The View from Your Window: Happy July 4th!

-

4th of July Kate Brown Minot Beach, MA.jpg
This terrific view was sent in this morning by TWN reader and communications diva Kate Brown from Minot Beach, Massachusetts.
Happy July 4th!
— Steve Clemons

Comments

137 comments on “The View from Your Window: Happy July 4th!

  1. rc says:

    Shir Hever speaks sense imo. Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS)sounds positive.
    “The United States pushed Israel in to OECD. The political aid that US gives Israel is extremely important, it

    Reply

  2. Carroll says:

    Posted by nadine, Jul 08 2010, 12:28AM – Link
    Well nadine …why don’t you tell us what multi culturalism means?…and why you are so against it.

    Reply

  3. nadine says:

    “If it weren’t for “multi-culturalism” jews wouldn’t be allowed to live in the US or any other non multi cultural country, you would all have to live in the Jewish state…ever think about that? ”
    Carroll you have just shown that besides being an anti-Semite, you haven’t the slightest clue what “multi-cultural” means.

    Reply

  4. Carroll says:

    Posted by nadine, Jul 07 2010, 9:20PM – Link
    But when it comes to Fatah or Hamas, it’s “see no evil hear no evil think no evil”. Mustn’t criticize them, they’re non-white & non-Western, wouldn’t be prudent, multi-culturalism forbids you to even notice what they do>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    you are so funny nadine…what you are really pissed about is that ‘multi-culturalism” and the holocuast industry doesn’t prevent anyone from criticizing the Jews and Israel any longer.
    If it weren’t for “multi-culturalism” jews wouldn’t be allowed to live in the US or any other non multi cultural country, you would all have to live in the Jewish state…ever think about that?
    gawd! the dumb things that come out of your mouth.
    Whoever thought up the multi cultural talking point as a case against Muslims probably forgot that the US Supreme Court many years ago declared Jews to be a seperate race in the US. It came about because the Jews wanted themselves declared a protected “minority” under the law and also entitled to be included in government quotas in education and government business programs and loans.
    So voila! You are officially a seperate race, part of the multi culturalism.

    Reply

  5. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Well, Paul, if she wasn’t so full of shit…..
    And hey, I gotta admit I enjoy your comments a lot more when you aren’t wearing your Piety Badge.

    Reply

  6. nadine says:

    No, Paul, I am not the problem. Your utter double standard for criticism is much more of the problem. It’s open season on Israel all the time, no proof needed for any charge to stick. They have a standard of perfection against which their every action is judged.
    But when it comes to Fatah or Hamas, it’s “see no evil hear no evil think no evil”. Mustn’t criticize them, they’re non-white & non-Western, wouldn’t be prudent, multi-culturalism forbids you to even notice what they do.
    Hamas says they won’t stop until Israel is eradicated and the Jews are all dead? Airbrush Hamas out of the picture, as if they don’t have any influence in Gaza, instead of running the place. Demand Israel end the blockade — those poor Gazans are suffering. Of course the Gazans would continue to suffer, as it suits Hamas very well to have them suffer (esp. the Fatah supporters, their own guys do better). Hamas is about killing Jews, not raising the living standard.
    What is needed is ONE standard to look at BOTH sides in context, judging both equally and impartially. You might be able to do this if you ever allowed yourself to notice what the Palestinians do and say, esp. to each other.

    Reply

  7. Paul Norheim says:

    Speaking of free speech, you are part of the problem,
    Nadine. Accusing everyone who criticizes Israel of being in
    bed with the terrorists or the Jew haters, makes you a
    constant obstacle to free speech and an environment for
    interesting debates at TWN.

    Reply

  8. nadine says:

    The Left means free speech for me, not for thee.
    They are as totalitarian in their impulses as the Islamists whom they have taken as allies.

    Reply

  9. questions says:

    rc writes:
    And ‘questions’ (2:37pm) — with one or two exceptions I generally like POA’s responses, they come from a deep place and are usually well constructed — cathartic and poetic even. POA is one ‘Voice of America’ that should not be suppressed imho. You want to fly your flag, then don’t complain about the winds blowing through it!
    Carroll quotes and adds:
    And ‘questions’ (2:37pm) — with one or two exceptions I generally like POA’s responses, they come from a deep place and are usually well constructed — cathartic and poetic even. POA is one ‘Voice of America’ that should not be suppressed imho. You want to fly your flag, then don’t complain about the winds blowing through it!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Ditto.
    POA Writes:
    Like I said, “questions”, SHOVE IT.

    Reply

  10. Carroll says:

    Breaking news…..Israel declares war on the Methodist…LOL
    Mondoweiss..
    “For instance, Robin Shepherd, writing in the Jerusalem Post about a decision last week by the Methodist Church of Britain to launch a boycott against goods emanating from settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, says:
    Overall, a church that behaves in the manner of the Methodists has buried its credibility under a gigantic dunghill of intransigence, pedantry, lies and distortions.
    But let us not allow this matter to rest with a mere recognition of whom and what they have chosen to become.
    If the Methodist Church is to launch a boycott of Israel, let Israel respond in kind: Ban their officials from entering; deport their missionaries; block their funds; close down their offices; and tax their churches.
    If it

    Reply

  11. Carroll says:

    Posted by rc, Jul 06 2010, 9:44PM – Link
    And ‘questions’ (2:37pm) — with one or two exceptions I generally like POA’s responses, they come from a deep place and are usually well constructed — cathartic and poetic even. POA is one ‘Voice of America’ that should not be suppressed imho. You want to fly your flag, then don’t complain about the winds blowing through it!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Ditto.

    Reply

  12. PissedOffAmerican says:

    http://www.chooseliberty.org/fecattacks1.aspx?pid=fc10
    From the Ron Paul camp…..
    Dear Liberty Activist,
    The FEC has launched a pair of investigations on Campaign for Liberty.
    Both are meritless, but could seriously disrupt our growing program.
    Please read Campaign for Liberty President John Tate’s letter below and stand with us.
    This is exactly the type of government action to quell liberty that I have spent my life opposing.
    Sincerely,
    Congressman Ron Paul
    ——————————————————————————–
    Dear Friend of Liberty,
    The best way to know you are succeeding in changing Washington is when you get attacked by the FEC.
    And attack us they have!
    I’m writing you this letter today not to scare you or to cry wolf. I’m writing to let you know that our success has its price, and that price right now is the wrath of the Obama Administration and its attack dogs at the Federal Election Commission.
    I urge you to read this message and then sign the Declaration of Support (in which I ask for your advice on a critical legal and moral question), as we are forced into battle with federal agencies and courts.
    You see, this isn’t theoretical. They’ve already come after us in multiple cases, alleging that Campaign for Liberty has acted illegally merely by putting the candidates on the record and reporting their positions.
    My attorneys tell me we are under a gag rule and cannot go in to too many details or even tell you with what we have been charged and where the charges originated.
    But I can say there have been at least two complaints filed in two different states against our issue discussion activities.
    They claim we are in violation of various FEC rules and laws.
    Their allegations are completely false. And we must fight back now, or they will win and be able to silence our movement.
    You see, the Washington, D.C. establishment doesn’t like to be challenged. They hate it when we fight back.
    They are absolutely BESIDE themselves when we are winning.
    In less than 2 years, your Campaign for Liberty has become a major force on the American political landscape.
    I can give you a list of our accomplishments, talk about our growth (we are approaching half a million members), and show you press coverage from across the nation on our efforts.
    But nothing shows our success more than how our enemies react when challenged.
    When that happens, they do what they do best: use the power of the federal government to attack us.
    They want to do one of two things: shut us up, or shut us down.
    This battle is over a very fundamental idea – that Campaign for Liberty and our members should have a voice in lobbying their legislators and exposing the radical views of candidates for office.
    Exposing what they’re up to – that’s what the powers that be can’t stand. That’s because they don’t want Americans to know:
    ** Congress is spending at a record pace and has now left us over 13 TRILLION dollars in debt, with no end in sight.
    ** The out of control FED has not accounted for nearly 2 trillion dollars and has doubled our monetary base, risking our entire economy.
    ** The federal government has imposed a mandate that every American either purchase a health care product the Feds approve of, costing tens of thousands of dollars, or risk fines and jail time.
    ** The federal government has attempted to take away your 1st, 2nd and 4th Amendment rights, all in the past year, with more certainly to come.
    We’re exposing them – and holding them accountable as they come back home to seek reelection.
    Of course, this may not sound like the end of the world. But just think: the FEC has an ARMY of lawyers and a budget of nearly $70 MILLION dollars.
    That’s a lot of lawyers.
    And add to it the fact that this group of people is adamantly against free speech under the First Amendment, and well, you have a recipe for trouble.
    Subpeonas. Depositions. Fishing expeditions that cover tens of thousands of documents.
    Legal fees just to defend our right to free speech.
    Thousands of hours of staff time to comply with their demands.
    You can see where this is going.
    If FEC radicals succeed, I will not even be allowed to tell you and your neighbors how candidates for the House and Senate (or for President in the future) have voted on Liberty issues, so you can put the heat on them when they are most likely to listen.
    Let me explain that a bit more.
    For the first time ever, there is a nationwide group that is dedicated to holding politicians accountable for their votes on Liberty issues.
    It’s Campaign for Liberty, and our over 450,000 members are doing battle across the country to hold the politicians’ feet to the fire.
    Whether it is getting more than 300 sponsors for Audit the Fed, or lobbying to stop Cap and Tax and Real ID schemes, Campaign for Liberty is making a difference.
    And we’re prepared to make an even bigger difference this fall, as the time comes to inform the people where their candidates stand.
    So the statists in Washington are out to make sure that doesn’t happen.
    Their main weapon is the Federal Election Commission.
    The FEC has always been against free speech and a tool of the powerful elite in Washington, who desperately seek to hang on to power.
    But as bad as the FEC has been since its inception, with the Obama Administration in power, you and I face even more aggressive assaults on our free speech.
    My attorneys have warned me that the puppets at the Federal Election Commission are ordering me to stop mobilizing hundreds of thousands of Americans against power grabs in Congress.
    In doing so, they are trying to cripple our ability to stop dangerous legislation in Congress. If we continue to oppose these Liberty-stealing bills as we have in the past, I face the danger of multimillion-dollar fines and even a jail term!
    In fact, I may even be questioned in court for writing this letter tonight.
    I must make a decision soon. Should I allow the Federal Election Commission to tie my hands during this crucial election year?
    Or should I defy their gag-rule regulations . . . and face prosecution from the out of control federal authorities for exercising our right to political speech?
    Please give me your answer by filling out the Declaration of Support.
    If you and other members want me to proceed with our efforts to inform the public of the positions of your candidates on Liberty issues, and to oppose legislation in the Congress (and I hope you do), I will also need your financial help.
    So please consider making a generous contribution – even if you can only afford to chip in $10 – to help Campaign for Liberty continue this fight.
    The fact is the enemies of Liberty are preparing for a political attack far more serious than their election power grab of 2008, in which they put in power some of the biggest enemies of freedom and promoters of Big Government in a generation.
    Our program to stop more statist takeovers in Congress is simple. By mobilizing our grassroots army, we can put a lot of heat on individual Congressmen and Senators.
    The FEC insists we can’t do that during election years.
    They say by telling you where your Congressman and Senators stand, I may influence your vote. The FEC election regulators contend that’s illegal electioneering.
    Basically, government bureaucrats and their out of control regulations insist I dismantle our lobbying operation during election years — precisely at the time it would have its greatest impact.
    Top legal experts tell me that this harassment by the FEC and any attempts to shut down our program violate several decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and are flatly unconstitutional.
    But they also warn me that if I challenge the FEC ruling, I may face a huge, tax-funded lawsuit which could stretch on for decades and cost us as much as a million dollars.
    In addition to potential million-dollar fines and legal penalties, I also face an enormous funding challenge.
    Our program to fight back in Congress will require at least $3.2 million.
    So there are a lot of decisions to make, and I wanted to be sure I have your support as we move forward.
    If I am to proceed with this effort (which I am hoping you will allow), I will need more than just your authorization. I will need your financial support as well.
    I’m hoping you will be able to help with a special contribution – even if you can only afford to chip in $10 – to help Campaign for Liberty continue this fight.
    Every dollar, every quarter, every dime will be used to defeat dangerous Liberty-stealing schemes in Congress and in all 50 states.
    Jon, please respond soon.
    This is one of the most far-reaching questions I have ever had to pose to you. The future of Campaign for Liberty is at stake.
    If our people are heard, I am sure Liberty will once again thrive in our country. And we are making great strides in even just the past year.
    So please, act today. If you believe our voices should be heard, and that the federal government CANNOT be allowed to silence them, it’s vital you answer today.
    Please fill out your Declaration of Support, and consider making a generous contribution – even if you can only afford to chip in $10 – to help Campaign for Liberty continue this fight.
    Thank you for all you do for Liberty.
    In Liberty,
    John Tate
    President
    PS: Your Declaration of Support and your maximum possible contribution today will ensure Campaign for Liberty will be able to keep fighting this election year.
    Just like in 2008, the establishment and statists are desperate to shut us up or shut us down. They don’t want to have their records exposed.
    You and I cannot give them the playing field. We must fight back today.

    Reply

  13. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Obama Showers Bibi With Love, Plus Me & General Petraeus
    By M.J. Rosenberg – July 6, 2010, 11:43AM
    President Obama’s love-in (transcript here) with Prime Minister Netanyahu today demonstrates that the adage that “politics stops at the water’s edge” does not apply to the Middle East. The President invited Netanyahu to Washington to get relations back on course (i.e., make AIPAC happy) as we go into the critical fundraising quarter for the November elections.
    When it comes to all matters relating to Israel, foreign policy is politics. And politics is fundraising.
    That is how Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s meetings with President Obama and other administration officials this week should be viewed. Nothing significant has changed since Obama last met with Netanyahu and conveyed his displeasure with Israeli behavior. Israel is still expanding settlements in Jerusalem, still expelling Palestinians from their homes, and still maintaing the blockade of Gaza. Of course, the blockade has been eased but only after the IDF attacked the flotilla, killing 8 Turks and one American. (Has any American’s death ever gone as unprotested as this one?)
    Nonetheless, it was all smiles at the White House today. It was embarrassing to watch.
    David Makovsky, who works for the AIPAC cutout, the Washington Institute for Near East Peace, explained what’s going on in today’s Washington Post. “As we get closer to the midterm elections, if there was a gap, it’s narrowing…. I think the blowup in March between Obama and Netanyahu has led each side to realize that they’ve gone too far, and they’ve got to dial it down.”
    Makovsky’s opening reference to the “midterm elections” is the key. The United States has to make things right with Israel or the Democratic Party will pay a price, quite literally.
    Israel’s loquacious ambassador, Michael Oren, correctly predicted that, unlike the last White House meeting between Netanyahu and Obama, there would be photographers on hand to record the two leaders making nice. And those photographs will go to all the right people.
    We are going to have a lot of photographers,” Oren said. Laughing, he added: “There are going to be more photographers there than at the Academy Awards.
    Of course, neither side (with the exception of loose cannon Oren) is likely to admit that this meeting is about politics. They will say that they are about getting negotiations started, although with Israel busily expanding settlements in Jerusalem, it is hard to see how that will happen.
    The Palestinians have no great incentive to negotiate with a prime minister whose government solidly opposes any dismantling of settlements, not now and not ever. They can be forgiven for believing that the Washington meeting is a charade, designed to appease a lobby whose members are threatening to punish the Democrats unless Obama capitulates with a smile.
    continues….
    http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/06/me_petraeus_and_the_lobby_how_the_general_responde/#more
    Like I said, “questions”, SHOVE IT.

