Trending Topics:

‘A better relationship with Iran’ is the deal’s secret promise, but supporters can’t say so

on 43 Comments

President Obama is still out front of his supporters on message. Three days ago he called his opponents on the Iran Deal “the crazies.” Will someone please give the president some support on this idea? No; political insiders are all afraid of the neoconservatives and the Israel lobby. So Obama is spending all his own political capital in what time he has left.

Though Chris Matthews also went after the crazies last night without calling them that. I’ve never seen him so emphatic in support of the Iran Deal. He pronounced Netanyahu like an epithet.

Let me finish with something really important, this agreement with Iran.

Some are asking now for President Obama to commit the United States to bombing Iran if it appears to be headed toward weaponizing 15 years from now. They want him to also give Israel a 30,000 pound bomb able to destroy even the most deeply buried Iranian nuclear facility.

What is the purpose of these demands? Is it to ensure that the agreement is carried out in good faith? Is it to further the possibility of a better relationship with Iran down the road? Really? Would committing ourselves to an attack at this point, in effect putting a gun to Iran’s head, achieve such a goal? Would giving Israel our giant penetrating bomb and giving Prime Minister Netanyahu the discretion on if and when to use it?

Notice that Matthews admits the possibility that Iran and the U.S. can become friends! This is the great unspoken benefit of the agreement, which its supporters are not allowed to express, again because of the presence of the Israel lobby in our politics. Even as British legislators champion this aspect of the agreement, a new chapter between the west and the ancient civilization of Persia, U.S. deal supporters are trapped in the rhetoric that Iran is irredeemably evil and can’t be trusted and the best way to contain that evil is through the mechanism of this deal. Matthews breaks out of that frame.

The folks who want Iran to get that huge bomb are Dennis Ross, Israel’s lawyer in the United States, and David Petraeus.

No one but Obama is calling opponents of the deal crazies because the opponents are generally Israel-supporters, and they have purchase inside the Establishment. Israel’s interest continues to dominate the American discussion of the issue.

Washington Senator Patty Murray’s statement in support of the Iran deal mentions Israel more often than it does the United States: Israel or Israeli, 11 times. United States or U.S., 9 times.  She is a liberal Democrat. And there’s no glimmer of hope that Iran can change in the statement. No, Iran is evil forever.

My support for this deal isn’t based on the hope that it will cause Iran to become more moderate, more trustworthy, or friendlier toward the United States and Israel.

Murray praises Israeli ambassador Ron Dermer for lobbying her on the question, and speaks repeatedly of working with Israel “hand-in-hand”:

Fourth, our support for Israel should continue and be strengthened to make it crystal clear to all in the region that we will stand with our ally to enforce this deal and make sure Iran doesn’t hurt our shared interests in any other way.

“As a strong supporter of Israel, I know full well the risks Israelis face every single day as the only democracy in a region where their some of their closest neighbors are also their fiercest enemies. I deeply value my friends in Washington state who have worked with me for decades to help me understand the region, its people, and its needs. I have traveled with them to Israel and I have seen the emotional, personal, and economic ties between our two countries. I have been a strong supporter of sanctions on Iran, military and economic support for Israel, and standing with our ally hand-in-hand toward our shared goals of peace, security, and prosperity in the region. There are strong supporters of Israel on both sides of this issue, and I deeply value the thoughts and guidance I received from those who share my view that the United States has a strong interest in protecting Israel and making sure Iran never develops a nuclear weapon. And I am looking forward to working with supporters of Israel to make sure that this deal is implemented and enforced in a way that works for our strong friend and ally.

The brave NY Congressman Jerrold Nadler continues to get slammed for his support for the deal. “I never expected the vicious nature of the opposition,” Nadler told Jewish Week. Nadler has more Jews in his district than any other congressperson, and the religious ones in Brooklyn are up in arms, and threatening to primary him next year. This rightwing Jewish site says, “Traitor Congressman commits treason again.” Nadler has called the rhetoric poisonous:

Responding to the critics and accusations, Nadler told JP [Jewish Political updates] on Friday that the comments made against him “poisonous” and “absurd.”

