I've often argued that our journalism has done our country a real injury by marginalizing Walt and Mearsheimer. I say this anew because of two pieces I just read in (as usual) Haaretz. 1, Haaretz essentially echoed much of what Walt and Mearsheimer wrote about the stranglehold on policy in this interview with Haim Saban, the Israeli-American financier of the Brookings Institution and of the Democratic Party.
You said once that you are a one-note person, and that note is Israel. Why?
"You can't explain love."...
Do you still feel, as you once did, that America's attitude toward Israel is liable to deteriorate?
"At the moment there is no sign of a crisis. But we must not be complacent. The two pillars of the state are the Israel Defense Forces and the U.S.; Dimona [the site of Israel's nuclear reactor] and Washington. We must do all we can to maintain the alliance with America. A major crisis at the wrong time could be a disaster, a disaster." [emphasis mine]
Do you feel that as an Israeli-American of influence your mission is to prevent that crisis?
"You said it."
You
can't be more explicit. Washington is a pillar of the Israeli state.
The only reason Walt and Mearsheimer were attacked as antisemites is
that they threatened the status-quo by saying, heaven forfend, that
this intimacy wasn't in the American interest.
2. Now we have Gideon Levy in Haaretz,
enraged by the scandal involving P.M. Olmert and an American
businessman, savaging the intimacy between nations, and also the Israel Lobby, from the standpoint of Israel's
national interest:
It is time to say to the American Jews directly, as is customary among relatives: Leave us alone. Take your hands off Israel. Stop using your money to buy influence in Israel. Stop "contributing" to advance your interests and views, some of which are at times delusionary and extremely dangerous to the future of the country you're supposedly trying to protect.
No thank you, we're doing all right. No thank you, some of you are causing us great damage. If you want to wield influence, do it in your own country. You have a lot of power and influence there. Perhaps too much; it's none of our business. You are American, not Israeli citizens, and no amount of money can or should change this fact. [Beautiful Gideon!] ...Dozens of Jewish associations foster and finance the most nefarious project we've ever had here, from the One Israel Fund to the Hebron Fund, from American Friends of Ateret Cohanim to Shuvu Banim. They are all fattening the settlements, some openly and others under the table.
By so doing the Jews are helping to shape and mutilate another state. It's not only money: The loud, blatant Jewish right wing, which crushes any display of a different opinion in America, is trying to do the same in Israel. Camera, a McCarthyist group that persecutes journalists in the United States, is directing its absurd persecution and slander campaigns against the Israeli media as well. That is also part of the distorted relationship.
Notice Levy talking about "the Jews." Oh my. Imagine if for one second Walt and Mearsheimer had said, "The Jews." The ADL would have served their livers on crackers. Haaretz understands that these ideas are simply too important to continue to be bound by post-World-War 2 prohibitions. It's time to get Walt and Mearsheimer into the mainstream of American discourse, and try and move our society forward--and maybe Israel's too...
(Thanks to Leila Abu-Saba, who is praying for Lebanon, for the tip.)
It's all about Jewish money.
Really simple.
Of course you can't say that in the MSM.
And the working and lower middle class Gentiles will pay especially dearly, as they have been doing.
So what 's new?
Look at history.
Americans have to look more closely at the usual ideological
views. But this won't happed as Americans are kept factually ignorant. The traitors are our government representatives. The cause is campaign financing as it exists.
Napoleon would have known.
I argue in Judonia Rising Part 2 ( link to members.aol.com
) that Israel is not a consequential or even independent state.
Judonia, which consists for the most part of 400-500 hyperwealthy Zionist megadonors or members, and an immense staff from Jewish communal, Israeli advocacy and related organizations, is the virtual colonial motherland, of which the Jewish settlement in Palestine has always been a colony.
Possession of Israel is steadily increasing the status, wealth and power of the members of Judonia. They won't let Israel go, but in general their control is not particularly strict except in matters on which the most important members agree.
The USA is a client state of Judonia, and the members of the US national government are of course in a state of dependency and intimidation vis-a-vis Judonia.
Judonia expands in part by providing liquidity and investment to the right people at the right time (like Saban in 1975).
