CNN viewers: Time for the US to get tough with Israel

Israel/Palestine

Youtube poster Media Matters Action Network says that Wolf Blitzer was "surprised" by Jack Cafferty’s viewer criticisms of Israel, and this is the case. Cafferty takes an atypically-sober tone, cautiously criticizing the Israel-US special relationship, suggesting that we should "start cutting back on the approximately 2.5 billion in aid we give to Israel every year…." and quoting Maureen Dowd saying that the White House is "appalled by Israel’s self-absorption." Then he polls viewers. The letters Cafferty reads are critical of Israel, 6-1. The 1 is repulsive: "We should be helping Israel occupy as much Arab land as possible." "You got a lot of emails?" Blitzer asks. "And most of it was anti-Israel, you would say?"

Cafferty then says this was a helluva way to treat Biden, the 1600 new settlements. Blitzer agrees: "I think a lot of people were very, very upset about it, including by the way in Israel." The former JPost reporter, playing the role of Israel apologist, to the end.

(hat-tip Ali Gharib, for pointing out the importance of this broadcast.)

About Philip Weiss and Adam Horowitz

Other posts by .


Posted In:

85 Responses

  1. Chaos4700
    March 19, 2010, 12:57 am

    LOL! Anyone else detect a hint of tension in Wolfowitz’s response?

    And the one “pro-Israel” comment they aired? It was so outlandish I almost have to assume it was a Tom Swift. Tells you a lot of that was the best “positive” comment they could find in the bunch.

    • Duscany
      March 19, 2010, 1:24 am

      More than tension. He was either panicked or pissed or both. Cafferty is going to pay for his commentary. I wouldn’t be surprised if he gets yanked.

    • zamaaz
      March 19, 2010, 5:58 am

      ‘ Time for the US to get tough with Israel’
      This could be a sound proposal or thinking…But on what basis! Legalistic, Rules of Conflict, Attrition, Historical? Let us think rationally many times first before we decide!

      • Chaos4700
        March 19, 2010, 10:31 am

        Legalistic. We have the Geneva Conventions, the UN, the ICC, about a dozen violated treaties and human rights standards, and plenty of precedent.

        Okay, now that that’s handled, time to move forward.

    • Chu
      March 19, 2010, 9:22 am

      Wolf had to bite his tongue, and I’m sure he wishes he was still in CNN’s War Room, a TV studio where an armchair Neocon can makes predictions on Iraq.
      From the mouth of the Wolf:
      ” A lot of people were very upset by it, including (by the way) in Israel.”
      [he should know]

      Time for the debates to begin!

    • yonira
      March 19, 2010, 11:39 pm

      old news, been linked on Mondoweiss at least 5 times since it came out.

      I did find it interesting (the first and second time i read it) and agree with it.

      • Chaos4700
        March 20, 2010, 1:48 am

        Look at that. Seriously. You agree with the post and you still have to be denigrating.

        I think, yonira, you are the second rudest person on the face of the Earth. The first being a Netanyahu.

    • javs
      March 20, 2010, 3:08 pm

      thats what really killed kennedy in my view

  2. Adam Horowitz
    March 19, 2010, 1:08 am

    Background on Blitzer here – link to youtube.com.

    It’s amazing how little the talking points have changed over the past 20 years.

    • bob
      March 19, 2010, 1:18 am

      People need to realize Blitzer’s AIPAC ties

      People also need to know how monumentally stupid he is

      • Chu
        March 19, 2010, 9:30 am

        I watched CNN about 2 years ago, and low and behold David Duke was on. Blitzer drags his name through the mud and then allows him to speak. So Duke says, you’re an AIPAC lobbyist and Blitzer changes the subject. It was classic stuff and it made me realize how pervasive the zionist narrative is shaped by newscaster like him. It’s dangerous, and they know it.
        (It was April 2008) link to youtube.com

        • Chaos4700
          March 19, 2010, 10:35 am

          Not that David Duke is really all that defensible, but is ironic to see two racist bigots jousting on cable news.

        • Chu
          March 19, 2010, 11:28 am

          I know, but it was unique. I never knew Blitzer was a lobbyist, as he fails to deny it here.

        • Chaos4700
          March 19, 2010, 11:33 am

          I was more amused by how his status as a lobbyist cripples his capacity to function as a journalist. If Blitzer were genuinely interested in discrediting David Duke, he would have cited some of Duke’s “white power” rhetoric.