“Saying that someone who supports the deal is an enemy of Israel is absurd; saying that anyone – Senator Schumer or someone else – who opposes the deal is guilty of dual loyalty or treason is absurd,” Nadler told JP. “That kind of rhetoric poisons a rational debate and poisons politics. It is just wrong and has to be discouraged. You know, it’s ‘sinas chinam’ (gratuitous hatred) – we’ve had that before – it’s just sinas chinam… The kind of rhetoric that talks about motives is poisonous.”

Here is a J Street petition to support Nadler in his hour of need. Notice that it mentions Israel but not the United States!

Thanks for speaking out in support of the international agreement with Iran.

As a supporter of Israel, I know that this deal is the best way to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

This is a tough fight, but your constituents have your back. We’re glad you’re standing up for diplomacy.

J Street must know its constituency: liberal Jews who still love Israel. Writes one: “Memo to US Jews: Listen to Isr security officials & SUPPORT #IranDeal.” To be clear, Zionism is still the predominant strain inside American Jewish life. Anti-Zionist Jews are still outliers in that community. We’re catching on among the young, but the young don’t give tens of thousands to political campaigns. And Jews who don’t care about Israel may well be a majority in Jewish life (as Jon Basil Utley says), but the lobby is the active voice.

The National Jewish Democratic Council is backing Nadler. Brooklyn power rabbi Andy Bachman is doing so. NY City Council Member Brad Lander is too. And three other Jewish NY congresspeople have come out against the attacks on Nadler. “No matter where you stand on the Iran deal, comparisons to the Holocaust, the darkest chapter in human history, questioning the credentials of long-standing advocates for Israel, and accusations of dual loyalty are inappropriate.” Chuck Schumer “issued a statement calling Nadler ‘one of the most steadfast supporters of Israel’s security.'”

Obama lost another NY congressperson, Carolyn Maloney, but picked up a California rep. J Street’s spokesperson:

Foreign Affairs Committee Rep. Alan Lowenthal [Democrat from Long Beach, CA] announces support for the . Pro-deal Jewish lawmakers outnumber those opposed 12 to 7

I am often attacked for counting Jews in powerful positions. Let’s be clear that Israel supporters are also counting Jews. They do so for the same reason I do, because Jews have disproportionate power in this discussion. Keep in mind that Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill and Indiana Senator Joe Donnelly have supported the Iran Deal without Nadler’s repercussions. “Expected legions” did not materialize at town halls. So the Christian Zionists don’t really care that much about this, while the ardent Jewish ones do.


Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

43 Responses

  1. Citizen on August 27, 2015, 11:29 am

    I have not read this MW article yet, but already agree with it’s banner. Just want to get this out there: A Palestinian Novel Par Excellence:

  2. Citizen on August 27, 2015, 12:27 pm

    Nice to know What’s good for Israel is the chief concern of in-fighting; who cares about US best interests, or the World’s? Nobody with influence. As a non-Jewish American, I am very depressed & frustrated about this. You’d think by how this is playing out that Jews comprised 98% of USA, not 2%. Campaign finance system needs a revolution.

  3. Bandolero on August 27, 2015, 12:32 pm


    Three days ago he (Obama) called his opponents on the Iran Deal “the crazies.”

    As I commented here before I do strongly think that saying Obama called his opponents of the Iran deal “the crazies” is a mischaracterisation of what he actually said.

    Bush Sr.’s CIA Briefer Ray McGovern was very clear that the term the crazies is widely known inside US power structures as a reference to the neocons trying to lead the US in endless international confrontations and serial wars of aggression.

    AMY GOODMAN:Now one of the things we are talking about a lot and seeing a lot is that the same people that were there during the Reagan-Bush years and even before, the Wolfowitzes the Rumsfelds, Cheneys were there then. What was George Bush’s view of these people then?

    RAY MCGOVERN: Well, you know it’s really interesting. When we saw these people coming back in town, all of us said who were around in those days said, oh my god, ‘the crazies’ are back — ‘the crazies’ — that’s how we referred to these people.

    AMY GOODMAN: Did George Bush refer to them that way?

    RAY MCGOVERN: That’s the way everyone referred to them.

    AMY GOODMAN: Including George Bush?

    RAY MCGOVERN: Well, when Wolfowitz prepared that defense posture statement in 1991, where he elucidated the strategic vision that has now been implemented, Jim Baker, Secretary of State, Brent Scowcroft, security advisor to George Bush, and George Bush said hey, that thing goes right into the circular file. Suppress that thing, get rid of it. Somebody had the presence of mind to leak it and so that was suppressed. But now to see that arise out of the ashes and be implemented. while we start a war against Iraq, I wonder what Bush the first is really thinking. Because these were the same guys that all of us referred to as ‘the crazies’.


    In April 2015 Ray McGovern used the term “the crazies” again over there at Consoritum News:

    Would the neocons – widely known as “the crazies” at least among the remaining sane people of Washington – have been crazy enough to opt for war to re-arrange the Middle East if the Soviet Union had not fallen apart in 1991?

    The question is not an idle one. Despite the debacle in Iraq and elsewhere, the neocon “crazies” still exercise huge influence in Establishment Washington. Thus, the question now becomes whether, with Russia far more stable and much stronger, the “crazies” are prepared to risk military escalation with Russia over Ukraine, what retired U.S. diplomat William R. Polk deemed a potentially dangerous nuclear confrontation, a “Cuban Missile Crisis in reverse.”

    As a BBC journalist claimed in 2004 Colin Powell is also said to have referred to the neocons as the crazies. And Bill Kristol, editor of the neocon flagship The Weekly Standard, immediately after Obama’s comment confirmed he felt he was among the people meant with the term the crazies. So, to me it’s quite clear that the crazies is a term refering to the adherents of the neocon ideology. I think the term “the extremists” would fit better, because the main problem with the neocons is their Likudist extremism, but the term to use to make many people understand that the neocons are meant is “the crazies.”

    And then look what Obama really said:

    “We were doing a little reminiscing and then figuring out how we’re going to deal with the crazies in terms of managing some problems. And then we talked about riding off into the sunset together.”

    He said he and Harry Reid are going to deal with the crazies, ie the neocons, in terms of managing some problems. Some problems is not only a single problem, but a plural. So, what’ Obama really said, was he’s going to take on the Neocons on a whole series of issues, and Harry Reid helps him doing that.

    And, of course, it’s not that hard to figure put, what these international problems are, where Obama is at loggerheads with the neocons. At the forefront of these problems are: Peace in Palestine, the relationship with Iran, and the wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine and Yemen.

    And herein lies what’s really behind the Iran deal. It’s a mischaracterization to say that it is in the cards that Iran and the U.S. can become friends. It’s not, both Obama and Khemenei have been clear on that. However, what is in the cards is a working relationship with Iran based on mutual interests. And here Iran is almost everywhere on Obama’s side, ie in Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen, while the neocons are on the opposite side. So, what is in the cards is that Obama and his huys in the US will work together on all the wars in Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen, working to get an outcome liked by Obama and Iran, and disliked by the neocons. That is a huge, very huge perspective.

    And there is even more US-Iranian collaboration based on mutual interests in the cards, for example bringing down the world heroin production and stamping out the ideological roots of global Wahhabi terrorism, so there is ample space for further US-Iranian cooperation based on mutual interests. And, of course, at the center of all this US-Iranian cooperation may well be the shared interest to put the neocon extremism back in the box, what is precisely why Netanyahu goes all out against the effort by Obama to bring back in Iran.

    • ritzl on August 27, 2015, 5:16 pm

      Great comment, Bandolero.

    • traintosiberia on August 27, 2015, 10:03 pm

      No body called Pol Pot or ISIS leader crazy. No body would call Hitler or Himmler now .
      Why are we calling crazy? They should be sitting on death row or be sitting in a cage crying for mercy

    • michelle on August 27, 2015, 10:21 pm

      so the POTUS (and other leaders) when ‘pointing’ at “neocons” is/are actually
      pointing at Israel as stated in the main post
      “…. Christian Zionists don’t really care that much about this, while the ardent
      Jewish ones do.”
      this would mean our leaders call Israelis/and Israeli supporters “the crazies”
      and have been for quite some time
      this misdirection is the way abusers try to get out from under their abusers
      while also trying to avoid further abuse
      this means Israel/Israel supporters are abusing America
      it’s long past time to stop the abuse
      G-d Bless

      • michelle on August 27, 2015, 10:28 pm

        this misdirection is the way abusers try to get out from under their abusers
        should have said;
        this misdirection is the way the abused try to get out from under their abusers
        a thousand excuse mes
        G-d Bless

  4. Dan Crowther on August 27, 2015, 1:39 pm

    I want to ask a question here: does anyone here, after watching the “Iran debate” and “The Lobby’s” antics ever question the shibboleth that all of European “antisemitism” was irrational and based solely on a racist hatred? Cuz you can read a million and one French, German, English, Spanish, Russian (and others) writers describing THE EXACT SAME shit happening in their countries at different times and obviously in different places.

    Its a question Phil should answer. We’re watching a worldwide conspiracy and shakedown right before our eyes, and no one here denies it. I’m wondering if people think this is the ONLY time the stereotype or the accusation is true.

    • Sibiriak on August 27, 2015, 2:24 pm

      Dan Crowther: … Cuz you can read a million and one French, German, English, Spanish, Russian (and others) writers describing THE EXACT SAME shit happening in their countries at different times…

      It would be helpful if you could give some examples of what you think appears to be the “exact same shit” happening previously.

    • Bandolero on August 27, 2015, 3:15 pm

      Dan Crowther

      All kinds of xenophobia, hatred against groups of others and the gruesome mistreatment of others individually and in groups were common and accepted until recently. Sometimes more or less rational disputes were at the bottom of such abhorrent human behaviour, at other times it was just irrational, and often a mix of both rational and irrational elements were involved. That’s human history, not just European or jewish history.

      What’s not new is the racism of the zionist movement, it’s just copied from wide-spread European racism in the era of colonialism and imperialism of the late 19th century. What’s new is the huge amount of power the zionist jewish movement got. I think it happened before in judaism, that quite large streams of the faith followed guys who claimed redemption came now, but never before judaism or a redemption stream of the faith got so much power and got so mainstream as it is with zionism now.

    • Krauss on August 27, 2015, 3:58 pm

      What conspiracy, Dan?

      Who were behind the takeover of Iran in the mid-50s? Jews? Or WASPs? Or look at architects of the Imperialism in the Middle East, who divided up the nations and drew the national borders(English and the French). Who were the men in those governments? Jews or Christians?

      It’s undeniable that Zionist Jews have a disproportinate influence over current U.S. policy visavi the Middle East, just as it is undeniable that this is a recent phenomenom when you look at the long arc in history.

      Further, the accusations against Jews in those eras were of an all-encompassing conspiracy. Jews controlled everything, or near-everything. Ask yourself, what’s the “Jewish agenda” on the economy? Healthcare? Education? Most Jews are liberal voters so most of them will vote for left-wing policies, but there isn’t any semblance of a Jewish lobby in domestic American politics.

      All Jewish political power has been focused on a single topic: U.S. Middle Eastern foreign policy. There’s no Jewish lobby on East Asian policy or on Africa. None on climate change or on the NPT. And so on.

      We talk a lot about Jewish lobbies on this site because the whole focus of this site is on American policy in the Middle East, and it is 100% relevant to do so. But outside of this niche, tell me where the conspiracies and the influence-peddling is? Because that was the refrain in the fantasies that existed in Europe in previous centuries.

      • Citizen on August 27, 2015, 5:50 pm

        @ Krauss

        “But outside of this niche, tell me where the conspiracies and the influence-peddling is? ”

        Do you mean, which areas of “jewish geography” come up persistently on the web? In terms of bragging sites, or critical sites?

    • Keith on August 27, 2015, 5:18 pm

      DAN CROWTHER- “I want to ask a question here: does anyone here, after watching the “Iran debate” and “The Lobby’s” antics ever question the shibboleth that all of European “antisemitism” was irrational and based solely on a racist hatred?”

      I have long denigrated the very notion of irrational and eternal anti-Semitism. Furthermore, the very statement itself represents irrational Jewish anti-Gentile bias. And while we endlessly discuss anti-Semitism (an insignificant problem), how often do we examine Jewish attitudes towards Gentiles? Is not Jewish “kinship” a form of de facto discrimination against Gentiles? How else to explain the wildly disproportionate level of Jewish wealth and power except as a consequence (at least partially) of a form of ethnic gild system which produces birthright Mandarins? The rise of Zionist inspired Jewish tribal solidarity and unprecedented American Jewish success go hand in hand.

      • Mooser on August 27, 2015, 10:33 pm

        “How else to explain the wildly disproportionate level of Jewish wealth and power except as a consequence (at least partially) of a form of ethnic gild system which produces birthright Mandarins? The rise of Zionist inspired Jewish tribal solidarity and unprecedented American Jewish success go hand in hand.”

        You tell ’em Keith! And I bet there isn’t a Zionist alive who wouldn’t whole-heartedly agree with you! Without Zionism, and all that goes with, we Jews would be sunk! You won’t get a Zionist to disagree with that.

      • Keith on August 28, 2015, 9:47 am

        MOOSER- “And I bet there isn’t a Zionist alive who wouldn’t whole-heartedly agree with you!”

        Actually, Mr. Smartypants, most Zionists would likely accuse me of anti-Semitic tropes for even suggesting such a thing. Just ask Hophmi. It is all explained by meritocracy and has nothing to do with kinship, Phil’s anti-Semitic construct. In Hophmi’s world, Zionism is a response to anti-Semitism, nothing more. Or at least that is what he claims.

      • Keith on August 28, 2015, 10:01 am

        MOOSER- “Without Zionism, and all that goes with, we Jews would be sunk!”

        The primary beneficiaries of Zionism are, of course, the Jewish elites. As with all groups, it is the elites who determine policy and reap most of the benefits. There has been enough trickle down, however, to keep the majority of non-elite Jews content, dimly aware of a privileged status yet convinced of eternal victimhood, a conviction which only grows stronger as Jewish power increases and the Holocaust recedes. Witness the phenomenon of the tribal anti-Zionists.

    • Citizen on August 27, 2015, 6:12 pm

      @Dan Crowther
      “I’m wondering if people think this is the ONLY time the stereotype or the accusation is true.”
      If they do, I suggest they read Esau’s Tears.

  5. Krauss on August 27, 2015, 3:51 pm

    The people who are against “counting Jews” are in effect saying let’s not talk about Jewish power.

    Like Rothkopf, who is rushing to declare the lobby dead at first moment he can.
    Or the liberal Zionists in Haaretz, including Bronfman, who keep urging unity and to suppress open debate.

    I don’t see many people batting an eyelash when white men and Asien men are counted in silicon valley tech CEO positions. You have to do it, in order to point to cultural power in a sector.

    The same is true when it comes to U.S. policy towards the Middle East.
    The people who want to forbid that in effect want to protect the status quo.

  6. ckg on August 27, 2015, 4:02 pm

    The West is apparently not allowed to have a better relationship with Iran. Israel is trying to get Merkel to have the Berlin State Opera cancel its upcoming Tehran Performance. Israeli Culture Minister Miri Regev, who also leads the government’s anti-BDS efforts, wants the orchestra to boycott Iran. You can’t make this stuff up.

    • Kay24 on August 27, 2015, 4:14 pm

      Israel reminds me of a mean and jealous neighbor, who cannot stand the thought of their neighbor doing well in life and having a better car and bigger house. Israel is constantly going around poisoning minds and interfering in the business of others. Disgusting lot.

    • lysias on August 27, 2015, 4:26 pm

      Berlin State Opera is going ahead with its plans to go to Iran, and Barenboim says Israel’s Palestinian policies put in question the very bases for the existence of Israel. Barenboim bestätigt Konzertpläne in Teheran:

      Barenboim hat immer wieder die israelische Siedlungspolitik und die Haltung der verschiedenen Regierungen gegenüber den Palästinensern kritisiert. Die Besetzung sei moralisch falsch und stelle auch die Existenzgrundlagen Israels in Frage.

      Article in RBB On Line details the complaints made by Israeli Culture Minister Miri Regev. They’re incredible, accuse Barenboim of “behaving in an anti-Israeli was [anti-israelisch verhält]”. Barenboim bestätigt Konzertpläne in Teheran.

      • ckg on August 27, 2015, 5:42 pm

        Die Besetzung sei moralisch falsch und stelle auch die Existenzgrundlagen Israels in Frage.


      • lysias on August 27, 2015, 5:54 pm

        Speaking of the German subjunctive, the SPIEGEL ONLINE article on this flap uses the indicative when it ought to have used the subjunctive:

        “Ich finde, Deutschland täte gut daran, den Auftritt der Kapelle und ihres Dirigenten abzusagen”, schrieb Regev. “Die Töne aus Teheran sind schrill und gefährlich.” Iran gilt als Erzfeind Israels und hat immer wieder zur Zerstörung des jüdischen Staates aufgerufen.

        Should have been:

        und habe immer wieder zur Zerstörung des jüdischen Staates aufgerufen.

      • ckg on August 27, 2015, 6:20 pm

        lol, lysias. It has been 35 years since I had a year of German in college.

      • lysias on August 27, 2015, 6:36 pm

        Subjunctive casts doubt on the truth of what is said. Indicative affirms its truth.

        In this case, it is not true that Iran has repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel.

      • Bandolero on August 27, 2015, 7:12 pm


        In this case, it is not true that Iran has repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel.

        Of course, Iran calls for the destruction of Israel. But Iran is equally clear that that shall not mean massacring jews. That’s the point missing in western media. See:

      • echinococcus on August 27, 2015, 10:05 pm


        A fastidious grammarian would not mark this as subjunctive proper but simply as reported speech tense (which exists in a variety of languages including German.) The proper tense to use when you are quoting but not necessarily verbatim, i.e. a tense that allows the narrator to keep a distance from the quoted person’s opinion.

      • WH on August 28, 2015, 3:47 am

        The use of the indicative here isn’t grammatically wrong, it’s factually wrong; the article is not reporting the speech of Regev, it’s claiming that Iran actually does this. But perhaps this is what you’re saying anyway.

      • lysias on August 30, 2015, 5:48 pm

        WH, that’s exactly what I’m saying.

    • lysias on August 27, 2015, 4:41 pm

      One wonders on what grounds the Israelis oppose cultural boycotts of Israel.

      • ckg on August 27, 2015, 8:14 pm

        We can thank Regev for blessing the cultural boycott as a legitimate tactic.

    • subconscious on August 30, 2015, 2:12 am

      Not to be out-loonied by the Israeli ministry of culture, the Iranian ministry of Culture & Islamic Guidance has announced that “once it became known that some of the leaders and those in charge of this orchestra have Israeli identities, this issue was confronted with immediately and this orchestra will not have permission to perform in Iran. … The Islamic Republic neither recognizes this regime, nor collaborates with their artists.” This followed a report by the hardline Fars News Agency warning of the “impending presence of the Berlin orchestra, headed by a citizen of the Zionist regime, in Tehran.”
      Regev, clearly, underestimated the Iranians in seeing through his dastardly reverse-psychology plot to plant the “Zionist-affiliated” Barenboim at the heart of the Islamic Republic.

  7. ritzl on August 27, 2015, 5:48 pm

    Again, gas prices are DOWN 50 cents a gallon since the Iran deal was hammered out.

    How does that NOT make ALL other political calculations on this irrelevant? Every single driving voter in the US is currently saving USD100 a week because of this deal.

    Just one short primetime speech, Mr. President and this “debate” is over. Just ONE.

    One link of MANY:


    This is Obama’s massive failing as a politician and a President. He shows the guts to go after and GET potentially profoundly game-changing political works done and then, instead of making the beneficial big picture case directly to the voter/beneficiaries, fiddles around with recedingly minor policial considerations to get it finalized.

    In this case (the ACA being the other case) he now seems to be trying to preserve Jewish campaign support for Dems by not slam-dunking this with popular appeals.

    Tough to read this exceedingly narrow political debate any other way.

    • Kay24 on August 27, 2015, 5:57 pm

      You are right. I notice that Obama is not very good at selling his policies to the American people, despite having the megaphone. He seems reluctant to send his officials around to clearly state the advantages of this nuclear deal. The other side is meaner and louder.

      • ritzl on August 27, 2015, 7:15 pm

        Hey Kay. I just wanted to say thanks for posting that Haaretz link on NGO funding of Jewish terrorism.

        Very important piece of the legal puzzle that may enable Palestinians to sue in US courts for damages due to Jewish terrorism in the WB. Just a piece, but a big piece, imho.

      • Kay24 on August 27, 2015, 9:48 pm

        You are welcome Ritzl. I am glad this has brought some focus on the situation too.
        Directly or indirectly those Jewish terrorists do get benefits from us too.

    • michelle on August 27, 2015, 11:25 pm

      one must see the mess to clean it up
      the issue isn’t the I-deal
      the issue is the Israel/Israel supporters efforts to block Americas acceptance of the I-deal
      or in bigger terms their efforts to control the American government/people
      the POTUS has already won this one
      the truth is pouring through the holes in the wall
      and Israel doesn’t have enough power to fill the holes
      the POTUS is tearing down the wall of power Israel built in/on America
      G-d Bless

  8. michelle on August 27, 2015, 9:04 pm

    America is Israels friend how so
    Israel is Americas friend how so
    what makes/defines a friend
    friends Israel doesn’t have or want friends
    the only ‘friends’ Israel has are gagged/tied/bleeding money & soldiers for Israel interests
    America needs to find real friends
    new leaf
    G-d Bless

    • Kay24 on August 27, 2015, 9:49 pm

      Israel pretend to be a friend, but it is more of a parasitic relationship.

      When we stop sending the aid, weapons, and the support, they will quickly unfriend us.

      • michelle on August 27, 2015, 11:03 pm

        hello Kay24
        May the Blessings of the universe be yours
        tick tock
        think of the actual good that can be done with all that
        American aid (let us hope not in the form of arms) in
        America and other places
        G-d Bless

  9. Kay24 on August 28, 2015, 6:39 am

    What do we get out of the Iran deal, how about cheaper gas?

  10. Krendall Mist on August 30, 2015, 8:39 pm

    “Jews have disproportionate power in this discussion.”

    What is “disproportionate power” in a “discussion”?

    Did the author mean to say “decision” instead of “discussion,” perhaps?

    No matter. Jewish predominance among media and other public platforms featuring the “Iran debate” is not something any rational person should whine about.

    From stem to stern, the “Iran nuclear weapon program” phenomenon has been a Zionist-manufactured and maintained fraud. Other than for political sycophants and the mutant known as the Christian Zionist, most of your American goyim are way too checked out when it comes to the policies of the US empire or its ruling Zionist elites to even care whether its real or not.

    Let the Jews have the discussion. The lumpen are watching TV.

Leave a Reply