    Reply

  14. JohnH says:

    Housing development has driven the American economy since WWII, and it drives the Israeli economy.
    There’s money to be made in them thar settlements. And ain’t nobody gonna get in the way of those developers.
    Profit and greed are the uncovered story of the Israeli occupation.

    Reply

  15. rc says:

    Marcus (2:37pm): “Every single bigot I have ever known has a litany of grievances (of varying importance to them) against a multitude of people.”
    Ever looked in a mirror Marcus, and wondered who the person was looking back at you? Bigot No. 1 in your life I suspect.
    And ‘questions’ (2:37pm) — with one or two exceptions I generally like POA’s responses, they come from a deep place and are usually well constructed — cathartic and poetic even. POA is one ‘Voice of America’ that should not be suppressed imho. You want to fly your flag, then don’t complain about the winds blowing through it!

    Reply

  16. rc says:

    JH: “the behavior of rich, powerful members of that community”
    Similar point is made here …
    The RealNews (July 6, 2010): The Political Economy of Israel’s Occupation
    “Hever: 18 families control 60% of the equity value of all companies in Israel”
    http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=5306

    Reply

  17. JohnH says:

    I don’t “equate Jewishness with perceived Superiority.” However, there is a faction within Judaism–the religious nationalists–who have perverted the term “chosen people” to suggest superiority over the “unchosen people,” Arabs.
    I think that if you look at the rise of anti-Semitism, there are two factors at work. One is Jews’ distinct culture and religion which makes them different (by choice) and an easy target. The second is the behavior of rich, powerful members of that community. When the leaders of a nation get angered at rich, powerful elements of the community, they tend to blame the whole community. The rich and powerful get away none the worse for wear, but the community suffers immensely.

    Reply

  18. SAnd says:

    A ‘poignant’ post made by MATTP over @ Stephen M. Walt’s Foreign Policy Blog:
    —————————————
    MATTP [July 6, ’10]
    * Israel vs. the whole ME
    Today American-Israeli relations are as strong as before but:
    – I understand that for the United States, Israel is more important than the Arab world.
    – I understand that for the United States Israel is more important than Iran.
    – I also understand that for the United States Israel is more important than Turkey.
    But I don’t understand how and why Israel is more important than the Arab world, Iran and Turkey together, in addition to the rest of the Muslim world. Now that the Cold War is over, what makes Israel so valuable to risk relations with all of these nations, countries or states. We are talking about 1.7 billion people here. There are serious security costs of this association and I don’t know if it is any more affordable for the United States to maintain its patron-client relations.
    —————————————

    Reply

  19. Marcus says:

    I do it to support Israel,I do it online,because nobody in the real world wants to hear about it.
    I believe Zionism is a Liberation Movement of glorious precedent.
    I believe every arab life that has been lost was an inevitable tragedy and every Jewish life lost was an avoidable one.
    I believe that jews are the most indeginous people in Israel-from the river to the sea.
    I believe Israel needs anyone willing to push back.
    So, Push-Off…B~#t@H
    PS; Interesting that you equated Jewishness with percieved Superiority, that hasn`t been my experience,particularly in “Polite Society”

    Reply

  20. JohnH says:

    questions says, “What seems to set anti-Semitism apart, then, is that somehow the Jews are unforgivably alien, unable to become one with the nation and so are already dual loyalists, ready to betray at the drop of a yarmulke.”
    questions may be describing beliefs of anti-Semites, but he is also describing behavior of the Israel First crowd. (Stereotypes often contain a kernel of truth.) Their loyalties are indeed suspect–they condone the killing of Americans, whether Rachel Corrie, Furkan Dogan, or the crew of the USS Liberty. They also defend those who spy on the US government and seek impunity for them. Finally, they seek to have the US undermine its own national interests by provoking unnecessary tensions with American allies and championing wars in Iraq and Iran on behalf of Israel.
    Fortunately, this group represents a minority of American Jews. Unfortunately, it includes some of the wealthiest in that community, people who have exhibited no compunction about using their power to subvert the democratic processes and historic American values.

    Reply

  21. Marcus says:

    A consensus that lets/sees Israel bomb Iran, may have been born today.
    about time.
    Thanks ! Thanks Alot !

    Reply

  22. Carroll says:

    Posted by Marcus, Jul 06 2010, 2:37PM – Link
    BTW; I would welcome any analysis of my own posts/mentality,I like reading about myself ( I waste alot of time arguing with idiots,maybe you could start with that ? )
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Hey! I can do that for you. You aren’t that complicated.
    You have a huge inferiority complex, and since you are Jewish you use the jewish thing as a projection for your efforts to appear not inferior and elevate yourself thru being jewish to being superior.
    That’s why you do all the silly Israeli rambo stuff and bragging about jews and Israel.
    Sadly..it’s not working. You could be as non jewish as Queen Elizabeth and people still wouldn’t like you because you’re just personally obnoxious.

    Reply

  23. questions says:

    “some support to it” refers to the fact that people seem to believe this, not that there actually is validity in the argument.
    Sorry for the lack of clarity.

    Reply

  24. Marcus says:

    Questions; Your ‘transgressive rhetorical strategy” premise for poa`s racsist rantings does hold some promise,I`ve long held that a few hundred well-staffed mental instituitions in the M/E would be helpful and certainly , POA would make a good test subject in the study of racsism and irrational/pathological hate-mongering in all things Israeli/Jewish, in people who are not muslem/arab or in any way personally affected by Israel.
    BTW; I would welcome any analysis of my own posts/mentality,I like reading about myself ( I waste alot of time arguing with idiots,maybe you could start with that ? )
    When you asked carroll “do you really think this way” In the real world my encounters with bigots is that thev`e been that way their whole life,as were their parents,grandparents,cousins,their circle of friends and that they never change,ever,and it is NEVER just one group they hate,her anti-zionism gives her PC cover here,but in her personal life you can be CERTAIN that her bigotry extends (in differing degrees) to many,many different ethnic groups.
    Every single bigot I have ever known has a litany of grievances ( of varying importance to them )against a multitude of people.

    Reply

  25. questions says:

    Here’s a possible reading of the material vs. metaphysical notions of bias. Note that I haven’t read the books that bring this point up, only the Rothstein review. But riffing on that….
    Homophobia seems to crop in people in really intense and crazy ways when they have some vague, medium or strong desires they are uncomfortable with. Most people don’t really care about other people’s sexual preferences once a society has liberalized a bit. The hatred that is taught, say in Uganda, is likely politically useful as an instigator for ambitious politicians and Christianizing missionaries (who might be closet cases for all I know.) But homophobia is passing away with the generations, and has been normal in practice at some level in many places around the world. I have come across suggestions that the Roman break from the Greeks might be part of our problem, but I don’t know much about it.
    White prejudice against Blacks seems to come in large measure because of economic competition and some sense that somehow the deck is stacked against white people. (hard to believe, but it seems to have some support to it.) Whites don’t fear that they might *be* black, and there hasn’t been much in the way of a “black agenda” or secret black organizations that will take things away. Limbaugh et al. play around with the reparations shit, but otherwise there isn’t a lot of this. Mostly, it seems that economics and labor considerations and the ease of having an obviously marked underclass are too too tempting. But people seem to get past this over time, and again, it seems to be a labor issue.
    The history of slavery, clearly, is economic in origin.
    And I will say that probably there is more going on. There could easily be slave holders and slavery supporters who were worried about the pernicious effects of the presence of darker peoples on the planet…. But mostly, I’m guessing, cheap labor was the basis and everything else was a construct to justify that labor condition. Hence the materialism reading from the books.
    What seems to set anti-Semitism apart, then, is that somehow the Jews are unforgivably alien, unable to become one with the nation and so are already dual loyalists, ready to betray at the drop of a yarmulke.
    The Merchant of Venice shows Shakespeare’s sense that Shylock would put his money over his daughter, that he uses language differently from the rest of the good Christian people, that the only way to beat him is to “out-Jew” him by taking the phrase “pound of flesh” so literally that the drawing of blood would negate the legalistic contractual cold-blooded deed Shylock is about to undertake. Note that the guy who owned the ships (whose name evades me, but who is Christian and needs the money for a marriage to go through, as I recall) needed trade to make money, but was willing to be generous with his money. He needed a usurer but was unwilling to be one. The whole of Christian goodness, it seems, rests uneasily on the shoulders of giant Jews who must occasionally be destroyed to let them know who is standing on whom.
    Shylock doesn’t love his daughter properly. He doesn’t love love properly. He doesn’t use language properly. He isn’t one with the people. He is other, unrepentant, and, shockingly, unchristian and unforgiving.
    The trope of the “Jew” is written as this sneaky, legalistic, money concerned, society-undermining, all powerful, non-compassionate, disloyal figure who must be brought under control as he is necessary for there to be an economy, but insufficient and lacking the grace of Christ. The Jew knows no forgiveness, cannot forgive and cannot be forgiven. Too clever by half and too unkind to allowed to live openly.
    Remember, the “Jew” is unchristian. And even that language itself is telling.
    At any rate, this is one of the underlying structures of anti-Semitism. And it is this structure, that has nothing to do with labor conditions or land grabs and everything to do with the harboring of the gross underbelly of sociality.
    That it is underlying, that it is that on which sociality rests, that it is the subtrate that makes social life possible yet is itself wicked is the metaphysical reading that the books, I think, are trying to get at.
    We need perpetual outsiders to be, ourselves, insiders. We need money grubbers so that we can be generous.
    Hence, anti-Semitism would seem to work differently from day-to-day racism.
    Again, I haven’t read the books, I don’t do much with this topic, but I’m not totally unfamiliar. Consider this a loose riffing on what I expect the books would present.
    Make of it what you will, and POA, save the weather forecast for someone who gives a damn. Or better yet, send a personal e-mail to the host of the website to let him know what a waste of electrons I am. But please spare me the usual stuff you toss this way. I already know it, and so does everyone else who is a regular here…..

    Reply

  26. Marcus says:

    Well, I tried to have an open-mind before reading the arguements that blame Israel/jews for causing the Iraq War….but I saw NOTHING of any import.Except that Israel wanted Bush`s push for democratic reforms in Arab countries to work,which was also in my opinion was the most important rational for war and a ongoing American policy that has not been abandoned.
    Questions,I enjoyed reading your posts,but you give POA way to wide a berth when you descibe his rascism as a “transgressive rhetorical strategy” It has been my personal experience in the “real world” that racial bigotries are generally long-held deeply felt opinions,imbued in children since birth,nothing metaphysical about them,even without personal contact with the persons of scorn,these prejudices are taught by parents,schools,governments and so on. Wide swaths of the world where there is no anti-semitism (and no jews) I think proves this. anti-arab,anti-black,anti-asian and anti-semitism are all prevalent in white-dominated societies.
    I think the bigotry ,on a daily, and profound way-directed towards blacks,asians,arabs is alot worse in white dominated societies, than the kind directed at jews. At least with anti-semitism there is the back-hand compliment that we are so influential,smart and wealthy that we control the world… black people are generally not accused of same (with one single notable exception)
    Today, Netanyahu and my Queen will both be visting your country,so as a Canadian,Zionist and a Monarchist you could accuse me of having Tri-loyalties,go ahead,but you just better treat them right.
    BREAKING NEWS: Obama re-affirms the unbreakable bond.
    That just leaves the Queen. Please be nice, we in the commonwealth would not like to see her embarrassed in any way.

    Reply

  27. Cee says:

    And evidently this is what the Israelis call fighting terrorism:
    Carroll,
    Boiling people alive is an example. The photos of a victim are so horrible I won’t post them.

    Reply

  28. Carroll says:

    Good news! Israel critics are in the majority. Actually they have been for some time but still..
    Just think what this really shows……that despite the fact that the US media regularly misleads the public on Israel, that our politicans regularly lie to the public about Israel, that the NYT, the WP and the WJS and US jewish zionistas regularly mislead the public on Israel….somehow the American public has figured it out.
    http://coteret.com/
    “Hasbarapocalypse

    Reply

  29. questions says:

    Sorry I left the quotation marks off the passage above. From “This” all the way to the link is a quotation. From “The scientists” all the way to “the U.S.” should be in a block quote.

    Reply

  30. questions says:

    Here’s another really perspicacious use of the word “Nazi”:
    This really is the goal of rightwing hate radio laid bare, as far as I am concerned.
    US climate scientists receive hate mail barrage in wake of UEA scandal
    The scientists revealed they have been told to “go gargle razor blades” and have been described as “Nazi climate murderers”. Some emails have been sent to them without any attempt by the sender to disguise their identity. Even though the scientists have received advice from the FBI, the local police say they are not able to act due to the near-total tolerance of “freedom of speech” in the US.
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/7/6/881986/-HannityLimbaugh-Speak,-Climate-Scientists-get-Death-Threats.
    I’m sure it’s not anti-Semitism that gets people to describe climate scientists as Nazis. I’m sure it’s actually just good descriptive journalism, a well drawn out allusion or metaphor to what clearly is a Nazi thang.
    Ho hum. Another day, another Nazi reference. And always, they are the best descriptors, these invocations of “Nazism.”