          But Blitzer’s actual motivation was to use Duke as a stepping stone to smear Ahmedinejad as an anti-Semite. Which is why Blitzer’s line of questioning was “Do you hate Jews? Do you deny the Holocaust?”

    • MRW
      March 19, 2010, 1:30 am

      Adam, add the Sanchez interview with Mark Perry yesterday after Petraeus appeared.
      Part 1
      link to youtube.com
      Part 2

    • MRW
      March 19, 2010, 1:33 am

      P.S. Where are the baby pictures? We want to see them. ;-)

    • aparisian
      March 19, 2010, 10:11 am

      Next time CNN might broadcast CNN viewers from Israeli point of view like this link to youtube.com

  3. VR
    March 19, 2010, 1:17 am

    Dowd –

    “America is not only protecting Israel from Iran, fighting war in Iraq and Afghanistan, but is also dealing with a miasma of horrible problems at home.”

    Interesting quote

    • Chu
      March 19, 2010, 9:34 am

      the quote should’ve been “fighting in Iraq in part due to Israel and Neocon ambitions”

  4. JBL
    March 19, 2010, 2:15 am

    Evenin’ all.
    In these cases, scan for the “O” word. McCafferty prefers to say “disputed East Jerusalem”. Maureen Dowd also uses “disputed” (link to nytimes.com), which is also the standard NYT adjective.
    Not a promising sign.

  5. Taxi
    March 19, 2010, 2:19 am

    Aipac is now being discussed at truck-stops across the nation.

    How surreal and beautiful is that?

  6. Richard Parker
    March 19, 2010, 2:27 am

    Israeli historian: Israel could find itself forced to wipe out Europe
    link to palestine-info.co.uk
    The name is Martin van Creveld, not Karfeld, and he has often said things like this before. Note that Israel will be forced to undertake this action. Why? Because Europe in general is hostile to Israel’s campaign against the Palestinians, and now, Iran.
    You can bet your bottom dollar that Israel already has some of its 200 nukes quietly embedded in its embassies and consulates worldwide, including the US and Europe. Its embassies are all in capital cities, and the consulates in major ones. Pressing a few buttons would eliminate those cities. Powerful backup for AIPAC.

    • radii
      March 19, 2010, 3:39 am

      yikes … those are some dark thoughts … surely even the radical zionists are not that crazy

    • bigbill
      March 19, 2010, 6:37 am

      Please.

      Your webreference said Crefeld’s comments were a translation from ” … the seventh Hebrew radio …”.

      Surely a reliable source … once we figure out from the pidgin English what the hell they are talking about.

    • potsherd
      March 19, 2010, 8:56 am

      I’d like to see reaction to such reports from France and Germany.

      • Shmuel
        March 19, 2010, 9:03 am

        You’d have to go back a bit, as this is a recycled comment from 2002. The radio interview never happened. See this article by Richard Silverstein: link to tinyurl.com

        • Richard Parker
          March 19, 2010, 10:29 am

          This is what Martin van Creveld actually said in the extract from a book published by the Guardian in 2003, as quoted by Richard Silverstein:
          “Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.” I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.’”

          Bigbill: the article is a translation from Arabic. The seventh Hebrew radio is just Israel Channel 7.

          It certainly seems that Creveld’s remarks are being resuscitated and re-circulated, and sometimes presented with a different emphasis on different parts of it, but it is also true that the ‘Samson Option’ has been around in Israeli circles for a very long time, and that a ‘Final Solution’ of the Palestinian problem involves forced transfer.

  7. Shmuel
    March 19, 2010, 3:10 am

    Here I was thinking the Messiah had come to CNN, and then Blitzer slapped me awake with his damage control – characterising perfectly reasonable comments as “anti-Israel” and making sure viewers know that there are a lot of reasonable people just like them in Israel too. Of course his two remarks are contradictory (anti-Israel views shared by many Israelis?), but at least he managed to put a couple of fingers in the dam.

  8. Avi
    March 19, 2010, 3:22 am

    So, who’s going to pay Mark from Oklahoma a visit? lol

  9. Shingo
    March 19, 2010, 4:32 am

    All I can say is WOW. Just….wow.

    Thsi would have been unthinkable until a year ago and on CNN of all channels.

    When you have liberla pundits like Olberman and Maddow afraid to touch this topic, you have to give Cafferty full marks for breaking this taboo.

    Now I am convinced that we’ve reached the point of no return, and how sweet it is!!

