crickets chirping.
For while the Zionists try to make the rest of the world believe that the national consciousness of the
Jew finds its satisfaction in the creation of a Palestinian state, the Jews again slyly dupe the dumb Goyim.
It doesn't even enter their heads to build up a Jewish state in Palestine for the purpose of living there;
all they want is a central organization for their international world swindle, endowed with its own
sovereign rights and removed from the intervention of other states: a haven for convicted scoundrels and a
university for budding crooks.
How prescient and prophetic these words were, written decades before the founding of the criminal entity in
Palestine! Israel does not serve as a Jewish homeland, it serves as a base of criminal operations, a weapons
depot, and a sanctuary for international fugitives from justice
Now that the Israeli-backed head choppers and liver eaters have been defeated, Syria has returned to the the
multi-confessional, pluralistic paradise it always was when compared with the abomination West of the Jordan
River. Before the establishment of the Zionist state, Jews as well as Christians were welcome in Arab states.
Even after 1948, Sephardim did not immediately flock to Israel.
When Ashkenazi Zionists discovered they had created a labor shortage by ethnically cleansing Palestinians,
they embarked on a propaganda and false flag campaign to get Sephardim to migrate to Israel, where many of
those well-educated and formerly wealthy Jews were discriminated against and forced to take menial jobs. The
false flags designed specifically to stampede Jews out of Iraq are well documented, so don't lie about it,
Tyrion. Jews were among the wealthiest of Iraqis, and had little organic reason to emigrate. The propaganda of
Arab governments expelling the Sephardim is largely false.
The racist, European (white) supremacist narrative (what Edward Said called "Orientalism") that Arabs and
Muslims are always killing each other and Europe must intervene for humanitarian reasons is actively cultivated
by Israel in order to justify its own ethno-supremacist society. That's why Israel encourages Wahhabi terrorism
emanating from the Gulf.
Better to be a minority in Israel than any other Middle Eastern country. The two settlers guilty of arson
are disgusting zealots. But their type is exponentially more common in Iraq, Syria, Iran and so on.
The minority groups in Iran, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, would laugh at you and the Jew of Iran prefer Iran to
Israel. These sorts of lunatics, without Israeli, West interference, are rare in Iraq, Syria, Iran and so on.
Israel is dominated by disgusting zealots. Israel is a zealot state of zealots.
Why I am all for wire tapping and all other spying by the CIA and FBI ...get all the uber Jews
and all the politicians and make it public.
Would be delighted if all the news channels did nothing but play the tapes on the daily news.
Following is a transcript of the Oct. 22, 1992 conversation with President David Steiner
of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) recorded without his knowledge by New
York businessman Haim (Harry) Katz. Its existence was first revealed to the Washington Times
and its release triggered Steiner's resignation.
(sample)
HK: Let me tell you, I was planning, I was planning to, to . . . Inouye, by the way, is in
real trouble? He's been there forever. . .
DS: Yeah! Well, we might lose him. There's been such a sea change, such trouble this year, I
can't believe all our friends that are in trouble. Because there's an anti-incumbency mood,
and foreign aid has not been popular. You know what I got for, I met with [U.S. Secretary
of State] Jim Baker and I cut a deal with him. I got, besides the $3 billion, you know
they're looking for the Jewish votes, and I'll tell him whatever he wants to hear . .
.
HK: Right.
DS: Besides the $10 billion in loan guarantees which was a fabulous thing, $3 billion in
foreign, in military aid, and I got almost a billion dollars in other goodies that people
don't even know about .
HK: Such as?
DS: $700 million in military draw-down, from equipment that the United States Army's going
to give to Israel; $200 million the U.S. government is going to preposition materials in
Israel, which Israel can draw upon; put them in the global warning protection system; so when
if there's a missile fired, they'll get the same advanced notification that the U.S., is
notified, joint military exercises -- I've got a whole shopping list of things .
May be Jewishness is of secondary importance, and connections to MIC should be considered
first.
Notable quotes:
"... They see dragging America into Israel's wars in the Middle East as furthering Israel's national security interest. Only a fool would deny the obscene amount of power the Zionist faction wields in the USA. ..."
I'm strongly against any war with Iran, but this comes of as an unhinged and bigoted rant.
Not nearly everyone who is pushing for war with Iran is Jewish, and this narrative
perpetuates the myth, beloved by alt-right types and paleocons, of a well-intentioned but
naive Trump administration that was hijacked by Jewish neocons.
In reality, despite differences within the administration, Iran was always something they
could all agree on. H.R. McMaster and James Mattis are well known Iran hawks, and neither are
Jewish.
Nikki Haley isn't Jewish, nor is Rex Tillerson. Steve Bannon and Michael Flynn wouldn't
have stopped Trump from going to war if they hadn't been forced out of the administration, as
both, especially the latter, were absolute lunatics when it came to Iran.
On that subject, they were worse than neocons.
And of course there's Trump himself, whose bloodlust regarding Iran has always been on
full display from the beginning, if you were paying attention. Hostility toward Iran might in
fact be the most consistent theme of the Trump administration and of Trump himself, who has
been known to vacillate on virtually every issue, except this one.
If you supported Trump because you thought he might be some sort of isolationist dove, you
have only yourself to blame. Evil Jewish neocons didn't force you to ignore the massive
evidence that was always right in front of your face.
Phil Giraldi's title, admittedly, is infelicitous because it gives ammunition to ADL and
their ilk to label the article, guess what, Antisemitic, their favorite slur.
Though again I disagree with the choice of his title, which makes it an easy target, I
understand Giraldi's frustration at witnessing the apocalyptic blow AIPAC delivers to the
sustainability of the United States as a country.
Obviously, not all Jews in DC's and NYC's elite are driving us to war, and of course many
non-Jews are. It remains incontrovertible, however, that a very active, powerful, organized,
and influential minority of people, who identify as Jewish, are restless and effective
Israel-firsters.
They see dragging America into Israel's wars in the Middle East as furthering Israel's
national security interest. Only a fool would deny the obscene amount of power the Zionist
faction wields in the USA.
The more things change, the more they stay the same. This article is read as if it was written yesterday. What is
interesting is the absence of US immune system, which would allow question the US relationship with Israel and the power of Zionist
lobby in the USA. Philip Giraldi was and remain a clear outliner who at least tries to analyze the phenomenon. But more
and deeper research is needed.
The level of subservience of Trump to Israel lobby is a couse of concerns.
Notable quotes:
"... Gus Savage was a black Member of Congress who was targeted by the Israel Lobby. And he had the foresight to use his position as an incumbent of the HofR to put his experience on the congressional record. ..."
"... Israel receives almost one-third of all the United States' foreign assistance, $3 billion in the foreign assistance bill, and usually $400 million or $500 million more tacked on here and there, roughly $3.5 billion a year. That is not the Government's money. That is your money, your tax dollars. ..."
"... We do not have enough money to maintain full funding for student grants and student loans for those in need to attend the colleges of their choice, for which they are qualified, not enough money to create jobs programs for those pockets of poverty in our Nation, not enough funds for long-term Medicare for our senior citizens in need, but $3 1/2 billion of your tax dollars to one little nation, Israel, a nation with only about 3 1/2 million citizens. That means then that you are giving $1,000 a year to every man, woman, and child citizen of Israel. Think about that. ..."
"... It's all about the money. As said in your excerpts, you can't run an effective campaign in the US w/o cash. The Israel Lobby's method is to "primary" non-compliant MOCs like McKinney and Savage by throwing money behind a similar candidate from the same Party – but one who has pledged support for Israel if elected. ..."
Spring in Washington would not be complete without the city's famous cherry blossoms and the annual
"Policy Conference" meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The 15,000 plus participants began arriving
on Sunday and will be here at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center until tomorrow morning, at which point many of them will
descend on Congress like a swarm of ravenous locusts to make sure that our Solons on the Potomac are doing what is right by Israel.
AIPAC is the most powerful foreign policy
lobby in Washington. Its annual budget exceeds $77 million plus it has an
endowment of $100 million . It has nearly
400 employees and also supports
local chapters and initiatives throughout the United States. What do all those employees do? They mostly lobby Congress and increasingly
state legislatures shamelessly on behalf of a foreign country that has little in the way of actual common interests with the United
States. When anything happens in the Middle East, AIPAC's drones get to work, drafting up position papers detailing the Israeli position
which are then placed by runners on the desks of every single congressman within a matter of hours. The congressmen, too lazy to
engage in any real inquiry into what is going on, rely on the AIPAC research. That is, lamentably, how our system works. And if the
congressman ignores the "expert" advice, AIPAC and its friends makes sure he or she has a strong, well-funded opponent in the next
election, someone who knows how to say "I love Israel" without moving his or her lips.
The current speakers' list for the 2017
conference includes many of the leading political parasites that have long made the nation's Capitol a "must miss" destination. I
will not attempt to summarize what Michael Pence, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Kevin McCarthy, Steny
Hoyer and others said on Sunday night and yesterday as it was all basically the same speech, declaring undying love for Israel and
the Jewish people and pledging that the United States will always have "Israel's back," whatever that is supposed to mean. Twenty-nine
congressmen were featured as attendees on the
AIPAC website but more than
two thirds of the entire Congress is expected to appear for a photo op while muttering something about that apparently vulnerable
"back." Or do they mean backside? Whatever. I won't name any more of the specific panderers as the reader probably already has a
good idea who they are.
And, of course, the redoubtable Professor
Alan Dershowitz was also a featured speaker, a wonderful human being who
recently told us goyim that Jewish power in this country is both deserved and granted by Jehovah. It is interesting how Jews
among themselves boast about their power
but if a gentile so much as suggests the same thing it is anti-Semitism.
There were also two certifiable loonies
among the speakers, apart from Dershowitz. They were Nikki Haley, America's stalwart U.N. Ambassador, and Stephen Harper, until recently
Prime Minister of Canada. Those who are following Haley's meteoric career are probably aware that while governor of South Carolina
she took the lead on making her state
the first in the nation to legislate against the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS) which supports peaceful pressure
on Israel to abandon its apartheid policies when dealing with its own Arab citizens as well as the Palestinians on the West Bank
and Gaza. Such legislation is an abrogation of First Amendment rights and will likely prove to be unconstitutional if it ever gets
to the Supreme Court, but Haley clearly believed then and believes now that nothing is too good when it comes to Israel. Since going
to the U.N., Haley has spoken more about Israel than about any possible American interests, pledging full support and protection
for Netanyahu and his government. She blocked the appointment of a well-qualified Palestinian to a senior U.N. position purely because
he was Palestinian. Ignorant of nearly everything that goes on in the world outside the U.S., it might be said that she is so horribly
inept that she actually makes her ghastly predecessor Samantha Power look good.
Stephen Harper is another certified knee
jerker when it comes to Israel. A fundamentalist Christian who believes the second coming of Christ is imminent, while Prime Minister
he led what was possibly the world's
most pro-Israeli government
. Harper described Israel as a light that " burns bright,
upheld by the universal principles of all civilized nations – freedom, democracy justice." He has
also said "I will defend Israel whatever the cost" to Canada,
an interesting proposition for those who might have believed that his duty was to protect his own country and advance its interests.
Harper, who has received awards from both Canadian and
American Jewish organizations, personally endorsed Israel's bombing of Lebanon in 2006, calling it "measured" even when Canadian
peacekeepers
were killed in the bombardment.
Paul Kagame, President of the Republic
of Rwanda, also spoke at the conference. Why? I don't know but it probably has something to do with characteristically liberal American
Jews pulling their usual doublespeak trick, trying to pretend that fundamentally racist Israelis are not actually racist by inviting
a black man to speak at a pro-Israel conference. I'll bet he was paid handsomely to do so.
And former British Prime Minister Tony
Blair, perhaps suggesting that love for Israel is truly international, spoke and was also probably paid handsomely to do so as he
an incorporated brand. Between 2007 and 2015 Blair was the "special envoy" representing (and personally profiting from) the Quartet
seeking to bring about a peace agreement between Israel and Palestine. Marwan Bishara
explained in The
New York Times : "A natural panderer to power, Mr. Blair morphed his complicity with the United States over Iraq into a new
complicity with Israel. The assumption that operates is that schmoozing with the powerful is the only way to make a difference. So
while Mr. Blair worked to reform the Palestinian Authority's finances, security and governance, he turned a blind eye as Israel expanded
its illegal settlements and tightened its hold on the autonomous territories. In the process, Mr. Blair helped render the Palestinian
Authority more, not less, dependent on Israel. Instead of protecting the Palestinians from the Israeli settlers, Palestinian security
forces have since been protecting Israeli settlers from Palestinian resentment." Blair also attacked the Palestinian leadership's
decision to seek United Nations recognition of the Palestinian state, calling it "deeply confrontational." Bishara dismisses him
as "Israel's puppy." As I am extremely fond of dogs, I would modify that to read "Israel and now AIPAC's butt boy."
The avenging angel Benjamin Netanyahu also
addressed the conference by satellite link and yet again described the threat posed by Iran. The satellite visit was somewhat surprising,
as he usually likes to drop by in person so he can pick up his annual tribute money from the U.S. Treasury. This year's Danegeld
will be $3.8 billion thanks to President Barack Obama, guaranteed for ten years, and there will be, of course, various supplements
as the Israelis discover things that they just need to have to stave off Netanyahu's wily Persians and fight the rising tide of anti-Semitism.
A rising tide, which we have just learned,
was carried out by an Israeli Jew who also holds U.S. citizenship, which again leads to the question why so many Israelis are
allowed to have American passports even though they live in Israel and serve in the Israeli Army?
And, of course, Persia was an
integral part of the conference as it is tough to want to destroy the entire Muslim Middle East without having a really formidable
enemy to focus on. Iran fits the bill quite nicely, but speakers were also prone to skewer those terrible Ay-rabs who just do not
want peace. And the Israelis settlements are not a problem, nosiree! The theme of this year's gathering was, in fact, "Many voices,
one mission," the mission presumably being the expansion of Israel so it will stretch east to west from the Nile to the River Jordan
and north to the Turkish border. The indigenous inhabitants will have to be removed, but as they are mostly terrorists that should
be okay with the world community and Donald Trump.
And with the 15,000 AIPAC attendees. The
AIPAC gathering is really all about subverting Congress, so it is a good thing that a large majority of Congressmen were attending,
making the necessary bowing and scraping that much easier. And they will enjoy it even more when the 15,000 AIPAC loyalists descend
on Capitol Hill as the conference ends to make sure that Congress is listening. Democracy in action is great, isn't it?
Even though I jest about the absurdity
of thousands of Americans who appeared to be confused about what country they actually live in gathering to honor a foreign country
that has an army that acts like a terrorist group, does not believe in equal rights even for its own citizens and bans visitors who
do not accept its more questionable policies, the AIPAC people are not a joke. They are a deadly serious threat to our own democracy
and way of life as they have figured out how to use money and the power that money buys to leverage and corrupt the system in such
a way as to produce wars and turmoil that have blown back on the United States and made every American citizen both less safe and
poorer.
I have written and spoken before how AIPAC
is ultimately doomed as Israel and its basic policies towards Arabs and its neighbors are unsustainable both from a human rights
and practical point of view. But that does not mean that it is going away any time soon. The Israel Lobby has the U.S. Congress and
media by the throat and the Trump administration promises to be completely uncritical in its relationship with Netanyahu and whatever
homicidal kleptocrat might be in line to succeed him. Ms. Haley and her peers in state governments have successfully pushed legislation
in a majority of states that punishes anyone who tries to boycott Israeli institutions or products. On university campuses non-violent
criticism of Israel is being suppressed. There is also increasing pressure to define any criticism of Israel as anti-Semitism and
therefore a hate crime, modeled on similar legislation in Canada, Britain and France.
In a number of European countries it is
a crime to challenge the standard narrative on "the Holocaust." Why should that be? You can in much of Europe stand in a town square
and say horrible things about your own country but if you criticize the factual basis of one particular "event" that took place in
the 1940s you will go to jail.
So hang on to your hats, my fellow Americans.
AIPAC is not going away and it will be doing all it can to keep neighboring Syria a cauldron of death and destruction while also
calling for war on Iran. And AIPAC as well as the other bits and pieces of the Israel Lobby will have many Quislings in the Congress
and U.S. media who will echo whatever they propose, even if it does grave damage to American interests. Meanwhile the billions and
billions of dollars will continue to flow from an increasingly straitened United States to a wealthy Israel. At its conference
AIPAC announced the latest windfall from America, applauding " the U.S. House of Representatives for significantly bolstering
its support of U.S.-Israel missile defense cooperation in the FY 2017 defense appropriations bill. The House appropriated $600.7
million for U.S.-Israel missile defense programs." That is on top of everything else Israel gets. Will it ever end? I don't know.
It's revealing that Zionist support Israeli immigration laws which specify JEWS ONLY, while those same Zionists demand massive
3rd world immigration into the US & Europe.
It's also revealing that we don't see Zionists criticizing Israel's very real WALL.
Fake News Versus No News
How Russia is pilloried while real news about Israel goes unreported
Israel interferes in our politics all the time, and it's never a scandal.
"The Israeli interference in our politics is the conspiracy in plain sight that no one in the media talks about because they're
too implicated themselves."
Israeli Mossad's motto: "By deception thou shalt do war"
Moscow has 92 synagogues for less than a thousand practicing Jews – they are staffed and manned by the imported American Rabbis
of Habad. Best and the choicest pieces of Russian municipal land are given to synagogues and Jewish cultural centres for free.
200 Words Very well said, Phil Giraldi. The power of the Israel Lobby in the US is almost absolute. Slowly but surely, they
get also a hold of the political elites in Great Britain, France, and Germany. None of these folks have the guts to criticize
the brutal Apartheid regime in Israel and the Palestinian Occupied Territories out of fear of being branded an "anti-Semite".
The US Congress doesn't serve the interest of the American people but only the Zionist regime and their expansionist lust for
territory and their aggression towards Iran. Not Iran is the major sponsor of terrorism such as the Zionist and their cheerleaders
in the US pretend but Israel with its terrorist military gang, the so-called IDF, which should be renamed in ITF (Israeli Terrorist
Forces).
Miko Peled, the author of "The General's Son" described this military gang as follows: "the IDF is the best trained, best equipped,
best fed terrorist organization in the world". And the US taxpayers are financing a terror organization that is against US law.
"Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner's choice of neighborhood narrows the focus on Chabad":
The residence they have reportedly picked, on Tracy Place NW, is about half a mile from TheShul of the Nation's Capital, a synagogue
run by the active Orthodox Jewish organization Chabad .
ome of Washington's highest-profile observant Jews, including Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and longtime senator and 2000 vice presidential
candidate Joseph I. Lieberman, have sometimes attended services at TheShul as an alternative to Kesher Israel, where they more
frequently spent Shabbat. Numerous Jewish ambassadors from foreign countries have chosen to worship at TheShul "
@
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/01/05/ivanka-trump-and-jared-kushners-choice-of-neighborhood-narrows-the-focus-on-chabad/?utm_term=.1bce47e39bc2
"Recently, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner visited the Ohel*, and every Jewish media outlet covered their visit. However Trump
and Kushner's visit was not publicized by Chabad".
@ http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/227102
*The Cambria Heights, Queens "Ohel" (literally 'tent' but used by Chabad hassidim to mean 'tomb') of the sixth and seventh
Chabad-Lubavitch Rebbes, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Scheerson and his son-in-law Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, has become a 24-hour
hub of activity with visitors stopping at all hours of day and night to pray and ask for blessings.
Thousands of Jews, from all backgrounds and ethnicities, as well as politicians, diplomats, and many others, visit the site every
day of the year.
Yes, the ones with silly hairstyles.
"Vice President Mike Pence on Sunday put the issue of moving the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem back on the
table, telling pro-Israel lobbying group that President Donald Trump was giving "serious consideration" to the issue.
@ http://www.newsweek.com/mike-pence-trump-us-embassy-jerusalem-consideration-574576
These are the folks who put the Zio in Anglo/Zio Empire. If you are an Imperialist (Hillary supporter) you gotta love these
people. Nationalists not so much.
Spiridon ,
March 28, 2017 at 8:58 am GMT \n
100 Words You are wrong when it comes to explain Kagame presence ; it is not cosmetic at all, it is not to give some "antiracist"
acceptable face to AIPAC. But it has to do with many years of Israel lobbying in Africa, it's hidden role in managing access to
resources and manipulating powers in Africa. Besides, Kagame is himself this kind of terrorist, most probably at the very origin
of Rwanda massacre, blaming others for being terrorist and dressing himself in innocent pure white colour a fake victim. He received
officially last year Netanyahu in Rwanda. Israel has been secretly very active in Africa for the benefit of UK and USA, trying
to encroach on French turf. One famous journalist has written crystal clear book on this influences : "Carnages" by Pierre Pean.
Israel was eager to play a role in destabilizing Sudan, an Rwanda was a piece on the chessboard. The FPR (patriotic front of Rwanda)
led by Kagame was an important tool of this war.
Incitatus ,
April 1, 2017 at 8:40 pm GMT \n
100 Words @iffen (deliberate)
attack on the USS Liberty '67
What do the parentheses mean? Why did you use deliberate? Of course it was deliberate. Are you trying to obscure the issue
of mis-identification by using deliberate?
LBJ's reaction was shameful.
Why was it shameful? Are you joining in with the warmonger, flag waving casket jumpers now? " (deliberate) attack on the
USS Liberty '67 "
"What do the parentheses mean?"
"Deliberate" was thus noted because I tried to make a larger point about Israel's possible motive (mistrust after Suez).
No question the attack was sustained and deliberate.
"Why was it [LBJ's reaction] shameful?"
The whole incident reeked cover up. LBJ planned to run for reelection. QED the clumsy obfuscation, willing acceptance (wink-wink)
of Israel's lame excuse, and turning the MOH into a consolation prize to keep survivors quiet. He even avoided personally awarding
it (customary). That's why LBJ's reaction was shameful.
"Are you joining in with the warmonger, flag waving casket jumpers now?"
Not at all. Truth – correcting the record – would satisfy me. And be healthier for Israel. It's too easy to drink koolaid and
believe one's own lies (e.g. GW Bush Iraq 2003).
Do yourself a favor? Spread your "wings" and ass cheeks, fly to Israel, and stay there.
U.S. Liberty Calling Sam The Sham: Cease meditations for a moment and show ''iffen-iffen the open door to Israel? Hey Chuck,
Yeah, I guess iffen-iffen, sam the sham and all these other hasbara assholes should indeed move to their beloved israel(Palestine).
Except, if all the diaspora zio slime moved there, it would only make the Palestinians' lives even more miserable. Then again,
they don't wanna go anyway
Read the following interview with the brave Jeffrey Blankfort(who is Jewish), a journalist and Middle-East analyst, well worth
it. He closes it with;
"Should Israel find a way to attack Iran, the repercussions from that might be sufficient to send Israel on the road to
what will ultimately be viewed as self-destruction. At the moment, thanks to the unconditional backing by the U.S. for all
it crimes, and given its arsenal of nuclear weapons, I consider Israel to be the most immediate threat to the future of the
planet."
BTW Chuck, and I only ask bc you already revealed even your home address, do you have any email address you'd be willing to
share? Perfectly alright if don't wish to, of course.
Maybe you can help me with this. (You seem to have a good filing system (-: )
When I mentioned to a friend (not a person who follows Israel/Palestine) that MOCs are "invited" to pledge loyalty to Israel,
she couldn't believe it, and asked for proof.
Is there hard evidence? Is there a written document, or is this an oral pledge? [I imagine an AIPAC delegation in every new
MOCs office.] Has any official - besides Cynthia McKinney - spoken about this?
Judging from my friend's reaction, this should go to the top of the LFTL list of essential information, (not to mention
prominent placement at If Americans Knew).
The only thing I know about (to send to my friend) is the video of Cynthia at a past WRMEA conference, telling her story. Also,
I think one of the other speakers, a former AIPAC employee, mentioned this.
Is there hard evidence? Is there a written document, or is this an oral pledge? [I imagine an AIPAC delegation in every
new MOCs office.] Has any official – besides Cynthia McKinney – spoken about this?
Hi, RobinG. I wasn't even aware of this allegation. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. I did a Google search and the
only thing I could come up with was this article:
Cynthia McKinney Drops Bombshell: Candidates to sign pledges of support for "Israel"
by Richard Edmondson
In an interview which aired on Press TV on Saturday–one day before the AIPAC conference got under way in Washington–former
Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney revealed what amounts to some pretty startling news regarding the extent of the Israeli
lobby's influence over Congress.
During her years in Congress, she stated, candidates for both the House and the Senate were requested to sign pledges of
support for Israel, documents in which the candidate promised to vote to provide consistent levels of economic aid to the Zionist
state. Refusal to sign the pledge meant no funding for the candidate's campaign.
"You make a commitment that you will vote to support the military superiority of Israel-the economic assistance that
Israel wants, that you would vote to provide that," McKinney, who served in Congress from 1993-2003 and again 2005-2007,
tells Press TV interviewer Marzieh Hashemi in the two-part video program below.
According to McKinney, the pledge also included a vow to support Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel.
" Every candidate for Congress at that time had a pledge, they were given a pledge to sign " she said. "If you
don't sign the pledge, you don't get money. For example, it was almost like water torture for me. My parents observed this.
I would get a call and the person on the other end of the phone would say 'I want to do a fundraiser for you.' And then we
would get into the planning. I would get really excited, because of course you have to have money in order to run a campaign.
And then two weeks, three weeks into the planning, they would say, 'Did you sign the pledge?' And then I would say, 'No,
I didn't sign the pledge.' And then my fundraiser would go kaput."
During her years in Congress, McKinney opposed U.S. involvement in foreign wars, questioned the official version of the
events of 911, and introduced articles of impeachment against former President George W. Bush. Her final term in Congress came
to an end after AIPAC, or the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, funneled money into the campaign of her opponent, Hank
Johnson.
In the interview, Miss McKinny also references one of her predecessors, Gus Savage, who was targeted by the Lobby before she
was. Here's what she had to say:
Gus Savage was a black Member of Congress who was targeted by the Israel Lobby. And he had the foresight to use his position
as an incumbent of the HofR to put his experience on the congressional record.
Here's an excerpt from Gus Savage's excellent speech:
Now, let me say something about my position regarding Israel that may explain the concern, but certainly does not justify
a body with no legal right to do so whose primary concern is a foreign nation rather than the interests of America, trying
to determine the outcome of an American election for Congress. That, my friends, Mr. and Mrs. America, is dangerous, indeed.
Israel receives almost one-third of all the United States' foreign assistance, $3 billion in the foreign assistance bill,
and usually $400 million or $500 million more tacked on here and there, roughly $3.5 billion a year. That is not the Government's
money. That is your money, your tax dollars.
We do not have enough money to maintain full funding for student grants and student loans for those in need to attend the
colleges of their choice, for which they are qualified, not enough money to create jobs programs for those pockets of poverty
in our Nation, not enough funds for long-term Medicare for our senior citizens in need, but $3 1/2 billion of your tax dollars
to one little nation, Israel, a nation with only about 3 1/2 million citizens. That means then that you are giving $1,000 a
year to every man, woman, and child citizen of Israel. Think about that.
Is there hard evidence? Is there a written document, or is this an oral pledge? [I imagine an AIPAC delegation in every new
MOCs office.] Has any official – besides Cynthia McKinney – spoken about this?
Hi, RobinG. I wasn't even aware of this allegation. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. I did a Google search and the only
thing I could come up with was this article:
Cynthia McKinney Drops Bombshell: Candidates to sign pledges of support for "Israel"
by Richard Edmondson
In an interview which aired on Press TV on Saturday–one day before the AIPAC conference got under way in Washington–former
Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney revealed what amounts to some pretty startling news regarding the extent of the Israeli
lobby's influence over Congress.
During her years in Congress, she stated, candidates for both the House and the Senate were requested to sign pledges of
support for Israel, documents in which the candidate promised to vote to provide consistent levels of economic aid to the Zionist
state. Refusal to sign the pledge meant no funding for the candidate's campaign.
"You make a commitment that you will vote to support the military superiority of Israel-the economic assistance that
Israel wants, that you would vote to provide that," McKinney, who served in Congress from 1993-2003 and again 2005-2007,
tells Press TV interviewer Marzieh Hashemi in the two-part video program below.
According to McKinney, the pledge also included a vow to support Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel.
" Every candidate for Congress at that time had a pledge, they were given a pledge to sign " she said. "If you
don't sign the pledge, you don't get money. For example, it was almost like water torture for me. My parents observed this.
I would get a call and the person on the other end of the phone would say 'I want to do a fundraiser for you.' And then we
would get into the planning. I would get really excited, because of course you have to have money in order to run a campaign.
And then two weeks, three weeks into the planning, they would say, 'Did you sign the pledge?' And then I would say, 'No,
I didn't sign the pledge.' And then my fundraiser would go kaput."
During her years in Congress, McKinney opposed U.S. involvement in foreign wars, questioned the official version of the
events of 911, and introduced articles of impeachment against former President George W. Bush. Her final term in Congress came
to an end after AIPAC, or the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, funneled money into the campaign of her opponent, Hank
Johnson.
Here's the video of CM's interview:
https://youtu.be/hXaCym8RjJU
In the interview, Miss McKinny also references one of her predecessors, Gus Savage, who was targeted by the Lobby before she was.
Here's what she had to say:
Gus Savage was a black Member of Congress who was targeted by the Israel Lobby. And he had the foresight to use his position
as an incumbent of the HofR to put his experience on the congressional record.
Here's an excerpt from Gus Savage's excellent speech:
Now, let me say something about my position regarding Israel that may explain the concern, but certainly does not justify a
body with no legal right to do so whose primary concern is a foreign nation rather than the interests of America, trying to
determine the outcome of an American election for Congress. That, my friends, Mr. and Mrs. America, is dangerous, indeed.
Israel receives almost one-third of all the United States' foreign assistance, $3 billion in the foreign assistance bill,
and usually $400 million or $500 million more tacked on here and there, roughly $3.5 billion a year. That is not the Government's
money. That is your money, your tax dollars.
We do not have enough money to maintain full funding for student grants and student loans for those in need to attend the
colleges of their choice, for which they are qualified, not enough money to create jobs programs for those pockets of poverty
in our Nation, not enough funds for long-term Medicare for our senior citizens in need, but $3 1/2 billion of your tax dollars
to one little nation, Israel, a nation with only about 3 1/2 million citizens. That means then that you are giving $1,000 a
year to every man, woman, and child citizen of Israel. Think about that.
The only revision I would make to Rep. Savage's great list of what the large annual tribute could be better spent on in the
US would be repairing broken down fire trucks for bankrupt cities like Detroit, MI (just south of the border from Canada, where
some suggest these fire trucks are said to be mfged).
The only revision I would make to Rep. Savage's great list of what the large annual tribute could be better spent on in the US
would be repairing broken down fire trucks for bankrupt cities like Detroit, MI (just south of the border from Canada, where some
suggest these fire trucks are said to be mfged). Hey Geo,
Don't forget support for the thousands of veterans and their families that are traumatized by their participation in the overseas
ME 'adventures' – these guys are committing suicide left and right and it should be made into headlines, but that would mean more
scrutiny on why the hell we went to war in the first place.
Is there hard evidence? Is there a written document, or is this an oral pledge? [I imagine an AIPAC delegation in every new
MOCs office.] Has any official – besides Cynthia McKinney – spoken about this?
Hi, RobinG. I wasn't even aware of this allegation. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. I did a Google search and the only
thing I could come up with was this article:
Cynthia McKinney Drops Bombshell: Candidates to sign pledges of support for "Israel"
by Richard Edmondson
In an interview which aired on Press TV on Saturday–one day before the AIPAC conference got under way in Washington–former
Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney revealed what amounts to some pretty startling news regarding the extent of the Israeli
lobby's influence over Congress.
During her years in Congress, she stated, candidates for both the House and the Senate were requested to sign pledges of
support for Israel, documents in which the candidate promised to vote to provide consistent levels of economic aid to the Zionist
state. Refusal to sign the pledge meant no funding for the candidate's campaign.
"You make a commitment that you will vote to support the military superiority of Israel-the economic assistance that
Israel wants, that you would vote to provide that," McKinney, who served in Congress from 1993-2003 and again 2005-2007,
tells Press TV interviewer Marzieh Hashemi in the two-part video program below.
According to McKinney, the pledge also included a vow to support Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel.
" Every candidate for Congress at that time had a pledge, they were given a pledge to sign " she said. "If you
don't sign the pledge, you don't get money. For example, it was almost like water torture for me. My parents observed this.
I would get a call and the person on the other end of the phone would say 'I want to do a fundraiser for you.' And then we
would get into the planning. I would get really excited, because of course you have to have money in order to run a campaign.
And then two weeks, three weeks into the planning, they would say, 'Did you sign the pledge?' And then I would say, 'No,
I didn't sign the pledge.' And then my fundraiser would go kaput."
During her years in Congress, McKinney opposed U.S. involvement in foreign wars, questioned the official version of the
events of 911, and introduced articles of impeachment against former President George W. Bush. Her final term in Congress came
to an end after AIPAC, or the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, funneled money into the campaign of her opponent, Hank
Johnson.
Here's the video of CM's interview:
https://youtu.be/hXaCym8RjJU
In the interview, Miss McKinny also references one of her predecessors, Gus Savage, who was targeted by the Lobby before she was.
Here's what she had to say:
Gus Savage was a black Member of Congress who was targeted by the Israel Lobby. And he had the foresight to use his position
as an incumbent of the HofR to put his experience on the congressional record.
Here's an excerpt from Gus Savage's excellent speech:
Now, let me say something about my position regarding Israel that may explain the concern, but certainly does not justify a
body with no legal right to do so whose primary concern is a foreign nation rather than the interests of America, trying to
determine the outcome of an American election for Congress. That, my friends, Mr. and Mrs. America, is dangerous, indeed.
Israel receives almost one-third of all the United States' foreign assistance, $3 billion in the foreign assistance bill,
and usually $400 million or $500 million more tacked on here and there, roughly $3.5 billion a year. That is not the Government's
money. That is your money, your tax dollars.
We do not have enough money to maintain full funding for student grants and student loans for those in need to attend the
colleges of their choice, for which they are qualified, not enough money to create jobs programs for those pockets of poverty
in our Nation, not enough funds for long-term Medicare for our senior citizens in need, but $3 1/2 billion of your tax dollars
to one little nation, Israel, a nation with only about 3 1/2 million citizens. That means then that you are giving $1,000 a
year to every man, woman, and child citizen of Israel. Think about that.
Hank Johnson , who still holds that seat, is a typical Dem., and CBC (Congressional Black Caucus) Member. While his obeisance
to Israel is less blatant than some others (CBC's Alcee Hastings touts his unwavering support of Israel, and his official site
now features photos of his recent AIPAC appearance), Rep. Johnson demonstrates his loyalty in only slightly more subtle ways.
His official site lists these accomplishments:
Co-authored legislation to impose sanctions on Iran's petroleum sector. It passed the House.
Cosponsored the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act, which passed the House. It would sanction Iran for its failure to make good on
its international legal commitments with regard to its clandestine nuclear program.
It's all about the money. As said in your excerpts, you can't run an effective campaign in the US w/o cash. The Israel Lobby's
method is to "primary" non-compliant MOCs like McKinney and Savage by throwing money behind a similar candidate from the same
Party – but one who has pledged support for Israel if elected.
Money quote (from comments): This GOP/Israel connection stinks to high heaven. Anyone who studied or remembers our problem with
Communist spies back in the '50s has got to be hearing alarm bells ringing in their ears. Worries about Soviet spying and Russian meddling
pale in comparison to what's now going on in plain sight with Israel.
Notable quotes:
"... As usual, Trump made the announcement of recognizing Israel's claim to the Golan Heights without any consultation with any of the relevant administration officials: ..."
"... After more than two years of watching Trump's impulsive and reckless "governing" style, it doesn't come as a surprise to anyone that he makes these decisions without advance warning. There is no evidence that Trump ever thinks anything through, and so he probably sees no reason to tell anyone in advance what he is going to do. ..."
"... Trump almost never bothers consulting with the people who will be responsible for carrying out his policies ..."
"... There is absolutely no upside for the United States in endorsing illegal Israeli claims to the Golan Heights. It is a cynical political stunt intended to boost Netanyahu and Likud's fortunes in the upcoming election, and it is also a cynical stunt aimed at shoring up Trump's support from Republican "pro-Israel" voters and donors. ..."
"... Once again, Trump has put narrow political ambitions and the interests of a foreign government ahead of the interests of the United States. That seems to be the inevitable result of electing a narcissist who conducts foreign policy based on which leaders flatter and praise him. ..."
"... Bolton is usually the culprit responsible any destructive and foolish policy decision over the last year, and his baleful influence continues to grow. We can also see the harmful effects of the administration's Iran obsession at work. In the end, the Syria "withdrawal" hasn't happened and apparently isn't going to, but Trump nonetheless gives Israel whatever it wants in exchange for nothing so that they will be "reassured" of our unthinking support. ..."
"... I wonder what Mr. Kagan has to say now about "authoritarian" regimes?! ..."
"... Trump is making one hell of a mess for the next president to clean up. ..."
"... The decision to leave the INF treaty was taken in a similar way and with a total disregard for the consequences. The leaders of the European NATO countries have shown utter spinelessness in going along with it. ..."
"... I am shocked and horrified by what I've seen under Trump. I am deeply disappointed that so few Republicans (or Democrats, for that matter) have stood up to him on foreign policy, and I will never vote Republican again. This GOP/Israel connection stinks to high heaven. Anyone who studied or remembers our problem with Communist spies back in the '50s has got to be hearing alarm bells ringing in their ears. Worries about Soviet spying and Russian meddling pale in comparison to what's now going on in plain sight with Israel. ..."
"... To be fair, it ain't just Team R that has the sloppy crush on Israel. Team D is just as bad, even if they don't gush quite so publicly. In fact, episodes such as this one are useful in a way, as they make it hard to pretend that this is just a one-off, a misguided decision that we have to go along with to appease a powerful friend. ..."
"... Nevertheless, Israel should be very concerned about Northern Syria. If war breaks out and the US is forced to go to war with its own NATO ally as a result, Israel should prepare to kiss its alliance with the US goodbye. ..."
"... Many (rightfully or not) will blame Israel due to its connections to neoconservatism and Saudi jingoism, and consequently we may end up seeing BOTH parties becoming unfriendly to Israel over the subsequent generation. ..."
"... All of this could be prevented if President Trump would just tell Saudi Arabia to STOP the nonsense. But no. He's too focused on MIC profits. He's not America First. And quite frankly, I'm starting to think Benjamin Netanyahu is not Israel-first either, because if he were he'd be warning Trump about the mess he's going to end up getting America, Israel, and much of Europe and the Middle East into. ..."
As usual, Trump
made the announcement
of recognizing Israel's claim to the Golan Heights without any consultation with any of the relevant administration officials:
President Donald Trump's tweet on Thursday recognizing the Golan Heights as Israeli territory surprised members of his own
Middle East peace team, the State Department, and Israeli officials.
U.S. diplomats and White House aides had believed the Golan Heights issue would be front and center at next week's meetings
between Trump and Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House. But they were unprepared for any presidential
announcement this week.
No formal U.S. process or executive committees were initiated to review the policy before Trump's decision, and the diplomats
responsible for implementing the policy were left in the dark.
Even the Israelis, who have advocated for this move for years, were stunned at the timing of Trump's message.
After more than two years of watching Trump's impulsive and reckless "governing" style, it doesn't come as a surprise to anyone
that he makes these decisions without advance warning. There is no evidence that Trump ever thinks anything through, and so he probably
sees no reason to tell anyone in advance what he is going to do.
Trump almost never bothers consulting with the people who will be responsible for carrying out his policies and dealing
with the international fallout, and that is probably why so many of his policy decisions end up being exceptionally poor ones. The
substance of most of Trump's foreign policy decisions was never likely to be good, but the lack of an organized policy process on
major decisions makes those decisions even more haphazard and chaotic than they would otherwise be.
There is absolutely no upside for the United States in endorsing illegal Israeli claims to the Golan Heights. It is a cynical
political stunt intended to boost Netanyahu and Likud's fortunes in the upcoming election, and it is also a cynical stunt aimed at
shoring up Trump's support from Republican "pro-Israel" voters and donors.
Whatever short-term benefit Israel gains from it, the U.S. gains nothing and stands to lose quite a bit in terms of our international
standing.
There has been no consideration of the costs and problems this will create for the U.S. in its relations with other regional states
and beyond because Trump couldn't care less about the long-term effects that his decisions have on the country.
Once again, Trump has put narrow political ambitions and the interests of a foreign government ahead of the interests of the
United States. That seems to be the inevitable result of electing a narcissist who conducts foreign policy based on which leaders
flatter and praise him.
Trump's bad decision can be traced back to Bolton's visit to Israel earlier this year:
Administration officials said that National Security Advisor John Bolton was instrumental to the decision, after visiting Israel
in January to assure officials there that the United States would not abandon them in Syria despite Trump's sudden withdrawal
of troops from the battlefield.
Nervous Israeli officials saw an opportunity. "It was an ask," one Israeli source said, "because of the timing -- it suddenly
became a relevant issue about Iran."
Bolton is usually the culprit responsible any destructive and foolish policy decision over the last year, and his baleful
influence continues to grow. We can also see the harmful effects of the administration's Iran obsession at work. In the end, the
Syria "withdrawal" hasn't happened and apparently isn't going to, but Trump nonetheless gives Israel whatever it wants in exchange
for nothing so that they will be "reassured" of our unthinking support.
Well, of course Trump puts America last. There is one and only one person he is interested in -- himself. As you say this is his
narcissistic personality at work.
My never ending question is always, "Why does any Republican with a conscience remain silent? Are they really all this shallow
and self absorbed? Is there nothing Trump does that will finally force them to put country before party and their own ambition?"
It's a really sad state of events that has put this country on the road to ruin.
Trump is making one hell of a mess for the next president to clean up. Straightening out all this stupidity will take
years. Here's hoping that Trump gets to watch his foreign policy decisions tossed out and reversed from federal prison.
The decision to leave the INF treaty was taken in a similar way and with a total disregard for the consequences. The leaders
of the European NATO countries have shown utter spinelessness in going along with it.
The administration says that a Russian missile violates the treaty but it will not tell us what the range of the missile is.
Nor will it allow its weapons inspectors to go and look at it.
The reason is clear: Fear that the weapons inspectors' findings would contradict the administration's claims.
I voted Republican ever since I started voting. I voted for Bush I, Dole, Dubya, and McCain. I couldn't vote for either Obama
or Romney, but I voted for Trump because of Hillary Clinton.
I am shocked and horrified by what I've seen under Trump. I am deeply disappointed that so few Republicans (or Democrats,
for that matter) have stood up to him on foreign policy, and I will never vote Republican again. This GOP/Israel connection stinks
to high heaven. Anyone who studied or remembers our problem with Communist spies back in the '50s has got to be hearing alarm
bells ringing in their ears. Worries about Soviet spying and Russian meddling pale in comparison to what's now going on in plain
sight with Israel.
To be fair, it ain't just Team R that has the sloppy crush on Israel. Team D is just as bad, even if they don't gush quite
so publicly. In fact, episodes such as this one are useful in a way, as they make it hard to pretend that this is just a one-off,
a misguided decision that we have to go along with to appease a powerful friend.
Europoliticians tell that last one a lot. "We really don't want to but the Americans twisted our arms ZOMG Special Relationship
so sorry ZOMG!" Only with a lot more Eurobureaucratese.
I agree with the article's premise, but not because of this move regarding Israel.
Personally, I believe this move will have little impact on the outcome of the crisis in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia and the
other Arab monarchies are too focused on containing Iran and Turkey to give a crap about what Israel does. The only Arab states
that I can see objecting to this move are Syria (obviously) and the others who were already allied with Iran and/or Turkey to
begin with.
Right now, the REAL center of attention in the region should be Northern Syria. THAT's where the next major war likely will
begin. In that area, Saudi Arabia and to a lesser extent Turkey and the United Arab Emirates are the ones doing the major escalations,
while Israel has virtually no role at all aside from sideline cheer-leading. And of course, Trump is doing nothing to stop what
could become the next July Crisis. What's "America First" about that?
Nevertheless, Israel should be very concerned about Northern Syria. If war breaks out and the US is forced to go to war
with its own NATO ally as a result, Israel should prepare to kiss its alliance with the US goodbye.
There is no way our international reputation will come out of this war unscathed, and odds are we'll be in a far worse position
diplomatically than we were at any point in our history, even during the Iraq war. When that happens, the American people will
be out to assign blame. Many (rightfully or not) will blame Israel due to its connections to neoconservatism and Saudi jingoism,
and consequently we may end up seeing BOTH parties becoming unfriendly to Israel over the subsequent generation.
All of this could be prevented if President Trump would just tell Saudi Arabia to STOP the nonsense. But no. He's too focused
on MIC profits. He's not America First. And quite frankly, I'm starting to think Benjamin Netanyahu is not Israel-first either,
because if he were he'd be warning Trump about the mess he's going to end up getting America, Israel, and much of Europe and the
Middle East into.
I don't think the issue is to end capitalism, but economic Zionism (all known as
capitalism changed into monopoism) is on its way out. Revolutionaries, all over the world, are
in place to revert monopolism back to capitalism and democracy back to human rights.**
She [Hillary] was the dream for Big Banking, the apartheid Jewish state, and probably a
lot more folks. That didn't happen, and some people became unhinged. by Zachary Smith @85 As
things have turned out.. we might have all been better off with Hillary than Trump.. Next time
around I am going to vote for the most obvious liar, and the candidate with the most stinking
capaign promises. looking back over the elections since Abe Lincolm was assassinated by the
city of London.. because Lincoln was moving to make USA its own bank and to issue its own
currency.. **
At http://representativepress.org/IsraelViolatesResolution.html
c/b found the pre conditions, all of which Israel agreed to,
for admission of Israel into the UN..
1. he status of jerusalem w/n/b altered
2. Palestinans w/b permitted to return
3. The partition agreement w/become the final borders.
Text of General Assembly Resolution 273 of May 11, 1949 admitting Israel into the UN,
notes Israel agreed to comply with Resolution 194 : UNITED NATIONS General Assembly A/RES/273
(III) 11 May 1949
what is really interesting is to take a look at the low life supporting this UN action at
the press, in the white house and at the MIC. Many supporters there played at hugmongous part
in the rest of the rise of Economic Zionism which depends on leg breaker USA to get its
way..
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Instagram March 10, 2019:
"Israel is not a state of all its citizens. According to the Nation-State Law that we
passed, Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish People -- and them alone."
It is a fascinating, though rather grim, story, spanning the First World War, the
creation of the states of Israel, Iraq, Syria and Saudi Arabia, and taking in Lawrence of
Arabia, all the way to the fall of Gadaffi in Libya, the Syria Civil War and Rise of the
so-called Islamic State, among other things. It's a story of long-term manipulation,
insidious indoctrination, and secret, almost 'mythical' works of literature.
These two ideologies -- Wahhabism in Islam and Zionism which is linked primarily to the
Jewish religion -- may seem like unrelated entities on the surface of it
"Germany still owes Israel $19 billion for the Holocaust. The new estimate was calculated
by independent American economist Sidney Zabludoff, a former CIA, White House and U.S.
Treasury official."
@ Zachary Smith who wrote about Clinton II
"
She was the dream for Big Banking, the apartheid Jewish state, and probably a lot more
folks.
"
So that makes Trump a nightmare for Big Banking, the apartheid Jewish state, etc., right?
I encourage you to understand how much you are being played. If Big Banking has both of
them, whom is being played?
@ 92 * time for everyone to stand up for human rights promoter Assange?
The end of capitalism, in disguise. US pol structure does not allow for such, as the US
(and other West, the US is just a stellar ex.) are ruled by rapacious coproratist (typo)
oligarchs. Won't happen.
"... Trump's failure here is his alone. Closing the border could be accomplished with a simple executive order. It has happened before: Reagan ordered the closing of the border when DEA agent Enrique "Kiki" Camarena was murdered on assignment in Mexico in 1985, for instance. ..."
"... Trump's empty threats over the past two years have had real-world consequences, prompting waves of migrants trying to sneak into the country while they still have the chance. His recent move to cut all foreign aid to Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador is another empty gesture that will probably have similar consequences. The funds directed to those countries were used for programs that provided citizens with incentives not to migrate elsewhere. (The situation was not ideal from an isolationist point of view, but a wiser man would have built the wall before cutting off the aid.) ..."
"... Trump's betrayal of American workers is perhaps best encapsulated by the fact that one of the members of the advisory board of his National Council for the American Worker (which claims to "enhance employment opportunities for Americans of all ages") is the CEO of IBM, a company that has expressed a preference for F-1 and H-1B visa holders in its job postings. ..."
"... There are more former Goldman Sachs employees in the Trump White House than in the Obama and Bush administrations combined. ..."
"... It is hard to escape the conclusion that Trump is not actually interested in curbing immigration and reversing America's demographic decline. He is a con artist and a coward who is willing to betray millions of white Americans so that he can remain in the good graces of establishment neoconservatives ..."
"... As Ann Coulter has put it, "He's like a waiter who compliments us for ordering the hamburger, but keeps bringing us fish. The hamburger is our signature dish, juicy and grilled to perfection, you've made a brilliant choice . . . now here's your salmon. " ..."
"... Third, he put an end to American funding for Palestinians. This coincided with the passing of a bill that codified a $38 billion, ten-year foreign aid package for Israel. Trump also authorized an act allocating an additional $550 million toward US-Israel missile and tunnel defense cooperation. ..."
"... Trump's track record on Israel shows that he is capable of exercising agency and getting things done. But he has failed to address the most pressing issue that America currently faces: mass immigration and the displacement of white Americans. The most credible explanation for his incompetence is that he has no intention of delivering on his promises. There is no "Plan," no 4-D chess game. The sooner white Americans realize this, the better. ..."
"... We elected America's first Jewish president, nothing more" ..."
"Unlike other presidents, I keep my promises," Trump boasted in a
speech delivered on Saturday to the Republican Jewish Congress
at a luxury hotel in Las Vegas. Many in the audience wore red yarmulkes emblazoned with his name. In his speech, Trump condemned
Democrats for allowing "the terrible scourge of anti-Semitism to take root in their party" and emphasized his loyalty to Israel.
Trump has kept some of his promises. So far, he has kept every promise that he made to the Jewish community. Yet he has reneged
on his promises to white America – the promises that got him elected in the first place. It is a betrayal of the highest order: millions
of white Americans placed their hopes in Trump and wholeheartedly believed that he would be the one to make America great again.
They were willing to endure social ostracism and imperil their livelihoods by supporting him. In return, Trump has turned his back
on them and rendered his promises void.
The most recent example of this is Trump's failure to keep his promise to close the border. On March 29, Trump threatened to close
the border if Mexico did not stop all illegal immigration into the US. This would likely have been a highly effective measure given
Mexico's dependence on cross-border trade. Five days later, he suddenly retracted this threat and said that he would give Mexico
a " one-year warning
" before taking drastic action. He further claimed that closing the border would not be necessary and that he planned to establish
a twenty-five percent
tariff on cars
entering the US instead.
Trump's failure here is his alone. Closing the border could be accomplished with a simple executive order. It has happened
before: Reagan ordered the closing of the border when DEA agent Enrique "Kiki" Camarena was murdered on assignment in Mexico in 1985,
for instance.
Trump's empty threats over the past two years have had real-world consequences, prompting waves of migrants trying to sneak
into the country while they still have the chance. His recent move to cut all foreign aid to Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador
is another empty gesture that will probably have similar consequences. The funds directed to those countries were used for programs
that provided citizens with incentives not to migrate elsewhere. (The situation was not ideal from an isolationist point of view,
but a wiser man would have built the wall before cutting off the aid.)
The past two years have seen a surge in illegal immigration without precedent in the past decade. Since late December, the Department
of Homeland Security has released 125,565 illegal aliens into the country. In the past two weeks alone,
6,000 have been admitted. According to current projections, 2019 will witness around 500,000 to 775,000 border crossings. Additionally,
about 630,000 illegal aliens will be added to the population after having overstayed their visas. By the end of the year,
more than one million illegal aliens will have been added to the population:
These projections put the number of illegal aliens added to the U.S. population at around one to 1.5 million, on top of the
11 to
22 million illegal aliens who are already living across the country. This finding does not factor in the illegal aliens who
will be deported, die over the next year, or leave the U.S. of their own will. As DHS data has revealed, once border crossers
and illegal aliens are released into the country, the overwhelming majority are never deported.
In February, Trump signed a
bill allowing the DHS
secretary to add another 69,320 spots to the current H-2B cap of 66,000. On March 29, DHS began this process by announcing that it
would issue an additional
30,000 H-2B visas this year. The H-2B visa program allows foreign workers to come to the US and work in non-agricultural occupations.
Unlike the H-1B program, a Bachelor's degree is not required; most H-2B workers are employed in construction, maintenance, landscaping,
and so on. The demographic most affected by the expansion of the H-2B program will be unemployed working-class Americans. This flies
in the face of Trump's promise to protect American workers and stop importing foreigners.
Trump has indicated that he has plans to expand the H-1B visa program as well. "We want to encourage talented and highly skilled
people to pursue career options in the U.S.," he said in a
tweet in January.
Trump's betrayal of American workers is perhaps best encapsulated by the fact that one of the members of the advisory board
of his National Council for the American Worker
(which claims to "enhance employment opportunities for Americans of all ages") is the CEO of IBM, a company that has
expressed a preference for F-1 and H-1B visa holders
in its job postings.
Trump has been working on legal immigration with Jared Kushner, who has quietly been crafting a
plan to grant
citizenship to more "low- and high-skilled workers, as well as permanent and temporary workers" (so, just about everyone). Kushner's
plan proves the folly of the typical Republican line that legal immigration is fine and that only illegal immigration should be opposed.
Under his plan, thousands of illegal aliens will become "legal" with the stroke of a pen.
There is a paucity of anti-immigration hardliners in Trump's inner circle (though Stephen Miller is a notable exception). Trump
has surrounded himself with moderates: the Kushners, Mick Mulvaney, Alex Acosta, and others. There are more former Goldman Sachs
employees in the Trump White House than in the Obama and Bush administrations combined.
The new DHS secretary, Kevin McAleenan, who was appointed yesterday following Kirstjen Nielsen's resignation, is a middle-of-the-road
law enforcement official who served under Obama and Bush and is responsible for the revival of the "
catch-and-release " policy, whereby
illegal aliens are released upon being apprehended. It was reported last week that Trump was thinking of appointing either Kris Kobach
or Ken Cuccinelli to a position of prominence (as an "
immigration czar "),
but this appears to have been another lie.
Trump's failure to deliver on his promises cannot be chalked up to congressional obstruction. Congress. As Kobach said in a recent
interview , "It's not like we're powerless and it's not like we have to wait for Congress to do something. . . . No, we can actually
solve the immediate crisis without Congress acting." Solving the border crisis would simply demand "leadership in the executive branch
willing to act decisively." Kobach recently outlined an intelligent
three-point plan that Trump could implement:
Publish the final version of the regulation that would supersede the Flores Settlement. The initial regulation was
published by the Department of Homeland
Security in September 2018. DHS could have published the final regulation in December. Inexplicably, DHS has dragged its feet. Finalizing
that regulation would allow the United States to detain entire families together, and it would stop illegal aliens from exploiting
children as get-out-of-jail free cards. Set up processing centers at the border to house the migrants and hold the hearings in one
place. The Department of Justice should deploy dozens of immigration judges to hear the asylum claims at the border without releasing
the migrants into the country. FEMA already owns
thousands of travel trailers and mobile homes that it has used to address past hurricane disasters. Instead of selling them (which
FEMA is currently doing), FEMA should ship them to the processing centers to provide comfortable housing for the migrants. In addition,
a fleet of passenger planes should deployed to the processing centers. Anyone who fails in his or her asylum claim, or who is not
seeking asylum and is inadmissible, should be flown home immediately. It would be possible to fly most migrants home within a few
weeks of their arrival. Word would get out quickly in their home countries that entry into the United States is not as easy as advertised.
The incentive to join future caravans would dissipate quickly. Publish a proposed Treasury regulation that prohibits the sending
home of remittances by people who cannot document lawful presence in the United States. This will hit Mexico in the pocketbook: Mexico
typically brings in well over $20 billion a year in
remittances , raking in
more than $26 billion in 2017. Then, tell the government of Mexico that we will finalize the Treasury regulation unless they do two
things to help us address the border crisis: (1) Mexico immediately signs a "safe third country agreement" similar to our agreement
with Canada. This would require asylum applicants to file their asylum application in the first safe country they set foot in (so
applicants in the caravans from Central America would have to seek asylum in Mexico, rather than Canada); and (2) Mexico chips in
$5 billion to help us build the wall. The threat of ending remittances from illegal aliens is a far more powerful one than threatening
to close the border. Ending such remittances doesn't hurt the U.S. economy; indeed, it helps the economy by making it more likely
that such capital will be spent and circulate in our own country. We can follow through easily if Mexico doesn't cooperate.
It would not be all that difficult for Trump to implement these proposals. Kobach still has faith in Trump, but his assessment
of him appears increasingly to be too generous. It is hard to escape the conclusion that Trump is not actually interested in
curbing immigration and reversing America's demographic decline. He is a con artist and a coward who is willing to betray millions
of white Americans so that he can remain in the good graces of establishment neoconservatives . At the same time, he wants to
maintain the illusion that he cares about his base.
As Ann Coulter has put it, "He's like a waiter who compliments us for ordering the hamburger, but keeps bringing us fish.
The hamburger is our signature dish, juicy and grilled to perfection, you've made a brilliant choice . . . now here's your salmon.
"
Nearly everything Trump has done in the name of restricting immigration has turned out to be an empty gesture and mere theatrics:
threatening to close the border, offering protections to "Dreamers" in exchange for funding for the ever-elusive wall, threatening
to end the "anchor baby" phenomenon with an executive order (which never came to pass), cutting off aid to Central American countries,
claiming that he will appoint an "immigration czar" (and then proceeding to appoint McAleenan instead of Kobach as DHS secretary),
and on and on.
While Trump has failed to keep the promises that got him elected, he has fulfilled a number of major promises that he made to
Israel and the Jewish community.
First, he moved the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Trump claimed that the move would only cost $200,000, but in
reality it will end up being more than
$20 million . The construction
of the embassy also led to a series of bloody protests; it is located in East Jerusalem, which is generally acknowledged to be Palestinian
territory.
Second, he pulled the US out of the Iran nuclear deal. Netanyahu
claimed on Israeli TV that Israel was responsible for convincing him to exit the deal and reimpose sanctions on Iran. (Both Trump
and Netanyahu falsely alleged that Iran lied about the extent of its nuclear program; meanwhile, Israel's large arsenal of chemical
and biological weapons has escaped mention.) Third, he put an end to American funding for Palestinians. This coincided with the
passing of a
bill that codified a $38 billion, ten-year foreign aid package for Israel. Trump also authorized an act allocating an additional
$550 million toward US-Israel missile and tunnel defense cooperation.
Fourth, he recognized Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights (in defiance of the rest of the world, which recognizes the
Golan Heights as Syrian territory under Israeli occupation). Trump's Golan Heights proclamation was issued on March 21 and was celebrated
by Israel. Trump's track record on Israel shows that he is capable of exercising agency and getting things done. But he has failed
to address the most pressing issue that America currently faces: mass immigration and the displacement of white Americans. The most
credible explanation for his incompetence is that he has no intention of delivering on his promises. There is no "Plan," no 4-D chess
game. The sooner white Americans realize this, the better.
If you haven't picked up a copy of Vicky Ward's book, Kushner, Inc.: Greed. Ambition. Corruption. The Extraordinary Story
of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump , you really should.
I haven't read Mr. Graham's essay yet, but I thought those two links would fit in nicely. I stay in a low boil, like it is,
and having plodded through both those reviews, I can't stand reading too much on this topic at once.
Something's gotta give. Or are the brainless goy just going to let themselves be led off a cliff?
Oh, yes. There's an interview with Ward on
BookTV .
Yep. Trump's a lying POS pond scum like the rest of the DC swamp that he said he was going to drain, turns out he is one of them
all along. We elected America's first Jewish president, nothing more. He needs to change his campaign slogan to MIGA, Make Israel
Great Again, that was the plan of his handlers all along.
What I want to know is, who are those idiots who still keep showing up at his rallies? Are they really that dumb?
Even Sanders came out and said we can't have open borders. I've also heard him said back in 2015 that the H1b visa program
is a replacement program for American workers. If he grows a pair and reverts back to that stance, teams up with Tulsi Gabbard,
I'll vote for them 2020. Fuck Trump! Time for him and his whole treasonous rat family to move to Israel where they belong.
His "implicitly white" supporters would have abandoned him in droves, not wanting to be associated with a racist, thus pointing
up the weakness of implicit whiteness as a survival strategy. And is it actually a survival strategy? A closer look at it makes
me think it's more of a racial self-extermination strategy. After all, what kind of a survival strategy is it that can't even
admit its goals to itself? And it's exactly this refusal of whites to explicitly state that they collectively want to continue
to exist as a race that is the greatest impediment to their doing so. It's an interesting problem with no easy solution. How
do you restore the will to live to a race that seems to have lost it? And not only lost its will to live, but actually prides
itself on doing so? Accordingly, this "betrayal" isn't a betrayal at all. It's what American whites voted for and want. Giving
their country away and accepting their own demographic demise is proof of their virtue; proof of their Christian love for all
mankind.
You are definitely onto something here.
Still, I feel it's not that deep and complicated. It could be that they simply don't believe that the danger is closing in.
Boils down to wrong judgment. People who haven't had the need to think hard about serious things tend to develop that weakness.
I guess that boils down to "good times make weak men."
Hard times are coming and they'll make hard men.
The catch is simple: will be enough of them in time ?
Switching to the Democrats is no solution. The DNC has proven itself to be a criminal organization through sabotaging Sander's
campaign and then being instrumental in creating Russophobia, in collusion with Obama, the CIA, the FBI, and the DoJ. The DNC
has rules in place stating that super delegates – elitists aligned with the DNC – can vote if one nominee does not win on the
first ballot at the National Convention.
Because we have a HUGE number of hats in the Democratic ring, the chances that the nomination
will not be decided on a first vote are extremely high, with the result being that the Democratic nominee is not going to be decided
by voters in the primaries but by super delegates, i.e., the elitists and plutocrats.
Democracy exists when we vote to support
candidates chosen by the elites for the elites; when we stop doing that, the elites turn on democracy. It is a sham; we will have
a choice in 2020: between Pepsi and Coke. You are free to choose which one you prefer, because you live in a democracy. For more
on the rigging of the democratic primaries for 2020, see
"... Weakened by "Russiagate" accusations, Trump was forced to back off his agenda of ending the wars. He put policy in the hands of neoconservative warmongers like John Bolton and Pompeo, and expanded the prospect of wars into Iran and Venezuela. Trump in office bears little resemblance to Trump campaigning for the presidency. ..."
"... It is not clear how Trump has benefited from his groveling. If polls can be believed, Trump's pandering has done him no good with American Jews, 70% of whom disapprove of Trump. Moreover, the Israel Lobby failed to use its influence to silence the presstitutes false "Russiagate" accusations against Trump. Perhaps the Lobby wanted to keep Trump in a weak position in order to extract more concessions from him. ..."
"... Trump, who campaigned on peace so that America's attention and resources could be focused on America's own situation, now has the US more embroiled than ever in the affairs of foreign countries, principally Israel, a Zionist state. This fact makes it reasonable to conclude that Trump is America's first Zionist president, a development that bodes more ill for the world. ..."
It is impossible not to feel some sympathy for President Donald Trump. His agenda to restore
normal relations with Russia and to end Washington's gratuitous wars has been frustrated by the
"Russiagate hoax" that the military/security complex and corrupt Democratic Party used in the
effort to remove Trump from the presidency. He and his wife have been embarrassed by the fake
"Steele Dossier" paid for by the Clinton campaign and used by a corrupt FBI leadership to
illegitimately obtain spy warrants on Trump and his associates. Accused of cavorting with
prostitutes in Moscow and confronted with claims by a porn star of an affair in order to boost
the recognition value of her name, Trump and his wife have experienced uncomfortable times. Now
that the lies the presstitutes have told since 2016 have been exposed by Mueller's inability,
despite his use of every dirty trick, to come up with any indictable offense connected to
"Russiagate," the psychopathic liars who comprise the presstitute media are on the verge of
tears. Mueller has betrayed them, they claim, by letting Trump off the hook. https://www.rt.com/usa/454550-mueller-media-reactions-trump-indictment/
In other words, there will be no apology to Trump. Don't be surprised to see the deranged
accusation that Mueller himself was part of the Russian collusion and was appointed for the
purpose of covering it up.
Weakened by "Russiagate" accusations, Trump was forced to back off his agenda of ending the
wars. He put policy in the hands of neoconservative warmongers like John Bolton and Pompeo, and
expanded the prospect of wars into Iran and Venezuela. Trump in office bears little resemblance
to Trump campaigning for the presidency.
Under such pressure Trump has broken American diplomatic precedent and international law
with respect to Jerusalem and the Syrian Golan Heights in his effort to seek the protection of
the powerful Israel Lobby. He recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital and moved the US Embassy
there, and on March 22 he said it is time to accept the reality of Israel's occupation of
Syria's Golen Heights as Israeli territory. This extreme pandering to Israeli Zionism is a
disgrace to the United States. https://www.rt.com/news/454528-trump-recognize-golan-heights-netanyahu/
It is not clear how Trump has benefited from his groveling. If polls can be believed,
Trump's pandering has done him no good with American Jews, 70% of whom disapprove of Trump.
Moreover, the Israel Lobby failed to use its influence to silence the presstitutes false
"Russiagate" accusations against Trump. Perhaps the Lobby wanted to keep Trump in a weak
position in order to extract more concessions from him.
Nevertheless, by terminating US aid to Palestinians and by being the only head of state to
fully recognize Jerusalem as the Israeli capital and to assign Syrian territory to Israel,
Trump has established a US relationship with Israeli Zionism that the US has with no other
state and that Israel has with no other state. On any issue that pertains to Israel's interest,
Trump has placed US foreign policy into Israel's hands.
Various diplomats and analysts are saying that Trump gifted the Golan Heights to Israel in
order to help out Netanyahu who faces indictment for corruption. I think the explanation is
that the neoconservatives running US foreign policy are Zionists and that the only ally Trump
has, other than the remnants of the American working class now dismissed as "white
supremacists," is the Israel Lobby.
The hostility of the Trump regime toward Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Syria, and
Venezuela does America no good (except for the shareholders of the military/security complex).
But the hostility toward Iran, Syria, and their protector -- Russia -- does benefit Israel.
Israel has been frustrated in its desire to occupy southern Lebanon by the Hezbollah militia,
which is supported by Syria and Iran. If Washington can destabilize Syria and Iran, as it did
Iraq and Libya, Hezbollah would be cut off from support. Moreover, Washington's accusations
against Russia and missile bases on Russia's border can distract Russia's attention and
resources away from the Middle East and leave Syria and Iran less able to resist the US/Israeli
pressures.
Trump, who campaigned on peace so that America's attention and resources could be focused on
America's own situation, now has the US more embroiled than ever in the affairs of foreign
countries, principally Israel, a Zionist state. This fact makes it reasonable to conclude that
Trump is America's first Zionist president, a development that bodes more ill for the
world.
King Solomon wrote, "Much study is a weariness of the flesh." (Eccl. 12:12 KJV) I will add that it doesn't
make one a lot of friends either -- especially if what one discovers through his studies cuts against the grain of
commonly accepted teaching.
In
my message to Liberty Fellowship last Sunday
, I made the point that Zionism is one of America's greatest
threats. I do not say that lightly. Many years and untold hours of laborious study have led me to that
conclusion. Only the lack of truth-preaching (including truth-preaching about Zionism) from America's pulpits
is a greater threat to our country. Beyond that, Zionism is one of the most politically protected institutions
in America. No! It is THE most politically protected institution in the country. Bar none!
The influence and intimidation that Zionism wields over America's major institutions and industries are
incalculable -- and seemingly impenetrable. From the church house to the White House, from Main Street to Wall
Street, from Hollywood and Vine to Broadway and from the marbled halls of Congress to the hallowed halls of
ivy-covered universities, Zionism reigns supreme.
ROBERT STEELE:
This is the single best over-all denouncement of the Zionist parasite as it
exists in America, that I have ever read. The pastor does three things: itemizes Zionist control and
atrocities of control, including the most recent attempts to destroy Senator Rand Paul and Representative Ilhan
Omar; challenges our President, whose past includes deep deep Zionist ties suggestive of compromise; and
explains how so many Christian Zionists have been bribed and brainwashed -- the two go together -- to place
Israel First instead of America First.
Zionism in the USA is OVER. The tide has turned.
I personally am hopeful that our President will divorce himself from the Zionists who think they own
him, and truly commit to America First.
Now we simply have to make #UNRIG – Election Integrity Act and disclosure of the Zionist role in
9/11 the twin demands of our President
if he wishes to be re-elected in 2020, AND to have a Congress
free of Zionist bribery, blackmail, and lies in 2020 and beyond.
On Monday, President Donald Trump designated the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization, the first time the
United States has designated part of another nation's government as such a threat.
Iran's Supreme National Security Council responded by declaring U.S. Central Command a terrorist group.
With 5,000 U.S. troops in Iraq and 2,000 in Syria, often in proximity to Iranian units, this inches America closer to war.
Why did we do it? What benefit did the U.S. derive?
How do we now negotiate with the IRGC on missile tests?
Israel's Bibi Netanyahu took credit for Trump's decision, tweeting, "Once again you are keeping the world safe from Iran aggression
and terrorism. Thank you for accepting another important request of mine."
Previous "requests" to which Trump acceded include moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, declaring Jerusalem Israel's eternal
capital, closing the Palestinian consulate and cutting off aid, and U.S. recognition of the Golan Heights, captured from Syria in
1967, as sovereign Israeli territory.
What Bibi wants, Bibi gets.
One hopes his future requests will not include a demand that we cease dithering and deliver the same "shock and awe" to Iran that
George W. Bush delivered to Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
With Bibi's election win Tuesday, his fifth, the secret Mideast peace plan Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner has been laboring
on these last two years is likely to be unveiled.
Yet it is hard to see how Jared's baby is not stillborn.
Bibi is not going to accept a Palestinian right of return to Israel, or a sharing of the Holy City with a Palestinian state ruled
by a successor of Yasser Arafat. And as Bibi fought Ariel Sharon's withdrawal of the 8,000 Jewish settlers from Gaza, he is not going
to order the removal of tens of thousands of Jewish settlers from homes on the West Bank.
Indeed, on the eve of his reelection Tuesday, Bibi promised Israelis he would begin the annexation of Jewish settlements on the
West Bank.
As for Trump, he is the most popular man in Israel. And he is not going to force Bibi to do what Bibi does not want to do and
thereby imperil his major political gains in the U.S. Jewish community.
Given the indulgence of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party for BDS, the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanction
movement, and the divisions among Democrats over Netanyahu's expansionism, the president's pro-Israel stance has proven a political
winner for the GOP.
But while a U.S. war with Iran may be what Bibi wants, it is not what America wants or needs.
Consider what 20 years of U.S. wars in the Mideast have cost this country, as China has stayed out of the region and pushed its
power and influence into Asia, Africa and Europe.
In Afghanistan, the Taliban have regained control of more territory than they have held since 2001, and they are negotiating with
the Americans for a withdrawal of our remaining 14,000 troops.
Cost of the Afghan war: 2,400 U.S. dead, 32,000 wounded, $1 trillion sunk, and the U.S. on the precipice of a potential strategic
defeat.
So dreadful has become the five-year Yemeni civil war between Iran-backed Houthi rebels and the Saudi-backed regime they ousted
that the U.S. House and Senate have invoked the War Powers Act and directed Trump to terminate U.S. assistance for the Saudi intervention.
In Libya, where a U.S.-led NATO intervention overthrew Colonel Gadhafi in 2011, a renegade general now controls two-thirds of
the country and is mounting an assault on Tripoli. U.S. soldiers and diplomats fled the capital last week.
In Syria, President Bashar Assad, with the support of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, defeated the U.S. backed-rebels years ago.
The Syrian Kurdish militia we partnered with to crush ISIS have been designated as terrorists by the Turks, who promise to annihilate
the Kurds if they try to return to homes along the Turkish border.
As for Turkey itself, President Erdogan says he will take delivery this summer of a Russian-made S-400 air and missile defense
system.
Go through with that, says the U.S., and we cancel your order for 100 F-35s. The justified U.S. fear: Russia's S-400 system will
be tested against America's most advanced fifth-generation fighter, the F-35.
If Turkey does not cancel the S-400, a NATO crisis appears imminent.
In Iraq, where 5,000 U.S. troops remain, the government has both pro-U.S. and pro-Iran elements in Baghdad, and mutual designation
of the IRGC and CENT-COM as terrorist organizations can only present hellish problems for America's soldiers and diplomats still
in that country.
Bottom line: Though Bibi and John Bolton may want war with Iran, U.S. national interests, based on the awful experience of two
decades, and Trump's political interests, dictate that he not start any more wars.
Not a single Middle East war this century has gone as we planned or hoped.
But amidst all the success, the Israeli government and its diaspora supporters discovered
that it was receiving a lot of unwelcome publicity from an essentially grassroots movement that
went by the label " Boycott, Divest and Sanctions "
or BDS. BDS was strong on American campuses and its appeal as a non-violent tool meant that it
was growing, to include many young Jews disenchanted with the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
version of the Jewish state.
Israel works hard to influence the United States at all levels and is generally very
successful, but it seemed a stretch to try to pass legislation banning a non-violent movement
at a national level so it focused on the states, where legislators would presumably be less
concerned over the Bill of Rights. It mobilized its diaspora resources to focus on elections at
local and state government levels where Jewish constituents were active in interviewing
candidates regarding their views on the Middle East. Candidates understood very well what was
happening and also appreciated that their answers could determine what level of donations and
the kind of press coverage they might receive in return.
Put together enough intimidated legislators in that fashion and you eventually will have a
majority willing to pass legislation blocking or even criminalizing the BDS movement while also
granting special benefits to Israel. As of this writing, there is anti-BDS legislation in 27
states, some of which denies state services or jobs to anyone who does not sign an agreement to
not boycott Israel. Particularly draconian bills currently
advancing in Florida equate any criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism, explicitly define
Israel as a Jewish state and also enable anyone who says otherwise to be sued.
Another blatant propaganda program that is being used with congressmen, as well as state and
local officials plus spouses, is the sponsorship of free "educational" trips to Israel. The
trips are carefully coordinated with the Israeli government and many of them are both organized
and paid for by an affiliate of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee called the
American Israel Education Foundation
(AIEF) . There are also other trips sponsored by AIEF as well as by regional Jewish
organizations that particularly focus on politicians at state and even local levels as well as
journalists who write about foreign policy.
Everyone is expected to return from the carefully choreographed trips singing the praises of
the wonderful little democracy in the Middle East, and many of the travelers do exactly that.
The pro-Israel sentiment is buttressed by the activity of the state and local diaspora Jewish
groups, which tend to be very politically active and generous with their political
contributions.
This coziness often borders on corruption and inevitably leads to abuses that do not serve
the public interest, particularly as American citizens are quite openly promoting the interests
of a foreign nation. An interesting example of how this works and the abuse that it can produce
has recently surfaced in Virginia, where a so-called Virginia-Israel Advisory Board (VIAB) has
actually been funded by the Commonwealth of Virginia taxpayers to promote and even subsidize
Israeli business in the state, business that currently runs an estimated $500 million per annum
in favor of Israel.
Grant Smith's Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy (IRMEP) has done
considerable digging into the
affairs of VIAB, which was ostensibly "created to foster closer economic integration between
the United States and Israel while supporting the Israeli government's policy agenda" with a
charter defining its role as "advis[ing] the Governor on ways to improve economic and cultural
links between the Commonwealth and the State of Israel, with a focus on the areas of commerce
and trade, art and education, and general government." Smith has observed that "VIAB is a pilot
for how Israel can quietly obtain taxpayer funding and official status for networked entities
that advance Israel from within key state governments."
Documents released under Virginia's Freedom of Information Act indicate that not only does
VIAB not create opportunities for Virginians, it also is active in working against the BDS
movement. According to the documents, VIAB, which avoids any public disclosure of its
activities, is currently also being scrutinized by the state Attorney General over its handling
of government funds.
VIAB was founded in 2001 but it grew significantly under governor Terry McAuliffe's
administration (2014-2018). McAuliffe, regarded by many as the Clintons' "bag man," received
what were regarded as generous out-of-state campaign contributors from actively pro-Israeli
billionaires Haim
Saban and J.B. Pritzker , who were both affiliated with the Democratic Party. McAuliffe met
regularly in off-the-record "no press allowed" sessions with Israel advocacy groups and spoke
about "the Virginia Advisory Board and its successes."
The Virginia Coalition for Human Rights (VCHR) reports that VIAB is "the only Israel business promotion
entity in the United States embedded within a state government and funded entirely by the
state's taxpayers. In terms of the overall state budget, VIAB's direct share is small ($209,068
for fiscal years 2017 and 2018). However, VIAB's diversion of state, federal and private
grants, as well as demands on state-funded entities like colleges and universities to
collaborate in projects designed primarily to benefit Israel, run in the millions of dollars
per year. VIAB's main objective is to provide preferential and unconditional funding to
oftentimes secretive Israeli business projects designed to entwine Israeli industries into
Virginia industries and government. VIAB seeks to transcend warranted, growing and legitimate
American grassroots concerns about human rights in Israel-Palestine by pressuring state
lawmakers and the local business community into providing unconditional support and developing
a long-term 'stake' in Israel."
Per VCHR, documents released under the Freedom of Information Act found that VIAB, among
other suspect practices, had "Provided reports of success that the office of the Governor found
to be " inflated
without merit ." VCHR concluded that "there should be no preferential and unconditional
Commonwealth of Virginia support for Israeli business projects for four key concerns:
moral , economic , good governance and state public opinion ."
Moral was due to Israel's "dismal human rights record," economic because Virginia has a
half-billion dollar trade deficit with Israel, good governance because VIAB's board and
leadership are drawn from the "Israel advocacy ecosystem," and public opinion because opinion
polls suggest that over one third of Virginians favor halting all funding for "Israeli business
ventures."
On a similar issue a shadowy
group called the Institute for Curriculum Services (ICS), which is actually a "partisan group
with backing by state and local Israel advocacy organizations," is seeking to change the information
conveyed by the history and social studies textbooks used in K-12 classrooms across Virginia.
ICS recommended changes include: "1. Emphasizing Arab culpability for crisis initiation leading
to military action and failure of peace efforts -- and never Israeli culpability, even when it
is undisputed historic fact. 2. Replacing the commonly used words of "settlers" with
"communities," "occupation" with "control of," "wall" with "security fence," and "militant"
with "terrorist." 3. Referencing Israeli claims such as "Israel annexed East Jerusalem" and the
Golan Heights as accepted facts without referencing lack of official recognition by the United
Nations and most member nation states."
The activity of the VIAB is little more than robbery of Virginia state resources being run
by mostly local American Jews to benefit their co-religionists in Israel. What is significant
is that the theft from the American taxpayer, having long occurred at the federal treasury
level, now extends down to state and local jurisdictions. And the ICS is yet one more example
of attempted Israeli brainwashing of the American public on behalf of
the Jewish state to completely alter the narrative about what is going on in the Middle
East. Will it ever end? Perhaps, but only when the American people finally wake up to what is
being done to them and by whom.
At http://representativepress.org/IsraelViolatesResolution.html
c/b found the pre conditions, all of which Israel agreed to,
for admission of Israel into the UN..
1. he status of jerusalem w/n/b altered
2. Palestinans w/b permitted to return
3. The partition agreement w/become the final borders.
Text of General Assembly Resolution 273 of May 11, 1949 admitting Israel into the UN,
notes Israel agreed to comply with Resolution 194 : UNITED NATIONS General Assembly A/RES/273
(III) 11 May 1949
what is really interesting is to take a look at the low life supporting this UN action at
the press, in the white house and at the MIC. Many supporters there played at hugmongous part
in the rest of the rise of Economic Zionism which depends on leg breaker USA to get its
way..
In reality, Chabad's ideology is NOT Jewish. In Israel, Chabad is considered by the most
important Rabbis as a religion different from Judaism. Chabad is a different religion.
Chabadism is NOT Judaism.
So, why is this bad for the Jews? Chabad is a criminal organization. Chabad is mostly
involved in white collar criminal activities such as financial fraud, tax evasion, and money
laundering.
Chabad has also been linked to various Jewish child abuse cases
When these criminal activities are discovered and exposed to the public, and because Chabad
poses as a Jewish organization, anti-Jewish hatred is created. That is, Chabad creates
anti-semitism in the world.
Also, many of Chabad victims are Jewish. Mostly, Jewish children. Chabad runs several
schools around the world. The objective of these schools is NOT to provide a good Jewish
education for their students. The objective of these schools is to MAKE A PROFIT at the expense
of the Jewish children.
... ... ...
Chabad-Lubavitch is also an international organized crime syndicate that strangles free
enterprise and raises the level of violence, fraud, and corruption in various cities in the
USA, and across the world.
... ... ...
Disclaimer: Please conduct your own investigation about the issues
mentioned in this website. This website is only a brief summary of the problems with Chabad.
For more information, please talk to your local community Rabbi. Also, if you really care about
being Jewish, come live in Israel and study Judaism.
Copyright Notice: According to Jewish Law, it is a Mitzva, a religious obligation, to
provide this information to every Jew in the world, in order to protect Jewish children from
Chabad, and to save Jewish lives and Jewish souls from being destroyed by Chabad. Therefore,
permission is granted to copy and reproduce all of the information found on this website in any
form and publication, including any website or blog, and to translate it to any language. The
only requirement is that you mention that the information was obtained from this website, and
in the case of internet pages, please add a link back to this website.
If you haven't picked up a copy of Vicky Ward's book, Kushner, Inc.: Greed. Ambition. Corruption. The Extraordinary Story
of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump , you really should.
I haven't read Mr. Graham's essay yet, but I thought those two links would fit in nicely. I stay in a low boil, like it is,
and having plodded through both those reviews, I can't stand reading too much on this topic at once.
Something's gotta give. Or are the brainless goy just going to let themselves be led off a cliff?
Oh, yes. There's an interview with Ward on
BookTV .
Thanks for sharing the links on the Kushner Crime Family. It has been quite an adventure watching the MAGA man "transition"
into the MIGA man. What amazes me are the number of dumb f*ck Americans who still worship this ass hat, all the while he is driving
the betrayal dagger deeper into their back.
@Dr. Robert
Morgan Trump did everything but explicitly say that he would restore white America when
talking about defining citizenship and restoring America, just as he did everything short of
naming the Jew when speaking of wars for other people and funding for other nations.
He knew
what he was doing, and he knew that he was lying.
Johnny Walker Read, April 10, 2019 at 11:54 am GMT
@Thinker
“What I want to know is, who are those idiots who still keep showing up at his rallies? Are they really that dumb?”
Can you say Christian Zionist? And yes they are that dumb.
"... The article is a thorough-going rebuke of every journalist and former official (Daniel Shapiro, former ambassador under Obama, for instance, as well as the Forward and the Times opinion writers) who says that money is not at the root, or very near the root, of Democratic Party support. So let's follow the money, and review the money quotes ..."
"... there is little willingness among Democrats to argue publicly for substantially changing longstanding policy toward Israel. ..."
"... In part, some Hill staff members and former White House officials say, this is because of the influence of megadonors: Of the dozens of personal checks greater than $500,000 made out to the largest PAC for Democrats in 2018, the Senate Majority PAC, around three-fourths were written by Jewish donors. ..."
"... Though the number of Jewish donors known to prioritize pro-Israel policies above all other issues is small, there are few if any pushing in the opposite direction ..."
"... The Obama administration didn't just support the occupation, it kept supporting it right up till the November 2016 election so that Hillary Clinton wouldn't lose donors. ..."
"... concerns about donors among Democrats dominated not just "what was done but what was not done, and what was not even contemplated." Even the timing of the administration's policies toward Israel was dictated by domestic politics. ..."
"... Everyone knows this math. And the Democrats fear they'll lose all their money. ..."
"... Joel Rubin, a deputy assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs in the Obama administration, former political director at J Street and a founding board member of the centrist Jewish Democratic Council of America, agreed: "The fight over Israel used to be about voters. It's more about donors now." ..."
"... Thrall says the Democratic Party leadership is perfectly happy with AIPAC, but he leaves out what we reported here: the extent of the reliance on Jewish donors is "gigantic" and "shocking," according to insiders JJ Goldberg and the head of Emily's List, and AIPAC gets to script congressional campaigns on their middle east positions before the candidates can raise money from the Jewish community. ..."
"... Sadly the Jewish community is largely supportive of Israel, as Thrall shows. By and large, American Jews are Zionists. Trump's horrors in the Middle East are OK by them. ..."
"... any declension in US support is seen as alienating the donor class. ..."
"... Joel Rubin said: "The problem for center-left groups that are more critical of Israel is that the Jewish donor class is comfortable with current U.S. policies. They just don't like Trump on other issues." ..."
"... Thrall shows that fear of losing donors played a role when the University of Michigan student body passed a narrow divestment measure last fall– to divest only from companies doing business in the occupation -- and still the administration said No way. ..."
"... Lara Friedman of Foundation for Middle East Peace and formerly of Peace Now continues to blaze a trail by honestly describing the intolerance in the Jewish community for debate of Israel. That community has pushed the anti-BDS legislation. ..."
"... I asked [Zionist Organization of America's Morton] Klein why he believed it was "utterly racist and despicable," as he put it, for [Richard] Spencer to promote a state for only one ethnic group but not racist for Israel to do so. "Israel is a unique situation," he said. "This is really a Jewish state given to us by God." He added, "God did not create a state for white people or for black people." ..."
"... Thrall says Israel is Jim Crow society thru and thru. ..."
"... Israeli law forbids citizens to obtain citizenship or permanent residency for Palestinian spouses from the West Bank and Gaza. ..."
"... First, of course there was the famous 'Benjamins' tweet in which Omar noted that members of Congress were obedient to the Lobby because of the hundreds of millions it raises and distributes to loyal pro-Israel candidates. ..."
"... The way this happened was instructive: there is, of course, an ancient anti-Semitic trope that Jews are rich and use their wealth to control the finance, banking, entertainment, and the media sectors, etc. That of course, has nothing to do with the true statement that the Lobby raises and distributes massive lucre to its favored candidates. A reasonable person can see the difference between these two concepts. ..."
"... anyone who believes that the interests of one of the greatest powers on earth is the same as that of a small Middle Eastern theocratic state is either terribly naïve or worse ..."
"... "Pro-Israel Jews like Engel are particularly exercised by the implication of dual loyalty. That is, that pro-Israel Jews are more loyal to Israel than America. An especially apt historical phrase connoting dual loyalty is the term 'Israel Firster.' It was not invented by an anti-Semite or white supremacist. But rather by the dean of American Jewish historians, Abe Sachar, the first president of Brandeis University. ..."
"... "American Jews continued to object to Israel's claim that a genuine Jewish life was possible only in Israel. Abram L. Sachar, president of Brandeis University, at the biennial convention of JWB [Jewish Welfare Board], declared on April 2, 1960 that among Jews there is no room 'for Israel Firsters whose chauvinism and arrogance find nothing relevant or viable in any area outside of Israel.'" ..."
"... Israel is no longer a democracy. Instead it has become a theocracy, run by fundamentalist extremists bent on holy war with the Muslim world. Israel's interests are diverging from those of the democratic west more than ever. And this fissure can only continue to widen as Israel sinks ever deeper into mass murder, Occupation and oppression. Israel's interests and America's are no longer the same. Not even close. That little sliver of daylight which presidents used to boast about not existing when it came to Israel and U.S. interests: it's now a wide-open expanse of sky. ..."
"... The smell of greenbacks remains too enticing to resist. ..."
"... Phil likes to downplay the role of Christian Zionists, while others who feel uncomfortable talking about Jewish donors ( fearing the antisemitism charge) like to emphasize them. The truth is that they are both important in why the US supports Israel. ..."
"... on the secular level American rightwingers sometimes see Israel as a bastion of "Western civilization" surrounded by the heathens. Of course some of that last part overlaps with what Israel supporters in the Democratic Party think. ..."
"... The truth is the GOP's courting of the donor class comes from the same motivation – the counting of the donor Benjamins. The difference is they can better hide their support (of Zionism) under banners of defense, business, and righteousness. ..."
"... Trump plays to this crowd with his actions in Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. Finally, this "donor class" could hardly match the daily U.S. gift of $10 million, so the pitch they make is to American taxpayers, although nobody ever talks about that. ..."
"... 'Senator Charles Schumer, the Democratic minority leader, similarly told the Aipac conference in 2018: "Of course, we say it's our land, the Torah says it, but they don't believe in the Torah. So that's the reason there is not peace."' Damn, and I thought that the reason there was no peace was because of the oppressive, prison-like conditions of the Palestinian people under Occupation. ..."
"... Of course it is "all about the Benjamins". Contending to the contrary is simply silly. One might well add that BDS can be viewed as a good thing for Israel, and in that country's true best interests. ..."
"... A collection of primitive Bronze Age fictional gibberish can confer land titles over bits of the Middle East, to its adherents – even to adherents with absolutely no ancestral connection to the land. ..."
This weekend the New York Times
breaks
one of the biggest taboos , describing the responsibility of Jewish donors for the Democratic Party's slavish support for Israel.
Nathan Thrall's groundbreaking piece repeats a lot of data we've reported here and says in essence that it really is about the Benjamins,
as Rep. Ilhan Omar said so famously. The donor class of the party is overwhelmingly Jewish, and Jews are still largely wed to Zionism–
that's the nut. Though that party is breaking up. Thrall's labors are minimized by the New York Times with the headline "The Battle
Over B.D.S.," but his message is that the progressive base has a highly-critical view of Israel that the leadership has refused to
reflect, and that's about to change. We're inside the tent. The party is going to have to reflect pro-Palestinian positions. Ben
Rhodes tells Thrall that the moment of overcoming the fear of the pro-Israel lobby (as the Cuba fear was overcome) is about to happen.
The article is a thorough-going rebuke of every journalist and former official (Daniel Shapiro, former ambassador under Obama, for
instance, as well as the Forward and the Times opinion writers) who says that money is not at the root, or very near the root, of
Democratic Party support. So let's follow the money, and review the money quotes. Deep into his piece, Thrall explains why progressives
aren't being heard. Megadonors.
For all the recent tumult over Israel in Washington, the policy debate remains extremely narrow Despite pointed critiques of American
support for Israel by representatives like Betty McCollum of Minnesota, [Rashida] Tlaib and Omar, there is little willingness
among Democrats to argue publicly for substantially changing longstanding policy toward Israel.
In part, some Hill staff members
and former White House officials say, this is because of the influence of megadonors: Of the dozens of personal checks greater
than $500,000 made out to the largest PAC for Democrats in 2018, the Senate Majority PAC, around three-fourths were written by
Jewish donors. This provides fodder for anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, and for some, it is the elephant in the room.
Though
the number of Jewish donors known to prioritize pro-Israel policies above all other issues is small, there are few if any pushing
in the opposite direction
As we reported from Ben Rhodes's book,
Rhodes tells Thrall that donors forced Obama to hew to the Netanyahu line.
According to Ben Rhodes, a former deputy national-security adviser and one of Obama's closest confidants, several members of the
Obama administration wanted to adopt a more assertive policy toward Israel but felt that their hands were tied. "The Washington
view of Israel-Palestine is still shaped by the donor class The donor class is profoundly to the right of where the activists
are, and frankly, where the majority of the Jewish community is." Peter Joseph, an emeritus chairman of the center-left Israel
Policy Forum, told me that the views of major Democratic Jewish donors could act as a check on the leftward pull by progressive
voters who are strongly critical of Israel: "I can't imagine that mainstream Democratic Jewish donors are going to be happy about
any Democratic Party that is moving in that direction."
Off the record, people go further. The Obama administration didn't just support the occupation, it kept supporting it right up till
the November 2016 election so that Hillary Clinton wouldn't lose donors. We reported as much at the time.
Another former member of the Obama White House, who asked not to be named, fearing professional retaliation, said that concerns
about donors among Democrats dominated not just "what was done but what was not done, and what was not even contemplated."
Even the timing of the administration's policies toward Israel was dictated by domestic politics. Faced with a 2016 United Nations
Security Council resolution condemning settlements, the Obama administration abstained (effectively supporting the resolution),
but only after having signaled it would not consider backing any resolution before November. "There is a reason the U.N. vote
did not come up before the election in November," the former official said. "Was it because you were going to lose voters to Donald
Trump? No. It was because you were going to have skittish donors. That, and the fact that we didn't want Clinton to face pressure
to condemn the resolution or be damaged by having to defend it."
Everyone knows this math. And the Democrats fear they'll lose all their money.
What worries establishment Democrats, the former official added, is that the partisan divide over Israel will concretize -- with
Republicans defined as pro-Israel, Democrats defined as anti-Israel -- and that the party coffers will empty. Joel Rubin, a deputy
assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs in the Obama administration, former political director at J Street and a
founding board member of the centrist Jewish Democratic Council of America, agreed: "The fight over Israel used to be about voters.
It's more about donors now."
Thrall says the Democratic Party leadership is perfectly happy with AIPAC, but he leaves out
what we reported here: the extent of the reliance on Jewish donors is "gigantic" and "shocking," according to insiders JJ Goldberg
and the head of Emily's List, and AIPAC gets to script congressional campaigns on their middle east positions before the candidates
can raise money from the Jewish community. We always said Sanders could be better on Palestine because he avoided the donor class
of the Democratic party. Rhodes agrees.
"If you don't rely on a traditional fund-raising model, then you have more freedom on these types of issues," Rhodes said. "You're
not worried about the one-hour phone call that you're going to have to do after the presidential debate with a really angry donor."
The key element here is, older Jewish donors are conservative about Israel. A former Clinton campaign official:
"There's no major donor that I can think of who is looking for someone to take a Bernie-like approach." And whereas none of the
most liberal Jewish donors have threatened to withdraw support because a candidate was too pro-Israel, pro-Israel donors and PACs
have a history of financing opposition to candidates deemed unfriendly. Haim Saban, one of Hillary Clinton's top five donors in
2016, has financed opponents of Democratic candidates critical of Israel
Sadly the Jewish community is largely supportive of Israel, as Thrall shows. By and large, American Jews are Zionists. Trump's horrors
in the Middle East are OK by them.
In the same [Mellman] poll -- conducted after the United States closed the Palestinian diplomatic mission in Washington, moved
the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, appointed a fund-raiser for the settlements as U.S. ambassador and cut
humanitarian aid to Palestinians -- roughly half of American Jews said they approved of President Trump's handling of relations
with Israel. On what is considered the most divisive issue in U.S.-Israel relations, the establishment of Israeli settlements
in the West Bank,
a November
2018 post-midterm election poll of more than 1,000 American Jews that was commissioned by J Street, the pro-Israel lobby aligned
with Democrats, found that roughly half said the expansion of settlements had no impact on how they felt about Israel.
Those Jews are conservative compared to the base, which is increasingly people of color and real progressives.
Members of the Democratic Party's progressive activist base, by contrast, find themselves light years from their representatives
in Washington.
And any declension in US support is seen as alienating the donor class.
Joel Rubin said: "The problem for center-left groups that are more critical of Israel is that the Jewish donor class is comfortable
with current U.S. policies. They just don't like Trump on other issues." In October, just weeks before the 2018 midterm election,
as the Democratic leadership was working to take back the House, a Democratic staff member, who asked not to be named for fear
of professional retaliation, told me that it was important to retain the support of all major donors, not just the most liberal
ones.
Referring to two of the largest Jewish donors to Democrats, on opposite ends of the political spectrum, the staff member
said: "Our members need George Soros and Haim Saban. And they need everything in between."
Thrall shows that fear of losing donors played a role when the University of Michigan student body passed a narrow divestment measure
last fall– to divest only from companies doing business in the occupation -- and still the administration said No way.
Michigan's administration quickly issued a statement that it would not appoint a committee to investigate divestment. A month
later, the board of regents released a letter backing the decision. (The two regents who didn't sign it were the only people of
color on the board.) Like many large American universities, the University of Michigan has extensive research partnerships with
Israeli universities. And many of its institutes and buildings are named after alumni donors who have contributed large sums to
Israel or pro-Israel groups.
Lara Friedman of Foundation for Middle East Peace and formerly of Peace Now continues to blaze a trail by honestly describing the
intolerance in the Jewish community for debate of Israel. That community has pushed the anti-BDS legislation.
"The American Jewish community, which is broadly speaking liberal, has allowed itself in the name of defending Israel and fighting
B.D.S. to become the leading edge of illiberalism by pushing legislation to curb free speech."
OK now let's get to some of the good news here. Thrall's overall point is that the battle is breaking out, thanks to those women
of color in the House and the progressive base.
As the Democratic Party is pulled toward a more progressive base and a future when a majority of the party will most likely be
people of color, tensions over Israel have erupted. In the past several months, a fierce debate over American support for Israel
has periodically dominated the news cycle and overshadowed the Democrats' policymaking agenda.
BDS is gaining ground. Israel knows it.
Emmanuel Nahshon, a spokesman for Israel's foreign ministry, told me, "Despite the overwhelming support for Israel in the U.S.,
we see that the attempt to delegitimize Israel is gaining ground, especially among extreme left-wing marginal groups."
When have you ever seen such a fair assessment of BDS in the Times?
Instead of tying itself to a specific outcome, the B.D.S. movement insisted on these three principles, which could be fulfilled
any number of ways: two states, one state with equal individual rights, a confederation with equal collective rights.
This is a simple turn by Thrall on why Zionism is racist at its core.
Following the 1948 war, which erupted after the United Nations announced its plan to partition Palestine into two states, the
Jews who fled could return; Palestinians could not.
Here's another great moment, brilliant reporting.
I asked [Zionist Organization of America's Morton] Klein why he believed it was "utterly racist and despicable," as he put it,
for [Richard] Spencer to promote a state for only one ethnic group but not racist for Israel to do so. "Israel is a unique situation,"
he said. "This is really a Jewish state given to us by God." He added, "God did not create a state for white people or for black
people."
Senator Charles Schumer, the Democratic minority leader, similarly told the Aipac conference in 2018: "Of course, we
say it's our land, the Torah says it, but they don't believe in the Torah. So that's the reason there is not peace."
Thrall says Israel is Jim Crow society thru and thru.
Currently, hundreds of Israeli towns have admissions committees that can bar Palestinian citizens from living in them based on
"social suitability." (It's illegal for people to be excluded on the basis of race, religion or nationality, but the rubric of
"social suitability" permits the rejection of applicants who are not Zionist, haven't served in the army or don't intend to send
their children to Hebrew-language schools.)
More than 900 towns in Israel contain no Arab families, according to Yosef Jabareen,
a professor at the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa. Palestinian schools can lose government funding if they commemorate
the Nakba, the displacement of Palestinians in 1948. Israeli law forbids citizens to obtain citizenship or permanent residency
for Palestinian spouses from the West Bank and Gaza.
And that's why MD Rep. Donna Edwards and two white congressional colleagues locked arms and sang We Shall Overcome in apartheid Hebron:
Edwards and her colleagues looked up to see garbage-filled nets hanging above their heads, put up to catch trash thrown by Israeli
settlers. "We had never seen anything like that," she told me recently. "Hebron is the place where I think you can see in the
most frightening way what the injustice is, where you have people on one side of the street who live one way and people on another
side of the street living another way. And streets that some people can cross and walk on, but other people cannot. To me, it
looked like the stories that my mother and my grandmother told me about living in the South."
The great news at the end of the article. Edwards et al are taking over the party. Thrall cites Electronic Intifada's influence,
and Jewish Voice for Peace, and IfNotNow too.
Politicians speaking on Israel-Palestine used to worry primarily about attacks from pro-Israel media and activist groups; now
progressives are starting to feel some heat from the pro-Palestinian side.
But it's over. All the anti-Omar stuff of recent weeks is just the froth on the wave. Jim Zogby got slamdunked on the platform in
2016 by the Clintonites. But that wont' happen again.
James Zogby says that standing for Palestinian rights is guaranteed to be a major topic in the 2020 election: "It's a smell-test
issue. If you go to young people, they know you stink if you don't talk about it right." A senior Democratic staff member on Capitol
Hill told me: "People like Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Bernie Sanders have opened the floodgates on this issue. It may be painful
for the party as we move in a more progressive direction. But we'll come out in a better place -- a more moral and evenhanded
place -- in the end."
This piece is going to resonate for weeks. It's going to come under fierce attack. Because it's huge, and it's calm and factual.
It doesn't say a word about Christian Zionists because they don't have influence in the Democratic Party. And Thrall did the shrewd
thing of avoiding the word "lobby." I guess it's been anathematized, but that's what this article is about. That and race. People
of color are driving this change. They are going to be punished. Betty McCollum doesn't get taken to the woodshed for calling it
apartheid, but one county west, Ilhan Omar is going to be primaried next year.
About Philip
Weiss
Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
" This piece is going to resonate for weeks. It's going to come under fierce attack. Because it's huge, and it's calm and factual.
It doesn't say a word about Christian Zionists because they don't have influence in the Democratic Party. "
Wrong. Read it again. He focuses mostly on the struggle within the Democratic Party so he doesn't say much about them, but
he does say that they are among the most pro-Israel groups, but are also mostly Republican voters.
I just read it again and I think your characterization of the piece as "mostly on the struggle within the Democratic
Party" is flat out wrong – it covers that but a lot else as well. It's a big sprawling piece that covers campus politics, the
human rights situation is Israel, the political temperature in the American Jewish community, the whole anti-semitism debate in
the U.S. and so on. I take the last paragraph as support for Phil's assertion that the piece will have an impact:
During his introduction of Sanders, King spoke of the Vermont senator's family members murdered in the Holocaust, and how
coming of age in these circumstances "gave Bernie a deep sense of right and wrong." King said: "He has always rejected the status
quo. He spoke out against apartheid in South Africa, when -- crazily -- that was an unpopular thing to do. And even today," King
added, "he speaks out against apartheid like conditions in Palestine, even though it's not popular." The crowd erupted in cheers.
"Israel Lobby and Pro-Israel House Democrats Tried to Excommunicate Ilhan Omar, They Failed"
By Richard Silverstein
EXCERPT:
... ... ...
"The 2018 Congressional election marked a watershed, sweeping a new progressive class into office. Most prominent among them
were Reps. Rashid Tlaib, Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, women who challenged the system, incumbents, and the Democratic
machine to win sweeping victories on truly progressive platforms. Their Middle East agenda was particularly forthright, and therefore
shocking: they opposed U.S. aid to Israel, supported BDS and a one state solution (AOC has not expressed herself as explicitly
on these issues, but presumably shares many of her colleagues' views).
"Anyone who knows the Israel Lobby knew that the other shoe was bound to drop. They just didn't know when. And it didn't take
long. Both Tlaib and especially Omar have been outspoken on Israel-Palestine since their elections. And their markedly pro-Palestine
views have rapidly become grist for the anti-Semitism mill churned by the Lobby and its water-carriers in Congress.
"First, of course there was the famous 'Benjamins' tweet in which Omar noted that members of Congress were obedient to the
Lobby because of the hundreds of millions it raises and distributes to loyal pro-Israel candidates. But somehow, noting that the
Lobby derived its power from money morphed into outright anti-Semitism. The way this happened was instructive: there is, of course,
an ancient anti-Semitic trope that Jews are rich and use their wealth to control the finance, banking, entertainment, and the
media sectors, etc. That of course, has nothing to do with the true statement that the Lobby raises and distributes massive lucre
to its favored candidates. A reasonable person can see the difference between these two concepts.
"But the Lobby plays a game of smoke and mirrors. It sees a clear statement attacking it and manages through a bit of hocus-pocus
to transform it into a classic anti-Semitic charge, when in actuality there is absolutely no connection.
"Now, the Lobby has done it again after Omar gave a talk at a Washington DC bookstore in which she criticized those in Congress
and the Lobby who had a foreign allegiance: 'I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is O.K.
for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.'
"By this, of course she meant that groups like Aipac and their Congressional sponsors who take their marching orders either
from Israel directly, or who conceive their agenda totally with Israel and its interests in mind. They may believe that the interests
of the U.S. and Israel are the same; and that therefore they are not betraying U.S. interests. But anyone who believes that the
interests of one of the greatest powers on earth is the same as that of a small Middle Eastern theocratic state is either terribly
naïve or worse.
"After Omar's statement, the Lobby went into Defcon mode. The attack was launched by Eliot Engel, a veteran of the New York
Democratic machine, who attacked the Somali-American Congresswoman:
"Pro-Israel Jews like Engel are particularly exercised by the implication of dual loyalty. That is, that pro-Israel Jews are
more loyal to Israel than America. An especially apt historical phrase connoting dual loyalty is the term 'Israel Firster.' It
was not invented by an anti-Semite or white supremacist. But rather by the dean of American Jewish historians, Abe Sachar, the
first president of Brandeis University.
And he used the term to deride precisely the figures Omar is now attacking: a powerful
Lobby and its apologists who put Israel before all else. This is a passage from the 1961 American Jewish Yearbook:
"American Jews continued to object to Israel's claim that a genuine Jewish life was possible only in Israel. Abram L. Sachar,
president of Brandeis University, at the biennial convention of JWB [Jewish Welfare Board], declared on April 2, 1960 that among
Jews there is no room 'for Israel Firsters whose chauvinism and arrogance find nothing relevant or viable in any area outside
of Israel.'"
"The NY Times headline about the speech said Sachar derided the 'dogma of Israel.' If American Jews can quarrel over the meaning
and primacy of Israel in Jewish life, why would we deny Arab American the same right, considering that their Palestinian sisters
and brothers are under the boot heel of Israeli Occupation?
"It would not be so bad if Israel was a democratic, secular nation like the U.S. and most western democracies. Then at least
there would be a confluence of interests and values. But Israel is no longer a democracy. Instead it has become a theocracy, run
by fundamentalist extremists bent on holy war with the Muslim world. Israel's interests are diverging from those of the democratic
west more than ever. And this fissure can only continue to widen as Israel sinks ever deeper into mass murder, Occupation and
oppression. Israel's interests and America's are no longer the same. Not even close. That little sliver of daylight which presidents
used to boast about not existing when it came to Israel and U.S. interests: it's now a wide-open expanse of sky.
"Apparently, Congress has not yet read the memo. It is sunk in old ways and habits. The smell of greenbacks remains too enticing
to resist. But the old ways are dying. The election victories I referenced above testify to that more strongly than a $100-million
Sheldon Adelson donation.
"That's why the anti-Semitism fire-drill convened by the Democratic Congressional leadership was initially so infuriating.
It decided to take Omar to the woodshed and whip her by passing a resolution denouncing anti-Semitism by its members. This represented
the Democratic Party eating its young. Nancy Pelosi, at the goading of Engel, Nita Lowey and other pro-Israel members, tabled
a pointless resolution. It would have forced members to swear allegiance on pain of getting a public spanking like Omar. The final
wording never ended up referring directly to Omar. But the message was clear: shut up on the subject or the Party caucus will
exact a toll."
"think your characterization of the piece as "mostly on the struggle within the Democratic Party" is flat out wrong – it covers
that but a lot else as well. "
That's true. It is one of the best pieces I have ever seen in this subject. I am not knocking the piece -- I am correcting
Phil. Thrall doesn't write much about why Republicans support Israel, where Christian Zionists are a major factor. Phil claimed
he didn't say anything about Christian Zionists when he actually did. Phil didn't notice that because to the extent the piece
was about political parties in the US, it focused on the Democrats where Christian Zionists are not very important. Also, Phil
likes to downplay the role of Christian Zionists, while others who feel uncomfortable talking about Jewish donors ( fearing the antisemitism charge) like to emphasize them. The truth is that they are both important in why the US supports Israel.
Liberal Christian guilt about anti-Semitism also plays a role.
If Thrall were writing about the political right he would have to say a lot about how many on the Christian Right see Israel
as a central element in their belief on how the world was going to end. He would be writing about Hal Lindsay's books and later
the "Left Behind" series and how on the secular level American rightwingers sometimes see Israel as a bastion of "Western civilization"
surrounded by the heathens. Of course some of that last part overlaps with what Israel supporters in the Democratic Party think.
That included both Jews and Muslims who were tortured on the rack, also known as the auto-da-fe
I realize this is a bit of a nitpick, but the auto-da-fé was the final public confession prior to execution – it had
nothing whatsoever to do with any specific instrument of torture.
The fact that nobody in the entire editorial process noticed this obvious screwup, speaks volumes about the lack of
standards (and the lack of knowledge of European history) in the modern print media.
Given that the author was using the Inquisition as a rhetorical device, it would have been nice if he didn't come away from
the attempt looking like an ignoramus.
The truth is the GOP's courting of the donor class comes from the same motivation – the counting of the donor Benjamins. The difference
is they can better hide their support (of Zionism) under banners of defense, business, and righteousness.
My one beef with Mondoweiss
is that you regularly downplay the role of American Evangelical Christianity in the oppression of the Palestinians.
I think it's at the very top of the list, for Jewish Zionists simply don't have the numbers to win what is essentially
a public relations war for control of the Middle East. Right-wing Christianity – especially those who espouse Dominionist beliefs
– will tolerate ANY form of behavior that fits their views of Biblical prophecy. Absent these believers, who honestly don't give
a crap about Israel's behavior, the hue and cry of anti-semitism is the only weapon the Zionists have.
Trump plays to this crowd with his actions in Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. Finally, this "donor class" could hardly match
the daily U.S. gift of $10 million, so the pitch they make is to American taxpayers, although nobody ever talks about that.
TERRYHEATON- ". I think it's at the very top of the list, for Jewish Zionists simply don't have the numbers to win what
is essentially a public relations war for control of the Middle East."
Well, you would say that wouldn't you? Miss the 700 club do you? The reality is that Evangelical Christian support for Israel
and Zionism didn't really take off until the late 1970s as a consequence of Israeli PM Menachem Begin's recruitment of their support.
This was well after Israel and Zionism had firmly established itself following the 1967 six day war. Zionism and Israel is an
overwhelmingly Jewish project, Christian Zionists little more than opportunistic camp followers. The Christian Zionist leadership
has taken advantage of the opportunity to jump on the bandwagon of Jewish Zionist power. While these Christian Zionists may be
numerous, they lack the access to the corridors of power comparable to the Jewish Zionists, although their alliance with Jewish
Zionism has improved their status.
Phil is correct to downplay the power of the Christian Zionists. They have negligible effect upon the policies of either Israel
or the American Jewish Zionists, pats on the head notwithstanding. Their power lies more in supporting the rightward drift in
American politics.
Keith, thanks for the input. If you've read my book, then you already know my feelings about The 700 Club and Pat Robertson.
Sadly, Christian Zionists are not at all merely clinging to right-wing beliefs. They started many of them. In fact, that's what
we did at The 700 Club. Rather, they're waiting and hoping for the return of Jesus Christ, who will then, the thinking goes, elevate
them and bring peace for 1,000 years. So their support of Israel is from their interpretation of scripture, and that's a powerful
force that permits them to look the other way whenever Israel's behavior is questioned. They don't care, because they have their
eyes on what they view as a bigger prize. Pro-Israel forces in the U.S. would never get their way without the blind support of
this massive group of citizens.