    Reply

  31. questions says:

    POA, then stop using the “I am an anti-Semite” thing or the “If this is what it is, then I’m an anti-Semite” thing.
    There is a state. The state is called Israel. It behaves like a state. This is sad. It is especially sad for the people who are on the wrong side of the state.
    Every state behaves like a state. Every state does bad things. The bad things are especially bad for the people on the wrong side of state action.
    States suck.
    They are also part of the landscape.
    In dealing with states, then, we need to make them not suck. To the extent that we can.
    The US has some seriously sucky things about it including institutionally accepted denials of civil rights, huge huge immigration/cheap labor issues, huge economic distribution issues. All of these issues lead to premature deaths, horrific deaths, and great sadness and loss of body parts for those on the wrong side of the United States.
    The same can be said of Israel. Basking and bathing and rubbing your nose in sexy transgressive declarations of anti-Semitism is not the way to deal with the problems of state action. The way to deal with the problems of state action is to weaken the state system in significant ways. When Obama tries this, he’s called a stuffed shirt, a horrible president, not leader enough….
    Also, when states are weakened asymmetrically, they actually can risk failing to do what it is we create them to do — protect our lives, liberties and pursuits of happiness. The US is currently playing a very risky international status change game. The costs of failure are astoundingly high. Energy, world stability, new iterations of the Cold War, the alliance shuffle — we do it wrong, we pay far more than the Gulf/BP mess is going to cost.
    Take seriously the strategic gamesmanship we’re dealing with. Yes, there are people on the wrong side of the state-game. But we don’t have a ready substitute for this game. Destabilizing relations can have a lot of interesting payoffs.
    There’s a curse that runs, “May you live in interesting times.” A curse.

    Reply

  32. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Israeli judge: Learn from Nazis
    Retired Judge Hadassa Ben-Itto says as part of PR war, Israel should adopt tactics used to distribute Protocols of Elders of Zion
    Modi Kreitman Published: 07.05.10, 16:44 /
    LONDON

    Reply

  33. questions says:

    Carroll writes: “Oh for heavens sake…do you realize how disgusting it is when you accuse POA of ‘hating”..”
    Carroll, POA called himself an anti-Semite multiple times here. Not me. Him.
    Carroll writes, “and rant on about anti semitism while your semite tribe ”
    Huh???? MY semite tribe? What does this even mean? I’m not Israeli, and the “tribe” language is a little weird. But that’s ok, because you seem to labor under the impression that being Jewish is some kind of essence that leads directly to being hate-able, worthy of the hatred, and in the end, actually being hated. Must be something going on there for the universality of hate to be so, ummm, universal.
    So Carroll, what is it about women that leads to their hatred around the world? Gays? Darker skinned people? Disabled people also come in for a fair amount of wickedness….. I guess there’s just something about them???? Do you really think this way?
    Carroll writes: “steals another people’s land, kills women and children and unarmed civilians and lies and whines about the poor Jews security blanket in Israel?”
    The central feature of Israel politics right now is a land dispute. My guess is that a large number of Israelis are pretty sure there are security problems. That’s what land disputes are all about. The US hasn’t had a good land dispute in a while, but it certainly has a long and storied history of land grabs, killing women and children for what it takes to be a security issue. It also has huge huge race and gender issues that lead to a fair amount of killing, imprisoning, and denial of civil rights. And that’s taken to be somehow quite justified by the right.
    You keep trying to make Israel into something exceptionally wicked rather than normally so, you keep bathing in this crazed view of how if Israel does something the something is so much worse than if anyone else does it. And probably, according to your view (it seems to me) if there is a bad thing done in the world, scratch the surface and there you’ll find Israel. So now they are responsible for the Kyrgysz treatment of Uzbeks because Natan Sharansky, himself a former Soviet political prisoner, has a view on Uzbekistan. Probably he himself engineered the Kyrgysz/Uzbek refugee situation. Though it seems that he likes the Uzbek regime from your reading. So I don’t quite know the point aside from 6 degrees of separation from a Jew….
    Anyway, “debating” with you is not really how I envision my summer. Gotta say, I feel the need for some baptismal/cleansing water experience after this. Maybe I’ll go puke blood. So that’s at least one response in some reader…..
    By the way, Wonkette has up on its front page the bizarro Christian fantasy/dream of a giant homosexual and his, umm, fall. Maybe you, too, should do some fantasy analysis as your drool over the final battle between the “gentiles” and the Jews is a little odd, to say the least. Fantasy/dream imagery is really striking stuff to think through!

    Reply

  34. Carroll says:

    Ah so…
    “The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, an umbrella organization comprising 52 national Jewish groups, once hailed Karimov

    Reply

  35. Carroll says:

    Posted by questions, Jul 06 2010, 3:06AM – Link>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
    First and foremost, you give permission to other posters to mimic the nasty tone rather than to hold back a bit and do actual analysis. So the invective makes discussion harder
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Oh for heavens sake…do you realize how disgusting it is when you accuse POA of ‘hating”..and rant on about anti semitism while your semite tribe steals another people’s land, kills women and children and unarmed civilians and lies and whines about the poor Jews security blanket in Israel?
    So really what is there to discuss? We’ve done the analysis, the evidence has been presented over and over, facts upon facts. All the pro Israel side has offered in rebuttal is childish hasbara, victimhood, the holocaust, you did it to the Indians so we can do it to the Palestines and anyone against Israel’s killing sprees, land theft, collective punishment, war crimes, security ‘excuse’,their sleezy jewish lobby, mouthpieces trashing their betters and US aid parasite existence is just anti semitic.
    So, now we call Israel and it’s supporters what they are. Speaking for myself if even one lurker here sees my rantings and says…..”gee I didn’t know I could actually say what I think out loud in public and call Israel a non democratic racist terrorist state and our AIPAC owned congressmen traitors and the jewish lobby a seditious organization trying to get the US to fight a war for Israel without being struck by lightening or assassinated by zionistas”…well then, my job is done.

    Reply

  36. Cee says:

    The Karimov regime is strongly pro-Israel. The Israelis run Karimov’s personal security. Interestingly, Sheikh Kabbani belongs to a tiny Lebanese Muslim faction aligned to Israel and the Christian Falangists, and has been the envoy for Karimov’s dealings with Israel. This article in the Jewish Daily Forward is interesting.
    http://www.forward.com/articles/3544/
    http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/03/sufi_muslim_cou.html

    Reply

  37. nadine says:

    questions, obviously the Uzbek refugees should hire the Israelis to bomb them. Then, the whole world would be outraged and shower them with aid.
    Unfortunately, there are no Jews to be found in the Kyrgyz-Uzbek dispute, so they’re out of luck.
    If 400,000 refugees should turn into 400,000 dead, our fine TWN humanitarians would still not care.

    Reply

  38. questions says:

    carroll, as always, you’re carroll. I’ll someone else parse that mess.

    Reply

  39. questions says:

    POA writes: “Questions” was nowhere to be found when Marcus The Maggot was making slurs about Carroll having anal sex with arab men, or asking me if I had sucked Arafat’s dick.”
    **I wasn’t put on the earth to defend Carroll against Marcus’s colorful language anymore than I was put here to tolerate yours. I’m not particularly moved by Marcus’s spelling, his views, or his postings. So I don’t bother. Gee. I must be a horrible person, then.
    POA Writes: “Marcus IS a maggot. Whats the problem here? And where are the Jews decrying Marcus’ comments, or calling Nadine out on her overt bigoted remarks about Muslims? But hey, these jackasses like “questions” are quick to jump if one of us throws the excrement right back into the face of one of these maggots like Marcus.”
    **Again, Marcus doesn’t interest me. And “IS” as we know from Clinton, is a loaded term. A maggot is fly larva (if I have the bio correct) and is an utterly necessary creature for the process of decay. You might not think much of maggots, but the world would be nastier without them. Think through your metaphors.
    POA writes: “Never mind when I compliment groups like Peace Now, or point out what an amazing human being Emily Henochowicz is. Nope, I must be anti-semitic because I call filthy scum like Marcus a “maggot”, or ponder the silence of the majority of the world’s Jews when Israel sautees women and children in white phosphorous.”
    **I kind of doubt “sautee” is what you mean. And indeed you “must be an anti-Semite” precisely because you have called yourself one often enough lately that even the level-headed Paul has expressed dismay. He’s one of your fans. Far more than I am, that’s for sure. And he called you out on your bathing in transgression. You really feel like you’re DOING something when you use these words, but you don’t quite get what it is that you’re doing.
    First and foremost, you give permission to other posters to mimic the nasty tone rather than to hold back a bit and do actual analysis. So the invective makes discussion harder.
    Second, you encourage people like Marcus to go to the extreme against you. The more you damn Israel, the more others will praise Israel to counter your crazed obsessions and your basic nastiness. That you don’t see that Marcus is your alter ego, and that he will toss at you equal and opposite reactions is a mark of your lack of basic understanding about human communication. You don’t do nuance, you don’t get nuance in return.
    POA Writes: “Note “questions” silence about Marcus’s disingenuous claims about Israel’s stance on the attack on Iraq? Or on the other thread where Marcus blatantly lies about Emily Henochowicz and her family?”
    **I actually pay so little attention to Marcus that I didn’t even notice this. And again, I think the sources you’re citing here only go part of the way to explaining the war. There were a whole lot of events, desires, historical moments that lined up behind the war. Any historian worth his or her salt is not going to come to the conclusion that something as massive as this war has been was caused by a single entity. So, your sense of history and historical movement suffers from your general lack of nuance and complexity.
    Events don’t happen just because one small group of people makes them happen. You really need a lot of things happening at once, a lot of people’s agendas’ being served by the course of action that ends up happening. And no matter how many of these sources you find who say, HMMM, it really was Israel… no historian will accept first hand accounts like this as definitive. There are a lot of people involved in the prosecution of war and they have many and various agendas. If defense of Israel is part of the story, so be it. I’m not convinced even on this score, but that’s my problem. You still have to explain a whole more about geostrategic thinking than you do with your knee jerk “Israel made me do it.”
    POA writes: “Then this horseshit about Native Americans not being the target of any widespread bigotry. I imagine Katherine could set him straight on that bit.”
    Again, you miss the point. I did not say no widespread bigotry. Rather, the point is that a)it’s not world wide (are there people in the middle of, name your country) who hate Native Americans and would like to see them exterminated? I don’t think so. The issues with Native Americans in, ummm, America (N and S) have much more to do with land grabs and resource grabs than with out and out metaphysical and conspiracy laden theories. Bigotry yes, but in a different way from what anti-Semitism seems to have done. The illogic of some anti-Semitic bits I’ve run across is striking. Sheer illogic about the power, the desire to destroy, the undermining of all that is acceptable — and all of this on the part of people who don’t have any contact with Jews.
    Beyond land grabs, there’s probably some Christianization of the heathens stuff going on, but that can often fall right back into lad grab issues. And since this, too, is out of my field, I will leave it to others to supply more of what’s going on.
    POA writes: “I’ve got no use for questions and his convoluted horseshit. He’s about fifty books on the wrong side of reality. If he’d pull his ass out of the library he’d discover there’s a real world out here.”
    I actually don’t know what you mean by “fifty books on the wrong side of reality.” And the “there’s a real world out here” thing is so old and tired I can’t even believe that you’d bring it up. Funny thing is, no matter what anyone does for a living, we all experience the REAL WORLD of death, taxes, loss, fear, OTHER people, suffering, horror, war, sadness, plagues of locusts or whatever. When the recession hits one place, it actually hits many places. It’s a funny thing that THE REAL WORLD is precisely where everyone lives, even Marcus.
    Your fantasy about being THE ONLY ONE who KNOWS what’s going on, the only one who cares about anything, the only one who can transgress to show the rest of us what it all means, the eye-opener to all the naive benighted creatures of the world — wow.
    POA, I gotta say, you’re just not the only one who knows anything. And disparaging reading, which you do repeatedly, is really not the swiftest move you can make to get your views publicized and respected. After all, people have to read this stuff, and here you are writing about how unreal reading is.
    So go ahead and slay some more of your dragons. Slay “Marcus” repeatedly. Slay “nadine” and “questions” and “sweetness” and “WigWag” and all the other electrons out there. Embrace anti-Semitism as a transgressive rhetorical strategy. It give you something to motivate you to get out of bed in the morning, so why not. Anti-Semitism is a powerful force in the world in a way that, say, nothing about Kyrgyzstan can be.
    ************************
    “Ethnic clashes in Kyrgyzstan caused a mass exodus of Uzbek refugees into neighboring Uzbekistan.
    Now, barely three weeks later, practically all of the estimated 100,000 refugees have returned to Kyrgyzstan. Only 395 refugees who need hospital treatment remain in Uzbekistan.
    U.N. refugee spokesman Adrian Edwards says the agency is now concentrating its emergency programs on helping the returnees and those internally displaced in Kyrgyzstan.
    “The crisis is not over,” Edwards says. “375,000 people represent a considerable population still in need of humanitarian support.”
    Edwards agrees the rapidity of the returns seems to call into question whether the refugees came back voluntarily.”
    http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/asia/UN-Says-Crisis-In-Kyrgyzstan-Not-Over-97397179.html
    So, umm, where were you when 100,000 refugees were driven out? And why aren’t you screeding about this one? Is it a moral failing on your part not to document every single displacement and death from political strife all around the world?
    I’ll make a deal with you — find a whole bunch of massacres and refugee situations you normally pass over in silence, and I’ll write something about Marcus!

    Reply

  40. Carroll says:

    Posted by questions, Jul 05 2010, 7:05PM – Link
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    Got any links to articles about the Jews’s anti gentilism?
    Why do Jews hate gentiles? Now that would be an interesting book.
    Maybe a book on what came first, the chicken or the egg…did jews hate ‘the others’ first or did the others hate the Jews first?
    Why did the Irish and Italian immigrants use to hate each other and now they don’t …but everyone still hates jews?
    It’s a mystery to me….maybe a book title..’The Mystery of Anti Semitism”.

    Reply

  41. nadine says:

    “The Zelikow piece was also great.” (JohnH)
    “”That was “a perfectly absurd expenditure unless you were going to ride out a nuclear exchange – they [Iraqi officials] were not preparing to ride out a nuclear exchange with us. Those were preparations to ride out a nuclear exchange with the Israelis,” according to Zelikow. ” (Zelikow piece)
    “Nadine regurgitates that Iraq WMD canard again. And she expects us to take her seriously? What a joke!” (JohnH)
    Hey, JohnH, I guess you really are too dumb to keep your story straight for three posts in a row. Or maybe you just can’t read.

    Reply

  42. Sand says:

    The National Jewish Democratic Council [NJDC] — responding to their base — alerting their membership to calm down — being ‘insiders’ they have the ‘Jewish’ voters covered:
    –Is Obama Really Pro-Israel?
    Steve Sheffey

    Reply

  43. Don Bacon says:

    For any reader just tuning in, this whole thread started with the claim that Americans have never died for Israel. We’ve obviously, with all sorts of evidence, put that bad boy to bed. It was a false claim, for sure.
    Over 4,000 Americans have died for Israel in Iraq. Oh, there were some other reasons, like fat profits for the war racketeers. But Israel was the prime mover, in may ways that have been documented above.
    Thousands of grieving people in America and tens of thousands in Iraq, thanks to Israel. Some achievement.

    Reply

  44. Carroll says:

    America Past…..
    Washington’s Farewell Address 1796
    “Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it – It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it ? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?
    So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
    As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
    Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.”
    “However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”
    America Present…………….
    “As a senator from New York, I was proud to be a strong voice for Israel in the Congress and around the world. And I am proud that I can continue to be that strong voice as Secretary of State”….Hillary Clinton
    “I

    Reply

  45. JohnH says:

    Nadine regurgitates that Iraq WMD canard again. And she expects us to take her seriously? What a joke!
    There never was going to be a nuclear exchange between Israel and Iraq, because the IAEA was all over the case. The Bush administration had to preempt them from completing their work, because there was nothing they feared more than the truth.
    But Zelikow does do us the favor of revealing the Israeli fingerprints all over the stupid war.

    Reply

  46. PissedOffAmerican says:

    This statement from Zelikow….
    “Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I’ll tell you what I think the real threat [is] and actually has been since 1990 – it’s the threat against Israel,”
    ….is just as true about Iran as it was about Iraq. Same oh, same oh. And Marcus The Maggot would have you believe that Israel is not willing to sacrifice American soldiers in wars that are against our best interests, and pursued with false claims.

    Reply

  47. Don Bacon says:

    Of course American people hate Arabs — they are the enemy in Iraq. Ragheads, camel jockeys. They kill Americans, so they’re terrorists. Except of course when the US brags about liberating them, and their purple fingers are on display in the capitol.
    Wars are so confusing, and people have other concerns like putting food on the table and paying the rent so they really don’t have much time for any of this foolishness that we spend time on. So they just tend to believe what the government/media authorities dish out to them. It has nothing to do with classic prejudice. It’s simply propaganda at work.
    It works the other way with Israel. Israel good.

    Reply

  48. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “questions, POA is a hater”
    I don’t “hate” anything, or anybody. But I can assure you, you disgust me beyond words.
    The fact that Kotz and Marcus seem to be your biggest, (and only), fans here, speaks volumes.

    Reply

  49. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “And when they do despicable things that kill people there’s nothing wrong with calling them despicable names”
    “We certainly don’t need meaningless babble like “Anti-Semitism is a metaphysical passion, not a materialist one.”
    “Questions” was nowhere to be found when Marcus The Maggot was making slurs about Carroll having anal sex with arab men, or asking me if I had sucked Arafat’s dick.
    Marcus IS a maggot. Whats the problem here? And where are the Jews decrying Marcus’ comments, or calling Nadine out on her overt bigoted remarks about Muslims? But hey, these jackasses like “questions” are quick to jump if one of us throws the excrement right back into the face of one of these maggots like Marcus.
    Never mind when I compliment groups like Peace Now, or point out what an amazing human being Emily Henochowicz is. Nope, I must be anti-semitic because I call filthy scum like Marcus a “maggot”, or ponder the silence of the majority of the world’s Jews when Israel sautees women and children in white phosphorous.
    Note “questions” silence about Marcus’s disingenuous claims about Israel’s stance on the attack on Iraq? Or on the other thread where Marcus blatantly lies about Emily Henochowicz and her family?
    Then this horseshit about Native Americans not being the target of any widespread bigotry. I imagine Katherine could set him straight on that bit.
    I’ve got no use for questions and his convoluted horseshit. He’s about fifty books on the wrong side of reality. If he’d pull his ass out of the library he’d discover there’s a real world out here.

    Reply

  50. nadine says:

    “That was “a perfectly absurd expenditure unless you were going to ride out a nuclear exchange – they [Iraqi officials] were not preparing to ride out a nuclear exchange with us. Those were preparations to ride out a nuclear exchange with the Israelis,” according to Zelikow. ”
    So, according you, JohnH, the only reason the US would want to prevent a nuclear exchange in the middle east was for Israel? Otherwise, US interests would be unaffected?
    You are as stupid as you are hate-filled.

    Reply

  51. JohnH says:

    POA–thanks for the Lobe article. I think he nailed it.
    The Zelikow piece was also great.
    And now guess who wants to rewrite history to remove any evidence of their being leading advocates for the Iraq War?
    Just like they tried to rewrite history of massive ethnic cleansing to make it disappear…

    Reply

  52. nadine says:

    “The Jewish people have actually prospered, haven’t they. ” (Don Bacon)
    Yes, the Jews of Europe prospered so well this last 100 years. Jews of the Arab lands too.
    Where are the Jews of Warsaw? of Lodz? of Vilna? of Budapest? of Cairo? of Bahgdad? There used to be millions there, what happened to them?
    You’ve got some friggin nerve, talking about how well the Jews are doing.

    Reply

  53. nadine says:

    questions, POA is a hater. It’s really just that simple. That’s what he runs on. He hates politicians (notice he hates Obama now, who didn’t turn out to be the messiah), he hates the unnamed “THEM” whose conspiracies ruin the world, and most of all, he hates Israel and the Jews. For a hater, the Jooooos are a perennial target. He attracts his fellow haters, who will spend 24/7 explaining how the Israelis are worse than Nazis, are committing a thousand crimes, and should be exterminated (from pure humanitarian impulses, natch) etc. etc.
    If that’s how Steve Clemons likes the comments section of his blog, there’s not much we can do about it. There must be someplace for non-anti-Semitic, non-conspiratorial liberals to blog, because this ain’t it.

    Reply

  54. JohnH says:

    questions, sorry, but your argument simply doesn’t wash. You say that “Compare that to the tropes underlying anti-Semitism, to the fact that people can harbor significant anti-Semitic sentiment with little or no contact with Jewish people.”
    In fact, racist views are most often held by people who have little contact with those they hate. How many people in this country know Arabs? Yet they hate them.
    Once people come into contact with “the other” and actually get to know them, they start to realize that the have many things in common and the hatred begins to dissipate.
    BTW questions, I did not “just toss in another book.” It was a review of one of the two books reviewed in the NYT. And the prominent Jewish reviewer concluded that the Julius book was woefully inadequate in its scholarship.
    Maybe YOU should have read to review I linked to.

    Reply

  55. Don Bacon says:

    questions,
    I thought you were mocking those book reviews. They certainly should have been mocked. The recent pain and suffering of Jews has of course been exaggerated compared to say native americans, chinese, vietnamese, japanese, hispanics etc etc. The Jewish people have actually prospered, haven’t they. They are an accomplished, capable people and they deserve to prosper. But they don’t deserve a free pass for pernicious deeds.
    I scrolled up and I haven’t seen a shred of anti-semitism. When people wear their religion on their sleeves, and people take note of their actions, say starting wars and stuff, it is not anti-semitism to recount their misdeeds. It’s accountability. It’s nothing to do with Jews in general, only with certain ones.
    And when they do despicable things that kill people there’s nothing wrong with calling them despicable names.
    We certainly don’t need meaningless babble like “Anti-Semitism is a metaphysical passion, not a materialist one.”
    What’s your evidence for accepting the ridiculous notion of “world wide hatred” of Jews by people who have no contact with Jews? Have you traveled much? I have, and I’ve never witnessed what you speak of. I’ve lived in one country in central america, three countries in Europe, four countries in asia and visited dozens more and I have never heard an anti-semitic remark. I don’t think that too many Chinese are anti-semitic, and there’s a billion of them, just for starters.
    Isn’t it odd that in a state with so many Zionist politicians we see a book review exaggerating anti-semitism. Well, not so odd.

    Reply

  56. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Blablablah…..
    Hows that “AIPAC is just like any other lobby” crap working out for you these days, questions???
    Shove it.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUGVPBO9_cA

    Reply

  57. questions says:

    POA,
    Think about what you pride yourself on. Vitriol, calling people “maggots”, rubbing yourself in “anti-Semitism” because, ooohhh, transgression is just so much fun as a persona. Nothing like a little danger bath once in a while (or several times a day.)
    Native Americans are not blamed for widespread human misery. There are local population on population biases all over the place. But they are not a locus of all evil. And of course, this is precisely the point of the review essay.
    Compare that to the tropes underlying anti-Semitism, to the fact that people can harbor significant anti-Semitic sentiment with little or no contact with Jewish people.
    There is not world wide hatred of, say, the Havasupai or the Navajo.
    Anti-Italian and anti-Irish bigotry are not particularly widespread either. Probably in a lot of cities where groups bump against each other there’s racism. That’s actually the point of the books, according to the review you probably didn’t read. Racism is one thing. It’s material. You bump up against a group who challenges your place and you get weird. But if you don’t bump up against them, you don’t really think about them anymore.
    Anti-Semitism functions differently, though, according to the two book authors and the reviewer. This may be hard for you to understand, but try reading the review. Maybe buy the books and read them. Maybe find some other reviews that disagree and post something about that.
    Maybe show that the only people who harbor anti-Semitic feelings are those who directly bump up against Jewish people and no one else actually gives a damn. Go ahead and challenge the distinction that the authors make. Cite some proof. It would make for lively posts.
    Rather than do that, of course, you’ll dive right back into your curses, invective, ad hominem crap, all the usual “persona” stuff you do so well that it may become you, or you may become it. You might want to be careful about the transformation of your basic decency into your persona. That would be pretty vile, indeed.
    And yet you’d pride yourself on that too. Pride. That’s what you convey as you roll around in your self-professed anti-Semitism. Pride. Self-professed.

    Reply

  58. PissedOffAmerican says:

    And the clincher comes from the mouth of Philip Zelikow……….
    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FC31Aa01.html
    Iraq was invaded ‘to protect Israel’ – US official
    By Emad Mekay
    WASHINGTON – Iraq under Saddam Hussein did not pose a threat to the United States, but it did to Israel, which is one reason why Washington invaded the Arab country, according to a speech made by a member of a top-level White House intelligence group.
    Inter Press Service uncovered the remarks by Philip Zelikow, who is now the executive director of the body set up to investigate the terrorist attacks on the US in September 2001 – the 9/11 commission – in which he suggests a prime motive for the invasion just over one year ago was to eliminate a threat to Israel, a staunch US ally in the Middle East.
    Zelikow’s casting of the attack on Iraq as one launched to protect Israel appears at odds with the public position of US President George W Bush and his administration, which has never overtly drawn the link between its war on the regime of Saddam and its concern for Israel’s security.
    The administration has instead insisted it launched the war to liberate the Iraqi people, destroy Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and to protect the United States.
    Zelikow made his statements about “the unstated threat” during his tenure on a highly knowledgeable and well-connected body known as the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB), which reports directly to the president. He served on the board between 2001 and 2003.
    “Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I’ll tell you what I think the real threat [is] and actually has been since 1990 – it’s the threat against Israel,” Zelikow told a crowd at the University of Virginia on September 10, 2002, speaking on a panel of foreign policy experts assessing the impact of September 11 and the future of the war on al-Qaeda.
    “And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don’t care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn’t want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell,” said Zelikow.
    The statements are the first to surface from a source closely linked to the Bush administration acknowledging that the war, which has so far cost the lives of nearly 600 US troops and thousands of Iraqis, was motivated by Washington’s desire to defend the Jewish state.
    The administration, which is surrounded by staunch pro-Israel, neo-conservative hawks, is currently fighting an extensive campaign to ward off accusations that it derailed the “war on terrorism” it launched after September 11 by taking a detour to Iraq, which appears to have posed no direct threat to the US.
    Israel is Washington’s biggest ally in the Middle East, receiving annual direct aid of US$3-4 billion.
    Even though members of the 16-person PFIAB come from outside government, they enjoy the confidence of the president and have access to all information related to foreign intelligence that they need to play their vital advisory role. Known in intelligence circles as “Piffy-ab”, the board is supposed to evaluate the nation’s intelligence agencies and probe any mistakes they make. The unpaid appointees on the board require a security clearance known as “code word” that is higher than top secret.
    The national security adviser to former president George H W Bush (1989-93) Brent Scowcroft, currently chairs the board in its work overseeing a number of intelligence bodies, including the Central Intelligence Agency, the various military intelligence groups and the Pentagon’s National Reconnaissance Office.
    Neither Scowcroft nor Zelikow returned numerous phone calls and e-mail messages from IPS for this story.
    Zelikow has long-established ties to the Bush administration. Before his appointment to PFIAB in October 2001, he was part of the current president’s transition team in January 2001. In that capacity, Zelikow drafted a memo for National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice on reorganizing and restructuring the National Security Council (NSC) and prioritizing its work.
    Richard A Clarke, who was counter-terrorism coordinator for Bush’s predecessor president Bill Clinton (1993-2001) also worked for Bush senior, and has recently accused the current administration of not heeding his terrorism warnings. Clarke said that Zelikow was among those he briefed about the urgent threat from al-Qaeda in December 2000.
    Rice herself had served in the NSC during the first Bush administration, and subsequently teamed up with Zelikow on a 1995 book about the unification of Germany.
    Zelikow had ties with another senior Bush administration official – Robert Zoellick, the current trade representative. The two wrote three books together, including one in 1998 on the United States and the Muslim Middle East.
    Aside from his position on the 9/11 commission, Zelikow is now also director of the Miller Center of Public Affairs and White Burkett Miller Professor of History at the University of Virginia. His close ties to the administration prompted accusations of a conflict of interest in 2002 from families of victims of the September attacks, who protested his appointment to the investigative body.
    In his university speech, Zelikow, who strongly backed attacking the Iraqi dictator, also explained the threat to Israel by arguing that Baghdad was preparing in 1990-91 to spend huge amounts of “scarce hard currency” to harness “communications against electromagnetic pulse”, a side-effect of a nuclear explosion that could sever radio, electronic and electrical communications.
    That was “a perfectly absurd expenditure unless you were going to ride out a nuclear exchange – they [Iraqi officials] were not preparing to ride out a nuclear exchange with us. Those were preparations to ride out a nuclear exchange with the Israelis,” according to Zelikow.
    He also suggested that the danger of biological weapons falling into the hands of the anti-Israeli Islamic Resistance Movement, known by its Arabic acronym Hamas, would threaten Israel rather than the US, and that those weapons could have been developed to the point where they could deter Washington from attacking Hamas.
    “Play out those scenarios,” he told his audience, “and I will tell you, people have thought about that, but they are just not talking very much about it”.
    “Don’t look at the links between Iraq and al-Qaeda, but then ask yourself the question, ‘gee, is Iraq tied to Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the people who are carrying out suicide bombings in Israel?’ Easy question to answer; the evidence is abundant.”
    To date, the possibility of the US attacking Iraq to protect Israel has been only timidly raised by some intellectuals and writers, with few public acknowledgements from sources close to the administration. Analysts who reviewed Zelikow’s statements said that they are concrete evidence of one factor in the rationale for going to war, which has been hushed up.
    “Those of us speaking about it sort of routinely referred to the protection of Israel as a component,” said Phyllis Bennis of the Washington-based Institute of Policy Studies. “But this is a very good piece of evidence of that.”
    Others say that the administration should be blamed for not making known to the public its true intentions and real motives for invading Iraq. “They [the administration] made a decision to invade Iraq, and then started to search for a policy to justify it. It was a decision in search of a policy and because of the odd way they went about it, people are trying to read something into it,” said Nathan Brown, professor of political science at George Washington University and an expert on the Middle East.
    But he downplayed the Israel link. “In terms of securing Israel, it doesn’t make sense to me because the Israelis are probably more concerned about Iran than they were about Iraq in terms of the long-term strategic threat,” he said.
    Still, Brown says that Zelikow’s words carried weight. “Certainly his position would allow him to speak with a little bit more expertise about the thinking of the Bush administration, but it doesn’t strike me that he is any more authoritative than [Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul] Wolfowitz, or Rice or [Secretary of State Colin] Powell or anybody else. All of them were sort of fishing about for justification for a decision that has already been made,” Brown said.
    (Inter Press Service)
    Like I said, Marcus, go screw yourself. With a 1 ton truck, preferably.