    • James Bradley
      March 19, 2010, 4:55 am

      I love Blitzers comment.

      “and people in Israel are really angry about this too!”

      Yea right.

      • Shmuel
        March 19, 2010, 8:01 am

        Blitzer’s comment is actually true: a lot of people in Israel are angry about the provocation and, according to a poll published in today’s Ha’aretz, 41% think that construction in E. Jerusalem should be halted until negotiations with the Palestinians are completed. The problem wasn’t with the truthfulness of Blitzer’s statement but with his attempt to frame criticism of Israeli behaviour as “anti-Israel” and to downplay the criticism itself by limiting it to this particular action taken by this particular Israeli government at this particular time (as if the critics had implied otherwise).

        • Chu
          March 19, 2010, 11:21 am

          He intends to frame it as we’re all angry by the actions of the Israeli government. See, we’re all in the same boat here, friends.

      • Chu
        March 19, 2010, 9:57 am

        I know, one for the team!

  10. Citizen
    March 19, 2010, 7:17 am

    When I read the Cafferty email comments nearly all of them backed Obama’s stance against
    the settlements.

    • Citizen
      March 19, 2010, 7:55 am

      Here are the 201 comments (before the subject was closed for comments)–the great majority of them are what AIPAC toady Blitzer characterizes as “anti-Israel” (as contrasted with pro-American):
      link to caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com

      BTW, my comment was posted subject to moderation. It was deleted.

      • Chu
        March 19, 2010, 9:59 am

        I notice in the times comments many of the readers selections are completely against Friedman’s half-baked pragmatic ideas on the mid east, as well with David Brooks.

  11. Citizen
    March 19, 2010, 8:03 am

    Today, the Quartet repeated last year’s demand for Israel to stop its settlements:

    • Citizen
      March 19, 2010, 8:04 am
    • Shmuel
      March 19, 2010, 8:12 am

      Today, the Quartet repeated last year’s demand for Israel to stop its settlements

      Great, but what are they going to do about it?

      • Citizen
        March 19, 2010, 10:17 am

        The same thing Obama will do. Nothing. Well, maybe something–allow it even more while Israel and the US are busy attacking Iran.

        • dalybean
          March 19, 2010, 11:22 am

          It will be interesting if Israel gets its coveted invitation to the OECD in May. Also, the EU just cancelled a meeting with Lieberman.

        • dalybean
          March 19, 2010, 11:37 am

          Another pressure point should be to start calling out for Israel to disgorge all of the accused felons it is shielding from extradition to America. That’s another thing that is “special” about the relationship. Israel won’t extradite criminals that flee there like other allies. Having a right of return with no extradition is another aspect of moral hazard that is not good for law and order in this country. Does anyone recall the case in the 1990s where Israel refused to disgorge a kid who had dismembered a friend of his in Silver Spring, MD? Israel is shielding 2 guys wanted in the agriprocessor human trafficking/immigration fraud case right now and we want those guys very badly.

          Israel knows this. I submit it is why the Florida fraudster Rothstein fled to Morocco instead of Israel. He was too high profile and fleeing to Israel would have invoked hideous publicity.

  12. potsherd
    March 19, 2010, 8:57 am

    Populist America loves talk about “getting tough,” and doesn’t much care who it’s directed at.

  13. Colin Murray
    March 19, 2010, 9:05 am

    The IDF enjoys a taste of its own medicine.

    Commander’s error prompts Hebron humiliation

    The [IDF] troops were unarmed [during a jog in Hebron ]and were not wearing uniforms, and ended up being beaten up and humiliated by dozens of Palestinians after entering the Abu Sneina neighborhood.

    During the incident, the Palestinians ordered the troops to take off their shoes and then beat them up and stoned them.

    • cvillej
      March 19, 2010, 9:21 am

      So it’s humiliation when it happens to the IDF but it’s Zionism when it happens to Palestinians?

      • Sumud
        March 19, 2010, 1:54 pm

        Let me guess – “there can be no peace as long as Palestinians shoe Israelis”

  14. Citizen
    March 19, 2010, 9:49 am

    Article on how Zionist nationalism differs from other forms of nationalism:
    link to salem-news.com

    • Chu
      March 19, 2010, 10:03 am

      Zionism is best described as an abnormal nationalism.
      link to dissidentvoice.org
      M. Shahid Alam / August 24th, 2009

      • Citizen
        March 19, 2010, 10:20 am

        Careful, Chu. Richard Witty doesn’t take kindly to calling him abnormal by logical deduction. Who knows, he might clamor to send GI Joe Gentile to your door, to save the world from the likes of you.

        • Chu
          March 19, 2010, 10:32 am

          I’ll be more careful towards the sensitivities amongst the crowd here (!), but things, um, may be changing and it’s gonna make some start to see things from a new perspective, RW included.

  15. Richard Parker
    March 19, 2010, 11:19 am

    US/Israel relations are on the cusp of a major change, from the US’s supine acceptance of Israeli behaviour to something a bit tougher. Not a lot tougher, but a bit, and this can’t be anything other than good. Netanyahu made a fool of Obama over the settlement freeze (remember Clinton in May last year: “”He (the President) wants to see a stop to settlements. Not some settlements, not outposts, not natural growth exceptions,” Clinton said.
    “We think it is in the best interest of the effort that we are engaged in, that settlement expansion cease,” she said.
    “That is our position, that is what we have communicated very clearly not only to the Israelis but to the Palestinians and others. And we intend to press that point,” she said.”

    Tough talk, but, in the face of Netanyahu, just so much hot air. Now he’s so full of himself that he announces a huge new settlement during a US VP visit. (forget his excuses that he didn’t know about it; it’s still a diplomatic insult).

    On the Cafferty show, many commenters mentioned the sacred cow, the bloated US aid to Israel of $2.5 billion per year, and its possible withdrawal if the Israelis don’t start behaving themselves. At some point that option will go viral in an economically-depressed America, and Israel will find itself without a big fat Uncle Sam doling out cash to a shitty little Levantine country.

    • Chaos4700
      March 19, 2010, 11:30 am

      The thing I worry about is that this makes it even more likely that Israel will stage an attack on Iran. Either A) that was the plan all along, and this is all just political theater, or B) Netanyahu will get desperate to preserve the status quo and will gamble that dragging the US into a war with Iran will force our cooperation.

      • Citizen
        March 19, 2010, 11:46 am

        Yes, Chaos, those things worry me too. I think Israel’s #1 priority is to just keep grabbing more land, and that it’s not really worried about Iran in comparison; once it has grabbed up all the relevant land it needs (to make the Palestinians subservient no matter what happens in the future as to the form of such subservience), it may then
        attack Iran to further insure its eternal hegemony in the Middle East. It just needs to twist and turn to keep the US backing it to the hilt. An objective account of Middle East history regarding the I-P conflict, delivered to the Joe and Mary Doakes, USA,
        is the only fear Israel really has.

      • Taxi
        March 19, 2010, 11:52 am

        We’re legally contracted to defend Israel only if Israel is attacked, not if it initiates a war. And with the current new cynical spotlight on Aipac and ADL, a preemptive attack on Iran is a high risk plan that could easily backfire on the jewish community here in USA – considering what General Patrius has just divulged to congress.

        Middle America today is questioning the very loyalty of high-profile jewish movers and shakers. This is about the worst time, strategically speaking, for vocal zionists to be operating in broad daylight.

        Till we all know fully what ‘concessions’ Natanyahu is offering Hilary behind closed doors, the battle between Israel and Obama continues.

        “No Surprises”, has been the constant message from Obama to Natanyahu.

        I somehow think at least this message, for now, has sunk in.

        Considering that the Dubai hit was explicitly documented, a large-scale false-flag operation by the Israelis to change the topic of discussion in the USA, is again, a high risk maneuver that could easily lead to their final demise.

        At the moment I see it like this: which ever way the Israelis move, they lose.

        This explains why for the last five days, I’ve been singing really loud in the shower, unsettling the neighborhood dogs.

        • Chaos4700
          March 19, 2010, 11:58 am

          Taxi, we’re not legally contracted to do anything. That’s the scary part. As far as I know, there is no formal treaty arrangement between the US and Israel (somebody feel free to correct me if I’m wrong).

          That’s the problem, Taxi. We’ve handed Israel a blank check and the keys to the family car.

        • Citizen
          March 19, 2010, 12:01 pm

          The issue is more clouded since the USA has copied Israel’s preemptive or preventive war concept–with the Iraq War of Shrub’s the obvious hallmark.
          Although I have not read the contracual guarantees the US has give Israel
          to assure we will join them to defend their homeland, I bet it’s open to
          interpretation to justify US war on Iraq to “defend our ally, Israel from attack.”

        • Citizen
          March 19, 2010, 12:04 pm

          Has anyone here every read any US-Israel treaty to defend each other if either is attacked? And even such does not exist, there are a whole slew of US memorandums to assure Israel security in the event of Israel need, e.g., the
          memo that guarantees Israel gets fuel for its Air Force, even if this means
          US citizens get deprived of gas for their cars, etc.

        • Citizen
          March 19, 2010, 12:46 pm

          Wikipedia shows no mutual defense treaty with Israel. Only that Israel sought to join NATO as early as 1954. There’s apparently no such treaty with Israel, and here’s some of the pros and cons on the subject:
          link to mitchellbard.com

        • Taxi
          March 19, 2010, 1:06 pm

          You’re right Chaos, there is no ‘direct’ pact/treaty. But our entanglement lies in the legalese small print of the long list of Defense Contracts we’ve made with Israel, always insuring they are the the military boots in the region.

        • Chaos4700
          March 19, 2010, 10:38 pm

          Defense contracts which, ironically, have lead to the flagrant violation of US laws concerning arms trading.

          But my point is, Taxi, without a treaty there is no structure to the relationship. Which is what has lead to the current virtual occupation of our Capital by the Israeli lobby.

    • Taxi
      March 19, 2010, 11:31 am

      “… a shitty little Levantine country.”

      The ‘Levant’ region does not recognize the colonial entity of Israel. Israelis have nothing culturally or historically in common with the people of the Levant (currently various nationalities).

      I think the good people of the Levant would be offended to have landthieves, culture-thieves and murderers counted as one of their own – when in fact most Israelis are european wannabe Levantines.

      • Richard Parker
        March 19, 2010, 11:24 pm

        The Israelis have stolen an entire culture along with the land of Palestine. Hummus and falafel and shish kebabs are their most popular ‘native Israeli’ foods (I couldn’t get gefilte fish anywhere in Jerusalem). Their politicians are openly corrupt in the most venal and ‘small-nation’ ways, and always get away with it. Israelis are not governed by their crazy Knesset, but the IDF exerts an iron rule, and it’s only their opinion that really matters.
        Israelis put people into hell-holes of prisons on the slightest pretext, with no legal process, and no determined terms. They have secret police, the Shin Bet, who are as bad, if not worse, than the Mukhabarat of neighbouring countries.
        The only difference is that none of the Israeli politicians have been in power long enough to appoint their favourite son as successor as in:
        Syria – Assad
        Jordan – King Abdullah
        Lebanon – Hariri
        Egypt – Mubarak isn’t dead yet, but his younger son, Gamal, will probably be appointed his successor.
        Ariel Sharon – if he hadn’t been struck down at an opportune moment, was grooming his son, Gilad, to take over.
        I have lived in two of the above Levantine countries, and visited them all. All of them are shitty in their various ways, and Israel is no different (except that it has a huge stream of cash coming in from the US).

        • Taxi
          March 20, 2010, 7:43 am

          Richard,

          Hariri’s son was elected by voters after his father was assassinated – I don’t know that he belongs on this list – maybe another one.

          Hey I too have lived in shitty little England.

        • DICKERSON3870
          March 20, 2010, 1:17 pm

          RE: “the IDF exerts an iron rule, and it’s only their opinion that really matters.” – Richard Parker
          SEE: Generals in the Cabinet Room: How the Military Shapes Israeli Policy (Paperback) ~ Yoram Peri (Author) (Professor of Political Sociology And Communication at Tel Aviv University) 2006

          In what is certain to become a landmark study, Israel’s foremost analyst of civil-military relations identifies and investigates a dramatic shift of power within Israel’s political system. Where once the military was usually the servant of civilian politicians, today, argues Yoram Peri, generals lead the way when it comes to foreign and defense policymaking. The implications for Israeli-Palestinian relations, for Israeli democracy, and indeed for other democracies are profound. “Generals in the Cabinet Room” offers unparalleled insights into the workings of Israel’s military-political complex over the past fifteen years. Drawing on extensive literature (much of it in Hebrew and thus largely unknown outside of Israel) and hundreds of interviews with leading players, Peri explains how Israel’s prolonged experience of low-intensity conflict and political crisis has enabled the military establishment to acquire unprecedented influence, shaping Israeli policy toward the Oslo process and the al-Aqsa intifada….
          ….He writes presciently about the risks of allowing the military to monopolize Israel’s intelligence apparatus, inviting generals into cabinet meetings to formulate policy, giving senior officers unlimited freedom to make media appearances, and encouraging a revolving door for ex-generals who retire to become politicians.
          Peri convincingly analyzes the shifts in Israeli policies since the late 1980′s as a reflection of the military leadership’s changing perceptions of the country’s security needs. His approach is subtle, recognizing that the generals first supported and advanced the Oslo peace process during the early 1990′s before abandoning hope for peace with the Palestinians by the end of the decade. In each phase the views of the active and retired senior officers deeply influenced Israel’s policy choices….

          AMAZON – link to amazon.com

  16. DICKERSON3870
    March 19, 2010, 12:15 pm

    RE: “We should be helping Israel occupy as much Arab land as possible.” – Email to Cafferty
    MY COMMENT: This is exactly what “Reverend” John Hagee, his ilk and his minions “think”.
    SEE: A Serial Obstructionist, By Rachel Tabachnick, ZEEK
    (EXCERPTS)…Shortly after Vice President Joe Biden’s arrival in Israel, Netanyahu and Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat were the headliners at Pastor John Hagee’s two-hour Christians United for Israel (CUFI) extravaganza at the Jerusalem Convention Center….
    …Monday’s CUFI production was based on the concept of “biblical Zionism,” or the belief that God mandates nonnegotiable borders of Israel, and any leader or nation who thwarts this divine plan will be cursed. Before introducing Netanyahu, Hagee stated, “World leaders do not have the authority to tell Israel and the Jewish people what they can and can not do in Jerusalem.” He added, “Israel does not exist because of a decree of the United Nations in 1948. Israel exists because of a covenant God made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob…The settlements are not the problem.”
    In his books and sermons Hagee has promoted a “greater Israel,” that will reclaim all of Israel’s former biblical territory, stating “In modern terms, Israel rightfully owns all of present-day Israel, all of Lebanon, half of Syria, two-thirds of Jordan, all of Iraq, and the northern portion of Saudi Arabia.”
    At the Jerusalem CUFI event Hagee described Ahmadinejad as the Hitler of the Middle East who could turn the world upside down in 24 hours, words similar to those he made when lobbying for the attack on Iraq…
    …During a performance by singer Dudu Fisher, the God TV camera panned to the audience and centered on Joel Bell, leader of Worldwide Biblical Zionists. WBZ is currently building a center in Sha’ar Benjamin for “facilitating absorption” of Christian Zionists into the West Bank. It was established after a joint meetingheld in Texas of the Board of Governors of World Likud led by Danny Danon, and World Evangelical Zionists led by Joel Bell. Speakers included ZOA’s Morton Klein….
    ENTIRE ARTICLE – link to zeek.forward.com

    • Citizen
      March 19, 2010, 12:54 pm

      The Christian Zionists will rapture up along with whatever Jews convert to Jesus. According to Islam countepart end times guys, Christians will convert to Islam when Jesus comes again in the end times. And the Jewish Zionists only want greater Israel
      to evolve and go on forever–no talk of being more than earth-bound. The most fanactical Jews only want to stay on land and be the power there, and then continue
      arguing with G-D. The first two are sword-carrying believers in a pie-in-the-sky; the latter is a sword-carrying realist in a less-than-perfect pie firmly grounded in the earth.

      • Citizen
        March 19, 2010, 1:02 pm

        You can be a Jew and an atheist or consistent agnostic. You can’t be a Christian or Muslim and be such a person. Therein lies a giant world of difference. To be thus Jewish is to have the cake and eat it too. To be a Christian or Muslim is to either eat the cake, or not. Now, which is more practical? The Zionists, in my opinion, have distorted Judiasm to make it less practical, less able to survive–I admit that seems to fly in the face of the Holocaust as a refuge for all Jews, but if Israel was so safe, then
        why do so many Jews not go to live there, and why to so many Israelis choose to leave Israel? All answers welcome.

  17. aparisian
    March 19, 2010, 1:25 pm

    Sorry for being off topic but i have very good news for you!!

    In a landslide, 16-4 vote, the University of California Student
    Senate passed the attached BDS motion endorsing divestment from
    companies profiting from Israel’s occupation and violation of
    Palestinian rights.

    link to aliabunimah.posterous.com

  18. Citizen
    March 19, 2010, 1:31 pm

    Here is what AIPAC and Israel are worried about:
    link to youtube.com

    While watching the video clip, recall that Irish Americans refused to dip the flag to England at an early Olympic game event, and that no American flag has ever been
    dipped since during any Olympic event. Now recall that Obama, during St Patrick’s Day last, pointed out his Irish-American heritage, while wearing a green tie; too, recall
    that Obama refused to bow to the Queen of England, but did bow deep to an Arbian King;
    recall his 20 years at the feet of his favorite Black Chiacgo pastor. I suggest deep down,
    that Obma is very conflicted, and that if Obama cannot save the Palestinians, and the US too, from what Israel has been doing, then no US President can, and you can figure out what that means.

    I was sent this video by a fundi American Christian who had never heard of Rachael Corrie or the USS Liberty.

    • Citizen
      March 19, 2010, 1:33 pm

      Please excuse my misspellings.

    • moonkoon
      March 20, 2010, 6:42 am

      One has to ask why Christians are so worried about how Islamic President Barack Hussein Obama might be. For heavens sake, he grew up in a Muslim country! Anyone who experiences beautiful faith of any denomination is going to be touched be it and respect it. We would be horrified if he was so boorish as to not be impressed.
      Are they also worried about how he acknowledges and respects Judaism? No.
      This is not a good look for the Christians, if they fear their faith cannot survive such a test. :-)

      So what are Christians, who carry their faith in their hearts, not per favour of the State, and worship the exact same God that Muslims do, worried about exactly? Is he going to somehow sign them over to some obscure Muslim sect? I don’t think so.
      Besides, he obviously has very limited power.What could he do that threatens these weak kneed Christians?
      And its not as if Christianity hasn’t figured prominently in the development of his character. I mean, they all go on about how he attended a Christian church (Rev. Wright) for years, what does that make him? Well it makes him a Christian in my eyes.
      No recent President up to and including George (Wahabbi :-) ) Bush (peace be upon him) ever showed anything but respect for Muslims. Only a fool would do otherwise.
      Its a war on terror we are fighting, not a war on Muslims. Muslims don’t have a monopoly on terror (don’t believe me?, read a book -you can start with a short history of the Haganah :-) ).

      The above in no way indicates support for WOT strategies such as attacking Iran etc. Everyone knows the real destabilizing entity in West Asia is the belligerent, erratic and nuclear armed rogue state of Israel. And we all know that the only way out of this mess is that it’s ultimately up to Israel to clean up its act. The rest of the world can assist forces within Israel and the diaspora to undertake this challenging task by ceasing the mawkish fawning and pandering to the crackpot fantasies of the Zionists. Heart and soul in Jerusalem indeed… And what? Christians and Muslims don’t get a look in? Back to the drawing board Bibi.

      • Cliff
        March 20, 2010, 6:49 am

        What?

        One has to ask why Christians are so worried about how Islamic President Barack Hussein Obama might be. For heavens sake, he grew up in a Muslim country! Anyone who experiences beautiful faith of any denomination is going to be touched be it and respect it.

        Wrong. He’s not a Muslim. And what ‘Islamic country’ did he grow up in, for how long, and what impact did it have on him?

        ‘Islamic President Barrack Hussein’ – you forget your meds, moonkoon?

        • moonkoon
          March 20, 2010, 7:38 am

          He spent some of his childhood in Indonesia, he says so in the video. I don’t think that is disputed. There is a statue of him (as a boy) at his old school in Menteng. They had it move it there from the park because of some militant nationalist(?) group didn’t like it in the park.
          link to naked-malaysian.com

          I didn’t say he was a Muslim, I said just the opposite, that he is a Christian.
          Pull yourself together. Pay more attention!

        • Cliff
          March 20, 2010, 8:02 am

          Listen, liar – you said:

          One has to ask why Christians are so worried about how Islamic President Barack Hussein Obama might be. For heavens sake, he grew up in a Muslim country! Anyone who experiences beautiful faith of any denomination is going to be touched be it and respect it.

          Now, you’re back-tracking by making a superficial (and dishonest) clarification.

          Anyway, I’m not even sure why you made that post. It’s kind of F-KING obvious that the kind of Christians upset w/ Obama’s LOOSE ISLAMIC CONNECTION (one you over-state, just like ‘those’ Christians) – are by and large the far-right, evangelicals.

          Before political Islam, their main target was Christian liberation theology. Look back to Latin/Central America, the ‘Santa Fe Report’, Reagan, Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Rios Montt, etc. etc.

          You keep begging the question about Christians – why not cut the act and just SAY what you want to say? There’s no big mystery. It’s not peculiar. This stuff is goddamn out in the open.

          They are religious nuts. Just like religious nuts in the Jewish State and just like those in Islamic States. Motivations/etc. all can be different, but the same point about crazy/irrational is there.

          Obama is a politician. I’d like for you to provide some evidence that he has meaningful ‘Islamic roots’ that have ‘influenced’ his actions in the present.

        • moonkoon
          March 20, 2010, 10:07 pm

          Cliff, here’s what I said about Obama and Christianity.
          … Well it makes him a Christian in my eyes.
          I can’t be clearer than that.
          It’s at about line 16 in my first post. Perhaps it’s a problem with my formatting. Apologies if that is the case.

          The point I was making in the first part of the post (the bit you have quoted) is that Obama, at least during his younger years, was exposed to Muslim culture (during his school time in Indonesia) and seems to have been impressed by some aspects of it. What’s wrong with that? I too have been favourably impressed by the faith and practice of various Jews, Muslims, Christians that I have have encountered.

          The reason I made the post was to comment on the video posted by Citizen which attempts (the video not Citizen) to portray Obama as a Muslim, maybe even a crypto-Muslim. Like you, I reject that accusation about Obama.

          I’m not sure what you are suggesting about “saying what I want to say”.
          I agree with you when you suggest that “far-right” Christians are peddling this line in an attempt to smear Obama. And yes, Obama is a politician and a very good one at that. And it doesn’t bother me in the slightest if he occasionally says something nice about the Islamic faith.

  19. Les
    March 19, 2010, 9:42 pm

    Is Blitzer an Israeli?

    • DICKERSON3870
      March 20, 2010, 1:24 pm

      RE: Is Blitzer an Israeli? – Les
      FROM WIKI: “Wolf Blitzer, who has the same first name as his maternal grandfather,[1] was born in Augsburg, Germany[2][3] and raised in Buffalo, New York, the son of Jewish refugees[4] from Poland. Blitzer graduated from Kenmore West Senior High School and received a B.A. in history from the University at Buffalo in 1970. While there, he was a brother of Alpha Epsilon Pi. In 1972, he received an M.A. in international relations from the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies.
      Blitzer began his career in journalism in the early 1970s in the Tel Aviv bureau of the Reuters news agency. In 1973 he caught the eye of Jerusalem Post editor Ari Rath, who hired Blitzer as a Washington correspondent for the English language Israeli newspaper. Blitzer would remain with the Post until 1990, covering both American politics and developments in the Middle East.[5]…”
      SOURCE – link to en.wikipedia.org

  20. javs
    March 20, 2010, 3:02 pm

    problem is the media and those whom feed the blitzers their lines to spew misinformation to the point that it is a fact in the minds of every one, which takes a hold in the result which are rockets etc, they deserve a homeland just not on someones elses, “cause god gave it to them” , untill god himself comes from the sky and states he did in person, they are screwing the u.s. ( and going by the way how american was formed i.e. the american indians on banter stands) and we should recall all loans and military help as well as include them in the iaea list of places like iran has skirted ever having an inspection on what has never been lawfully gained and now hidden without access. Iran is not the threat it is the unfeather support for too many suspicious actions by an out of control religous fanatical regime, i.e. (hammas was not supported too much after they closed the liqour stores in palestine. which goes to show even though they would have been ousted in next elections, the people were not given a chance as the 47m given in weapons to fight back and hold a cu against the democratically elected hammas (whom was created in part by israel) small world huh, now consider whom tolls the line in the media everywhere and what is presented by mis used and wrong words like” disputed”, fact is it is not disputed, and is being allowed to have everyword repeated to the pubic and the u.s. till it is fact. there is not god end israels statehood and send them back to europe. that will have a great effect on world peace, and africa as well should be given back, the sorted lies and deceptions run deep can the world be deprogramed from the anti that zionist elite created, are we just to accept religous radicals which is the root of how it was able to fester for so many decades.

  21. javs
    March 20, 2010, 3:07 pm

    sanctions too are needed for israel as they have stolen more of the coastal gas from gaza. Not to mention the u.n resolutions NEVER followed by israel ever . The title of friends & Foes need to be switched, maybe then we would escape the strangle hood on this u,s, government which has been held by the balls since kennedy. Times are changing and the truths of how they used thery’re own people as patsys in this religous scheme to take over the middle east and rewritew the factual history of what was and try to call the truth a conspiracy or anti semite slang to qwell the people shall be no more.

Leave a Reply