Take a look at link to members.aol.com
especially The Financial Orgy and the Russian Oligarchs, which includes the Infitah (not intifada — something entirely different). "Zayat's great colt…" takes us off to the twilight zone.
Anyway, with regard to Talansky and Olmert, there are today really two important transnational political elites within Judonia: the Jabotinskians (Neoconservatives) and the Kookians. (Chomsky calls them the Kooks. I call them Occult Nationalists in line with the nomenclature used to discuss similar Central and Eastern European political movements.
Because Israeli government officials are relatively low-down in the food chain of Judonia and because the Kooks have far less resources than the Jabotinskians, sometimes the Kooks and the Israeli government officials work together to lend each other strength and possibly exert more influence than the sum of the influence each group could manage separately.
BTW, figuring out these revenue stream relationships is very difficult and requires archival work as well as a higher level of Russian (in the case of oligarch issues) and Arabic (in the case of infitah issues) than I have (but I have a coleague whose expertise I could hire).
I also need to do some original work in economic theory like defining a GDP for the virtual colonial motherland, which has a very real very wealthy economy.
Because the effort is very expensive but very important, I put out a request for donations on my website.
I expect to cover the shortfall, but if cash flow associated with the work product (a book on the Israel Lobby) went positive, I would put it into an ongoing project to create a film academy in Palestine so that Palestinians could create and distribute Hollywood-style films targeting the American audience in the US market.
BTW the endnote associated with The Financial Orgy may be of interest.
Here is the content present at link to members.aol.com
.
The connections of the Safran, Orebi (Gisèle [Orebi] Littman also known as Bat Ye’or), and Zayat families with each other during the 30s, 40s or 50s as well as with Jabotinsky during the 30s need to be investigated. The family of Haim Saban may also be connected with this group as well. See Shlepping to Moguldom or link to tinyurl.com
.
The Orebis were Egyptian Italian Jews. Their original family name may have been Schinazi (Skinazi).
According to Gudrun Krämer in The Jewish in Modern Egypt, 1914-1952 ( link to books.google.com
), p. 46:
Emmanuel Misrahy Pasha as well as Moise bey Dichy and Isidore Feldman, who were among the delegation representing Egypt at the 1937 Montreux Conference, or Zaki bey Orebi, who as late as 1953 served as a member on the constitutional committee, were some of the most prominent lawyers in the country.
Krämer writes (p. 188):
One of the groups most active at the time [1933-4] was the revisionist movement, affiliated with Vladimir Jabotinsky, who in 1935 separated from the General Zionist Organization. The revisionists, led by the journalist Albert Staraselski, were particularly influential among Italian Jews in Alexandria, some of whom were moreover suspected of harboring fascist sympathies. According to a later activist, members were mostly Sephardim (i.e, Sephardi and Oriental Jews) of lower- and lower-middle class background, including many workers and a few professionals, but no students. Between 1931 and 1934, Staraselski even edited his own Zionist revisionist paper La Voix Juive.
Krämer adds (p. 213):
The Jewish community of Port Said sent a letter [May 1948] to the governor of the Canal Zone confirming their loyalty to the state of Egypt and condemning Israel. The Jewish lawyer Zaki Orebi sent articles to the Egyptian press denouncing Zionism as a tool of imperialism. Al-Shams, which as late as March 1946 had published an article on the importance of creating a Jewish state in Palestine, did not mention the establishment of the State of Israel; and al-Kalīm, which in July 1945 was still calling for `aliya to Palestine, dissociated itself from Zionism and “vehemently” condemned the establishment of the “so-called state” of Israel.
—————-
The contrast with Gisèle [Orebi] Littman’s Zionist demonization of Islam is striking.
Littman’s husband David Gerald Littman has been particularly active in poisoning human rights discourse for the sake of Zionism. See David G. Littman or link to dhimmitude.org
. Note that Christian Solidarity International (CSI) and International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) have been strongly associated with Charles Jacobs and the American Anti-Slavery Group or The David Project.
Phil,
In your knowledge and/or speculations, what do you think reforms Israel?
How are you going to form common cause with those that are Zionists but also oppose the expansion?
Say, people like me?
