Trending Topics:

Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 67 (since 2011-07-06 05:51:58)

An Avid Reader. A News-Political Junkie

Showing comments 67 - 1

  • Palestinian legislators are 'dragged out' of Knesset as Pence promises embassy will move in 2019
    • After reading all the replies and the name calling .... I am rather hesitant to reply in case I may appear to be encouraging such actions by Palestinian supporters or with voicing support for terrorism. I want to make it quite clear that I am only commenting as a discussion point only.

      However; I will respond this final time in regards to the views expressed here by comments made by readers..

      I agree that Americans would be totally angry. Totally!

      Do yuh think that Americans could be any more angry than the Palestinians are at this moment in history?

      But what could the Americans actually do about it but to relent and negotiate.

      It would be impossible for the Americans to ignore.

      I guess America could choose some nuclear option against Palestine, but there are far too many Palestinian supporters who might react and act upon the threat with the use of violence in reaction to the threat.

    • I agree that the average American would not be too impressed, but a threat such as this would succinctly put the ball directly into the American mainstream. If given the choice, I believe that the American public will never willingly give up their "Sacred Ground" (forests/parklands) for the sake of some biblical dream of Israel. I think the public would demand immediate negotiations with updates on a daily basis. Otherwise, the cost would be to great to have ever imagined. Truth is, the Americans would be unable to defend themselves from such a threat just as the Middle East is unable to defend themselves from Israeli aggression. Americans would be just as defenseless as the Palestinian Peoples are while attempting to protect and preserve their Palestinian sacred ground.

    • I read somewhere that the Palestinian leadership is about to make it known to U.S. negotiators that for every inch of land illegally seized by Israel since the 1967 war that there would be a reprisal within all NATO member countries and would result in the destruction of any/all forest and parklands?

      Do you think that NATO countries be willing to lose the heritage and financial asset of these lands for Israel?

      NATO members are unable to defend themselves from such destruction by fire because of the land areas being so vast.

      I believe that the threat alone would be sufficient and that there would be no need to actually carry out such a dastardly act. Most importantly, if any fire began with a lightning strike, would simply raise the attention of the Palestinian cause with the paranoia rise within NATO member countries.

      NATO member countries view their forests and parklands as sacred ground just as the Palestinians view their historical homeland.

      I think that NATO would be at the negotiating table in the morning.

      I think that the threat alone would grab worldwide attention and force the average American (Not Politicians) to view the Palestinian issue in a proper light with an easy comparison on how each view their homeland. I think that the threat alone would have the average voter demanding pre-1967 borders and refusal to support Israel wars any further. Israel would have a huge public relations issue on the table as with the possibility of smoke rising high into the skies and Americans see the Israeli war arriving on their doorstep.

  • I'm not worried about anti-Semitism
    • I have never seen the American public so angry as they are today.

      They want to strike out at anybody who even smells of wealth.

      And we all know full well what that means.


  • Why Trump's revolution succeeded, and Bernie's fizzled
    • The Left is much too polite, and thus appear in TV Land and Mouse Land as a bunch of whimps.

      The Left needs to scream just as loud, just as angrily, as the Tea Party did as they turned up at townhall meetings with guns strapped to their waist.

      The Left is seen whimpering "Duh .... Can't we all just get along?"

      When the Left watch media stories, they want to see the same tone of anger from their leadership as they feel within their own hearts.

      Anger denotes "commitment".


  • Thank you, Chief Rabbi. Now I know: Judaism is to blame for the Nakba
    • @ Ritzl

      Thank You for your reply. It was very kind of you.

      I will take my website off-line now too.


    • Well, I guess they are not going to post the reply I gave to Annie Robbins ..... Maybe it got lost in Mouse Land.

      I explain again for you since you were kind enough to reply to me.

      I was at a forum and I read a discussion concerning settlements.

      One person made the claim that there were new settlements opening up .....

      And a Pro-Israel person replied that Israel had not opened a new settlement since the Oslo Accords.

      I was kind of shocked by this because I was under the impression that Israel had opened new settlements.

      I keep a personal database of sorts on the Israel/Palestine issue because it interests me immensely. I will link you to it, and will leave it available for your viewing for a short time. Normally I don't have it open for public viewing.

      Anyways; when I attempted to find "New" settlements within all the articles and commentaries I have collected over the years, I could not find "New".

      So, that is why I asked the question here.

      Thank you for your interest.


    • Your answer is in an earlier post I aimed at Annie Robbins. (about 15 minutes ago, before I read your reply.)

      It is still with "Moderation". (Maybe they won't post it.)


    • Oh! I thought you would know a bit about me if you clicked my name and it would show previous conversations here.

      I am quite serious ..... I keep reading that Bibi has not created new settlements since the Oslo accords and I find it awful confusing to investigate whether or not this is true. I don't live in the area and "Expansion" is all I read about, but not "New" settlements.