    Reply

  59. Sand says:

    To be fair — we got this from Wilkinson:
    — WASHINGTON, Aug 28, 2007 (IPS) –
    Israeli officials warned the George W. Bush administration that an invasion of Iraq would be destabilising to the region and urged the United States to instead target Iran as the primary enemy, according to former administration official Lawrence Wilkerson.
    “…Wilkerson, then a member of the State Department’s Policy Planning Staff and later chief of staff for Secretary of State Colin Powell, recalled in an interview with IPS that the Israelis reacted immediately to indications that the Bush administration was thinking of war against Iraq. After the Israeli government picked up the first signs of that intention, Wilkerson says, “The Israelis were telling us Iraq is not the enemy – Iran is the enemy.”
    [However]
    …Israeli strategists generally believed that taking down the Hussein regime could further upset an Iran-Iraq power balance that had already tilted in favour of Iran after the U.S. defeat of Hussein’s army in the 1991 Gulf War. By 1996, however, neoconservatives with ties to the Likud Party were beginning to argue for a more aggressive joint U.S.-Israeli strategy aimed at a “rollback” of all of Israel’s enemies in the region, including Iran, but beginning by taking down Hussein and putting a pro-Israeli regime in power there…”
    http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39051
    and the rest is history — as soon as AIPAC was onboard.

    Reply

  60. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “After all, there’s not much in the way of bias in the US against Italians or Japanese, or Irish people or Native Americans”
    Once again, “questions” gives us some convoluted missive on an issue he hasn’t a clue about.
    (If it ain’t in a book, he’s completely clueless about it. What, the guy has spent his entire life in school in one capacity or another??? Thats my bet.)
    Obviously, he’s never lived anywhere that has a large population of Native Americans. I can say definitely, with my experiences with the Flathead Tribe in Montana that they are subjected to blatant bigotry on a daily basis.
    Sometimes “questions” should just STFU. Theres a huge difference between trying to SOUND smart, and actually BEING smart.
    “I definitely think I’m better off doing other things than posting here sometimes…..”
    And, sometimes, so are we. Better off, that is.

    Reply

  61. PissedOffAmerican says:

    JERUSALEM, Aug. 16, 2002
    Israel To U.S.: Don’t Delay Iraq Attack
    Sharon Government Urges Prompt Action Against Saddam
    (CBS) Israel is urging U.S. officials not to delay a military strike against Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, an aide to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said Friday.
    Israeli intelligence officials have gathered evidence that Iraq is speeding up efforts to produce biological and chemical weapons, said Sharon aide Ranaan Gissin.
    “Any postponement of an attack on Iraq at this stage will serve no purpose,” Gissin said. “It will only give him (Saddam) more of an opportunity to accelerate his program of weapons of mass destruction.”
    The United States has been considering a military campaign against Iraq to remove Saddam from power, listing him as one of the world’s main terrorist regimes. However, there is considerable world opposition to a U.S. strike.
    As evidence of Iraq’s weapons building activities, Israel points to an order Saddam gave to Iraq’s Atomic Energy Commission last week to speed up its work, Gissin said.
    “Saddam’s going to be able to reach a point where these weapons will be operational,” he said.
    Meanwhile, Iraq told the United Nations on Friday that it will continue to discuss the return of U.N. weapons inspectors, but it insisted on conditions that Secretary-General Kofi Annan has already rejected.
    In a 10-page letter to Annan, Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri reaffirmed an Iraqi offer to hold a round of technical negotiations but he insisted they focus on outstanding issues related to Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction as well as “practical arrangements for the return of the inspection system in the future.”
    Sabri was replying to a letter from Annan that rejected Iraq’s proposal to have chief weapons inspector Hans Blix and Iraqi experts determine outstanding disarmament issues of mass destruction and figure out how to resolve them before inspectors return to the country.
    Also on Friday, President Bush said he knows there are “very intelligent people” who doubt the wisdom of attacking Iraq.
    But he says Saddam Hussein is “thumbing his nose at the world” — and must be ousted.
    Speaking to reporters near his Texas ranch, the president vowed to make his own decision — based on the best intelligence available.
    Gissin also said Israel was not seeking to dictate the timing of a U.S. military campaign but said that, faced with the threat of one, Saddam was fast developing weapons.
    While the Israeli government backs U.S. action against Iraq, there is also concern in Israel that in response, Iraq would launch missile attacks against Tel Aviv and other cities in Israel.
    During the 1991 Gulf War, in which U.S.-led forces pushed back an Iraqi invasion of neighboring Kuwait, Iraq hit Israel with 39 Scud missiles

    Reply

  62. questions says:

    Don Bacon, it’s way out of my field so I’m not gonna go on for long about this….
    The point of the Rothstein review of the Julius and Wistrich books is that anti-Semitism didn’t require the presence of the Jews to be felt, didn’t need economic competition, labor issues, land issues or the like to be felt. At least, near as I can tell.
    The other anti- …isms you list seem to be basic population struggles that have stemmed more from immigration patterns than from the mere existence of a people seemingly set apart.
    Maybe I’m wrong, maybe Rothstein and Julius and Wistrich are wrong. Maybe you’re right. All bias is the same, and as soon as the populations are separated from each other, the bias goes dormant.
    After all, there’s not much in the way of bias in the US against Italians or Japanese, or Irish people or Native Americans. Those people, ummm, up and left and the bias disappeared. Oh wait, they didn’t go anywhere. Hmmm.
    I’m honestly not convinced that your sense of symmetry is correct. But then you knew that already.
    And JohnH tosses in a review for some other book ALSO published by the NYT (suspect just like that) that equates anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism just to prove that Julius and Wistrich and Rothstein are to be ignored.
    It’s an interesting form of argument.
    The NYT says it, so it MUST be false. There’s some other author who makes a bad argument. Therefore Rothstein is doubly wrong, as are Julius and Wistrich. And so, there’s nothing a little extra weird about anti-Semitism’s sticking power. Because of course, the NYT is…..
    I definitely think I’m better off doing other things than posting here sometimes…..

    Reply

  63. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Do, Marcus thew Maggot, how do you like being shown to be completely and utterly full of shit?
    http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/167/35433.html
    Israel Says War on Iraq Would Benefit the Region
    By James Bennet
    New York Times
    February 27, 2003
    Israelis once believed that the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians would usher in a new Middle East of comfortable Israeli-Arab coexistence.
    With Oslo in tatters, the Israelis are now putting similar hopes in an American war on Iraq.
    Other nations may cavil, but many in Israel are so certain of the rightness of a war on Iraq that officials are already thinking past that conflict to urge a continued, assertive American role in the Middle East.
    Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz told members of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations last week that after Iraq, the United States should generate “political, economic, diplomatic pressure” on Iran. “We have great interest in shaping the Middle East the day after” a war, he said.
    It may seem paradoxical that the country most vulnerable to an Iraqi attack in case of war is most eager for that war to begin. But Israel’s military intelligence apparatus has concluded that the chances of a successful Iraqi missile strike here during this war, while ever present, are small.
    The Israeli government and military elite believe that Saddam Hussein seeks devastating weapons but has far less capacity for mayhem than he had during the Persian Gulf war of 1991, when his forces fired 39 Scud missiles at Israel. The Israeli Army also believes that its own national defenses are much improved.
    Israel regards Iran and Syria as greater threats and is hoping that once Saddam Hussein is dispensed with, the dominoes will start to tumble. According to this hope “or evolving strategy” moderates and reformers throughout the region would be encouraged to put new pressure on their own governments, not excepting the Palestine Authority of Yasir Arafat.
    “The shock waves emerging from post-Saddam Baghdad could have wide-ranging effects in Tehran, Damascus, and in Ramallah,” Efraim Halevy, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s national security adviser, said in a speech in Munich this month.
    Until recently, Mr. Halevy was the chief of the Mossad, Israel’s spy agency. He said, “We have hopes of greater stability, greater enhanced confidence from the Persian Gulf to the Atlantic shores of Morocco.”
    Israelis have also suggested that that an Iraq war may salvage their economy and even prompt the opposition Labor Party to join Mr. Sharon’s coalition in a new government of national unity.
    Expressed in its broadest, vaguest terms, that theory has come in for the sort of mockery that the idealistic vision of Oslo’s effects suffered from the right. The accusation is the same: fuzzy, wishful thinking.
    Uzi Benziman, a journalist and author of a biography of Mr. Sharon, wrote in the newspaper Haaretz, “Israel is looking for Ares, the ancient Greek god of war, to play the part of the deus ex machina in this drama.”
    Referring to this “almost pagan faith,” he continued, “It’s still hard to shake the feeling that what the fervency of Israeli expectations regarding the war really attests to is despair.” Opinion polls here have shown a strong though not overwhelming majority in favor of war.
    The precise mechanism for converting a war into regional stability has not been detailed.
    Mark Heller, a senior researcher at the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, said the potential engine for change would be the example of a transformed Iraq. “It’s at least conceivable that Al Jazeera will end up showing pictures of Iraqis celebrating in the streets, in which case people in other places — like Syria, Saudi Arabia and Egypt — are going to start saying, `If Iraqis deserve decent government, so do we.’ ” Al Jazeera is a widely watched Arab broadcast network.
    Israeli officials say that only sustained American pressure can turn that hope into reality. Mr. Mofaz warned that without continued attention to the rest of the region, an Iraqi collapse could strengthen Iran.
    As they look ahead to the aftermath of an Iraq war, Israeli officials are also considering how the Bush administration’s present diplomatic struggle could help or hurt them. A top Israeli official predicted that after such a war would come a fork in the road for American policy and “a battle for the heart and mind” of President Bush.
    The official said the Bush administration might try to mend relations with Arab and European nations by wringing concessions from Israel toward the Palestinians.
    But he said it was more likely that rising American frustration with Europe would benefit Israel. Mr. Sharon has been alarmed by the recent efforts of the so-called quartet “the United States, the United Nations, the European Union and Russia” to intervene in the conflict here. Mr. Sharon would much prefer to deal only with the United States.
    The top Israeli official said the quartet might prove a “casualty” of an Iraqi war. “The idea of using the quartet as the great instrument of resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — there are people in Washington who are going to say, `What do we need these people for?’ ” he said.

    Reply

  64. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “BTW; It was well known and publically stated by Israel then and now, that Iran NOT Iraq was/is the threat in the region”
    So, Marcus The Maggot is crappin’ all over this thread too, eh?
    He’s a ignorant little pissant. Pretty hard to take serious.
    http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=467
    Israel Urges US to Attack Iraq: “Sooner, Rather than Later”
    Sharon’s advisor: Urges US to accelerate aggression on Iraq, says postponement bad for Israel
    18 January, 2003 (IAP News)
    A former Israeli ambassador to Washington who is now advisor to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has urged the Israeli government to step up pressure on the Bush Administration to accelerate the war on Iraq.
    Zalman Shuval said in an article in the Hebrew newspaper Yedeot Ahranot, published Thursday 16 January, that Israel should make behind-the-scene efforts to get the American administration to attack Iraq “sooner rather than later.”
    Shuval argued that postponing or delaying the war, let alone cancelling it, would have “very negative consequences” on Israel.
    He suggested that in case the United States doesn’t launch the war on Iraq in the near future, opposition to the war will gather momentum and the US will come under pressure to pressurize Israel.
    Shuval argued that while Israel shouldn’t brazenly appear as pushing the Bush Administration to attack Iraq, the Jewish state should never ignore or be oblivious to the risks of a postponed war on Iraq.
    Israel calculates that a devastating American war on Iraq would break the collective spirit of the Arab world, including the Palestinian people, and enable Israel and the United States to imposed a capitulation on the Palestinians or, worse, effect an ethnic cleansing against hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.