Richard, its not what your country (born in America, protected by its relatively dirt poor GIs) can do for you, but what you can do it for it. It's not Phil who is the American problem, but you. Zionism is not American. Pretty simple.
Phil,
Do you think that I am a traitor because I care about Israel, including Israel's defense, and think that the US should contribute to that defense, as an ally?
Richard Witty: Phil,
In your knowledge and/or speculations, what do you think reforms Israel?
LeaNder: This is so utterly unrelated, even contradicting the tenor of the article above, that I am left puzzled.
Richard Witty: How are you going to form common cause with those that are Zionists but also oppose the expansion? Say, people like me?"
nitwit: Support J-Street. Maybe Phil does.
I've consistently supported the themes of J-Street which are similarly Zionist and reform and peace oriented.
Apologizing for neither.
Again, the problem with the headline "Walt and Mearsheimer must be brought into the Mainstream", is that the original LRB article was itself polemic (by definition NOT in the mainstream), and Mearsheimer's subsequent presentations have relied on Pappe, Finkelstein, Chomsky as authority, also not in the mainstream.
Polemic, biased, partisan.
The book improved the footnotes, and clarified some of his conclusions, but the reasoning was still off.
I'm going to ask you again and again in every post, Phil.
"What practically do you propose? Why? How? When?"
BTW somewhat off topic but are the claims in this blog real?
http://www.hebronorphans.blogspot.com/
I am unsure whether they are or not (I don't put significant trust in a newish blog), but if it is true, it needs wider distribution and better publicity and better sources.
Haaretz: You said once that you are a one-note person, and that note is Israel. Why?
Haim Saban: "You can't explain love."
This reminds me of Woody Allen's explanation for molesting and marrying Soon Yi: 'The heart wants what it wants,’ said Woody. It's all out of their control. Maybe God made them do it.
Is there a more clichéd way of finagling out of self-responsibility than hiding behind God? It makes one wonder if history’s first Jew invented Yahweh at sword’s point, on the spot and out of thin air, as a convenient, harried explanation for some perversion he had committed–a contrivance that Jews bent on chicanery find useful to this day.
Haim Saban: 'The two pillars of the state are the Israel Defense Forces and the U.S.; Dimona [the site of Israel's nuclear reactor] and Washington. We must do all we can to maintain the alliance with America.'
Could Haim make it any clearer where his primary, and even only, loyalties lie? How can anyone who makes such a statement be described as anything other than a Jewish Zionist agent for Israel? If it was a Russian Communist with naturalized US citizenship making a statement akin to that in the 50's, he would have been stripped of his US citizenship and deported to the Soviet Union. How is this different? Israel is our ally? So was the Soviet Union during WWII.
Nuclear-armed Zionism is at least as dangerous and threatening to our way of life than was Communism, the difference being Communism didn’t have literally millions of adherents residing in America with the ability to hide behind freedom of religion as do the Zionists, and hundreds of millionaire's and billionaires among its subversive ranks, hiding behind the respectable veneer of Judaism.
America is in a huge spot of trouble for allowing the network-within-the-nation-within-a-nation to get such a foothold.
It's going to take Roman-like, Crusader-level determination and perseverance to root out these traitors and banish them to their primary loyalty. No wonder Jewish-American ideologues are bent on filling America with millions of third world, non-Crusader, non-Western civilization immigrants, who are unfarmiliar and inexperienced in the ways of Judeofascist chicanery, to hide behind.
God help us all if they succeed in getting final control of the US government; every non-Zionist the world over will all be in the position that the Palestinians are in today, and World War III will be inevitable.
They must be stopped here in America…today…now…or our descendents–and the world–will curse us forever.
Coincidentally The Christian Science Monitor mentions Walt & Mearsheimer prominently in an article dated 5-12-08
If he's pro-Israel, then he would have named his book "Pro-Israel – the Good Way"
americans are going to hate israel once this one is done and over with…
link to antiwar.com
/>
"What sparked the decision to strike Iran wasn't anything happening on the ground in Iraq, however. It's all about Lebanon. As Giraldi puts it:
"The decision to go ahead with plans to attack Iran is the direct result of concerns being expressed over the deteriorating situation in Lebanon, where Iranian ally Hezbollah appears to have gained the upper hand against government forces and might be able to dominate the fractious political situation."
Translation: The Israelis are demanding war with Iran, and the national security bureaucracy – thoroughly riddled with and corrupted by the neocons – has capitulated.
The Israeli failure to dislodge Hezbollah from its Lebanese fortress and subvert their growing political dominance – a direct result of the 2006 war – has Tel Aviv in a tizzy. The whole point of their "Clean Break" strategy, the linchpin of the American neocons' decade-long drive to embroil us in Iraq, has been compromised and even reversed by Hezbollah's continuing defiance. Tel Aviv wants them taken out – by the U.S., which alone has the firepower to do it.
This has been the real purpose of the "surge" all along – to prepare the ground for the final assault on Israel's deadliest enemy in the region, which is Iran. This is why Israel's lobby in the U.S. has made ratcheting-up tensions with Tehran their number-one priority, and clearly their relentless campaign is succeeding.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/glantz1.html
That's because over the course of the two-week trial, the VA was compelled to produce a series of documents that show the extent of the crisis affecting wounded soldiers.
"Shh!" begins one e-mail from Dr. Ira Katz, the head of the VA's Mental Health Division, advising a media spokesperson not to tell CBS News that 1,000 veterans receiving care at the VA try to kill themselves every month.
"Our suicide prevention coordinators are identifying about 1,000 suicide attempts per month among the veterans we see in our medical facilities. Is this something we should (carefully) address ourselves in some sort of release before someone stumbles on it?" the e-mail concludes.
Leading Democrats on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee immediately called for Katz's resignation. On May 6, the Chair of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs, Bob Filner (D-CA) convened a hearing titled "The Truth About Veteran's Suicides" and called Katz and VA Secretary James Peake to testify.
"That e-mail was in poor tone but the content was part of a dialogue about what we should do about new information," Katz said in response to Filner's questions. "The e-mail represents a healthy dialogue among members of VA staff about when it's appropriate to disclose and make public information early in the process."
Filner was nonplused and accused Katz and Peake of a "cover-up."
"Here's another number that we don't often hear discussed in the media: 287,790. That's the number of returning Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans who had filed a disability claim with the Veterans Administration as of March 25th. That figure was not announced to the public at a news conference, but obtained by Veterans for Common Sense using the Freedom of Information Act."
Only the US has the firepower to take out Hizbullah?
If the US can't control Iraq, how are they expected to "take out" Hizbullah?
We could nuke all of South Lebanon I suppose – kill 'em all and let God sort them out. This was supposed to have worked in Fallujah (granted without using nukes). Not sure it really has… OH yes, and nuking South Lebanon would kill plenty of Sunnis and Christians, too, but hey, a raghead is a raghead, huh? The worst part of it would be the consequences to the neighbors, the Israelis, who might suffer some fallout, even some actual nuclear fire, if we really were to nuke Lebanon in order to "take out" Hizbullah.
Perhaps you want to argue that we could hit Lebanon harder than even Israel did in '06. Good luck.
Please explain to me what US strategy, military or other, is reasonably going to "take out" a party supported by a million people?
Get a clue, folks. You are not going to "take out" Hizbullah. Not the USA, not the Israelis. The Syrians couldn't take them out or suppress them if they wanted to. The Iranians could starve them of cash if they changed their minds about their support, but Hizbullah would survive. Hizbullah is now a legitimate political party that won a substantial bloc of Parliament seats in fair elections. You don't have to like them but you have to be clear-eyed about their existence.
I don't know how the current Lebanese mess is going to settle … but I know that Hizbullah is not going anywhere, and is ready for more attempts to "take it out." Has anybody actually "taken out" the various Palestinian movements? Hamas is still around, isn't it? Hizbullah is about 10 times as organized and savvy as any Palestinian group.
I get tired of Americans who mouth off about US military powers. Sometimes battleships and jet bombers can't solve your political or military problems. You have to negotiate.
I get tired of all use of military power.
Iranian, American, Israeli, Palestinian, Pakistani, Indian, Iraqi.
All outside of human scale.
Iran IS the elephant in the room. The left is in utter denial of its expansionism, and therefore only offer impractical "solutions" and put a great deal of pressure for them.
Hezbollah is undertaking a coup in Lebanon currently. A martial coup, that will easily devolve to a violent purge of all dissenting elements, same as occurred in Iran in 1981 and 82, when thousands of former compadres in opposing the Shah were murdered.
Again, "the US fought a war with Iraq, Iran won."
Prior to the Iraq invasion, both Iraq and Iran were largely contained, not at war, relatively content to reap their windfall oil profits.
I don't get the reasoning that Bob Marley asked "Now that you've got what you want, and still you want more, want more."
Is the Walt/Mearsheimer analysis even actually descriptive now?
In the two years since its been published, is the reality the same?
Or, are its proponents beating old news?
Isn't the reality of Iran's involvement in Iraq, Lebanon and elsewhere changing the chemistry, as upsetting a reality as that is?
I sincerely think that Walt/Mearsheimer did a profound disservice, a profound negligence, in not discussing the degree that Saudi Arabian interests, and US oil company interests were served by the US invasion, MUCH MUCH moreso than Israel's in fact.
Saudi Arabia has made TRILLIONS of dollars beyond what they would have received for the oil currently pumping. The oil companies made hundreds of billions dollars more profits on speculation in oil markets, based on insider knowledge of US policies and likely affects.
Israel got NOTHING out of the invasion of Iraq. It got heightened rhetoric from Iran, increasingly armed proxy armies on its northern border, and now a nuclear threat on its soil (conducted by the same factions that willingly funded the blowing up of Sunni mosquest in Iraq), and that willingly shelled Haifa (40% Arab).
The attempt by right-wing neo-conservatives to influence American policy is relevant, but the effort did not serve Israel.
Now, denial of Iran's threats and actions do not serve Israel.
"The attempt by right-wing neo-conservatives to influence American policy is relevant, but the effort did not serve Israel."–Witty
Nor did the effort serve the USA, a minor consideration, no?
"Now, denial of Iran's threats and actions do not serve Israel."–Witty
Nor does avoiding the Iranian POV in local historical and geographical context, especially since the days of the Shah.
Which nations have engaged in preemptive actions? Which have nukes? Which threaten to obliterate? Indeed, even campaign with a Crusader sword? Iran's right to self-defense is something that should be discussed directly with Iran. It's in everybody's long term interest.
Hezbollah (a proxy Iranian army) conducting a coup is something different than defense.
Yeah, that Walt & Mearsheimer article is so 2006.
The nature of pro-Israel advocacy in the U.S. has changed dramatically in these last 25-26 months. Namely: it has turned completely benign, undeserving of harsh scrutiny, because it is a net GOOD for American interests.
Consider the Iranian elephant in the room.
Some on the left want to confuse it with a cartoon. Dumbo. An adorable, peace-loving pachyderm (who can fly).
It's not that.
It is a war elephant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_elephant
Ignoring the warnings of our friends who support Israel, trying to feed the war elephant with peanuts, and other diplomatic gestures, could end up getting us trampled under foot.
Israelis are experienced war zoologists. There are a lot of elephants in their neighborhood. They have been trampled by elephants before. They now vow, NEVER AGAIN.
To react otherwise would be naive and dangerous. Ignoring elephants' known propensity for violence, for mass-destruction, and even, yes, anti-Semitic genocide.
(When I was a child, we used to visit the zoo regularly. One time we noticed that the elephants would be especially friendly with gentile children onlooking, but would turn their backs as soon as we approached.)
My question for the rejectionists of the left is this: Besides euthanasia and nuclear obliteration, what ought to be DONE about the elephant problem?
Shouldn't the left lift up more moderate elephants? Is that asking too much? Rather than the either/or dichotomy of war/peanuts.
"I sincerely think that Walt/Mearsheimer did a profound disservice, a profound negligence, in not discussing the degree that Saudi Arabian interests, and US oil company interests were served by the US invasion, MUCH MUCH moreso than Israel's in fact."
Very sincere thoughts, Richard.
Now, why don't you go and sincerely get out your copy of The Israel Lobby and American Foreign Policy by Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, and sincerely turn the page to 481.
Sincerely look for the words "Saudi Arabia" in the index.
Allow me, in all sincerity, to demonstrate all W&M's "not discussing" Saudi Arabia:
Saudi Arabia: 7, 33, 37, 59, 74, 83, 86, 201, 221, 281, 287, 294, 299, 316, 318; oil of, 142, 143-144, 254; U.S. arms sales to, 144, 148, 158, 190
Looks like they really swept Saudi Arabia under the carpet. Sincerely.
The left cannot succeed by ignoring reality.
It can only succeed by making good judgements from being INFORMED.
There is a lot of contempt for self-censorship, meaning controlling one's tongue.
But there is not a lot of contempt stated for self-propaganda, meaning identifying complexity, rather than over-simplification.
Phil for example is Harvard educated, a journalist for the most elite liberal publications in the planet and over decades.
He is capable of seeing that Iran is not benign. That shouldn't compel invasion. That would be a simple-minded approach. But, to ignore a new prospective nuclear power, a nation sponsoring a coup in a formerly democratic (strained) country, would be simple-mindedness by someone capable of complexity, tension, and clarity.
The left cannot succeed by ignoring reality.
It can only succeed by making good judgements from being INFORMED.
There is a lot of contempt for self-censorship, meaning controlling one's tongue.
But there is not a lot of contempt stated for self-propaganda, meaning identifying complexity, rather than over-simplification.
Phil for example is Harvard educated, a journalist for the most elite liberal publications in the planet and over decades.
He is capable of seeing that Iran is not benign. That shouldn't compel invasion. That would be a simple-minded approach. But, to ignore a new prospective nuclear power, a nation sponsoring a coup in a formerly democratic (strained) country, would be simple-mindedness by someone capable of complexity, tension, and clarity.
Here, Richard, just in case you've misplaced your well-worn copy of the W&M book:
From page 143,
"Countries like Saudi Arabia have repeatedly pressed Washington to adopt a more evenhanded position toward the Israeli Palestinian conflict, but to little avail, and even wielding the "oil weapon" during the 1973 October War had little effect on U.S. support for Israel or on overall American policy in the region. Similarly, if oil companies were driving U.S. policy, one would also have expected Washington to curry favor with big oil producers like Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Muammar Gaddafi's Libya, or the Islamic Republic of Iran, so that U.S. companies could make money helping them develop their energy resources and bringing them to market. Instead the United States imposed sanctions on all three of these countries, in sharp opposition to what the oil industry wanted."
Richard, why are you scare-mongering over Iran's inexistant nuclear weapons when Israel is sitting on 200 undeclared, illegal (per the terms of the IAEA) nukes in its stockpile.
You want to show us the good version of zionism? Why don't you try to redirect the movement toward international cooperation? Why don't you focus at all on the movement you claim to be a supporter of?
Wouldn't that be more pragmatic to building a better zionism than following the Jabotinskyist strain of apologism for violence and dishonest scare-mongering?
Just asking (sincerely).
The escalation by Iran, makes the prospect of moderating Israel's behavior, much less likely.
To identify behavior is not war-mongering. There is no George W that takes my advice. If there was, we'd be in a very very different situation right now.
We would have peace in Palestine, and Iran would be rendered irrelevant as there would be no instability for them to squeeze in on.
They are neglecting their own population, if even dissenting publications are to be believed, and they are escalating their military capabilities, INCLUDING delivery missiles.
Its really not nothing.
Its not just Israel that is concerned. Shia and Sunni fight bitterly. The escalation effects Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAR, Pakistan, India, who would then add to their arsenals given a new threat.
Elephants!!
They are not what they want you to believe:
http://www.judaism.com/gif-bk/40430.gif
Trust your instincts! You just know when you see one:
http://www.warbirdphotographs.com/ATC/ATC-16InchGun-2.jpg
Iran has no nukes. If it gets them it has already been put on notice it will be blown to oblivion. If you are a nation without nukes you have to kowtow, whatever the cost to your charge.
If anyone posting on this blog lived in Iran, given its modern history, and the history of its neighbors, would they want nukes?
I don't understand why Obama is taking heat for saying he'd ASAP talk to Iran.
A process by which you demand up front as means from your opponent the very end of negotiation is absurd. It means endless war. Some will benefit from that.
It will be the usual suspects.
My mom explains the treatment of Obama with regard to Wright, Iran, and Israel by pointing out that the Jewish Zionists and fellow traverlers berating Obama in the media are bullies.
"What else do you expect? They have no other way of dealing with people they disrespect."
Yeah, Rodney Dangerfield–he's actually a Palestinian.
There's actually this melodrama going on: World trailer trash and USA white trailer trash versus Doctor Daddy in Dirty Dancing.
The revised movie has yet to be written. It would bring out all the concealed bigotry and also stress the economic power involved. The irony is of course that Rodney D would not be a Jew. Two wrongs don't make a right.
The long history will play out, like a cheap movie. Later generations will wipe the blood off the video tape or DVD.
Popcorn, anyone?
The Jewish Question is its name, the show is on. Jews have given much to the world. And they have taken away as much, crassly.
Hence we have Phil, and, on the other side, Witty.
This flick will never end.
In a hundred years, a thousand years, just be glad if you were not a gold star mother. The slaughter of the innocents is perpetual.
And Phil and I socialize. We are really family in ways, the Weiss's and Witty's have been so close for so long, a couple generations even.
The harrassment of Jews continues.
Far exagerated beyond cause and events.
Ed and Joachim each make their points. One stating that Jews should leave Israel and return to Europe, the other stating (like Eichman), that Europe is better rid of Jews. Let them migrate to Israel.
The only agreement, is that Jews are less than human beings.
And, in that compel those with a heart to take a stand for what is right. Acceptance.
An actual life, not a stimulated irritation.
Sorry, looks to me like the main point of the dialogue has been that non-Jews are less than human beings. I urge all who come here to Phil's blog to take a stand for what's right. You have to give him credit for even posing the question. An actual life. On the other hand, what does it mean that in America, you have to depend on Philip Weiss to even raise the questions he raises? That says a lot, no?
What does it mean when nearly 98% of the American population
don't know a damn thing about 1948 Palestine? Or 1917?
And yet we have given a trillion dollars to Israel? And attacked Iraq? And next Iran?
America is nothing but a hat salesman, a tiny guy, really. Å true man, with his tiny shoes. Luck is no longer with us. Wake up, true Americans!
If people know the issues of Iran, they will be informed sufficiently to choose other paths.
The propaganda path of "Iran is innocent" is the path that prohibits skillful response.
"The propaganda path of "Iran is innocent' is the path that prohibits skillful response."–Witty
Everytime an Iranian is born, I see Witty throwing a few more gentile Americans on the fire to keep warm.
Roast those marshmellows!
Traitor.
Look at at the latest US Congress gift of aid to Israel. Look at past behavior. We give the tyrant Arab families more weapons, but we always give Israel better ones simultaneously.
Who is the loser? The Arab masses. The USA masses.
Nothing changes.
Who wins?
Judge for yourself.
An elite arms industry of goys & jewish masters.
We remain in the Middle Ages.
Just pay your taxes, dummies.
And send your young kids to Iraq, Afghanstan, and, next–to Iran.
This will be seen in fifty years.
But then, it won't matter. The USA will be a third world country.
"Look at at the latest US Congress gift of aid to Israel. Look at past behavior. We give the tyrant Arab families more weapons, but we always give Israel better ones simultaneously."
It reminds me of a time at the beginning of the Iraq and Afghan campaigns when troops were complaining that they were not getting full combat and overtime pay, and the government basically told them to be quiet. At the same time, Israel demanded more money, and got it!
I remember this because I was living near a major Army base where wives were on the local news complaining that there were not able to live on the current pay, and that the soldiers were not being completely compensated.
I remember the MSM reporting on the two stories at the same time, but making no linkage. What a disgrace!
But we'll all be happy to know that NPR devoted time this afternoon to the difficulty that many Israelis have in finding organic fruits and vegetables. The time is coming!
So, Witty, should we treat Iran like Israel, India, Pakistan when it comes to getting nukes? If not, why not? We can't wait to hear your answer.
As evidenced by those who support the zionist state of israel on this or any other blog, what we have to realize when dealing with them is that they are always defending israel as if they were defending the jews of the entire world against the ghost of the holocaust.
i was a non jewish supporter of israel of the christian persuation, you know the type, the ones who according to malcolm hoenlein seem to be israels greatest defenders.
over a period of several years and mainly because of the sept 11 events, i ran into a couple of articles that led me down the rabbit hole and accross some facts that i initially had to corroborate before i was able to accept.
apart from the historical facts revealed by the revisionist historians coming out of israel, the jewsagainstzionism.com website has shed a lot of insight into how the judaics in europe felt about zionism, it shares warnings given by the rabbis of those years as to what zionism was going to do to judaics and the danger it represented to those who call themselves jews.
zionism purposefully fosters anti semitism in order to foment migration to israel, the old rabbis made these claims and their words have been validated by history.
i imagine that judaics who research zionism and discover some of its ugly as hell truths must feel like a kid who discovers during their teen years that the people they thought were their parents had really kidnapped them from their real parents and had brainwashed them into beliving THE LIE.
Zionist Jews, youve been adopted by parents who kidnapped you from your family and have brainwashed you into believing many many lies, once you perceive that cognitive dissonance at the center of your being, your natural instinct will be to defend your zionist parent even in the light of facts revealed by the ugly truths of history.
get the hell out of zionism and be true to your judaic roots, stop being the revengefull hatefilled zionist that you have been molded into being.
it's sort of like those cult kids who have to get reprogrammed.
And further, what shall we say about Arab information?
Does this filter apply also to Jewish information?
Goy, U have a lot of filtering to do.
Richard did you grow up on a farm? 'cause you sure know how to put up and knock down a strawman.
"Iran is innocent"
Oy vey. Give me a break.
Population growth and capitalist doctrine (grow or perish) are the real, REAL "elephant in the room." Lack of any real alternative paradigms is leading the world into constant, endless chains of conflict. The corporate media seems to be liking the euphemism, "Rising food prices"/"rising oil prices".
But no, no discussion of the American paradigm. Instead, we must be scare-mongered, by our media, on our airwaves, and now by "gentle" Richard Witty no less, about:
IRAn!
As if zionism's big 21st-century thud is all, somehow, Iran's fault?
Quick, anyone know a good Shah?
"Iran is innocent"
Really Richard, give your straw baling hands a break. A state (any state) is innocent? Who said that? A state is nothing more than a power-grouping. The inverse of innocence.
States have been entering into agreements however with other states, for their mutual benefit (and occasionally that of their peoples in general, too), mostly however in the interest of the maintaining state power, probably for the last 5 or 6,000 years I'm guessing.
States and groups of people make agreements with others.
It just so happens that 1948, that special year that also marked the birth of Israel, is somewhat unique in the history of such agreements.
The 20th century mid-way through had already witnessed the double edged sword of rapid technological industrialization and population growth ultimately creating competition for resources: The end result were easily hundreds of millions killed in state-organized conflict.
In a fleeting moment of sanity, and human enlightenment, at the WWII victors party of the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, some very, very wise men tried and succeeded to produce a document delineating the rights of human individuals against (mostly) state (or organized group) violence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_declaration_of_human_rights
Wiki says Guiness says it's "the most translated document in the world".
Have you read it recently, Richard?
Sadly, the profitability of state violence has, in the last 60 years, managed to negate the documents' popular mandate (Guiness, above).
Witty, you say that if you had George W's ear, Palestine would have a state, as if there is something really courageous about that statement. I suppose there is, considering the community you belong to.
But tell me, do you have the courage to stare into zionism, really look at it, without an incessant, manic need to rationalize all the many, many, many, institionally-engrained violations of human rights that have been the material consequence of zionist ideology over the years?
How should we commemorate the 60 year anniversary of 1948 this year, Richard?
By insinuating that Iran is the world's foremost threat?
Zionism is nothing but a land grab. Try to separate it from its effect. Impossible. Justification? Just ask a gypsy why he pick-pocketed anybody at the square, where the pidgeons drop their droppings.