      And, when the claim "Expansion" is used, does that mean the actual land size increased or that only more settlers moved in or the building of new houses?

      Does "Expansion" (not land size but only new houses) break the Oslo Accords?

      I keep reading about security fences ..... Are the Israeli's getting around Oslo by building security fences outside of the original settlement land base?

      I thank you for offering to assist me. I would really appreciate it.


    • Can a reader answer this question for me, Please?

      Since the Oslo Accords, has Israel opened any new settlements or have they only expanded existing ones?


  • Resolution 242 does not mean what you may think it means
    • I thank you for your replies.

      Very kind of you.


    • Is Robert Fisk Right?


      Robert Fisk’s World: One missing word sowed the seeds of catastrophe
      No one in 1967 thought the Arab-Israeli conflict would still be in progress 41 years later
      By Robert Fisk
      December 20, 2008

      The Israelis say that they are not required to withdraw from all the territories – because the word "all" is missing and since the definite article "the" is missing before the word "territories", its up to Israel to decide which bits of the occupied territories it gives up and which bits it keeps.

      Hence Israel can say it gave up Sinai in accordance with 242 but is going to keep East Jerusalem and much of the West Bank for its settlers. Golan depends on negotiations with Syria. And Gaza? Well, 242 doesn't say anything about imprisoning one and a half million civilians because they voted for the wrong people. No one in 1967 dreamed that the Israeli-Arab conflict would still be in ferocious progress 41 years later. And as an Independent reader pointed out a couple of years ago, the Security Council clearly never intended the absence of a definite article to give Israel an excuse to stay in the West Bank. Alas, our reader was wrong.

      I've been going back through my files on 242 and discovered a most elucidating paper by John McHugo, who was a visiting fellow at the Scottish Centre for International Law at Edinburgh University. He points out that pro-Israeli lawyers have been saying for some years that "Resolution 242 unanimously called for withdrawal from 'territories' rather than withdrawal from 'all the territories'. Its choice of words was deliberate... they signify that withdrawal if required from some but not all the territories".

      McHugo is, so far as I know, the only man to re-examine the actual UN debates on 242 and they make very unhappy reading. The French and Spanish versions of the text actually use the definite article. But the Brits – apparently following a bit of strong-arm tactics from the Americans – did not use "the". Lord Caradon, our man at the UN, insisted on putting in the phrase about the "inadmissability of the acquisition of territory by war" in order to stop the Israelis claiming that they could cherry-pick which lands to return and which to hand on to. Britain accepted Jordan's rule over the West Back – the PLO were still shunned as super-terrorists at the time – but it did no good. Abba Eban, Israel's man on the East River, did his best to persuade Caradon to delete both "the" and the bit about the inadmissability of territory through war. He won the first battle, but not the second.

  • Israel and its lobby lose the Iran Deal all over again, in news of damning wiretaps
    • When I first read the WSJ article, I was left with the thought that NSA wiretaps would expose the duplicity of some members of congress and then could be used to entice these same members to vote for the deal or be exposed or accused of treason with threats that recordings of such conversations with Bibi and The Boys being leaked.


  • 'Valentino's Ghost' makes comeback after 4 years of suppression
  • Large majority of Palestinians in WB and Gaza think a full scale Intifada is on the horizon
    • I often wonder why the Palestinians just don't begin extrajudicial assassinations in cities across the universe, just like Israel does.

      The only way they will win is if Jewish supporters across the world are just as terrified as those living in Palestine are.


  • Watch: Young Israeli Jew at Western Wall calls for 'another war and another war and another war and another war'
    • American sympathy has turned to the tearful folks on a mountain top in Iraq and away from the Palestinian Folks who dwell in a valley surrounded by raw sewage and rotting corpses.

      On the Mountain Top it is said to be all about "Cruelty" and "Survival", and in Gaza it said to be all about "Legalities".

      In Iraq the narrative begins with "Innocence" and "Morality", and in Gaza the narrative begins with "Was It Legal?"


  • Thought experiment. Dateline Ukraine
    • I constantly view this crisis and compare it to how the protesters during the Occupy Movement were portrayed.

      Never once did I ever hear the U.S. media describe the Occupy Protesters as being "Brave".

      Earlier this week I contacted Media Lens and IPS and suggested a story which compared media coverage of protesters during the British riots or with Occupy Wall Street.

      As of this date, I have on viewed one commentary which sort of makes the comparison.

      What if Americans Demanded the Ouster of This Government?
      Criticizing repression of protest abroad, practicing it at home
      By Dave Lindorff
      February 26, 2014


  • Cut off arms to Israel, Amnesty Int'l says, citing 22 civilians killed at protests last year
  • Stephen Harper's Criticizing-Israel-Is-Anti-Semitic screed is exploded on CBC
    • I'm not trying to be a stickler or whatever, but just wanted to give the correct spelling of the host of the CBC program.

      Piya Chattopadhyay


  • Two-state advocates are on the defensive in debate on Capitol Hill
    • I made a mistake referring to "International Law" and should of used the term "International Opinion".

      When the oil/gas pipelines servicing the European Union have all been completed, and when Europe is no longer dependent upon Russian natural gas and oil, that is when the U.S. walks away. The minute this "split" happens, is the very moment in time that the world becomes a 2-axis community and not an international community. The pipeline routes through Syria or Turkey or Pakistan must be decided first. I will take another 5 years after securing the pipeline route for the pipelines to be built.

      There is one huge problem right now with Bahrain and the U.S. may lose its shipping port located there. Thus making the gas/oil pipelines more necessary.

      I think that the next move (leave UN) by Israel is quite plain.

      And, what I am trying to explain is that "Negotiations" is a stalling tactic and that when push comes to shove, Israel will just ignore any United Nations resolutions which would be critical of Israel and the Facts On The Ground.

      In fact, Israel has made or stated this point many times.

      This is why I have little patience for the opinion that negotiations will bring about a 2 State Solution. If there was any real push or threat against Israel by the United Nations and for Israel to return to the 1967 borders, Israel will just leave the U.N..

      Negotiations are a complete joke. A dream. Whenever Israel would lose an important case against them, they will just walk away and claim that the facts on the ground are "Legal" and then dare any other country to do anything about it.

      Israel will threaten to bomb any foe back to the dark ages just as the U.S. told the government in Pakistan in 2001. (You are either with us or against us routine.)

      From recent events, it appears to me that when Saudi Arabia talks about closer ties to Israel, what it really means is that Saudi Arabia is going to be a member of NATO.


    • Hi! Talknic

      The "Negotiations" over the past 75 years has been just "Speculation".

      For the past 75 years, the world has "Speculated" that Israel will soon adhere to the decision of the International Courts.

      If Israel ever felt for a moment that its "Sovereignty" was going to be "Dictated" by the United Nations, Israel would just walk away.

      If it came to nuclear war, Israel would take the whole world down with them.


    • I mentioned something about Israel needing Gaza as a means of having access to offshore energy deposits.

      I'm no energy expert, so maybe somebody could explain why this video is wrong?

      Gaza Marine Natural Gas Deposits
      Press TV - Energy World - London
      Host Amanda Burt interviews Peter Eyre
      January 30, 2009
      (YouTube Video)


    • The United Nations was deliberately set up by the U.S. in order to facilitate its grasp of power after World War II.

      The United Nations will be a useless fart in the wind when the U.S. quits sending the United Nations money and just simply walks away. Do you think that China is gonna finance the United Nations when it's headquarters are in New York and every diplomatic conversation is over heard by the NSA?

      Once the U.S. pulls it's funding, the United Nations will crumble under its own weight.

      And as it is, everything Israel has done since 1948 is totally legal ..... once it walks away from the United Nations.

      And who is gonna argue? Who has the "International Power" to force implementation of any decisions made by a discarded United Nations?

      The world "The Globalized World" will have 2 reigns of power. Russia/China axis and the U.S. Capitalist axis.


    • I see things a little differently.

      When Israel walks away from the United Nations, it walks away with "Every Slice Of Land" it "Owns/Controls and that is why there is such a huge rush to change the facts on the ground.

      I think that the U.S. is gonna walk away from the United Nations within the next 10 years, and it will be NATO which will be then utilized.

      As China gains more influence within the world, the less support America will give the United Nations.

      In June 2006, Kofi Annan accused the United States of undermining the United Nations. It has recently been shown that every room at the United Nations has been wiretapped by the NSA.

      NATO has no obligation to consider global interests, nor does it allow non-members to participate in its decision-making.

      There are two main tasks which must be completed prior to walkin' away.

      At the moment, Europe is dependent upon Russia for it's gas and this must change. At the moment, there are huge military battles being fought throughout the Middle East and a race towards Western owned pipelines via finance and construction.

      Israel must become a full member of NATO prior walking away from the United Nations. Israel will find it continuously difficult to ignore U.N. resolutions against the Jewish State and when push comes to shove, Israel will walk away from the U.N.. The race is on for Israel to complete the creation of "Facts On The Ground" with settlements. Because what the facts are at the moment Israel walks away from the UN, are the facts of international law and where Possession is 9/10ths of the Law.

      NATO and Israel have been holding joint military exercises since 2004.

      Israel and NATO became "Partners" in the fight against terror on March 07, 2013. The Israel-NATO Brussels protocol obligates NATO to come to the rescue of Israel under the doctrine of collective security, were the security of Israel to be threatened. Prior to this agreement, Israel was operating under the [NATO] Mediterranean Dialogue (Observer status), which was created in 1994.

      And one final point .... Israel must also "Change The Facts On The Ground" as per Gaza. At the moment, Israel has no "Land Coast" .... Without the Lands of Gaza, Israel has no rights to gas deposits off the coast and thus complicates further interests within the Mediterranean Sea. (Greece/Cyprus as an example.)


  • Will there be fallout from the NSA sharing intel with Israel?
    • Because I thought that this story would totally upset Joe Public, I have spent all day tripping around Mouse Land and watching all TV channels wanting to view and read reactions.

      To my knowledge, no major TV news network has mentioned this story at all.

      The only newspaper I have seen the story in is US News World Report with a link to the Guardian. The Washington Times has it on page 29.

      Twitter is shutting down accounts if the topic is mentioned. I know of 3 instances myself.

      I think that this story will cause more harm to Israel then anything of recent times. Every suspicion concerning Israeli power within the U.S. has been confirmed.

      I believe that the next town hall meeting for any politician will require the rental of the local arena because of the public reaction.

      I have wondered if the Guardian deliberately chose this date to print the article knowing full well that the media is working full time on the 9-11 memorial story and the Syria story.

      Was it the Israeli's who raided the General Petraeus e-mail account because of his "Israel Not A Strategic Ally" story when he was discredited by a romantic affair?

      On a side story ..... did anybody view the news story which has Petraeus walking down the street in New York and being harassed by ordinary citizens as they recognized him and were screaming "War Criminal"?


  • Obama is competitive with 'Mr. Snowden'
    • My view on the NSA circumstance:

      A Song For Edward Snowden:

      Every Call You Make

      When I enter a Wal-Mart store, I can not help but imagine the complete construction being the perfect place for the National Guard to set up camp. Each store is a military depot. The parking lot is large enough to house a thousand troops and equipment to defend and distribute (perhaps ration) "Essential" community goods and services.

      In a sense that is how I visualize America within the next 5 or 7 years.

      I see everything through this prisim.

      I am quite convinced that the futurists within the Upper Class and World Governments visualize everything through the identical prisim as well.

      The "People" ..... The "Universe" have asked the Upper Class around the globe, "Are You Following Me?"

      The reply given is "It's Legal" and "It's Constitutional".

      But, the "People" ..... The "Universe", never asked if it was "Legal" or not ..... they asked (as a group) "Are You Following Me?"

      Legal and constitutional means that the Upper Class is telling us that they (as a group) are prepared to use all the tools and force of the State to keep the NSA surveillance collection in place.


  • Exclusive: Al Jazeera English’s online US broadcast to end with the launch of Al Jazeera America
    • As the economy continues to crumble, access to any media source outside the U.S./NATO alliance will be blocked.

      Not only has the IranTV channel been blocked on satelites, but YouTube has shut down its channel too.

      Everytime you read a story about "Fear and Terrorism" .... the "Fear" is with the Upper Class and every attempt to save them from being strung up on lamp posts.

      The Ruling Class have been planning for the oncoming economic collapse since at least 1980. Free Trade was introduced to allow the Rich Folks to move their assets and wealth offshore and out of reach to anyone who may wish to sue in lieu of broken promises made to the Working Class since the end of World War II.

      The U.S. Capitalists decided to abandon the North American Continent in 1980 because they recognized that 75 million Americans (10 thousand new applicants each and every day) were gonna be lining up to collect on the promise of 20 thousand bucks each as per Social Security and corporate pensions alone and the cookie jar is empty.

      When reviewing Edward Snowden's descriptions of NSA expansive surveillance methods, it stuns me that no one within mainstream media have spoken about this program being implemented as a method of control and as a means of gathering evidence to use in courtrooms as protesters are charged with civil unrest. All information will be used to show a "Pattern" and will be used to track down everyone associated with the arrested protester in an attempt to entice friends and associates of the accused protester to become an informant and to testify against the protester in court.

      Every step ..... every court appearance over the past 10 years is not so much to implement justice but to create legal precedents and in preparation for thousands of protesters being arrested as the economy continues to crumble.


  • The peace process meets Einstein's definition of insanity, says Josh Ruebner
    • I thought this was a pretty good read:

      Is Kerry’s Middle East diplomacy a smokescreen for another war?
      By Abdel Bari Atwan
      July 20, 2013

      History provides plenty of evidence to suggest that flurries of American ‘peace talk’ activity are generally accompanied by a war in the region. The aim of the exercise is to readjust the image of the US on the international stage. Bellicosity is offset by the quest for peace between the Palestinians and Israelis, brokered, of course, by the Americans.

      Thus, under George Bush Sr, the Madrid Conference came just months after the coalition invaded Iraq in 1991. George W. Bush took it one step further, telling startled Palestinian ministers that God himself had told him first to invade Afghanistan in 2001, then “go end the tyranny in Iraq” (2003) and then, “Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East”.

      It is a logical conclusion that Kerry’s intensive diplomacy is intended to counteract preparations for a war in Syria, or Iran, or both.