    Reply

  65. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Feb. 1, 2003….
    Of intimidation and Israel
    By Jim Lobe
    WASHINGTON – Why is the administration of US President George W Bush preparing to go to war against Iraq?
    It has put forward three reasons, none of which is taken particularly seriously by policy veterans. They include eliminating Hussein’s presumed arsenal of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), reducing the threat of international terrorism and promoting democracy and human rights in Iraq and throughout the Middle East.
    As Michael Klare of Hampshire College argued recently in a paper, none of these rings very true. Yes, Iraq undoubtedly has WMD – although not nuclear – but so do many countries in the wider region, including Israel, Pakistan and Iran (not to mention North Korea, whose destructive capabilities not only are far greater than Iraq’s, but also can be delivered at much longer range with much greater accuracy).
    As for international terrorism, Washington has been insisting for years that Iran is far more active than Iraq, and, despite extraordinary efforts, administration hawks have yet to come up with any persuasive evidence that Saddam has any ties at all to al-Qaeda or other active terrorist groups.
    Indeed, according to the CIA, Saddam is considered most unlikely to use WMD against the United States, let alone hand them over to terrorists for their use, unless he were face-to-face with his own elimination – precisely what the administration is now planning.
    As for promoting democracy, critics note that this theme has been pushed by neo-conservatives who rose to power in the Reagan administration by attacking Jimmy Carter’s human rights policies, which they claimed unfairly undermined friendly “authoritarian” regimes like the Shah of Iran and Somoza’s Nicaragua, and have since argued that Arabs and Muslims respect only power and force.
    “There is … something hypocritical about the belief in democratization when it is propounded by people who also hold the belief in the ‘clash of civilizations’, [and] who were insisting a few months ago that there are regions of the world, particularly the Islamic regions, in which culture makes freedom impossible,” noted The New Republic magazine last fall.
    That hypocrisy is compounded by the fact that the administration has shown no reservation about aligning itself since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US with some of the broader area’s worst dictatorships, including Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan and Saudi Arabia, among others.
    “Already, this has looked too much like a war in search of a justification,” Washington Post columnist E J Dionne, wrote last August when the democracy-promotion argument first became prominent.
    So, if the administration’s public justifications are unpersuasive, what lies behind the drive to war? On this question, the experts are divided. But most believe there are three possible major explanations: oil, intimidation and Israel.
    To most on the left, oil seems entirely persuasive, particularly when, as British writer Robert Fisk recently noted, you assert the fact that the US is quickly running out of oil and that Iraq sits on the world’s second largest oil reserves. Combine that with the well-established connections of Bush, Bush’s father and Vice President Dick Cheney, and you have a very strong case.
    As Klare, who also favors this thesis, points out, the US since World War II has always considered the Gulf a “vital interest”, precisely because of its status as the world’s greatest underground sea of petroleum.
    But this thesis suffers some weaknesses. First, there is no evidence that US oil companies favor an Iraqi adventure; indeed, some top oil executives have expressed alarm that an invasion may destabilize other key oil-producers, notably Saudi Arabia, which may greatly compromise their access in both the short and long runs.
    And if the theory is correct, one would expect Bush’s father and his former top advisers, who are also major figures in the oil industry, to back military action, unilaterally if necessary. Yet, not only has Bush senior been unenthusiastic about the mission, but his former secretary of state, James Baker, whose oil connections are legion, has gone to the trouble of publishing a report that warned explicitly against any action that would lend credence to the idea that “imperalist reasons” were behind an invasion, least of all in the oil sector.
    Finally, some have argued that Hussein represents no obstacle to US access to Iraqi oil; indeed, US oil companies have been buying Iraqi oil, like everyone else, under the United Nations oil-for-food program. And, while Saddam’s removal could bring badly needed new investment in Iraq’s oil sector that could then increase the global oil supply, an invasion also risks disrupting those new supplies, either through sabotage or destabilization of other nearby sources. “If oil is the question, Iraq is not the answer,” noted oil historian Daniel Yergin recently.
    That leaves intimidation and Israel, which, to some analysts, are closely linked. Intimidation underlies much of the hawks’ rhetoric and comes across very strongly in the administration’s National Security Strategy document published in September, which makes clear that the United States favors a uni-polar world in which its military power is unrivalled. In that respect, invading Iraq is meant above all as a “demonstration” of what will happen to “rogue states” with WMD, links to terrorism or anyone else, for that matter, who challenges US supremacy.
    “The fastest way to impress one charter member of the axis of evil,” argued the Wall Street Journal, a major cheerleader for the hawks, earlier this month, “is to depose another, and sooner rather than later.”
    Klare offers an interesting, oil-related variant of this view by citing 1990 remarks by Cheney to the effect that whoever controls Gulf oil enjoys a “stranglehold” not only on our economy, but also “on that of most of the other nations of the world as well”. By overwhelming Iraq, he argues, Washington will be sending an unmistakable message to potential future rivals, namely China, whose economy will depend increasingly on Gulf oil.
    Significantly, the imperial worldview that underpins the intimidation rationale was first articulated by neo-conservative policy analysts and writers who have long championed the positions of the right-wing Likud Party in Israel and now occupy key positions in the Bush administration, particularly in the offices of Cheney and Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld, and the latter’s defense policy board, chaired by Richard Perle.
    Some critics argue that Iraq policy is driven primarily by these individuals, who, like Likud, believe that Saddam’s obsession with obtaining WMD marks the greatest threat to Israel’s regional military dominance and security.
    Indeed, the strongest advocates for attacking Iraq both inside and outside the administration – Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Perle and other defense policy board members, respectively – have been the neo-conservatives.
    “Absent their activities, the United States would be focusing on containing Iraq, which we have done successfully since the Gulf War, but we would not be trying to overthrow Saddam Hussein,” says Stephen Walt, a dean of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, who also points to Washington’s unexpectedly sharp tilt toward Likudist positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as evidence of the neo-conservatives’ influence.
    In their view, the interests of Israel and the United States are virtually identical, or, as one of them, former Education Secretary William Bennett, noted last year, “America’s fate and Israel’s fate are one and the same.”
    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EB01Ak04.html

    Reply

  66. Marcus says:

    Looks like I was wrong- It wasn`t 3 jews who caused the Iraq War but rather (according to DonBacon and JohnH it was 11 jews) Thanks for clearing that up for me.
    Don Bacon writes that the reason for the war was to “Disarm Iraq-for Israel” Gee, didn`t Israel do that for itself 10 years earlier ?
    On a more serious note,I have believed for a long time 4 or 5 years that it is going to have to be israel alone who takes on Iran,now with the big appeaser in office I`m more sure than ever.
    Is it fair that Israel (just like the Osirak reactor) needs to go it alone , no it`s not because not only Bush and Obama but many other western leaders have identified Iran as the west`s greatest threat,but hey, It will be one of Israel`s greatest cotributions to Western Civilization,so maybe it`s only fitting that she goes it alone, just as she has EVERY other military conflict. No Foreign soliders ,american or otherwise has ever fought any of Israel`s wars.
    And no American solider has ever died fighting for Israel, that`s a fact that even a rabid anti-semite like JohnH cannot refute.
    BTW; JOHNH; like everything else you write you are wrong . Frum never coined the phrase “axis of evil” that was a revision Bush himself made. Frum actually wrote “axis of hate”
    I`m still waiting for a Thank You to Israel for disarming Iraq and Syria.
    Israel has done so much more than the US in containing the spread of nuclear weapons.
    In Obamas recent fraud of a NPT talks he was able to get Canada to agree to ship to the US some (loose)Uranium we had here….this shit was Americas to begin with that you were storing here ! Waytogo Obama,making the world safer.

    Reply

  67. Sand says:

    — Iraq looks to spectacular oil boom to revive its political fortunes. What is being called the great Iraqi oil rush has gained momentum in the wake of BP’s Gulf of Mexico disaster
    Patrick Cockburn [1 July ’10]
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iraq-looks-to-spectacular-oil-boom-to-revive-its-political-fortunes-2015156.html
    “…staff from the giant oil companies have been pouring into Basra recently, establishing expensive headquarters in the city. Visiting diplomats said they were impressed with the speed with which the oil giants are moving to develop the Rumaila field in particular. At the heart of the current excitement is that there may be more oil under the sands of southern Iraq than almost anywhere else on the planet. The country has 115 billion barrels of proven reserves but there may be up to another 100 billion barrels under the Western Desert where there has been little exploration…”
    Won’t the oil companies be a bit pissed off if all their oil exploration projects and supply lines would then have to be shut down to a military strike?

    Reply

  68. Sand says:

    From Biden’s ‘surprise’ visit to Iraq [with or without his bullet proof vest?] telling us ‘Nothing is wrong over here folks… now move along, move along’:
    “…Biden ALSO defended the administration’s plan for Afghanistan, saying the surge of troops hasn’t even been concluded yet. He said he disagreed with a “MANUFACTURED NOTION that this is a rush to the exits.” He stressed, “This is not an endless encounter.”
    Really?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    — Biden: ‘Nobody’ Worried About Security Breaking Down In Iraq
    Christina Bellantoni [July 5, ’10]
    http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/biden-nobody-worried-about-security-breaking-down-in-iraq.php?ref=fpb

    Reply

  69. Don Bacon says:

    There is also anti-Chinese-ism:
    Passed in 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act was a climax to more than thirty years of progressive racism. Anti-Chinese sentiment had existed ever since the great migration from China during the gold rush, where white miners and prospectors imposed taxes and laws to inhibit the Chinese from success. Racial tensions increased as more and more Chinese emigrated, occupied jobs, and created competition on the job market.
    and anti Japanese-Americanism:
    Japanese-American internment was the forced relocation and internment by the United States government in 1942 of approximately 110,000 Japanese Americans and Japanese residing along the Pacific coast of the United States to camps called “War Relocation Camps.
    And the native americans, the irish, the italians — all mistreated. These were metaphysical passions, not materialist ones, and they all cry out for books to be reviewed in New Yawk.

    Reply

  70. JohnH says:

    Funny, I thought the Crusades happened more than two decades ago. But, if the NY Times says so, it must be true: “Islamophobia is a concept developed within the last two decades.”
    questions might be interested in the review of “Trials of the Diaspora” by Anthony Lerman, former director of the Institute for Jewish Policy Research: “many delighted readers will see in this book a robust defense of Israel, a rebuke to its critics and an unsparing expose of Muslim and Christian anti-Semitic anti-Zionism…But for anyone who cares about the serious study of contemporary anti-Semitism, ‘Trials of the Diaspora’ is a disaster…”
    http://www.thenation.com/article/undefined
    It sounds like the book is nothing more than a long winded cover for labeling anti-Zionists as anti-Semites.

    Reply

  71. Don Bacon says:

    re: Cee
    It’s pretty hard to disagree with the CIA report forecasting an eventual one-state solution when one looks at the Palestinian loss of land
    http://tinyurl.com/y8a6wpp
    the Arab/Jewish populations (4.2m/5.9m),
    the Arab v. Israeli growth rates in Israel (2.6/1.7), and the Palestinian growth rate (2.2).
    These factors added to the current political situation.

    Reply

  72. janinsanfran says:

    Rising sun or setting sun? Just wondering.

    Reply

  73. Sand says:

    Posted by samuelburke, Jul 05 2010, 2:12PM – Link
    Re: Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell interview on Antiwar.com.
    After listening to the interview it makes you wonder how neocon embeds/burrowers we have within the State Dept. and Pentagon.
    I listened to the interview with Ray McGovern as well — worrying what he had to say about the CIA.
    http://scotthorton.org/radio/10_06_30_mcgovern.mp3
    Also, I always thought that Gates was brought in to clamp down on ‘the crazies’?
    So when McGovern quotes Gates [in April ’08] as saying “…Iran is hell bent on getting a nuclear weapon…” I was hoping that the guy was not nuts enough to support a military strike.
    [April ’09}: “…Gates told a Senate panel that a military option would only delay Iran

    Reply

  74. Sand says:

    Questions — I wouldn’t have expected anything less from the New York Times book review section.
    As an aside, I wonder if we’ll ever find out who leaked to the New York Times from the Likud [strike that] US State Department — The Eikenberry cables:
    “…In November 2009, Eikenberry sent **two classified cables to his superiors** in which he assessed the proposed US strategy in Afghanistan. A description of the content of the cables was leaked soon after. In January 2010, the New York Times obtained and published the cables…”
    A “the hidden plot” nah — it’s common knowledge and has been quoted all over the place that the Jewish AIPAC/Israel advocates would rather keep their disagreements with the administration ‘behind closed doors’ except that is when it’s in their own best interest.

    Reply

  75. questions says:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/books/06antisemtism.html?_r=1&8dpc
    An absolutely fascinating book review. I am pasting in a couple of passages from it:
    “Racism attaches negative attributes onto people bearing a particular biological heritage. Such characteristics are passed on; they are inherited. The hatred is focused; the perceived threat can be excised. In a way, racism is a materialist or physical passion: the problem and the solution are concrete.
    While anti-Semitism has tapped into racial hatreds in modern times, Mr. Julius and Mr. Wistrich highlight its traditional reliance on conspiracy: the hidden plot. Anti-Semitism isn

    Reply

  76. JohnH says:

    And then there is David Frum, Bush’s speechwriter, who coined the term ‘axis of evil.’
    Frum’s book “An End to Evil” was co-written with Richard Perle. It provided a defense of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and advocated regime change in Iran and Syria.

    Reply

  77. Cee says:

    I can’t wait until the day we free ourselves from this attachment
    A study conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has cast doubt over Israel’s survival beyond the next 20 years.
    The CIA report predicts “an inexorable movement away from a two-state to a one-state solution, as the most viable model based on democratic principles of full equality that sheds the looming specter of colonial Apartheid while allowing for the return of the 1947/1948 and 1967 refugees. The latter being the precondition for sustainable peace in the region.”
    The study, which has been made available only to a certain number of individuals, further forecasts the return of all Palestinian refugees to the occupied territories, and the exodus of two million Israeli – who would move to the US in the next fifteen years.
    “There is over 500,000 Israelis with American passports and more than 300,000 living in the area of just California,” International lawyer Franklin Lamb said in an interview with Press TV on Friday, adding that those who do not have American or western passport, have already applied for them.
    “So I think the handwriting at least among the public in Israel is on the wall…[which] suggests history will reject the colonial enterprise sooner or later,” Lamb stressed.
    He said CIA, in its report, alludes to the unexpectedly quick fall of the apartheid government in South Africa and recalls the disintegration of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, suggesting the end to the dream of an ‘Israeli land’ would happen ‘way sooner’ than later.
    The study further predicts the return of over one and a half million Israelis to Russia and other parts of Europe, and denotes a decline in Israeli births whereas a rise in the Palestinian population.
    Lamb said given the Israeli conduct toward the Palestinians and the Gaza strip in particular, the American public — which has been voicing its protest against Tel Aviv’s measures in the last 25 years — may ‘not take it anymore’.
    Some members of the US Senate Intelligence Committee have been informed of the report.

    Reply

  78. Mr.Murder says:

    Ben Franklin’s community of Philadelphia(the Nation’s capital at the time we still upheld the Constitution) included a mosque in its mosaic of metropolitans.
    That serves as a tolerance landmark for these times.

    Reply

  79. Mr.Murder says:

    Steve, forgive me for not being able to recall which candidate Hillary gave an endorsement to in the elections for Poland.
    Was that an example of soft power being successful?
    It does seem different wire services and media outlets have chosen different sides of the ballot, so trying to guage off any one story may be subjective.
    This, coupled with talks about Georgia, and a movement on START, all of this could be considered a concerted movement to a new kind of containment? One that couples engagement and strengthening of the EU, provided the result of recent advance towards accepting Turkey, huge gains could be accomplished.