'Senator Charles Schumer, the Democratic minority leader, similarly told the Aipac conference in 2018: "Of course, we say it's
our land, the Torah says it, but they don't believe in the Torah. So that's the reason there is not peace."' Damn, and I thought that the reason there was no peace was because of the oppressive, prison-like conditions of the Palestinian
people under Occupation.
Thanks, Chuck, for the enlightenment! Boy, do I feel dumb now!!
@ genesto: 'Senator Charles Schumer, the Democratic minority leader, similarly told the Aipac conference in 2018: "Of course,
we say it's our land, the Torah says it, but they don't believe in the Torah. So that's the reason there is not peace."' ||
So according to Mr. Schumer's "logic" any lack of peace with Muslims isn't the fault of Muslims – it's the fault of non-Muslims
(including Jews) who do not believe in the Qur'an.
Very good! Unfortunately,
logic was never a strong point among the Zionists.
Schumer, the self-proclaimed shomer (guardian) of the state of Israel in the Congress (Did someone say dual loyalty???), somehow
manages to be both humorous and frightening at the same time. Nice trick, if you can do it.
Of course it is "all about the Benjamins". Contending to the contrary is simply silly. One might well add that BDS can be viewed
as a good thing for Israel, and in that country's true best interests.
There's little point analysing this nonsense in terms of what is or isn't silly. After all, the entire shebang is predicated
on an idea that is breathtaking in its silliness: in a nutshell it's this –
A collection of primitive Bronze Age fictional gibberish can confer land titles over bits of the Middle East, to its adherents
– even to adherents with absolutely no ancestral connection to the land.
It's absolutely no coincidence that Herzl and his mob could not get any rabbi west of Lviv to endorse their nonsense: the rabbis
of all genuine centres of scholarship repudiated the Zionist project as an abomination.
So Herzl etc just kept going further East until they found someone theologically illiterate enough to give a rabbinical imprimatur,
and hence a veneer of intellectual respectability, to their project.
It's an indictment on the Polish rabbinate that they signed off on such an obvious apostasy it would have been nice if Herzl
etc had really had to go full retard and end up relying on a Chinaman (a Kaifeng) – but if that's what it would have taken at
the time, they would have done so.
(I'm an atheist, so I reject the idea that a project is validated if some religio-dipshit whackball waves some magic words
at it but Herzl's project wanted a religious imprimatur).
"... Brookfield Asset Management has agreed to lease the troubled office tower for 99 years and is paying for the lease up front, rather than in the typical yearly ground rent, the Wall Street Journal reports. The financial terms of the deal were not made public, but the New York Times reports that Brookfield is paying $1.1B. ..."
"... Thanks b and you are wise to be sceptical. The up front payment to the Kusher kleptocracy by Brookfield Partners (Asset Management) is not just unusual but more like extraordinary! One test will be how this deal compares to other deals. Was Kushner avoiding taxes by doing a lease? Is this a common practice? ..."
"... It is an old story. From February 12, Bess Levin, Vanity Fair: Qatar Shocked, Shocked to Learn It Accidentally Bailed Out Jared Kushner ..."
"... In 2015, Kushner and his family business, Kushner Cos., bought a portion of the New York Times building on West 43rd Street from Russian /Israeli real estate billionaire Lev Leviev for $295M, where $285M was borrowed from Deutsche Bank to complete the transaction, despite the 666 albatross hanging over Kushners head ..."
"... Qatar paid over a billion dollars to build and expand the US base in Qatar and charges no rent for that base. This allows Qatar to easily brush aside any question of loyalty that may be posed by USA and makes the US/US military reluctant to pressure Qatar. But Israel would have no qualms about apply pressure. The "Jared bailout" allows for a narrative of Qatari leadership as weak and corrupt - much like the ridiculous claims that Putin is pro-Israel. ..."
Kushner Extorted Qatar - Or Did He?DG , Mar 30, 2019 5:37:23 PM |
link
The Hillreporter just published a very juicy story about Jared Kushner, the son in law and senior advisor of President
Trump.
It says that Kushner, with the help of the Saudi clown prince Mohammad bin Salman, extorted Qatar for $1 billion to save his families
real estate business in New York.
While the story sounds plausible and fits the public known timeline of other events, there is so far no evidence that supports
it.
Ward first talked through the story on yesterday's KrassenCast
, a podcast by the anti-Trump and
somewhat shady Krassenstein
brothers who also run the Hillreporter .
In 2007, at the hight of the real estate bubble, the Kushner family bought the 666 5th Avenue building in New York City for $1.8
billion. Ten years later the Kushners were in real trouble. Plans to replace the building with a new one found no financing. The
property was losing lots of money and a huge mortgage payment was due in January 2019. The family had to look for a bail out.
In early 2017 the Kushner family had several meetings with Qatari officials to discuss a deal. The Intercept
reported :
Joshua Kushner, a venture capitalist and the younger brother of White House adviser Jared Kushner, met with Qatari Finance Minister
Ali Sharif Al Emadi the same week as his father, Charles Kushner, did in April 2017, in an independent effort to discuss potential
investments from the Qatari government. Both meetings took place at Al Emadi's St. Regis Hotel suite in Manhattan.
This revelation comes after Charles Kushner, in an interview with the Washington Post this week, confirmed for the first time
that his meeting with Al Emadi had indeed taken place on the subject of financing for the underwater Kushner property at 666 Fifth
Avenue.
"What I have learned is that in the ensuing month [May 2017] before the US visit to Riyadh, Jared Kushner got on a plane and flew
to Doha, the Qatari capital, and he reamed the Qatari ruling family, the al-Thanis, for not doing the deal with his father They
began to feel that he was indirectly threatening their sovereignty. The next thing they know, when they show up to the summit
in Riyadh, the Emir, the ruler of Qatar, arrives with an entourage, but his entourage is suddenly cut off from him, and not allowed
into the summit at the same time by the Saudis, which he felt was a move to deliberately make him look weak. You have to remember
during this summit, Jared and Ivanka go off for a cozy secret unmonitored dinner with [Saudi Crown Prince] MBS. Nobody knows what
they talked about."
Fifteen days later the Saudis and the UAE blockade Qatar and send troops to its border. Trump supports the Saudi blockade against
the advice of his Secretary of State Tillerson and his Defense Secretary Mattis and despite the fact the the biggest U.S. base in
the area is in Qatar.
Nine months later, a Canadian company, Brookfield Partners, who the Qatari Investment Authority owns a $1.8 billion or 9% stake
in, bailed out Kushner Properties, with a 99-year lease agreement for 666 5th Ave.
...
Around this same time, President Trump publicly shifts course, no longer supporting the blockade, as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
tells Saudi Arabia to stop the embargo.
If the blockade of Qatar originates in a Kushner extortion scheme, as the story insinuates, it would have serious political consequences.
But is that true?
Charles Kushner, head of the Kushner Companies, is in advanced talks with Brookfield Asset Management over a partnership to take
control of the 41-story aluminum-clad tower in Midtown Manhattan, 666 Fifth Avenue, according to two real estate executives who
have been briefed on the pending deal but were not authorized to discuss it.
The deal only
closed in August 2018 on terms that had changed from the first report and were unusual:
Brookfield Asset Management has agreed to lease the troubled office tower for 99 years and is paying for the lease up front,
rather than in the typical yearly ground rent, the Wall Street Journal reports. The financial terms of the deal were not made
public, but the New York Times reports that Brookfield is paying $1.1B.
What was the real sequencing here? Was the property deal agreed upon before the Trump administration changed its stand on the
Qatar blockade or after that happened? Was it related to it or not? We don't know. There is no public record of the alleged Jared
Kushner flight to Qatar. There is so far no other evidence that would support the story. The tale fits the publicly known timeline,
but that is not enough to believe it. Its authors may have used the public timeline to then fit a story onto it.
It is possible that the Kushner property deal and the Qatar blockade are intimately intertwined but there is, so far, no proof
for it. That idea that Kushner played the Saudis is dubious. The other way around is more likely.
Saudi Arabia and the UAE had plenty of reason to blockade Qatar. Both countries fear the Qatari support for the Muslim Brotherhood.
They hate Qatar's Al Jazeerah TV because it often publicly opposes their policies. The Saudis need money and annexing the very rich
Qatar would solve all their problems. Brookfield Properties denies that Qatar or the Qatari investment agency had any involvement
in 666 5th Ave. deal.
Even if Qatar, through Brookfield, made a deal with the Kushner family, it does not mean that it was extorted. The Qatari rulers
might simply have hoped that the deal would help them. It did not. The blockade still continues despite the real estate deal. Trump
had his own reasons to support the Saudis Qatar blockade. He wanted them to buy as many U.S. weapon system as possible, if only to
beat out Obama, who sold the Saudis all sorts of military trash for a record amount of money.
During the Mueller Russia investigation lots of smoke seemed to show that there was a 'collusion' fire burning somewhere under
the hundreds of facts and figures. There wasn't.
The story about the Kushner 'extortion of Qatar' might create a similar '
the walls are closing in ' (vid) farce only to end up with
nothing. It is interesting that the Vicky Ward story was published on March 29, a day after Jared Kushner
was interviewed
behind closed door by the Senate Intelligence Commission:
President Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner returned to the Senate Intelligence Committee for a closed door interview Thursday
as part of the committee's Russia investigation.
...
The first time Kushner appeared before the panel in 2017, he was interviewed by committee staff. The committee has wanted to re-interview
witnesses central to the investigation. On Thursday, senators were sitting in on the interview.
Russiagate is really finished
. The Republican's rule the Senate. Why would they continue to interview Kushner and why would senators sit in on it? Might the 'Kushner
extorted Qatar' be a planned sequel to Russiagate or why else was it launched right now?
Posted by b on March 30, 2019 at 05:28 PM |
Permalink
One has to wonder whether Kushner's influence was involved in this deal which would have seen the geopolitical balance in the
Middle East tilt into Saudi Arabia's favour.
Thanks b and you are wise to be sceptical. The up front payment to the Kusher kleptocracy by Brookfield Partners (Asset Management)
is not just unusual but more like extraordinary! One test will be how this deal compares to other deals. Was Kushner avoiding
taxes by doing a lease? Is this a common practice?
I did like the reference to Trump outdoing Obummer in arms deals and had a good laugh at Trumps childish racism in that game.
He sure hates Obummer but he sure won't go after him in any way. Trump wont even go after $hillary and her global empire shakedown
Foundation. Sometimes I think he is now a sitting duck but then I am an optimist.
In addition to likely having had the chance to hear about the deal through Brookfield directly or read about it in the paper
of record, one would imagine the Qataris were keeping tabs on all things Kushner on account of Jared's father, Charles Kushner,
taking a meeting with Qatar's finance minister, Ali Sharif Al Emadi in April 2017. (Kushner the Elder later said he accepted
the invite purely "out of respect" for the Qataris to tell them there was no way "we could do business.")
Of course Trump throwing the full weight of the US behind Saudi Arabia and UAE was a de facto shake down of Qatar. And of course,
Saudi and UAE were actively lobbying for it.
thanks b.. it will be interesting to see how much traction vicky wards reporting gets and whether any of it gets substantiated..
i do believe the usa is crazy enough to do another witch hunt, so anything is possible here... she works for the huffpost..
that is grounds to discredit here right there in my books..
More theatrics as diversion, while the crooks in D.C. dismantle the agencies that keep the wealthy oligarchs at bay, as they rewrite
the rules to allow greed and avarice to become virtues.
"Rules and regulations never changed a man's heart, but they can restrain the heartless."
Meanwhile, propaganda organs in America won't publicize real Donald Trump scandals like the case of ''Maria'' a Waterbury 12-year
old alleged child rape victim of Donald Trump and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The crimes allegedly occurred at a midtown
Manhattan mansion owned by Epstein's friend Les Wexner.
Donald Trump recently named as his Secretary of Labor, Alex Acosta, former U.S. Attorney for South Florida, the federal official
directly overseeing sweetheart future immunity deal for Grifter in Chief acolytes like Jeffrey Epstein... As Labor Secretary,
Acosta is charged with overseeing federal laws designed to combat domestic and international sex trafficking.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York is currently deciding whether to unseal the documents from a 2017
lawsuit involving one of Epstein's sex trafficking victims and Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's assistant.
Other possible corrupt practices involving stable genius center around China's decision to grant Ivanka Trump 38 new trademarks
in the middle of a trade war dispute... Part of current trade war negotiations are EB-5 investment visas. Jared Kushner and Trump
stand to benefit from EB-5 visas designed to attract Chinese investment in the United States in return for permanent residency.
Curiously an EB-5 visa scam was being run out of an office in Jupiter, Florida, located across the street from the Orchids
of Asia massage parlor raided by police where Trump billionaire friend Kraft was caught in a possible Chinese Honey Trap.
Russiagate may be done but thats because it was defined improperly. Sometimes it helps to look back to get a big picture perspective
Starting in 1999, Putin enlisted two oligarchs Lev Leviev and Roman Abramovich, who would go on to become Chabad's biggest
patrons worldwide, to create the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia under the leadership of Chabad rabbi Berel Lazar,
who would come to be known as "Putin's rabbi."
Roman Abramovich is the owner of the Chelsea Football Club of the English Premier League. He was a victor (along with Paul
Manafort's patron Oleg Deripaska) in the aluminum wars of the 1990s and reportedly the person who convinced Boris Yeltsin that
Putin would be a proper successor.
Ivanka Trump is very close friends with Abramovich's wife , Dasha Zhukova. Zhukova reportedly attended the inauguration as
Ivanka's personal guest. Leviev is the one with the closest links to the Trumps and Israel
It starts with Bayrock . This is the company that Donald Trump teamed up with to build his Trump Soho project. There were three
main actors . One was convicted mob associate and FBI informant Felix Sater. Another was Tevfik Arif, a likely Russian intelligence
connection who was once was arrested by the Turks . The third was the late Tamir Sapir, another man with ties to Russian intelligence.
The late billionaire Tamir Sapir, was born in the Soviet state of Georgia. Trump has called Sapir "a great friend." In December
2007, he hosted the wedding of Sapir's daughter, Zina, at Mar-a-Lago. The groom, Rotem Rosen, was the CEO of the American branch
of Africa Israel, the Putin oligarch Leviev's holding company, and known as Leviev's right hand man.
As mentioned Leviev was one of two oligarch's who Putin had establish the "Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia" under
the leadership of Chabad rabbi Berel Lazar, who would come to be known as 'Putin's rabbi.'" Sater, Sapier, Jared, Ivanka are all
Chabad members and/or donors
Trump had business discussions in Moscow in 2013 about Moscow real estate projects with Agalarovs, Alex Sapir (son of Tamir
Sapir, brother of Zina, and brother-in-law of Rotem Rosen.) and Rotem Rosen, a pair of New York-based Russian . This may also
have been discussed during the June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower that was attended by Kushner, Manafort and Donald Trump Jr and
a Russian lawyer associated with Fusion GPS (Steele dossier) and the Leviev linked Prevezon
Agalarov is a Moscow-based property developer who had won major contracts from Putin's government. He hosted Trump's 2013 Miss
Universe contest at his concert hall in Moscow. He orchestrated the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting and formed a new American shell
company a month beforehand with the help of the Russian lawyer who attended the meeting.
In 2015, Kushner and his family business, Kushner Cos., bought a portion of the New York Times building on West 43rd Street
from Russian /Israeli real estate billionaire Lev Leviev for $295M, where $285M was borrowed from Deutsche Bank to complete the
transaction, despite the 666 albatross hanging over Kushners head
Deutsche Bank and two companies tied to Leviev, Africa Israel Investments and Prevezon, have all recently been the subject
of money laundering investigations. A laundering case against Prevezon was settled two months after Trump fired Bharara, with
a $6M slap on the wrist settlement that raised some eyebrows.
As for 666, Kushner gets bailed out by Brookfield who has Qatar as its 2nd largest investor. But consider that at the same
time they did this deal they also acquired Westinghouse Electric, a nuclear power company. Now members of the Trump administration
propose selling nuclear power plants to Saudi Arabia. Interesting.
Can't seem to find a Putin/Russian oligarch connection although that's probably due to the fact you cant use anonymous shell
companies to buy property in NYC any longer due to new rules by FinCEN
But so many conflict of interests here, Israel, China, Saudis, Russian oligarchs, etc and virtually no oversight or transparency.
With twitter being used to manipulate markets one has to imagine rampant insider trading as well (hey guys, my tweets going out
at 3 pm, get your trades in and remember my 5%).
@7 savvy globalist somebody wants us to know that there's nothing to see here!
But the Vanity Fair article he links to, written by Bess L-evin, makes this unsubstantiated(!) point:
So why is Doha taking pains to insist it accidentally bailed out the First-in-Laws on their no good, very bad investment
now?
1) Actually, the Reuters article that she refers to explicitly states that Qatar has a minority position and no board representation
! It is a known in the financial world as a "passive investment".
2) L-evin's wording is extremely disingenuous: the Qataris never said they bailed out anyone, accidentally or otherwise!!
Interestingly, Vicky Ward used to work at Vanity Fair, and is currently an editor at HuffPost (a Democratic rag). And media that
broke/promoted this story (Leevin and Krasseenstein) could (naturally) rise some suspicions of a connection to Israel's conflict
with Iran. Qatar shares a huge gas field with Iran so Qatar has been reluctant to join KSA and Israel against Iran.
Qatar paid over a billion dollars to build and expand the US base in Qatar and charges no rent for that base. This allows
Qatar to easily brush aside any question of loyalty that may be posed by USA and makes the US/US military reluctant to pressure
Qatar. But Israel would have no qualms about apply pressure. The "Jared bailout" allows for a narrative of Qatari leadership as
weak and corrupt - much like the ridiculous claims that Putin is pro-Israel.
1) Documentation is scarce and the few that exist don't fit the journalist's story chronology (even though, in the concrete
case, you could argue for expediency/bureacratic delay, so this criterium alone doesn't bust the journalist's chronology)
2) The whole narrative simply doesn't have social cohesion. It simply doesn't make any sense for Trump to risk be impeached
in such polarized scenario just to rescue his son-in-law. It makes even less sense for the Arab royalties to submit to a much
weaker political player such as Kushner. And, as b mentions, Trump had many more powerful reasons to sanction Qatar.
@11 &12
Corruption abounds, but any of it that touches Zionists, the Clinton's, or the royal family (Epstein, Prince Andrew) is off limits.
They are untouchable to the MSM.
people like Brennan & Clapper are feeding the "trump really, really, no really hearts putin" narrative to the msdnc crowd, and
this of an administration being helmed by CIA men like Pompeo.
like the fbi's manufacture wholesale of "islamo-terrorist" non-events
in part to distract from the presence of the actual threat of rising fascism & racism (a la Nazism, as in NZ) from the usual suspects,
much beloved of the fibbies, it's convenient for all, incl trump, to be painted as bff's with Vlad.
if the goal was to stop or in any way impede the trump admin (not just trump himself, who is a know-nothing shit golem animated
by the glad-handing he receives from the people actually in charge, who just feed his narcissistic fantasies), there are other,
more practical & achievable ways to do it. in-fighting among the herd who have not yet jumped off the Gadarene cliffs is not the
same thing as opposition, not among the Legion possessed swine in D.C. they are just grunting & snorting at each other, occasionally,
very occasionally & deliberately, trampling one of their own, as they plummet over the edge.
it's pretty clear that funny things like such pigs' full-throated support of Zionism is more important to Pelosi & Schumer
than resisting the Trump admin *in any way,* no matter how much they personally despise trump. and mainly they despise him for
helping to reveal what some POTUS would have sooner or later: the pointlessness of Congress; that the "unitary executive", as
the titular head of the corporate security state, is already fully in charge; that "dyarchy," dual rule by legislative & executive,
is non-existent.
PressTV: How Zionism Infiltrated The United States
Interview with Scholar and Journalist, Mark Bruzonsky. Mark Bruzonsky, a Jewish, American Scholar and Journalist, has been
a key member behind the scenes of the Israeli Palestinian peace initiative in the 1980s, meeting with Former Egyptian President
Anwar Sadat and with Palestinian officials. In this exclusive interview with Press TV's Autograph, Mr. Bruzonsky talks about the
challenges and missed opportunities he witnessed first-hand, and how Zionist groups infiltrated American politics, US institutions
and organizations.
He goes further to explain the specific time and day Obama sold out to the AIPAC lobby, and how President Obama would never
dare oppose the stronghold of the Zionist, Israeli Lobby in the US.
a so-called Virginia-Israel Advisory Board (VIAB) has actually been funded by the
Commonwealth of Virginia taxpayers to promote and even subsidize Israeli business in the
state, business that currently runs an estimated $500 million per annum in favor of
Israel.
According to the documents, VIAB, which avoids any public disclosure of its activities,
is currently also being scrutinized by the state Attorney General over its handling of
government funds.
VIAB was founded in 2001 but it grew significantly under governor Terry McAuliffe's
administration McAuliffe, regarded by many as the Clintons' "bag man," received what were
regarded as generous out-of-state campaign contributors from actively pro-Israeli
billionaires Haim Saban and J.B. Pritzker, who were both affiliated with the Democratic
Party.
The Virginia Coalition for Human Rights (VCHR) reports that VIAB is "the only Israel
business promotion entity in the United States embedded within a state government and
funded entirely by the state's taxpayers.
In terms of the overall state budget, VIAB's direct share is small ($209,068 for fiscal
years 2017 and 2018). However, VIAB's diversion of state, federal and private grants, as
well as demands on state-funded entities like colleges and universities to collaborate in
projects designed primarily to benefit Israel, run in the millions of dollars per year.
a so-called Virginia-Israel Advisory Board (VIAB) has actually been funded by the
Commonwealth of Virginia taxpayers to promote and even subsidize Israeli business in the
state, business that currently runs an estimated $500 million per annum in favor of
Israel.
Reconciliation between Palestinians and Israeli might now be impossible. But the county can't keep more then a million people in
Bantustan forever. Probably Israel eventually will go the way South Africa went and settlers will repatriate to Western countries, Russia
and Ukraine.
Notable quotes:
"... A number of analysts were quick to point out how this sets the stage for further unnecessary tit-for-tat escalation inevitably making things messier for US forces in the Middle East, and significantly increases the changes of direct war. ..."
"... Netanyahu is taking credit for Trump's decision to designate the Revolutionary Guard as terrorists. "Thank you for responding to another important request of mine," Bibi says. ..."
"... He got the Golan 2 weeks ago and now this 1 day before Israel's election ..."
"... Likely the statement was not made in English in order to avoid making President Trump look weak in front of US political leaders and the American public , while at the same bolstering (in Hebrew to Israel's domestic audience) Netanyahu's ability to immediately make Washington bend to Israel's interests. ..."
"... Though Trump has clearly thrown his full support behind a Netanyahu victory, it doesn't bode well for "America First" having the Israeli leader essentially bragging that Washington policy can be dictated from Jerusalem. ..."
"... Netanyahu is the friend one appreciates not having. He's unable to avoid insulting everyone he's around, because he just can't control his need to announce at every opportunity how much better and smarter and prettier than everyone else he is. (Are we sure he's not a New Yorker? :-) ..."
"... Netanyahu over the weekend historically declared that he fully intends to extend Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank. The incumbent prime minister also said he had told President Donald Trump that would not evacuate "a single person" from the 400,000 or so Jews residing in the West Bank. ..."
"... "There will be no Palestinian state," he said, "not like the one people are talking about. It won't happen." ..."
We noted Monday that just hours after President Trump formally designated Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps as a terrorist
organization, Iran's foreign ministry
responded
in kind , immediately put forward a bill placing US Central Command on a list of organizations designated as terrorists, akin
to Daesh.
A number of analysts were
quick to point out how this sets the stage for further unnecessary tit-for-tat escalation inevitably making things messier for
US forces in the Middle East, and significantly increases the changes of direct war. Soon after the White House's IRGC designation,
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thanked President Trump in a tweet, the Hebrew version of which bragged it was all the
prime minister's idea .
Netanyahu said in the Hebrew-only tweet that he was glad Trump "answered another one of my important requests" which will keep
the world safe from Iran. It's unclear what the prime minister mean from "another" of his requests, but less than two weeks ago Trump
made a dramatic decisions to overturn decades of official US policy and bestow formal recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the
Golan Heights after receiving a
"quickie"
history lesson .
It's well known that Netanyahu had personally lobbied for weeks and months for that decision, and on Monday appeared to be touting
both as his initiative on the eve of Israel's election.
According to The Intercept's translation the statement said: "Thank you, my dear friend, President Donald Trump," Netanyahu
tweeted in Hebrew , "for answering another one of my important requests."
Netanyahu is taking credit for Trump's decision to designate the Revolutionary Guard as terrorists. "Thank you for responding
to another important request of mine," Bibi says.
Likely the statement was not made in English in order to avoid making President Trump look weak in front of US political leaders
and the American public , while at the same bolstering (in Hebrew to Israel's domestic audience) Netanyahu's ability to immediately
make Washington bend to Israel's interests.
Though Trump has clearly thrown his full support behind a Netanyahu victory, it doesn't bode well for "America First" having
the Israeli leader essentially bragging that Washington policy can be dictated from Jerusalem.
On the further significance of the statement, The Intercept
observed :
Joe Dyke, an Agence France-Presse correspondent, pointed out that Netanyahu omitted the claim that Trump's move was made at
his request in a subsequent tweet in English. That left the prime minister open to the charge often leveled at Palestinian leaders
by Israelis, that they placate the international community in English and then say something quite different for domestic consumption
in their native tongue.
Israelis head to the polls to elect a prime minister on Tuesday, and one key feature of Netanyahu's campaign -- lately beset by
no less than three corruption charges as prime minister -- has been his warm relations with the American president and close cooperation.
while at the same bolstering (in Hebrew to Israel's domestic audience) Netanyahu's ability to immediately make Washington bend
to Israel's interests.....
Disgusting. Zionist evil neo-con warmongers pulling strings in DC....what else is new.
I have to challenge your position for its intellectual integrity...
Is is "disgusting" for a group - any group - to use all methods of influence to reach their goals, or is it disgusting that
it's targets fold so easily?
Your indignation at the situation may be just, but your wrath is misplaced. Direct it at the cowards and scumbags who can be
flipped so easily.
Do you now understand why Zionists refer to us as "Dumb* Goyim"?
* 'Dumb' seems kind, given how a tiny minority can bridle the large majority so so easily. Other choice words come to mind.
HRC: Do you now understand why Zionists refer to us as "Dumb* Goyim"?
* 'Dumb' seems kind, given how a tiny minority can bridle the large majority so so easily.
Blind: Nepotism is why Jews are successful in host nations - Tribalism is a form of nepotism.
Also there is parasitism. The Jewish nation living independently within a host nation, meets the definition of a parasite:
one independent entity living within another, and deriving sustenance from it.
And CONCEALMENT is the main form of defense of every PARASITE.
● FOR EXAMPLE: The private-currency Ponzi-scheme PARASITE. In America they call their banks FEDERAL-Reserve banks, and their
currency FEDERAL-Reserve Notes. The "FEDERAL" part is to suggest FEDERAL-government and CONCEAL the fact they are PRIVATE. And
their FEDERAL-Reserve Notes look just like FEDERAL-government notes - more CONCEALMENT.
● FOR ANOTHER EXAMPLE, click this link:
http://static.neatorama.com/images/2006-08/cymothoa-exigua.jpg
[[Cymothoa exigua PARASITE enters the HOST fish and REPLACES it's tongue .. and CONCEALS the job by the PARASITE's body looking
just like the HOST's original tongue.]]
At best there is the suspicion that Israeli intelligence knew something was coming up. But same can be said about American intelligence,
where at some levels suspicions were pronounced, which due to incompetence and/or miscommunication between services weren't followed
upon.
The idea that Israel would stage super-complex false flag massacres against its big brother ally, using no less than 4 planes,
with Muslim recruits (mostly Saudis) is ridiculous. There is everything too lose, too little to gain.
Look at the aftermath: Iraq and Afghanistan were invaded. What's the gain here for Israel?!?! It had no big issues with any
of those two countries. And Iran was NOT attacked.
Critical: Look at the aftermath: Iraq and Afghanistan was invaded. Israel had no big issues with any of those countries.
Blind: Nonsense! Both countries stood in the way of the "Greater Israel" ("from the Nile to the Euphrates") project. Especially
IRAQ, the Euphrates River runs right through the middle of it!
The Greater Israel fantasy is an outlandish theory. Maybe some jewish reli-nutcases adhere to it, but it is mostly a fruit
of the mind of conspiracy theorists without geopolitical knowledge and realism.
Proof: Israel gave the Sinai back to Egypt + they left Southern Lebanon + it walled itself in...
The perpetrators own the media, own Hollywood and domimate the advertising industry. They've engineered our society so any
discussion of their political motives/actions is met with cries of bigotry. They've also used social engineering to turn half
of us against the other. We're on the losing end of a cultural war and 99% of us don't even know it's happening and 50% of those
people have mush for brains.
Captain: The [911] information is out there. They [Americans] just don't care.
Blind: The same people who engineered 9/11, also own the American Mainstream Media, and the keep us in the dark and feed us
********. The mushroom syndrome.
Yes of course! The Mossad 9/11 project was enabled by traitorous INSIDERS within the US government. Led by Cheney and Bush.
9/11 was an INSIDE job, as well as a false-flag to make Israel's enemies look like ours.
SpaceIL, an Israeli nonprofit, launched its Beresheet moon lander on a SpaceX rocket in February. ... Russia, China, and the
United States. Could Israel innovate and actually achieve this ...
The moon is in reach for Israel's Beresheet mission. The privately funded SpaceIL spacecraft is currently orbiting our lunar
neighbor and making preparations to attempt a soft landing Thursday.
Israel is on track to attempt a moon landing Thursday and, if successful, the tiny nation will become just the fourth to touch
down on the lunar surface. The landing attempt of the robotic probe ...
Netanyahu is the friend one appreciates not having. He's unable to avoid insulting everyone he's around, because he just
can't control his need to announce at every opportunity how much better and smarter and prettier than everyone else he is. (Are
we sure he's not a New Yorker? :-)
TEL AVIV – The U.S. is fully aware of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's flat rejection of the creation of a Palestinian state
along with his plans to extend Israeli law to West Bank settlements, the Israeli premier said on Monday.
In an interview with
Channel 12 , Netanyahu pushed back against his main challenger Benny Gantz's claims that his vow to annex the West Bank was
nothing more than an empty campaign promise.
Netanyahu over the weekend
historically declared that he fully intends to extend Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank. The incumbent prime minister
also said he had told President Donald Trump that would not evacuate "a single person" from the 400,000 or so Jews residing in
the West Bank.
Gantz on Sunday said Netanyahu's statement was "meaningless" and no more than a last-minute bid for Likud to gain the upper
hand over Gantz's Blue and White party. Netanyahu, however, countered that such radical moves did not happen overnight.
"Why did it take two years to get recognition of the Golan Heights even with such a friendly president? These things takes
time," said Netanyahu in reference to Trump's presidential order last month recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights.
Netanyahu said annexation of the West Bank would happen in three stages and he hoped to do it with "full American support."
"I discussed [annexation] with representatives of President Trump and I expressed my belief that there is no other option,
I think it is also the right move," he said.
"I want to do it gradually. If possible, I want to do it with full American support," the prime minister added.
"It is going to happen," he stated. "This isn't something I invented for the elections."
"I was under incredible pressure from the Obama administration -- that no prime minister has ever had -- to cease construction
in the [West Bank] and yet I withstood them and we continued building and now we will continue," he said.
Netanyahu also told
Army Radio that the Palestinians would not have a state or security control.
"There will be no Palestinian state," he said, "not like the one people are talking about. It won't happen."
It's almost as if these "western" elites represent an occupying power tasked with
stripping America of assets before steering it into a war it can't win.
Western humanity has been run into the ground by a cabal of elite that own global private
finance and everything else.
They have managed to brainwash Americans into believing that profit is a necessity in
every human interaction or development and it has a higher priority than function or service
(which is the really sick part)
The complete demise of the Western system with the private jackboot on finance cannot come
soon enough.
"... Booker is a close friend of the controversial "America's rabbi" Shmuley Boteach and has taught himself enough Hebrew to pop out sentences from Torah with Jewish audiences. ..."
"... Last week the Intercept published a secret recording of Booker meeting with a group of Jews from New Jersey at the recently concluded AIPAC summit in Washington, which Booker, unlike a number of other Democratic presidential hopefuls, attended enthusiastically. Booker pandered so assiduously that it is hard to believe that he actually knows what he is saying in an effort to be more Israeli than the Israelis. ..."
"... Phil Weiss on Mondoweiss sums up the high points of what Booker said and did not say in the meeting: "Donald Trump is endangering Israel's security in Syria; there is no 'greater moral vandalism' than dividing the U.S. and Israel; ..."
"... A progressive senator who invokes Martin Luther King Jr. over and over again has not one word to say about the Jim Crow status of Palestinians while describing Israel as a 'country that I love so deeply, that changed my life from the day I went there as a 24 year old.'" ..."
"... Booker elaborated in his own words: "Israel is not political to me. It's not political. I was a supporter of Israel well before I was a United State Senator. I was coming to AIPAC conferences well before I knew that one day I would be a federal officer. If I forget thee, o Israel, may I cut off my right hand." ..."
"... Normally progressive Booker, who has criticized the endless war in Afghanistan on the campaign trail, has hypocritically condemned Trump for not continuing war in Syria to protect Israel ..."
"... Do we need a man like Cory Booker as President of the United States? He is articulate enough to cite "moral vandalism" but not perceptive enough to take the concept one step further and appreciate that uncritical close ties to Israel's feckless and fascist government could easily lead to a nuclear war that would constitute something far worse. He further believes that Israel's hand deep in the U.S. Treasury is a desirable policy, that unlimited "all resources" support of Israel is a U.S. national imperative, that ending the continued American military presence in the Middle East "would endanger our ally" Israel, and that moves to nonviolently oppose Israel's oppression of the Palestinians must be made illegal. ..."
"... Frankly, we already have an American leader who puts Israel first in Donald Trump and we don't need another round of wag the dog in our next president. ..."
Israel works hard to influence the United States at all levels. Its tentacles dig deep, now extending to local and state government
levels where candidates for office can expect to be grilled by Jewish constituents regarding their views on the Middle East. The
constituents often insist that the responses be provided in writing. The candidates being grilled understand perfectly well that
their answers will determine what kind of press coverage and level of donations they will receive in return.
One of the most blatant propaganda programs is the sponsorship of free "educational" trips to Israel for all newly elected congressmen
and spouses. The trips are normally led by Israel boosters in Congress like Democratic House Speaker Steny Hoyer, who recently boasted
at an AIPAC gathering how he has done 15 trips to Israel and is now preparing to do another with 30 Democratic congressmen, including
nearly all of those who are newly elected. The congressional trips are carefully coordinated with the Israeli government and are
both organized and paid for by an affiliate of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee called the
American Israel Education Foundation (AIEF) . Other trips sponsored
by AIEF as well as by other Jewish organizations include politicians at state and even local levels as well as journalists who write
about foreign policy.
As noted above, all the trips to Israel are carefully choreographed to present a polished completely Israel-slanted point of view
on contentious issues. Visits to Palestinian areas are arranged selectively to avoid any contact with actual Arabs. Everyone is expected
to return and sing the praises of the wonderful little democracy in the Middle East, which is of course a completely false description
as Israel is a militarized ethno-theocratic kleptocracy headed by a group of corrupt right-wing fanatics who also happen to be racists.
Even progressive politicians who are aware that the Israeli message is bogus and also resent the heavy handedness of the Israelis
and their diaspora friends often decide that it is better to go along for the ride rather than resist. But some embrace it enthusiastically,
like Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, a liberal Democrat running for his party's nomination for president, who has, by his own
admission, visited Israel many times. Israel and its friends are, of course, both courting and promoting him assiduously.
Booker inevitably reminds one of ex-President Barack Obama because he is black but the similarity goes beyond that as he is also
presentable, well-spoken and slick in his policy pronouncements. One suspects that like Obama he would say one thing to get elected
while doing something else afterwards, but we Americans have become accustomed to that in our presidents. More to the point, Booker
was and is a complete sell-out to Israel and its Jewish supporters during his not completely successful career in New Jersey as mayor
of Newark as well as in his bid for the presidential nomination. Booker is
a close friend of the controversial
"America's rabbi" Shmuley Boteach and has taught himself enough Hebrew to pop out sentences from Torah with Jewish audiences.
Last week the Intercept published
a secret recording of Booker meeting with a group of Jews from New Jersey at the recently concluded AIPAC summit in Washington,
which Booker, unlike a number of other Democratic presidential hopefuls, attended enthusiastically. Booker pandered so assiduously
that it is hard to believe that he actually knows what he is saying in an effort to be more Israeli than the Israelis. He described
an Israel that deserves total commitment from Washington and stated clearly that he wants to create a "unified front" against the
nonviolent boycott movement (BDS). He said that there is "no greater moral vandalism than abandoning Israel."
Phil Weiss on Mondoweiss sums up
the high points of what Booker said and did not say in the meeting: "Donald Trump is endangering Israel's security in Syria; there
is no 'greater moral vandalism' than dividing the U.S. and Israel; Booker would cut off his right hand before abandoning Israel;
he lobbied black congresspeople not to boycott Netanyahu's 2015 speech because we need to show a 'united front' with Israel; AIPAC
is an 'incredible great' organization whose mission is urgent now because of rising anti-Semitism; he 'text messages back and forth
like teenagers' with AIPAC's president Mort Fridman; and he swears to uphold bipartisan support in the Congress for Israel and give
it even more money. And Booker says not one word about Palestinian human rights or Israel's persecution of Palestinians. That's right.
A progressive senator who invokes Martin Luther King Jr. over and over again has not one word to say about the Jim Crow status of
Palestinians while describing Israel as a 'country that I love so deeply, that changed my life from the day I went there as a 24
year old.'"
Booker elaborated in his own words: "Israel is not political to me. It's not political. I was a supporter of Israel well before
I was a United State Senator. I was coming to AIPAC conferences well before I knew that one day I would be a federal officer. If
I forget thee, o Israel, may I cut off my right hand."
Booker described how he is appalled by the rise of alleged anti-Semitic incidents in the U.S. and worldwide. Rather than using
that possible development as leverage to get Israel to behave more humanely, he instead prefers to punish all Americans with new
legislation intended to strip all everyone of their First Amendment rights. Per Booker "We must take acts on a local stage against
vicious acts that target Israel. That's why I'm cosponsor of Senate Bill 720. Israel anti-Boycott Act."
Normally progressive Booker, who has criticized the endless war in Afghanistan on the campaign trail, has hypocritically condemned
Trump for not continuing war in Syria to protect Israel, saying
"This administration's seeming willingness to pull away from Syria makes it more dangerous to us, makes it more dangerous to
Israel, and this is not sound policy . When you're tweeting about pulling out of Syria within days, when that would create a vacuum
that would not only endanger the United States of America but it would endanger our ally Israel as well. We need a comprehensive
strategy for that region because Israel's neighborhood is getting more dangerous than less. Syria is becoming a highway for Iran
to move more precision guided missiles to Hezbollah. There has got to be a strategy in this country to support Israel that is
bipartisan that is wise and that frankly calls upon all the resources of this country, not just military".
And because Israel always needs more money, Booker is ready to deliver: "Unequivocally 100 percent absolutely [yes] to the 3.3
billion [a year]. I have been on the front lines every time an MOU is up to make sure Israel gets the funding it needs. I even pushed
for more funding."
Do we need a man like Cory Booker as President of the United States? He is articulate enough to cite "moral vandalism" but not
perceptive enough to take the concept one step further and appreciate that uncritical close ties to Israel's feckless and fascist
government could easily lead to a nuclear war that would constitute something far worse. He further believes that Israel's hand deep
in the U.S. Treasury is a desirable policy, that unlimited "all resources" support of Israel is a U.S. national imperative, that
ending the continued American military presence in the Middle East "would endanger our ally" Israel, and that moves to nonviolently
oppose Israel's oppression of the Palestinians must be made illegal.
One does not see an actual American interest in any of that, but perhaps special spectacles made in Israel are needed, an environment
where Booker has clearly spent a great deal of time both physically and metaphorically. Or maybe it's the Benjamins. Booker will
need millions of dollars to mount his campaign and he knows where to go and what he needs to say to get it.
One struggles to see just a tiny bit of humanity in Booker vis-à-vis the Arabs who have lost their homes and livelihoods to Israeli
criminality, but none of that comes through in a session in which, admittedly, the Senator from New Jersey is speaking with his Jewish
donor/supporters. Booker is on record favoring an Israel-Palestine "two state solution," which is no longer viable, though he has
not objected to Israeli army snipers shooting dead children, journalists, medical personnel and unarmed protesters in Gaza.
Frankly,
we already have an American leader who puts Israel first in Donald Trump and we don't need another round of wag the dog in our next
president.
Cory Booker should work hard to maintain his perfect attendance record at AIPAC as he texts "like a teenager" with Mort
Fridman, but maybe someday he will actually grow up and learn to think for himself. As he is a U.S. Senator that certainly is something
we might all hope for.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational
foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected].
"... In so doing, he has effectively repudiated the entire post-World War II international order and signalled that wars of conquest and territorial aggrandisement are the order of the day. Such annexations were declared illegal under the Geneva Conventions, enacted in the wake of the Second World War to prevent the repetition of similar actions carried out by Germany's Nazi regime, which set the stage for the outbreak of war in 1939. ..."
"... Netanyahu's announcement will give succour to his support base among fascistic layers of the settlers and religious nationalists, driving Israel's capitalist political setup ever further toward outright apartheid, fascism and military dictatorship. It is a prelude to intensified Israeli military aggression in the occupied West Bank, Gaza and the broader Middle East. ..."
"... He has brought into his electoral coalition, and a possible share of government power should he win, outright fascist elements linked to the banned Kach Party of the late Meir Kahane, a party that was designated a terrorist organization by the US, Canada, the European Union, Japan and Israel itself. ..."
"... Trump's naked interference in the Israeli elections is bound up with US imperialism's broader aim of escalating its military intervention in the Middle East to roll back the growth of Iranian influence in the wake of the successive debacles suffered by Washington in Iraq, Libya and Syria. ..."
"... The political antecedents of Netanyahu's Likud Party, Vladimir Jabotinsky's Revisionists, who were to remain a minority tendency until the 1970s, articulated this position most clearly. Their aim was the establishment of a Jewish state on the entire land of Biblical Palestine, including Transjordan. With the Jews a minority in Palestine, such a state would necessarily mean expelling the Arab population to ensure its Jewish character. ..."
"... In 1923, Jabotinsky explained, in an article titled "The Iron Wall," that the Zionist project could be achieved only against the wishes of the native population. He envisaged the need for an iron wall to protect the Jews from the native population. He said, "A voluntary reconciliation with the Arabs is out of the question either now or in the near future." Without a garrison, Zionist colonization of Palestine would be impossible, and "therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force." ..."
"... Netanyahu has now made explicit what has long been implicit: the incorporation of the West Bank into a Greater Israel. It can be achieved and sustained only through the imposition of military rule. To this end, his government has passed a series of measures, including the openly racist "Nation-State Law" enshrining Jewish supremacy as the legal foundation of the state, bringing the political and legal system into alignment with the reality of Jabotinsky's garrison state, based on the brutal oppression of an entire people, the Palestinians. ..."
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has declared his intention of extending Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank, captured in
the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, if he is re-elected prime minister in Tuesday's general election.
In so doing, he has effectively repudiated the entire post-World War II international order and signalled that wars of conquest
and territorial aggrandisement are the order of the day. Such annexations were declared illegal under the Geneva Conventions, enacted
in the wake of the Second World War to prevent the repetition of similar actions carried out by Germany's Nazi regime, which set
the stage for the outbreak of war in 1939.
Netanyahu's announcement will give succour to his support base among fascistic layers of the settlers and religious nationalists,
driving Israel's capitalist political setup ever further toward outright apartheid, fascism and military dictatorship. It is a prelude
to intensified Israeli military aggression in the occupied West Bank, Gaza and the broader Middle East.
Netanyahu told a television Channel 12 interviewer on Saturday that he would not "evacuate any community." Nor would he divide
Jerusalem, a reference to Palestinian demands for East Jerusalem to serve as the capital of a future Palestinian state. He said,
"I will not divide Jerusalem, I will not evacuate any community and I will make sure we control the territory west of Jordan."
He added, "A Palestinian state will endanger our existence and I withstood huge pressure over the past eight years. No prime minister
has withstood such pressure. We must control our destiny."
Netanyahu made it clear that he viewed President Donald Trump's recognition of Israel's illegal annexation of Syria's Golan Heights,
captured in 1967, as a green light to press on with Likud's long-held expansionist policy of a Greater Israel. He said, "Will we
move ahead to the next stage? Yes. I will extend sovereignty, but I don't distinguish between the settlement blocs and the isolated
ones, because each settlement is Israeli, and I will not hand it over to Palestinian sovereignty."
Speaking about the Bedouin community of Khan al-Ahmar, which he has pledged to evacuate despite international outrage, Netanyahu
promised that "it will happen." He added, "I promised, and it will happen at the soonest opportunity."
Netanyahu's announcement was aimed at bolstering his position in the election, which he had called ahead of schedule in order
to win political backing to ensure his immunity from prosecution on a raft of corruption charges. Facing unexpectedly strong opposition
from a slate of generals assembled by the so-called Blue and White coalition, headed by former chief of staff Benny Gantz, he has
leveraged Trump's support to appeal to his right-wing support base.
He has brought into his electoral coalition, and a possible share of government power should he win, outright fascist elements
linked to the banned Kach Party of the late Meir Kahane, a party that was designated a terrorist organization by the US, Canada,
the European Union, Japan and Israel itself.
Trump's naked interference in the Israeli elections is bound up with US imperialism's broader aim of escalating its military
intervention in the Middle East to roll back the growth of Iranian influence in the wake of the successive debacles suffered by Washington
in Iraq, Libya and Syria.
Netanyahu's growing alliance with the House of Saud and the petro-monarchs of the Gulf has served to ensure their acquiescence
-- with pro forma denunciations -- to this latest assault on the Palestinians.
But apart from Netanyahu's short-term political calculations, his announcement derives from Zionism's foundation upon exclusivist
conceptions of racial, religious and linguistic hegemony to justify the establishment of a Jewish state through the violent dispossession
of the indigenous Arab population, who formed the overwhelming majority of the population, making use of the horrors of the Holocaust
as a rationale for the oppression of another people.
The political antecedents of Netanyahu's Likud Party, Vladimir Jabotinsky's Revisionists, who were to remain a minority tendency
until the 1970s, articulated this position most clearly. Their aim was the establishment of a Jewish state on the entire land of
Biblical Palestine, including Transjordan. With the Jews a minority in Palestine, such a state would necessarily mean expelling the
Arab population to ensure its Jewish character.
In 1923, Jabotinsky explained, in an article titled "The Iron Wall," that the Zionist project could be achieved only against
the wishes of the native population. He envisaged the need for an iron wall to protect the Jews from the native population. He said,
"A voluntary reconciliation with the Arabs is out of the question either now or in the near future." Without a garrison, Zionist
colonization of Palestine would be impossible, and "therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force."
The establishment of a Jewish state was viewed with sympathy by millions of people around the world, who were appalled at the
catastrophe that had befallen the Jews. But the major powers excluding Britain, but including the Soviet Union, supported the establishment
of a Jewish state as a means of blocking Britain's position in the Middle East. As a result, the UN voted in 1947 for the partition
of Palestine, hailing the new state as a progressive entity dedicated to building a democratic and egalitarian society for the most
cruelly oppressed people of Europe.
As soon as the State of Israel was declared in 1948, war broke out between the Arabs and the Jews, who were able to seize more
land than was included in the 1947 partition plan, driving out some 750,000 Palestinians from their homes. Not wanting to pay the
price of the concessions demanded by the superpowers, in terms of borders and refugees, Israel's Labour government did not try to
make peace after the war, instead instituting a policy of "striving for peace" -- but not too fast -- which became the template for
future governments. The more Israel got used to the situation of neither peace nor war, the louder grew the voices calling for the
maintenance of the status quo.
After the 1967 war, when Israel captured East Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan, Gaza from Egypt and the Golan Heights from
Syria, the Labour government moved rapidly to annex East Jerusalem and build settlements in the occupied territories that are now
home to some 700,000 Israeli Jews, many of them extreme nationalists and religious zealots who are heavily armed. Labour had, in
effect, adopted the Revisionists' policy.
The war and the settlement movement spawned the growth of immensely reactionary political and social forces within Israel itself,
with Menachem Begin's Likud party demanding the territories be brought under Israeli sovereignty on the grounds that they were the
Biblical lands of Samaria and Judea, promised by God to the Jewish people.
In 1993, a Labour government signed an illusory peace deal, the Oslo Accords, brokered by the US, with the Palestine Liberation
Organization. Ostensibly, the agreement was to usher in a Palestinian statelet. But its real purpose was to prevent the intifada
that broke out in 1987 from developing into a revolutionary uprising by the Palestinian masses in the occupied territories, and to
subcontract the task of suppressing the masses to the Palestinian bourgeoisie.
Instead of peace and a Palestinian state, the Oslo Accords set the stage for an expansion of the settlements and land seizures
to control the access roads to these enclaves and strengthen their connection to Israel itself, with the Palestinian Authority left
to police small patches of land, mostly impoverished cities, surrounded and cut off by Israeli troops.
In line with its long-held policy, the Likud Party vehemently opposed any territorial concessions to the Palestinians embodied
in the Accords. Its leaders stood by as its angry supporters called Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin a traitor, paving the way for his
murder in 1995 by a right-wing fanatic. With none of the mainstream political parties prepared to make any fundamental changes, the
fraudulent peace process was all but dead.
Netanyahu has now made explicit what has long been implicit: the incorporation of the West Bank into a Greater Israel. It
can be achieved and sustained only through the imposition of military rule. To this end, his government has passed a series of measures,
including the openly racist "Nation-State Law" enshrining Jewish supremacy as the legal foundation of the state, bringing the political
and legal system into alignment with the reality of Jabotinsky's garrison state, based on the brutal oppression of an entire people,
the Palestinians.
The so-called "centre-left" opposition in the elections, led by Gantz, has not challenged Netanyahu's annexation pledge, resorting
to verbal obfuscations and calls for a "regional conference" or "secure separation," thereby signifying consent.
This marks the historic bankruptcy and culmination of the entire reactionary Zionist project and all such nationalist programs.
"The confluence of their interests as Jews in promoting the policies of the Israeli right
wing and their construction of American interests allows them to submerge or even deny the
relevance of their Jewish identity while posing as American patriots. [ ] Indeed, since
neoconservative Zionism of the Likud Party variety is well known for promoting a
confrontation between the United States and the entire Muslim world, their policy
recommendations best fit a pattern of loyalty to their ethnic group, not to America."
[4]
Kevin McDonald, Cultural Insurrection, op. cit., p. 66.
The neocons' U.S. foreign policy has always coincided with the best interest of Israel as
they see it. Before 1967, Israel's interest rested heavily on Jewish immigration from Eastern
Europe. From 1967, when Moscow closed Jewish emigration to protest Israel's annexation of Arab
territories, Israel's interest included the U.S. winning the Cold War. That is when the
editorial board of Commentary, the monthly magazine of the American Jewish Committee,
experienced their conversion to "neoconservatism," and Commentary became, in the words
of Benjamin Balint, "the contentious magazine that transformed the Jewish left into the
neoconservative right . " [5]
Benjamin Balint, Running Commentary: The Contentious Magazine That Transformed the Jewish
Left into the Neoconservative Right, Public Affairs, 2010. Irving Kristol explained to
the American Jewish Congress in 1973 why anti-war activism was no longer good for Israel: "it
is now an interest of the Jews to have a large and powerful military establishment in the
United States. [ ] American Jews who care about the survival of the state of Israel have to
say, no, we don't want to cut the military budget, it is important to keep that military budget
big, so that we can defend Israel." [6]
Congress Bi-Weekly, quoted by Philip Weiss, "30 Years Ago, Neocons Were More Candid
About Their Israel-Centered Views," Mondoweiss.net, May 23, 2007:
mondoweiss.net/2007/05/30_years_ago_ne.html This tells us what "reality" Kristol was
referring to, when he famously defined a neoconservative as "a liberal who has been mugged by
reality" ( Neoconservatism: the Autobiography of an Idea, 1995).
With the end of the Cold War, the national interest of Israel changed once again. The
primary objective became the destruction of Israel's enemies in the Middle East by dragging the
U.S. into a third world war. The neoconservatives underwent their second conversion, from
anti-communist Cold Warriors to Islamophobic "Clashers of Civilizations" and crusaders in the
"War on Terror."
The neocons' capacity to deceive the American public by posturing as American rather than
Israeli patriots required that their Jewishness be taboo, and Carl Bernstein, though a Jew
himself, provoked a scandal by citing on national television the responsibility of "Jewish neocons" for the Iraq
war. [14]
April 26, 2013, on MSNBC, watch on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRlatDWqh0o. But the
fact that the destruction of Iraq was carried out on behalf of Israel is now widely accepted,
thanks in particular to the 2007 book by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, The Israel Lobby
and U.S. Foreign Policy . And even the best liars betray themselves sometimes. Philip
Zelikow briefly dropped the mask during a conference at the University of Virginia on September
10, 2002:
Norman Podhoretz, editor-in-chief of Commentary (and father-in-law of Elliott
Abrams), said that after June 1967, Israel became "the religion of the American Jews."
[16]
Norman Podhoretz, Breaking Ranks: A Political Memoir, Harper & Row , 1979, p.
335. That is, at least, what he started working at. But, naturally, such religion had
better remain discreet outside the Jewish community, if possible even secret, and disguised as
American patriotism. The neocons have perfected this fake American patriotism wholly profitable
to Israel, and ultimately disastrous for Americans -- a pseudo-Americanism that is really a
crypto-Israelism or crypto-Zionism.
On a less exalted note, I've long found it a convincing theory that as Jews have ceased to take
Judaism seriously and have become culturally almost indistinguishable from gentile whites,
Israel and Zionism have become increasingly important as the sole remaining touchstone of
Jewish identity. Like as not, a modern American Jew has only his loyalty to Israel as evidence
that he remains a good Jew.
For most Jews, Judaism and its strictures have ceased to be compelling. One can get modern
secular Jews to eat pork, or marry gentiles, or cease practicing their religion entirely; but
for that very reason, there are few who are prepared to renounce Israel outright.
For the moment I will only make this observation. The UN did not base their establishment of
Israel on the promises of the OT – certainly not formally. And nothing about the state of
Israel relations with God makes her exempt from international law. And to my knowledge nothing
about the current rules regarding international law demand that Israel do anything to disobey
God.
So if the article is intended to be informative – ok. But what of a prescription is
intended to promote, if any is unknown to me.
This film goes in detail through the untold history of The Project for the New American
Century with tons of archival footage and connects it right into the present.
Jun 29, 2016 Neoconservatives Endorse Hillary Clinton for President Because They Know She's
One of Them
Neoconservatives like Iraq warmonger Robert Kagan aren't endorsing Hillary Clinton for
president merely because they want rid of Donald Trump, but because she's one of them, writes
Trevor Timm at The Guardian.
@Matt07924
It doesn't matter. When a group of people can get together and find psychic connection to one
another through some talisman, no matter how inconsequential, they form a group of self
interested individuals who can and do control their own destiny.
As we see in the west today, they can, by controlling the money, take over the leadership of
the area where they live. Thereby dictating that which can be discussed in polite company. i.e.
Political Correctness.
There are other, less effective groups that have done the same thing. But not recently.
Excellent article. Brilliant! This is why Unz.com is now my favorite website. Guyénot
has already written several fine articles for Unz, but this is probably his best yet. Keep 'em
coming!
I have been exposed to elements of Guyénot's thesis before in various different
contexts. For example, I understand that many of the original Gnostic sects of Christianity
also rejected the idea that Yahweh and the Creator God were one and the same being. Many
Gnostics seemed to have regarded the former as a 'lesser god', or as a Platonic demiurge, or
even as a completely diabolical entity. In their view, Jesus had come to rebuke the
Israelites–the Pharisees especially–for worshipping a false god, and for putting
themselves on a pedestal relative to the goyim. (He often spoke sympathetically of the
Samaritans, for example, who were a race of lowly converts.)
All of which makes me wonder about Christianity and the Abrahamic religions generally. I,
personally, am sure that there is a God or a supreme spirit of some sort; but I really just
don't buy the catechism I was raised with at all. And if, once upon a time, I might have gone
along with it in public anyway, accepting its theological anomalies as the price that had to be
paid for preserving the moral foundations of civilization, now that I no longer believe it does
our civilization any good, I have lost all interest in it whatsoever.
But what shall replace Christianity now that it is dead? Nihilism is an inherently unstable
state; nature–including human nature–abhors a vacuum. We need some kind of civic
religion to provide moral order. At the moment, 'Holocaustianity' serves as our overarching
civic religion, and so we get a modern version of the old faith vs. good-works dichotomy (i.e.,
Zionism vs. SJWism). Generally speaking, the hardline Protestants prefer the former, while the
remaining denominations prefer the latter. Virtually all of our remaining 'Christian' churches,
it seems, have lined up behind one or the other; but either way you go, it's all for the
benefit of another people–not our own.
Very interesting article. Informative throughout. Purely on a political level, this piece has
given me a much greater understanding of the psychic sources of historical abuses by those who
call themselves Jews...
I think this is another very important concept. Its not that Jews don't hold themselves to
moral standards, but it's that sin cannot alter their fundamental 'rightnes'. They are Chosen
– if they sin they will be punished mercilessly, but they are fundamentally and basically
'justified' unto eternity.
Catholics used to have this concept as well, and it was also a source of immense strength
for them – first, you are saved through Jesus. Jesus took on the sins of humanity.
Nothing you can do will make you any less saved, provided you accept Jesus's gift.
Second, by confessing your sins you are absolved.
So the old Christian is eternally justified and his sins cannot fundamentally put him on the
'wrong' side of life.
This also led to that absolutely crucial thing – in Jungian terms, acceptance of the
Shadow, the bad and weak side of man. People were not afraid to accept the dirty and bad and
weak about themselves without collapsing into self hatred, because they knew they were
fundamentally right anyways. This is an immense source of strength and integrity.
When the modern Western world lost this ability to accept the Shadow, and strove to become
God itself, it very easily fell into a crushing sense of guilt and self hatred at its 'sins',
as it no longer has a theology that allowed to accept its common human frailty without
collapsing into self hatred.
The Jews never abandoned their theory of being 'saved' – and so their evil and
weakness does not result in self hatred, but is more accepted.
@AaronB
This is too divorced from reality & is basically some kind of dubious philosophy of
history.
Simply, traditional Jewish culture is not that different from other traditional cultures.
Jews' behavior & position in pre-modern Europe was not determined by some metaphysical
ingredient in their belief, or their ethnic-religious peculiarity. They were middle-eastern
tolerated aliens in Christian Europe, and they survived because medieval Christian order had
found a place for them (unlike Muslims, who were not tolerated).
After assimilation in 19th C, we can't speak of a unified (more or less) "Jewish culture".
True, some branches like ethno-psychology could find common traits among them (professions
oriented, eager to get educated, politicized, showbiz & entertainment,..), but they are not
too adaptable -- persons of Jewish ancestry are, perhaps, but many/most of them are not Jews
anymore. Assimilated individuals of Jewish ancestry do not show any more flexibility than their
co-nationals of other faiths.
As for Zionism, this is a typical late 19th C national ideology from central- & eastern
Europe. It differs from pre-modern Jewish historical mass movements.
@Anon
Theologically Jesus came to offer a new message of universal brotherhood to replace the
tribalism and overly legalistic Law of Moses.
The reason the New Testament quotes so heavily from the Old Testament is that the early
church sought to cement it's legitimacy by establishing that Jesus was the one prophesied
about.
Simply, traditional Jewish culture is not that different from other traditional
cultures
Agreed. What was distinctively 'modern' in European culture was the one-sided development of
abstract reason and the increasing neglect of the emotional, aesthetic, and spiritual side of
man. At first the imaginative arts responded to this challenge – producing masterpieces
– and attempted to incorporate or ameliorate this development. Eventually, in our day,
the 'managerial' movement became exclusively dominant, as was bound to happen.
So we can turn to any traditional culture, not just Jewish. What is unusual about Jews
perhaps is that they went further than other traditional cultures in adopting European abstract
reason and participating in European culture.
I am unclear yet what the author's point besides making a claim that Israel has no right to be
a state based on false notions of scripture. But that has very little to do with why Israel is
a state in the secular understanding.
One can complain about Israel from now till doomsday, but until you make a case to Israel's
supporting states that Israel is out of line -- the complaint doesn't have much weight. They
exist by international law. And they engage in tactics to their own interests – no
kidding.
Israel is not going to change course if what she is doing yields her results. The attempt to
decouple support for Israel by engaging in arguments about how "rotten" she is only fuels the
complaint that Israel is surrounded by enemies that seek her destruction. Which is fed into the
"holocaust" pipeline, which in the secular is why Israel was afforded the statehood she now
has.
Theologically Communism came to offer a new message of universal brotherhood to replace
the tribalism and overly legalistic Law of nationalism.
Fixed it for you.
As with communism, Christianity was written by the very same nationalists (Jews) who wrote
it to use as a cultural and political weapon against their enemies and peoples they wished to
eventually rule. Such international domination being the expressed primary goal of the Jewish
god as described in the Jewish Torah.
@Digital
Samizdat'This. Jewish 'leftism' historically is mostly about destroying the church, the
(goy) family and the (goy) nations. It is almost never about helping the working class or
making life better for the goyim generally.'
I don't think that's fair -- but at the same time, there is something mindlessly destructive
about Jewish radicalism.
I'm reminded of More Powerful than Dynamite -- a fairly good book about the radical
upheavals that beset New York City around 1915.
The author doesn't seem to notice, but a disproportionate number of his protagonists are
young Jewish immigrants, fresh out of the shetl. The young Jewesses seem to have been
the worst; those girls had the devil in them somehow.
I think it probably all had more to do with a rebellion against the traditional authorities
of Judaism more than anything; the rabbis et al who had held Eastern Jewry in thrall for so
long. I'm not saying they actually wished gentiles well -- but I don't think destroying
gentile society was really the motive.
Maybe it's one of those secrets like, deligitimizing Israel's right to exist. That if one
dismantles the Zionist pose, then the UN will simply reneg the 1948 resolution and Israel will
be no more. I think I can keep that secret.
I have news for you. It's not going to happen. Not even the Russians or the Chinese are on
that band wagon
But what shall replace Christianity now that it is dead? Nihilism is an inherently
unstable state; nature–including human nature–abhors a vacuum. We need some kind
of civic religion to provide moral order.
Atheists in the real world don't act like the Christian belief about them. This suggests
that atheists didn't invent nihilism; instead Christians imagined nihilism late in history as a
new Christian doctrine about atheism in response to the growth of nonbelief among quite
functional people in Western countries since the Enlightenment, and they did so as a new
strategy to try to recover from their loss of power and status.
Of course, real atheists, as opposed to Christians' fantasy atheists, face no obligation to
live according to the Christian stereotype. And atheists have made enormous contributions to
civilization in recent generations. You have to wonder why they would have bothered if they
suffered from "nihilism."
Dr. Guyenot, your book is excellent and so are your sources/recommendations. What needs to be
sorely addressed is Zionist exploitation of Christ in the free world. Jewish and Christian
Zionists are no different than Al Sharpton never did see the first relavent issue (he/they)
couldn't exploit. It's all about Israel first and nothing second. That is they ONLY seek to
possess, enslave and then destroy (their) host friend or foe conquering nation or friendly host
for the Zionist parasite. Good job as always. Like Douglas Reed your prior preparations have
brought you to your most important work.
@Laurent
Guyénot You are treading a thin line. I wish too that they could be convinced to
recant their belief in a vengeful, merciless, whimsical, jealous, nepotistic,
'variable-geometry' God. The world would be spared a lot of suffering.
"... Mr. Trump's recognition of Israel's claim to the Golan came with just two weeks remaining in Israel's closely fought election race – leading to complaints that Mr. Trump was unfairly aiding the incumbent. On Saturday, just three days before the vote, Mr. Netanyahu raised the prospect of an even more controversial move ahead, promising to annex Jewish settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank if he is returned to the prime minister's office. ... ..."
"... During the Pax Britannica 1815-1914 the British army fought a total of "381 wars, campaigns, and other military operations" Raugh, Harold E. The British Army 1815-1914. Ashgate, 2006 ..."
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's bid to win another term in office has relied
heavily on his close relationship with U.S. President Donald Trump. Campaign posters show the
two leaders smiling and shaking hands, reminding Israelis of the gains that bond has
delivered to their country, including Mr. Trump's decisions to move the U.S. embassy to
Jerusalem and to recognize Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights.
Mr. Trump's recognition of Israel's claim to the Golan came with just two weeks
remaining in Israel's closely fought election race – leading to complaints that Mr.
Trump was unfairly aiding the incumbent. On Saturday, just three days before the vote, Mr.
Netanyahu raised the prospect of an even more controversial move ahead, promising to annex
Jewish settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank if he is returned to the prime minister's
office. ...
During the Pax Britannica 1815-1914 the British army fought a total of "381 wars,
campaigns, and other military operations" Raugh, Harold E. The British Army 1815-1914.
Ashgate, 2006
"The king said
that the plan was dangerous and not simple to implement, in particular the part relating to the
land swaps in Tzofar, a moshav in the Arava desert, and Naharayim, where Jordan conquered in 1948
the Island of Peace and a hydroelectric power-plant that belonged to Israel.
According to the
Trump proposal, Jordan would receive from Saudi Arabia an area equal in size to these territories
which Israel would reacquire.
In addition, Jordan has been asked to take in a million
"Palestinian" refugees in several stages, in return for $45 billion in investments.
Jordan's
entire GDP is only $40 billion. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states will finance these
investments."
Jewish Press
--------------
The full "good deal of the century" will evidently be
revealed after the Israeli election. Pieces of the "good deal of the century" have previously
been revealed. The move of the US Embassy to Jerusalem has been followed by endless Palestinian
waves of self immolation along the Gaza "dead line." This will continue indefinitely unless the Beebster or his successor decide to re-occupy Gaza to stop Palestinian rockets reaching Tel Aviv.
Now, that would be a spectacle.
Another piece of "The Kushner Plan" was the cession by the US of
the occupied Syrian Golan Heights to Israel. The justification for this was that the Israelis
hold it by force of arms. Syria, of, course does not accept the US transfer of title deed to part
of its territory. These two things are typical of Trump's NY City real estate methodology. In his
mind he is systematically taking points of contention off "the bargaining table" so that he can
"close" over what's left. This latest "offer" made to Jordan is part of what is left.
Perhaps
some savant can explain what the various parts of this "partial good deal" mean. " A million
Palestinians?" Where would they come from? Would they be round up for transportation to The East?
Saudi Arabia would transfer land to Jordan? Where? On the Gulf of Akabah coast near Tabuk?
Really?
The Saudis and Gulfies would cough up $45 billion for investments in Jordan? To do what?
Tourism? Really?
And who would own these enterprises? Lebanon will give its citizenship to the
hordes of Palestinian descended people who inhabit the country? They have firmly resisted this
for decades. Explain all this, someone. pl
Would King Abdullah accept any of Kushner's offers? He knows that at best Kushner will be
around for another 6 years. What happens after? Recent history (past 50 years) shows that the
US can't be trusted in any deal.
According to people I talk with in Israel, when Israel takes over the West Bank the
Palestinians would not be offerred Israeli Citizenship or national voting rights. The theory
is Israel is not annexing the West Bank but just acting as a Civil Administrator. A semantic
justification but Israel would have total control over the West Bank and it's people.
"Would they be round up for transportation to The East?"
Well that would be the irony to end all ironies; the sight of Jews rounding up millions of
citizens, whom the Israeli Reich considers it is better off without. Whoops, forgot we are
not supposed to make comparisons with the folk whose own Deal of the Century was aimed at
bringing about their ethnically pure state.
Colonel, I wonder, how is this brazen collusion with Zionists likely to go down with the
regular people of the Gulf states. Have MbS' bread and forthcoming circuses replaced all
solidarity with the Ummah, or might we see some resistance to this planned grand betrayal of
the Palestinians?
Why would KSA give some of its land to Jordan? Why would "Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states"
finance those "investments"? I don't understand what's in this for SA and the Gulfies.
We might recall that the King of Jordan, heir to the Hashemite kingdom, asserted his
historical claim and authority over the two holy cities (Mecca and Medina) and a good part of
western Saudi Arabia. His declaration to the world came about at the same time as Saddam
overran Kuwait and was preparing to take the Northestern Province of Saudi Arabia and the
oilfiields there. So the current 'deal of the century' would lay to rest those claims,
leaving S.A. with control of the holy cities. The price would be paying off Jordan with
billions and giving them some, but not nearly all the land they had claimed and now
controlled by Saudi Arabia.
It gets better. Looks like an attempt to ensure that Syria can never get its land back.
Striking when Syria is weak. Not sure how the other Arabs will react, if at all.
Via Middle East Monitor,
Israel is planning to settle some 250,000 settlers in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights
over the next 30 years, the Israeli Broadcasting Authority (IBA) revealed yesterday.
"... US President John Bolton is a disaster for our country. This is going to end bad. ..."
"... Adelson/Bolton/Netanyahu Remember Israel is in bed with Saudi Arabia. Don Corleone Trump is just their puppet. ..."
"... Well let's get ready for another 20 year war trying to bring "Democracy" or fighting "Terrorists" which will be paid for with U.S. tax dollars. Lets just open up the check book now and write one out to John Bolton so it can save everybody time. ..."
"... Trump drained the swamp and put the worst swamp creatures in his administration. ..."
It always ends up with the middle east. Adelson/Bolton/Netanyahu Remember Israel is in bed with Saudi Arabia. Don Corleone
Trump is just their puppet.
Obama made so many enemies in the world, and then we get this cult in DC. Who are hell bent on supremacy of the world. Batshit
crazy times we're witnessing.
Well let's get ready for another 20 year war trying to bring "Democracy" or fighting "Terrorists" which will be paid for
with U.S. tax dollars. Lets just open up the check book now and write one out to John Bolton so it can save everybody time.
Looks like Trump is a tenant of House of Bolton, not the owner of the White House ;-)
It always ends up with Adelson/Bolton/Netanyahu. Looks like Adelson is a new Don Corleone Trump is just their puppet.
Ilhan is right and DC is ZOGGED!
Notable quotes:
"... How is it that President Trump's national security advisor John Bolton seems to actually be running things and even over-riding his boss's foreign policy? ..."
"... It is similar to the role played by Bolton's ideological comrades in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq war: Keep control of the president and make sure he sees nothing that contradicts what is your desired policy: ..."
How is it that President Trump's national security advisor John Bolton seems to actually be running things and even over-riding
his boss's foreign policy?
As RPI Director Daniel McAdams tells Rick Sanchez of RT America, it's because he's frozen everyone else from the intelligence
and national security community out and insists on controlling all information that gets to the president.
It is similar to the role played by Bolton's ideological comrades in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq war: Keep control of the
president and make sure he sees nothing that contradicts what is your desired policy:
They killed my president in broad daylight because Kennedy said no to nukes in
Israel....since then no American president dares to stop these evil people
Israel keeps using the USA for a long time. The United States even go against their own
interest to defend and stand with Israel. The result is endless war and increasing United
States national debt.
Israel has been the major Distributer for ISIS Oil for the past 4 years at least and the
Media will not ever talk about that !!! US Goverment is being controlled by Zionist Criminals
working very hard to bring about the same type of POLICE STATE that exhists there where
anyone speaking out is killed or imprisoned and their homes and family destroyed !!!! WAKE UP
AMERICA IT MAY ALREADY BE TOO LATE !!!!!!
I have to give RT major props for this! It is sad that we have to watch Russian Media in
order to fully understand what kind of system we live in. The sad thing is that daily life
for an ordinary Israeli is better than the ordinary American! We are paying for this! It is
not antisemetic to discuss our concerns about handing over 30 and 40 billion dollars per year
to this country when our country is broke!
Actually, Obama practically sealed his nomination by openly making a pledge of allegiance
to Israel's interests at a 2008 AIPAC meeting and picking Rahm Emanuel (an Israeli army
veteran) as his chief of staff!
The New York Times itself reported Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin's own 1982
confession on the matter. The newspaper cites him as saying: "In June 1967, we again had a
choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was
really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him".
So Trump took Adelson money and completely lost his independence, became Bolton marionette. He betrayed all major point of
his election campaign.
Notable quotes:
"... The fact is, the neo conservative "Never Trumpers" began moving in on Trump almost as soon as he won the election in order to ensure that their policy perspective prevailed. Greased by Adelson's money, it appears that they have succeeded to a considerable degree, particularly on Iran, but also on other aspects of national security policy as well, including, it appears, on Venezuela. And if US relations with Russia don't improve now that Russia-gate is dead, it'll be because of this crowd as well. ..."
"... Adelson's only concern, by his own quoted words, is protecting Israel and, according to the reports below, has even advocated the nuclear bombing of Iran if it doesn't give up a nuclear weapons program that every reasonable intelligence assessment and the IAEA say it doesn't have. Adelson is also credited with facilitating the firing of both H.R. McMaster and Rex Tillerson and replacing them with Bolton and Mike Pompeo, another one of Adelson's boys. ..."
"... Goldberg, who came out of the neo-con Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, is clearly part of Adelson's orbit. ..."
"... it turns out that Politico published a big piece , last Friday, basically attributing Trump's decertification decision to Haley, who is portrayed as a neo-con channel into the White House. ..."
"... According to Politico's sources, the line in Trump's speech where he said that the US could pull out of the JCPOA "at any time" was added after Bolton reached Trump on the phone on Thursday afternoon. Bolton was calling from Las Vegas where he "was visiting with Republican megadonor Sheldon Adelson." Adelson's possible role in this is not further explored in the Politico article but probably bears further investigation. ..."
"... After Trump's speech, Bolton gloated: "The Iran deal may not have died today, but it will die shortly." He supports full US withdrawal from the agreement, and has reportedly transmitted his view to the White House through Jared Kushner. ..."
"... The even more lunatic John Bolton is thrilled about Trump's policy, but complains, in an op-ed in The Hill, that so far at least, it doesn't go far enough. After blaming Obama for giving the Middle East to Iran and Russia, Bolton demands that Trump recognize Kurdish independence and give the peshmerga the weapons and support they need to face the American-made tanks of the Iraqi army. ..."
"... He identifies Jared Kushner as the main conduit for the Likudist outlook into the White House. Kushner is a friend and supporter of Netanyahu and his parents have been backers of Israeli settlements. ..."
"... Adelson is a long time friend of Netanyahu, has used his assets in Israel to give Netanyahu political support and gave the Trump campaign $100 million. ..."
"... It was Bolton, Porter reports, "who worked with Israeli officials to plan a campaign to convince the world that Iran was secretly working on nuclear weapons." But the real purpose, which continues, was not so much to scare the world about an Iranian bomb, but rather, to use it as an issue to be exploited to weaken the Islamic regime and ultimately achieve regime change. Porter concludes by saying that Trump is cooperating with this objective even more enthusiastically than GW Bush did. ..."
"... Neo-cons in the Congress and elsewhere in Washington are enthusiastically following Bolton's lead. "The Iranian people want freedom and an end to the ayatollahs' reign of terror," said Senator Ted Cruz. ..."
"... Bolton's protégé, Nikki Haley, is calling for an emergency UNSC session to discuss the crisis in Iran. "The Iranian dictatorship is trying to do what it always does, which is to say that the protests were designed by enemies. We all know that is complete nonsense," Haley said (is it, realy?), yesterday. "The U.N. must speak out," Haley added. "We must not be silent. The people of Iran are crying out for freedom." ..."
"... It also likely means that Sheldon Adelson has a direct line to the White House and Nikki Haley's position at the UN has been strengthened, since she and Bolton have been reported to have a close relationship. ..."
"... Jim Lobe and Eli Clifton, writing in Lobelog, yesterday, argue that Sheldon Adelson was responsible for Trump's turnaround from populist anti-war candidate to pro-Israel hawk. In 2016, they write, Trump was mocking those, like Marco Rubio, who were seeking Adelson's support, meaning they were seeking his money. By the time of his inauguration, however, Trump had adopted Adelson's militant pro-Israel stance, including Adelson's demands to move the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and pursue a confrontationist approach to Iran, and Adelson occupied a prominent seat at the inauguration ceremony. ..."
"... "Trump met Adelson in Las Vegas in early October 2017. One week later, Trump announced that he would no longer certify that Iran was complying with the Iran nuclear deal, even though the U.S. intelligence community and all of Washington's European allies, as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), had found no evidence that Tehran was cheating," Lobe and Clifton write. ..."
"... Adelson's big protégé, as I've reported previously, is John Bolton. According to Lobe and Clifton, it was Adelson who made the arrangements to get Bolton back into the White House, overcoming efforts by White House chief of staff John Kelly keep to keep him out. Adelson also reportedly orchestrating the firing of McMaster and of Tilleson and their replacements by Bolton and Pompeo. ..."
"... According to Shaul Mofaz, former Israeli defense minister, Bolton "tried to convince me that Israel needs to attack Iran," which Mofaz recently asserted was not "a smart move – not on the part of the Americans today or anyone else until the threat is real." ..."
"... "To those who claim that the nuclear deal isn't working, regime change remains the only solution," wrote Rezaian. "For the MEK, and Bolton, if his words are to be taken at face value, the only path to that could be war. The group has long been prepared to do whatever it takes to see that happen, including presenting fake intelligence about Iran's nuclear program." ..."
"... On the JCPOA Bolton denied that the US had violated the agreement. Instead, the US is withdrawing from it. But he wouldn't acknowledged that Iran is in compliance, as the IAEA has reported numerous times. ..."
"... Sheldon Adelson has only one issue, Israel, and he has paid the Republican Party handsomely to make sure his views are the views of the party. According to Mintpress News' Whitney Webb, Adelson has lavished some $90 million on the part since 2016, including $35 million to the Trump campaign, and another $55 million to two Republican SuperPACS, Congressional Leadership Fund and the Senate Leadership Fund. ..."
"... Bolton has marginalized Mattis in national security policy making, so Mattis is turning his energies towards preventing a US attack on Iran. At the core of Mattis' concerns is, number one, it's a lot easier to start a war with Iran than to end it, and secondly, the US military services are all in poor shape after decades of wars and other never-ending contingency operations. Mattis, like many of his colleagues in the senior military leadership, have a long standing animus towards Iran, but at the same time, they don't see any good way through a war against Iran. Bolton and his co-thinkers, on the other hand, see a war to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon and to change the regime in Tehran as almost a moral obligation. ..."
"... Ha'aretz's sources say, however, that Bolton is behind the scenes advancing the option of collapsing the Iranian regime. According to those sources, Bolton views the demonstrations that have broken out in Iran in recent months over the state of the country's economy as an indication of the regime's weakness. He has told Trump that increased U.S. pressure could lead to the regime's collapse. One person who recently spoke with senior White House officials on the subject summarized Bolton view in the words: "One little kick and they're done." ..."
"... If the US is really seeking to employ such groups to try to destablilize Iran along ethnic lines, this would be nothing new. Gareth Porter, in an article that appeared in Middle East Eye on May 18, reports that John Bolton, when he was in the GW Bush Administration pushed aggressively for regime change but that Bush himself wasn't interested ..."
"... Daniel Larison, writing in The American Conservative, characterized Goldberg this way: "Goldberg has been a leading opponent of the nuclear deal and a fanatical advocate for enforcing new sanctions on Iran and anyone that does business with them. Bringing Goldberg into the administration is a sign that the Iran obsession is getting worse, and by making him the 'Director for Countering Iranian Weapons of Mass Destruction.'" One might say we've seen this playbook before, in Iraq in 2002-2003. ..."
"... This is one dangerous pack of rats. It's frightening how easily prone to manipulation Trump has proven. One would think he'd be more resistant to this sort of thing. ..."
A review of publicly available reporting that I have accumulated in my files over the past two years would suggest that John Bolton's
boss is really Sheldon Adelson, the Las Vegas casino king who has plied the Republican Party with tens of millions of dollars in
largesse in order to remake it in his image. This conclusion is irrespective of what you might think of Trump himself and whether
or not you believe he really meant it when he said there should be no more regime change wars. The fact is, the neo conservative
"Never Trumpers" began moving in on Trump almost as soon as he won the election in order to ensure that their policy perspective
prevailed. Greased by Adelson's money, it appears that they have succeeded to a considerable degree, particularly on Iran, but also
on other aspects of national security policy as well, including, it appears, on Venezuela. And if US relations with Russia don't
improve now that Russia-gate is dead, it'll be because of this crowd as well.
Bolton's history goes back to the Reagan Administration in the 1980's, and his perfidy during the runup to the Iraq invasion is
well known to this readership. What I focus on here is the period from January of 2017 through mid-2018, around the time of his appointment
to be Trump's national security advisor, plus a couple of months, during which period a number of interesting reports were posted
on Trump's lobbying of the White House to get an administration position and his sponsorship by Adelson. Adelson's only concern,
by his own quoted words, is protecting Israel and, according to the reports below, has even advocated the nuclear bombing of Iran
if it doesn't give up a nuclear weapons program that every reasonable intelligence assessment and the IAEA say it doesn't have. Adelson
is also credited with facilitating the firing of both H.R. McMaster and Rex Tillerson and replacing them with Bolton and Mike Pompeo,
another one of Adelson's boys.
What follows is a time line of summaries of news stories covering the period above in the form that I wrote them at the time with
the dates over each one of them. It's not meant to be comprehensive–there's undoubtedly a great deal of insight still to be gained
on how deeply these neo-con networks have actually penetrated the administration–and the news reports the summaries are based on
likely vary in their quality. I hope anyone with such deeper insights will post them in the comments section.
Appended at the end of the time line is a short report on Richard Goldberg, the Z-lobby activist who Bolton brought onto the NSC
in January to be his "Director for Countering Iranian Weapons of Mass Destruction." Goldberg, who came out of the neo-con Foundation
for the Defense of Democracies, is clearly part of Adelson's orbit.
1) John Bolton: A Timeline for 2017-2018
Feb. 19, 2017
AP circulated a
wire , yesterday, reporting that Trump was interviewing candidates for the National Security Advisor position at his estate
in Florida. The names mention were Cheneyac John Bolton (who, if I remember correctly, was already rejected by the Trump administration
for a State Department job) and LTG H.R. McMaster, according to one unnamed White House official. Another had said that Trump
had been interested in David Petraeus but that Petraeus was not a finalist for the position. Picking Bolton would be shear lunacy,
but McMaster is highly interesting. McMaster wrote a famous book about the Vietnam war in which he documented that practically
everybody in the military leadership, and especially Maxwell Taylor lied about Vietnam and, like Mattis, he has a history of being
a harsh critic of the RMA. I'll have more to say about him if he gets the job.
May 10, 2017
Bloomberg's Eli Lake, in a
column posted on Monday, described what amounts to a factional war inside the White House, with Steve Bannon and Reince Priebus
on one side and H.R. McMaster on the other. Trump himself is said to have blasted McMaster for his phone conversation with his
South Korean counterpart during which he assured him that Trump didn't really mean it when he said that South Korea should pay
for the THAAD deployment. "McMaster's allies and adversaries inside the White House tell me that Trump is disillusioned with him,"
Lake writes. "This professional military officer has failed to read the president -- by not giving him a chance to ask questions
during briefings, at times even lecturing Trump."
According to Lake's sources (and I'm wondering if they might, in fact, be Bannon and Priebus, or people close to them), Trump
has complained in front of McMaster in intelligence briefings about "the general undermining my policy." They say Trump has privately
expressed regret for choosing McMaster and even called in neo-con John Bolton to talk being McMaster's deputy, an idea which was
ultimately dropped.
Oct. 17, 2017
Nikki Haley told NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday that it's the administration's hope that America stays with the Iran nuclear
deal if Congress takes action to keep it together. "I think right now you are going to see us stay in the deal," she said. "What
we hope is that we can improve the situation," she added. "And that's the goal. So I think right now, we're in the deal to see
how we can make it better. And that's the goal. It's not that we're getting out of the deal. We're just trying to make the situation
better so that the American people feel safer." The NBC
press report doesn't report whether or not she explained how the JCPOA is going to be made better when all of the other parties
agree that it's not up for renegotiation. They note, however, that Haley was one of the few voices in the Trump administration
to encourage the president to declare Iran in violation. It's well known that both Tillerson and Mattis opposed decertification,
with Mattis telling the Senate Armed Services Committee, two weeks ago, that it was in the US interest to stay in the agreement.
I didn't come across this until yesterday afternoon, but it turns out that Politico published a
big piece , last
Friday, basically attributing Trump's decertification decision to Haley, who is portrayed as a neo-con channel into the White
House. At the other end of the channel is John Bolton, who even is able to get Trump on the phone himself from time to time, despite
John Kelly's efforts to obstruct him.
According to Politico's sources, the line in Trump's speech where he said that the US could
pull out of the JCPOA "at any time" was added after Bolton reached Trump on the phone on Thursday afternoon. Bolton was calling
from Las Vegas where he "was visiting with Republican megadonor Sheldon Adelson." Adelson's possible role in this is not further
explored in the Politico article but probably bears further investigation.
The article otherwise goes into great depth on how Haley is at odds with most of the rest of the administration on Iran, particularly
Tillerson, her nominal boss and who is reported to have strenuously objected to her trip to Vienna in August to put pressure on
the IAEA to demand inspection of military sites in Iran. One White House official described the escalating tensions between Tillerson
and Haley as reaching "World War III" proportions. Two weeks after the Vienna trip, Haley appeared at the AEI in Washington where
she publicly floated what became the parameters of the policy that Trump announced on Friday. "The purpose of the AEI speech was
to figure out, 'Is this gonna work? Does this thread that needle?'" one official said. After Trump's speech, Bolton gloated: "The
Iran deal may not have died today, but it will die shortly." He supports full US withdrawal from the agreement, and has reportedly
transmitted his view to the White House through Jared Kushner.
Asked about the Politico report on Sunday, Haley said "That is just so much drama. I mean, it's really, it's all this palace
intrigue."
Anti-neocon activist and former US Air Force analyst Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski
told Sputnik that
she believes that Trump was mislead by fake intelligence. "I suspect that Mr. Trump is being fed information regarding Iran as
a nation and as a government that is cherry-picked and creatively elaborated, largely outside of intelligence channels, by his
neoconservative advisers," she said. She noted despite Trump's 2016 promise to "drain the swamp" of discredited foreign policy
interventionists, many of them have managed to weasel their way back into government service. "This faction has always slated
the destruction of Iran as a regional power for several decades now, and if they have the ear of the President, there is never
a better time than the present to press their case," she said. She insisted, however, that neither Trump himself, nor the U.S.
military is determined on war against Iran.
Oct. 24, 2017
According to VOA (at any rate), there's a big fight in Washington over the future of U.S. adherence to the JCPOA. Lunatic Lindsey
Graham fully supports the policy that Trump announced on Oct 13 (no surprise there), while the French armed forces minister, Florence
Parly, who was in Washington, last week, supports the agreement. "We need the JCPOA," she
said during an appearance at
CSIS on Friday. "Scrapping it would be a gift to Iran's hardliners and a first step towards future wars." Tim Kaine, who has leading
an effort in the Senate to write a new war authorization, echoed her. "If you weaken diplomacy, you raise the risk of unnecessary
war, and that's what this president is doing. If we take a step back from the deal, Iran will take a step back. And what will
they ask for, that they get to now increase centrifuges or get some of their enriched uranium back? I do not want to give Iran
one thing back from this deal," said Kaine.
But, if you believe Graham, Iran will be let loose from the deal in 15 years (some people say 10 or even 8 years) to enrich
as much uranium as it wants. This ignores the fact that Iran will still be a member of the NPT and will be subject to its additional
protocol. Top Iranian officials have said that if the US sabotages the JCPOA, Iran will make appropriate decisions in response,
but they won't be building bombs.
The even more lunatic John Bolton is thrilled about Trump's policy, but complains, in an
op-ed in The Hill, that so far at least, it doesn't go far enough. After blaming Obama for giving the Middle East to Iran
and Russia, Bolton demands that Trump recognize Kurdish independence and give the peshmerga the weapons and support they need
to face the American-made tanks of the Iraqi army.
"Rapidly increased pressure against Iran's role as the world's central banker
of international terrorism, stressed in Trump's Oct. 13 speech, cannot come fast enough," he goes on. And, of course, European
commercial relations with Iran are not to be tolerated. Othewise, "Tehran will rightly conclude the United States is really not
serious about confronting their threat to us and our allies. That is the legacy of the Obama administration. It should not also
be the legacy of the Trump administration." Nobody wants to rush the country headlong into disastrous faster then the neo-cons.
Oct. 26, 2017
Gareth Porter, in an
article that was posted on Oct. 20 (but that I didn't come across until yesterday) on the American Conservative, reports that
the new policy that Trump announced on Oct. 13 not only "clearly represents a dangerous rejection of diplomacy in favor of confrontation"
but also marks "a major shift toward a much closer alignment of U.S. policy with that of the Israeli government of Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu." "Whether explicitly or not, Trump's vow to work with Congress to renegotiate the Iran nuclear agreement,
and his explicit threat to withdraw from the deal if no renegotiation takes place, appear to be satisfying the hardline demands
Netanyahu has made of Washington's policy toward Tehran," Porter writes. Those demands being either US withdrawal from the JCPOA
altogether, or demanding changes in it that cannot be attained.
Porter goes deeper into the conduits for this policy into the White House than a Politico article I reported on earlier that
came out at about the same time. He identifies Jared Kushner as the main conduit for the Likudist outlook into the White House.
Kushner is a friend and supporter of Netanyahu and his parents have been backers of Israeli settlements.
He also delves deeper into the significance of Sheldon Adelson than the Politico report did, noting that Adelson is a long
time friend of Netanyahu, has used his assets in Israel to give Netanyahu political support and gave the Trump campaign $100 million.
"Adelson's real interest has been in supporting Israel's interests in Washington -- especially with regard to Iran," Porter notes,
adding that in 2013, Adelson openly called for the nuclear intimidation of Iran. In the next few paragraphs, Porter provides a
thumbnail sketch of the history of the neo-cons in order to highlight the role of John Bolton in all of this. It was Bolton,
Porter reports, "who worked with Israeli officials to plan a campaign to convince the world that Iran was secretly working on
nuclear weapons." But the real purpose, which continues, was not so much to scare the world about an Iranian bomb, but rather,
to use it as an issue to be exploited to weaken the Islamic regime and ultimately achieve regime change. Porter concludes by saying
that Trump is cooperating with this objective even more enthusiastically than GW Bush did.
Jan. 3, 2018
The protests in Iran may have started spontaneously in anger at economic conditions, and/or at the instigation of Rouhani's
rival Raisi and his father -in-law in Mashad, but the evidence that they're being, at the very least, encouraged from the outside
is growing. Unnamed Trump Administration officials
told
the Washington Free Beacon that both Trump and Pence are watching the protests very closely and the officials said they are working
to ensure that Trump does not miss an opportunity to incubate a possible revolution that could topple Iran's hardline ruling regime.
"With the world watching growing demonstrations across Iran, the Trump administration sees an opportunity to feed the growing
protests," the Free Beacon reports, something that they and the neo-cons say that Obama failed to do in 2009, when protests erupted
against Ahmedinijad's re-election. "The Trump administration's strong and vocal support for the demonstrators is a 180 from the
Obama administration's approach and it's signaling to Tehran that this will not be a repeat of the 2009 demonstrations," the administration
official said.
The regime change cheerleader from outside the administration is, not surprisingly, John Bolton. During an appearance on "Fox
and Friends" on Monday, Bolton
argued
that these protests are different than the post-election protests in Iran in 2009, which questioned the legitimacy of the election
of then-Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and who should lead the regime. "These protests are about whether the regime survives
or not, and that makes them much more threatening to the ayatollahs, much more dangerous, and raises the stakes considerably,"
Bolton said. He called on Trump to end the nuclear deal, re-impose previous sanctions and impose new ones that increase the economic
pressure on Iran and provide material support to opposition forces. "There's a lot we can do to, and we should do it," Bolton
said. "Our goal should be regime change in Iran."
Neo-cons in the Congress and elsewhere in Washington are enthusiastically following Bolton's lead. "The Iranian people want
freedom and an end to the ayatollahs' reign of terror,"
said Senator Ted Cruz.
"Iranians are looking toward America to support their struggle," Mark Dubowitz, chief executive of
the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, wrote in The Wall Street Journal, urging the White House to continue condemning the
regime, and follow up with "sanctions targeting corruption and human-rights abuses."
Bolton's protégé, Nikki Haley, is calling for an emergency UNSC session to discuss the crisis in Iran. "The Iranian dictatorship
is trying to do what it always does, which is to say that the protests were designed by enemies. We all know that is complete
nonsense," Haley
said (is it,
realy?), yesterday. "The U.N. must speak out," Haley added. "We must not be silent. The people of Iran are crying out for freedom."
March 10, 2018
John Bolton has been snooping around the White House. CNN
reported on Wednesday,
that Trump met with him at the White House, suggesting that he may be under consideration as an "outside expert" to help the State
Department manage the North Korea portfolio. CNN says that Bolton argues that a pre-emptive strike on North Korea would not only
be legal but also effective at curbing the threat.
On Tuesday, Bolton
told Fox News that "The only thing North Korea is serious about is getting deliverable nuclear weapons." Bolton said direct
and indirect talks with North Korea have occurred for the last 25 years and never end up successful. He said if a new round of
talks begins, North Korea will possess a deliverable nuclear weapon by the end of the year. So, Bolton obviously believes that
the past determines the future.
The Washington Post, in the above cited article, reports that Christopher Hill, who was on Capitol Hill this week to talk about
North Korea, said that he face "withing attacks" from conservative Republicans when he was engaged in the six-party talks in 2005.
"People like John Bolton said I was a traitor for talking to the North Koreans," Hill said in an interview. The Post then reports
that Bolton offered conditioned praise for Trump, saying Friday that he expected the president to deliver a warning about U.S.
willingness to use military force.
Daniel Davis, in an
op-ed in Fox News, argues that Trump goes ahead with announced plans to meet with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, he would
open the door to potentially solving our nuclear dispute with the Communist nation short of war. This is a far better course that
listening to the calls from some to give up on diplomacy and use military force against the North. The "some" include Bolton who
has been making the case for a preventive military strike against North Korea. "If such a U.S. strike were ordered, it would have
catastrophic consequences for us. Far from ensuring our safety, it would impose egregious levels of casualties on U.S. forces
and American civilians [not to mention Koreans who would make up the bulk of casualties -cjo], and harm – not help – our security
and our prosperity," Davis writes.
March 23, 2018
You've all seen the headlines by now. I'm not going to say a lot about it. The punditry is that it means more aggressive US
policies towards both Iran and North Korea. It also likely means that Sheldon Adelson has a
direct line to
the White House and Nikki Haley's position at the UN has been strengthened, since she and Bolton have been reported to have a
close relationship. The
suggestion in the press coverage is that Bolton is more likely to tell Trump what he wants to hear, particularly on Iran,
but we probably shouldn't automatically assume that Trump wants to go to war as badly as Bolton does.
March 25, 2018
Jim Lobe and Eli Clifton,
writing in Lobelog, yesterday,
argue that Sheldon Adelson was responsible for Trump's turnaround from populist anti-war candidate to pro-Israel hawk. In 2016,
they write, Trump was mocking those, like Marco Rubio, who were seeking Adelson's support, meaning they were seeking his money.
By the time of his inauguration, however, Trump had adopted Adelson's militant pro-Israel stance, including Adelson's demands
to move the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and pursue a confrontationist approach to Iran, and Adelson occupied a prominent
seat at the inauguration ceremony.
"Trump met Adelson in Las Vegas in early October 2017. One week later, Trump announced that he would no longer certify that
Iran was complying with the Iran nuclear deal, even though the U.S. intelligence community and all of Washington's European allies,
as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), had found no evidence that Tehran was cheating," Lobe and Clifton write.
"One month later, Adelson used his own newspaper, The Las Vegas Review Journal, to express his frustration with Trump's failure
to quickly redeem his promise to move the embassy. Two months after that, Trump reversed a half century of U.S. policy by formally
recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital. According to Michael Wolff's book Fire and Fury, Steve Bannon credited Adelson for
Trump's decision."
Adelson's big protégé, as I've reported previously, is John Bolton. According to Lobe and Clifton, it was Adelson who made
the arrangements to get Bolton back into the White House, overcoming efforts by White House chief of staff John Kelly keep to
keep him out. Adelson also reportedly orchestrating the firing of McMaster and of Tilleson and their replacements by Bolton and
Pompeo. Ands Bolton, like Adelson, has long favored a "military solution" to the Iran nuclear problem. In 2013, Adelson posted
an op-ed in his newspaper, the Las Vegas Review Journal, calling for the nuclear bombing of Iran, first in some uninhabited area
of the country to send Iran's leaders "a message" and if that didn't work, a second bombing of Tehran itself (this of course,
would be a war crime in the first degree). Bolton, himself, in an op-ed two years later, held up the Israeli bombing of Iraq's
Osirak reactor as the model for what the US should (as was later documented by a Norwegian researcher who's name I don't recall,
the bombing of Osirak did not end Saddam's Hussein's nuclear bomb program. Rather, it forced it underground and out of sight,
as UN weapons inspectors discovered in the 1990's after Gulf War I).
March 31, 2018
Journalist Whitney Webb,
writing Mintpress News, finds Bolton's appointment as Trump's national security advisor, to be particularly dangerous. Webb
puts Bolton's appointment in the context of those of Pompeo to be secretary of state and Gina Haspell to run the CIA, but finds
Bolton the most dangerous of the three, "due to his bellicose rhetoric, unilateral decision-making, and his "kiss up, kick down"
style of interaction with superiors and colleagues, allowing him to be remarkably effective in getting his way."
Webb's purpose is to explore what Bolton's appointment means for US national security policy and he begins with Bolton's deep
ties to Israel–ties "so deep that some have posited that his commitment to extreme Zionism has led him to betray the national
interest of his own country on more than one occasion." Webb cites a number of examples of this, which add up to Bolton pursuing
his own warmongering policy against Iran even when the administration he was nominally working for had the opposite policy. Bolton
has pressured Israeli officials to attack Iran even when calling for such an attack was not the U.S. government's position.
According to Shaul Mofaz, former Israeli defense minister, Bolton "tried to convince me that Israel needs to attack Iran," which
Mofaz recently asserted was not "a smart move – not on the part of the Americans today or anyone else until the threat is real."
May 8, 2018
Trump tweeted yesterday that he would be announcing his decision on Iran today at 2 PM. The Washington Post, citing the usual
gaggle of unnamed officials, US and foreign,
reports that he is expected to say that he will not continue a waiver of sanctions against Iran. Exactly what this means is
not at all clear. Trump is not expected to renege on the nuclear deal altogether. Instead, the Post says, he will address a portion
of the wide range of sanctions that were waived when the deal was first implemented, while leaving in limbo other waivers that
are due in July. As for what comes next, Boris Johnson said that as far as he knows, the administration has no clear "Plan B"
for what's to follow. The affected sanctions, the Post notes, not only impose restrictions on US trade with Iran but also threaten
pther countries that buy Iranian oil. Officials, who spoke to the Post about the upcoming announcement on the condition of anonymity,
suggested that Trump will use the threat of further measures as leverage on both the Europeans and Iran itself.
As has been too often the case, we may be seeing Trump and his advisors expressing two different policies on Iran. Rudy Giuliani,
Trump's newest lawyer, delivered remarks to meeting of something called the Iran Freedom Convention for Democracy and Human Rights,
during which he advocated regime change in Tehran. "We have a president who is tough," Giuliani is reported to have said. "We
have a president who is as committed to regime change as we are." Confronting Iran, he added, is "more important than an Israeli-Palestinian
deal." He also
predicted
the end of the nuclear deal. "What do you think is going to happen to that agreement!" Giuliani said of the deal, before taking
a piece of paper in his hands and pretending to rip it apart.
The State Department immediately dismissed Giuliani's remarks. "He speaks for himself and not on behalf of the administration
on foreign policy," State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert told The Associated Press on Monday. The Hill further
noted that U.S. officials were alarmed by Giuliani's comments and said they weren't consistent with the White House's policy.
This is confirmed by another
report in the Washington Post. "But if regime change is on the agenda, Trump has been far more circumspect about how it would
happen," writes the Post's Ishaan Tharoor. "Dethroning the mullahs would likely involve waging war against Iran, a prospect at
odds with his own stated desire to withdraw from Syria and disentangle the United States from a generation of costly conflicts
in the Middle East." Tharoor goes on to tie the regime change crowd, including Giuliani and Bolton directly to the MeK. The MeK,
Tharoor writes, was behind the event at which Giuliani spoke this weekend, "marking yet another episode in his long, cozy relationship
with the organization." Tharoor cites Politico reporting that the MeK has paid Giuliani "handsomely," to include not only appearances
before the group but also for lobbying to have it removed from the State Department's terror list, which was done in 2012.
Tharoor also cites Jason Rezaian, the Washington Post reporter who was detained in Iran for a year-and-a-half, reporting that
the MeK is held with contempt by ordinary Iranians, who view the organization as a craven, treacherous outfit. "In the seven years
I lived in Iran, many people expressed criticism of the ruling establishment -- at great potential risk to themselves," noted
Rezaian. "In all that time, though, I never met a person who thought the MEK should, or could, present a viable alternative."
"To those who claim that the nuclear deal isn't working, regime change remains the only solution," wrote Rezaian. "For
the MEK, and Bolton, if his words are to be taken at face value, the only path to that could be war. The group has long been prepared
to do whatever it takes to see that happen, including presenting fake intelligence about Iran's nuclear program."
May 9, 2018
Before I get into the reactions following Trump's
speech of yesterday, I'll cover a few other details from what Trump announced.
The
memorandum that he signed after concluding his remarks states that the policy of the U.S. is "that Iran be denied a nuclear
weapon and intercontinental ballistic missiles; that Iran's network and campaign of regional aggression be neutralized; to disrupt,
degrade, or deny the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and its surrogates access to the resources that sustain their destabilizing
activities; and to counter Iran's aggressive development of missiles and other asymmetric and conventional weapons capabilities."
In addition to directing the Secretaries of State and Treasury to begin the process of reimposing the economic sanctions that
were waived as a result of the nuclear deal, it also directs the Secretary of Defense to "prepare to meet, swiftly and decisively,
all possible modes of Iranian aggression against the United States, our allies, and our partners. The Department of Defense shall
ensure that the United States develops and retains the means to stop Iran from developing or acquiring a nuclear weapon and related
delivery systems."
Trump's speech was shortly followed by a
press briefing by John Bolton. One of the matters that came up repeatedly was the question of regime change. The first question
was whether or not the administration was hoping that regime change would be part of addressing Iran's supposed malign activities.
"No," Bolton said. What Trump has said, he went on, "is that one of the fundamental criticisms that the President and others have
made to the deal is that it sought to address only a limited aspect of Iran's unacceptable behavior -- certainly a critical aspect
-- but not taking into account the fact this is, and has been for many years, the central banker of international terrorism."
Secondly, he was asked if this was a precursor for the U.S. putting boots on the ground in Iran. Anybody who believes that
"would be badly mistaken if that's what they thought," Bolton said.
Thirdly, a reporter asked Bolton if the administration was in contact with the MeK or other exile groups about a government
in exile. 'I'm not aware of any of that, and that's just not something that's ever come up," he said.
Bolton was then asked if the administration would support a regime change in Syria as well. "I think the President made clear
in his address a couple weeks ago when he announced the response to the Syrian chemical weapons attack, that the use of military
force there and our diplomatic responses was limited to the question of the use of weapons of mass destruction," he siad. He then
added that the real concern was Iran extending its influence through Iraq and Syria to Lebanon."
On the JCPOA Bolton denied that the US had violated the agreement. Instead, the US is withdrawing from it. But he wouldn't
acknowledged that Iran is in compliance, as the IAEA has reported numerous times. "I think there are plenty of cases where
we're simply incapable of saying whether they're in compliance or not. There are others where I think they've clearly been in
violation," he said. "For example, their production of heavy water has repeatedly exceeded the limits permissible under the JCPOA.
They're almost in the heavy water production business. They sell excess to Oman. They've sold it to European countries. It's a
way of keeping the heavy water production facilities alive. They're warm. And that's part of the danger. And they have exceeded
the limits."
At the end of his speech, yesterday, Trump said that the future of Iran belongs to its people. At first, this sounded to me
like the preface to a call for regime change. What he said was this: "Iran's leaders will naturally say that they refuse to negotiate
a new deal; they refuse. And that's fine. I'd probably say the same thing if I was in their position. But the fact is they are
going to want to make a new and lasting deal, one that benefits all of Iran and the Iranian people. When they do, I am ready,
willing, and able." A reporter asked Bolton if this meant that the US was ready tot alk to the Iranians from a position of strength.
He replied that what the administration is prepared to do, along with the Europeans and others, is "to talk about a much broader
deal addressing all of the aspects of Iran's conduct that we find objectionable. We're prepared to do that beginning right now."
May 21, 2018
If the New York Times is to be believed, Bolton is
bringing
with him, the same coterie of old neo-con cronies to work for him in the NSC that he's been surrounded by since his days in the
Reagan Administration in the 1980's. This includes Charles M. Kupperman, a former Reagan administration official and defense contracting
executive, who has come in as a temporary advisor. The list of those under consideration for positions in the NSC includes Frederick
H. Fleitz, Sarah Tinsley and David Wurmser. "Mr. Bolton's relationships with most of the associates date back decades, to his
days working in positions related to foreign policy in the Reagan administration. But he continued working with them in the dozen
years since he has been out of government, serving as an adviser to Mr. Wurmser's company, according to its website, while relying
on Mr. Kupperman, Ms. Tinsley and several other associates to help run a constellation of conservative political organizations
that he founded to advance his foreign policy views and political prospects," the Times reports. "The activity brought Mr. Bolton
into regular contact with some of the biggest donors on the right, while giving him a platform to explore his own possible presidential
campaign in 2016 and to be an advocate for confrontational strategies in dealing with Iran, North Korea and Russia."
The Times report is a little weak on the ideology of these folks, preferring instead to focus on Bolton's ethical lapses, but
can't avoid the matter entirely. Matthew C. Freedman, a long time associate who Bolton appointed to interview prospective hires,
Kupperman, Tinsley and another associate, Garrett Marquis, the Times reports further, were affiliated with a Bolton-led nonprofit,
the Foundation for American Security and Freedom, which aired ads in 2015 opposing the Iran nuclear deal. The Times also notes
Bolton's close relationship with Sheldon Adelson, whom the Times describes as "an influential hawk and supporter of Israel from
whom Mr. Bolton has sought assistance for his political ventures."
May 22, 2018
Sheldon Adelson has only one issue, Israel, and he has paid the Republican Party handsomely to make sure his views are
the views of the party. According to Mintpress News' Whitney Webb, Adelson has
lavished some $90 million on the part since 2016, including $35 million to the Trump campaign, and another $55 million to
two Republican SuperPACS, Congressional Leadership Fund and the Senate Leadership Fund. "After investing so heavily in the
GOP in 2016, Adelson's decision to again donate tens of millions of dollars to Republican efforts to stay in power is a direct
consequence of how successfully Adelson has been able to influence U.S. policy since Trump and the GOP rode to victory in the
last election cycle," Webb writes. "Adelson's belief that Trump would be "good for Israel" was the main driver behind his decision
to spend more than $90 million on helping Trump and other Republicans win in the last election."
June 29, 2018
Mark Perry, in an article posted
in Foreign Policy, yesterday, posits that Mattis is waging a losing battle against Bolton over the question of war with Iran.
He reports that since his arrival at the White House, Bolton has marginalized Mattis in national security policy making, so
Mattis is turning his energies towards preventing a US attack on Iran. At the core of Mattis' concerns is, number one, it's a
lot easier to start a war with Iran than to end it, and secondly, the US military services are all in poor shape after decades
of wars and other never-ending contingency operations. Mattis, like many of his colleagues in the senior military leadership,
have a long standing animus towards Iran, but at the same time, they don't see any good way through a war against Iran. Bolton
and his co-thinkers, on the other hand, see a war to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon and to change the regime in Tehran
as almost a moral obligation.
Mattis' concerns are shared by the senior military leadership. "We've been in the air and in combat since 1993," a senior retired
Air Force officer said, "and the wear and tear on the force has been considerable. The tempo has been crushing." Perry says this
is actually an understatement, given that 30 percent of Air Force aircraft are not "mission capable," in part because of huge
pilot shortfalls and a deterioration of military capability. The story is the same for the other services.
Then there's the military campaign itself. An air campaign could easily destroy Iran's nuclear facilities and its conventional
military forces, but what happens afterwards? As noted by several experts that Perry consulted, the end of the air campaign would
be the beginning of the war, not the end of it. There's no reason to expect that the government in Tehran would surrender and
it would be able to fight on with its considerable unconventional military capabilities, not only in the IRGC but its proxy forces
as well, such as Hezbollah.
In truth, the unease over any future conflict goes much deeper than these concerns, Perry notes, "and is seeded by what one
senior and influential military officer called 'an underlying anxiety that after 17 years of sprinkling the Middle East with corpses,
the U.S. is not any closer to a victory over terrorism now than it was on September 12.' It is this anxiety that undergirds military
doubts about going to war with Iran -- that the United States would be adding bodies to the pile and not much more." In other
words, it would be another forever war, only one that asborbs many times mor resources than even the ones we're in right now have
done.
July 2, 2018
Ha'aretz ran a
story , yesterday, very similar to the Mark Perry article I reported on last week, on the policy fight within the administration
over what to do about Iran. Officially, the administration is committed to diplomatic and economic pressure to bring Iran to the
negotiating table, where a new agreement should be constructed that would replace the JCPOA. Ha'aretz's sources say, however,
that Bolton is behind the scenes advancing the option of collapsing the Iranian regime. According to those sources, Bolton views
the demonstrations that have broken out in Iran in recent months over the state of the country's economy as an indication of the
regime's weakness. He has told Trump that increased U.S. pressure could lead to the regime's collapse. One person who recently
spoke with senior White House officials on the subject summarized Bolton view in the words: "One little kick and they're done."
Mattis, on the other hand, despite is long held animus towards Iran is skeptical of regime change. Mattis, the sources stated,
supports increasing pressure on Iran, but with the clear objective of bringing the Iranians back to the table for a better agreement
– one that would roll back their regional aggression. Pompeo is said to lie in between but is moving towards Mattis.
Ha'aretz also points to the influence of outside advisors like Rudy Giuliani–who recently addressed the annual conference of
the National Council of Resistance in Iran in Paris as–as a further factor in the uncertainty around Trump's policy. What Ha'aretz
doesn't mention, though, is the Russia factor and that what Trump ultimately decides to do could be determined in Helsinki on
July 16.
July 26, 2018
Fazel Hawramy, an independent journalist working in Iraqi Kurdistan,
reports in an article in Al Monitor, that the State Department is replacing the outgoing counsel general in Erbil with an
Iran expert by the name of Steven Fagin, the director of the Office of Iranian Affairs at the State Department's Bureau of Near
Eastern Affairs. As director of the Office of Iranian Affairs, which has several outposts around the world, including in Istanbul
and Dubai, Fagin was responsible for developing, coordinating, recommending and executing US policy on Iran, Hawramy reports.
Fagin's presence in Iraqi Kurdistan is significant given that the armed Iranian Kurdish opposition groups fighting the Islamic
Republic are based in the region. Hawramy names the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI), in particular, whose leader, Mustafa
Hijri, Fagin met with last month, when he was in Washington, by invitation from the Trump Administration, for a week long series
of meetings at various think tanks. Each side is said to be exploring the seriousness of the other.
The KDPI, it turns out, is a military organization that has a long history of staging attacks against the IRGC in Iran. The
KDPI has also stepped up efforts to establish an entity through which all the Kurdish parties can coordinate their efforts against
Tehran. Meanwhile, on July 21, the Kurdistan Free Life Party, affiliated with the Kurdistan Workers Party, announced the killing
of 15 Iranian soldiers near the town of Marivan, close to the border with Iraqi Kurdistan. No mention is made of how much support
these groups might have among Iranian Kurds, however. They may not be any more viable than the MeK, except for making trouble
of course.
If the US is really seeking to employ such groups to try to destablilize Iran along ethnic lines, this would be nothing
new. Gareth Porter, in an
article
that appeared in Middle East Eye on May 18, reports that John Bolton, when he was in the GW Bush Administration pushed aggressively
for regime change but that Bush himself wasn't interested. Bolton may find history repeating itself, with Trump resisting
his plan for regime change, just as Bush did in 2003, Porter writes. In the week before Porter's article came out, Bolton denied
that the administration policy for Iran was regime change, despite the pullout from the JCPOA. "I've written and said a lot of
things when I was a complete free agent. I certainly stand by what I said at the time, but those were my opinions then. The circumstance
I'm in now is I'm the national security adviser to the president. I'm not the national security decision-maker," he told CNN's
Situation Room. The implication is clear. Number one, Bolton still believes in regime change. Number two, his view has not prevailed
with Trump. The recent comments by both Trump and Pompeo would seem to bear out that Trump's policy remains, as Pompeo said, to
change the regime's behavior, not to change the regime.
2) Who Is Richard Goldberg?
In early January of this year, Bolton brought onto the NSC, one Richard Goldberg, to be the NSC's "Director for Countering
Iranian Weapons of Mass Destruction." Goldberg, Jewish Insider
reported on Jan. 7, was the
lead Congressional staff negotiator for sanctions on Iran prior to the nuclear deal in 2015 in his capacity as deputy chief of
staff and senior foreign policy adviser to former Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL), and later served as chief of staff for former Illinois
Governor Bruce Rauner. After leaving government in 2017, Goldberg joined the neo-con Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
The National Interest's Curt Mills
confirmed
Goldberg's neo-con credentials the same day. "Couldn't think of anyone better than my @FDD colleague @rich_goldberg to join NSC
to maximize the maximum pressure campaign against the Islamic Republic of Iran." FDD president mark Dubowitz jubilantly tweeted.
Goldberg "takes a view of Iran similar to many of Washington's most committed Iran hawks. He views the regime in Tehran as akin
to the Soviet Union -- a hub of a global, anti-American counterculture and internally collapsible if Reagan-style pressure is
applied," Mills reports. "For FDD, which has functioned as the administration's go-to think-tank on Iran, it's another coup. The
Goldberg move to the White House comes as at a time when the organization had been publicly doubting the administration's course
for the first time," Mills reports later in the article.
Daniel Larison,
writing
in The American Conservative, characterized Goldberg this way: "Goldberg has been a leading opponent of the nuclear deal and a
fanatical advocate for enforcing new sanctions on Iran and anyone that does business with them. Bringing Goldberg into the administration
is a sign that the Iran obsession is getting worse, and by making him the 'Director for Countering Iranian Weapons of Mass Destruction.'"
One might say we've seen this playbook before, in Iraq in 2002-2003.
As for Goldberg's history, we find that he's been a very militant advocate for Likudnik Israel going back to 2004 when he first
arrived on Capitol Hill as a staffer (Goldberg is a young punk and was probably in his early to mid-20's in 2004). According to
the FDD's biography of him, Goldberg was "A leader in
efforts to expand U.S. missile defense cooperation with Israel, Richard played a key role in U.S. funding for the Arrow-3 program,
Iron Dome and the deployment of an advanced missile defense radar to the Negev Desert." During his time working for Mark Kirk,
Goldberg "emerged as a leading architect of the toughest sanctions imposed on the Islamic Republic of Iran. He was the lead Republican
negotiator for three rounds of sanctions targeting the Central Bank of Iran, the SWIFT financial messaging service, and entire
sectors of the Iranian economy. Richard also drafted and negotiated legislation promoting human rights and democracy in Iran,
including sanctions targeting entities that provide the Iranian regime with the tools of repression."
In September 2017, Goldberg authored a memo that was circulated on Capitol Hill which advocated that the president should declare
to Congress next month that the deal is no longer in the national security interest of the United States, Foreign Policy
reported at the time. Then the president
would make clear his readiness to hit Iran with a "de-facto global economic embargo" if it failed to meet certain conditions over
a 90-day period, including opening military sites to international inspectors. "This would be a 21st century financial version
of [John F.] Kennedy's Cuba quarantine," according to a copy of the proposal obtained by Foreign Policy. The embargo would involve
reimposing sanctions lifted under the deal, as well as additional measures including restrictions on oil exports. This is clearly
recognizable, now, as the policy that the Trump Administration has imposed on Iran since Trump announced the US withdrawal from
the JCPOA in May 2018.
TTG • 3 hours ago
Willy B., thanks for pulling all this information together into a very readable piece. Well done. This is one dangerous
pack of rats. It's frightening how easily prone to manipulation Trump has proven. One would think he'd be more resistant to this
sort of thing.
Because of Trump's recent recognition of Israel's ownership of the Golan Heights, I Googled
"Israel six day war," which in turn led me to the page link below. Turns out, Isreal lied
about everything.
1) Both Egypt and Israel claim the other side started it. Israel lied.
2) Israel claims Egyptian forces were assembling for an offensive strike. Israel lied.
3) Israel merely initiated a pre-emptive war, rather than because the two stripes on its
flag represent the boundaries of its nation as the Nile and the Euphrates. Israel lied.
@mark
green I think a deceptively simple exercise would produce surprising results. We should
try to figure out what Anti-Semitism is.
The answer will be that it's a vague concept like 'racism' that is used as a pejorative
and slur, and that it would be very hard to find any real, verifiable 'Anti-Semites' or
'racists' who could be shown to hate all members of their chosen enemy group.
Yes, there are people who imagine that they hate all Jews, or all black people, etc. But I
doubt that they really know who they hate, and would be surprised to find that they mostly
hate a concept, rather than real people.
People who self-identify as 'Jews' are varied, by many different measures, and not all
'semitic', either. And not all people with 'semitic' genes identify as being a 'Jew'.
To those who would say, "well, we still know what we mean by the terms" I would respond,
"I think you do, in the very fuzzy, vague, dangerous sense that characterizes your
thinking."
That's one point. A second is that it's not a crime to hate anyone or anything. If you
hate something or someone, you're within your rights to do so .waste of time and energy that
that usually is.
Zionist colonization of America is nearing culmination. Nothing short of a comprehensive
anti-colonial resistance movement will rid us of the Zio-cancer that is corroding our
national identity, integrity, self determination and independence. The cancer must be
extirpated and the time is now.
Anybody reading from West Virginia? Our Senator Joe Manchin receives six figures of donations
from AIPAC. Don't vote for him.
AIPAC's February 2019 press release stated, "AIPAC commends Congress for strongly
supporting Israeli security and strengthening the U.S.-Israel relationship in provisions
included in the new spending bill. Importantly, the legislation increases security assistance
to Israel by $200 million to fully fund the first year of the new 10-year U.S.-Israel
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). These funds help Israel maintain its qualitative military
edge in the region in order to defend itself, by itself, from mounting threats on its
borders." This plundering was co-sponsored by the other West Virginia Senator Shelley Moore
Capito. So don't vote for her either.
So where does that leave West Virginia voters? Staying home and abstaining from voting,
because we never get a good alternative due to the primary election. Which actually solves
nothing.
Yep, looking at our options, the only change is going to come from a coup or
revolution.
In other words Russiagate was a smoke screen over Isrealgate...
Notable quotes:
"... Being a citizen of a country is not just an accident of birth. It requires loyalty to the interests of that country and to one's fellow citizens. ..."
"... The Lobby works assiduously to compel American government at all levels to adopt positions that are beneficial to Israel and almost invariably harmful to U.S. interests. Asserting that the two nations have nearly identical interests is little more than a fraud. ..."
"... Second, there is the claim that Israel benefits American security. That is also a lie. Washington's relationship with Israel, which is now more subservient than it ever has been, is a major liability that is and always has been damaging to both American regional and global interests. ..."
"... Former CIA Deputy Director Admiral Bobby Inman has also rejected the claim that Israel is a security asset by observing that "Israeli spies have done more harm and have damaged the United States more than the intelligence agents of all other countries on earth combined. They are the gravest threat to our national security." ..."
"... Israel and AIPAC have relentlessly pursued their agenda while also corrupting the Congress of the United States to support the Israeli government with money and political cover. ..."
"... There are forty or so congressmen, senators and thousands of high-level policy wonks. infecting the U S government who hold dual citizenship with Israel. Such dual citizenship must be strictly prohibited. Those holding dual citizenship must be required to renounce said foreign citizenship. Refusal to do so should result in immediate deportation with loss of American citizenship. Present and former holders of dual citizenship should never be allowed to serve in any American governmental capacity. ..."
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has just completed its annual summit in
Washington. It claims that 18,000 supporters attended the event, which concluded with a day of
lobbying Congress by the attendees. Numerous American politicians addressed the gathering and
it is completely reasonable to observe that the meeting constituted the most powerful gathering
of people dedicated to promoting the interests of a foreign nation ever witnessed in any
country in the history of the world.
There are a number of things that one should understand about the Jewish state of Israel and
its powerful American domestic lobby. First of all, the charge that the actions of The Lobby
(referred to with capital letters because of its uniqueness and power) inevitably involves dual
or even singular allegiance based on religion or tribe to a country where the lobbyist does not
actually reside is completely correct by definition of what AIPAC is and why it exists. It
claims to work to "ensure
that the Jewish state is safe, strong and secure" through "foreign aid, government
partnerships, [and] joint anti-terrorism efforts ," all of which involve the U.S. as the donor
and Israel as the recipient.
Being a citizen of a country is not just an accident of birth. It requires loyalty to
the interests of that country and to one's fellow citizens. No two countries have
identical interests, something that is particularly true when one is considering Israel, an
ethno-religious autocracy, and the United States, where The Lobby works assiduously to
compel American government at all levels to adopt positions that are beneficial to Israel and
almost invariably harmful to U.S. interests. Asserting that the two nations have nearly
identical interests is little more than a fraud.
Second, there is the claim that Israel benefits American security. That is also a lie.
Washington's relationship with Israel, which is now more subservient than it ever has been, is
a major liability that is and always has been damaging to both American regional and global
interests. The recent decisions to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and to recognize
Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights were ill-conceived and have been condemned by the
world community, including by nearly all of America's genuine close allies.
The harm done by the Israeli connection to policy formulation in Washington and to U.S.
troops based in the Middle East has been noted both by Admiral Thomas Moorer and General David
Petraeus, with Moorer decrying how
"If the American people understood what a grip those people have got on our government,
they would rise up in arms. Our citizens certainly don't have any idea what goes on."
Petraeus complained to a Senate Committee that U.S. favoritism towards Israel puts American
soldiers based in the Middle East at risk. He was quickly forced to recant, however.
Former CIA Deputy Director Admiral Bobby Inman has also rejected the claim that Israel
is a security asset by observing that "Israeli spies have done more harm and have damaged the
United States more than the intelligence agents of all other countries on earth combined. They
are the gravest threat to our national security." Inman was referring to American Jewish
spy Jonathan Pollard, who stole for Israel an entire roomful of the most highly classified
defense information. Israeli spies, including current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and
Hollywood movie producer Arnon Milchan, also participated in the systematic theft of weapons
grade uranium and nuclear triggers in the 1960s so Israel could secretly create a nuclear
weapons arsenal. The FBI, for its part, in its annual counterintelligence report, consistently
identifies Israel as the "friendly" country that spies most persistently against the U.S. FBI
Agents have testified that there are very
few prosecutions of the swarms of Israeli spies due to "political pressure."
Third, there is the myth that the United States and Israel have "shared values," which is
meant to imply that both are liberal democracies where freedom and human rights prevail,
beacons of light offering enlightened leadership in a world where tyranny threatens at every
turn. This was stressed in the opening remarks last weekend by AIPAC Executive Director Howard
Kohr, who described Israel as "A nation
always striving to be better, more just and true to the message of its founders, a nation
dedicated to freedom of religion for people of all faiths. We do our work for all to see. What
unites our pro-Israel movement is the passion for bringing American and Israel closer for the
benefit of both and the benefit of all. We look like America because we are America."
Kohr is, of course, preaching to an audience that wants desperately to believe what he says
in spite of what they have been able to see with their own eyes in the media when it dares to
publish a story criticizing Israel. Jewish hypocrisy about one standard for Israel and Jews
plus another standard for everyone else operates pretty much out in the open if one knows where
to look. Zionist Organization of America's Morton Klein, who once tweeted regarding a "filthy
Arab,"
was interviewed by journalist Nathan Thrall and asked why he believed it was "utterly
racist and despicable" to support a "white nationalist" ethnic group but not racist for Israel
to do the same. He responded "Israel is a unique situation. This is really a Jewish state given
to us by God. God did not create a state for white people or for black people." Senator Charles
Schumer, the Democratic minority leader, who calls himself the Senate's "shomer" or guardian
for American Jews, had a slightly different take on it: "Of course, we say it's our land, the
Torah says it, but they don't believe in the Torah. So that's the reason there is not
peace."
But Kohr, Klein and Schumer all know as well as anyone that Israeli Jews, fortified by their
conceit of being a "Chosen people," are not interchangeable with contemporary Americans, or at
least not "like" the Americans who still care about their country. There are hundreds of mostly
Jewish pro-Israel organizations in America, having a
combined endowment of $16 billion, that are actively propagandizing and promoting Israeli
interests by ignoring or lying about the downside of the relationship. The University of
Michigan affiliate of the Hillel International campus organization alone has a multistory
headquarters supported by a budget of $2 million and a staff of 15. It hosts an emissary of the
Jewish Agency for Israel, an Israeli government supported promotional enterprise.
So, what is the meaning of the "American" in AIPAC? Requiring a religious-ethnic litmus test
for full citizenship and rights is Israeli, not American. Having local government admissions
committees that can bar Israeli-Palestinian citizens based on "social suitability" would not be
acceptable to most Americans. Demanding a unique Israeli right to exist while denying it to
Israel's neighbors; demolishing homes while poisoning Palestinian livestock and destroying
orchards; shooting children for throwing stones; and inflicting death, terror and deprivation
upon the imprisoned people of Gaza are all everyday common practice for the Israeli
government.
Israel and AIPAC have relentlessly pursued their agenda while also corrupting the
Congress of the United States to support the Israeli government with money and political
cover. Israel and friends like Kohr routinely make baseless charges of anti-Semitism
against critics while also legislating against free-speech to eliminate any and all criticism.
This drive to make Israel uniquely free from any critique has become the norm in the United
States, but it is a norm driven by Israeli interests and Israel's friends, most of whom are
Jewish billionaires or Jewish organizations that meet regularly and discuss what they might do
to benefit the Jewish state.
And the fourth big lie is that the American people support Israel on religious as well as
cultural grounds, not because mostly Jewish money has corrupted our political system and media.
Indeed, many Christian fundamentalists have various takes on what Israel means, but their
influence is limited. The Israel-thing is Jewish in all ways that matter and its sanitized
Exodus -version that has been sold to the public is essentially a complete fraud
nurtured by the media, also Jewish controlled, by Hollywood, and by the Establishment.
"This weekend the New York Times
breaks one of the biggest taboos , describing the responsibility of Jewish donors for the
Democratic Party's slavish support for Israel. Nathan Thrall's groundbreaking piece repeats a
lot of data we've reported here and says in essence that it really is about the Benjamins, as
Rep. Ilhan Omar said so famously. The donor class of the party is overwhelmingly Jewish, and
Jews are still largely wed to Zionism– that's the nut." Ben Rhodes, a former deputy
national-security adviser to ex-President Barack Obama recounted in the article how "a more
assertive policy toward Israel" never evolved "The Washington view of Israel-Palestine is
still shaped by the [Jewish] donor class."
And the support for Israel goes beyond money. The Times article included an October
2018
"Survey of 800 American voters who identify as Jewish, conducted by the Mellman Group on
behalf of the Jewish Electoral Institute, 92 percent said that they are 'generally
pro-Israel.' In the same poll -- conducted after the United States closed the Palestinian
diplomatic mission in Washington, moved the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to
Jerusalem, appointed a fund-raiser for the settlements as U.S. ambassador and cut
humanitarian aid to Palestinians -- roughly half of American Jews said they approved of
President Trump's handling of relations with Israel. On what is considered the most divisive
issue in U.S.-Israel relations, the establishment of Israeli settlements in the West Bank,
a November 2018 post-midterm election poll of more than 1,000 American Jews that was
commissioned by J Street, the pro-Israel lobby aligned with Democrats, found that roughly
half said the expansion of settlements had no impact on how they felt about Israel.
According to a 2013 Pew survey , 44 percent of Americans and 40 percent of American Jews
believe that Israel was given to the Jewish people by God, [a] fact that Jews believe they
have rights in historic Palestine that non-Jews do not."
And one only has to listen to the AIPAC speeches made by leading members of the U.S.
government establishment to appreciate the essential hypocrisy over the U.S. wag-the-dog
relationship with the Jewish state of Israel. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer
led the parade of Democrats on the first evening of AIPAC, thundering "When someone accuses
American supporters of Israel of dual loyalty, I say: Accuse me, I am part of a large,
bipartisan coalition in Congress supporting Israel -- an overwhelming majority of the United
States Congress. I tell Israel's accusers and detractors: Accuse me."
Well, Steny there is a certain irony in your request and to be sure you should be accused
over betrayal of your oath to uphold the constitution against all enemies "domestic and
foreign." Hoyer is a product of the heavily Jewish Maryland Democratic Party machine that has
also produced Pelosi and Senator Ben Cardin. Pelosi told the AIPAC audience about her
father in Baltimore, a so-called Shabbos goy who would perform services for Jews on the
sabbath and who would also speak Yiddish while at home with his Italian family. Cardin
meanwhile has been the sponsor of legislation to make criticism or boycotting of Israel
illegal, up to and including heavy fines and prison time.
Hoyer, widely regarded as one of the most pro-Israel non-Jewish congressman, also boasted to
AIPAC about the 15 official trips to Israel he's made in forty years in Congress, accompanied
by more than 150 fellow Democrats. "This August, I will travel with what I expect will be our
largest delegation ever -- probably more than 30 Democratic members of Congress, including many
freshmen."
Steny Hoyer will be on an AIPAC affiliate sponsored trip in which any contact with
Palestinians will be both incidental and carefully managed. He also clearly has no problem in
spending the taxpayer's dime to go to Israel on additional "codels" to get further
propagandized. He is flat out wrong about Israel in general, but don't expect him to be
convinced otherwise, which may be somehow related to the $317,525 in pro-Israel PAC
contributions he has received.
There was much more at the AIPAC Summit. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denounced "the
pernicious myth of dual loyalty and foreign allegiance" while Secretary of State Mike Pompeo,
fresh from selling out U.S. interests on a visit to Israel, declared that "We live in
dangerous times. We have to speak the truth. Anti-Semitism should and must be rejected by all
decent people. Anti-Semitism – anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, and any nation that
espouses anti-Zionism, like Iran, must be confronted. We must defend the rightful homeland of
the Jewish people."
Vice President Mike Pence, like Pompeo an evangelical Christian, piled on in his Monday
prime time speech,
declaring that "Anyone who aspires to the highest office of the land should not be afraid
to stand with the strongest supporters of Israel in America. It is wrong to boycott Israel. It
is wrong to boycott AIPAC. Anti-Semitism has no place in the Congress of the United States of
America. Anyone who slanders this historic alliance between the United States and Israel should
never have a seat on the Foreign Affairs Committee."
Clearly, there is considerable evidence to support the theory that one has to be completely
ignorant to hold high office in the United States. Rejecting Zionism and/or questioning Israeli
policies is not anti-Semitism and the Jewish state is in fact no actual ally of the United
States. Nor is there any mandate to defend it in its questionable "rightful homeland."
Furthermore, dual-loyalty is what the relationship with Israel is all about and it is Jewish
money and political power that makes the whole thing work to Israel's benefit.
But the good news is that all the lying blather from the likes of Steny Hoyer and Howard
Kohr reveals their desperation. They are running scared because "the times they are a
changing." Sure, Congressmen will continue to be bought and sold and Jewish money and the
access to power that it buys will be able to prevail in the short term in a conspiratorial
fashion. But, in the long run, everyone knows deep down that loyalty to Israel is not loyalty
to the United States. And what Israel is doing is evil, as is becoming increasingly clear. It
is trying to convince Washington to make war on Iran, a country that does not threaten the
U.S., while the willingness of the American people to continue to look the other way as
Benjamin Netanyahu uses army snipers to shoot down unarmed demonstrators who are starving will
not continue indefinitely. It must not continue and we Americans should do whatever it takes to
stop it.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest,
a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign
policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box
2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is[email protected].
No he chose to. He was a high ranking general nearing retirement. Nobody could touch him
if he really was looking out for the country as he took and oath to do.
It must not continue and we Americans should do whatever it takes to stop it.
Amen, brother Phil!
We are all suffering from cognitive dissonance where our conflicted minds refuse to force
our government to declare AIPAC as an agent of a foreign nation that must be made to register
as such.
But, as I said in a previous post, the foxes are guarding the henhouse. We need to take
them down by hook or by crook. I have made it a mission in my copious free time to confront
every politician that I can and ask them uncomfortable questions about their loyalty to this
nation. So far, success has been limited, but if more people would join me, we could make
these sniveling cowards fear us more than they fear The Lobby.
We have put together a series of articles that explore the candidates’ (and
potential candidates’) Jewish connections — from those who identify as Jews, or
are married to one, to candidates who are not Jewish but have ties to the community in
different ways. We also explore their views on Israel.
Below are links to articles, sorted alphabetically, that our staff has written about some of
the political contenders, mostly those seeking the Democratic nomination. This list will be
updated as additional candidates join the fray.
And you thought Israel only dictated US policy in the ME? Every country knows that to get
anything from the US they have to go thru the Jews. The only thing of value Israel has ever
had to sell is its control of the US. Lets see how long it takes for Trump and congress to
reinstate the aid.
Trump cuts aid to 3 countries with strong relations with Israel
Last week, in his speech at the AIPAC policy conference, said President Juan Orlando
Hernández of Honduras that he would open a commercial office in Jerusalem – but
not an embassy.
By OMRI NAHMIAS Jerusalem Post
April 1, 2019 08:47
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump decided to stop programs of foreign aid for
three states in the Northern Triangle – Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, who are
known to have a strong relationship with Israel. Trump is cutting off nearly $500 million to
put pressure on the three governments to stop their citizens from trying to cross the Mexican
border into the US. However, it could also jeopardize the Israeli efforts to convince
Honduras to move its Embassy to Jerusalem.
Last week, in his speech at the AIPAC policy conference, President Juan Orlando
Hernández of Honduras said that he would open a commercial office in Jerusalem –
but not an embassy.
Just three months ago, things were moving in a positive direction. A trilateral meeting
between Hernández, Prime Minister Netanyahu and Secretary of State Pompeo was followed
by an announcement from the government of Honduras, saying it opened a dialogue with
Netanyahu to explore the possibility of opening an embassy in Jerusalem.
After the trilateral meeting, Israeli media outlets indicated that Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu was trying to mediate a deal between Honduras and United States to secure
the continuing of foreign aid to the country in exchange for opening a Honduran embassy in
Jerusalem.
The Israeli Embassy in Washington, as well Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office did not
respond for a comment request from The Jerusalem Post on that matter. Another country that
would face a cut in foreign aid is Guatemala – the only country that followed the US
and moved the embassy to Jerusalem”
Petraeus is in position to have lucrative –part-time– broadcasting
appearances. He would not get those opportunities, if if he espoused that Israeli-bought US
favoritism was wrong. Bobby Inman while not caring about the media, would be true to his
beliefs.
JFK and LBJ both knew it was wrong three generations ago. The difference was that JFK knew
it, complained to his underlings and at least partially did things that rocked the Israelis.
LBJ just wanted ‘the Jews off my back’ and acted accordingly with regard to
Israel.
while the willingness of the American people to continue to look the other way as
Benjamin Netanyahu uses army snipers to shoot down unarmed demonstrators who are
starving
” In Beit Suhur outside Bethlehem, I have seen IDF troops shoot at Palestinian
Christian women hanging out laundry in their gardens. This was done with tank coaxial machine
guns from within a bermed up dirt fort a couple of hundred yards away, and evidently just for
the fun of it.
In Bethlehem a lieutenant told me that he would have had his men shoot me in the street
during a demonstration that I happened to get caught in, but that he had not because he
thought I might not be a Palestinian and that if I were not the incident would have caused
him some trouble.
I have seen a lot of things like that”……Col Pat Lang
Israel is a crime that makes me wish I was the US President.
The comment on the stealing of nuclear materials in the sixties reminds that Michael
Scheuer’s blog has been pulled, any chance we could have him hosted here?
If the American people understood what a grip those people have got on our government,
they would rise up in arms. Our citizens certainly don’t have any idea what goes
on.
and
But, in the long run, everyone knows deep down that loyalty to Israel is not loyalty to
the United States.
How long is this “long run” when the people who don’t know finally
know?
Israeli spies, including current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hollywood movie
producer Arnon Milchan, also participated in the systematic theft of weapons grade uranium
and nuclear triggers in the 1960s so Israel could secretly create a nuclear weapons
arsenal.
I’ve been bringing that up for years on various platforms and have yet to get any
comment on it. Why there isn’t enough outrage to barley even address it is inexplicable
to me. Netanyanhoo belongs in solitary for the rest of his miserable days but instead gets
treated better than royalty by our butt-kissing politicians. Sick, sick sick.
As far as the Izzies running our military, the Air Force officer Karen Kwiatkowski has
written about it in the past, and is hardly ever mentioned.
“My fellow escort and I chatted on the way back to our office about how the
[Israeli] generals knew where they were going [in the Pentagon] (most foreign visitors to
the five-sided asylum don’t) and how the [Israeli]generals didn’t have to
sign in. I felt a bit dirtied by the whole thing and couldn’t stop comparing that
experience to the grace and gentility of the Moroccan, Tunisian, and Algerian ambassadors
with whom I worked”.
Thank you for your exceptional and important work. Please allow me to suggest that you
back off a bit from referencing (and elevating) the manipulative term
‘anti-Semitism’. It’s a tendentious phrase designed to stifle much-needed
criticism and much-needed opposition to the world’s most coddled brand of political
extremism.
‘Anti-Semitic theory’ promulgates the false notion that those of us (non-Jews)
who reject the depredations of Organized Jewry are spiritually deformed, mentally ill, or
prone to irrational acts of physical violence. This is a calculated libel.
Ironically, as pro-Zionist violence is embraced by Official Washington, verbal expressions
that are “too critical” of (lethal) Israeli policies–or which dare to
explore the destructive role of Zionist operatives inside Washington–are the kiss of
political death here in the Land of the Free.
Thou shalt not… say that.
How did this happen?
Jewish-manufactured taboos have allowed the perpetrators of serial warfare to snatch
sensitivity points as Israeli missiles fly. This perverse mindset and oddball collection of
modern double-standards have turned the rule of law on its head. Common sense is also a
causality.
People should have the right to think whatever they want. The one red line that must never
be crossed however is initiating aggressive physical violence.
How simple. How appealing. How universal. How old fashioned.
How did we ever forget it?
(Political necessity?)
Indeed, Official Washington now does pretty much the opposite. Contemporary
‘American’ leaders embrace (and vote to subsidize) serial Israeli
warfare/expansion along with Israeli ethnic cleansing. Meanwhile, far less powerful US
citizens and political observers get slammed for making mere utterances about Israeli
ruthlessness and the Zionist domination of Washington.
How much longer will these strange delusions last?
Thank you for a very informative, if thoroughly depressing, article.
we Americans should do whatever it takes to stop it
As a first step, stop supporting your two pro-Israel Establishment parties. If you keep
voting for them, they will carry on as before, nothing will change. Politicians only ever sit
up and take notice when their access to power comes under threat.
That said, there is little chance Valerie Plame will be tweeting this one like she
previously did two others of yours.
Excerpts from Former Spy Accused Of Anti-Semitism Eyeing Senate Run :
Former CIA spy Valerie Plame Wilson is considering a run for the United States Senate in
New Mexico, the Washington Examiner reported Friday.
One early obstacle for Plame Wilson, should she choose to run, is an anti-Semitism
controversy: She was criticized in September 2017 for tweeting links to anti-Semitic
articles, including a column titled “American Jews Are Driving America’s
Wars” and another called “The Dancing Israelis” that insinuated the
Mossad was involved in the 9/11 attacks. Plame at first defended her sharing of the
“Jews drive wars” article, arguing, “many neocon hawks ARE Jewish.”
But she eventually apologized and resigned from her position on the board of the
Ploughshares Fund, an anti-nuclear not-for-profit foundation. She has not tweeted
since.
Plame Wilson told the Examiner on Friday that she would “like another
opportunity to serve my country” and would run as a Democrat. The seat will open
up in 2020 after the retirement of incumbent Sen. Tom Udall.
More accurately, she would like to serve those who’ll be funding her campaign.
There are forty or so congressmen, senators and thousands of high-level policy wonks.
infecting the U S government who hold dual citizenship with Israel. Such dual citizenship
must be strictly prohibited. Those holding dual citizenship must be required to renounce said
foreign citizenship. Refusal to do so should result in immediate deportation with loss of
American citizenship. Present and former holders of dual citizenship should never be allowed
to serve in any American governmental capacity.
In addition, any American citizen who serves in a foreign military (Israel Defense Forces)
should automatically lose their American citizenship.
When Netanyahu addressed both houses of congress, it was sickening to see our politicians
slobber all over themselves to PROVE that they were unconditional supporters of Israel. It
was a scene out of the Soviet Politburo where every jewish or Israel supporter tried to outdo
the others with the applause. Just who the hell do they work for? Certainly not for the
interests of the American people and the United States,they should renounce their United
States citizenship and be deported to Israel.
WASP culture was completed, formed fully, finalized, by Puritans and Puritanism, by
Judaizing heresy. WASP culture, therefore, always must gravitate toward Jews, always must
be pro-Semitic, always will feature a drive to neutralize, and preferably destroy, that
which is aligned toward historic Christianity and Christendom, while promoting endless
heretical groups, especially those that reveal a willingness to be subservient to Jews and
to WASP Elites who invariably are staunchly pro-Semitic (either pro-Jewish or
pro-Arabic/Islamic).
I don’t know about that. The Nazis were WASPs, they clearly didn’t get your
memo. The WASPs who are most eager to drink the Jew liberal Kool-aid are all atheists.
I am not fond of the title given the piece, but Mr Giraldi always has something to say worth
listening to.
" But, in the long run, everyone knows deep down that loyalty to Israel is not
loyalty to the United States. And what Israel is doing is evil, as is becoming increasingly
clear. It is trying to convince Washington to make war on Iran, a country that does not
threaten the U.S., while the willingness of the American people to continue to look the
other way as Benjamin Netanyahu uses army snipers to shoot down unarmed demonstrators who
are starving will not continue indefinitely. "
Well said indeed.
I am generally an optimist for the long term., although forced to be a pessimist for the
near future.
Such abuse and oppression just cannot go on forever.
Even the mighty Soviet Union finally collapsed, leaving a peaceful and reasonable Russia
in its place.
And, while not generally noticed, there are many parallels between modern Israel and the
USSR.
You cannot go on proclaiming democracy when half the people you rule cannot even vote.
They could all vote in the USSR, but their votes meant nothing.
You cannot claim to represent our great Western values when oppression is an integral part
of your society.
Millions of prisoners cannot be kept without rights indefinitely. Only a tyranny such as
the USSR is capable even of attempting it.
But in the meantime, many must suffer terribly while the nightmarish events which
represent Israel's behavior play themselves out.
If you are willing to use brutality regularly to get your way, as the USSR did and as
Israel does, you can continue for quite a while, but not indefinitely.
I think this is not true. Only if the person puts interests of the other state above the interests of the home state
such behaviour can be qualified as the fifth column mentality.
Peter Beinart and the rest of the 'Goldstein-Big Brother' tagteam have a cynical hasbara
role to disguise the real fight, which is ending 'Jewish Kahanism'
Screw Anti-Zionism is not Anti-Semitism, the 'Zionists' are KAHANISTS
Peter Beinart's shtick of being a 'Liberal Kahanist' is just his way of conning America
while appearing respectable rather than being shunned
At time of Pollard's release, Fortress America was not completely dominated by
Israel
He was released in November, 2015, only 52 months ago. I don't believe that the Israeli
lobby was much weaker then.
He was release under parole in accordance with US law.
According to the Tel Aviv edited source, wikipedia, Rumsfeld,Cheney,Tenet,several former
sec. of defense, a bi-partisan group of US congressional leaders and members of the US
intelligence community, all opposed clemency for Pollard.
He deeply angered many top Americans, so clemency was not possible. Parole, however
was.
Pollard, I understand sold much information to other nations. Maybe if he had only stolen
information for Israel he could have gotten clemency.
Pollard tried to get asylum in the Israeli embassy in Washington DC, but was refused
entry. His Israeli handlers in Washington DC all fled the US within 24 hours after his
arrest
At the time of his arrest in 1985, Israeli power over Washington was far weaker than it is
today. America apparently still had some patriots at high levels at that time.
"The problem with statements like this is that their very utterance reveals the presence of
the strategically damaging assumption that Israel and Jews can be reasoned with on these
topics."
I am disinclined to relegate but a few to this kind of stricture. The issue not can a
Jewish person be reasoned with, but who has the ability to stand on disagreements that might
not be in line with the ambitions of the other. And certainly all indications are that Jews
can be reasoned with. I don't subscribe to a totalitarian view that this is an impossibility.
I will say what I have said since entering these discussions. Despite where one falls on
Israel's selection by God, they are still responsible for behaving as members of the larger
community and even God says so. In fact Israel should as an agent selected by God, if such be
the case, be the leading actor of responsible behavior. I have made that point before and
their I rest.
She should be responsible and accountable. In the same manner as Christians are
responsible and accountable in the countries in which they live. Those parameters do not in
any manner diminish one's special role or character.
In regards to the secular, the elected and appointed members of the the US represent the
interests of the US first and foremost – period. And they can certainly support
Israel's existence without denying her any sleight of her unique spiritual of scriptural
meaning. Her ability to leverage the three variables to her stead is more a reflection on the
weakness of US representatives to tackle each of those variables head on in relation to how
supports US policy. God is not going to be chagrined about telling Israel, she cannot merely
confiscate land as she wants. But that she must obey/abide by the rules that govern sovereign
states. The holocaust, real or manufactured does make room for running ruff shod over her
neighbors. There are processes by which she could press for more territory that are legal --
she should use that process.
The ability to reason requires the ability to stand against unreason and their in my view
is where the US simply fails. Can one reason with Israel, sure as long as one has the
backbone to stand.
__________________
My love and support for Israel in no manner condones violations of rules that in no manner
contradict spiritual or scriptural truth. And I am confident that includes abiding by the
rules of members states of the international community. No one need be a "jew worshiper" or
"worshiper of Israel" to support Israel or hold her accountable among the nation-state
community.
And no one has to become a Jew to support Israel or be a christian while there are deep
roots, the two are not the same by a long shot.
I remain steadfastly in support of her right to exist, self defense and that others have
no less a right than she. My original position from start to this moment and unlikely to
change.
That is key. The right of others to co-exist alongside Israel the issue. The state of
Israel, regardless of her standing with respect to scripture and christian ethos, as a
nation state she is bound by the same rules as other nation states.
The problem with statements like this is that their very utterance reveals the presence of
the strategically damaging assumption that Israel and Jews can be reasoned with on these
topics.
Even if that reason is by way of potential sanctions, boycotts, and other forms of
political and economic pressure.
The truth of the matter is that anyone who would theoretically be engaging with Israel, or
even the gentile groups that put various forms of pressure on Israel, absolutely has to be
well-educated in Judaism.
To know Judaism is to know that its core thesis is that Jews are not bound by the same
rules as other peoples and nations. It is to know that Judaism's core tenet is that Israel is
the only legitimate nation and therefore the only nation that is destined to survive. It is
to know that it is religiously incumbent on the Jews to not make concessions that would allow
any other nation to survive in the long term.
To know all of this is to come to the strategic conclusion that attempting to reason with
Israel in regard to playing by the rules is a failed effort before it begins. In fact, it
would do nothing more than to waste time and allow Israel an opportunity for further
deception toward its ultimate nation-destroying goals.
Instead, Israel and the wider Jewish nation must be dealt with on an open foundation of
their religiously expressed hostility to all other nations that includes their expressed
domination and genocide goals. Anything else allows them a certain degree of cover that
allows them to maneuver to our detriment.
Thank you for your exceptional and important work. Please allow me to suggest that you
back off a bit from referencing (and elevating) the manipulative term 'anti-Semitism'. It's a
tendentious phrase designed to stifle much-needed criticism and much-needed opposition to the
world's most coddled brand of political extremism.
'Anti-Semitic theory' promulgates the false notion that those of us (non-Jews) who reject
the depredations of Organized Jewry are spiritually deformed, mentally ill, or prone to
irrational acts of physical violence. This is a calculated libel.
Ironically, as pro-Zionist violence is embraced by Official Washington, verbal expressions
that are "too critical" of (lethal) Israeli policies–or which dare to explore the
destructive role of Zionist operatives inside Washington–are the kiss of political
death here in the Land of the Free.
Thou shalt not say that.
How did this happen?
Jewish-manufactured taboos have allowed the perpetrators of serial warfare to snatch
sensitivity points as Israeli missiles fly. This perverse mindset and oddball collection of
modern double-standards have turned the rule of law on its head. Common sense is also a
causality.
People should have the right to think whatever they want. The one red line that must never
be crossed however is initiating aggressive physical violence.
How simple. How appealing. How universal. How old fashioned.
How did we ever forget it?
(Political necessity?)
Indeed, Official Washington now does pretty much the opposite. Contemporary 'American'
leaders embrace (and vot to subsidize) serial Israeli warfare/expansion along with Israeli
ethnic cleansing. Meanwhile, far less powerful US citizens and political observers get
slammed for making mere utterances about Israeli ruthlessness and the Zionist domination of
Washington.
How much longer will these strange delusions last?
The term and multi-tiered concept marketed as 'anti-Semitism' is a deceptive misnomer.
This is no accident.
Where's the 'Jew' in 'anti-Semitism'?
It's missing. But why?
After all, 'anti-Semitism' is basically about one thing: anti-Jewishness.
Yet the J-word is missing.
Did someone forget?
Of course not. The Jews have removed 'Jew' from this manipulative term for a strategic
purpose.
Keep in mind that 'Semites' are a real (and diverse) collection of peoples. So are Semitic
languages which involve millions of mostly-Arab peoples who dwell in different countries,
speak various languages, and practice different religions.
Yet, 'anti-Semitism' in the West means only one thing: 'anti-Jewishness'.
And Jews–unlike 'Semites'–are one cohesive people who claim one exclusive
country with one supreme religion. And they also happen to play an exceedingly powerful role
throughout Europe and America.
So why the linguistic sleight-of-hand with 'anti-Semitism'?
After all, Semitic Arabs get no protection from charges involving 'anti-Semitism'. It's
all about Jews.
Why not call 'anti-Semitism' what it actually is?–'Jew hatred or Jews contempt'?
'Jew fatigue', perhaps?
That's because the shomers who safeguard Jewry don't want anti-Jewish sentiment to
be simple or comprehensible or (most importantly) made legitimate in any way
whatsoever.
After all, hate is a common emotion and it is routinely directed from high above at
certain unpopular groups, ideologies and 'bad' countries. Nothing wrong with that, right?
Not so fast.
Jewry has conflated 'anti-Semitism' with 'genocide' and 'white supremacy' (See: Hitler).
Very clever. This ramps up gentile guilt and Jewish untouchability.
Anti-Jewishness ('anti-Semitism') is therefore designed to be understood as a unique
mental disorder with unique political dangers. This is no small accomplishment,
especially when one considers that Jews aren't exactly the 'innocent victims' that they claim
to be.
Indeed, if anti-Jewish commentary ('anti-Semitic speech') was brought down to earth and
even permitted, this would undermine Israeli power inside America as well as the
effectiveness of the taboos and 'red flags' which have elevated 'anti-Semitism' into a
rarified class of evil–not to mention 'political tool' for it's handlers.
Indeed, without the special shield that 'anti-Semitic theory' accords Jews, they would be
subject to the same harsh criticism often accorded Arabs, Russians, Iranians, Germans or
Muslims.
So the Guardians of Zion have cooked up a theoretical framework to pretty-much prevents
all that. It serves them quite well.
Thus conceptual 'anti-Semitism' is a self-exonerating paradigm. This also empowers Israel
enormously.
Anti-Semitic theory injects voodoo Freudianism and Frankfurt School gobbledegook into all
Jewish historiography. In doing so, it establishes two dubious beachheads.
1) 'Anti-Semitism' is not about Jewish behavior, nor is 'anti-Semitism' about everyday
political and economic conflicts that involve the collective (and conflicting) interests of
Jews and gentiles. No siree. Not that!
Such a bilateral and down-to-earth view is unacceptable. It's far too simple, too
accessible– too empowering for the anti-Semitic rabble.
To truly comprehend 'anti-Semitism' requires the expertise of a psychiatrist (preferably
Jewish) or qualified 'expert'. Please check with the 'Jewish Studies' Dept. for further
information.
These scholars will cleanly explain the dark, hidden forces that drive the periodic
eruptions (pograms, genocides) involving political good (the Jew) and evil (the
'anti-Semite').
Thus 'anti-Semitic theory' communicates the view that Jewish power, Jewish abuse of power
and Jewish crypsis are 'myths and allegations' and not relevant to understanding anti-Jewish
sentiment among the evious goyim.
'Anti-Semitism'? It's all in your head! And those afflicted with it are suffering from
hidden conflicts in their hate-filled twisted minds! Hitler!
('Trust me', says the 'expert'. 'Would I lie about such a thing'?)
Once the kosher 'diagnosis' is established, 'Anti-Semitism' becomes a powerful and handy
political weapon. And they certainly know how to use it.
'Anti-Semitic theory' even flips overdue criticism of Zio-Israeli power into this:
'You people (goys) who have a grievance against God's chosen people are merely
jealous. Jews don't mean any harm. Their violence is all in self-defense.
'You are projecting your own pathetic feelings of inferiority. Your contempt for Jew[ish
conduct and beliefs] is a neurotic projection of your own pathologies.
'So don't muddy the waters with irrelevant references to wars in Europe and Russia and
now in the Middle East that have killed tens of millions.
'And certainly don't discuss the unimportant Jewish role in banking, finance,
immigration policies, education, law, entertainment and the manufacture of 'news'. All that
bigoted discourse is anti-Semitic propaganda and is irrelevant.
'We must strive to assure Jewish safety and Jewish survival.'
It is pretty funny, this "America is Israel, we are joined at hip" business, because a lot of
Israelis have dual citizenship with RUSSIA.
So, that is kind of like the East of Eden scenario, where two brothers have sex with the
same woman.
And no one knows who is the real father of the child.
Lunatics in the Dem Party have been screaming about RussiaGate, but meanwhile the same
lunatics are advising "mixing their seed" with that of Russians.
How ignorant can you get?
Furthermore, and extending the metaphor, as for dual loyalty, these congresspeople with
their "American IS Israel" shtick,such as Steny Hoyer, are all like bigamists. Two wives.
Hey, Steny, You can't be loyal to two wives.
And you can't be loyal to two countries.
The bigamist often would like the two wives to be friends.
That is a harem.
So, the American people are being treated like women in a harem -- occasionally "visited" by
the Congress for conjugal "congress," while occasionally Israel is visited for conjugal
"congress."
The American Congress is nothing more than a collection of bigamists trying to put
lipstick on this pig. They should be called out as such: Political bigamists.
@Fran
Taubman The US has been providing a safe and prosperous home for your ungrateful lot. And
yet, the Jews are seemingly not able to be loyal to a country of their dwelling because "next
year in Jerusalem" -- even if the majority of the Jews prefer to admire Jerusalem from a
distance.
It is not just the Jewish treasonous behavior towards the USA citizenry, which is so
repulsive. The problem is the subversive influence of the Lobby towards the western values at
large (such as the First Amendment, including the active suppression of factual information
that is unpleasant for the tribe) -- all while the holo-biz continues encouraging the whining
and wailing about special victimhood of the Jews. This does not work anymore. After
converting tens of thousands of Middle Eastern children into the bags of shredded meat in the
name of Eretz Israel and after supporting military the Kievan neo-Nazi, the Jewish State's
screeching about existential threat and some special dues that western world owes to the
Jewish tribe do not have any power anymore. It's over.
In addition, the cynicism, indecency, and the cruelty displayed by the Jews against
Palestinians, Arabs, and Russians have made the AIPAC, the ADL, and other mighty Jewish
organization into pariahs among decent people.
It has no sense to engage in name-calling ("all the fringe sick people on UNZ"). Look at a
mirror. Your tribe has lost the moral fiber. It does not help that the Jewish mythology
treats non-Jews as subhumans.
"These imbeciles perceive in US-Jews their own human distortion – and hate
themselves in projecting self-hate on a tiny minority within their degenerated
population."
-- Anja, why does this article about the pernicious influence of the Lobby made you so
hysterical? The "tiny minority" has decided to be loyal to the tribal Jewish interests on its
own volition. The tiny minority has a choice to relocate to its "promised land" and thus
leave the US alone. The parasitic and disloyal minority is not welcome by the decent
Americans, whereas the zionized degenerate in the US Congress do behave treasonously towards
the US citizenry. Just take Bolton, Pompeo, Schumer, and Pelosi with you.
Leave the US alone. Sort out your problems with your Arab cousins ((Ishmaels) on your own.
And, by the way, stop murdering the Middle Eastern children; this is a very bad behavior that
is not going to be forgotten by good people.
Israeli nukes were always our government's policy.
First off, Lot, given your passionate attachment to the Zionist Project, you need to be a
little clearer as to whom you are referring when you write "our" government.
Secondly, if you were referring to the policy of the US gov't, as you are no doubt aware,
JFK had several correspondences with David Ben Gurion in which he warned him against the
development of a nuclear program for fear of nuclear proliferation in the region. The issue was
so divisive that it led to DBG's resignation and JFK's demise.
@renfroHow about POTUS making a secret pledge to Israel? Clinton, Bush the younger, Obama,
and Trump have all signed letters pledging never to expose Israel's nuclear arsenal. At last
week's conference, Grant Smith outlined his efforts to stop this practice of subverting both
letter and spirit of US law. For starters, we should demand that all presidential candidates
pledge: No Secret Pledge to a (((Foreign))) Power.
U.S. foreign aid and the Israeli nuclear weapons program – Grant F. Smith
"It's the Benjamins Baby" -- money is everything to the Jew.
Israeli banks screw America – help US Jews to circumvent taxes
US MSM screw America – never tell the American people about it.
Media Blackout as Israel's Largest Banks Pay over $1 Billion in Fines for US Tax
Evasion Schemes
Israel's three largest banks -- Hapoalim Bank, Leumi Bank and Mizrahi Tefahot Bank -- have
all been ordered to pay record fines, which collectively are set to total over $1 billion, to
the U.S. government after the banks were found to have actively colluded with thousands of
wealthy Americans in massive tax-evasion schemes.
80% of the American people are serfs – living paycheck to paycheck – paying
interest on everything – receiving none back – actually, outright owning little of
value.
The American people have gotten extraordinarily tired of the demands, bullying, and blackmail
the American government has received from the fully nuclear armed, viciously apartheid,
theocracy which is what neo-nazi Israel has become in the 21st century.
And we have one word for you: enough!!
We will provide you no more American military to get slaughtered or maimed for life in the
process of "neutralizing" all your alleged existential threats in the Middle East. And of
course, as we both know, that includes all of your neighbors in the region.
And on top of that, sir, we would appreciate it greatly if the US government immediately
pull all financial and military aid from your country immediately, as all this aid is
completely illegal under the Symington Amendment.
We the people would like to see this accomplished and immediately, sir. The days of the
host/parasite relationship between the Us government and that of Israel may well be coming to
a very abrupt halt, and it is damn well about time, sir!!!
Sun comes up, Israel demands money. Sun goes down, Israel demands money. Moon waxes,
Israel demands money. Moon wanes, Israel demands money. Weather is sunny, Israel demands
money. Weather is rainy, Israel demands money. I sense a pattern here!
Even as President Donald Trump threatens to shut down the southern border, his
administration is quietly working on a plan to expand some forms of legal immigration into the
U.S.
Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, has been working for months on a
proposal that could increase the number of low- and high-skilled workers admitted to the
country annually, four people involved in the discussions told POLITICO.
The low-profile effort to allow more legal immigrants into the U.S. stands in stark contrast
to Trump's increasingly dramatic efforts to curb illegal immigration, an issue he speaks about
daily and describes as a national crisis. But Trump himself has publicly said he also supports
higher levels of legal immigration, a priority generally backed by a business community short
on skilled workers.
The effort began in January when Kushner started to convene a series of meetings with dozens
of advocacy groups, including business and agriculture organizations. Some, though not all of
them, openly support the expansion of legal immigration. It has continued in recent weeks with
a smaller four-person White House working group led by Kushner and could generate a proposal
for Congress by summer.
Trump personally tasked Kushner -- who successfully
forged a December compromise on criminal justice reform but is still struggling to deliver
a Middle East
peace plan -- with the priority of legal immigration. But it is a daunting challenge,
requiring legislation in an issue area that has confounded Congress in recent years.
In other words Russiagate was a smoke screen over Isrealgate...
Notable quotes:
"... Being a citizen of a country is not just an accident of birth. It requires loyalty to the interests of that country and to one's fellow citizens. ..."
"... The Lobby works assiduously to compel American government at all levels to adopt positions that are beneficial to Israel and almost invariably harmful to U.S. interests. Asserting that the two nations have nearly identical interests is little more than a fraud. ..."
"... Second, there is the claim that Israel benefits American security. That is also a lie. Washington's relationship with Israel, which is now more subservient than it ever has been, is a major liability that is and always has been damaging to both American regional and global interests. ..."
"... Former CIA Deputy Director Admiral Bobby Inman has also rejected the claim that Israel is a security asset by observing that "Israeli spies have done more harm and have damaged the United States more than the intelligence agents of all other countries on earth combined. They are the gravest threat to our national security." ..."
"... Israel and AIPAC have relentlessly pursued their agenda while also corrupting the Congress of the United States to support the Israeli government with money and political cover. ..."
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has just completed its annual summit in Washington. It claims that 18,000
supporters attended the event, which concluded with a day of lobbying Congress by the attendees. Numerous American politicians addressed
the gathering and it is completely reasonable to observe that the meeting constituted the most powerful gathering of people dedicated
to promoting the interests of a foreign nation ever witnessed in any country in the history of the world.
There are a number of things that one should understand about the Jewish state of Israel and its powerful American domestic lobby.
First of all, the charge that the actions of The Lobby (referred to with capital letters because of its uniqueness and power) inevitably
involves dual or even singular allegiance based on religion or tribe to a country where the lobbyist does not actually reside is
completely correct by definition of what AIPAC is and why it exists. It
claims to work to "ensure that the Jewish state is safe, strong
and secure" through "foreign aid, government partnerships, [and] joint anti-terrorism efforts ," all of which involve the U.S. as
the donor and Israel as the recipient.
Being a citizen of a country is not just an accident of birth. It requires loyalty to the interests of that country and to one's
fellow citizens. No two countries have identical interests, something that is particularly true when one is considering Israel, an
ethno-religious autocracy, and the United States, where The Lobby works assiduously to compel American government at all levels to
adopt positions that are beneficial to Israel and almost invariably harmful to U.S. interests. Asserting that the two nations have
nearly identical interests is little more than a fraud.
Second, there is the claim that Israel benefits American security. That is also a lie. Washington's relationship with Israel,
which is now more subservient than it ever has been, is a major liability that is and always has been damaging to both American regional
and global interests. The recent decisions to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan
Heights were ill-conceived and have been condemned by the world community, including by nearly all of America's genuine close allies.
The harm done by the Israeli connection to policy formulation in Washington and to U.S. troops based in the Middle East has been
noted both by Admiral Thomas Moorer and General David Petraeus, with Moorer decrying how
"If the American people understood what
a grip those people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens certainly don't have any idea what goes
on."
Petraeus complained to a Senate Committee that U.S. favoritism towards Israel puts American soldiers based in the Middle East
at risk. He was quickly forced to recant, however.
Former CIA Deputy Director Admiral Bobby Inman has also rejected the claim that Israel is a security asset by observing that "Israeli
spies have done more harm and have damaged the United States more than the intelligence agents of all other countries on earth combined.
They are the gravest threat to our national security." Inman was referring to American Jewish spy Jonathan Pollard, who stole for
Israel an entire roomful of the most highly classified defense information. Israeli spies, including current Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu and Hollywood movie producer Arnon Milchan, also participated in the systematic theft of weapons grade uranium and nuclear
triggers in the 1960s so Israel could secretly create a nuclear weapons arsenal. The FBI, for its part, in its annual counterintelligence
report, consistently identifies Israel as the "friendly" country that spies most persistently against the U.S. FBI Agents have testified
that there are very few prosecutions of the swarms of Israeli spies due to
"political pressure."
Third, there is the myth that the United States and Israel have "shared values," which is meant to imply that both are liberal
democracies where freedom and human rights prevail, beacons of light offering enlightened leadership in a world where tyranny threatens
at every turn. This was stressed in the opening remarks last weekend by AIPAC Executive Director Howard Kohr, who
described Israel as "A nation always striving
to be better, more just and true to the message of its founders, a nation dedicated to freedom of religion for people of all faiths.
We do our work for all to see. What unites our pro-Israel movement is the passion for bringing American and Israel closer for the
benefit of both and the benefit of all. We look like America because we are America."
Kohr is, of course, preaching to an audience that wants desperately to believe what he says in spite of what they have been able
to see with their own eyes in the media when it dares to publish a story criticizing Israel. Jewish hypocrisy about one standard
for Israel and Jews plus another standard for everyone else operates pretty much out in the open if one knows where to look. Zionist
Organization of America's Morton Klein, who once tweeted regarding a "filthy Arab,"
was interviewed
by journalist Nathan Thrall and asked why he believed it was "utterly racist and despicable" to support a "white nationalist" ethnic
group but not racist for Israel to do the same. He responded "Israel is a unique situation. This is really a Jewish state given to
us by God. God did not create a state for white people or for black people." Senator Charles Schumer, the Democratic minority leader,
who calls himself the Senate's "shomer" or guardian for American Jews, had a slightly different take on it: "Of course, we say it's
our land, the Torah says it, but they don't believe in the Torah. So that's the reason there is not peace."
But Kohr, Klein and Schumer all know as well as anyone that Israeli Jews, fortified by their conceit of being a "Chosen people,"
are not interchangeable with contemporary Americans, or at least not "like" the Americans who still care about their country. There
are hundreds of mostly Jewish pro-Israel organizations in America, having a
combined
endowment of $16 billion, that are actively propagandizing and promoting Israeli interests by ignoring or lying about the downside
of the relationship. The University of Michigan affiliate of the Hillel International campus organization alone has a multistory
headquarters supported by a budget of $2 million and a staff of 15. It hosts an emissary of the Jewish Agency for Israel, an Israeli
government supported promotional enterprise.
So, what is the meaning of the "American" in AIPAC? Requiring a religious-ethnic litmus test for full citizenship and rights is
Israeli, not American. Having local government admissions committees that can bar Israeli-Palestinian citizens based on "social suitability"
would not be acceptable to most Americans. Demanding a unique Israeli right to exist while denying it to Israel's neighbors; demolishing
homes while poisoning Palestinian livestock and destroying orchards; shooting children for throwing stones; and inflicting death,
terror and deprivation upon the imprisoned people of Gaza are all everyday common practice for the Israeli government.
Israel and AIPAC have relentlessly pursued their agenda while also corrupting the Congress of the United States to support the
Israeli government with money and political cover. Israel and friends like Kohr routinely make baseless charges of anti-Semitism
against critics while also legislating against free-speech to eliminate any and all criticism. This drive to make Israel uniquely
free from any critique has become the norm in the United States, but it is a norm driven by Israeli interests and Israel's friends,
most of whom are Jewish billionaires or Jewish organizations that meet regularly and discuss what they might do to benefit the Jewish
state.
And the fourth big lie is that the American people support Israel on religious as well as cultural grounds, not because mostly
Jewish money has corrupted our political system and media. Indeed, many Christian fundamentalists have various takes on what Israel
means, but their influence is limited. The Israel-thing is Jewish in all ways that matter and its sanitized Exodus -version
that has been sold to the public is essentially a complete fraud nurtured by the media, also Jewish controlled, by Hollywood, and
by the Establishment.
"This weekend the New York Timesbreaks
one of the biggest taboos , describing the responsibility of Jewish donors for the Democratic Party's slavish support for
Israel. Nathan Thrall's groundbreaking piece repeats a lot of data we've reported here and says in essence that it really is about
the Benjamins, as Rep. Ilhan Omar said so famously. The donor class of the party is overwhelmingly Jewish, and Jews are still
largely wed to Zionism– that's the nut." Ben Rhodes, a former deputy national-security adviser to ex-President Barack Obama recounted
in the article how "a more assertive policy toward Israel" never evolved "The Washington view of Israel-Palestine is still shaped
by the [Jewish] donor class."
And the support for Israel goes beyond money. The Times article included an October 2018
"Survey of 800 American voters who identify as Jewish, conducted by the Mellman Group on behalf of the Jewish Electoral Institute,
92 percent said that they are 'generally pro-Israel.' In the same poll -- conducted after the United States closed the Palestinian
diplomatic mission in Washington, moved the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, appointed a fund-raiser for the
settlements as U.S. ambassador and cut humanitarian aid to Palestinians -- roughly half of American Jews said they approved of
President Trump's handling of relations with Israel. On what is considered the most divisive issue in U.S.-Israel relations, the
establishment of Israeli settlements in the West Bank,
a November
2018 post-midterm election poll of more than 1,000 American Jews that was commissioned by J Street, the pro-Israel lobby aligned
with Democrats, found that roughly half said the expansion of settlements had no impact on how they felt about Israel.
According
to a 2013 Pew survey , 44 percent of Americans and 40 percent of American Jews believe that Israel was given to the Jewish
people by God, [a] fact that Jews believe they have rights in historic Palestine that non-Jews do not."
And one only has to listen to the AIPAC speeches made by leading members of the U.S. government establishment to appreciate the
essential hypocrisy over the U.S. wag-the-dog relationship with the Jewish state of Israel. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer
led the parade of Democrats on the first evening of AIPAC, thundering "When someone accuses American supporters of Israel of
dual loyalty, I say: Accuse me, I am part of a large, bipartisan coalition in Congress supporting Israel -- an overwhelming majority
of the United States Congress. I tell Israel's accusers and detractors: Accuse me."
Well, Steny there is a certain irony in your request and to be sure you should be accused over betrayal of your oath to uphold
the constitution against all enemies "domestic and foreign." Hoyer is a product of the heavily Jewish Maryland Democratic Party machine
that has also produced Pelosi and Senator Ben Cardin. Pelosi
told the AIPAC audience about her father in
Baltimore, a so-called Shabbos goy who would perform services for Jews on the sabbath and who would also speak Yiddish while
at home with his Italian family. Cardin meanwhile has been the sponsor of legislation to make criticism or boycotting of Israel illegal,
up to and including heavy fines and prison time.
Hoyer, widely regarded as one of the most pro-Israel non-Jewish congressman, also boasted to AIPAC about the 15 official trips
to Israel he's made in forty years in Congress, accompanied by more than 150 fellow Democrats. "This August, I will travel with what
I expect will be our largest delegation ever -- probably more than 30 Democratic members of Congress, including many freshmen."
Steny Hoyer will be on an AIPAC affiliate sponsored trip in which any contact with Palestinians will be both incidental and carefully
managed. He also clearly has no problem in spending the taxpayer's dime to go to Israel on additional "codels" to get further propagandized.
He is flat out wrong about Israel in general, but don't expect him to be convinced otherwise, which may be somehow related to the
$317,525 in pro-Israel PAC contributions
he has received.
There was much more at the AIPAC Summit. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denounced "the pernicious myth of dual loyalty and foreign
allegiance" while Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, fresh from selling out U.S. interests on a visit to Israel,
declared that "We live in dangerous times.
We have to speak the truth. Anti-Semitism should and must be rejected by all decent people. Anti-Semitism – anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism,
and any nation that espouses anti-Zionism, like Iran, must be confronted. We must defend the rightful homeland of the Jewish people."
Vice President Mike Pence, like Pompeo an evangelical Christian, piled on in his Monday prime time speech,
declaring that "Anyone who aspires to the highest office of the land should not be afraid to stand with the strongest supporters
of Israel in America. It is wrong to boycott Israel. It is wrong to boycott AIPAC. Anti-Semitism has no place in the Congress of
the United States of America. Anyone who slanders this historic alliance between the United States and Israel should never have a
seat on the Foreign Affairs Committee."
Clearly, there is considerable evidence to support the theory that one has to be completely ignorant to hold high office in the
United States. Rejecting Zionism and/or questioning Israeli policies is not anti-Semitism and the Jewish state is in fact no actual
ally of the United States. Nor is there any mandate to defend it in its questionable "rightful homeland." Furthermore, dual-loyalty
is what the relationship with Israel is all about and it is Jewish money and political power that makes the whole thing work to Israel's
benefit.
But the good news is that all the lying blather from the likes of Steny Hoyer and Howard Kohr reveals their desperation. They
are running scared because "the times they are a changing." Sure, Congressmen will continue to be bought and sold and Jewish money
and the access to power that it buys will be able to prevail in the short term in a conspiratorial fashion. But, in the long run,
everyone knows deep down that loyalty to Israel is not loyalty to the United States. And what Israel is doing is evil, as is becoming
increasingly clear. It is trying to convince Washington to make war on Iran, a country that does not threaten the U.S., while the
willingness of the American people to continue to look the other way as Benjamin Netanyahu uses army snipers to shoot down unarmed
demonstrators who are starving will not continue indefinitely. It must not continue and we Americans should do whatever it takes
to stop it.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational
foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is[email protected].
Israel is running America into the ground, wrecking Europe and trying to start a war with
Russia. America needs to cut all aid and get away from the nasty little cancer before they
finish the Job and start WW3!
@A123 Palestinain Mandate and Palestine are historically 2 completely separate
entities.
But Jews have a knack of conflating and presenting the mess as the reality that you and me
have to respect. No, we don't.
Long time ago Israel started giving biblical names to certain areas of Palestine to make it
appealing to the ignoramus leaders among the Bible thumping Western crowd of 1900.
It was planted as religious historical archeological realities with deeply emotional arc
that bound lefties conservatives religion secular educated uneducated, local fellow
international citizen and spliced together vast segmented stratified minds of western society
to one theme – positive view about Jew and Zionism-on the sly.
It succeeded. But that success is an abomination. It is travesty, it is moral and
intellectual and ethical failures of western education and politics. it is a dereliction of
academic responsibility .
Now the tide is against the presence of intellectual dishonesty . BDS is part of that , so
is the truth being forced on Democrats voters . Chasm is widening with raw edges .
Conservatives still cling to the old charade at a cost . It hurts them BY allowing continued
presence of the disastrous Zionist views on each and every aspect of their lives, they lose-
religion,economy,society , and values. . It robs them a safe a prosperous future .
"... She suggests, "Kushner was increasingly caught up in his own mythology. He was the president's son-in-law, so he apparently thought he was untouchable." (Pg. 114) She notes, "allowing Kushner to work in the administration broke with historical precedent, overruling a string of Justice Department memos that concluded it was illegal for presidents to appoint relatives as White House staff." (Pg. 119) ..."
"... She observes, "Those first few days were chaotic for almost everyone in the new administration. A frantic Reince Priebus would quickly discover that it was impossible to impose any kind of order in this White House, in large part because Trump didn't like order. What Trump liked was having people fight in front of him and then he'd make a decision, just like he'd made snap decisions when his children presented licensing deals for the Trump Organization. This kind of dysfunction enabled a 'floater' like Kushner, whose job was undefined, to weigh in on any topic in front of Trump and have far more influence than he would have had in a top-down hierarchy." (Pg. 125) ..."
Author Vicky Ward wrote in the Prologue to this 2019 book, "Donald Trump
was celebrating being sworn in as president And the whole world knew that his daughter and
son-in-law were his most trusted advisers, ambassadors, and coconspirators. They were an
attractive couple---extremely wealthy and, now, extraordinarily powerful. Ivanka looked like
Cinderella Ivanka and her husband swept onto the stage, deftly deflecting attention from Donald
Trump's clumsy moves, as she had done do often over the past twenty years. The crowd roared in
approval They were now America's prince and princess."
She notes, "Jared Kushner learned about the company [his father's] he would later run. Jared
was the firm's most sheltered trainee. On his summer vacations, he'd go to work at Kushner
Companies construction sites, maybe painting a few walls, more often sitting and listening to
music No one dared tell him this probably would not give him a deep understanding of the
construction process. But Charlie [Jared's father] doggedly groomed his eldest son for
greatness, seeing himself as a Jewish version of Joseph Kennedy " (Pg. 17-18)
She states, "Ivanka had to fight for her father's attention and her ultimate role as the
chief heir in his real estate empire When Donald Trump divorced her mother, Ivana she would go
out of her way to see more of her father, not less she'd call him during the day and to her
delight, he'd always take her call. (Trump's relationship with the two sons he had with Ivana,
Don Jr. and Eric, was not nearly so close for years.) 'She was always Daddy's little girl,'
said a family friend." (Pg. 32-33) She adds, "As Ivanka matured, physically and emotionally,
her father talked openly about how impressed he was with her appearance---a habit he has
maintained to this day." (Pg. 35)
She recounts, "at a networking lunch thrown by a diamond heir Jared was introduced to Ivanka
Jared and Ivanka quickly became an intriguing gossip column item. They seemed perfectly matched
But after a year of dating, they split in part because Jared's parents were dismayed at the
idea of their son marrying outside the faith Soon after, Ivanka agreed to convert to Judaism
Trump was said to be discombobulated by the enormity of what his daughter had done. Trump, a
Presbyterian, who strikes no one as particularly religious, was baffled by his daughter's
conversion 'Why should my daughter convert to marry anyone?'" (Pg. 51-53)
She observes, "Ivanka Trump was critical in promoting her husband as the smoother, softer
counterpart to his father's volatility.. they could both work a room, ask after people's
children, talk without notes, occasionally fake a sense of humor And unlike her husband, she
seemed to have a ready command of figures and a detail, working knowledge of all the properties
she was involved in Ivanka seemed to control the marital relationship, but she also played the
part of devoted, traditional Orthodox wife." (Pg. 70-71)
Of 2016, she states, "No one thought Kushner or Ivanka believed in Trump's populist
platform. 'The two of them see this as a networking opportunity,' said a close associate.
Because Kushner and Ivanka only fully immersed themselves in Trump's campaign once he became
the presumptive Republican nominee they had to push to assert themselves with the campaign
staff Kushner quickly got control of the campaign's budget, but he did not have as much
authority as he would have liked." (Pg. 74-75) She adds, "Ivanka appeared thrilled by her
husband's rising prominence in her father's campaign. It was a huge change from the days when
Trump had made belittling jokes about him. If Don Jr. and Eric were irked by the new favorite
in Trump's court, they did not show it publicly." (Pg. 85)
She points out, "Trump tweeted an image [Hillary with a backdrop of money and a Star of
David] widely viewed as anti-Semitic an 'Observer' writer, criticized Kushner in his own
newspaper for standing 'silent and smiling in the background' while Trump made 'repeated
accidental winks' to white supremacists Kushner wrote a response [that] insisted that Trump was
neither anti-Semitic nor a racist Not all of Kushner's relatives appreciated his efforts to
cover Trump's pandering to white supremacists." (Pg. 86-87) Later, she adds, "U.S.-Israel
relations was the one political issue anyone in the campaign ever saw Kushner get worked up
about." (Pg. 96)
On election night, "Kushner was shocked that Trump never mentioned him in his speech and
would later tell people he felt slighted. He was going to find a way to get Trump to notice him
more. Ivanka would help him the couple would become known as a single, powerful entity:
'Javanka.'" (Pg. 101) She suggests, "Kushner was increasingly caught up in his own mythology.
He was the president's son-in-law, so he apparently thought he was untouchable." (Pg. 114) She
notes, "allowing Kushner to work in the administration broke with historical precedent,
overruling a string of Justice Department memos that concluded it was illegal for presidents to
appoint relatives as White House staff." (Pg. 119)
She observes, "Those first few days were chaotic for almost everyone in the new
administration. A frantic Reince Priebus would quickly discover that it was impossible to
impose any kind of order in this White House, in large part because Trump didn't like order.
What Trump liked was having people fight in front of him and then he'd make a decision, just
like he'd made snap decisions when his children presented licensing deals for the Trump
Organization. This kind of dysfunction enabled a 'floater' like Kushner, whose job was
undefined, to weigh in on any topic in front of Trump and have far more influence than he would
have had in a top-down hierarchy." (Pg. 125)
She recounts, "Another epic [Steve] Bannon/Ivanka fight came when bannon was in the Oval
Office dining room while Trump was watching TV and eating his lunch Ivanka marched in, claiming
Bannon had leaked H.R. McMaster's war plan [Bannon said] 'No, that was leaked by McMaster '
Trump [told her], 'Hey, baby, I think Steve's right on this one ' Bannon thought he would be
fired on the spot. But he'd learned something important: much as Trump loved his daughter and
hated saying no to her, he was not always controlled by her." (Pg. 138-139)
She notes, "[Ivanka] also found a way to be near Trump when he received phone calls from
foreign dignitaries -- while she still owned her business. While Ivanka's behavior was
irritating, Kushner was playing a game on a whole different level: he was playing for serious
money at the time of the Qatari blockade Kushner's family had been courting the Qataris for
financial help and had been turned town. When that story broke the blockade and the Trump
administration's response to it suddenly all made sense." (Pg. 156)
Arguing that "Kushner was behind the decision to fire [FBI Director James] Comey" (Pg.
163-164), "Quickly, Trump realized he'd made an error, and blamed Kushner. It seemed clear to
Trump's advisers, and not for the first time, that he wished Kushner were not in the White
House. He said to Kushner in front of senior staff, 'Just go back to New York, man '" (Pg. 167)
She adds, "[Ivanka's] reluctance to speak frankly to her father was the antithesis of the story
she had been pushing in the media Ivanka had told Gayle King 'Where I disagree with my father,
he knows it. And I express myself with total candor.'" (Pg. 170)
She states, "at the Group of 20 summit in Germany she briefly took her father's seat when he
had to step out The gesture seemed to send the message that the U.S. government was now run on
nepotism." (Pg. 182)
E-mails from George Nader [an adviser to Shiekh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the crown
prince of Abu Dhabi] "made it clear that Kushner's friends in the Gulf mocked him behind his
back Nader wrote 'Nobody would even waste a cup of coffee on him if it wasn't for who he was
married to.'" (Pg. 206)
She points out, "since October 2017, hundreds of children had been taken from their parents
while attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border and detained separately news shows everywhere
showed heartbreaking images of young children being detained. The next month, Ivanka posted on
Instagram a photograph of herself holding her youngest child in his pajamas. Not for the first
time, her tone-deaf social media post was slammed as being isolated in her elitist, insulated
wealthy world On June 20, Trump signed an executive order that apparently ended the border
separations. Minutes later, Ivanka finally spoke publicly on the issue Her tactic here was tell
the public you care about an issue; watch silently while your father does the exact opposite;
and when he moves a little, take all the credit." (Pg. 225)
She asserts, "Kushner's friendship with a Saudi crown prince was now under widespread
scrutiny [because] Rather than expressing moral outrage over the cold-blooded murder of an
innocent man [Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi], Kushner did what he always does in a crisis:
he went quiet." (Pg. 232)
She concludes, "Ivanka Trump has made no secret of the fact that she wants to be the most
powerful woman in the world. Her father's reign in Washington, D.C., is, she believes, the
beginning of a great American dynasty Ivanka has been carefully positioning herself as
[Trump's] political heir " (Pg. 236)
While not as "scandalous" as the book's subtitle might suggest, this is a very interesting
book that will be of great interest to those wanting information about these crucial members of
the Trump family and presidency.
"... "If true, these new reports raise grave questions about what derogatory information career officials obtained about Mr. Kushner to recommend denying him access to our nation's most sensitive secrets, why President Trump concealed his role in overruling that recommendation, why [former White House chief of staff John] Kelly and [former White House counsel Don] McGahn both felt compelled to document these actions, and why your office is continuing to withhold key documents and witnesses from this Committee," wrote Cummings. ..."
"... Since then, the White House has yet to release the documents, and Kushner has come under further scrutiny for allegedly discussing sensitive government matters over WhatsApp and private email. Cummings wrote another letter demanding documents related to Kushner's communication practices on March 21, 2019, threatening to subpoena if the White House fails to comply by April 1. ..."
"... During his period with top-security clearance, the President's son-in-law had access to the nation's most sensitive information. Like President Trump, Kushner did not put his assets in a blind trust, and he retains extensive real estate properties and substantial ownership of Kushner companies. Kushner Companies sought investment from Qatar in the family's heavily indebted 666 Fifth Avenue property (which has since been rescued by Brookfield Properties), which the Qataris denied, weeks before the Saudi and UAE blockade on the nation. ..."
"... In February 2019, a report titled "Whistleblowers Raise Grave Concerns with Trump Administration's Efforts to Transfer Sensitive Nuclear Technology to Saudi Arabia," House Democrats detailed a push by top Trump officials, including Kushner, to give Saudi Arabia technology to build nuclear power plants. According to the Intercept , the Saudi crown prince boasted to the Emirati prince he had Kushner "in his pocket." ..."
"... Although it appears Kushner may no longer have to worry about the Mueller investigation, the President's son-in law's financial conflicts of interest and foreign policy inexperience make him a dangerous liability to the national security of the United States, and evidence indicates he will remain under the scrutiny of the House Oversight Committee for the foreseeable future. ..."
Jared Kushner Called Before Senate
Intelligence Committee
"If
true, these new reports raise grave questions about what derogatory information career officials obtained about
Mr. Kushner to recommend denying him access to our nation's most sensitive secrets."
On March 28, 2019, the Senate Intelligence
Committee called President Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner for a closed-door meeting. It
was Kushner's second meeting in front of the panel, having previously testified about his contacts with
Russians during the 2016 campaign in July, 2017.
Kushner has faced intense media scrutiny since his
nomination, as the 38-year-old real estate developer and investor held no prior foreign policy experience at
the time President Trump designated him as the administration's Middle East emissary. His failure to disclose
numerous encounters with Russians he made during Trump's campaign, such as Russian Ambassador
Sergey Kislyak
and banker
Sergei Gorkov
, fueled suspicions of collusion that have plagued his tenure.
It is unknown what was discussed in Kushner's most
recent meeting with the Senate Intelligence Committee, but he later expressed hope the Mueller probe's
conclusion would put an end to the suspicions. After his meeting with the Congressional Committee, Kushner gave
Axios
a statement:
"Today I voluntarily
answered follow up questions with the Senate Committee on Intelligence to help them complete their
investigation. Which they said would be soon. I hope my cooperation will help the country get the transparency
it deserves and puts an end to these baseless accusations. It is time for Congress to complete its work, move
on, and to turn its attention to the real problems facing Americans every day."
Jared Kushner's Access to Government Intel
Raises Alarm
Intelligence and White House officials have
expressed concern about granting Kushner access to government secrets in lieu of his failure to disclose his
meetings with foreign contacts in his clearance application.
Reports
that President Trump ordered his then-Chief of Staff, John Kelly, to override the misgivings of
senior officials and approve Kushner's security clearance led to the House Oversight Committee demanding the
White House release documents related to the clearances of top advisors. The committee's chairman,
Representative Elijah Cummings (D-MD), wrote a
letter
to White House counsel Pat Cipollone, ordering the documents to be handed over by March 4, 2019.
"If true, these new
reports raise grave questions about what derogatory information career officials obtained about Mr. Kushner to
recommend denying him access to our nation's most sensitive secrets, why President Trump concealed his role in
overruling that recommendation, why [former White House chief of staff John] Kelly and [former White House
counsel Don] McGahn both felt compelled to document these actions, and why your office is continuing to
withhold key documents and witnesses from this Committee," wrote Cummings.
Since then, the White House has yet to release the
documents, and Kushner has come under further scrutiny for allegedly discussing sensitive government matters
over WhatsApp and private email. Cummings
wrote another
letter demanding documents related to Kushner's communication practices on March 21, 2019,
threatening to subpoena if the White House fails to comply by April 1.
During his period with top-security clearance, the
President's son-in-law had access to the nation's most sensitive information. Like President Trump, Kushner
did not
put his assets in a blind trust, and he retains extensive real estate properties and substantial
ownership of Kushner companies. Kushner Companies
sought investment
from Qatar in the family's heavily indebted 666 Fifth Avenue property (which has since
been
rescued
by Brookfield Properties), which the Qataris denied, weeks before the Saudi and UAE blockade on the
nation.
Jared Kushner's Cozy Relationship with Saudi
Arabia, MBS
Kushner's financial conflicts of interest lead to
serious national security concerns. Kushner has maintained a close relationship with Saudi Crown Prince
Mohammed bin Salman, whom he allegedly messages directly over
WhatsApp
.
In February 2019, a
report
titled "Whistleblowers Raise Grave Concerns with Trump Administration's Efforts to Transfer
Sensitive Nuclear Technology to Saudi Arabia," House Democrats detailed a push by top Trump officials,
including Kushner, to give Saudi Arabia technology to build nuclear power plants. According to the
Intercept
, the Saudi crown prince boasted to the Emirati prince he had Kushner "in his pocket."
In the
report
, the whistleblowers stated, "Strong private commercial interests have been pressing aggressively for
the transfer of highly sensitive nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia." Around the same time, Brookfield Asset
Management made a deal with the Kushner's to bail out the underwater 666 Fifth Avenue property; Brookfield
announced the $4.6 billion purchase of Westinghouse Electric, a bankrupt nuclear power company. Westinghouse
Electric has previously
sought bids
to develop atomic energy in the Saudi kingdom.
Although it appears Kushner may no
longer have to worry about the Mueller investigation, the President's son-in law's financial conflicts of
interest and foreign policy inexperience make him a dangerous liability to the national security of the United
States, and evidence indicates he will remain under the scrutiny of the House Oversight Committee for the
foreseeable future.
Russiagate may be done but thats because it was defined improperly. Sometimes it helps to
look back to get a big picture perspective
Starting in 1999, Putin enlisted two oligarchs Lev Leviev and Roman Abramovich, who would
go on to become Chabad's biggest patrons worldwide, to create the Federation of Jewish
Communities of Russia under the leadership of Chabad rabbi Berel Lazar, who would come to be
known as "Putin's rabbi."
Roman Abramovich is the owner of the Chelsea Football Club of the English Premier League.
He was a victor (along with Paul Manafort's patron Oleg Deripaska) in the aluminum wars of
the 1990s and reportedly the person who convinced Boris Yeltsin that Putin would be a proper
successor.
Ivanka Trump is very close friends with Abramovich's wife , Dasha Zhukova. Zhukova
reportedly attended the inauguration as Ivanka's personal guest. Leviev is the one with the
closest links to the Trumps and Israel
It starts with Bayrock . This is the company that Donald Trump teamed up with to build his
Trump Soho project. There were three main actors . One was convicted mob associate and FBI
informant Felix Sater. Another was Tevfik Arif, a likely Russian intelligence connection who
was once was arrested by the Turks . The third was the late Tamir Sapir, another man with
ties to Russian intelligence.
The late billionaire Tamir Sapir, was born in the Soviet state of Georgia. Trump has
called Sapir "a great friend." In December 2007, he hosted the wedding of Sapir's daughter,
Zina, at Mar-a-Lago. The groom, Rotem Rosen, was the CEO of the American branch of Africa
Israel, the Putin oligarch Leviev's holding company, and known as Leviev's right hand
man.
As mentioned Leviev was one of two oligarch's who Putin had establish the "Federation of
Jewish Communities of Russia" under the leadership of Chabad rabbi Berel Lazar, who would
come to be known as 'Putin's rabbi.'" Sater, Sapier, Jared, Ivanka are all Chabad members
and/or donors
Trump had business discussions in Moscow in 2013 about Moscow real estate projects with
Agalarovs, Alex Sapir (son of Tamir Sapir, brother of Zina, and brother-in-law of Rotem
Rosen.) and Rotem Rosen, a pair of New York-based Russian . This may also have been discussed
during the June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower that was attended by Kushner, Manafort and Donald
Trump Jr and a Russian lawyer associated with Fusion GPS (Steele dossier) and the Leviev
linked Prevezon
Agalarov is a Moscow-based property developer who had won major contracts from Putin's
government. He hosted Trump's 2013 Miss Universe contest at his concert hall in Moscow. He
orchestrated the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting and formed a new American shell company a
month beforehand with the help of the Russian lawyer who attended the meeting.
In 2015, Kushner and his family business, Kushner Cos., bought a portion of the New
York Times building on West 43rd Street from Russian /Israeli real estate billionaire Lev
Leviev for $295M, where $285M was borrowed from Deutsche Bank to complete the transaction,
despite the 666 albatross hanging over Kushners head
Deutsche Bank and two companies tied to Leviev, Africa Israel Investments and Prevezon,
have all recently been the subject of money laundering investigations. A laundering case
against Prevezon was settled two months after Trump fired Bharara, with a $6M slap on the
wrist settlement that raised some eyebrows.
As for 666, Kushner gets bailed out by Brookfield who has Qatar as its 2nd largest
investor. But consider that at the same time they did this deal they also acquired
Westinghouse Electric, a nuclear power company. Now members of the Trump administration
propose selling nuclear power plants to Saudi Arabia. Interesting.
Can't seem to find a Putin/Russian oligarch connection although that's probably due to the
fact you can't use anonymous shell companies to buy property in NYC any longer due to new
rules by FinCEN
But so many conflict of interests here, Israel, China, Saudis, Russian oligarchs, etc
and virtually no oversight or transparency. With twitter being used to manipulate markets
one has to imagine rampant insider trading as well (hey guys, my tweets going out at 3 pm,
get your trades in and remember my 5%).
Grey prostitute usually adopts pro-isreal position as for Iran deal. no suprose here. Why
Trump admnistration did the same is an interesting question. Is this Kushner influnce? is this
Trump jewesh ficnacier influnce? or Both?
Notable quotes:
"... As a nonproliferation agreement, the JCPOA continues to work as intended despite the active sabotage of the Trump administration. That is a testament to the value of the agreement and to the overwhelming international consensus in favor of it. The U.S. has stupidly and unnecessarily broken with that consensus for the sake of its obsession with hostility towards Iran. ..."
tries to claim
that reneging on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has been good for the U.S.:
It's been nearly a year since Donald Trump made the decision to withdraw from the Iran
nuclear deal, to loud cries that it would bring nothing but woe to the United States and our
interests in the Middle East.
So far, the result has been closer to the opposite.
Nuclear deal opponents always argue in bad faith, and Stephens' latest column is no
exception. For starters, virtually no one said that reneging on the deal would bring "nothing
but woe." It was nonetheless an irrational, costly decision whose costs continue to add up as
time goes by. Some of the worst-case scenarios have not yet happened, but reneging on the deal
has done nothing but harm U.S. interests and our relations with major allies. No one can point
to any real gains for the U.S., and even by the Trump administration's own standards their Iran
policy has failed to achieve anything. U.S. relations with European allies have come under
significant strain, and their determination to sustain the deal has led them to create
workarounds to allow legitimate trade with Iran to continue. Pressuring Iraq to join the
anti-Iran sanctions has likewise strained relations with Baghdad and contributed to the
backlash against the U.S. there.
Stephens applauds the damage that the reimposition of U.S. sanctions is doing to Iran's
economy, but inflicting pain for its own sake is pointless cruelty. The U.S. gains nothing from
this, and it imposes enormous costs on the Iranian people who bear most of the burden. The
sanctions were originally created to pressure Iran into making the concessions on the nuclear
issue that they have made. The sanctions cannot do anything except inflict damage on Iran's
economy because Iran's government is already doing the things that were required to get them
lifted. Strangling Iran's economy doesn't make the U.S. any safer, but it does make us seem
treacherous and underhanded in our dealings with other states. Reneging on the JCPOA has
inflicted diplomatic and political costs on the U.S. that make it more difficult for any other
government to trust ours to honor its side of agreements, and it has made a mockery of our
government's commitment to nonproliferation.
It needs to be emphasized here that all of the costs of reneging on the deal are purely
self-inflicted. The president pandered to the ideologues and hard-liners that hated the deal
from the beginning and made an unnecessary, irresponsible decision to give up on a successful
agreement. Meanwhile, the vast majority of arms control and nuclear experts opposed the
decision. All that the U.S. had to do to keep faith with Iran and the other parties was to lift
sanctions and keep them lifted. It cost us nothing to do this, and it created an opening for
reduced tensions and improved relations with Iran that stood to benefit both of our countries
and the surrounding region. Throwing that away has gained the U.S. nothing, and it has isolated
the U.S. internationally from almost all other governments that support the agreement. Any fair
and honest reckoning of the costs and benefits of Trump's decision to renege would show that
the U.S. is now in a worse and weaker position than it was before that decision. It is the
definition of a foreign policy fiasco.
U.S. withdrawal has not caused the agreement to collapse yet, but that is only because all
of the other parties to it have made concerted efforts to keep it alive in spite of completely
unwarranted sanctions. Contrary to hawkish predictions that Iran would cheat on the agreement,
Iran has fulfilled its obligations to the satisfaction of the IAEA for more than three years.
Even though Iran has received very few of the promised benefits for complying with the
agreement, Iran has done what it said it would do. That doesn't line up very well with the Iran
hawks' usual picture of a fanatical government hell-bent on acquiring a nuke.
As a
nonproliferation agreement, the JCPOA continues to work as intended despite the active sabotage
of the Trump administration. That is a testament to the value of the agreement and to the
overwhelming international consensus in favor of it. The U.S. has stupidly and unnecessarily
broken with that consensus for the sake of its obsession with hostility towards Iran.
This bit may be the least credible part of Stephens' column:
The point isn't to punish Iran for punishment's sake. It's to create leverage for a better
nuclear deal.
If unjustly reimposing sanctions on Iran was meant to "create leverage for a better nuclear
deal," it has completely failed. Iran has no interest in renegotiating the agreement that it
has honored from the start, and it has no reason to trust the government that just went back on
its word that it will obtain sanctions relief by offering more concessions. Quitting agreements
does not create additional leverage on the other parties to an agreement. It necessarily
weakens the U.S. position by making our promises seem worthless. A "better" deal isn't
possible, but then Iran hawks' interest in one has always been disingenuous. They have never
wanted a "better" deal. They have wanted Iranian capitulation. That is reflected in the
preposterous demands that Pompeo made last year. No Iranian government would ever agree to the
vast majority of those demands, and they amount to abandoning its foreign policy and its
nuclear program. Stephens marvels that "any of it should be controversial," which should tell
you how clueless he is.
It's worth noting here that Stephens has been and still is one of the most fanatical
opponents of the nuclear deal. When the P5+1 concluded the interim nuclear deal, the Joint Plan
of Action (JPOA), in 2013, he asserted
that forerunner to the JCPOA was "worse than Munich." Anyone who invoked Nazi appeasement in
the context of negotiations for a nonproliferation agreement has no credibility to chide anyone
else about anything related to foreign policy.
Stephens declares:
Non-nuclear states that sponsor terrorism and subscribe to millenarian ideologies should
never have access to any part of the nuclear fuel cycle, ever.
Here he is falling back on an old, discredited trope of Iran as a "martyr-state" to
support his fanatical position that Iran shouldn't have a nuclear program at all. Not only is
the Iranian government not filled with "millenarian" zealots (they are interested in
self-preservation and staying in power just like any regime), but Stephens ignores that Iran is
entitled to possess and develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes under the
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). If the U.S. seeks to deprive them of that access, they might
end up choosing to go the North Korea route by leaving the treaty and developing nuclear
weapons. That isn't the most likely outcome right now, but the more that the U.S. pressures
Iran the greater their incentive to acquire a nuclear deterrent becomes.
Stephens concludes:
The Trump administration has succeeded in dramatically raising the costs to Iran for its
sinister behavior, at no cost to the United States or our allies.
U.S.-European relations are frayed and probably worse than at any time since the Iraq war
debate, and those strains have mostly been caused by the administration's bankrupt Iran policy.
Our government has violated the JCPOA and the Security Council resolution that endorsed it, and
that has both left the U.S. isolated on this issue and weakened our position internationally.
Our allies have been forced to defend themselves against U.S. sanctions, and their efforts to
circumvent the sanctions will have longer term negative consequences for U.S. foreign policy.
The Iranian government's behavior has not changed significantly, and the costs borne by the
Iranian people are very high. Our government is inflicting collective punishment of an entire
nation for no good reason, and we are teaching another generation of Iranians to loathe and
distrust us. Stephens can ignore reality if he wants, but the costs to the U.S. and our allies
are real and growing.
Reneging on the nuclear deal was a destructive and stupid move, and the U.S. will be paying
for it for years to come. If it hasn't led to the worst possible outcomes yet, that doesn't
change the fact that it has been a colossal blunder and a huge own goal by the Trump
administration. It isn't surprising that a hardened ideologue like Stephens defends such a bad
decision, but his readers are poorly served by his propaganda masquerading as
analysis.
If the anti-deal hawks got their way, Iran would have the bomb by now
How this isn't obvious to them is beyond me, it makes me wonder if their actual plan was
to ratchet up tensions so they would have no choice but to invade to stop Iran from getting
the bomb. They would get to accomplish their true goal, regime change.
You also have those outraged that Obama 'gave' the Iranians billions. First off Obama gave
them nothing, it was their money. Many of them know this but it sounds better to pretend it
was US taxpayer dollars instead of Iranian money in frozen accounts. Then it seems they don't
know how deals are supposed to work, you can't expect to get something it you offer nothing
in return.
"... Netanyahu is scheduled to visit the White House next week ahead of his April 9 re-election vote. While he's officially coming for the AIPAC conference, an annual pro-Israel policy gathering, his visit will serve up excellent campaign material back home. He's certain to be photographed meeting Trump while his speech, delivered in his American-accented baritone, will get plenty of airtime in Israel. ..."
"... "What Trump is doing is totally gratuitous," said Martin Indyk, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel under President Bill Clinton. "He is intervening in an Israeli election for the sake of his friend Bibi Netanyahu, and in the process undermining Israel's chances of achieving peace with its neighbor Syria." ..."
"... Asked about the report, which dropped the previous use of the word "occupied" in reference to the Golan Heights, West Bank, and Gaza, Pompeo said the change in language was intentional. "It wasn't a mistake; it wasn't an error. It was done knowingly. We believe it's the most factual description that was appropriate for the report," he said. ..."
"... "I can say that all of you can imagine what would have happened if Israel were not in the Golan," Netanyahu said. "I think it's time the international community recognizes Israel's stay in the Golan, the fact that the Golan will always remain part of the state of Israel." ..."
"... Pompeo told reporters at a briefing in Kuwait on Wednesday that there had been no change in U.S. policy toward the Golan Heights. In a media roundtable on Thursday, he declined to say whether the U.S. was weighing whether to recognize Israel's annexation of the Golan. ..."
Trump Supports Israel Sovereignty Over Golan, Aiding Netanyahu
Netanyahu to visit Trump next week ahead of tough re-election
Move would be at odds with longstanding international policy
President Donald Trump said it's time for the
U.S. to "fully recognize" Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, a political gift to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu just
weeks before a tough re-election vote.
The remark -- which would break with decades of U.S. policy -- could prove decisive in swaying Israeli voters just as Netanyahu
faces corruption allegations that have marred his campaign. It is also likely to draw a rebuke from the international community,
which never recognized Israel's sovereignty over the territory it captured in 1967.
"The message that President Trump has given the world is that America stands by Israel," Netanyahu said Thursday after Trump's
tweet.
Trump's message came a day after Netanyahu, in a press briefing with Secretary of State Michael Pompeo in Jerusalem, called for
the U.S. and the rest of the world to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. Israel extended its law to the area in
1981.
The future of the plateau, a scenic area containing important water sources, had long been considered a subject for negotiation
in any potential peace agreement with Syria. Now, with Syria wracked by a civil war that includes support from Iran, Israel wants
its control over the area to be recognized worldwide.
"I've been thinking about doing that for a long time," Trump said in an interview to be broadcast Friday on Fox Business Network's
"Mornings With Maria." "It's been a very hard decision for every president, no president has done it. This is very much like Jerusalem,
moving the embassy to Jerusalem -- I did that."
While the news was welcomed by most Israelis, some saw it as a cynical ploy to interfere in their election and help Netanyahu
at a time when he's facing increasing scrutiny in a sprawling corruption probe. Merav Michaeli, a member of the opposition Labor
party, said there's little national debate that the Golan should stay in Israeli hands.
It "only helps public opinion for Netanyahu," she added. "That's why it came now. And so it doesn't really benefit Israel now,
it benefits Netanyahu."
Netanyahu is scheduled to visit the White House next week ahead of his April 9 re-election vote. While he's officially coming
for the AIPAC conference, an annual pro-Israel policy gathering, his visit will serve up excellent campaign material back home. He's
certain to be photographed meeting Trump while his speech, delivered in his American-accented baritone, will get plenty of airtime
in Israel.
"What Trump is doing is totally gratuitous," said Martin Indyk, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel under President Bill Clinton.
"He is intervening in an Israeli election for the sake of his friend Bibi Netanyahu, and in the process undermining Israel's chances
of achieving peace with its neighbor Syria."
Trump's move may also give the president a political boost as he courts Jewish voters in the U.S.
The U.S. had signaled strongly in recent weeks it was ready to accept Israeli sovereignty. In an annual report on human rights
released last week, the State Department referred to the Golan Heights, the West Bank and Gaza as "Israeli-controlled," not "Israeli-occupied."
Asked about the report, which dropped the previous use of the word "occupied" in reference to the Golan Heights, West Bank, and
Gaza, Pompeo said the change in language was intentional. "It wasn't a mistake; it wasn't an error. It was done knowingly. We believe it's the most factual description that was appropriate
for the report," he said.
American support for Israel has strengthened under Trump, who moved the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in 2018 and backed
out of the nuclear agreement his predecessor Barack Obama negotiated with Iran, a cherished goal of Netanyahu.
Saeb Erekat, a senior Palestinian official, said Trump's move would destabilize the region.
"I can say that all of you can imagine what would have happened if Israel were not in the Golan," Netanyahu said. "I think it's
time the international community recognizes Israel's stay in the Golan, the fact that the Golan will always remain part of the state
of Israel."
The U.S. recognition underscores the changing reality on the ground, as the chances of Israel returning the northern territory
to Syria diminished.
Pompeo told reporters at a briefing in Kuwait on Wednesday that there had been no change in U.S. policy toward the Golan Heights.
In a media roundtable on Thursday, he declined to say whether the U.S. was weighing whether to recognize Israel's annexation of the
Golan.
"The administration's considering lots of things always, and I try to make sure we get to answers before we talk
That was written in March 2017. Looks like Paul Craig Roberts was completely detached from reality
Notable quotes:
"... By standing up for Americans, Trump alienated the global corporations, their executives and shareholders, all of whom benefit from stealing the economic life of Americans and producing abroad where labor and regulatory costs are lower. Neoliberal junk economists describe this labor arbitrage, which reduces the real incomes of the American labor force, as the beneficial working of free trade. ..."
"... These offshoring firms not only have destroyed the economic prospects of millions of Americans, but also have destroyed the payroll tax base of Social Security and Medicare, and the tax base of local and state governments, with the consequence that numerous pension systems are on the verge of failure. The New York Teamsters Road Carriers Local 707 Pension Fund has just failed. This failure, experts predict, is the beginning of a tsunami that will spread into municipal and state pension systems. ..."
"... Once Trump put Flynn's blood in the water, he set the situation for the sacrifice of other of his appointees, ending with himself. At the present time, "the Russian connection" black mark is operating against Trump's Attorney General, Jeff Sessions. If Sessions falls, Trump is next. ..."
"... Despite the facts, the Washington Post, New York Times, CNN and all the rest of the CIA's media whores are consciously and intentionally misrepresenting the facts. Americans do not need any more evidence that the entirety of the American media is totally devoid of integrity and respect for truth. The American media is a collection of whores who lie for a living. The presstitutes are despicable, the scum of the earth. ..."
"... The real question is how has contact with Russian government officials become criminalized, grounds for removing a National Security Adviser, an Attorney General, and impeaching a President himself. President John F. Kennedy had ongoing contact with Khrushchev, the head of the Soviet government, in order to resolve the Cuban/Turkish missile crisis without nuclear war. President Nixon had ongoing contact with the Russians in order to achieve SALT I and the anti-ballistic missile treaty. President Carter had ongoing contact with Russians in order to achieve SALT II. President Reagan worked with the Russian leader in order to end the Cold War. I know. I was there. ..."
"... Dear reader, ask yourself, how did communications with Russians in the interest of peace and the reduction of tensions become a criminal act? Have laws been passed that it is forbidden for US officials to speak with Russian officials? Are you so utterly stupid that a presstitute media that has never in your entire life told you anything that was truthful can convince you that those who seek to avoid a conflict between thermo-nuclear powers are "Russian agents"? ..."
"... The entirety of the world has been put on the knife edge of existence by the arrogance, stupidity, and hubris of the neoconservative pursuit of American world hegemony. The neoconservative ideology is perfect cover for the material interest of the military/security Deep State that is driving the world to destruction. ..."
"... W Bush: "Dad, what's a neocon?" HW Bush: "You want names or description?" W: "Description." HW: "Israel." ..."
"... "To see who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." -Voltaire ..."
"... Hint: If you criticize them, you're called an anti-Semite. And they're not even Semites. ..."
"... Insouciant is merely Paul Craig Roberts way of registering his extreme disgust, being a gentlemen, unlike me, he doesn't use other, more crude adjectives .. ..."
"... What we are witnessing is calculated, but is driven by desperation.. Trump has resources now that he did not have as a candidate, and he is using them. Yes, it is taking longer than we hoped, but the progressives are doing everything possible to slow if not stop him. I seriously doubt any president has faced such resistance before. We still don't know the story behind Flynn. He surely knew his phones were tapped and is surely smart enough to know they would leak it. And, while he lost his title, he is still there with his team. ..."
"... No, because if he gets too close to anything important his family members start dropping dead. He knows this... he knew it before he ran. If he goes after the rothchild-backed cabal he gets dead. ..."
"... It's war and there is no going back. Trump has the will and the resources, so all we can do is support where possible....and hope. ..."
"... The public does know what is going on. Nobody is being fooled. The problem is that the press presents the narrative (often implicitly) that gives the impression PCR is conveying here. ..."
The question in the title is V.I. Lenin's question. His answer was to create a revolutionary "vanguard" to spread
revolutionary ideas among the workers, the economic class that Karl Marx had declared to be the class rising to the ascendency of
political power. Finally, democracy, frustrated by upper class interests in its earlier manifestations, would become reality. The
workers would rule.
Given the presence of evil and human failing, it did not work out in that way. But Lenin's question remains a valid one.
Americans whose economic life and prospects for their children have been destroyed by the offshoring of American manufacturing and
tradable professional skills jobs, such as software engineering, answered the question by electing Donald Trump.
The Americans, dispossessed by the offshoring corporations, elected Trump, because Trump was the only American running for a political
office who called attention to the problem and declared his intention to fix it.
By standing up for Americans, Trump alienated the global corporations, their executives and shareholders, all of whom benefit
from stealing the economic life of Americans and producing abroad where labor and regulatory costs are lower. Neoliberal junk economists
describe this labor arbitrage, which reduces the real incomes of the American labor force, as the beneficial working of free trade.
These offshoring firms not only have destroyed the economic prospects of millions of Americans, but also have destroyed the
payroll tax base of Social Security and Medicare, and the tax base of local and state governments, with the consequence that numerous
pension systems are on the verge of failure. The New York Teamsters Road Carriers Local 707 Pension Fund has just failed. This failure,
experts predict, is the beginning of a tsunami that will spread into municipal and state pension systems.
When you add up the external costs of jobs offshoring that are imposed on Americans, the costs far exceed the value of the profits
that flow to the One Percent. Clearly, this is an intolerable situation.
Dispossessed Americans rose up. They ignored the presstitute media, or perhaps were driven to support Trump by
the hostility of the media. Trump was elected by dispossessed America, by the working class.
The working class is out of favor with the elite liberal/progressive/left which abhors the working class as racist, misogynist,
homophobic, gun nuts who oppose transgendered toilet facilities. Thus, the working class, and their chosen representative,
Donald Trump, are under full assault by the presstitutes. "Trump Must Go" is their slogan.
And well he might. Trump, in a fit of stupidity, dismissed his National Security Advisor, Gen. Flynn, because Flynn did what he
should have done and spoke with the Russian ambassador in order to avoid a Russian response to Obama's provocation of expelling Russian
diplomats at Christmas.
Russians have been demonized and ascribed demonic powers. If you speak to a Russian, you fall under suspicion
and become a traitor to your country. This is the story according to the CIA, the Democratic Party, the military/security complex,
and the presstitute media.
Once Trump put Flynn's blood in the water, he set the situation for the sacrifice of other of his appointees, ending with himself.
At the present time, "the Russian connection" black mark is operating against Trump's Attorney General, Jeff Sessions. If Sessions
falls, Trump is next.
Let's be clear. As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sessions met with the Russian ambassador, just as he met with
a number of other countries' ambassadors. There is nothing unusual or surprising about a US senator meeting with foreign diplomatic
representatives.
Those who accuse Sessions of lying are misrepresenting the facts. Sessions met with ambassadors in his capacity
as a US Senator, not in his capacity as a Trump representative. As a former US Senate staffer, I can attest that it is perfectly
normal for US Senators to meet with diplomats. John McCain and Lindsey Graham even fly to the Middle East to meet with terrorists.
Despite the facts, the Washington Post, New York Times, CNN and all the rest of the CIA's media whores are consciously and
intentionally misrepresenting the facts. Americans do not need any more evidence that the entirety of the American media is totally
devoid of integrity and respect for truth. The American media is a collection of whores who lie for a living. The presstitutes are
despicable, the scum of the earth.
The real question is how has contact with Russian government officials become criminalized, grounds for removing a National
Security Adviser, an Attorney General, and impeaching a President himself. President John F. Kennedy had ongoing contact with Khrushchev,
the head of the Soviet government, in order to resolve the Cuban/Turkish missile crisis without nuclear war. President Nixon had
ongoing contact with the Russians in order to achieve SALT I and the anti-ballistic missile treaty. President Carter had ongoing
contact with Russians in order to achieve SALT II. President Reagan worked with the Russian leader in order to end the Cold War.
I know. I was there.
But if President Trump wants to defuse the extremely dangerous tensions that the reckless Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes
have resurrected with a powerful thermo-nuclear state that only wants peace with the US, President Trump and any of his appointees
who spoke to a Russian are unfit for office! This madness is the position of the idiot liberal/progressive/left, the CIA,
the Democratic Party, the right-wing morons of the Republican Party such as Lindsey Graham and John McCain, and the two-bit whores
that comprise the Western media.
Dear reader, ask yourself, how did communications with Russians in the interest of peace and the reduction of tensions become
a criminal act? Have laws been passed that it is forbidden for US officials to speak with Russian officials? Are you so utterly stupid
that a presstitute media that has never in your entire life told you anything that was truthful can convince you that those who seek
to avoid a conflict between thermo-nuclear powers are "Russian agents"?
I have no doubt that the vast bulk of Western populations are insouciant. But if there is no intelligence and
awareness left anywhere in the population, and most certainly there is none whatsoever in the governments of the West or in the Western
media or the Identity Politics of the liberal/progressive/left, then don't expect to be alive much longer.
The entirety of the world has been put on the knife edge of existence by the arrogance, stupidity, and hubris of the neoconservative
pursuit of American world hegemony. The neoconservative ideology is perfect cover for the material interest of the military/security
Deep State that is driving the world to destruction.
Trump needs to tighten up. Get even tougher than he is now. Go out and do more speeches. Take the message STRAIGHT to the masses.........unfiltered.
LET the MSM "fake" that.
W Bush: "Dad, what's a neocon?" HW Bush: "You want names or description?" W: "Description." HW: "Israel."
The neocons are Israel-first fanatics. They did 9/11 and support all terrorist groups. And because Russia came to Syria's aid,
they're after Russia as well.
In Dr Strangelove, the mindblowingly stupid response of the characters played by the generals saying "attack Russia no matter
what they do" was portrayed as a joke, and the audience got it. Nobody could be that stupid, so it looked funny.
We are in desperately sick times when the attitude displayed by those comedically-stupid characters has become our official
policy and our propaganda.
Let's pray the American people are not yet completely stupid, and that there are still enough who see this insanity for the
immediate and extreme danger that it is.
The purpose of all of this "RussiaDidIt" bollocks has long been postulated as having the purpose of starting the Last War.
The question arises: "Who benefits?" (Ordinarily, no-one 'benefits' and only morons think that a 'benefit' could arise)
But, just for a moment, turn it on its head and ask the counter-question: "Who benefits the least ?"
Pretty obviously, the USA and the Russian Federation come out badly. Assume the impossible: that it doesn't spread out and
result in planetdeath.
Who just (quite coincidentally - of course) had its main rivals effectively eliminated? Quietly. Efficiently. Anonymously...
Who, currently quietly colonizing Africa for its resorce base, might now divert their attentions to the (much greater and closer)
resource base to their North, West and East, ostensibly in the name of "reconstruction?"
Naturally, it's just a coincidence that a large slice of Global Manufacturing has recently been transferred to that country
(recent decades)
So congrats are due to the DemoCrud skum who perpetrated this crime against humanity as the willing "useful idiots" of the
PuppetMasters. Burn in Hell you motherfukkerz.
The only way to "drain the swamp" is to eliminate the brainwashed masses who enable the warmongering globalist neocons. Without
the democratic partys' tens of million sheeple, the power hungry devils like Soros, the Clintons, McCain, Pelosi, Feinstein, and
the rest of the "perverted elite" would have no power.
Having considered this FACT, I have decided not to oppose their quest to start a global thermonuclear war with Russia. I saw
war up close and personal in Viet-Nam. I am 71 years old, so not much time remaining to waste in a political battle against the
snowflakes here in Californicate. I feel confident that I have a better chance of surviving than they do.
I have also decided to sit back, with my personal defenses in hand, and watch them experience, up close and personal for themselves,
the horrors of war like they are presently inflicting on the mid-eastern countries. The children of these despots, if they survive,
will finally witness proof that their parents are the cause of their misery.
Then, and only then, will the survivors be able to reconstruct toward a peaceful world.
1. free from concern, worry, or anxiety; carefree; nonchalant.
I agree, we're way past that ... Robert's knows this , all too well ..
Insouciant is merely Paul Craig Roberts way of registering his extreme disgust, being a gentlemen, unlike me, he doesn't
use other, more crude adjectives ..
I cut him slack on his overuse of the word insouciant, because it would just seem so out of place substituting instead, "fucking
assholes," for every place it is prominently used in his writing.
I mean can you imagine?
No, I'm glad he's more refined than me. Makes for a more interesting and gentile world.
Hahaa Dr Strangelove. Strange movie, for even stranger times
"They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. I can no longer sit back and allow Communist
infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all
of our precious bodily fluids."
What we are witnessing is calculated, but is driven by desperation.. Trump has resources now that he did not have as a
candidate, and he is using them. Yes, it is taking longer than we hoped, but the progressives are doing everything possible to
slow if not stop him. I seriously doubt any president has faced such resistance before. We still don't know the story behind Flynn.
He surely knew his phones were tapped and is surely smart enough to know they would leak it. And, while he lost his title, he
is still there with his team.
Everything is obvious now and I think this is what Trump has been goading them into. Putting blood in the water to draw the
sharks to the surface. We will see.
i hope you're right. i keep wanting to think he's a clever fox but the acceleration of events is mind-boggling. the liberal
onslaught is from all directions and relentless. i pray he's able to withstand their attacks and counter with an epic T-Day rout--one
for the history books--that exposes and annihilates the seditious traitors in the world of public opinion, giving him political
capital to rid our nation of the unconstitutional Patriot Act and Big Brother's illegal 4th Amendment violations of illegal search
and seizure.
it's hard to keep the faith right now... i wanna believe he's got the wherewithall to pull this off. if i get weak and shout
for quick solutions, just downvote my stupid butt bigly.
No, because if he gets too close to anything important his family members start dropping dead. He knows this... he knew
it before he ran. If he goes after the rothchild-backed cabal he gets dead.
Give up guys... there's no winning this. The sooner we accept this the sooner we can maybe fucking DO something.
i think you are suggesting first touch/listen of utah spying. if true, step one. step 2 is to take down the main operatives
and bring them down with all the resources of the justice dept.
this is assuming that all parties stay in the confines of law...hmmm
Exactly, Trump needs to go on TV and speak plainly, layout the thesis as outlined in this article. Make sure the country knows
EXACTLY what is going on and what the stakes are. Most libtards don't have one fucking clue how they are being used by these sick
fucks. Get everything he knows and what he SUSPECTS, even with no direct evidence out into the general public. Time is running
short.
I don't twit. I don't even 'follow' a twit. I don't know how.
But I'm pretty sure this sort of message would take a hell of a lot more characters than, what is it, 140?
That means he would need some other means to deliver a complicated message that by-passes an inherently hostile media yet still
gets viewed by tens of millions.
Couldn't agree more. I fail to fathom how meeting with Russian diplomats constitutes any type of crime. That's what diplomats
do for God's sake. Wake up people before it's too late.
Ah, but everything PCR says is true. It's what he doesn't say that gives away the lie.
All of his articles demonize the west (and he's right). But he's deliberately not looking at the higher dynamics of this globalist,
central bank-led kabuki theater.
I think he's a 'gatekeeper' who's job is to point out the evils of the west and make the east look good in comparison, so that
when the 'reset' comes people will buy into the globalist one world currency that will be offered.
I've never seen him talk disparagingly about either China or Russia or the BRICS. Certainly he has mentioned the FED and the
IMF, but not the big one - the BIS - that I have seen. And until he does, he's just another Rothschild/Rockefeller plant to me.
he takes on the CIA, State Department, Pentagon, NATO, liberals, Ruling Establishment, Obama the War Criminal Butcherer of
Women and Children, Kissinger, pretty much everybody. i agree he's not a Russiaphobe, thankfully someone's got a balanced position.
anyway... we'll have to agree to disagree. i believe he's a patriot true blue... errr, red. nope. red, white and blue.
it's nothing to me and i'm not trying to defend him. i just think he's not what you suggest. professionals feel responsible
for their words and only write about what they know. we can all speculate about 9/11 but without launching our own investigation,
it's just "talk." and at PCR and Stockman's level, they refrain from flapping their lips to hear themselves speak, metaphorically.
> "He is a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy.
> He is a former editor at the Wall Street Journal.
> He was the "first occupant of the William E. Simon Chair for Economic Policy at the Center for Strategic and International
Studies [CSIS], then part of Georgetown University." It's worth noting that Georgetown is a Jesuit institution, and the Board
of Trustees of CSIS includes Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and representatives of Exxon Mobil, Boeing, Coca Cola, AIG,
GlaxoSmithKline, and Morgan Stanley (to name a few).
Looking at the high positions this guy has held in the Washington/Wall Street Establishment, ask yourself this: "Is PCR really
going against all of his lifelong associates or is he simply carrying water for them like he always has?" "
i consider myself open-minded and reviewed your link.
as far as the 3 bullet points the author suggests condemn PCR:
Austrian economics are largely followed by most conservative economists as opposed to Keynesian.
I would also argue the American govt pursues global hegemony, i.e., an American empire
Who among us would not believe there is widespread incompetence in DC? Would anyone use the term "competent" with Obama,
other than describing his knack for telling untruths and perhaps killing innocent Near East women and children?
He was former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy under Reagan
A strong critic of the Bush (and later
Obama ) administrations' handling of the
War on Terror , he has taken positions strongly at odds
with mainstream politicians: harshly criticising the ineffectiveness, severity and high rates of incarceration associated with
the War on Drugs , excessive police violence and use
of SWAT teams against civilians. He has criticised the
law and order politics and congressional
approval of increased government surveillance associated with the
War on Terror age, which he views as fundamental threats
to the civil liberties and Right to Privacy enshrined
in the US constitution, opening the way for an oligarchic
police state to be imposed upon the US population... --
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Craig_Roberts
sorry, i just don't see it. as far as his association with the WSJ and Georgetown Univ, that would pretty much be the aspirations
of most journalists. and lastly, here are the closing statements from his newsletter yesterday:
The voice here at this website, my voice, provides perspectives that permit escape from the Matrix, but it depends on your
support. As March is upon us, so is my quarterly request for your support. So far, we have both kept our word. You have supported
the site, and I have continued to ruin my reputation in Washington by writing explanations that are unpopular in the ruling circles.
but even more than that, i read his articles and take what i want and discard the rest. no one is mind controlling me. can't
be brainwashed. got to have a brain first. (;
"I have no doubt that the vast bulk of Western populations are insouciant. But if there is no intelligence and awareness left
anywhere in the population, and most certainly there is none whatsoever in the governments of the West or in the Western media
or the Identity Politics of the liberal/progressive/left, then don't expect to be alive much longer."
The public does know what is going on. Nobody is being fooled. The problem is that the press presents the narrative (often
implicitly) that gives the impression PCR is conveying here.
"... By many yardsticks, Israeli citizens enjoy higher living standards than US citizens. ..."
"... President Obama next week is scheduled to sign the most lavish foreign aid package in the country's history - $3.1 billion in military assistance to Israel - raising an urgent question: can the U.S. afford it? ..."
"... The United States already transfers $3.1 billion in taxpayer money to Israel every year, far more than any other country, but the deal that will be signed into law next week will guarantee foreign aid to the country until the year 2027, a decade after Obama has left office. ..."
By many yardsticks,
Israeli citizens enjoy higher living standards than US citizens. With more unemployed people than
at any time in U.S. history,
President Obama next week is scheduled to sign the most lavish foreign
aid package in the country's history - $3.1 billion in military assistance
to Israel - raising an urgent question: can the U.S. afford it?
The United States
already transfers $3.1 billion in taxpayer money to Israel every year, far more than any other country,
but the deal that will be signed into law next week will guarantee foreign aid to the country
until the year 2027, a decade after Obama has left office.
"... Meanwhile, Israel spends 100 times more and actively seeks to influence in US federal and state governments and no one says anything. ..."
"... The US interferes and overthrows governments all over the world and no one says anything. Russiagate has been a massive psyop and a highly effective one. Now it's time to fight back. ..."
Jay, nothing special here. The investigators found corruption because US politics is all
about corruption. Some of it may even have involved people or properties in Russia.
But the
charge, the subject of the investigation was Russian interference in the US election and
Trump's collusion with it. And here there was never any evidence, and there still isn't. Like
$20,000 worth of FB ads in a $2 billion dollar campaign.
Meanwhile, Israel spends 100 times
more and actively seeks to influence in US federal and state governments and no one says
anything.
The US interferes and overthrows governments all over the world and no one says
anything. Russiagate has been a massive psyop and a highly effective one. Now it's time to
fight back.
AIPAC, the swaggering and influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which brands itself as "America's Pro-Israel Lobby,"
is holding its annual policy conference. Top politicians from both parties vie for speaking slots at the group's glitzy gala. Everyone
pays AIPAC attention. And for good reason. Since the late 1970s, it has informally directed substantial campaign contributions toward
chosen candidates for Congress. Its messaging on the Middle East is essential in Washington's foreign-policy conversation.
Some love AIPAC, some hate it, some fear it -- but it is a huge factor in U.S. policy, in American politics and in American Jewish
life.
AIPAC's
beginnings in the 1950s reveal the long journey the group has traveled as it has grown in size and stature. It once operated
in obscurity; now its influence lies partly in its genius for publicity. But some things have remained consistent: It has always
responded to Israeli actions, working to mitigate their impact on the American scene. At the same time, it has welded a united front
of American Jews in support of Israel, a unity that politicians have had to respect.
Even before advocates for Israel had AIPAC, they had the tireless I.L. "Si" Kenen. He led AIPAC -- in a real sense, he was
AIPAC -- from its inception until 1974. A journalist and lawyer, Kenen had switched back and forth during the 1940s and early
1950s between working for American Zionist organizations and for the state of Israel.
During Harry Truman's presidency, Kenen started helping to win U.S. aid for the new state, cultivating ties with members of Congress
and their staffers and supplying talking points for those willing to advocate for Israel. A political progressive, Kenen found his
strongest support on Capitol Hill among liberal Democrats, and his toughest opponents were conservative Midwestern Republicans and
Southern Democrats. In contrast to his brash successors at AIPAC, Kenen's methods were low-key and discreet.
But despite their early successes, Kenen and other American champions of Israel faced challenges after Dwight Eisenhower entered
the White House in 1953. Ike's secretary of state, John Foster Dulles, said he wanted to pursue a balanced, neutral policy toward
the Israeli-Arab conflict -- not what Israel's supporters wished to hear.
In the fall of 1953, Eisenhower briefly suspended the delivery of U.S. aid to Israel after it violated the terms of a U.N.-brokered
armistice agreement with Syria by venturing into a demilitarized zone to try to divert the waters of the Jordan River. Eisenhower
and Dulles resolved to use their leverage to get Israel to back off. However, Israel and the United States apparently agreed to keep
Eisenhower's action quiet in hopes of a quick resolution.
But on Oct. 15, 1953, all hell broke loose. News spread that a special Israeli army unit had struck into the Jordanian-occupied
West Bank and committed a massacre in the Palestinian village of Qibya, killing more than 60 civilians indiscriminately in retaliation
for the murder of a Jewish woman and her two children in Israel on the night of Oct. 12.
The strike reflected Israeli policy. Ever since the end of the 1948 war, Palestinians had frequently crossed the so-called "Green
Line" into Israel. Most had been driven or had fled from their homes in what was now Israel and simply wished to return. But some
committed violence against Israelis. Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion had fixed on a policy of reprisals -- military assaults, intentionally
disproportionate, on local Arab populations -- as a response to any such attacks. After the Oct. 12 killings, Ben-Gurion and top
colleagues chose nearby Qibya to suffer retribution.
The outcry was sharp and wide.
Time magazine carried a shocking account of deliberate, even casual mass murder by Israeli soldiers at Qibya -- "slouching . .
. smoking and joking." The New York Times ran extensive excerpts from a U.N. commission that refuted Israeli lies about the incident.
Israel's most active U.S. supporters realized how severe the danger of damage to Israel was. Kenen wrote of the ill effect of
Qibya on what he called "our propaganda." After Qibya, Dulles confirmed for the first time that Washington was holding up aid to
Israel. The United States supported a censure of Israel in the U.N. Security Council. U.S. aid soon resumed, after Israel pledged
it would stop its work at the controversial water-diversion site.
Aware Israel's reputation in the United States had been tarnished, American Jewish supporters of Israel scrambled to mount a damage-control
effort in late 1953 and early 1954. Kenen managed this ad hoc effort, involving many parties in Washington and around the country.
But it was clear that a firmer, more nimble, ongoing structure of advocacy for Israel was necessary to better meet such challenges.
In March 1954, Kenen and his associates announced the formation of the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs (AZCPA) --
which would be renamed AIPAC in 1959 -- and thus launched the modern Israel lobby. AZCPA was quickly joined by the new Conference
of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. That group of top Jewish leaders promoted Israel's interests with high U.S.
government officials, including presidents and secretaries of state. Si Kenen regularly attended meetings of the Conference of Presidents
and coordinated the work of the two new groups.
Kenen had additional reason for forming a new advocacy group in early 1954. U.S. officials had been inquiring into whether his
(then) employer, the American Zionist Council, ought to register as the agent of a foreign power, which might limit its activities
and complicate its funding. It made sense for the council to consider spinning off a new lobbying group with a "cleaner" financial
basis.
However, that motivation for forming AZCPA, while significant, did not dominate the thinking of American Zionists in these crucial
months as much as the need to manage the political fallout over Qibya, and to prepare for any future shocks coming out of Israel.
Even before AZCPA appeared, Kenen and others labored to construct a united front among American Jewish groups in support of Israel
amid the Qibya controversy. AZCPA strengthened that Jewish united front, which was impressively broad. This was revealing and foretold
the future.
It showed that there was nothing Israel might do that would jeopardize American Jewish support. Indeed, to some in the Jewish
community, the more disturbing Israeli behavior was, the more Israel needed their ardent advocacy. So began a three-decade cycle,
one that did not end until Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon, in which American Jews closed ranks to support Israel regardless of
circumstances. Jews harboring reservations about Israeli actions found it extremely hard to gain a foothold in Jewish communal life
-- something that is less true today, but still a central reality in Jewish America.
The perception that AIPAC represents a consensus among American Jews has always been a key to its political influence, which explains
the group's sometimes seemingly outsized opposition to Jewish dissent from its line. "America's Pro-Israel Lobby," born in awful
knowledge, has always existed to make Israeli realities and priorities palatable to Americans. The dark roots of AIPAC, 'America's
Pro-Israel Lobby' - The Washington Post
Doug Rossinow teaches history at the University of Oslo, and is currently writing a history of American Zionism from
1948 to 1995.
There is no "other economic aid" to Israel and has not been for decades.
By law, 100% of the military aid Israel gets (the ONLY aid Israel gets) must be spent on overpriced US manufactured armaments,
and never leaves the US. More properly, it should be called a subsidy to the US arms industry ... more See More Like Share
AIPAC is inconsequential compared to Christian support for Israel. CUFI (Christians United for Israel) has THIRTY TIMES AS
MANY MEMBERS AS AIPAC (3,000,000 versus 100,00)
American approval of Israel is 71%, within one point of a 25 year high:
So keep on whining and living in your "Israel is doomed" bubble as Israel goes from strength to strength. Israeli GDP when
BDS started 12 years ago was $141.2 billion, now it's $318.0 billion.
I wish BDS and all other Israel bashers such continued successes ... more See More Like Share
Very good article. It shows the extent to which foreign lobbying money shapes US policy by essentially bribing politicians who
need the money to run and win their campaigns. A huge problem in US "democracy" or, should I say, plutocracy and oligarchy. There's
absolutely no reason why the US needs to support or fund Israel in any way, but the influence of groups like AIPAC insures
that they do. ... more See
Excellent article, WaPo, keep them coming and never retreat.
American voters, we are bought. Our legislators are carrying water for Israel first, not for us.
Almost as offensive and pernicious as AIPAC, is FIDF, Friends of the Israeli Defense forces, an American "charity" that raises
US money for the express purpose of supporting the Israeli military.
The 2017 Beverly Hills gala alone raised $53.8 million for a FOREIGN ARMY.
Attendees are interesting, including Schwarzenegger, Stallone, DeNiro, thousands of mega donors with former Oracle CEO Ellison
giving $16.6 million this year alone. His hand picked replacement, Israeli born Catz is pitching in big money too.
This is only one of many FIDF annual galas in the US.
We have veterans of wars for the benefit of Israel right here who can't afford to live. Amputees. But the money for the IDF
is funneled out of here tax free.... and supports such programs as extended respites for soldiers, scholarships, cultural centers,
arts, holistic therapies. Unbelievable. ... more See More Like Share SoCalledVirginian Schlnm
Anthony Klune Peweee e84695 and 10
Jeffrey Bacon 3/8/2018 10:25 PM EST
Ted: He speaks the truth. Debate it, refute it. You cannot. Accept that Israel's hold on America cannot last. The younger
generation is not as religious at all, and they look at Israel's actions, not what the bible says. These folks see the
injustice Israel has perpetuated. Their reactions follow. No other foreign country gets away with what Israel does in our
politics. The word is out. ... more
Evan Simon 3/8/2018 2:20 PM EST [Edited]
AIPAC is now an insidious agitator and propaganda arm of a vicious war criminal government. We need MORE articles like this
one and anyone who protests is part of the problem. ... more
On Nov 21, 1963, the U.S. Dept of Justice under U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy ordered the American Zionist Council to
register as an Israeli foreign agent.
On Nov 22, 1963, U.S. President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas. On June
5, 1968, former U.S. Attorney General & present U.S. Senator, Robert F. Kennedy, was assassinated in Los Angeles, CA just after
winning the California Democratic primary election for candidacy for the President of the United States.
In 1963, the American Zionist Council (AZC) eluded having to register as agents of a foreign government by reorganizing as the
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Today, the AIPAC has become what Senator Fulbright most feared: a foreign agent
dominating American foreign policy while disguised as a domestic lobby
Olivia Davidejonson 3/8/2018 4:50 PM EST
Dear Contributor, An interesting post. Thank you. May I add that there are over 150 UN Resolutions including UN Security Council
Resolutions 476 and 478 which was supported by the world and was passed as law.
It declared that Israel's "eternal claim" to Jerusalem
was NULL and VOID. The International Court of Justice, EU (including the UK), UN all condemned Israel's monstrous 700 km "wall"
as illegal.
The EU have Settlement Guidelines and Settlement Labelling and view colonial West Bank settler settlements (accessible
by settler only roads) as illegal and a violation of the 4th Geneva Convention.
The West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem is viewed
as Palestinian Territory and Palestine is a UN non-member STATE and was recognised by 138 nations (including Western European
nations). Palestine is registered with over 50 UN Agencies and has bilateral relations with over 130 nations as a STATE.
Israel's current Government rejects Palestine's right to exist in secure borders and that is why she continues expanding
settlements and outposts (both of which are illegal).
The UN had repeatedly stated that the West Bank and East Jerusalem are illegally occupied.
Olivia Davidejonson 3/8/2018 6:53 PM EST
Dear TedDruch, With respect that is an opinion, which I respect but is not correct. The UN Resolutions and those passed by the
International Court of Justice have legal standing, which are huge in support of Palestine.
Prior to the US allowing the UN Security
Council Resolution pass condemning settlements (UNSC 2334), there were UN Resolutions which the West supported and which were
passed with a majority in excess of 150 nations.
Olivia Davidejonson 3/8/2018 6:55 PM EST [Edited]
Security Council, 20 August 1980
Resolution 478 (1980)
Recalling its resolution 476 (1980),
Reaffirming again that the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible,
Deeply concerned over the enactment of a "basic law" in the Israeli Knesset proclaiming a change in the character and status of
the Holy City of Jerusalem, with its implications for peace and security,
Noting that Israel has not complied with resolution 476 (1980),
Reaffirming its determination to examine practical ways and means, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter of
the United Nations, to secure the full implementation of its resolution 476 (1980), in the event of non-compliance by Israel,
1. Censures in the strongest terms the enactment by Israel of the "basic law" on Jerusalem and the refusal to comply with relevant
Security Council resolutions;
2. Affirms that the enactment of the "basic law" by Israel constitutes a violation of international law and does not affect the
continued application of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949,
in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since June 1967, including Jerusalem;
3. Determines that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which have altered
or purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and in particular the recent "basic law" on Jerusalem,
are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith;
4. Affirms also that this action constitutes a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the
Middle East;
5. Decides not to recognize the "basic law" and such other actions by Israel that, as a result of this law, seek to alter the
character and status of Jerusalem and calls upon:
All Member States to accept this decision;
I believe there is a huge difference between not kotowing to Israel.. who , really, as an ally, is as much trouble as they are
good, and being anti Semitic. Israel, wildly dependent upon US aid and good will to survive, mostly acts like they are running
the show and that we should be grateful for letting us help them. ... more
Andy Taylor 3/7/2018 3:04 PM EST
Untrue but I am not going to waste time on that suffice to say American aid to Israel is illegal under a law passed in the
1970s that prohibits aid to nuclear powers who don't sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
alyssa3 3/7/2018 4:38 PM EST
So Andy, spread your words of wisdom - explain to us, what exactly in the Symington and Glenn amendments does the United States
violate by providing aid to Israel, Pakistan, and India?
And further, if it is illegal, why are you bellyaching about Israel, when it is the United States, and their government
officials that have violated the law since 1976? Your misguided criticism is equivalent of blaming Iran and Nicaragua Contra
Rebels for the United States arms for hostages fiasco back in the mid-1980s. Pretty silly....
Evan Simon 3/8/2018 2:26 PM EST
Fine. Give back our money so we don't have the standing to call them a parasite anymore. See how easy that is, since they
don't NEED the money? ...
It is time for AIPAC members to chose between America and Israel. Israel firsters need to be exposed and kept out of our
government. ...
Marian Paroo 3/7/2018 10:22 AM EST
Totally agree. I have heard, albeit in only online, I don't have friends like that IRL, that they were voting for Trump
because he was better for Israel, even if they felt he was worse for America ...
"... "I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy," Trump said of Epstein during a 2002 interview with New York magazine. "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side." ..."
"... "How would he know that?" he said of Trump's acknowledgement of Epstein's penchant for young women. The interview came nearly six years before Epstein's secret sex life exploded into public view when the money manager pleaded guilty to Florida charges of procuring and soliciting a minor for prostitution. "Why would he make a joke like that?" the West Palm Beach attorney asked. ..."
"... Bill has frequent flier points on Lolita Express. He had a 14yr.old toy on the island and the flight logs can prove his attendance. ..."
"... "The Government aligned themselves with Epstein, working against his victims, for 11 years..." ..."
"... THE SAME can be said for this: "The Government aligned themselves with APARTHEID Israhell, working against their Palestinians victims, for over 70 years... " ..."
"... Epstein has dirt on EVERYONE ... If he ever gets in a legitimate court room? - many, many, shitty people will be in trouble ... GOP and Democrat. And Trump? Acosta is in his admin, right? Or, he didn't fire the scum yet? And when is Hillary going to jail? ..."
"... I assume MOSSAD & friends will have to pull some very fancy rabbits out of their hat to get this buried again. The $wamp can't afford to have him cooperating, so I'm guessing Epstein will have to 'retire' to Tel-Aviv - or have an accident/become 'depressed, etc.' ..."
"... Hastert mentioned in WikiLeaks: https://wearechange.org/disgraced-house-speaker-pedophile-dennis-hastert/ As you dig into these stories, one singular theory emerges again and again: Sexual deviants and psychos have been groomed for office because they are easier to blackmail and control. ..."
Both Clinton and Trump were close to Epstein. To me this smells like there was a bi-partisan consensus to bury this, and only
now that the Clintons are no longer dominating the Democrat party, do we get some results.
While Trump has recently distanced himself from Epstein, a 64-year-old financier, it wasn't always that way.
"I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy," Trump said of Epstein during a 2002 interview with New York magazine.
"He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger
side."
Attorney Spencer Kuvin, one of dozens of lawyers who successfully sued Epstein on behalf of roughly 30 women who claimed
he lured them to his Palm Beach mansion for sexually-charged massages when they were as young as 14, said he always found the
comment curious.
"How would he know that?" he said of Trump's acknowledgement of Epstein's penchant for young women. The interview came
nearly six years before Epstein's secret sex life exploded into public view when the money manager pleaded guilty to Florida
charges of procuring and soliciting a minor for prostitution. "Why would he make a joke like that?" the West Palm Beach attorney
asked.
Be nice if someone found the guest list because Bill Clinton wouldn't be able to kill that many people to cover it up. It'd
be sweet if they found evidence that Trump went, because he definitely did. He's probably the one to name it "Lolita Express."...no,
that was probably Bill.
"The Government aligned themselves with Epstein, working against his victims, for 11 years..."
THE SAME can be said for this: "The Government aligned themselves with APARTHEID Israhell, working against their Palestinians
victims, for over 70 years... "
Epstein has dirt on EVERYONE ... If he ever gets in a legitimate court room? - many, many, shitty people will be in trouble
... GOP and Democrat. And Trump? Acosta is in his admin, right? Or, he didn't fire the scum yet? And when is Hillary going to
jail?
I assume MOSSAD & friends will have to pull some very fancy rabbits out of their hat to get this buried again. The $wamp
can't afford to have him cooperating, so I'm guessing Epstein will have to 'retire' to Tel-Aviv - or have an accident/become 'depressed,
etc.'
I will further bet that JE has had adequate notice of all this to be getting out of the USA to Balfourstan - a non-extradition
country - ASAP.
Saker is talking about this episode YouTube. Trump clearly
tries to exploit this episode to his advantage...
There is also such thing as Diplomacy... To say "members of Congress support Israel because they are collecting money from Jewish
groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)" (as if this is a new) you are clearly positioning herself against
the colleagues, not matter who they are. that complicates your position without any return on investment.
Notable quotes:
"... In fact, all Omar did was to say on Twitter that some members of Congress support Israel because they are collecting money from Jewish groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Duh?! Is that really news to anybody? Even Trump himself mentioned that during this campaign. ..."
"... By the way, check out how Rep. Ilhan Omar grills that sorry SOB Abrams here: http://thesaker.is/rep-ilhan-omar-vs-elliott-abrams/ . This young lady clearly has more courage and integrity that all her colleagues taken together! ..."
"... But the Neocons have now "lowered" Trump to the status of "rooster" and he now is acting like a willing "combat rooster" for those who "lowered" him to that status, which makes Trump the worst and most despised kind of "rooster": one who willingly serves his own rapists. See for yourself: ..."
In the bad old days of the Soviet Union, one of the tricks used by the prison/camp administration to break a prisoner (be he political
or not) was to stick him into a cell with the so-called "roosters". In the slang of the Russian criminal underworld, the "roosters"
are the very lowest category of prisoners (in what is a rather complex hierarchy): "roosters" are either homosexuals, rapists, child
molesters or men who have been down-ranked ("lowered" in slang) to that status as a punishment for some kind of action which the
criminals consider reprehensible (like interacting with other "roosters", mistakenly sitting down next to one, not repaying a card-debt,
etc.).
I won't go into all the details here, but suffice to say that one thing which was well known in the Soviet jails/camps is that
somebody who has committed some kind of trespass can be "lowered" to the status of "rooster" and that the prison/camp administration
often uses these man as "combat roosters" – they send them to attack and even rape some prisoner who needs to be broken. And, needless
to say, after you have been raped by such "roosters" you yourself get that status for the rest of your life.
What Trump did in the case of Rep. Ilhan Omar is act like a "lowered combat rooster", sent to abuse somebody else on the behalf
of the prison/camp administration. Of all people, Trump ought to know that accusations of anti-Semitism are absolutely, total
hogwash. This is just a verbal whip used by AIPAC/ADL/etc to beat up their opponents. In fact, all Omar did was to say on Twitter
that some members of Congress support Israel because they are collecting money from Jewish groups like the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Duh?! Is that really news to anybody? Even Trump himself mentioned that during this campaign.
By the way, check out how Rep. Ilhan Omar grills that sorry SOB Abrams here:
http://thesaker.is/rep-ilhan-omar-vs-elliott-abrams/
. This young lady clearly has more courage and integrity that all her colleagues taken together!
But the Neocons have now "lowered" Trump to the status of "rooster" and he now is acting like a willing "combat rooster" for
those who "lowered" him to that status, which makes Trump the worst and most despised kind of "rooster": one who willingly serves
his own rapists. See for yourself:
jacques sheete, February 17, 2019 at 12:07 pm GMT • 100 Words
@der einzige
Thanks for that! Still the article was excellent just for this alone.:
But the Neocons have now "lowered" Trump to the status of "rooster" and he now is acting like a willing "combat rooster"
for those who "lowered" him to that status, which makes Trump the worst and most despised kind of "rooster"
The only beef I have with that statement is that no one did it to him and he obviously volunteered for the job right from the
start.
"... While Kim has not tested his missiles or nuclear warheads in a year, few believe he will ever surrender the weapons that secure his survival and brought the U.S. superpower to the negotiating table. ..."
"... Is Trump prepared to accept a deal that leaves a nuclear North but brings about a peace treaty, diplomatic relations and a withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula? Or are American forces to be in Korea indefinitely? ..."
"... What is our vital interest in Yemen's civil war? Why would Trump not wish to extricate us from that moral and humanitarian disaster? Answer: Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and his regime would sustain a strategic defeat should the Houthis, supported by Iran, prevail. ..."
"... Before the Warsaw conference called by the U.S. to discuss the Middle East, Bibi Netanyahu's office tweeted: "This is an open meeting with representatives of leading Arab countries, that are sitting down together with Israel in order to advance the common interest of war with Iran." ..."
"... The "war-with-Iran" tweet was swiftly deleted, replaced with a new tweet that spoke of "the common interest of combating Iran." Like many Americans with whom he is close, Bibi has never hidden his belief as to what we Americans must do to Iran. ..."
"... Today, the U.S. maintains a policy of containment of Russia and China, which are more united than they have been since the first days of the Cold War. We are responsible for defending 28 NATO nations in Europe, twice as many as during the Cold War, plus Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Australia and New Zealand. ..."
"... We have troops in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, and appear on the cusp of collisions with Venezuela and Iran. Yet we field armed forces a fraction of the size they were in the 1950s and 1960s and the Reagan era. ..."
In the Venezuelan crisis, said President Donald Trump in Florida, "All options are on the table." And if Venezuela's generals
persist in their refusal to break with Nicolas Maduro, they could "lose everything."
Another example of Yankee bluster and bluff? Or is Trump prepared to use military force to bring down Maduro and install Juan
Guaido, the president of the national assembly who has declared himself president of Venezuela? We will get an indication this weekend,
as a convoy of food and humanitarian aid tries to force its way into Venezuela from Colombia. Yet, even given the brutality of the
regime and the suffering of the people -- 1 in 10 have fled -- it is hard to see Trump sending the Marines to fight the Venezuelan
army in Venezuela.
Where would Trump get the authority for such a war? Still, the lead role that Trump has assumed in the crisis raises a question.
Does the reflexive interventionism -- America is "the indispensable nation!" -- that propelled us into the forever war of the Middle
East, retain its hold on the American mind?
Next week, Trump meets in Hanoi with North Korea's Kim Jong Un. While Kim has not tested his missiles or nuclear warheads
in a year, few believe he will ever surrender the weapons that secure his survival and brought the U.S. superpower to the negotiating
table.
Is Trump prepared to accept a deal that leaves a nuclear North but brings about a peace treaty, diplomatic relations and a
withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula? Or are American forces to be in Korea indefinitely?
Nancy Pelosi's House just voted to cut off U.S. support for the Saudi war against the Houthi rebels in Yemen. The Senate may follow.
Yet Trump is prepared to use his first veto to kill that War Powers Resolution and retain the right to help the Saudi war effort.
What is our vital interest in Yemen's civil war? Why would Trump not wish to extricate us from that moral and humanitarian
disaster? Answer: Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and his regime would sustain a strategic defeat should the Houthis, supported
by Iran, prevail.
Before the Warsaw conference called by the U.S. to discuss the Middle East, Bibi Netanyahu's office tweeted: "This is an open
meeting with representatives of leading Arab countries, that are sitting down together with Israel in order to advance the common
interest of war with Iran."
The "war-with-Iran" tweet was swiftly deleted, replaced with a new tweet that spoke of "the common interest of combating Iran."
Like many Americans with whom he is close, Bibi has never hidden his belief as to what we Americans must do to Iran.
Early this week came leaks that Trump officials have discovered that Shiite Iran has been secretly collaborating with the Sunni
terrorists of al-Qaida. This could, headlined The Washington Times, provide "the legal rationale for U.S. military strikes" on Iran.
At the Munich Security Conference, however, NATO allies Britain, France and Germany recommitted to the Iran nuclear treaty from
which Trump withdrew, and to improved economic relations with Tehran.
Trump pledged months ago to bring home the 2,000 U.S. troops in Syria and half of the 14,000 in Afghanistan. But he is meeting
resistance in his own party in Congress and even in his own administration. Reasons: A U.S. pullout from Syria would abandon our
Kurdish allies to the Turks, who see them as terrorists, and would force the Kurds to cut a deal with Syria's Bashar Assad and Russia
for their security and survival. This week, Britain and France informed us that if we leave Syria, then they leave, too. As for pulling
out of Afghanistan, the probable result would be the fall of the Kabul government and return of the Taliban, who hold more territory
now than they have since being overthrown 18 years ago. For Afghans who cast their lot with the Americans, it would not go well.
U.S. relations with Russia, which Trump promised to improve, have chilled to Cold War status. The U.S. is pulling out of Ronald
Reagan's INF treaty, which bans land-based nuclear missiles of 300 to 3,000 mile range.
Putin has said that any reintroduction of land-based U.S. missiles to Europe would mean a new class of Russian missiles targeted
on Europe -- and on the United States.
Today, the U.S. maintains a policy of containment of Russia and China, which are more united than they have been since the
first days of the Cold War. We are responsible for defending 28 NATO nations in Europe, twice as many as during the Cold War, plus
Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Australia and New Zealand.
We have troops in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, and appear on the cusp of collisions with Venezuela and Iran. Yet we field
armed forces a fraction of the size they were in the 1950s and 1960s and the Reagan era.
And the U.S. national debt is now larger than the U.S. economy. This is imperial overstretch. It is unsustainable.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided
America Forever." Copyright 2019 Creators.com.
Ilhan Omar Is Not Finished With AIPAC
There's a lot to be said about this year's AIPAC conference, but primarily, it's been a venue
for Democrats and Republicans in attendance to illustrate just how hopping mad they've become
over Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar.
Omar didn't attend the conference, but given how many times she was referenced over the past
three days, she might as well have been the keynote speaker. Which is why it's understandable
that on the third day of the conference, Omar is continuing to "raise hell" about it and push
back on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's address to AIPAC, which both directly and
indirectly mentioned her.
"Again the Jews are said to have too much influence, too much power, too much money," he
said. "I have a message to all the anti-Semites out there...whether they march through the
streets of Charlottesville, or murder worshipers in a synagogue in Pittsburgh. Whether they
voice their hatred in political parties in...the United States: the Jewish people do not bow
down. We stand up, we fight, and we win."
It was the final day of
AIPAC's annual policy conference in Washington, D.C., and the star of the gathering had finally appeared: Benjamin
Netanyahu. An estimated 18,000 attendees sat in rows in a large downtown convention center, watching the Israeli prime
minister address them through a patchy satellite feed on gigantic blue screens; although Netanyahu met with President
Donald Trump in Washington this week, he cut short his trip after rockets fired from Gaza struck a home outside Tel
Aviv.
It was difficult to hear what Netanyahu was saying at times, but the audience didn't care: The staunch Israel
supporters who filled the room gave him standing ovations. The only other speaker who won nearly as much applause on
Tuesday morning was David Friedman, the U.S. ambassador to Israel. He brought greetings from Trump, "Israel's greatest
ally ever to reside in the White House," as Friedman put it. The whole event underscored the enthusiastic
Trump-Netanyahu alliance, even by the standard of the traditionally strong U.S.-Israel relationship. In his meeting with
Trump at the White House on Monday, Netanyahu compared him to Cyrus the Great, the Persian king, and Harry Truman, the
U.S. president who recognized Israel.
Anxiety was a consistent
theme throughout the conference: American and Israeli leaders condemned rising anti-Semitism and consistently took shots
at Representative Ilhan Omar, the freshman Democrat from Minnesota who
caused an uproar
over her use of anti-Semitic tropes and criticisms of Israel. Many speakers wrung their hands over
the way Israel is allegedly becoming a so-called wedge issue in American politics, lamenting partisan divisions over
support for the Jewish state.
And yet, the two men who have been among the greatest drivers of U.S. political division over Israel, Trump and
Netanyahu, were celebrated. Inside the grand ballroom at AIPAC's annual conference, longtime attendees and political
leaders forcefully maintained that support for Israel is as strong and unifying as it has ever been. Outside the
hermetic world of AIPAC, however, the American political conversation about Israel is shifting, in part because of
backlash against America's and Israel's right-wing leaders.
... ... ...
But even as American
political leaders forcefully maintained that U.S. support for Israel hasn't changed, they avoided addressing the
incredible discomfort that many American Jews, almost all Democrats, and a wide range of self-described Israel
supporters feel about Trump and Netanyahu. Many people who would count themselves among these groups believe that Trump
has enabled the rise of right-wing extremism in the United States,
including the kind of virulent anti-Semitism that led to the synagogue shooting
in Pittsburgh last fall.
In 2018,
the American Jewish Committee (AJC) found that 71 percent of American Jews rate Trump's performance as unfavorable.
(Disapproval of Trump is
even higher
among Democrats as a whole.) And according to AJC's survey, 57 percent of American Jews
disapprove
of how the president is handling U.S.-Israel relations. American attitudes toward Netanyahu are less
commonly measured in polling data, but
anecdotal evidence
from events in recent years suggests that American attitudes toward the Israeli prime minister
are
cold
.
AIPAC has tried to navigate these tensions among Jews, Democrats, and pro-Israel supporters at several points in
recent years, usually awkwardly. In 2016, AIPAC's president, Lillian Pinkus,
apologized
for a speech made by Trump, who was then a presidential candidate, because he openly criticized President
Barack Obama. That same year, an Orthodox rabbi in D.C. stood up during Trump's speech,
shouting
that he is "wicked" and "inspires racists and bigots."
More recently, AIPAC
endorsed
a statement by the American Jewish Committee condemning Otzma Yehudit, the far-right Israeli political
party of Kahanists, who believe that Arabs are the enemies of Jews and shouldn't have political rights within the state
of Israel. Although neither statement said it outright, these were oblique criticisms of Netanyahu, who reached out to
Otzma in the hope of cobbling together a winning governing coalition in the upcoming Israeli elections.
"The American Jewish establishment has conducted itself for decades under the assumption that the right approach to
strengthening the U.S.-Israel relationship is by unquestioning support for whatever is going on over in Israel," said
Jeremy Ben-Ami, the head of J Street, an organization that often frames itself as the progressive alternative to AIPAC.
"Where we are, in 2019, is a world in which the overwhelming majority of the people they're supposed to represent -- which
is American Jews and others who care about Israel -- are deeply upset about what's going on here and what's going on
there."
Despite its bipartisan aspirations, AIPAC is unable to set a consensus D.C. policy conversation on Israel. One of its
main legislative priorities,
a bill condemning the boycotts, divestments, and sanctions movement
in opposition to Israel, generated partisan
backlash earlier this year: "Nothing -- nothing -- will motivate Americans to exercise their rights more than efforts to
suppress them," said Chris Van Hollen, the senator from Maryland. "Trying to suppress free speech, even unpopular speech
will only add momentum." And when Omar criticized AIPAC directly, claiming that the organization's influence in
Washington is "all about the Benjamins," or financial influence, Democrats in the House were
unable to rally
behind a straightforward condemnation of anti-Semitism.
But at AIPAC's policy conference, as attendees posed for pictures with a person in a plush, large-headed Golda Meir
costume and applauded wildly at mentions of America's embassy in Jerusalem, Trump's decision to withdraw from the Iran
deal, and his recognition of Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights, they did not acknowledge that the American
conversation about Israel might be fracturing under Trump and Netanyahu. As the pro-Israel activists listened to
American and Israeli leaders tell them that support for Israel is as strong as ever, they gamely nodded along.
"... It gives a formal US stamp of approval to Israel's violation of international law, and, in particular of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits an occupying power from transferring its civilians into occupied territory. Roughly 20,000 Israeli settlers live in the occupied Golan Heights today – now with the unambiguous backing of the US government. ..."
"... Jared Kusher's family is so close Netanyahu that the prime minister once slept in Kushner's childhood bedroom . Between the Trump administration's personnel and rightward lurch in Israeli politics, the pieces that would make the current one-state reality permanent are rapidly falling into place. ..."
No country in the world recognizes Israel's rule over the Golan Heights, occupied by
Israel in 1967 and unilaterally annexed in 1981 – no country,
that is, until now.
Donald Trump signed a presidential proclamation on Monday formally recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, still
considered Syrian territory under international law. Standing by President Trump's side during an address by the two heads of state
in Washington DC, the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, reportedly called Trump's decision "
historic justice " and gifted the president a box of wine from the occupied territory. As they embraced, Israeli forces began
an aerial bombardment of the besieged Gaza Strip after rockets launched from Gaza hit a house in a community north of Tel Aviv earlier
that day.
Trump's announcement is unmistakably an election-time favor for Netanyahu. Saddled with multiple corruption charges, including
one for bribery, Netanyahu and his Likud party have been flagging in the polls. Likud increasingly appears threatened by the center-right
Blue and White party, jointly headed by the taciturn retired general Benny Gantz and former TV personality Yair Lapid. Netanyahu's
desperation can be measured by the extremity of his rhetoric. He and his surrogates have spent the past several weeks waging a hateful,
vicious campaign, accusing the Arab political parties of supporting terrorism and explicitly warning that a Gantz and Lapid victory
would lead to dead Israelis.
Many in Israel, however, view Netanyahu, despite his flaws, as a talented statesman and skilled advocate for the country's interests
on the international stage, and Netanyahu has campaigned on achievements such as normalizing relations with the Gulf states and the
US embassy's move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The Golan Heights declaration – which initially took even the secretary of state, Mike
Pompeo, who was in Israel at the time, by surprise – is likely meant to bolster this image.
Trump's recognition of the Golan Heights marks the total capture of US policymaking in the Middle East by pro-Israel right
But Trump's Golan Heights proclamation is not just a cynical political gambit. It is a dramatic change in US policy in the Middle
East that could have serious consequences. Trump, unlike his predecessors, has never even pretended to abide by international norms
and conventions. And yet the decision to recognize Israeli sovereignty over territory that the international community nearly unanimously
considers occupied, or at the very least disputed, is unprecedented.
It gives a formal US stamp of approval to Israel's violation of international law, and, in particular of the Fourth Geneva
Convention, which prohibits an occupying power from transferring its civilians into occupied territory. Roughly 20,000 Israeli settlers
live in the occupied Golan Heights today – now with the unambiguous backing of the US government.
This potentially paves the way for Israel's annexation, in part or whole, of the West Bank. It has long been a talking
point on the Israeli hard right that, despite the international community's protestations, there would be few consequences for extending
Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank . Trump's declaration,
it seems, has not only proven them right, but given them an added boost: unlike during the Obama years, they can be confident that
the global hegemon will take their side.
If Netanyahu's Likud wins enough seats on 9 April to form a government, it is very like that annexation, at the very least, will
be on the table for discussion. The Likud's central committee unanimously voted in 2017 in favor of annexing the West Bank. Naftali
Bennett, co-chair of the New Right party, has proposed a plan to annex parts of Area C of the West Bank. And the other rightwing
parties – the extremist Union of Parties of the Right and Moshe Feiglin's Identity party, both of which would almost certainly sit
in a future Likud government – have only more extreme proposals for dealing with "the Palestinian question", including the forced
transfer of Palestinians out of the West Bank and into Jordan.
Trump's recognition of the Golan Heights marks the total capture of US policymaking in the Middle East by pro-Israel right. US
ambassador to Israel David Friedman is an opponent of the two-state solution who previously operated the charitable arm of
a rightwing orthodox religious seminary in the West Bank settlement of Beit El. Jared Kusher's family is so close Netanyahu
that the prime minister once slept
in Kushner's childhood bedroom . Between the Trump administration's personnel and rightward lurch in Israeli politics, the pieces
that would make the current one-state reality permanent are rapidly falling into place.
It is important to remember this in light of the glitz and pablum of the AIPAC policy conference taking place this week in Washington
DC, where the PR hacks and policy flacks are working hard to launder Israel's image, to obscure the fact that there is one sovereign
state between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea that determines the lives of roughly 13 million people; that of those 13
million, only half – Israeli Jews – have full citizenship and social rights; and that the other half, the Palestinians, live under
a range of discriminatory systems, from codified discrimination but legal citizenship within Israel, to residency without the right
to vote in East Jerusalem, to military dictatorship in the West Bank.
Donald Trump , his administration, the pro-Israel lobby,
and Netanyahu all intend to keep it that way.
Joshua Leifer is an associate editor at Dissent. Previously, he worked at +972 Magazine and was based in Jerusalem
AFP news agency
Verified account @AFP
2h2 hours ago
#UPDATE Saudi Arabia has rejected US President Donald Trump's recognition of Syria's Golan
Heights as Israeli territory, condemning it as a violation of international law http://u.afp.com/JqPV #GolanHeights
"US President Ronald Reagan on Israel's decision to annex the 🇸🇾 Syrian
Golan Heights 🇸🇾 in 1981:
"'We do deplore this unilateral action by Israel, which has increased the difficulty of
seeking peace in the Middle East under the terms of the U.N. Resolutions 242 and 338.'"
His attitude made UNSCR 497 possible. Trump's move shows he's anti-Reagan, which is a
point his opponents could use if they weren't pro-Zionist like Trump.
This rocket attack was a gift to Bibi, not a constraint in any manner. The one thing that
could save that pathetic waste of oxygen is another war in Gaza. Taken together with the
upcoming election, it's even harder to see how Hamas could possibly benefit from the
situation. Therefore my money would be on a splinter group in Gaza aiming to erode popular
support for Hamas, or a false flag by Netanyahoo and cohorts.
Israel now has the pretext the media desires to whitewash its crimes and the Israelis will
once again be picnicking along the Palestinian border in Gaza cheering the destruction.
I can only agree with Gideon Levy quoted @51 as the explanation for the Israeli madness:
they have thoroughly brainwashed themselves. Bibi isn't the cause for the racism, he is a
symptom. There will be no one stepping forward from that populace who would even poke at the
status quo. Change will only be imposed from the outside. Much like in the US where the
'progressives' (maximum snark) have deluded themselves into thinking Trump is the problem.
Trump is the symptom, not the cause. We ourselves, both the left and the right, are the
problem.
The recent missile attack was denied by Hamas and claimed by what was a new unknown group
whose name I can't recall. Interesting that in the very limiting confines of Gaza there could
arise a group armed with missiles unknown to Hamas. That led me to think in terms of Zionist
provocation to help criminal Bibi.
Nutty clearly reached a dead-end policy-wise long ago and has done nothing to solve
Palestine's fundamental problem of the presence of so many Zionists. Trump hasn't helped
Zionistan with his illegal declaration of Golan belonging to it as it only ensures Syria will
eventually regain it in what will be a ruinous war.
Nobody has mentioned the presence of an enlightened Zionist leader (is there such a
thing?) amongst the candidates. But if there is one, s/he needs to be elected as at some
future point Israel will be replaced by Palestine.
April-May-June sure looking like some very interesting months geopolitically.
Israel/Gaza
Ukraine
Brexit/UK - bye-bye May?
EU Elections - bye-bye Merkel?
Indonesia Elections
India Elections
South Africa Elections
Australia Elections
That's 25% of the G20 right there potentially changing leaders.
"But whoever wins the election will have an interest in a fundamental change of the
situation. A new leader in Tel Aviv might have ideas on how to do that."
Gideon Levy, in a recent article in Haaretz, dispels any notion that fundamental change is
even possible in Israel.
"Simply put, the people are the problem. Netanyahu has voters. There are those who vote
for his kind. There are those who have hated Arabs long before Netanyahu. There are those who
despise blacks, detest foreigners, exploit the weak and look down their noses at the whole
world – and not because of Netanyahu. There are those who believe they are the chosen
people and therefore deserve everything.
There are those who think that after the Holocaust, they are permitted to do anything.
There are those who believe that Israel is tops in the world in every field, that
international law doesn't apply to it, and that no one can tell it what to do.
There are those who think Israelis are victims – always victims, the only victims
– and that the whole world is against us. There are those who are convinced that Israel
is allowed to do anything, simply because it can.
There are those who believe in the sword alone. There are those who champion aggression,
in the territories and on the roads, and who don't know any other language. There are
unprecedented levels of ignorance.
There's brainwashing to an extent unknown in a democracy. Is Netanyahu responsible for all of
this? Come on.
The problem is the atmosphere, the spirit of the times, the values and outlooks that
have become ingrained here during decades of Zionism.
...The apartheid did not start with him and will not end with his departure; it probably
won't even be dented. One of the most racist nations in the world cannot complain about its
prime minister's racism....That there is no ideological alternative has nothing to do with
Netanyahu."
One can only imagine the reaction stateside if this article appeared in a major American
publication. Politicians would be falling over themselves in a frenzy of outrage and the
jewish lobbies would be pounding the drumbeats of 'anti-semite'.
As per the above assessment, the 'single missile at long range near a fine hospital, with
seven "wounded" and none killed' seems like the most likely scenario.
So what would this accomplish? Well most people here have been saying that Benny will most
likely pull some sort of military escalation in the face of being tried for various things
and being called 'soft' on Palestinian "terrorists". In his position how can he not? With the
official nod from The Orange One re: the annexation of the Golan to ratchet up the tension,
maybe even some further escalation? A recently installed USAn base and a few pledge of
allegiance papers signed might be a good trip-wire in case thins heat up... As we have seen
seemingly disparate events are often planned to coincide at pivotal times. What might be some
others that are ready to be sprung? Is the Donbass line ready to burst as the temps warm? Are
there a few B-52s lumbering around the airspace? Maybe the regime change dream-team is
brewing up something nasty and new in Venezuela having exhausted the rather dated playbook?
Perhaps when the Brexit fiasco begins to boil over, there will be a chaotic chorus of events
unleashed to thrill us all...!!!
"Trump & his crew have made a mockery of both #AmericaFirst & #MAGA concepts by
putting the interests of a foreign country before those of the US. I just cant understand how
Americans put up w/ this shit. Zionists & Evangelicals support it but why do the rest
stay silent?"
My simple answer: Small minds dominated by BigLie Media.
"... The president's tweet does not signal any definitive action or official state recognition, but it does do much to boost Netanyahu's profile with possible voters. ..."
President Donald Trump announced on Twitter Thursday that he would recognize and support Israel's control
over the disputed Golan Heights territory on the border of Syria.
The decision immediately followed
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's meeting with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu Thursday, nearly a
year after Trump officially recognized Jerusalem as the sole capital of Israel and announced that he would
move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv.
"After 52 years it is time for the United States to fully recognize Israel's Sovereignty over the Golan
Heights, which is of critical strategic and security importance to the State of Israel and Regional
Stability!" Trump tweeted early Thursday afternoon.
Smoke from explosions rises during
fighting in the village of Jubata Al Khashab, held by Syrian rebel groups fighting to overthrow President
Bashar al-Assad, as seen from the Israeli side of the border fence between Syria and the Israeli-occupied
Golan Heights, on September 11, 2016.
REUTERS/Baz
Ratner
Netanyahu, a conservative leader who is currently facing the threat of indictment for bribery and three
counts of breach of trust, has a tough election coming up in early April. The president's announcement,
followed by a planned trip to the White House, will surely bolster the Israeli leader's chances of retaining
his seat.
In fact, in 2015, President Barack Obama refused to meet with Netanyahu close to his election date,
saying, "He needs to be far away enough from the election that it doesn't look like in some ways we're
meddling or putting our thumbs on the scale."
But President Trump has signaled that he doesn't mind putting his thumb on the scale for his political
ally, even when it involves the controversial and much-disputed Golan Heights territory.
"At a time when Iran seeks to use Syria as a platform to destroy Israel, President Trump boldly
recognizes Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights," Netanyahu tweeted on Thursday. "Thank you President
Trump!"
The Golan Heights, a strategically situated 400-plus square mile area that overlooks Damascus, was first
captured by Israel from Syria in the 1967 Arab war. In 1973, Syria attempted to take the land back during
the Yom Kippur War and during a surprise attack, Egyptian and Syrian troops managed to kill 2,688 Israeli
soldiers. Israel, however, prevailed and retained control. They annexed the Golan Heights in 1981, but the
move was never officially recognized by the international community, including the United States. Syria and
Israel are still technically in a state of war over the land, but the area is now a demilitarized zone
occupied by U.N. observers.
The Golan Heights are an atypically fertile land in the desert that holds key water sources: About
one-third of Israel's water supply currently comes from Golan. The territory also provides Israel with a
high vantage point to monitor the Syrian military and ward off attacks.
There are currently about 30 Israeli settlements on the land, which are home to 20,000 citizens. Experts
estimate that there are likely about 20,000 Syrians living in Golan, as well. They are mostly part of the
Druze sect. The Druze, however, are typically at odds with the Syrian government.
There are also military concerns about Trump's move. Israel is currently in the middle of a precarious
situation with its neighbors: It has been striking Iranian targets in Syria and this latest development,
created by the Trump, could provoke Syria, Russia and Iran to further isolate and perhaps attack Israel,
complicating matters immensely.
The situation also hurts America's standing on Russia's annexation of the Crimean Peninsula. "It makes it
quite hard for the US to continue to contest Russia's annexation of Crimea under the principle that taking
territory by force is illegal," wrote Ilan Goldenberg, Middle East security director at the Center for a New
American Security, on Twitter. "We now have no leg to stand on and the Russians will use it."
The president's tweet does not signal any definitive action or official state recognition, but it does do
much to boost Netanyahu's profile with possible voters.
Related Stories
"... There's brainwashing to an extent unknown in a democracy. Is Netanyahu responsible for all of this? Come on. ..."
"... The problem is the atmosphere, the spirit of the times, the values and outlooks that have become ingrained here during decades of Zionism. ..."
"... ...The apartheid did not start with him and will not end with his departure; it probably won't even be dented. One of the most racist nations in the world cannot complain about its prime minister's racism....That there is no ideological alternative has nothing to do with Netanyahu." ..."
As per the above assessment, the 'single missile at long range near a fine hospital, with
seven "wounded" and none killed' seems like the most likely scenario.
So what would this accomplish? Well most people here have been saying that Benny will most
likely pull some sort of military escalation in the face of being tried for various things
and being called 'soft' on Palestinian "terrorists". In his position how can he not? With the
official nod from The Orange One re: the annexation of the Golan to ratchet up the tension,
maybe even some further escalation?
A recently installed USAn base and a few pledge of allegiance papers signed might be a
good trip-wire in case thins heat up...
As we have seen seemingly disparate events are often planned to coincide at pivotal times.
What might be some others that are ready to be sprung? Is the Donbass line ready to burst as
the temps warm?
Are there a few B-52s lumbering around the airspace?
Maybe the regime change dream-team is brewing up something nasty and new in Venezuela
having exhausted the rather dated playbook? Perhaps when the Brexit fiasco begins to boil
over, there will be a chaotic chorus of events unleashed to thrill us all...!!!
"Trump & his crew have made a mockery of both #AmericaFirst & #MAGA concepts by
putting the interests of a foreign country before those of the US. I just cant understand how
Americans put up w/ this shit. Zionists & Evangelicals support it but why do the rest
stay silent?"
My simple answer: Small minds dominated by BigLie Media.
"But whoever wins the election will have an interest in a fundamental change of the
situation. A new leader in Tel Aviv might have ideas on how to do that."
Gideon Levy, in a recent article in Haaretz, dispels any notion that fundamental change is
even possible in Israel.
"Simply put, the people are the problem. Netanyahu has voters. There are those who vote
for his kind. There are those who have hated Arabs long before Netanyahu. There are those who
despise blacks, detest foreigners, exploit the weak and look down their noses at the whole
world – and not because of Netanyahu. There are those who believe they are the chosen
people and therefore deserve everything.
There are those who think that after the Holocaust, they are permitted to do anything.
There are those who believe that Israel is tops in the world in every field, that
international law doesn't apply to it, and that no one can tell it what to do.
There are those who think Israelis are victims – always victims, the only victims
– and that the whole world is against us. There are those who are convinced that Israel
is allowed to do anything, simply because it can.
There are those who believe in the sword alone. There are those who champion aggression,
in the territories and on the roads, and who don't know any other language. There are
unprecedented levels of ignorance.
There's brainwashing to an extent unknown in a democracy. Is Netanyahu responsible for all of
this? Come on.
The problem is the atmosphere, the spirit of the times, the values and outlooks that
have become ingrained here during decades of Zionism.
...The apartheid did not start with him and will not end with his departure; it probably
won't even be dented. One of the most racist nations in the world cannot complain about its
prime minister's racism....That there is no ideological alternative has nothing to do with
Netanyahu."
One can only imagine the reaction stateside if this article appeared in a major American
publication. Politicians would be falling over themselves in a frenzy of outrage and the
jewish lobbies would be pounding the drumbeats of 'anti-semite'.
This rocket attack was a gift to Bibi, not a constraint in any manner. The one thing that
could save that pathetic waste of oxygen is another war in Gaza. Taken together with the
upcoming election, it's even harder to see how Hamas could possibly benefit from the
situation. Therefore my money would be on a splinter group in Gaza aiming to erode popular
support for Hamas, or a false flag by Netanyahoo and cohorts.
Israel now has the pretext the media desires to whitewash its crimes and the Israelis will
once again be picnicking along the Palestinian border in Gaza cheering the destruction.
I can only agree with Gideon Levy quoted @51 as the explanation for the Israeli madness:
they have thoroughly brainwashed themselves. Bibi isn't the cause for the racism, he is a
symptom. There will be no one stepping forward from that populace who would even poke at the
status quo. Change will only be imposed from the outside. Much like in the US where the
'progressives' (maximum snark) have deluded themselves into thinking Trump is the problem.
Trump is the symptom, not the cause. We ourselves, both the left and the right, are the
problem.
President Trump reportedly ordered former Chief of Staff John Kelly to give son-in-law Jared
Kushner a top-secret security clearance, even though the decision was not supported by the
intelligence community.
Trump directed Kelly to give his senior adviser the security clearance early last year after
both Kushner and wife, Ivanka Trump, told the president to intervene in the process,
according to The Washington Post .
Kelly was apparently so concerned about the move, he documented Trump's request in a memo,
the paper said. Kushner finally received the clearance in May.
Both Ivanka and the president have said in the past that they did not interfere in the
security-clearance process.
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said on Thursday
that his committee is already probing the process and is awaiting documents they had requested
from the White House.
A spokesman for Kushner's lawyer told the paper that in 2018, "White House and security
clearance officials affirmed that Mr. Kushner's security clearance was handled in the regular
process with no pressure from anyone."
Is he really that stupid? After Hillary Clinton email scandal ? Amazing ! Those people really feel that they are above the
law.
Notable quotes:
"... But Lowell said Kushner was not violating federal law requiring official communications to be preserved because he takes screenshots of his messages and then sends them to his White House email account, Cummings wrote. ..."
"... Cummings said Lowell also told him and then-South Carolina GOP Rep. Trey Gowdy, who was the chair at the time of the December meeting, that first daughter and presidential adviser Ivanka Trump conducts official White House business on her personal email account. ..."
President Trump's adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner used the encrypted
messaging service WhatsApp as well as his personal email account to conduct official business,
a top House Democrat charged Thursday.
The revelation came during a Dec. 19 meeting of the House Oversight and Reform Committee,
which released the information in a letter Thursday.
Chairman Elijah Cummings wrote to White House counsel Pat Cipollone to tell him that
Kushner's lawyer, Abbe Lowell, had confirmed during the meeting that Kushner "continues to use"
WhatsApp to conduct White House business.
But Lowell said Kushner was not violating federal law requiring official communications to
be preserved because he takes screenshots of his messages and then sends them to his White
House email account, Cummings wrote.
Kushner, whom the president put in charge of finding peace in the Middle East, regularly
communicates with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman via WhatsApp, Politico reported.
It was unclear whether Kushner continued to use WhatsApp after the December meeting.
Cummings said Lowell also told him and then-South Carolina GOP Rep. Trey Gowdy, who was the
chair at the time of the December meeting, that first daughter and presidential adviser Ivanka
Trump conducts official White House business on her personal email account.
"These communications raise questions about whether these officials complied with the
Presidential Records Act and whether the White House identified this personal email use during
its internal review and took steps to address it," Cummings wrote.
Before Jared Kushner became a senior White House adviser, he was at the helm
of the New York Observer - where he would personally order the removal of content that was critical of his
associates.
According to a report by
Buzzfeed
, the president's son-in-law ordered a software developer at his newspaper to kill a handful of
stories that were unfavorable to his cronies.
One of the stories that he had removed from online was a seemingly benign
story from 2012 about
NBA
Commissioner Adam Silver purchasing a $6.75million apartment, however personal real estate purchases
are something privacy-conscious famous New Yorkers typically like to keep out of the press.
The NBA commissioner has since publicly praised his friend, Kushner, for
helping the NBA find space for a retail store.
Kushner also had a legal story about a 2010 settlement between a then-New York
attorney general Andrew Cuomo and real estate firm Vantage Properties wiped from the Observer site.
That suit alleged Vantage illegally forced tenants out of their apartments to
raise rents.
+5
Copy link to paste in your message
'Nothing Sacred But the Truth': Before Jared Kushner went to work for the Trump
administration he was at the helm of the New York Observer after purchasing the publication in 2006 for
$10million. According to a report, Kushner used his power to have stories that were critical of his rich
friends wiped from the site
+5
Copy link to paste in your message
Jared Kushner used his position as owner of the New York Observer to wipe stories
from the site that his upper-echelon associates would not want out. One of the vanished pieces was about
NBA Commissioner Adam Silver's (pictured) purchasing a $6.7million apartment
Additionally Kushner ordered another 2010 article deleted about Vantage's top
executive Neil Rubler removed that apparently had him on a '10 worst landlords' list.
The Observer's articles often took aim at the city's upper-echelon but it
faltered under Kushner's leadership.
He stepped down from the helm of the publication to join the Trump
administration. The ownership of the Observer is currently in a family trust, with the Observer Media Group
saying he does not currently have a hand in editorial matters.
Austin Smith, the software employee who handled the eye-raising requests for
content to be deleted, told Buzzfeed: 'That Kushner, a newspaper owner of all people, would participate in
an administration that labels news media the enemy of the people, is an affront to the very notion of the
freedom of the press and an utter betrayal of those who worked hard and in good faith for him at the
Observer,'
Meanwhile Elizabeth Spiers who was the Editor-in-Chief at the time Kushner was
purging articles he found unfavorable, said she was not aware that he was doing so, and that he purposely
went behind her back to get the underhanded job done.
'If I had known about it, Jared and I would have had a big problem,' she
said.
'Jared's such a coward. Went directly to Austin because he knew I wouldn't do
it.' Spiers said adding that that Smith didn't have any choice in the matter but to delete the stories since
he was not an editorial employee.
Spiers took to Twitter Monday night with some choice words for Kushner.
'I found out a few months ago that while I was the editor in chief of the
Observer, Jared was instructing our third party tech provider to delete articles critical of his business
associates w/out my knowledge. I don't have enough choice expletives describe my feelings about that,' she
tweeted in response to the report published by Buzzfeed.
+5
Copy link to paste in your message
Elizabeth Spiers pictured with Kushner at an Observer event in 2011 had choice
words for the president's son-in-law's under-handed deletion of articles to the favor of his wealthy
friends
+5
Copy link to paste in your message
+5
Copy link to paste in your message
Copy link to paste in your message
...
Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump made $83 million in 2017
Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
0:00
Previous
Play
Skip
LIVE
Mute
00:00
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration Time
0:55
Fullscreen
Need Text
Video Quality
Minimize
Expand
Close
'But if you want to be the worst possible owner of a news operation,
vindictively and unethically erasing the work of your own your own (severely underpaid, hardworking)
journalists solely to lubricate the volume and frequency of your cocktail party invites is a good way to do
it,' Spiers added.
Kushner's under-the-table favors via his news publication did not end when
Spiers was out.
Instead, he continued wiping the pages clean for his friends in high places
under Aaron Gell as well.
Gell, Spiers' deputy editor and successor, said he also was unaware that
Kushner was deleting the work of his editorial staff as favors to his friends, as the president's son-in-law
was still using the tech team to remove the articles.
'When Jared announced I was out, he told me, ''I just needed someone I could
trust,'' Gell said to BuzzFeed News.
'The more I learn about how he wanted to run the paper, the more I've been
able to take that as a compliment.'
Kushner purchased the New York Observer in 2006 for $10million, with money he
made from real-estate investments. The money for those property investments was gifted to him by his
family.
Advertisement
Read more:
Observer Media has once again bounced its editor-in-chief -- the latest sign of turmoil at the New York publication with ties
to Jared Kushner, the real estate scion and senior adviser to President Trump.
Ben Robinson
, a former chief creative officer of Thrillist, was out on Friday after only 10 months as the editor-in-chief. Observer president
James Karklins said the EIC job is not being replaced and that instead there would be "continued executive direction."
Also gone in the Friday shakeup is deputy editor Adam Laukhuf.
The top edit job now falls to social media editor Mary von Aue, according to changes posted on the Observer website, which listed
her as editorial director.
Kushner, married to Ivanka Trump, said he was stepping away from involvement with the publication he bought in 2005 shortly after
becoming an unpaid senior adviser to President Trump in early 2017. At that time, he handed the Observer to a family trust and appointed
his brother-in-law Joseph Meyer as CEO.
Karklins did not mention the new role for von Aue in his statement to The Post.
"Ben Robinson is no longer with the organization and has stepped down as Editor-in-chief of Observer," he said. "At this time
the Observer is not replacing the Editor-in-chief position and will continue to execute our content strategy with our current editorial
team in place and continued executive direction."
Said one former staffer, "Working at the Observer, you get used to unpleasant surprises. And every setback -- especially the latest
one, which I fear may signal the death of the Observer -- is entirely the fault of upper management."
Observer names former Thrillist executive to top editor job The Observer Media Group finally tapped a new editor-in-chief,
naming...
The ex-staffer said that Robinson had hoped to rekindle some of the Observer's past glory when he joined on Feb. 14, 2018. He
had staffers read "The Kingdom of New York," a collection of classic Observer stories.
"Upper management treated Ben horribly and they should be ashamed of themselves though I know they're not," the ex-staffer added.
The publication, once a salmon-colored print weekly, in its glory days had been a must-read for the media and political chattering
classes following its founding by Arthur Carter. Graydon Carter had once been its editor-in-chief before landing at Vanity Fair.
Under EIC Peter Kaplan, its "Sex and the City" column by Candice Bushnell inspired the hit TV show that starred Sarah Jessica Parker.
The publication dropped New York from its title and abandoned its print edition in early 2017 in favor of chasing a national digital
audience.
Kushner reportedly paid $10 million to acquire the money-losing publication from Arthur Carter in 2005.
Said former executive editor Merin Curotto, "More than anything, I think it's really sad. When our last EIC Ken Kurson resigned,
the editorial team -- one that for nearly two years had weathered the Trump-Kushner turmoil -- was left essentially lost at sea.
It took nine months not only to find Ben Robinson, but to convince him the Observer really was an environment ripe for change."
"... "Mr. Kushner pled guilty, he admitted the crimes. So what am I supposed to do as a prosecutor?" Christie asked. "If a guy hires a prostitute to seduce his brother-in-law, and videotapes it, and then sends the videotape to his sister in an attempt to intimidate her from testifying before a grand jury, do I really need any more justification than that?" ..."
"... Christie now writes that Jared Kushner retaliated after the 2016 election by having Stephen K. Bannon, then an executive for Trump's campaign, fire him. The White House and a spokesperson for Jared Kushner did not immediately respond to a request for comment. ..."
"... Jared is ethically deficient if he thinks his father's behavior was acceptable. ..."
"... Two crime families: a marriage made in "heaven".! ..."
Chris Christie rips Kushner's dad: 'One of the most loathsome, disgusting crimes that I prosecuted' - The Washington Post
Former New Jersey governor Chris Christie took several shots at White House senior adviser Jared Kushner in his new book "
Let Me Finish ," alleging that in an act of spite, Donald Trump's son-in-law coordinated his removal from the president's transition
team shortly after the 2016 election.
He claims Kushner was still "seething" from events that took place more than a decade prior -- when Christie, as a U.S. attorney,
prosecuted Kushner's father, Charles, for tax evasion, witness tampering and illegal campaign contributions, sending the elder Kushner
to prison for 14 months.
The former governor did not mince words while discussing the case Tuesday:
"Mr. Kushner pled guilty, he admitted the crimes. So what am I supposed to do as a prosecutor?" Christie asked. "If a guy
hires a prostitute to seduce his brother-in-law, and videotapes it, and then sends the videotape to his sister in an attempt to intimidate
her from testifying before a grand jury, do I really need any more justification than that?"
He added, "It's one of the most loathsome, disgusting crimes that I prosecuted when I was U.S. attorney," Christie said during
a segment with PBS's "Firing Line With Margaret Hoover." "And I was a U.S. attorney in New Jersey, Margaret -- so we had some loathsome
and disgusting crime going on there!"
"It's one of the most loathsome, disgusting crimes that I prosecuted...and I was the U.S. attorney in New Jersey."
@ChrisChristie talks about prosecuting Charles
Kushner for tax evasion, illegal campaign contributions and witness tampering.
#FiringLineShowPBS pic.twitter.com/rBNn0j0bCY
-- Firing Line with Margaret Hoover (@FiringLineShow)
January 29, 2019
Charles Kushner, a wealthy and well-connected real estate developer, pleaded guilty in 2004 to 18 counts of filing false tax returns,
retaliating against witnesses and making illegal campaign contributions. He was sentenced to 24 months in prison and served 14.
Christie at the time wrote in a
news release that Kushner's
guilty plea was a "great victory for the people of New Jersey."
"No matter how rich and powerful any person may be, they will be held accountable for criminal conduct by this office," he wrote.
Christie now writes that Jared Kushner retaliated after the 2016 election by having Stephen K. Bannon, then an executive for
Trump's campaign, fire him. The White House and a spokesperson for Jared Kushner did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
"Jared Kushner, still apparently seething over events that occurred a decade ago, was exacting a plot of revenge against me, a
hit job that made no sense at all for the man we had just helped elect," Christie wrote in "Let Me Finish." "And Steve Bannon, hot-shot,
big-balls campaign executive, was quietly acquiescing to it."
He continued, "What wimps, what cowards. And how disloyal to Donald Trump."
MollyNYC, 1 month ago (Edited)
So Charles Kushner (by way of suborning a witness) hires a hooker to destroy his own sister's marriage, humiliate her, and
cause what was probably profound emotional harm.
His own sister.
What does it say about Jared Kushner that after all those years, he still couldn't wrap his head around the idea that his father
-- not the federal attorney -- was the bad guy in this story?
Marilynn Gray-Raine, 1 month ago (Edited)
A SNAKE PIT, People !!! What slimy vipers, every one of them! Rotten, deeply flawed creatures in human guise! Mobsters! Soul-less
ignoranus's*. Beyond contempt. White collar crime "punishment" should be much harsher. 14 months in jail?! Really?
The cancerous
crimes these capitalist thugs commit against weaker individuals and the planet at large are IMMENSE , and the punishment should
fit the crime! I say they should all be sardined in a sewer cell with Bernie Madoff forever !
*"ignoranus" someone who is both
ignorant and an a**hole !
Wolfie Smith, 1 month ago (Edited)
tax evasion, witness tampering and illegal campaign contributions ... WTF!!!
Am I alone in seeing patterns in this White House, only the best people can attend the court of King Donald.
Aumale, 1 month ago
More proof that Trump and his ilk operate like mobsters.
UrbanLover, 1 month ago
Jared is ethically deficient if he thinks his father's behavior was acceptable.
This is one of the best summaries of Chris christi book. Bravo !
It is important to understand that Flynn approached Russian at Kusher request with the goal to derail anti-Isreali resoluition in
the US.
So if Jared then initiated firing of Flynn then Jared is a really dangerous ruthless shark.
Notable quotes:
"... When Bannon canned him at Trump Tower not long after the 2016 election, Christie demanded to know who was behind it, threatening that he would publicly finger Bannon if he didn't spill the beans. Bannon blamed Kushner, saying he was still furious over Christie's prosecution of Charles Kushner in 2005. "The kid's been taking an ax to your head with the boss ever since I got here," Bannon told him, according to the book. ..."
"... Christie also reveals how Jared Kushner bad-mouthed him to Trump in 2016, begging the future president not to name him transition chairman. "He implied I had acted unethically and inappropriately but didn't state one fact to back that up. Just a lot of feelings -- very raw feelings that had been simmering for a dozen years," he writes. ..."
"... Christie also slams Kushner for giving his father-in-law tone-deaf political advice. He says Kushner thought firing Flynn would end talk of collusion with Russia's election meddling, and that firing FBI chief James Comey would not spark "an enormous sh-t-storm" in Washington. "Again, the president was ill-served by poor advice," he writes. ..."
Chris Christie, in his new tell-all about working on Donald Trump's campaign, paints a scathing portrait of first son-in-law Jared
Kushner -- depicting him as a vengeful, underhanded dullard ill equipped to work in the White House.
In " Let Me Finish
," the former New Jersey governor accuses Kushner of orchestrating a "hit job" on him in revenge for Christie's prosecution of
Jared's dad, Charles Kushner, which resulted in him doing time in a federal pen.
"Steve Bannon made clear to me that one person and one person only was responsible for the faceless execution that Steve was now
attempting to carry out. Jared Kushner, still apparently seething over events that had occurred a decade ago," Christie writes in
the book, a copy of which was obtained by The Guardian.
In other revelations:
Christie writes about how Trump told him he was too fat and that he needed to slim down. "You gotta look better to be able
to win" in politics, Trump told him over dinner in 2005. During the 2016 presidential campaign, he also urged Christie to wear
longer ties -- like the president's -- because it would make him look thinner.
He trashes Trump's pick for attorney general, Jeff Sessions, saying that the arch-conservative former Alabama senator was
"not-ready-for-prime-time" and that his recusal from the special counsel's Russia probe led to its expansion. Christie himself
wanted the job, but he was blackballed by Kushner and Trump's daughter, Ivanka, according to the book.
Christie also slammed disgraced former national security adviser Mike Flynn, who faces sentencing for lying to the FBI about
his contacts with Russia, branding him "the Russian lackey and future federal felon."
Christie mocked the former Army general as "a train wreck from beginning to end a slow-motion car crash."
But most of his venom
is directed at Kushner,
who talked Trump out of naming Christie the head of his transition team, a position that ultimately went to Vice President Mike
Pence.
When Bannon canned him at Trump Tower not long after the 2016 election, Christie demanded to know who was behind it, threatening
that he would publicly finger Bannon if he didn't spill the beans. Bannon blamed Kushner, saying he was still furious over
Christie's prosecution of Charles Kushner in 2005. "The kid's been taking an ax to your head with the boss ever since I got here,"
Bannon told him, according to the book.
Charles Kushner pleaded guilty to 18 charges and served 14 months in a federal pen in Alabama. He also hired a hooker to
seduce his brother-in-law, recorded them doing the deed and sent a tape of the encounter to his sister -- an effort to force his
brother-in-law's silence about Kushner's crimes.
Christie also reveals how Jared Kushner bad-mouthed him to Trump in 2016, begging the future president not to name him transition
chairman. "He implied I had acted unethically and inappropriately but didn't state one fact to back that up. Just a lot of feelings
-- very raw feelings that had been simmering for a dozen years," he writes.
Kushner insisted the sex tape and blackmailing were a family matter and that his father should not have been prosecuted for it.
"This was a family matter, a matter to be handled by the family or by the rabbis," Christie writes.
Christie also slams Kushner for giving his father-in-law tone-deaf political advice. He says Kushner thought firing Flynn
would end talk of collusion with Russia's election meddling, and that firing FBI chief James Comey would not spark "an enormous sh-t-storm"
in Washington. "Again, the president was ill-served by poor advice," he writes.
Christie also claims that the Trump White House -- which other exposes have portrayed as beset by chaos and scandal -- would be
running like a Swiss watch if he had been in charge of the transition. Pence's transition team had a "thrown-together approach"
that resulted in bad hires for top posts "over and over again." Unlike other tomes by former White House staffers and journalists,
Christie takes it easy on the president, admitting only that he often speaks off the cuff, creating needless controversy.
I
would like to express my gratitude to
Jared
Kushner
for reviving interest in my 2006 book,
The
Price of Admission
. I have never met or spoken with him, and it's rare in this life to find such a selfless benefactor. Of
course, I doubt he became Donald Trump's son-in-law and
consigliere
merely
to boost my lagging sales, but still, I'm thankful.
My book exposed a grubby secret of American higher education: that the rich buy their underachieving children's way into elite
universities with massive, tax-deductible donations. It reported that New Jersey real estate developer Charles Kushner had
pledged $2.5m to
Harvard
University
not long before his son Jared was admitted to the prestigious Ivy League school, which at the time accepted about
one of every nine applicants. (Nowadays, it only takes one out of 20.)
I also quoted administrators at Jared's high school, who described him as a less-than-stellar student and expressed dismay at
Harvard's decision.
"There was no way anybody in the administrative office of the school thought he would on the merits get into Harvard,'' a former
official at the Frisch school in Paramus, New Jersey, told me. "His GPA [grade point average] did not warrant it, his SAT scores
did not warrant it. We thought, for sure, there was no way this was going to happen. Then, lo and behold, Jared was accepted. It
was a little bit disappointing because there were at the time other kids we thought should really get in on the merits, and they
did not.''
Risa Heller, a spokeswoman for Kushner Companies, said in an email on Thursday that "the allegation'' that Charles Kushner's gift
to Harvard was related to Jared's admission "is and always has been false". His parents, Charles and Seryl Kushner, "are
enormously generous and have donated over $100m to universities, hospitals and other charitable causes. Jared Kushner was an
excellent student in high school and graduated from Harvard with honours.'' (About 90% of Jared's 2003 class at Harvard also
graduated with honours.)
My Kushner discoveries were an offshoot of my research for a chapter on Harvard donors. Somebody had slipped me a document I had
long coveted: the membership list of Harvard's Committee on University Resources. The university wooed more than 400 of its
biggest givers and most promising prospects by putting them on this committee and inviting them to campus periodically to be
wined, dined and subjected to lectures by eminent professors.
My idea was to figure out how many children of these corporate titans, oil barons, money managers, lawyers, high-tech consultants
and old-money heirs had gone to Harvard. A disproportionate tally might suggest that the university eased its standards for the
offspring of wealthy backers.
I began working through the list, poring over Who's Who in America and Harvard class reunion reports for family information.
Charles and Seryl Kushner were both on the committee. I had never heard of them, but their joint presence struck me as a sign
that Harvard's fundraising machine held the couple in especially fond regard.
The clips showed that Charles Kushner's empire encompassed 25,000 New Jersey apartments, along with extensive office, industrial
and retail space and undeveloped land. Unlike most of his fellow committee members, though, Kushner was not a Harvard man. He had
graduated from New York University. This eliminated the sentimental tug of the alma mater as a reason for him to give to Harvard,
leaving another likely explanation: his children.
Sure enough, his sons Jared and Joshua had both enrolled there.
Charles Kushner differed from his peers on the committee in another way: he had a criminal record. Five years after Jared entered
Harvard, the elder Kushner pleaded guilty in 2004 to tax violations, illegal campaign donations and retaliating against a
witness. (As it happens, the prosecutor in the case was Chris Christie,
recently
ousted
as the head of Trump's transition team.)
Charles
Kushner had hired a prostitute to seduce his brother-in-law
, who was cooperating with federal authorities. Kushner then had a
videotape of the tryst sent to his sister. He was sentenced to two years in federal prison.
I completed my analysis, which justified my hunch. Of the 400-plus tycoons on Harvard's list – which included people who were
childless or too young to have college-age offspring – more than half had sent at least one child to the university.
I also decided that the Kushner-Harvard relationship deserved special attention. Although the university often heralded big gifts
in press releases or a bulletin called, in a classic example of fundraising wit, Re:sources, a search of these outlets came up
empty. Harvard didn't seem eager to be publicly associated with Charles Kushner.
While looking into Kushner's taxes, though, federal authorities had subpoenaed records of his charitable giving. I learned that
in 1998, when Jared was attending the Frisch school and starting to look at colleges, his father had pledged $2.5m to Harvard, to
be paid in annual instalments of $250,000. Charles Kushner also visited Neil Rudenstine, then Harvard president, and discussed
funding a scholarship programme for low- and middle-income students.
I phoned a Harvard official, with whom I was on friendly terms. First I asked whether the gift played any role in Jared's
admission. "You know we don't comment on individual applicants,'' he said. When I pressed further, he hung up. We haven't spoken
since.
At Harvard, Jared Kushner majored in government. Now the 35-year-old is poised to become the power behind the presidency. What he
plans to do, and in what direction he and his father-in-law will lead the country, are far more important than his high school
grades.
"... On May 9, 2004, according to the court documents, Kushner got in touch with one of the private detectives and instructed him to mail the tape and still photos to his sister Esther, who opened the package and saw her husband having sex with the prostitute. If Charles Kushner's plan was to "gain leverage" over his sister, it didn't work. Esther and Schulder took the tape to law enforcement, and another count, retaliating against a cooperating witness, was added to the charges against Kushner. ..."
"... Charles Kushner was charged in July 2004. He had all the resources anyone would need to fight the charges, but instead chose to plead guilty. He was sentenced to two years in prison and served 14 months, at a facility in Alabama. His son Jared flew down to visit him every Sunday. ..."
"... Last November, Kushner told Forbes that, "Six months ago, Gov. Christie and I decided this election was much bigger than any differences we may have had in the past, and we worked very well together. The media has speculated on a lot of different things, and since I don't talk to the press, they go as they go, but I was not behind pushing him out or his people." Maybe. Maybe, as Jared Kushner maintains, all the reports of "differences" between him and Christie are inaccurate. But if the case of Kushner's father, and his uncle, and his other uncle, and his aunt, and their business is any indication, putting aside differences is not the family way. ..."
Jared Kushner is thought to have been behind the purging of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie from the presidential transition.
By all accounts, Jared Kushner, the husband of President Trump's favorite daughter, has become an extraordinarily powerful man
in the White House. To formally appoint Kushner a senior adviser, with a top security clearance, the president sought and received
a Justice Department opinion declaring the White House exempt from federal anti-nepotism laws. That meant Kushner could have an official
White House title to go along with his trusted-member-of-the-family influence. But Kushner wielded plenty of power before joining
the White House staff.
For one thing, he is thought to have been behind the purging of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie from the presidential transition.
Of course, Christie, tainted by Bridgegate, had problems of his own. But opposition from Kushner is said to have blocked Christie
at key points during the campaign and transition. Kushner's ire reportedly targeted others, too, for their Christie connections.
After Christie was fired from heading the transition, two colleagues Christie had brought into the effort, Mike Rogers and Matthew
Freedman, were dumped as well. "Both were part of what officials described as a purge orchestrated by Jared Kushner," the
New York Times reported on November
15. "Mr. Kushner, a transition official said, was systematically dismissing people like Mr. Rogers who had ties with Mr. Christie."
"As a federal prosecutor, Mr. Christie sent Mr. Kushner's father to jail," the Times noted. Many other sources have confirmed
the origin of Kushner's animus was Christie's prosecution of the elder Kushner. But most public mentions of the reason have been
as brief as the Times'. It turns out the story behind the story is much longer, and more complicated. And ugly. The short version
is: In 2004, Jared Kushner's father Charles, a real estate magnate in New Jersey and New York, pleaded guilty to a tax fraud scheme
in which he claimed hundreds of thousands of dollars in phony deductions for office expenses at the partnerships he created to manage
the apartment buildings he owned. Kushner, a major donor to the Democratic Party, also pleaded guilty to fraudulently making hundreds
of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions in the names of employees and associates who didn't know their names were being
used. Finally, Kushner pleaded guilty to retaliating against a cooperating witness in the case -- his sister. He did so by setting
a trap in which he hired a prostitute to lure his sister's husband into a sexual encounter in a New Jersey hotel, where the action
was secretly photographed and videotaped. Kushner sent the pictures and tape to his sister as revenge, apparently motivated by Kushner's
belief that she and her husband were helping U.S. Attorney Christie and his prosecutors. Another Kushner brother-in-law, his wife's
brother Richard Stadtmauer, was charged in the tax evasion scheme, and was convicted and sentenced to three years in prison. Beyond
that, the Kushner family also brought employees into the fraud, with three Kushner Companies workers charged in the matter. All pleaded
guilty.
Given the extent of the criminal behavior involved -- confirmed by guilty pleas and a conviction at trial -- it's hard to imagine
that one could examine the Kushner family case and conclude that the prosecutor was the bad guy. But in the Trump campaign and presidency,
Christie has apparently suffered for his role in bringing members of the Kushner family and their employees to justice. The criminal
case began as a family feud. (For a detailed look at the complicated and intense relations between the various Kushners, see this
Gabriel Sherman New York magazine article from 2009.) Some of
the problems seemed rooted in the lifelong competitiveness between Charles Kushner and his brother Murray. In the early 2000s, Murray
Kushner came to believe there was serious mismanagement going on in Kushner Companies. Murray sued Charles. The suit was settled
and sealed. But then, while the suit was still in arbitration, a Kushner Companies employee, accounting manager Robert Yontef, filed
a suit of his own against Charles. Yontef alleged that Charles used monies from various real estate properties (referred to as "the
entities" in the lawsuit) for activities that had nothing to do with the companies, like paying speaking fees to Benjamin Netanyahu
($100,000), Bill Clinton ($125,000), Paul Volcker ($50,000), and Terry Bradshaw. (Alas, the lawsuit gave no dollar figure for the
former quarterback's speaking appearance.)
Yontef also charged that Charles Kushner had made millions in campaign contributions through a fraudulent bundling scheme. "Initially,
contributions that Charles made through the entities were returned because there was a requirement that the names of partners be
given when a partnership makes a political contribution," the suit said. "As a result, Charles issued partnership checks for the
contribution and then attributed the contribution to particular partners. These partners, however, were not notified that certain
contributions had been made in their names until after the contributions were made, and in many instances were never notified that
other political contributions were being made by Charles with partnership funds in their names." In a declaration attached to the
suit, Yontef said that he had become increasingly upset by what he had seen at the Kushner Companies, and that he told Charles' sister
Esther and her husband William Schulder, who also worked for the company, what Charles was doing. According to Yontef, Esther introduced
Yontef to Murray Kushner, and Yontef also told him the story. "Over the next months, I would occasionally provide Murray with samples
of the documents which demonstrate these wrongdoings," Yontef said. The lawsuits did more than aggravate existing family antagonisms.
They also raised the suspicions of law enforcement and gave investigators a roadmap into what was going on inside Kushner Companies.
And indeed, in February 2003, the office of U.S. Attorney Christie began a grand jury investigation. In the months that followed,
the grand jury heard evidence of tax fraud, illegal political contributions, and more. An attachment to the criminal information
ultimately filed against Charles Kushner refers to Cooperating Witness 1 (CW1), Cooperating Witness 2 (CW2), and Cooperating Witness
3 (CW3). They are not named in the case, but a look at circumstances and other documents strongly suggests that CW1 was Esther, CW2
was her husband William Schulder, and CW3 was Yontef. The three of them, court papers noted, provided information and documents to
the FBI and prosecutors. The criminal information laid out an extensive scheme to use "the entities," that is, Kushner-created companies
that owned and managed individual Kushner properties, as vehicles for phony deductions. An entity known as Pheasant Hollow Associates
filed for $41,356 in "fraudulent office expenses" on Tax Day, 1999, the information said, and for $142,030 in such expenses on Tax
Day, 2000. Another entity, Quail Ridge Associates, filed for $119,000 in fake office expenses on Tax Day 2000 and $349,123 in 2001.
Still another entity, Westminster Management, filed for $112,250 in phony expenses on Tax Day 2001. In another count, the criminal
information says Charles Kushner, "without the knowledge or permission of certain partners," made federal campaign contributions
"in excess of $385,000" in the names of those unwitting partners. (Kushner was a major supporter of New Jersey Democratic Gov. Jim
McGreevey, who in 2002 appointed Kushner to the board of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. McGreevey wanted to make
Kushner chairman of the Port Authority, but backed down after accusations the appointment would have been a political payoff.) The
criminal information says Charles Kushner became aware of the grand jury investigation in March 2003, and that his sister Esther
was "providing information to investigating law enforcement." In the weeks and months that followed, authorities said, Kushner's
lawyers made "regular efforts" to convince investigators that CW1, CW2, and CW3 were "generally untrustworthy." The efforts were,
apparently, to no avail.
Then, in August 2003, according to court documents, Kushner "initiated a scheme" to "gain leverage" over Esther and William Schulder.
The idea was to "orchestrate the covert videotaped seduction" of Schulder and then hit Esther with video of her husband committing
adultery. Charles Kushner recruited two private investigators to do the work. In New York , Gabriel Sherman reported that
Kushner complained to one of the men that Schulder "has been f -- king around on my sister forever." Kushner paid the two men a total
of $25,000 to set the trap. The problem was, they didn't do it. According to court papers, the men spent weeks complaining that they
couldn't find a woman who would agree to have sex with Schulder on camera. "The scheme stalled," according to court papers. Things
went nowhere for about four months. Then, in November 2003, a frustrated Charles Kushner took matters into his own hands and "personally
recruited" a New York prostitute for the job. The two private investigators took a room in the Red Bull Inn in Bridgewater, New Jersey
and wired it for video. It took a couple of tries, but the Kushner-recruited prostitute found Schulder in a diner, introduced herself,
told him her car had broken down, and asked for a ride back to the hotel. When Schulder agreed, she invited him to her room. He declined,
but got her phone number.
The next day, he came back, and Charles Kushner got the video he wanted. After the sexual encounter, one of the private investigators
took the video to Kushner. "In a conference room with an associate present, defendant Charles Kushner viewed the videotape and expressed
satisfaction with it," the criminal information says.
Kushner was so pleased, the court papers say, that he wanted the two investigators to set the same trap for Robert Yontef. In
December, another woman was recruited, the hotel room was wired, the my-car-broke-down approach was made. But Yontef turned the woman
down twice. There was no sex, and no tape. According to the papers, Kushner didn't use the Schulder videotape until May 2004, when
he learned that some of his associates had been told they were targets of the grand jury investigation.
On May 9, 2004, according to the court documents, Kushner got in touch with one of the private detectives and instructed him
to mail the tape and still photos to his sister Esther, who opened the package and saw her husband having sex with the prostitute.
If Charles Kushner's plan was to "gain leverage" over his sister, it didn't work. Esther and Schulder took the tape to law enforcement,
and another count, retaliating against a cooperating witness, was added to the charges against Kushner.
Of course, the sex angle got the most coverage in the New Jersey and New York media. When the prostitute who had been with Schulder
cooperated with authorities, the New York Post ran a
story headlined, "Sex
Gal Now Helping Feds -- Hooker Turns On Kushner."
Charles Kushner was charged in July 2004. He had all the resources anyone would need to fight the charges, but instead chose
to plead guilty. He was sentenced to two years in prison and served 14 months, at a facility in Alabama. His son Jared flew down
to visit him every Sunday.
Brother-in-law Richard Stadtmauer went to trial in 2009 and was convicted and sentenced to three years. The others charged in
the case pleaded guilty and received lesser sentences. While it was all going on, Jared Kushner was a student at Harvard and, later,
studied for law and business degrees at New York University. He was not involved in the family's criminal activity. His father's
spectacular flameout meant that Jared, who conferred with Charles constantly on matters of business, had to take a much bigger role
in the family's business affairs.
Chris Christie, has paid a price for bringing a case in which every single defendant was guilty.
Who did Jared blame
for what had happened? Not his father. "Charlie and Jared blamed papers in general and more specifically the Newark Star-Ledger
for besmirching the family name," Gabriel Sherman wrote in 2009: And, the crimes notwithstanding, [Jared] sees his father as
a victim. "His siblings stole every piece of paper from his office, and they took it to the government," Jared maintained.
"Siblings
that he literally made wealthy for doing nothing. He gave them interests in the business for nothing. All he did was put the tape
together and send it. Was it the right thing to do? At the end of the day, it was a function of saying 'You're trying to make my
life miserable? Well, I'm doing the same.'"
Five years later, in a 2014
interview with the New York real estate publication The Real Deal, Jared called his father's treatment "obviously unjust" and
said the experience had soured him on an earlier ambition to become a prosecutor.
"If you're convicting murderers, it's one thing,"
Jared said. "It's often fairly clear. When you get into things like white-collar crime, there are often a lot of nuances. Seeing
my father's situation, I felt what happened was obviously unjust in terms of the way they pursued him."
Now the pursuer, the prosecutor-turned-governor-turned-Trump-supporter
Chris Christie, has paid a price for bringing a case in which every single defendant was guilty. Both Jared Kushner and Christie
deny there's a problem. "That stuff is ancient history,"
Christie
told ABC two weeks ago, on March 29.
Last November,
Kushner told Forbes that, "Six months ago, Gov. Christie and I decided this election was much bigger than any differences we
may have had in the past, and we worked very well together. The media has speculated on a lot of different things, and since I don't
talk to the press, they go as they go, but I was not behind pushing him out or his people." Maybe. Maybe, as Jared Kushner maintains,
all the reports of "differences" between him and Christie are inaccurate. But if the case of Kushner's father, and his uncle, and
his other uncle, and his aunt, and their business is any indication, putting aside differences is not the family way.
Byron York is the chief political correspondent for the Washington Examiner, a Fox News contributor and the author of The
Vast Left Wing Conspiracy.
US report drops references to 'occupation' of Palestine,
now it's 'Israeli-controlled'
13 Mar, 2019
In the latest annual global human rights report, the US has stopped using the term
"occupied" when talking about areas of Palestine controlled by Israel, including the Golan
Heights, the West Bank and Gaza.
In a report by the State Department intended to detail data
regarding human rights around the globe in 2018, the US has decided to alter the words it uses
to describe the situation in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel, opting for what
seems to be more neutral language.
This decision comes despite the fact that the word "occupation" is official
terminology approved by the United Nations and how the US had formerly described the
territories in question.
The administration said that the change in rhetoric does not imply any policy changes, but
were otherwise unclear about their reasons for the new phrasing.
The report appears to reflect the sentiments of a meeting between Senator Lindsey Graham, US
ambassador to Israel David Friedman and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday,
where the three discussed plans to work towards US recognition of the Golan Heights as a part
of Israel.
"Working with Senator [Ted] Cruz, I will start an effort to recognize the Golan as part
of the State of Israel now and forever," Graham said in light of the meeting.
Last November, the US voted against a UN resolution condemning Israel's occupation of the
Golan heights for the first time ever. The vote was 151 to 2, with the US and Israel the only
opponents of the declaration.
"... While all the establishment may not have been aware that Trump had massive Zionist help in 2016 to make the argumentative distraction look credible in the media, all the establishment is now on board. Trump is the Chosen of the elites, he is holding all the cards. Tomorrow he is signing over sovereignty of the Golan Heights to Israel as a gift to Netanyahu and the oligarchs and the Board of Genie Oil in thanks for conspiring together to ensure Trump became President. ..."
The establishment represented by Bill Barr is 110% behind Trump. He is now clear on all
charges because Mueller discovered it was Zionist oligarchs who put Trump in power with the
help of at least 2 Zionist Russian oligarchs to provide the Russia red herring that served as
a massive distraction for the real collusion.
Mueller and Barr both delivered their report and conclusions precisely when the AIPAC
EXTRAVAGANZA begins celebrating 4 more years of Trump as Mueller has provided Trump with
bragging rights from here to 2020.
While all the establishment may not have been aware that Trump had massive Zionist help in
2016 to make the argumentative distraction look credible in the media, all the establishment
is now on board. Trump is the Chosen of the elites, he is holding all the cards. Tomorrow he
is signing over sovereignty of the Golan Heights to Israel as a gift to Netanyahu and the
oligarchs and the Board of Genie Oil in thanks for conspiring together to ensure Trump became
President.
It's all coming together on schedule just in time for the AIPAC CELEBRATION set to HAIL
Trump.
"... Jared sold himself as the only man who could make a deal between Dems and the GOP. He pointed to "his" recent success with prison reform as proof of his bonafides. ..."
"... Of course, he blew it as usual. He told his side that Dems would vote for Trump's $5.7 billion "wall, or whatever you want to call it" -- and they didn't. He said the Dems would break ranks -- and they didn't. ..."
"... The Senate votes came, and the Trump proposal got FEWER votes than the Democratic proposal, which managed to get 6 GOP Senators to jump ship. Kushner had not only failed; he'd embarrassed the boss. ..."
"... Of course, it was Donald who appointed Jared, and gave him the reins on this critical project -- ignoring the fact that Pence had actually served in Congress, knew the players, and knew the game. Even after two years' worth of evidence that a political neophyte cannot solve all the nation's most intractable problems just because he sleeps with the boss's daughter, the First Con fell for a con man. ..."
Jared sold himself as the only man who could make a deal between Dems and the GOP. He pointed to "his" recent success with
prison reform as proof of his bonafides.
Of course, he blew it as usual. He told his side that Dems would vote for Trump's $5.7 billion "wall, or whatever you want
to call it" -- and they didn't. He said the Dems would break ranks -- and they didn't.
It appears that Kushner talked to a few junior Dems, who were too wet behind the ears to tell the president's son in law that
he needed to change his meds. He read their silence as meaning they were prepared to commit mutiny and, putting all his chips
on that bet, stopped talking to both Pelosi (where the real power lies) and Schumer.
Then he told everyone he'd cracked it.
The Senate votes came, and the Trump proposal got FEWER votes than the Democratic proposal, which managed to get 6 GOP
Senators to jump ship. Kushner had not only failed; he'd embarrassed the boss.
As others have said below, Trump always finds someone to blame for his mistakes. But in this case there were very good reasons
for pointing the finger at Kushner.
Of course, it was Donald who appointed Jared, and gave him the reins on this critical project -- ignoring the fact that
Pence had actually served in Congress, knew the players, and knew the game. Even after two years' worth of evidence that a political
neophyte cannot solve all the nation's most intractable problems just because he sleeps with the boss's daughter, the First
Con fell for a con man.
A lot of demagogy but Israel technical prowess is undisputable. They do have some innovative products, although they mostly rely
on the USA for commercializing them.
From Netanyahu presentation it looks like both Trump and Haley are Israel clients, hell bent of defending Iseral policies at all
cost, without any consideration of the USA interests in the region. Which might be different in some area at some times that the
state of Israel, as attack of Israeli jets Liberty and
Jonathan Pollard case has
shown ...
And what is interesting is that theocratic state Israel has the right to have nuclear weapon but non of its neibours, including
theocratic state of Iran, has not. Isreal also has the right to bomb Syria at will. Just the right of the strong. Such a truly
exceptional nation.
Notable quotes:
"... Thanks to President Trump's unequivocal support for Israel in this body, that positive change is gathering force. So, thank you, President Trump. Thank you for supporting Israel at the UN. And thank you for your support, Ambassador Nikki Haley. Thank you for speaking the truth about Israel. ..."
Mr. Secretary General, I very much appreciate your statement that denying Israel's right to exist is anti-Semitism, pure and simple.
Now, that's important, because for too long the epicenter of global anti-Semitism has been right here at the UN. And while it may
take many years, I am absolutely confident that the revolution in Israel's ties with individual nations will ultimately be reflected
in this hall of nations. I say that because there is also a marked change in the position of some of our key friends.
Thanks
to President Trump's unequivocal support for Israel in this body, that positive change is gathering force. So, thank you, President
Trump. Thank you for supporting Israel at the UN. And thank you for your support, Ambassador Nikki Haley. Thank you for speaking
the truth about Israel.
But, ladies and gentlemen, here at the UN, we must also speak the truth about Iran, as President Trump did so powerfully this
morning. Now, you know I've been ambassador to the UN and I'm a long-serving Israeli prime minister, so I've listened to countless
speeches in this hall, but I can say this: none were bolder, none more courageous and forthright than the one delivered by President
Trump today.
President Trump rightly called the nuclear deal with Iran, he called it an embarrassment. Well, I couldn't agree with him more.
And here's why: Iran vows to destroy my country every day, including by its chief of staff the other day. Iran is conducting a campaign
of conquest across the Middle East and Iran is developing ballistic missiles to threaten the entire world.
Two years ago, I stood here and explained why the Iranian nuclear deal not only doesn't block Iran's path to the bomb, Iran's
nuclear program has what's called a sunset clause. Let me explain what that term means: It means that in a few years, those restrictions
will be automatically removed - not by a change in Iran's behavior, not by a lessening of its terror or its aggression. They'll just
be removed by a mere change in the calendar. And I warned that when that sunset comes, a dark shadow will be cast over the entire
Middle East and the world, because Iran will then be free to enrich uranium on an industrial scale, placing it on the threshold of
a massive arsenal of nuclear weapons.
That's why I said two years ago that the greater danger is not that Iran will rush to a single bomb by breaking the deal, but
that Iran will be able to build many bombs by keeping the deal.
Now, in the last few months, we've all seen how dangerous even a few nuclear weapons can be in the hands of a small rogue regime.
Now imagine the danger of hundreds of nuclear weapons in the hands of a vast Iranian Islamist empire, with the missiles to deliver
them anywhere on earth.
I know there are those who still defend the dangerous deal with Iran, arguing that it will block Iran's path to the bomb.
Ladies and gentlemen, That's exactly what they said about the nuclear deal with North Korea, and we all know how that turned out.
Unfortunately, if nothing changes, this deal will turn out exactly the same way.
That's why Israel's policy regarding the nuclear deal with Iran is very simple: Change it or cancel it, fix it or nix it. Nixing
the deal means restoring massive pressure on Iran, including crippling sanctions, until Iran fully dismantles its nuclear weapons
capability. Fixing the deal requires many things, among them inspecting military and any other site that is suspect, and penalizing
Iran for every violation. But above all, fixing the deal means getting rid of the sunset clause.
And beyond fixing this bad deal, we must also stop Iran's development of ballistic missiles and roll back its growing aggression
in the region. I remember we had these debates. As you know, I took a fairly active role in them. And many supporters of the nuclear
deal naively believed that it would moderate Iran. It would make it a responsible member, so they said, of the international community.
Well as you know, I strongly disagreed. I warned that when the sanctions on Iran would be removed, Iran would behave like a hungry
tiger unleashed, not joining the community of nations, but devouring nations, one after the other. And that's precisely what Iran
is doing today.
From the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean, from Tehran to Tartus, an Iranian curtain is descending across the Middle East. Iran
spreads this curtain of tyranny and terror over Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and elsewhere, and it pledges to extinguish the light of Israel.
Today, I have a simple message for Ayatollah Khamenei, the dictator of Iran: The light of Israel will never be extinguished.
Those who threaten us with annihilation put themselves in mortal peril. Israel will defend itself with the full force of our arms
and the full power of our convictions. We will act to prevent Iran from establishing permanent military bases in Syria for its air,
sea and ground forces. We will act to prevent Iran from producing deadly weapons in Syria or in Lebanon for use against us.
And we will act to prevent Iran from opening new terror fronts against Israel along our northern border.
As long as Iran's regime seeks the destruction of Israel, Iran will face no fiercer enemy than Israel.
But I also have a message today for the people of Iran: You are not our enemy; you are our friends. Shomaah doosteh mah hasteed
[You are our friends]. One day, my Iranian friends, you will be free from the evil regime that terrorizes you, hangs gays, jails
journalists, tortures political prisoners, and shoots innocent women like Neda Sultan, leaving her choking on her own blood on the
streets of Tehran. I have not forgotten Neda. I am sure you haven't too.
And when that day of liberation finally comes, the friendship between our two ancient peoples will surely flourish once again.
Ladies and gentlemen, Israel knows that in confronting the Iranian regime, we are not alone. We stand shoulder to shoulder with
those in the Arab world who share our hopes for a brighter future.
We've made peace with Jordan and Egypt, whose courageous President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi I met here last night. I appreciate President
el-Sissi's support for peace, and I hope to work closely with him and other leaders in the region to advance peace.
Israel is committed to achieving peace with all our Arab neighbors, including the Palestinians. Yesterday, President Trump and
I discussed this, all of this, at great length. I appreciate President Trump's leadership, his commitment to stand by Israel's side,
his commitment to advance a peaceful future for all. Together, we can seize the opportunities for peace and together we can confront
the great dangers of Iran.
The remarkable alliance between the United States and Israel has never been stronger, never been deeper. Israel is deeply grateful
for the support of the Trump administration, the American Congress and the American people.
It is interesting to read how naive Thierry Meyssan was in 2018
Notable quotes:
"... Over the last 70 years, Israël has continually been stealing its neighbours' territory. It currently occupies the Syrian Golan, the farms of the Lebanese Shebaa, and a very large part of the Palestinian territories of 1967, including almost all of East Jerusalem. ..."
"... For Fatah, Israël is a second Rhodesia, a colonial State which pronounced itself independent. For Hamas, based on an interpretation of the Hadiths (not the Coran), the problem is that a Muslim land cannot be governed by non-Muslims. ..."
"... Equally, it is today extremely unjust, not to transfer the US embassy to West Jerusalem, but to give up on establishing the Palestinian government in East Jerusalem. Here again, the responsibility does not lie with Jared Kushner, but with the " international community ", and in particular with the Arab Sionist governments, who have allowed Israël, for the last 70 years, to eat up the city, apartment by apartment. ..."
"... So while, for 70 years, Western diplomats have contrived to multiply and complexify the conflicts in the Middle East, Jared Kushner is the first to have brought a resolution. The angel-faced Presidential advisor is a talented organiser. Thierry Meyssan ..."
Jared Kushner is a very secret personality about whom we know very little. At best, we know
he has a high regard for the Law, and was destined to become a prosecutor. However, when his
father was arrested and incarcerated for tax evasion, he was sure this was an injustice.
According to him, his father had fallen victim to a sting operation. He therefore abandoned his
law studies and set to work rescuing the family business, a real estate development firm -
which he managed with success. During this period, he developed for himself the smoothest image
possible in order to distance himself from the accusations leveled against his father.
His father-in-law, Donald Trump, seems to trust him implicitly, to the point of tasking him
de facto with the organization of his electoral campaign. Certain of his adversaries expressed
their surprise that he was able to run this campaign with minimal means, and yet lead it to
victory.
As soon as he arrived at the White House, President Trump asked him to participate in the
most secret meetings, despite the fact that he does not have Top Secret accreditation –
which in fact he still does not have.
Hoping to leave a name in History by succeeding in a task that his predecessors have all
addressed without ever having realised, President Trump tasked him with resolving the
Israëli-Arab conflict and pacifying the Middle East. This is a gamble which is all the
more perilous in that the young man (age 36) has previously taken a stand alongside Israël
by financially supporting Tsahal and the Jewish colonies on Palestinian land. However, Kushner
has a great need of being accepted by his milieu, so it is quite possible that these gifts have
another meaning.
Nominating for this assignment a trusted personality who is devoid of diplomatic experience
is a second challenge for President Trump. Considering the failure of US professional
diplomats, he is attacking an old problem from a new angle. For this mission, Jared Kushner has
obtained a rare privilege – he is the only senior administrator whose meetings with
foreign political personalities are not the object of written records. In this way, no-one can
rebuke him for his mistakes, nor even criticise the way in which he approaches the subjects -
not even the Secretary of State, since he is accountable only to the President.
In the opinion of those personalities who have met him, Kushner follows the same principles
as his father-in-law:
first of all, acknowledge reality, even if this implies abandoning well-established
official rhetoric;
secondly, consider all the advantages that can be drawn from earlier bilateral
agreements;
and thirdly, as far as possible, take into account multilateral Law.
The only difference with his father-in-law is his perfect mutism, as compared to the
provocative and contradictory declarations used by the President to destabilise his
listeners.
During the last ten months, Jared Kushner has multiplied his journeys to the Middle East -
particularly to his favorite destinations – Saudi Arabia and Israël. We have just
experienced, without understanding it, the beginning of his operation.
Saudi Arabia
The reality of
Arabia, from Trump's point of view during his electoral campaign, was as follows:
• the accumulation of petro-dollars, or the massive sums in dollars paid by the USA for
oil that the Saudis do not produce.
• the central role of the Kingdom, under the control of MI6 and the CIA, in the fight
against Arab nationalism and the manipulation of Islamic terrorism.
• Its crisis of succession.
The bilateral agreements are the Quincy agreements signed by Franklin Roosevelt in 1945,
renewed by George Bush Jr. in 2005, and valid until 2065. Although they have never been
published, many people who participated in their negotiation have described them as
follows:
• The King of Arabia accepts the control of its oil by the United States, while in return,
the US agrees to protect the King, and by extension, his private property, Saudi Arabia.
• The King of Arabia agrees to raise no obstacle against the creation of a state for the
Jewish population of the ex-Ottoman Empire, while the United States favors its regional
role.
So Jared Kushner prepared the summit on 21 May 2017 in Riyadh which brought together almost
all of the heads of state of the Muslim world around President Trump. Saudi Arabia immediately
broke its ties with the Muslim Brotherhood and ceased financing the jihadist groups all over
the world – at least, almost all, except for Yemen [ 1 ]. The Kingdom used its influence to
convince the other Muslim states present. However, this success had a price:
• Qatar refused the new US policy. Not wishing to have wasted the 137 billion dollars it
had spent in the fight against Syria [ 2 ], it continued its support for
certain jihadists. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates unilaterally decided on an
embargo. While Secretary of State Rex Tillerson tried to distance himself from this quarrel,
Kushner and President Trump took sides with Arabia.
• Kushner agreed to help King Salman sort out his succession to the throne as he saw
fit.
The palace coup of 4 November
At the end of October, Jared Kushner went to Saudi Arabia for three days. He shared long
work sessions with the King's son, Prince Mohammed ben Salmane (MBS), and drew up with him a
list of the members of the royal family who were to be neutralised. Unsure of the possible
reactions of the Royal Guard once Prince Mutaib had been dismissed, he offered MBS the
assistance of the mercenaries of Academi (ex-Blackwater) in order to proceed with the arrests.
Finally, remembering the media campaign against his father, he provided the spin doctors with a
soothing tale of " the fight against corruption " with which to gloss over the palace coup.
He had already left Riyadh when the Lebanese Prime Minister, Saad Hariri – the legal
son of Rafic Hariri, but the biological son of a Fadh prince [ 3 ] – was invited to an emergency
meeting in Riyadh, " where he would be received by King Salman ". We know the end of this story
[ 4 ] –
the resignation speech of Hariri and the arrest or execution of all the princes capable of
contesting or claiming the succession to the throne.
Hundreds of cousins of MBS were arrested, and placed under house arrest or in detention. One
after the other, they agreed – often under torture – to hand over their fortunes to
their sovereign. In this way he collected more than 800 billion dollars, according to the
Wall Street Journal [ 5 ].
No voices anywhere in the world spoke up to come to the aid of these fallen billionaires,
who until then had sat in the most prestigious board of directors.
Witnesses declared that certain members of the royal family were hospitalised and treated
before they were taken back into the interrogation room. MBS affirmed that he had liberated
several personalities, including Prince Mutaib himself, Turki ben Abdallah, Doctor Ibrahim ben
Abdelaziz ben Abdallah al-Assaf (ex-Saudi Minister of finances) and Mohammad ben Abdel Rahman
al-Toubaichi (ex-head of protocol to the Court).
This is certainly not the end of the story. In conformity with the instructions of President
Trump, Jared Kushner will now attempt to recuperate part of the confiscated fortunes for his
country.
The Hariri affair
Contrary to what the French Press pretends, the liberation of the Lebanese Prime Minister
owes little to Paris. It is true that President Emmanuel Macron intervened, since Saad Hariri
has triple nationality - Saudi-Lebanese-French. It is true, Macron went to Riyadh, but only
succeeded in being insulted [ 6 ]. The only useful action came from
his Lebanese counterpart, President Michel Aoun.
France was blocked by a simple reality – in international consular Law, multinationals
are not allowed to benefit from diplomatic immunity in a country of which they are citizens.
However President Aoun overturned the situation by defending not Saad Hariri the man, but his
Prime Minister Saad Hariri. There is no doubt whatsoever that arresting and placing under house
arrest the head of the government of another country outside of any judicial procedure is an
act of war – and indeed, the international press whispered rumours of a possible Saudi
bombardment of Lebanon. Immediately, the Baabda palace threatened to bring the affair before
the arbitration court of the United Nations, and simultaneously, to alert the Security Council.
And via his Syrian counterpart Bachar el-Assad, he also contacted Egyptian President Abdel
Fattah al-Sissi, who made the connection between the pro- and anti-US. It was al-Sissi who
telephoned Jared Kushner and obtained, with his support, the liberation of the Prime Minister.
And in fact, as soon as Hariri was freed, he went to Cairo to thank al-Sissi.
The
Israëli-Arab question
This leaves us with the Israëli-Palestinian question.
The naked reality is this:
Over the last 70 years, Israël has continually been stealing its neighbours'
territory. It currently occupies the Syrian Golan, the farms of the Lebanese Shebaa, and a very
large part of the Palestinian territories of 1967, including almost all of East Jerusalem.
The leaders of the Palestinian Resistance have almost all been neutralised by
Israël – many of them have been assassinated, those who remain with Fatah have
mostly been corrupted by their enemies, while those of Hamas have openly collaborated with
Mossad to eliminate their rivals [ 7 ]. The only organisations who
continue to fight for their rights are a few small groups like the Islamic Jihad and the
FPLP-CG.
It is true that the Palestinians and the other Arab and/or Muslim people maintain a
sense of the Law, and militate for the respect of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian
people. But in the absence of credible political representation, they can do nothing, apart
from marching by the tens of millions on " Jerusalem Day ".
The bilateral agreements are:
The realisation of the project expressed by the British Balfour Declaration, and by the
14 points of US President Wilson which created Israël [
8 ].
The letter addressed to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon by President George Bush Jr., which
refutes the right of return to Palestinian refugees, and recognises the territories conquered
since 1949 as being integral parts of Israël [
9 ].
The multilateral agreements are:
Resolutions 242 [ 10 ] and 338 [
11 ] of the United Nations
Security Council and article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention.
Only President Trump and a few of his advisors know the scenario written by Jared Kushner.
He has followed the policy of his predecessors by reducing the situation to a simple
Israëli-Arab dispute. Following the line of John Kerry, he has favored the reconciliation
of Fatah and Hamas against Israël, and has succeeded in persuading them (but not the
FPLP-CG, nor the Islamic Jihad) to sign an agreement, on 12 October in Cairo [ 12 ]. He has engineered
the election to the head of Hamas of a childhood friend of the leader of Fatah, Mohammed
Dahlan, in preparation for the fusion of the two movements.
Meanwhile, the Palestinian factions continue to express radically different ideas. For
Fatah, Israël is a second Rhodesia, a colonial State which pronounced itself independent.
For Hamas, based on an interpretation of the Hadiths (not the Coran), the problem is that a
Muslim land cannot be governed by non-Muslims.
The beginning of events came with the announcement of the transfer of the US embassy from
Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem.
Clearly, the White House is testing its ability to force its way through. Indeed, on one
hand, the plan for the sharing of Palestine in fact anticipates that West Jerusalem will be the
capital of the Hebrew state. But on the other hand, the Security Council has condemned
Israël for designating West Jerusalem as its capital [ 13 ].
The strange meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, which has just been held in
Istanbul, proposed to transfer the capital of the Palestinian State from Ramallah to East
Jerusalem [ 14
]. Except that this seems difficult to realise, and in fact has not been realised. Perhaps this
was simply a gallant last stand designed to force the acceptance of this abandon by Muslim
public opinion.
Provisional Conclusion
The adversaries of President Trump are attempting by any means possible to oblige him to
give up on his advisor Jared Kushner. Nevertheless, he is still in office. He has, for the
moment, managed to end Saudi support for terrorist groups and resolve the question of the
succession to the throne by cutting the Gordian knot, in other words, by neutralizing the royal
family. We may regret the method chosen – hanging old men by their feet and torturing
them until they hand over their bank accounts. The fact remains that all the other solutions,
or even worse, the absence of solutions, could have led to a civil war. The fault lies not with
Jared Kushner, but with those who have for so long accepted the barbaric and medieval
régime of the Saudis.
Equally, it is today extremely unjust, not to transfer the US embassy to West Jerusalem, but
to give up on establishing the Palestinian government in East Jerusalem. Here again, the
responsibility does not lie with Jared Kushner, but with the " international community ", and
in particular with the Arab Sionist governments, who have allowed Israël, for the last 70
years, to eat up the city, apartment by apartment.
So while, for 70 years, Western diplomats have contrived to multiply and complexify the
conflicts in the Middle East, Jared Kushner is the first to have brought a resolution. The
angel-faced Presidential advisor is a talented organiser. Thierry Meyssan
Is Trump's Jared Kushner connection to the Chabad Lubavitch sect the cause for his dramatic U-turn? The sect is deliberately
fomenting a prophesied Third World War.
It believes Jews are God's chosen people and
everyone else is trash. In the book "Gatherings of Conversations"Rebbe
Schneerson tells his followers that Jewish people are an extension of God and
Gentiles are destined to serve the Jews .
"Israel wasn't a political discussion for him; it was his family, his life, his people,"
said Hirschy Zarchi, rabbi at the Chabad House at Harvard.
Between 2003 and 2013, his family foundation donated a total of $342,500 to various
institutions and projects associated with the movement. Especially endowed was the Chabad
center at Harvard University, which received $150,000 in 2007 (the foundation's single biggest
donation to a Lubavitch-affiliated enterprise) and then another $3,600 in 2013. In addition
, the Donald J. Trump Foundation has donated $11,550 to three Chabad institutions. In
2006,
Kushner's father Charles was sentenced to 24 months in prison for making illegal campaign
donations & witness tampering.
He and the rest of his family are all crooks as are most politicians. Deals are made
between thieves. Wealth serves as a mask.
I wonder how much he will make! Am so sick at
the lack of morals among officials all over the world. Do good because it is the right
thing to do not because of the accolades. Let thereby real judge!
No! Of course not. Why does anyone believe this nonsense!
First off, I think by "bring peace to the Middle East" you must be referring to "solve the
Israeli-Palestinian dilemma". There are numerous conflicts in the broader Middle East that make
broader peace impossible.
Jared Kushner has no diplomatic experience. He doesn't seem to have any special knowledge
about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Being raised an Orthodox Jew, I think
it will be impossible for the Palestinians to see him as a neutral party.
Here's something that people should have learned before the election: p...
(more)
"... "Jared Kushner of 666 Fifth Avenue is the beating heart of this unprecedentedly corrupt and deeply evil administration," Tribe wrote . "He'll eventually be exposed as an insatiably greedy Benedict Arnold." ..."
"... "Kushner is going to get us into a *devastating* war with Iran. Jared, singlehandedly. Jared, to make money for himself [sic]," the attorney wrote. "I'll say now that Jared more richly deserves to be in prison for the rest of his life than Manafort, and Manafort richly deserves it," he argued. "That's how bad this is." ..."
"... "Don't believe anything you hear from Kushner's attorney or from Kushner. *Ever*. The latter will always be lying to you, and the former will either be lying to you or will have been lied to by his client [sic]," Abramson continued. He then pointed to the reports surrounding Kushner's top-secret security clearance, which he allegedly was granted despite the disapproval of intelligence agencies and top administration officials. ..."
"... "Our foreign policy is totally off the rails in a way that is dangerous, and the sole reason for this is the Kushner-Trump axis. Our values have been betrayed in ways that we may shortly feel so keenly our heads will spin. We need whistleblowers to blow their whistles now," he said. Abramson also argued that Kushner should go to prison for "a very, very long time." ..."
"... Trump's former chief of staff John Kelly and top intelligence officials opposed granting Kushner access to viewing sensitive top secret materials pertaining to the nation's security, according to a recent report from The New York Times . However, the president reportedly ordered his son-in-law be granted the clearance, allegedly disregarding the objections. ..."
Laurence Tribe, a professor
of constitutional law at Harvard Law School, slammed President Donald Trump's son-in-law of Jared Kushner in a tweet this weekend,
suggesting he would soon be "exposed" as a traitor.
Sharing a long Twitter thread by attorney and academic Seth Abramson, who is also a
columnist for Newsweek , Tribe on Saturday referred
to Kushner as "Smarmy, slimy, smiling."
Kushner, who is married to Ivanka Trump, was appointed by the president as a senior White House adviser in January 2017.
"Jared Kushner of 666 Fifth Avenue is the beating heart of this unprecedentedly corrupt and deeply evil administration,"
Tribe wrote . "He'll eventually be exposed
as an insatiably greedy Benedict Arnold."
Tribe is referring to the infamous General Benedict Arnold, an early hero of the American Revolution against the British, who
later switched sides and betrayed his young nation in 1779. "His name has since become synonymous with the word 'traitor,'"
according to History .
Abramson's thread , shared by Tribe,
laid out a case for why Kushner is allegedly the "greatest domestic danger to America."
The attorney and columnist made the claim after "many months" of research for a forthcoming book titled Proof of Conspiracy
. "Many former US government officials know for a fact that what I've just said is true," Abramson wrote in his first tweet in the
series.
"Kushner is going to get us into a *devastating* war with Iran. Jared, singlehandedly. Jared, to make money for himself [sic],"
the attorney wrote. "I'll say now that Jared more richly deserves to be in prison for the rest of his life than Manafort, and Manafort
richly deserves it," he argued. "That's how bad this is."
"Don't believe anything you hear from Kushner's attorney or from Kushner. *Ever*. The latter will always be lying to you,
and the former will either be lying to you or will have been lied to by his client [sic]," Abramson continued. He then pointed to
the reports surrounding Kushner's top-secret security clearance, which he allegedly was granted despite the disapproval of intelligence
agencies and top administration officials.
"Trump circumventing our intelligence community to give his son-in-law that access is the shibboleth that made the current danger
to America *possible* [sic]," Abramson warned.
"Our foreign policy is totally off the rails in a way that is dangerous, and the sole reason for this is the Kushner-Trump
axis. Our values have been betrayed in ways that we may shortly feel so keenly our heads will spin. We need whistleblowers to
blow their whistles now," he said. Abramson also argued that Kushner should go to prison for "a very, very long time."
Trump's former chief of staff John Kelly and top intelligence officials opposed granting Kushner access to viewing sensitive
top secret materials pertaining to the nation's security, according to
a recent report from The New York Times . However, the president reportedly ordered his son-in-law be granted the clearance,
allegedly disregarding the objections.
Jim Boyle Kathy Rhodarmer The article said the details will be revealed soon, so I guess we'll all just have to wait for the investigation
to decide. Traitor is pretty strong accusation, but the massive Qatar loan, secretive relationship with MSB and intelligence agencies
concern with his security clearance are all big red flags. The oversight will continue...
Martin Wulfe Tribe is a highly respected constitutional lawyer,
but so far this article is a real disappointment and lacks any details. We'll just have to wait until the full article comes out
to see what actual evidence there is to back this up, if there is any.
Danny LaMaster Trump and Kushner are selling American
secrets for personal gain
Bud
Dailey Kushner is not and never will be a American patriot , and has no business in American government.
Kathy
Dreher The same is true of the Trump crime family.
Joan Nelson Jared is too cozy with our enemy, no, not
ally, Saudi Arabia.Setting up some opportunities for himself and his family after he leaves the WH. The scummy atmosphere in the
WH is reflective of the presence of incompetent family members who have no business there...
In Ber 2018 Kusher security clearance wasdongraded.
Notable quotes:
"... Among those nations discussing ways to influence Kushner to their advantage were the United Arab Emirates, China, Israel and Mexico, the current and former officials said. ..."
"... Kushner's interim security clearance was downgraded last week from the top-secret to the secret level, which should restrict the regular access he has had to highly classified information, according to administration officials. Washpost ..."
" Officials in at least four countries have privately discussed ways they can manipulate Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law
and senior adviser, by taking advantage of his complex business arrangements, financial difficulties and lack of foreign policy experience,
according to current and former U.S. officials familiar with intelligence reports on the matter.
Among those nations discussing ways to influence Kushner to their advantage were the United Arab Emirates, China, Israel and Mexico,
the current and former officials said.
It is unclear if any of those countries acted on the discussions, but Kushner's contacts with certain foreign government officials
have raised concerns inside the White House and are a reason he has been unable to obtain a permanent security clearance, the officials
said.
Kushner's interim security clearance was downgraded last week from the top-secret to the secret level, which should restrict the
regular access he has had to highly classified information, according to administration officials. Washpost
------------------
Most people will probably be struck by the fall from grace of Kushner and other WH staff dilettantes. I am not terribly interested
in that. What strikes me is that this is the third major compromise of US SIGINT products in the last year. The first was the felonious
disclosure to the press of US intelligence penetration of Russian diplomatic communications. the second was the disclosure to the
press of penetration of GRU communications. In this one the oral or written discussions among the officials of several foreign countries
are revealed. These conversations were probably encrypted.
Is Jeff Sessions still alive? Why are there no prosecutions for these felonies? pl
"... In phone conversations with friends, Trump would share his frustrations concerning members of his staff and the internal chaos that drove the White House. ..."
"... Kushner was a suck-up. ..."
"... Jared and Ivanka should never have come to Washington. ..."
In phone conversations with friends, Trump would share his frustrations concerning members
of his staff and the internal chaos that drove the White House.
When he got on the phone after dinner, he'd speculate on the flaws and weaknesses of each
member of his staff. Bannon was disloyal (not to mention he always looks like shit). Priebus
was weak (not to mention he was short -- a midget). Kushner was a suck-up. Sean Spicer was
stupid (and looks terrible too). Conway was a crybaby. Jared and Ivanka should never have
come to Washington.
Wolff reveals that the small group of friends did not keep details of Trump's calls to them
confidential.
... ... ...
Trump fired Priebus and brought Gen. John Kelly in to serve as the White House chief of
staff. Bannon left the White House soon after, and Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump are serving a
more diminished role in the White House. Sean Spicer also quit, and Kellyanne Conway remains a
counselor to the president.
There is a probably difference between contacts with officials of Russian state and member of
Jewish mafia of Russia/USSR origin. But it never ne investigated.
The Soviet and
Russian émigré
community in New York's Brighton Beach contains a large Jewish
presence. Some of these newer American-based Jewish gangsters, such as Ludwig Fainberg (who has lived in Ukraine,
Israel and the United States, but never in Russia), share more in common culturally with Russia
and the Soviet republics than their predecessors, such as Meyer Lansky. [36][ page
needed ]
Russian Jewish mafia figures, such as Semion Mogilevich , have attempted to
penetrate the United States, including participating in a US$10 billion money laundering scheme
through the Bank of New York in 1998.
Israeli mobsters also have had a presence in the United States. The Israeli mafia (such as the Abergil crime family ) is heavily
involved in ecstasy trafficking
in America. [37]
US President Donald
Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, who is also a senior adviser to the White House, is under FBI
scrutiny as part of its probe into Russia's meddling in the 2016 US election, NBC News reported
on Thursday.
The report citing multiple sources said Kushner's interaction with the Russians has been a
focus of the investigation. In December, Kushner met with the Russian ambassador to the US
Sergey Kislyak and a banker from Moscow, according to NBC.
But it remains unclear exactly what activities have drawn the FBI's attention, and
investigators' interests in Kushner "does not mean they suspect him of a crime or intend to
charge him," the report said.
This came after reports that Trump's former national security adviser Michael Flynn and
campaign manager Paul Manafort have been examined for their connections with the Russian
government.
The 36-year-old Kushner, who is married to Trump's daughter Ivanka, is an American real
estate investor and worked in his father-in-law's presidential campaign team as a key adviser
on US policy toward Israel and campaign strategy. In January, he was named senior adviser to
the president and became a powerful figures in the West Wing.
"... Benjamin Netanyahu supports US rejection of Iran nuclear deal: 'Israel has opposed Iran's nuclear deal from the start' Attacking Mr Obama proposal of dealing with Iran, he added: "We must all stand together to stop Iran's march of conquest, subjugation and terror." Mr Chomsky said Mr Putin had never made such a speech to Congress, which political observers said was unique in the way a foreign leader so acidly attacked the policy of the US government. "Did Putin come to give an address to the joint sessions of Congress trying to calling on them to reverse US policy, without even informing the president," he said. ..."
"... The power of the pro-Israel lobby has long been one of the contentious, and disputed, issues in Washington. In 2007, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, published The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy , which described the lobby as "loose coalition of individuals and organisations who actively work to steer US foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction". ..."
In comments in which he accused much of the media of concentrating on stories he considered marginal and ignoring issues such
as the "existential threat" of climate change, the 89-year-old linguist said in much of the world, the US media's focus with Russia's
alleged interference in the 2016 was "a joke".
"First of all, if you're interested in foreign interference in our elections, whatever the Russians may have done barely counts
or weighs in the balance as compared with what another state does, openly, brazenly and with enormous support," he said.
Speaking to Democracy Now, Mr Chomsky
added : "Israeli intervention
in US elections vastly overwhelms anything the Russians may have done, I mean, even to the point where the prime minister of Israel,
Netanyahu, goes directly to Congress, without even informing the president, and speaks to Congress, with overwhelming applause, to
try to undermine the president's policies - what happened with Obama and Netanyahu in 2015."
In March 2015, at the invitation of then Republican House Speaker John Boehner, and assisted by Israel's Ambassador to the US,
Ron Dermer, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the joint houses of Congress about the yet to be signed Iran nuclear
deal. He did so without formally informing the White House, something said to have infuriated Barack Obama, whose administration
would the following month join a seven-party agreement to limit Iran's alleged nuclear weapons ambitions.
In a speech to Congress that was boycotted by more than 50 Democrats, Mr Netanyahu made clear his opposition to the deal.
"This deal won't be a farewell to arms," said Mr Netanyahu, to loud applause. "It would be a farewell to arms control. And the
Middle East would soon be crisscrossed by nuclear tripwires. A region where small skirmishes can trigger big wars would turn into
a nuclear tinderbox."
Benjamin Netanyahu supports US rejection of Iran nuclear deal: 'Israel has opposed Iran's nuclear deal from the start'
Attacking Mr Obama proposal of dealing with Iran, he added: "We must all stand together to stop Iran's march of conquest,
subjugation and terror." Mr Chomsky said Mr Putin had never made such a speech to Congress, which political observers said
was unique in the way a foreign leader so acidly attacked the policy of the US government. "Did Putin come to give an address
to the joint sessions of Congress trying to calling on them to reverse US policy, without even informing the president," he said.
"And that's just a tiny bit of this overwhelming influence. So if you happen to be interested in influence of. foreign influence
on elections, there are places to look. But even that is a joke."
The power of the pro-Israel lobby has long been one of the contentious, and disputed, issues in Washington. In 2007, John
Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, published
The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy , which described the lobby as "loose coalition of individuals and organisations
who actively work to steer US foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction".
The group's annual convention is a frequent stopping off point for politicians seeking election or reelection, and Mr Netanyahu
has addressed it several times. In 2016, top speakers included Vice President Joe Biden, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton,
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, Governor John Kasich, Senator Ted Cruz, and Speaker Paul Ryan.
The group's website says: "The mission of AIPAC is to strengthen, protect and promote the US-Israel relationship in ways that
enhance the security of the United States and Israel."
Neither the Israeli Embassy in Washington or AIPAC immediately responded to enquiries about Mr Chomsky's claim.
In his comments to Democracy Now, Mr Chomsky said the media was "focusing on issues which are pretty marginal. There are much
more serious issues that are being put to the side".
"Of all Trump's policies, the one that is the most dangerous and destructive, in fact poses an existential threat, is his policies
on climate change, on global warming," he said. "That's really destructive. And we're facing an imminent threat, not far removed,
of enormous damage. The effects are already visible but nothing like what's going to come."
He added: "These are the kinds of issues that should be under discussion. Instead here is a focus on what I believe are marginalia."
"... At Netanyahu's behest, Flynn and President Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner reportedly took the lead in the lobbying to derail the U.N. resolution, which Flynn discussed in a phone call with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak (in which the Russian diplomat rebuffed Flynn's appeal to block the resolution). ..."
"... In this case, what Flynn and Kushner were doing was going directly against US foreign policy, because Obama wanted the resolution to pass; He just didn't want to vote for it because that would cross the Israel lobby in the United States. The US finally ended up abstaining on the resolution and it passed 14-0. ..."
"... But before that happened, Flynn went to the Russians and to Egypt, both members of the Security Council, and tried to get the resolution delayed. But all of Israel's machinations to derail this resolution failed and that is what Mueller was investigating, the intervention and disruption of American foreign policy by private citizens who had no official role. ..."
"... While I think Bibi is an idiot, I also think the Logan Act is overinvoked, overstated, probably of dubious legal value and also of dubious constitutional value. ..."
"... In short, especially because Trump had been elected, though not yet inaugurated, I think he is not at all guilty of a Logan Act violation. This is nothing close to Spiro Agnew calling Anna Chenault from the airplane in August 1968. ..."
"... Probably true, although evidence of extreme collusion with Israel eliminates any case against Russia, with whom we have far more reasons for amity. Bringing out the Israel collusion greatly improves public understanding of political corruption. Perhaps it will awaken some to the Agnew-Chennault betrayal of the people of the US. ..."
"... It's ironic that Russia-gate is turning out to be Israel's effort to distract attention from its complete control over the Democratic party in 2016. From Israeli billionaires behind the scenes to Debbie Wasserman-Schultz at the helm. ..."
"... "Whether we like it or not, the former and current administration view Russia is as an enemy state." So that is how it works, the White House says it is an enemy state and therefore it is. The so called declaration is the hammer used for trying to make contact with Russia a criminal offense. We are not at war with Russia although we see our leaders doing their best to provoke Russia into one. ..."
"... The Israel connection disclosed by the malpracticer hack Mueller in the recent Flynn-flam just made Trump bullet-proof (so to speak). ..."
"... So Mueller caught Kushner and Flynn red-handed, sabotaging the Obama administration? What of it? He can't use that evidence, because it would inculpate the Zionist neocons that are orchestrating his farcical, Stalinist witchhunt. And Mueller, being an efficient terminator bot, knows that his target is Russia, not Israel. ..."
"... So Mueller will just have to continue swamp-fishing for potential perjurers ahem witnesses, for the upcoming show trials (to further inflame public opinion against Russia and Russia sympathizers). And continue he will, because (as we all know from Schwarzenegger's flicks), the only way to stop the terminator is to terminate him/it first. ..."
"... Trump and Kushner have nothing to worry about, even if a smoking gun is found that proves their collusion with Israel. That's because the entire political and media establishment will simply ignore the Israeli connection. ..."
"... Journalists and politicians will even continue to present Mike Flynn's contacts as evidence of collusion with Russia. They'll keep on repeating that "Flynn lied about his phone call to the Russian ambassador". But there will be no mention of the fact that the purpose of this contact was to support Israel and not any alleged Russian interference. ..."
"... I think you have it right Brendan. The MSM, Intelligence Community, and Mueller would never go down any path that popularized undue Israeli influence on US foreign policy. "Nothing to see here folks, move along." ..."
"... The Nice Zionists responsible for the thefts and murders for the past 69 years along with the "Jewish Community" in the rest of the world will resolve the matter so as to be fair to both parties. This is mind-boggling fantasy. ..."
"... FFS, Netanyahu aired a political commercial in Florida for Romney saying vote for this guy (against Obama)! I mean, it doesn't get any more overtly manipulative than that. Period. End of story. ..."
"... God, I hate to go all "Israel controls the media" but there it is. Not even a discussion. Just a fact. ..."
"... I also have to point out that he "fist pumped" Hillary Clinton at Mohammed Ali's eulogy. If he's as astute as he purports to be, he has to know that Hillary would have invaded Syria and killed a few hundred thousand more Syrians for the simple act of defiantly preserving their country. By almost any read of Ali's history, he would have been adamantly ("killing brown people") against that. But there was Silverstein using the platform to promote, arguably, perpetual war. ..."
"... Yeah I found a couple of Silverstein's statements to be closer to neocon propaganda than reality: "Because this is Israel and because we have a conflicted relationship with the Israel lobby . . ." "Instead of going directly to the Obama administration, with which they had terrible relations, they went to Trump instead." My impression was that the whole "terrible relationship between Obama and Netanyahu" was manufactured by the Israel lobby to bully Obama. However these are small blips within an otherwise solid critique of the Israel lobby's influence. ..."
The Israel-gate Side of Russia-gate December 23, 2017
While unproven claims of Russian meddling in U.S. politics have whipped Official Washington
into a frenzy, much less attention has been paid to real evidence of Israeli interference in
U.S. politics, as Dennis J Bernstein describes.
In investigating Russia's alleged meddling in U.S. politics, special prosecutor Robert
Mueller uncovered evidence that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pressured the Trump
transition team to undermine President Obama's plans to permit the United Nations to censure
Israel over its illegal settlement building on the Palestinian West Bank, a discovery
referenced in the plea deal with President Trump's first National Security Adviser Michael
Flynn.
At Netanyahu's behest, Flynn and President Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner reportedly took
the lead in the lobbying to derail the U.N. resolution, which Flynn discussed in a phone call
with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak (in which the Russian diplomat rebuffed Flynn's appeal
to block the resolution).
I spoke on Dec, 18 with independent journalist and blogger Richard Silverstein, who writes
on national security and other issues for a number of blogs at Tikun Olam .
Dennis Bernstein: A part of Michael Flynn's plea had to do with some actions he took before
coming to power regarding Israel and the United Nations. Please explain.
Richard Silverstein:
The Obama administration was negotiating in the [UN] Security Council
just before he left office about a resolution that would condemn Israeli settlements.
Obviously, the Israeli government did not want this resolution to be passed. Instead of going
directly to the Obama administration, with which they had terrible relations, they went to
Trump instead. They approached Michael Flynn and Jared Kushner became involved in this. While
they were in the transition and before having any official capacity, they negotiated with
various members of the Security Council to try to quash the settlement resolution.
One of the issues here which is little known is the Logan Act, which was passed at the
foundation of our republic and was designed to prevent private citizens from usurping the
foreign policy prerogatives of the executive. It criminalized any private citizen who attempted
to negotiate with an enemy country over any foreign policy issue.
In this case, what Flynn and Kushner were doing was going directly against US foreign
policy, because Obama wanted the resolution to pass; He just didn't want to vote for it because
that would cross the Israel lobby in the United States. The US finally ended up abstaining on
the resolution and it passed 14-0.
But before that happened, Flynn went to the Russians and to Egypt, both members of the
Security Council, and tried to get the resolution delayed. But all of Israel's machinations to
derail this resolution failed and that is what Mueller was investigating, the intervention and
disruption of American foreign policy by private citizens who had no official role.
This speaks to the power of the Israel lobby and of Israel itself to disrupt our foreign
policy. Very few people have ever been charged with committing an illegal act by advocating on
behalf of Israel. That is one of the reasons why this is such an important development. Until
now, the lobby has really ruled supreme on the issue of Israel and Palestine in US foreign
policy. Now it is possible that a private citizen will actually be made to pay a price for
that.
This is an important development because the lobby till now has run roughshod over our
foreign policy in this area and this may act as a restraining order against blatant disruption
of US foreign policy by people like this.
Bernstein: So this information is a part of Michael Flynn's plea. Anyone studying this would
learn something about Michael Flynn and it would be part of the prosecution's
investigation.
Silverstein:
That's absolutely right. One thing to note here is that it is reporters who
have raised the issue of the Logan Act, not Mueller or Flynn's people or anyone in the Trump
administration. But I do think that Logan is a very important part of this plea deal, even if
it is not mentioned explicitly.
Bernstein: If the special prosecutor had smoking-gun information that the Trump
administration colluded with Russia, in the way they colluded with Israel before coming to
power, this would be a huge revelation. But it is definitely collusion when it comes to
Israel.
Silverstein: Absolutely. If this were Russia, it would be on the front page of every major
newspaper in the United States and the leading story on the TV news. Because this is Israel and
because we have a conflicted relationship with the Israel lobby and they have so much influence
on US policy concerning Israel, it has managed to stay on the back burner. Only two or three
media outlets besides mine have raised this issue of Logan and collusion. Kushner and Flynn may
be the first American citizens charged under the Logan Act for interfering on behalf of Israel
in our foreign policy. This is a huge issue and it has hardly been raised at all.
Bernstein: As you know, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC has made a career out of investigating the
Russia-gate charges. She says that she has read all this material carefully, so she must have
read about Flynn and Israel, but I haven't heard her on this issue at all.
Silverstein:
Even progressive journalists, who you'd think would be going after this with a
vengeance, are frightened off by the fact the lobby really bites back. So, aside from outlets
like the Intercept and the Electronic Intifada, there is a lot of hesitation about going after
the Israel lobby. People are afraid because they know that there is a high price to be paid. It
goes from being purely journalism to being a personal and political vendetta when they get you
in their sights. In fact, one of the reasons I feel my blog is so important is that what I do
is challenge Israeli policy and Israeli intervention in places where it doesn't belong.
Bernstein: Jared Kushner is the point man for the Trump administration on Israel. He has
talked about having a "vision for peace." Do you think it is a problem that this is someone
with a long, close relationship with the prime minister of Israel and, in fact, runs a
foundation that invests in the building of illegal Israeli settlements? Might this be
problematic?
Silverstein:
It is quite nefarious, actually. When Jared Kushner was a teenager, Netanyahu
used to stay at the Kushner family home when he visited the United States. This relationship
with one of the most extreme right political figures in Israel goes back decades. And it is not
just Kushner himself, but all the administration personnel dealing with these so-called peace
negotiations, including Jason Greenblatt and David Friedman, the ambassador. These are all
orthodox Jews who tend to have very nationalist views when it comes to Israel. They all support
settlements financially through foundations. These are not honest brokers.
We could talk at length about the history of US personnel who have been negotiators for
Middle East peace. All of them have been favorable to Israel and answerable to the Israel
lobby, including Dennis Ross and Makovsky, who served in the last administration. These people
are dyed-in-the-wool ultra-nationalist supporters of [Israeli] settlements. They have no
business playing any role in negotiating a peace deal.
My prediction all along has been that these peace negotiations will come to naught, even
though they seem to have bought the cooperation of Saudi Arabia, which is something new in the
process. The Palestinians can never accept a deal that has been negotiated by Kushner and
company because it will be far too favorable to Israel and it will totally neglect the
interests of the Palestinians.
Bernstein: It has been revealed that Kushner supports the building of settlements in the
West Bank. Most people don't understand the politics of what is going on there, but it appears
to be part of an ethnic cleansing.
Silverstein:
The settlements have always been a violation of international law, ever since
Israel conquered the West Bank in 1967. The Geneva Conventions direct an occupying power to
withdraw from territory that was not its own. In 1967 Israel invaded Arab states and conquered
the West Bank and Gaza but this has never been recognized or accepted by any nation until
now.
The fact that Kushner and his family are intimately involved in supporting
settlements–as are David Friedman and Jason Greenblatt–is completely outrageous. No
member of any previous US administration would have been allowed to participate with these
kinds of financial investments in support of settlements. Of course, Trump doesn't understand
the concept of conflict of interest because he is heavily involved in such conflicts himself.
But no party in the Middle East except Israel is going to consider the US an honest broker and
acceptable as a mediator.
When they announce this deal next January, no one in the Arab World is going to accept it,
with the possible exception of Saudi Arabia because they have other fish to fry in terms of
Iran. The next three years are going to be interesting, supposing Trump lasts out his term. My
prediction is that the peace plan will fail and that it will lead to greater violence in the
Middle East. It will not simply lead to a vacuum, it will lead to a deterioration in conditions
there.
Bernstein: The Trump transition team was actually approached directly by the Israeli
government to try to intercede at the United Nations.
Silverstein:
I'm assuming it was Netanyahu who went directly to Kushner and Trump. Now, we
haven't yet found out that Trump directly knew about this but it is very hard to believe
that Trump didn't endorse this. Now that we know that Mueller has access to all of the emails
of the transition team, there is little doubt that they have been able to find their smoking
gun. Flynn's plea meant that they basically had him dead to rights. It remains to be seen what
will happen with Kushner but I would think that this would play some role in either the
prosecution of Kushner or some plea deal.
Bernstein: The other big story, of course, is the decision by the Trump administration to
move the US embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem. Was there any pre-election collusion in that
regard and what are the implications?
Silverstein:
Well, it's a terrible decision which goes against forty to fifty years of US
foreign policy. It also breaches all international understanding. All of our allies in the
European Union and elsewhere are aghast at this development. There is now a campaign in the
United Nations Security Council to pass a resolution condemning the announcement, which we will
veto, but the next step will be to go to the General Assembly, where such a resolution will
pass easily.
The question is how much anger, violence and disruption this is going to cause around the
world, especially in the Arab and Muslim world. This is a slow-burning fuse. It is not going to
explode right now. The issue of Jerusalem is so vital that this is not something that is simply
going to go away. This is going to be a festering sore in the Muslim world and among
Palestinians. We have already seen attacks on Israeli soldiers and citizens and there will be
many more.
As to collusion in all of this, since Trump always said during the campaign that this was
what he was going to do, it might be difficult to treat this in the same way as the UN
resolution. The UN resolution was never on anybody's radar and nobody knew the role that Trump
was playing behind the scenes with that–as opposed to Trump saying right from the get-go
that Jerusalem was going to be recognized as the capital of Jerusalem.
By doing that, they have completely abrogated any Palestinian interest in Jerusalem. This is
a catastrophic decision that really excludes the United States from being an honest broker here
and shows our true colors in terms of how pro-Israel we are.
As most regular readers of CN already know, some dynamite books on the inordinate amount
of influence pro-Israel zealots have on Washington:
1.) 'The Host and the Parasite' by Greg Felton
2.) 'Power of Israel in the United States' by James Petras
3.) 'They Dare to Speak Out' by Paul Findley
4.) 'The Israel Lobby' by Mearsheimer and Walt
5.) 'Zionism, Militarism and the Decline of U.S. Power' by James Petras
I suggest that anyone relatively knew to this neglected topic peruse a few of the
aforementioned titles. An inevitable backlash by the citizens of the United States is
eventually forthcoming against the Zionist Power Configuration. It's crucial that this
impending backlash remain democratic, non-violent, eschews anti-Semitism, and travels in a
progressive in direction.
Annie , December 23, 2017 at 5:47 pm
Which one would you suggest? I already read "The Israel Lobby."
Sam F , December 23, 2017 at 8:38 pm
Findley and Mearsheimer are certainly worthwhile. I will look for Petras.
Larry Larsen , December 24, 2017 at 6:38 pm
If you haven't already read them, the end/footnotes in "The Israel Lobby" are more
illuminating.
That influence is also shown, of course, by the fact that Obama waited until the midnight
hours of his tenure and after the 2016 election to even start working on this resolution.
While I think Bibi is an idiot, I also think the Logan Act is overinvoked, overstated,
probably of dubious legal value and also of dubious constitutional value.
In short, especially because Trump had been elected, though not yet inaugurated, I think
he is not at all guilty of a Logan Act violation. This is nothing close to Spiro Agnew
calling Anna Chenault from the airplane in August 1968.
Sam F , December 23, 2017 at 8:41 pm
Probably true, although evidence of extreme collusion with Israel eliminates any case
against Russia, with whom we have far more reasons for amity. Bringing out the Israel
collusion greatly improves public understanding of political corruption. Perhaps it will
awaken some to the Agnew-Chennault betrayal of the people of the US.
JWalters , December 24, 2017 at 3:32 am
It's ironic that Russia-gate is turning out to be Israel's effort to distract attention
from its complete control over the Democratic party in 2016. From Israeli billionaires behind
the scenes to Debbie Wasserman-Schultz at the helm.
The leaked emails showed the corruption
plainly, and based on the ACTUAL evidence (recorded download time), most likely came from a
highly disgruntled insider. The picture was starting to spill into public view. I'd estimate
the real huge worry was that if this stuff came out, it could bring out other Israeli
secrets, like their involvement in 9/11. That would mean actual jail time. Might be hard to
buy your way out of that no matter how much money you have.
Annie , December 23, 2017 at 10:48 pm
The Logan act states that anyone who negotiates with an enemy of the US, and Israel is not
defined as an enemy.
Annie , December 23, 2017 at 6:59 pm
The Logan act would not apply here, although I wish it would. I don't think anyone has
been convicted based on this act, and they were part of a transition team not to mention the
Logan act clearly states a private citizen who attempts to negotiate with an enemy state, and
that certainly doesn't apply to Israel. In this administration their bias is so blatant that
they can install Kushner as an honest broker in the Israeli-Palestine peace process while his
family has a close relationship with Netanyahu, and he runs a foundation that invests in the
building of illegal settlements which goes against the Geneva conventions. Hopefully Trump's
blatant siding with Israel will receive a lot of backlash as did his plan to make Jerusalem
the capital of Israel.
I also found that so called progressive internet sites don't cover this the way they
should.
Al Pinto , December 24, 2017 at 9:16 am
@Annie
"The Logan act would not apply here, although I wish it would."
You and me both .
From the point of starting to read this article, it has been in my mind that the Logan act
would not apply here. After reading most of the comments, it became clear that not many
people viewed this as such. Yes, Joe Tedesky did as well
The UN is the "clearing house" for international politics, where countries freely contact
each other's for getting support for their cause behind the scene. The support sought after
could be voting for or against the resolution on hand. At times, as Israel did, countries
reach out to perceived enemies as well, if they could not secure sufficient support for their
cause. This is the normal activity of the UN diplomacy.
Knowing that the outgoing administration would not support its cause, Israel reached out
to the incoming administration to delay the vote on the UN resolution. I fail to see anything
wrong with Israel's action even in this case; Israel is not an enemy state to the US. As
such, there has been no violation of any acts by the incoming administration, even if they
tried to secure veto vote for Israel. I do not like it, but no action by Mueller in this case
is correct.
People, just like the article in itself, implying that the Logan Act applies in this case
are just plain wrong. Not just wrong, but their anti-Israel bias is in plain view.
Whether we like it or not, the former and current administration view Russia is as an
enemy state. Even then, Russia contacting the incoming administration is not a violation of
the Logan Act. That is just normal diplomacy in the background between countries. What would
be a violation is that the contacted official acted on the behalf of Russia and tried to
influence the outgoing administration's decision. That is what the Mueller investigation
tries to prove hopelessly
"Whether we like it or not, the former and current administration view Russia is as an
enemy state." So that is how it works, the White House says it is an enemy state and
therefore it is. The so called declaration is the hammer used for trying to make contact with
Russia a criminal offense. We are not at war with Russia although we see our leaders doing
their best to provoke Russia into one.
Annie , December 24, 2017 at 1:55 pm
Thanks for your reply. When I read the article and it referenced the Logan Act, which I am
familiar with in that I've read about it before, I was surprised that Bernstein and
Silverstein even brought it up because it so obviously does not apply in this case, since
Israel is not considered an enemy state. Many have even referenced it as flimsy when it comes
to convictions against those in Trump's transition team who had contacts with Russia. No one
has ever been convicted under the Logan Act.
Larry Larsen , December 24, 2017 at 6:41 pm
The Logan Act either should apply equally, or not apply at all. This "Russia-gate" hype
seems to apply it selectively.
mrtmbrnmn , December 23, 2017 at 7:36 pm
You guys are blinded by the light. The Israel connection disclosed by the malpracticer
hack Mueller in the recent Flynn-flam just made Trump bullet-proof (so to speak).
There is no doubt that Trump is Bibi's and the Saudi's ventriloquist dummy and Jared has
been an Israel agent of influence since he was 12.
But half the Dementedcrat Sore Loser Brigade will withdraw from the field of battle (not
to mention most of the GOP living dead too) if publically and noisily tying Israel to Trump's
tail becomes the only route to his removal. Which it would have to be, as there is no there
there regarding the yearlong trumped-up PutinPutinPutin waterboarding of Trump.
Immediately (if not sooner) the mighty (pro-Israel) Donor Bank of Singer (Paul), Saban
(Haim), Sachs (Goldman) & Adelson (Sheldon), would change their passwords and leave these
politicians/beggars with empty begging bowls. End of $ordid $tory.
alley cat , December 23, 2017 at 7:45 pm
So Mueller caught Kushner and Flynn red-handed, sabotaging the Obama administration? What
of it? He can't use that evidence, because it would inculpate the Zionist neocons that are
orchestrating his farcical, Stalinist witchhunt. And Mueller, being an efficient terminator
bot, knows that his target is Russia, not Israel.
Mueller can use that evidence of sabotage and/or obstruction of justice to try to coerce
false confessions from Kushner and Flynn. But what are the chances of that, barring short
stayovers for them at some CIA black site?
So Mueller will just have to continue swamp-fishing for potential perjurers ahem
witnesses, for the upcoming show trials (to further inflame public opinion against Russia and
Russia sympathizers). And continue he will, because (as we all know from Schwarzenegger's
flicks), the only way to stop the terminator is to terminate him/it first.
Leslie F. , December 23, 2017 at 8:28 pm
He used it, along with other info, to turn flip Flynn and possibly can use it the same way
again Kusher. Not all evidence has end up in court to be useful.
JWalters , December 23, 2017 at 8:40 pm
This is an extremely important story, excellently reported. All the main "facts" Americans
think they know about Israel are, amazingly, flat-out lies.
1. Israel was NOT victimized by powerful Arab armies. Israel overpowered and victimized a
defenseless, civilian Arab population. Military analysts knew the Arab armies were in poor
shape and would not be able to resist the zionist army.
2. Muslim "citizens" of Israel do NOT have all the same rights as Jews.
3. Israelis are NOT under threat from the indigineous Palestinians, but Palestinians are
under constant threats of theft and death from the Israelis.
4. Israel does NOT share America's most fundamental values, which rest on the principle of
equal human rights for all.
Maintaining such a blanket of major lies for decades requires immense power. And this
power would have to be exercised "under the radar" to be effective. That requires even more
power. Both Congress and the press have to be controlled. How much power does it take to turn
"Progressive Rachel" into "Tel Aviv Rachel"? To turn "It Takes a Village" Hillary into
"Slaughter a Village" Hillary? It takes immense power AND ruthlessness.
War profiteers have exactly this combination of immense war profits and the ruthlessness
to victimize millions of people. "War Profiteers and the Roots of the War on Terror" http://warprofiteerstory.blogspot.com
Vast war profits easily afford to buy the mainstream media. And controlling campaign
contributions for members of Congress is amazingly cheap in the big picture. Such a squalid
sale of souls.
And when simple bribery is not enough, they ruin a person's life through blackmail or
false character assassination. And if those don't work they use death threats, including to
family members, and finally murder. Their ruthlessness is unrestrained. John Perkins has
described these tactics in "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man".
For readers who haven't seen it, here is an excellent riff on the absurdly overwhelming
evidence for Israel's influence compared to that of Russia, at a highly professional news and
analysis website run by Jewish anti-Zionists. "Let's talk about Russian influence" http://mondoweiss.net/2016/08/about-russian-influence/
mike k , December 23, 2017 at 8:44 pm
Hitler and Mussolini, Trump and Netanyahoo – matches made in Hell. These characters
are so obviously, blatantly evil that it is deeply disturbing that people fail to see that,
and instead go to great lengths to find some complicated flaws in these monsters.
mike k , December 23, 2017 at 8:49 pm
Keep it simple folks. No need for complex analyses. Just remember that these characters as
simply as evil as it gets, and proceed from there. These asinine shows that portray mobsters
as complex human beings are dangerously deluding. If you want to be victimized by these
types, this kind of overthinking is just the way to go.
Sam F , December 23, 2017 at 9:00 pm
There is a modern theory of fiction that insists upon the portrayal of inconsistency in
characters, both among the good guys and the bad guys. It is useful to show how those who do
wrongs have made specific kinds of errors that make them abnormal, and that those who do
right are not perfect but nonetheless did the right thing. Instead it is used by commercial
writers to argue that the good are really bad, and the bad are really good, which is of
course the philosophy of oligarchy-controlled mass publishers.
Sam F , December 23, 2017 at 8:54 pm
A very important article by Dennis Bernstein, and it is very appropriate that non-zionist
Jews are active against the extreme zionist corruption of our federal government. I am sure
that they are reviled by the zionists for interfering with the false denunciations of racism
against the opponents of zionism. Indeed critics face a very nearly totalitarian power of
zionism, which in league with MIC/WallSt opportunism has displaced democracy altogether in
the US.
backwardsevolution , December 23, 2017 at 9:18 pm
A nice little set-up by the Obama administration. Perhaps it was entrapment? Who set it
up? Flynn and Kushner should have known better to fall for it. So at the end of his
Presidency, Obama suddenly gets balls and wants to slap down Israel? Yeah, right.
Nice to have leverage over people, though, isn't it? If you're lucky and play your cards
right, you might even be lucky enough to land an impeachment.
Of course, I'm just being cynical. No one would want to overturn democracy, would
they?
Certainly people like Comey, Brenner, Clinton, Clapper, Mueller, Rosenstein wouldn't want
that, would they?
Joe Tedesky , December 23, 2017 at 10:33 pm
I just can't see any special prosecutor investigating Israel-Gate. Between what the
Zionist donors donate to these creepy politicians, too what goods they have on these same
mischievous politicians, I just can't see any investigation into Israel's collusion with the
Trump Administration going anywhere. Netanyahu isn't Putin, and Russia isn't Israel. Plus,
Israel is considered a U.S. ally, while Russia is being marked as a Washington rival. Sorry,
this news regarding Israel isn't going to be ranted on about for the next 18 months, like the
MSM has done with Russia, because our dear old Israel is the only democracy in the Middle
East, or so they tell us. So, don't get your hopes up.
JWalters , December 24, 2017 at 3:33 am
It's true the Israelis have America's politicians by the ears and the balls. But as this
story gets better known, politicians will start getting questions at their town meetings.
Increasingly the politicians will gag on what Israel is force-feeding them, until finally
they reach a critical mass of vomit in Congress.
Joe Tedesky , December 24, 2017 at 11:12 am
I hope you are right JWalters. Although relying on a Zionist controlled MSM doesn't give
hope for the news getting out properly. Again I hope you are right JWalters. Joe
Actually, Netanyahu was so desperate to have the resolution pulled and not voted on that
he reached out to any country that might help him after the foreign minister of New Zealand,
one of its co-sponsors refused to pull the plug after a testy phone exchange with the Israeli
PM ending up threatening an Israeli boycott oturnef the KIwis.
He then turned to his buddy, Vladimir Putin, who owed him a favor for having Israel's UN
delegate absent himself for the UNGA vote on sanctioning Russia after its annexation of
Crimea.
Putin then called Russia's UN Ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, since deceased, and asked him to
get the other UNSC ambassadors to postpone the vote until Trump took over the White House but
the other ambassadors weren't buying it. Given Russia's historic public position regarding
the settlements, Churkin had no choice to vote Yes with the others.
This story was reported in detail in the Israeli press but blacked out in the US which,
due to Zionist influence on the media, does not want the American public to know about the
close ties between Putin and Netanyahu which has led to the Israeli PM making five state
visits there in the last year and a half.
Had Clinton won the White House we can assume that there would have been no US veto. That
Netanyahu apparently knew in advance that the US planned to veto the resolution was, I
suspect, leaked to the Israelis by US delegate Samantha Power, who was clearly unhappy at
having to abstain.
Abe , December 24, 2017 at 12:39 am
The Israeli Prime Minister made five state visits to Russia in the last year and a half to
make sure the Russians don't accidentally on purpose blast Israeli warplanes from the sky
over Syria (like they oughtta). Putin tries not to snicker when Netanyahu bloviates ad
nauseum about the purported "threat" posed by Iran.
He thinks Putin is a RATS ASS like the yankee government
JWalters , December 24, 2017 at 3:34 am
"This story was reported in detail in the Israeli press but blacked out in the
US"
We've just had a whole cluster of big stories involving Israel that have all been
essentially blacked out in the US press. e.g. "Dionne and Shields ignore the Adelson in the room" http://mondoweiss.net/2017/12/jerusalem-israels-capital
This is not due to chance. There is no doubt that the US mainstream media is wholly
controlled by the Israelis.
alley cat , December 24, 2017 at 4:49 am
"He [Netanyahu] then turned to his buddy, Vladimir Putin "
Jeff, that characterization of Putin and Netanyahu's relationship makes no sense, since
the Russians have consistently opposed Zionism and Putin has been no exception, having
spoiled Zionist plans for the destruction of Syria.
"Had Clinton won the White House we can assume that there would have been no US
veto."
Not sure where you're going with that, since the US vote was up to Obama, who wanted to
get some payback for all of Bibi's efforts to sabotage Obama's treaty with Iran.
For the record, Zionism has had no more rabid supporter than the Dragon Lady. If we're
going to make assumptions, we could start by assuming that if she had won the White House
we'd all be dead by now, thanks to her obsession (at the instigation of her Zionist/neocon
sponsors) with declaring no-fly zones in Syria.
Brendan , December 24, 2017 at 6:18 am
Trump and Kushner have nothing to worry about, even if a smoking gun is found that proves
their collusion with Israel. That's because the entire political and media establishment will
simply ignore the Israeli connection.
Journalists and politicians will even continue to present Mike Flynn's contacts as
evidence of collusion with Russia. They'll keep on repeating that "Flynn lied about his phone
call to the Russian ambassador". But there will be no mention of the fact that the purpose of
this contact was to support Israel and not any alleged Russian interference.
Skip Scott , December 24, 2017 at 7:59 am
I think you have it right Brendan. The MSM, Intelligence Community, and Mueller would
never go down any path that popularized undue Israeli influence on US foreign policy.
"Nothing to see here folks, move along."
The zionist will stop at nothing to control the middle east with American taxpayers
money/military equiptment its a win win for the zionist they control America lock stock and
barrel a pity though it is a great country to be led by a jewish entity.
What will Israel-Palestine look like twenty years from now? Will it remain an apartheid
regime, a regime without any Palestinians, or something different. The Trump decision, which
the world rejects, brings the issue of "final" settlement to the fore. In a way we can go
back to the thirties and the British Mandate. Jewish were fleeing Europe, many coming to
Palestine. The British, on behalf of the Zionists, were delaying declaring Palestine a state
with control of its own affairs. Seeing the mass immigration and chafing at British foot
dragging, the Arabs rebelled, What happened then was that the British, responding to numerous
pressures notably war with Germany, acted by granting independence and granting Palestine
control of its borders.
With American pressure and the mass exodus of Jews from Europe, Jews defied the British
resulting in Jewish resistance. What followed then was a UN plan to divide the land with a
Jerusalem an international city administered by the UN. The Arabs rebelled and lost much of
what the UN plan provided and Jerusalem as an international city was scrapped.
Will there be a second serious attempt to settle the issue of the land and the status of
Jerusalem? Will there be a serious move toward a single state? How will the matter of
Jerusalem be resolved. The two state solution has always been a fantasy and acquiescence of
Palestinians to engage in this charade exposes their leaders to charges of posturing for
perks. Imagined options could go on and on but will there be serious options placed before
the world community or will the boots on the ground Israeli policies continue?
As I have commented before, it will most probably be the Jewish community in Israel and
the world that shapes the future and if the matter is to be resolved that is fair to both
parties, it will be they that starts the ball rolling.
Zachary Smith , December 24, 2017 at 1:34 pm
As I have commented before, it will most probably be the Jewish community in Israel and
the world that shapes the future and if the matter is to be resolved that is fair to both
parties, it will be they that starts the ball rolling.
The Nice Zionists responsible for the thefts and murders for the past 69 years along with
the "Jewish Community" in the rest of the world will resolve the matter so as to be fair to
both parties. This is mind-boggling fantasy.
Larry Larsen , December 24, 2017 at 5:56 pm
Truly mind-boggling. Ahistorical, and as you say, fantasy.
Larry Larsen , December 24, 2017 at 5:48 pm
FFS, Netanyahu aired a political commercial in Florida for Romney saying vote for this guy
(against Obama)! I mean, it doesn't get any more overtly manipulative than that. Period. End
of story.
$50K of Facebook ads about puppies pales in comparison to that blatant, prima facia,
public manipulation. God, I hate to go all "Israel controls the media" but there it is. Not even a discussion. Just a fact.
Larry Larsen , December 24, 2017 at 6:11 pm
Just for the record, Richard Silverstein blocked me on Twitter because I pointed out that
he slammed someone who was suggesting that the Assad government was fighting for its
(Syria's) life by fighting terrorists. Actually, more specifically, because of that he read
my "Free Palestine" bio on Twitter and called me a Hamas supporter (no Hamas mentioned) and a
"moron" for some seeming contradiction.
I also have to point out that he "fist pumped" Hillary Clinton at Mohammed Ali's eulogy.
If he's as astute as he purports to be, he has to know that Hillary would have invaded Syria
and killed a few hundred thousand more Syrians for the simple act of defiantly preserving
their country. By almost any read of Ali's history, he would have been adamantly ("killing
brown people") against that. But there was Silverstein using the platform to promote,
arguably, perpetual war.
Silverstein is probably not a good (ie. consistent) arbiter of Israeli impact on US
politics. Just sayin'.
This may be a tad ot but it relates to the alleged hacking of the DNC, the role debbie
wasserman schultz plays in the spy ring (awan bros) in house of rep servers: I have long
suspected that mossad has their fingers in this entire mess. FWIW
Good site, BTW.
Zachary Smith , December 24, 2017 at 7:35 pm
I can't recall why I removed the Tikun Olam site from my bookmarks – it happened
quite a while back. Generally I do that when I feel the blogger crossed some kind of personal
red line. Something Mr. Silverstein wrote put him over that line with me.
In the course of a search I found that at the neocon NYT. Mr. Silverstein claims several
things I find unbelievable, and from that alone I wonder about his ultimate motives. I may be
excessively touchy about this, but that's how it is.
Larry Larsen , December 24, 2017 at 8:51 pm
Yeah Zachary, "wondering about ultimate motives" is probably a good way to put it/his
views. He's obviously conflicted, if not deferential in some aspects of Israeli policy. He
really was a hero of mine, but now I just don't get whether what he says is masking something
or a true belief. He says some good stuff, but, but, but .
P. Michael Garber , December 24, 2017 at 11:54 pm
Yeah I found a couple of Silverstein's statements to be closer to neocon propaganda than
reality: "Because this is Israel and because we have a conflicted relationship with the Israel
lobby . . ." "Instead of going directly to the Obama administration, with which they had terrible
relations, they went to Trump instead." My impression was that the whole "terrible relationship between Obama and Netanyahu" was
manufactured by the Israel lobby to bully Obama. However these are small blips within an otherwise solid critique of the Israel lobby's
influence.
Late Robert Parry was a great investigative reporter...
Notable quotes:
"... So, the open secret of Israeli influence is studiously ignored, even as presidential candidates prostrate themselves before the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump both appeared before AIPAC in 2016, with Clinton promising to take the U.S.-Israeli relationship "to the next level" – whatever that meant – and Trump vowing not to "pander" and then pandering like crazy. ..."
"... Israeli officials and AIPAC also coordinate their strategies to maximize political influence, which is derived in large part by who gets the lobby's largesse and who doesn't. On the rare occasion when members of Congress step out of line – and take a stand that offends Israeli leaders – they can expect a well-funded opponent in their next race, a tactic that dates back decades. ..."
"... Well-respected members, such as Rep. Paul Findley and Sen. Charles Percy (both Republicans from Illinois), were early victims of the Israeli lobby's wrath when they opened channels of communication with the Palestine Liberation Organization in the cause of seeking peace. Findley was targeted and defeated in 1982; Percy in 1984. ..."
"... Today, many U.S. pols grovel before the Israeli government seeking a sign of favor from Prime Minister Netanyahu, almost like Medieval kings courting the blessings of the Pope at the Vatican. ..."
"... During the 2008 campaign, then-Sen. Barack Obama, whom Netanyahu viewed with suspicion, traveled to Israel to demonstrate sympathy for Israelis within rocket-range of Gaza while steering clear of showing much empathy for the Palestinians. ..."
"... Money, of course, has become the lifeblood of American politics – and American supporters of Israel have been particularly strategic in how they have exploited that reality. ..."
"... One of Israel's most devoted advocates, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, has poured millions of dollars in "dark money" into political candidates and groups that support Israel's interests. Adelson, who has advocated dropping a nuclear bomb inside Iran to coerce its government, is a Trump favorite having donated a record $5 million to Trump's inaugural celebration. ..."
"... Israel's involvement in U.S. politics also can be covert. For instance, the evidence is now overwhelming that the Israeli government of right-wing Prime Minister Menachem Begin played a key role in helping Ronald Reagan's campaign in 1980 strike a deal with Iran to frustrate President Jimmy Carter's efforts to free 52 American hostages before Election Day. ..."
"... In a 1992 memoir, Profits of War , former Israeli intelligence officer Ari Ben-Menashe also noted that Begin and other Likud leaders held Carter in contempt. ..."
"... "Begin loathed Carter for the peace agreement forced upon him at Camp David," Ben-Menashe wrote. "As Begin saw it, the agreement took away Sinai from Israel, did not create a comprehensive peace, and left the Palestinian issue hanging on Israel's back." ..."
"... Ben-Menashe was among a couple of dozen government officials and intelligence operatives who described how Reagan's campaign, mostly through future CIA Director William Casey and past CIA Director George H.W. Bush, struck a deal in 1980 with senior Iranians who got promises of arms via Israel in exchange for keeping the hostages through the election and thus humiliating Carter. (The hostages were finally released on Jan. 20, 1981, after Reagan was sworn in as President.) ..."
"... In particular, NED has been at the center of efforts to flip elections to U.S.-backed candidates, such as in Nicaragua in 1990, or to sponsor "color revolutions," which typically organize around some color as the symbol for mass demonstrations. Ukraine – on Russia's border – has been the target of two such operations, the Orange Revolution in 2004, which helped install anti-Russian President Viktor Yushchenko, and the Maidan ouster of elected pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014. ..."
"... NED president Carl Gershman, a neoconservative who has run NED since its founding in 1983, openly declared that Ukraine was "the biggest prize" in September 2013 -- just months before the Maidan protests -- as well as calling it an important step toward ousting Russian President Vladimir Putin. In 2016, Gershman called directly for regime change in Russia. ..."
"... In some European circles, the neocons are described as "Israel's American agents," which may somewhat overstate the direct linkage between Israel and the neocons although a central tenet of neocon thinking is that there must be no daylight between the U.S. and Israel. The neocons say U.S. politicians must stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel even if that means the Americans sidling up to the Israelis rather than any movement the other way. ..."
"... Since the mid-1990s, American neocons have worked closely with Benjamin Netanyahu. Several prominent neocons (including former Assistant Defense Secretary Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser, Meyrav Wurmser and Robert Loewenberg) advised Netanyahu's 1996 campaign and urged a new strategy for "securing the realm." Essentially, the idea was to replace negotiations with the Palestinians and Arab states with "regime change" for governments that were viewed as troublesome to Israel, including Iraq and Syria. ..."
"... Bush also could pursue "regime change" in Syria only as a proxy effort of subversion, rather than a full-scale U.S. invasion. President Barack Obama escalated the Syrian proxy war in 2011 with the support of Israel and its strange-bedfellow allies in Saudi Arabia and the other Sunni-ruled Gulf States, which hated Syria's government because it was allied with Shiite-ruled Iran -- and Sunnis and Shiites have been enemies since the Seventh Century. Israel insists that the U.S. take the Sunni side, even if that puts the U.S. in bed with Al Qaeda . ..."
"... In Campaign 2016, both Clinton and Trump wore their love for Israel on their sleeves, Clinton promising to take the relationship to "the next level" (a phrase that young couples often use when deciding to go from heavy petting to intercourse). Trump reminded AIPAC that he had a Jewish grandchild and vowed to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. ..."
"... By contrast to Israel's long history of playing games with U.S. politics, the Russian government stands accused of trying to undermine the U.S. political process recently by hacking into emails of the Democratic National Committee -- revealing the DNC's improper opposition to Sen. Bernie Sanders's campaign -- and of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta -- disclosing the contents of Clinton's paid speeches to Wall Street and pay-to-play aspects of the Clinton Foundation -- and sharing that information with the American people via WikiLeaks. ..."
Special Report: As Official Washington fumes about Russia-gate, Israel's far more
significant political-influence-and-propaganda campaigns are ignored. No one dares suggest a
probe of Israel-gate, says Robert Parry.
The other day, I asked a longtime Democratic Party insider who is working on the Russia-gate
investigation which country interfered more in U.S. politics, Russia or Israel. Without a
moment's hesitation, he replied, "Israel, of course."
Which underscores my concern about the hysteria raging across Official Washington about
"Russian meddling" in the 2016 presidential campaign: There is no proportionality applied to
the question of foreign interference in U.S. politics. If there were, we would have a far more
substantive investigation of Israel-gate.
The problem is that if anyone mentions the truth about Israel's clout, the person is
immediately smeared as "anti-Semitic" and targeted by Israel's extraordinarily sophisticated
lobby and its many media/political allies for vilification and marginalization.
So, the open secret of Israeli influence is studiously ignored, even as presidential
candidates prostrate themselves before the annual conference of the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee. Hillary Clinton and
Donald Trump both appeared before AIPAC in 2016, with Clinton promising to take the
U.S.-Israeli relationship "to the next level" – whatever that meant – and Trump
vowing not to "pander" and then pandering like crazy.
Congress is no different. It has given Israel's controversial Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu a
record-tying three invitations to address joint sessions of Congress (matching the number
of times British Prime Minister Winston Churchill appeared). We then witnessed the Republicans
and Democrats competing to see how often their members could bounce up and down and who could
cheer Netanyahu the loudest, even when the Israeli prime minister was instructing the Congress
to follow his position on Iran rather than President Obama's.
Israeli officials and AIPAC also coordinate their strategies to maximize political
influence, which is derived in large part by who gets the lobby's largesse and who doesn't. On
the rare occasion when members of Congress step out of line – and take a stand that
offends Israeli leaders – they can expect a well-funded opponent in their next race, a
tactic that dates back decades.
Well-respected members, such as Rep. Paul Findley and Sen. Charles Percy (both Republicans
from Illinois), were early victims of the Israeli lobby's wrath when they opened channels of
communication with the Palestine Liberation Organization in the cause of seeking peace. Findley
was targeted and defeated in 1982; Percy in 1984.
Findley recounted his experience in a 1985 book, They Dare to Speak Out: People and
Institutions Confront Israel's Lobby , in which Findley called the lobby "the 700-pound
gorilla in Washington." The book was harshly criticized in a New York Times review by Adam
Clymer, who called it "an angry, one-sided book that seems often to be little more than a
stringing together of stray incidents."
Enforced Silence
Since then, there have been fewer and fewer members of Congress or other American
politicians who have dared to speak out, judging that – when it comes to the Israeli
lobby – discretion is the better part of valor. Today, many U.S. pols grovel before the
Israeli government seeking a sign of favor from Prime Minister Netanyahu, almost like Medieval
kings courting the blessings of the Pope at the Vatican.
During the 2008 campaign, then-Sen. Barack Obama, whom Netanyahu viewed with suspicion,
traveled to Israel to demonstrate sympathy for Israelis within rocket-range of Gaza while
steering clear of showing much empathy for the Palestinians.
In 2012, Republican nominee Mitt Romney tried to exploit the tense Obama-Netanyahu
relationship by stopping in Israel to win a tacit endorsement from Netanyahu. The 2016 campaign
was no exception with both Clinton and Trump stressing their love of Israel in their
appearances before AIPAC.
Money, of course, has become the lifeblood of American politics – and American
supporters of Israel have been particularly strategic in how they have exploited that
reality.
One of Israel's most devoted advocates, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, has poured millions
of dollars in "dark money" into political candidates and groups that support Israel's
interests. Adelson, who has advocated dropping a nuclear bomb
inside Iran to coerce its government, is a Trump favorite having donated
a record $5 million to Trump's inaugural celebration.
Of course, many Israel-connected political donations are much smaller but no less
influential. A quarter century ago, I was told how an aide to a Democratic foreign policy
chairman, who faced a surprisingly tough race after redistricting, turned to the head of AIPAC
for help and, almost overnight, donations were pouring in from all over the country. The
chairman was most thankful.
The October Surprise Mystery
Israel's involvement in U.S. politics also can be covert. For instance, the evidence is now
overwhelming that the Israeli government of right-wing Prime Minister Menachem Begin played a
key role in helping Ronald Reagan's campaign in 1980 strike a deal with Iran to frustrate
President Jimmy Carter's efforts to free 52 American hostages before Election Day.
President Jimmy Carter signing the Camp David peace agreement with Egypt's Anwar Sadat and
Israel's Menachem Begin.
Begin despised Carter for the Camp David Accords that forced Israel to give back the Sinai
to Egypt. Begin also believed that Carter was too sympathetic to the Palestinians and –
if he won a second term – would conspire with Egyptian President Anwar Sadat to impose a
two-state solution on Israel.
Begin's contempt for Carter was not even a secret. In a 1991 book, The Last Option ,
senior Israeli intelligence and foreign policy official David Kimche explained Begin's motive
for dreading Carter's reelection. Kimche said Israeli officials had gotten wind of "collusion"
between Carter and Sadat "to force Israel to abandon her refusal to withdraw from territories
occupied in 1967, including Jerusalem, and to agree to the establishment of a Palestinian
state."
Kimche continued, "This plan prepared behind Israel's back and without her knowledge must
rank as a unique attempt in United States's diplomatic history of short-changing a friend and
ally by deceit and manipulation."
But Begin recognized that the scheme required Carter winning a second term in 1980 when,
Kimche wrote, "he would be free to compel Israel to accept a settlement of the Palestinian
problem on his and Egyptian terms, without having to fear the backlash of the American Jewish
lobby."
In a 1992 memoir, Profits of War , former Israeli intelligence officer Ari
Ben-Menashe also noted that Begin and other Likud leaders held Carter in contempt.
"Begin loathed Carter for the peace agreement forced upon him at Camp David," Ben-Menashe
wrote. "As Begin saw it, the agreement took away Sinai from Israel, did not create a
comprehensive peace, and left the Palestinian issue hanging on Israel's back."
So, in order to buy time for Israel to "change the facts on the ground" by moving Jewish
settlers into the West Bank, Begin felt Carter's reelection had to be prevented. A different
president also presumably would give Israel a freer hand to deal with problems on its northern
border with Lebanon.
Ben-Menashe was among a couple of dozen government officials and intelligence operatives who
described how Reagan's campaign, mostly through future CIA Director William Casey and past CIA
Director George H.W. Bush, struck a deal in
1980 with senior Iranians who got promises of arms via Israel in exchange for keeping the
hostages through the election and thus humiliating Carter. (The hostages were finally released
on Jan. 20, 1981, after Reagan was sworn in as President.)
Discrediting History
Though the evidence of the so-called October Surprise deal is far stronger than the current
case for believing that Russia colluded with the Trump campaign, Official Washington and the
mainstream U.S. media have refused to accept it, deeming it a "conspiracy theory."
President Ronald Reagan, delivering his Inaugural Address on Jan. 20, 1981, as the 52 U.S.
hostages in Iran are simultaneously released.
One of the reasons for the hostility directed against the 1980 case was the link to Israel,
which did not want its hand in manipulating the election of a U.S. president to become an
accepted part of American history. So, for instance, the Israeli government went to great
lengths to discredit Ben-Menashe after he began to speak with reporters and to give testimony
to the U.S. Congress.
When I was a Newsweek correspondent and first interviewed Ben-Menashe in 1990, the Israeli
government initially insisted that he was an impostor, that he had no connection to Israeli
intelligence. However, when I obtained documentary evidence of Ben-Menashe's work for a military
intelligence unit, the Israelis admitted that they had lied but then insisted that he was just
a low-level translator, a claim that was further contradicted by other documents showing that
he had traveled widely around the world on missions to obtain weapons for the Israel-to-Iran
arms pipeline.
Looking back over the history of U.S.-Israeli relations, it is clear that Israel exercised
significant influence over
U.S. presidents since its founding in 1948 , but the rise of Israel's right-wing Likud
Party in the 1970s – led by former Jewish terrorists Menachem Begin and Yitzhak
Shamir – marked a time when Israel shed any inhibitions about interfering directly in
U.S. politics.
Convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard in the photo from his U.S. Naval Intelligence ID.
Much as Begin and Shamir engaged in terror attacks on British officials and Palestinian
civilians during Israel's founding era, the Likudniks who held power in 1980 believed that the
Zionist cause trumped normal restraints on their actions. In other words, the ends justified
the means.
In the 1980s, Israel also mounted spying operations aimed at the U.S. government, including
those of intelligence analyst Jonathan
Pollard , who fed highly sensitive documents to Israel and – after being caught and
spending almost three decades in prison – was paroled and welcomed as a hero inside
Israel.
A History of Interference
But it is true that foreign interference in U.S. politics is as old as the American
Republic. In the 1790s, French agents – working with the Jeffersonians – tried to
rally Americans behind France's cause in its conflict with Great Britain. In part to frustrate
the French operation, the Federalists passed the Alien and Sedition Acts.
Wanted Poster of the Palestine Police Force offering rewards for the capture of Stern Gang
terrorists: 1. Jaacov Levstein (Eliav), 2. Yitzhak Yezernitzky (Shamir), 3. Natan
Friedman-Yelin
In the Twentieth Century, Great Britain undertook covert influence operations to ensure U.S.
support in its conflicts with Germany, while German agents unsuccessfully sought the
opposite.
So, the attempts by erstwhile allies and sometimes adversaries to move U.S. foreign policy
in one direction or another is nothing new, and the U.S. government engages in similar
operations in countries all over the world, both overtly and covertly.
It was the CIA's job for decades to use propaganda and dirty tricks to ensure that pro-U.S.
politicians were elected or put in power in Europe, Latin America, Asia and Africa, pretty much
everywhere the U.S. government perceived some interest. After the U.S. intelligence scandals of
the 1970s, however, some of that responsibility was passed to other organizations, such as the
U.S.-funded
National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the U.S. Agency for International Development
(USAID).
NED, USAID and various "non-governmental organizations" (NGOs) finance activists,
journalists and other operatives to undermine political leaders who are deemed to be obstacles
to U.S. foreign policy desires.
In particular, NED has been at the center of efforts to flip elections to U.S.-backed
candidates, such as in Nicaragua in 1990, or to sponsor "color revolutions," which typically
organize around some color as the symbol for mass demonstrations. Ukraine – on Russia's
border – has been the target of two such operations, the Orange Revolution in 2004, which
helped install anti-Russian President Viktor Yushchenko, and the Maidan ouster of elected
pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014.
NED president Carl Gershman, a neoconservative who has run NED since its founding in 1983,
openly declared that Ukraine was "the biggest
prize" in September 2013 -- just months before the Maidan protests -- as well as calling it
an important step toward ousting Russian President Vladimir Putin. In 2016, Gershman called directly
for regime change in Russia.
The Neoconservatives
Another key issue related to Israeli influence inside the United States is the role of the
neocons, a political movement that emerged in the 1970s as a number of hawkish Democrats
migrated to the Republican Party as a home for more aggressive policies to protect Israel and
take on the Soviet Union and Arab states.
Prominent neocon intellectual Robert Kagan. (Photo credit: Mariusz Kubik,
http://www.mariuszkubik.pl)
In some European circles, the neocons are described as "Israel's American agents," which may
somewhat overstate the direct linkage between Israel and the neocons although a central tenet
of neocon thinking is that there must be no daylight between the U.S. and Israel. The neocons
say U.S. politicians must stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel even if that means the
Americans sidling up to the Israelis rather than any movement the other way.
Since the mid-1990s, American neocons have worked closely with Benjamin Netanyahu. Several
prominent neocons (including former Assistant Defense Secretary Richard Perle, Douglas Feith,
David Wurmser, Meyrav Wurmser and Robert Loewenberg) advised Netanyahu's 1996 campaign and
urged a new strategy for "securing the realm." Essentially, the idea was to replace
negotiations with the Palestinians and Arab states with "regime change" for governments that
were viewed as troublesome to Israel, including Iraq and Syria.
By 1998, the Project for the New American Century (led by neocons William Kristol and Robert
Kagan) was pressuring President Bill Clinton to invade Iraq, a plan that was finally put in
motion in 2003 under President George W. Bush.
But the follow-on plans to go after Syria and Iran were delayed because the Iraq War turned
into a bloody mess, killing some 4,500 American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.
Bush could not turn to phase two until near the end of his presidency and then was frustrated
by a U.S. intelligence estimate concluding that Iran was not working on a nuclear bomb (which
was to be the pretext for a bombing campaign).
Bush also could pursue "regime change" in Syria only as a proxy effort of subversion, rather
than a full-scale U.S. invasion. President Barack Obama escalated the Syrian proxy war in 2011
with the support of Israel and its strange-bedfellow
allies in Saudi Arabia and the other Sunni-ruled Gulf States, which hated Syria's
government because it was allied with Shiite-ruled Iran -- and Sunnis and Shiites have been
enemies since the Seventh Century. Israel insists that the U.S. take the Sunni side, even if
that puts the U.S. in bed
with Al Qaeda .
But Obama dragged his heels on a larger U.S. military intervention in Syria and angered
Netanyahu further by negotiating with Iran over its nuclear program rather than
bomb-bomb-bombing Iran.
Showing the Love
Obama's perceived half-hearted commitment to Israeli interests explained Romney's campaign
2012 trip to seek Netanyahu's blessings. Even after winning a second term, Obama sought to
appease Netanyahu by undertaking a three-day trip to Israel in 2013 to show his love.
Still, in 2015, when Obama pressed ahead with the Iran nuclear agreement, Netanyahu went
over the President's head directly to Congress where he was warmly received, although the
Israeli prime minister ultimately failed to sink the Iran deal.
In Campaign 2016, both Clinton and Trump wore their love for Israel on their sleeves,
Clinton promising to take the relationship to "the next level" (a phrase that young couples
often use when deciding to go from heavy petting to intercourse). Trump reminded AIPAC that he
had a Jewish grandchild and vowed to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
Both also bristled with hatred toward Iran, repeating the popular falsehood that "Iran is
the principal source of terrorism" when it is Saudi Arabia and other Sunni sheikdoms that have
been the financial and military supporters of Al Qaeda and Islamic State, the terror groups
most threatening to Europe and the United States.
By contrast to Israel's long history of playing games with U.S. politics, the Russian
government stands accused of trying to undermine the U.S. political process recently by hacking
into emails of the Democratic National Committee -- revealing the DNC's improper opposition to
Sen. Bernie Sanders's campaign -- and of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta -- disclosing
the contents of Clinton's paid speeches to Wall Street and pay-to-play aspects of the Clinton
Foundation -- and sharing that information with the American people via WikiLeaks.
Although WikiLeaks denies getting the two batches of emails from the Russians, the U.S.
intelligence community says it has high confidence in its conclusions about Russian meddling
and the mainstream U.S. media treats the allegations as flat-fact.
The U.S. intelligence community also has accused the Russian government of raising
doubts in the minds of Americans about their political system by having RT, the
Russian-sponsored news network, hold debates for third-party candidates (who were excluded from
the two-party Republican-Democratic debates) and by having RT report on protests such as Occupy
Wall Street and issues such as "fracking."
The major U.S. news media and Congress seem to agree that the only remaining question is
whether evidence can be adduced showing that the Trump campaign colluded in this Russian
operation. For that purpose, a number of people associated with the Trump campaign are to be
hauled before Congress and made to testify on whether or not they are Russian agents.
Meanwhile, The Washington Post, The New York Times and other establishment-approved outlets
are working with major technology companies on how to marginalize
independent news sources and to purge "Russian propaganda" (often conflated with "fake
news") from the Internet.
It seems that no extreme is too extreme to protect the American people from the insidious
Russians and their Russia-gate schemes to sow doubt about the U.S. political process. But God
forbid if anyone were to suggest an investigation of Israel-gate.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated
Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen
Narrative, either in print here or
as an e-book (from
Amazon and
barnesandnoble.com ).
Trump is definitely deeply compromised politician, a marionette of a lobby, but not Russian
lobby. Just look at
Jared Kushner and Ivanka role in WH (the books Kushner Inc
shed some light on Trump son-in-law) This is both nepotism and pandering to Israeli lobby. As one
Amazon reviewer put it "I'd also advise counting your fingers after you shake hands with any of
the Kushners..." and "The best way to describe Kushner and Ivanka is that they are both nothing
but "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels" - unpatriotic, self-enriching, lying, scheming, tax dodging
POS's."
Trump campaign was a large extent financed by Sheldon Adelson . Trump connection to
convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein are also of great concerns (
Flight logs reveal trips Bill Clinton and Alan Dershowitz took on Jeffrey Epstein's private jet
Daily Mail Online ) if we view this as an attempt to compromise and then control US
politicians. And the content of the hard drive of Anthony Wiener laptop was never revealed. Death
of Seth Rich was highly suspicious as was the content of Podesta email box. Mueller did not dare
to move his investigation in this direction.
Top-ranking Democrat, and House Judiciary Committee Chairman, Jerry Nadler did the rounds of
Sunday's political shows this morning but it wasn't until he reached the safety of CNN that he
decided to unleash his 'facts' in response to the narrative-crushing conclusions reached by
special counsel Robert Mueller.
"We know there was collusion," Nadler insisted several times during an appearance on CNN's
"State of the Union" while shrugging off Mueller's apparent facts - " Why there's been no
indictments, we don't know. "
This is clear that the Emollients Law is being broken. Kushner is making a ton of money
and using over seas trips to create a larger establishment for his own empire . He is trying
to make up for his big loses . This truly Breaks all laws of our Government .Using his
position to make money . He needs to go ................
The Family Trump, the people are absolutely no shame, not 1%, to the Millions of poor
Americans, on the Streets, in Tents, on Highways, under Highways!!! Ivanka Trump, she a young
Women, no heart!!! No Empathy to the Millions of poor Amer.
It's not rocket science people! They were raised by corrupt parents and grandparents who
taught them well. Children will model what their parents teach them. They are also children
who are inexperienced & way over their head and very unqualified so they are
overwhelmed.
Everyone on this site must have heard of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty during the
Six-Day-War in 1967.
Just to recap, the Liberty, which was focused on intelligence - gathering and thus lightly
armed, was attacked by Israeli Mystere jets using machine guns and napalm, and by attack
boats which hit the ship with several torpedoes. As survivors scrambled for safety the
Israelis strafed the lifeboats with machine gun fire.
All the evidence to hand makes it clear that the Israelis knew that the Liberty was
American although the motives of Moshe Dayan, who ordered the attack, remain unclear to this
day.
Nothing illustrated the validity of the ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government) charge than
this incident and the American reaction to it.
For a start while the two hour attack was in progress "Defense" Secretary Robert McNamara
called back a US rescue mission, stating "President Johnson is not going to war or embarrass
a close ally for the sake of a few sailors".
Leaving the callousness aside, and the fact that the same President used "an attack on a
few sailors" (Tonkin incident) to declare war on North Vietnam, the reluctance to "embarrass"
a country that was in the process of murdering your servicemen beggars belief.
But what really blew my mind was the story of the Grafton Memorial.
This relates to the privately-funded memorial library to be established in the city of
Grafton near Milwaukee twenty years after the attack. As was and still is required in the
Land Of The Free, the Israeli connection was played down with the focus almost exclusively on
commemorating those who had served and suffered.
Now you'd imagine that local Jews would have at worst kept their heads down, at best
supported the project while apologising for the Israeli "mistake". Not a bit of it! Instead
the attack dogs were unleashed, crying - you've guessed it - "anti-Semitism". Rabbi Gideon
Goldenholz declared it "insulting to Jews" while James Fromstein of the Milwaukee Jewish
Council proclaimed the Liberty incident(!!) to be a "sensitive subject considered offensive
to Jewish people everywhere"
I swear I'm not making this up. But it gets better. The local press turned on the
Outrage Button. An editorial in the Milwaukee Journal thundered "where is the outrage in
Grafton? Why is there no outcry?" Now let me be clear, because we're talking about an upside
down world here. The requested outrage and outcry were against the idea of commemorating
American servicemen who had given their lives for their country, because such commemoration
might offend the sensitivities of the people who cost them their lives!
But it gets better still. The full machinery of the national and local government was
brought to bear on the memorial organisers. An $83,000 federal donation was withdrawn, an
invitation to the White House to send a representative was ignored (as was a personal
invitation to GHW Bush), the local high school refused to provide a band for the opening
ceremony, denouncing the organisers as Nazis, while the Commander of a nearby Naval Training
Centre was ordered not to attend by Naval brass.
"... The people who paid for Trump's election campaign, foremost casino magnate and zionist Sheldon Adelson, want to keep the Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahoo in office. ..."
"... Trump needs money for his re-election campaign and is willing to do anything to get it. ..."
"... Trump is colluding with Netayahoo to influence the Israeli election. It is the reason why he decided yesterday to claim that Israel has sovereignty over the Golan Heights : ..."
The people who paid for Trump's election campaign, foremost casino magnate and zionist
Sheldon Adelson, want to keep the Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahoo in office.
Netanyahoo
is under investigation in several corruption cases and has a serious competitor in the upcoming
general elections in Israel. Trump needs money for his re-election campaign and is willing to
do anything to get it.
Trump is colluding with Netayahoo to influence the Israeli election. It is the reason why
he decided yesterday to claim that Israel has sovereignty over the Golan Heights :
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump - 16:50 utc - 21 Mar
2019
After 52 years it is time for the United States to fully recognize Israel's Sovereignty over
the Golan Heights, which is of critical strategic and security importance to the State of
Israel and Regional Stability!
The Heights are Syrian lands that were occupied by Israel during its 1967 war of aggression
against Egypt and Syria.
March 22, 2019 In a 23-8 vote, the UN Human Rights Council
voted Friday to endorse a report on Israel's treatment protests along the Gaza Strip, which
determined that the government's actions amounted to war crimes against civilians in Gaza.
The
report itself was published in late February , and found that Israel intentionally shot
both children and journalists in the Gaza Strip during those protests. They noted that 154 out
of 183 people killed at the time had been unarmed.
Israeli officials insisted at the time the report came out that the killings amounted to the
"right of self-defense and the obligation to defend its citizens and borders." Israeli
officials now say the only supporters of the resolution are dictatorships and "hypocrites."
Other UNHRC resolutions, also opposed as "absurd" by Israel, included an endorsement of the
right of Palestinian self-determination, and criticism of Israeli abuses in the occupied
territories, and one on the illegality of Israeli settlements.
The business of Trump giving away something he doesn't own is insane. But insanity has been
the theme of most everything else him and his neocon helpers have been doing of late.
I believe it's time to start paying attention to the truly nutty stories. The crazier
sounding ones ought to get the most attention. After all, who would have conceived the
Trumpies declaring a genuine nobody to be the true President of Venezuela? Early finds:
A US military base on Taiwan. New weapons to Taiwan. More high-level contacts with that
nation. All proposed by the Trumpies. Who benefits most from a small or large war with China?
Headline from the neocon york times:
Israel Is on the Brink of Disaster. Trump Just Made Things Worse.(March 22,
2019)
On Twitter on Thursday, he wrote that "it is time for the United States to fully
recognize Israel's Sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which is of critical strategic and
security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability!" It is the latest, and
most important, signal from Washington that Mr. Trump is ready to acknowledge Israeli
control of the Golan Heights.
But those signals are also being read by the Israeli right wing as an encouragement to
pursue annexation of territory in the West Bank -- a far more dangerous step that would
present Israel with an unparalleled existential threat to its Jewish and democratic
character.
I'd ask if there is any reason for the murdering and stealing rightwingnut
settlers not to celebrate? Trump has been doing their bidding at every turn, even when
it does direct harm to the US. Are there any indications the Trumpies have something planned
for the subhuman Palestinians. As a matter of fact, YES.
The are much better 'Kushner, boy wonder' articles than this one floating around, but I
want to focus on a single part:
Kushner said in February the White House was poised to unveil the peace plan after
Israel's election in April. While in Warsaw, Kushner said the plan will impact the
entire Middle East region and is "really about establishing border and resolving
final-status issues," according to Sky News Arabia.
Change "final-status" to Final Solution and that would be just about right.
Death-March time, Baby, and to the exultant Republican & End-Timers chant of "they had
their chance, but blew it".
The Trump administration along with Jared Kushner employed in the White House, a lawyer by
the name of Ira Greenstein from Newark, New Jersey, who was by all accounts still acting
as President and/or in the interest of his energy corporation when the U.S. bombed Syria.*
Genie Energy.
An energy corporation operating privately in Syrian territory -- the Israeli-occupied
Golan Heights.
U.S. President Donald Trump and his administration are inherently subjugated by this
paradigm of interests. When commencing with hostile military action against Syria, they
did so while having a direct conflict of interest, primarily related to business ties with
this corporation. This, along with seemingly ulterior political dealings with the Israeli
government, has gone part and parcel to the destabilization of Syria.
While benefiting
Genie Energy, its backers and involved officials.
Officials such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
This essentially represents extortion against Syria, as part of a behind-the-scenes
deal between parties, with Greenstein's boss, the founder of Genie Energy and top
Netanyahu donor Howard Jonas having made billions through a telecommunications deal made
possible under the watch of both the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and White
House Office of American Innovation (OAI ) -- for which to benefit said parties for their
actions.
*
The U.S. has since attacked Syria's government a number of times, furthering the
risk of nuclear war or a widened conflict in the Middle East. Ira Greenstein left the
White House on March 30th, 2018 following earlier reporting by this author.
U.S. Navy's USS Porter strikes Syria in April of 2017.
On April
6th, 2017, the U.S. launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at Syria.
Targeting Shayrat Airbase (FAA LID: OS65), numerous aircraft were
destroyed, primarily Mikoyan Mig-23ML and Sukhoi Su-22M3 models. These
being the same parent models which had been involved in
operations
over Daraa, which is a choke point near the Golan Heights,
it remains as of this posting as being under the control of hostile actors
such as Islamic State (ISIS).*
*
Syria has since made strides in retaking this key area.
On April 14th, 2018, about a year later, this act was repeated with
U.S.-led military strikes against a large number of targets within
Syria -- both France and the U.K. participated in this escalation despite
the associated risks.
Ira Greenstein
Troop deployments
had preceded the airstrikes, with a permanent
presence
with or without ISIS
being
touted
in 2017, setting U.S. involvement in Syria at an ever
increasing rate
. Continued or further involvement in Syria by the Trump
administration or other U.S.-led actors, as shown below in this article, is
illegal.
James Mattis
claimed
at the time that approximately 20% of the Syrian Arab Air Force
(SyAAF) was destroyed; impacting Syria's military capabilities, this would
then continue with further bombings on Syria by the Israeli Air Force.
Israel would find herself
losing
an F-16 this year after Syrian Air Defenses retaliated in
self-defense due to these bombings.
More recently
, activity has included an increasing amount of U.S.
military action against the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) or its pro-government
forces, despite inherent conflicts of interest present within the Trump
administration.
This type of behavior sits in stark contrast to Iran and Russia having
been formally invited by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to participate in
Syria's affairs militarily.
To get to the very heart of the matter, we have to go back to the
presidential transition period, when Newark
lawyer
Ira Greenstein was a member of ex-Congressman John Sweeney's
"Tiger Team."
While he was still Genie Energy's acting President.
This made Greenstein an official presidential transition team member for
the incoming Trump administration, as some may recall, Jared Kushner was a
member
of this team as well.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said that there is a strong possibility that Trump's family
could be indicted by other entities based on the work of Mueller. http:// ow.ly/ZibI30o9PFQ
Another example of Trump and Netanyahu putting their own political interests ahead of the
interests of our respective countries. Will escalate tensions and likelihood of war between
Israel/US/Syria/Iran/Russia. Shortsighted. https:// twitter.com/nytimes/status /1108783266075684865
Omani 1:12 PM - 21 Mar 2019
How long will this continue to go on? They must be stopped. #Tulsi2020
"... State sovereignty means nothing to these people. The post-Westphalia international system means nothing to them. Trump does not have a clue about the ME but Ivanka and Jared are pleased I am sure. pl ..."
"President Donald Trump on Thursday overturned longstanding US policy regarding the
Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, announcing "it is time" for the US to "fully recognize Israel's
sovereignty" over the region. "After 52 years it is time for the United States to fully
recognize Israel's Sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which is of critical strategic and
security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability," Trump tweeted." CNN
This sounds like the Mustachioed Menace (Bolton) and his All Star team at work.
Help Bibi.
Weaken the Syrian government.
Demonstrate to the Lebanese that parts of their
strange little country could experience something similar in the south.
Show everyone that
the US is in charge of - everything.
State sovereignty means nothing to these people. The post-Westphalia international system
means nothing to them. Trump does not have a clue about the ME but Ivanka and Jared are pleased
I am sure. pl
"... Perhaps most dangerous of all is the signal that it sends to Israeli hard-liners that want to annex some or all of the West Bank. ..."
"... Trump's statement is just the latest in a string of bad decisions that are absurdly biased in favor of Israel. No U.S. interests are advanced by doing this, and it discredits any criticisms that the U.S. wants to make of any other government's illegal occupation and annexation of territory. The double standard that the U.S. applies when it comes to violations of international law by itself and its clients could not be more obvious, and it will make it much more difficult to challenge similarly egregious violations in the future. ..."
There were hints
in recent days that U.S. recognition of Israel's claim to the Golan Heights was coming, and now the president has done it. Israel's
control of this territory dates back to the 1967 war, when Israel grabbed this part of Syria and refused to return it. Israel has
no legitimate claim to this territory, and in recognizing Israeli sovereignty over land that it seized during a war the U.S. is sending
a potentially very dangerous message to governments all around the world.
Perhaps most dangerous of all is the signal that it sends
to Israeli hard-liners that want to annex some or all of the West Bank. It tells them that illegal occupation will eventually be
rewarded with full U.S. recognition, and it also tells them that the U.S. isn't going to pay any attention to international law when
it comes to making decisions regarding Israeli control over occupied territories.
Trump's statement is just the latest in a string of bad decisions that are absurdly biased in favor of Israel. No U.S. interests
are advanced by doing this, and it discredits any criticisms that the U.S. wants to make of any other government's illegal occupation
and annexation of territory. The double standard that the U.S. applies when it comes to violations of international law by itself
and its clients could not be more obvious, and it will make it much more difficult to challenge similarly egregious violations in
the future.
"... The White House didn't immediately respond to requests for comment. But in another stand-off with House Democrats, Cipollone on Thursday rejected a request renewed last week from Cummings and two other committee chairmen for information on Trump's communications with Russian President Vladimir Putin. ..."
"... Cummings said the committee obtained a document that "appears" to show that McFarland conducted official business on her personal email account. He said the document was related to efforts by McFarland and other White House officials to transfer sensitive U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia "in coordination with Tom Barrack, a personal friend of President Trump and the chairman of President Trump's inaugural committee." ..."
"... Regarding Trump's communications with Putin, Cummings, House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff and Foreign Affairs Chairman Eliot Engel say they are examining the substance of in-person meetings and phone calls, the effects on foreign policy, and whether anyone has sought to conceal those communications. ..."
"... The Constitution gives the executive branch exclusive power to conduct foreign relations, Cipollone said. "Congress cannot require the president to disclose confidential communications with foreign leaders." ..."
A key House Democrat is renewing demands that the White House turn over documents about the use of private texts or emails by
Jared Kushner, saying Kushner's lawyer acknowledged that the senior aide used the non-secure WhatsApp application to communicate
with foreign leaders.
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings said in a letter sent Thursday to White House Counsel
Pat Cipollone that the administration has failed to produce documents tied to Kushner and other officials despite requests from the
committee since 2017. Cummings also sought a briefing on how the official messages are being preserved.
... ... ...
The White House didn't immediately respond to requests for comment. But in another stand-off with House Democrats, Cipollone on
Thursday rejected a request renewed last week from Cummings and two other committee chairmen for information on Trump's communications
with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
WhatsApp
Cummings, to underscore his concern about whether unsecured White House communications have included classified information, said
in his letter that Lowell acknowledged during the December meeting that Kushner had used WhatsApp to communicate with foreign leaders.
Kushner is a senior White House adviser and the son-in-law of President
Donald Trump , overseeing the administration's Middle
East policies among other issues. Cummings said he and then-Oversight Chairman
Trey Gowdy , a Republican who has since retired from Congress,
met with Lowell in December.
Cummings's letter said Lowell said that Kushner has been in compliance with the law, and that he takes "screenshots" of communications
on his private WhatsApp account and forwards them to his official White House email account or to the National Security Council.
Cummings wrote that when asked whether Kushner ever used WhatsApp to discuss classified information, Lowell replied, "That's above
my pay grade."
The focus on Kushner and others follows the earlier investigations by the Justice Department and Republican-controlled congressional
committees of Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server when she served as secretary of state during the Obama administration.
'Alternative Means'
In Thursday's letter, Cummings said the White House's refusal to turn over documents is "obstructing the committee's investigation
into allegations of violations of federal records laws" and potential breaches of national security. He demanded that the White House
say by March 28 whether it intends to comply voluntarily with the renewed requests.
"If you continue to withhold these documents from the committee, we will be forced to consider alternative means to obtain compliance,"
Cummings said.
... ... ....
K.T. McFarland
Cummings also wrote that his committee has obtained new information about other White House officials that raises additional security
and federal records concerns about the use of private email and messaging applications.
His letter said others may have been involved in the practice while they worked at the White House, including former deputy national
security adviser K.T. McFarland and former chief strategist
Steve Bannon.
Cummings said the committee obtained a document that "appears" to show that McFarland conducted official business on her personal
email account. He said the document was related to efforts by McFarland and other White House officials to transfer sensitive U.S.
nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia "in coordination with Tom Barrack, a personal friend of President Trump and the chairman of President
Trump's inaugural committee."
The chairman said another document appeared to show that Bannon received documents "pitching the plan from Mr. Barrack through
his personal email account," at a time Bannon was at the White House and working on broader Middle East policy.
Regarding Trump's communications with Putin, Cummings, House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff and Foreign Affairs Chairman
Eliot Engel say they are examining the substance of in-person meetings and phone calls, the effects on foreign policy, and whether
anyone has sought to conceal those communications.
In a written response Thursday, Cipollone wrote, "While we respectfully seek to accommodate appropriate oversight requests, we
are unaware of any precedent supporting such sweeping requests."
The Constitution gives the executive branch exclusive power to conduct foreign relations, Cipollone said. "Congress cannot require
the president to disclose confidential communications with foreign leaders."
In a joint statement on Thursday night, Cummings, Engel and Schiff said that the Obama administration had "produced records describing
the president and secretary of state's calls with foreign leaders." The congressmen added that "President Trump's decision to break
with this precedent raises the question of what he has to hide."
( Updates with statement from Cummings, Schiff and Engel, in final paragraph.
"... In a copy of the letter obtained by NBC News, Trump highlighted a paragraph in the letter about the U.S. goals in Syria, which said, "Like you, we seek to ensure that all of the gains made in Syria are not lost, that ISIS never returns, that Iran is not emboldened, and that we consolidate our gains and ensure the best outcome in Geneva for American interests." ..."
Two months after saying all U.S. troops are leaving Syria, the president wrote members of Congress that he agrees with keeping
a U.S. presence in Syria. A bipartisan group of Senators and Representatives wrote to Trump on Feb. 22,
applauding
his decision to keep a small residual force in Syria.
"We support a small American stabilizing force in Syria," the group wrote, adding that a force "which includes a small contingent
of American troops and ground forces from our European allies, is essential to ensure stability and prevent
the return of ISIS ."
In a copy of the letter obtained by NBC News, Trump highlighted a paragraph in the letter about the U.S. goals in Syria, which
said, "Like you, we seek to ensure that all of the gains made in Syria are not lost, that ISIS never returns, that Iran is not emboldened,
and that we consolidate our gains and ensure the best outcome in Geneva for American interests."
"I agree 100%. ALL is being done," President Trump responded, writing directly on the letter and signing it.
"... George Galloway and Steve Topple of the Canary posted this video on the ongoing transatlantic attack campaign against the left wing, including Ilhan Omar, Jeremy Corbyn, and the Yellow Vests under the canard that they are anti-Semitic. This has now reached the level of the transnational RussiaGate hysteria to the point where it is obviously a coordinated smear by global corporate and political Establishment and ruling class people to muzzle the voice of a rising generation which is anti-capitalist and anti-war. ..."
George Galloway and Steve Topple of the Canary posted this video on the ongoing transatlantic attack campaign against the
left wing, including Ilhan Omar, Jeremy Corbyn, and the Yellow Vests under the canard that they are anti-Semitic. This has now
reached the level of the transnational RussiaGate hysteria to the point where it is obviously a coordinated smear by global corporate
and political Establishment and ruling class people to muzzle the voice of a rising generation which is anti-capitalist and anti-war.
@4 Adam Curtis is always great, I personally preferred The Trap and his short film on Nixon, but Hypernormalisation is arguably
the most powerful and illustrative film of our times. It would be perfect if it weren't for the Russia segment.
anti-semitism... regarding the 2 links on corbyn - both very good btw and worth checking out if you are interested. i find
it disturbing how this topic can be pushed to the forefront 24/7, or ad nauseam... for me, the only purpose it seems to serve
is to inadvertently turn people completely off everything to do with israel.. obviously the initial purpose here is to smear corbyn
in the hopes that the mud sticks.. either way, the fact it is in the news constantly is a clear heads up the media is not neutral,
or unbiased in it's selection of the topics put before people on a regular basis..
Speaking of anti-semitism, what do Dershowitz, Netanyahoo, Adelson and Trump all have in common?
https://journal-neo.org/2019/03/10/the-netanyahu-problem/
Here's the thing (if any of the stated things in the article are true): Bibi's up for re-election on the 9th, and not looking
too well, it seems. Elijah Magnier has sounded alarm bells, too:
https://ejmagnier.com/2019/03/07/syria-preparing-its-missiles-for-the-next-battle-with-israel/
Things might be getting quite interesting in the next weeks. Oh, we can add Corbyn
with the anti-semitism accusations against him and the Brexit mess into the mix, too, with the big vote on May's deal on Tuesday.
It's small wonder why there is so much talk of anti-semitism these days, given the stellar cast of characters involved.
The anti-semistism charges against Corbyn only seem potentially damaging because they occur in the echo chamber of a media system
unanimously organised against him and the anti-imperialism that he supports.
There are signs-one of which is the desperation
of the media in making ever more extreme charges- that the campaign has had very little effect. Labour Party membership is increasing
steadily, the largest political party in Europe gets larger every week, making the party financially independent (it relies much
less now than it ever has in the past on Union financing) and organisationally stronger, as thousands of energetic, intelligent
youthful people volunteer to work for it.
Part of the antisemitism campaign has consisted of MPs going out on a limb and, with maximum publicity, resigning from the
party, thus saving the members the messy job of expelling them or refusing to select them for re-election. At the same time local
party organisations, long strongholds of municipal and regional bosses and Blairite politics, are being re-captured by the membership.
Both Scotland and Wales, for example, are now led by anti-imperialist socialists. Two years ago they were centres of anti-Corbyn
organising.
These things are important because this is a demonstration of the way that a media system, by consistently promoting the interests
of the 'elites' loses its credibility. Most of those who read and contribute to this site were once regular and comnplacent consumers
of the MSM. We used if not to accept uncritically then at least to take as probably true the 'news' on public broadcasters and
quality broadsheets. Now we realise that they are utterly unreliable retailers of propaganda.
The good news is that this is becoming a majority attitude- we are on the way to a situation, already achieved in France I
suspect, in which nothing from the state is taken on trust. And people are making up their own minds after comparing information,
thru places such as this one, with each other.
To get back to Corbyn, I find it hard to believe that he will not only win the next general election but in doing so lead a
new sort of party, backed by a powerful and massive popular movement, full of committed, if often mild reforming, socialists into
Parliament.
If that happens it will only be fair if the Israeli government be asked to take a bow for 'going over the top' to such an extent
that it is going to be difficult to convince anyone that Corbyn is other than spotlessly clear, politically and highly principled.
Jeremy Corbyn is a dead man walking. His failure to stand by his allies (from Ken LIvingstone to the more recent Chris Williamson)
within the Labour Party as they have been successfully picked off, victims of anti-semetic smear campaigns, has seriously undermined
his leadership and increasingly isolated him within his own party. Corbyn's policy of accommodation and appeasement is obviously
failing and has only emboldened his attackers. From his failure to geld the Blairites within his party by expelling its most vocal
zionist mouthpieces (the odious Margaret Hodge and Joan Ryan being prime examples) to Labour's adoption of IHRA's redefinition
of anti-semetism to include anti-zionism, Corbyn's appeasement policy has been an unmitigated disaster, leaving him effectively
neutered in the face of this unremitting onslaught as his poll numbers continue to drop. Even George Galloway, a staunch Corbyn
supporter, is despairing of this state of affairs.
The comments below is just a small secion of almost 200 comment for the article. Moststrong
opinions are deliberately omitted...
Many people now realize that they live in occupied by neocons for 40 years county and want to
get thier state back. Tulsi Gabbard in this sense is just the pit of the iceberg.
Looks like alt-Right is now turned completely anti-Israeli.
Notable quotes:
"... Senator Lindsey Graham intends to initiate legislative action to compel the United States to actually recognize Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights which has not been recognized as part of Israel by any other country or international body. ..."
@Willie'
They are engaged in a battle for Jewish self determination in a sea of Muslim only countries,
they are going to fight to the death, too bad if civilians get in the way, wars are not
fair.'
What a farcical distortion. The last actual Jewish civilian actually killed within the
actual borders of Israel died over two years ago. It's not a battle for 'Jewish
self-determination' but an endless exercise in vicious oppression. It's about as morally
edifying as the Nazi occupation of Poland.
Israel is a racist apartheid state and I resent that my tax dollars are sent there to buy
bombs to slaughter Palestinians that have never done anything to harm me.
" They are engaged in a battle for Jewish self determination in a sea of Muslim only
countries, they are going to fight to the death, too bad if civilians get in the way, wars
are not fair.'"
The cure is diversity, mass immigration and equality. That is what the Jewish media,
academia, judiciary, US rabbis say, yes to their white hosts in the diaspora. It is virtuous
and noble to listen to Jewish media and do exactly as they wish.
Israel, do unto thy selves as your diaspora insists is the moral thing to do. Make
yourselves a minority in Eretz Yisroel as you wish unto white goyim. KILL YOURSELF.
Recognising the West Bank as part of Israel without risking Arab numbers and fertility having
the consequences to be expected in a modern democratic country would make it impossible for
Israel to escape the description of apartheid state. How is that consideration going to
affect outcomes in the near future?
The Jewish Firster colonization of the United States has been incremental. It is now nearing
completion. Few countries if any, colonized by other (usually more powerful) countries appear
to have accepted colonization with such alacrity as have many Americans in their colonization
by Israel. Most have resisted colonial rule and even launched wars to rid themselves of
their colonial masters.
Question is, if Israel were to be a 51st American state, would she get away with so
many crimes as she does outside the Union? Or is this a case of an informal union of two
criminal gangster nations? We have read in the UR of the compelling evidence of Jewish
collusion in history's two most devastating world wars. The Third one -- and mother of all
wars, is sure to be instigated by Zionist Israel. BTW, this post is not addressed to paid
Hasbara trolls.
Zionist pigs are nothing but FAKE Jews, they are the STATE, and DO NOT represent the majority
of the Israeli people. This action is nothing more than criminal FASCISM with an Imperialist
agenda!
It is not the pig that is disgusting and filthy, it is the Zionist State and the rodents
that control it, such as the Premier. The USA is nothing more than a filthy shit bag whore to
Israel, as is the rest of the West!
Where is the UN and ICC? Eating their pork chops laughing all the way to bank. The sooner
Israel is bombed to rubble, the better the world will be. Hitler new the truth about these
filthy scum, that is why he wanted to remove them from planet earth. The Lords day is coming,
but the Zionist scum's are coming to an end!
AIPAC's annual star-studded gala demonstrates once again that Zio-Israeli influence in
American life is alive and well and operating unopposed.
No foreign or domestic lobby comes even close to The Lobby's baleful impact on American
independence. This includes its shameless role in the manufacture of Zionist-friendly Fake
News, Congressional waste and murderous appropriations, as well as Zio-Washington's
blood-soaked war machinery that rewards one 'democratic ally' way over yonder while it
relentlessly targets that same ally's foes, rivals, and outcasts.
Is this any way to run an Empire?
In any case, one is expected to not examine this phenomena too critically as it's
already Badthink to do so (and possibly even verging on 'anti-Semitism'!)
Just. Don't. Go. There.
Thus the great majority of middle-of-the-road, 'centrist-seeking' Americans have learned
to bow their collective heads in a show of deference when the activist offspring and
well-heeled advocates of a certain downtrodden tribe of Glorious Survivors gather in DC to
make political whoopee by praising the Zionist juggernaut and raising boatloads of
influence-buying shekels for America's next class of political prostitutes. It's who we
are.
And as for you HATERS out there, we have this to say:
Six Million! Six million you Nazi scum! We are coming for you!
Understand?
Therefore Do Not talk back. Do Not get out of line.
Bear in mind that those who do get out of line tend to disappear rapidly from
public life. (worth keeping in mind, eh?)
It is advised therefore to not examine this phenomena too aggressively. (Just be
quiet)
This is America and compromises must be made!
Israel's pampered, moneyed, exclusive, and relentlessly militarized agenda therefore
must get special, praised, and privileged treatment on every DC stage and from the mouth of
every pundit and tastemaker on every American TV.
It's unanimous! Gotta love em!
(or else).
Why spoil the party with needless dissent, unpleasant facts, or contrary opinions?
Really.
Thus when AIPAC's in town, there's glorious bipartisanship and wondrous unanimity. Zionism
is great!
To make political matters even more surreal, Democrat attack-dog, Robert Mueller (with
forward assistance of our Israeli-centric news and entertainment media) is still sniffing
around Google and still turning over rocks on Facebook and elsewhere in hopes of finding
those dastardly Russian fingerprints that will 'prove' (once and for all!) that Putin and a
handful of underpaid Russian propagandist tricked the American people into voting the WRONG
WAY.
The Russkies stole the whole damn election on behalf of Trump and his deplorable base of
rednecks and white supremacists. Just check with the attendees at this season's AIPAC soiree,
they'll splain it to ya. It's Russia!
However, when one considers that the Russian/US cold war has only escalated since
the election of Donald J. Trump, this far Left conspiracy theory does not entirely hold
water.
Oh well.
Thank goodness Israel is intervening here and helping and orchestrating for the good of
America (and for democracy in general) and that the Israeli people stand united and for all
things righteous and democratic and free.
Circumspect, thoughtful and well done. Unfortunately, religion in general, and its relation
to Israel specifically, seem to function as areas of inactivity in our President's otherwise
well-functioning intellect.
It is not Otzma Yehudit that some fascist fraction of Israel or Judaism, no –
exceptionalism is fascism by a simpler name, and those that self declare themselves as the
chosen people of God are all fascists.
@Colin
Wright Israel has no borders defined.
The jews regard greater Israel the borders, Euphrates and Nile, the two blue strips on their
flag.
It is in plain sight, but many can't see it.
Depressing as usual Philip Giraldi, thanks for brightening up my day, lol.
Other leading American politicians who will be at AIPAC in supporting rolls include the
slimy Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and the despicable former U.N.
Ambassador Nikki Haley.
A who's who of Zionist lackeys.
It will also include numerous other congressmen, administration officials and the usual
scumbags who gravitate to these events, including pardoned criminal Elliott Abrams and
unindicted felon Senator Robert Menendez. Abrams, who believes that Jews and gentiles
should not intermarry, is currently engaged in destroying Venezuela and just might be
otherwise occupied.
I live in the Garden State and can't believe Menendez got re-elected, but really I
do.
As for Abrams I have to agree with him there, Jews and Gentiles shouldnt be allowed to
intermarry or have children.
There are many reasons for this, some good and some maybe not so good (in your eyes). Let me
cut to the chase and be as offensive , to some, as I can. Infesting gentile blood
lines (white Christian) with Jew-ish ones only muddies the waters even more in the battle or
right and wrong, from deep philosophical and religious grounds, Christianity versus Judaism
and Islam, to the earthly issue of landing the Zionist Entity right smack on top of
Palestine.
Going back to the big picture, I'm may not be a very good Christian but as a follower of
Christ and knowing of the Book of Revelation and even less of the works of Nostradamus, it
seems that Christian Zionists, for all their stupidity, may be on to something especially
with the approximate timelines of Nostradamus.
I will just hope for the best and that 'the truth shall set me free.'
He has entered into a coalition with the openly racist Kahanist party Otzma Yehudit
Racist and anti-Christian. Its leader, Michael Ben-Ari, tore up a New Testament,
describing it as a despicable book which should be in history's trash can. Activist Benzi
Gopstein has called for churches in Israel to be burned down and has
described Christians as blood-sucking vampires who should be expelled from Israel.
The New Observer
has the story . Ben-Ari's racism was too much even for Israel and he has been banned from
standing in next month's election.
Senator Lindsey Graham intends to initiate legislative action to compel the United
States to actually recognize Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights which has not been
recognized as part of Israel by any other country or international body.
The US has a record of recognizing scumbag regimes, and here's another
example.:
Even after Woody Wilson's attorney general Mitchell Palmer's "Great Red Scare*" of 1919 in
the USA and much opposition to International Commienizm, Stalin-stlye, 'Ol FDR couldn't
wait to recognize the USSR which is something he did shortly after getting elected in
1933 after getting a meaningless "promise" from Stalin that he'd stop supporting Red terror*
in the US. It must not have mattered to him that Lenin and Stalin had been terrorizing their
own for over a decade, and in fact, Stalin had just finished engineering a slow
death-by-starvation holocaust of up to 10 million Ukrainians. He also deported many
adults, leaving their children to starve in the streets.
Americans support Jews and Israel over Muslims, Arabs and Palestine, because they
identify with Jews, and feel a kinship*.
My, how tender. But keep dreaming and scheming; why else do you think AIPAC et al
exist? Thanks for the laughs. It has nothing to do with kinship, but rather much to do about knowing who's "boss," at
least for now.
AIPAC is a seriously threatening organization with income of more than $100 million per
annum, nearly 400 employees, 100,000 members, seventeen regional offices, and a "vast pool of
donors." It clearly includes a lot of smart and savvy folks who know a lot about what is
going on in the Middle East, but its panels will not include a single word about shooting
unarmed protesters, declaring Israel to be a "nation state for Jews alone," its own acceptance
of laws attacking freedom of speech, or its use of Jewish donated money to corrupt the American
political system encouraging "allegiance to a foreign country" on the part of U.S. citizens.
Bibi will undoubtedly pick up on AIPAC's cozy theme of inclusiveness by taking the opportunity
to burnish his credentials as the leader who can continue to deliver on unlimited and
uncritical support from the United States. He will almost certainly meet with President Donald
Trump and the two will undoubtedly mention the terrible wave of anti-Semitism that is sweeping
the globe, justifying still more ethnic cleansing of the diminishing number of Arabs living in
Greater Israel and the bombing of Iran.
Other leading American politicians who will be at AIPAC in supporting rolls include the
slimy Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and the despicable former U.N. Ambassador
Nikki Haley. It will also include numerous other congressmen, administration officials and the
usual scumbags who gravitate to these events, including pardoned criminal Elliott Abrams and
unindicted felon Senator Robert Menendez. Abrams, who believes that Jews and gentiles should
not intermarry, is currently engaged in destroying Venezuela and just might be otherwise
occupied.
A number of the "American" government attendees at the event are actually Israeli citizens.
Sigal Mandelker,
a committed Zionist who holds the perpetually Jewish position of Under Secretary for
Terrorism and Financial Intelligence in the United States Department of Treasury, is an Israeli
by birth and it is widely believed that a number of Jewish congressmen and government officials
who will be attending the AIPAC conference have dual citizenship. On the conference website's
roster of attendees, it is amusing to see the official photos in which the U.S. legislators and
officials are standing in front of the American flag, seemingly disinterested in the irony that
what AIPAC is doing is destructive of democracy in America and a sell-out to Israeli interests,
undermining those of the United States.
Netanyahu's most serious opposition in the election appears to be
a centrist coalition headed by former Israeli Defense Force chief General Benny Gantz, who
has spoken of his pride in killing 1,364 "terrorists" in Gaza, and former Finance Minister
Yair Lapid. It is the principal challenge to incumbent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's
re-election hopes. Israeli courts have also meanwhile banned several Arab parties while
allowing extreme right-wing Jewish parties to appear on the ballot
Well they are swinging for the fences, what would you like them to do, invite Hezbollah for
tea, these Islamist make no small talk about destroying the Jewish state completely IE the
Jews.
So what would you have them do. If you are in favor of the Jewish state going down, you are
in the minority not because of dual loyalty evil AIPAC.
Americans support Jews and Israel over Muslims, Arabs and Palestine, because they identify
with Jews, and feel a kinship. Jews fought in both World wars, I mean search thru a
microscope for a muslim, and lets face it Shira is anti capitalist, anti women, and anti
separation of church and state.
Nothing like the obvious reasons, yet you like to make it all about the Jews.
They are engaged in a battle for Jewish self determination in a sea of Muslim only countries,
they are going to fight to the death, too bad if civilians get in the way, wars are not fair.
They are engaged in a battle for Jewish self determination in a sea of Muslim only
countries,
Such a shame the zionists did not know about that sea of Muslim only countries in 1897
when they started plotting to take over Palestine.
All those Muslims. who knew?
RFLMAO. That's EXACTLY the line the PR advisers coached you to say, right?
Good boy, Willie. LOL. There's a great film about Israeli propaganda, FREE online. Watch the
Israeli spokesman bleat, "What would you do?"
THE OCCUPATION OF THE AMERICAN MIND
__________________________________ Israel's Public Relations War in the United States
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's main political opponent Benny Gantz, who is heading
the "Blue and White" party that leads in the polls, thinks President Trump could recognize
Israeli sovereignty in the Golan Heights in order to help Netanyahu win the April 9
elections, three Gantz aides told me.
Why it matters: Israel has occupied the Golan Heights from Syria since 1967. U.S.
recognition of Israeli sovereignty in the Golan Heights would be a huge diplomatic win for
Netanyahu -- no less significant than the moving of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem. In the
last year, Netanyahu and other Israeli politicians, including Gantz's political ally Yair
Lapid, have started calling for U.S. recognition of the Golan Heights.
•Gantz's aides told me they think Trump could announce U.S. recognition of the
Golan Heights during Netanyahu's visit to the White House two weeks from now. Gantz's aides
told me that if Trump does this, it will give Netanyahu a huge achievement to campaign
on.
****
Driving the news: Netanyahu discussed the possibility of U.S. recognition of the Golan
Heights during a visit to the territory on Monday with Sen. Lindsey Graham. U.S. Ambassador
to Israel David Friedman attended all of Netanyahu's talks with Graham.
•After the talks, Graham stood next to Netanyahu in front of cameras and said that
once he arrives back to Washington, he will help push Sen. Ted Cruz's initiative to pass a
bill in the Senate for U.S. recognition in the Golan Heights.
****
The White House refrained from commenting and a State Department official told me there is
no change to the U.S. position on the Golan Heights for the moment.
"... In Kushner, Inc. , investigative journalist Vicky Ward digs beneath the myth the couple has created, depicting themselves as the voices of reason in an otherwise crazy presidency, and reveals that Jared and Ivanka are not just the President's chief enablers: they, like him, appear disdainful of rules, of laws, and of ethics. ..."
"... They are entitled inheritors of the worst kind; their combination of ignorance, arrogance, and an insatiable lust for power has caused havoc all over the world ..."
"... In Kushner, Inc. , Ward holds Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump accountable: she unveils the couple's self-serving transactional motivations and how those have propelled them into the highest levels of the US government where no one, the President included, has been able to stop them. ..."
Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump are the self-styled Prince and Princess of America. Their
swift, gilded rise to extraordinary power in Donald Trump's White House is unprecedented and
dangerous.
In Kushner, Inc. , investigative journalist Vicky Ward digs beneath the myth
the couple has created, depicting themselves as the voices of reason in an otherwise crazy
presidency, and reveals that Jared and Ivanka are not just the President's chief enablers:
they, like him, appear disdainful of rules, of laws, and of ethics.
They are entitled
inheritors of the worst kind; their combination of ignorance, arrogance, and an insatiable lust
for power has caused havoc all over the world, and may threaten the democracy of the United
States.
Ward follows their trajectory from New Jersey and New York City to the White House, where
the couple's many forays into policy-making and national security have mocked long-standing
U.S. policy and protocol. They have pursued an agenda that could increase their wealth while
their actions have mostly gone unchecked.
In Kushner, Inc. , Ward holds Jared Kushner
and Ivanka Trump accountable: she unveils the couple's self-serving transactional motivations
and how those have propelled them into the highest levels of the US government where no one,
the President included, has been able to stop them.
To paraphrase the author, on the dangerous scale, Jared & Ivanka are #1 & #2 with
Donald Trump, as terrible as he is, coming in at #3. Imagine that. While Donald Trump is
acting out, getting all of the attention, these two are like sharks below the surface,
making policy in the Middle East in order to make the Saudi's happy and being paid
personally & handsomely for that policy". It's like Donald Trump is running cover for
Jared & Ivanka. The biggest question remains. How much longer is the Republican Party
going to allow this kind of nepotism and corruption to continue?
Inside the Kushner pompousness. Vicky did a great job showing how dangerous these two
ignorant no nothing people are ruining our democracy. A must read.
"... Both Clinton and Trump were close to Epstein. To me this smells like there was a bi-partisan consensus to bury this, and only now that the Clintons are no longer dominating the Democrat party, do we get some results. ..."
"... "I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy," Trump said of Epstein during a 2002 interview with New York magazine. "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side." ..."
"... "The Government aligned themselves with Epstein, working against his victims, for 11 years..." THE SAME can be said for this: "The Government aligned themselves with APARTHEID Israhell, working against their Palestinians victims, for over 70 years... " WARNING: Graphic Images ..."
"... Epstein has dirt on EVERYONE ... If he ever gets in a legitimate court room? - many, many, shitty people will be in trouble ... GOP and Democrat. ..."
"... The ruling comes after Senators on the Judiciary Committee asked that the DOJ open an investigation into the deal, which was offered at a time when Robert Mueller was running the FBI . ..."
"... I assume MOSSAD & friends will have to pull some very fancy rabbits out of their hat to get this buried again . The $wamp can't afford to have him cooperating, so I'm guessing Epstein will have to 'retire' to Tel-Aviv - or have an accident/become 'depressed, etc.' ..."
Both Clinton and Trump were close to Epstein. To me this smells like there was a bi-partisan consensus to bury this, and
only now that the Clintons are no longer dominating the Democrat party, do we get some results.
While Trump has recently distanced himself from Epstein, a 64-year-old financier, it wasn't always that way.
"I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy," Trump said of Epstein during a 2002 interview with New York magazine.
"He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger
side."
Attorney Spencer Kuvin, one of dozens of lawyers who successfully sued Epstein on behalf of roughly 30 women who claimed
he lured them to his Palm Beach mansion for sexually-charged massages when they were as young as 14, said he always found the
comment curious.
"How would he know that?" he said of Trump's acknowledgement of Epstein's penchant for young women. The interview came nearly
six years before Epstein's secret sex life exploded into public view when the money manager pleaded guilty to Florida charges
of procuring and soliciting a minor for prostitution. "Why would he make a joke like that?" the West Palm Beach attorney asked.
Be nice if someone found the guest list because Bill Clinton wouldn't be able to kill that many people to cover it up. It'd
be sweet if they found evidence that Trump went, because he definitely did. He's probably the one to name it "Lolita Express."...no,
that was probably Bill.
"The Government aligned themselves with Epstein, working against his victims, for 11 years..." THE SAME can be said for
this: "The Government aligned themselves with APARTHEID Israhell, working against their Palestinians victims,
for over 70 years... " WARNING:
Graphic Images
I assume MOSSAD & friends will have to pull some very fancy rabbits out of their hat to get this buried again. The
$wamp can't afford to have him cooperating, so I'm guessing Epstein will have to 'retire' to Tel-Aviv - or have an accident/become
'depressed, etc.'
I will further bet that JE has had adequate notice of all this to be getting out of the USA to Balfourstan - a non-extradition
country - ASAP.
As you dig into these stories, one singular theory emerges again and again: Sexual deviants and psychos have been groomed for
office because they are easier to blackmail and control.
"We can't be divided by race, religion, by tribe. We're
defined by those enduring principles in the Constitution, even though we don't necessarily all
know them."
So Joe Biden told the firefighters union this week.
But does Joe really believe that? Or does that not sound more like a plea, a wistful hope,
rather than a deep conviction?
For Biden surely had in mind the debate that exploded last week in the House Democratic
caucus on how to punish Somali-American and Muslim Congresswoman Ilhan Omar for raising the
specter of dual loyalty.
Rebutting accusations of anti-Semitism, Omar had fired back: "I want to talk about the
political influence in this country that says it is OK to push for allegiance to a foreign
country."
Omar was talking about Israel.
Republicans raged that Nancy Pelosi's caucus must denounce Omar for anti-Semitism.
Journalists described the raising of the "dual loyalty" charge as a unique and awful moment,
perhaps a harbinger of things to come.
Yet allegations of dual loyalty against ethnic groups, even from statesmen, have a long
history in American politics.
In 1915, President Theodore Roosevelt, at a convention of the Catholic Knights of Columbus,
bellowed: "There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism German-Americans,
Irish-Americans, English-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans, or Italian-Americans. There is no
such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American
is a man who is an American and nothing else."
The New York Times headline the next morning: "Roosevelt Bars the Hyphenated." It
continued: "No Room in This Country for Dual Nationality, He Tells Knights of Columbus. Treason
to Vote as Such."
What would Roosevelt think of the dual citizenship of many Americans today? If someone is a
citizen of more than one country, how do we know where his primary allegiance lies?
Does not dual citizenship, de facto, imply dual loyalty?
Nor was the Rough Rider alone in his alarm. As America edged toward intervention in the
European war, President Woodrow Wilson, too, tore into "the hyphenates":
The passions and intrigues of certain active groups and combinations of men amongst us who
were born under foreign flags injected the poison of disloyalty into our most critical
affairs.
I am the candidate of a party, but I am above all things else, an American citizen. I
neither seek the favor nor fear the displeasure of that small alien element amongst us which
puts loyalty to any foreign power before loyalty to the United States.
In another address, Wilson declared:
There is disloyalty active in the United States, and it must be absolutely crushed. It
proceeds from a very small minority, but a very active and subtle minority. It works
underground but it shows its ugly head where we can see it, and there are those at this
moment who are trying to levy a species of political blackmail, saying: "Do what we wish in
the interest of foreign sentiment or we will wreak our vengeance at the polls."
What did Ilhan Omar say to compare with that?
Roosevelt and Wilson had in mind some German and Irish citizens whose affections for the
lands and peoples whence they came made them adversaries of Wilson's war, into which we would
soon be dragged by a WASP elite with deep ties to Great Britain.
Our Founding Fathers, too, were ever alert to the dangers of dual loyalty. In his Farewell
Address, President Washington warned against a "passionate attachment" to any foreign nation
that might create the illusion of some "common interest where no common interest exists."
Did FDR fear dual loyalty? His internment of 110,000 Japanese, mostly U.S. citizens, for the
duration of World War II suggests that he did.
Did not the prosecution of American communists under the Smith Act, begun by Truman and
continued by Eisenhower, suggest that these first postwar presidents saw peril in a secret
party that gave allegiance to a hostile foreign power?
Where Wilson, TR, and FDR distrusted ethnic and racial minorities, Truman went after the
ideological enemies within -- the communists.
What defines us, said Joe Biden, are the "enduring principles in the Constitution, even
though we don't necessarily all know them."
But if these principles, of which many Americans are not even aware, says Joe, are what
define us and hold us together, then what is it that is tearing us apart?
Is it not our differences? Is it not our diversity?
Is it not the powerful and conflicting claims of a multiplicity of races, religions, tribes,
ethnicities, and nationalities, as well as clashing ideologies, irreconcilable moral codes, a
culture war, and conflicting visions of America's past -- the one side seeing it as horrible
and hateful, the other as great and good?
"Diversity is our greatest strength!" we are ever admonished.
But where is the evidence for what appears to be not only an inherently implausible claim
but a transparently foolish and false one?
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made
and Broke a President and Divided America Forever. To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and
read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at
www.creators.com.
It has been clear for some
time that Ilhan Omar owes no one any apologies for her remarks on AIPAC and those who tow
its line; quite to the contrary, apologies are owed her. Developments over the past several
weeks underscore how important it is to drive that point home.
Before the 2008 publication of John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's The Israel Lobby and
U.S. Foreign Policy , the subject was, for all practical purposes, taboo.
Everything had to be kept hush hush, just as it did with the NSA (no such agency), the
massive signals intelligence operation at Fort Meade. Everybody who cared knew that it was
there and what it did, but only "conspiracy theorists" dared speak of it.
Ten years ago, and for many years before that, there was no shortage of books and articles
critical of Israel and Zionist ideology. But accounts of anything resembling an Israel lobby
were as rare as snowstorms in July. To broach the topic was to invite charges of
anti-Semitism.
Then in 2006, two years before they came out with the book, Mearsheimer and Walt published
an article in The London Review of Books. The authors are distinguished political
scientists and public intellectuals, but no suitable mainstream American publication would
touch it.
After the book appeared, it did not take long for its arguments to win the day -- to such an
extent that, nowadays, the taboo that protected the Israel lobby from scrutiny is, like the one
that kept the NSA out of public view, a dead letter. Too bad that the news has yet to penetrate
the bubble that surrounds our political class, or the editorial offices of servile mainstream
media.
But even in those benighted quarters, the existence of a powerful Israel lobby is, by now,
in general currency. The old taboos still survive, however -- enough to keep scrutiny of its
activities to a minimum. Also dissidents still risk being labeled anti-Semitic.
But Israel's salad days are over. For that, it has mainly its wars on Palestinians in Gaza
– massacres really -- its brutal, seemingly never-ending, occupation of the West Bank,
the predations of its settlers there, and the overall moral decline of Israeli politics in the
Netanyahu era to thank.
It is only getting worse too, especially with elections looming and with Benjamin Netanyahu
facing prison for corruption, while his political party, the Likud, is now in open alliance
with the bona fide fascists of Otzmot Yehudit (Jewish Power), the latest incarnation of Meir
Kahane's outlawed Kach Party.
But none of this was about to bring on the sea change in American, especially Jewish
American, attitudes towards Israel that now seems to be in the works. For that, more than
anyone or anything else, we have Ilhan Omar to thank.
She didn't mastermind it, no one could have, but, standing on the shoulders of other
progressives in Congress, especially newly elected ones not yet frozen into bad old ways, she
precipitated it. She was the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back.
The straw has been accumulating for a very long time, and there is a lot of it. There is
also a general sense now in many parts of the world, including the United States and Canada,
and also Donald Rumsfeld's "old Europe," that, for the first time in many decades, the times
may be changing rapidly and for the better.
Anxiety levels are therefore running high within the Democratic Party, at both the
leadership level and among large strata of the rank-and-file.
Needless to say, Zionists are panicking too.
The large and growing numbers of Christian evangelicals within the Zionist fold are not the
problem – they have many times shown that they are capable of believing almost anything.
That an omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good Being, the creator of all that is, wants Jews to
"return" to the Promised Land where they will either accept Jesus or when the End Time comes be
cast into Hell for all eternity is, by their lights, only common sense.
Jewish Zionists are another story. So are the Senators and House members for whom, as Omar
pointed out, it's all about "the benjamins."
Republicans, of course, are the worst of all; they were born to be vile.
They have always had the Christian Zionists in their pocket, but, true to Blake's dictum
that "the weak in courage are strong in cunning," they are shrewd enough to realize that
they'll never win over the Jewish vote. No matter: there are plenty of lesser or greater
Sheldon Adelsons out there, reactionary old farts clinging on to their "identities," and they
wouldn't mind getting their benjamins away from the Democrats, into whose pockets their money
used to flow, and into the ever-greedy coffers of their Grand Old Party.
More important: they have figured out that in these days of post-post-modern times, when
words mean whatever those who utter them want, and when speech is reduced to what cable news
pundits, following the lead of obscurantist literary "theorists," call "memes" or "tropes,"
there evidently is a percentage, for racists and anti-Semites, in going after anti-racists and
anti-anti Semites, by accusing them of, what else!, racism and anti-Semitism.
In much the way that, in the late seventies, the Brits led the way, with Mrs. Thatcher
showing the hapless actor, Ronald Reagan, how to promote and implement free market theology
– in the process, undoing decades of social progress and enriching the rich from whose
troughs all blessings purportedly flow – followers of the despicable Tony Blair and
others of their ilk in the British Labor Party have been showing Democrats how to go about
keeping progress at bay.
With a true socialist and internationalist in line to become Prime Minister, should there
soon be a general election that Labor would win, rightwing and centrist Laborites are now using
all the means at their disposal to besmear Jeremy Corbyn and his allies.
Ilhan Omar should feel honored to be similarly targeted, and proud to be leading a
resistance every bit as robust as the one that the Labor Party's left wing has been able to
mount.
And then in France there is Emmanuel Macron, a twit for all seasons, identifying
anti-Zionism, and criticism of Israel generally, with anti-Semitism and then proposing to
criminalize the former -- this in the motherland of free speech. This is not the first time
that en route from Voltaire to the French political class, the message has become distorted,
neutered, and nearly lost.
Craziness happens when times change. The Omar Affair is a chapter in a larger crisis of
ruling class confidence, a general freak-out the clearest sign of which is the way that
corporate media are hell bent on disgracing themselves by going after Alexandria Osacio-Cortez,
as if their aim is to expose their own imbecility. Fox is the worst, of course, but they all do
it to some extent.
Liberals and anti-Trump publicans do it mainly by evincing attitudes so condescending that,
if they could be bottled and sold, would fast become the nation's best selling emetic.
But the joke is on them. AOC has proven herself more than capable of countering every one of
their provocations, leaving them and their desperation exposed. Without breaking a sweat, she
mows them down with consummate nonchalance.
***
On the spurious question of Omar's anti-Semitism, I hesitate to belabor the obvious,
especially inasmuch as the territory has, by now, been examined so thoroughly, so often, by so
many, but there are a few points worth making over and over again nevertheless – until
the mindless know-it-all Democrats and the Republican defectors at MSNBC and CNN finally get
it.
Even in their world, even at NPR, even at The Washington Post and The New York
Times , it would not be news to point out that not all criticisms of Israel warrant charges
of anti-Semitism.
Not all criticisms are anti-Zionist either; quite to the contrary, most are not.
Opposition to the idea of a Jewish state in all or part of Palestine, as distinct from a
state of the people who live in it, Jewish or otherwise, is a lot rarer than criticism of the
Israeli government or its Apartheid policies or the ethnic cleansing it promotes.
The important point, though, is the one that Ilhan Omar has forced into public awareness:
that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are not the same.
"Zionism" denotes an ethno-nationalist political movement that did not exist before the late
nineteenth century. Its aim, at first, was to establish a Jewish state, not necessarily in
Palestine, that would provide a safe haven for victims of anti-Semitic violence and
discrimination in Europe and elsewhere too, if need be.
It soon became a movement wedded to Palestine and dedicated, above all, to cultural revival
– and to forging a Hebrew-speaking culture.
This exacerbated tensions within the Jewish community. Jews were anti-Zionists before anyone
else was.
Nowadays, "anti-Semitism" has many meanings. In the term's broadest sense, it signifies
hatred of and opposition to Jews as such. It is largely a creature of late nineteenth century
nationalist and racialist ideologies.
It draws on, but also differs from, anti-Judaism, which targets the Jewish religion –
and Jewish people only insofar as they are practitioners of it. Anti-Judaism goes back at least
to the days of the Roman Empire; by the time Judaism and Christianity parted ways, it had grown
into a full-fledged, theologically driven ideology.
Christian anti-Judaism had little in common with traditional Muslim views of Jews and
Judaism. Relations between Muslims and Jews have varied over the centuries; they were sometimes
more hostile than friendly, but nearly always more benign than those that existed between Jews
and Christians.
Outside the minds of the miscreants who crawled out from under the rocks that Trump
overturned, most anti-Semitism these days has little connection, historically or conceptually,
with the anti-Semitism that emerged and flourished in Europe in the years between the end of
the Napoleonic Wars and Hitler's defeat in World War II.
There is therefore an argument to be made for reserving the term for the anti-Semitism of
that historical period. It is the genuine article, the paradigm case. In addition differences
between then and now are considerable enough that it might be useful if different words
described them.
Today's versions, in Eastern Europe especially, do echo some of the motifs of pre-Second
World War anti-Semitism, but with important modifications. For one, today's anti-Semites are
not, for the most part, viscerally opposed to all things Jewish; they love Netanyahu, for
example, and they love Israel, Netanyahu's "nation state of the Jewish people."
Thus the original Zionists had a point: should there be a full-fledged fascist revival in
the heartlands of modern anti-Semitism, Israel probably would save some Jews from the ravages
of anti-Semitic persecution – by becoming like what it was concocted to oppose, and by
redirecting animosities away from Jews – towards Muslims.
The most common forms of anti-Semitism, in the broadest sense, nowadays bear much less
resemblance to the genuine article than to phenomena that are unfortunately all too common all
over the world, and that involve Jews no more than other peoples.
Moreover, today's anti-Semitic acting out has little or no ideological basis: it is like the
racially tinged hatred that Americans felt, and for the most part no longer feel, towards the
Japanese after Pearl Harbor. The contempt that drove the Nazis and their allies on had deeper
roots, and an ideology behind it -- an idiotic and evil one, but an ideology nonetheless.
Can the phenomena that fear mongers today deride slide over into something more
authentically anti-Semitic? Of course, it can. It sometimes does too, esp. in subaltern Muslim
communities in Europe and the Middle East.
The amazing thing, though, is that there isn't more of that going on than there is –
not just because moral and economic desperation in the communities where it exists is acute,
but also because the Israeli propaganda machine has been working overtime to bring out the
anti-Semitism in the communities they seek to repress.
Zionism came into being thanks to anti-Semitism and its well-being continues to depend upon
it; with Israel having become so widely and justifiably despised around the world, the last
thing Zionists need is to lose their reason for being.
***
In much the way that only people with "dirty minds" find problems with remarks that most
people would find inoffensive, the remarks for which Omar has received so much grief would seem
problematic only to troubled anti-anti-Semites.
On the other hand, people who only know what corporate media tell them would take it for
gospel truth that Omar is an anti-Semite of the worst kind. She can deny it all she wants, but
they will not be moved.
Surely, there is some reason for all the consternation she elicited in some – by no
means all – Jewish circles. Omar must surely be wrong about something.
I would say that a better way to think about is that to get to where she wanted to go, she
had to walk on eggshells, and, being somewhat new to the game, she didn't do it quite
delicately enough.
I hate to put it that way because it would seem to put me on the side of her high-minded,
nauseatingly condescending – and generally obtuse – liberal critics. But the facts
are what they are; and the fact is that ours is a time when identity politics, though widely
and justifiably criticized, is still riding high, and therefore when hypersensitivities
abound.
To negotiate a way around and through them requires experience, the right kind with the
right people and situations. Novices beware.
On the other hand, there was and continues to be something ennobling in Omar's honesty and
fervor, and even, if that is what it is, in her naiveté.
But then who am I or anyone else, for that matter, to say? Perhaps she did know what she was
doing. More likely, though, she did not.
In either case, it would not have hurt had Omar taken more care negotiating her way through
the minefields.
But however that may be, three cheers to her for kicking down the doors; that was long
overdue. That she could have been more cognizant of the sensitivities and hypersensitivities
involved doesn't change that.
I say this not because I think that in general such feelings deserve deference, or that
Jewish sensitivities merit more deference than those of other peoples.
I say it because I suspect that, all things considered, her remarks were impolitic, and
therefore functioned as a distraction in much the way that her critics claim.
However, I am far from sure that I am right about this; perhaps she needed to do it the way
she did.
She must have done something right, after all, because she did what no one else had been
able to do -- she got a national conversation going about what Israel, aided and abetted at
every turn by the United States, has been doing to Palestinians for more than half a century in
plain violation of simple justice, international law, and fundamental principles of political
morality.
This probably wasn't beginner's luck either; there is every reason to expect that the role
she will play in whatever comes next will be a constructive one, like the role she has played
so far. Join the debate on
Facebook More articles by: Andrew LevineANDREW LEVINE is the
author most recently of THE AMERICAN IDEOLOGY (Routledge) and POLITICAL KEY WORDS
(Blackwell) as well as of many other books and articles in political philosophy. His most
recent book is In Bad Faith: What's Wrong
With the Opium of the People . He was a Professor (philosophy) at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison and a Research Professor (philosophy) at the University of Maryland-College
Park. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and
the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).
It is possibly the greatest of American political myths, repeated ad nauseam by presidential
candidates in their election campaigns. President Barack Obama has claimed that the United
States enjoys a special bond with Israel unlike its relations with any other country. He has
called the friendship "unshakeable", "enduring" and "unique", "anchored by our common interests
and deeply held values".
His Republican rival, Mitt Romney, has gone further, arguing that there is not "an inch of
difference between ourselves and our ally Israel". A recent Romney election ad, highlighting
his summer visit to Israel, extolled the "deep and cherished relationship".
But, while such pronouncements form the basis of an apparent Washington consensus, the
reality is that the cherished friendship is no more than a fairy tale. It has been propagated
by politicians to mask the suspicion – and plentiful examples of duplicity and betrayal
– that have marked the relationship since Israel's founding.
Politicians may prefer to express admiration of Israel, and hand over billions of dollars in
aid, but the US security establishment has – at least in private – always regarded
Israel as an untrustworthy partner.
The distrust has been particularly hard to hide in relation to Iran. Mounting pressure from
Israel appears to be designed to manoeuvre Washington into supporting an attack on Tehran to
stop it supposedly developing a nuclear weapon.
While coverage has focused on animosity between Mr Obama and the Israeli prime minister,
Benjamin Netanyahu, the truth is that US officials generally are deeply at odds with Israel on
this issue.
The conflict burst into the open this month with reports that the Pentagon had scaled back
next month's joint military exercise, Austere Challenge, with the Israeli military that had
been billed as the largest and most significant in the two countries' history.
The goal of the exercise was to test the readiness of Israel's missile-defence shield in
case of Iranian reprisals – possibly the biggest fear holding Israel back from launching
a go-it-alone attack. The Pentagon's main leverage on Israel is its X-band radar, stationed in
Israel but operated exclusively by a US crew, that would provide Israel with early warning of
Iranian missiles.
A senior Israeli military official told Time magazine what the Pentagon's rethink had
conveyed: "Basically what the Americans are saying is, 'We don't trust you'."
But discord between two "unshakeable allies" is not limited to Iran. Antipathy has been
the norm for decades. Over the summer, current and former CIA officials admitted that the US
security establishment has always regarded Israel as its number one counter-intelligence threat
in the Middle East.
The most infamous spy working on Israel's behalf was Jonathan Pollard, a naval
intelligence officer who passed thousands of classified documents to Israel in the 1980s. At
least two more spies have been identified in the past few years. In 2008 a former US army
engineer admitted that he had allowed Israeli agents to photograph secret documents in the
1980s. And in 2006 Lawrence Franklin, a US defence official, was convicted of passing
classified documents to Israel concerning Iran .
In fact, such betrayals were assumed by Washington from the start of the relationship. In
Israel's early years, a US base in Cyprus monitored Israeli activities; today, Israeli
communications are intercepted by a team of Hebrew linguists stationed at Fort Meade,
Maryland.
Documents released this month by the Israeli air force archives also reveal that Israel
eventually identified mysterious high-altitude planes that overflew its territory throughout
the 1950s as American U-2 espionage planes.
In a sign of continuing US caution, Israel has not been included in the coterie of countries
with which Washington shares sensitive intelligence. The members of the "Five Eyes" group,
consisting of the US, Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, have promised not to spy on
each other – a condition Israel would have regularly flouted were it a member.
Indeed, Israel has even stolen the identities of nationals from these countries to assist
in Mossad operations. Most notoriously, Israel forged passports to smuggle Israeli agents into
Dubai in 2010 to assassinate Hamas leader Mahmoud Al Mabhouh.
Israel is far from a trusted ally in the US "war on terror". A former intelligence
official told the Associated Press in July that Israel ranked lower than Libya in a list of
countries helping to fight terrorism compiled by the Bush administration after September
11.
So why all the talk of a special bond if the relationship is characterized by such deep
mistrust?
Part of the answer lies in the formidable tactics of the pro-Israel lobby in Washington, all
too evident last week when the Democratic national convention approved an amended policy
designating Jerusalem as Israel's capital, in opposition to both international law and the
vocal wishes of delegates.
But there is another, less public reason. Francis Perrin, the head of the French Atomic
Agency in the 1950s and 1960s, when France was helping Israel develop a nuclear weapon, once
observed that the Israeli bomb was really "aimed against the Americans". Not because Israel
wanted to attack the US, but because it realized that – once it possessed the only
nuclear arsenal in the Middle East – the US would rarely risk standing in its way,
however much its policies ran counter to US interests.
For that reason, if no other, Israel is determined to stop any rival, including Iran, from
getting a nuclear weapon that would end its monopoly.
"... Ward delves into questions about whether Kushner misused his role as a way to find financing to rescue a Fifth Avenue property in Manhattan and suggests that Kushner dimwittedly nearly dragged the United States into a war in the region. It is a dark and mostly one-sided portrait, one with which the Kushner and Trump families no doubt will disagree. ..."
"... The greatest challenge of the book, and one that is likely to raise questions, is fulfilling the third element of Ward's subtitle: "Greed. Ambition. Corruption." The latter word connotes criminality; while Kushner's father served time in prison, neither Jared nor Ivanka has been accused of crimes by a prosecutor. ..."
"... To be sure, President Trump and his family have thrown around such concepts loosely, and without hedging. During the 2016 campaign, he called Hillary Clinton the " Most Corrupt Candidate Ever! ," retweeting an image that encased the words in a Jewish star against a backdrop of U.S. currency, a tweet widely criticized as anti-Semitic. (Trump said he thought it was a sheriff's star.) Clinton, like Jared and Ivanka, has not been charged by prosecutors with corruption. ..."
"... To rehabilitate the family image, Ward writes, the elder Kushner adopted a plan that called for transitioning from owning garden apartments in New Jersey to acquiring a Fifth Avenue office tower, a "trophy" that would dazzle the doubters. In addition, Jared would buy the New York Observer to get friendly media treatment, and he would "date someone prominent." While the father pulled the strings, the son got the credit -- and later the blame -- for buying the nation's most expensive office property just before the Great Recession, leaving him with a staggering debt. As for the prominent woman, Kushner dated Ivanka Trump. ..."
"... In the rather cynical portrait Ward draws, Ivanka, too, was strategic. Ward quotes her as saying in her own book, " The Trump Card ": "If someone perceives something to be true, it is more important than if it is in fact true." ..."
"... She writes that only after a thorough investigation by Congress and other authorities might they "finally face a reckoning." ..."
Kushner, Inc. Greed. Ambition. Corruption. The Extraordinary Story of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump By Vicky Ward
St. Martin's. 286 pp. $28.99
... ... ...
There are no blockbuster revelations here regarding Kushner's meeting with a Russian banker or his involvement in a meeting with
a Russian lawyer at Trump Tower, two issues that have drawn the interest of investigators. Ward is, however, particularly critical
of Trump's decision to hand over Middle East policy to Kushner, which led to clashes with then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and
others.
Ward delves into questions about whether Kushner misused his role as a way to find financing to rescue a Fifth Avenue property
in Manhattan and suggests that Kushner dimwittedly nearly dragged the United States into a war in the region. It is a dark and mostly
one-sided portrait, one with which the Kushner and Trump families no doubt will disagree.
For much of the book, as is often the case with volumes seeking to tell an inside story of the White House, the sources are anonymous
and highly critical. If Ward secured on-the-record interviews with her two main subjects, she does not say so; their voices are mostly
filtered through the mouths of others, most of whom may have a vested interest in spinning conversations a certain way. It is, to
be sure, a particularly challenging task that Ward has undertaken, given Kushner's rare public comments and the couple's obsession
with maintaining their image and protecting the president.
The greatest challenge of the book, and one that is likely to raise questions, is fulfilling the third element of Ward's subtitle:
"Greed. Ambition. Corruption." The latter word connotes criminality; while Kushner's father served time in prison, neither Jared
nor Ivanka has been accused of crimes by a prosecutor.
In the text, while Ward hammers the couple on page after page, she doesn't explicitly accuse them of corruption as defined by
legal statutes. Perhaps the closest she comes is when she writes that "it's been reported" that Ivanka Trump oversaw her family's
project in Azerbaijan in which a partner's brother had been described in a U.S. diplomatic cable as corrupt.
"As a result, it's possible that the Trump Organization violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act," Ward writes, providing
a notable hedge.
To be sure, President Trump and his family have thrown around such concepts loosely, and without hedging. During the 2016
campaign, he called Hillary Clinton the "
Most Corrupt Candidate Ever! ," retweeting an image that encased the words in a Jewish star against a backdrop of U.S. currency,
a tweet widely criticized as anti-Semitic. (Trump said he thought it was a sheriff's star.) Clinton, like Jared and Ivanka, has not
been charged by prosecutors with corruption.
Ward, who relies heavily on the reporting of others (noted in endnotes), as well as her own sources, has a tendency, particularly
in the first half of the book, to make sweeping statements and repeat rumors, some of which she then bats down. She writes that one
man "was rumored to sleep with men and hired prostitutes," and says another was "not one to be troubled by ethics."
Ward paints a sordid portrait of Kushner's coming-of-age, retelling tales of how his father's contributions to Harvard may have
greased his way into the college. A war within the Kushner family led his father, Charles Kushner, to arrange for a prostitute to
entrap a relative with whom he had feuded. Charles Kushner went to prison for his part in the scheme and other matters. Jared later
told New York magazine that his father's viewpoint was: "
You're trying to make my life miserable? Well, I'm doing
the same. "
To rehabilitate the family image, Ward writes, the elder Kushner adopted a plan that called for transitioning from owning
garden apartments in New Jersey to acquiring a Fifth Avenue office tower, a "trophy" that would dazzle the doubters. In addition,
Jared would buy the New York Observer to get friendly media treatment, and he would "date someone prominent." While the father pulled
the strings, the son got the credit -- and later the blame -- for buying the nation's most expensive office property just before
the Great Recession, leaving him with a staggering debt. As for the prominent woman, Kushner dated Ivanka Trump.
Donald Trump was not pleased at first, according to Ward. "Why couldn't she have married Tom Brady?" he said, referring to the
New England Patriots quarterback, Ward writes. "Have you seen how he throws a football?"
In the rather cynical portrait Ward draws, Ivanka, too, was strategic. Ward quotes her as saying in her own book, "
The Trump Card ": "If someone perceives something to be true, it is more important than if it is in fact true."
When President Trump said there were "
very fine people, on both sides " of a Charlottesville clash during which white supremacists shouted "Jews will not replace us,"
Trump's economic adviser Gary Cohn threatened to resign, noting that some of his family members had been killed in the Holocaust.
Ivanka urged him to stay, telling him: "My dad's not a racist. He didn't mean any of it; he's not anti-Semitic," according to Ward.
Cohn remained in his post.
At first, Jared and Ivanka didn't plan to work in the White House, but after Trump brought them in as advisers, they frequently
clashed with chief strategist Stephen Bannon and others. An "epic" and profane fight took place between Bannon and Ivanka over who
was leaking stories, Ward writes.
"Everybody knows you leak," Bannon is reported to have told Ivanka.
"You're a f---ing liar," she is said to have responded. "Everything that comes out of your mouth is a f---ing lie."
"Go f--- yourself. . . . You are nothing," Bannon reportedly said.
The president, according to Ward, eventually wanted to send Jared and Ivanka back to New York, but after so many firings and resignations
in the White House, he needed them more than ever.
Some of their activities have remained largely opaque. And Ward can take speculation about corruption only so far. She writes
that only after a thorough investigation by Congress and other authorities might they "finally face a reckoning."
I am taking the liberty of copying a recent comment into the last Open Thread
You see this napkin? In 24 hours, we could have the signatures of 70 Senators on this
napkin.
–Steven Rosen, AIPAC
Questioning support for the U.S.-Israel relationship is unacceptable.
–Rep. Juan Vargas, D-CA
If this capitol crumbled to the ground, the one thing that would remain would be our
commitment to aid -- I won't even call it aid -- our cooperation with Israel.
–Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-CA
AIPAC now seems acutely sensitive to the appearance of dual loyalty. The theme of this
year's AIPAC conference was "Israel, an American Value".
To be sure, President Trump and his family have thrown around such concepts loosely, and without hedging.
During the 2016 campaign,
he called Hillary Clinton the "
Most Corrupt Candidate Ever! ," retweeting an image that encased the words in a Jewish star against a backdrop of U.S.
currency, a tweet widely criticized as anti-Semitic. (Trump said he thought it was a sheriff's star.)
(JTA) -- From the man who married her grandmother to the man who married her daughter, from
working a room full of bar mitzvah guests on behalf of her husband's political career to
headlining major pro-Israel events during her own, Hillary Rodham Clinton's journey has never
wandered far from Jews.
Clinton's Jewish encounters have been a natural consequence of her East Coast education, her
trajectory in the party favored by a substantial majority of Jewish-Americans, and her embrace
of the Jewish narrative of triumphing over adversity and bigotry, longtime friends of the 2016
presidential candidate say.
Sara Ehrman, whose friendship with the Democratic front-runner dates back more than four
decades, told JTA that the Clintons, upon arriving in Arkansas in the mid-1970s, quickly
established ties with leaders of the state's tiny Jewish community.
"They were a smart, educated young couple who had come down to this wonderful little city,"
said Ehrman, now 96, referring to Little Rock. "The Jews gravitated to them. Among her best and
most fervent supporters were Jews."
by the Forward
The Clintons would attend seders at the homes of Jewish friends during their Little Rock
years, and in 1988 Bill Clinton as governor co-officiated with Rabbi Zeke Palnick of Arkansas'
capital city at the Jewish wedding of Richard and Sheila Bronfman.
The Clintons are "both very spiritual and they tend to like to experience different cultures
around them," Sheila Bronfman, who traveled the country to campaign for Bill Clinton in 1992
and 1996, and for Hillary Clinton in 2008. (Plans are underway for a road trip in advance of
the 2016 presidential election, she said.)
Ehrman, a longtime activist with the Democratic Party and with pro-Israel groups, met
Hillary Rodham during the 1972 George McGovern presidential campaign.
"I went down to San Antonio to run south Texas for McGovern," Ehrman said of the Democratic
nominee. "We were doing voter registration, Mexican-Americans. I wanted a lawyer to make sure
everything we did was right. I called D.C., I said 'You gotta send a lawyer down here.' The
next day, a young woman comes in, she looks 19, all in brown with Coke-bottle glasses. She
said, 'I'm Hilary Rodham, the lawyer.' And everyone in the room said, 'We don't want a girl, we
want a real lawyer.' We immediately bonded as outsiders."
Two years later, Rodham was hired by the U.S. House of Representatives' Judiciary Committee
to investigate President Nixon's role in the Watergate scandal. So she called Ehrman, asking
whether she knew of cheap digs. Ehrman invited her to bunk at her house, and Rodham agreed.
After Nixon resigned, the two drove together from Washington, D.C., to Fayetteville, where
Bill Clinton was teaching law at the University of Arkansas and where Rodham planned to join
him.
"All the way down, I would say, 'Are you out of your mind? It's a godforsaken place, you
can't get decent food there, what are you going to do?'" recalled Ehrman, speaking to JTA in
her apartment on Embassy Row here.
In Fayetteville, Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham soon befriended another law professor, Mort
Gitelman.
"They were both very happy to come to the bar mitzvah of my son, Eliot," Gitelman said in an
email.
Palnick's son Lazar, who attended the bar mitzvah, remembers Hillary Rodham and Bill Clinton
working the room for political support. And when his rabbi father would travel to Fayetteville
for pastoral work, the teenage Lazar would ride along to help leaflet neighborhoods in support
of Clinton, who would go on to lose his 1974 congressional bid to the Republican incumbent.
During Hillary Clinton's 2000 U.S. Senate campaign, Paul Fray, Bill Clinton's campaign
manager in the '74 race, told a writer that Hillary Rodham, in a heated argument on election
night as it became clear that Clinton would be defeated, called Fray a "f***ing Jew bastard."
Both Clintons have vehemently denied the charge, and noted that they had fallen out with Fray
after the campaign. They also said that they had no idea Fray was one-eighth Jewish.
A year after the loss, the couple were married by a Methodist minister in their Fayetteville
living room. The following year, Bill Clinton became the state's attorney general, and two
years after that he was elected governor of Arkansas.
"I remember them coming for seder at our house," said Lazar Palnick, now a lawyer for the
Democratic Party in Pennsylvania. "The Clintons fit very much in with a group of people who
cared about feeding the poor, educating people, making sure everyone gets an opportunity."
Hillary Clinton's maternal grandmother, Della, who was divorced, had remarried a Jewish man,
Max Rosenberg. And the presidential hopeful has credited Rosenberg with encouraging her mother,
Dorothy, and her grandmother to reconcile years after Della sent Dorothy at age 8 to live with
her strict and forbidding parents.
In her first autobiography, "Living History," Hillary Clinton recalls, when she was 10,
noticing numbers tattooed on the arm of an acquaintance of her father. Hugh Rodham explained
that Nazis had tattooed his acquaintance when he was a prisoner of war, and told her how the
Nazis also tattooed Jews, whom they murdered en masse.
by the Forward
Getty Images
"I knew that my grandmother Della's husband, Max Rosenberg, was Jewish, and I was horrified
that someone like him could have been murdered just because of his religion," Clinton wrote in
2003.
By the time Bill Clinton was running for president in 1992, the youthful governor and his
wife had become favorites among Jewish Democrats. Ehrman described a presidential campaign
headquarters buzzing with Jewish activists.
"The Jews loved the Clintons so much, they were coming from around the country," she said.
"If they couldn't come, they would send food – the whole staff would end up in the Jewish
room because there were bagels from New York, Danish pastries, Goldenberg's peanut chews."
The "Jewish room" she describes refers to the area where Jewish activists would
congregate.
Steve Rabinowitz, a campaign volunteer who went on to become a deputy communications
director in the White House, recalls 100 people coming to a Yom Kippur break-fast he organized
in Little Rock during the campaign.
The Jewish sensibility permeated the Clinton White House, where the first couple inaugurated
the annual Hanukkah party in 1993, in part because of the abundance of Jewish staffers. They
included communications chief Ann Lewis, senior adviser Rahm Emanuel and Rabinowitz. There was
Jack Lew, a special assistant to President Clinton who would go on to become Treasure secretary
under President Barack Obama, and Ron Klain, the chief of staff to Vice President Al Gore and
now Obama's Ebola czar.
"I said, 'You're having a Christmas party, you've got to have a Hanukkah party,' " Ehrman
recalled. (Unlike the formal Hanukkah parties inaugurated by President George W. Bush and
continued by Obama, these were for staffers and their families, although on occasion children
from Washington-area Jewish day schools made an appearance.)
The Clintons' first Israel visit, with a church group in 1981, also included the West Bank.
Approaching Bill Clinton's presidential run in 1992, they reached out to the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee, and AIPAC helped set up a meeting with Martin Indyk, a former staffer
who founded the Washington Institute for Near East Policy think tank. The trio hit it off --
the meeting ran hours overtime as both Clintons peppered Indyk with questions, according to a
source who was present. Indyk went on to become the U.S. ambassador to Israel and Clinton's top
Middle East peace negotiator.
Bill Clinton's embrace of the Oslo Accords between Israel and the Palestine Liberation
Organization -- initiated by the government of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin -- further
strengthened the couple's ties to national Jewish groups. Hillary Clinton's eight years in the
Senate representing New York cemented those ties. Her pro-Israel advocacy included exposing
incitement in Palestinian media and helping to win full membership for Magen David Adom in the
International Committee of the Red Cross. She also blamed the Palestinians, and not the
Israelis, for the collapse of the 2000 Camp David peace talks and the subsequent second
intifada.
Her advocacy followed the headline-making fallout from an appearance by Hillary Clinton in
1999 at an event with Suha Arafat, the wife of the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. Speaking
in Arabic, Suha Arafat accused Israel of poisoning Arab children. Clinton, ostensibly listening
to a translation on headphones, did not react and kissed Suha Arafat after her remarks. Clinton
claimed that she did not hear the reference to poisoning; she noted that others in the room
missed it, too.
The subsequent tabloid attention rattled her, coming just as Clinton was launching her
Senate campaign, and helped shape the political caution that has come to define her.
"I had learned a hard lesson about the hazards of merging my role in the international
diplomatic arena with the complexities of local New York politics," she wrote in "Living
History."
After winning the Senate seat in 2000, Clinton repeatedly secured the Tuesday-morning slot
at national Jewish conferences for AIPAC and the Jewish Federations of North America, among
others – a slot reserved for the most respected pro-Israel figure in Congress. Clinton
chose the annual AIPAC conference in 2008 to concede the primaries to Obama.
For her 2016 bid, Clinton has lined up pro-Israel funding powerhouses who helped fuel her
'08 bid, like entertainment mogul Haim Saban, and has added some of Obama's most prominent
Jewish bundlers, notably movie executive Jeffrey Katzenberg. Lewis, the former White House
communications chief, leads her Jewish outreach.
There were other alliances, less noticeable back in the 1990s, that would also be
consequential, at least personally.
The 1992 election swept into Congress the largest class of Jewish lawmakers ever, 51. Among
them was Rep. Marjorie Margolies, D-Pa., who served a single term before being ousted in the
Republican takeover of the House in '94. Her opponents raised the issue of Margolies'
tie-breaking vote in 1993 passing Bill Clinton's unpopular tax bill.
The Clintons, known for their loyalty to those who fall on their sword for them, campaigned
for Margolies in her 2014 congressional bid; she lost in the primaries. Neither Hillary
Clinton's office nor Margolies responded to requests for comment.
Margolies' son, Marc Mezvinsky, met the Clintons' daughter, Chelsea, when they were children
at a political retreat, and fell in love when they met again at Stanford University. At their
wedding, co-officiating was Rabbi James Ponet, the head rabbi at Yale.
Ponet chatted only briefly with Hillary Clinton at the wedding, but got to know her more
recently at a memorial for the philanthropist Edgar Bronfman. Ponet in an interview with JTA
said Clinton spoke with sensitivity about Bronfman's efforts to make Swiss banks accountable
for Holocaust-era Jewish assets.
"There's a sense of foundational connection to the Jewish people and a sense of the
responsibility to the Jewish people in the world," he said.
Ponet also described a pre-wedding meeting with the young couple and discussing the huppah.
The rabbi advised the couple that any cloth with meaning to the family could serve as a wedding
canopy.
"Marc said, 'My bar mitzvah tallit, that could be used, but I don't know where it is',"
Ponet recalled. "Chelsea said, 'I know where it is.'"
This story "Hillary Clinton and Her Enduring Ties to Jews" was written by Ron Kampeas.
"... Revealed: Donald Trump's son-in-law challenged by Rex Tillerson and Gary Cohn for mixing personal interests with US foreign policy ..."
"... Jared Kushner was told by the secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, that his interference had 'endangered the US', while his wife Ivanka's team was derided as the 'home of all bad ideas'. Photograph: Jim Bourg/Reuters Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner , was confronted by two of the most senior US government officials for mixing his personal interests with US foreign policy, according to a new book. ..."
"... Ward reports that Tillerson blamed Kushner for Trump's abrupt endorsement of a provocative blockade and diplomatic campaign against Qatar by Saudi Arabia and several allies in June 2017. ..."
"... "You've got to be crazy," Cohn is said to have told Kushner in front of others. Kushner met the executives around the time he hosted Chinese government officials at the Fifth Avenue tower. The building was eventually refinanced by a Qatari-backed investment fund. ..."
"... Ward's book portrays Kushner and Ivanka Trump as relentlessly ambitious operators who are loathed by many forced to work with them. She reports that White House staffers mocked Kushner as the "secretary of everything" for his wide-ranging meddling and derided Ivanka Trump's team as Habi – "home of all bad ideas". ..."
"... Bannon recalls Kushner furiously shouting at him at the White House in 2017 after he confronted Kushner about holding secret talks with senators on immigration reform. "He goes from a little boy to, like, this fucking devil," Bannon is quoted as saying. ..."
"... Bannon also claims to have told Ivanka Trump: "Go fuck yourself you are nothing" in front of her father, during an argument over who was the bigger leaker to the media. Ivanka Trump is said to have called Bannon a "fucking liar". ..."
Revealed: Donald Trump's son-in-law challenged by Rex Tillerson and Gary Cohn for mixing personal interests with US foreign policy
Jared Kushner was told by the secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, that his interference had 'endangered the US', while his wife
Ivanka's team was derided as the 'home of all bad ideas'. Photograph: Jim Bourg/Reuters Donald Trump's son-in-law,
Jared Kushner , was confronted by two of the most
senior US government officials for mixing his personal interests with US foreign policy, according to a new book.
Kushner, an envoy to the Middle East for his father-in-law, is said to have been robustly challenged by both Rex Tillerson, then
secretary of state, and Gary Cohn, formerly Trump's top economic adviser.
The confrontations are detailed in Kushner Inc by the journalist Vicky Ward, who also describes interference in foreign relations
by Kushner's wife, Ivanka Trump . The book is scheduled
to be released on 19 March. A copy was obtained by the Guardian.
Ward reports that Tillerson blamed Kushner for Trump's abrupt endorsement of a provocative blockade and diplomatic campaign
against Qatar by Saudi Arabia and several allies in June 2017. The US has thousands of troops stationed in Qatar.
Tillerson "told Kushner that his interference had endangered the US", an unidentified Tillerson aide tells Ward. Tillerson is
also said to have read negative "chatter" about himself in intelligence reports after Kushner belittled him to Kushner's friend Mohammed
bin Salman, the controversial Saudi crown prince.
Meanwhile, Cohn is said to have rebuked Kushner in January 2017 after it was revealed Kushner had dined with executives from the
Chinese financial corporation Anbang, which was considering investing in the Kushner family's troubled tower at 666 Fifth Avenue
in Manhattan.
The heart of the US-Saudi relationship lies in the Kushner-prince friendship | Mohamad Bazzi Read
more
"You've got to be crazy," Cohn is said to have told Kushner in front of others. Kushner met the executives around the time
he hosted Chinese government officials at the Fifth Avenue tower. The building was eventually refinanced by a Qatari-backed investment
fund.
Ivanka Trump is reported to have interfered in telephone calls between her father and foreign dignitaries despite having overseas
business interests. "Thanks so much for the CD you sent me," she is quoted as having told an Indian leader by someone who heard the
call. The Trump Organization owns several residential towers in India.
Ward's book portrays Kushner and Ivanka Trump as relentlessly ambitious operators who are loathed by many forced to work with
them. She reports that White House staffers mocked Kushner as the "secretary of everything" for his wide-ranging meddling and derided
Ivanka Trump's team as Habi – "home of all bad ideas".
John Kelly, formerly Trump's chief of staff and homeland security secretary, is quoted as dismissing the couple as "just playing
government".
The book also details disagreements between them and Steve Bannon, Trump's former campaign chief and top White House strategist.
Bannon clashed with the couple, who are former Democrats, while pushing to convert Trump's aggressively nationalist campaign rhetoric
into government policy.
Bannon recalls Kushner furiously shouting at him at the White House in 2017 after he confronted Kushner about holding secret
talks with senators on immigration reform. "He goes from a little boy to, like, this fucking devil," Bannon is quoted as saying.
Bannon also claims to have told Ivanka Trump: "Go fuck yourself you are nothing" in front of her father, during an argument
over who was the bigger leaker to the media. Ivanka Trump is said to have called Bannon a "fucking liar".
For her part, Ivanka Trump is focused on cementing a Trump dynasty to rival the Kennedys and Bushes by becoming commander-in-chief
herself one day, according to Ward. "She thinks she's going to be president of the United States," Cohn is quoted as saying.
Virologists are working around the clock to map the genome of this scurrilous scourge, about
which very little is known, other than that it has a sudden onset, and attacks the language
center of the brain, causing the sufferer to express opinions about "Zionism," "globalism,"
"the Israel lobby," "banks," and other code words for "Jews." Patients appear to be unaware
that they are spouting these anti-Semitic code words until they are told they are by the
corporate media, or their colleagues, or some random account on Twitter, at which point their
symptoms alter dramatically, and they suffer a series of petit mal seizures, causing them to
repeatedly apologize for unintentionally advocating the extermination of the entire Jewish
people and the establishment of a worldwide Nazi Reich.
At the moment, Britain is taking the brunt of it. Despite the best efforts of the ruling
classes and the media to contain its spread, several new cases of anti-Semitism have been
reported throughout the Kingdom, or at least among the Labour Party, which, at this point, has
been so thoroughly infected that it resembles a
neo-Nazi death cult .
Jeremy Corbyn, who contracted the virus more or less the moment he assumed the leadership,
is now exhibiting symptoms of late-stage disease. Reliable sources close to the party, reached
for comment at a brunch in Qatar with Tony Blair and a bunch of Saudis, report that Corbyn is
running around Momentum HQ in full Nazi regalia, alternately heiling Hitler and looking for
journalists to apologize to.
Another Labour MP, Chris Williamson, had to be summarily quarantined after publicly
apologizing for not apologizing for inciting a gathering of Labour members to stop apologizing
for refusing to apologize for being disgusting anti-Semites or something basically along those
lines. Owen Jones is fiercely denying denying that the party is a hive of Nazis, and that he
ever denied that denying the fact that there is zero
actual evidence of that fact is essential to preserving what is left of the party, once it
has been cured of anti-Semitism, or disbanded and reconstituted from scratch.
Emergency measures are now in effect. A full-scale Labour Party lockdown is imminent. Anyone
not already infected is being advised to flee the party, denounce anyone who hasn't done so as
"a Hitler-loving Corbyn-sympathizer," and prophylactically apologize for any critical
statements they might have made about Israel, or "elites," or "global capitalism," or
"bankers," or anything else that anyone can construe as anti-Semitism (
preferably in the pages of The Guardian ).
Nor has the Continent been spared! What at first appeared to be a series of spontaneous
protests against Emmanuel Macron, economic austerity, and global capitalism by the so-called
"Yellow Vests" in France has
now been officially diagnosed as a nationwide anti-Semitism outbreak. In a heroic attempt
to contain the outbreak, Macron has dispatched his security forces to shoot the eyes out of
unarmed women , pepper spray paraplegics in wheelchairs , and
just
generally beat bloody hell out of everyone . Strangely, none of these tactics have worked,
so France has decided to join the USA, the UK, Germany, and the rest of the empire in
defining anti-Zionism as form of anti-Semitism , such that anyone implying that Israel is
in any way inherently racist, or a quasi-fascist Apartheid state, or making jokes about
"elites" or "bankers," can be detained and prosecuted for committing a "hate-crime."
Meanwhile, in the United States (where Donald Trump, "U.S. patient zero," had already
single-handedly infected the vast majority of the American populace, and transformed the nation
into an unrecognizable, genocidal Nazi Reich), the anti-Semitism virus has now spread to
Congress, where Representative Ilhan Omar (reputed to be a hardcore member of the infamous "
Axis of
Anti-Semitism ") has apparently totally lost her mind and started talking about the Israel
lobby, and the billions of dollars the U.S. government provides to Israel on an annual basis,
and other Israel-related subjects one simply does not talk about (unless one writes for The
New York Times and isn't a hijab-wearing Muslim, in which case it's completely fine to
characterize support for Israel as being "
bought and paid for by the Israel lobby ").
OK, I know, you're probably questioning the fact that this anti-Semitism pandemic just
sprang up out of the ether one day, more or less in perfect synch with the Russian plot to
destroy democracy that Vladimir Putin set in motion the moment the Global War on Terror seemed
to be running out of steam. If you are, you need to close this essay, pull up either MSNBC or
The Guardian website on your phone, and inoculate yourself against such thoughts. That
conspiratorial type of thinking is one of the early warning signs that you have been infected
with anti-Semitism! Unless you act now to protect yourself, before you know it, you'll be
raving about "the ruling classes," "globalist elites," "austerity," "neoliberalism," "the
Israel lobby," or even "Palestinians."
... ... ...
C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist
based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play
Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is
published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant Paperbacks. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .
"Anti-semite" has lost its sting, because every justified criticism of the fully nuclear
armed, viciously apartheid, theocratic Zionist Israeli government is declared to be
anti-semitism. The word is so overused and misapplied as to be useless. Indeed, to be
declared "anti-semite" by the Israel Lobby is to be declared a person of high moral
conscience.
"Another Labour MP, Chris Williamson, had to be summarily quarantined after publicly
apologizing for not apologizing for inciting a gathering of Labour members to stop
apologizing for refusing to apologize for being disgusting anti-Semites or something
basically along those lines. Owen Jones is fiercely denying denying that the party is a
hive of Nazis, and that he ever denied that denying the fact that there is zero actual
evidence of that fact is essential to preserving what is left of the party, once it has
been cured of anti-Semitism, or disbanded and reconstituted from scratch."
brilliant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! y, it's much the same here across the pond.
The Solons on Capitol Hill are terrified of the expression "dual loyalty." They are afraid
because dual loyalty means that one is not completely a loyal citizen of the country where one
was born, raised and, presumably, prospered. It also suggests something more perverse, and that
is dual citizenship, which in its present historic and social context particularly refers to
the Jewish congressmen and women who just might be citizens of both the United States and
Israel. There is particular concern over the issue at the moment because a freshman
congresswoman Ilhan Omar has let the proverbial cat out of the bag by alluding to
American-Jewish money buying uncritical support for a foreign country which is Israel without
any regard to broader U.S. interests, something that everyone in Washington knows is true and
has been the case for decades but is afraid to discuss due to inevitable punishment by the
Israel Lobby.
Certainly, the voting record in Congress would suggest that there are a lot of congress
critters who embrace dual loyalty, with evidence that the loyalty is not so much dual as skewed
in favor of Israel. Any bill relating to Israel or to Jewish collective interests, like the
currently fashionable topic of anti-Semitism, is guaranteed a 90% plus approval rating no
matter what it says or how much it damages actual U.S. interests. Thursday's 407 to 23 vote in
the House of Representatives on a meaningless and almost unreadable
"anti-hate" resolution was primarily intended to punish Ilhan Omar and to demonstrate that
the Democratic Party is indeed fully committed to sustaining the exclusive prerogatives of the
domestic Jewish community and the Jewish state.
The voting on the resolution was far from unusual and would have been unanimous but for the
fact that twenty-three Republicans voted "no" because they wanted a document that was only
focused on anti-Semitism, without any references to Muslims or other groups that might be
encountering hatred in America. That the congress should be wasting its time with such nonsense
is little more than a manifestation of Jewish power in the United States, part of a long-sought
goal of making any criticism of Israel a "hate" crime punishable by fining and imprisonment.
And congress is always willing to play its part. Famously, American Israel Public Affairs
Committee (AIPAC) official Steven Rosen once boasted that he
could take a napkin and within 24 hours have the signatures of 70 Senators on it, reflective of
the ability of the leading pro-Israel organization to impel the U.S. legislature to respond
uncritically to its concerns.
Ilhan Omar has certainly been forced to apologize and explain her position as she is under
sustained attack from the left, right and center as well as from the White House. One
congressman told her that "Questioning support for the
US-Israel relationship is unacceptable." Another said "there are many reasons to
support Israel, but there is no reason to oppose Israel" while yet another one declared that
all in Congress are committed to insuring that the "United States and Israel stand as one."
But Omar has defended herself without abandoning her core arguments and she has further
established her bona fides as a credible critic of what passes for U.S. foreign policy
by virtue of an astonishing attack on former President Barack Obama, whom she criticized
obliquely
in an interview Friday , saying "We can't be only upset with Trump. His policies are bad,
but many of the people who came before him also had really bad policies. They just were more
polished than he was. That's not what we should be looking for anymore. We don't want anybody
to get away with murder because they are polished. We want to recognize the actual policies
that are behind the pretty face and the smile." Presumably Omar was referring to Obama's death
by drone program and his destruction of Libya, among his other crimes. Everything she said
about the smooth talking but feckless Obama is true and could be cast in even worse terms, but
to hear the truth from out of the mouth of a liberal Democrat is something like a revelation
that all progressives are not ideologically fossilized and fundamentally brain dead. One
wonders what she thinks of the Clintons?
The Democrats are in a tricky situation that will only wind up hurting relationships with
some of their core constituencies. If they come down too hard on Omar – a Muslim woman of
color who wears a head covering – it will not look good to some key minority voters they
have long courted. If they do not, the considerable Jewish political donations to the
Democratic Party will certainly be diminished if not slowed to a trickle and much of the media
will turn hostile. So they are trying to bluff their way through by uttering the usual
bromides. Senator Kristin Gillibrand of New York characteristically tried to cover both ends
by
saying "Those with critical views of Israel, such as Congresswoman Omar, should be able to
express their views without employing anti-Semitic tropes about money or influence." Well, of
course, it is all about Jews, money buying access and obtaining political power, with the
additional element of supporting a foreign government that has few actual interests in common
with the United States, isn't it?
As Omar put it, "I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it
is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country " She also tweeted to a
congressional critic that "I should not be expected to have allegiance/pledge support to a
foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress or serve on committee." Gilad Atzmon,
a well known Jewish critic of Israel,
observed drily that "How reassuring is it that the only American who upholds the core
values of liberty, patriotism and freedom is a black Muslim and an immigrant "
But such explicatory language about the values that Americans used to embrace before
Israel-worship rendered irrelevant the Constitution clearly made some lightweights from the GOP
side nervous. Megan McCain, daughter of thankfully deceased "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran"
Senator John McCain appears on a mind numbing talk-television program called The View
where she
cried as she described her great love for fellow Israel-firster warmonger former U.S.
Senator Joe Lieberman as "like family," before launching into her own "informed" analysis: "I
take the hate crimes rising in this country incredibly seriously and I think what's happening
in Europe is really scary. On both sides it should be called out. And just because I don't
technically have Jewish family that are blood-related to me doesn't mean that I don't take this
seriously and it is very dangerous, very dangerous what Ilhan Omar is saying is very scary to
me."
The New York Times also had a lot to say, covering the story on both its news and
op-eds pages daily. Columnist Michelle Goldberg, who is usually sensible,
criticizes Omar because of her "minimizing the legacy of the holocaust" and blames her
because "she's committed what might be called, in another context, a series of microaggressions
-- inadvertent slights that are painful because they echo whole histories of trauma." In other
words, if some Jews are indeed deliberately corrupting American politics on behalf of Israel
and against actual U.S. interests using money to do so it is not a good idea to say anything
about it because it might revive bad historical – or not so historical – memories.
It is perpetual victimhood employed as an excuse for malfeasance on the part of Jewish groups
and the Jewish state.
Another Times columnist Bret Stephens also takes up the
task of defenestrating Omar with some relish, denying that "claims that Israel uses money
to bend others to its will, or that its American supporters 'push for allegiance to a foreign
country'" are nothing more than the "repackage[ing] falsehoods commonly used against Jews for
centuries." He attributes to her "insidious cunning" and "anti-Jewish bigotry" observing how
"she wraps herself in the flag, sounding almost like Pat Buchanan when he called Congress
"Israeli-occupied" territory." And it's all " how anti-Zionism has abruptly become an
acceptable point of view in reputable circles. It's why anti-Semitism is just outside the
frame, bidding to get in." He concludes by asking why the Democratic Party "has so much trouble
calling out a naked anti-Semite in its own ranks."
Stephens clearly does not accept that what Oran claims just might actually be true. Perhaps
he is so irritated by her because he himself is a perfect example of someone who suffers from
dual loyalty syndrome, or perhaps it would be better described as single loyalty to his tribe
and to Israel. Review some of his recent columns in The Times if you do not believe that
to be true. He has an obsession with rooting out people that he believes to be anti-Semites and
believes all the nonsense about Israel as the "only democracy in the Middle East." In his op-ed
he claims that "Israel is the only country in its region that embraces the sorts of values the
Democratic Party claims to champion." Yes, a theocratic state's summary execution of unarmed
protesters and starving civilians while simultaneously carrying out ethnic cleansing are
traditional Democratic Party programs, at least as Bret sees it.
People like Stephens are unfortunately possessors of a bully pulpit and are influential. As
they are public figures, they should be called out regarding where their actual loyalties lie,
but no one in power is prepared to do that. Stephens wears his Jewishness on his sleeve and is
pro-Israel far beyond anyone else writing at The Times . He and other dual loyalists, to
be generous in describing them, should be exposed for what they are, which is the epitome of
the promoters of the too "passionate attachment" with a foreign state that President George
Washington once warned against. If the United States of America is not their homeland by every
measure, they should perhaps consider doing Aliyah and moving to Israel. We genuine
Americans would be well rid of them.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest,
a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign
policy in the Middle East. Website is <a://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org%2C/"
title="http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org%2C/"
href="http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org%2C/">www.councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is
<a:[email protected]" title="mailto:[email protected]"
href="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected].
Stephens wears his Jewishness on his sleeve and is pro-Israel far beyond anyone else
writing at The Times
Amazingly the Times has actually improved from 30 years ago, when their op-ed page included
Abe Rosenthal and William Safire, two of the most repulsive Zionists to ever appear in print.
I still remember Safire's campaign against Bobby Inman. Inman's 1994 press conference is
still a classic. (The good part begins at 23:00)
Grant Smith joins the show to talk about his upcoming event, The Israel Lobby & American
Policy Conference 2019, which will be held in Washington, D.C. on March 22. The conference
features many prominent guests and will explore the lobby's powerful influence over American
politics.
Donate to the show through Patreon , PayPal , or Bitcoin:
1Ct2FmcGrAGX56RnDtN9HncYghXfvF2GAh.
Joji Cherian on March 5, 2019 at 10:28 pm – Nothing will work.The entire
establishments are in Jewish lobby and Israel's pockets, Right from president, lawmakers,
media, finance.
More to it, Today Michel Bloomberg announced his candidacy.Suppose any one who does not
support him will be branded Anti Semitic!! Yes that is possible in today's America.
The only way for America is to decline and fall from the position of strength that is
today. Then the lobby will desert America.
The Israel Liability: Moral and Strategic Hazards of an Ill-Advised Alliance
by Maj. Danny
Sjursen, USA (ret.) Posted on
March 12, 2019 March 10, 2019 Blindly backing Israel has become an article of faith, a
civic religion even, for mainstream American politicians. Rarely do any dare publicly
question the costs and benefits of this decades-old relationship. Such hesitancy is
understandable. After all, to criticize Israeli policy, however mildly, is to risk near
certain rebuke and reflexive charges of anti-semitism. Denouncing Israel's current right-wing
government or its ongoing, half-century-long occupation of Palestinian Territories is all
risk and no reward – it's a potential career-ender or, at least, a ticket to the
margins of polite political discourse. Israel/Palestine is, as I've
long said , the veritable "third-rail" of U.S. foreign policy debate.
Nonetheless, regarding the U.S.-Israel nexus, the time is now for reassessment and
realignment. For far too long, Washington's bipartisan, reflexive backing of Israel has
damaged America's good name on the Arab (or Muslim) "street," and inflicted substantial
strategic costs in the Greater Middle East. As President Trump, ostensibly, gears up to
withdraw the US military from a series of regional quagmires, he should simultaneously
address one root of America's long-term "beef" with average Muslims –
Washington's no-strings-attached support for Israel.
He won't, naturally. Though Trump sometimes displays admirable
instincts to ditch military liabilities in the Mideast, he has only ratcheted up
America's iron-alliance with Israel. In a staggering, and internationally isolated, move, he
even moved
the US embassy to Israel into the heart of Jerusalem – recognizing the contested city
as the singular capital of the Jewish state. Look, Israel – like our other nefarious
frenemy, Saudi Arabia – buys tons of American weapons, and Trump-the-businessman
absolutely loves that. Besides, Trump and (recently
indicted ) Prime Minister Netanyahu are political peas in a pod – both face
potential corruption charges and rely on fear-mongering to whip up support from their right
wing bases.
The (not so) dirty little secret is that the American president could care less about the
plight of brown-skinned foreigners, whether along the US southern border or in Gaza and West
Bank refugee camps. Trump doesn't want to recalibrate America's relationship with the Muslim
world, he simply wants to (rightfully) cut the sunk costs of aimless US military
interventions in the region. Cynicism, even when the man is right – remains the
name of the proverbial game.
Unfortunately, here in the real world, nuance often prevails. As such, virulent hatred for
the US, and Islamist terrorist plots, will not meaningfully decrease until Washington at
least begins to address the roots of the problem and rebalances its one-sided
relationship with Israel. First off, it's the right thing to do, and recognizing Palestinian
plight would improve America's ethical image worldwide, which – like it or not –
still matters. Second, a pivot away from Israel's more unhinged policies in the occupied
territories is strategically sound, rendering American soldiers and citizens safer
.
To wit, this former army officer received countless "ear-fulls" about U.S.-Israel policy
from angry moderates in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Decorating dingy Baghdad apartments
and Kandahar hovels with pictures of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem was quite common
– these people cared about average Palestinians, even if their cynical national
leaders did not. Even former CIA Director and then General David Petraeus – not exactly
a liberal snowflake –
recognized way back in 2010 that US favoritism towards Israel and a stalled peace process
in the region endangered his troops across the Greater Middle East. He was, predictably,
lambasted by the
powerful US Israel lobby – but that didn't make him wrong ! Want to genuinely
protect the homeland and "the troops" from Islamist-inspired violence? Then insist that
Washington demonstrate some sense of equity and justice in Israel/Palestine.
And, as Israeli military atrocities and congressional lobbying clout reach a fever pitch,
now is the time to raise the alarm. Recent events indicate the moral and strategic
drift of Israeli policy and its unyielding defenders here in the US A recent United Nations
Human Rights Committee
report absolutely eviscerated the Israeli Army's heavy-handed response last year to
(generally) peaceful Palestinian protests along the Gaza border. The casualty statistics were
absurdly one-sided, raising serious questions about Israel's respect for proportionality.
Some 130 unarmed Gazans were killed by military gunfire – including 35 children –
and 6,000 others were wounded, as opposed to just two Israeli fatalities. Netanyahu's
government, of course, simply
dismissed the report outright.
Netanyahu, and his increasingly right-leaning administration, face their own problems.
Israel's Attorney General has
recommended that "King Bibi" be criminally indicted in three separate corruption cases,
this coming just before the prime minister's reelection campaign. Bibi is a liability for the
US; he's politically fragile and his intransigent militarism is increasingly unhinged.
Moreover, in years past, Netanyahu has proven willing to meddle in
American politics – addressing the US Congress in the midst of previous election
campaigns – which would most certainly be publicly decried if the perpetrator was
Russian!
Unfortunately, Netanyahu's shenanigans and Israel's transgressions receive little
criticism here in the "land of the free." The Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC)
lobbying organization still exerts significant power in Congress. Need proof? Consider that
rather than debating allegations of Israeli military aggression or Netanyahu's unceasing
– if illegal – settlement enterprise in Palestinian territory, the US Senate
instead passed
an unprecedented violation of Americans' free speech. This bill makes it illegal for
US citizens and groups to "boycott" Israeli institutions or otherwise actively support the
growing worldwide BDS (Boycott, Divest, Sanction) movement intended to pressure Israel to end
its half-century-long occupation of Palestinian lands.
Nor is this some sort of partisan, Republican scheme hatched in a right-wing think tank.
Mainstream Democratic Party leaders – think Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer – more
than displayed their (literal and figurative) investment in Netanyahu's audacious cause
recently when they publicly rebuked freshman congresswoman (and Muslim) Ilhan Omar after she
mildly
criticized Israeli policy and its American lobbyists' power in Washington. It appears
that free speech only qualifies as a constitutional right so long as Israel is not the
subject!
Ethics aside for a moment, Israel – by occupying much of the West Bank, blockading
Gaza, and maintaining growing Jewish settlements in the Palestinian Territories – is
in violation of international law . UN Resolutions 191 (protecting the right of return
of Palestinian refugees) and 242 (requiring Israel's withdrawal to its pre-1967 borders)
remain in effect, and as such – regardless of the nature of sometimes violent
Palestinian resistance – Israel maintains an extralegal rogue occupation of foreign
territory.
As the US continues to wail about Iranian, North Korean, and Chinese transgressions on the
world scene, Washington demonstrates its hypocrisy by ignoring Israeli violations. There
appear to be two standards of international behavior: one that applies to the "protected
class" of American partners, and another for everyone else . And make no mistake,
global Muslims take notice and Islamist terror organizations cheer their resultant recruiting
windfall.
Additionally, if Trump is serious about extracting the US military from the Mid East,
Israel seems far from a supportive partner in that endeavor. Indeed, Netanyahu and his
entrenched policymakers would like nothing more than for the American Armed Forces to do
Israeli's bidding in Iran, Yemen, and Syria. It's the same old story: American blood for
Israeli power, as the Netanyahu tail deftly wags the Washington dog. It has to stop, lest the
US blunder its way into a new Iraq-style-quagmire in the region.
Finally, and embarrassingly, the United States is simply on the wrong side of history
here. Mark my words. Though there are meaningful distinctions, Israel today maintains a South
African-style apartheid
regime both within its borders and in the occupied territories. Palestinians live under
endless military occupation, lack basic civil and political rights, and suffer gradual land
theft courtesy of Israeli settlers.
Brown Palestinians are modern day black South Africans. It is not coincidental – if
unsurprising – that during the height of the 1980s international castigation of
apartheid, it was the United States and Israel (almost alone) that reliably
backed racist white
South Africa. Though that embarrassing tidbit of America's historical dishonor is
oft-forgotten, Washington's current shameful behavior in the Israel/Palestine conflict will
prove far more pricey.
We count the cost in American bodies, dollars, and credibility.
Danny Sjursen is a retired US Army officer and regular contributor toAntiwar.comHe served combat tours with
reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West
Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War,Ghostriders of
Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge. Follow him on Twitter at@SkepticalVet .
[ Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author, expressed in
an unofficial capacity, and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department
of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. government.]
"... "Omar has broken the taboo and sunlight is already flooding in. The Dems and US politics in general will emerge the better for the impending discussion." ..."
"... Is Jared a dual citizen? Trump's biggest donor in the last election, Sheldon Adelson will sell out the USA without batting an eyelid when it comes to Israel. ..."
Congresswoman Ilhan
Omar has caught intense flak over her comments questioning the influence of the Israeli lobby in
US foreign policy and the split allegiances of some Jewish-Americans. The vociferous attacks on
the Congresswoman coalesce around one theme, criticism of Israel equals antisemitism. This is a
consistent theme. Walt and Mearsheimer endured the same accusations when they wrote their essay,
"The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" in 2006. The attacks did not let up with the
publication of their book of the same name in 2007. At that time, Mearsheimer and Walt described
the Israel lobby as a loose coalition. Perhaps at that time it largely was a loose coalition
brought together as a counter against the ugliness of antisemitism. I think it was more than
that back then and it is certainly more than that now. It is a far reaching and powerful
phenomena largely consisting of a coordinated information operation run out of the Israeli
Ministry of Strategic Affairs to further Israeli government policies.
Al Jazeera has put
together an excellent series on this phenomena. The first piece of in depth investigative
reporting examined the activities of the Israel lobby in Britain entitled "The Lobby." They
followed this series up with "The Lobby - USA" covering the lobby's actions in the US in 2016.
So far I watched the first part of this four part series focusing on the campaign to derail the
BDS movement on the UC Davis campus and in Washington DC. This is how modern information
operations are conducted. The series was released by the Electronic Intifada rather than Al
Jazeera because Qatar censored the series after being pressured by Washington, Tel Aviv and
probably Riyadh.
-- -- -- -- -- -- --
"The Electronic
Intifada has obtained a complete copy of The Lobby – USA, a four-part undercover investigation
by Al Jazeera into Israel's covert influence campaign in the United States. We are releasing the
leaked film simultaneously with France's Orient XXI and Lebanon's Al-Akhbar, which have
respectively subtitled the episodes in
French
and
Arabic
.
The film was made by Al Jazeera during 2016 and was completed in October 2017. But it was
censored
after Qatar, the gas-rich Gulf emirate that funds Al Jazeera, came under
intense
Israel lobby pressure
not to air the film. Although Al Jazeera's director-general
claimed last month that there were outstanding legal issues with the film, his assertions have
been
flatly contradicted by his own journalists
."
"In March, The
Electronic Intifada was the
first to report
on any of the film's specific content. We
followed this in August
by publishing the first extract of the film, and
shortly after
Max Blumenthal at the Grayzone Project released others. Since then, The
Electronic Intifada has released
three
other extracts
, and several other journalists have watched the entire film and
written about it – including
Alain Gresh
and
Antony Loewenstein
. Now The Electronic Intifada can reveal for the first time that it
has obtained all four parts of the film."
(Electronic Intifada)
-- -- -- -- -- -- --
The first episode of
the series offers a graphic portrayal of a a modern information operation. It largely centers on
the activities of one Julia Reifkind, an American employed first by AIPAC and then by the
Israeli Embassy. She reported to the Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs (MSA) with its office
in the same building as the Israeli PM. On a daily basis she monitored BDS social media
communications and activity using pseudonyms. She gave the collected info to her Embassy boss
who transmitted the info back to the MSA. The MSA would pass instructions back to Rifkind
through the DC Embassy. She also conducted activities including direct IO action on the UC Davis
campus at the direction of the MSA. Dual allegiance my ass! She's an American citizen employed
as an Israeli intelligence and action agent. Her only allegiance is to Israel.
In all of Reifkind's
pro-Israeli activities, she probably didn't break any US laws, just Facebook TOS in using her
pseudonyms. What Al Jazeera did is what we should do. Expose this activity to the light of day.
At a minimum, we could be aggressively publicizing this Al Jazeera documentary. I don't blame
the Israeli government for conducting these intelligence and IO activities any more than I blame
Russia, China and others for undertaking these activities in their own interests. It's not war,
but we shouldn't sit back and let this stuff go on unchallenged. We should officially encourage
more of this kind of investigative reporting and commence a vigorous public awareness campaign
concerning this threat. Expose the vampire to sunlight and holy water. Beyond that, LEA, IC and
CYBERCOM elements should be tearing into foreign country's activities and capabilities in this
area without mercy. After all, it's not war.
In the case of
Israeli IO, we must work to break the idea that opposition to Israeli governmental policies and
actions is equivalent to antisemitism. Given the persistence of that idea and the lengths the
Israeli government goes to reinforce that persistence, this is a tall order. However, it must be
confronted. In this vein, I welcome those voices in the Democratic Party who are speaking out in
defense of Ilhan Omar. If it causes strife within the Democratic Party, so be it. Some fights
are worth the price.
TTG is a highly trained and experienced retired US Army psywar officer, SF officer and HUMINT clan
ops officer. IOW, he and I are similarly qualified colleagues. i asked him to research this because
of the now ever present theme in the media that criticism of Israel is both anti-Semitic and career
suicide.
I'll add that I spent near the last ten years of my career penetrating these kinds of
national IO and cyber activities. I know what several states have done in these fields and
are still capable of doing. In other words, I know what I'm talking about. One of the central
tenets of these PSYOP and influence ops is that basing them on total lies is a near guarantee
of failure. There has to be some truth to build on. In Russia's case, the divisions in US
society were and are real. In Israel's case, antisemitism is absolutely real, a real and ugly
threat to Jews everywhere and to Israel. It needs to be confronted and fought. At the same
time the Israeli government's cynical use of antisemitism to further their own hateful
policies is equally vile.
"In Israel's case, antisemitism is absolutely real, a real and ugly threat to Jews
everywhere and to Israel. It needs to be confronted and fought."
Can you be more specific?
The omnipresent charge of "antisemitism" has a chilling effect: the old lady who runs
the drycleaning shop is afraid to say anything lest she violate PC.
So precisely what are these "ugly threats to Jews everywhere" and who is committing
them?
In addition, I reject most of the definitions of antisemitism posted at the IHRA
website. Nobody has the right or authority to tell me that the logic that I apply to
evidence of history is not permissible.
For that matter, nobody has the right to tell me who I may or may not hate, or for what
reason. If it is not acceptable to constrain who a person may "love," as in homosexual
relations, then it is equally not acceptable to tell me who I may or may not hate. Both
are matters for my own moral sense and character.
If I do actual, physical harm to any person, there are laws that sanction those acts
and that can be employed to punish me.
My thoughts, however, are my own, and I reject any authority that presumes to constrain
them.
Neither Jews nor any other ethnic or religious or however-designated group is entitled
to exalted protection by laws that cover all men/women, if the affirmation, All are
created equal under the law, holds true.
I would suggest that the fastest way to a second holocaust is to keep telling people
that Jews are different from other people, Jews deserve safety more than other groups,
that you can't criticize Jews, Jews are gods chosen people etc, etc. When they are
singled out like that it breed resentment and paints a target on them.
How do you
eliminate
real
anti-Semitism? Admit Jews are just people like every one else.
Some are good people and some are monsters just like every other group of people on the
planet.
No known connection as Paul Harvey used to say but DOJ is going to spent time enforcing
the FARA requirements. Link may be dead so good luck.
https://www.nytimes.com/201...
Bravo for publicizing "The Lobby" TTG, frankly I am astonished YouTube haven't taken the videos
down yet.
I just wish to comment on your final paragraph. The
IHRA definition of antisemitism
(adopted by the State Department in 2010) now includes the
following: "
Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a
Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country
cannot be regarded as antisemitic.
". This IMO is not that unreasonable and offers 2 key
defenses to accusations of antisemitism when criticizing Israeli:
1) The State of Israel is of course a state comprised of people of many faiths and not simply a
"Jewish collectivity". Criticism solely directed at state policy cannot therefore fall within this
definition.
2) If another state introduces legislation to discriminate against a section of its population,
shoots dead unarmed children protesting at a border fence etc. it should, of course, be condemned
in the same terms.
Omar has broken the taboo and sunlight is already flooding in. The Dems and US politics in
general will emerge the better for the impending discussion.
Finally, I have said this here before and with your indulgence I will say it again: Israeli
state policy of conflating anti Zionism with antisemitism is profoundly dangerous. Criticism of
Israel will not stop, unless state policies change - and there is no sign of that. What will change
is the stigma of being labelled an antisemite, if it simply becomes synonymous with holding
legitimate views against an apartheid state. Do Jews everywhere really want to wake up one day in a
world where we have no separate way to identify real Jew-haters?
There is a perverse irony in this. The final example of antisemitism given by the IHRA is this:
"
Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
". By deliberately
seeking to dilute the definition of a hate crime, the MSA is holding Jews collectively hostage.
Israel has effectively made all Jews responsible for speaking up and challenging this policy before
it is too late. One must hope they now do so.
"Omar has broken the taboo and sunlight is already flooding in. The Dems and US politics in
general will emerge the better for the impending discussion."
Omar has also stated - in congress nonetheless - with certainty that US troops, while
furthering oppressive US policy, perpetrated a massacre of hundreds of civilians in Central
America in the 1980s and destroyed governments in the region. She represents a district that
the FBI has identified as the #1 jihadist recruitment center in the US. Before becoming a
congressional rep for that district she wrote pleas for leniency for young men caught with
fake passports trying to leave the country to join ISIS in Syria. She's just getting warmed
up.
If you believe that AIPAC causes the US to do things in the MENA that it wouldn't do
otherwise, then Omar is the last person you want calling it out. In time she will prove that
she is a true anti-Semite by anyone's standards and anti-USA. She will confirm everything
that AIPAC and their allies are saying about her recent words. She will have the reverse
effect from what TTG wants.
Perhaps the progressive congress could propose legislation that no members of congress can hold
duel citizenship. We can follow the example of our ally in that regard.
https://www.timesofisrael.c...
I would support such legislation. My intel sergeant still had his British passport and
considered himself a boyo from the bogs. The Group S2 kept asking him to drop/renounce his
British citizenship so he could get a TS clearance. This was in the early 80s. I don't know
if this was a government wide or Army wide policy at the time. In the 90s one of my ops
officers had a British passport, but that was forced on him simply because he was born while
his US citizen parents were stationed there. He had a TS clearance and we were in a black
SMU. I know the US now doesn't give a rat's ass about dual citizenship. Maybe that should
change for those in government positions. I'm surprised Trump, an avowed nationalist, hasn't
jumped on that band wagon.
Is Jared a dual citizen? Trump's biggest donor in the last election, Sheldon Adelson
will sell out the USA without batting an eyelid when it comes to Israel. While I'm on
the other side of the policy spectrum to Reps. Omar & AOC, I applaud Rep. Omar for
having the courage to challenge the prevailing orthodoxy on criticism of Israeli policy
and AOC for having the guts to back her.
Don't see any Republicans challenging the Israel ueber alles theme song.
As you know I am a dual US/Canadian national. But I was unaware of this when I held a
US clearance (all 50 or so compartments and SAPS) It really is a matter of decision by
someone way up high in the IC as to whether or not a dual can hold a US clearance at
any level.
Could Congress legislate eligibility requirements for congressional candidates or would that
require a constitutional amendment? Where do the states fit in with respect to Congressional
elections?
That's a good question. The oath of naturalization when becoming a citizen requires
renouncing all other allegiances.
https://www.uscis.gov/us-ci...
The only limitations on members of the House of
Representatives are stated in article 1 section 2. However article 1 section 5 states:
"Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and
qualifications of its
own member
s..."
I don't see why the house could not pass such a restriction for being a member and
refuse to seat those who don't comply.
How does renouncing all other allegiances work when religion is involved? Do you
think that a literal Christian renounces the belief in the Bible and the promised
Second Coming and all the associated prerequisite events that must occur in
Israel? Do you think that a Muslim like Omar or Tlaib renounces their religion
and belief in the supremacy and inevitability of the global Ummah?
I am curious
as to what Omar and Tlaib are going to say and do the next time some jihadis
raise hell. In the meanwhile, the Dem are helping them establish a law that says,
as Muslims, whatever their reaction, they can't be criticized anymore than Israel
can be. Sometimes enemy of your enemy is not your friend, but is worse than your
enemy.
Yet some nations will not recognize a renunciation by their citizens of their
citizenship.
You also have the situation where someone born in the US also has
foreign citizenship. For example, a US citizen born in the US to a French citizen
mother is also a French citizen. There is no naturalization involved and thus no
renunciation of that French citizenship either.
Finally, though the US may not recognize dual citizenship, the US has no
authority to strip away or revoke the foreign citizenship. That would only lie
with the foreign nation, as above, France.
No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty
five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not,
when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.
Those are the constitutional requirements. Changing the requirements would require
an amendment imo.
On a related matter, I also think the various proposals circulating in Congress to
require that presidential candidates furnish their tax returns are also
unconstitutional on their face in the absence of an amendment. The constitution sets
forth the requirements for presidential eligibility, not Congress.
I am still trying to figure out how the MSM accepts the narrative that accusing non-Jewish
Congressman of supporting Israel because they are being paid off by lobbyists is an 'anti-Semitic
meme'. Many have accused Congressman of being in the pockets of lobbyists over many different
topics. It is hardly a 'meme' uniquely applied to Jews. It is as common a statement as 'save money
by cutting wasteful govt spending'.
I disagree with her, to rightwing Republicans like Pence,
Cotton, and Rubio, suporting Israel is a labor of love.
My posts on the lack of critical thinking in the MSM are redundant. I am still in mourning over
it because without these fools being on their game there is no accountability until circumstances
imposes one on us.
Yep. Plenty of people in Congress and other positions of power would support Israel 100% due
to purely religious convictions and a sense of making good on what happened in the past in
Europe. Conversely, I have to believe that Omar is also acting out of religious convictions.
She has made statements that tend to confirm that motivation. As Col Lang has taught over the
years, ideology is a stronger and deeper motivator than "the Bejamins". AIPAC offers money.
However, there is money available from many sources. Ideology determines from which source
the money will be accepted. The whole, "AIPAC and Israel, as a clan with only loyalty to
themselves, are undermining the USA" sounds awfully close to what Hitler had to say about
Jews.
This is what is so tragic (and I use that word in the Sophoclean sense) about the
motivations and forces at work here. The doubtless very smart folk at the MSA are in
real danger of outsmarting themselves on a grand scale. The label of "antisemite" has
become a
Wunderwaffe
to be used in ever broader attempts to quash groups
opposing Israeli policy. Liberal elites and their tame media have seen its
effectiveness and have adopted the same tactic to counter anti Establishment movements
such as the Labour party and the Gilets Jaunes. It is like a biological weapon that has
got out of hand. But where it is not lethal, an immunity will gradually build up in
target populations. A catastrophic backlash is the logical outcome, unless it can be
got under control.
This is a battle that's becoming daily more important. I started tweeting warnings to the Justice
Democrats some time back that the same anti-Semitism fraud being used to attack UK Labour was headed
their way and now it's arrived... Donald Trump accusing the Democrats of being anti-Semitic and the
attacks on Ilhan Omar are the Confederates opening fir on Fort Sumter...
Philip Giraldi has written an excellent examination of a number of these issues:
"The Growing Anti-Semitism Scam"
by Philip Giraldi, 2019-02-19
Parts of his article:
Congressional votes professing love for Israel notwithstanding,
the fact is that
there is a massive, generously funded effort to
corrupt America's government in favor of Israel
.
And regarding charges of anti-Semitism:
Former Israeli Minister
Shulamit Aloni
explained how it is done
"Anti-Semitic" "its a trick, we always use it."
A very good explanation by TTG. The main issue about Ilhan Omar which is ignored is that it is a
matter of protected speech, core political speech, free expression, or whatever term is desired.
Everything she has said is 100% protected speech, and those persons excoriating her -- especially
those who are lawyers -- whether Jewish or not, know that. I have yet to hear an authentic
recording, if there is one, of what she said about "allegiance", and how accurate a use of language
it was.
Three more issues of course are what foreign policy should be as to all foreign
countries, including Israel; who does lobbying and seeks to influence the U.S. government and
politicians; and where the money comes from and goes to for the lobbying and efforts at influence.
As has been said inside and outside of "the law", the answer to speech that is disliked is more
speech.
The House resolution is H.Res. 183. As of about 5:23 p.m., eastern time, I have not found a copy
of it. There apparently was 40 minutes of "debate", and now a vote is going on--
5:05:06 PM H. Res. 183 On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended
Roll Call 108 - 2/3 Yea and Nay vote pending.
4:02:28 PM H. Res. 183 DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 183.
4:02:26 PM H. Res. 183 Considered under suspension of the rules.
"...I have yet to hear an authentic recording, if there is one, of what she said about
"allegiance", and how accurate a use of language it was..."
Go to about 1:03:30 in the
video at the bottom of the article to hear that particular sentence. The transcript of that
section of the
Busboys and Poets
event provided seems accurate and adds the necessary
context.
What Did Ilhan Omar Say? Here's the Full Transcript of Her Response to a Question about
Anti-Semitism [Institute for Policy Studies]
Thankyou TTG for the video links. The four episodes run consecutively from Youtube so I
accidentally on purpose binge-watched all four parts. Apart from the main topic of the expose,
several things stood out:
The ease in which the AJ reporter managed to infiltrate the various anti-BDS groups and the high
quality of the surreptitiously recorded AV.
The way the targets 'sang like canaries' to above reporter with the minimum of prompting.
I'm the polar opposite of an expert in these matters but it seems like the actions of the 'lobby'
(the collecticn of various groups that promote Israel and denigrate Israeli opposition) have the
these faults:
Belief that they are untouchable and above the law (familiarity breeds contempt).
Belief in their own bullshit; i.e. those that espouse lies begin to believe them.
An uncritical view of what may happen in the future. Altough I will concede that several lobbiests
admitted the they had lost the BDS youth battle.
There is no question that the 'controller' of these affairs is the Israeli government further funded
by wealthy US citizens (semi-citizens?).
My belief is that Israel is playing a very dangerous game courting the US in the way they are. The
time will come when the Alderson"s et al are gone, youth have taken up new causes and goverments
change. Human or natural events could trigger a rapid collapse in their society. They would have
only themselves to blame for this. There is still time for a correction however, whatever that
maybe.
RW
it's not war, OK.
But seems to me that Reifkind work as "an American citizen employed as an Israeli intelligence and
action agent " can be labeled as treason ?
Or did I miss something ?.
It's not war, nor is is espionage since no state secrets are involved. We are also not at war
with Israel so it cannot be legally called treason. I think the most applicable crime is a
violation of FARA. Perhaps we may see a more draconian application of the FARA statutes going
forward.
All major browsers allow you to personalize a website's font. You can set your browser to
change the font to something different from the original display. Here's a guide on how to do
it in Firefox:
https://support.mozilla.org...
The comic sans font has grown on me over the years. I am fully aware that it is more
appropriate for use in graphic novels or comics for perfectly logical typesetter and
design reasons. Unfortunately, I don't have the time or drawing skills to present
articles as graphic novels. I wish I did. That would make for a truly wonderful SST.
I watched Episode 2 last night. It is plain as day 1)You must support Israel or your career will be
destroyed as a politician - Bernie Sanders can criticize Israeli and get away with it because he is
Jewish - the lone exception. 2)Their(AIPIC,etc.) influence over the media is complete especially
illuminating was the guy bragging about their control of the Washington Post editorial team. 3)
They are super organized and basically control our House of Representatives, Senate, and by
extension policy of the Executive branch. 4) They control the State Department policy/positions on
any issue dealing with the Middle East or Israeli 5) The chances of AIPIC, etc. finding a candidate
to challenge Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) in a primary is 100% since she spoke the truth and if history
is any guide she loses due to their complete control of the narrative 6) Probably true for AOC and
Rashida Tlaib, in fact an AIPIC representative already suggested they will not be around in a few
years. 6) They were a significant driving force pressuring United States politicians to invade Iraq
in 2003 based on the WMD lie 7) I have zero respect for the House or the Senate, cowards all
1) Some supporters of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar say that she did not mention Jews when she
questioned dual loyalties and that she was actually referring to congress members who accept AIPAC
support and vote as AIPAC directs.
2) I think that the power of AIPAC flows in part from its alignment with the
military-industrial-propaganda complex in the US and also with certain strains of American
Christianity. If AIPAC demanded demilitarization and a cessation of US intervention in the Middle
East (for example Syria and Libya) and asked for huge sums of money for purchasing Chinese
industrial goods rather than US military goods, wouldn't much of its base in the US turn on it?
"... While Tom Friedman wrote in the Times that Ilhan Omar is endangering the bipartisan consensus on Israel, and she's a bigot. ..."
"... Friedman went over Omar's statements on BDS, which he views as "code for wanting to get rid of Israel." While he is, he says, "devoted to Israel as a Jewish democracy," in our "ancestral homeland." And P.S. the ethnic cleansing needed to keep it that way is fine. ..."
"... It is good to have the lines so clarified. Omar– who says she supports a two-state solution– is now a hero of the progressive left, including many Jews. She has stood tall throughout the controversy, refusing to apologize, made Nancy Pelosi seem like a heavy, and the Congress look like a proof of her own diagnosis in its rush to condemn her. ..."
"... Ilhan Omar promptly got backing from progressive candidates in the Democratic presidential primaries, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Kamala Harris. While Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar and Cory Booker all criticized her. ..."
In the last election cycle, it was demoralizing to watch Hillary Clinton promise Benjamin
Netanyahu she'd take the Israel relationship to the
"next level" if she became president and her party platform committee shoot down one
resolution after another about Jerusalem and the occupation and settlements, sponsored by
Bernie Sanders' forces.
Those days are now over. Thanks in large part to the bravery of Rep. Ilhan Omar of
Minneapolis and the organizing of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign,
progressive Democrats who hate the occupation and even imagine equal rights for Palestinians at
last have a place inside the Democratic Party, and the party leadership feels the need to
reckon with that force. This week it had to alter a resolution initially aimed at smacking down
Omar for her remarks critical of Israel and the lobby so as to broaden its concerns.
Palestine Legal calls it a victory:
Thanks to thousands of activists mobilizing in support of Rep. Ilhan Omar, House Democrats
were forced to rewrite a resolution meant to condemn her for statements she made challenging
the Israel Lobby, falsely represented as antisemitic.
Politico agrees that "It was a clear-cut victory for Omar and her allies on the left."
younger Democrats rallied behind Omar and objected to her being singled out, and the
party's leadership, desperate to defuse the situation, finally settled on a catch-all version
of the resolution condemning all forms of hate speech
The new era is heralded angrily by Donald Trump and Tom Friedman. Today Trump made an appeal
to Israel-supporting Jews to come into the Republican Party and away from the anti-Semites.
The Democrats have become an anti-Israel party, they've become an anti-Jewish party, and I
thought that vote was a disgrace. And so does everybody else if you get an honest answer The
Democrats have become an anti-Israel party, they've become an anti-Jewish party, and that's
too bad.
While Tom Friedman wrote in the Times that Ilhan
Omar is endangering the bipartisan consensus on Israel, and she's a bigot.
Everything I have heard from her leads me to conclude that she dislikes Aipac because she
dislikes Israel, because she does not really believe the Jewish people have a right to an
independent state in their ancestral homeland.
Friedman went over Omar's statements on BDS, which he views as "code for wanting to get rid
of Israel." While he is, he says, "devoted to Israel as a Jewish democracy," in our "ancestral
homeland." And P.S. the ethnic cleansing needed to keep it that way is fine.
It is good to have the lines so clarified. Omar– who says she supports a two-state
solution– is now a hero of the progressive left, including many Jews. She has stood tall
throughout the controversy, refusing to apologize, made Nancy Pelosi seem like a heavy, and the
Congress look like a proof of her own diagnosis in its rush to condemn her.
In 2012 Barack Obama could crush this movement when it rose on the floor of the Democratic
convention to say Jerusalem is not Israel's capital. Today no Democrat who ignores the movement
is safe. Ilhan Omar promptly got backing from progressive candidates in the
Democratic presidential primaries, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Kamala Harris.
While Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar and Cory Booker all criticized her.
Tim Alberta at Politico writes that Omar progressives are the Tea Party of the Democrats,
and the party is "long overdue for an ideological reckoning."
Democrats are dangerously close to entering into their own fratricidal conflict .
And Omar isn't shying away from it. "I am certainly not looking to be comfortable, and I
don't want everyone necessarily to feel comfortable around me," she told me, a mischievous
smile tugging at her lips. "I think really the most exciting things happen when people are
extremely uncomfortable."
Can you even imagine Pelosi saying what she said to a rightwing Israel
lobby group last year: "If this Capitol crumbled to the ground, the one thing that would
remain would be our commitment to [Israel]."
The biggest loser in this disruption is the Israel lobby. Even Tom Friedman comes out
against AIPAC, in his need to condemn Omar; and the organization's image has suffered from its
alliance with Trump. The renegade Jewish group IfNotNow is calling on all
Democratic presidential candidates not to attend the policy conference in Washington later
this month because AIPAC supports settlements.
As for the Israel lobby of the Democratic Congress, J Street has more power than it's ever
had but it is inheriting a mess. J Street had lined up with the Democratic leadership on the
earlier version of the resolution aimed at Ilhan Omar, and joined right in the finger-pointing:
"Harmful language that echoes long-standing stereotypes and anti-Semitic tropes concern us
deeply."
Last night on PBS Jeremy Ben-Ami aimed his main criticism at those who "weaponize"
anti-Semitism charges so as to seek to eradicate criticism of Israel. He seemed to echo the
non-Zionist young Jews of IfNotNow, who write:
three days ago, it seemed inevitable that Speaker Pelosi and Democratic Leadership were
going to allow conservative members of their caucus publicly weaponize antisemitism to
intimidate a member of their own caucus because of opposition to Israeli policy.
We are in a new era where criticism of unjust Israeli policies is not simply equated with
antisemitism. That is a victory.
The "overwhelming majority of Democrats in Congress support the U.S.-Israel relationship," a
conservative Democratic lobby group claims, and that seems true. As much as Batya
Ungar-Sargon's claim that 92 percent of Jews are
Zionists . But the devil is in the details, and as Allison Deger noted , the
Gallup poll this week makes clear that sympathy for Israel is sliding in the Democratic Party,
with Democratic liberals sympathizing nearly as much with Palestinians as with
Israelis.
Feb. 2019 Gallup survey of World Affairs showing American liberal Democrats plummeting in
their sympathy for Israelis over Palestinians.
The percentage of Democrats siding more with Israel fell less sharply, from 49% to 43%;
however, today's figure approaches the lowest level of Democratic partiality toward Israel
since 2005.
In terms of recent changes, however, most of the decline in net sympathy for Israel has
occurred among liberal Democrats, from +17 in 2013-2016 to +3 in 2017-2019. What this means
is that nearly as many liberal Democrats now sympathize more with the Palestinians (38%) as
with the Israelis (41%), with the rest favoring neither side or unsure.
There has been one headline after another since the 2018 elections saying that Israel has never been
so divisive in modern political history. This week brought proof that the Democrats are
officially divided; and the question of American support and why is sure to be in the center
ring of the 2020 primary process– a "litmus test" for young Jews.
I thought we were going to get this debate 13 years ago when The Israel Lobby was published.
But the writers of that book were smeared and you had to read the book in brown covers in D.C.,
and it has taken that long for the discussion to get into the Capitol, thanks in great measure
to the BDS campaign.
Next thing you know, we might even discuss Palestinian human rights!
"... Our first president had it right. Keep away from entanglements with other countries. The entanglement with Israel has turned into one of the costliest and most damaging relationships in history. ..."
"... In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. ..."
"... So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. ..."
"... Israel didn't own US foreign policy until after the Cold War was over. That was when US foreign policy stopped being driven an external rival and started being driven by special interest groups and their lobbyists. Ironically, the situation might shift back as Cold War 2.0 picks up steam and the US finds that it can't afford to indulge Israel anymore. ..."
"... Not only "ally" and "alliance" are overused and under-defined, but also "adversary" and "enemy", in the cases of Iran or Russia or other countries. ..."
"... Most often "adversary" means one of a) not bending over for US capitalists, or b) opposing bad US intent. Rarely has to do with the US' publicly proclaimed interests such as democracy and freedom and stopping terrorism. ..."
"... While this is all true, I'm not sure the politicians who insist on giving Israel aid and special status necessarily believe all they say about the "alliance" being in the best interest of the US. Rather they are aware it is in their political interest to support Israel because there's lots of donor money to be had, and any votes against the interest of Israel are punished in the politician's next election ..."
Andrew Sullivan
comments
on the U.S.-Israel relationship and the role of "pro-Israel" lobbying groups in our politics in a new
essay. There are several things that I think Sullivan gets wrong, but perhaps the most significant and pervasive error
in the piece is his repeated description of the relationship an "alliance." He notes that the U.S. gets nothing in
return for the extensive military and diplomatic support that it provides, he acknowledges that the U.S. "suffers
internationally" on account of its close relationship with Israel, and he marvels at how badly its government under
Netanyahu has behaved towards the U.S.
Nonetheless, he writes, "I would defend the alliance despite this, because of
my core belief in a Jewish state." The trouble with all this is that there is no alliance and Israel is not our ally.
Its government does not behave as an ally does, it has never fought alongside U.S. forces in any of our foreign wars,
and its interests are not aligned with ours as an ally's should be. There is no formal treaty and no binding obligations
that require our governments to do anything for the other.
There are few words in U.S. foreign policy debates used more frequently and with less precision than ally and
alliance. Our politicians and pundits use these terms to refer to almost every state with which the U.S. has some kind
of security relationship, and it always grossly exaggerates the nature and extent of the ties between our governments.
The exaggeration in Israel's case is greatest of all because it is routinely called our
"most important ally"
in the region, or even our
"most cherished ally"
in all the world. These are ideological assertions that are not grounded in any observable reality.
Dozens of other states all over the world are better allies to the United States than the "most cherished ally"
is, and they don't preside over an illegal occupation that implicates the U.S. in decades of abuses and crimes against
the Palestinian people living under that occupation, but none of them enjoys the lockstep, uncritical backing that this
one state does. The effect of this constant repetition is to make the U.S.-Israel relationship seem extremely important
to U.S. interests when it is not, and that serves to promote the
"illusion of an
imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists."
It is this illusion as much as anything
else that prevents a serious reassessment of the relationship.
Israel is one of America's regional clients, and it is the one that the U.S. indulges more than any other, but
that is all that it is.
As such, it receives far more support than it needs to and far more than makes sense for
the U.S. to give, and the overwhelming political support that the relationship has is out of all proportion to the value
of the relationship to the United States. In fact, like several other regional clients Israel has increasingly become a
liability for the U.S., and the relationship should be changed accordingly.
Most Americans have no idea what we're doing over there, so the special
interests, the big money people, they tend to dominate what our government does. Later, when it hits home, as
it did on 9/11, it's too late.
Our first president had it right. Keep away from entanglements with other countries. The entanglement with
Israel has turned into one of the costliest and most damaging relationships in history. It is deeply implicated
in what has become the longest series of wars we've ever fought, and we got nothing in return.
That seems to be setting too high a standard for "ally." Weaker states always have less to offer the more
powerful states that have made commitments to support or defend them. Maybe most of our "allies" have been only
"regional clients" if seen in that perspective.
The relatives of those killed on the USS Liberty may well find themselves in agreement with the claims made in
this article:
Secretary of State Dean Rusk:
"I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink Liberty
precluded an assault by accident or some trigger-happy local commander. Through diplomatic channels we refused
to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was
outrageous."
In an alliance, both parties have obligations and both parties have benefits. Exactly what are the benefits to
the US from this relationship? What do we get out of the deal?
I wish that someone from AIPAC would come out
with a statement as to exactly what the US gets out of this rather one sided relationship.
Excerpt from George Washington's Farewell Address:
In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies
against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of
them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated.
The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a
slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray
from its duty and its interest
So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for
the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common
interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in
the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification.
It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to
injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained,
and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal
privileges are withheld.
And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation),
facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with
popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for
public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption,
or infatuation.
Amazingly prescient. That Nitwit Marco Rubio and his ilk are completely oblivious to the wisdom and insights
of the Founders is more than disturbing.
And given President Washington's guidance in his last paragraph here – yes, follow the money
"The United States is an ally of Israel, but Israel is no ally of the United States."
Israel is a
normal country that seeks its own interests. We're the ones who don't.
Remember when the pro-Israel types used to gravely assure us how valuable Israel would prove to be if we
ever got into a Middle East war? Then 9/11 happens, and Israel proved to be nearly completely worthless. Not
just for the initial stages, but for the next
eighteen years
.
Worse than worthless, really, because our Israel entanglement was one of the main reasons the terrorists
attacked us in the first place. And the money spigot that was turned on after the Camp David accords? Congress
never turned it off. Forty years later, not only has Israel never fought by our side, it has gotten more cash
out of us than any country ever got from another country in recorded history.
Israel didn't own US foreign policy until after the Cold War was over. That was when US foreign policy stopped
being driven an external rival and started being driven by special interest groups and their lobbyists.
Ironically, the situation might shift back as Cold War 2.0 picks up steam and the US finds that it can't afford
to indulge Israel anymore.
Andrew Sullivan starts his essay by calling Rep. Omar's recent statements anti-Semitic before he goes on to
speculate how the debate about Israeli influence could be made more appropriate (i.e. toothless).
The Israeli
lobby won't lose any of it's malign influence until American politicians are shamed and harshly criticized for
not resisting it. Mild criticism, pulling your punches and declining support for outspoken people like Rep.
Omar isn't going to cut it.
It is often subtle differences in alliances (putting aside the legal definition) that can have catastrophic
consequences. These come down to incompatible interests, objectives. In any US/Israeli conflict with Iran, it
should be remembered that Israel (its stated position) has limited aims: protect its own borders and remove all
threats from surrounding territories. If Tehran agrees to remove its missiles and troops from Syria and rein in
its proxies Israel might withdraw from the campaign, having achieved its realistic objectives. But Washington's
interests – one can only assume – are broader, extending to the whole Middle East. So would be left to fight on
without an important military ally – whatever that means. A trap many great powers fall into is the syndrome of
the tail wagging the dog. As we hurtle toward another world war we should look back at history for some
guidance, if it is not already too late.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
I agree with the analysis, but the true dilemma only begins where the author leaves off.
How should the relationship be altered? Should US material support for Israel substantially decrease, even
if this might have a real effect on the security of the Israeli state?
Is leaving Israel vulnerable a real political possibility?
I had an interesting dinner conversation with a Major in the Israeli army (the uncle of a Jewish friend) some
time back. I asked him how long he expected Israel to survive since the demographics of the region were totally
against it. He told me that Israel would survive as long as it was of use to America. I unfortunately didn't
ask him what use Israel was to the USA.
One thing that has always bugged me is the phrase "the peace process." You either are at peace or you are
not. It is not a process.
Bravo! This needs to be said until our public wakes up to the reality of our subservience to a foreign power.
As Manafort slinks off to the penitentiary we need ask, when will AIPAC be judged by the same standard?
This is flat out false and misleading. First, Israel offered to send troops to both the first and second Iraq
wars, but the United States did not want them. Arab countries that joined those efforts would have dropped out.
Second, the United States has long quietly used bases in Israel. Again, they did not want this publicized for
fear of antagonizing Arab countries.
One thing that has always bugged me is the phrase "the peace process." You either are at
peace or you are not. It is not a process.
That's far too binary. Much of the world is neither at war nor truly at peace: India and Pakistan, Russia
and Ukraine, the two Koreas. For a long time Northern Ireland, Colombia, Nicaragua, Angola and other places
were in the same condition. The absence of war doesn't necessarily mean peace exists.
"First, Israel offered to send troops to both the first and second Iraq wars, but the United States did not
want them. Arab countries that joined those efforts would have dropped out."
So Israel didn't want to be
useless, but it was. Not exactly a compelling point, not where American national interests and American lives
are concerned. The bottom line is that the rubber hit the road back on 9/11. Our NATO allies fought by our
side. Israel whiffed.
Quite beautifully expressed. AIPAC has mesmerized the American establishment to blindly support Israel under
any circumstances and to fight its useless and endless wars in the Middle East. Further, more than $3B in aid
plus military aid is funelled unconditionally to this parasitic nation to continue its oppression of the
Palestinians in the name of security. Now we're hearing drumbeats for a war against Iran, again at the behest
of the Netanyahu government. When will the American government ever come to its senses that Israel is not an
ally?
In street parlance, the United States is Israel's b**ch. Nothing more. Nothing less. And every honest person
knows it. Solzhenitsyn famously said to live not by lies. Admitting the fundamentally false nature between
the United States and Israel would be an excellent start toward no longer living by lies.
Daniel, thanks so much for saying what needs to be said. Israel has existed for over 70 years as a home for the
Jewish people. It's just sad that over the last several decades they have come to be the very overlords and
murderers they worked so hard to escape.
It's time to reset our relationship with Israel. It's time for all Jewish people, wherever they live to
reclaim the high moral ground they once had.
I have no idea how this can happen, but the US continuing to enable Israel's current government is not the
way.
Not only "ally" and "alliance" are overused and under-defined, but also "adversary" and "enemy", in the cases
of Iran or Russia or other countries.
Most often "adversary" means one of a) not bending over for US capitalists, or b) opposing bad US intent.
Rarely has to do with the US' publicly proclaimed interests such as democracy and freedom and stopping
terrorism.
While this is all true, I'm not sure the politicians who insist on giving Israel aid and special status
necessarily believe all they say about the "alliance" being in the best interest of the US. Rather they are
aware it is in their political interest to support Israel because there's lots of donor money to be had, and
any votes against the interest of Israel are punished in the politician's next election
All other countries resent Americans. Our so called Allies only placate us for their benefit. With that said
keeping your enemies close is good practice, getting too involved with other nations serves no US interest.
Currently only the Brits can be depended on. If they end up staying in the EU that to will then change. Best
example is seriously reviewing post WW 2 world bodies, UN , World Bank, IMF. etc etc . No longer functioning in
our interest.
Your arguments does not hold up to even a superficial inspection when the facts are reviewed.
First, the US has relationships with literally dozens of countries that also offered military support during
the first Gulf War and the Iraq wars. NONE of them receive even a tiny faction of the aid we give Israel every
year. None of them cost the US even a fraction of the military, economic and political capital we are wasting
on Israel.
2nd: the US maintains over 1000 military bases in over 100 countries around the world. There are at least 20
countries that have allowed major US military bases, in some cases for more than half a century that are larger
than anything Israel has ever allowed the US in Israel. Furthermore, the majority of the "bases" in Israel
which you mention are actually primarily Weapons storage depots which are designed to aid Israel more than they
are they US in times of war. Israel gets more US direct and indirect aid than nearly all these other countries
combined. And we get NOTHING in return.
The facts prove the relationship with Israel is relatively speaking, a very narrow one-way street. Critical
thinking, rational thought and plain old common sense tell anyone willing to stop and listen that this
"relationship" sinks and represents a Direct threat to US National Security and must be terminated NOW!
I have not problem with the US being Israel's ally even they Israel is not ours. My complaint is that we are
not a better ally in insisting that the Israel GOVERNMENT not engage in self-destructive actions like
permitting "settlements" in the Occupied Territories.
" they are going to follow the path of apartheid South Africa step by step they are going to become isolated, a
pariah state, delegitimized, very much like South Africa, they are going to be able to survive as long as US
supports them.
It's very interesting to look at the history of South Africa. You could pretty much replace the
word South Africa with Israel through the history. Back in 1960 roughly, the apartheid regime recognized that
it was becoming an international pariah.
We know now from declassified documents that the foreign minister
called the American ambassador and told him that he knew everyone was voting against them, but that as long as
the US was backing them, they did not care. That's pretty much what happened.
By 1988 and a few years beyond,
the US was still supporting S.A., strongly. Thatcher too, but it was mainly Reagan & the US US foreign policy
will have to change because of pressure from the bottom. Take South Africa.
It was popular pressure which
finally induced Congress & even businesses to begin to pull out of SA. It could not get to the executive.
Reagan vetoed congressional sanctions, but there was enough popular pressure for Congress to override the
vetoes. Reagan had then to violate the congressional legislature. Popular pressure did make a difference. "
–
Noam Chomsky in discussion with Ilan Pappe and Frank Barat in "On Palestine."
From the University of Chicago Magazine (believe it or not), October, 1999:
" who invented the Holocaust the first place? Who decided to capitalize the noun
"holocaust" and transform genocide into a political weapon and fund raising tool? "
" its message of an exclusivity in suffering-serving to promote a Zionist agenda ."
"His policies are bad, but many of the people who came before him also had really bad
policies. They just were more polished than he was," Omar said.
"And that's not what we should be looking for anymore. We don't want anybody to get away
with murder because they are polished. We want to recognize the actual policies that are behind
the pretty face and the smile."
The explosive comments about a man lionized by Democrats were only the latest in a series of
incendiary statements that have put the national spotlight on Omar, a Somali-American Muslim
who spent four years in a refugee camp in Kenya after her family fled the violence in their
homeland.
In February, her second month in office, Omar responded to a tweet about House GOP leader
Kevin McCarthy's threats to punish her and another congresswoman for criticizing Israel. "It's
all about the Benjamins baby," she tweeted, a line from a Puff Daddy song about $100
bills.
Critics said Omar was perpetuating a hateful trope about Jewish Americans and money.
She recently got into another hot mess after another tweet was slammed by some as
anti-Semitic.
The ensuing firestorm rattled the Democratic House majority and spurred days of
recriminations and tense negotiations that led to the compromise package condemning bigotry
that sailed through the House on Thursday, with only 23 Republicans voting against it.
The party's leftist wing, led by New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, said Omar was being
singled out when others at the highest levels of government had said things that were worse and
escaped censure.
More moderate Dems, including Jewish lawmakers such as New York's Eliot Engle, wanted the
resolution to focus only on anti-Semitism as a direct response to Omar's comment, which
questioned the loyalty of politicians who accept donations from pro-Israel PACs and
organizations.
Ultimately, after days of chaos and acrimony, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was able to unite
her caucus -- and box in a big majority of Republicans -- to back the compromise.
And Omar -- along with Rashida Tlaib of Michigan the first Muslim women in Congress -- said
she's willing to keep speaking out and be a Republican punching bag if it helps advance her
agenda, a prospect that likely makes many of her fellow Democrats cringe.
Seenator Bernie Sanders came to the defense of Representative Ilhan Omar as the Minnesota
congresswoman faced backlash over remarks that some perceived as anti-Semitic. Sanders said
there was a key difference between anti-Semitism and legitimate criticism of the Israeli
government.
The Vermont senator criticized House Democrats' reaction to Omar after she was heavily
condemned for her tweet that said: "I should not be expected to have allegiance/pledge support
to a foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress or serve on committee." Omar was
referring to Israel.
The comment, which has been rebuked
by members of her own party , was seen as exploiting anti-Semitic tropes and attacking U.S.
support of Israel.
In a statement, Sanders, who is a 2020 presidential candidate, said that while
anti-Semitism is a "hateful and dangerous ideology which must be vigorously opposed we must not
equate anti-Semitism with legitimate criticism of the right-wing, Netanyahu government in
Israel.
"Rather, we must develop an even-handed Middle East policy which brings Israelis and
Palestinians together for a lasting peace," Sanders said, reported HuffPost. "What I fear is
going on in the House now is an effort to target congresswoman Omar as a way of stifling that
debate. That's wrong."
Sander's statement came after senior Democrats had planned to vote on a resolution
condemning anti-Semitism, which was seen as a direct response to
Omar's comments . The vote was delayed as the House Foreign Affairs Committee rewrites the
resolution to include condemnation of all hate.
Kamala Harris, also a 2020 presidential candidate, also issued a statement defending Omar,
suggesting that the spotlight currently on the congresswoman "may put her at risk.
"We should be having a sound, respectful discussion about policy," Harris said, as reported
by HuffPost. "You can both support Israel and be loyal to our country. I also believe there is
a difference between criticism of policy or political leaders, and anti-Semitism."
Elizabeth Warren, another Democratic presidential candidate, expressed similar views in her statement defending Omar.
"We have a moral duty to combat hateful ideologies in our own country and around the world, and that includes both anti-Semitism
and Islamophobia. In a democracy, we can and should have an open, respectful debate about the Middle East that focuses on
policy," Warren said.
"Branding criticism of Israel as automatically anti-Semitic has a chilling effect on our public discourse and makes it harder to
achieve a peaceful solution between Israelis and Palestinians. Threats of violence-like those made against Omar-are never
acceptable."
Omar, who was forced to apologize for previous remarks in which she suggested that the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee (AIPAC) was paying politicians for their support of Israel, has defended her latest remarks.
"Being opposed to Netanyahu and the occupation is not the same as being anti-Semitic. I am grateful to the many Jewish allies
who have spoken out and said the same," she tweeted on March 2.
We need new leadership on the Democratic (and Republican, for that
matter) side of the aisle. If the Ilhan Omar saga has taught us anything, it's that AIPAC
(and Israel's) demand for fealty from Congress is unjust at best and traitorous at worst. The
entire episode surrounding the Russian hysteria has been a bait-and-switch to keep people
from discussing the undue influence of Zionism in Western governments everywhere.
The unwillingness of the Democrats to have real political discussion is also visible in
their attempt to subdue the new young House members who have come up with real new proposals
and ideas. The use of the Zionist lobby AIPAC and false claims of 'anti-semitism' against them
is especially
outrageous :
When Representative Ilhan Omar landed a coveted seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee,
Stephen Fiske began working the phones to Capitol Hill.
Alarmed by messaging that he saw as anti-Semitic and by Ms. Omar's support for the
boycott-Israel movement, Mr. Fiske, a longtime activist with the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee, began texting and calling his friends in Congress to complain. He is
hoping Aipac activists will punish Ms. Omar, a freshman Democrat from Minnesota, with a
primary challenge in 2020.
On Wednesday, House Democratic leaders will mete out one form of punishment : Spurred by
outrage over Ms. Omar's latest comments suggesting that pro-Israel activists "push for
allegiance to a foreign country," they will put a resolution condemning anti-Semitism on the
House floor.
'Anti-semitism', in the false sense of AIPAC and the Democratic leadership bound to it, is
anything that is not 100% in support of the racist state of Israel and the Zionism
ideology.
The resolution is aimed at House member Ilhan Omar who suggested that such automatic dual
loyalty is a problem. It also proves that she is right:
Ilhan Omar @IlhanMN - 20:01 utc - 3 Mar 2019
I am told everyday that I am anti-American if I am not pro-Israel. I find that to be
problematic and I am not alone. I just happen to be willing to speak up on it and open myself
to attacks.
Ilhan Omar will not be the only one to be targeted like that. The Lobby is aiming at
two more :
In Florida, Mr. Fiske said it was time for "pro-Jewish voices to speak up" about Ms. Omar and
two other Democratic freshmen who have been critical of Israel: Representatives Rashida Tlaib
of Michigan and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.
And he offered a prediction: "They are three people who, in my opinion, will not be around
in several years."
The leadership of the Democrats is not defending the three freshmen who proved that they can
attract and motivate young voters. It is actively helping the Lobby to oust them. The new
policies the newcomers stand for will likewise be discarded.
In Florida, Mr. Fiske said it was time for "pro-Jewish voices to speak up" about Ms. Omar
and two other Democratic freshmen who have been critical of Israel: Representatives Rashida
Tlaib of Michigan and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.
And he offered a prediction: "They are three people who, in my opinion, will not be
around in several years."
Despite Mr Fiske's bluster, only 2 of those 3 have been targeted. AOC has not. The
delightful Mr Fiske prolly threw her name in there in order to fend off any accusations of
Anti-Muslim bigotry/"Islamophobia".
But the fact remains AOC has not been targeted.
The other two were, however, immediately smeared by the presstitutes and AIPAC's bought
and paid for whores in Congress.
As Glenn Greenwald pointed out, it only took Congress a mere 48 hrs to whip together a
Congressional condemnation specifically targeting Omar.
The more that IPAC and it's related Israeli-First lobby groups push for the complete
uniformity and unquestioning compliance on all matters regarding the current racist, extreme
right wing Likud government of Occupied Palestine, the more that there will be these kinds
long overdue rebellion and constitutionally protected dissent.
Let these IPAC lobby enriched, ossified Demipubilicans censure anyone who dares to expose
their treasonous servitude to a wholly foreign (and some might say - hostile) entity. Their
day of rightful reckoning is soon coming in the form of a popular and progressive rebellion
that they can no longer threaten, destroy or monetize.
Odd (although on further consideration, maybe not so odd) that the US Democrats themselves
are in a similar bind as the British Labour Party does.
The pro-Israeli Klintonator Democrats are more or less equivalent to the Blairite faction
in British Labour and the younger generation of Democrats represented by Ilhan Omar is
equivalent to the grassroots British Labour Party that still supports Jeremy Corbyn.
Perhaps the way forward would be for Ilhan Omar and others supporting her and like-minded
Democratic politicians who actually put grassroots America first to split and form a new
party. A third party not held hostage by AIPAC, Southern Poverty Law Center and other
pro-Israeli agencies might attract enough voters from the old Democrats (and old Republicans
fed up with their party's grovelling to the pro-Israeli lobby) to be a real rival to Trump in
the 2020 Presidential elections.
Those of us who read MoA regularly will not be fooled by the current false narrative being
bandied about. Instead, what this incident's proving is the degree to which The Lobby
controls the Democrat Party's puppet strings. Omar's tweet b cites above--"I am told everyday
that I am anti-American if I am not pro-Israel. I find that to be problematic and I am not
alone. I just happen to be willing to speak up on it and open myself to attacks"--proves she
has more integrity than the entire D-party congressional membership combined. She's the one
proving to one and all that she stands by her oath of allegiance to Congress and her US
Citizenship by defending the Constitution from its enemies--including several hundred
treasonous members of congress. The Ds accuse Trump of Obstructing Justice; well, the Ds are
doing it too. Hell, the Ds made Speaker of the House a person who refused to do her sworn
duty and prevented others from doing theirs --That's TREASON!
But I guess we should just take this all in stride as the Outlaw US Empire hasn't had a
genuinely legitimate government--legitimate in that it obeys the Law of the Land--since 1945
when each POTUS has committed multiple impeachable offenses. So, to our newest
Troll--AOC=Fake--who really is the faker, the liar, the more dangerous: AOC, or Pelosi and
her Loyalty to Zionistan First crew? Nor is the Outlaw US Empire's populace fooled as much as
is thought.
Gallup's
Feb 2019 polling reports "Record High Name Government as Most Important Problem," and
when the chart at page-bottom is scrutinized, the overall percentage pointing to the federal
government as THE problem is beyond 85%, not the initial, "highest" 35%.
The next question then becomes the mandatory: What can we do about this deplorable
situation? I told james who asked the same question about Canada: Form another political
party based on the Rule of Law and fundamental Progressive Values. And I've repeatedly said
the same about the Outlaw US Empire. People seem to be as close to united as they'll ever get
as to what and where the problem exists, so it would appear the time's ripe for an Electoral
Revolt as neither Ds nor Rs are legitimate any longer.
What AIPAC and its paid-for-lackeys don't understand is that Ilhan Omar *wants* them to
attack her in this mad-dog fashion, because doing that brings before the voting public the
very point that she is trying to make.
Think about it: she is never, ever going to see a cent of Israel Lobby money. She is
never, ever going to be on the receiving end of any "support" from AIPAC. Never. Ever.
So she may as well speak her mind on this topic. Which she most certainly is.
That they would respond by attacking her so rabidly was inevitable, those attacks will
never stop, and so there is zero incentive for her to back down. She will double-down, and
then double-down again.
She can keep that up indefinitely, and every time she will be turning a spotlight on the
very thing that AIPAC wants to keep in the shadows. And they are helping her to do that,
because they have become so arrogant and so lazy that they do not understand when they are
taking aim at their own big toe.
And when AIPAC does what it always does - bankroll a Democrat challenger against her -
then she will finally have what she wants: a name and the face of an American politician who
she can hold up to the voting public and say: This! This is exactly what I am talking about,
because this douchebag has been paid to put loyalty to Israel above all else.
In closing I refer you to Robert Heinlein's 1973 novel "Time Enough for Love" and his
character Lazarus Long's thoughts on arguments
Not everybody has access to that old book, and not everybody would want to have it around.
An Amazon review -
Spoiler alert: The dude goes back in time and nails his own mom. I don't care how
speculative your fiction is, that's just gross.
Heinlein also has his hero L.L. making love to the twin clones of himself he has raised
from newborns. I tossed my own copy into the book donation box sometime last year. So perhaps
you ought to either find a link to the part you found relevant, or spend a few minutes typing
a few sentences to either copy or summarize what the old knucklehead had to say.
"they will put a resolution condemning anti-Semitism on the House floor" They're fucking bonkers. One of the cornerstones of a functioning representative democracy is
that anything can be said on the parliament's floor, without any fear of repercussions. These
fools are going back to the dark days of Tiberius and other arrogant Roman emperors who used
lese-majeste laws to go against their opponents, including taking down senators.
Besides, if I feel some Dems (with major assistance from GOP) can more or less take down
Omar and get away with it, going openly after Occasio-Cortez is political suicide, if not for
these specific representatives, at the very least for the Democratic party as such.
"One of the cornerstones of a functioning representative democracy is that anything can be
said on the parliament's floor, without any fear of repercussions."
Hahaha, In an AIPAC-less society that statement of your's might have had some
validity, but the US is not an AIPAC-less society now, is it?
And yes, anything CAN be said, but will it? There will be repercussions if so. That's no
reason AIPAC exists, after all.
Unz Review just posted this article about Ilhan Omar
Ilhan Omar's "Tropes" Are True (by Kevin Barrett)
"Some people just can't handle the truth. Case in point: America's Jewish Establishment
and the Shabbat goys on their payroll, who are all squealing like stuck pigs in response to
Rep. Ilhan Omar's pointed remarks about Jewish-Zionist power.
I wrote about Rep. Omar's first (February 10) Twitter outrage in the new issue of Crescent
Magazine:
"Ilhan Omar's 'all about the Benjamins' tweet, and the media feeding frenzy that followed,
unleashed an unprecedented exposé of Jewish-Zionist money power in America. .
In the past, the entire America Left, led by people like Noam Chomsky, has denied the
power of the Israel Lobby. Anyone who pointed out that Israel runs America's Mideast policy
through its Fifth Column, using its monstrous money power, was denounced with the obligatory
nonsensical slur "anti-Semite."
Even Walt and Mearsheimer's understated The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy (2007) was
vilified and marginalized.
But in the wake of Ilhan Omar's tweet, many voices that would normally denounce
"anti-Semitism" have instead admitted that Omar is right:
AIPAC's power really is "all about the Benjamins." The Nation, America's leading
Establishment Left magazine, published Israeli Jew Ady Barkan's confession "What Ilhan Omar
Said About AIPAC Was Right."
The Jewish Daily Forward responded with Peter Feld's "No, Ilhan Omar Is Not Anti-Semitic
For Calling Out AIPAC." Feld put it bluntly, "There are plenty of Jews, like me, whose
beliefs are voiced by Omar, not AIPAC."
Mehdi Hasan of The Intercept summed it all up, "There Is a Taboo Against Criticizing AIPAC
and Ilhan Omar Just Destroyed It."
On the other side of the political divide, Donald Trump called on Omar to resign. Good
luck with that one, Donnie!
Most Republicans, and quite a few Democrats, ritually waxed indignant in an effort to
please their Zionist paymasters -- ironically proving that Omar's tweet was accurate. Rarely
has the saying "if you're catching flak, you're over the target" been better
illustrated."
excerpt from Ilhan Omar's "Tropes" are True, by Kevin Barrett, Unz Review, March 5, 2019,
with over 220 comments
AIPAC's hysterical reaction to Ilhan Omar's comments was entirely predictable, yet it stands
as evidence that what she said was true. Identifying the interests of the United States with
those of Israel is a sign of dual loyalty. Sometimes those interests may align, but they are
not identical. Members of Congress do covet the Israel Lobby's support and fear its wrath.
Moreover, labeling criticism of Israel's government as anti-semitic is simply BS. Israel is
not synonymous with Jewry, and many diaspora Jews are highly critical of the Israeli
government. Those are plain and simple facts which no congressional resolution can change.
So you think Sanders is fake? Then you must think Tulsi Gabbard is stupid and fake too,
because Tulsi supported Sanders in 2016. Tell me something, if Tulsi lags behind with her
campaign and Sanders picks her as a running mate for the VP position, will you think him fake
then?
----------
Ilhan Omar is paving the way for justice. She's taking on the power establishment; she's
taking on the rulers like no one else has. She's a warrior who won't be muzzled, and those
yellow-belly Zionist shills in her party accusing her of heresy against their true religion,
Zionism, are trying to tie her to a stake, while Zionist Trump lights the match to make an
example of her. Hopefully she will not be silenced. She's making powerful enemies and
everyone must fight like hell to keep her in Congress.
Once upon a time I had a copy of everything Heinlein had ever written. But as time went by
I found I was outgrowing him. As of this moment I retain Double Star,Farmer in the
Sky, and Job: A Comedy of Justice. Turns out I'm not the only one turned off by
the way he handled the "romance" in Door into Summer .
@ james #37
Some blogs have the forum nanny set at a hair-trigger level, so I was being cautious. It
appears this one isn't that sensitive. :)
She's making powerful enemies and everyone must fight like hell to keep her in Congress.
This is true, but the only people who really matter are the constituents back in her home
district. As of this moment I'm going to give them credit for being a bit brighter than the
average US citizen. Judging from the types we here in Indiana constantly send to Washington,
the average Hoosier surely has a 2-digit IQ. Obviously this can't be right, but that's the
way it looks!
Russian today yidish tommorow , Mar 5, 2019 8:19:29 PM |
link
Another article on the same day, by another influential news outlet on the internet allegedly
Russian funded and operated, not being pro-Trump this time but instead pro-Israel... that is
kinda celebratory about ... the first ...can you guess people? First Israeli flag (sort of -
its a plaque) on the Moon. Israel landed its first piece of equipment on the Moon with a
screenshot of the equipment and Australia slowly rotating in view in the background according
to the "Russian" site.
Brought to you by the same people that brought the Ukrainian civil war, the war in Syria,
(and only God knows what else holds the future) in full unbiased detail right in front of
you, perfectly tailored and formated for your modern electronic media internet enabled
devices.
I just contacted my district representative, Jared Huffman and Speaker Nancy Pelosi asking
them not to censure Ilhan Omar tomorrow. Please take the time to email your representative
and Speaker Pelosi in defense of Ms. Omar and urge your friends to do the same. Thanks
Subtitled: The likely next Speaker urged those attending not to pay 'attention to a few
people who may want to go their own way,' apparently referring to new members such as Rashida
Tlaib of Michigan and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota
Since a 'shunning' strategy didn't work, Speaker "Nancy" is getting out the tar and
feathers. With any luck Representative Omar will do penance by crawling across a hundred
yards of broken glass to kiss the enormous foundation stones surrounding the grounds of the
Dome of the Rock. Those foundation belonged to the Roman Fort in Jerusalem, but until the
subhuman Palestinians are gone that is not to be said aloud!
"Israel Lobby Rebuts Omar's Claims About Its Immense Influence By Exerting Its Immense
Influence" Best observation of this contrived blow-up I've seen yet, and from the other and
underside of the planet!
This is a false contradiction! It took me a while to understand the nature of what is
called "anti-Semitism" since I grew up in a country where you can easily encounter "the
original anti-Semitism", and in USA, UK etc. the main issue is "new anti-Semitism". Kind of
when I was surprised that Germany had a law that a beer may be produced only from barley
malt, hops and water. Why legislating the obvious? Well, it is not obvious at all, in USA
beer indeed contains water, but barley malt and hops are not to be found in a "normal
beer".
Back to new (and now, normal) anti-Semitism. It is true that paleo-anti-Semites and
anti-anti-Semites can make similar or identical claims in substance, but they diametrically
differ in the spirit. It is so obvious that nobody explains it, kind of like 2 + 2 = 4, one
can actually prove it knowing set theory, set-theoretical definition of natural numbers etc.,
but this while everybody know that 2 + 2 = 4 (at least, a plurality of Congress), few could
prove it. Similarly, everybody knows what is wrong when someone claims that AIPAC is a
powerful lobby even though it is OK if AIPAC is very proud of its powerful status. But some
play semantics and pretend that they do not know, or genuinely are at loss of words.
There is a list of symptoms of anti-Semitism, and indeed, it may be confusing. The
cardinal feature of (new) anti-Semitism is BEGRUDGING. If you are proud that AIPAC is a very
powerful (or most powerful) lobby, or admire them for this reason, it is OK. But it is not OK
if you tell about it hinting that it makes you unhappy. And if the reports are true, Rep.
Omar was genuinely unhappy (or worse, trying to be popular iin her own district).
@49 James Damn straight they made a huge mistake attempting to muzzle her so aggressively.
Where the Lobby has miscalculated is in thinking she made a "mistake" in pointing a
spotlight at their corrosive influence and, therefore, she will wilt under pressure.
No, she didn't. This was no mistake from a greenhorn who hadn't learnt the ropes.
It should be obvious that taking on the Lobby is the REASON why she worked to get herself
elected. This is conviction politics at work, not some rookie mistake.
I doubt very much if she gives a s**t what Lobby Lackeys do to her now. She has already
won simply by standing up to them.
Think about it: if they drive her out of politics then they are simply proving her point.
While if they fail to destroy her then she has demonstrated that the power of the Lobby is
merely a gigantic bluff.
Either way, AIPAC ends up losing, and That Is Exactly What She Has Always Been Aiming
For
I applaud her. She has courage, and she has conviction, and she has it in abundance.
Despite all the contrived hoopla I suspect there are a shit-load of people in and around
Congress who are muttering "you go, girl!"
Hot damn, that's an awfully long-winded way to say "Yes, its exactly because they're
Jewish."
Let's remove religion out of the equation since that's a walking bad faith argument
on par with "when did you stop beating your wife?" Imagine a theoretical organization
called the American China Public Affairs Committee (ACPAC). ACPAC is not officially part of
the People's Republic of China, but their stated agenda is to influence US policy to be
more supportive of the country and elect officials that take an outspokenly pro-PRC stance.
Their donations make up upwards of 15% of the campaign budget of the politicians they
support. They curate all-expense-paid trips to Beijing for said politicians. They conduct
"political leadership training" to college students. Oh yeah, and on at least one occasion
an analyst at the Pentagon was busted for giving this lobbying group classified documents.
Would you be perfectly fine with ACPAC running around doing these things? Would you accuse
anyone critical of ACPAC as just being racist towards Chinese and Asians in
general?
No one is entitled to a nation just on the merit of their ethnicity and religion. We
didn't accept that justification when Hitler and Milosevic were claiming it. Israel is a
far cry from Nazi Germany and Milosevic's Serbia, and they very well may be the lesser evil
compared to Hamas, but they don't deserve preferential treatment and allowed to establish
the type of ethnostate we vehemently opposed in the past. Israel's policies and the
behavior of AIPAC should be as open to criticism as it is for any other nation state or
lobbying group. Using religion and a past history of persecution as a shield from criticism
and a billy club to bash opponents with is a weak cop-out. Its the same as when abusers use
their past history of being abuse victims as justification for their actions.
Ex-Rep. Paul Findley, R-Illinois, continues to state that Israel has a vast, undue
influence in the United States.
The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee is considered the most powerful lobby
in Washington. How else could anyone explain why we are still fighting in Iraq, a country
that is not a threat to us?
Findley states that we attacked Iraq for "Israel and for oil." But he's not the only
important American to say this. Ralph Nadar, ex-President Jimmy Carter, Noam Chomsky, the
Washington Post, ambassadors and newsmen have all stated that Israel has undue influence in
American foreign policy.
How can AIPAC be the most powerful lobby in our nation's capital? Israel only has 6.4
million people.
Why isn't the American Chinese Public Affairs Committee more influential? China has
1.3 billion people. Oh, I forgot, this committee doesn't exist.
Well then, why isn't the American Indian Public Affairs Committee more
influential?
India has 1.1 billion people. Oh, I forgot again, this committee doesn't exist
either. I must be having a senior moment.
Well, talking about seniors, how about the American Seniors Public Affairs Committee?
Why aren't they the most influential lobby in Washington?
There are 45 million Americans over 62 and with their collective wisdom, who better
to lead the way in Washington? But they don't exist either.
We've given Israel more than $100 billion over the years, but almost nothing to
Palestinians. Could this be part of the reason why Israel still illegally occupies
Palestinian land, why Israel, with over 70 U.N. human rights violations, has not been
invaded by the United States?
The United States invaded Iraq, which only had 17 U.N. human rights
violations.
How can Israel have so much influence in our American government? Are we now living
in the United States of Israel and America?
That's a nice link, and there was one part in particular which struck a chord with me.
More to the point, nobody in her party bothered to inform the Somali-born congresswoman
that the one cardinal rule of mainstream US politics is to never even notice, much less
criticize, the Israel lobby.
The moment I saw that the memory of another "gag rule" popped into my head - the one
enacted by the House of Representatives in 1836.
Speaker "Nancy" wants to gag any Representative unwilling to kiss the backside of the main
lobby for the apartheid Jewish state. AIPAC has the job of putting lipstick on the pig - to
'prettify' the murders and thefts and generic outrages done by God's Favorite One-Holer.
Speaker "James" did that to squash the pesky abolitionists. You know, the guys and gals who
didn't approve of humans being sold like cattle, and worked to death by their owners if such
an outcome suited those owners.
Ah, but isn't Democracy great?
Never forget that the glorious AIPAC is also trying to criminalize us ordinary citizens
from boycotting the apartheid Jewish state. Or moving our money out of investments from
companies who assist the horrors over that way. Or even trying to get governments around the
world to sanction the little pissant nation. Nations like Iran and Venezuela are "sanctioned"
for far less criminal activity, yet poor-little-Israel gets rewarded with billions in
taxpayer dollars and never "sanctions".
The unwillingness of the Democrats to have real political discussion is also visible in
their attempt to subdue the new young House members who have come up with real new proposals
and ideas. The use of the Zionist lobby AIPAC and false claims of 'anti-semitism' against them
is especially
outrageous :
When Representative Ilhan Omar landed a coveted seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee,
Stephen Fiske began working the phones to Capitol Hill.
Alarmed by messaging that he saw as anti-Semitic and by Ms. Omar's support for the
boycott-Israel movement, Mr. Fiske, a longtime activist with the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee, began texting and calling his friends in Congress to complain. He is
hoping Aipac activists will punish Ms. Omar, a freshman Democrat from Minnesota, with a
primary challenge in 2020.
On Wednesday, House Democratic leaders will mete out one form of punishment : Spurred by
outrage over Ms. Omar's latest comments suggesting that pro-Israel activists "push for
allegiance to a foreign country," they will put a resolution condemning anti-Semitism on the
House floor.
'Anti-semitism', in the false sense of AIPAC and the Democratic leadership bound to it, is
anything that is not 100% in support of the racist state of Israel and the Zionism
ideology.
The resolution is aimed at House member Ilhan Omar who suggested that such automatic dual
loyalty is a problem. It also proves that she is right:
Ilhan Omar @IlhanMN - 20:01 utc - 3 Mar 2019
I am told everyday that I am anti-American if I am not pro-Israel. I find that to be
problematic and I am not alone. I just happen to be willing to speak up on it and open myself
to attacks.
Ilhan Omar will not be the only one to be targeted like that. The Lobby is aiming at
two more :
In Florida, Mr. Fiske said it was time for "pro-Jewish voices to speak up" about Ms. Omar and
two other Democratic freshmen who have been critical of Israel: Representatives Rashida Tlaib
of Michigan and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.
And he offered a prediction: "They are three people who, in my opinion, will not be around
in several years."
The leadership of the Democrats is not defending the three freshmen who proved that they can
attract and motivate young voters. It is actively helping the Lobby to oust them. The new
policies the newcomers stand for will likewise be discarded.
Memorandum of Agreement on Security Cooperation
(October 31, 1998)
"The United States Government would view with particular gravity direct threats to Israel's
security arising from the regional deployment of ballistic missiles of intermediate range or
greater.
In the event of such a threat, the United States Government would consult promptly with the
Government of Israel,
with respect to what support, diplomatic or otherwise, or assistance, , it can lend to
Israel."
Realize as an indirect result of the USA withdrawing from the INF and accusing Russia of
having IRBM's(600 mile range , and the Crimiea being only 800 miles from Israel , this
immediately gave Israel carte' blanche for any and all defense "requests" the foreseeable
future. This goes beyond even the previous status of Iran for all concerns presenting an IRBM
threat as well.
There is also the default alliance created by the USA recently building an Airbase inside
the bounds of Israel's Mashabim Air Base, near Dimona, that any air or actual missile attack on
Israel will be considered an attack that threatened or was toward a US military
installation.
They got the US permanently allied/tied covering their butts . No need for further
acknowledgment in writing required IMO.
"When Hamas was created, with the aided influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, the
organization was not at first much of an armed group, that came five years later in the form of
the Izz Ad-Deen Al-Qassam Brigades (Armed wing of Hamas).
Hamas however was far more radical than the Mujamma, had a Palestinian nationalist flavor to
its Islamic ideology and attempted to follow in the footsteps of the likes of the Islamic
revolution in Iran.
A famous speech, delivered by former US representative for Texas, Ron Paul, is often used as
reference point for claiming that Hamas was an invention of Israel and hence prompting the idea
that Hamas must be controlled by them still.
Ron Paul stated that, "if you look at the history, Hamas was encouraged and really started by
Israel, because they wanted Hamas to counteract Yasser Arafat".
This speech seems to be the reference point for many today, when it comes to their
allegations of Israelis controlling and starting Hamas.
Although what Dr. Paul said, was very close to the truth, it was extremely broad and is
often misinterpreted into something entirely false.
For some time, Israel still allowed for Hamas to operate, taking a hands off approach as it
did with the Mujamma. It is completely true that Israel was utilizing Hamas as a counterweight
to the Fatah movement, although there is no proof of any further cooperation with Hamas than
this.
In 1984, the founder of Hamas, Sheikh Yassin, had already been imprisoned – until his
release a year later as the result of a prisoner swap – for weapons smuggling. Israel was
not the same partner that it had been to the Mujamma and was a lot more aware of its [Hamas]
ambitions to reclaim Palestine." AMN
-------------
I was the head of liaison between DoD (DIA) and IDF General Staff intelligence for nine
years (1985-1994). As such I was the "minder" for the IDF reps in Washington based in their
embassy. The CIA tried continuously to acquire this task but without success. They were not
content to nurture their long standing relationship with Mossad, the Israeli civilian
intelligence service. In Israel, IDF intelligence is the senior service and the national
estimator.
The brigadiers who seriatim were the chief military attache in the embassy spent a lot of
time in my office consulting, being given guidance as to their sometimes arrogant and
unacceptable behavior with regard to the DC police, and just chatting. There were a lot of
lunches and dinners with wives. It was a very friendly set of relationships. I used to take
them to WBS battlefields both for the educational benefit for them concerning the US and to
have a day in which to study them as individuals.
One day, sitting in my Pentagon office, the head man from the embassy began to tell me of
his concern with regard to what was happening in the 2nd Intifada, then ongoing. He told me
that Israel had sponsored the growth of Hamas as a rival to the PLO, then in exile in Tunisia,
believing that a religiously based resistance movement would attract many Palestinians,
splitting them off from the PLO and generally weakening the Palestinian resistance. Instead,
the al-Qassem Brigades of Hamas were proving to be daunting opponents in the rebellion.
"Sometimes we outsmart ourselves," he said with a sad smile. He was a very skilled man. He
was one of a small number of IDF officers trained as an Arab affairs specialist from secondary
school onward. At one point he was Military Governor of the occupied West Bank. I believe him.
pl
Thank you for this enlightening note. As your Israeli interlocutor noted, the main
opponent of Israel in Palestine is now Hamas. In fact, it seems that the PLO has become an
Israeli 'poodle', occasionally baring its teeth for show, but most of the time happy to loll
comfortably in the Israeli lap.The PLO 'old guard' has grown rich and comfortable, and appear
to be content to attend conferences, issue the occasional statement, and watch Israel slowly
gobble up their country.
I also believe the great majority of ordinary Palestinians understand what has become of
the PLO, and those not just fully involved in the business of existing from day to day, place
their hopes in Hamas for any progress in their struggle for independence.
It also seems that the chances of creating an independent Palestine have almost vanished.
The final nail in its coffin is likely to be Jared Kushner's much-touted plan.
As for Hamas, it is not clear how long it can survive in Gaza. That probably depends
largely on Qatar. For the latter, Gaza is just a bargaining chip in its tussle with SA, and
in its dealings with the West. They can throw it away any time.
Really enjoying the publicity that tiny Somali girl is collecting exposing AIPAC's influence
on government.
The chorus of condemnation is just another indication of the level of entrenchment of the
Zionist lobby. It's amusing to see even Democrats contorting in their dogma, but it seems
that in the end fealty to Israel supersedes the trendy, minority female candidates of the
Islamic persuasion.
Congresswoman Omar is an American citizen. Representatives Omar, Tlaib and Cortez are three
horsewoman of the D'apocalypse. Apparently Hilary has been put out to pasutre.
That line up will be unlikely to convert many 2016-era Trump voters to the 'progressive'
cause. It may well, however, bring out newly arisen 'progressive' voters from the ranks of
previous non-voters who could not bring themselves to vote for dear Hillary.
The Dems would appear to be trying to get over the line in 2020 by replicating their
recent H of R victory.
"... AIPAC, the flagship of the Israeli Lobby in America denounced Netanyahu's embrace of the Kahanistas and the party itself. The American Jewish Committee tweets that the party is "racist and reprehensible." ..."
Jeff Ballabon is a not-so-high-level advisor to the Trump Election Campaign, but he's out to
climb higher in the 2020 Campaign by denouncing US Representative Ilan Omar (D-Minnesota) as
"filth," "disgusting" and "filthy." She and her criticisms of Israel, "got to go," he says. "So
what if she's in Congress." Does that mean "so what if American voters elected her?" Ballabon's
hurling was on the
Varney & Co. show on Fox Business TV.
A bullyish loudmouth, Ballabon exemplifies what's wrong with the Israel Lobby, the
Netanyahu-lovers, and Israel-firsters in America -- they don't really believe in democracy, and
when American voters reject the candidates that get the "Benjamins" and other currency that the
likes of Sheldon Adelson throw into election races every cycle, operatives like Ballabon snarl
and gnash like rabid animals. Preferably in front of TV cameras.
VARNEY: "Insulting language there."
BALLABON: "Yes."
VARNEY: "Insulting to Ms. Omar. You've used it."
BALLABON: "Yes."
VARNEY: "I don't hear other Jewish members of Congress saying the same thing. They're not
making the same demands and they're not using the same language."
BALLABON: "Absolutely correct. They're still playing politics...."
Using vile, violent language, Ballabon called Omar "a filthy, disgusting hater. So what if
she's in Congress? That's the problem." Her beliefs "got to go." Her tweets scare him, Ballabon
said.
But in the same Varney & Co. show, Ballabon also bellowed against American Jewish
voters, denouncing them as "this ghetto of Jewish voters in the Democratic Party," who don't
understand that Republicans like himself, as opposed to Jewish politicians like Senator Chuck
Schumer, are their real friends.
Is he a self-annointed political policeman telling Jewish voters what they should think and
do? Or is it bigger than Ballabon? The Varney & Co. show wasn't the first time he
criticized other Jews for their politics. In December 2018, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz
reported:
"I find the
hypocrisy truly hysterical. This administration started and the so-called mainstream
establishment announced that they were going to boycott the president," Ballabon recalled,
referring to the decision made by rabbinical and religious groups representing the Reform,
Conservative, and Reconstructionist movements to discontinue the tradition of participating in
a pre-High Holidays conference call with Trump in 2017.
"They have been maligning the president
since the campaign, using the worst kind of libel and lies, and I would be appalled to see any
one of these individuals in the room."
Ballabon probably does feel threatened these days. But not as much from the popularity of
Democrats like Rep. Omar as by trends in Jewish American views and recent developments in
Israel -- especially the decision by the Israeli Attorney General to indict Netanyahu and
Bibi's desperate ploy to bring the Otzmah Yehudi (Jewish Power) party, offshoot of the late
terrorist leader Meir Kahane, into the mainstream election blocs so that he can hope to survive
the April 9th election with an extremist right-wing coalition.
AIPAC, the flagship of the
Israeli Lobby in America denounced Netanyahu's embrace of the Kahanistas and the party itself.
The American Jewish Committee tweets that the party is "racist and reprehensible."
What do the voters of Minnesota think of Ballabon's diatribe? He doesn't care. "So what if
she's in Congress?" It matters. This is America. -- Decameron, March 4, 2019.
Congresswoman Oman's mistake was apologizing. Instead she should have
respectfully pushed back by pointing out the difference between antisemitism and opposing the
policies and actions of the state of Israel, and by calling BS on attempts to conflate the two.
In response to this and other recent, similar incidents the Australian independent journalist
Caitlin Johnstone put up a post a few days ago on exactly this topic entitled, "How (And How
Not) To Beat A Smear Campaign."
Looks like Minnesota is gaining in the race to the bottom.
Current title holder is California, followed closely by NY, NJ, VT., IL.
Virginia tried, but ultimately couldn't keep up with the serious losers who have been at for
a long time.
As much as I'm not a fan I will say Omar sure knows how to get under his skin. The two
probably deserve each other. Who was this meant to be a hit-job on, Trump or Omar? I can't
imagine it hurting her any as it only makes Ballabon look like a biggoted ass. If he's
actually working for the Trump campaign he needs to be fired faster than George Papadopoulos
was.
"threatened .... by trends in Jewish American views and recent developments in Israel"
I think you hit the nail on the head. As to the district, it voted 78% democratic in the last
election. Whoever wins the primary wins the general election. That primary in 2108 was
delayed due to Keith Ellison waiting to the last minute to announce not running for
reelection. Omar won in a 6 way race. Next election cycle will tell what that district is
really like.
I agree with the congresswoman's complaints about dual loyalty to both the US and Israel by
many of her peers and the WH. I just wish she would also speak out against the Saudis and
Emiratis. She would get a lot more mileage doing that.
"Wolf Blitzer's book, ''Between Washington and Jerusalem,'' is primarily about the
Washington side of these maneuvers. Mr. Blitzer, the Washington bureau chief of The Jerusalem
Post, provides a series of close and well-informed reports on recent episodes in the
American-Israeli relationship from his vantage point as a chronicler of the subtle concerns
that move Israelis and Americans in their dealings with one another."
"Mr. Blitzer has some of the specifics on the record: the retired Air Force intelligence
chief, Gen. George F. Keegan, told him of Israeli assistance in discovering Soviet Air Force
capabilities, new weapons, electronics and jamming devices. ''I could not have procured the
intelligence . . . with five CIAs,'' General Keegan is quoted as saying."
I found this article because I searched for the term "better than 5 CIAs" on Google, this
was said on the recent CPAC (more like AIPAC) but I've heard this before and wanted to find
the origin of this phrase.
"... If a non government militia threatens a British citizen by its definition is a terrorist. The only British citizens that Hezbollah threatens are its Jihadists. So, now, England legally protects its Jihadis from Hezbollah. ..."
"... As Israel has long demanded, UK govt now follows US and designates political wing of #Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation. This despite that Hezbollah is a part of the democratically elected govt of Lebanon, and has taken a lead in the fight against IS ..."
"... Israel has been "destabilising" the Near East for 70 years, simply by existing on land that belongs to Palestinian people. ..."
This move by the UK is more BS to keep the brainwashed in line as the lines of our new multi-polar world are drawn.
Will this get discussed at the UN or are there too many more pressing issues?
Is there a maximum chaos theory that posits that the more crazyness that is going on when the music stops provides the most
opportunity for retaining control at the core?
The PLO's attacks on Israel's northern border prompted a full-scale invasion by Israeli troops in 1982, a conflict which angered
south Lebanon's largely Shi'ia Muslim community -- which directly suffered the consequences of Israel's military intervention
-- and fueling the rise of the next generation of militant groups, Hizballah among them. "When we entered Lebanon, there was no
Hizballah. We were accepted by perfumed rice and flowers by the Shi'a in the south," Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak once
noted. "It was our presence there that created Hizballah." http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1903301,00.html
The Shia in Southern Lebanon were not an enemy of Israel until the 1982 invasion. In fact Hizbullah didn't even exist as an organization.
It was founded in 1985 to resist the Israeli occupation and control of Southern Lebanon. The Shia of Southern Lebanon at first
cheered Israeli army removing the Palestinians because they were poor, stealing, a drain on their resources, and had made a nuisance
of themselves. Who wants to live next to a refugee camp? They were happy they Israelis kicked them out.
The IDF didn't just kick them out though. They began building military defenses, setting up roadblocks, establishing curfews,
and treating the local population exactly like the Palestinians. The Shia community say the righting on the wall. They were to
become the next Palestinians. Israel wanted their land too.
Hizbullah is the farthest thing from a terrorist organization there is. They are fighting for their homes, their families,
and their right to exist and run their own lives in the lands they were born. No amount of Israeli and American propaganda or
bullying other nations to call them terrorists actually makes them terrorists. If ever there was a group of humans fighting a
justifiable war it is them.
Their fight is literally a fight for survival. They have no choice. The Israelis and Americans gave them no choice but to surrender
their lands and homes or be brave enough to risk their lives and fight them with all they have and with whatever allies they can
muster. That is why they are aligned with Syria, Iran, and to some extent Russia. They really have no choice after witnessing
what has become of the Palestinians and realizing they are next.
It is impossible to accuse Iran of supporting terrorism (and provide the basis for non-nuclear sanctions, or outright war)
unless they first define Hizbollah as a terrorist organization
In its deathrows, one of the British Empire's final, killing stabs was the completion of its newest colonial state, Israel, needed
to keep the Middle East in bloody turmoil till the End of Time itself. The only force willing to take their toddler on? Hizbullah.
Like a doting mother, any potential attack on their offspring brings out an insane level of visciousness.
Hezbollah poses no threat to the UK or any western country. It's a Lebanese military group with a political wing that was critical
to protecting Lebanon, Syria & Iraq against ISIS & has helped stabalize the Middle East. Nothing terrorist about it. It's a counter
terror group.
No matter what the whole world thinks of Hezbollah, they will always remain a legitimate Lebanese resistance in the eyes of their
people.
No more words needed. Shame on the United Kingdom!
If a non government militia threatens a British citizen by its definition is a terrorist. The only British citizens that Hezbollah
threatens are its Jihadists. So, now, England legally protects its Jihadis from Hezbollah.
Has the Elite's Slavish pro-Israel Agenda Finally Gone Too Far? - Hezbollah's defeat of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in the
July war of 2006 was heroic and an essential redress to the Middle East power balance. I supported Hezbollah's entirely
Probably they are going to arrest Corbyn and demoralize the entire British socialist movement in the process (making a bridge
with the antisemitism thing).
Al-Qaeda affiliated so called "Syrian opposition" is welcoming a British absurd decision to list the Lebanese resistance Hezbollah
as a "terrorist" organisation. Not surprised. After all, Hezbollah did crush their precious "moderate" jihadists and their Al
Qaeda allies in Syria
So Hezbollah has been fighting AlQaeda in Syria for 8 years while the UK has been supporting AlQaeda. The UK has now put Hezbollah
on a terror list. So why did they decide to do this now?
Abrahamic religions have been scamming foolhardy people for over 2,000 years.
Continuing to present day with pedophile priests, tafiri nutjobs, and Zionist dickheads.
If governments had any sense, they would ban or regulate those who prey on the weak-minded because these fundamentalist asshat
conmen have been responsible for more pain and suffering than any other organized human effort in the history of organized human
efforts.
<> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Why is the British government doing this ban?
My cynical guesses would be that this is:
1) another anti-Corbin measure ahead of elections
May's Brexit plans were (deliberately ) a failure and who knows what else May has up her sleeve. The way things are going,
Corbin may have a good chance at being PM. But the establishment will NEVER accept that (as per May's own words). So dirty
tricks are in order. Banning Hezb follows from the previous effort to paint Corbin as anti-Semitic.
2) and could set-up a future false flag
Any "terrorist act" by any Shia could be interpreted as a response to this measure and provide a reason for FUKUS/NATO to bomb/invade
Lebanon.
The Muppet Show has run out of applicable sex scandals since nearly everything including dead pigs is now normal and whatever
is left involves serious jail time and worse. They've been unable to provoke enough nativist violence and see no choice but to
try to annoy some of their imported voter-slaves instead. That will fail as well but from the Muppet Show's point of view it carries
their narrative along for future false flags by people brainwashed and goaded into it.
It's an open secret that several European countries are exchanging intelligence with Hezbollah to combat terrorist activity. If
the UK is serious about its security, it should follow Germany and France in this cooperation, not childishly proscribe Hezbollah's
political wing.
Hezbollah is a social and political movement with a strong armed wing. It was formed in 1980s. Hezbollah's creation was conditioned
by the aspiration of the Shia population of Lebanon to meet the challenges of Israeli expansion and Western "new-style" colonialism.
Hezbollah is banned in the UK according to Home Secretary Sajid Javid who is also a member and regular speaker for Conservative
Friends of Israel Lobby group. Support for Hezbollah in any form will be a crime carrying up to 10 years jail. Israel has its
fangs deep in UK politics
Charles Shoebridge , Mar 2, 2019 4:31:10 PM |
link
As Israel has long demanded, UK govt now follows US and designates political wing of #Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation.
This despite that Hezbollah is a part of the democratically elected govt of Lebanon, and has taken a lead in the fight against
IS
Hassan Nasrallah is one of the few people involved in politics who demands respect. Hezbollah whipped Israel's ass in 2006. With
another Israeli military adventure in Lebanon on the horizon, the Anglo-American political prostitutes must provide some ROI on
the shekels in their pockets.
Israel has been "destabilising" the Near East for 70 years, simply by existing on land that belongs to Palestinian people.
Even if the Jews killed the original owners, the land should still revert to their legitimate heirs.
It is rich for any member of a British government to complain about terrorism and destabilisation when the UK government is
one of the world's worst offenders in those regards - and quite deliberately, too.
UN Commission of Inquiry on the 2018 protests in Palestine finds that "Israeli snipers shot at journalists, health workers, children
and persons with disabilities, knowing they were clearly recognizable as such."
The answer to the question "Why Is The British Government Banning Hizbullah?" is very easy.
The Lobby has helped the Tories in Britain a lot recently in painting Corbyn as an anti-Semite. Making sure that Corbyn never
becomes prime minister is a big issue for them.
The payback for the Israeli help given is of course banning Hizbullah.
It would be a fitting response, to this provocation from the Home Secretary, for as many British people as possible to follow
@15 Craig Murray's courageous lead and indicate their admiration of, and unwavering support for, the Lebanese Resistance movement
which has recently distinguished itself by its fight to save Syria from genocidal jihadists, funded and supported by the British
government.
Why it is acceptable for Javid, the Tory PM May and the government to be contributing public funds to the White Helmets and Al
Qaeda militias while banning support for their opponents is a question that the Labour Party should be demanding be answered.
"Britain" stoped pretending and really started preping for a WWIII. Else called "Brexit" for the unsuspecting masses.
It doesn't mean they could pull this off though.
Has the Elite's Slavish pro-Israel Agenda Finally Gone Too Far?
...
Posted by: Craig Murray | Mar 2, 2019 3:49:25 PM | 15
Not yet, but it's another step in the right direction.
I want to see a few more gullible hi-profile pro-"Israel" ideologues scramble into rat trap Trump set for them with his utterly
meaningless Jerusalem gambit.
Another thing I wish to add is IMO "Britain" might have felt the need to ban Hizbullah before giving a Go to programes for distabilizing
the Balkan peninsulae and its assorting archipelago at the south including both big islandic masses of Cyprus and last but not
least Crete.
They want the locals completely desperate pivoting towards extreme right groups that are secretly being proped
by cia/mossad/mi6,french,fukus in short.
This morning, Al Jazeera ran a snippet on "Israel's" bullying on the conditional reopening of al Aqsa Mosque which the "Israelis"
closed 16 years ago, for HAMAS reasons. I lost count of the number of times they used the expression "occupied East Jerusalem"
during the story...
The burnt out remains of Merkava tanks and outclassed ground forces were a devastating blow to the Israeli superiority complex.
Not even wanting to upset Hezbollah in Syria, their behaviour towards them speaks volumes about who won the 2006 conflict. Looking
at the number of military killed on both sides, the Lebanese lost only a handful more than Israel.
Rather than risk a backlash
from Hezbollah, Israel will attempt to use other methods to try to hinder them. The UK move is a sign of desperation by Netanyahu.
No one takes any notice of of the British anymore, 'we' are quite rightly a joke. No doubt Hassan Nasrallah will be chuckling
at these latest desperate attempts to keep him in check.
The UK's been in gross violation of International Law for decades on end, the latest determination by the WCJ on the Chomoro Islanders
is its latest defeat and proof of its terrorizing policies. Then we have the subject of support for terrorists in Syria and terrorism
in Venezuela. Some brave, enterprising folk ought to plant a passel of Hezbollah flags on the grounds of the minister's house,
then report him for his crime of being in possession of banned material. And yet another reason for Scots to vote for independence
and the end of Union, as I'm certain Scots don't want to be associated with a terror state like Britain.
My understanding is that in the UK, wearing a T-shirt saying "Fuck the UK" is fine but wearing a shirt saying "Fuck Israel" is
a hate crime. If this is correct, what has gone wrong in the UK? Why do the UK people believe all this anti-semitism nonsense
and why do they give a flying f**k about anti-semitism anyway?
I am guessing that Sontaran Sajid is positioning himself as a challenger for Theresa May's job as Tory leader after Brexit comes
and goes and all Hell breaks loose once people realize how very poorly she managed the transition.
This insidious and obtuse move by the british government is a typical example of setting the stage and future narrative for the
forthcoming announcement by the zionist cabal (US/UK etc) of recognition of the Golan Heights as being official Israeli territory.
It's pre-planning as they know everyone in the region goes onto an imminent war footing when the announcement comes
"Hizballah is continuing in its attempts to destabilase the fragile situation in the Middle East"
By his logic there is far more urgent requirement for him to proscribe the current Republican Party as a terrorist organization
and, before that, the Democrats when they controlled the Oval Office.
Both constitute the political wing of a warmongering deep-state, and both are quite indistinguishable from the military wing
of that same deep-state.
And, indisputably, both the political wing and the military wing of that deep-state are hell-bent on destabilizing the Middle
East.
In any just and logical world it is well past time for Sajid Javid to put a pox on them all.
@54 Jackrabbit I tend to agree with Craig Murray on this, in the sense that this could represent an attempt by the lobby to Jump
The Shark.
After all, where does this stop?
If Corbyn voices support for the Red Cross does Sajid Javid then rush to proscribe the ICRC as a terrorist organization, all
the better to sneer "Gotch'a a good one there, terrorist!!"
And to answer b's question of why: the answer is obvious.
The Israel Lobby is utterly terrified of Corbyn becoming Prime Minister, hence the ludicrous "anti-Semite" smear campaign against
him.
Clearly the poll number are showing that isn't going to be enough, hence this new angle of attack.
But it sniffs of desperation. It suggests nothing more than that Israel and its lackeys/sycophants know that Corbyn is certain
to win the next election, so they are willing to attempt anything - no matter how illogical - to prevent him from contesting that
election.
It looks like the Inquisition is becoming Totalitarian. Dissent is being criminalized in devious ways. In antiquity, Aristotle
defined the progression as democracy-oligarchy-tyranny.
I think we have enough empirical data for the modern era to revise it as: democracy-capitalism-totalitarianism. The quintessential
feature of this totalitarianism is mass psychosis. The driving force behind it is divorce from reality. The imperators behind
the scenes:
the Infernal Inquisitors. Prognosis-Incurable, Terminal.
@49 aspnaz "Why do the UK people believe all this anti-semitism nonsense and why do they give a flying f**k about anti-semitism
anyway?"
Who says they do?
The political chattering class and their lackeys in the MSM have been pusing this nonsense - and it is nonsense - as hard as
they can, and despite that they must have polling data that shows it isn't going to be enough to stop Corbyn from becoming Prime
Minister at the next election.
We can be certain of that because this latest move is an attempt to widen the line of attack e.g. to paint Corbyn as a "terrorist
sympathizer".
They wouldn't even need to do that if their smear campaign to paint Corbyn as an "anti-Semite" had any gained any traction
with the actual voters.
After all, that smear campaign has been so vicious that if it had worked then Corbyn would already be history.
Hezbollah are not targeting children, cripples, medics and journalists with sniper fire as outlined in the UN report. If the UK
government had any morality it would be Israel that would be designated a terrorist organization.
Posted by: Den Lille Abe | Mar 2, 2019 10:41:56 PM | 64
Can we ban Britain ?
-----------------------
If we all are able to ban Israel then many, if not all, reasons to ban the USA, Britain and other western countries just disappear.
Israel is a real asshole of the Earth.
@61 Jackrabbit "But the law may be used in other devious ways also."
True enough, but *this* law is so stupid that it will have other consequences as well.
Here is one: British Home Secretary Sajid Javid must now live in abject terror (an apt word indeed) of walking into a BBC studio
to debate this issue only to find George Galloway sitting across the table.
Because it is an absolute certainty that Galloway will tear him a new one over the "logic" of this pronouncement.
Let's be honest here: Javed's order has now made "attempts to destabilase the fragile situation in the Middle East" a criteria
for designating a political party as a terrorist organization.
So how does Javid answer this question: Your own govt is on record as stating that the decision of President Trump to scrap
the JCPOA will have a destabilizing effect on peace and security in the Middle East. Doesn't that oblige your govt to declare
his Administration a terrorist organization?
Or how does he answer this question: Your own govt has openly declared its support for the "moderate rebels" in Syria, whose
avowed aim is to replace Bashir Assad by destabilizing his govt. By your own guidelines wouldn't that make the Tory party a terrorist
organization?
Because there is real danger here for this utterly lamentable govt. If they do attempt to defend this new criteria then they
are going to be revealed to be blathering idiots. If they don't attempt to defend it then their critics are simply going to shred
them anyway.
@66 yeah, right... the part of uk support for 'moderate rebels' in syria question would be easy for this bozo to answer.. he will
say syria gov't under assad is not a legit gov't... just like this bozo and the uk refer to maduros gov't in venezuala as not
legit.. they say so and that makes it right, lol..
furthermore, a pdf (see link at bottom) found in the 2nd link in b's post from the top says
"The US, Canada, Netherlands, Israel, Gulf Co-operation Council and Bahrain also designate the group in its entirety as a terrorist
organisation."
with legitimacy like that, who is to argue, LOLOL! i think they need to get freeland to run that by the lima group so they
can get more members to join in the party..
I am reminded of the ginned up charge that Hezbollah attacked the Jewish embassy in Argentina,just another attempt to put some
'facts' in the media to influence popular perception. Remember Pompeus Minimus also tried this scare tactic when he floated the
egregiously dubious propaganda balloon that Hezbollah was in Venezuela! The Zionists are too clever by half in all of their ratf$@%ing
schemes.
Hezbollah is a social and political movement with a strong armed wing. It was formed in 1980s. Hezbollah's creation was conditioned
by the aspiration of the Shia population of Lebanon to meet the challenges of Israeli expansion and Western "new-style" colonialism.
Are we ever going to get beyond group identity politics and deal with the social structure issue that fuels the group identity
politics?
Do others not see the dead end that fighting group identity politics gets the 99%? There is always going to be friction but
that friction is being managed to insure that none question the structure that causes most of the friction (Global Private Finance/God
of Mammon)
I believe that making the tools of finance public will eliminate the fuel behind much of the group identity politics we see
happening......if they don't have guns and money they are a lot less likely to kill each other.
And to the posting here, if the UK didn't have empire money and empire corrupt government it wouldn't go around trying to impose
itself globally.
IMO, challenging the social structure is going to prove more fruitful than ongoing group identity politics.
He was elected using Israel lobby money, so now he heed to pay them off.
Notable quotes:
"... B..b..but his campaign promises .. the upcoming election .. his noninterventionist principles .. MAGA! The cynics were right. Pro-Trump dreamers (including the pro-Russian/anti-US contingent at MoA) were wrong. Another misleading narrative bites the dust. Another populist outsider is revealed to be a faux populist bullshitter. ..."
"... For anyone paying attention, this kind of thinking (that Trump is a hero that is undermined by the Deep State) is not dumb, it is suspect. We saw the same rear-action BS from Obamabots who sought to excuse every betrayal of the faux populist hero. Faux populists like Trump, Obama, Sanders, Macron, Guaido, etc. are members of the establishment (which the Deep State works for) that pretend to be on the side of ordinary people. ..."
B..b..but his campaign promises .. the upcoming election .. his noninterventionist principles .. MAGA! The cynics were
right. Pro-Trump dreamers (including the pro-Russian/anti-US contingent at MoA) were wrong. Another misleading narrative bites
the dust. Another populist outsider is revealed to be a faux populist bullshitter.
For anyone paying attention, this kind of thinking (that Trump is a hero that is undermined by the Deep State) is
not dumb, it is suspect. We saw the same rear-action BS from Obamabots who sought to excuse every betrayal of the faux populist
hero. Faux populists like Trump, Obama, Sanders, Macron, Guaido, etc. are members of the establishment (which the Deep
State works for) that pretend to be on the side of ordinary people.
"... There are foundations in Washington, all closely linked to Israel and its lobby in the U.S., that are wholly dedicated to making the case for war against Iran. ..."
"... The Times suggests how it all works as follows: "Congressional and legal sources say the law may now provide a legal rationale for striking Iranian territory or proxies should President Trump decide that Tehran poses a looming threat to the U.S. or Israel and that economic sanctions are not strong enough to neutralize the threat." The paper does not bother to explain what might constitute a "looming threat" to the United States from puny Iran but it is enough to note that Israel, as usual, is right in the middle of everything and, exercising its option of perpetual victim-hood, it is apparently threatened in spite of its nuclear arsenal and overwhelming regional military superiority guaranteed by act of the U.S. Congress. ..."
"... So going after Iran is the name of the game even if the al Qaeda story is basically untrue. The stakes are high and whatever has to be produced, deduced or fabricated to justify a war is fair game ..."
Observers of developments in the Middle East have long taken it as a given that the United
States and Israel are seeking for an excuse to attack Iran. The recently terminated conference
in Warsaw had that objective, which was clearly expressed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu, but it failed to rally European and Middle Eastern states to support the cause. On
the contrary, there was strong sentiment coming from Europe in particular that normalizing
relations with Iran within the context of the 2015 multi party nuclear agreement is the
preferred way to go both to avoid a major war and to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation.
There are foundations in Washington, all closely linked to Israel and its lobby in the U.S.,
that are wholly dedicated to making the case for war against Iran. They seek pretexts in
various dark corners, including claims that Iran is cheating on its nuclear program, that it is
developing ballistic missiles that will enable it to deliver its secret nuclear warheads onto
targets in Europe and even the United States, that it is an oppressive, dictatorial government
that must be subjected to regime change to liberate the Iranian people and give them democracy,
and, most stridently, that is provoking and supporting wars and threats against U.S. allies all
throughout the Middle East.
Dissecting the claims about Iran, one might reasonably counter that rigorous inspections by
the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirm that Tehran has no nuclear
weapons program, a view that is supported by the U.S. intelligence community in its recent
Worldwide Threat Assessment. Beyond that, Iran's limited missile program can be regarded as
largely defensive given the constant threats from Israel and the U.S. and one might well accept
that the removal of the Iranian government is a task best suited for the Iranian people, not
delivered through military intervention by a foreign power that has been starving the country
through economic warfare. And as for provoking wars in the Middle East, look to the United
States and Israel, not Iran.
So the hawks in Washington, by which one means National Security Adviser John Bolton,
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and, apparently President Donald Trump himself when the subject
is Iran, have been somewhat frustrated by the lack of a clear casus belli to hang their
war on. No doubt prodded by Netanyahu, they have apparently revived an old story to give them
what they want, even going so far as to develop an argument that would justify an attack on
Iran without a declaration of war while also lacking any imminent threat from Tehran to justify
a preemptive strike.
What may be the new Iran policy was recently outlined in a Washington Times article,
which unfortunately has received relatively little attention from either the media, the
punditry or from the few policymakers themselves who have intermittently been mildly critical
of Washington's propensity to strike first and think about it afterwards.
The article is entitled "Exclusive: Iran-al Qaeda alliance May Provide Legal Rationale
for U.S. military strikes." The article's main points should be taken seriously by anyone
concerned over what is about to unfold in the Persian Gulf because it is not just the usual
fluff emanating from the hubris-induced meanderings of some think tank, though it does include
some of that. It also cites government officials by name and others who are not named but are
clearly in the administration.
As an ex-CIA case officer who worked on the Iran target for a number of years, I was shocked
when I read the Times ' article, primarily because it sounded like a repeat of the
fabricated intelligence that was used against both Iraq and Iran in 2001 through 2003. It is
based on the premise that war with Iran is desirable for the United States and, acting behind
the scenes, Israel, so it is therefore necessary to come up with an excuse to start it. As the
threat of terrorism is always a good tactic to convince the American public that something must
be done, that is what the article tries to do and it is particularly discouraging to read as it
appears to reflect opinion in the White House.
As I have been writing quite critically about the CIA and the Middle East for a number of
years, I am accustomed to considerable push-back from former colleagues. But in this case, the
calls and emails I received from former intelligence officers who shared my experience of the
Middle East and had read the article went strongly the other way, condemning the use of both
fake and contrived intelligence to start another unnecessary war.
The article states that Iran is supporting al Qaeda by providing money, weapons and
sanctuary across the Middle East to enable it to undertake new terrorist attacks. It is doing
so in spite of ideological differences because of a common enemy: the United States. Per the
article and its sources, this connivance has now "evolved into an unacceptable global security
threat" with the White House intent on "establishing a potential legal justification for
military strikes against Iran or its proxies."
One might reasonably ask why the United States cares if Iran is helping al Qaeda as both are
already enemies who are lying on the Made in U.S.A. chopping block waiting for the ax to fall.
The reason lies in the Authorization to Use Military Force, originally drafted post 9/11 to
provide a legal fig leaf to pursue al Qaeda worldwide, but since modified to permit also going
after "associated groups." If Iran is plausibly an associated group then President Trump and
his band of self-righteous maniacs egged on by Netanyahu can declare "bombs away Mr.
Ayatollah." And if Israel is involved, there will be a full benediction coming from Congress
and the media. So is this administration both capable and willing to start a major war based on
bullshit? You betcha!
The Times suggests how it all works as follows: "Congressional and legal sources say
the law may now provide a legal rationale for striking Iranian territory or proxies should
President Trump decide that Tehran poses a looming threat to the U.S. or Israel and that
economic sanctions are not strong enough to neutralize the threat." The paper does not bother
to explain what might constitute a "looming threat" to the United States from puny Iran but it
is enough to note that Israel, as usual, is right in the middle of everything and, exercising
its option of perpetual victim-hood, it is apparently threatened in spite of its nuclear
arsenal and overwhelming regional military superiority guaranteed by act of the U.S.
Congress.
Curiously, though several cited administration officials wedded to the hard-line against
Iran because it is alleged to be the "world's leading state sponsor of terrorism" were willing
to provide their opinions on the Iran-al Qaeda axis, the authors of the recent Worldwide Threat
Assessment issued by the intelligence community apparently have never heard of it. The State
Department meanwhile sees an Iranian pipeline moving al Qaeda's men and money to targets in
central and south Asia, though that assessment hardly jives with the fact that the
only recent major attack attributed to al Qaeda was carried out on February 13
th in southeastern Iran against the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, a bombing that
killed 27 guardsmen.
The State annual threat assessment also particularly condemns Iran for funding groups like
Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which are, not coincidentally, enemies of Israel who would care
less about "threatening" the United States but for the fact that it is constantly meddling in
the Middle East on behalf of the Jewish state.
And when in doubt, the authors of the article went to "old reliable," the leading neocon
think tank the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, which, by the way, works closely with
the Israeli government and never, ever has criticized the state of democracy in Israel. One of
its spokesmen was quick off the mark: ""The Trump administration is right to focus on Tehran's
full range of malign activities, and that should include a focus on Tehran's long-standing
support for al Qaeda."
Indeed, the one expert cited in the Times story who actually is an expert and
examined original documents rather than reeling off approved government and think tank talking
points contradicted the Iran-al Qaeda narrative. "Nelly Lahoud, a former terrorism analyst at
the U.S. Military Academy and now a New America Foundation fellow, was one of the first to
review documents seized from bin Laden's hideout in Abbottabad, Pakistan. She wrote in an
analysis for the Atlantic Council this fall that the bin Laden files revealed a deep strain of
skepticism and hostility toward the Iranian regime, mixed with a recognition by al Qaeda
leaders of the need to avoid a complete break with Tehran. In none of the documents, which date
from 2004 to just days before bin Laden's death, 'did I find references pointing to
collaboration between al Qaeda and Iran to carry out terrorism,' she concluded."
So going after Iran is the name of the game even if the al Qaeda story is basically untrue.
The stakes are high and whatever has to be produced, deduced or fabricated to justify a war is
fair game. Iran and terrorism? Perfect. Let's try that one out because, after all, invading
Iran will be a cakewalk and the people will be in the streets cheering our tanks as they roll
by. What could possibly go wrong?
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest,
a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign
policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected]
.
Israel has a population of approximately 8.7 million, roughly equal to the state of New
Jersey. It is among the world's most affluent nations, with a per capita income slightly
below that of the European Union. Israel's unemployment rate of 4.3% is better than
America's 4.4%, and Israel's net trade, earnings, and payments is ranked 22nd in the world
while the US sits in last place at a dismal 202nd.
Yet, Israel receives more of America's foreign aid budget than any other nation. The US
has, in fact, given more aid to Israel than it has to all the countries of sub-Saharan
Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean combined – which have a total population of
over a billion people.
And foreign aid is just one component of the staggering cost of our alliance with
Israel.
Given the tremendous costs, it is critical to examine why we lavish so much aid on
Israel, and whether it is worth Americans' hard-earned tax dollars. But first, let's take a
look at what our alliance with Israel truly costs.
given the constant threats from Israel and the U.S.
And it has been more than threats: the Stuxnet virus and Mossad assassinations. While I
think even Trump may be reasonably nervous about a potential attack, if he has cheerleaders
like Kushner, Friedman, MBS, AIPAC, et al, it does seem almost a certainty. Is this not what
NSA Bolton has been waiting for most of his career?
And the neocon media crew will likely be out in full force soon doing their "mushroom
cloud" thing.
I saw Rubin, Boot, Pletka, Todd in shock over what Rep Omar had said. Poor David Brooks felt
the Democrats had "slapped him the face (PBS Newshour)."
Democrats need to be talking about this early. They can't let this happen. As for the GOP
I'm sure the words at the AIPAC convention will be supportive.
The patent absurdity of the 'indispensable nation,', in one administration, making peace with
Iran and then, in the very next (on the basis of no palpable facts) making war, should
eventually wake even the most catatonic to the monstrous activities that have led us to this
point.
I suspect that this (seemingly imminent) attack on Iran will, also become the noose to
hang Trump with. Thus, the Neocons, with Stalinesque subtlety will have killed two birds with
one shot.
But in a world of America attacking countries over non-existent weapons of mass
destruction or over supposed destruction of democracy, both plainly false claims, does it
make any difference?
America will do what it wants to do. Simply because it can.
The European powers allowed World War II to unfold by wringing their hands rather than
taking a stand while Hitler built up his forces, threatened his neighbors and bit off
chunks of their territory.
You have to be kidding. You're re-spouting nearly century old war propaganda as fact. You
need to go back and read the article and focus on the parts where pretexts are made up.
Here, start with this.:
So the hawks in Washington, by which one means National Security Adviser John Bolton,
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and, apparently President Donald Trump himself when the
subject is Iran, have been somewhat frustrated by the lack of a clear casus belli to
hang their war on. No doubt prodded by Netanyahu, they have apparently revived an
old story to give them what they want, even going so far as to develop an argument that
would justify an attack on Iran < /blockquote>
@renfro Thanks for the
tweets renfro .
I saw the news of Iran's FM Zarif's resignation yesterday and I was immediately alarmed. If
Zarif is actually removed from power a Western educated man with TV charisma will be taken
off the 'airs'. Iran will lose a big positive public relations asset with Zarif's departure
to the glee of Netanyahu and the rabid Zionists in Isra-hell and here in Trump's
administration and the Beltway. Bad news.
In any case US needs a proxy group to attack Iran. Who could be interested?
I agree. Who'd be stupid enough to "ally" themselves with the money bags "one world" crowd
after seeing so many others get tossed under the bus?
CAIRO, Egypt, May 27, -- The last hope of 30,000,000 Arabs to win freedom for their race
without further bloodshed vanished when cables from Washington announced that the United
States had concluded an agreement with Great Britain The Arabs came into the war on the
side of the allies against their Turkish co-religionists in- response to the
allies' promise of freedom The Arab support" was determined and effective."
Newspaper article by Junius B. Wood on the American recognition of Britain's mandate in
Palestine, Chicago Daily News,27 May 1922 (also The Sunday Star, Washington)
When the smoke of [WW2] cleared only three purposes had been achieved, none of them
disclosed at its start: the world-revolution, with Western arms and support, had
advanced to the middle of Europe; Zionism had been armed to establish itself in Palestine
by force; the "world-government", obviously the result which these two convergent
forces were intended to produce, had been set up anew in embryo form, this time in New
York. The war behind the war was the true one; it was fought to divert the arms,
manpower and treasure of the West to these purposes.
-Douglas Reed, "the Controversy of Zion," p 333 (written ~1955 ) https://archive.org/stream/TheControversyOfZion/TheControversyOfZi
Sep 11, 2011 General Wesley Clark: Wars Were Planned – Seven Countries In Five Years
"This is a memo that describes how we're going to take out seven countries in five years,
starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran."
I said, "Is it classified?" He said, "Yes, sir." I said, "Well, don't show it to me." And I
saw him a year or so ago, and I said, "You remember that?" He said, "Sir, I didn't show you
that memo! I didn't show it to you!"
July 23, 2006 Secret 2001 Pentagon Plan to Attack Lebanon
Bush's Plan for "Serial War" revealed by General Wesley Clark. "[The] Five-year campaign
plan [includes] a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya,
Iran, Somalia and Sudan" (Pentagon official quoted by General Wesley Clark) According to
General Wesley Clark–the Pentagon, by late 2001.
The problem with this (sky is falling) analysis is the number of troops available to wage a
war over there. We're in 150 countries with 165,000 people deployed OCONUS. There's no
150,000 here for this potential war, 150,000 there for that potential war (and the list of
wars we're apparently going to start is pretty long, Russia, China, North Korea, Iran,
Venezuela ).
And there's no draft. The composition of a US division has significantly fewer trigger
pullers than support people and nobody thinks the mechanics and admin people are going to
conquer another country.
I think that before indulging in paranoia it would seem like you'd want to be looking for
mass mobilizations and significant movements of armored vehicles. You can't hide it and
troops are dumb about social media None of that's happening now.
@Colin
Wright Before the US psychopaths start bombing Iran, Russia and China need to step up to
the plate and just tell them NO, your world empire will NOT expand further. I'd rather see
the US nuked than to see it kill millions of innocent Persians and wipe out their ancient
society.
If war with Iran can somehow be prevented before the coming presidential election, I'd
rather see any of the Dems far-left loony candidates elected than to hear the rantings of
psychos like Trump, Bolton, and Pompeo for one more day. God, the US and Israel are horrible,
evil countries that must be stopped!
@wraith67 That's why all US
wars are now fought with bombs and missiles, not infantry. The US no longer has to invade
countries to destroy them – witness Libya where there were no military casualties. As
for the draft – bring it on and draft the wymyn. I'd love to see middle class parents
start rioting in the streets once their 19 year-old daughters were drafted. I've read, also,
that there is a dire shortage of qualified pilots. Perhaps our high schools and universities
are not graduating enough psychos willing to kill great numbers of civilians from high
altitude for no reason. I've heard that a lifetime PTSD is a bitch, as the veteran suicide
rate of 22 a day demonstrates.
I'm actually not sure that is inaccurate. If trends continue in the current way, there may
well eventually be a push to force all Palestinians out of the West Bank. There is nothing
controversial about this:
"Over the past 50 years, Israel has demolished tens of thousands of Palestinian properties
and displaced large swathes of the population to build homes and infrastructure to illegally
settle its own population in the occupied territories. It has also diverted Palestinian
natural resources such as water and agricultural land for settlement use."
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2017/06/israel-occupation-50-years-of-dispossession/
"Nearly half of Jewish Israelis agree that Arabs should be expelled or transferred from
Israel The survey makes no distinction between Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank and
citizens of Israel in its question about whether Arabs should be expelled from Israel. And
yet, 48% of Jewish Israelis said they were in favor, 46% were opposed, and 6% said they
didn't know. Breaking it down into religious groups, the Modern Orthodox (the report uses the
Hebrew term dati'im), were the most likely to support such a measure, at 71%."
https://www.timesofisrael.com/plurality-of-jewish-israelis-want-to-expel-arabs-study-shows/
If that number grows (and there is little to doubt it will because of demographic patterns
in the Jewish populace) and it eventually becomes the case, then Daniel's statement will just
be a statement of fact; Palestinians used to live there and now they do not because they were
killed or forced out. So the jury is still out on that as far as I'm concerned. Maybe
slightly hyperbolic, but – meh – it's the internet. Hardly qualifies as "hate
speech" though.
@Wizard
of Oz Of course there are numerous options but containment only works if the targeted
country does not strike back, which would instantly escalate the conflict. Bear in mind that
all the pre war estimates of what would happen with Iraq were wrong. Assumptions that a
conflict with Iran would be manageable or containable are likely to be equally misplaced
particularly as there are hardliners on both sides that would welcome a shooting war
What no one, not even in alternative media, has picked up on is the real reason for Iran
being a threat.
An Iran war is itself a distracting event for the real issue: Palestinians.
Israel always tries to provoke a war with Iran. This is to stoke unifying nationalism
among the Israelis. Iran is a far preferable opponent than the Palestinians.
Furthermore, in the event of an actual war, you now have a global state of emergency which
allows you to expel the remaining Palestinians. The world powers will all be occupied with
fighting Iran. So will the regional powers. The Palestinians will be a legitimate security
threat in the event of a war with Iran. So an expulsion would be justified.
But of course the instigators of such a conflict would be Israelis and their toadies among
the idiot Christians of the GOP.
There is a high degree of cognitive dissonance here. I do not think that even Netanyahu
can admit to himself this is why he keeps on hyping the Iran threat. But deep down, this is
why. Otherwise, Israel has made its bed among the Palestinians. Jews are a white minority
governing and oppressing a brown Muslim majority. Their only population growth is coming from
the religious ultra orthodox, who they view with disdain and disgust.
Israel needs Iran more than anyone else in the world.
@Philip
Giraldi If I recall, the Iranian leadership has made it clear that any direct attack on
it of this magnitude will be considered an attack by proxy by Israel and they will respond in
kind. Am I correct?
@NoseytheDuke Agree. The
continued destruction of the economy and social fabric has no downside for the people who
plan to rule through globalized tyranny. It's a feature, not a bug. Middle class America
still has memory of freedoms. Not much of an impediment to real power, but nonetheless they
must go.
Act I – Remove Sunni regimes (e.g., Iraq, Libya) that are hostile to the Zionist
Project
Act II – Take a Sunni Turn by funding, arming, advising Sunni "terrorist" groups
(e.g., al Qaida, IS) to attack Shia regimes (e.g., Syria, Iran) that are hostile to the
ZP
Act III – push the KSA-led Sunni coalition to wage an eternal war against the
Iranian-led Shia coalition, while the ZP continually expands.
"has likely been the goal from the get-go" of what?
"Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to
safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The
object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power
is power."
Al Qeada=CIA created BS. The smarter sort of zombies know this. Americans, however are one of
the most heavily propagandized populations outside of 1984, a true story. The media reliably
spreads fear of groups like al Qaeda, ISIS, the Viet Cong, Iraqis, Iranians, Martians, New
America Foundation you name it – fear, credulity and obedience sustains the taxpaying
class of war mongering morons. The US needs to end trying to run every country. It costs the
hard working and mostly underpaid voters a lot of money to overthrow foreign Governments with
CIA fake revolutions. Moreover, every time the military drops a bomb the tax payers pay to
replace it and a billionaire profits.
There are tons of reasons to continue all the wars or start a new one, all related to
Profit, the central concept of Capitalism. War means Profit. The propaganda war means the
rich get to loot other countries without any complaints from the confused, moronic voting
class who pay for it and support it while they debate the merits of the latest CIA prepared
Al Qeada narrative. Usually pro-Jew Giraldi does a better job faking a divisive meme with his
propaganda. Another "debate" that misses the real questions.
Anyone who knows anything about the Muslim world would know this link between Al Qaeda and
Iran is a complete sham. Al Qaeda is Sunni, Iran is Shia. They are mortal enemies. Al Qaeda
is about as likely to ally themselves with the Shias they are with the Jews, which is to say,
over their dead bodies.
But this Jew driven war machine is definitely hard at work building its case, not just
drumming up support from the left, but even more so, from the right, through their Zionist
mouthpieces esp. Breitbart. Jews are now in total control of America, controlling both sides
of the aisle in congress, and both sides of the debate in the media.
If Trump is dumb enough to invade Iran, he'll have signed his own death warrant.
In any case US needs a proxy group to attack Iran. Who could be interested?
The US and Israel already have a proxy group–the MEK– who has been doing
assassinations. bombings and false flags for them for years.
The MEK (People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran or the Mojahedin-e Khalk is a Iranian
political–militant organization that advocates overthrowing the Islamic Republic of
Iran leadership and installing its own government.
It was listed as a terrorist group by the US for blowing up American embassies and killing
americans.'
Just who has been killing Iran's nuclear scientists? | The Independent https://www.independent.co.uk
› Voices › Comment
Oct 6, 2013 – Is it a last-minute attempt by Israel or the Iranian dissident group the
Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) to sabotage talks – or at least to show that they
As of 2018, MEK operatives are believed to be still conducting covert operations inside
Iran to overthrow Iran's government. Seymour Hersh reported that "some American-supported
covert operations continue in Iran today," with the MEK's prime goal of removing the current
Iranian government.
The MEK use to be anti Israel . BUT THEN . Israel offered them a deal they couldnt
refuse .the Jewish lobby would get them of the terrorist list in exchange for them ceasing to
support Palestine.
"In the beginning, MEK used to criticize the Pahlavi dynasty for allying with Israel and
Apartheid South Africa, calling them racist states and demanding cancellation of all
political and economic agreements with them. MEK opposed and was anti-Zionist.
The Central Cadre established contact with the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), by
sending emissaries to Paris, Dubai, and Qatar to meet PLO officials. In one occasion, seven
leading members of MEK spent several months in the PLO camps in Jordan and Lebanon. On 3
August 1972, they bombed the Jordanian embassy as a means to revenge King Hussein's
unleashing his troops on the PLO in 1970.
After their exile, the MEK changed into an 'ally' of Israel in pursuit of its ideological
opportunism"
I could write all week about how Israel uses its control of the US to further its goal of
being the Super Power of the ME .coming into play now also is how they offering their control
of the US to help Egyptian mad man, General Sisi, to implement his President of Egypt for
life plan in exchange for being Israel's side kick.
Makes you want to vomit doesnt it?.. to know what the US has become.
@Philip
Giraldi There are hardliners in Alaska, Texas, North Dakota and other oil-producing
states that wouldn't be too troubled if the horse manure hit the fan in Iran.
Haven't the Iranians said they would pulverize Saudi Arabian oil installations if they are
attacked by Israel or the United States?
Two hundred dollar a barrel oil could buy a lot of joy in the USA oil patch!
In England and in France, as well as in the US, the Jews became a symbol of the present
neo-liberal regime, as the scams and hoaxes make it apparent.
The pride and pressure of Jews as high-achievers could be fueling the scams and frauds in
so many fields.
Non-Jews don't feel particularly bad if they don't achieve much. But Jews have this
reputation, indeed a point of pride among Jews, as being intelligent and high-achieving. So,
it seems like many many Jews come under the pressure to be high-achieving or at least appear
so. To be a 'loser' Jew is far more humiliating that it is to be a loser goyim. It's like a
black guy losing to a white guy in boxing or one-on-one basketball. Unheard of. Consider the
movie BOILER ROOM where lesser Jews resort to fraud to make easy money and seem
successful.
Shamir, you missed a very simple point. This Jussie Smollett is Jewish. His father is a Jew.
He isn't black, he is bi-racial and since Judaism is not a race (like being black) but an
ethnicity Jussie actions are more that of a jew than it is as a black person. In fact a lot
of black people didn't believe him and show his actions as a means to exploit the black
identity even before his actions where exposed as a hoax
@swamped
I believe he's pointing out the supremacy that the Jews enjoy in Israel/Palestine is due to
the role that Jews play in the neoliberal institutions – that Israel is dependent on
corporate patronage, trade concessions, capital flow from the West, etc.
Thank you Mr. Shamir, for a very informative and interesting article.
In many ways the exposure of the "Smollett Hoax" as a "hoax" is a watershed event in post
9-11 America.
It is, perhaps , the first time that the deliberate defrauding of the public through the
enacting of a "staged event" has been given the media attention for being uncovered "as
such".
And actually prosecuted.
Amazing.
But to many of us, increasingly aware we are living in (what could only be fairly
described as) an Empire of Fraud the "Smollett Hoax"attention is akin to one noticing a tiny
chipmunk urinating on your toe while standing, hapless, under a torrential deluge raining
down from the mammoth elephant above you.
We live in the great age of fraud, Mr. Shamir, and Mr. Smollett's phony act was but a drop
in the bucket.
Consider the fact that nearly every pretext for war, especially since 9-11, has been
proven to be founded on fraudulent narratives , hoaxes, lies , and staged events . and you
will see what I mean.
Do I need to remind you of the media's "iron clad" certainty it was "Saddam's Anthrax"
deposited in both Tom Brokaw and Senator Leahy's office in the run up to the Iraq war ?
Why they even had the 'matching spores from Baghdad' to prove it .Right ?
How about the "Yellow Cake" from Niger ? .or the "aluminum tubes" ? .or the impending
"mushroom clouds" from Saddam's imminent WMD's ?.
All "hoaxes" .All "lies" A veritable cornucopia of war and terror "fraud" which has led to
the unconscionable death of millions of innocent people and the greatest debt crisis our
country has ever faced.
Were it only that our leaders and the oligarchs (for whom they serve) be faced with same
accountability from their "defrauding" as Jussie Smollett ..we would be living in a much
different world , today.
ex.: "Jewish, black and gay actor Jussie Smollett was charged Wednesday with making a
false police report, after he had told Chicago police last month that two men physically
attacked him and yelled racial and homophobic slurs at him."
' In England, seven (now eight) Jewish and Judeophile MPs have stormed out of the Labour
Party claiming Labour has been 'infected' with 'anti-Jewish racism' '
I noted some details on the latest of these, an Ian Austin, who supposedly quit because of
'anti-semitism.'
His recorded foreign trips over the last three years:
'Kurdistan', AIPAC conference in Washington DC, Jerusalem, Israel, Israel, 'Kurdistan',
AIPAC conference in Washington DC, Israel, Israel Admittedly, there's also a visit to
Auschwitz.
Sponsors: Nokan Group, Labour Friends of Israel, Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Australia Israel Cultural Exchange Ltd -- all multiple times.
The data comes from a site somewhat ironically called 'They Work for You.'
"... Trump didn't drain the swamp, he pour fertilizer in it. ..."
"... The shekel counting big snout alligators? They're particularly nasty. ..."
"... Acosta = Epstein Pedogate Prosecutor "When I first heard the name Alexander Acosta, Trump's new pick for Labor Secretary, I knew it sounded eerily familiar. And then it dawned on me. He was the U.S. Attorney in charge of the Southern District of Florida from 2006 through 2009, and oversaw a sweetheart deal for Jeffrey Epstein." ..."
"... Trump - Epstein civil suit COMPLAINT FOR RAPE, SEXUAL MISCONDUCT, CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTS, SEXUAL ABUSE, FORCIBLE TOUCHING, ASSAULT, BATTERY, INTENTIONAL AND RECKLESS INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, DURESS, FALSE IMPRISONMENT, AND DEFAMATION ..."
"... Over 200 children. 12,13,14 years old. Broken homes. Different countries. "Punishment" = Empty wing of a comfy 'prison' with liberal leave privledges for him to work from his office, where he could receive guests including females. That's not prison Tyler's, it's ******* daycare - which is the kind of place he's attracted to. Stop calling it / quoting it as a "prison sentence". ..."
So Trump appoints the prosecutor who slapped Epstein on the wrist for a cabinet position. This is so obvious as Trump was part
of the Lolita Express as was lifelong Democrat Alan Dershowitz who has suddenly flipped to Trump's most ardent supporter as well
as the usual group of pervs like Clinton and Spacey (who cares I guess).
Trump didn't drain the swamp, he pour fertilizer in it.
Acosta = Epstein Pedogate Prosecutor
"When I first heard the name Alexander Acosta, Trump's new pick for Labor Secretary, I knew it sounded eerily familiar. And
then it dawned on me. He was the U.S. Attorney in charge of the Southern District of Florida from 2006 through 2009, and oversaw
a sweetheart deal for Jeffrey Epstein."
Trump - Epstein civil suit COMPLAINT FOR RAPE, SEXUAL MISCONDUCT, CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTS, SEXUAL ABUSE, FORCIBLE TOUCHING, ASSAULT, BATTERY, INTENTIONAL
AND RECKLESS INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, DURESS, FALSE IMPRISONMENT, AND DEFAMATION
Over 200 children. 12,13,14 years old. Broken homes. Different countries. "Punishment" = Empty wing of a comfy 'prison' with
liberal leave privledges for him to work from his office, where he could receive guests including females. That's not prison Tyler's,
it's ******* daycare - which is the kind of place he's attracted to. Stop calling it / quoting it as a "prison sentence".
Must be some really compromising video footage with some very powerful people on it to get that kind of deal. Day of the rope
for that **** and all who let him walk. No exceptions.
I had to search this up to believe what you said. Holy ****... the rabbit hole is deeper than most realize:
" Instead of being sent to state prison, Epstein was housed in a private wing of the Palm Beach County jail. And rather
than having him sit in a cell most of the day, the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office allowed Epstein work release privileges,
which enabled him to leave the jail six days a week, for 12 hours a day, to go to a comfortable office that Epstein had set up
in West Palm Beach. This was granted despite explicit sheriff's department rules stating that sex offenders don't qualify for
work release ."
Note how they spent hours to placate and kowtow to the pedophile while dumping on the victims. That is because the government
is loaded with dog **** like the half monkey Epstein and his fellow tribe members. The only justice left to Americans will come
from the streets. I am completely against torture and war, yet this piece of scum should be waterboarded for names. They need
to clear out those members of government who have been compromised by the activities of the tribe.
The websites contain not only virus, malware, spyware whatever. .. (depends on your PC protection)
It is a ripoff . You never get paid a cent. But if one is gullible and naive enough to give away to shady strangers personal
data as address, birth date, social security number, credit card number, bank account etc., they empty your account , and they
do Identity theft.
p.e. They ask for an initial payment for training, or they sell you a starter kit etc., so they get your data. Or they promise
you to pay salary in advance, before they ever saw you. Sometimes they have "real" job interviews with a "recruiter" by Skype
or Smartphones facial, no skills required, with faked websites of real companies, faked or personal email addresses.
Every last pedophile is dead meat just like Judaica is dead meat which promoted it. No, you cannot touch a kid any longer,
ignorant arrogant sick followers of the Talmud and Kabbalah, for the Talmud and Kabbalah will be burned out of every last Synagogue
on the planet just as the entire religion will be burned down to the ground. Including many dumb parts of the Bible. Take for
example that sick *** stupid mother ******* event where some guy holds a knife up to his son because God told him to. You ignorant
arrogant assholes. God never said any such thing, and God sure as hell never said you were chosen! Well, I take that back. You
see, God told me that you are actually especially chosen for the *** kicking of a millenia.
This is the manner that the scum in the so called "Justice Department" works to protect pedophiles. If it wasn't for an intense
amount of corruption, Epstein would have been prosecuted by the full extent of the law. Instead, sneaky deals by the scum bags
that "prosecuted" this fraud of a case ended up with a plea agreement which "punished" this slimy creep with a measly 13 month
sentence.
To add insult to injury to the victims, the civil case is dragged on for 11 years.
This is the same type of "justice" that is in place that has protected the Catholic clergy pedophiles, which for the most part,
never saw the inside of a court room for their unspeakable crimes.
Why are pedophiles seemingly protected in this society? Is it because pedophilia is rampant among so many that are in powerful
positions? I think we all know the answer to that one.
And then there are all Epstein's friends, who enjoyed themselves with little girls on that benighted island: hearsay includes
both the Clintons among them, and the Queen of England's second son, prince someone or the other. I assume that what they did
on that island was felonious. Need to go after them.
And then there's ACOSTA - our current Federal Secretary of Labor. TRUMP NEEDS TO FIRE HIM, perhaps to prosecute him.
Shhhh, never let the facts get in the way of a good story. Orange Jesus is their messiah. He can do no wrong. He was misquoted
when he said he'd bang his daughter, ignore those creepy photos too.
Facts? Oh you mean like the Donald Trump, Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislane Maxwell connection? Yeah. Wait, they obviously never met
right? "He's a lot of fun to be with," "It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on
the younger side."
This ****** is toast. If you don't get that, you're just not ready for what's happening, and it's OK. The adults have stepped
in, and are cleaning house. The streets will be paved with the carcases of these pedophiles, satanists, and assorted scumbags.
Some will be from the dregs of society, others from the highest echelons, but none will escape.
[So it has been spoken, so it shall be done... (Yul Brenner as Pharoah - from The Ten Commandments)]
I figure God helps those that help themselves,there is an afterlife though,the trick is being in this world but not of it.I
have a roof over my head,a full belly,an income and good family and friends hell thats better than 70 per cent on this planet
so I tend not to be much of a God botherer.
I must apologize, it seems his pimpette (?) named Ghislaine was there, representing Prince Andrew, who also seems to like them
young, ... not sure if thats why Fergie left him... its complicated...
As far as the Clinton Foundation paying for the 3 million dollar wedding, well that's murky too
Far more important in the here and now is Bernie Sanders refused to go with the Dims and back fat Mike's 'Guido' in Venezuela.
The head of the Clinton Foundation , a Congresswoman from Florida and ex Bill Clinton Secretary of something, loudly condemned
Bernie and said he will NEVER be the Dems candidate for President.
Was Epstein "Lolita exress" a special operation to compromise Us politicians?
Notable quotes:
"... Of course it shouldn't be Mueller, he's probably on video there too. I bet ((Mossad)) has video on a lot of the "goy" D.C. traitors. ..."
"... Judge Rules Plea Deal For "Orgy Island Billionaire" Broke Federal Law. My response : I would bet money that there are a whole lot of "plea deals" that broke federal law. I think the new AG BARR needs to look at all of these deals. The ones that come to mind are the plea deals given to members of both the CLINTON and 'OBOZO' administrations. ..."
"... Start with the Awan bros! ..."
"... "Epstein will likely live out his life as a free man (unless new offenses are committed, or if other victims of his sex trafficking in different jurisdictions come forward. There's no statute of limitations on sex trafficking)." If the prosecutor was corrupt, then the above is not a true statement ..."
"... "... ferried Bill Clinton and actor Kevin Spacey to his "Orgy Island" aboard his plane, which has been termed "the Lolita Express... " ..."
Nice timing. Right after a prostitution sting nets some pretty high-profile players in . . .
S. Florida.
bh2 , 5 hours ago
It isn't Epstein who they were most trying to protect, even though he was the one directly
charged. It was all the cronies in political life who hung out with him on his island "paradise".
Perhaps now the underage women who were molested will be able to name names. Could be
interesting. Trump should dump Acosta like a hot rock.
NiggaPleeze , 4 hours ago
Well I'd rather Mueller spend time looking into the activities at Epstein island than this
Russian crap. There's a real threat to national security if the Orangutan is compromised,
which IMO, he very much seems to be. And IMO, that is where the real "collusion" probably
lies.
Of course it shouldn't be Mueller, he's probably on video there too. I bet ((Mossad)) has
video on a lot of the "goy" D.C. traitors.
GUS100CORRINA , 5 hours ago
Judge Rules Plea Deal For "Orgy Island Billionaire" Broke Federal Law. My response : I would bet money that there are a whole lot of "plea deals" that broke
federal law. I think the new AG BARR needs to look at all of these deals. The ones that come
to mind are the plea deals given to members of both the CLINTON and 'OBOZO'
administrations.
sodbuster , 4 hours ago
Start with the Awan bros!!!!!!!!!!!
spoonful , 5 hours ago
"Epstein will likely live out his life as a free man (unless new offenses are committed,
or if other victims of his sex trafficking in different jurisdictions come forward. There's
no statute of limitations on sex trafficking)." If the prosecutor was corrupt, then the above
is not a true statement - the case can be retried as a fraud on the court by a so-called
"officer of the court" - the new Labor Secretary . . . drumroll please . . . Alex Acosta . .
. appointed as a cabinet member by the President, who just so happens to be a potential
witness in the very same case.
sixsigma cygnusatratus , 5 hours ago
"... ferried Bill Clinton and actor Kevin Spacey to his "Orgy Island" aboard his plane,
which has been termed "the Lolita Express... "
Wait, so is he going to be CEO of Disney or will it be Netflix?
I wouldn't give up on America yet. There are pockets of resistance to the PTB popping up
around the country.
Here we have a Arkansas newspaper suing the state over the Israel Boycott ban .. that it is a
newspaper doing the suing is significant.
ACLU and ACLU of Arkansas to Appeal Ruling on Boycott Ban
February 21, 2019
LITTLE ROCK –The Arkansas Civil Liberties Union Foundation and the American Civil
Liberties Union Foundation today filed a notice of appeal in their lawsuit challenging a
state law that requires government contractors to pledge not to boycott Israel or reduce
their fees by 20 percent. The lawsuit, which was dismissed by a U.S. District Court judge in
January, was filed on behalf of the Arkansas Times LP. The Times was penalized by the
government after it refused to certify that it is not boycotting Israel or Israel-controlled
territories.
The case is being appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
"The district court's decision would radically limit the First Amendment right to boycott
if allowed to stand," said Rita Sklar, ACLU of Arkansas executive director. "Allowing the
government to force people to relinquish their First Amendment rights or pay a penalty for
expressing certain political beliefs disfavored by the government would set a dangerous
precedent. This 'pay-to-say' tax is blatantly unconstitutional and we're committed to seeing
the law struck down."
"... US soldiers are butchered, maimed and horribly wounded fighting wars on behalf of Israel and Charles Schumer will start screaming about so-called "anti-Semitism" if anyone questions the foreign policy choices of the American Empire's ruling class ..."
...Charles Schumer is a JEW NATIONALIST who uses his power and the
power of the Israel Lobby to get American soldiers to fight wars on behalf of Israel in the
Middle East and West Asia.
US soldiers are butchered, maimed and horribly wounded fighting wars on behalf of Israel and
Charles Schumer will start screaming about so-called "anti-Semitism" if anyone questions the
foreign policy choices of the American Empire's ruling class.
"... The anti Semitism ploy is used to shield the Zionists from any criticism and to place them in a special place kind of like in Orwell's Animal Farm ..."
Ilhan Omar quickly understood that she had touched a live wire, surrendered, and
recanted. She apologized by Monday afternoon, 18 hours after her original tweet, saying
"Anti-Semitism is real and I am grateful for Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating
me on the painful history of anti-Semitic tropes. My intention is never to offend my
constituents or Jewish Americans as a whole. We have to always be willing to step back and
think through criticism, just as I expect people to hear me when others attack me for my
identity. This is why I unequivocally apologize."
What does that sound like? A Stalin-era confession? 'I have betrayed the Party. I have
betrayed the Revolution. I humbly request to be sent to Joo-lag.'
The anti Semitism ploy is used to shield the Zionists from any criticism and to place them in
a special place kind of like in Orwell's Animal Farm and in fact the Zionists are in fact in
that special place here in America where they reign above all and none dare call them out for
their genocide of the Palestinians or the fact they did 911 and murdered some 3000 Americans.
So great is the Zionist control of the US government that no congressman who values his
position in congress dares criticize Zionists and goes along with everything that Israel and
the Zionists do, and if fact congress would be more accurately called the lower house of the
Knesset!
Accusations of so-called "anti-Semitism" are used by the JEW/WASP ruling class to cover up
the treasonous activities of the JEW/WASP ruling class.
When CIA Leprechaun Boy Buckley wanted to attack Pat Buchanan because Buchanan was
skeptical of wars that benefited Israel, Buckley the whore called Buchanan an "anti-Semite."
In fact, the CIA Leprechaun scumbag Buckley wrote a whole book screaming about so-called
"anti-Semitism" and Pat Buchanan. Buckley is a disgusting Leprechaun rat who is now roasting
in the hottest pits of fiery Hell!
When disgusting rat whores in the US Congress such as Charles Schumer want to cover the
fact that they are pushing JEW NATIONALISM by pushing to continue to use the US military as
muscle to fight wars on behalf of Israel, they accuse those who call them out on their
actions by the swear word of the ruling class: "anti-Semite."
Charles Schumer is a JEW NATIONALIST who uses his power and the power of the Israel Lobby
to get American soldiers to fight wars on behalf of Israel in the Middle East and West Asia.
US soldiers are butchered, maimed and horribly wounded fighting wars on behalf of Israel and
Charles Schumer will start screaming about so-called "anti-Semitism" if anyone questions the
foreign policy choices of the American Empire's ruling class.
"... The epithet 'anti-semitic' continues to have a lot of clout. Measuring this in the most accurate way -- how effectively it cows one into silence -- I've realized it's quite effective. ..."
It was manufactured outrage, with political leaders from both parties latching on to a media
frenzy to score points against each other. Even though it is perfectly legitimate for a
Congresswoman on the Foreign Affairs Committee to challenge what AIPAC does and where its money
comes from, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi complained that Omar's "use of anti-Semitic
tropes and prejudicial accusations about Israel's supporters" was "deeply offensive." Chelsea
Clinton
accused Omar of "trafficking in anti-Semitism." President Donald Trump, who
has admitted that his Mideast policy is intended to serve Israeli rather than U.S.
interests, also jumped in, saying "I think she should either resign from congress or she should
certainly resign from the House Foreign Affairs Committee."
Ilhan Omar quickly understood that she had touched a live wire, surrendered, and recanted.
She
apologized by Monday afternoon, 18 hours after her original tweet, saying "Anti-Semitism is
real and I am grateful for Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating me on the painful
history of anti-Semitic tropes. My intention is never to offend my constituents or Jewish
Americans as a whole. We have to always be willing to step back and think through criticism,
just as I expect people to hear me when others attack me for my identity. This is why I
unequivocally apologize." But she also bravely wrote "At the same time, I reaffirm the
problematic role of lobbyists in our politics, whether it be AIPAC, the NRA or the fossil fuel
industry. It's gone on too long and we must be willing to address it."
Pelosi approved of the apology. Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat from Minnesota who is
running for president in 2020, chimed in to make sure that everyone knew how much she loves
Israel, saying "I'm glad she apologized. That was the right thing to do. There is just no room
for those kinds of words. I think Israel is our beacon of democracy. I've been a strong
supporter of Israel and that will never change."
Two days later,
a motion sponsored by Congressman Lee Zeldin of New York passed by a 424 to 0 vote. It was
specifically intended to serve as a rebuke to Omar. It
stated that "it is in the national security interest of the United States to combat
anti-Semitism around the world because there has been a significant amount of anti-Semitic and
anti-Israel hatred that must be most strongly condemned."
Congressional votes professing love for Israel notwithstanding, the fact is that there is a
massive
, generously funded effort to corrupt America's government in favor of Israel. It is
euphemistically called the Israel Lobby even though it is overwhelmingly Jewish and it boasts
fairly openly of its power when talking with its closest friends about
how its money influences the decisions made on Capitol Hill and in the White House. Its
combined budget exceeds one billion dollars per year and it includes lobbying powerhouses like
the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) which alone had $229 million
in income in 2017, supporting more than 200 employees. It exists only to promote Israeli
interests on Capitol Hill and throughout the United States with an army of lobbyists and its
activities include using questionably legal all expenses paid "orientation" trips to Israel for
all new congressmen and spouses.
McCarthy and the other stooges in Congress deliberately sought to frame the argument in
terms of Ilhan Omar having claimed that he personally was receiving money from pro-Israel
sources and that money influenced his voting. Well, the fact is that such activity does take
place and was documented three years ago by the respected Foreign
Policy Journal , which published a piece entitled "The Best Congress AIPAC can Buy" as well
as more recently in an al-Jazeera investigative expose using a concealed camera.
And Kevin McCarthy does indeed receive money from Israel PACs –
$33,200 in 2018 . The amount individual congressmen receive is dependent on their actual or
potential value to Israel. Completely corrupt and enthusiastically pro-Israel Senator Robert
Menendez of New Jersey received
$548,507 in 2018 . In the House, Beto O'Rourke of Texas received $226,690. The numbers do
not include individual contributions of under $200, which are encouraged by AIPAC and can be
considerable. In general, congressmen currently receive over $23,000 on
average from the major pro-Israel organizations while Senators get $77,000.
But, of course, direct donations of money are not the whole story. If a congressman is
unfriendly to Israel, money moves in the other direction, towards funding an opponent when
re-election is coming up. Former Rep. Brian Bard has observed that "Any
member of Congress knows that AIPAC is associated indirectly with significant amounts of
campaign spending if you're with them, and significant amounts against you if you're not with
them." Lara Friedman, who has worked on the Hill for 15 years on Israel/Palestine, notes how
congressmen and staffs of "both parties told me over and over that they agreed with me but
didn't dare say so publicly for fear of repercussions from AIPAC."
A good example of how it all worked involves one honest congressman, Walter Jones of North
Carolina, who recently passed away. In 2014, "Wall Street billionaires, financial industry
lobbyists, and neoconservative hawks" tried to unseat Jones by bankrolling
his primary opponent . The "dark money" intended to defeat him came from a PAC called "The
Emergency Committee for Israel," headed by leading neoconservative Bill Kristol. Jones' war
views, including avoiding a war with Iran, were clearly perceived as anti-Israel.
And one should also consider contributions directly to the political parties. Israeli/U.S.
dual nationals Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban are the largest single donors to the GOP and to
the Democrats, having contributed
$82 million and
$8,780,000 respectively in the 2016 presidential campaign. Both have indicated openly that
Israel is their top priority.
If they have demonstrated fealty to Israel while in office, many Congressmen also find that
loyalty pays off after retirement from government with richly remunerated second careers in
Jewish dominated industries, like financial services or the media. And there are hundreds of
Jewish organizations that contribute to Israel as charities, even though the money frequently
goes to fund illegal activity, including the settlements. Money also is used to buy newspapers
and media outlets which then adhere to a pro-Israel line, or, where that does not work, to buy
advertising that is conditional on being friendly to Israel. So the bottom line is indeed "the
Benjamins" and the corruption that they buy.
Karen Pollock of the Holocaust Education Trust
said in January that "One person questioning the truth of the Holocaust is one too many."
That is nonsense. Any, and all, historical events should be questioned regularly, a principle
that is particular true regarding developments that carry a lot of emotional baggage. The
Israel Lobby would have all Americans believe that any criticism of Israel is motivated by
historic hatred of Jews and is therefore anti-Semitism. Don't believe it. When the AIPAC crowd
screams that linking Jews and money is a classic anti-Semitic trope respond by pointing out
that Jews and money are very much in play in the corruption of congress and the media over
Israel. Terrible things are being done in the Middle East in the name of Jews and of Israel and
it all comes down to those Benjamins and the silence they buy by accusing all critics of
anti-Semitism. Just recall what the Israeli minister admitted, "It's a trick, we always use
it."
Israel has a population of approximately 8.7 million, roughly equal to the state of New
Jersey. It is among the world's most affluent nations, with a per capita income slightly
below that of the European Union. Israel's unemployment rate of 4.3% is better than
America's 4.4%, and Israel's net trade, earnings, and payments is ranked 22nd in the world
while the US sits in last place at a dismal 202nd.
Yet, Israel receives more of America's foreign aid budget than any other nation. The US
has, in fact, given more aid to Israel than it has to all the countries of sub-Saharan
Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean combined – which have a total population of
over a billion people.
And foreign aid is just one component of the staggering cost of our alliance with
Israel.
Given the tremendous costs, it is critical to examine why we lavish so much aid on
Israel, and whether it is worth Americans' hard-earned tax dollars. But first, let's take a
look at what our alliance with Israel truly costs.
Here's Nancy Pelosi on what's most important about America.
"I have said to people when they ask me, if this Capitol crumbled to the ground, the
one thing that would remain would be our commitment to our aid, I don't even call it our aid,
our cooperation with Israel. That's fundamental to who we are."
.Jews and money are very much in play in the corruption of congress and the media
over Israel.
Absolutely, and this 4 part documentary, "The Israel Lobby in the U.S." proves it's every
bit as bad as you imagine, maybe worse.
Start with this, Part 2, which focuses on Congress. (Part 1 introduces the undercover
reporter, and shows how the Israel Lobby operates on college campuses.)
The Israel Lobby in the U.S. – Documentary by Al Jazeera (Part 2 of 4
)
@Marcus
Aurelius Tarkus If you watch Al Jazeera's The Lobby you would obviously be pleased to
learn that the lobbyists are lamenting the falling effectiveness of the anti-Semitism
accusation. It stands to reason that under 30s do not have the reliably implanted mindset
about the shame of antisemitism that the, say, over 55s are likely to have.
A lot of pro-Israel pressure comes from some decidedly un-Jewish sources. Namely, the
"Rapture Ready" crowd among evangelical Christians. They support Israel because they think
Israel's existence is a precondition for Jesus' return. They want to go to Heaven, but don't
want to die, and think that the "Rapture" is a way around that.
Rashida Tlaib believes that US States must be banned from making geopolitical considerations
a part of which companies they do business with. She calls it a free speech issue.
On the other hand, she also believes that States, and the Federal Government, must
discriminate in favour of companies not owned by white people. She calls that an
equality issue.
She often calls into question all manner of other people's loyalties, while she is also
endlessly talking about Palestine, and how Israel must become majority Palestinian.
In a one off piece of consistency, she also supports the same thing for America though, as
she want to abolish immigration enforcement. Which would obviously directly lead to
abolishing America itself.
Meanwhile, Philip Giraldi pretends that he thinks $23,000 of campaign contributions will
buy a US Congressman. In which case, Jezz Bezos could have bought 10 literally every
single minute with the money he made in 2018.
People disagree with you. They have reasons. Cluelessly implying it is because they are
all bought by the Jews makes you look dumb, especially to them.
Israel came into being because Britain needed to get America into the WW1, and the American
leadership were glad of the the PR/ Media and political wherewithal of Jews to help get the
USA in. Even Germany felt it had to match the Balfour Declaration. The Jewish community has
not declined in influence since WW1.
If the US had nothing better to worry about they could, and would, deal with the
subjugation of the whole political system on the issue, but the fact is the priorities lie
elsewhere. The Israel Lobby are an opponent best avoided, and the West has to concentrate on
China.
If one were to read the U.S. mainstream media one would think that there has been a
dramatic increase in anti-Semitism worldwide, but that claim is incorrect. What has been
taking place is not hatred of Jews but rather a confluence of two factors
As well as the factors you mention -- Israeli behaviour and broadening the definition of
anti-Semitism -- the Internet has enabled millions of gentiles to become 'Jew woke', which
inevitably leads to a rise in what Jews perceive as anti-Semitic comment.
The Irish Savant recently blogged about a
lecture by Rabbi David Bar-Hayim: 'He sees Jews as having no moral obligations to us
[gentiles] at all, we're there to be robbed, exploited and, where possible, physically
destroyed.'
Memo to Jews: Has it crossed your minds that anti-Semitism is your fault?
I'd always reckoned myself soundly philo-semitic, based mainly on my father's dealings with
British Jews, backed up by my own acquaintanceships amongst them.
I've cooled in the last few years. That's because two or three times one website comment
threads I've made factual remarks about Palestine that have led to vituperative responses
from commenters who have presumably been Jewish, perhaps Israelis.
I'm not so daft as to think that a few internet nutters or crooks should outweigh personal
experience but it has made me a little more sensitive to institutionalised bullying on behalf
of Israel. An example was the pressure recently put on the (British) Labour Party to adopt
Israel's favoured definition of anti-semitism. I accept, of course, that there are lots of
disgusting anti-semites in that party but I'm damned if I see why a whole political party
should be expected to swallow uncritically some other buggers' definition of
anti-semitism.
In Warsaw, Pompeo urges Poland to pass Holocaust restitution law Poland is the only EU member without comprehensive legislation to return, or provide
compensation for, private property confiscated by the Nazis
By JTA
14 Feb 2019
As part of his remarks, Pompeo called on the Polish government to resolve outstanding
restitution issues.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo raised the issue of Holocaust-era property restitution
during his first official visit to Poland.
"We also appreciate the importance of resolving outstanding issues of the past, and I
urge my Polish colleagues to move forward with comprehensive private property restitution
legislation for those who lost property during the Holocaust era," he said.
Gideon Taylor, chair of operations for the World Jewish Restitution Organization, said
he welcomed Pompeo's "expression of his commitment to securing justice for Holocaust
survivors and their families. This is a powerful affirmation of the importance of this
issue to the United States."
His first state visit and he makes this the key issue.
1. stop blaming Jews for your own stupidity, corruption, greed & whoredom
2. Jews, as a national collective, have some unpleasant traits, among them, recently,
emotional blackmail misusing the shoah to extort money from most white/Euro-derived nations.
This behavior, similar to divorced women's scheming, should be publicly exposed &
denounced. OK guys, you suffered, we admit, but others suffered too, so to hell with this
game
3. US political system, Jews & Gentiles, is too plutocratic, with all these PACs, big
donors, super PACs & whatnot. This should be reformed because the very system perpetuates
corruption & suicidal policy at all levels
Thus, is there a significant difference, ethical or otherwise between being bought by
the NRA, the health insurers, the organised aged, the arms industry, the
sugar/biofuels/cattle lobbies, trial lawyers etc as compared with Israel?
Well wiz, while it's true that the arms industry and Big Sugar, Big Tobacco, Big Pharma
and others, are responsible for the deaths of millions of people, including Americans,
there's no evidence that they deliberately murdered Americans in cowardly and treacherous
acts of war, as Israel has done repeatedly, as with the cowardly and treacherous attack on
the USS Liberty, and the cowardly and treacherous false flag attack on 9/11.
So as to your query over the ethical question of extorting Americans to lavish lucre on an
enemy state with the blood of thousands of Americans on its hands, this question should
answer itself.
Why are Americans looted to fund an enemy state that murders Americans with fiendish glee,
as the "dancing Israelis" so egregiously demonstrates.
It's like the people of Iraq being taxed to pay for Tony Blair or Dubya's new private jet.
Forcing the victims of war crimes to fund their abusers.
Lobbyists for Big Tobacco are saints by comparison.
American mass media is especially two faced when it comes to outing intolerance. A good
deal has been made over over Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar's comments on the influence
of AIPAC (American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee). The anti-Russian establishment hack
journalist Julia Ioffe tweeted her belief that Omar's comments are "anti-Semitic"
(anti-Jewish). I'm not too familiar with what Omar has said about Jews over the course of
time. I doubt that it['s more repugnant than what Ioffe has stated about Russians.
There has been no letting up with Ioffe. In one recent mass media TV appearance, she
said (in a joking tone) that a relaxation of Russian gun laws isn't a good idea because
Russians drink too much. In another prominent TV segment, Ioffe stated that when the
Russians call someone corrupt, that person must be pretty bad.
Some generalizations are hypocritically more acceptable than others. A good number of
Western reared Russians see thru this gross hypocrisy. On the subject of Russia, these
individuals regularly get limited coverage in Western mass media.
A lot of pro-Israel pressure comes from some decidedly un-Jewish sources. Namely, the
"Rapture Ready" crowd among evangelical Christians. They support Israel because they
think Israel's existence is a precondition for Jesus' return. They want to go to Heaven,
but don't want to die, and think that the "Rapture" is a way around that.
Aaahhh the beauty of religion ..a very old method for controlling people.
This is Protestantism, which was a Jewish revolutionary movement.
1. stop blaming Jews for your own stupidity, corruption, greed & whoredom
Who's blaming them for that?
Here's what they get the blame for
"Goyim [non-Jews] were born only to serve us." Explaining why God allowed non-Jews long
lives, he added: "Imagine that your donkey would die, you'd lose your income. [The donkey]
is your servant. That's why he [the gentile] gets a long life, to work well for the
Jew."
This summer, Yosef Elitzur and Yitzhak Shapira, who head an influential seminary in the
West Bank settlement of Yitzhar, published The King's Torah, a 230-page guide to how Jews
should treat non-Jews.
The two rabbis concluded that Jews were obligated to kill anyone who posed a danger,
immediate or potential, to the Jewish people, and implied that all Palestinians were to be
considered a threat. On these grounds, the pair justified killing Palestinian civilians and
even their babies.
@Wizard of
Oz'If you watch Al Jazeera's The Lobby you would obviously be pleased to learn that
the lobbyists are lamenting the falling effectiveness of the anti-Semitism accusation. It
stands to reason that under 30s do not have the reliably implanted mindset about the shame of
antisemitism that the, say, over 55s are likely to have.'
The epithet 'anti-semitic' continues to have a lot of clout. Measuring this in the most
accurate way -- how effectively it cows one into silence -- I've realized it's quite
effective.
Islamophobes feel entirely free to publically walk their dog these days. Speaking for
myself, I feel entirely free to express my opinions about blacks, and frequently do. I'd do
the same with respect to other groups if I felt strongly enough.
But to be labelled anti-semitic? I'll caught myself hesitating to click 'publish' when I
notice that my post could reasonably be read as 'anti-semitic.'
The United States of America must have political leaders who will stop the JEW/WASP ruling
class rats from using accusations of so-called "anti-Semitism" to stop debate on policy
issues. The rats who screech about so-called "anti-Semitism" must be ignored!
With all the dirty cash swirling around the Swamp, it's almost hard to believe that Kevin
McCarthy can be bought for $33,200. Seems to me the figure has to be much higher,
probably in the mid 6 figures per year. Those sub-$200 donations need to be reported, with
names attached. I wonder how many of them are precisely $198, since the Saturday people love
gifts that are a multiple of 18. Funny since 18 is also the alphanumeric code for a famous
world leader.
Marco Rubio is a treasonous rat whore for Israel First Jews.
Marco Rubio puts the interests of Israel ahead of the interests of the United States. Jew billionaires pay Marco Rubio to put the interests of Israel over the interests of the
United States.
The JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire will screech on about so-called
"anti-Semitism" if you call Marco Rubio a treasonous rat whore for Israel First Jew
billionaires.
They don't even care about Israel all that much. But what they do care about is power,
Empire and war. That they really care about.
I disagree. Empire is always dominated by a group, and US empire is dominated by Jews. If
the US is merely after Empire, why not cook up excuses to sanction, invade, and destroy
Israel? After all, the world community has condemned Israel many times over for its myriad
crimes. Also, why not invade and smash Saudi Arabia as well? If US is just after empire and
more wars, why not wage war on Israel and Saudis? More bucks for the military industrial
complex.
In truth, the US empire is selective. It is not empire for empire's sake but empire for
Zion's sake. That is why US empire targets Russia, Syria, and Iran while hailing Israel and
protecting Saudi Arabia. US empire is premised on the biases and hatreds of its ethnic
super-elites. "Is it great for the Jews?"
"... Trump ought to know that accusations of anti-Semitism are absolutely, total hogwash. ..."
"... Trump is a recipient of the 'The Tree of Life Award' "the highest humanitarian award the Jewish National Fund* presents to one individual or family each year in appreciation of their outstanding community involvement, their dedication to the cause of American-Israeli friendship, and their devotion to peace and the security of human life". ..."
"President Trump continued to condemn the Saturday shooting at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh that killed at least
11 people.
"The hearts of all Americans are filled with grief following the monstrous killing of Jewish Americans at the Tree of
Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pa., you've all seen it, you've been watching it, it's horrible," he said at a rally in Murphysboro,
Ill.
"This evil anti-Semitic attack is an attack on all of us, it is an assault on humanity. It will require all of us working
together to extract the hateful poison of anti-Semitism from our world. This was an anti-Semitic attack at its worst," Trump
added. "The scourge of anti-Semitism cannot be ignored, cannot be tolerated, and it cannot be allowed to continue It must be
confronted and condemned everywhere it rears its very ugly head."
Through the centuries, the Jews have endured terrible persecution And those seeking their destruction, we will seek their destruction.
And when you have crimes like this, whether it's this one or another one on another group, we have to bring back the death penalty,"
he said. [the audience exploded in wild ovations].
Trump is a recipient of the 'The Tree of Life Award' "the highest humanitarian award the Jewish National Fund* presents to
one individual or family each year in appreciation of their outstanding community involvement, their dedication to the cause of
American-Israeli friendship, and their devotion to peace and the security of human life".
*The Jewish National Fund (Hebrew: קֶרֶן קַיֶּימֶת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, Keren Kayemet LeYisrael, previously הפונד הלאומי,
Ha Fund HaLeumi) was founded in 1901 to buy and develop land in Ottoman Palestine (later the British Mandate for Palestine, and
subsequently Israel and the Palestinian territories) for Jewish settlement.
"... The turning point may well have been John F Kennedy's assassination in November 1963. After that event - which some say was organized by various individuals and groups, of which Mossad and the Israeli government may have been two co-conspirators -- a great deal changed. ..."
<
>if we say fly mentally back to early nineteen sixties, the admiration>
> for America was still very strong, even in the USSR.
> Posted by: Robert Snefjella | Feb 16, 2019 1:34:44 PM | 38
My uncle was in the US Navy in the early sixties. He made many ports of call in the
Mediterranean basin, where he and his mates were warmly greeted. Not so much now, I'm
sure.
Some here might recall that Ike was extremely pissed off at the British, French, and
Israelis for attacking Egypt and creating the 1956 Suez crisis. He threatened to dump UK
bonds and crash their financial system. That's pretty serious stuff!
So how did the Israelis manage to shift US policy 180 degrees, like a parasite taking over
the host's brain? Perhaps the answer to that could yield clues as to how to remove said
parasite without killing the host. Although the host is already brain-dead, so maybe it
wouldn't matter...
The turning point may well have been John F Kennedy's assassination in November 1963.
After that event - which some say was organized by various individuals and groups, of which
Mossad and the Israeli government may have been two co-conspirators -- a great deal changed.
The US began to escalate its war in Vietnam and the cost of pursuing that war eventually led
to the US government in 1971 taking the US dollar off the gold standard and allowing it to
create fiat money.
Something must have happened well before 1967 when the USS Liberty was strafed by Israeli
fighter jets in the intent to destroy it and all its crew and the incident blamed on the
Egyptians in an effort to draw the US into the Six Day War.
Being pro-Zionism is New York way of being militarist
Notable quotes:
"... Trump just appointed John Bolton ! Trump has betrayed us ! How did they turned him ? Blah blah blah .. Forchrissake ! ..."
"... It boggles the mind that even at this stage, so many peoples are still bamboozled by this duopoly dog and pony show , aka the mukkan election ! ..."
"... Because DC is bought and paid for by the defense industry. Constant wars are good for the bottom line, so winning is not the right strategy. Loosing doesn't work either. A constant low level set of global conflicts is perfect. ..."
"... The goal of any "peddler" is to move product. When perpetual war is the product, then any rationale that leads to more sales will do. Enemies become interchangeable. The only thing to apologize for is the lack of sales. ..."
Why Are These Professional War Peddlers Still Around? Pundits like Max Boot and Bill
Kristol got everything after 9/11 wrong but are still considered "experts."
1. The goal of the neocons was to exploit 9/11 to destroy countries in the Middle East
that posed a threat to Israel. As Wesley Clarke told us a long time ago, they were going to
"do" Iraq first, and after that, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Lebanon and finally Iran. Most
of this has been accomplished. We are now in the end game and Iran is in their
cross-hairs.
From the perspective of the neocons, everything has gone their way.
2. The only people who got everything thing wrong were useful idiots like Rod Dreher,
Tucker Carlson and Walter "Freedom Fries" Jones who were too dense to see what the neocons
were really up to. You did not a PhD from Harvard to see that Bush and Blair had no evidence
to back up their claims that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction or to figure out the true
intentions of the neocons.
So why are Boot and Kristol still around? Because Iran is not yet reduced to an ash-heap,
courtesy of USA!USA!USA! so they still have work to do.
Why have they paid no price? Let's all pretend like we don't know the answer to this. And
don't forget to condemn Ilhan Omar for her tweets just to be on the safe side.
It's difficult to live in a post-America America where American interests are subordinate to
Israel and AIPAC and lunatics like Bolton and Pompeo, now have replaced the president in
matters of foreign policy.
Trump has done a 180 and given in completely.
I like Tulsi Gabbard
and hope that she might have a chance of winning the Democratic nomination in spite of the
fact that she now is being attacked by members of her own party, along with the
representative from Minnesota who has the courage to talk of the power of the Israel lobby
that functions solely in the interest of Israel. It seems the Democrats are not so tolerant
of strong women after all. And its time for everyone to stop being intimidated by the charge
of anti-Semitism. When Israeli interests are not those of America and Americans.
Because DC is bought and paid for by the defense industry. Constant wars are good for the
bottom line, so winning is not the right strategy. Loosing doesn't work either. A constant
low level set of global conflicts is perfect.
The goal of any "peddler" is to move product. When perpetual war is the product, then any
rationale that leads to more sales will do. Enemies become interchangeable. The only thing to
apologize for is the lack of sales.
These two hucksters are not experts on the product itself, but rather experts at selling
the product.
Pres. Eisenhower, a genuine "authority on armed conflict", warned us of such peddlers.
Yes the neocons have a poor track record but they've succeeded at turning our republic into
an empire. The mainstream media and elites of practically all western nations are unanimously
pro-war. Neither political party has defined a comprehensive platform to rebuild our
republic.
Even you, Tucker Carlson, mock the efforts of Ilhan Omar for criticizing AIPAC and
Elliott Abrams.
I don't personally care for many of her opinions but that's not what matters:
if we elect another neocon government we won't last another generation. Like the lady asked
Ben Franklin "What kind of government have you bequeathed us?", and Franklin answered "A
republic, madam, if you can keep it."
US Representative Ilhan Omar's (D-Minnesota) tweet is a critique of US-Israel collusion in
the Middle East, Institute for Public Accuracy's Sam Husseini tells RT America's Manila Chan.
#RTAmerica#InQuestionRT#QuestionMore
Democratic Congressmember Ilhan Omar of Minnesota is facing
criticism today after commenting on a tweet by Glenn Greenwald. On Sunday, Greenwald tweeted,
"GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy threatens punishment for @IlhanMN and @RashidaTlaib over their
criticisms of Israel.
It's stunning how much time US political leaders spend defending a foreign nation even if it
means attacking free speech rights of Americans." Rep. Omar retweeted his post and added the
line: "It's all about the Benjamins baby."
She later named AIPAC as the organization paying American politicians to be pro-Israel.
A debate about the power in Washington of the pro-Israel lobby is underway, after Rep. Ilhan
Omar, D-Minn., responded sharply to reports that Republican leader Kevin McCarthy was targeting
both Omar and fellow Muslim Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat from Michigan.
Omar quoted rap lyrics -- " It's all about the Benjamins baby
" -- to suggest McCarthy's move was driven by the lobby's prolific spending. Asked specifically
who she was referring to, Omar responded, " AIPAC !"
The debate over the influence of pro-Israel groups could be informed by an investigation by
Al Jazeera, in which an undercover reporter infiltrated the Israel Project, a Washington-based
group, and secretly recorded conversations about political strategy and influence over a
six-month period in 2016. That investigation, however, was never aired by the network --
suppressed
by pressure from the pro-Israel lobby .
In November, Electronic Intifada obtained and published the four-part
series, but it did so during the week of the midterm elections, and the documentary did not get
a lot of attention then.
In it, leaders of the pro-Israel lobby speak openly about how they use money to influence
the political process, in ways so blunt that if the comments were made by critics, they'd be
charged with anti-Semitism.
"Congressmen and senators don't do anything unless you pressure them."
David Ochs, founder of HaLev, which helps send young people to American Israel Public
Affairs Committee's annual conference, described for the reporter how AIPAC and its donors
organize fundraisers outside the official umbrella of the organization, so that the money
doesn't show up on disclosures as coming specifically from AIPAC. He describes one group that
organizes fundraisers in both Washington and New York. "This is the biggest ad hoc political
group, definitely the wealthiest, in D.C.," Ochs says, adding that it has no official name, but
is clearly tied to AIPAC. "It's the AIPAC group. It makes a difference; it really, really does.
It's the best bang for your buck, and the networking is phenomenal." (Ochs and AIPAC did not
immediately return The Intercept's requests for comment.)
Without spending money, Ochs argues, the pro-Israel lobby isn't able to enact its agenda.
"Congressmen and senators don't do anything unless you pressure them. They kick the can down
the road, unless you pressure them, and the only way to do that is with money," he
explains.
He describes a fundraiser for Anthony Brown, a Democrat running for Congress in Maryland, as
typical. "So we want the Jewish community to go face to face in this small environment, 50, 30,
40 people, and say, 'This is what's important to us. We want to make sure that if we give you
money, that you're going to enforce the Iran deal.' That way, when they need something from him
or her, like the Iran deal, they can quickly mobilize and say look, we'll give you 30 grand.
They actually impact," Ochs tells the reporter.
Such a claim is not so different from what Omar was describing, and for which she was
roundly condemned. In the wake of Omar's tweets, the Washington Post,
for instance, reported , "The American Jewish Committee demanded an apology, calling her
suggestion that AIPAC is paying American politicians for their support 'demonstrably false and
stunningly anti-Semitic.'" (On Monday, Omar apologized for her tweets, but
insisted that AIPAC and other lobbyist groups are harmful to U.S. politics.)
In the censored documentary, Ochs went on to describe a fundraiser hosted by
Jeff Talpins , a hedge fund giant, as similar as well. "In New York, with Jeff Talpins, we
don't ask a goddamn thing about the fucking Palestinians. You know why? 'Cause it's a tiny
issue. It's a small, insignificant issue. The big issue is Iran. We want everything focused on
Iran," Ochs says. "What happens is Jeff meets with the congressman in the back room, tells them
exactly what his goals are -- and by the way, Jeff Talpins is worth $250 million -- basically
they hand him an envelope with 20 credit cards, and say, 'You can swipe each of these credit
cards for a thousand dollars each.'"
Ochs explains that the club in New York required a minimum pledge of $10,000 to join and
participate in such events. "It's a minimum commitment. Some people give a lot more than
that."
AIPAC, on its own
website , recruits members to join its "Congressional Club," and commit to give at least
$5,000 per election cycle.
Eric Gallagher, a top official at AIPAC from 2010 to 2015, tells the Al Jazeera reporter
that AIPAC gets results. "Getting $38 billion in security aid to Israel matters, which is what
AIPAC just did," he notes at one secretly recorded lunch. "Everything AIPAC does is focused on
influencing Congress."
The film, called "The Lobby," was produced by Al Jazeera's investigative unit, and features
hidden-camera footage obtained by the reporter, who posed as a Jewish, pro-Israel activist from
Britain who wanted to volunteer with the Israel Project. Join Our NewsletterOriginal reporting. Fearless journalism. Delivered to you. I'm in Outfitted with a
luxury apartment in Dupont Circle, the reporter hosted multiple gatherings and otherwise
socialized broadly within the pro-Israel community, winning the confidence of senior officials,
who divulged insider details, many of which have been leaked and created international
news.
A companion version of the film, which looked at the Israel lobby's influence in the United
Kingdom, did make it to air and was the subject of intense controversy. It exposed a plot by an
Israeli embassy official in the United Kingdom to "take down" pro-Palestinian members of
Parliament, leading to his resignation.
That film, however, included a snippet of footage from the United States. Officials here
quickly realized that they, too, had been infiltrated. In the U.K., the Israel lobby lodged an
official complaint claiming the series was anti-Semitic, but the U.K.'s communications agency
rejected the claim, finding that "the allegations in the programme were not made on the grounds
that any of the particular individuals concerned were Jewish and noted that no claims were made
relating to their faith."
Pro-Israel officials in the United States, rather than file an official complaint, exerted
political pressure. A bipartisan group of 19 lawmakers
wrote to the Justice Department requesting an investigation into "the full range of
activities undertaken by Al Jazeera in the United States," and suggesting that the organization
be made to register as a foreign agent. Ultimately, Qatar bent to the pressure and killed the
documentary.
"... But if someone has joint US/Israel citizenship I guess the rules are different as Rahm Emanuel served as White House chief of staff - can't get much higher level government job.. ..."
During the VN War Canada stripped Canadians of their citizenship if they fought for the US
although they had had no problem having US citizens in their ranks in both world wars with no
penalty from the US. One of my uncles did that in WW1. I did not know I was a Canadian
citizen until after I had left active US government service and no longer had a US government
information security clearance.
It is possible to be a dual national in the US government but
this requires individual judgments to be made by heads of agencies and it would probably bar
someone from high level jobs.
It used to be against US law to hold a second citizenship but
the law changed to accommodate US/Israeli citizenship and of necessity now applies to all. If
you act to the detriment of the US for the benefit of your second country I would say that is
prima facie proof of dual loyalty.
But if someone has joint US/Israel citizenship I guess the rules are different as Rahm
Emanuel served as White House chief of staff - can't get much higher level government job..
You must be new here. We have been through the issue of US information security clearances
several times. This security clearance system foe access to classified information is
entirely an artifact of Executive Orders, not of laws. therefore the president as the
ultimate executive can give anyone he wants access at any level.
Members of congress and
federal judges do not have access under this system.
They have access by virtue of their
constitutional office outside the Executive Branch.
- Ilhan Omar tweeted that AIPAC plays a role in encouraging a lot of Jewish Americans to
contribute campaign funds to congressional candidates? Is that a serious question? AIPAC is not
a PAC in American law and thus cannot make political contributions, but it illegally controls a
lot of real PACs and has a lot of political influence in the Jewish community.
- Ralph Northam said on TeeVee that the very first blacks brought to Virginia were initially
considered to be "indentured servants" in English law? He is correct although within a few
decades the colonists realized that it would be more profitable to keep them permanently as
slaves. One must remember that Northam is only now learning some actual Virginia history
- Lindsey Graham is IMO correct in suggesting that Trump should "pocket" the barrier money
in the negotiated bill, keep the government fully open, and then proceed to used additional
funds available to him as CinC to continue to build the barrier system.
- The National Guard of several states is probably serving on the border with federal
funding support although still under state control. There is a law which provides for that. If
the governors order a withdrawal from the border, Trump should IMO call these National Guard
forces into federal service. The governors would then have no control over this matter at all.
pl
To me, repeat, to me, the issue is less,, much less, what AIPAC does, or Israelis, or
American Jews do, than what the pols making policy do. I fully expect the three groups above
will try their damndest to do what they believe is in Israel's interest . I get that. I might
not like it that they are so damn successful...but that's another issue. But American pols
that betray their own Nation's interest is what bugs me. They are the ones selling their
people out. The Lobbyists are just doing their job. Dirty and counter productive job as I
think it will prove to be in the long run...
With friends like Marco Rubio, the United States doesn't need enemies. I still remember very
well, when then-candidate Donald Trump ridiculed Rubio as "little Marco" during the 2016
debates. He was perfectly right. Like Phil Giraldi demonstrated Rubio's "intellectual"
capability, It seems he has a birdbrain. Joke aside, Rubio's political busyness Israel is
concerned raises the question who owns his true loyalty. Instead of working for his
constituency, he is on the road primarily for Israel. As it seems he loves Israel more than
his birthplace the United States, and he despises Cuba that political system is more
social-oriented that the American one.
The problem with the Florida senator is his absolute blind obedience towards the Zionist
state, his engagement against the BDS movement and his loyalty to Israel's stalwarts in the
US. He is not the only US politician in Congress who is in the pocket of the Zionist lobby.
At least the American Middle Eastern policy is run by the Zionist Israel Lobby in the US. But
from all walks of life, their influence is also not to be underestimated.
The so-called unbreakable bond between the US and Israel is mere rhetoric, but most
members of Congress believe in this nonsense just out of mere political survival. Israel is
not an ally but a massive liability to US national interest in the region. The Zionist
political class uses the American political system to its advantage and pays nothing in
return. The opposite is true. The State of Israel is massively spying on the US and cause the
American people a lot of damage.
There are not only the assassinations of JFK and RFK, but also the killing of JFK, Jr.
who's private plane crashed into the sea right of the coast of Martha's Vineyard. It was the
same cover-up as in the case of his father and his uncle. There are persistent rumors in the
wind that the Israeli Mossad was behind it, such as Laurent Guyénot laid out in his
two excellent articles on UNZ Review. Among large parts of the truther movement, some
segments make a strong argument that Israel was behind the 9/11 attacks, although with the
collaboration of sections of the Bush/Cheney administration.
To refer to Israel as a friend or ally such as Rubio does is just a joke. Israel is
nothing more than an albatross like an ally. The whole American-Israeli relationship must be
put to the test. There is no room for romance because such romanticism is for the sole
detriment of the United States and the American People.
How such a lightweight came to be a Senator of the United States of America eludes
me.
I know this question is meant to be a bit rhetorical but let me try and answer it.
This senator, and the vast majority of his ilk in the Congress, are venal lying whores in
thrall to a foreign party and to money interests. He is not unique in this regard but only
one of many lying whores in power.
And the American people–by and large–are so dumbed down by a dumbed down
culture and a dumbed down media that they cannot recognize these treacherous weasels for the
traitors that they are.
The Senator is using contentions meant to protect us citizens from unfair business
practices by state and enterprise to launch protections against free speech for a foreign
entity.
That is painfully funny. I hope it is only a feeling, a sensation, but our political
leadership seems to have abandoned their collective minds. But this is convenient for the
Sen. because nullifying the constitution is one way of nullifying borders.
Zionists control our money via the unconstitutional FED and that gives the Zionist banking
cabal total control over the U.S. government and we the goyim/proles!
Nathan Rothschild infamously said, I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of
England for the man who controls the money supply controls the British Empire and I am that
man!
It is the same here in America and every country in the world that has a Zionist central
bank and that is almost all of them!
Rubio is just another puppet of the Zionist banking kabal and is just like the rest of
congress and in fact congress would be better named as the lower house of the Knesset.
Marco Rubio Is A Complete And Total Politician Whore For Jew Billionaires Norman Braman and
Paul Singer and Shelly Adelson.
Marco Rubio does the bidding of Jew Billionaires by putting the interests of Israel ahead
of the interests of the United States.
Jew Billionaires Norman Braman and Paul Singer and Shelly Adelson all push nation-wrecking
mass legal immigration and amnesty for illegal alien invaders.
Marco Rubio pushes nation-wrecking mass legal immigration and amnesty for illegal alien
invaders.
Jew Billionaires Shelly Adelson and Paul Singer and Norman Braman have bought the mass
legal immigration policies and the amnesty for illegal alien invaders immigration policy of
the Republican Party ruling class and Marco Rubio and Shyster Boy Trump.
Marco Rubio and New York City Shyster Boy Trump have been bought and paid for like common
whores by Jew Billionaires Shelly Adelson and Paul Singer and Norman Braman.
Israel is powerful only to extent its goals are well correlated with the goal of the US MIC.
So like neocons Israel serves as a collective lobbyist of MIC. If this would not be the case, all
power of AIPAC and similar organizations would disappear, and the organization itself would be
put under FARA where it belongs.
The same is true for Zionists billionaires. The minute they turn against MIC would the minute
some dirty dealing and connections with organized crime would be exposed and some pedophile
scandals put on the front pages of MSM.
Notable quotes:
"... There wouldn't be calls for BDS movement if the US wasn't providing 3.8 billion per to a country whose domestic policy is apartheid and foreign policy goal is an attack on Iran. ..."
All these anti-Semitic articles fail a basic logical test :
i) If gentiles are so smart, why are Zionists, whom gentiles outnumber 40:1 across the
combined Western World, able to control everything? The entire premise of White Nationalism
fails.
ii) If Israel is able to manipulate the US government this totally, why can't someone like
China, with deeper pockets, do the same? Conversely, why can't Israel manipulate Russia or
the EU?
iii) Virtually everything that White Nationalists say about Zionists is what blacks say about
whites. Given the small number of Zionists and no prior history of enslavement, the WN claim
is even weaker.
There is a reason that the conspiracy theories regarding Zionists don't get any purchase
outside of a small fringe.
@Thomm i) It's not so
surprising given the wholesale lies pedaled by the predominantly Zionists media and
entertainment sectors of Western civilization, compounded by the outright censorship of
opposing views by those same groups with the assistance of the ADL, SPLC, et al. Add to that
the altruistic nature and generally independent spirit of Whites as opposed to the *dare I
say tribal* nature of Zionists.
ii) China's recent ascent to global dominance was not built on usury and manipulation of
foreign nation states through a diaspora of what has been described as "nations within
nations." I'd say Zionists in Russia (ever hear of the Holodomor?) manipulated that part of
the world for over a century quite completely, and in Eastern Europe for slightly less time,
to the tune of 100 million dead White Christians.
iii) Interesting you bring up Blacks but leave out the part about Zionists manipulating
Whites with "Birth of a Nation" being the first movie many arriving White immigrants viewed.
Shock status: imagined. Clearly, that's but one of a laundry list of things any reasonably
educated White person could hold up as an example of manipulation of public opinion.
Calling truisms tropes doesn't absolve ... crimes committed against humanity.
Every single day Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, Han Chinese, are criticized and critiqued for
all sorts of reasons and all manner of circumstances. Only one category of people is immune
from criticism: Zionists. It's a double standard, and it must end.
> If gentiles are so smart, why are Zionists, whom gentiles outnumber 40:1 across the
combined Western World, able to control everything? The entire premise of White Nationalism
fails.
WN's largely agree that Zionists are more intelligent, so they are not surprised that
Zionists have been able to achieve outsized influence (to "control everything," in the
language of this lame troll).
ii) If Israel is able to manipulate the US government this totally, why can't someone
like China, with deeper pockets, do the same? Conversely, why can't Israel manipulate
Russia or the EU?
If the Chinese attempted the same thing, Americans would be permitted to notice .
Noticing Zionists political activity is "anti-semitic", so many Americans don't notice it (or
pretend not to).
There are far fewer Zionists in the EU and Russia, but they enjoy outsized influence in
those lands too – just not to the same extent as in the U.S.
iii) Virtually everything that White Nationalists say about Zionists is what blacks say
about whites. Given the small number of Zionists and no prior history of enslavement, the
WN claim is even weaker.
Incorrect. WN's admit that Zionists are more intelligent than white gentiles; blacks who
accuse whites of racism seldom admit that whites are more intelligent than blacks.
Ultimately, WN's want separation from Zionists. Blacks who accuse whites of racism virtually
never desire separation from whites. I'm not even a WN, but it really shouldn't be
controversial to admit these obvious facts.
Why does Phil have such a hard time banning moronic trolls like this clown? (Who everybody
suspects is just a sad little hindoo, but it's possible is a deranged little zionut.)
There wouldn't be calls for BDS movement if the US wasn't providing 3.8 billion per to a
country whose domestic policy is apartheid and foreign policy goal is an attack on Iran.
I was disappointed to see that one of my two senators voted for the bill. And I would have
to say the biggest surprise was Sen. Gillibrand who probably wanted to say 'aye' but
didn't.
The next step is likely to be that any public disagreement with the state of Israel is
akin to antisemitism. Which I'm certain that the Republicans will be happy to throw at the
Dem. congress.
The full interview is at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67y2V3ksdlA it's a interesting interview, especially considering Kushner lack of
experience in this area and composition of his team.
This interview was in 2017. As of 2019 the results were zero and with recent Israeli actions problem probably became worse. Palestine conflict after so many Palestinian brood was spilled by Israel
looks like a permanent feature which, unfortunately, might one day to bring Israel down iether by unleashing a war with Iran
(without USA support), or when the USA might decide to toss Israel to wolfs.
Notable quotes:
"... You can view the complete interview here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZyGpirUMvk . ..."
"... Watch the full interview before making a judgment. ..."
"... Try to grasp the real power struggles underneath the headlines and hype. ..."
"... It's almost as if cronyism and nepotism breed incompetence. Who knew? ..."
"... One reason Jared has been chosen to interact with Israel is because he is a practicing Koshier Jew and long time family ties and friends with Israli PM Netanyahu since Jared was a young child and in fact Jared would give up his bedroom when Netanyahu came to visit. ..."
Jared Kushner, President Trump's senior adviser and son-in-law, is interviewed at the Saban Forum on the topic of Israeli-Palestinian
peace and his talking points get crushed by Israeli telecom billionaire Haim Saban
....Watch the full interview before making a judgment. Because he's betting that you
won't because of your short attention span.
silverskid1, year ago
There's no story here. I watched the interview. It's a nothing-story. Of course the premise of Trump and his team as peacemakers
in Israel is a bad joke-- but Kushner hasn't been "taken down" and "humiliated."
His demeanor throughout the interview was normal for him. The problem lies in what he says, and that's a different matter
entirely. You're show is way to shallow. Try to grasp the real power struggles underneath the headlines and hype.
Kim Nguyen, 1 year ago (edited)
Jared sounds like that guy in your international relations class who is presenting his term paper, which he composed by collecting
the cliff notes.
In terms of social issues, the achievement of peace between Palestine and Israel may be somewhere around P vs NP. There's no better
person to expose the ridiculous of this team and how grossly unqualified they are than an Israeli or a Palestinian person. You
can tell he feels insulted by the composition of this team.
Touting a bankruptcy lawyer for a committee to solve the middle east problem, jesus h. Christ we are in trouble. Kushner sounds
like daddy-in-law on the campaign trail. Every thing is so vague as to be rendered useless. We are going to fix the middle east.
Yeah, how?
We are going to fix the problems there. Yeah, you said that but how are you going to fix it? Well the Iranians are
a problem. Uh huh, we know that, how are you going to fix it? Also the Palestinians and Israelis don't seem to get along either.
The talking while saying nothing just keeps going with this Administration.
Priceless, when I first heard that Kushner was tasked with working on bringing peace to the Middle East my first thought was
who? That that idiot Trump could throw this milk toast Jewish nobody into such a complex, sensitive protracted policy issue speaks
volumes. From what I now know Kushner is a failed real estate agent with a father who is a convicted felon. Just cause he's married
to Big orange daddies equally vacuous dumb daughter seems to be the only reason he is even in the White House. What a disgrace.
1 year on, and this little pecker wood is still just as inept, but at least we can finally begin to see through that fake (and
very creepy) smile. The criminal Trump organization is falling apart at the seems, I think the only thing holding it all together
is the sheer strength of the criminal investigations. Once those are all wrapped up, the Trump org. Will just collapse into a
nasty little pile of rubble at Trumps feet. Fingers crossed Jared and Ivanka will be swept right up into the collapse and find
themselves and in prison as well
So what he saying is Israel is still just a victim they do nothing wrong to stimulate the wars going on in the Middle East
don't do anything they're just playing victims. ??? It's well-known what part did Jesus play in the explosion of the Mesopotamia
Cruise liner for the Americans to get into the war and save England where the Jews benefit in and got his real out of it through
the Rothschild.
The Jewish bankers have been front and center of every war right in the middle stirring up the problems every country that
took them in the Jew would find out their secrets their dislikes for the enemy that you will then go to the enemy and tell him
everything hit the Jews host said causing War then the Jew finances both sides.
I know people like that who was start s***and watch the fight Jews have also claimed that they are A different race from your
average Caucasian. Rh-positive bloodline
I grew up around them and i know that to be true about their conversational interactions them and Italians I just like black
American people in that aspect, you may think it's an argument but it's not, you may think they are joking but they're expressing
the irony of a situation or a persons stupidity.
Trump seems at times to be allergic to real knowledge, competence and expertise - except for the crooks in his cabinet that
he hired to do his dirty work, like Mnuchin. And Trump could have hired real Middle East experts to be on his team. But no, he
hired his son in law - someone he trusts, but also someone with no real expertise in the field, someone who's totally clueless.
It seems like loyalty is 100% to Donald Trump, and knowledge, competence and expertise count for absolutely nothing.
Janet Johnson2 weeks ago (edited)
Ok Packman... so what is your expertise or qualifications? Your experience.. if any? IQ? What are you..15..16?? What qualifies
you to peck away at the Trumps and all interactions with world leaders?
One reason Jared has been chosen to interact with Israel is because he is a practicing Koshier Jew and long time family
ties and friends with Israli PM Netanyahu since Jared was a young child and in fact Jared would give up his bedroom when Netanyahu
came to visit.
I understand Jared has a very high IQ. You Packman are just plain mean. Your friend there with you is even less impressive.
You both sit around and poke fun of brave people who actually go out and try to do something to contribute and better this messed
up world. I hope you aren't old enough to vote bc you aren't capable of making a wise choice yet.
Super Sonic 1 year ago (edited)
Good god we have complete fcking idiots running this country. This guy was absolutely SPOT ON! More people like this need to
tell Trump and his cronies exactly this. The best bankruptcy lawyer to negotiate peace in the Middle East-wtf?? They have not
the dimmest dullest notion on how to run a country starting with that orange ape at the top! ISIS on the run, good economy, low
unemployment rate, Thank-you Obama!
David everyone keeps on talking about the Trump team and how its biased toward Israel. But what about all the other so called
teams of other administrations. What about the Obama team?
What about the Bush team when Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered the PLO peace, what about the Clinton team when Ehud Barak
practically offered 97% of the West Bank and East Jerusalem?
Oh and again while Bush was in office what about the fact that Israel removed itself and all of its settlers from Gaza? And
what we got in return was an Iranian based about 40 minutes from Tel Aviv??
Why do you concentrate on the Trump team and not the "teams" we've had for the past 20 years or since the Oslo accords began.
People keep on saying that the Trump team is not good for the peace process but I insist what peace process???
We've had this peace process since the late 80's and nothing has happened under the most leftist governments in Israel: Rabin,
Peres, Barak, Olmert, all these Prime Ministers couldn't bring peace with the varying American teams....so why do you pick on
Kushner???
Kushner had the balls to come out and say it like it is: There is NO solution to the conflict...
Eric Grosch1 month ago
So Trump and Kushner won't solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. So, who is your exemplar of someone who has done so? The
United States government has been funding Israel greatly and the Palestinians less so for years. Trump came to understand that
Israel knows which side its bread is buttered on, so it sides with the US on most questions and the US sides with Israel on
most questions.
Palestinians hate the US and Israel more or less equally, so Trump rationally withdrew funding from the Palestinians.
That was a divisive move, but the parties, Israel and Palestinians have already been divided since 1948, the year of the
founding of modern Israel. It has long been US-policy to promise recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and move its
embassy there.
Trump finally did it. Divisive? Sure, but so what? The parties are already divided.
sam n1 year ago
Stop Zionism. It preaches the same ideology and Isis and Nazism. it considers one group of people more superior.
Abban A7 months ago
Kushner only in the picture because his father in law and because he is a Jewish. He has zero international ,foreigners
policies . Basically trump forcing Arab world leaders to pass this deal or else . There will be no peace in Middle East with
those guys in charge and in office. Just more innocent people will die .
"... Around the same time, an unnamed Israeli official was quoted as being "in shock" at the president's decision. Obviously Trump hadn't read his intelligence briefing, explained the Israeli: after all, there were Iranians in Syria! But so what? Perhaps President Trump decided that Washington doesn't have to do everything for everyone in the Middle East. There is a very powerful, nuclear-armed nation next door to Syria that so far has done quite well protecting itself. Perhaps that country could take care of the Iran-in-Syria problem, in the unlikely event that it poses a serious threat. ..."
"... It is not just foreign leaders who complain about U.S. policy. There is hardly a war that some foreigner somewhere is not busy advocating that Washington join or start. ..."
"... Financial Times ..."
"... Truth be told, Iran is a weak regional power that uses irregular warfare because it lacks conventional strength. Missiles are its deterrence against better armed, threatening neighbors. It certainly doesn't endanger America, with the globe's greatest military. Israel, too, can launch a devastating retaliation against any attack. Saudi Arabia alone spends more than five times as much on its armed forces as Iran. ..."
America's policymakers should ignore this advice, no matter how fervently it's offered. And
if any president is willing to tell this self-interested chorus to shut up, it is Donald
Trump.
Among the notable nations lobbying for America's attention are Israel and Taiwan, otherwise
isolated and vulnerable governments that seek Washington's military backing. Greece and Turkey
have carried their battle in the eastern Mediterranean back to D.C., as they fight over
America's role there. Kosovar insurgents worked with ethnic Albanians in the U.S. to push
Washington into the Yugoslav civil war in 1999. Gulf countries, especially Saudi Arabia and the
United Arab Emirates, spread cash lavishly around the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to pressure
American policymakers into such atrocities as the Yemen war.
The consequences can be long-lasting. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the
governments of the newly freed Eastern European states lobbied to join NATO. Their diasporas in
the United States -- derisively called "hyphenated Americans" during World War I -- helped win
Washington's support. The result was a rapid expansion of NATO to Russia's borders, compounding
humiliation with hostility, which continues to bedevil the West's relations with Moscow
today.
Advertisement
Sometimes foreigners talk as if they should be consulted and heeded whenever U.S.
policymakers act. In many cases, Washington has created this problem. Alliances in which other
states theoretically have authority over American military deployments encourage foreign
meddling. For instance, the Obama administration intervened in Libya at least partially in
response to pressure from Rome and Paris, which wanted to use the transatlantic alliance to
oust Libyan strongman Moammar Gaddafi. Europeans were essentially returning the favor by which
Washington had dragged them into the seemingly endless Afghan war, which never made sense for
them.
NATO is particularly problematic, since it's made ever less sense as foreign threats have
diminished, Europeans' capabilities increased, and gaps between allies' interests expanded.
Although America remains the big kahuna, recently empowered "friends" assert authority over
U.S. decisions and behavior. Today, the transatlantic alliance is made up of one transcendent
military power, America, and eight moderately important nations with serious, or at least
potentially serious, militaries: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, Turkey, and the
United Kingdom.
The remaining score of NATO members are, well, largely irrelevant. That doesn't mean they
don't contribute to and suffer losses in Western military operations -- as The Netherlands has,
for example. But what they do doesn't and never will make much of a difference. Yet they sit at
the NATO table as nominal equals. Of these 20, three have populations of less than one million,
while another 11 come in at under 10 million. Incoming member (Northern) Macedonia barely
breaks the two million barrier.
Why the pretense that the opinions of micro-states Iceland, Luxembourg, and Montenegro
matter to Washington? Why should governments with more than their shares of controversies --
Albania, Romania, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Hungary, and even Poland -- theoretically have a say on
the use of the alliance's one military that really matters? Imagine if Georgia, which helped
provoke war with Russia in 2008, and Ukraine, which ended up in conflict with Moscow after a
street putsch backed by the West ousted their elected president, joined NATO. Tbilisi and Kiev
would push to borrow the U.S. military to fight their wars. Who would blame them? But it
certainly would not be in America's interest to let them.
This presumptuousness reaches beyond European security. French President Emmanuel Macron
apparently called President Donald Trump to complain about the latter's decision to withdraw
from Syria, which he said he "deeply" regretted. Added Macron, "An ally must be dependable,"
which apparently means that America must forever maintain a deployment illegal under both U.S.
and international law. Macron said that French troops would remain, proclaiming: "To be allies
is to fight shoulder to shoulder." But that fight should stop when the justification for
fighting has ended.
Around the same time, an unnamed Israeli official was quoted as being "in shock" at the
president's decision. Obviously Trump hadn't read his intelligence briefing, explained the
Israeli: after all, there were Iranians in Syria! But so what? Perhaps President Trump decided
that Washington doesn't have to do everything for everyone in the Middle East. There is a very
powerful, nuclear-armed nation next door to Syria that so far has done quite well protecting
itself. Perhaps that country could take care of the Iran-in-Syria problem, in the unlikely
event that it poses a serious threat.
Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked complained that the withdrawal would hurt the Kurds,
whom she characterized as "allies" and "great heroes." Moreover, the pull-out "strengthens
[Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan, an antisemitic war criminal who carries out massacres
of the Kurdish people, and does so with a wink from the international community." Well, why
doesn't her country -- the one with nuclear weapons and a strong conventional military force --
rescue the Kurds? Israel is there and has far greater interests at stake than does America.
It is not just foreign leaders who complain about U.S. policy. There is hardly a war
that some foreigner somewhere is not busy advocating that Washington join or start.
For instance, TheEconomist , a British magazine, recently headlined an
article: "A deal to end the insurgency in Afghanistan would be wonderful: As long as it is not
a figleaf to cover an American retreat." Really? After 17 years of unsuccessfully trying to
plant a liberal democracy in Afghanistan, the only logical U.S. policy is to exit -- with
figleaf if possible, but without if necessary.
After the president announced his intent to withdraw U.S. forces from Syria, the
Financial Times , a United Kingdom newspaper, declared that the decision made America
appear "erratic and inconsistent." Indeed, the United States needed a new defense secretary "to
stand up to the president's wilder impulses," like making sure America stayed involved in the
Syrian war as long as the FT thought necessary. The paper was horrified that the
withdrawal "constitutes, too, an abandonment of key allies" and "signals, more broadly, a US
retreat from the Middle East." Perhaps the anonymous FT writers should form a
volunteer unit to patrol the Mideast in America's stead. After all, it was British and French
line-drawing post-World War I that created the current national boundaries that are failing so
badly.
Roger Boyes, diplomatic editor of The Times of London, headlined his article: "Only
the US can rein in ambitions of Iran." And not just "can." Boyes explained, "As the Syrian war
nears its end, Trump must find ways to loosen Tehran's grip on the region." Frankly, I don't
remember Americans asking him for his advice. Why the U.S.? Is there no one else available?
Saudi Arabia, the other Gulf States, Jordan, Egypt, Turkey? That unnamed country that already
possesses nukes? Toss in a little assistance from the Brits and French, too.
Truth be told, Iran is a weak regional power that uses irregular warfare because it
lacks conventional strength. Missiles are its deterrence against better armed, threatening
neighbors. It certainly doesn't endanger America, with the globe's greatest military. Israel,
too, can launch a devastating retaliation against any attack. Saudi Arabia alone spends more
than five times as much on its armed forces as Iran.
Perhaps Americans should be honored that so many overseas "friends" have so much free advice
to offer. However, much of it is bad. Policy should be based on the interests of the U.S. --
protecting its people, territory, prosperity, and system of constitutional liberties. That
means advancing peace first and making war a last resort. Desiring to do good abroad cannot
justify sacrificing American lives, wealth, and security in never ending war.
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former special assistant to
President Ronald Reagan, he is author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global
Empire.
"... Trump's White House Has a Massive Security Problem. Jared Kushner isn't the only Trump official who got a special pass after security experts said he shouldn't be allowed to access national-security secrets. ..."
"... After he was cleared by the White House, Kushner's file was reportedly submitted to the C.I.A. to be evaluated for an S.C.I., or "sensitive compartmented information" clearance -- an even higher designation. It didn't go well: ..."
"... After reviewing the file, CIA. officers who make clearance decisions balked, two of the people familiar with the matter said. One called over to the White House security division, wondering how Kushner got even a top-secret clearance, the sources said. Given his various entanglements, the CIA.'s alarm makes sense. ..."
"... I don't trust Kushner, but denying clearances is the main weapon used by the Deep State to retain control, and Trump was right to place his own man in charge. Note the media sources mentioned are Deep State media, who quote "the CIA" as though that is a person to be trusted. ..."
"... I'm sure people like Ron Unz and the Saker would be denied clearances if appointed to a position in Washington if Deep Staters were gatekeepers. The "CIA" prefer narcissistic retired military officers who lack a soul and wave the flag. ..."
The Ziocons are now fully in charged at the WH. They are wild and giddy with power, ready to set the whole world on fire.
Pence has no need to undermine Trump. He can just wait. All the militant Zionist Trump brought into the WH have already done
that ..and Trump let them. Who do you suppose Kushner has shared US secret intelligence with Israel for sure, probably Saudi in
exchange for their allying with Israel. We use to worry about spies and moles in government but now they are the government.
Trump's White House Has a Massive Security Problem. Jared Kushner isn't the only Trump official who got a special pass
after security experts said he shouldn't be allowed to access national-security secrets.
by Tina Nguyen
January 25, 2019 11:44 am
AFP
The CIA took one look at Kushner's SCI application and freaked out, calling over to the White House to find out how he even
got the lower level clearance.
[MORE]
In May, after months working under an interim clearance, Jared Kushner's request for a permanent security clearance, which
would allow him to see top-secret material, was finally granted. At the time, observers took this as an indication that Donald
Trump's son-in-law, who'd reportedly attracted Robert Mueller's attention for his ties to various foreign entities, was in the
clear.
On Thursday, however, an NBC News report threw that conclusion into doubt. In fact, two sources familiar with the matter told
the outlet, Kushner's clearance was only approved because Trump's handpicked director of security personnel overruled two career
White House security specialists, who had recommended against Kushner receiving top-secret clearance after seeing the results
of his F.B.I. background check.
Kushner's case represents a worrisome pattern for the White House. Per NBC, Trump's director of security, Carl Kline, overruled
security experts in at least 30 cases, recommending that Trump officials be granted clearances despite troubling information uncovered
in their background checks. That number is indeed extraordinary.
Prior to the Trump administration, White House security experts had only been overruled once in the past three years. (The
White House told NBC, "We don't comment on security clearances." A CIA. spokesman said the same, and Kushner's lawyer, Abbe Lowell,
had "no comment." Kline, a former Pentagon employee, could not be reached for comment.)
Denying a security clearance to a White House official, noted Daniel Jacobson, a former lawyer in Barack Obama's administration,
is not something that's done lightly. "It is not normal for the head of the Personal Security Office to ever overrule the career
employees who adjudicate clearances," he wrote on Twitter. "It takes some pretty bad stuff to be denied a clearance. The fact
that there have been thirty denial recommendations of WH staff in the last 1.5 years is itself crazy, before you even get to the
overruling part."
After he was cleared by the White House, Kushner's file was reportedly submitted to the C.I.A. to be evaluated for an S.C.I.,
or "sensitive compartmented information" clearance -- an even higher designation. It didn't go well:
After reviewing the file, CIA. officers who make clearance decisions balked, two of the people familiar with the matter
said. One called over to the White House security division, wondering how Kushner got even a top-secret clearance, the sources
said. Given his various entanglements, the CIA.'s alarm makes sense.
@renfroI don't trust Kushner, but denying clearances is the main weapon used by the Deep State to retain control, and
Trump was right to place his own man in charge. Note the media sources mentioned are Deep State media, who quote "the CIA" as
though that is a person to be trusted.
I'm sure people like Ron Unz and the Saker would be denied clearances if appointed to a position in Washington if Deep
Staters were gatekeepers. The "CIA" prefer narcissistic retired military officers who lack a soul and wave the flag.
and especially in the US, where any criticism of Israel is regularly treated as
'anti-semitism', just as it is here in the UK. I have never recognised the state of Israel,
even though my mother's family was exterminated almost in its entirety during WWII. And I
don't even know where or when my aunts, uncles, cousins et al vanished, even 70 yrs later.
Oft times I'm ashamed to be considered Jewish and see very little difference between Hitler's
Nazis and the so-called Jewish state that treats Palestinians as untermensch.
This write-up is an uncanny coincidence for me as I just watched the four part movie The
Lobby (UK) yesterday. As I watched the maneuvers of the israeli's lobby groups and their
wilful political accomplices, I kept smiling seeing how much they are putting into an
unwinnable war. They seem not to learn from history. Michelle Alexander would be vilified and
demonized but I think she will live in peace with herself. The Apartheid-Israel is indeed a
horrendous shame.
I falsely said earlier that every Congress-person is on the payroll but only 269 (62%) of
the 435 voting House delegates received pro-Israel money, an average of $23,220 each. . .
here
There was one man who completely delegitimized state of Israel and who, under political
pressure from Polish Government conducting political purge of Jews, Polish workers party
members, was fired from his job as director of hospital and pushed to leave country for
Israel and to denounce Polish Citizenship.
He, a Jew, in 1969 refused to immigrate to Israel because as he described it, Israel was
apartheid country run by Jewish Nazi collaborators and American Zionists.
This man was Marek Edelman, one of leaders of Warsaw Ghetto uprising in April 1943.
No need for further delegitimization of state of Israel.
iv> Two newly-elected Democrats in the House, Rhashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar also
represent a sea change with regards to open, vociferous criticism of Israel. Omar was just
appointed to the Foreign Affairs Committee--that should be interesting. Tlaib was appointed to
the powerful Oversight Committee. Let's see if she can help rid the White House of the Zionist
Manchurian Candidate.
Your pal, your buddy that you like to defend so much around here, Trump, appointed
Kenneth Marcus, a rabid BDS watchdog to the civil rights office of the Education Department as
a check and slayer of the growing BDS movement in Academia.
Maybe she's being tarred and feathered because she called the new high priest of Zionism,
Trump... Gee I wish I said it first!
Even the leader of the Women's March is getting painted with the Scarlett letters AS
(anti-Semite). Obviously, because, like Black Lives Matter, they are two powerful activist
movements sympathetic to Palestinian rights.
Okay, so if you bothered to peruse these articles you'll hopefully understand why I bring
up Zionism often in these threads as a force for evil on many fronts in this world.
The powerful wider Lobby didn't waste a minute in destroying Occupy Wall Street, and now
they're going after every movement that aligns itself with Palestinian rights and trying to
destroy the fledgling careers of two powerful pro-Palestinian female voices in Congress. A pox
on Zionism for the evil it does! ">link
Two newly-elected Democrats in the House, Rhashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar also represent a
sea change with regards to open, vociferous criticism of Israel. Omar was just appointed to
the Foreign Affairs Committee--that should be interesting. Tlaib was appointed to the
powerful Oversight Committee. Let's see if she can help rid the White House of the Zionist
Manchurian Candidate.
Your pal, your buddy that you like to defend so much around here, Trump, appointed
Kenneth Marcus, a rabid BDS watchdog to the civil rights office of the Education Department
as a check and slayer of the growing BDS movement in Academia.
Maybe she's being tarred and feathered because she called the new high priest of
Zionism, Trump... Gee I wish I said it first!
Even the leader of the Women's March is getting painted with the Scarlett letters AS
(anti-Semite). Obviously, because, like Black Lives Matter, they are two powerful activist
movements sympathetic to Palestinian rights.
Okay, so if you bothered to peruse these articles you'll hopefully understand why I
bring up Zionism often in these threads as a force for evil on many fronts in this
world.
The powerful wider Lobby didn't waste a minute in destroying Occupy Wall Street, and
now they're going after every movement that aligns itself with Palestinian rights and trying
to destroy the fledgling careers of two powerful pro-Palestinian female voices in Congress. A
pox on Zionism for the evil it does! ">link
There is not a single newspaper in the US that supports the views of the US President.
Nobody defended him when he was
accused , brazenly, in-your-face, of being a Russian agent. Nobody supported him when he
called to bring the troops home from Syria. Nobody came to his aid when he mulled parting with
NATO. There are tens of millions of men and women who voted for him, but he has only his
Twitter account at his disposal.
The media
accuses Trump of paying too little attention to Israel's needs. Israel needs US troops in
Syria and in Germany, US jets in Spain and Qatar, US ships in Italy and the Gulf. Israel needs
the US to lead NATO to contain Russia. If Israel needs it, the US should provide,
says Daniel Shapiro, the ex-ambassador. Not a single American newspaper, not a single US
statesman cared to reply that President Trump had been elected by the American people to do
what is needed for them, not for Israel
You know there's a lot of rampant insanity sloshing around when every time there's a
debate about potential threats to the US, whether it starts with Russia, China, NK, or (?),
the Neocons rarely fail to include Iran.
I've been wondering what's fueling their obsession, given that Iran has never threatened
"Israel." The dominant factor which comes to mind is the Holocaust Conference held in Tehran
in 2006 to examine the numerous inconsistencies in the Official Narrative.
The conference was organised as a series lectures based on detailed research undertaken by
the speaker, or a spokesman for an organisation which had undertaken research into the
subject.
Much of the info consisted of statistical analysis of pre & post Holocaust population
factors which cast 'doubt' on the magnitude of various and varying claims made in the
Official Story.
At the end of the conference all of the 'papers' delivered during the conference were
published online and some of them were very well researched and very persuasive. In the
aftermath there were many objections from the 'usual suspects' which, instead of attempting
to refute the published findings, confined themselves to smearing the convenors and
participants. I found this response to be disappointing, lazy and stupid; and tantamount to
an endorsement, by default, of the findings.
It was NEVER the subject of public debate of any note or duration and was quickly 'forgotten'
by the MSM. However, despite the forgetfulness, Iran appears not to have been forgiven.
If a country ruled by a Muslim theocracy tolerates large numbers of Jews living in its
territory, that in itself contradicts Israel's claim to be the only country in the Middle
East that offers Jews the freedom, stability and security to worship as they wish. Israel
offered money to Iranian Jews to move but the Iranian Jewish community rebuffed the offer,
saying it considers itself Iranian first and Jewish second and its identity is not for
sale. https://www.haaretz.com/1.4952371
The fact that a Muslim theocratic state hosts a large Jewish community represents an
existential threat to Israel. Why does Israel need to exist for then, if other countries can
host Jewish communities so well that they don't feel they need to move?
I remember reading several years ago that Israel offered cash incentives to the French
Jewish community and that community also knocked back the offers. Since then France has had a
number of terrorist attacks - guess what those have done to the French Jewish community? https://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/22/middleeast/france-israel-jews-immigration/index.html
Iran has the second largest Jewish population in the Middle East after Israel.
...
Posted by: Jen | Jan 18, 2019 11:36:14 PM | 48
Thanks for the timely reminder.
I forgot all about Iran's Jewish citizens but, now that you've jogged my memory, I do recall
looking it up in 2006 and discovering the fact you've reiterated.
It begs a lot of questions about Jewish Unity, doesn't it?
It also reminds me of a rant by Gilad Atzmon called Judea Declares War On Obama. I haven't
posted a link because it's easy to find on the www. Suffice to say that it's about the
prelude to the Holocaust and is ... unflattering...
I dont call 12-15K Jews in a large country an existential threat to Israel.
Zionism was unpopular among most Jews, orthodox and assimilated Jews alike, up until the
holocaust. Without Hitler there never would be an Israel today
Looks like when it will all shake out, the net result will not be in the favor of the US-Israel-Saudi axis. That will be the new
"normalcy of some sort."
"Essentially, the Creditor Class and their allies--which have existed for several thousand years--constitute a real life Hydra
that must be slain, as was recognized by the Greeks who first told the whole story."
In doing research for a dinosaur novel I'm planning to write, I was pleased to learn that the feature of the hydra sprouting
multiple heads to replace each one severed wasn't part of the original myth, but was added later during the decadent stage of
Greek culture. That ancient perception tallies well with the cultural-economic decadence of this collapsing civilization.
BTW I got my copy of Spirit in the Gene and look forward to reading it.
@65 pyschohistorian.. that is a good personal story of yours from today.. it is an easy analogy and many people will understand
it.. one person at a time maybe...
More than one person at a time came out to hear Bernie Sanders deliver that message. There is no doubt they heard it vaguely
via the US media but that was enough, they came in their tens of thousands. Such was the response that the Sanders campaign had
to sometimes book bigger venues and truck in extra PA and video gear to broadcast to crowds outside.
The yankee establishment is just desperate to smash any chance of this growing a second time. Come on Bernie and Tulsi Gabbard
and all those newly elected put on the yellow vest. I dare you. Millions of Americans are willing. Ditto throughout the world
millions of people are waiting to mock the BS colour revolutions and have a real one.
Socialism and thoughts of socialist economic management spread like pheromones on the wind.
Its all like living on the film set of Alice In Wonderland while reading 1984 and Brave New World at the same time while overdosing
on chocolate. Just batshit surreal, and the presstitutes keep pushing the World to the edge of the abyss in their continuous Russia
and Putin bashing. And the vast majority in the West are completely oblivious to what is going on in the World, and completely
oblivious to what is coming. And it will not be pleasant.
@57 James
Did anyone notice an article copied from the Guardian by Information Clearing House entitled "Brought to Jesus - the evangelic
grip on the Trump administration"? "Pense and Pompeo both call evangelical theology a powerful motivating force". "Evangelics
now see the US locked into a holy war against the forces of evil who they see embodied by Iran". It is a never-ending struggle
until.... the rapture." It is a chilling read, especially when it comes to their belief in the role of Zion. Extremely dangerous
because entirely irrational.
I also want to see it [yellow vest] on the tower of london, somewhere in rome, fluttering in the Swiss alps, in china
near the sacred city, in Russia, in India........
apparently you missed the fact that an anti-establishment, anti-euro(thus threatening global bond markets) government was elected
here in Italy last summer, precluding the necessity for protests in the streets. for the moment you might say we're riding the
avant-garde.
@61 NemesisCalling "Saw that Blackwater founder did an interview explaining that they can also replace the role of US troops in
Syria."
They would fit the definition of a Mercenary in Article 47 of the Geneva Conventions.
As such they would not be afforded the protections of Geneva Convention III.
"Fine by me, as long as the US offers no protection or no-fly-zone for them."
I believe that Prince is advocating his own private mercenary airforce to provide support for his own mercenary army. Might
work as far as ground support goes, but not against SU-35 fighter jets.
So, yes, if Trump agrees to this proposal then it is inevitable that he will end up either providing a no-fly-zone for them
or be accused of leaving these brave, brave boys to be slaughtered.
I would assume that the Pentagon has told him that, but I make no assumption that he is paying that advice any attention.
"Open season on all guns for hire. In Afghanistan, too."
Well, yes, that's what International Humanitarian Law says.
So today we have US service men killed in Manbij and ISIS claim responsibility. It is reasonable to suspect that this is a false
flag (with actual deaths) in order to create political justification for US to stay in Syria. Many commentators here view ISIS
as being effectively a US proxy force.
In my view the only real evidence that the US would be leaving Syria would involve direct negotiations with the Syrian government.
In this case the US could leave saving face and securing some concessions that reflect their interests. The alternative is that
the US would leave with their tails between their legs being bombed out, very ignoble and looking like the withdrawal from Vietnam;
it is just not plausible that the US would leave in this way.
Yes. What better way to demonstrate that ISIS is not defeated and the US "job" in Syria is not done.
I suspect that Trump's rhetoric will not change. He will continue to insist that he is/will 'pull out' of Syria .... it's just
gonna take longer. Just how long will remain a mystery.
I see you have been accused of having a one sized fits all condom!😁
Your theory, unfairly, gets short shrift whereas ideas like "Trump is doing all the right things, but is frustrated at every
turn by the deep state" is just accepted unquestioningly.
However, the Syrian withdrawal could happen and this would not necessarily be incompatible with your theory; there may be tactical
reasons. Whatever, the idea that the US is just going to retreat and leave the Middle East alone is so far fetched that I am staggered
that people see this as a real possibility.
Personally, I think the US have a strategy for the world based on the model they created in Congo, South America, Libya and
Afganistan. All of these areas are hugely profitable for the Empire because "controlled" chaos allows cheap extraction of resources
and control of the world drug trade. This is what I believe the Empire has in mind for the Middle East, everywhere along OBOR
and, also, Europe (and, perhaps, the US itself?).
from Asia Times, quote:
On a mission from God: Pompeo messages evangelicals from the Middle East
The US secretary of state was communicating to an audience back home on his Middle East tour, the key Trump constituency of evangelical
Christians.
In Cairo: "This trip is especially meaningful for me as an evangelical Christian, coming so soon after the Coptic Church's Christmas
celebrations. This is an important time. We're all children of Abraham: Christians, Muslims, Jews. In my office, I keep a Bible
open on my desk to remind me of God and His Word, and The Truth." . .
here
Trump is being prosecuted by Robert Swan Mueller III, who entire career has been him covering up and fixing cases which involved
CIA criminality. Now William Barr is Trump's own choice for Attorney General. Barr spent the mid-1970s in the CIA. While there
he got his degree in law, suggesting his career path was being drawn by his employer. Unsurprisingly, GHW Bush moved him along
until he became Bush's AG.
Trump is either more demented than many have thought, he's in on the whole charade of his Presidency or he's in deep trouble
with the Deep State. The strings all lead back to Langley.
> Starting with Reagan, every President and/or VP has had, or rumored to have had, links to CIA: Bush Sr. had led the CIA;
Clinton allowed CIA flights into Arkansas; Obama's grandfather/mother. Questions have also been raised about Trump - the first
casino he purchase was rumored to have been involved in CIA money laundering (prior to Trump's purchase).
> Wolin, a respected Princeton University academic, described how the ruling establishment engages in "managed democracy"
to retain control. A key part of that management is the money-based electoral system which ensures that no real populist is
elected President.
If you enjoy the Kool-Aid then just pass over my comments.
Yes! Why nominate Barr for AG? Why nominate Gina Haspel for CIA? Why bring on Bolton? These choices make no sense for a President
that is supposedly at war with the Deep State.
Great list, b. Another. From the top of google (enter co name or part of post in goog for details.)
Afaik (please correct if), Trump tried to do biz in Russia but more or less failed or gave up or didn't get anywhere much,
nothing major transpired.
"There are 517 McDonald's restaurants in Russia, 73 of which were opened in 2014. The company's total revenue for 2014 in Russia
was 65.8 billion rubles.. the chain has been operating in Russia independently for 22 years."
"PepsiCo reported that in 2017, its Russian operations generated net revenue of $3.23 billion, which made up 5.1 percent of
the company's total net revenue."
Philip Morris has good sales in Russia. Cisco Systems (idk about this, look it up.) Abbot Labs (US) sells generic drugs in
Russia. Ford is still selling cars there.
The leading Chocolate co. in Russia is Mondelez (should be another topic .. )
Starbucks celebrated its 100 stores in Russia in 2015.
The CEOs of these cos. + their shareholders, employees, are in bed w. Russia and undermining US Democracy, interfering in people's
choices, the true shining light on the hill, or what? It is collusion! They meet and deal with Russians, all the time.
Note: Flynn revelation was likely just a tip of the iceberg. It was from his agency (DIA) that Judicial Watch got the memo (via
FOIA) that talked of how US allies wanted to establish a Caliphate.
These were important to understanding ISIS as a proxy force, not the grass-roots group of Jihadi hoodlums that the Obama Administration
wanted us to believe. Obama infamously called ISIS al Queda's "JV team" to explain why he was essentially ignoring it's rise.
Later, the story changed to "ISIS was created by Assad." LOL.
@68 uncle tungsten.. i wish you all the best trying to take back control of the gov't, or following thru on the yellow jacket
demonstrations... i am with you in spirit..
@70 montreal.. something is driving these folks... some whacky evangelical fantasy sounds about right... i can't believe how
easily duped people are with fundamental religion of all stripes...
@74 john.. you probably would have voted for frank zappa if he was running in the italian elections!
i've never embraced the argument that Trump is a president who is at war with the deep state. i've only said that this sort
of yammering is all conjecture and as such will never be sufficient grounds for proof...that it doesn't really matter anyway.
for all i know every incoming president is given a private screening of the zapruder film and the rest is left to his imagination.
i don't drink Kool-Aid, and if i passed over your comments i wouldn't know that they pretty much all say the same thing.
Fair enough! But what should be done about the many people that HAVE drunk the Kool-Aid and believe the Trump vs. Deep State
narrative?
I think some amount of repetition is unavoidable. Especially since the Trump vs. Deep State narrative is repeated ad nauseum
by MSM and even independent bloggers (that haven't thought it through).
@90 James.
As someone said, history doesn't always repeat itself but sometimes rhymes....... in India, in the early nineteenth century, the
British presence consisted largely of lowland Scots - evangelical Presbyterians. People like Dalhousie and Grant. They managed
to combine an iron conviction in their own Godly righteousness - and duty to improve the benighted heathen - with a sincere belief
that there was nothing wrong in robbing the natives blind whilst improving them. Their arrogance and greed led directly to the
disaster of the First Afghan War and subsequently the First Indian War of Independence (or Indian Mutiny depending on your point
of view). Maybe Presbyterian Evangelical certainty will be the American downfall as well. I do often hope so.
do you know the story
of when once president of Czechoslovakia, Vaclav Havel, appointed Frank as Special Ambassador to the West on Trade, Culture
and Tourism , much to the chagrin of then U.S. Secretary of State, James Baker?
apparently Baker declared, 'You can do business with the United States or you can do business with Frank Zappa.'
@93 montreal.. i was unaware of the specifics on the history in india as you note.. thanks for sharing that.. i just assumed it
was the british empire mindset, without looking more closely at the details of it..
@94 john.. lol! cool pic - man from utopia... i do recall frank getting that appointment from vaclav havel, but this is the first
time i heard of james bakers response! james baker is long forgotten, but frank zappa is a cultural icon that will be remembered
for a long time!
Superbowl democracy : pick the red team or pick the blue, really doesn't matter which you do, none of the wrestling is really
true, just a snare of a circus we're forced to view, where puppets pose and pretend to duel, and the House will always win...
Indeed the Levant is returning to the centre of Middle East and world attention in a stronger position than in 2011. Syria
has advanced precision missiles that can hit any building in Israel. Assad also has an air defence system he would have never
dreamed of before 2011 -- thanks to Israel's continuous violation of its airspace, and its defiance of Russian authority. Hezbollah
has constructed bases for its long and medium range precision missiles in the mountains and has created a bond with Syria that
it could never have established -- if not for the war. Iran has established a strategic brotherhood with Syria, thanks to its
role in defeating the regime change plan. . .
here
Alastair Crooke
NATO's support for the growth of ISIS has created a bond between Syria and Iraq that no Muslim or Baathist link could ever
have created: Iraq has a "carte blanche" to bomb ISIS locations in Syria without the consent of the Syrian leadership, and
the Iraqi security forces can walk into Syria anytime they see fit to fight ISIS. The anti-Israel axis has never been stronger
than it is today. That is the result of 2011-2018 war imposed on Syria". . .
here
And then add to that the current hectic itinerary of pompous Pompeo to explain the defeat to eight Middle East countries
in eight days, highlighted by his feeble pleas to Qatar to join with Saudi Arabia against Iran. Solidity is crucial! Pompeo
says, to which Qatar which shares a huge gas field with Iran gave pompous the middle finger. Another factor is the Turkey-Qatar
alliance promoting the Muslim Brotherhood, anathema to the Saudi despots. This will all shake out, not to the favor of the
US-Israel-Saudi axis. That will be the new "normalcy of some sort."
First of all, if Trump is so bad with and Russia, why are you and others here always loving on him, singing his praises and
defending him like he's still a naive schoolboy in short pants that the big boys are picking on?
@21 Jackrabbit
Bolton's not steering Trump into war with Iran, Trump hired Bolton so he'd have someone to blame and take the heat when
he greenlights war with Iran and things go bad; which they will.
Trump was an Iran hawk from start. He's been railing against Iran since he got off the Trump Tower escalator and stepped
behind the AIPAC podium.
@43 uncle tungsten
Wow, I mean wow. That's a bull's eye zinger. DB was really off the mark.
Yeah, and Israel still has one of the most powerful arsenals in the world funded to the tune of $38 billion, the largest
aid package to Israel in U.S. history delivered by Trump. and Israel has hundreds of nukes, still occupies Palestine and the
Golan Heights, and still has the Empire's bases where it wants them, and now has the GCC in its corner all in, and Trump has
delivered on so many promises already: tearing up the Iran deal, defunding aid to Palestinians, closing the Palestinians D.C.
mission office, moving the U.S. Embassy and declaring Jerusalem capital of Israel, and sabotaging a Resolution at the U.N condemning
settlements when he wasn't even President yet. Poor Israel, so abandoned by Trump...NOT.
You ask the question: "How will we ever gain control of our country."
As psychohistorian intones, private financial casinos and their ilk need to become public utilities to fund public activities
and protect the resources on which they're based, while the political/philosophical change to create that paradigm metes our
justice and cleans The Swamp. To discover the veracity of our prescription, one need only read
Michael Hudson's works , although there're others we might also cite.
Essentially, the Creditor Class and their allies--which have existed for several thousand years--constitute a real life Hydra
that must be slain, as was recognized by the Greeks who first told the whole story.
Of course, the end is far easier than the road to get there. But as the polling link I provided upthread and others show,
the public is roused and of greater solidarity for the first time this century. Why do ya think the Deep State's trying so
hard to limit and falsify information I an overt manner!
@ Circe | Jan 16, 2019 12:10:26 AM | 51 Poor Israel, so abandoned by Trump...NOT.
I never said Israel was abandoned by Trump, so I was never "really off the mark," was I. If Trump is doing any abandoning anywhere,
it's in Syria, Israel's enemy, now stronger due to Obama's mistake, one of many. Trump is a late arrival.
Aren't you getting a little ahead of yourself. US troops are still there. NY Times says the 'pull out' is expected to take
4-6 months.
How many times has US been rumored to be leaving Afghanistan?
US still has troops in Iraq! Years after Obama was forced (yes, forced) to remove the bulk of the forces in that country.
And what good is the 'pull out' if US keeps mercenaries/special forces in the country to fight with SDF? The plan seems
to be retain control of Syrian territory via proxies. There is NO TALK of a hand over to SAA.
Thanks karlof1 I will explore that Michael Hudson link it looks good from first scan.
Generally: I don't do graphics but I think a statue of liberty with a yellow vest would be a good theme for a behind the
scenes 'competition' submitted via email to b (if willing) then published here for a discussion and 'vote' would be a great
aid to mirth. I won't be in your revolution if I can't dance - sort of thing. Maybe its been done by now ?
I rarely harangue at US Exceptionalism like I did when I first began commenting here as it gets in the way of highlighting
other points, and with me it's a priori along with its kin Manifest Destiny. It should also be observed that all Imperialist
Nations share both to differing degrees and becomes part of Elite "Magic Mirror" persona--Mirror, mirror on the wall; who's
the fairest of them all..."--generating the deadliest of snobbishness. When I taught, I took pains to properly explain the
Outlaw US Empire's Mythos and show where it's present in everyday life--The Few; The Proud; The Marines. He's shooting the
ball. (You throw the damn thing; do baseball pitchers shoot their pitch!?)
The Canadian domestic situation differs from the USA's in numerous ways, but it faces the same forces trying to keep citizens
from gaining control over their destiny and that of their nation. And Canadians share much of the same negative American baggage.
Both nation's citizens would benefit by knowing the true nature of their past which would aid them greatly in their current
struggle.
@43 uncle tungsten is bang on... for some reason - maybe you need to read a tao te ching verse before i say this to you!
- you can't seriously believe trump has changed his fealty to israel? that is just not the reality as i see it.. the whole
of the usa establishment are completely subservient to israel.. take a look at trumps daughter and son in law.. what the fuck
is that?
trump is also totally down with war on iran.. why is that? was a little zionist birdie talking in his ear, or not? sure
looks like 24/7 fealty to israel is spite of whatever bullshit trump is tweeting about..
@56 karlof1... thanks.. i agree with you and see what you are saying... it seems though on one small level canucks are not
always thinking we are the fucking greatest.. that is the one difference i would point to.. so if that isn't exceptionalism
rearing it's ugly head, i don't know what to call it.. other then that - i agree with you and i suppose your point is that
the concept of exceptionalism is just another distraction..
@ karlof1 with the hat tip about gaining control of "our" country....thanks.
I am with uncle tungsten with wanting to put a yellow vest on the statue of liberty and especially the dance part because
I already do that twice a week. I also want to see it on the tower of london, somewhere in rome, fluttering in the Swiss alps,
in china near the sacred city, in Russia, in India........you get the picture.
We are entering that cleft of time where psychohistorian is suppose to wave its magic wand and greatly reduce the time before
"real change". Ok, so I did that. But that still means that others will need to play their roles as well for the change to
occur. We all need to continue the zombie awakening so that when the time comes for "we the people" to make a collective "sound",
it comes out as beautiful music that we can all dance to.
This is a good place to begin at Hudson's site as it explains a great many things about the recent past and present. I
would suggest this page next .
His opus, Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire ought to be in every respectable library, for
which the videos here provide
a bit of context. If I add another link, this might be construed as spam, so I'll also highly suggest Life & Thought: An
Autobiography from last August. Enjoy!
Saw that Blackwater founder did an interview explaining that they can also replace the role of US troops in Syria.
Fine by me, as long as the US offers no protection or no-fly-zone for them.
Remember the episode where 100+ Russian contractors were strafed fighting alongside SAA by USAF? Open season on all guns
for hire. In Afghanistan, too.
YES!and some really good (short)5second? video to stream via whatever those social media platforms are. One on each of the
religious icons of whatever would be inviting.
"The fact that what amounts to palace intrigue -- the fracas between the White House, the two houses of Congress and a ghoulish
grand inquisitor named Mueller -- has taken center stage is uncannily reminiscent of various earlier political collapses, such
as the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire or of the fall and the consequent beheading of Louis XVI. The fact that Trump,
like the Ottoman worthies, stocks his harem with East European women, lends an eerie touch. That said, most people in the US
seem blind to the nature of their overlords in a way that the French, with their Gilets Jaunes movement (just as an example)
are definitely not."
By now everybody knows that Netanyahu asks and Trump delivers. The servility of US politicians and media to Israel is so obvious
that they world laughs at the "superpower USA, that is being rough shod" by a toy shit entity called Israel. THE GREATEST TREASON
OF ALL "Israel first"
@ james who quoted Orlov:
"
That said, most people in the US seem blind to the nature of their overlords in a way that the French, with their Gilets Jaunes
movement (just as an example) are definitely not."
"
This is part of the elite massaging of nationalism narratives. There is still too much "frontier" in America that blind
many to not feeling part of a government controlled community. I talked to a young guy today with 3 kids and living in a mobile
home on property in the sticks so he doesn't have problems with neighbors and government. I think I got my message across when
I pointed out that the roads he drives on to his house, the power and water he gets are forms of socialism and I just want
the tools of finance to be public-minded like that.
The Zionist Plan for the Middle East, also known as the Yinon Plan, is an Israeli
strategic plan to ensure Israeli regional superiority. It insists and stipulates that Israel
must reconfigure its geo-political environment through the balkanization of the surrounding
Arab states into smaller and weaker states.
The reach of a "Greater Israel", as described in the Yinon plan.
When viewed in the current context, the war on Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war
on Libya, the ongoing war on Syria, not to mention the process of regime change in Egypt,
must be understood in relation to the Zionist Plan for the Middle East. The latter consists
in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of an Israeli
expansionist project.
"Greater Israel" consists in an area extending from the Nile Valley to the Euphrates.
Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge. This is why Iraq was
outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. In
Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the
division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one Shiite and the other
Sunni.
The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military's Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both
published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside
from a divided Iraq, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The Yinon
Plan also calls for color revolutions (Arab Spring) North Africa and forecasts it as starting
from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region.
"Greater Israel" requires the breaking up of the existing Arab states into small states.
The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must
become an imperial regional power, and
must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all
existing Arab states.
Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently,
the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel's satellites and, ironically,
its source of moral legitimation This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first
time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units
has been a recurrent theme.
Viewed in this context, the war on Syria is part of the process of Israeli territorial
expansion. Israeli intelligence working hand in glove with the US, Turkey and NATO is
directly supportive of the Al Qaeda terrorist mercenaries inside Syria.
The Zionist Project also requires the destabilization of Egypt, the creation of factional
divisions within Egypt as instrumented by the "Arab Spring" leading to the formation of a
sectarian based State dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood.
"... Since the announcement (but no real follow through) to end our military involvement in Syria what passes for our statesmen - John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo - have been ignored, mocked or both. ..."
"... When was the last time you heard of a major US political figure go overseas and be refused a meeting with a foreign head of state, publicly upbraided and sent home like an irrelevant flunkie? ..."
"... The insult couldn't be plainer. The lack of Bolton's self-awareness and understanding of the situation was embarrassing. And it left Erdogan the perfect opportunity to call out the Trump Administration's policies as beholden to a foreign power, Israel. ..."
Something has changed in U.S. politics. And it may finally signal something changing for the
better. Since the announcement (but no real follow through) to end our military involvement in
Syria what passes for our statesmen - John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo - have
been ignored, mocked or both.
Bolton attempted to box Trump in on not leaving Syria while Israel chest-thumped about how
they will not yield an inch to Iran. Turkish President Erdogan publicly lambasted him with no
response from President Trump. Or anyone else for that matter.
When was the last time you heard of a major US political figure go overseas and be refused
a meeting with a foreign head of state, publicly upbraided and sent home like an irrelevant flunkie?
I can't think of one. Bolton came into the Middle East and made demands like he was the President which Bolton
knew were clearly red lines for Erdogan -- guaranteeing the safety of the Syrian Kurds. And he did this from Jerusalem.
The insult couldn't be plainer. The lack of Bolton's self-awareness and understanding of the
situation was embarrassing. And it left Erdogan the perfect opportunity to call out the Trump
Administration's policies as beholden to a foreign power, Israel.
No. In November 2018, the US rejected a symbolic UN resolution calling on Israel to end its
occupation of the Golan Heights. The resolution passed with 151 votes in favor, 14 abstentions and only two votes against
– the US and Israel itself They call it, "Occupied" for no reason. Gaza also an example but joos kept slicing it out ever since
installed there.
Well yes and I held a conference with resolutions in my backyard over some beers and it
resulted in calling out the occupation as the spoils of war. The Syrians will just have to
suck it up. Everyone else who pays attention to the bleating of ****** morons at the UN
should realize the backyard beer occupation resolution trumps all.
"The lack of Bolton's self-awareness and understanding of the situation was embarrassing.
And it left Erdogan the perfect opportunity to call out the Trump Administration's policies
as beholden to a foreign power, Israel. "
This fits into my theory regarding Trump as a good boss. He obviously could not avoid hiring Bolton, as Trump's balancing act goes on. Bolton is an old PNAC petty
potentate, and he obviously believes that triumphalist drivel from 2000. So, Bolton obviously thought he could deke around Trump and defy him and walked right into this act of political suicide. He'l be fired when the time is right. He's too connected to get beat up like Sessions. Trump will have to lever Bolton out using his own mustache and with the appropriate backing. That's going to easier now that Bolton danced a jig in Jerusalm.
Something has changed in U.S. politics. And it may finally signal something changing for the
better. Since the announcement (but no real follow through) to end our military involvement in
Syria what passes for our statesmen - John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo - have
been ignored, mocked or both.
Bolton attempted to box Trump in on not leaving Syria while Israel chest-thumped about how
they will not yield an inch to Iran. Turkish President Erdogan publicly lambasted him with no
response from President Trump.
Or anyone else for that matter.
When was the last time you heard of a major U.S. political figure go overseas and be refused
a meeting with a foreign head of state, publicly upbraided and sent home like an irrelevant
flunkie?
I can't think of one.
Bolton came into the Middle East and made demands like he was the President which Bolton
knew were clearly red lines for Erdogan -- guaranteeing the safety of the Syrian Kurds.
And he did this from Jerusalem.
The insult couldn't be plainer. The lack of Bolton's self-awareness and understanding of the
situation was embarrassing. And it left Erdogan the perfect opportunity to call out the Trump
Administration's policies as beholden to a foreign power, Israel.
Well yes and I held a conference with resolutions in my backyard over some beers and it
resulted in calling out the occupation as the spoils of war. The Syrians will just have to
suck it up. Everyone else who pays attention to the bleating of ****** morons at the UN
should realize the backyard beer occupation resolution trumps all.
" The lack of Bolton's self-awareness and understanding of the situation was embarrassing.
And it left Erdogan the perfect opportunity to call out the Trump Administration's policies
as beholden to a foreign power, Israel. "
This fits into my theory regarding Trump as a good boss. He obviously could not avoid
hiring Bolton, as Trump's balancing act goes on. Bolton is an old PNAC petty
potentate,
and he obviously believes that triumphalist drivel from 2000. So, Bolton obviously
thought he could deke around Trump and defy him and walked right into this act
of political suicide.
He'l be fired when the time is right. He's too connected to get beat up like Sessions.
Trump will have to lever Bolton out using his own mustache and with the appropriate
backing. That's going to easier now that Bolton danced a jig in Jerusalm.
IMO Senate anti-BDS bill is an Israeli effort to kill free speech in the US
"Pro-Israel lawmakers in Washington, undeterred by the partial shutdown of the United States
government, are pursuing their agenda full speed with the introduction of the first piece of
legislation before the 116th Senate -- a bill that aims to stifle the free-speech rights of
American critics of apartheid Israel.
The Republican-controlled Senate's first bill (S.1) would enact penalties on entities that
engage in boycotts of Israel -- one of many measures in the United States intended to push back
on the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
BDS seeks to place economic pressure on companies and institutions that support Israeli ones
operating in illegally occupied areas in Palestine, in order to pressure the Israeli government
into compliance with international law and to cease its practices of apartheid, ethnic
cleansing, and the ongoing encroachment of Israeli settlements." Alexander Rubenstein
------------
Even as this travesty of law is driven forward in the senate, US senators Cruz and Cotton
are in Israel supporting Israeli annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights and official American
recognition of the annexation. These Syrian lands were seized in war by Israel in 1967 and
occupied ever since.
IMO this bill, if it became law, would be struck down by the courts as
unconstitutional.
Servants of a foreign power and enemies of the Constitution. Disgraceful. The Republic has
been utterly corrupted and these traitors should all be in jail.
Seems this Senate bill goes far beyond trying to muzzle our free speech. It attempts to
force us to buy Israeli products and invest in Israeli companies and institutions. There's
going to be some serious civil disobedience if this piece of crap passes.
Good to see the new Congress has got its priorities straight with 'Strengthening
Israel's America's Security in the Middle East Act of 2019'. The anti-BDS
bit is an abomination. As it is not yet illegal to petition your senator, and with our host's
permission, I'd urge everyone to make use of the ACLU's pro-forma message of objection to the
bill. Just fill in the form online:
Unfortunately this is probably not unconstitutional. It won't be illegal to call for a
boycott of Israel, it will just be illegal to boycott Israel. An analogy: it's not illegal to
say "don't hire black people," but it is illegal to not hire black people.
Also, I bet South Africa wishes they had a better lobby.
How do Cruz and Cotton get around the UN resolutions that recognize the Golan as Syrian
territory? And if they are successful what would that do to US relations with Jordan, the
Saudis, and the Gulf States?
I suspect Cruz and Cotton are just playing to that part of their evangelical base like
Jeffress and others that seem obsessed with apocalyptic literature.
Recognizing Taiwan involved similar problems but we finessed it - I think Israel's friends
in Congress can come up with something similar for "de facto but not official recognition" of
Golan as Israeli territory. The Izzies will be happy - they like to take things inch by
inch.
As for Jordan, KSA, and the Gulfies - they have had to swallow more bitter medicine in the
past, and they will again in the future. They have nowhere to go.
"... At risk of being censored and/or convicted of Thought Crime - it is *remarkable* how very highly disproportionate the number of Jewish Zionists is who are in the media and in Congress and in ThinkTankistan and shouting about Russian meddling, 'aggression,' and the like. ..."
"... I don't think Bill Kristol and David Frum and Jeff Goldberg are either honest nor primarily concerned with American national security, nor the lives of MENA civilians. I think they care only about using American blood and treasure to facilitate Israeli lebensraum, however bloody and expensive. ..."
"... Trump survives only if he dances for the Deep State *and* Likud. ..."
At risk of being censored and/or convicted of Thought Crime - it is *remarkable* how very
highly disproportionate the number of Jewish Zionists is who are in the media and in Congress
and in ThinkTankistan and shouting about Russian meddling, 'aggression,' and the like.
It's too bad it is forbidden to examine this phenomena as one part of the matrix of power
and lies leading the US into conflict with Russia, no?
I don't think Bill Kristol and David Frum and Jeff Goldberg are either honest nor
primarily concerned with American national security, nor the lives of MENA civilians. I think
they care only about using American blood and treasure to facilitate Israeli lebensraum,
however bloody and expensive.
Trump survives only if he dances for the Deep State *and* Likud.
As usual Philip Giraldi out writes the NYT hacks. Stephens and his cohorts at the Times are
constantly kvetching about Israel then they scream anti-Semitism if it's pointed out. It's
exhausting. I'm exhausted with neocons.
Trotskyism : the political, economic, and social principles advocated by Trotsky
especially the theory and practice of communism developed by or associated with Trotsky and
usually including adherence to the concept of worldwide revolution as opposed to socialism
in one country.
Pro-Zionist liberals such as those at the New York Times have the dilemma of how to
oppose President Trump, who pursues pro-Zionist policies. A solution seems to be to argue
that Trump is not really that pro-Zionist.
Inspired by the Scofield Bible, it is, regrettably, a fundamental belief of millions of
voters that Israel is good for America.
In John Hagee's words , '50 million evangelical bible-believing Christians unite with
five million American Jews standing together on behalf of Israel.'
The linked article concludes: 'Not least among the many victims of the Scofield Bible are
5 million Palestinian refugees whose right to return is fervently opposed by America's
Zionized Christians. Thanks to their indoctrination by Scofield's unholy book, they believe
that Palestine belongs not to the Palestinians -- many of whom are fellow Christians -- but
exclusively to "God's chosen people".'
I'm pleased to say I was not for moving the embassy and as for the Iran deal it was
better than the alternative, with the potential for further talks down the road. Stephens
didn't approve but both aspects of US foreign policy were good for the US. So why would we
expect him to?
Where the clash is going to come is the Democratic party is not going to put up with this
rubbish anymore. Yes there will be some holdovers (Schumer, Cardin et al.) but blanket
support is not going to play with the next congress. They will lose donor support as well as
media acceptance –from the Times– but Christian Zionism isn't a factor for Dem's
and constituents see that a brutal Israeli government that is focusing on attaching itself to
kindred spirit states led by strongman types, doesn't deserve support.
when we here about israel as the problem it is really not israel the country but israel the
people. they are spread out over many countries but all still believe in their cult of israel
i have read many times how the majority of them are not even ancestors of israel but are
instead converts form centuries ago there are lawsutis in the US against the government aid
to israel which vilotlates US law on providing aid to an undeclares nuke power,,,and against
aipac for not registering FARA,,,they have gone nowhere In my opinion, their whole power
comes from media control when the media goes on and on about bogus Russian influence and says
nothing of israel influence you know you have a problem
The World will never be free and peaceful until we can liberate AMERICAN & European
politcal, economic, military, intelligentsia, educational & cultural DECISION MAKING
CENTERS from destructive & inhuman ZIONIST lobby. As Stephen Walt & John Mearsheimr
wrote in their unique & worldwide known "US FOREIGN POLICY AND ISRAEL LOBBY" not only
these lobbying organizations are anti US interests but they are as well against the long term
interests of ISRAEL itself.
Briefly we should free mind of American people before all to have a ideal and productive
world.
Social Media has opened the door and continues to pave the path for the world to see the
truth of the Apartheid State of Israel and the struggle of the Palestinian People. Most
Americans are struggling themselves, so many won't make the effort to learn what's happening
to foreigners living half a world away. It's perfectly understandable. On the other hand,
there are others of us–and the number is growing exponentially–who feel a human
bond with the suffering and humiliation Palestinian People experience daily from an Apartheid
"ally" who we–through our American taxes–support. Our representatives in congress
are heavily influenced to vote for measures to support Netanyahu's Apartheid Regime. Use your
power of the pen to reach out to your local representative in congress to stop now. And keep
it up my Brothers and Sisters. Social Media is the Way!
Social Media has opened the door and continues to pave the path for the world to see the
truth of the Apartheid State of Israel and the struggle of the Palestinian People. Most
Americans are struggling themselves, so many won't make the effort to learn what's happening
to foreigners living half a world away. It's perfectly understandable. On the other hand,
there are others of us–and the number is growing exponentially–who feel a human
bond with the suffering and humiliation Palestinian People experience daily from an Apartheid
"ally" who we–through our American taxes–support. Our representatives in congress
are heavily influenced to vote for measures to support Netanyahu's Apartheid Regime. Use your
power of the pen to reach out to your local representative in congress to stop now. And keep
it up my Brothers and Sisters. Social Media is the Way!
This is what I said on Pat Buchanan's page about a comment, very apropos to this article,
also from the NY Times "That comment from the NY Times exposes how aligned the globalist
leftist elite is with the NEOCON globalist elite. There's 'no daylight' between characters
like 'Linda' Graham and 'Up Chuck' Schumer when it comes to globalist hegemony. Thank God for
Donald and keep America First!" The comment that Pat made his point on was this: 'In
Monday's editorial celebrating major figures of foreign policy in the past half-century, The
New York Times wrote', "As these leaders pass from the scene, it will be left to a new
generation to find a way forward from the wreckage Mr. Trump has already
created." This is what Pat attacked in his column.
Correct me if I'm wrong but America still has NO formal alliance treaty with the Jewish
State, no?
And finally 'Bret Stephens'; How clever they are with their names.
@Hamed
Ghashghavi The problem 'Hamed from Tehran' is that the Main Stream Media and the
political class in the USA is almost completely owned by the rich 'Zionist Lobby'.
For example: aid to Egypt is necessary because of Israel. It is how we pay off the
dictatorship for not pressing the Palestinian issue. So add another 1.5 billion.
Aid to Palestinians: another $500 million.
Tax deductible funds going towards settlement expansion: several hundreds of million if
not billion.
Aid to Jordan. Aid to Lebanon.
Add it all up and it probably is $20 billion each and every year.
I predict proactive Jewish Lobby Stink-Think Tanks have engineered plans to dramatically
influence Democrat Congress & presidential candidate elections, and which are underway
now.
Elections come and go but the Zio stump-song remains the same.
First, and as you should well understand Mark, particular campaigns for US Senate cost
$millions simply to get a candidate's mere "name" in front of ever longing & frustrated
American voters.
Of course, such efforts are enhanced by manifold "special interests" and billionaire
campaign contributions.
Regrettably, U.S. election campaign "donor support" (uh, speech?) trumps the will of the
paltry amount of Americans who indulge voting, and our Zionist Corporate Media obliges the
biggest beneficiary winner$, and can finagle ideologically blind & typically
GOP-Christian Zionist's to bloc vote for, i.e., brand-name & repackaged Zio Democrats,
Pocahontas, Bloomberg, Biden, Bob Casey, etcetera.
In short, Mark, the "brutal Israeli government" expertly followed Protocols of Zion by
neutering U.S. Congressional & Presidential democratic elections, and the Zionist
Corporate Media entertainingly promotes the THEATER.
National rejection of the great "rubbish" work of, for one little example, NYT's Bret
Stephens, is a giant step toward how America could become gallant/noble again, and afterward
repent & focus upon strivation to "greatness."
The proximate reason why Iran is a problem in this region is because Israel cannot resolve
the Palestinian issue. Iran is basically a gigantic wag the dog. Without this external ginned
up threat, Israel is simply stuck in a Palestinian mire.
A war with Iran would also serve as a pretext and cover for Israel to expel its remaining
Palestinians.
This is why they amp up the Iran threat. This is why they want to draw the United States
into a war with Iran. Fundamentally because they refuse to take responsibility for the
Palestinian issue that they created.
"I still say that US and Russia should come to Israels help in hour of need.
But Israel also should stop behaving like rotten spoiled child."
Russia can provide the "Jewish Autonomous Oblast" (already exists), and the U$A can
provide the means to move them there. Of course the FORMER Israel will have to pay for
everything.
I support Great Britain and France, that does not mean I approve of colonial behavior or
trouncing British or French identity. I can certainly support the existence of Is areal and
chagrin their attacks and encroachments onto Palestine uninvited and without compensation
or shooting protectors for the matter.
I tend to agree with you on this. No matter what one thinks of the morality of the events
of 1948, most of today's Israeli Jews were born on the land and have a right to live there.
They're no more responsible for the sins of their grandfathers than a modern German, except
to the extent that they help perpetuate continued injustice.
With that said, what frightens me is the extent to which some of them have been emboldened
by a combination of unchecked ethnocentrism and a sense of immunity from scrutiny and
criticism. Particularly in the realm of ethnic bioweapons. Most of the leading DNA analysis
companies seem to be Jewish-owned. It seems to be an area of emphasis with them. It was
reported 20 years ago that Israel has an anti-Arab virus. Who else might be a target?
Israeli participation in spyware and their access to raw NSA data is also concerning. How
do we know that the data isn't be used to intimidate Americans from speaking out, or to
siphon money from ordinary investors by insider trading?
@polistra Israel
is hardly a normal country. It is an Apartheid Colony. That's why it needs American support
and will need it for the foreseeable future. It uses its co-religionists in the US to
maintain an iron grip on US mideast policy, making sure that it is at the heart of it and
that almost no dissenting voices can ever be elected in the US or get any mainstream media
access. If that sounds like a normal country to you, I have a bridge for sale.
but as far your critisisms of Israel policy and 'undemocratic' and 'illiberal' stances
and actions.
well guess what
You're missing the thrust of Giraldi's position. Israel can do whatever it likes as long
as it doesn't entangle the US in their fight. But, as you well know, Israel is not interested
in fighting this fight alone. It has dragged others into it, including the US. As long as the
American taxpayer is forced to pay an annual tribute of ~$4B, they have every right to
condemn Israeli policies that clearly don't align with their values. So, get used to it.
Israel is no friend of America , never was , never has been and never will be, and just a few
examples, JFK was shot and killed in full view of Americans for his executive order 11110
which would have restored America to constitutional money bypassing the FED, who benefits?
The USS Liberty was attacked by Israel killing 34 and wounding 174 in an attempt to blame
the attack on Egypt and bring the U.S. into the war against Egypt and of course Israel lied
about the attack and got away with it!
... ... ...
Israel is Bad for America, by Philip Giraldi - The Unz Review
You have to hand it to the Israelis for conquering like Romans.
As for the US in Syria, it has always had the potential for handing us a "Charge of the
Light Brigade" moment where, like in the Crimean War, we manage to keep the Russians and the
Iranians checked in the region for a few years, but at a cost where even the dulled senses of
the US voter can't escape the toll taken to achieve this fleeting "strategic objective."
@bucky Aware,
Bucky said: "This is why they amp up the Iran threat. This is why they want to draw the
United States into a war with Iran."
Appreciate your posting of the wise sentences, above, bucky. Thanks.
Israel will never allow their territory expansion/M.E. hegemon goals to get interrupted by
mere U.S. elections.
The will and desires of American voters are easily manageable, manipulated, & another
major & fear-provoking "Homeland" False Flag attack, and voila, it's Fire & Fury upon
Syria and Iran.
Well, Israel itself isn't bad for us. Israel is a normal country defending its own
interests fiercely. Every country SHOULD defend its own interests fiercely
But it is HOW they defend those interests that is problematic. Hungary has insisted
that they will never tolerate a large number of migrants in their country. Hungary will be
for Hungarians. They do not wage wars, they do not commit ethnic cleansing in other people's
lands. They have merely closed their borders and that is a peaceful way in which they
fiercely protect their interests. The same goes for Japan. Despite a stagnating economy
caused by plummeting birth rates, the Japanese insist on a strict no immigrant policy. That
is a peaceful way of fiercely protecting their interests.
Israel on the other hand is anything but peaceful. They engage in ethnic cleansing and
drag the US (and whoever else they can con) into their conflicts. If we are looking for a
foreign example to emulate, there's no question about it – we should emulate Japan and
not Israel. Japan is a civilized nation where the people genuinely love their country. Israel
is a thuggish and fascist state that justly deserves all the opprobrium they shamelessly
whine about.
The level of alienation of Palestians probably reached that stage at which reconciliation is impossible.
Notable quotes:
"... This is why they amp up the Iran threat. This is why they want to draw the United States into a war with Iran. Fundamentally because they refuse to take responsibility for the Palestinian issue that they created. ..."
The proximate reason why Iran is a problem in this region is because Israel cannot resolve
the Palestinian issue. Iran is basically a gigantic wag the dog. Without this external ginned
up threat, Israel is simply stuck in a Palestinian mire.
A war with Iran would also serve as a pretext and cover for Israel to expel its remaining
Palestinians.
This is why they amp up the Iran threat. This is why they want to draw the United
States into a war with Iran. Fundamentally because they refuse to take responsibility for the
Palestinian issue that they created.
For example: aid to Egypt is necessary because of Israel. It is how we pay off the
dictatorship for not pressing the Palestinian issue. So add another 1.5 billion.
Aid to Palestinians: another $500 million.
Tax deductible funds going towards settlement expansion: several hundreds of million if
not billion.
Aid to Jordan. Aid to Lebanon.
Add it all up and it probably is $20 billion each and every year.
@bucky It's more
that that, specifically to Izruel . If you include 'Non Governmental Agencies', the
'Charaties' and hedge funds funneling unknown amounts of ZOG bucks to the land of Zion plus
other underhanded methods of getting money to their Zionist bretheren, it's in the tens of
billions .
Other than
brain-dead Christian fundamentalist, it come's as no surprise that Jews who wrote the Old and
New Testament, granted themselves special permission to violate virtually every moral law and
restriction known to mankind, including the right to steal land and resources belonging to
others. While, at the same time, giving themselves the right to condemn anyone daring to
point-out their lying and deceptive ways.
Realist, January 1, 2019 at 7:44 pm GMT
@bucky
Add it all up and it probably is $20 billion each and every year.
Middle East involvement costs trillions of dollars.
"... They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel's Lobby ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... Donald Trump is Bad for Israel ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is ..."
American journalism has become in its mainstream exponents a compendium of half-truths and
out-and-out lies. The public, though poorly informed on most issues as a result, has generally
figured out that it is being hoodwinked and trust in the Fourth Estate has plummeted over the
past twenty years. The skepticism about what is being reported has enabled President Donald
Trump and other politicians to evade serious questions about policy by claiming that what is
being reported is little more than "fake news."
No news is more fake than the reporting in the U.S. media that relates to the state of
Israel. Former Illinois congressman Paul Findley in his
seminal bookThey Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel's
Lobby observed that nearly all the foreign press correspondents working out of Israel are
Jewish while most of the editors that they report to at news desks are also Jews, guaranteeing
that the articles that eventually surface in the newspapers will be carefully constructed to
minimize any criticism of the Jewish state. The same goes for television news, particularly on
cable news stations like CNN.
A particularly galling aspect of the sanitization of news reports regarding Israel is the
underlying assumption that Israelis share American values and interests, to include freedom and
democracy. This leads to the perception that Israelis are just like Americans with Israel's
enemies being America's enemies. Given that, it is natural to believe that the United States
and Israel are permanent allies and friends and that it is in the U.S. interest to do whatever
is necessary to support Israel, including providing billions of dollars in aid to a country
that is already wealthy as well as unlimited political cover in international bodies like the
United Nations.
That bogus but nevertheless seemingly eternal bond is essentially the point from which a
December 26 th op-ed in The New York Times departs. The piece is by one of
the Times' resident opinion writers Bret Stephens and is entitled
Donald Trump is Bad for Israel .
Stephens gets to the point rather quickly, claiming that "The president has abruptly
undermined Israel's security following a phone call with an Islamist strongman in Turkey. So
much for the idea, common on the right, that this is the most pro-Israel administration ever. I
write this as someone who supported Trump moving
the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and who praised his decision to
withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal as courageous
and correct . I also would have opposed the president's decision to remove U.S. forces from
Syria under nearly any circumstances. Contrary to the invidious myth that
neoconservatives always put Israel first, the reasons for staying in Syria have everything to
do with core U.S. interests. Among them: Keeping ISIS beaten, keeping faith with the Kurds,
maintaining leverage in Syria and preventing Russia and Iran from consolidating their grip on
the Levant."
The beauty of Stephens overwrought prose is that the careful reader might realize from the
git-go that the argument being promoted makes no sense. Bret has a big heart for the Kurds but
the Palestinians are invisible in his piece while his knowledge of other developments in the
Middle East is superficial. First of all, the phone call with Turkey's President Recep Tayyip
Erdogan had nothing to do with "undermining Israel's security." It concerned the northern
border of Syria, which Turkey shares, and arrangements for working with the Kurds, which is a
vital interest for both Ankara and Washington. And it might be added that from a U.S. national
security point of view Turkey is an essential partner for the United States in the region while
Israel is not, no matter what it pretends to be.
Stephens then goes on to demonstrate what he claims to be a libel, that for him and other
neocons Israel always comes first, an odd assertion given the fact that he spends 80% of his
article discussing what is or isn't good for Israel. He supports the U.S. Embassy move to
Jerusalem, the end of the nuclear agreement with Iran, both of which were applauded in Israel
but which are extremely damaging to American interests. He attacks the planned withdrawal from
Syria because it is a "core interest" for the U.S., which is complete nonsense.
Contrary to Stephens' no evidence assertion, Russia and Iran have neither the resources nor
the desire to "consolidate[e] their grip on the Levant" while it is the United States has no
right and no real interest to "maintain leverage" on Syria by invading and occupying the
country. But, of course, invading and occupying are practices that Israel is good at, so
Stephens' brain fart on the issue can perhaps be attributed to confusion over whose bad
policies he was defending. Stephens also demonstrate confusion over his insistence that the
U.S. must "resist foreign aggressors the Russians and Iranians in Syria in this decade,"
suggesting that he is unaware that both nations are providing assistance at the request of the
legitimate government in Damascus. It is the U.S. and Israel that are the aggressors in
Syria.
Stephens then looks at the situation from the "Israeli standpoint," which is presumably is
easy for him to do as that is how he looks at everything given the fact that he is far more
concerned about Israel's interests than those of the United States. Indeed, all of his opinions
are based on the assumption that U.S. policy should be supportive of a rightwing Israeli
government, that of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who has recently been indicted for
corruption and has called for an early election to subvert the process.
Bret finally comes to the point, writing that "What Israel most needs from the U.S. today is
what it needed at its birth in 1948: an America committed to defending the
liberal-international order against totalitarian enemies, as opposed to one that conducts a
purely transactional foreign policy based on the needs of the moment or the whims of a
president."
Stephens then expands on what it means to be liberal-international: "It means we should
oppose militant religious fundamentalism, whether it is Wahhabis in Riyadh or Khomeinists in
Tehran or Muslim Brothers in Cairo and Ankara. It means we should advocate human rights, civil
liberties, and democratic institutions, in that order."
Bret also throws America's two most recent presidents under the bus in his jeremiad, saying
"During the eight years of the Obama presidency, I thought U.S. policy toward Israel --
the
hectoring , the incompetent
diplomatic interventions , the moral
equivocations , the
Iran deal , the backstabbing at the
U.N. -- couldn't get worse. As with so much else, Donald Trump succeeds in making his
predecessors look good." He then asks "Is any of this good for Israel?" and he answers
"no."
Bret Stephens in his complaining reveals himself to be undeniably all about Israel, but
consider what he is actually saying. He claims to be against "militant religious
fundamentalism," but isn't that what Israeli Zionism is all about, with more than a dash of
racism and fanaticism thrown in for good measure? One Israeli Chief Rabbi has called black
people "monkeys" while another
has declared that gentiles cannot live in Israel. Right-wing religious fundamentalist
parties currently are in power with Netanyahu and are policy making for the Israeli Government:
Shas, Jewish Home, and United Torah Judaism. None of them could be regarded as a moderating
influence on their thuggish serial financial lawbreaker Prime Minister.
And isn't Israel's record on human rights and civil liberties among the worst in the world?
Here is the Human Rights Watch's assessment of Israel :
"Israel maintains entrenched discriminatory systems that treat Palestinians unequally. Its
50-year occupation of the West Bank and Gaza involves systematic rights abuses, including
collective punishment, routine use of excessive lethal force, and prolonged administrative
detention without charge or trial for hundreds. It builds and supports illegal settlements in
the occupied West Bank, expropriating Palestinian land and imposing burdens on Palestinians
but not on settlers, restricting their access to basic services and making it nearly
impossible for them to build in much of the West Bank without risking demolition. Israel's
decade-long closure of Gaza, supported by Egypt, severely restricts the movement of people
and goods, with devastating humanitarian impact."
Israel, if one is considering the entire population under its rule, is among the most
undemocratic states that chooses to call itself democratic. Much of the population living in
lands that Israel claims cannot vote, they have no freedom of movement in their homeland, and
they have no right of return to homes that they were forced to abandon. Israeli army snipers
blithely shoot unarmed demonstrators while Netanyahu's government kills, beats and imprisons
children. And the Jewish state does not even operate very democratically even inside Israel
itself, with special rights for Jewish citizens and areas and whole towns where Muslims or
Christians are not allowed to buy property or reside.
It is time for American Jews like Bret Stephens to come to the realization that not
everything that is good for Israel is good for the U.S. The strategic interests of the two
countries, if they were openly discussed in either the media or in congress, would be seen to
be often in direct conflict. Somehow in Stephens' twisted mind the 1948 theft of Palestinian
lands and the imposition of an apartheid system to control the people is in some way
representative of a liberal world order.
If one were to suggest that Stephens should move to Israel since his primary loyalty clearly
lies there, there would be accusations of anti-Semitism, but in a sense, it is far better to
have him stick around blathering from the pulpit of The New York Times . When he
writes so ineptly about how Donald Trump Is Bad for Israel the real message that comes through
loud and clear is how bad Israel is for America.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based
U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is[email protected].
The Last but not LeastTechnology is dominated by
two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt.
Ph.D
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social
issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which
such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free)
site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should
be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors
of this site
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or
referenced source) and are
not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society.We do not warrant the correctness
of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be
tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without
Javascript.
Philip Giraldi December 12, 2019 | Featured Story Donald Trump and Israel: When Does a 'Passionate Attachment' Threaten National Security? In his Farewell Address , of 1796 America's first president George Washington famously warned his fellow citizens that " a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification."
It showed that those identifying as "very left-wing" – the section of the public that supports Corbyn – were among the least likely to express antisemitic attitudes. Those identifying as "very right-wing", on the other hand – those likely to support Boris " piccaninnies " Johnson – were three and a half times more likely to express hostile attitudes towards Jews. Other surveys show even worse racism among Conservatives towards more obviously non-white minorities, such as Muslims and black people. That, after all, is the very reason Boris " letterbox-looking Muslim women " Johnson now heads the Tory party.
Even now, our most prized rights, such as free speech, are being eroded and subverted to protect Israel from criticism. In the US, the only infringements on the American public's First Amendment rights have been legislated to silence those seeking to pressure Israel over its crimes against the Palestinians with a boycott – similar to the campaign against apartheid South Africa. In the UK, the Conservative manifesto similarly promises to bar local councils from upholding international law and boycotting products from Israel's illegal settlements.
In his state of historical and political myopia, Mirvis cannot begin to understand that there might be political activists who, in defending the Palestinian people, are also defending Jews. That they, unlike him, understand that Israel was created not out of western benevolence towards Jews, but out of western malevolence towards "lesser peoples". The real left in Britain speaks out against Israel not because it hates Jews but because it holds dear a commitment to justice and a compassion for all.
Israeli citizens/nationals virtually on arrival, while Arabs driven from their ancestral homes in 1947-48 and 1967 may not go back, much less become full-rights citizens/nationals. Put concretely, I, an atheist born in Philadelphia to Jewish parents born in Philadelphia (with roots likely in the vicinity of the Black Sea), can "return" [sic] to Israel and become an Israeli citizen at once, while my friend Raouf Halaby, a naturalized American citizen born to Arab Christian parents in west Jerusalem three years before Israel was founded, may not. The only difference is that my mother was Jewish, making me, a Spinozist, a Jewish national in Israel's eyes, and Raouf's mother was not.
Rep. Ilhan Omar participates in a panel discussion during
the Muslim Collective for Equitable Democracy Conference and Presidential Forum at the National
Housing Center in Washington, D.C., on July 23, 2019. , Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
"IT'S ALL ABOUT the Benjamins, baby."
MIGA!
Anonymous
+5
+5
'Never
say never': Hope Hicks told reporters she'd consider...
Trump
ducks the media after assault on 'dangerous & sick'...
Trump
DENIES concern over son Don Jr.'s legal exposure for...
+5
+5
+5
The
Facial That Celebrities Say Takes 10 Years Off Your Face
Marie
Claire | Hanacure
Undo
Kelley Blue Book
Subcompact
Luxury SUV Best Buy of 2019
Kelley Blue
Book
Undo
MoneyWise.com
20
Places Where $150K Is Enough To Retire
MoneyWise.com
Undo
MoneyPop
50
Of The Most Useless Cars Ever Made
MoneyPop
Undo
BlitzLift
Historians
Agree That She Was The Most Powerful Woman In History
BlitzLift
Undo
Novelodge
The
One WD40 Trick Everyone Should Know About
Novelodge
Undo
Kiwi Report
What
Happened To Jenna Jameson? We Can't Look Away... The New Look Is Mes
Kiwi
Report
Undo
1 Smart Penny
Seniors
With No Life Insurance Should Do This Before March 31
1
Smart Penny
Undo
NewRetirement
How
Much Money Do You Really Get from a Reverse Mortgage?
NewRetirement
Undo
by Taboola
by
Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored
Links
Promoted Links
Promoted
Links
YOU MAY LIKE
History101
Hidden Room Of Thomas Jefferson's
History101
Undo
EternalLifeStyle
Steve Harvey Burst Into Tears When He
Realiz
EternalLifeStyle
Undo
Discount Car
Insurance Quotes
Mount Arlington, New Jersey Drivers Surpri
Discount
Car Insurance Quotes
Undo
Comments
30
Loading...
The reality of
Arabia, from Trump's point of view during his electoral campaign, was as follows:
