Total number of comments: 149 (since 2010-07-02 18:57:12)
Showing comments 149 - 101Page: 2 1
Obama had overwhelming support from black voters in the Democratic primary (what was it, like 90%?); plus overwhelming support from people who wanted to stop Hillary Clinton (thats me; I sent Obama a contribution as soon as he announced because I could see he was the only chance to stop her and I have always thought she is awful. A warmonger as senator and delusions of royal consort as first lady); plus he had people who thought he was the least likely to be a warmonger.
I think black voters will stick with him but not turn out to vote as much as they did in 2008. The others must be very, very skeptical of Obama now; I know I am.
Also, a lot of the old Zionist bulls like Waxman, Harman, Berman, Spector - who else? - are going to be gone from Congress within the next 10 years. Their replacements won't be as hard Zionist, IMO.
In my lifetime, Jim Crow segregation and lynchings went on in the US. The Tuskegee syphilis experiment went on all the way up to 1972. I'm glad no other country bombed and invaded the US and killed Americans to stop those horrible, evil practices.
should have said, "The New York Times not putting the attack on the Liberty on Page 1" - still mindboggling that the Times buried that story inside the paper.
As long as the mainstream media is controlled by extreme Zionists, this hate campaign against all Muslims was inevitable. It was inevitable as far back as 1967: The New York Times not putting the Israeli sustained air and sea attack on the USS Liberty was extreme Zionism. It never lets up. It won't end until some large segment of ordinary Americans visibly turns against the Zionists, speaks out clearly, and politicians are up against the wall to respond. That could happen to politicians in either party. Look for the presidential primaries where they have to face the voters directly.
Then Obama is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. He'll have a primary challenge if he bombs Iran. Not hard to predict what will happen: Black voters will stay with him; Blue Dog Democrats already won't be seen with him; it looked like the people who got out for him in the Iowa caucuses were the most progressive/antiwar types and won't be enthusiastic for him again. The wealthy Jewish Zionists won't give him campaign money if he looks like a sure loser, will they? All his bowing and scraping to them will be for nothing.
The Israelis are so arrogant and selfish. Its mindboggling to think that probably 90% of the nice American Jews I've ever known are OK with this crap. Probably, they'd be quick to make some stupid irrelevant slam on CHINA! if asked about any of it, or Darfur, the Zionist created distraction campaign.
I have a memory that the NY Times took pains to point out that David Berkowitz (Son of Sam) was adopted and originally of Italian birth parentage.
Bloomberg isn't a civil libertarian. Remember the extended detentions and arrests during the 2004 Republican convention? And overturning the term limits law that the voters passed twice.
I wonder if using the landmarks preservation law in the attempt to stop the mosque didn't seem like "bad for business" to Bloomberg.
Right now, its kind of like Israel's borders.
Excellent point. It would be nice to have a one sentence definition of antisemitism particularly.
Not to criticize Glenn Greenwald, who I mostly like, but on the topic of comments - Every once in a while he would ban someone for "anti-semitism." I'm white and have listened to many, many people over the years say mean things about black people. The handyman I hired when we first moved to this house telling me how the lime green in that bathroom was the kind of color black people like! Its a fact of life and all white people know it and probably black people make mean remarks about white people. And thats just the way it is. They are not going to go do anything to hurt someone and we all know that. So what if they're prejudiced? The antisemitism/racism sensitivity, in my opinion, is a pretence of daintiness. Plus, its SO misused.
There was also a Salon poster, London Lad, who thought, as I do, that the evidence against the official version of 9/11 is overwhelming and he'd write comments about that. How, how, how can 9/11 be off topic while we kvetch about these wars and government undermining civil liberties and the Constitution, all of which would never have happened without the official version of 9/11? Talk about elephants in the room.
Personally, I like seeing outrageous commenters. I feel safer knowing they're out there, still posting. If they are banned, how will we know the government or other nefarious agents didn't whisk them away? I'm serious.
All we've gotten for the last 9 years is Muslim hating and specifically Muslim hating instigated in large measure by Jews like that Pam woman with the website ("Atlas something"). From 10:30 AM September 11, 2001, all we've gotten is Muslim hating and demonizing the Muslim Religion.
I remember an Ashley Banfield show on MSNBC (she got canned for being too evenhanded) with young Israelis and young Palestinians and one of the young Palestinian men said that the "72 Virgins" crap was something that Israeli media had always used to dehumanize Palestinians. Remember the video that was played instantly all over TV of Palestinians celebrating 9/11 and it turned out to be a set up, someone was handing out candies or something.
Why wouldn't Arabs hate Jews? Its 60 plus years of living under Zionist terrorism, warmongering, stealing, false flags to instigate attacks on them, demonization, bribing US politicians to give Israel weapons to terrorize, double standard treatment at the United Nations, etc. Yes, there are some Jews who speak out against it . . . a little.
The last pope pointed out that Islam is an "Abrahamic" religion. But, you know what, it doesn't get through to people, not here in the US, anyway. I wonder if most people don't see religion as some kind of "label" and tune out, i.e., don't think about it.
Does the US Congress pass a resolution that China, Burma or North Korea are wonderful, wonderful friends and allies and the greatest thing since sliced bread every time one of them commits some bad act? No. But thats what they do when its Israel. What a smug attitude it is that with warmonger Israel, everyone is supposed to shut up and take it.
Remember Cohen (and WAPO columnist Mary McGrory, now deceased) leaping to proclaim that Colin Powell's lame United Nations speech convinced them of the need to attack Iraq? Within days, Powell's speech was debunked - mobile biological weapons labs, indeed. I watched the speech and it was obvious while Powell was full of BS; he was playacting OUTRAGE and it was obvious how weak he was on facts.
How do people like Cohen and his ilk in the Washington elite become so easily convinced? They're going along with something. They decided they have a right to do that, for their own careers and personal preferences, go along and not think even if its promoting a war. What has to happen for them to have any humility?
The point made that Iran's leaders would want to avoid the fate of Saddam makes an awful lot of sense. What have they got to lose? If the US invades, Obama would execute or imprison them. Their only shot is to hurt us so bad right at the outset that Obama gets scared. I hope Obama is thinking hard about it but he's pretty callous about the rest of us.
We need another war like a hole in the head. Obama will get a primary challenge if he does this and the only Democrats left voting for him will be black voters. In other words, it will destroy the Democratic Party.
He has an odd career, something about Twitter.
Friedman having a column in the NY Times proves that the Times (and by extension other Jewish Zionist controlled media) advance and promote Jews to the exclusion of others. No way is Friedman a super duper intellect; no way does he have insight or a lot of knowledge or anything that would make him stand out as even a CANDIDATE for a regular column in the top newspaper in the US. Same thing with former NY Times columnist William Safire and current columnist David Brooks. El Diario no doubt advances Latino columnists and The Amsterdam News no doubt advances black columnists but they don't pretend to be newspapers for everyone.
I bet the NY Times has also had more front page mentions of Jewish summer camps and coop boards than of the Israeli sustained air and sea attack on the USS Liberty.
Here's former Pakistan spy chief saying there is no evidence Osama bin Laden had anything to do with 9/11.
Pakistan spy chief says war lost cause
But Tom "Suck on This" Friedman has been right in there drumming up hatred for Muslims and lust for bombing and murdering Muslims. If there is no evidence today, there was no evidence in 2001-3 either.
You reap what you sow. It has all been in the service of Jewish triumphalism and domination of the entire planet on the part of people like Friedman. What a lot of nerve to complain about getting some of his own medicine. Let the American people speak; they are not in love with Israel.
My initial reaction is that if the US attacks Iran, we deserve the consequences but, NOOOO! Me and mine do not deserve the consequences! We've been against every one of these stupid, hate-filled, ugly, arrogant wars for Israel and this insane Jewish triumphalism over the entire Muslim world. Thats what its all about. As the former Pakistani top spy Hamid Gul said the other day, there is no evidence that Osama bin Laden did 9/11:
Afghanistan war is a lost cause
Theres no evidence because he didn't do it. It was a plot by Cheney & Co. assisted by Israel's government and Israel's Mossad (for the special protection you get when you let Israel in on the plot, that the Congress and the US media WILL NOT investigate if they suspect Israeli evil; see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil). The plan was to steal (from Afghanistan, Iraq and the US treasury) and to let Israel grab more from those territories and attack, attack, attack.
I wonder who he thinks really wrote the Shakespeare plays? Who cares what he thinks about the Holocaust? How is that relevant to anything that would cause the US to attack Iran and kill people? Only a monster would think the Iranian president's opinion about the events of WWII justifies harming one hair on the head of one Iranian.