    Reply

  80. Don Bacon says:

    Barry Rubin had a hand in the Iraq War too: (natch)
    Behind the Iraq Dossier Hoax: Intelligence Was Cooked in Israel, by Jeffrey Steinberg (extracts)
    According to media accounts, the 10 Downing Street “dossier,” cited favorably by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell in his disastrous Feb. 5 report to the United Nations Security Council, was plagiarized from an American graduate school paper, based on information more than a decade old. . .
    Barry Rubin echoed Perle and Doug Feith’s “A Clean Break” strategy, arguing that the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein would herald the “third Arab revolution” of the postwar period, triggering a spontaneous outbreak of democracy, human rights, and free trade throughout the Arab world.
    It takes two to tango. The Blair dossier

    Reply

  81. JohnH says:

    Nadine and marcus obviously can’t read very well. I never said that the Israeli government and its supporters (AIPAC, neocons, etc.) were primarily to blame for the US decision to invade Iraq. In fact, I believe that there were other powerful special interests who were much more instrumental behind the scenes.
    But many of the most vocal, full throated advocates (AIPAC and neocons) were Jewish. And they are all outspoken advocates for all the military adventures. Now the Israeli government is clearly trying to instigate a US attack on Iran along with the other, usual suspects.
    All this jingoism puts a very Jewish face on these campaigns. You get the impression that Israel will stand up and fight these wars–right up to the last dead American soldier.
    When Americans wake up and find that these wars have cost them their Social Security, people will be angry. And that anger will be directed at the most visible group rabidly supporting military misadventures.

    Reply

  82. Don Bacon says:

    Iraq was on its knees as a result of Clinton’s air attacks, the no-fly zone and particularly the crippling sanctions which killed half a million children (SoS Albright saying it was worth it). So the only threat from Iraq were their (fictitious) WMD’s against Israel, and the Jewish cabal in the Pentagon made it a reality, with decided help from the Lobby-controlled Congress.
    There was also Douglas Feith’s Office of Special Plans (OSP) and the Pentagon Near East and South Asia (NESA) office. Jim Lobe: “Key personnel who worked in both NESA and OSP were part of a broader network of neoconservative ideologues and activists who worked with other Bush political appointees scattered around the national-security bureaucracy to move the country to war, according to retired Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, who was assigned to NESA from May 2002 through February 2003. The heads of NESA and OSP were Deputy Undersecretary William Luti and Abram Shulsky, respectively. Other appointees who worked with them in both offices included Michael Rubin, a Middle East specialist previously with the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI); David Schenker, previously with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP); . . .Along with Feith, all of the political appointees have in common a close identification with the views of the right-wing Likud Party in Israel.”
    Wiki- “Feith was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He was one of three siblings born to Rose and Dalck Feith. His father, Dalck, was a member of the Betar, a Revisionist Zionist youth organization, in Poland, and a Holocaust survivor who lost his parents and seven siblings in the Nazi concentration camps. Feith was Undersecretary of Defense for Policy in 2001. As part of his portfolio, he supervised the Pentagon Policy Counter-terrorism Evaluation Group – a.k.a Office of Special Plans, a group of policy and intelligence analysts created to provide senior government officials with raw intelligence, unvetted by the intelligence community. The office, eventually dismantled, was later criticized in Congress and the media for analysis that was contradicted by CIA analysis and investigations performed following the invasion of Iraq.”
    “The FBI had been covertly investigating senior Pentagon analyst, Larry Franklin and AIPAC leaders, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman for several years prior to their indictment for spying. On August 29, 2005 the Israeli Embassy predictably hotly denied the spy allegation. On the same day Larry Franklin was publicly named as a spy suspect. Franklin worked closely with Michael Ledeen and Douglas Feith, then Undersecretary for Defense in the Pentagon, in fabricating the case for war with Iraq. Franklin was the senior analyst on Iran, which is at the top of AIPAC

    Reply

  83. nadine says:

    Don Bacon, this whole ‘Iraq was a war for Israel’ is just stupid, and is believed only by the stupid.
    Sure, the Israelis were glad to see the last of Saddam Hussein, but they were always more worried about Iran. If they could have ordered a US war, it would have been on Iran. If they could order a war today, it would be on Iran. Iran is the country racing to get the bomb, denying the Holocaust, and promising the destruction of Israel. Iran is the terror master, patron of foreign legions like Hizbullah and Hamas.
    The US had plenty of reasons of its own for the war in Iraq, not least of which was that the US was already holding the bag for 12 years of inconclusive war and no-fly zones and sanctions that were breaking down, while Saddam beat his chest as the ‘Great Arab Survivor’ and collected infant corpses a month at a time for his dead baby parades, which the morons in the left (like many here) all took at face value and repeated as anti-American propaganda.

    Reply

  84. Marcus says:

    Don bacon claims that, a jewish columnist,one deputy secretary and a Pentagon commimtee chair. 3 Jewish GUYS caused the Iragi war,then johnh (the deep thinker) decides that therefore it`s the “entire ethnic group” resposible. ZZZZZZZZZZ (does anyone but yourselves take you seriously)
    ” President Bush-who was fervently commited to Israel” This is yet ANOTHER lie driven by anti-semitism, the fact is that Bush was the first President ever,to call for a palestinian state in the heartland of Israel-SOME FRIEND !
    JohnH;You in particular have an inflated (hero worship ?) relationship with jews (ru gay?)
    BTW; It was well known and publically stated by Israel then and now, that Iran NOT Iraq was/is the threat in the region.

    Reply

  85. JohnH says:

    Yes, there is a very Jewish face to America’s imperial wars. Frankly, I believe that other factors were key drivers. However, the Lobby and neocons were its most visible advocates.
    When public opinion sours on these imperial adventures, it will not be the defense lobby or the oil field suppliers (Halliburton) that that will be held accountable. No, it will be those who were the most vocal champions of war. Their entire ethnic group will be the ones held accountable.
    It’s happened before; it will happen again. But some people never learn…

    Reply

  86. Don Bacon says:

    Iraq: A War For Israel, By Mark Weber
    “Whatever the secondary reasons for the [Iraq] war, the crucial factor in President Bush

    Reply

  87. Marcus says:

    No americans have been killed because of americas support for Israel (nothing bizarre about it btw) The General was speaking about Obamas “war” for the hearts and minds of arabs.
    Your own President has killed more with his battlefield restrictions than any jewish congressman has by voicing his personal support for Israel , That support for Israel has probably SAVED military lives by demonstating that there are still American leaders with the spine to stick-up for americas traditional allies,and thereby discouraging furture wannabe jihadis.

    Reply

  88. Marcus says:

    JohnH; what I said was that “not one American serviceman has died fightining for Israel” You haven`t proved me wrong.
    American serviceman have died fighting for half the world, but not one has died for Israel…So why all the fuss about jews and israel if it isn`t plain old anti-semitism ?

    Reply

  89. JohnH says:

    “Not one American serviceman has died fighting for Israel.” But numbers of Americans have been killed with impunity by Israel, including 34 sailors on the USS Liberty, Rachel Corrie, Furkan Dogan, and others.
    And this does not include Americans killed because of America’s bizarre obsession with supporting Israel. Count Robert F. Kennedy is among those.

    Reply

  90. Don Bacon says:

    And from Israel-West, AKA The Empire State:
    Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY):
    “You know, my name …. comes from the word shomer, guardian, watcher. My ancestors were guardians of the ghetto wall in Chortkov. And I believe Hashem [Orthodox for God] actually gave me that name. One of my roles, very important in the United States senate, is to be a shomer — to be a or the shomer Yisrael. And I will continue to be that with every bone in my body …”
    Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY):
    “Settlements illegal? – ‘they’re not as far as I’m concerned…There’s no immediate prospect of a (peace) settlement that can be enforced.’…”
    Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY):
    Israel is the ‘best ally the United States has in the Middle East, but I would argue the best ally in the world.’…If US pressures Israel ‘you’re going to hear it from me.
    Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY):
    Ackerman, the President of the International Council of Jewish Parliamentarians (ICJP), citing urgent threats to Israel

    Reply

  91. Marcus says:

    Not one American serviceman has died fighting for Israel ,NONE,ZERO.
    Thousands of jews have fought and died for America (since 1654 ),including 12,000. dead and 40,000. injured in WW2 alone.
    On a per capita basis jews are as well represented as any any other group (not just in Congress !) but in the army,navy and marines as well.
    In case you missed the begining; not one American has ever died fighting for Israel.

    Reply

  92. samuelburke says:

    Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin
    Powell, discusses why Bush and Cheney must have known most
    Guantanamo prisoners were innocent, the US military

    Reply

  93. Don Bacon says:

    On June the 14th, 2010, Sen. Chuck Schumer, a member of AIPAC, openly praised the Israeli Government for their “Economic Strangling” of the Palestinians along the Gaza Strip at a Democratic Convention. He stated that the Palestinians voted for Hamas so therefore some economic strangling is justified.
    If I/P is your top issue, and considering our lack of ballot choices (by design), then obviously the Repubs are a better choice. The Dems are so tight with AIPAC that — POA could describe it better than I.

    Reply

  94. downtown says:

    Don’t vote for these bastards…..
    http://thinkprogress.org/2010/06/11/schumer-strangle-gaza-economically/
    The Schumers, Nadlers, Weiners, Engels, Ackermans etc…..
    They don’t serve us…they answer to a higher power!
    http://mondoweiss.net/2010/04/israels-guardian-sen-schumer-says-gazans-are-suffering-but-they-deserve-it.html
    America, please, please, please wake up!!!

    Reply

  95. Don Bacon says:

    There is also The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948.
    PREAMBLE
    Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
    Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,
    Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law, etc.
    http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

    Reply

  96. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Hey Steve…….
    If you’re not too busy bringing yourself up to speed on who Hillary Clinton is, you might be interested in this…..
    http://www.bloggersunite.org/event/bloggers-unite-for-gaza
    Call to bloggers to unite for Gaza on July 9
    Washington – Bloggersunite.org is calling on all bloggers to unite on July 9 to blog about Gaza. The site is asking bloggers to make “a simple promise: ‘Gaza, We will not forget You.'”
    According to Bloggers Unite, “On 9 July 2004, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion condemning Israel’s infringement of the Palestinian right to self-determination and violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The ICJ explicitly affirmed the international community that the burden also falls on them not to recognize or assist the illegal situation. This year, on 9 July, remind your own government of its own obligations not to recognize or assist Israel’s violations of international law. Urge that there must be an independent and international inquiry into the attacks on the Gaza aid flotilla.”
    Bloggers Unite describes itself as an attempt to harness the power of the blogosphere to make the world a better place. “By asking bloggers to write about a particular subject on 1 day of the month, a single voice can be joined with thousands to help make a difference; from raising awareness for cancer, to an effort to better education systems or supporting 3rd world countries,” adds Bloggers Unite.

    Reply

  97. JohnH says:

    “It

    Reply

  98. PissedOffAmerican says:

    I just got this email from the foreign agency of AIPAC……
    “Dear Friend of Israel,
    They

    Reply

  99. downtown says:

    “Posted by PissedOffAmerican, Jul 04 2010, 1:43PM – Link
    We have deviated so far from what we claim to be that it is difficult to see the Fourth of July as anything other than an excuse to get drunk and screw your neighbor’s wife.”
    I’m batting 500!

    Reply

  100. Don Bacon says:

    nadine,
    When one starts reading a comment one naturally assumes it is a comment and not a quote, and I responded accordingly. Burying a link down at the bottom doesn’t cut it. People put a link at the bottom for various reasons — to show what they derived their comment from, for additional information or perhaps to show where the last line came from. What you did is dishonest and the least you can do is recognize it. Freedom of speech does not include a freedom to plagiarize.

    Reply

  101. nadine says:

    I forgot the quotes but supplied the link, which you could have looked at. So sue me.

    Reply

  102. Don Bacon says:

    nadine,
    What piece. Those words weren’t in quotes, so they were your words. If your supposed comments are cut and paste from Barry Rubin or anyone then the least you can do is to use proper attribution and quotes. That’s the way it is done in blogworld. To do it any other way is misleading and dishonest. You ought to apologize for misleading us. What you did is wrong, wrong, wrong.

    Reply

  103. nadine says:

    MarkL, Rabbi Boteach may have started out Lubavitch, but his outreach to non-Jews (such as his friendship/ministering to Michael Jackson) and his very easy-going attitude to ritual commitments made him part company (amiably I think) from the Lubavitch some time ago.
    Many of his social/political attitudes, which I’ve picked up from reading his columns in the Jpost, are much more liberal than you would expect from an Orthodox rabbi. E.g.
    “Gays Have a Right to Serve their Country
    Every person has a right to serve his country, gays included. All have a right to serve their country openly without hiding who they are. It

    Reply

  104. MarkL says:

    Boteach a liberal?
    I find that unlikely.
    He’s an Orthodox Lubavitcher Rabbi
    whose political writing is informed by a passionate concern for Israel’s reputation.
    For instance: ”
    Why has hatred of Israel been raised to such unprecedented levels? Because the American presidency, shining herald of human liberty and democracy throughout the world, is occupied by a man who is utterly silent when Israel is defamed. President Obama

    Reply

  105. nadine says:

    “And to think that nadine once worked in the Justice Department, or so she recently claimed, again without a shred of proof. ”
    What? you have me confused with somebody else.

    Reply

  106. nadine says:

    Don Bacon,
    That piece was from Rabbi Schmuley Boteach, who is a liberal. It was in today’s Washington Post.
    JohnH,
    So you think when Tripoli’s ambassador told John Adams that Allah gave Muslims the RIGHT to enslave Americans, he just meekly and respectfully accepted that answer? Because he was a non-racist who loved and respected Islam?
    Tell me: do you believe that Muslims have the RIGHT to kill and enslave infidels? By your own rule, you’re an “racist Islam hater” if you say no.
    You’re so full of it you could pull a buzzard off a shit wagon.

    Reply

  107. The Pessimist says:

    The privilege awarded by this comment section is to share divergent viewpoints on the topics Steve and his guests contribute. Nadine regularly ignores both the content and the context of the contribution and simply hurls vindictive and demeaning slurs against those that challenge her questionable statements.
    She is disregarding the two most fundamental constraints that Steve has repeatedly called for, civility and respect. She invariably hijacks every topic at TWN and turns it into her own personal target range. Her writing style reminds me of Cheney

    Reply

  108. Don Bacon says:

    nadine,
    You have just claimed that the world, the whole world, hates Israel and that’s wrong. Maybe we should poll the Martians?

