Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 1054 (since 2011-06-09 18:09:41)

Sometimes my imagination gets the best of me. I speculate and generalize too much. I'm only human. My heart is in the right place though. Something is wrong and I want to help make it right. Truth and Knowledge are empowering. J.R.R. Tolkien said it best: "And some things that should not have been forgotten were lost. History became legend. Legend became myth." Want to know the truth? Meditate. If you don't meditate, start meditating and keep at it. Eventually you will understand. Don't worry about the whole 'exploding brain syndrome' and paralysis thing. Don't be afraid, just relax and hear out your primitive side... Your 'guardian angel'... Become one and be 'enlightened.' and then you will understand the truth.

Showing comments 800 - 701

  • Jewish power + Jewish hubris = 'moral catastrophe of epic proportions'
    • link to

      Study: many Jewish college students perceive anti-Semitism on campus

      Other findings suggest that roughly 40 percent of Jewish students have heard what they regard as “anti-Israel” sentiment from a professor in class, and that the majority of non-Jewish students have “no opinion” on anti-Israel statements

      Anti-Israel as antisemitism? In 2012? Is this trick ever going to be ineffective? Is it still effective for most people? I really think people need to be taught the difference between ethnicity, nationalism, and religion. I recently read that a high percentage of "Christians" and even "Catholics" (??) are irreligious and atheist. That's NOT POSSIBLE!! Okay, maybe you celebrate Easter and Christmas but there is hardly anything religious about them. It's not a nation or an ethnicity either, sorry red states. 80% of Muslims are not Arabs. Iranians (aka Persians) are not Arabs either. Trust me, most people don't know this. Finally, Jewishness can be religious, ethnic, or a political ideology (Zionism). The latter is what is mostly associated with Israel. You can be ethnically Jewish or religiously Jewish and not be a Zionist or an Israeli even if Israel wants to make the world think that Jews are a nation and that nation is Israel.

      Sorry, nice try. It didn't work. It only serves to keep Israel immune to criticism and spin it into 'antisemitism' and that's all by design. Nobody is immune from criticism. No matter how many rapturous fundie cheerleaders support it because it's named like something in their bible and they erroneously believe it is the same thing.

    • The reason why people don't realize this is because of the 'god program' in our brain. The ability to submit to the will of another. There is a theory that the brain (they call it bicameralism.. but for your brain) used to let one side submit to the will of the other which would tell it what to do in the form of auditory and even visual hallucinations of a 'god'. That may be too much for many people to handle, but people definitely have similar hallucinations in dark isolation tanks or during meditation. This may be a link to this old primitive portion of our self. Other hints are schizophrenia and autism. In schizophrenia, people are heard guiding voices and see hallucinations and often submit to their will.

      So we're individuals now with free will (if that theory is accurate) but the 'god program' is still susceptible to third-party hijacking. This is why perception is difficult, if not impossible in certain people. I have to wonder if certain people still can 'pull up' that bicameral mode and control it.. or if such a thing exists in all of us if there is a biological way to hack into it 'wirelessly' and really mess with our brains on a mass-scale. Science fiction? Dolphins can project their thoughts on each other. We're actually a lot more like dolphins than people think. Dolphins in most cases seem to be fond of each other and other life without condition, unless they're starving (or one of those bottle nose military ones that kill porpoises for no reason.. first they jacked our brains and created Breivik-like killers and now they're doing it with dolphins?)

    • Fringe is a powerful word hophmi. The old smear terms are not as effective as they were ten years ago. The 'fringe' media now includes social networks with a mass audience in addition to news sites and blogs of varying levels of credibility. Ron Paul's ability to be in the position he is in, even if he doesn't make it, has got to be making the MSM's puppeteers pretty nervous. The MSM is losing it's grip, it has much less effect on the under 40 crowd who are going to be the future leaders. Even if this I/P thing were to get drawn out for 30 more years, a lot of the cheerleaders would either have retired, died of old age, or would be too senile to be credible. The truth will get out and I only hope Americans don't blame Judaism but if history is any indicator, that's not an unlikely scenario. Just ask an Israeli why it's okay to contain Gaza into an open air prison even if 40% of the population is a kid. Or why demonize all Palestinians or all Arabs as terrorists? Not saying you do, but I'm sure you know people who do. I certainly do. Or the nutjobs calling for Iran to be wiped off the map just because they don't like their leaders? What kind of behavior is this? Oh yeah human behavior. They don't learn their lessons. I'd say we don't learn our lessons, but I'm to embarrassed to associate myself with the human race during times like these.

    • Secrecy breeds suspicion. Some people are terrible 'mind readers' completely lacking in intuition. They require solid facts. Others have a pretty good intuition which gets better the more you 'exercise' it with experience knowledge. If it was a trial for the death it would be one thing, but when it's not you don't need solid facts. Circumstantial evidence is like a jigsaw puzzle peace. The more peaces you have, the better you can see the truth. If you have enough of it, you don't need 100% if your intuition is functioning, although it's always nice .

      If a a group of powerful men, like say an elite few banking dynasties, were to intermarry among each other for a couple hundred years and keep the secret of their success hidden in only select few family members who have been conditioned and 'programmed,' even threatened, and it just so happened many had a common religious/ethnic/political affiliation... Well if any word of this got out.. say to their lesser associates (who are also not trustworthy, but don't know anything damaging) banking and corporate executives along with their political useful idiots that will do anything if you have them enough money... eventually somebody would start to piece it together and become highly suspicious of a specific religious/ethnic/political affiliation (or secret society, banking empire, banking family, etc) and might demonize entire groups of people unfairly when 99.999%+ of those groups have absolutely nothing to do with it.

      It's human nature, it sucks, but you can't really blame them for that conclusion. And that was most likely the entire purpose of identifying with a certain religious/ethnic/political affiliation by those secret dynasties. There is also a trickling down effect to the middle and lower classes who are 'useful idiot' cheerleaders for an agenda they have no idea is suicide. Who's more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him? :)

      This goes beyond specific groups of people and affects entire classes of secular Western society. When and if we hit rock bottom, the middle class will be attacking the middle class. They already do. Police vs protester. Internet hacker vs. private business (as opposed to monolithic corporation). Poor against the wealthy and well off (who have nothing to do with the elite ruling class).

      I/P has been a mess since inception. The Internet has allowed the truth to spread like a virus these past 15 or so years. There's been a few distractions ('terrorist' attacks, wars, the entire Bush administration) but there is more than enough solid proof to convince normal people what's really happening. IMO, any cheerleaders for Israel who aren't waking up to or don't care about the reality of it are responsible for the problem just as much as Israeli leadership.

  • Several thousand US troops headed to Israel for 'unprecedented' joint missile defense exercise
  • Uniformed corporal's criticism of Iran attack breaks off on CNN mid-sentence
    • Pretty convenient glitch. I'm sure some glitches are real, but IMO it's foolish to trust the MSM. You can trust a liar only to tell lies, and we all know (Hasbarists aside) they lie about Israel. Why even waste any time other than for entertainment purposes? To laugh and point out the lies. Wolf Blitzer, former AIPAC employee. Some folk try to deify him and say he's come along way. That's a little suspicious if you ask me.

  • Paul's challenge to progressives
    • Alternatives are not going to materialize as long as big oil is big. That's the problem. We the people need to declare war on big oil. I personally think the story about the Chevy Volt catching fire is phony and intended to ruin the vehicle's image and reduce sales. Big oil can do this. They really did kill the 90s version of the electric car through a chain of patent acquisitions over what eventually became Texaco's Cobasys NiMH batteries (from Ovonic - GM - Chevron - Texaco 's Cobasys). I don't know if the Cobasys NiMH is better than others, but it is expensive to license for hybrids and they did sue Toyota in the past (dunno if it was over Prius or RAV-4). The patent expires in three years. That's just one example.

      A few years back I had an environmental science course where both the professor and the book re-enforcing that fossil fuel was in a class of it's own with no alternatives. It put it on a pedestal and only listed the cons of alternatives. I dropped the class because the professor was a jerk and later found out that a major oil subsidiary published the book.

      Urban legend says if we changed all our lights to CFL ones that enough energy would be saved to shut down every power plant. CFLs have issues of their own (poison, the 'color' of the light, size, etc.) but if that urban legend is true, the good would probably outweigh the bad.

      Why does everybody hate and attack the concept of Perpetual Motion generators? Like something run using permanent magnets (or semi-permanent magnets powered by sunlight?). I've never read an honest response to this. All I've heard is "permanent magnets require energy" (???), "permanent magnets are expensive," (free energy is worth it) "permanent magnets used in a generator would be dangerous to assemble," "permanent magnet generators would generate heat from friction and fail quickly," (heat is wasted energy, so don't waste it, a careful design in theory could repel instead of touch). Well I'm scientifically ignorant they would say, that I don't understand energy and physics and relativity. I do understand that even science doesn't try to explain magnetism other than the elementary-level stuff. Magnetism is left out of energy theories on purpose. Scientists are the scientifically ignorant ones in this case.

      Even if there was a breakthrough in perpetual motion, big oil would buy the tech and probably 'take care' of anybody who knew of it. Lobbies run the show. The Israel lobby isn't the only big lobby in town and they have a mutual friend in the big oil lobby. Things need to get worse before they get better. Oil production needs to decline (pseudo scientists don't think this will ever happen, they don't think it is fossil in origin and that it is naturual and sustainable.. it also is organic and scabs like blood.. the blood of our planet? crazy, but you never know). Big oil needs to be taxed up the wazoo. We'll pay for it at the pump, but alternatives would actually be made.

  • Arendt: Born in conflict, Israel will degenerate into Sparta, and American Jews will need to back away
    • Wanted to add RT (Russia Today) to that . Also state-sponsored. PressTV and RT often seem to report the stories the alternative media reports. Many alternative media sites often use PressTV and RT as a source too. This is dangerous because they are both state-owned. My guess is they scour the alternative media for stuff to report which is why they share stories. These stories are taboo for the Western MSM, but not for Iran/Russia since they're Eastern. Their English-speaking and Western-looking reporters confused me at first until I found out they were state-sponsored and based in the East.

      I just don't trust them at all. They're about as reliable as DEBKAfile (Mossad's made-up 'news' propaganda arm... debkaFAIL)

  • Happy New Year
    • Happy New Year, dimadok. Happy New Year to the fellowship. And also to hophni, DBG, eee, DEBKAfile, and all of your fellow brothers and sisters. All sarcasm aside, let's seriously all try to understand each other this year, see where each side is coming from. Try not to use low-level tricks or personal attacks. Hear one and other out. We're all human after all, brothers and sisters. We just have superficial differences and different perceptions.

  • Ron Paul challenges liberals on love of 'big finance' and 'big-ass wars'
    • Political blogs are already trying to spin this in a positive way. I read one this morning saying Obama 'debunked' claims that it applies to US citizens. Either the author of this piece was a (useful) idiot, a shill, or a sucker, I dunno.

      "My administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens," Obama said in the signing statement. "Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation."

      Obama's administration ends in one year. He can't speak for the next administration if he doesn't get re-elected. They might just interpret it the way many of us fear, the way it was written to be interpreted as. Obama has 'reservations' but still signs it. And the political 'experts' (aka, arrogant/ignorant suckers) say things like 'he had to sign it, otherwise there would be no military funding... a veto wouldn't matter, Congress would just override it and it would damage Obama's election.' That last part is probably true, but still speculation. Obama threatened to veto. A threat to veto is not a veto. What's the point of a President? Congress is the one with ultimate veto power.

      This is what it has come to. The US can verbally condemn Israel all they want and not rule out vetoing a UN SC resolution in favor of condemnation. When it comes down to it, they veto anyways and say "this doesn't mean we approve." Well then why did you veto? Obama threatens to veto this bill and then signs it with reluctance. Weak! Totally weak! Powerless, he has no power. The POTUS is a cowardly puppet. All talk never backed up by actions. Even if he means well, his actions don't do anything to back it up. People need to stop defending the guy. "He's shackled.. he would do it if he could" is not only more speculation, it's a reason not to trust him since he won't ever be able to do anything.

    • "As Glen Greenwald points out — putting these questions before the American people should certainly have higher priority than discussing some of RP’s more irritating points"

      These questions should most certainly have priority. Since many Americans have already been conditioned to oppose ending the war on drugs, opposed to ending support for Israel, opposed to nonintervention, etc. why aren't (most) of Paul's critics discussing and spinning each of these particular items? Certainly you can spin 'end the war on drugs' in a way that slams the guy. IMO, they just don't want people asking these questions because they will start to think about them critically.

      I'm personally not a fan of labels. Right/Left/Center/Left-of-Center/Republican/Democrat/Liberal/Progressive, etc. I personally don't identify with anything unless it sounds right to me (although I acknowledge their existence, what they mean, and the people who like to be labeled as such). Even if my view and opinion aligns mostly under one of these, I refuse to be labeled. I'm an individual, I'd like to believe I have free will. There might be a certain group I find to be comfortable with, having others share the same views as my own. IMO it could be a trap. You fall under the will of the party banner. What you think is of your own will might just be an unconscious group-think opinion that you may not have agreed with at an individual level.

      In my experience, most people look at Ron Paul's party - Republican - and stop right there. My cousin told me "I can't vote for a Republican, I almost always vote Democratically." That's a mistake because obviously his policy is not in the mainstream as far as the GOP is concerned and also because he is Libertarian. Perceptions must be stored in the same part of the brain as religious beliefs. They're next to impossible to change.

  • 'People who promoted the Iraq war ought to be so discredited that no one listens to them any more'
    • Richard, if I only disagreed with your definition of Zionism and your approach/support of Israel and the situation with the Palestinians, that would be one thing. And if we agreed in other areas besides I/P, that would be great. I just find not only myself, but the other members disagreeing with almost everything you say. It just doesn't make any sense that we can be the opposite of one and other no matter what the issue is. That only means there really is a difference between us that goes beyond I/P. I'd like to know what that is.

      In 2002-3 there were so many rational voices from every class and every sector saying that a war was a bad idea and wrong. The US famously proclaimed that 'diplomacy had failed' or whatever and ignored the UN and the entire world to go to war with Iraq. All of the cheerleaders should be forever silenced as a result. They were wrong, everybody told them they were wrong. They ignored them and called for war. Many of the above faces got a 'chub' over it including Mrs. Clinton. Almost everybody said they were wrong. This is different, these people don't deserve another chance.

  • Kampeas: Jewish neocons are more than 2 degrees removed from Bush's decision to invade Iraq
    • Why not still take a thorough look at those guys? They're still alive. And a lot of their buddies are using the same rhetoric for Iran that was previously used on Iraq. Emphasis on rhetoric because that's what it is. These people are liars under the impression that they are intelligent. They are ignorant morons with low IQs and a primitive hive mind which thinks it knows what justice and logic means. Wolfowitz especially. The sooner others realize how smart we are, the better chance we have at over throwing these ignorant biological robots.

    • anonymouscomments, I agree with you. It's also not a popular topic around here for obvious reasons. I don't mean to sound cold, but I seriously think I/P is far more important. Dwelling on 9/11 is dwelling on the past. Expose the criminals responsible for this global Israel-first status quo and you expose any sort of 3rd party involvement in 9/11. No need to speculate a conspiracy, it's not relevant. Bringing it up just gives others a reason to smear us. If such a thing is true (as I believe it is) it isn't just Zionist intelligence agencies. It was more than that.

  • Israel's mythological borders: an interview with Rachel Havrelock
    • I don't think it matters if an ultra orthodox Jew or Christian fundie gets upset about it. If they get violent, you throw them in prison. Simple.

    • I know some religious Zionists still desire all that land based on their interpretation of scripture. Do they know there aren't enough Jewish people to populate it? It's a huge chunk of land but it's mostly desert.

      The official Zionist 'Greater Israel' desired by the likes of DBG (the real historical person, not the MW user) included a small amount of territory East of the Jordan River, part of Syria (mostly Golan Heights), most of Sinai, and Southern Lebanon. It is absolutely no coincidence that Israel has occupied (or in Golan's case still occupies) that very same territory. DBG even predicted that in '20 years' they would find a way to attain in. Zionists and Jewish terrorists like Irgun weren't very happy with Jordan's independence. That's the only place they never occupied (they probably tried, probably even had a hand in some of the uprisings blamed on Palestinians).

      Unofficially others have speculated they wanted more. Arafat claimed a Nile-Euphrates map existed in the Knesset and also carried around an Israeli 10 Agorot coin claiming the reverse had a map of the same thing. Saudi Arabia was a concerned the Zionists wanted or would take their land, even Medina. Possibly paranoia. Yet some of the Ultra Orthodox groups today believe it is theirs, you never know.

      The coin thing is allegedly the outline of an actual Jewish coin from antiquity. It doesn't match up the way Arafat says (I tried it in photoshop) but it does if you turn in 90 degrees align with mountains and Rivers. Interestingly a thousands of years back there was a kingdom with similar borders called Ammuru, home of the Amorites. It's very difficult to find any history about the place too, but Babylonian sources survive. Hammurabi was an Amorite. Ammuru lost territory and was eventually destroyed, it's inhabitants fled to the Caucasus Mountains. Gog/Magog and the Gates of Alexander are referring to this. Historic stories of 'barbaric' mountain tribes refer to them as Vikings, Scythians, Frisians, Khazars, Mongols, some Turkic Tribes like Tatars, Germanic mountain tribes, etc. I said this a while ago and a Zionist responded with something like "which means it's our homeland even if you're an antisemite believing in the 13th tribe thing." Whatever makes you happy I guess.

    • Unrelated, but I'm guessing such provisions didn't exist for Kurdistan when it got separated by rivers.

    • It's actually the France's fault. Napoleon Bonaparte had an earlier and lesser-known proclamation of his own calling for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. He also tried to revive the Sanhedrin. Things got messy for France and Napolean, didn't work out as planned. The British Balfour Declaration was probably a second attempt by the same hidden-hand PTB who once guided Napolean. It was addressed to a Rothschild. The Rothschilds promised and later designed/donated the Israeli Supreme Court in Jerusalem. Not exactly the Sanhedrin, but hey it's a court. Maybe it's just a coincidence and I'm finding patterns where patterns don't exist. Or maybe, it isn't a coincidence at all.

    • 17%-20% of the WB's population is settlers. That's around 500k people with about 200k of that living in EJ. Take out EJ, and 10% of the WB's population is comprised of Israeli settlers.

      300k people is less than 4% of Israel proper's population. 60% of the occupied WB is controlled exclusively by Israel, is where virtually all (sans Hebron) the settlers live with only 4% of the population being Palestinian. Zionists spin this the other way around and say 'most of the Palestinians live on Palestinian-administered land.' So? If Israel will never allow refugees in their borders, they're going to have to live somewhere. 40% of Palestinians still live in an Israel-controlled area of the WB (with PA administration).

      When you really look at the numbers, the justification to keep these settlements - even the large 'blocs' - because they're established and the 'reality on the ground has changed' is ridiculous. There are hardly any Israeli settlers living there. It might be unrealistic to expect Israelis in Israel proper to give back stolen land, but that argument doesn't work for the WB. It's occupied Palestinian land and there aren't many settlers. A lot of the people in Ariel are wary of the future of Ariel. A lot of the Ultra Orthodox claim they would rather die then leave and Israel says it will take decades to remove them. Nonsense! Use military force to get them out of there and throw them into a prison if they fight back. Treat them like the criminals that they are. If Palestinian resistance is terrorism, so is ultra orthodox resistance especially in those outposts that are illegal to begin with.

      It is not irrational to believe all the settlement blocs can be dismantled. Jerusalem is a more sensitive issue as is the refugee right of return. Jerusalem aside, there is no excuse for the Palestinians not to have 100% of the WB. The settlements were created and are still created only to prevent the very thing Israel conned us into believing they would allow.

    • I'm a spiritual agnostic theist who has spent quite a bit of my free time studying the various world religions and mythologies. I'm not religious, I don't really favor any religion, nor do I have any religious bias.

      When I think of an empire, I think of Byzantine/Romans, Neo-Assyrians, Achaemenid and Sassanid Persians, the Caliphates, the Ottomans, etc. These all took up quite a bit of territory at various points around the Mediterranean. Ruins, artifacts, artwork, etc. survive as do detailed historical accounts.

      When you say Solomon created empire, what empire would that be? If the biblical kingdom of Israel was in modern day Israel/Palestine, at best it would have to be a tribal kingdom. We have biblical accounts of a grand and glorious kingdom and Romans destroying Jerusalem to a pulp so no evidence remains. If that were the case, archaeologists would be digging up the ruins. Yet everything they dig up refutes this and is consistent with other Levant artifacts from other empires. This area is well documented in recorded history. Egyptians have been recording history for 5,100 years and they don't say anything about it other than a vague reference to ysri r's seed being laid to waste on the Merneptah Stele (which is talking about Northern Africa.. and one of the glyphs is damaged, the translator took some reservations).

      Solomon is a complex and interesting person whose history is not limited to the biblical account nor is the biblical account the source. There is a similarly described person in multiple religions/mythologies often with a name phonetically similar to Shlomo. Beta Israel has a different account. British Israelites have their own account. Knights Templar incorporated him into their origin myth and Scottish Rite Freemasonry adopted it. You might brush their beliefs as nonsense, but they would return the favor. Solomon is even described in the bible as being black, but people like to dispute this. I'm sure there was a Solomon and a Solomon's Temple.. just not in Jerusalem, Israel/Palestine. It could've been in Ethiopia, it could've been in Scotland, it could've been in Lebanon (Baalbek's Jupiter Temple). And any of these spots could've been called "Jerusalem" for all we know. The city in occupied Palestine is very old, but perhaps it was named after the destroyed one in antiquity? Think outside the box, the Zionists are historical revisionists. They've applied biblical history to inappropriate places like tombs and ruins. It can be proven that they just made it up in many of these cases. How do you know they aren't lying about the entire thing?

  • More responses to Ron Paul's surge
    • "That’s no answer. Some people can’t afford to no live where they live, but they have the right to not live in a racist hell hole."

      No, that's no answer. Anybody can afford to live elsewhere even if they don't have any money. 'broke' is a state of mind. Government freebies, tax cheating, foreclosure, bankruptcy, default, so many ways to cheat the system enough to afford not being broke, especially coupled with work. Negative consequences, sure. Some worse than others. Dirty, cheap, immoral? That's an opinion. If you don't feel safe in the neighborhood, the only one stopping you from moving is yourself and your perceptions. There are plenty of racist states already down south. It's no stereotype. We're not talking about bringing back slavery. If 'big brother' federal protection was required for the civil rights movement, that probably means the civil rights laws were just another lie to sell Orwelian laws. They use the same tricks in every era.

      I don't expect you to change your perception, but as I said in another thread, is it your perception out of free will? Or the will of the MSM? The MSM is like a broken clock being right twice a day. It's broke, they lie. If they tell you the truth, you wouldn't know if it was true or a lie. Why trust them? The racist thing is redic, you must have bought the MSM story. So yeah, whose will? Yours or theirs?

    • The Atlantis thing was a joke btw. Beaides, it's on the South Pole you know! :P Norway's Google-Earth censored "Valkyrie" outpost is a nice little doorway under the ice. "Valkyrie" was the code name for Germany's continuity of government in WWII. It was modified into an assassination plot (and a stupid Tom Cruise film). U-boats were sent to Antarctica even when the war was over. They went to the same location as Norway's Valkyrie outpost today. 500-year-old maps show a Valkyrie wing on a then-hypothetical continent on the South Pole called Terra Austrailis. Swap it for Antarctica and it's coincidentally in the same spot. If that's a joke, I don't think it's funny. And mentioning this here while supporting Ron Paul just gives people more ammo to call me a kook too, eh? And all Paul supporters by proxy too I guess. Doesn't hurt my feelings

    • Woody, the Atlantis thing was a joke. Please don't drop to a hasbarist's level and use one odd statement to dismiss the rest. Global warming aside, Russia, Canada, and I think Norway (among others) have tried to claim sovereignty over parts of the North Pole. Except the North Pole is just the frozen Arctic Ocean. They're essentially fighting over territorial waters, most likely for potential resources under the ice cap. Melting portions of the ice would make searching and retrieving these resources a heck of a lot easier.

      There are scientists studying global warming on both sides. There is no majority consensus. The ones who say it exists have the support of corporations, media, and politicians. You know, people who are liars and untrustworthy. You don't think money can't buy a scientific consensus or biased research? It could go both ways, but I'm not drinking the kool aid because I don't like the well it comes from. It was poisoned a long time ago. Liars can only be trusted to lie, you don't know when they are telling the truth so why believe them?

      Global warming didn't exist until this:

      link to

      Was published by Art Bell of Coast to Coast AM and Whitley Strieber. Streiber was told about it from a strange visitor, and he has a history of strange (alien) visitors. Before that it was global cooling and ice age. Again, I think we should react as if global warming were real, but not from a political standpoint with carbon taxes. It would benefit our environment and health. No alternative to fossil fuel is going to materialize as long as big oil goes about business as usual. Talking about 'perpetual motion' is as taboo as talking about Zionist manipulation of foreign policy, thanks to the established energy provider interests.

    • It's not about states filling a void. A 'neutered' federal government is essentially removing federal veto power over decisions states already make. For example, almost half of the states (23) have cannabis decriminalized, legal for medical use, or both. It's still illegal according to the DEA, federal jurisdiction overrides the states and clinics get raided by the DEA all the time.

      You could say 'cannabis is bad, medical/decriminalization is abused, it should be illegal and I support the federal raids' but that's a biased opinion in opposition. It doesn't work both ways because if you were to say 'it should be up to the states' it may very well be bias for cannabis but it could also just be non-biased and logical aka you can oppose cannabis personally but support leaving it up to the state to decide. States aren't usually split down the middle in terms of bias and opinion the way the nation is. People often settle in communities among others of similar beliefs. Communities, towns, cities, and states often have majority opinions on controversial subjects. Not 50-50 like the nation as a whole.

      I also don't know why people are thinking about it in terms of foreign policy and national security, it's a domestic policy that constitutionally should already exist.

      Saying that Ron Paul amplifies one dollar, one vote is just putting a spin on his policy. Placing barriers and restrictions can and will backfire. Like the do-not-call list for example. Some people, like my mother-in-law, liked certain telemarketers for whatever reason. They stopped calling after she signed up for list and now loopholes have allowed shady scammers to open a backdoor and call anyway. Saying 'thou shalt not kill' is worse than using positive language to say the same thing. Ex. 'thou shall respect all life' or something like that.

      Citizens do not benefit in any way from the Orwellian laws that trump our constitution. If Paul was president and accomplished even half of his policy, perceptions would change with along with transparency and accountability that could lead to things that manifest as a cancerous tumor inside of the establishment and eventually the establishment and status quo would be dead... a good thing unless you support the status quo. Not saying Paul doesn't have negative aspects, but no other candidate is going to do this. They will just support the status quo and continue to oppress us

    • Why is that a federal government issue? Do you want big brother to be watching? Let the local community and states take care of such things. And if the local community and state is a bunch of racist bigoted pricks who side with the business owner, don't live in that state.

      The federal government has too much control over isolated domestic issues that you may have been conditioned to believe is a good thing. How so? Like the folks saying Ron Paul is against gay marriage. He's against government involvement in marriage period. Why should the government care who you're married to? Even if you're a polygamist or you marry a squirrel. If you exploit marriage laws in ways that are unlawful and get caught, you suffer the consequences of committing a crime. If you make sweet, sweet love with that squirrel and get caught, you also suffer the consequences of committing a crime depending on what the law says about making love with squirrels.

      People spin that as "Ron Paul hates gays" and "Ron Paul opposes gay marriage" and that's a spin. There is no other official candidate to vote for. Certainly not Obama for a second term. So if you aren't going to vote or plan to vote for a third party, then I get it. If you plan to vote for any of the other guys, I don't get it unless you like the status quo (which includes Israel's status quo). Ron Paul isn't perfect, but there isn't anybody else 'radical' enough that could change things. And Ron Paul himself might be unable to change things, that doesn't mean one shouldn't give him the chance. I sure see a lot of people spinning his policy from a superficial level in negative ways when under the surface there is nothing negative about it.

    • What limitations exist today? Limitations are unconstitutional and when limitations exist, there are exceptions and loopholes allowing say the Israel lobby to have free reign as it already is.

      AIPAC does not control Ron Paul and Ron Paul has spoken out against AIPAC's control on more than one occasion. AFAIK, Paul has not said anything about AIPAC registering with the justice department as a foreign agent once and for all. Given is position toward AIPAC and toward the status quo of the US, it would be likely to happen. They can have all the money in the world, but they'll get taxed up the wazoo if that were the case. Only thing is because he hasn't said anything about it, we don't know if that would happen. I guarantee it wouldn't happen at all under any other candidate.

    • Global warming from the political stand point is a phony agenda. Humans are far too insignificant to influence climate the way the politicians are saying. We can influence a little, but not to the extremes of say melting the North Pole. The polar bears aren't losing their icy homes. You can try flying a plane up there to see the ice cap yourself, but for some reason you won't be able to get near it without being chased by military aircraft. Other planets are having strange weather coinciding with ours here on Earth. If the polar ice cap is really shrinking at an unusual rate, perhaps it's deliberate. There might be something cool under that ice. Oil, gas, unknown life forms, tasty giant lobsters and crabs, the ruins of Atlantis, who knows?

      What we are doing though is wasting resources and poisoning ourselves and other forms of life including the food we eat. We could benefit from being greener from health, financial, and resource conservation stand points. I'm not concerned that Paul isn't addressing this directly. Other candidates aren't sincere because they are backed by corporations contributing to the problem. They just want to find away to regulate and tax things, suck even more out of the economy and the middle class

      The thing with Ron Paul is that a lot of his ideas do not directly address major issues but they indirectly help those issues more than any other candidate who lies about addressing them ever will. This includes global warming.

      link to

      "We should start by ending subsidies for oil companies. And we should never, ever go to war to protect our perceived oil interests. If oil were allowed to rise to its natural price, there would be tremendous market incentives to find alternate sources of energy. At the same time, I can’t support government “investment” in alternative sources either, for this is not investment at all.

      Government cannot invest, it can only redistribute resources. Just look at the mess government created with ethanol. Congress decided that we needed more biofuels, and the best choice was ethanol from corn. So we subsidized corn farmers at the expense of others, and investment in other types of renewables was crowded out."

      Basically he's saying the government shouldn't be the one to invest in an alternative because they're terrible at it. But they can make life hard on the oil companies. As a result, alternatives will spring up. No other candidate is going to dare take on big oil, but they will pretend to be concerned about global warming and say that Ron Paul isn't.

    • What kind of deals? Like Defense contracts and corporate alliances? Selling weapons and providing aid? Kind of already goes on with and without being under the federal government's banner, both related and unrelated to foreign policy. Maybe I'm misunderstanding though.

      I'm pretty sure that Paul's wanting to give more rights to the states is a domestic policy. The nation is still the USA. Foreign policy isn't a domestic issue (well it is, but you know what I mean) it's a national issue. Paul's hypothetical policy wouldn't allow the government of Ohio to make an alliance with an enemy and risk our national security. Too many trixsters are trying to spin this

  • AIPAC-championed amendment pushes Obama into a corner on Iran
    • Emphasis on the forcing of the US into another endless war. Embargoes and Economic sanctions are an act of war, especially when a nation's economy is significantly impacted by them. Just ask Japan circa 1941. Iran has threatened to close the Straits before as a possible response to an attack on their nuclear sites. This threat is serious business. The US response saying they won't allow them to do so doesn't mean they won't try and either way Americans are going to being paying the price at the gas pump in any scenario. An American response might as well be an attack on their nuclear sites. The result in either case is war. A war where congress prevents the US from any diplomatic approach, something that is all-out insanity.

      I agree with MHuhes976 above. Obama will do anything to prevent a war during an election year. These special interest groups are forcing his hand, backing him into a corner, but it's only going to look bad for them in the end. It won't lead to war. War destroyed our economy. War made our gas prices stabilize at a rate 3x what it had been for ages. Any US/NATO/Israel attack on Iran is a suicide attack.

  • Ron Paul prose on Israel allegedly makes woman cry
    • All the Paul haters, probably don't have anything to worry about if there is anything true to this:

      link to

      Basically, the results for the Iowa caucus are tallied by an Israeli defense firm. You trust that? If true, why does Israel dictate so many critical aspects of our society? That's partially sarcastic, you know the answer to that.

    • I love that video. My favorite part is the end where he says "I've never been in a crowd like this, they're nuts"

      That's part of the problem. These people, these Israeli-firsters, they're nuts. Many Jewish people support Israel for obvious reasons. Many Christian fundamentalists support Israel due to 19th and 20th century Zionist-funded interpretations (Scofield and Darby bibles) creating the rapture and building a case for suckers to support endless wars and Zionism so they'll get raptured. Ironically, a lot of them could care less about the fate of the Jews in this end-times scenario (convert or suffer the consequences). Most of them have no Idea that many Israelis are atheists. Or that 10% of the Palestinians are Christians. Or that Palestine was 40% Christian in the early 20th century until the Zionist genocides. Mormons support Israel because of the Judeophilia built into their religion. Several other Christian sects and cults support Israel because of the Judeophilia that's been added to their faiths for the past 3 centuries (with a strong emphasis on the Zionist infiltration of their faiths in the 19th and 20th centuries).

      The US supports Israel for various reasons. Former Cold War strategy, international finance/corporate influence, powerful lobbies, blackmail, etc. The media supports Israel for all of the above reasons. The sheeple support Israel because they don't know any better. If the sheeple find out the truth, they won't support Israel. Israel is not an oasis of peace in the middle east, Zionists didn't scratch a desert and make a garden, Israel's history is mostly a 20th century fabrication, Israel is not the Israel from scripture, Israel is not the only democracy in the ME nor is it a democracy, Israel's existence is only threatened by Israel themselves, Israel's wars were all jokes and their army is also a joke. Their army is not moral, they are immoral amateurs with fancy expensive weapons. Israel is a danger to the US national security. Israel uses Americans, they don't like Americans. Israel is a parasite on a US host. Criticism of Israel and Zionism, even being anti-Zionist is not anti-Semitic no matter who tries to tell you it is. MLK Jr was wrong to say that it was. Apartheid, ethnic cleansing, genocide, history altering with propaganda, blood-thirsty corporations, scams, land theft, war criminals, murderers.... Usual deal.

      Anybody who supports this is nuts.

  • 'Haaretz' columnist says 2-state solution is dead--and global community must help us toward equal rights
    • asherpat, a lot of traffic runs through here. Like everything else, higher reader-to-comment ratio. This is why hasbarists like to post nonsense, they're hoping to persuade and 'scare away' casual readers. It also pops up in search engines. Luckily, posting nonsense allows other comments to debunk the nonsense with truth. Some of the ideas here make their way to other blogs and some of the users here are active in many internet blogs as well as IRL events. Not just from 'the armchair.' But even the armchair alone is quite powerful. Ron Paul's popularity is not because of MSM influencing public opinion for example. If the 'armchair' isn't powerful than governments, like Israel, wouldn't have an army of shills on their payroll poisoning the wells of the internet.

      Truth will destroy Zionism. Because Zionism is founded on and supported by lies. The truth is what Israel and the neocons fear the most. Zionism is a house of cards. I've already convinced several people IRL. Maybe they don't care as much as me, but if they do, perhaps they will convince others. When a lie is sold to the public as truth and there are plenty of facts to expose the lie, the truth will eventually prevail.

    • "1947 was 64 years ago.

      Is the world the same?"

      Actually Witty, yeah it pretty much is the same. Fear of terrorism has replaced fear of communism. They say the cold war ended and the USSR fell. NATO is still around though, cold war attitudes still remain in the form of East vs. West, neither is trusting of the other. There are more nukes around then ever before. The American empire has been infiltrated by Soviet-style attitudes via Neoconservativism same as communism before it. The UN, unlike the LON, still exists and there hasn't been another huge global war. Only superficial differences coupled with better technology.

      Now regarding I/P, the "Jewish" area of the partition plan is where the majority of Israel's Jews live TODAY. The Arab area of the partition plan is where the majority of Palestinian and Israeli Arabs live TODAY. The few exceptions are so few, it's amazing that it's been such an issue for so long. 48 hours and a few bulldozers would take care of the problem on the ground. From 1947 to 1967 nothing really changed and afterwards the settlement project started. It didn't really escalate until Oslo and the Russian immigration. Recent history. When Obummer and Bibi talk about 'facts on the ground' the fact is there is hardly anything on the ground. Most Jews live in the Tel Aviv metro area, the same as they have for 100 years. The only thing that has changed is global attitudes towards Israel's legitimacy.

  • Ron Paul and the left
    • "Wow. Did you ever consider that he might just simply be a racist kook trying to pull one over on you so he can become president?"

      I've personally considered a lot of things about Paul. I considered maybe the establishment actually wanted him and was trolling his supporters. If that were the case, the MSM probably wouldn't be ignoring and smearing him. All the other guys (and gal) except Obama are racist kooks (and Obama has done nothing to deserve another term). The racism thing is extremely weak, IMO you're drinking MSM kool aid and should know better considering the MSM can't be trusted. You don't like Paul, you don't seem to like the competition. If Ron Paul as president can translate his 'radical' policy into reality, it's an improvement over the status quo. If he can't translate policy into action, then the status quo remains. If you're right and I'm wrong, the status quo remains. The alternative to Paul is the status quo period with no potential to change in any meaningful way.

      Taking no action is not going to change perception and will just prolong this status quo. I think I understand your position, even agree with it partially. Some folks mention how Obama promised change too. I voted for Obama. Before that, I voted for Paul as the Republican candidate (good for me, eh? I deserve a cookie or a prize or something sarcastic). I believe in the guy, the MSM does not. Is your perception of you own free will, or the will of the MSM?

    • Not really, dbroncos. It may look that way superficially and his MSM critics might be saying the same thing, but why trust the MSM liars?

      The fact is the status quo already is dog-eat-dog. None of the candidates are going to change that. Ron Paul just doesn't advocate government involvement. Governments shouldn't have bailed out AIG or the auto companies or take over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

      The current status quo is business as usual. The big corporations get bailed out by uncle Sam and continue business as usual. Without a bailout or government involvement, these companies would fail. That's what needs to happen. Don't intervene, if you don't intervene and try to fix it, it will collapse in on itself. Intervene at the expense of taxpayers keeps a sinking ship afloat. No lessons are learned. And the government and elected officials now have a stake in corporations.

      Very few learn their lesson until it's too late. You can tell your best friend that their partner is abusive and not the right person for them. When it's over they'll say you're right, while it's going on it won't make a difference and they'll ignore you. The gluttony of elite irresponsibility would destroy a lot of them if there was no intervention.

      Ron Paul isn't the guy who is going to pass any laws taxing inheritance 100% to destroy elite dynasties, nobody else is either. That's too radical for most people to grasp right now. Eventually people will realize knowledge is worth more than money. That the family business will be just fine if you teach the kids everything you know instead of just giving it to them along with the money and everything else they want so they're lazy and learn nothing. That the middle class idea of inheritance differs substantially from the elite and yeah for the parents who have nothing to pass on it is greedy for anybody to have your kids get a head start without earning it. The ignorant masses are not ready to handle this. They'll defend it somehow thinking they'll amass a meaningful fortune to pass along, then die without doing so. Too radical for this time.

    • Like lacrosse?

    • john h, you have a point, but what is the alternative?

      Perceptions are part of the problem. They say we live in a democracy. A few of us know this isn't a real democracy because un-elected Über-rich elites can dictate everything including who the public votes for via manipulating public opinion. The ignorant sheeple will tell us 'the is a democracy, even if a group of people feel as you do you still have to weigh in the opinions of everybody else.' Not really. Because a small group of people already control the entire establishment. They make the rules, they don't play by them. We have to play by the rules and that involves a lot of money. They not only have a lot of money, they control the money supply.

      The sheeple are part of the problem too. It's not just the ruling class at fault, it's the zombies allowing the ruling class to get away with it and not doing anything to stop them. They're in the way, their votes don't count because they aren't voting out of free will, just the illusion of free will. This isn't an opinion, although some folks here claim it is. The system is rigged to create perceptions. These perceptions are wrong and difficult to change. Says my opinion? It's not an opinion, it's the zombie apocalypse. Kinda

      Ron Paul is not perfect. If all the candidates are evil, he is the lesser evil. How can I be so sure? I can't be 100%, but considering the way the media has ignored him, smeared him, and attacked him and yet this has had little effect on him, I'm pretty sure. He's a threat to the establishment. If he were president and accomplished even half of his policy, it would be of great harm to the establishment, the upper class, the media, Zionism, etc. That's a good thing for the majority of Americans whether they know it or not. Of course he could wind up being shackled like Obama. A lame duck. A puppet. But you don't know that

      You can sit it out and not vote because the present two-party system is terrible That's not going to change the present two-party system. You can vote for some obscure person if you'd like, but you know that's not going to do anything. Ron Paul is different. If he is president, these differences will change perception. Unless he's just Obama 2.0, then you can say you told me so.

    • IMO, the newsletter thing has run it's course. It was worth discussion, because this man is running for a very important political position. It's like the birth certificate, but far less important. Now it's become a straw man.

      All of Paul's opponents have far worse dirt to fixate on. Seems an awful lot of people are jumping on this as a way to dismiss the guy which I don't really get considering his competition. If you weren't a US citizen, weren't of voting age, didn't plan to vote, or planned to vote for a third party, it would make sense. But nobody could make a single rational case to pick one of the other GOP candidates over Paul. Call it an opinion, but I don't see it that way. Anybody who believes in one of the other GOP candidates either profits from the status quo or is a useful idiot without knowledge of the truth. An enemy of the middle class so to speak. People live in hell and actually fell in love with it. It's nice here they say. They protect their criminal overlords like a kidnap victim often does to a kidnapper.

      On the other end you got Obama. Obama might've meant well and tried but he failed. He doesn't deserve another chance, let somebody else try. And if they fail (and they probably will because Congress will block anything 'radical') then it's time to bring out the guillotine and start our own reign of terror 2.0, bring about some real change and destroy the establishment.

    • This is good for neutrality I guess. Ultimately, it's a straw man. All of Paul's opponents have far worse (and racist) dirt. The MSM just isn't singling them.

      You can believe what you want to. I mean, the message here is no different than a biased MSM smear complete with stormfront founder photo (anybody can pose for a picture, would you know who that guy was?). No point in arguing or convincing. You either see it or you don't. Not worth wasting words on arguing about this.

      Ultimately the president is one guy. Paul is the guy that most of America needs whether they know it or not. One last hope for this establishment. In all likelihood, he would (as hypothetical president) be stonewalled by Congress and unable to accomplish much. I still would rather have a rationalist like Paul than Obummer as the puppet in chief. Obummer had his shot and blew it. Why vote for him again? Why vote for any of the other GOP nutjobs? Because they are nutjobs.

  • 'New York Times' implies anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic
    • IMO, there is no difference between those forms of nationalism and all nationalist movements are just racist and supremacist ideologies in disguise.

      Many people don't understand what nationalism is. They confuse it with ethnicity and culture. For example, don't confuse an American with proud Italian ancestry and traditions for nationalism. It's not nationalism. It's not self-determination. When Witty writes about his personal definition of Zionism and says we all have the right to self-determination, I have no idea what he is trying to say. Self-determination as in free will? Free will is at the individual level, not national. Or is it self-determination as in national sovereignty? The latter can be related to nationalism, but not without dual loyalty. If you claim to be Zionist because of self-determination, that's the same as saying you're an Israeli, not an American. Pick one or gtfo IMO.

      Nationalism IMO is acceptable in a secular nation like the US. Americans are one people but it's based on our citizenship and not our race, religion, or ethnicity. All other forms of nationalism are unhealthy and will lead to problems for those who subscribe to a different nationalist ideology. The PTB promotes nationalism along our differences as part of the divide and conquer strategy. It makes it a lot easier to bait multiple parties into a conflict.

      BTW, this NYT article is weak. It's not even an op-ed. What a low point for the NYT.. Mention Jews and Whites in the first sentence.. going for the sleeping masses hoping that their brains label Paul as a racist antisemite.

  • 'This is awful,' Bush said, coming into Bethlehem
    • No reason to stop dissing Rice. Her words today are empty compared to her actions of the past. Clearly these politicians know the reality of the situation. They know the Israeli leaders are hawks, trixsters, and liars. They know the Palestinian people are suffering under occupation, why they resist, and quite possibly even sympathize with them. But they don't even try to do anything about it. They're puppets and suckers. I don't expect heroism from any of them. By heroism I mean to risk the consequences of telling the truth regardless of any threats from the other side.

      President-wise, from Carter on nearly every US President has criticized Israel post-presidency (in memoirs and interviews) with words that no sitting president dare ever say. If memory serves, Reagan is the only one who didn't and took Israel's side. That says a lot about Reagan. Well that and the fact that he already had symptoms of Alzheimer's while in office.. and his staff knew it and nobody did anything. Not that it matters anyway if you're just a puppet I guess.

  • Europe asks: Where's Israel's proposal?
    • No doubt about it, HarryLaw. I read a JPost comment once that said land East of the Jordan was even part of the historic greater land of Israel and Israel is generously allowing Palestinians to live on it as Jordan citizens if only they would move there. Maybe it would mention something like that too. Maybe mention Bibi's signet ring and throw in a holocaust reference to seal the deal.

      I wish more people had the guts to dispel the 3,000+ years claim to the land. Archaeology has dug up quite a few artifacts that contradict the official narrative. History itself has little facts to go by, but even taken the biblical narrative and putting it in perspective, the largest this 'kingdom' ever was still did not take up all of what Israel claims to be theirs. It also didn't last any longer than 70 years until it was split. And most of the people who lived in its borders were not Hebrews. There is archaeological evidence of great kingdoms and empires all throughout the fertile crescent. But archaeological evidence proves that, if the great biblical kingdoms existed in what is modern day Israel/Palestine, they couldn't have been great. Small tribal 'cities' at best. That's what the evidence points to.

      Zionists have been mis-labeling Palestinian ruins and ancient sites for over a century trying to change history to support their claim for the land. I have a feeling this went on all over the world whenever territory was conquered. It's just Israel and Zionism happened in modern times with more eyes on it. No matter how many times they lie, it doesn't make it true. And even if their G-d was a real estate agent entrusting the land to them, the actual scripture is up to interpretation and scrutiny. And besides, G-d isn't a real estate agent.

      Israel, including the West Bank and East Jerusalem is only 130 years old. And the Jewish population area does not extend much further than the Tel-Aviv metro area. Those extremist nutters who envision a grand 'greater Israel' extending from Egypt to Iraq don't realize that there would be nobody to populate it with. Population would be spread so thin, they would be vulnerable to attack.

    • Israeli leaders are bloodthirsty lawyers when it comes to this sort of thing. They interpret international law and UN resolutions down to the fine print the same way a corporation does with a contract. Not surprising considering Israel is a corporation, a brand, and it is full of monopolistic corporations doing business in the US with tax-exempt provisions their neocon buddies in congress wrote into laws back in the day. I mean when they aren't running legal scams in South Carolina touristy junk shops like waves or mall kiosks staffed by illegals, etc.

      The intent of the Oslo Accords was never to make the Jordan River valley a designated security zone as Netanyahu says it is. How Bibi interprets it doesn't matter when the intent was established and clear. These things aren't service contracts. In this case Israel changed their mind and went back to the 'negotiation' thing because they never expected the Palestinians to submit a proposal. Now they're using their MSM to do 'damage control' and change recent history to make it look like they never said that.

  • Two critiques of Norman Finkelstein
    • Thanks for clarifying, Dan. When Obama mentioned the 'two peoples' in his ME speech last May, he specifically said one for the Jewish people and one for the Palestinians. Sounds pretty grim for nearly 25% of Israel's population that isn't Jewish. At the same time, it also means a Palestinian state wouldn't have any Jews in it (except maybe for the Palestinian Jews defined by Arafat). Two states seems to be anti-peace IMO.

    • You're right Jeffrey, my mistake. That's exactly their position. I misinterpreted it as advocating.

    • That's my understanding as well. AFAIK, Finkelstein doesn't personally advocate or favor any solution. He's just trying to be rational about the cards that each side has been dealt. For example, what Dan wrote about Finkelstein's analysis. Two states might be dead on the ground, but international consensus via UNGA and ICJ support two states based on 1967 borders. Israel may have "annexed" EJ (and Golan Heights, but that's not really a part of I/P) but their annexations are meaningless. Nobody but Israel and the opinions of few radicals recognize this. EJ, all of Gaza and all of the WB beyond the green line (including the Jordan River bank and the large settlement 'blocs') is Palestinian land according to international consensus.

      If they stick to this plan, the world has their back. At least they are supposed to anyways. The two state solution is dead, but the Palestinians have to ride it out a little longer since the world isn't convinced. It's a Zionist opinion that Israel should keep the settlement blocs and EJ. It's an international fact that all of the WB including EJ and even the Western Wall is occupied Palestinian land. Just because there are holy Jewish sites there doesn't mean it belongs to Israel. There are holy Jewish sites in Iran. Just because they occupy and build homes in it doesn't mean it is there's. Only a fool would argue this, and that's who is arguing most of the time... Zionist fools.

      It's a Zionist opinion that the Palestinians should sacrifice any of this for nothing. That's foolish. They shouldn't settle for anything less than 100% equal contiguous land swaps. If Abbas would 'approach the table to negotiate' and not compromise anything less than they deserve, eventually the international consensus would see that the two state solution is dead. By avoiding it because of Israeli pre-conditions, Israel can win this argument and consensus remains.

    • Dan, did Finkelstein really say 'two states for two people' ? I know he has always advocated the right of return for refugees, that would mean more Arabs inside of Israel proper. Every time I read 'two states for two people' (Obama, especially likes to say this) it makes me think the refugees are going to get shafted out of the ROR.

  • Ben-Ami: I advocate for Israel, Palestinian groups should advocate for Palestinian human rights
  • The Ron Paul moment-- bad and good
    • Ironic. All the other candidates have been accused of racism toward blacks, Arabs, and Latinos. They're focusing on Paul because they're scared. They're saying if he wins Iowa it will make Iowa 'irrelevant.' What a sad state of affairs. Politics, IMO, are not some sort of sacred religious-like topic. When people get offended when you 'pry' into their opinions about who they support, those people are ridiculous. Secrecy in politics is a problem for me. Even if you're just an average middle class joe. IMO, other than Paul, the only 'serious' GOP contender is Romney. I wouldn't vote for Romney unless you like the status quo, war, and are pro-Israel (or Mormon). If you like war and the status quo, I'm sorry to hear that. The other candidates are a joke. Even if Obama is shackled and trying to change things in secret, it's not good enough. He had plenty of time to grow a pair and instead sucked up to the elite and the status quo.

    • Exactly, Citizen. It's strange to see so many differing opinions. If a lot of us agree that the way US and politicians treat I/P is not based on reality, why trust them with anything else? Ron Paul's ideas are radical and different. But that's what needs to be done in order to change things. If the man was president, he very well could be fighting Congress to change anything for the length of his term, but I'd still rather give him a chance than any of the other business-as-usual candidates (that includes Obummer). People are afraid of change. It's odd to see WP comments defending the same people who are robbing them. The victim defending the perpetrator and saying the crime was okay, they liked the crime. More please.

    • Dan, you have good points. I wouldn't call Lew Rockwell a trusted advisor though, more like an old friend. I could be wrong, I just haven't read anything about him being an advisor recently.

      Paul's argument on the 17th amendment is because the power of the Senate was given to the people instead of state legislators. He believes the constitution never intended for this to happen. Instead of the state (via legislation) choosing representation, the people of the state choose, which might not be a wise idea. IMO, the reality is there wouldn't be a difference either way. The same person would wind up in that position via manipulation of popular opinion with the 17th amendment or being manipulation of legislators with not 17th amendment.

      You're right about revisionist goals. More effort is spent on revising truths rather than bring to the surface other lesser-known truths. As for Lincoln, I guess I don't really know if we've ever had a good president. The reason why some states like South Carolina seceded may have largely been emancipation, but it was also individual rights of the state and that was particularly the case fort the whole of the Confederacy. States only superficially have their own rights today. Some folks back then didn't think that was the initial intent of the US. The Confederacy is forever smeared with racism which makes it look like the Union wasn't as racist. That's because history is not written by the losers of war. And again with Lincoln, even in the early 20th century, it was nearly criminal to say negative things about Lincoln. Hmmm....

      Paul isn't perfect, but the other candidates are far worse unless you love the status quo (or believe in Obummer's lies about change). IMO Paul is the last chance for this system. If he follow's in Obummer's footsteps then it's time to bring out the guillotine and change things ourselves. Probably should already be doing that anyways...

    • Dan, why do you say that? Paul is a constitutionalist, what does that have to do with re-constituting the Confederacy? Our Draconian laws that have limited constitutional rights are not progress.

      US financial problems stem from financial democracy and the FED is a huge part of that. Not the only part, but they are pretty big. The US didn't always have a central bank. The Bank of North America was much hated and kept failing and coming back every time until Andrew Jackson killed it (likely the reason for his assassination attempt). It is said that 'killing the bank' was among his proudest accomplishments. The central banks of Europe still had the ability to influence our economy and influence 'recession' which led to adopting the Federal Reserve system, a private non-government (the 'partial government' thing is BS... the president appoints somebody that the FED tells him to appoint) bank that is as federal as Fed Ex.

      It's not the source of all our problems obviously, but it is the primary source of debt and also responsible for much of inflation.

      Off topic but kinda related. I've taken a huge interest recently in reading about history. Much like I/P, a lot of what we are taught in school is a combo of propaganda and cliffnotes. The American Civil War wasn't about slavery. Even after the emancipation proclamation, there were a ton of elite slave owners in the north. There were much more powerful forces and factors at play. I'll leave it at that. It's worth looking into if you have an interest and the time. I've changed my long-standing opinion on 'honest' Abe because of it. IMO, based on what I've read (and much of it is true, not circumstantial or speculative) he was a terrible president, a tool for the elite of the time.

    • Ron Paul isn't racist. This newsletter, which was not written by Paul, was also briefly brought up nearly four years ago during his previous campaign. It was brought up, 'debunked' and not brought up again until this campaign where it's been tossed around from time to time. Now apparently because Paul is likely going to win Iowa, they're trying to smear him with the only real dirt they have. I'm not a fan of Alex Jones, but according to infowars, this is being pushed by a 'Gingrich-Linked Propagandist:'

      link to

      I do agree that he has to do a better job apologizing and putting it behind him, walking away from interviews is only going to be spun against him by opponents.

      Another Alex Jones link (sorry) from an NAACP president who has known Paul for 20 years:

      link to

      Paul's campaign team should find some racist or sexist dirt on any of his opponents. I think I read that Michele Bachmann is involved with a camp that's supposed to make gay people straight. Anders Breivik may have even attended it (it is said he is a Bachmann supporter and was in Lake Elmo, MN last year which is where the camp is located.. proves nothing but you never know, that's a random place to visit for the Norwegian psycho). If Ron Paul had David Duke's past, I wouldn't support him. The good thing is he doesn't and he isn't a racist. The bad thing is this is the kind of smear that people buy into.

  • Israel says it's 'disgusting' for world to take stand on 'domestic affair' --settlers
    • Israel's internal affairs are also the US, UN, and Quartet's affairs. If Israel can't 'survive' without American military aid and the US has veto power and gives Israel a free pass to commit war crimes and other atrocities, their internal affairs are ours.

  • Naming Weinstein and Comcast chief as bundlers, 'Forward' wonders about 'Jewish influence' on Obama I/P policy
    • eee, four of the top 10 American billionaires are Jewish with an additional two being crypto-Jewish based on their ancestry and contributions to Jewish charities. 40-60%

      That's not representative of all billionaires, but many are Jews. Thing is, they make up a teeny tiny minority of that 2% you're taking credit for.

      Why don't us goy get our act together? There are three Waltons in the top 10 (one is a Widow). They were born or married into a dynasty. They never worked an honest day in their life. When I was a kid I briefly worked for Sam's Club and the training video showed Jim Walton speaking about the one time he bagged groceries so he knows what it's like. One time, that makes him an expert I guess. Probably the most work he ever did in his life.

      Most Americans, Jews and goyim, don't have a chance. We don't start in the same place. We don't get born into a dynasty. Every now and then somebody get's lucky and makes it big. Luck plays a hefty role in success. Many recent successful entrepreneurs like the 1-800-junk guy didn't even go to college. A good idea, taking a risk, and luck. Like everything else. Dynasties are the problem and until inheritance is controlled (and it will be, the kids of today will find a way) dynasties will remain and most people won't have a chance because none of us have an equal starting place.

      So it's not 2%, it's probably .002%. The entire elite class is an exclusive club and a lot of them are Jewish. The non-Jews look out for the fellow club member interests. They are not your people. If you don't belong to a prestigious country club, don't enjoy fine dining every night, don't go to the opera, etc, then don't smugly take credit for the elite rich Jews. You are not one of them. You are not in the club. The tribe is not the club. They are a different class. You are a peon to them. This class did make the rules and they don't play by the rules. Eventually those rules won't even exist.

  • For Hanukkah this year, our chefs prepare a special dish: their own words
  • Columbia U book on Iraq war suggests Wolfie, Feith, Wurmser and Perle had 'Israeli interests, not just U.S. interests at heart'
    • It makes perfect sense to me. Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, who represented all the Arabs of Palestine, was best friends with Hitler. They had long walks on the beach and talked about better ways to deal with the Jews. He gave Hitler hints because he thought they were going to easy on them (the propaganda about the hints really exists.. people really believe this...!). Therefore, all Arabs are Nazis and all Nazis are Anakites. It is the duty of every Jew to exterminate the Anakites. Says so in the book.

      This really is a mental condition, probably a society-based one. Possibly curable, but doubtful. The holocaust refugees in Palestine were brainwashed from the get go. They were told that all the Arabs want to push them to the sea, that Arabs are their biblical enemies, and that if they don't do anything a holocaust will happen again. And they're only safe in Israel because the world didn't do anything about the holocaust because the world hates Jews and is pretending to like them. Yeah that'll do it

    • I'm sure there is some sort of a war equation out there. The Bush administration had the right amount of neocons (many who wrote a clean break and were involved in pnac), banking/finance veterans, and oil men (from various oil-related backgrounds) to all agree on the equation. Increase and better standardize existing oil supply, remove current regime, make oil lobbies happy, make saudis happy, make other neighbors happy, make Israel happy, reduce population, potentially divide and partition population, Western archaeological access to important ancient sites, insert Western-friendly dictator, etc.

      Could say many of the same things to Iran, although to a much lesser degree. And the administration has changed so there is no astronomical alignment to wage war.

  • Bias in the Great Library at Alexandria?
    • The Internet has reached a point where it is a threat to the establishment. The influence of the Internet has reached critical mass and more than ever these guys want to police it. Even if intelligence agencies had a hand in helping to provoke protests, they certainly didn't act as guides thanks to the Internet allowing for the people to take control of them. Ron Paul is proof that traditional MSM outlets are losing influence, especially in the under 45 crowd. Now it's hitting home where it hurts the most and they are panicking.

      SOPA today and bill to fight 'internet terrorism' (hackers like anonymous) tomorrow. Not cause they care about IPs or anonymous, because they want to control the internet. I'm personally not even concerned about whether SOPA passes or not. These politicians have absolutely no idea what they are asking for or how DNS and the Internet in general even works. They are asking for the impossible. I wouldn't worry about any bills to police the internet because it can't be policed. You can work around everything.

      IMO, that library is a new-age library full of books that condition people to the status quo. The Internet has shown be factual and reliable sources that Israeli history is invented (seriously, that's not a pun on Newt). Probably all history is invented by the victor of war. We don't know anything. Ironically, it was the library in Alexandria of antiquity that was burned and history was destroyed.

  • Howard Fineman seeks to redline Ron Paul's populist Iran ideas as extremist
    • Witty, you are skewing the facts

      Ron Paul is a pro-life supporter, that is true. BUT his official stance is that it's "best handled at the state level." Constitutionally it falls under an umbrella within state jurisdiction. Mandating it at the federal level would be insanity considering how states are completed divided on it. (north vs south kinda)

      He is NOT an opponent of gay marriage. "I am supportive of all voluntary associations and people can call it whatever they want." His view is that governments should have absolutely no say in matters of marriage, and why should they? Why is marriage a 'legal' thing to begin with? It is almost 2012, don't you think that's kind of ridiculous? If somebody wants to marry a squirrel, isn't that their own business?

      What's wrong with a gold standard? The federal reserve note is fiat money. So back in the day you put valuables in a bank and get a receipt. The receipt became used as currency. Eventually the bank realizes that people don't take their money out at the same time and loans out money that mostly isn't theirs. Eventually the receipt is backed by nothing (over a few centuries) except faith and people accept it. Our money is fiat money. Fiat money has failed in every single instance in history. Fiat money will always inflate, pretty much a hidden tax.

      I suppose by saying his opposition to large financial institution and corporations you're referring to his opposition to the Sarbanes–Oxley Act and the bailouts? The former would allow incentives for foreign financial interests. The latter has led to government sponsorship of financial institutions at taxpayer expense. You worded your sentences as if is opposition is a problem.

      As for income tax, he wants to abolish the IRS and income tax altogether. There is absolutely no rationalization for any sort of an income tax. None whatsoever. Don't even try to rationalize it.

      So what's the problem? This guy wants to destroy the status quo and make our economy stronger. Why are you defending the status quo? As for Israel, he wants to cut foreign aid. All foreign aid. Even Bibi said to Congress that Israel doesn't need any help, Israel helps itself. I guess if you like the way things are, I can see why you'd oppose it. But most Americans don't benefit from the status quo. The elite class is un-American. It's time to stop living by their guidelines and to stop living in an invisible caste system. If you're apart of the middle class, don't brainwashingly defend the elite establishment with their propaganda excuses. You're protecting them and killing yourself and loving it for whatever reason.

  • Defense lawyer Lichtman says Palestinians have a 'culture of death'
    • It might be deeper than that actually. The whole "exterminate Amalekites" command. Wikipedia article on Amalek:

      link to

      It says Armenians as Amalekites, Jewish Communists as Amalekites, Zionists as Amalekites, Nazis as Amalekites, and Palestinians as Amalekites. This is insane. Palestinians and Arabs in general as Amalekites seems to be accepted even by some of the non-religious. Who else will be added to this list? Liberals and Leftists? Self-haters? Secular Israel? The West who doesn't want to attack Iran? What kind of an irrational ideology is this.. to take an ancient biblical command incompatbile with a modern world view and apply it to anybody you don't like so it's morally okay to 'exterminate' them?

    • Finkelstein is often interviewed with 'educated' 'experts' (for balance) who speak the same way. What is education really other than conditioning? In this society, a successful lawyer wins cases with maximum profit. It doesn't matter how many tricks they, or whether they are moral or not. A successful journalist obeys the publisher and doesn't cross the line (at least not until they become 'respected' and can risk it). A successful politician is somebody who submits their will to the highest bidder and can convincingly sell that will to the public. A successful corporation makes a profit and has a good PR team to do damage control.

      That's generalizing my opinion. I know there are good people in those professions, but they are the few. My point is, a scumbag is still a scumbag. Even if they are educated and successful. For every educated scumbag, there are many more uneducated non-scumbags who never had the same opportunity as Lichtman. Doesn't mean Lichtman isn't a scumbag.

  • What my God chip says about Jerusalem
    • "If I cannot be myself, at least don't drag me into the public sphere to act like something I am not. This is the essence of my stance...My rational mind versus my awe chip wrestle, scratch and elbow each other, depending on the day, the week and the season"

      Perhaps an aspect of the self's duality? If you have to put on a public persona that makes you feel uncomfortable or anxiety, then you aren't being yourself. In some cases there is a chance it is caused by repressed experience in the past. Maybe it's just not you. Maybe most everybody feels this in different ways and puts on false public personas. Or maybe it's hopeless and they really have fallen into a borg-like hive mind state of materialist commercialism.

      Spiritualism is important to us, religion is a spiritual outlet. These days it seems people of varying religious faiths lack the spiritual element. They don't get it. Especially the extremists. They really don't get it. IMO, the leftover dogmatic elements, the contradicting passages (due to mistranslation, misinterpretation, vandalism, or all of the above) can and are really interpreted in a dangerous way for these people. The wisdom and the spiritualism gets lost.

      We are definitely 'wired' for religion/spiritualism. I've never been religious and it took 30 years to figure out the importance of spiritualism so now I've been meditating quite a bit more and it works. You get to know yourself. Perhaps even slay some old demons and get your duality to act as one. Work out inner problems first and maybe we'll be able to better handle the public sphere. The US is passing some pretty scary laws, but in a lot of cases Israel already operates that way. A corporation-driven Orwellian 'democracy.' Anybody who sees through the BS is a terrorist sympathizer... or a terrorist. What the PTB don't realize is you can't destroy what I'll call the Freudian id. The anxiety over being something against our nature will eventually lead to rebellion.

  • Obama's rabbi sidekick is opposed to 'too many Arabs' in Israel
    • Interesting interview, MRW. It seems like such a hopeless situation as long as the US has their nose in it. The good news is that it is so unsustainable, collapse is eminent. It's just a question of when. And when it happens, what will the Zionists do? I hope the world tells the US to get their nose out of it and the lobby becomes powerless by defamation via exposing hard facts. Congress will have little to talk about from a foreign policy perspective if that were to happen. They would be forced to focus more on domestic issues and because their domestic issues favor the flawed establishment, a window of opportunity might open for Americans to wake up and rebel against it. To take back our gold and kick out the international criminal bankster syndicate out of the country. Wishful thinking

    • Universalist isn't the appropriate term. Universalism is like reconciliation. I wouldn't say that it is not natural. It would work if we all started from the same point and from the same system of values and beliefs. In that case it would be natural. Asking to reconcile with something that goes far against your personal morals and ethics is difficult. Seeing all sides is difficult for most people. A different culture has elements that you might personally find so repulsing that if in a position to change it, it is human nature to go about changing it in a dominate way. This is destructive and won't change anything. So I agree and disagree, but again don't think it's the right term at all.

      I agree that you cannot raise good children if you love them like all the children of the world. I would like to add you cannot raise good children if you love them like all the children in the tribe. The tribe isn't your family or even extended family. It's almost 2012, tribal mentality has no place in this world. The only place it works is if you view all of humanity as one tribe and not in the universalist sense. You can't tell me with a straight face that all Jews get along with all Jews and wouldn't hurt one and other. If that were the case, the settlers wouldn't be attacking the IOF.

      Yoffie is holding onto a fading dream that was setup for disaster from day one. If there were a sizable plot of empty cultivable land for the Zionist project, things would be different. The land wasn't empty and required ethnic cleansing and angry neighbors to accomplish. Israel still has no final international borders, Palestinians are still in refugee camps, and the neighbors are still angry. Saying there is too many Arabs in Israel is not going to help the situation.

  • Has NYT become an 'existential threat'? Oren says Friedman column was 'dangerous'
    • Israeli ambassoder Michael Oren is deliberately - and dangerously - taking a comment out of context written by a Thomas Friedman NYT op-ed. Friedman, who is Jewish, wrote in the op-ed: "I sure hope that Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, understands that the standing ovation he got in Congress this year was not for his politics. That ovation was bought and paid for by the Israel lobby."

      Oren, however, has misconstrued Friedman's statement saying it "strengthened a dangerous myth" when he wrote Congress was "bought and paid for by the Israel lobby." Friedman said the standing ovations were bought and paid for, he never said Congress was bough and paid for. It is unlikely that Oren is confusing myth with fact, the misintpretation was deliberate... and even more dangerous.

      It was fact, not myth, that Bibi's standing ovations were bought and paid for by AIPAC. Bibi's speech came just one day after the AIPAC conference. In attendance were several members of AIPAC, a couple who attacked CODEPINK activist Rae Abileah after she disrupted the speech. Bibi received a near-record 29 standing ovations. Obama's 2011 state of the union address received 25 in comparisons. Bibi received standing ovations after making false and bigoted statements, a few of which went against the administration's policy.

      Unofficial reports from anonmous congressional aides claimed that the Congressmen had been warned by AIPAC that their body language would be observed and taken into consideration at campaign time. What other proof do you need that the incident was not bought and paid for by the Israel lobby?

      Oren claims that pointing out the obvious truth is dangerous because it implies the existence of a Zionist cabal wielding inordinate economic and political power. This is a manipulative and antisemitic lie. Oren is promoting antisemitism by trying to convince American Jews that the truth is a lie. When the lie is exposed it will create antisemitism which is exactly what Oren wants.

    • link to

      That's the first thing that came up. Seven is no random coincidence. Lucky 7, seven cities of gold, seven heavens, seven gates to the underworld, seven candlesticks. If 3, 7, 9, 12, 13, and 33 are all just numbers and only the human brain sees patterns of re-occurring coincidentally I wouldn't believe it.

      Don't let them bully us with nuclear threats. A lot of countries have nukes. A lot of countries have nuclear reactors. Accountability is worse than people have been led to think, the US allegedly had nukes stolen and the people involved in that particular incident all died suspiciously. Israel obviously has a secret nuclear program and who knows how many nukes they have or if they've shared tech with the US. The US and Russia has made fissionable material into much smaller packages (and much smaller detonations) over the years, there is circumstantial evidence that it has been used.

      Fear mongering claims that the bad guys have them buried in major cities, that Israel has a second-strike policy using Mediterranean subs always on the move secretly (plenty of evidence proves the latter). So let's pretend that's true. And your nation has to do what these people say or else they'll cause devastation. Is that really how you want to live your life? That's not how I want to live my life. I'd rather die helping to expose and disarm them.

      If you have a few minutes, open your mind, don't roll your eyes, temporarily lower your skepticism level, read this: link to and then afterwards try to prove it wrong with additional sources. Keep in mind that the primary debunking source is essentially a user-submitted news service which itself has been debunked. Crazy becomes plausible. If it's plausible, that's concerning. Because if something even remotely similar to this took place, is there is a power trying to stop it from happening again?

    • PEZ is deliberately forged so that Jews would get the blame. Forged and inspired from revolutionary text from France along with an actual agenda by some sort of hidden hand that the PEZ is claiming to be Judeo-Masonic under the guise of Zionism. This caused further antisemitism, and even Herzl said antisemitism would help Zionism.

      IMO, from the outset Zionism intended to destroy Judaism and due to things like the holocaust it has successfully initiated many Jews and accomplished part of that goal. The original Zionist movement was comprised of atheist Jews (sort of like Bolshevism which happened around the same time). It's worth considering whether there was a non-Jewish 'hidden hand' behind all this that sought to use and exploit Jews for a real secret agenda. Let's call them the international criminal banksters because in all likelihood that's who they are.

      If you read PEZ and replace all the references to Jews to 'banksters.' it is completely relevant to the events which have taken place over the last century or so for the most part. The document mixes a bankster agenda with elements from Jesuit and Bavarian Illuminati writings, and then ultimately attributes it to Jews. The forgery is pointed out and it's labeled antisemitic. The genius in this is if anybody figured out the tricks the banksters use and they're in the PEZ, it can be discredited as antisemitic. The banksters just laugh. This is speculation obviously, I don't have the answers and I'm not trying to offend anybody.

  • 'The Social Network' and the Acceptance World
    • Fight Club is a really difficult film to interpret. Think of the narrator character as one of the occupy protesters. The status quo is a hopeless situation to live in with nowhere to go getting worse as time goes on. The frustration is boiling to the surface.

      Though we seem to be better off than our parents, our parents had more opportunity available. For the most part our parent's generation refuses to acknowledge this and is under the illusion that things our better. In some ways, like human rights, that's true. But career wise, not really. Owning a home is far more difficult than ever before and owning a home is kinda a big deal.

      So the narrator, frustrated by going nowhere in a materialistic illusion creates Tyler Durden, this is akin to unleashing your inner beast. Your animal nature. Tyler Durden has excellent advice and is an excellent teacher, but he is out of control and rebellious. By the end of the book/film he has taken the majority of control over the narrator. When the narrator finally figures this out within himself, he 'kills' Tyler. He conquers it. He's enlightened, never felt better. That's what I got out of it at least.

  • Mainstream press sniggers at Ron Paul's antiwar message
    • I read that editorial and ask "what's new?" The establishment only cares about the past and the present. They don't care about the future. When they look back on bad 'decisions' (as if it was our choice, I recall most people IRL against going to war) and say 'oops' it is ultimately meaningless. The damage is done, and they were responsible for the damage. Admitting the truth after the fact, that it was a bad choice, is weak.

      The entire world was saying it was a bad choice back in 2003. Not listening, going to war, promoting the war, and later concurring it was a bad choice just exposes the hypocrisy and guilt. The MSM should be put on death row (if it was at all possible) for their role in that war. Times they are a changing. You can't propaganda your way through a war and write a false history anymore thanks to the internet. We can call journalists out on their bigotry and double standards. The establishment is going to fail very soon, coincidentally with this whole 2012 thing. Maybe the Mayans really could predict the future?

      BTW, the mentally ill 'controllers' appear to completely lack intuition, our suppressed sixth sense. They make judgement based on their own two eyes and also interpretation. Lacking intuition, their interpretation is always wrong. Example, eee and DBG always interpreting things that aren't there, jealous of our intuition because they don't have any. I believe this, they don't have something that we do. It might sound crazy, but it feels right.

    • a straighlaced guy who would go by his conscience once he saw the light

      As much as I loath congress and their unbreakable loyalty to AIPAC, IMO the same could be said about many of them. The question is how can we show them the light? For once you see it, not even blackmail or death threats will sway an opinion. They can kill us but even death won't silence us. If you want to change the world you have to be willing to sacrifice your own life. That's asking a lot. If you can get over that, then you are a hero. Not everybody in congress is a coward, they just haven't seen the light.

    • They don't know and they don't care. They are worse than a bunch of jerks. They are the enemy of the people. The people just don't realize it.

  • Is portrait of Mark Zuckerberg in 'The Social Network' anti-Semitic?
    • Hmmm... Pictures are deceiving. There is something wrong about seeing a bunch of unhappy young people at the bar snapping pictures pretending to have fun and then immediately turn into zombies as they upload them to their facebook via their smartphone. Those pictures are telling a lie. Maybe the above Zuckerberg photo is also telling a lie. Like how the media always runs photos of Pollard looking all sensitive. I could be wrong. IMO, Zuckerberg in all likelihood is probably just a dick. That's it.

      Zuckerberg, Jewishness aside, came from a well-off family and went to Harvard. If you can't be successful given those circumstances, you're doing it wrong.

      Perhaps Phil is on to something though. Producers are pretty darn important in Hollywood in terms of getting the film they want, however, the director is the main person that ultimately translates this to film via their vision. David Fincher, the director, is not Jewish.

      Fincher has been fighting against the Hollywood system since his very first film, Alien 3. He pretty much disowns Alien 3. The studio hacked his version of the film into an incoherent mess. When he made The Game, the studio forced him to tack on a 'happy ending' he wasn't crazy about. And when he made Fight Club, the studio hated it and and no idea how to market it. Since Fight Club is intended for a male audience, Fincher was opposed to exploiting Brad Pitt's likeness in advertising as the studio wanted to do. Perhaps that's why the initial posters has a pink bar of soap. Pink washing?

      I don't think this is anything new really. Hollywood and the studio heads are predominantly Jewish. Somebody told me that they won't watch Harry Potter because the goblins who control the gold are antisemitic caricatures. Are they? They might be. And some say that George Lucas was also frustrated with the studio system and Jawas (phonetically similar to Jews) and Watto (prequel character with allegedly antisemitic caricature features), who are both dishonest merchants, are apparently a jab at them. If true, it's probably just a joke. Spielberg is one of Lucas' best friends, so he can't be antisemitic.

  • Time Magazine says 2011 was the year of the Protester. We agree!
    • The media kool aid started getting to me. Started thinking the protester were the loose-knit bunch portrayed by the MSM. I should've known better. Darn that human nature that is easily taken advantage of. From the link:

      The demands are:
      1. An end to the banker bailouts and an end to centralized PRIVATE banking (Federal Reserve). This is very closely followed by an end to all forms of corporate welfare and "buying" of electoral candidates by corporations.

      2. An end to insider trading and favored status being given to investment firms like Goldman Sachs.

      3. Media accountability - the movement is well aware of the fact that it is a few families of a particular (small) religious group that owns the media, which during elections especially, and at all other times publishes only information which serves a handful of "elite". They want candidates to represent themselves without the boost provided by media bias, from a fixed money pool drawn from public funds.

      4. From this, they hope to accomplish their fourth objective - an honest government that does not go around killing innocent people in foreign nations every time the will of the "elite" banking cabal is not served to it's extreme desire while robbing the people of their taxes and future to fund elite cronies in their financial scams. They do not want world government, this movement clearly sees the value in maintaining national soverignty. They want the old America back.

      5. They want an end to the police state, over excessive law enforcement, government snooping in the electronic arena, de-criminalization of victimless activities, such as adding onto a home without a permit, running a generator without a permit, growing food without a permit, as well as the legalization of hemp. They would like to see the end of America's absolutely monstrous prison system which is mostly full of people who never actually did anything other than violate a law or ordinance which bans an activity that never involved anyone other than the individual performing the action. They believe prison should be for theives, rapists and murderers, and that it is impossible to deserve arrest for inaction, or action which involved no one else.

      6. They want accountability for ALL corporations producing genetically modified foods, and focus especially on Monsanto. They want labeling of genetically modified foods to be MANDATORY, and an end to genetic modification altogether

      There are also many affinity groups, such as animal rights, gay rights, women's rights, openly communist or socialist groups and trade unions, who have little to no representation (single tents) placed in prominent locations, the remaining 95 percent of the movement stands for what is listed above.

    • link to

      Pretty good pics and info regarding occupy LA and masked ancient provocateur troublemakers. Anytime somebody feel the need to cover their face, question whose side they are really on.

  • More funding for Jewish museums in the West Bank
    • Why does the army demolish homes like that in the WB? Serious question for any of the Zionists here. I want to hear their side of the story. Is demolition an exaggeration? Like did they go in for the son and mess the place up, or actually demolish it? Demolition makes no sense. This isn't the first time this has happened in the WB nor is it the first time it has happened in Jericho.

      Kinda impressive that Jericho has no Jewish settlements in it. It it also has one of the very oldest (if not the oldest) evidence of civilization. Archaeology has unearthed something completely different from the biblical account. A lot of people are interested in Jericho and the surrounding area. I know it's a stretch, but maybe it's related.

  • Obama says nothing about Palestinians-- because Indyk says Netanyahu has Congress in his 'back pocket'
    • Peaceful settlers? I just threw up in my mouth a little. ALL the settlers are hostile. Doesn't matter if they act peaceful. There actions, as in settling an occupied territory beyond the green line is provocative and hostile. There is no rationalization for this. Any settler claiming to want peace is a hypocrite. Because they are a settler.

      Occasionally they use the 'give back Texas' excuse. The difference is huge. There are laws in place that prevent war-conquered territory from being annexed and laws that prevent an occupying power from settling in the territory they occupy. Israel has violated a crapton of laws and nobody seems to care. Not only that, most of this settler activity has taken place in my lifetime and I consider myself a young person. This is recent-recent history. If they were seriously peaceful they would GTFO

    • If Obama sticks around for another term, I don't expect anything to change regarding I/P. If anybody among the ruling class has a conscious, and if there is any force of 'good' left in Western leaders, we probably wouldn't even know about it. I have a funny feeling that it isn't just their careers they worry about if you know what I mean. If there is somebody out there who sees where this is going and has the ability to 'play the game' and actually do something about it, I hope they would focus on disarming Israel's nukes. Both the ones inside of Israel and the 'second strike' ones that allegedly exist like in secret submarines.

      Equally important would be locating any 'surprises' they've left behind. Like the ones of the "Biscopic camera" variety that Magna BSP makes.

  • Iraq-- I'm sorry
    • A while back I wrote a facebook status about the unofficial-but-probably-true civilian death toll in Iraq. A heavily politically-minded person on my friend list repeated the 'collateral damage' and 'cost of war' cliche. Then they said 'why do you care, they're mostly terrorists anyways?' After that I stopped making political-ish statements on fb.

      The old Star Trek quote 'the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few' is just IMO. But that's not how the West conducts their warfare. There is little, if any, distinction between 'terrorist' and civilian. Soldiers are trained to kill children in certain instances because children can be used to deliver messages between terrorists. Children are innocent though! This is insanity! This is evil!

      If a deadly and incurable virus broke out in NYC and the entire city was quarantined, the just thing to do would be to make every effort to save all of the people who were not affected by the virus. Not just blow the whole city. There shouldn't even be any debate on the financial aspects involved for a rescue plan. Because human lives are priceless, they are worth more than all of the money in the world. All of the money in the world cannot bring somebody back to life. Blowing the whole city should only be considered when there are no other options. When there is either no way to rescue anybody or nobody to rescue. And if people could survive long enough for a cure to be made, you don't blow it up either.

      Human lives are not currency. Deaths are not a 'price' or collateral damage. People who say otherwise would change their mind if they were staring death in the face.

    • eee isn't a very good mind reader. I'm not a mind reader either but i reckon my intuition works better. Let's dissect your comment:

      "Asking for forgiveness without offering reparations is BS." Why? Firstly, this is an individual apology written by Annie and not the US government. The current US government would never apologize. Unless you're a billionaire, an individual can't give reparations to an entire country. Secondly, I didn't realize apologies had rules. Pretend the US government apologized to Iraq. A few things could happen. Iraq might accept the apology or reject the apology ("sorry isn't good enough"). Then the US could say "how about some reparations?" Again, either accept or reject ("we don't want your blood money"). What difference does it make? You think they're going to be offended? ex. "Why didn't you offer that with the initial apology?" Only in your mind maybe.

      "Annie, if you want forgiveness commit to giving billions of dollars to rebuild Iraq" Who says she isn't? You're not a mind reader

      "and allow Iraqis that want to the right to live in the US, for example the millions of Iraqi Christians that can’t go home. But of course, you do not support that. All you support is hot air, nothing that would really help." Again, you're not a mind reader. Why do you assume she doesn't support any of this? Because your intent was probably just to cause trouble. As for the 'millions of Iraqi Christians that can’t go home' comment. I'm pretty sure that's supposed to stir up some sort of anti-Muslim sentiment.

  • Ron Paul's stunning antiwar performance: Iran threat recalls Iraq, 'a useless war that killed 1 million Iraqis' and 8000 Americans
    • Right, left. Good, evil. Id and Ego. Love and Hate. Yin and Yang. Republican and Democrat. Duality. There is a reason why there are two dominant political parties in every form of government.

      Think of it in terms of brain lobes. You have a left brain and a right brain. The left side is more primitive than the right side. It is more logic and mathematic oriented. The right side is more creative. We are literally two people, read about split brain studies. It's quite interesting. One side is dominant over the other. The business class tend to be predominantly left-brained. Same with psychopaths. Another analogy is liberty and justice. Lady Justice is blind and has a scale. Lady Liberty is liberated and free.

      If we all concentrate and 'set aside' the differences between our brains and harness them as one, it would be quite empowering (and enlightening). As long as the political system is made up of two opposing parties (who have more similarities than differences, they just don't realize it) then we will never be free. So yeah, if a strong third party with androgynous values (and IMO, even though Ron Paul identifies as a Rep. he is pretty androgynous) won the US presidency... The game is over.

    • I share that opinion, eljay. To be fair, he's coming up with his responses in real time. The neocons and the questioners are resorting to their usual rhetorical tricks. They quote him out of context and spin around his words. Find one thing out of place to derail everything. "You said that you are an X, but you support Y. How can you support Y and still say you are an X?" Something like that. I personally can see through the BS tricks these people use, but have to think about my responses. I can't come up with them in realtime. I'm amazed that RP can. I can't speak for the masses though, who I am sure will perceived him as stumbling over his words.

    • Justice Please, war most certainly effects the environment. If it's poison for humans, it's poison for the planet. Like DU munitions and white phosphorous for example. All life on Earth could benefit from humanity reducing its carbon footprint and being greener. And I don't doubt that some of our actions have an effect on aspects of the weather (like for example acid rain). If knowledge has taught me anything recently, it is to question anything 'scientific' when it is politicians embracing it. Especially the US Congress, a den of notorious liars who sell out to the highest bidder. The proceeds of a carbon tax go right back in to the pocketbooks for the elite. Another unnecessary squeeze that the public willingly buys into because they disguised it as saving the environment.

      There is no majority scientific consensus on climate change, contrary to popular MSM-influenced belief. In normal low Earth orbits, Astronauts cannot see any evidence of human civilization in daylight. The Earth is huge and in the grand scheme of things, were are nothing to it. But we are introducing poisons that could eventually be the death of us. Money can buy scientific opinion which can be spun out of context to support an agenda.

      In the 70's it was global cooling coupled with an ice age theory. The ice age became popular then and it was said that it was coming again. One thing to keep in mind about the ice age is that there is no proof it even happened, not the way they said it did at least. Now you got global warming which is more popularly known as 'climate change' because warm areas are unusually cooling. And we've had strange weather lately. But so has Saturn and Jupiter. Did humans cause that too? "Recorded History" is selfish from a historical perspective. Because history wasn't always recorded. That doesn't mean this hasn't happened before. If you buy into the green house thing, read about planet Venus. Obviously Venus to Earth isn't Apples to Apples because it's made of different stuff and rotates retrograde (and slowly) but still..

      Whitley Strieber, an author of fictional novels, invented global warming in 1998. He claims a strange possibly non-human man visited him and told him about it. He also claims he was abducted by UFOs in the 80s. Strieber told Art Bell about it on Coast to Coast AM and from there it went viral.

      Ron Paul's position on climate change is the same as mine and IMO rational. None of the other candidates would dare consider ending subsidies for oil companies and all would go to war to protect oil assets. Why would anybody trust them to be serious about reducing our carbon footprint then? The politicians behind this campaign are big spending hypocrites who won't reduce their own carbon footprint but still ask the middle class to reduce theirs.

  • Adelson is helping Gingrich, as he once helped Bush
    • Not the article I was thinking of, this one is new and from the same place. It's similar:

      link to

      The author is a Palestinian American. It's a response to the invented people thing and doesn't say he was a product of the lobby but it's kinda along the same lines. I can't find the one I was thinking of. Now that I remember it, I think it was implicating that Rupert Murdoch had something to do with bribing Newt from the outset too. Who knows...

    • I don't trust him, but Gordon Duff of Veterans Today once wrote something on Gingrich being 'invented' that made a whole lot of sense. That Gingrich was a 'creation' of the lobby from the very beginning. Basically they saw in this man somebody who could do their dirty work with a straight face and be 'charming' about it to gullible masses. Ron Paul's political ads kinda exposed part of this. His constant flip-flopping on issues and all the third party conflict-of-interest bribery.

      Adelson is one of the PTB. He has all the symptoms. Philanthropy to save face superficially that funds propaganda and can be used to throw his weight around if need be (the way 'donors' pressure universities to silence criticism of Israel). He is invested in the media, his Israeli newspaper has the highest readership in Israel. He is sue crazy, he sues everybody. And when people sue him he accuses them of lying. Always. And smears them. His lawyers are well-paid and make him nearly invincible. He apologizes a lot and his apologies lack empathy meaning he is likely a psychopath. And this is not the first time he has donated something to Gingrich.

      $20 million is quite a bit of cash. In the back of my mind, I kept thinking about that article written by Duff. I was thinking if this man was really a Likudite brought up by the lobby, why was he in the background in the initial straw polls and debates? Maybe they were waiting for the opportune moment to bring him to the spotlight, assuming there way any truth to the 'creation' thing to begin with. Now he's the front runner. That's why I think Duff was telling the truth (I'll try and dig up the article). Weird that the "Jewish Vote" abandoned Obummer to support Romney and now are supporting Gingrich. And that folks, is why Ron Paul is going to come out ahead. At least IMO. Because Gingrich is truly unelectable.

  • US and Israel march in lockstep towards expansion of military detention
    • Eric Cantor is a disgusting treasonous pig. "Culture of resentment and hatred" ???? That comment should be directed at his Zionist kin, not the Palestinians. For the Zionists are the culture of resentment and hatred. That's not even an opinion. What an ironic thing to say. These political pigs attacking the Palestinians (Cantor, Gingrich, etc.) are shooting themselves in the foot. You just don't go demonizing an entire people. Zionists are not an entire people by the way so yeah they can be demonized. Witty's Zionism is a fantasy that doesn't exist. Real Zionism is Jewish in name only, there is nothing Jewish about Zionism. It's time to take the pigs to the slaughter house.

    • pretty soon, talking about The Enlightenment will be a crime…

      I think that's kinda the point. The ruling class want to bring about another dark age. Abrahamism's original sin starts with eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge (of good and evil) which results in the 'fall of man.' Knowledge, knowing the truth, is 'sinful' to the few who really know the truth. Because when the truth gets out, the game is over.

      There has been several times in history where the truth began to spread. The Internet is the greatest tool we've ever had. Quirks aside, even Google has the ability to translate any language. There are chat programs that do the same. Every time this has happened in history it was followed by disaster. Plague, religious persecution if you don't convert, suppression of writing and philosophy. The mother of all conspiracy theories. Except it isn't a theory. It's a fact. The ruling class want to hold on to their dynasties no matter what the human cost is. The useful idiots under them will endlessly argue among themselves completely oblivious that the real bad guy is the elite PTB laughing at them from the sidelines.

  • Obama administration is likely to fold on AIPAC-backed legislation it opposed targeting Iran
    • IDF's invincibility is just an illusion. If you continue to repeat a lie, people believe it. It's the same thing. Even Israel's 'enemies' believe it and are also under the illusion they believe to have witnessed first hand. They have not. The IDF is a bunch of children with expensive and dangerous weapons that they don't know how to use. It's like Voldemort wielding the elder wand (yeah, I just referenced Harry Potter).

      The American government is the enemy of Americans and, for the most part, they have absolutely no clue. We are being destroyed from the inside. Admitting this will be considered terrorism in a month's time. Keep watching Jersey Shore, America. GTL will be the death of you.

  • Kristol is going to 'punch' Obama administration, in Palm Beach and Vegas
    • My responses to each of the bullet points:

      Israel's PM is a liar. He lied to the UN when he said he was going to tell the truth. Even Israelis don't like the guy

      It's both

      Israel isn't a democracy, the WB settlements are proof as are the recent non-Democratic laws. The ADL basically said the same thing as Clinton.

      It is Israel's fault. Even the CIA said that back in 1947: "Before the enunciation of the Balfour Declaration in 1917, the Jews in the Near East fared as well as other minority groups throughout the world. Since 1917, however, they have had to bear the brunt of Arab antagonism to the development of political Zionism in Palestine."
      Page 7 of link to

      Arab awakening and unification to overthrow their puppet dictators is a radical change?. If that's a problem for Israel, well it doesn't say a lot about Israel. I like how it says Israel needs US support in order to live. What is the scientific term for such a thing? A parasite. Why would the host care about keeping the parasite alive?

  • Settlers torch West Bank mosque, second attack in two days
    • It there any other occupation in the world where the occupying power's people come in and illegally set up outposts to live? Israel officially doesn't condone it, but neither do they seriously condemn it. That makes them responsible. Even many 'official' settlements have similar origins to the illegal outposts. The difference is they usually asked for permission. G-d isn't a real estate agent either. Consensus by a minority religion is outweighed by majority consensus of the rest of the world.

    • Christianity yes, Judaism probably not. Not saying they were 'best buds' but if you look at how Muslims spread Islam across North Africa all the way to Spain, you'll also find Sephardi Jews among them. When the Crusaders took over Jerusalem, they fought against Jews and Muslims. Jews may have been second class citizens, but it's nothing compared to how the Catholic Church would have treated them during the dark ages and inquisition.

      Most 'Judaism against Islam' happened in the past 100 years and really is Zionism's fault. The whole 'biblical enemies' thing is a modern creation, invented history.

  • 'Haaretz' hosts Ron Paul ad, and questions about Israel's 'sway' in U.S.
    • A lot of haaretz journalists would be out of a job if they wrote the same article verbatim in the US MSM. I just read that Bibi's approval rating is at 20%. Israelis ('left' and 'right') are not shy about voicing unfavorable opinions about him, even in the press. Even in the Knesset. Heck, even some of the Zionists and Hasbarists here. Another reason why Congress (both republican and democrat) kissing his arse is surreal.

  • Israel's war on Christmas --Updated
    • On my daily commute few years back, I recall driving past a huge Hanukkah menorah in front of a synagogue. It got knocked down a couple times. The area is a melting pot with no extremists or intolerance so I thought it was strange. Maybe it was the wind, I dunno.

    • When I was in high school in the late 90s, they re-named the Christmas tree 'Giving Tree' because of Kwanzaa. I think it was Kwanzaa. The staff would tell the students not to call it a Christmas tree (and then roll their eyes). Not the same thing as banning them as provocative though.

  • Friedman line, 'Congress is bought and paid for by Israel lobby,' is shot heard round the world
    • The masses have been manipulated by a mind control campaign to equate Israel together with Jews as if the two are inseparable. Therefore Friedman's critics can pretend he said "Jews" instead of Israel and the useful idiots will buy it.

      I love Rubin's mention of "cabal of Jews" ... Somebody should tell her that the Israel lobby is not a cabal of Jews, but primarily a cabal of psychopathic fundies who deliberately target wealthy Jewish donors (the "Jewish Vote") to pay for their political aspirations.

  • Obama to Palestine: Drop dead
    • Koshiro, you're absolutely right. Nothing is going to change. Somebody once said that if Israelis began eating Palestinian babies, the US would find a way to rationalize it. That's not intended to be a blood-libel reference btw. The banksters are the main problem. Look at the NYC skyline. Some say it's beautiful. I think it's ugly. Just a bunch of mostly boring buildings influenced by the same business class that occupies their offices. Business as usual is the status quo.

      The banksters created a recession that mainly hurt the middle class. They were bailed out by taxpayer money, siphoned from the middle class from bankster vampires. Instead of going to prison, they made the problem worse to fatten their pocketbooks. Then they go on business as usual.

      They support Israel for many reasons, mostly strategic, none of them having anything to do with Jewish self-determination. There are natural gas fields worth billions off of Israel's coast. There is a fortune of mineral in the Dead Sea. "Fortress Israel" keeps the neighbors and Eastern establishment in check and deters attacks when the banksters 'democratize' the ME and rob their resources.

      The USSR once supported both partition of Palestine on the surface, but behind the scenes they wanted it to remain the same (this is in a CIA report btw). They funded Zionist terror groups and via channels sold weapons and support. They also played both sides. My guess is that when Israel became independent, there was an opening that the US took advantage to win Israel from the USSR (which spiraled into the special relationship). The problem is the same 'hidden hand' from the USSR eventually took control over the US. Israel is a US presence in the ME, a strategic asset to the banksters for many reasons but mostly to maintain their order.

      There are a whole bunch of conspiracy theories about masonic imagery in Israel (especially the supreme court) but there is no conspiracy. Freemasonry is dominated by bankers. Just ask any freemason IRL. The banksters like to mark their territory with masonic imagery. That's why pyramids, all-seeing eyes, hexagrams, two-headed eagles, winged discs, etc. are quite common in banking logos, currency, and any property under bankster influence. My guess is it has to do with our founding fathers being mostly freemasons. That was in a time period before banksters 'corrupted' it into a joke. Banksters love fraternal secret societies because they love secrecy, that's how they carry out their agenda... in secret. There is no NWO, it's the status quo.. Globalized Western Democracy. An NWO would be a good thing in all honesty

  • Settlers attack Israeli military base and set fire to Jerusalem mosque
    • The JDL and the Sicilian Mafia. They get away with it because they aren't Palestinian (that and the whole organized crime thing). They're rouge, they could care less about Israel. They just take advantage of the status quo. And if the IOF wants to sit there calm as cattle, they're going to take them out too. "Israel" is a disaster from start to finish. Alpha to Omega. Zionism is dead. Whatever is left is a zombie (brainzzzzz!!)

  • A single-state vision must go beyond Israel vs Palestine, and be inclusive
    • yourstruly, There are differing opinions depending on how many 'layers' you peel back. Taking on the lobby won't necessarily bring down the special relationship, but it's a good start. The problem is the whole establishment of the modern era. The conspiracy theory about the "NWO" is completely backwards. The West has been globalizing this planet with 'democracy' for decades. It's not a conspiracy. It's not a NWO either, it's the status quo. There already is a one-world government (the UN) and a one-world leader (the US). The NWO is the current world order. I have this theory that the 'homeland' in DHS really is derived from 'moledet' and an old Hebrew definition of 'moledet' can be understood to mean 'common era'

      The US are the world's police. It's a fact. They want to preserve this plutocracy wrapped in democracy's clothing. Even going after the lobby, or anything really, is putting the cart before the horse. Why not put all our energy in taking on the elite? The international criminal banking empire and all the fools who protect them (world leaders.. financial dynasties of all flavors, especially monarchs like the Windsors). That is the problem. They have no transparency. We didn't elect anybody on wall street, therefore we don't live in a democracy. Because wall street is unofficially part of the government.

      The establishment is a bankster establishment. Cut off the head, and things like I/P will solve themselves. The occupy movement should spend sometime exposing these people. Names and names of family members. Faces. Political contributions. Daily activities including what they do in their private life. Some might say 'that's not right, bringing their families into it' and I say why? They live the lifestyle, they are also part of the problem. Do something that scares the elite because right now they are just laughing at the protesters.

    • The J14 movement failed because the protesters did not have a unified agenda. They figured once they started 'making demands' differing opinions would divide the movement and it would collapse. This is the same thing with the occupy movements in the US. Yeah they have a wiki with various ideas, but they're too afraid of dividing everybody if they start 'making demands.' This is why it too is headed for failure unless they take the beast head-on (like exposing names and their dynastic families).

      The problem with politics is that MOST PEOPLE are very much sleeping sheeple. Their hearts and minds are being manipulated by the ruling class. I had an IRL political argument with my in-laws and they were religiously disagreeing with me in favor of repeating tired rhetoric the MSM hypnotized them with. Unknowingly useful idiots for the elite. They have zero clue they are protecting the very people they complain about by repeating their bullet point scare tactics.

      Witty is right about changing attitudes. But in order to do that, you have to harness the exact same tools that are used to manipulate public opinion: the media. An impossible task for a 'nobody' like myself. The mutual humanization thing is not so simple however. Because changing attitudes is not a simple task. Spreading awareness that the elite ruling class 'dynasties' of the world (bankers and monarchs, many who are even inter-related) are the problem is simple. Getting everybody to agree on how to solve the problem is not simple. We're stuck in an endless argument among ourselves over superficial differences. We should be fighting against the PTB, not each other, but the PTB have the ability to influence public opinion. Sorry to get off topic there, but it's kinda related.

      Witty is less a liberal Zionist and more of an 'agnostic' Zionist. He cherry picks certain favorable aspects from what Zionism really is and has his own flavor of Zionism which isn't really Zionism. By not supporting one state or binationality, he supports segregation. There is no mutual humanization in a 2SS. Nobody expects the Jews to leave Israel. Some realize that the Jews in the WB are never going anywhere either. This is why a 2SS is impossible and also why Israel is guilty of Apartheid.

  • 'One of the most disturbing days I have ever experienced': An eyewitness account of the Israeli attack on Mustafa Tamimi's funeral
    • If anybody cares to look further down this rabbit hole, read the first chapter of Revelation, specifically 1:12-15. Now in your imagination think about what a Christmas angel looks like (like those ones you see on windows). With that in mind, here is a picture of Inanna:

      link to

      This is taken from a 4000+ year old Akkadian cylinder seal.

Showing comments 800 - 701