I like to see pictures of Ahmadinejad traveling around the world meeting other leaders like the top guys in Brazil and Turkey: It shows that there are some leaders who are not US toadies and are unafraid to show they don't think the Holocaust and anyone's opinion about it is the defining issue forever and ever.
I agree with the Arab world in that new poll: It would be good for the region for Iran to have a nuclear weapon. Its deterrence. It works. The US used nuclear weapons when the US was the only one to have them and not since. Israel, with its arrogance, special privilege, dishonesty and selfishness, is exactly the kind of country that would use nuclear weapons and they've got plenty of them. They need to be afraid of retaliation. Iran hasn't started a war in hundreds of years; Israel starts one every once in a while to keep in practice.
Another way of putting it is that Israel was officially given a license to steal. This doesn't go on for 60+ years without being deliberate, just as the "peace process" is an official shell game without a pea for the Palestinians.
And the Israelis and their government and Israel Firsters around the world think they are the world's smartest people to "get away" with it. Like what they're doing isn't obvious and enforced by brutal power (bought and paid for US power) as much as slavery or any other evil the world has every seen.
Stunning about that hot link. But, of course, I already know that the New York Times did not report the Israeli sustained air and sea attack on the USS Liberty on Page 1 back when it happened. I wonder if the New York Times has EVER mentioned the attack on the Liberty on Page 1.
Keep it up. This mentality is so unreasonable, so strange, so deliberately ignorant on the part of people with degrees from fancy-schmancy colleges that it is a form of evidence. Like, you wouldn't put a member NAMBLA on a child molestation jury. For Israel lovers, everything else is a distant, distant second. They would cover up murder and mayhem and, yes, attacks on Americans by Israel.
I saw a whole shelf of these Ahava products at TJ Maxx last week. Does that mean they're overstock and not selling well in the department stores so they go to a secondary place like TJ Maxx/Marshalls?
I am not a lawyer so this is an honest question: which is stronger in international law, the right of refugees to return to the place they were pushed out of/fled in fear OR the right of a state to exist? I kind of think - non-lawyer thinking - that there must not be ANY right of a state to exist in international law or we'd still have East Germany. East Germany was a state, had United Nations membership, sent a lot of athletes to the Olympics (won a lot of medals, too, as I recall). But its gone and the people who ran it and the elites of E. Germany lost their power. Tough for them. Is there any international law about a right to exist as a nation devoted to the interests of one ethnic group?
It is a curious bit of US government and media/Israel/worldwide Jewish thinking that the Palestinians have to give up a right that is legitimate and recognized under international law AND they have to acknowledge a right that doesn't seem like it can possibly be a legitimate "right" (right of Israel to exist) before they have what everyone is supposed to have as human rights: self-determination, political rights, life, liberty and happiness, freedom from fear, freedom from want, free speech, etc.
I remember that the wife and father of one of the Israeli soldiers that Israel went on its 2006 Lebanon rampage over were all over US TV. Geez, how many times on Larry King alone? Larry asked a sort-of pro Lebanon commentator (of course, there is never anyone on US TV to really give the other side's point of view with passion) whether Hezbollah shouldn't return the two soldiers "as a gesture of good faith." Unimaginable that Israel would stop bombing and murdering as a gesture of good faith! But we should all be so moved for that wife and father worrying about their soldier. More than for American soldiers being killed and maimed in the Iraq War going on at the same time, too. Israelis are the most special beloved people and we are supposed to care so much about them. So, so weird.
Did Rachel Corrie's family ever get on mainstream US TV even once? I once heard her aunt get through to the C-SPAN morning call-in, just as a regular caller, meaning she worked hard to dial and redial and hope to get thorugh. What she wanted to say was that the family had tried to get the 2 Washington Senators, Murray and Cantwell to say something but they were ignored.
What was the case for getting tough with Iraq? There was none whatsoever and its been a huge disaster that will cost us trillions. And it was immoral, ruthless, coldhearted, murderous, illegal, monstrous, as it would have been if Clinton had done it, too. I don't get from Paul Krugman's column that he saw that.
What you've got there from Krugman doesn't hold a candle to, say, Gen. Odom warning against the Iraq War.
I hope for the best, sure, but I am wary as I have come to spot the weasel stuff and remember it. Before the Iraq War, I remember a Krugman column (In fact, I just found it, "Things to Come" 3/18/03) in which he says:
"There is a case for getting tough with Iraq; bear in mind that an exasperated Clinton administration considered a bombing campaign in 1998."
Clinton was wrong to consider bombing. Clinton was wrong to continue the Iraq sanctions that killed half a million children. Wrong and cowardly.
That column stopped me in my tracks for admiring Paul Krugman. Something monstrous had a good rationale because Bill Clinton had also wanted to do it? Clinton wanted to do it to appease Lieberman and the other neocons and the Israel Lobby, not because it was right for the US or the world.
Can't help seeing it as a bias and blind spot that discredits people. How could Tony Judt, in a Times OpEd, say that Israel has a written constitution? It was later issued a correction --- who sees the corrections except people looking back for quotes? How could he not know that Israel has no written constitution? And no borders --- he calls it a legitimate state repeatedly in the piece, what kind of legitimate state doesn't have borders? Its his Jewish bias that doesn't see it.
And Joe Klein is not an "intellectually honest man," either. What is this bilge:
". . . the probable outcome of democracy in places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia would be the installation of Islamist parties that might prove more repressive than the dictatorships they replaced. "
A democracy would be more repressive than a (US sponsored) dictatorship? Maybe if the US put sanctions on them to strangle their economy. Maybe if the US instigated and sponsored some remaining dictator to attack them as we did getting Saddam Hussein to attack Iran and plunging that country into 8 years of war.
I would never trust Andrew Sullivan half as far as I could pick him up and throw him. He was flogging that "Green Revolution" in Iran last year and the anonymous Neda video, for which you cannot find any hard evidence of what it actually shows and the way it was pushed to the top of the charts among the hundreds of millions of videos on-line would make any serious person suspicious. The crime it purports to show makes no sense, that the Iranian government would kill a woman getting out of a car a kilometer away from the demonstration. A serious person would smell a rat.
Sullivan is also nastily dismissive of the 911 Truth movement and, of course, he has not bothered himself to read or listen for one minute. That is the only way to dismiss the overwhelming evidence that the official story is a pile of lies: keep yourself ignorant.
Andrew Sullivan doesn't learn. He was 100% wrong about Iraq and, as I recall, he was a BIG supporter of the Iraq War and very nasty towards opponents of the Iraq War back then. Didn't he get onto our radar because he's so smart having gone to one of the elite Ivy League equivalent schools in England or we'd have never heard of him? It cannot be intelligence or the ability to think and reason that gets people into elite schools, just cannot be. We have too much evidence that deliberately ignorant people who cannot think or reason got into those schools and graduated with flying colors.
The phrase "the Jewish people" seems more and more weird. Its the comfortably retired couples who live next to me and across the street, and its the Israelis with their missiles and targeted killings and starving people. The only way it has consistency is in this idea of Jews as a "nation" as a pro Israel poster put it here the other day. Such a creepy idea; within our country we have this other "nation" that is their own nation.
If I said "my people," who would I be talking about? The idea of "my people" is so outside of my personal lexicon.
Oy. Did that come out like I was talking about the Venus de Milo's boob?
You're thinking about it too much; you're not into the spirit of it, the rote (especially of the sign of the cross). You've probably read that a lot of Catholics stopped going to mass when it went from Latin to English. Why was that? When it was all in Latin they could just daydream and follow everyone else kneeling, standing, sitting. I've talked with Catholics who were so upset, offended even, by the mass going from Latin to English. Like they understood the Latin better than the English.
Try this on a Roman Catholic: Ask him/her the meaning of the Immaculate Conception (December 8). Most of them will say its the conception of Jesus. Its right before Christmas so how could it be the conception of Jesus! No, its the immaculate conception of Mary; she had to be free of original sin when she was conceived in her mother's womb. But people don't think about what they're hearing and I wouldn't myself if the priest hadn't stopped us leaving the church on the Dec. 8 Holy Day of Obligation mass for public school children back when I was in Junior High. He called us back and told us he wanted to explain it so we would know. It must have been in the gospel that day and every December 8, but who was listening?
Re "idol worship" - I have talked with Muslims who bring that up about Christianity, too. They don't get it that the statues and stained glass windows are inspiration and people are not praying "to" them.
I wish you lived near me so we could trade taking care of each others dogs. Oh, how many places I could go and would love to go if I could just pick up and go and not worry about these dogs. Taking them to the kennel and back home are big chores. My neighbors are old people; I'd never trust them not to hurt themselves.