    Reply

  109. JohnH says:

    Nadine wants you to believe that the Founding Fathers were racist, Islam haters. Nothing could be further from the truth. Morocco was the first nation to recognize the United States. And the United States was grateful for that recognition.
    What’s highly amusing is that Nadine opposes piracy when Barbary pirates were engaged in it. But she very much approves of Israeli piracy (Mavi Marmara) and attacks on US war ships (USS Liberty).
    As long as Israel does it, anything goes. But everyone else had better obey the law, or else there will be a pogrom against your people.
    Typical Jewish supremacist thinking…

    Reply

  110. nadine says:

    Israel’s obviously not perfect. Like any moral democracy fighting for its very life it’s going to make mistakes. But compared to Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia and so many other of its neighbors, it is positively angelic. Disagree? Well, rather than engage in useless and endless debate let’s employ John F. Kennedy’s famous argument delivered in the summer of 1963 in his memorable ‘Ich Bin Ein Berliner’ speech. Kennedy addressed the two world systems that were in mortal conflict, Capitalism and Communism. Each said their side was right. Each brought endless facts to make their case. “There are many people in the world,” Kennedy said, “who really don’t understand, or say they don’t, what is the great issue between the free world and the Communist world… There are some who say that Communism is the wave of the future… And there are some who say in Europe and elsewhere we can work with the Communists….” OK. A major dilemma. Two world systems each claiming to be righteous and asserting the other to be evil. How to adjudicate between them? Kennedy did so with memorable eloquence. “Freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect, but we have never had to put a wall up to keep our people in, to prevent them from leaving us.”
    I say the same thing to you. If Israel really is so terrible, if it’s government is so evil, then let’s put it to the Kennedy test. If all of Israel’s most rabid critics were forced to choose to live either in Israel or under Hamas in Gaza, or under Assad in Syria, or under Ahmedenijad in Iran, or under Abdullah in Saudi Arabia, or even in Communist China, which would they choose? In Israel they would have the freedom to mercilessly assail their government on the radio, in print, and in public squares. In any of these other countries they would be locked up or worse midway through their inaugural speech. In Israel if they were female or gay they would enjoy absolutely full rights and equal protection under the law. In Iran or Saudi Arabia, if female they would be severely punished for not adhering to a certain dress codes, and if openly gay they would be lucky to escape with their lives.
    Yet it is Israel which the world hates.
    Go figure.
    Or perhaps there is no need. This kind of hatred has a long and cruel precedent. It comes in many guises. Today it targets Israel but at its root it’s just good old-fashioned, unbridled, unapologetic Jew-hatred. Ecclesiastes had it right. There is nothing new under the sun.
    http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2010/07/the_worlds_oldest_hatred.html

    Reply

  111. Don Bacon says:

    POA,
    The US government has already determined that criticism of Israel constitutes “the new anti-semitism.”

    Reply

  112. Don Bacon says:

    POA,
    My last line of the above (deleted) was going to end “and POA would miss her” but I wasn’t sure. Thanx for clearing it up. 😉

    Reply

  113. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “One of the freedoms we enjoy is freedom of speech”
    Yeah, ya gotta love them “Free Speech Zones”, doncha?
    But have no fear, Don, the scumbag Joe Lieberman is on the job, and he’ll do his best to shit all over whatever “free speech” we have left, particularly on the internet. If he has his way, criticism of Israel will be criminalized.
    But I gotta agree with you about Nadine and her bigoted and vile compatriots. Let’em spew, for there is no greater demonstration of what they stand for than their own words are.

    Reply

  114. Don Bacon says:

    Pessimist,
    One of the freedoms we enjoy is freedom of speech. Nadine, even with her biases, has that right. I enjoy dialogue with her occasionally. Your suggestion that she not post here is, as Kervick would say, over the line.

    Reply

  115. The Pessimist says:

    Nadine, you sure do have a chronic habit of projecting your interpretations into other commenter

    Reply

  116. Don Bacon says:

    Drive down a highway in a southwestern state where you will be stopped and questioned by brownshirts with dogs. Other states too, in the northwest and northeast.

    Reply

  117. PissedOffAmerican says:

    (Steve, just in case you’re wondering who “Hillary Clinton” is, do a google search on “Secretary Of State”, and you should find plenty of information on her. I think you might find that she is highly relevent to discussions and debates about foreign policy. I realize you’re busy, and can’t keep up with every little factoid and personality on the planet, but I think you might find Mrs. Clinton relevent to many of the issues you raise here. Its C-L-I-N-T-O-N, just in case you need help with the spelling.)
    http://www.activistpost.com/2010/07/hey-hillary-which-intolerant.html
    Hey Hillary, Which

    Reply

  118. PissedOffAmerican says:

    We should have impeached Bush. And now we are making the same mistake in not impeaching Obama. How bad will the next piece of shit that slimes his way into the Oval Office be, now that it is clear they can do anything they want without fear of being held to account?
    We shoulda been on the streets in mass protest loooong ago. The window of opportunity has been closed for some time now.

    Reply

  119. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Philip Giraldi…..
    “Americans who care about their country and its constitution should be mortified by recent developments, but, apart from a vocal minority, most people appear to accept that the government is a benign force that will do what is right. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The past nine years has seen a sustained assault on the rights guaranteed in the United States bill of rights, an assault in many cases carried out by those very individuals who have sworn an oath to defend the constitution against all enemies domestic and foreign. History teaches that liberties lost can never be regained. We are living in an age where the government can conceal what is doing, where it can imprison anyone indefinitely or strip people of citizenship, where it can kill citizens on suspicion, and where it is increasingly seeking to control the public

    Reply

  120. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Israel: A Failing Colonial Project
    by M. Shahid Alam Ph.D.
    (M. Shahid Alam is professor of economics at Northeastern University, Boston. He is author of Israeli Exceptionalism (Palgrave, 2009) and Challenging the New Orientalism (IPI, 2006). Visit his website at http://qreason.com.)
    Increasingly, despite its early military and political successes, Israel cannot for long endure as a colonial project. It must choose between wars

    Reply

  121. nadine says:

    “Too ironic. What, it was ok for Christian Anglos to enslave people, just not ok for Muslim nations to do same? Treaty of Tripoli also important here. All enslavement of every form sucks, including confining people in various forms of internment camps.”
    More ironic than you realize, David, since today’s Left concentrates obsessively on white people enslaving others in the past, while giving a free pass for Muslim nations to do so both in the past and even TODAY (Saudi Arabia, Mauritania). Oh, they don’t run around praising slavery in Mauritania, they just pretend it doesn’t exist. The ironclad law of multiculturalism is that you can’t say anything bad about Muslims without turning it into an indictment of all humanity. So it’s easier not to look.
    So POA pretends that Hamas doesn’t exist, and Gaza is being blockaded for Israel’s amusement, not because it is an enemy statelet dedicated to Israel’s destruction.
    BTW, you want to see real internment camps, check out the conditions of Sabra and Shatilla in Lebanon.

    Reply

  122. nadine says:

    “Too ironic. What, it was ok for Christian Anglos to enslave people, just not ok for Muslim nations to do same? Treaty of Tripoli also important here. All enslavement of every form sucks, including confining people in various forms of internment camps.”
    More ironic than you realize, David, since today’s Left concentrates obsessively on white people enslaving others in the past, while giving a free pass for Muslim nations to do so both in the past and even TODAY (Saudi Arabia, Mauritania). Oh, they don’t run around praising slavery in Mauritania, they just pretend it doesn’t exist. Like POA pretends that Hamas doesn’t exist, and Gaza is being blockaded for Israel’s amusement, not because it is an enemy statelet dedicated to Israel’s destruction.
    BTW, you want to see real internment camps, check out the conditions of Sabra and Shatilla in Lebanon.

    Reply

  123. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “POS, you defend Hamas all the time by pretending that they are not in charge of Gaza”
    Take your lying straw arguments and shove ’em, Nadine. You’re an abomination.

    Reply

  124. David says:

    Too ironic. What, it was ok for Christian Anglos to enslave people, just not ok for Muslim nations to do same? Treaty of Tripoli also important here. All enslavement of every form sucks, including confining people in various forms of internment camps. All major groups have done it, and it has always been an affront to humanity. And if one is going to quote the Qu’ran, one would do well to look to the Old Testament as well. My particular favorite is the notion that the Old Testament God told one group to go kill everyone in another group. I think that is called genocide, so the God of the Old Testament is genocidal. Wee haaa. Let literalism roll down like the abomination that it all too often is.
    Jefferson, by the way, had little use for the absurdities found in any religious text. You might want to be more comprehensive in you historical analyses, perhaps looking for the actual lessons it has to teach us.

    Reply

  125. nadine says:

    Nice timing, Pessimist, go ballistic about my supposed “personal attacks” (I’m guessing that would be “your buddies in Hamas”) just after POA calls me an “ignorant racist maggot”. This, I suppose, is a term of endearment.
    POS, you defend Hamas all the time by pretending that they are not in charge of Gaza. In fact, you pretend they don’t exist at all. You claim to be defending the sufferings of the Gazans, but when hundreds of Fatah supporters are shot by Hamas in cold blood, or Hamas destroys all kiddie camps but their own, or Hamas shuts down 25% of Gaza’s electricity in a faction fight, you can’t be bothered to notice. And of course, when Hamas shoots off tens of thousands of “unguided missiles” you’re all sympathy.
    In reality, you don’t give a damn about the Gazans. They are just fodder for your daily Two Minute Hate of Israel. Anybody who supports actual peace in the Mideast knows that Hamas is a big obstacle to it.

    Reply

  126. nadine says:

    Our actual founding fathers were less than impressed with Islamic theocracies, particularly when they were busy enslaving American sailors:
    “In March 1785, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to negotiate with Tripoli’s envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). Upon inquiring “concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury”, the ambassador replied:
    It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy’s ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once. [2] [3]”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War
    Did you ever hear of the Barbary Wars? Does “the shores of Tripoli” ring a bell?
    It was a great blessing for the whole Mediterranean when first the Americans and then the British put down the piracy and slave-taking of the Barbary states.
    Our founders, unlike you JohnH, could discern the difference between democrats and Oriental despots.

    Reply

  127. The Pessimist says:

    Jeez Steve, do you consider nadine’s latest postings to be over the line, or just up to the line. It

    Reply

  128. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “While we’re on Gaza, POS, your buddies in Hamas are running around destroying blahblahblah….”
    Heres the deal, you ignorant racist maggot. This kind of shit from you got old a loooong time ago. Do you see anyone here defending the more radical actions of Hamas??? NO. Have you ever seen me defend ANY acts of terrorism committed by radical Islamists, Muslims, Hamas, Hezbellah, etc??? NO. The closest I’ve EVER come to defending these kinds of actions has been statements that I UNDERSTAND how a defenseless and oppressed popuilation can resort to acts of terrorism, as it is impossible for them to fight tanks and clusterbombs with slingshots, rocks, and crude unguided missiles.
    But you??? You defend the oppression, murder, dehumanization, humiliation, and acts of terror that Israel commits against the Palestinians on a daily basis. Its YOU that is the PIECE OF SHIT, Nadine. Its YOU that is despicable and biogoted beyond words. Take your obnoxious scripted bullshit and disingenuous accusations and shove it. You showed us what you are made of a long time ago, and it ain’t pretty. The Jews, and Israel, oughta distance themselves from scum like you, because you’re dragging them into worldwide disfavor. But it appears they’re going in the opposite direction, so in a few years you can brag that you helped drag down the state of Israel, and bring about an increase in worldwide anti-semitism. Well done, you sputtering propaganda spewing jackass. Proud of yourself?

    Reply

  129. samuelburke says:

    sticks and stone may blah blah blah, but blah blah blah blah blah
    blah blah.
    May the spark that gave birth to this nation once again lead her
    during the next 234 years.
    Happy 4th of July!!

    Reply

  130. JohnH says:

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.”
    It sounds like the Founding Fathers would have opposed the Israeli Occupation and supported Palestinians’ rights to free themselves from a government that has become destructive of their inalienable rights.
    Jewish supremacists: read it and weep.

    Reply

  131. nadine says:

    While we’re on Gaza, POS, your buddies in Hamas are running around destroying the UN day camps. They object to day camps where boys and girls play together instead of learning to grow up to be suicide bombers.
    http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/06/28/gaza-united-nations-summer-camp-vandalized.html
    http://www.demotix.com/news/370384/childrens-un-summer-camp-after-destroyed-gaza-strip
    This is why giving humanitarian aid to an area controlled by fascists does not result in people in need receiving that aid. The fascists control what they can and destroy the rest.

    Reply

  132. Don Bacon says:

    Excuse me. The five fatalities occurred previously and were identified yesterday.

    Reply

  133. The Pessimist says:

    “A People’s History of the United States” by Howard Zinn should be required reading for every American in the month leading up to this holiday. The collective works of George Orwell as well should be required reading for every high school student prior to graduation.
    The American public is so ignorant regarding our own historical past that it is no wonder how completely corrupt our despicable representatives have become. They enable their own devious behavior by their function as stewards of the national education system, and thereby ensure that the public at large not be privy to the truth about the actions they take in our name.

    Reply

  134. Don Bacon says:

    Today’s casualty reports aren’t in yet but five died yesterday. Sgt. 1st Class Kristopher D. Chapleau, 33, of LaGrange, Ky., Spc. Morganne M. McBeth, 19, of Fredricksburg, Va., Sgt. Johnny W. Lumpkin, 38, of Columbus, Ga., Pfc. Ryan J. Grady, 25, of Bristow, Okla. and Capt David A. Wisniewski, 31, of Moville, Iowa. Two of the fatalities were “non-combat related.”

    Reply

  135. PissedOffAmerican says:

    We have deviated so far from what we claim to be that it is difficult to see the Fourth of July as anything other than an excuse to get drunk and screw your neighbor’s wife. I mean hey, we might as well celebrate the visions of our Founding Father’s with the same moral clarity we employ in practicing them.
    But happy Fourth anyway. Perhaps today providence will skip the sad specter of one more American dying on foreign soil for these lyin’ cowardly self-serving sacks of shit in DC. But I doubt it.

    Reply

  136. Don Bacon says:

    While July 4th is the anniversary of separation from Britain it is not the anniversary of the founding of our country.
    While the 1776 “Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies” mentioned the uSA. . .
    “We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America”[note the lower case “u”]
    it went on to ordain thirteen fully independent states:
    “solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.”
    This was changed to the USA eleven years later in the Constitution:
    “. . .do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *