Two pieces of news strike me today:

1)

“>link to nypost.com

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1813198,00.html

These two stories are about an Arab sovereign wealth fund that is buying the Chrysler building and an Italian company buying the Flatiron building in NY. Both the Arab countries and most European countries have enormous current account SURPLUSSES in contrast to the vast deficits we run year after year.

My point is that reality is setting in, and no amount of media spin will change that. If there is still an old establishment (and I have doubts that one still exists), it better step in fast and preserve American wealth or this country is going to be seriously hurting after another year of this dead-end war. And if another war is started with Iran, you can kiss our dominance goodbye. Recall that Great Britain was one of the "winners" of WWII, spent the 50s as a spent force on foodstamps issued by the US gov't.

This question is a canard, framed as a provocation. Being amply overrepresented in management posts throughout print, broadcasting and film, Jews don't need "control" to have their cultural sensitivities reflected. There's nothing remarkable or conspiratorial about this commonplace situation.

So the purpose of the question is to provoke its target into foolishly answering, "Yes, they do." Then the target can be summarily dispatched (following the ad hominem route) as a loony-bin anti-semite who doesn't deserve a reasoned response. Mission accomplished!

Carla Cohen's below-the-belt question is the equivalent of pulling a knife on somebody in the midst of a heated argument. She may own a bookstore. But she's a lowdown abuser who fights dirty.

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12972
The Office of Special Plans was one of several neocon-created "parallel institutions" designed to circumvent the ordinary vetting process for intelligence gathered by U.S. agencies. Two analysts from the neocons' DoD policy shop, Harold Rhode and Larry Franklin, were assigned to the Rome meetings. Franklin was once Douglas Feith's top Iran analyst. His career ended in 2005 when he was convicted of stealing U.S. state secrets on behalf of Israel.

http://amconmag.com/2008/2008_06_02/cover.html
Virtually every U.S. government body concerned with security has confirmed that Israeli espionage takes place, though it is frequently not exposed because FBI officers know that investigating these crimes is frustrating and does no favors for their careers. But 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.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/06/10/lichtblau/index.html

NYT circulates fear-mongering claims on FISA debate
(updated below)
The New York Times' Eric Lichtblau has a long, prominent article today on the pending debate over FISA and telecom amnesty — headlined: "Return to Old Spy Rules Is Seen as Deadline Nears" — that features (and endorses) virtually every blatant falsehood that has distorted these spying issues from the beginning, and which is built on every shoddy journalistic practice that has made clear debate over these issues almost impossible. The article strongly suggests that a so-called "compromise" is imminent, a "compromise" which will deliver to the President virtually everything he seeks in the way of new warrantless eavesdropping powers and telecom amnesty.

Organizations like AIPAC belong to those who fund them and not to the entities on whose behalf the organizations claim to act.

Once again another serious American scholar simply does not take Jewish history, economics, politics, and sociology seriously.

Here is a recent short blog entry on Yiddish studies: link to eaazi.blogspot.com
.

This is the equivalent of American Zionist rhetoric such as "Do you think there's a Jewish conspiracy to put Israel first?" or "Do you think there was a Jewish conspiracy to lie America into the Iraq war?"

Even though the technical answer to all is "yes" (just as there was a Nazi conspiracy to elimante Jews and, prior to that, a Communist conspiracy to eliminate Christians), once one answers yes, they automatically become "a conspiracy theorist." (It's interesting how that label never applies to those who beleive ALL Germans knew about and endorsed the Holocaust, and how most Americans are still ignorant that there was a Communist conspiracy to eradicate Christianity — all of which goes to who is actually writing and shaping the national narrative.)

Jewish ideologues are expert at negatively labeling their opponents so they can be safely dismissed and marginalized as beyond the pale, and in the case of Palestinians, safely eliminated (ie Islamofascist, anti-Semite, bigot, terrorist), but when they themselves are labeled (ie Jewish Zionist, racialist, Judeofascist, Ziofascist) suddenly all bets are off and their critics are motivated by "hate" and probably the desire to perpetrate another Holocaust.

Why then aren't Jews critical of Christianity motivated by "hate" and the desire to eliminate Christians in the tradition of the Jewish Bolsheviks?

Because Christians don't "control" the media.

The very fact that criticizing organized Jewry and its agenda is taboo is evidence enough of who wields the real power in the media today.

Neither do I.