There are an awful lot of non-Jews completely left out of your essay! (A lot of Jews, too, I dare say.) Like, the 95% of us who live ordinary lives, work, have families, take care of kids and our homes, don't aspire to Ivy League schools and elite clubs, watch movies and TV, have worries, retire, get old and spend the a quarter of their lives being old, etc. There is a "striving" quality to the Jewishness you describe. A few years ago, my neighbor, a retired doctor and Jewish who went to an Ivy League school himself, told me that his grandson was going to such-and-such state university because he probably couldn't get into the Ivy League schools and I didn't say anything, just nodded, but I can see a lot of reasons for not going to an Ivy League school. I've known people who went to Ivy League schools and would have been better off going to the state school. The rest of us do pick up on this nuttiness that if you don't "get into" an elite college/university, you might as well not go. No, you'll go through life and have ups and downs and probably the really good things that happen for you as well as the really bad will have nothing to do with where you went to school.
I grew up Roman Catholic in the 50's and 60's and that whole "culture" has changed. Around age 18, I knew I didn't believe it (What happened to the 3 Wise Men? They traveled all that way to see the baby Jesus and then just disappeared?). For a period of over 20 years, I didn't think about the Catholic Church, until my daughter was in school and knew kids who were Catholic and I talked to their mothers at Girl Scouts, etc. The Catholic religion has TOTALLY changed from what it was when I was a kid. They have general confessions; most people don't go to mass, even the kids (used to be a mortal sin to miss mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation); dropping the "No meat on Fridays" thing seems to have shaken the faith of a lot of people, weirdly trivial as that seems.
So - I wonder if this Jewishness thing stands out more now because with other groups, the unifying culture has fallen away so much? Because of an effort to unify, some of which is Israel, Jewishness is standing there while the rest of American society mushed out into one (bland?) culture?
Re the Venus de Milo's schmatte - the Louvre website had a slideshow with audio on the Winged Victory. A lot of description about the masterful carving of the drapery and I could really appreciate what they were talking about. What kind of Yale professor would just say "its the schmatte" when there is SO much he could say? What a boob.
So, the revenue would be higher if there was state tax, no? I thought Strayhorn’s point was that they were able to measure specific illegal immigrant tax/licensing/fees payments because there is no income tax.
Not the point. The point is that the report itself says estimating revenue is difficult and depends on significant assumptions. That amounts to somebody saying this is what he thinks immigrants buy, how much they spend, etc. Well, you may be the nerd that reads government reports but I am the news consumer who (as I said back in my original post) has been seeing dishonesty and manipulation in government reports, news reports, you name it. Giving someone the ability to dream up his own assumptions --- why am I wary of that?
You telling me in Jersey that the immigrants are taking gardening jobs from citizens? Or maid jobs? And rendering Jerseyians (!?) unemployed?
This is one of those areas where "ordinary" people know things and I trust them because its firsthand. I actually have an example. I went through Home Depot to get my house's exterior painted a couple of years ago. They have a system of contracting out where you wonder if the guy at the end who actually does the work is making any money at all. Anyway, the guy who actually painted my house (with his brother) told me that the second tier contractor who gave him the job got it because it was a Home Depot job and Home Depot stays on top of them, does follow-up, calls while they're on the job, does a survey at the end and doesn't pay that contractor until the customer is satisfied. And the contractor is afraid of losing Home Depot work. Otherwise, he would not have gotten the job because that subcontractor has illegal immigrant crews for most of his work.
Maybe you don't want to paint houses (I would make such a mess) but that painter and his brother are nice people and they both had a little families, a wife and child each.
You know what? The Israel Lobby would just buy off the Latino politicians and leaders! And then all of the politicians would vote another round of loot to Israel to pay off the money that had to go to the new Latino political clout.
I read the first few paragraphs and the New York Times article is, again, very snide towards Americans who are upset about illegal immigration. Its like the author thinks they are just fools. I don't have much first hand experience with illegal immigration and probably the author doesn't either! But a lot of people do, ordinary people in their daily lives, and they are upset about it. I'm not going to say they are just fruitcakes because thats not my experience of ordinary people. And this is supposed to be a democracy.
What bothers me is the non-enforcement of the law at the will of the politicians. For me, its like when Obama decided he wouldn't investigate or prosecute the torture that went on in the Bush administration. He took an oath to enforce the law but because he sees a political benefit to himself for not enforcing it, he does whats good for him.
What is our democracy worth if the people effectively have no say? They cannot change these laws because the public wants these laws and even stronger laws, so the politicians just don't enforce the laws.
I note caveats in the Texas report, like:
"Estimating state government revenue attributable to undocumented immigrants is a difficult undertaking because any calculations must be based both on limited data and a number of significant assumptions about spending behavior." Since Texas doesn't have an income tax, and the only revenue they're getting is sales tax, thats a pretty big caveat.
Also, it seems that the estimate of costs is for costs to the state and not costs to local governments, hospitals, special districts. I don't know how Texas finances education, whether the state pays most all of it or local districts.
Finally, is Texas representative of my state (New Jersey) or, say, California? Texas is a low social services, low tax state.
Another cost is if illegal immigrants cause unemployment and the unemployed legal people are getting income supplements/aid payments/unemployment payments from government. Was there any calculation for that?
HOW would you know its 12 million? A number like that amounts to "Who knows?" Who is making these number? Probably they are getting the number from some kind of survey or poll and its a matter of methodology in the survey.
Thank you for the information but what does it prove? I still don't know the total amount spent on services to illegal immigrants and that is the important figure. Education and health care are very expensive and could easily be higher than $9 billion/year for 12 - 20 million illegal immigrants. If it isn't the majority, what percentage of illegal immigrants are children, non-working mothers or elderly?
The UCLA study on Latinos and health - still doesn't say what the costs are, just that by some calculation, Latinos are "less likely" to have some diseases. I don't know what to make of that since some very serious illnesses are random incidence, according to the current science.
As to "scapegoating" - illegal immigration, GATT/WTO and outsourcing are probably all hurting American workers.
I read something recently and - this is like so much - I do not know if it is true or not but if it is true it is very important. The mainstream media is so darned dishonest about illegal immigration, always pushing the idea that "racism" and "bigotry" are the reasons for opposition, that I suspect this is most likely true: The majority of illegal immigrants are children, non-working mothers and elderly.
If that information is true, it changes everything, in my opinion. It means that non-enforcement of the immigration laws and efforts to allow amnesty (a "path to citizenship") are purely subsidies to employers from the taxpayers who are forced to pay for the services that children, non-working mothers and elderly people surely utilize in disproportion to working people. Immigration "reform" bills and non-enforcement are just a way to put money in the pockets of employers who get to pay low wages and the politicians don't give a hoot that the services cost money because the politicians are fine with borrowing the money.
These migrant workers in Israel and their children are a whole different kettle of fish. Deporting them is just Jewish/Zionist racism. (I always wonder about the idea of Jewishness as a "race." Is it a race? My immediate neighbors are Jewish and I don't think they're a different race from me. I don't think they're religious at all, either.)
Oh, they're on it. There was something last night on CNN about abuse of women in Turkey.
There are family members who think the government story is bogus and think there was never any investigation.
(Towards the bottom, pink boxes) Survivors and family members question official theory
To think the government just put out a phony line about a guy in a cave in Afghanistan - allbeit a FABULOUS cave, with its own hospital, computer systems and truck garages! all of which turned out not to exist - that must be much more painful than thinking about a mosque a couple blocks from the WTC site.
These Jewish people who say you're insensitive to them - how have THEY suffered?
And you can't see the WTC site from the Islamic Center site. Theres a couple of big buildings in the way.
How is the ADL still a respectable organization with this history? It sounds more like a hate group.
"In the absence of any serious threats of anti-semitism," indeed. The "American Al Qaeda," Adam Gadahn/Pearlman is the grandson of an ADL board member. That "Revolution Muslim" group whose members had all been West Bank settlers from Brooklyn." There was a story recently of a Jewish girl at George Washington University who painted swastikas on her own dorm door and got caught by a concealed camera. Makes you wonder how coordinated, funded and organized it all is. I don't know if it is true but I read that the German-American Bund was funded by the ADL.
The big bluff being that these people have gotten away with not being called out that they are a special interest. Why is it OK to demonize "Big Oil" and "money from BP" and not look at these folks, who donate to politicians in order to get favors and money for a foreign country.
These people (as Bob Dole put it a long time ago) are "not just interested in good government." Any reasonable person would surmise that the money going to politicians is part of the money that the politicians are giving to Israel. Its a totally corrupt scheme. The politicians take billions from the US treasury to give to Israel and then a small portion of it cycles back to campaign contributions to benefit Israel.
Most of the mainstream media and politicians either know, suspect or fear that Israel had a hand in 9/11.
Turnabout will be fair play.
Congressman releases opponent's Jewish money list
Its coming. The American public knows that their government is dominated by and in thrall to the small Jewish-elite segment of the population, not the 1.4 percent that is the Jewish population, but maybe a tenth of that, very rich Jews who give politicians money. Its why Sessions kept going after Kagan about her Jewishness; he knows that a third of the Supreme Court being Jewish is preposterous without the money angle.
I think that is the REAL Tea Party, not the people they put on TV worrying that Obama is going to ban fishing or the Sarah Palin fans or the "birthers." How curious that number one Birther Orly Taitz is a Russian Jew! Thats a media-aided distraction campaign from what ordinary Americans who do care about the future of the country are trying to talk about.
This billboard ad is the first time I have seen a campaign, an actual campaign, to directly attack Israel. Having watched US politics for my adult life, I am convinced that this is what is effective, going for the jugular, not mealy-mouthing it but making Israel the target, the enemy. Thats how the American public CAN take a stand. Otherwise, they're in the position of "what are we supposed to do?" Here's what: oppose that money going to Israel.
I saw an NBC show with Ann Curry the other night that had these families in poverty in Ohio and I had to turn it off it was so upsetting. How does the state allow the children to live like that? Living in tents in the winter, 14 people in a house, etc. For one day of Israel money, how many families like that could live decently?
Theres an old story that back in the 50's, there was a can on the counter of a coffee shop in Manhattan for "The Restoration of King Farouk" and by lunchtime they'd collected $50.
Erdogan did a very smart thing to take on the leadership of the Turkish military by going at the "Sledgehammer plots." Or there'd have been a (US and Britain behind the scenes) military coup by now. He'd be dead like Mossadegh in Iran in the early 50's. He wouldn't let the US use Turkey to attack Iraq in 2003 and our SOBs at the top would have taken him out. It was at that time that the Sledgehammer plots were revealed to the Turkish public.
Turkey has had a lot of military coups over the years and the Turkish public respected their military as a safeguard when the elected government was ineffective but now, the military has lost prestige in the wake of stories that they were planning false flag attacks to harm Erdogan's government and that the top generals are corrupt.
We'll be hearing that old song from my childhood with the line, "Istanbul or Constantinople. Is it Istanbul or Constantinople? Why did Constantinople get the works? Its nobody's business but the Turks!" with the very oriental kazoo-like stuff playing behind the main melody. Members of Congress swaying to it.
I notice the reference to Darfur in the song and remember reading that super Zionists are behind the Darfur campaign. In other words, its a ruse to distract world attention and intends no sincere concern for suffering. They got an awful lot of mileage and celebrity involvement out of it.
Re Hariri Tribunal - Fascinating.
In September 2001, before the 9/11 attacks, the Washington Times had an article (since "disappeared" from the website) on a paper from the Army School of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS):
"Of the MOSSAD, the Israeli intelligence service, the SAMS officers say: "Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act."
And the Israelis gloat about it because they think they are so clever and fool everyone. They don't fool anyone paying attention, of course, but the ones in a position to do anything are either bribed or fearful for their jobs.
Blacks are about 13% of the population. Imagine if blacks became the same percentage of TV news reporters/commentators/hosts that Jews are now. Like that would be a non-issue!
They can count on never being nailed to the mat to be explicit.
Yeah, its so bad that antisemitism, will come to look like the only weapon available against this powerful, dominating, selfish force that has corrupted and stolen our democracy. Rather like the way racism is used so that politicians are very wary of white people thinking they are pro-black. That Shirley Sherrod incident last week --- immediately get rid of her, don't even bother to find out what she actually said.
Personally, I am not sure whether that dominating force is Zionism or Jewish-elite triumphalism. Some peculiar Jewish-elite satisfaction in being able to "lord it over" others and bring others to their knees, just as Obama the other day looked like he'd be happy to give Netanyahu sexual services for a smile.
J Street is a pro Israel lobby. We don't need another pro Israel lobby. They have corrupted and stolen our US democracy.
When it happened, the NY Times did not report it on the front page. A sustained air and sea attack on a US naval vessel killing 34 US sailors and wounding 170+ more was not front page worthy. I wonder what was on the NY Times front page that day? Its a big front page but no room to report the attack on the USS Liberty.
You mean that the reasoning about why Wikileaks publication is terrible, terrible, terrible is "circular?" Thats an interesting point that dogma must be circular.
Re Afghanistan War - nothing makes sense. The November election will be interesting. All thats left for Democrats is partisanship and we'll see how many are THAT partisan.
I think Mr. Cohen is very disingenuous (and I recall his first writing on the murderous Israeli attack on the flotilla, when he called it "crass" and there were comments allowed and people took him on for it. "Crass.") He wants to say Furkan Dogan's death has been buried because of his Muslim name. No. Rachel Corrie's death was buried, too. And Joe Meador of the USS Liberty was on the flotilla and the mainstream media ignored him and the US Congress would LOOOOVE to pass a law calling Meador a terrorist for being on that flotilla.
"It’s different, however, when an American Muslim male gets stuck in a hail of Israeli gunfire." No, no, no. Israel gets off scot free with US media and politicians no matter what it does and no matter to whom. As Mr. Mearsheimer said in a speech earlier this month:
"If I went to the Middle East, and visited Israel, and I was killed, somebody shot me, do you think there would be any accountability? Seriously. If any of you went to the Middle East and were killed, do you think there would be accountability? There wouldn’t be. This is how outrageous this situation is."
Thats how Glenn Greenwald handled Eliot Spitzer asking him if Hamas is a terrorist organization - said he thought Hamas had committed terrorist acts just as the founders of the state of Israel had committed terrorist acts. But boy, did he have to talk fast because Spitzer was right there jumping on him trying to cover over Israel's foundation in terrorism.
That is one of the very dishonest, very bad things you notice about the humongous disproportion of Jewish commentators in the media and Jewish dominance of ownership or management, especially on TV: All the while they're yapping about terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, that terrorist history of Israel cannot be mentioned; only someone who is Jewish heritage like Greenwald would dare to be say it. A non-Jew would be the skunk at the garden party at the least, more likely out of a job and unemployable and they know it. Nor can the USS Liberty be named, all the while banging the drum that Iran is our enemy because of the embassy hostages.
Yeah, whats the difference between this and everything I've ever heard about the Gestapo? Scale? Maybe not. More likely most incidents are not recorded at all.
The Israeli court had to clear him because the Russians released old KGB documents that proved Demjanjuk was framed. But there was a parade of survivors who swore he was the person they remembered. I don't suppose anything more will be written or said about that (and the people who went on TV during the 80s saying Demjanjuk was "Ivan the Terrible" have kept mum when it was proven he was not "Ivan the Terrible"). I suppose it will be attributed to some kind of survivor PTSD that they claimed to remember him. I'm skeptical. We've seen Israelis and Israel supporters behave with absolute viciousness and hatred for a long time now and they seem to feel entitled to it and triumph in it.
re Meg Ryan - I guess she didn't go to one of the poison ivy league schools so we shouldn't take her thoughts seriously at all. No, she must be dumb if she doesn't have those great credentials from Hahvahd and Yale where they teach you how to be OK with starving people, shooting people, drone bombing people, torturing people. In fact, its humanitarianism; its REAL humanitarianism. Its peace, even.
re antisemitism - sorry to say but Zionists have such absolute control over our media and politicians that I can see a kind of antisemitism coming as what else can people do? I'd like to see a poll of the "Tea Party" on whether they are more concerned about Obama's race than they are about the foreign wars for Israel. I can see where political contributions from AIPAC, J Street, the whole cabal of pro Israel lobbies could become stigmatized. Make politicians as wary of the public thinking they are Zionists as they are of the public thinking they might support reparations for slavery or amnesty for illegal immigrants. OR, American Jews can detach themselves from Israel and the Jewish owned US media can integrate non Jews with SOME semblance of proportion to the population so that those non Jews aren't always thinking they have their jobs on sufferance and must watch what they say. Etc.
The other day I saw Michelle Bachman say that the Tea Party should "speak for themselves" and that gave me a whole new outlook on her. I normally see her portrayed as a lunatic and she may have said some odd stuff but I can remember lots of odd stuff I've heard politicians say on TV; she's in no way an outlier for saying crazy things. Hillary Clinton's landing under fire in Tuzla was much, much crazier than anything Michelle Bachman ever said.
If they got to speak for themselves, what would Tea Partiers say? I think they know that the foreign wars are bankrupting us and campaign contributions are corrupting every damned one of our politicians.
I came to the conclusion that dailykos is so controlled that it says something about the membership to want to hang around. Nothing but official "conspiracy theories" allowed; watch out you don't say something that could be quoted in the Wall Street Journal as antisemitic; don't criticize Democrats too much; once the Democratic candidate for President is clear, don't say ANYTHING critical about him. (Until after he loses - Kerry - and then Markos attacks him harder than Rush Limbaugh.)
You get a sense of what not to say on dailykos, for sure.
I have not visited dailykos in a long time but it used to be that I-P threads were very, very active threads. If the "Netroots" are going to go with the flow on Israel-Palestine, the Netroots will peter out as a force. Same with MSNBC shows slinking away from the Israeli attack on the Gaza flotilla. Why should I care about them bleating that Republicans are hardhearted not to extend unemployment benefits if they are OK with what we're financing Israel to do? Ignoring I-P bespeaks corporatization of the Netroots, IMO. Same thing with the way Tea Party has been characterized by the media as obsessed with deficits when I would bet money that they are in large part Republicans who are disgusted with their own party's foreign wars and military spending as this blog notes:
Most significant line from the Raw Story interview with Joe Meador:
"The Liberty incident remains the only maritime attack in which American forces were killed that was never investigated by the US Congress."
Oh, he probably didn't want it on the front page. Its just the contradictory nature of the man that he knew right from wrong - it should have been on the front page - at the same time as he'd wanted to allow the Israelis to kill every sailor on board.
The Liberty isn't an isolated incident of Israel getting off scot free, for sure (while theres a TV ad running lately calling Iran our "enemy" despite that Iran has never attacked us and I don't recall that any of the embassy hostages died and we did keep those people under the thumb of the megalomaniac Shah for 25 years).
Why did Democrats do such a lame job on Iran Contra when they had the goods to impeach Reagan? Why did Democrats drop the October Surprise investigation? Israel was involved; they wanted to protect Israel.
Its even more grotesque than you wrote: The New York Times did not put it on the front page!
"According to a memoir by then-CIA director Richard Helms, President Johnson's personal anger was manifest when he discovered the story of the Liberty attack on an inside page of the next day's New York Times. Johnson barked that "it should have been on the front page!"'
page 5 of Chicago Tribune October 2007 on Liberty
A commenter on another blog calls it the "poison ivy league." I like that; sorry to good people like Phil Weiss who went to Harvard but theres so much toxic crap that traces back to Harvard, Yale, etc. Those torture memo writers went to big deal law schools and the schools have had nothing to say; they must teach them at Harvard, Yale, etc. that theres a way to make torture legal, no? Otherwise, wouldn't the schools be saying "He didn't learn that here and we are outraged!" Harvard or Yale or wherever would be proud and delighted to take a donation fund in honor of John Yoo.
This is an epiphany I sure had with the Obama presidency. If I ever felt "white guilt," I'm over it. That black president can bomb innocent defenseless people as ruthlessly as any white president.
Obama is such a weak communicator; I have no hope for him.
Charles ("Charlie") Rangel is going to be tried in the House on ethics charges. He's 80 years old and wants to stay there forever like Byrd and Kennedy but has a serious primary challenge. Be interesting to see how much the Democratic leadership and Obama help him with his primary. New blood in Congress as all these 70, 80+ year olds leave one way or the other is the best hope; at least there will be primaries.
It would probably be a good thing for Sestak to lose and learn that all the bowing and scraping didn't help him. Or would he learn the lesson that he should have bowed and scraped more?
I never said that and you know damned well I never said that. What is it with you?
You're the one that thinks 90,000 tons of steel weakens from a jet fire that lasted at most a few minutes followed by office furniture and rugs burning for an hour. According to you, thats an "intense hydrocarbon fire" that weakened 90,000 tons of steel.
I said the architectural principal of floors suspended off a central structure to the frame was an innovation of cast iron architecture and you know I said it to you over and over but you play at being dense.
Thats such a good point. Its what we've been told is the "Karl Rove" political strategy of identifying your own candidate's weakness and attacking the opponent in that very area. Remember how George W. Bush's privileged National Guard slot became braver than John Kerry's Purple Hearts because of the Swift Boat attacks?
I would imagine that a lot of Muslims are very wary of these "moderate" thinkers who get attention every once in a while and occupy space that could have been occupied by more aggressive spokespeople. Not the only time but it stands out like a sore thumb, in my opinion, that moderate Muslim spokespeople have gone along with the "19 Muslim hijacker" theory of 9/11 rather than demand proof, of which we have seen none in almost 9 years. Where would we be if aggressive Muslim spokespeople had demanded proof back in 2001 rather than being so quick to kow-tow to power? The moderate Muslim spokespeople, so eager to be moderate, only showed they were weak and the neocons and neolibs have kept their boots on the necks of the moderate Muslim spokespeople.
With no proof, no evidence, the government and media started in at about 10:30 on 9/11 saying it was Osama bin Laden's doing because of religion and no one stood up to say it was just racism to blame Muslims with no proof, even Muslim leaders, and so it stuck. And we still haven't seen any evidence. And so much fell apart - bin Laden's fabulous caves, the people locked up after 9/11 for weeks because they were identified as accomplices and have been absolutely cleared and the reasons for locking them up were ridiculous, and the Iraq War and Israel's attacks on Lebanon and Gaza and grabbing more of the West Bank --- but the moderate Muslim spokespeople who get to go on our TVs are afraid to make an argument.
When China pulls the plug on our economy? When Tea Party people get to talk for themselves rather than filtered through the MSM that only wants to talk about racism and Sarah Palin and loonie people like the lady who thought Obama was going to ban fishing?
I saw a few minutes (all I could take) of Obama on this unemployment extension the other day and he has 3 "middle class" people behind him who, I guess, are going to be getting this extension and there is nothing about those people or their stories that would make a rational person think its a good idea to borrow more money from China to give them more unemployment benefits. Until theres a crunch that says the money isn't there for "middle class" Americans because of these wars, military spending, foreign aid, until then, nothing changes. So, I have to root for the Tea Party and their anti-deficit shtik because the alternative is to let the pols borrow and spend on everything, military, war, unemployment benefits, whatever.
"Robert Mackey’s The Lede blog at The New York Times serves up a steady diet of Israel-related stories that give hardcore anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic commenters a home at the paper but is energetic in removing the most egregious posts."
That is bulls--t. I have seen egregious hate filled antiMuslim comments posted on The Lede.
Our political system was set up for legalized bribery (no doubt Zionist-designed just like the Israelis are in the meeting for whatever the US does) and the "campaign reform" laws that are touted are intended to institutionalize the bribery. The Supreme Court decision a few months ago the Democrats make such a fuss about because it lets in corporate money more --- its probably a good thing; let a thousand flowers bloom.
One clear, absolute example that the "reform" laws like McCain-Feingold are a sham is that Joe Lieberman's campaign spent almost $400,000 in petty cash (undocumented expenses) in 2 weeks before the 2006 primary (that he lost) and neither McCain nor Feingold said "boo" about it. They just let it go through the normal FEC complaint process that took years and eventually issued a fine. If you can pay out petty cash like that, you can hire the Mafia to break legs. But it was Jewish Lobby Sweetie Lieberman so the whole crew of reformers kept their mouths shut.
Re Forrestal - Forrestal tried to courtmartial McCain's grandfather, who got a lot of servicemen killed through incompetence in typhoons. McCain was saved by political connections in Washington. Interestingly, McCain's own father was in charge of the investigation of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, which he contained to investigate whether the Liberty crew did anything to cause the deaths! So, we wonder why the current John McCain has been shoved down our throats all these years.
There were 3 Greenwald responses to me in the first 3 pages of the Letters thread.
The right kind of bigotry - letters threadl
Several months ago, I got a tremendously aggressive attack from Glenn Greenwald in his comments section for asking about Jewish intolerance of intermarriage. It was actually like Glenn had never, ever contemplated that Jews might be intolerant of intermarriage! It was odd because (a) Glenn is not usually such a defender of Jewishness and (b) I sure wasn't the first person in the world to notice that Jews are pushed/indoctrinated/whatever to marry Jews!
The whole point of noticing is that it means more than being nosy about who people marry. If this non-intermarriage policy tends to set Jews apart so that they are easily recognized as Jews for advantages over non-Jews, is that a good thing?
Do you know about Edna Cintron (who is in the NIST report)? She stood in the place where the plane hit the building for a long time, waving. She could have been saved if the building hadn't been blown up. The firemen weren't far off. How could she stand there if there was such an intense hydrocarbon fire?
Edna Cintron in NIST photos
What material burned that hot to weaken steel, totally weaken 90,000 tons of structural steel, in about an hour or so?
Remember, NIST itself says the jet fuel was gone in "at most a few minutes."
Ha! Isn't that interesting how syvanen put the 2 of us off on a tangent! Of course, I never said the buildings were cast iron but that the principle is the same (floors suspended off central structure and frame), as I noted was explained rather nicely and succinctly in that movie Liebestraum from the early 90s.
There are pilots with many hours in 757s and 767s who say they could not have done the Pentagon maneuver. Me, I have no idea. It is hard for me to believe that the Pentagon didn't have many, many security cameras of super duper quality that could have shown what happened. They released that one video and it was not possible to see what it was. They confiscated security video from a gas station and have not released it.
Thats good, sure, but NOTHING beats Bush continuing to read "My pet goat" and chat with the second graders after he's told.
Yeah, I got that avoidance but if I put "steel is a purefied form of iron" into google, I come up with 211,000 results and looking through a few, they concur that steel is iron with its impurities reduced to a minimum and its carbon content carefully controlled. Syvanen is off on a silly tangent.
You are really being silly. The principles that Mooser mentioned in that post way back when - floors suspended from central columns/structure out to the frame was an innovation of cast iron architecture that allowed building tall buildings. That is how the WTC skyscrapers were built: the floors were suspended from central core columns to the steel frame.
What is your point? Are you saying the WTC buildings were not built with frame and central structure and the floors suspended?
The government admits that the jet fuel lasted "at most a few minutes." Exactly what material are you thinking was present in the buildings that could have burned hot enough to weaken the 90,000 tons of interconnected steel in each of the 100+ story towers? Honest question.
Steel conducts heat; that heat would have been conducted throughout the entire structure for the building to weaken and totally collapse all at once like that. In about an hour or so, right?
I don't know what syvanen is talking about re steel. Steel is made by purefying iron and alloying it to other metals, carbon being the most common. Wikipedia says the carbon content is "between 0.2% and 2.1% by weight." Its purefied iron.
Try looking it up:
Steel is made from purifying iron and alloying it with other metals.
Remember the stories about mysterious stock trades in American Airlines, United Airlines and Morgan Stanley - "put" options, betting on the stocks to go down? Very unusual high volume. The 9/11 Commission dealt with those trades in circular reasoning fashion: The trades were made by people with no known connection to Al Qaeda, hence were irrelevant! Recently, in response to a FOIA request, the SEC has stated that it destroyed all records of those trades.
Rather like the CIA destroying all the recordings of the interrogations yielding confessions that the 9/11 Commission used as the basis of its report.
Why would it be hard to lug hundreds of tons of explosives into the World Trade Center? Tons of stuff got lugged into those buildings every day of the week! What kind of deliveries went into the big firms and government agencies that had several floors? Tons. Every day. Tons of computer paper alone. Think about it.
That third building that came down, Building 7, the one that wasn't hit by an airplane and which the government has been FORCED to admit experienced 2.25 seconds of freefall, would have been the tallest building in 33 states and I wonder if thats not a factor in the gullibility, that most Americans don't come into much contact with massive, enormous, awesome buildings like those, especially the 2 WTC 100+story towers. New Yorkers have always been more skeptical. The planes that hit the 2 towers were NOT "jumbo jets." They were 767s, midsize planes, seats only 7 across. (Jumbo jets like 747s have seats 10 across and twice total seating capacity).
Exactly. Thats the principle of cast iron structural innovation that allowed skyscrapers to be built to any height. (Steel being a purefied form of iron). Theres an old movie, Liebestraum, (no, its not German, takes place in Illinois, stars Bill Pullman) that has a description of the suspension of floors from the central structure and why it allowed architects to keep going up.
re your professional training in thermodynamics, it reminds me of the Dorothy Parker poem that concludes, "And I am Marie of Rumania."
Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song,
A medley of extemporanea;
And love is a thing that can never go wrong;
And I am Marie of Romania.
Raimondo and others seem to think that Israel or the US government was aware of this Al Qaeda plot and did nothing to stop it ---- ??? Why posit something so complicated when we have never seen any evidence that the "19 Arab hijackers" did it and the evidence we know of is (1) confessions obtained with torture and (2) a bin Laden confession the US army claims to have "found" in a house?
On the other hand, we have absolute proof that false identities were involved because of the story of the Bukharis --- CNN reports on 9/11 said Adnan and Ameer Bukhari were among the hijackers but Ameer had died a year earlier and Adnan was found alive in his apartment in Florida and completely cleared of any involvement. Clear, absolute proof that someone was collecting and using Saudi identities.
Is there anything in that link as wacky as the Secretary of Defense believing that bin Laden had caves with entrances big enough for tanks? Caves with ventilation systems, computer systems, hydroelectric power? And this was 2 months after the attacks that Rumsfeld was telling Tim Russert bin Laden had those caves. (See MTP link down thread)
The jet fuel angle is just amazing. People believe it has magical properties. It migrates to elevator shafts and becomes an inferno.
The government itself says that the jet fuel burned of in "at most a few minutes." A few minutes at most of localized fire weakened 90,000 tons of steel. A hundred years from now, they are not going to understand how we were so gullible.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Myers (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs) --- very odd doings on 9/11. Myers actually told the 9/11 Commission that the reason the US military (at $500/billion + per year) sat on its hands for 109 minutes while the US was under attack was that they worried about the Posse Comitatus Act. During the attacks, the commander of NORAD, General Ralph Eberhart, actually got in his car and drove and was incommunicado for an hour because his phone wasn't working.
It must have been about 10:30 in the morning that the media started telling us that the government thought the attacks were the work of Osama bin Laden, not a household name in 2001. In December, Rumsfeld was on Meet the Press and Russert showed the famous cartoon drawing of bin Laden's cave, with "secret exits on the side and on the bottom, cut deep to avoid thermal detection so when our planes fly to try to determine if any human beings are in there, it's built so deeply down and embedded in the mountain and the rock it's hard to detect. And over here, valleys guarded, as you can see, by some Taliban soldiers. A ventilation system to allow people to breathe and to carry on. An arms and ammunition depot. And you can see here the exits leading into it and the entrances large enough to drive trucks and cars and even tanks. And it's own hydroelectric power to help keep lights on, even computer systems and telephone systems. It's a very sophisticated operation. " Rumsfeld not only agrees with Russert that the cave has all that but says theres more than one such cave.
We all found out that there were no such caves. Ergo, the capacity that the US government attributed to bin Laden when he was fingered for 9/11 was completely untrue. But it changed nothing. Down the memory hole with that spectacular drawing of bin Laden's cave and the Secretary of Defense, 2 months after September 11, saying that cave and others like it existed.
Rumsfeld on MTP
Unlikely it'll be on Meet the Press. David Gregory, I understand, is an extremely religious Jew. I stopped watching when he had a panel of Michael Chertoff, Jane Harman and Joe Lieberman, with himself, 100% Jewish. He's talking about US security with these 3 Iraq War supporters who couldn't give a damn about US security because they've got their refuge in Israel and plenty of money to get there.
Wow. But whats the odds it'll make the MSM news? CNN is promoting some show about or with Mel Gibson before his infamous phone call; that phone call to his girlfriend is very important news, I guess.
Yes, obviously. Ahmadinejad goes around the world meeting leaders and getting his photograph taken with them, smiling. But an American president could not shake his hand because he is a "Holocaust denier." The American people are told, have been told for years, that because Ahmadinejad is a "Holocaust denier," he is crazy and if he had a nuclear bomb, he might use it, because he is crazy because he is a "Holocaust denier." So, we might want to bomb Iran. And "Holocaust denier" is defined by non-acceptance of the 6 million number.
Regarding Mr. Hilberg, I don't think its reasonable to rely on one historian, especially knowing that all historical debate on the subject is shut down by law in the countries where it occurred. I came across the other day an article about someone tried in Europe under those laws and he could not put on a defense because what he would say in his defense - that he believed his own theories because of such and such evidence - would get him charged and tried again and his lawyer could not put on a defense because his lawyer would be charged under those laws.
I looked up Wikipedia and even Mr. Hilberg was denied access to the Yad Vashem archives by Israeli authorities.
How can a reasonable person trust that number knowing that in the countries where it happened, anyone who would dispute the official version risks a prison sentence? Reasonably, I have to infer that the reason those laws were put in place was that there were people disputing the official version. Logically, I have to infer that the laws were put in place in order to absolutely shut down dissent that was being voiced at the time. Those countries needed capital to rebuild, the dissenters were a monkey wrench in their plans and so they shut down dissenters with those laws. That must have been how it went.
And then on top of that theres all this deceit all the time in the service of Israel, vicious deceit that has gotten many people killed, maybe millions with the Iraq war that the deceit pushed us into. And wants to kill more. I'm trying to say that the lack of integrity is amazing. I START from the premise that everything could be a lie because theres so much shameless lying.
Shameless. We had a long discussion on one of these articles about the number of Holocaust victims the other day. This deceit, constant deceit, brazen, shameless lies - this is why I don't put much stock in anything, anything that supports Israel or the concept of a "Jewish state, " and for sure, that 6 million Holocaust number is the big deal of it all. I think its been shoved down our throats my entire life. If you don't believe that, its supposed to be so terrible except that the people pushing that it and insisting its so important it has to be on our minds every day are a bunch of liars! Whatever they're saying, theres a darned good chance they're lying. If it serves whatever they see as their interest, they lie about it. And they'll kill for it, either doing the dirty job themselves or by proxy getting our useful idiot politicians to attack Muslim countries.
What would the results be if Americans were polled about the foreign aid Israel gets? How about detailed polls that inform people that Israel gets more foreign aid than any other country; that Israelis have social services better than Americans (don't they have socialized medicine/national healthcare?); that they are building these settlements against the wishes of the US government; that the official 9/11 theory (theory because we've yet to see any evidence) is that the attacks were in part because of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians?
They don't do those kind of polls yet but its coming. We've come a long way since 1991 when the only one I remember speaking out about Israel and Israel firsters was Pat Buchanan --- he called Congress "Israeli occupied territory." He got a lot of flak. I remember Ted Koppel doing a Nightline linking Buchanan's father to a right wing radio personality from the Depression area, Father Coughlin.
There you go with the "refuge" thing. Are you in the US? That is so offensive that Jews need a "refuge" from the rest of us, like we might turn into monsters and do horrible, violent things to Jews (like the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians for 60+ years). Thats not going to happen in the US, where Jews are probably the most successful ethnic group.
What I do worry about happening because of Jewish "nationalism" - actually, because its such a big deal in the media, and antipathetic neocon/neolib blowhards get so much attention and because our elected officials bow and scrape to wealthy Israel fanatics like Saban for money - what I do worry about is the resentment, distrust and alienation towards Jews that non-Jews will feel. It'll be an unpleasant, sad, confused thing, not a violent thing. In my opinion, it will be unfair because, just my opinion, I think the majority of US Jews are not Israel fanatics. Among Jews I have known personally, and I have lived in New York and New Jersey all my life so have known plenty, maybe 90% would take a trip to Hawaii over a trip to Israel.
The New York Times reported the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty INSIDE the paper. It didn't make the first page. Thats pretty huge. How BRAZEN not to report on the front page an attack that killed over 30 US servicemen. I don't hold my breath for the mainstream media changing but the internet is a powerful thing.
I wish I could believe that non-violent protest would be effective but then I think of Rachel Corrie and Emily Henochiwicz (sp??) and they weren't being violent. The sadistic behavior of the IDF gives me no confidence that they would give a damn about Israelis protesting the occupation. And then there's the US Congress passing a resolution about how wonderful, wonderful, wonderful Israel is and everything it does. And shoveling money at them. Why would they change? They look to be getting worse and worse. As of now, I'm hoping that Iran gets a nuclear weapon to at least have a little deterrence in the Middle East. That seems to be something that works.
". . . Obama administration seems to believe that Jews don’t have the right to live in places populated by Jews for more than 3,500 years."
They want to live under Israeli law in a place that is not part of Israel. The Israelis wanted that Dubai assassin caught in Poland to be returned to Israel for "trial, " too. (Yeah, they'd give him a trial, along with a slew of medals like they gave the perpetrators of the Lavon Affair and the attack on the USS Liberty. Like they have a shrine to Baruch Goldstein and like they want Jonathan Pollard so they can make him Man of the Year.)
Putting politicians on the spot like Andrew did. The presidential cycle will start in January and Israel is pushing for war on Iran. When they go to New Hampshire and Iowa, they have to face more real voters, Obama will have to face them a bit, too, as he can't ignore the primaries. Should be interesting.
One thing stands out as missing from this account, a definition of "the domestic political implications." Jews are like 2% of the population so they can't be talking about the Jewish vote. Christian Zionists/Christian fundamentalists were not a political factor in 1956. Not spelling it out is deceit by omission. Its all about money, like the story that Truman recognized Israel over the objections of Marshall and others who knew better right after getting a big plop of money from Zionists. We give Israel so much money that no doubt some of it is cycled back to the US for campaign contributions. The campaign contribution component is probably built into the appropriation. Nifty.
Our torturers got Omar Khadr to confess by telling him they'd send him to Jordan where he would be raped. That little King Abdullah and his wife and his stepmother go on TV pretty often and no one has asked about Jordan using rape to interrogate prisoners.
I looked through that link and find many of the answers to be along the lines of this one:
2nd question: How accurate is the total if there were no detailed records kept?
The total is quite accurate. Detailed records do exist, but the demographics can be difficult to understand.
Frankly, thats a "saying makes it so" argument. The simple fact that historians in the countries where it happened would be prohibited under penalty of prosecution from disputing Mr. Hilberg et al should put a HUGE question mark on the number, for any reasonable person. Just that issue of the Auschwitz plaque dropping from 4 million to 1.5 million, despite having stood with the 4 million number for decades, like 40 years --- thats a muddle in the responses on your link. To say, "the 4 million numbers was never really believed" is not much of an answer.
You want to treasure that 6 million number as some Jewish treasure but here we are 9 years into a war on the Muslim world that any way you look at it has to do with Israel. If you accept the official version of 9/11, thats supposed to be one of bin Laden's 3 reasons to attack the West, Israel's abuse of the Palestinians. So, it is not just your Jewish treasure; it is affecting all of us.
Geez, how many times has the news media pounded us that we are supposed to hate Ahmadinejad because he's a Holocaust denier? Thats supposed to explain the need to attack Iran, Ahmadinejad is a Holocaust denier so he might want to drop a nuclear bomb on us if he got one! We're supposed to be OK with a war on Iran that would cause huge numbers of deaths and economic disaster because we're supposed to hate this one man because he doesn't toe the official line on something that from the 1940s. If thats not the Holocaust running the world, what is?
Actually, that 6 million number is the whole ball of wax because people who don't accept it - accept it on faith alone, apparently, because there is no objective proof - have been reviled as "Holocaust deniers." And thats been done for the agenda of "Israel has a right to exist." I distrust anyone who uses that "right to exist" phrase. Thats manipulation; its meant to imply Jews will be killed, the population of Israel will be killed. If Israel goes the way of the Soviet Union, so be it.
You don't know the methodology but you believe it, right? If you knew the methodology, you could describe it in a few sentences rather than direct me to read a book!
There is a lot of that - using the tragedies of other people. Its very cynical. Obama's use of an uncle who was at the liberation of a concentration camp was the same kind of thing. It was obvious Obama wasn't close to that man.
Actually, the Armenian lobby is a big deal. Not as big as the many branches of the Israel lobby but powerful.
Turkey gets a lot of flak for not "acknowledging the Armenian genocide" but, in fact, Turkey has asked for a commission of historians to look at all the available material and Turkey will accept the result. That proposal goes no where because, I guess, you wouldn't want to start being meticulous about these kinds of things. Much better to have the US Congress declare genocide. They got all they know about it from an Armenian lobbyist handing them a bundle of checks, so that makes them experts. The Armenian lobby no doubt plans to demand reparations and the Congresspeople would get a cut of that, too.
Its become too obvious.
What is the methodology? I presume they are using some kind of census figures but how would they track down where people went? Just saying the figure is 5 - 7 million tells me its not from records; thats too big a discrepancy. Someone says 5 - 7 million, it might as well be 3 - 5 million or 7 - 9 million or, really, any number. Give or take a few million.
Then, wouldn't Yad Vashem have those records and be able to say 6 million based on those records rather than on testimonials? How are the testimonials researched or are they?
Mel Gibson was grilled by - I think - Diane Sawyer in the wake of his father's comments about the 6 million number and his own rant. She nailed him to the mat to say that he "believed" the 6 million number. That was interesting to me, that (1) its all about belief, or she would have a list of 6 million individuals or SOME proof; and (2) not believing the 6 million number makes someone a "Holocaust denier." If you don't have 6 million individuals, what are you basing it on? Precisely what? There must be some methodology to get that number.
After that Mel Gibson bit, I noticed things. Chris Matthews telling Richard Ben Veniste that Yad Vashem is a list of 6 million, so, per Matthews, its an absolute fact and Ben Veniste nods, but with a slightly confused look. Yad Vashem lists 3 million, is based on testimonials and some internet sources say that there appear to be many repeats of names. And I would bet money that Ben Veniste knew all that as he's agreeing with Matthews that theres a solid list of 6 million.
Whats the truth? Its not like it doesn't matter with the Holocaust running the whole world and especially US foreign policy. George Stephanopoulos tells Ahmadinejad that the Holocaust is "the most studied event in world history" and Stephanopoulos knows that in the countries where it happened, historians would have to fear prison if they disputed the official version.
Being a reasonable person, I have to infer that the 6 million number is not trustworthy.
Honestly, I have no idea.
Russia lost between 10 and 20 million people in WWII - highlighting the problem with this numbers thing: they don't have a number at the correct MILLION. The number of Vietnamese who died in our war with that country is between 2 and 7 million. These numbers amount to saying, "Who knows?" But you have to say that the number of Jews who died in Nazi concentration camps is 6 million . . . because you BELIEVE it. Like Ahmadinejad said, its become a religion.
Regarding war on Iran, I was think about that Leverett article linked yesterday: How could Obama do it? He can't claim its an emergency and just bomb Iran like Reagan bombed Libya after all the yapping about Iran for the last 9 years, "axis of evil" and so forth. He'd have to go to Congress for authorization. It would be a much closer vote than Iraq, if he could get it at all. I saw an article that quoted 2 Republican congressmen saying that almost everyone in Congress now felt the war on Iraq was a mistake. Its going to get more scrutiny. The TV parade of Israel agents like Beinart, Pollack, etc. --- could they really do it a second time? Will Oprah have Pollack on again?
If Israel makes the airstrikes themselves, Israel will be totally responsible and blamed for everything that happens and Israel's apologists won't be able to weasel.
Yes, what are the conspiracy theories? The tales from our media and government run with conspiracy theories all the time. Was it, like, 10:30 AM on 9/11/2001 that they were telling us a guy in a cave in Afghanistan was behind it all?
This is a good one from the commenters:
"It doesn't take much imagination to know how Israel would have dealt with Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Ghandi and the Reverend Martin Luther King, does it?"
It IS a worry that the Israel enterprise and its domination of our government and our media will cause anti-semitism. It is a worry that all Jews are going to be tarred as a fifth column. The flotilla tragedy brought the attention of more Americans to the simple fact that our government will let Israel get away with anything and will even praise Israel for heinous acts. Then right after, they saw Barack Obama snuggling up to Netanyahu . . . because he had to; he had to do it for the campaign money from rich Jews.
Yeah, it will cause resentment and distrust of Jews.
If the American Jewish community stands with the Israeli government, they are complicit and to blame. They shouldn't be allowed to weasel. Thats what they count on to avoid blame: weaseling.
Beinart is in effect admitting that news organizations with integrity would not have Jewish commentators or reporters covering the Middle East above a certain low percentage in order to proactively cull this deference to personal feelings of friends and relatives.
Mondoweiss posts some pieces on the lack of Palestinian voice in the news media but how about the lack of non-Jewish American voice? I find this Jewish nationalism on the part of other Americans like Beinart personally offensive. I don't see country other than the US as "my" country. I don't have any nationalistic pride about any of the half dozen countries I used to hear my ancestors came from; they're just foreign countries. The idea that any of those countries might be a refuge for me and mine is weird. Do American Jews need a possible refuge from the rest of us? And if something terrible happens and we're invaded, can only Jews go to that Israel refuge, even though the rest of us have had to pay for it for all these years?
As the saying goes, the rest of us are just chopped liver.
I'm not one to believe in Obama playing "11th dimensional chess;" certainly it is not intentional on Obama's part HOWEVER. I have been thinking that I would support Sarah Palin for President because it would be good for the US president to be someone of so little credibility that the rest of the world won't go along with her on anything and the US media is embarrassed by her. When she smiles next to Netanyahu or whatever thug is head of Israel, it will grate on even more Americans and folks around the world than any other President because of how antipathetic she is.
HOWEVER, maybe it won't take a new president and another 3 years. Maybe Obama is getting to Palin-disgust status himself. I don't see too many people rhapsodizing about how intelligent he is any more.
I remember when Vanessa Redgrave was booed at the Academy Awards. I wonder what would happen today if someone gave a proPalestinian speech at the Academy Awards.
Watching Obama over the last year and a half, I've come to think his problems are that he is inarticulate, a slow thinker and lazy. Either that or he is just lazy and is a slow thinker and inarticulate because he doesn't try very hard.
The Henry Louis Gates/beer summit affair was the moment that defined Obama, IMO. I cannot imagine anyone I know in my own life, ordinary people, making such a politically foolish comment as his at the press conference, that the police acted "stupidly." And whatever his point was, whatever was the reason for his belief that the police acted stupidly, he just didn't bother to make that point - in his own words, as I recall, "Its fair to say . . . " - he doesn't have to explain, in other words. Then, boy did he ever have to walk that back and abase himself for that cop. He was just lucky the cop didn't have a personal political agenda or it would still be going on.
Re Rand Paul --- his real name is "Randall" and it was his wife who shortened it to "Rand" as a nickname.
I have seen so many TV panel discussions where the MAJORITY of participants were Jewish. Meet The Press had one with 100% Jewish participants not long ago, Jane Harman, Joe Lieberman, Michael Chertoff, and the host himself, David Gregory.
Several years ago, I saw a C-SPAN Washington Journal with Brian Lamb as the host and Frank Rich of the NY Times on the phone as the guest. A caller asks about the disproportion of Jews in the media and both Lamb and Rich question him about why it mattered. (Brian Lamb, per Frank Rich, is also Jewish, as is Rich.) The caller said he would notice if there was that kind of disproportion of Italians. But, of course, it matters. This is one of the reasons why the TV media will never deal with the Nakba: the Jewish guests would feel embarrassed. It would come off as rude. They sit and blab about terrorism-terrorism-terrorism but anyone who mentioned the Jewish state's birth in terrorism would be the skunk at the garden party.
Or: Petraeus being afraid of being accused of anti-semitism? Seems like a big deal that a US general, top general, has to worry about being accused of anti-semitism over what he says about Israel.
In other words, according to Gen. Myers, the Posse Comitatus Act meant that New York City Police Department should have its own missiles to shoot down airplanes-used-as-weapons out of the sky (or to shoot down missiles if they're incoming to NYC). Because according to Gen. Myers, the US military can't do anything about it, is prohibited by law from doing anything about it. And he had almost 3 years to prepare that answer.
I have been reading Mondoweiss for a few months and just created an account to be able to say something about this. It ought to be the elephant in the room. On September 11, our half-trillion $/year (now 3/4 trillion$/yr) military sat on its hands. One Senator, Mark Dayton, noticed and made a speech about how we were literally defenseless for 109 minutes (and he paid for that, couldn't run for reelection as was derided as a fruitcake). Gen. Myers, in fact, told the 9/11 commission that the military did nothing because they were afraid of the Posse Comitatus Act! Here are some quotes (bottom of page):
Commissioner Gorelick and Myers Spar over NORAD June 17 2004
That quote was actually from Wilkerson, not Goldberg, but its the same horseshit. Wilkerson's defense of his boss, the great man Colin Powell, are lame, too. Powell lied in his speech to the UN and he knew he was lying.
When pigs fly, as the saying goes. Meanwhile, establishing "facts on the ground" and agitating for wars on more Muslims.
I saw a movie with Orlando Bloom about the Christians losing Jerusalem to Saladin. Thats probably what will happen eventually. The Europeans spent hundreds of years trying to get that piece of land for their own. Israel is just the latest iteration and will go the way of all the others.
Obama made his Cairo speech in June 2009 and noted a few wrongs on the US part, like conspiring with Britain to overthrow the new democratic government in Iran in 1953. Of course, he didn't go the extra step to say the Iranians were right to overthrow the despot, megalomaniac Shah we imposed on them for 25 years and, most importantly, Obama didn't say WHY we had wanted that Shah ruling over them. He wound up the speech looking to the future, "But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward."
Then, within a day or two, he was at a Holocaust memorial service in Buchenwald. What did that communicate to the people in the Middle East who were impressed or hopeful after the Cairo speech? Those who were more attuned to US politics probably thought the Buchenwald trip was deliberately set up to mitigate anything he said in the Cairo speech about Israel needing to do anything. Others probably got the message that there is one group of people, one sect, one tribe, whose grievances from the past must never be out of mind for one minute and are always, always of paramount concern to US policy. Those grievances will always trump the millions or billion+ people of the Muslim world who had nothing to do with concentration camps in WWII.
O/T comment on James Forrestal - as secretary of the Navy in WWII, he tried to courtmartial McCain's grandfather over Typhoon Viper and Typhoon Cobra disasters. McCain was saved by his political connections in Washington.
I learned this term "hasbara" from reading Mondoweiss and am not sure of the exact definition. It seems to me that Beinart and the J Street group are maybe a form of hasbara: Another proIsrael commenter taking up a lot of space and another proIsrael lobby getting attention, with the new tack of quibbling a bit about Israeli policies but the real intention is to take up the space, sort of a shell game.
Comments are closed.