  • Chomsky says 'Snowden should be honored' for 'telling Americans what the government was doing'
  • Liberal MSNBC host says Snowden thinks he's in a Spielberg movie and Greenwald is a 'jerk'
    • Hi! German Lefty and Kathleen

      The musician or production company I hired is very tempermental like all of the artists which I have ever encountered. I have made a few suggestions and I can feel the negativity immediately. So, I have decided to let the arranger do what they feel comfortable with. I may not be 100 percent happy, but at this late point (I began this project 3 weeks ago) I think I'm gonna have to settle for at least something "Pleasant" to listen to.

      I wanted it to be a "Dance" tune and not a "Trance" tune. I wanted the "We Are Watching You" to remind those dancing about the YMCA tune by the Village People and sort of had visions of people yelling "We Are Watching You" from the dance floor, if yuh know what I mean?

      When I first heard about Snowden, "Every Breath You Take" was the very first tune which entered my mind. So, I checked out the lyrics and altered them somewhat. I deliberately chose not to use the same musical arrangement because of copyright problems. My preferred choice would of been to have a female voice so as not to confuse the song by Sting and The Police, but it would of cost me more money to hire a female singer. As it is, the musical arrangement and copyright has already cost me a thousand bucks. I do all the website design stuff myself so the cost is just for domain name purchase and to pay a commercial hosting service. The artwork (the Snowden sketch and my logo which appears in the YouTube video as an example) was done by a friend of mine. I have T-Shirts and Coffee mugs with the logo applied. I intend to allow people to upload photos of themselves wearing the T-Shirt or drinking coffee as I designed earlier for this website.

      I do thank you for your comments though. Every bit of feedback I get is much appreciated as I attempt to market the tune.

      The new website I'm in the process of setting up will detail all the information as per my efforts. I intend to be extremely transparent as to where all the money will go. The last thing I want is to be accused of being a fraud, like many of the Occupy Movement websites quickly became.


    • I have a small project on the go.

      I want to support Edward Snowden (The whistleblower) and I have put some Lyrics together and contracted a production company to put some music to it. It is named "Every Call You Make" and which is sort of a spoof on the tune "Every Breath You Take" by Sting.

      I was hoping that people here might listen to it and comment.

      It is just a sample of the first stanza. The complete presentation should be ready by Thursday July 18th.

      It is a very small .MP3 file.

      I would really appreciate your input.

      I already have the YouTube Channel set up. I have ordered some T-Shirts and Coffee Mugs too.
      (YouTube Video)


    • I have followed the NSA Surveillance Program very closely for years.

      I thought I would post an .html page which contains articles and commentaries dealing with the Edward Snowden leaks only. (Sort of like an 2.3MB e-Book)
      June 06, 2013 and last updated July 13, 2013


    • I thought that this interview was pretty good.

      The Weapons of Mass Distraction
      Across the world - Greece, Spain, Brazil, Egypt - citizens are turning angrily to their governments to demand economic fair play and equality. But here in America, with few exceptions, the streets and airwaves remain relatively silent. In a country as rich and powerful as America, why is there so little outcry about the ever-increasing, deliberate divide between the very wealthy and everyone else?
      Media scholar Marty Kaplan points to a number of forces keeping these issues and affected citizens in the dark - especially our well-fed appetite for media distraction.
      “We have unemployment and hunger and crumbling infrastructure and a tax system out of whack and a corrupt political system - why are we not taking to the streets?” Kaplan asks Bill. “I suspect among your viewers, there are people who are outraged and want to be at the barricades. The problem is that we have been taught to be helpless and jaded rather than to feel that we are empowered and can make a difference.”
      An award-winning columnist and head of the Norman Lear Center at the University of Southern California, Kaplan also talks about the appropriate role of journalists as advocates for truth.
      PBS - Bill Moyers & Company
      Host Bill Moyers interviews Marty Kaplan
      July 12, 2013
      (Vimeo Flash Video)

  • Snowden shows up Obama on leadership
    • A story from 2008

      "Faulk said some of his fellow operators, after stumbling upon a titillating conversation, couldn't wait to let their friends in on it.

      "There's good phone sex or there's some pillow talk -- pull it up, it's really funny," Faulk told ABC, recalling conversations between operators."

  • Meet the Israeli-linked firm that sold Big Brother machines to Mubarak, Qaddafi – and Washington
  • Chris Matthews takes populist stance against another Establishment war on an Islamic country
    • I think that we are not facing the reality of the situation.

      About 18 months ago, and when the U.S. government said that Assad had to go, the writing was already on the wall.

      There is no way that Assad can remain in power after the U.S. said he had to go. How is it that the U.S. can clearly state that Assad had to go while at the same time suggest that the U.S. is "Reluctant" to become militarily involved?

      The West could not lose face on this situation after the leader of the world said that Assad was not fit for power.

      All the U.S. is doing now is manufacturing the consent required to remove Assad from office.


  • The MSM tries to distinguish between Manning and Snowden. Don't let them
    • I think that Mondoweiss should interview a network engineer or protocol analyst and have the person detail the term "raw data" and "actual content" of Internet traffic and just how easy it is for NSA to reassemble "raw data" into the actual "content".

      None within the Mainstream Media has done this.


    • It seems to me that we are all being treated as if we were all in Gitmo except we are not being subjected to cavity searches and torture.


  • Jewish space plays host to spirited debate over whether Israel is a democracy
  • Insider-trading case touches on American support for Zionism
    • I believe that as the economy crumbles, there is gonna be a huge resentment against any "bogeyman" who worked or is strongly associated with the banking/financial sector, just as what happened in Europe during the great depression.

      In the 1930's, when Europeans visited pawn shops to sell their family heirlooms, they remembered the roaring 1920's and how the rich folks flaunted their wealth while having abused the financial system.

      It is not gonna be pretty.


  • 'Talk is cheap' -- Jon Stewart weighs in on Obama trip
    • I could be wrong, but it seems to me that recently (past 2-3 years) Jon Stewart is constantly making it known that he is Jewish.

      I probably watched his show or viewed clips which were often provided by the Crooks and Liars website and I don't recall Jon Stewart making proclamations about his being Jewish. (In Canada, there was no station carrying his nightly show, thus I always relied on the CNL website.)

      In fact, it was quite awhile until I realized the proper spelling of his name as "Jon" and not "John".

      Am I way out in left field and stupid? Or is it only within the past 2 years where Jon Stewart is making it a point to have us know he is Jewish?

      I am not suggesting that Jon Stewart did not have skits about Israel-Palestine, but rather that he was not constantly advising his audience that he was Jewish.


  • Hea culpa: 'New Yorker' editor backed Iraq war because Saddam had WMD and wanted to liberate Jerusalem
    • A conversation with Chris Matthews of MSNBC with Chris Matthews (Clip)
      Chris Matthews on Charlie Rose makes the astounding pronouncement that he knew full well that what he was saying on the air about our invasion of Iraq was wrong but he didn't want to admit it since he felt it would have been bad for the country. He also takes a cheap shot at bloggers while he's at it.
      May 25, 2009

      Why the Iraq War was a mistake
      Chris Matthews points out the ill-considered issues that have complicated the U.S. war in Iraq but should have been resolved before.
      Chris Matthews Revises History on His Opposition to the Iraq Invasion During his 'Let Me Finish' Segment
      MSNBC - Hardball
      Host Chris Matthews
      August 31, 2010

      DAVID GREGORY, HOST, “RACE FOR THE WHITE HOUSE”: ".... I think the questions were asked. I think we pushed. I think we prodded. I think we challenged the president. I think not only those of us the White House press corps did that, but others in the rest of the landscape of the media did that.
      If there wasn‘t a debate in this country, then maybe the American people should think about, why not? Where was Congress? Where was the House? Where was the Senate? Where was public opinion about the war? What did the former president believe about the pre-war intelligence? He agreed that—in fact, Bill Clinton agreed that Saddam had WMD.
      The right questions were asked. I think there‘s a lot of critics—and I guess we can count Scott McClellan as one—who thinks that, if we did not debate the president, debate the policy in our role as journalists, if we did not stand up and say, this is bogus, and you‘re a liar, and why are you doing this, that we didn‘t do our job. And I respectfully disagree. It‘s not our role."
      --David Gregory, MSNBC - HardBall, The Press And Iraq, May 28, 2008--

  • 'NYT' landmark: Jewish philosophy prof says we 'really ought to question' Israel's right to exist
    • United Nations (UN) Resolution 194 states:

      “The refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return.”

      Israel’s admittance into the UN was conditional: it must recognize UN Resolution 194. Nevertheless, since the passing of UN Resolution 273—which admitted Israel into the UN on May 11, 1949— Israel has openly rejected this requirement. Commenting on Israel’s dismissal of the resolution, Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle wrote in his book "Palestine, Palestinians and International Law"

      “Insofar as Israel has violated its conditions for admission to UN membership, it must accordingly be suspended on a de facto basis from any participation throughout the entire United Nations system.”

      "Must a Native-American recognize the right of the United States of America to exist?"
      --Uri Avnery, February 17, 2007--

  • FBI video of convicted spy suggests that US let Israeli gov't off hook in the case
  • Did Oren's iron dome of affability stop Colbert's brilliant strikes?
  • The controversy over the Oscars joke that Jews run Hollywood
    • Some information on this topic:

      This is what Brando said on Larry King

      "Hollywood is run by Jews; it is owned by Jews--and they should have a greater sensitivity about the issue of people who are suffering. Because...we have seen...the greaseball, we've seen the Chink, we've seen the slit-eyed dangerous Jap, we have seen the wily Filipino, we've seen everything but we never saw the kike. Because they knew perfectly well, that that is where you draw the [line]."
      --Marlon Brando on Larry King Live--

      How Jewish is Hollywood?
      A poll finds more Americans disagree with the statement that 'Jews control Hollywood.' But here's one Jew who doesn't.
      "As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood. Without us, you'd be flipping between "The 700 Club" and "Davey and Goliath" on TV all day."
      By Joel Stein
      December 19, 2008,0,4676183.column

      Jews DO control the media
      We Jews are a funny breed. We love to brag about every Jewish actor. Sometimes we even pretend an actor is Jewish just because we like him enough that we think he deserves to be on our team. We brag about Jewish authors, Jewish politicians, Jewish directors. Every time someone mentions any movie or book or piece of art, we inevitably say something like, “Did you know that he was Jewish?” That’s just how we roll.
      Let’s be honest with ourselves, here, fellow Jews. We do control the media. We’ve got so many dudes up in the executive offices in all the big movie production companies it’s almost obscene. Just about every movie or TV show, whether it be “Tropic Thunder” or “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” is rife with actors, directors, and writers who are Jewish. Did you know that all eight major film studios are run by Jews?
      But that’s not all. We also control the ads that go on those TV shows.
      By Manny Friedman
      July 01, 2012

      On My Mind; Wall Street Worries
      Fear of a particular backlash led to private meetings among some top Jewish figures in the industry, bankers, chief executive officers, heads of brokerages. The central topic was the fact that so many of the men caught cheating or about to be indicted were Jewish. There was concern that the backlash might carry a decided tinge of anti-Semitism. The anti-Jewish arbitrageur jokes are all around the street.
      Anybody with an ounce of sensitivity knows that anti-Semites do not need excuses to hate Jews. There is no need for Jews on Wall Street to feel called upon to explain the number of Jews involved any more than there is for the members of any race or religion to try to explain their evildoers.
      But anybody with an ounce of sensitivity also knows that this good advice will not prevail. Every minority group whose members are caught doing dirty worries anyway, even though it knows it should not have to.
      The religion of the crooks and near-crooks is not the issue. Anti-Semitism is not the issue either. The issue is that Wall Street every day practices what the people believe is just plain wrong. That is dangerous to Wall Street and to the rest of us.
      By A. M. Rosenthal
      January 31, 1987

  • Citing growing division among Australian Jews over Israel, cartoonist refuses to apologize for likening Gaza to Nazis' victims
  • Joseph and Mary can't make it to Bethlehem, on Banksy's Christmas card
  • Did you see the location for the presidential debate on foreign policy? Help!
    • Has anybody seen Romney speaking (or even being invited) to a christian church during this election cycle? Do people actually believe that the Republican choice of a Mormon candidate was because the establishment is unaware that most christians views Mormonism as a cult much like Scientology? Do people actually believe that this was just a slignt oversight by the establishment?

      The fix is already in for Obama to win, because he is the only person who can sell the loss of the American Dream and call it " Fairness".

      The Republican Party realizes that as the economy worsens, Christians will be asking what is fair and "What would Jesus do?". (Not about social issues such as abortion, etc.) Thus the Republicans have chosen to deliberately abandon the christian mantra and to rebrand themselves as the "Law and Order" party for future electoral battles. (The Occupy Movement will be named as "Terrorists".)

      Obama is going to be "Allowed" to win and which gives the Republican Party ample time to rebrand themselves and for the establishment to introduce all the necessary "Anti-Terror" legislation required for the battles on the horizon.

      The press would have us all believe that the Occupy Movement is a spent force, and that Occupy is a group of people without cause or a sense of direction. If that were true, then why was such brutal state force used against them in order to quell the outrage?

      Make no mistake, the Occupy Movement is the largest threat to face the Ruling Class in the past 60 years or more.


    • Make no mistake .... Obama has already been chosen by the establishment to win the presidency but not the control of Congress.

      The establishment knows full well that if Obama was to lose, that is the exact day that the Occupy Movement becomes whole and complete because the visible minorities will begin to feverishly participate. At the moment, the minority population is keeping their powder dry because of not wanting to destroy the first black presidency.


  • Jon Stewart on Romney's painfully oblivious racism against Palestinians
    • I don't really think there is much difference between both major political parties.

      They just play an awfully great game of musical chairs and which gives us the illusion of a functioning democracy.

      The Fix is already in place.

      The Republican Party (The Corporatist Party) has decided to walk away from the Christian Right. They knew that electing a Mormon was a direct insult to the Christians as they view Mormonism as a cult. The Republicans know full well that as the economy worsens, people like Billy Graham and The Boys will begin to ask "What Would Jesus Do?" and not be so much concerned about cultural issues such as abortion and whatever.

      The Republican Party needs time to rebrand itself from the "Religious" brand and become a "Personal Security" brand.

      As the economy continues to crumble, it will become a battle between the Occupy Folks and the Law and Order Folks.

      The establishment also realizes that the minority population has suffered the greatest during this economic collapse, (43% unemeployment among black youth).

      The establishment knows full well that the only reason the Occupy Movement did not become "Whole" was because the visible minorities wanted to keep their powder dry. The visible minorities don't want to destroy the first black presidency.

      Once Obama leaves office, the Occupy Movement will be front and center stage, (Complete and Whole) and pose the largest threat to the Ruling Class since the 1960's.

      So, the establishment has already conceded the election to Barack Obama and he will be "Allowed" to win.

      Obama will be "Allowed" to own the Presidency, but not the control of Congress.

      And in the meantime, the Republican controlled congress will use the next four years to rebrand it self as the "Personal Security Party", and get all the ducks in order and introduce all the necessary anti-terror legislation required for the battles (civil unrest) which lay ahead.


  • One apartheid state, with liberty and justice for Jews only
    • Hi! Mr. Saigon

      I was wonderin' ....

      If Jewish Folks were too afraid to walk the streets of any country in the world because of the fear of the Palestinians and their supporters carrying out extra-judicial killings as the Jewish Folks have been doing for years ..... do yuh think the American Jewish support for the occupation would increase or decrease?

      Would extra-judicial killings carried out by Palestinians and their supporters around the globe assist the cause or ruin it?

      Here we are 60 or 70 years after the Hitler-Trip and Jewish Folks are still entering courthouses across this universe and insisting on justice and the “Right-Of-Return” of stolen artifacts, property and jewels confiscated by Hitler.

      I think that the Palestinian people deserve the same “Right-Of-Return” and the same sense of justice that the Jewish Folks insisted upon in every courthouse in the land.

      Never once did I hear any Jewish Person suggest that the “Facts Had Changed On The Ground” and thus the Jews we’re not entitled to compensation for losses incurred under Hitler … but this is the claim that the Jewish Folks make with the Palestinian People and their “Right-Of-Return”.


    • While I was reading this particular article and another By David Samel, I kept wondering how the Palestinian People can just continue to sit back and take all this abuse year after year?

      I can't comprehend why the Palestinian People just don't go out and begin committing extra-judicial killings like the Jewish Folks do in all parts of the universe.

      My temper is seething and I'm just a plain O'l Catholic boy from Canada.

      I guess the same thing could be said about the African Americans. If I were black, I would of struck back long before this.

      When will it be "Okay" for the trodden-down to get even?


  • EU upgrades Israel because 'nobody wants fuss' with Jewish community or Washington
  • '60 Minutes' profiles Palestinian Christians, Michael Oren falls on his face
  • Assange's first guest on RT world premier: Nasrallah says US & Israel seek civil war in Syria
    • I thought his comparison between media coverage of Syrian conflict and the Israel-Palestinian conflict was quite good.

      .... That the U.S. media all appeared to be breathless with a sense of urgency towards the protests in Syria because so many people were being injured/killed while the Israel-Palestine conflict has been happening for 40 years.

      Everytime I view Anderson Cooper, I will think of this comparison.


  • Wait-- do you like Israel? (Jeffrey Goldberg's ultimate test)
    • Hi! Annie Robbins

      Is not a "Messiah" going to arrive in Israel and all the Jews buried in the Land Of Israel gonna rise up and get to heaven? How can this happen if Israel did not exist?

      And, about the afterlife ..... If there is no afterlife, then why do Jewish Folks need to have all their body parts when they are buried?


    • Can somebody explain to me what Jewish Heaven is?

      Or, how Jewish Folks get to their idea of Heaven?

      Does Israel need to exist for a Jewish Person to make it to heaven?

      Perhaps this is why Jewish Folks are so tied to Israel?


  • Why aren't the best and the brightest in our MSM?
    • I used the word "Feverishly" as per support of the Occupy Movement.

      It has been pointed out many times throughout the media that the minority population has not climbed on board in great numbers. In fact the Occupy Movement itself has stated that there needed to be a more concerted effort to reach out to the minority population. And, during the past 2 months the Occupy Movement has been doing exactly that.


    • The minority population within the U.S. has suffered much more than the Ordinary Joe during this economic collapse.

      The main reason they have not feverishly joined or supported the Occupy Movement is because they don't want to destroy the first black presidency.

      That is why Obama will be "Allowed" to win the presidency and not control of Congress.

      It is all about musical chairs which give us the illusion of a functioning democracy.


  • When is it okay to say that Jews own Wall Street?
  • 'Adbusters' seeks right of reply to 'NYT''s smear of anti-Semitism and fails to get it
  • Breakthrough: 'Ynet' honestly seeks answer to question, How did American Jews get so rich?
    • "And yes, also, the extent to which Jewish kinship networks have operated in the same way that WASP exclusiveness served that tribe under the old order."


      Does this mean or suggest insider trading?


Showing comments 67 - 1