The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Meanwhile, in the Non-Bizarro Universe ...
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From YNetNews in Israel:

Fearing Ebola, Israel will not send medical teams to Africa

Israel is already sending medical aid to Ebola hit countries, but has decided not to send medical crews, set up field hospitals, citing fear of infection.

Itamar Eichner

Published: 10.02.14, 15:59 / Israel News

Israel has rejected a special request by the US and UN to send IDF field hospitals to Ebola hit Liberia and Sierra Leone. Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon, who rejected the request, cited the threat of infection to Israeli medical teams in explaining his decision.

The request was lodged by the UN and US, and was passed onto Israel though US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power and Ron Prosor, Israel’s envoy.

… Despite all these risks, the Foreign Ministry believed that participation in such a mission would help bolster Israel’s international standing, which suffered a severe blow in the aftermath of Operation Protective Edge.

However, after examining the request and mission details, the Defense Ministry decided against Israel’s participation, saying there was no feasible way to provide for the safety of the Israeli doctors and medical crews, which could then return to Israel and further spread the virus.

Critics of Israel often argue that it operates in some sort of Bizarro alternative universe where a national government is expected to act in the interests of the majority of the nation. Perhaps, though, it’s not Israel, it’s everybody else that is stuck in the Bizarro universe?

Ebola victims request refuge in Israel

 
Hide 111 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Israel: possibly the only Western nation that uses its thinking brain

    • Replies: @Chubby Ape
    "Israel: possibly the only Western nation that uses its thinking brain"

    Israel is not a western nation; it was dreamt of and founded by those who wanted to get away from the West and the rest of Christendom; don't be fooled by all the Israeli diplomats, settlers and politicians with Noo Yawk accents. This decision not to send doctors to Africa, and their harsh treatment of African migrants who try to cross their borders, show how Israel is not burdened with any of our vestigial Christian missionary zeal or "good Samaritan" stuff.

    Russia, by the way, is sending doctors to Africa to help fight the Ebola outbreak. Russia's not part of the West either but it's part of Christendom. I haven't checked but I wouldn't be surprised if Japan is sending some doctors to help. They're obviously neither western nor Christian but then the Japanese don't define themselves in opposition to us the way the majority culture of Israel does and has done long, long before the modern state was founded.
    , @Anonymous
    Israel: possibly the only Western nation that uses its thinking brain

    You mean the only one spared Jewish cultural Marxism.
    , @Keith Vaz
    'Western nation' LOL!
  2. That’s the same Israel whose supreme court recently shut down all illegal migrant internment camps

    • Replies: @International Jew
    "That’s the same Israel whose supreme cour shut down all illegal migrant internment camps."

    Quite right. The battle between sanity and suicidality is being fought in Israel too. Maybe sanity has the edge a little. But the Israeli supreme court is a redoubtable force for national suicide.
  3. There’s that pesky 1 SD Ashkenaz Jew advantage showing up again. Or, perhaps in the case of our beloved leader and all his court, I should say that 2.1 SD advantage.

    • Replies: @Udolpho
    It's odd because the 'nazi Jews here in the States are saying something totally different:

    http://www.vox.com/2014/10/4/6905303/ebola-scared-quarantine

    Summary: You goy fools, there's nothing to fear! Besides, Ebola is just another vibrant ingredient of our melting pot (it does help melt internal organs).
  4. You don’t need an especially high IQ to come to such a decision: a moderate IQ and a bit of backbone is quite enough.

    • Replies: @Kevin O'Keeffe
    "You don’t need an especially high IQ to come to such a decision: a moderate IQ and a bit of backbone is quite enough."

    Indeed. Israel has essentially undertaken the same policy that every auto mechanic and shoe salesman in the USA would regard as axiomatic (or "common sense").
  5. The liberal response to Ebola (instead of not accepting flights from infected countries, we have to send soldiers and doctors to those countries until they’ve eradicated the infection) seems bizarrely similar to the neocon response to Iraq. It’s Invade the World, Invite the World all over again.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Invade the world, invite the world, infect the world.
  6. It would easy to bring medical personnel home with entailing any risk of infection of the homeland : just wait three weeks in quarantine. Or four weeks to be extra safe.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Presumably, their concern is that if the medical personnel do get infected, they'll still have to bring them home and care for them, since they are their fellow citizens. And if their medical personnel got infected despite using precautions, then the same could happen to the folks caring for them in Israel.
    , @WhatEvvs
    What if there's another crisis where the medical team would be needed while they are quarantined?
  7. @FredR
    The liberal response to Ebola (instead of not accepting flights from infected countries, we have to send soldiers and doctors to those countries until they've eradicated the infection) seems bizarrely similar to the neocon response to Iraq. It's Invade the World, Invite the World all over again.

    Invade the world, invite the world, infect the world.

  8. The Israelis did better than almost anyone during the zombie apocalypse (World War Z). Maybe Max Brooks was onto something. (I’ve read the book, haven’t seen the movie.)

    • Replies: @Tokenn
    If you liked the book, expect to be disappointed by the movie.
  9. @gcochran
    It would easy to bring medical personnel home with entailing any risk of infection of the homeland : just wait three weeks in quarantine. Or four weeks to be extra safe.

    Presumably, their concern is that if the medical personnel do get infected, they’ll still have to bring them home and care for them, since they are their fellow citizens. And if their medical personnel got infected despite using precautions, then the same could happen to the folks caring for them in Israel.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    So why not simply apply that common sense logic to America as well? Ban all flights to those known Ebola infected nations as well as a total ban on incoming flights from those infected nations?
    , @gcochran
    We used to know how to send medical teams off to treat anything, anywhere, without significant risk of bringing it home - and we still do. So do the Israelis. Look for another reason, one that works.
  10. What is going on with Israel these days? First they build a border fence around their nation and then they refuse to send people to Ebola, er, into Liberia and other infected nations. What, don’t they want to put their own people at risk to catch Ebola? Wonder why?

    Israel isn’t just an ideological construct but a legitimate tangible nation with borders and a common culture? Who knew?

    Now with the Ebola crisis having hit home, so to speak, wonder what impact it could have on the midterms next month? As in, why was the WH asleep at the switch and why didn’t he protect US from doing all he could to prevent the virus from coming here?

  11. Since there is no cure, what exactly is the point? Isn’t the problem one of educating the people in the infected areas on not contacting infected persons fluids, etc. ? This doesn’t require medical teams.

  12. @Dave Pinsen
    Presumably, their concern is that if the medical personnel do get infected, they'll still have to bring them home and care for them, since they are their fellow citizens. And if their medical personnel got infected despite using precautions, then the same could happen to the folks caring for them in Israel.

    So why not simply apply that common sense logic to America as well? Ban all flights to those known Ebola infected nations as well as a total ban on incoming flights from those infected nations?

  13. Israel loses badly in the movie due to two changed premises.

    1) Movie has fast rage zombies, not slow zombies.

    2) Israel chooses to defend Jersusalem. May also invite everyone in, not just Jews and Palestinians, but I’m not sure.

  14. @dearieme
    You don't need an especially high IQ to come to such a decision: a moderate IQ and a bit of backbone is quite enough.

    “You don’t need an especially high IQ to come to such a decision: a moderate IQ and a bit of backbone is quite enough.”

    Indeed. Israel has essentially undertaken the same policy that every auto mechanic and shoe salesman in the USA would regard as axiomatic (or “common sense”).

    • Replies: @Ed
    Heck the vast majority of low IQ African nations have shut down air travel fro Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea.
  15. You would think someone like Frieden would have more sense than to advocate against effective measures such as a ban on immigration (temporary or otherwise) from West Africa at this point in time. Really dumb to be the public face of the CDC if it all goes pear-shaped.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death_Jewish_persecutions

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    You would think someone like Frieden would have more sense than to advocate against effective measures such as a ban on immigration....
     
    "Advocate against" means "speak in favor of against". You can do better than that.
  16. Then why are Israeli citizens — literal citizens — who happen to live in non-Israel countries so strongly in favor of bringing Ebola victims to those countries?

    • Replies: @Power Child
    What makes you so sure they are? Have you asked them all? And if you're just going to quote a few so-called "Jewish leaders", what makes you think they represent Jews any better than the GOP represents you?
    , @seth
    Like whom for instance?
  17. @Dave Pinsen
    Presumably, their concern is that if the medical personnel do get infected, they'll still have to bring them home and care for them, since they are their fellow citizens. And if their medical personnel got infected despite using precautions, then the same could happen to the folks caring for them in Israel.

    We used to know how to send medical teams off to treat anything, anywhere, without significant risk of bringing it home – and we still do. So do the Israelis. Look for another reason, one that works.

    • Replies: @Whiskey
    Israel is a very small nation with limited resources. Even quarantine would stretch their finances and people and land. Add in an ISIS attack or Hamas shelling and the risk for a defacto nation at eternal war is too high.

    The US meanwhile could quarantine people in the Aluetians where the cold inhibits viral activity and acts as a firebreak to airborne mutation from this rna rapid mutstion virus.
  18. It’s not just Israel. Almost all non-white nations put the self interests of their own first. It’s the white countries who pathetically prostrate themselves before other peoples.

  19. @gcochran
    It would easy to bring medical personnel home with entailing any risk of infection of the homeland : just wait three weeks in quarantine. Or four weeks to be extra safe.

    What if there’s another crisis where the medical team would be needed while they are quarantined?

  20. Israel is taking a terrible social gamble, if in the future she suffers her own unique plague, she can expect to do so without the benefit of African medical teams – payback’s a bitch.

  21. Any interested MSM member who decides to editorialize negatively on Israel’s policy can send their resumes to Vdare.com or Takimag.com now. Or just send an email to Steve: Subject Line – How to start your own blog.

  22. @meep
    Israel: possibly the only Western nation that uses its thinking brain

    “Israel: possibly the only Western nation that uses its thinking brain”

    Israel is not a western nation; it was dreamt of and founded by those who wanted to get away from the West and the rest of Christendom; don’t be fooled by all the Israeli diplomats, settlers and politicians with Noo Yawk accents. This decision not to send doctors to Africa, and their harsh treatment of African migrants who try to cross their borders, show how Israel is not burdened with any of our vestigial Christian missionary zeal or “good Samaritan” stuff.

    Russia, by the way, is sending doctors to Africa to help fight the Ebola outbreak. Russia’s not part of the West either but it’s part of Christendom. I haven’t checked but I wouldn’t be surprised if Japan is sending some doctors to help. They’re obviously neither western nor Christian but then the Japanese don’t define themselves in opposition to us the way the majority culture of Israel does and has done long, long before the modern state was founded.

  23. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Cases are doubling every few weeks, rapidly increasing the likelihood that Ebola will get entrenched, with leakage to rich countries and various other costs. Getting it stopped early is broadly beneficial to the world, and free riding on the efforts of others rather than contributing one’s fair share isn’t praiseworthy.

    Especially because the rationale is bogus, as Greg Cochran notes.

  24. Perhaps, though, it’s not Israel, it’s everybody else that is stuck in the Bizarro universe?

    Who is this “everybody else” that is stuck in a Bizarro universe? I would argue that it’s only a small number of countries that are in this alternate universe, and that the most proximal cause of their location is that they all fall sway to a system of media and institutions heavily influenced by a group whose allegiance lies outside that alternate universe.

  25. I’m no Israel groupie, but I’ve never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel. Here we have a civilized Western nation that routinely acts to advance the self-interests of its citizens and their culture, without a hint of shame or apology.

    Shouldn’t we look at them as a model? Frankly, I’d welcome it if my country could summon up Israel’s degree of self-confidence.

    • Replies: @Chubby Ape
    " I’m no Israel groupie, but I’ve never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel. Here we have a civilized Western nation ...."

    What do you mean by "civilized"? That they eat with knives and forks? What is civilized about Israel?

    , @candid_observer
    The one thing I wish we could copy more from Israel is how they don't give a good goddam about anybody else.

    For us, of course, it's Israel we shouldn't be giving a good goddam about.
    , @Art Deco
    I’m no Israel groupie, but I’ve never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel.

    Because 'paleocon' is not an appellation of a social ideology, but one for political discourse which derived from a stew of hostility and pretension.
    , @rod1963
    Israel is your classic case of a bunch of hypocrites in one locale who do one thing and demand others do as they say.

    Paleocon dislike of Israel has to do with it's immense influence on our foreign policy and domestic politics via a bunch of rich and connected dual passport holders here in the U.S. For example if you are a aspiring GOP candidate you go nowhere politically without pledging your support of Israel and getting Israeli approval. This goes for senators, congressmen and presidential candidates. The dual passport holders have very influential positions within the DoD, think tanks and MSM. FoxNews has a virtual parade of them on every night.

    Their agents here in the U.S. were the ones that demanded the U.S. invade a innocent country on bogus pretexts - Iraq. They were also the ones who demanded we go to war with Russia over Syria. Luckily Putin and a total lack of public support defused the situation

    They're influential but rather stupid, proof that brains don't equal common sense or self-restraint.

    They were so brazen they even concocted a grand strategy for the U.S. called PNAC. It's signatories are virtual who's who of Jewish shot callers in D.C. and a handful of their goy sock puppets. Every country we've attacked has been on the PNAC hit list(Iraq, Libya, Syria, Egypt via regime change) - which also includes Russia BTW.

    It's really fun to watch Jews flip out when you mention all the Jewish signatories on more mainstream sites. They really don't like anyone pointing out their influence.

    Domestically its the Jews that are the biggest advocates of open borders and unlimited immigration of 3rd world peoples; they are the first to attack any public expression of Christian faith via the ADL and ACLU; they are major exponents of gun control and confiscation; and major supporters of Islamic immigration including the radicals.

    We can do without their influence and would be a better country for it.
  26. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    They’re very rational and do what’s best for them. That’s their guiding principle, looking out for number one. That’s also why they’re not any friend of ours, or anyone else’s, except as a matter of what they can get out of the relationship. Remember the USS Liberty or the Lavon affair, for example.

    • Replies: @Big Bill

    That’s also why they’re not any friend of ours, or anyone else’s, except as a matter of what they can get out of the relationship.
     
    Oh gawd! The people we give stuff to are not our "friends". "Friends" are human beings, not governments. Governments exist for the sole benefit of their people and no one else. The fact that the Israelis have not forgotten this ultimate and unchangeable truth is to their eternal credit. As far as the African "refugees" they treat so "harshly", they could line them all up at gunpoint and force them into the Negev Desert for all I care.
    , @Art Deco
    Remember the USS Liberty or the Lavon affair, for example.

    One was an obvious accident (a detailed account of which has been published by Michael Oren) and the other never occurred.
  27. @Mr. Blank
    I'm no Israel groupie, but I've never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel. Here we have a civilized Western nation that routinely acts to advance the self-interests of its citizens and their culture, without a hint of shame or apology.

    Shouldn't we look at them as a model? Frankly, I'd welcome it if my country could summon up Israel's degree of self-confidence.

    ” I’m no Israel groupie, but I’ve never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel. Here we have a civilized Western nation ….”

    What do you mean by “civilized”? That they eat with knives and forks? What is civilized about Israel?

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Literally, they have cities. They are also an affluent society (at least to the level of Spain though not the United States) and made themselves so in spite of inclement circumstances, have a low crime rate (homicide rates at 1.8 per 100,000 are typical of Europe and one-third the American mean), and are one of about two-dozen countries who have maintained parliamentary institutions fairly consistently since the early 1920s (i.e. without interruptions borne of something other than foreign invasion). They have also successfully contained political violence and contention, in spite of having an enormous population of irreconcilables (Arabs amounting to 20% of the total). Israel's political spectrum is also largely free of communist, fascist and revanchist parties. Abortion is a horror in Israel as it is elsewhere, but the ratio of abortions to live births in Israel is half what it is in the United States. Illegitimate births are about 6% of the total in Israel, v. 40% in the United States. Israel is one of the few affluent countries in the world not suffering a serious fertility deficit.
  28. @Newdist
    Then why are Israeli citizens -- literal citizens -- who happen to live in non-Israel countries so strongly in favor of bringing Ebola victims to those countries?

    What makes you so sure they are? Have you asked them all? And if you’re just going to quote a few so-called “Jewish leaders”, what makes you think they represent Jews any better than the GOP represents you?

  29. The Jews (in Israel) are a “Light Unto The Nations” yet again!

    Follow their moral teachings!

    Don’t send our own people to those African hellholes to be infected.

  30. @Mr. Blank
    I'm no Israel groupie, but I've never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel. Here we have a civilized Western nation that routinely acts to advance the self-interests of its citizens and their culture, without a hint of shame or apology.

    Shouldn't we look at them as a model? Frankly, I'd welcome it if my country could summon up Israel's degree of self-confidence.

    The one thing I wish we could copy more from Israel is how they don’t give a good goddam about anybody else.

    For us, of course, it’s Israel we shouldn’t be giving a good goddam about.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Israel actually had an extensive development aid apparatus in Africa prior to 1973. Your other remarks reflect your interiors.
  31. It’s also strange that Israel never joins the U.S and the Coalition Of The Willing ie Britain Canada Australia and New Zealand in the never ending Middle East wars.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "It's also strange that Israel never joins the U.S and the Coalition Of the Willing ie Britain Canada Australia and New Zealand in the never ending Middle East wars."

    Not really. They just use their influence OVER those countries to get THEM to do THEIR fighting for them. Take the crazy war in Iraq in 2003. Entirely engineered by Neoconservatives, almost all of them Jewish. That war was fought to benefit Israel. Use American muscle to take out an Arab country that could be a possible threat to Israel and keep the USA deeply involved in the Middle East to Israel's long term gain.

    There never were, of course, any "weapons of mass destruction".
    , @Anonymous
    It's not strange at all. The Arab coalition partners have neverwanted Israel to be involved.
  32. @Anonymous
    They're very rational and do what's best for them. That's their guiding principle, looking out for number one. That's also why they're not any friend of ours, or anyone else's, except as a matter of what they can get out of the relationship. Remember the USS Liberty or the Lavon affair, for example.

    That’s also why they’re not any friend of ours, or anyone else’s, except as a matter of what they can get out of the relationship.

    Oh gawd! The people we give stuff to are not our “friends”. “Friends” are human beings, not governments. Governments exist for the sole benefit of their people and no one else. The fact that the Israelis have not forgotten this ultimate and unchangeable truth is to their eternal credit. As far as the African “refugees” they treat so “harshly”, they could line them all up at gunpoint and force them into the Negev Desert for all I care.

  33. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Banning all flights to the US from Ebola infected countries makes total sense. If a US citizen was unfortunate enough to be in one of these countries when the epidemic began, keep them in quarantine for 3 weeks before they can return. Tough luck for them, but it is for the common good. If a US citizen or medical worker becomes infected while in West Africa, by all means bring them back to this country for advanced medical care, using all of the extraordinary precautions that have been used in prior cases

  34. @Chubby Ape
    " I’m no Israel groupie, but I’ve never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel. Here we have a civilized Western nation ...."

    What do you mean by "civilized"? That they eat with knives and forks? What is civilized about Israel?

    Literally, they have cities. They are also an affluent society (at least to the level of Spain though not the United States) and made themselves so in spite of inclement circumstances, have a low crime rate (homicide rates at 1.8 per 100,000 are typical of Europe and one-third the American mean), and are one of about two-dozen countries who have maintained parliamentary institutions fairly consistently since the early 1920s (i.e. without interruptions borne of something other than foreign invasion). They have also successfully contained political violence and contention, in spite of having an enormous population of irreconcilables (Arabs amounting to 20% of the total). Israel’s political spectrum is also largely free of communist, fascist and revanchist parties. Abortion is a horror in Israel as it is elsewhere, but the ratio of abortions to live births in Israel is half what it is in the United States. Illegitimate births are about 6% of the total in Israel, v. 40% in the United States. Israel is one of the few affluent countries in the world not suffering a serious fertility deficit.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "Israel’s political spectrum is also largely free of communist, fascist and revanchist parties"

    I'm pretty sure that any western country with race-based immigration laws, collective punishment for its enemies (demolishing the homes of Palestinian bad guys or even 'suspects') and uncomfortable desert camps for 'illegal infiltrators' - well, some people would call that country 'fascist'. Maybe even the same people who keep quiet when Israel does it.

    Revanchist ? Well, there are all those settlements in Judea and Samaria.
  35. What’s interesting and intriguing about this move is that Israel is quite involved in Africa. They are one of the first on the scenes of disasters there and have considerable investments . Yet they are balking at sending aid to these countries which suggests to me that their research has revealed something troubling about this Ebola strain.

    Also where are the Muslim nations? Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea have large Muslim populations. I think Muslims are the majority in 2 out of the 3 countries. Yet the Saudis too have shut down travel to their country from these nations.

  36. @Anonymous
    They're very rational and do what's best for them. That's their guiding principle, looking out for number one. That's also why they're not any friend of ours, or anyone else's, except as a matter of what they can get out of the relationship. Remember the USS Liberty or the Lavon affair, for example.

    Remember the USS Liberty or the Lavon affair, for example.

    One was an obvious accident (a detailed account of which has been published by Michael Oren) and the other never occurred.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/lavon.html

    Or was the Lavon affair an obvious accident and the Liberty incident a fiction?
  37. The Israeli decision illustrates the myth of the Judeo-Christian ethic, or any other Judeo-Christian conflation. They are two completely separate religions despite what a few evangelicals think. We look on them with kindness, at least the Christians do, while the Israelis are contemptuous of America.
    The US, hold on, is the nation with the highest percentage Christian population, the culture most influence by the Christian faith, even at this low point of the culture wars. (this is a main reason the left hates conservatives so much,)
    That’s why American medical missionaries are in Africa when no one else who can help is. That’s why we send our medical people and soldiers while they talk and watch porn at the UN.
    Christianity is a compassionate religion while Judaism is more of a collection of shared religious, historical and cultural traditions.
    Just what my lyin’ eyes tell me.

    • Replies: @Chubby Ape
    "The Israeli decision illustrates the myth of the Judeo-Christian ethic, or any other Judeo-Christian conflation. They are two completely separate religions despite what a few evangelicals think".

    Yes, "Judeo-Christian civilization" is a bogus concept. Jews were only emancipated over the 19th century and only started making a dent in the wider culture over the last century. If there is a Judeo-Christian civilization it's only about as old as the telephone and only started to really dominate over the lifetime of Woody Allen. Some civilization.
    , @granesperanzablanco
    The US is the nation with the highest percentage of Christians? I don't even have to look this up to tell you that is false. Clearly you could look south to Mexico to see a more Christian nation. Places like Poland and Armenia are close to 100% Christian nations.
  38. @Kevin O'Keeffe
    "You don’t need an especially high IQ to come to such a decision: a moderate IQ and a bit of backbone is quite enough."

    Indeed. Israel has essentially undertaken the same policy that every auto mechanic and shoe salesman in the USA would regard as axiomatic (or "common sense").

    Heck the vast majority of low IQ African nations have shut down air travel fro Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea.

  39. @candid_observer
    The one thing I wish we could copy more from Israel is how they don't give a good goddam about anybody else.

    For us, of course, it's Israel we shouldn't be giving a good goddam about.

    Israel actually had an extensive development aid apparatus in Africa prior to 1973. Your other remarks reflect your interiors.

  40. @Mr. Blank
    I'm no Israel groupie, but I've never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel. Here we have a civilized Western nation that routinely acts to advance the self-interests of its citizens and their culture, without a hint of shame or apology.

    Shouldn't we look at them as a model? Frankly, I'd welcome it if my country could summon up Israel's degree of self-confidence.

    I’m no Israel groupie, but I’ve never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel.

    Because ‘paleocon’ is not an appellation of a social ideology, but one for political discourse which derived from a stew of hostility and pretension.

    • Replies: @Udolpho

    Because ‘paleocon’ is not an appellation of a social ideology, but one for political discourse which derived from a stew of hostility and pretension.
     
    hostility and pretension, two things you appear to be an expert on
  41. @gcochran
    We used to know how to send medical teams off to treat anything, anywhere, without significant risk of bringing it home - and we still do. So do the Israelis. Look for another reason, one that works.

    Israel is a very small nation with limited resources. Even quarantine would stretch their finances and people and land. Add in an ISIS attack or Hamas shelling and the risk for a defacto nation at eternal war is too high.

    The US meanwhile could quarantine people in the Aluetians where the cold inhibits viral activity and acts as a firebreak to airborne mutation from this rna rapid mutstion virus.

  42. Paleos hate Israel bc ‘jews killed Jesus’ and Israels existence is Americas original sin. Ie without Israel muslims would not bevrage machines bent on jihad and slaughter driven by cousin marriage and polygamy.

    Israel is reasonably non corrupt, at Italian not Egyptian levels Westernized, treats women well and is mostly middle class.

    Almost forgot, paloes hate Israels military stance, being isolationist peaceniks. Exhibit A, Pat Buchanon. A western nation defending itself is too threatening.

    Yes Jewish religion is weird and not eating pork strange. But its mostly about paleos weird Christian ideas of original sin and blood guilt that make them hate Israel and not say Qatar or Pakistan.

  43. don’t approve this… posted this in the wrong blog post…

  44. @meep
    Israel: possibly the only Western nation that uses its thinking brain

    Israel: possibly the only Western nation that uses its thinking brain

    You mean the only one spared Jewish cultural Marxism.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    There is no such thing as 'cultural Marxism', Jewish or otherwise. It's a nonsense term.
  45. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Not Paul Walker
    It's also strange that Israel never joins the U.S and the Coalition Of The Willing ie Britain Canada Australia and New Zealand in the never ending Middle East wars.

    “It’s also strange that Israel never joins the U.S and the Coalition Of the Willing ie Britain Canada Australia and New Zealand in the never ending Middle East wars.”

    Not really. They just use their influence OVER those countries to get THEM to do THEIR fighting for them. Take the crazy war in Iraq in 2003. Entirely engineered by Neoconservatives, almost all of them Jewish. That war was fought to benefit Israel. Use American muscle to take out an Arab country that could be a possible threat to Israel and keep the USA deeply involved in the Middle East to Israel’s long term gain.

    There never were, of course, any “weapons of mass destruction”.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    There never were, of course, any “weapons of mass destruction”.

    International inspectorates spent seven years destroying Iraq's stockpiles, residues and equipment were still present in 2003, and officers in the Iraqi military were certainly under the impression that units other than their own had them.
  46. @Retired
    The Israeli decision illustrates the myth of the Judeo-Christian ethic, or any other Judeo-Christian conflation. They are two completely separate religions despite what a few evangelicals think. We look on them with kindness, at least the Christians do, while the Israelis are contemptuous of America.
    The US, hold on, is the nation with the highest percentage Christian population, the culture most influence by the Christian faith, even at this low point of the culture wars. (this is a main reason the left hates conservatives so much,)
    That's why American medical missionaries are in Africa when no one else who can help is. That's why we send our medical people and soldiers while they talk and watch porn at the UN.
    Christianity is a compassionate religion while Judaism is more of a collection of shared religious, historical and cultural traditions.
    Just what my lyin' eyes tell me.

    “The Israeli decision illustrates the myth of the Judeo-Christian ethic, or any other Judeo-Christian conflation. They are two completely separate religions despite what a few evangelicals think”.

    Yes, “Judeo-Christian civilization” is a bogus concept. Jews were only emancipated over the 19th century and only started making a dent in the wider culture over the last century. If there is a Judeo-Christian civilization it’s only about as old as the telephone and only started to really dominate over the lifetime of Woody Allen. Some civilization.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    Yes, “Judeo-Christian civilization” is a bogus concept. Jews were only emancipated over the 19th century and only started making a dent in the wider culture over the last century.
     
    Right, 'cause Christianity never happened. The Jews have had a huge influence on European thought for the last 2000 years.
  47. Paleocons are ‘hostile’ to Israel because they resent seeing their country subordinated to its interests. America doesn’t need Israel at all.

    As for the attack on the Liberty being an “accident” ROTFLMAO.

  48. @Art Deco
    Remember the USS Liberty or the Lavon affair, for example.

    One was an obvious accident (a detailed account of which has been published by Michael Oren) and the other never occurred.

    http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/lavon.html

    Or was the Lavon affair an obvious accident and the Liberty incident a fiction?

  49. @Mr. Blank
    I'm no Israel groupie, but I've never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel. Here we have a civilized Western nation that routinely acts to advance the self-interests of its citizens and their culture, without a hint of shame or apology.

    Shouldn't we look at them as a model? Frankly, I'd welcome it if my country could summon up Israel's degree of self-confidence.

    Israel is your classic case of a bunch of hypocrites in one locale who do one thing and demand others do as they say.

    Paleocon dislike of Israel has to do with it’s immense influence on our foreign policy and domestic politics via a bunch of rich and connected dual passport holders here in the U.S. For example if you are a aspiring GOP candidate you go nowhere politically without pledging your support of Israel and getting Israeli approval. This goes for senators, congressmen and presidential candidates. The dual passport holders have very influential positions within the DoD, think tanks and MSM. FoxNews has a virtual parade of them on every night.

    Their agents here in the U.S. were the ones that demanded the U.S. invade a innocent country on bogus pretexts – Iraq. They were also the ones who demanded we go to war with Russia over Syria. Luckily Putin and a total lack of public support defused the situation

    They’re influential but rather stupid, proof that brains don’t equal common sense or self-restraint.

    They were so brazen they even concocted a grand strategy for the U.S. called PNAC. It’s signatories are virtual who’s who of Jewish shot callers in D.C. and a handful of their goy sock puppets. Every country we’ve attacked has been on the PNAC hit list(Iraq, Libya, Syria, Egypt via regime change) – which also includes Russia BTW.

    It’s really fun to watch Jews flip out when you mention all the Jewish signatories on more mainstream sites. They really don’t like anyone pointing out their influence.

    Domestically its the Jews that are the biggest advocates of open borders and unlimited immigration of 3rd world peoples; they are the first to attack any public expression of Christian faith via the ADL and ACLU; they are major exponents of gun control and confiscation; and major supporters of Islamic immigration including the radicals.

    We can do without their influence and would be a better country for it.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Palaeocon dislike of Israel is commonly appended with fantasy history and fantasy current affairs and has little to do with Israel and much to do with the promoters rancid interiors.
    , @Art Deco
    Their agents here in the U.S. were the ones that demanded the U.S. invade a innocent country on bogus pretexts – Iraq.

    Again, this never occured outside your imagination. The priority for the Government of Israel has been and remains Iran. See Martin Kramer on this subject.
  50. The USS Liberty incident was an “obvious accident” and the Lavon affair “never occurred” (36)? That’s the most preposterous assertion made on this blog all year.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Israel had no manifest interest in bombing an American navy vessel, which is why the Johnson Administration made nothing of it and Johnson told his apparatchik Secretary of State that he was talking rot on the subject. Because it had no interest in doing so, anti-semites have spent more than four decades concocting fantasies of possible antecedents. With the release of archival information not previously available, Michael Oren has been able to construct a precise timeline which discredits earlier work.

    The Lavon affair concerned a plan concocted within intelligence services which was never executed. Nothing happened bar David Ben-Gurion getting into repeated disputes with his colleagues over it.
  51. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Minor nit: Israel the country didn’t exist in the 1920s:

    No, but the Yishuv did, and had a large elected assembly. The common institutions of the kibbutzim and Jewish towns were all in place when Israel declared independence on 14 May 1948.
  52. @Anonym
    You would think someone like Frieden would have more sense than to advocate against effective measures such as a ban on immigration (temporary or otherwise) from West Africa at this point in time. Really dumb to be the public face of the CDC if it all goes pear-shaped.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death_Jewish_persecutions

    You would think someone like Frieden would have more sense than to advocate against effective measures such as a ban on immigration….

    “Advocate against” means “speak in favor of against”. You can do better than that.

  53. @Newdist
    Then why are Israeli citizens -- literal citizens -- who happen to live in non-Israel countries so strongly in favor of bringing Ebola victims to those countries?

    Like whom for instance?

  54. “since the early 1920s”: The Jews of Israel maintained their own Parliamentary institutions before the State was established, from the early 1920s and continued them after the State was established, seamlessly. Unlike the Arabs, they used the time of the British mandate to build a full governmental infrastructure, really a parallel government. When the British left, the Jewish state was already there, with existing democratic institutions.

    The Israelis state that it is not feasible for medical personnel to be kept safe and they will bring the disease home. Does the US differ in opinion or do we not care and are we simply suicidal? That is the question I would like answered. If they are correct, it is not feasible for US doctors to be safe either.

    • Replies: @Retired
    Israel only acts when it is her national interest, as do most all countries outside the anglosphere. They can't come out and say that because it's not PC to blatantly admit that kind of callousness.

    America, on the other hand is conflicted. Paleocons are more like the Israeli's, particularly with respect to military action although it would be hard to find people not on the fringe right (like the commenters on this site) who would object to humanitarian aid. Then you have the left like Obama and his water carriers, who only want the US to act when it's not in our national interest .e.g. bombing Libya and invading Syria.

    I believe we should only act militarily when it is in our national interest. We should render humanitarian aid because it is the right thing to do and because no one else in the world does it. Certainly not the UN. It is part of our Christian heritage.

    We can help in Africa by sending volunteers who understand and accept the risk. We could secure our borders to keep ebola out if anyone in DC has the stones to do it. The rest is simple medicine, public health and what used to be called common sense.
  55. @Chubby Ape
    "The Israeli decision illustrates the myth of the Judeo-Christian ethic, or any other Judeo-Christian conflation. They are two completely separate religions despite what a few evangelicals think".

    Yes, "Judeo-Christian civilization" is a bogus concept. Jews were only emancipated over the 19th century and only started making a dent in the wider culture over the last century. If there is a Judeo-Christian civilization it's only about as old as the telephone and only started to really dominate over the lifetime of Woody Allen. Some civilization.

    Yes, “Judeo-Christian civilization” is a bogus concept. Jews were only emancipated over the 19th century and only started making a dent in the wider culture over the last century.

    Right, ’cause Christianity never happened. The Jews have had a huge influence on European thought for the last 2000 years.

    • Replies: @Chubby Ape
    "Right, ’cause Christianity never happened. The Jews have had a huge influence on European thought for the last 2000 years."

    Yes that tiny handful of Hellinized Jews from 1st century Roman Judea we've all read about did have an enormous impact on the West but that's pretty much it until the era of the steamship. There were some notable exceptions to this rule over the millenia but then there were also notable influences from the Islamic world and we don't talk about "Islamo-Christian" civilization. Maybe we will if current trends continue, but I digress.

    This is leaving aside the odd paths into Kabbalah and mysticism the Jews of Eastern Europe took over the centuries. It's worth mentioning though that even the star of David is a relatively recent add-on they got from Kabbalah and was not something they left Judea with.
    , @D.Jones
    If Christianity is a parasitic meme, its effects, according to KMac have not always been negative.

    The important question for future research is to better document the suggestions that medieval
    society is indeed analyzable as a collectivist society with a strong sense of group identification and
    commitment. In addition to indications of a clear sense of Christian ingroup economic interests vis-à-vis the Jews as an outgroup outlined above— interests which were incompatible with the individualistic tendencies of the aristocracy to favor the Jews, there appear to have been high levels of reproductive altruism, particularly among the mendicant friars, many other religious personnel, and eventually the secular elite, the latter mainly the result of coercion but also, as in the case of St. Louis, influenced by voluntary restraint. (In this regard it is interesting that St. Louis was not only a paragon of proper Christian sexual behavior but also had a powerful sense of Christian group economic interests vis-à-vis the Jews [e.g., Chazan, 1973; Jordan, 1989].) In addition, medieval society, and especially the 13th century which represents the apogee of ecclesiastical power, was also characterized by historically high levels of charity to the poor which were not matched until the present century (Gilchrist, 1969; Tierney, 1959). Moreover, there was intense group identification and group commitment to Christianity among all levels of society, as indicated, for example, by the multitudes of pilgrims and the outpouring of religious fervor associated with the Crusades.


    Mark Silk in his 'Notes on the Judeo-Christian Tradition in America' opines that the invocations of the Judeo-Christian tradition arose in the 1930s and 1940s as a counterpoise to 'fascist-travelers and anti-semites who appropriated Christianity as their identity.'

    Stephen Prothero in his 'American Jesus' argues that Jewish leaders were the originators and strongest defenders of Judeo-Christian traditions.
  56. @Steve (not Sailer)
    "since the early 1920s": The Jews of Israel maintained their own Parliamentary institutions before the State was established, from the early 1920s and continued them after the State was established, seamlessly. Unlike the Arabs, they used the time of the British mandate to build a full governmental infrastructure, really a parallel government. When the British left, the Jewish state was already there, with existing democratic institutions.

    The Israelis state that it is not feasible for medical personnel to be kept safe and they will bring the disease home. Does the US differ in opinion or do we not care and are we simply suicidal? That is the question I would like answered. If they are correct, it is not feasible for US doctors to be safe either.

    Israel only acts when it is her national interest, as do most all countries outside the anglosphere. They can’t come out and say that because it’s not PC to blatantly admit that kind of callousness.

    America, on the other hand is conflicted. Paleocons are more like the Israeli’s, particularly with respect to military action although it would be hard to find people not on the fringe right (like the commenters on this site) who would object to humanitarian aid. Then you have the left like Obama and his water carriers, who only want the US to act when it’s not in our national interest .e.g. bombing Libya and invading Syria.

    I believe we should only act militarily when it is in our national interest. We should render humanitarian aid because it is the right thing to do and because no one else in the world does it. Certainly not the UN. It is part of our Christian heritage.

    We can help in Africa by sending volunteers who understand and accept the risk. We could secure our borders to keep ebola out if anyone in DC has the stones to do it. The rest is simple medicine, public health and what used to be called common sense.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Paleocons are more like the Israeli’s,

    I tend to doubt there are too many people in Israel addled by fantasies about wire-puller conspiracies, or by white supremacist rubbish, or by an inexplicable impulse to write apologetics on behalf of heads of state who range from coldly Machiavellian to bloodthirsty Machiavellian.
  57. @Retired
    The Israeli decision illustrates the myth of the Judeo-Christian ethic, or any other Judeo-Christian conflation. They are two completely separate religions despite what a few evangelicals think. We look on them with kindness, at least the Christians do, while the Israelis are contemptuous of America.
    The US, hold on, is the nation with the highest percentage Christian population, the culture most influence by the Christian faith, even at this low point of the culture wars. (this is a main reason the left hates conservatives so much,)
    That's why American medical missionaries are in Africa when no one else who can help is. That's why we send our medical people and soldiers while they talk and watch porn at the UN.
    Christianity is a compassionate religion while Judaism is more of a collection of shared religious, historical and cultural traditions.
    Just what my lyin' eyes tell me.

    The US is the nation with the highest percentage of Christians? I don’t even have to look this up to tell you that is false. Clearly you could look south to Mexico to see a more Christian nation. Places like Poland and Armenia are close to 100% Christian nations.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    He may be thinking in terms of affluent counties and assessing actual religious observance. Malta is likely the most religiously observant country in the occidental world, followed by Ireland.
  58. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I am of the opinion that the best thing we can do for the Ebola stricken west African states is to send them as many protective ‘space suits’ as we possibly can.
    The disease, I believe, is incurable, so there’s nothing a western medic can do that an African can’t do. As I’ve read the disease is solely transmitted by bodily contact with the infected, therefore space suits and liberal supplies of bleach are really all that can be done.

  59. Well, I have to say it again: Ebola is overrated. It is not as dangerous for public health as the fear mongers here are trying to paint it.
    It’s surely not “suicidal” to send medical teams to Africa to help. Funny to see a lot of people who tend to look down on others for their lack of intelligence become so irrational.

    • Replies: @Udolpho
    We keep having to tutor these slow learners.

    The reason people are alarmed about Ebola is that it is already a massive outbreak which we have largely made worse by sending in medical teams (216 medical workers have died according to WHO). Medical teams haven't kept Ebola infected people from getting on airplanes, they're basically just helping stack up the corpses in sick tents.

    What's irrational is thinking that a highly infectious disease can't spread because you've got doctors in hazmat suits on the scene. What's irrational is telling the world that we can't possibly cut off traffic with Liberia, our second greatest ally. What's irrational is taking comfort in "first class medical care" that sends a symptomatic patient home with some amoxicillin and pain pills after he says he's from an Ebola outbreak country. Apparently it's possible to be so smart that you believe irrational things.

    Finally, most people understand that this particular Ebola patient has probably been contained (despite Presbyterian Hospital's best efforts). What they're wondering about is the next one, and the next one, and the next one, because serenely stupid people like you seem to be the ones in charge, making blunder after blunder. What I tell people is: just wait until this hits Mexicans. Then we'll have a problem on our hands. They live 20 to a house, go to the hospital when it gets to the ER stage, and then squat in a crowded waiting room with their entire family. Oh and we're right on the cusp of flu season.

    I'm sorry--facts are irrational things I guess.
  60. Keith Vaz [AKA "D\'Marco Mobley"] says:
    @meep
    Israel: possibly the only Western nation that uses its thinking brain

    ‘Western nation’ LOL!

  61. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I liked the proposal to rename Israel to “JSIL” – the Jewish State in Israel and the Levant. JSIL and ISIL, after all, are both founded by terrorists (Stern/Irgun in the case of JSIL) and have roughly equal legitimacy.

    They are similar in so many ways that IS seems to be consciously following the Jewish template on how to steal a country.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Meanwhile, back in the real world, Israel was founded by the Jewish Agency and has successfully built and maintained a handsome structure of agricultural, industrial, and service enterprises, not to mention a philanthropic sector with cultural institutions. It has also had parliamentary institutions with scant interruption since 1920, little political violence considering its large population of irreconcilable Arabs, and a low crime rate.

    You ever wonder, Mr. Sailer, why some of your acolytes talk like they live in the parallel universe where Mr. Spock has a beard?
  62. Regardless of what Internet cranks think, the secular right in Israel has often used “defense of Western Civilization”-type arguments. In recent times, the defense minister Moshe Ya’alon, who is a kibbutznik who turned to the right, has been particularly well-known for this.

  63. @a very knowing American
    The Israelis did better than almost anyone during the zombie apocalypse (World War Z). Maybe Max Brooks was onto something. (I've read the book, haven't seen the movie.)

    If you liked the book, expect to be disappointed by the movie.

  64. @Anonymous
    I liked the proposal to rename Israel to "JSIL" - the Jewish State in Israel and the Levant. JSIL and ISIL, after all, are both founded by terrorists (Stern/Irgun in the case of JSIL) and have roughly equal legitimacy.


    They are similar in so many ways that IS seems to be consciously following the Jewish template on how to steal a country.

    Meanwhile, back in the real world, Israel was founded by the Jewish Agency and has successfully built and maintained a handsome structure of agricultural, industrial, and service enterprises, not to mention a philanthropic sector with cultural institutions. It has also had parliamentary institutions with scant interruption since 1920, little political violence considering its large population of irreconcilable Arabs, and a low crime rate.

    You ever wonder, Mr. Sailer, why some of your acolytes talk like they live in the parallel universe where Mr. Spock has a beard?

  65. @granesperanzablanco
    The US is the nation with the highest percentage of Christians? I don't even have to look this up to tell you that is false. Clearly you could look south to Mexico to see a more Christian nation. Places like Poland and Armenia are close to 100% Christian nations.

    He may be thinking in terms of affluent counties and assessing actual religious observance. Malta is likely the most religiously observant country in the occidental world, followed by Ireland.

  66. @Retired
    Israel only acts when it is her national interest, as do most all countries outside the anglosphere. They can't come out and say that because it's not PC to blatantly admit that kind of callousness.

    America, on the other hand is conflicted. Paleocons are more like the Israeli's, particularly with respect to military action although it would be hard to find people not on the fringe right (like the commenters on this site) who would object to humanitarian aid. Then you have the left like Obama and his water carriers, who only want the US to act when it's not in our national interest .e.g. bombing Libya and invading Syria.

    I believe we should only act militarily when it is in our national interest. We should render humanitarian aid because it is the right thing to do and because no one else in the world does it. Certainly not the UN. It is part of our Christian heritage.

    We can help in Africa by sending volunteers who understand and accept the risk. We could secure our borders to keep ebola out if anyone in DC has the stones to do it. The rest is simple medicine, public health and what used to be called common sense.

    Paleocons are more like the Israeli’s,

    I tend to doubt there are too many people in Israel addled by fantasies about wire-puller conspiracies, or by white supremacist rubbish, or by an inexplicable impulse to write apologetics on behalf of heads of state who range from coldly Machiavellian to bloodthirsty Machiavellian.

  67. @anonymous

    Minor nit: Israel the country didn’t exist in the 1920s:

    No, but the Yishuv did, and had a large elected assembly. The common institutions of the kibbutzim and Jewish towns were all in place when Israel declared independence on 14 May 1948.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "...when Israel declared independence on 14 May 1948."

    Let's make that when Palestine was stolen from the Palestinians.
  68. @anonymous
    The USS Liberty incident was an "obvious accident" and the Lavon affair "never occurred" (36)? That's the most preposterous assertion made on this blog all year.

    Israel had no manifest interest in bombing an American navy vessel, which is why the Johnson Administration made nothing of it and Johnson told his apparatchik Secretary of State that he was talking rot on the subject. Because it had no interest in doing so, anti-semites have spent more than four decades concocting fantasies of possible antecedents. With the release of archival information not previously available, Michael Oren has been able to construct a precise timeline which discredits earlier work.

    The Lavon affair concerned a plan concocted within intelligence services which was never executed. Nothing happened bar David Ben-Gurion getting into repeated disputes with his colleagues over it.

  69. @rod1963
    Israel is your classic case of a bunch of hypocrites in one locale who do one thing and demand others do as they say.

    Paleocon dislike of Israel has to do with it's immense influence on our foreign policy and domestic politics via a bunch of rich and connected dual passport holders here in the U.S. For example if you are a aspiring GOP candidate you go nowhere politically without pledging your support of Israel and getting Israeli approval. This goes for senators, congressmen and presidential candidates. The dual passport holders have very influential positions within the DoD, think tanks and MSM. FoxNews has a virtual parade of them on every night.

    Their agents here in the U.S. were the ones that demanded the U.S. invade a innocent country on bogus pretexts - Iraq. They were also the ones who demanded we go to war with Russia over Syria. Luckily Putin and a total lack of public support defused the situation

    They're influential but rather stupid, proof that brains don't equal common sense or self-restraint.

    They were so brazen they even concocted a grand strategy for the U.S. called PNAC. It's signatories are virtual who's who of Jewish shot callers in D.C. and a handful of their goy sock puppets. Every country we've attacked has been on the PNAC hit list(Iraq, Libya, Syria, Egypt via regime change) - which also includes Russia BTW.

    It's really fun to watch Jews flip out when you mention all the Jewish signatories on more mainstream sites. They really don't like anyone pointing out their influence.

    Domestically its the Jews that are the biggest advocates of open borders and unlimited immigration of 3rd world peoples; they are the first to attack any public expression of Christian faith via the ADL and ACLU; they are major exponents of gun control and confiscation; and major supporters of Islamic immigration including the radicals.

    We can do without their influence and would be a better country for it.

    Palaeocon dislike of Israel is commonly appended with fantasy history and fantasy current affairs and has little to do with Israel and much to do with the promoters rancid interiors.

  70. @rod1963
    Israel is your classic case of a bunch of hypocrites in one locale who do one thing and demand others do as they say.

    Paleocon dislike of Israel has to do with it's immense influence on our foreign policy and domestic politics via a bunch of rich and connected dual passport holders here in the U.S. For example if you are a aspiring GOP candidate you go nowhere politically without pledging your support of Israel and getting Israeli approval. This goes for senators, congressmen and presidential candidates. The dual passport holders have very influential positions within the DoD, think tanks and MSM. FoxNews has a virtual parade of them on every night.

    Their agents here in the U.S. were the ones that demanded the U.S. invade a innocent country on bogus pretexts - Iraq. They were also the ones who demanded we go to war with Russia over Syria. Luckily Putin and a total lack of public support defused the situation

    They're influential but rather stupid, proof that brains don't equal common sense or self-restraint.

    They were so brazen they even concocted a grand strategy for the U.S. called PNAC. It's signatories are virtual who's who of Jewish shot callers in D.C. and a handful of their goy sock puppets. Every country we've attacked has been on the PNAC hit list(Iraq, Libya, Syria, Egypt via regime change) - which also includes Russia BTW.

    It's really fun to watch Jews flip out when you mention all the Jewish signatories on more mainstream sites. They really don't like anyone pointing out their influence.

    Domestically its the Jews that are the biggest advocates of open borders and unlimited immigration of 3rd world peoples; they are the first to attack any public expression of Christian faith via the ADL and ACLU; they are major exponents of gun control and confiscation; and major supporters of Islamic immigration including the radicals.

    We can do without their influence and would be a better country for it.

    Their agents here in the U.S. were the ones that demanded the U.S. invade a innocent country on bogus pretexts – Iraq.

    Again, this never occured outside your imagination. The priority for the Government of Israel has been and remains Iran. See Martin Kramer on this subject.

  71. @Anonymous
    "It's also strange that Israel never joins the U.S and the Coalition Of the Willing ie Britain Canada Australia and New Zealand in the never ending Middle East wars."

    Not really. They just use their influence OVER those countries to get THEM to do THEIR fighting for them. Take the crazy war in Iraq in 2003. Entirely engineered by Neoconservatives, almost all of them Jewish. That war was fought to benefit Israel. Use American muscle to take out an Arab country that could be a possible threat to Israel and keep the USA deeply involved in the Middle East to Israel's long term gain.

    There never were, of course, any "weapons of mass destruction".

    There never were, of course, any “weapons of mass destruction”.

    International inspectorates spent seven years destroying Iraq’s stockpiles, residues and equipment were still present in 2003, and officers in the Iraqi military were certainly under the impression that units other than their own had them.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Mind explaining to me sport, how come none of them have been found by the USA in the past eleven years?
  72. @Anonymous
    Israel: possibly the only Western nation that uses its thinking brain

    You mean the only one spared Jewish cultural Marxism.

    There is no such thing as ‘cultural Marxism’, Jewish or otherwise. It’s a nonsense term.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "There is no such thing as 'cultural Marxism', Jewish or otherwise."

    Yeah, your 'right' sport. I guess I should pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.
  73. @IHTG
    That's the same Israel whose supreme court recently shut down all illegal migrant internment camps

    “That’s the same Israel whose supreme cour shut down all illegal migrant internment camps.”

    Quite right. The battle between sanity and suicidality is being fought in Israel too. Maybe sanity has the edge a little. But the Israeli supreme court is a redoubtable force for national suicide.

  74. @ben tillman

    Yes, “Judeo-Christian civilization” is a bogus concept. Jews were only emancipated over the 19th century and only started making a dent in the wider culture over the last century.
     
    Right, 'cause Christianity never happened. The Jews have had a huge influence on European thought for the last 2000 years.

    “Right, ’cause Christianity never happened. The Jews have had a huge influence on European thought for the last 2000 years.”

    Yes that tiny handful of Hellinized Jews from 1st century Roman Judea we’ve all read about did have an enormous impact on the West but that’s pretty much it until the era of the steamship. There were some notable exceptions to this rule over the millenia but then there were also notable influences from the Islamic world and we don’t talk about “Islamo-Christian” civilization. Maybe we will if current trends continue, but I digress.

    This is leaving aside the odd paths into Kabbalah and mysticism the Jews of Eastern Europe took over the centuries. It’s worth mentioning though that even the star of David is a relatively recent add-on they got from Kabbalah and was not something they left Judea with.

  75. It doesn’t say Israel won’t send *anyone* to Liberia — it just won’t send army teams. The Israeli army is a serious organization with a serious mission.

    “Israel has rejected a special request by the US and UN to send IDF field hospitals to Ebola hit Liberia and Sierra Leone. Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon, who rejected the request…”

  76. I’m no Israel groupie, but I’ve never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel.

    Probably because you’ve never tried to understand it. It’s about American Jewry, not Israel. And rightly so.

    The Jews (in Israel) are a “Light Unto The Nations” yet again!

    The funny thing is, the Christian Zionists say this, but make no effort to actually look at the light. The Jews say this, but deliberately hide what the light actually is. Anti-semites like me seem to be the only ones actually holding the light up.

    It’s also strange that Israel never joins the U.S and the Coalition Of The Willing ie Britain Canada Australia and New Zealand in the never ending Middle East wars.

    They’re our greatest ally in the Universe though.

    Whiskey:

    Paleos hate Israel bc ‘jews killed Jesus’ and Israels existence is Americas original sin.

    “Forget about the neocons. They don’t exist. There’s no such thing. But the paleos are eeeevil.”

    Starting to get the picture, Blank?

  77. Israel is a very small nation with limited resources. Even quarantine would stretch their finances and people and land. Add in an ISIS attack or Hamas shelling and the risk for a defacto nation at eternal war is too high.

    Whiskey tacitly admits that Israel is America’s most useless “ally.”

  78. “Art Deco says:

    “”Remember the USS Liberty or the Lavon affair, for example.””

    One was an obvious accident (a detailed account of which has been published by Michael Oren) and the other never occurred.”

    The USS Liberty incident was not an obvious accident. It was – quite obviously – not an accident.

    You obviously are a fool or a liar.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    The USS Liberty incident was not an obvious accident. It was – quite obviously – not an accident.

    The thesis that Israel would attack a naval vessel of a friendly country a propos of nothing in particular was never plausible to begin with, which is why people advancing that thesis began concocting fantasies. Sorry you're a sucker.
  79. @Jus' Sayin'...
    There's that pesky 1 SD Ashkenaz Jew advantage showing up again. Or, perhaps in the case of our beloved leader and all his court, I should say that 2.1 SD advantage.

    It’s odd because the ‘nazi Jews here in the States are saying something totally different:

    http://www.vox.com/2014/10/4/6905303/ebola-scared-quarantine

    Summary: You goy fools, there’s nothing to fear! Besides, Ebola is just another vibrant ingredient of our melting pot (it does help melt internal organs).

  80. @bossel
    Well, I have to say it again: Ebola is overrated. It is not as dangerous for public health as the fear mongers here are trying to paint it.
    It's surely not "suicidal" to send medical teams to Africa to help. Funny to see a lot of people who tend to look down on others for their lack of intelligence become so irrational.

    We keep having to tutor these slow learners.

    The reason people are alarmed about Ebola is that it is already a massive outbreak which we have largely made worse by sending in medical teams (216 medical workers have died according to WHO). Medical teams haven’t kept Ebola infected people from getting on airplanes, they’re basically just helping stack up the corpses in sick tents.

    What’s irrational is thinking that a highly infectious disease can’t spread because you’ve got doctors in hazmat suits on the scene. What’s irrational is telling the world that we can’t possibly cut off traffic with Liberia, our second greatest ally. What’s irrational is taking comfort in “first class medical care” that sends a symptomatic patient home with some amoxicillin and pain pills after he says he’s from an Ebola outbreak country. Apparently it’s possible to be so smart that you believe irrational things.

    Finally, most people understand that this particular Ebola patient has probably been contained (despite Presbyterian Hospital’s best efforts). What they’re wondering about is the next one, and the next one, and the next one, because serenely stupid people like you seem to be the ones in charge, making blunder after blunder. What I tell people is: just wait until this hits Mexicans. Then we’ll have a problem on our hands. They live 20 to a house, go to the hospital when it gets to the ER stage, and then squat in a crowded waiting room with their entire family. Oh and we’re right on the cusp of flu season.

    I’m sorry–facts are irrational things I guess.

  81. @Art Deco
    I’m no Israel groupie, but I’ve never understood the paleocon hostility to Israel.

    Because 'paleocon' is not an appellation of a social ideology, but one for political discourse which derived from a stew of hostility and pretension.

    Because ‘paleocon’ is not an appellation of a social ideology, but one for political discourse which derived from a stew of hostility and pretension.

    hostility and pretension, two things you appear to be an expert on

  82. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Art Deco
    Literally, they have cities. They are also an affluent society (at least to the level of Spain though not the United States) and made themselves so in spite of inclement circumstances, have a low crime rate (homicide rates at 1.8 per 100,000 are typical of Europe and one-third the American mean), and are one of about two-dozen countries who have maintained parliamentary institutions fairly consistently since the early 1920s (i.e. without interruptions borne of something other than foreign invasion). They have also successfully contained political violence and contention, in spite of having an enormous population of irreconcilables (Arabs amounting to 20% of the total). Israel's political spectrum is also largely free of communist, fascist and revanchist parties. Abortion is a horror in Israel as it is elsewhere, but the ratio of abortions to live births in Israel is half what it is in the United States. Illegitimate births are about 6% of the total in Israel, v. 40% in the United States. Israel is one of the few affluent countries in the world not suffering a serious fertility deficit.

    “Israel’s political spectrum is also largely free of communist, fascist and revanchist parties”

    I’m pretty sure that any western country with race-based immigration laws, collective punishment for its enemies (demolishing the homes of Palestinian bad guys or even ‘suspects’) and uncomfortable desert camps for ‘illegal infiltrators’ – well, some people would call that country ‘fascist’. Maybe even the same people who keep quiet when Israel does it.

    Revanchist ? Well, there are all those settlements in Judea and Samaria.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    1. All those settlements are known as 'suburbs'.

    2. I cannot help it if ignorant people fancy the Law of Return is a 'fascist' measure.
  83. Right, ’cause Christianity never happened.

    C’mon, Ben, you’re smart enough not to fall for this sort of nonsense.

  84. @Not Paul Walker
    It's also strange that Israel never joins the U.S and the Coalition Of The Willing ie Britain Canada Australia and New Zealand in the never ending Middle East wars.

    It’s not strange at all. The Arab coalition partners have neverwanted Israel to be involved.

  85. @ben tillman

    Yes, “Judeo-Christian civilization” is a bogus concept. Jews were only emancipated over the 19th century and only started making a dent in the wider culture over the last century.
     
    Right, 'cause Christianity never happened. The Jews have had a huge influence on European thought for the last 2000 years.

    If Christianity is a parasitic meme, its effects, according to KMac have not always been negative.

    The important question for future research is to better document the suggestions that medieval
    society is indeed analyzable as a collectivist society with a strong sense of group identification and
    commitment. In addition to indications of a clear sense of Christian ingroup economic interests vis-à-vis the Jews as an outgroup outlined above— interests which were incompatible with the individualistic tendencies of the aristocracy to favor the Jews, there appear to have been high levels of reproductive altruism, particularly among the mendicant friars, many other religious personnel, and eventually the secular elite, the latter mainly the result of coercion but also, as in the case of St. Louis, influenced by voluntary restraint. (In this regard it is interesting that St. Louis was not only a paragon of proper Christian sexual behavior but also had a powerful sense of Christian group economic interests vis-à-vis the Jews [e.g., Chazan, 1973; Jordan, 1989].) In addition, medieval society, and especially the 13th century which represents the apogee of ecclesiastical power, was also characterized by historically high levels of charity to the poor which were not matched until the present century (Gilchrist, 1969; Tierney, 1959). Moreover, there was intense group identification and group commitment to Christianity among all levels of society, as indicated, for example, by the multitudes of pilgrims and the outpouring of religious fervor associated with the Crusades.

    Mark Silk in his ‘Notes on the Judeo-Christian Tradition in America’ opines that the invocations of the Judeo-Christian tradition arose in the 1930s and 1940s as a counterpoise to ‘fascist-travelers and anti-semites who appropriated Christianity as their identity.’

    Stephen Prothero in his ‘American Jesus’ argues that Jewish leaders were the originators and strongest defenders of Judeo-Christian traditions.

    • Replies: @Chubby Ape
    "Stephen Prothero in his ‘American Jesus’ argues that Jewish leaders were the originators and strongest defenders of Judeo-Christian traditions."

    The "Judeo-Christian" idea would work best in America amongst a certain type of Protestant: those for whom the centuries between the writing of the book of Revelations and the first Thanksgiving at the Plymouth colony are a near total blur. It doesn't help either that so many of the Nonconformist and Dissenter sects who felt the need to settle in America were themselves wannabe Israelites with an excessive interest in the Old Testament.
  86. Commenter “Deco” holds out Israeli diplomat Michael Oren as a credible authority regarding the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty. Yup, an Israeli diplomat is the go-to guy for information on that. Incredible, just incredible.

  87. @Anonymous
    "Israel’s political spectrum is also largely free of communist, fascist and revanchist parties"

    I'm pretty sure that any western country with race-based immigration laws, collective punishment for its enemies (demolishing the homes of Palestinian bad guys or even 'suspects') and uncomfortable desert camps for 'illegal infiltrators' - well, some people would call that country 'fascist'. Maybe even the same people who keep quiet when Israel does it.

    Revanchist ? Well, there are all those settlements in Judea and Samaria.

    1. All those settlements are known as ‘suburbs’.

    2. I cannot help it if ignorant people fancy the Law of Return is a ‘fascist’ measure.

  88. @Mr. Anon
    "Art Deco says:

    @Anonymous

    ""Remember the USS Liberty or the Lavon affair, for example.""

    One was an obvious accident (a detailed account of which has been published by Michael Oren) and the other never occurred."

    The USS Liberty incident was not an obvious accident. It was - quite obviously - not an accident.

    You obviously are a fool or a liar.

    The USS Liberty incident was not an obvious accident. It was – quite obviously – not an accident.

    The thesis that Israel would attack a naval vessel of a friendly country a propos of nothing in particular was never plausible to begin with, which is why people advancing that thesis began concocting fantasies. Sorry you’re a sucker.

  89. @D.Jones
    If Christianity is a parasitic meme, its effects, according to KMac have not always been negative.

    The important question for future research is to better document the suggestions that medieval
    society is indeed analyzable as a collectivist society with a strong sense of group identification and
    commitment. In addition to indications of a clear sense of Christian ingroup economic interests vis-à-vis the Jews as an outgroup outlined above— interests which were incompatible with the individualistic tendencies of the aristocracy to favor the Jews, there appear to have been high levels of reproductive altruism, particularly among the mendicant friars, many other religious personnel, and eventually the secular elite, the latter mainly the result of coercion but also, as in the case of St. Louis, influenced by voluntary restraint. (In this regard it is interesting that St. Louis was not only a paragon of proper Christian sexual behavior but also had a powerful sense of Christian group economic interests vis-à-vis the Jews [e.g., Chazan, 1973; Jordan, 1989].) In addition, medieval society, and especially the 13th century which represents the apogee of ecclesiastical power, was also characterized by historically high levels of charity to the poor which were not matched until the present century (Gilchrist, 1969; Tierney, 1959). Moreover, there was intense group identification and group commitment to Christianity among all levels of society, as indicated, for example, by the multitudes of pilgrims and the outpouring of religious fervor associated with the Crusades.


    Mark Silk in his 'Notes on the Judeo-Christian Tradition in America' opines that the invocations of the Judeo-Christian tradition arose in the 1930s and 1940s as a counterpoise to 'fascist-travelers and anti-semites who appropriated Christianity as their identity.'

    Stephen Prothero in his 'American Jesus' argues that Jewish leaders were the originators and strongest defenders of Judeo-Christian traditions.

    “Stephen Prothero in his ‘American Jesus’ argues that Jewish leaders were the originators and strongest defenders of Judeo-Christian traditions.”

    The “Judeo-Christian” idea would work best in America amongst a certain type of Protestant: those for whom the centuries between the writing of the book of Revelations and the first Thanksgiving at the Plymouth colony are a near total blur. It doesn’t help either that so many of the Nonconformist and Dissenter sects who felt the need to settle in America were themselves wannabe Israelites with an excessive interest in the Old Testament.

    • Replies: @D.Jones
    It doesn’t help either that so many of the Nonconformist and Dissenter sects who felt the need to settle in America were themselves wannabe Israelites with an excessive interest in the Old Testament.
    The point was, imo, that these considerations are moot. Western Civ, Christian Zionist and Judeo-Christian traditions are memes that arose to deal with issues during and after WWII. Now that their purpose is served, they have lost their usefulness and are denigrated by many scholars as mythology.
  90. @Art Deco
    There is no such thing as 'cultural Marxism', Jewish or otherwise. It's a nonsense term.

    “There is no such thing as ‘cultural Marxism’, Jewish or otherwise.”

    Yeah, your ‘right’ sport. I guess I should pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

  91. @Art Deco
    There never were, of course, any “weapons of mass destruction”.

    International inspectorates spent seven years destroying Iraq's stockpiles, residues and equipment were still present in 2003, and officers in the Iraqi military were certainly under the impression that units other than their own had them.

    Mind explaining to me sport, how come none of them have been found by the USA in the past eleven years?

  92. @Art Deco
    Minor nit: Israel the country didn’t exist in the 1920s:

    No, but the Yishuv did, and had a large elected assembly. The common institutions of the kibbutzim and Jewish towns were all in place when Israel declared independence on 14 May 1948.

    “…when Israel declared independence on 14 May 1948.”

    Let’s make that when Palestine was stolen from the Palestinians.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Let’s make that when Palestine was stolen from the Palestinians.

    There were no 'Palestinians' in 1948 unless you mean the Jewish population who made occasional use of variants of the term. Use of the term is anachronistic in referring to any period of time prior to 1968.

    That aside, I'm not getting how the Jewish farmers and tradesmen in that part of the Levant - who made up half the population and produced the bulk of the goods and services therein every year - can be said to have 'stolen' it from an Arab population who elected to cut and run and rely on armies from surrounding Arab states to clear the Jews out (and, in the process, learning the hard way that the Hashemite clan are unusual among Arab rulers for their talent at building an armed force which accomplishes something). Those who've remained in the area have spent sixty-odd years doing nothing sensible about their situation (those remaining in Israel the exception). You can look at Gaza and see where six decades of collecting the UNRWA dole, striking attitudes and deferring to crime bosses and stupid teenagers gets you.

  93. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    As I recall, one explanation that was frequently advanced for the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty was that the Israelis had somehow confused it for an Eygptian merchant ship, or similar, despite the fact that the resemblance between the two was tenuous at best and one, according to the reference material (some Jane’s publication or similar) was about 30 meters or so longer than the other.

    There was a motive, too. James Bamford – that NSA insider – had a good account in *Body of Secrets,* but I think his explanation – that the Israelis attacked the USS Liberty to cover up a massacre of Egyptian POWs – is implausible, since the Liberty was a SIGINT ship and collected intelligence by monitoring radio transmissions – I don’t think it ever steamed (motored?) within sight of the coast, and if I were responsible for conducting a massacre of POWs, I’d make sure it didn’t generate any radio traffic.

    I think a better explanation – which some other author (whose name I do not recall) proposed – is suggested by the timing of the attack. The day after the attack on the USS Liberty, the Israelis attacked the Golan Heights and perhaps launched some other offensive operations – this suggests that the attack was meant to ensure that the US did not get wind of this development, since they might have leaned on the Israelis to stop.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Covering up the Golan attack seems like the consensus explanation today. I can remember me and a friend going over possible explanations for the Liberty attack a decade ago and being stumped. The attack went on for two hours in sunny weather on a ship flying a big American flag, so it's hard to say it was unintentional, but what the desired advantage was is not crystalline either.
  94. @Anonymous
    "...when Israel declared independence on 14 May 1948."

    Let's make that when Palestine was stolen from the Palestinians.

    Let’s make that when Palestine was stolen from the Palestinians.

    There were no ‘Palestinians’ in 1948 unless you mean the Jewish population who made occasional use of variants of the term. Use of the term is anachronistic in referring to any period of time prior to 1968.

    That aside, I’m not getting how the Jewish farmers and tradesmen in that part of the Levant – who made up half the population and produced the bulk of the goods and services therein every year – can be said to have ‘stolen’ it from an Arab population who elected to cut and run and rely on armies from surrounding Arab states to clear the Jews out (and, in the process, learning the hard way that the Hashemite clan are unusual among Arab rulers for their talent at building an armed force which accomplishes something). Those who’ve remained in the area have spent sixty-odd years doing nothing sensible about their situation (those remaining in Israel the exception). You can look at Gaza and see where six decades of collecting the UNRWA dole, striking attitudes and deferring to crime bosses and stupid teenagers gets you.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    ArtDeco - Sir, I salute your indefatigability.
    , @Anonymous
    "there were no Palestinians in 1948.."

    Yeah your 'right'. Palestine was just an empty country that Jews just accidentally fell into.
  95. @Chubby Ape
    "Stephen Prothero in his ‘American Jesus’ argues that Jewish leaders were the originators and strongest defenders of Judeo-Christian traditions."

    The "Judeo-Christian" idea would work best in America amongst a certain type of Protestant: those for whom the centuries between the writing of the book of Revelations and the first Thanksgiving at the Plymouth colony are a near total blur. It doesn't help either that so many of the Nonconformist and Dissenter sects who felt the need to settle in America were themselves wannabe Israelites with an excessive interest in the Old Testament.

    It doesn’t help either that so many of the Nonconformist and Dissenter sects who felt the need to settle in America were themselves wannabe Israelites with an excessive interest in the Old Testament.
    The point was, imo, that these considerations are moot. Western Civ, Christian Zionist and Judeo-Christian traditions are memes that arose to deal with issues during and after WWII. Now that their purpose is served, they have lost their usefulness and are denigrated by many scholars as mythology.

  96. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “The thesis that Israel would attack a naval vessel of a friendly country a propos of nothing in particular was never plausible to begin with…”

    I’m willing to believe the attack on the Liberty was due to sustained incompetence or even individual actions, but there are plausible reasons why Israel might have wanted the Liberty out of the way. Similar to modern US intelligence, much US intelligence at the time was based on electronic eavesdropping. That was Liberty’s job.

    From the wikipedia’s article on the USS Liberty (where it examines a list of theories):

    “…Russian author… in his book “History of the Mossad” states Israel was justified in attacking the Liberty. Israel knew that American radio signals were intercepted by the Soviet Union and that the Soviets would certainly inform Egypt of the fact that, by moving troops to the Golan Heights, Israel had left the Egyptian border undefended.”

    “…explanation… found in Liberty’s nature and its task to monitor communications on both sides… He writes, “Israel clearly did not want the U.S. government to know too much about its dispositions for attacking Syria, initially planned for 8 June, but postponed for 24 hours. It should be pointed out that the attack on Liberty occurred on 8 June…”

    “…Syria announced its acceptance of the cease-fire. Despite this, at 7 am, that is, four hours later, Israel’s minister of defense, Moshe Dayan, “gave the order to go into action against Syria.” He further writes that timely knowledge of this… and preparatory moves toward it “might have frustrated Israeli designs for the conquest of Syria’s Golan Heights” and… provides “a plausible thesis that Israel deliberately decided to incapacitate the signals-collecting American ship …””

    The Liberty story does not sound like it’s over:

    “… On 2 October 2007, The Chicago Tribune published… numerous previously unreported quotes from former military personnel with first-hand knowledge… directly contradict… National Security Agency’s position that it never intercepted the communications of the attacking Israeli pilots, saying that not only did transcripts of those communications exist, but also that it showed the Israelis knew they were attacking an American naval vessel.”

    “…Two diplomatic cables written by… Israel’s ambassador in Washington… have been declassified by Israel… The first… a U.S. informant told… that there was “clear proof that from a certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway.” The second cable… added that the White House is “very angry” because “the Americans probably have findings showing that our pilots indeed knew that the ship was American.””

    The Liberty’s crew probably wasn’t helped by President Johnson being from a family of fundamentalist preachers in a very pro-Israel sect, the Christadelphians. The wikipedia article ends with (this is what the senior survivor of the Liberty, Lieutenant Commander David Lewis, said 6th Fleet Rear Admiral Lawrence Geis told him):

    “… This time President Johnson ordered the recall with the comment that he did not care if every man drowned and the ship sank, but that he would not embarrass his allies.”

  97. “Art Deco says:

    “”The USS Liberty incident was not an obvious accident. It was – quite obviously – not an accident.””

    The thesis that Israel would attack a naval vessel of a friendly country a propos of nothing in particular was never plausible to begin with, which is why people advancing that thesis began concocting fantasies. Sorry you’re a sucker.”

    It was not apropos of nothing. It was apropos of the six-day war and Mosche Dyan’s desire to seize the Golan Heights. A lot of people in America’s military establishment suspected, and more than suspoected, that it was a deliberate act by Dyan. You evidently know nothing about the incident, beyond the name of it. As I said, you’re a liar or a fool. However, unlike you, I am not sorry for it, rather I don’t give a damn.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    I have read academic articles on it. I just never bothered with the tomes which are to military history what David Lifton's work is to political history or biography.

    Again, Syria was a willing participant in Nasser's schemes and no military objectives were enhanced by attacking the Liberty.

    This remains an issue due to the animosities of certain people, not because anything particularly untoward happened.
  98. @Anonymous
    As I recall, one explanation that was frequently advanced for the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty was that the Israelis had somehow confused it for an Eygptian merchant ship, or similar, despite the fact that the resemblance between the two was tenuous at best and one, according to the reference material (some Jane's publication or similar) was about 30 meters or so longer than the other.

    There was a motive, too. James Bamford - that NSA insider - had a good account in *Body of Secrets,* but I think his explanation - that the Israelis attacked the USS Liberty to cover up a massacre of Egyptian POWs - is implausible, since the Liberty was a SIGINT ship and collected intelligence by monitoring radio transmissions - I don't think it ever steamed (motored?) within sight of the coast, and if I were responsible for conducting a massacre of POWs, I'd make sure it didn't generate any radio traffic.

    I think a better explanation - which some other author (whose name I do not recall) proposed - is suggested by the timing of the attack. The day after the attack on the USS Liberty, the Israelis attacked the Golan Heights and perhaps launched some other offensive operations - this suggests that the attack was meant to ensure that the US did not get wind of this development, since they might have leaned on the Israelis to stop.

    Covering up the Golan attack seems like the consensus explanation today. I can remember me and a friend going over possible explanations for the Liberty attack a decade ago and being stumped. The attack went on for two hours in sunny weather on a ship flying a big American flag, so it’s hard to say it was unintentional, but what the desired advantage was is not crystalline either.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Steve, the attack did not go on for two hours and there is no 'consensus explanation'. Read Michael Oren on the precise timeline.
    , @Ravelin
    As a follow-up:

    http://www.ussliberty.org/submarine.txt

    Apparently, there was a USN submarine - perhaps the USS Amberjack (SS-522), a Tench-class boat, on the scene. It apparently filmed the attack. Who knows - maybe the film (and perhaps other records) survive somewhere, in unexpurgated form.
  99. […] nightmares of various kinds, to historical reminiscences, neo-Puritan panic attacks, border disputes, alarm calls, and conspiracy […]

  100. @Steve Sailer
    Covering up the Golan attack seems like the consensus explanation today. I can remember me and a friend going over possible explanations for the Liberty attack a decade ago and being stumped. The attack went on for two hours in sunny weather on a ship flying a big American flag, so it's hard to say it was unintentional, but what the desired advantage was is not crystalline either.

    Steve, the attack did not go on for two hours and there is no ‘consensus explanation’. Read Michael Oren on the precise timeline.

  101. @Mr. Anon
    "Art Deco says:

    @Mr. Anon

    ""The USS Liberty incident was not an obvious accident. It was – quite obviously – not an accident.""

    The thesis that Israel would attack a naval vessel of a friendly country a propos of nothing in particular was never plausible to begin with, which is why people advancing that thesis began concocting fantasies. Sorry you’re a sucker."

    It was not apropos of nothing. It was apropos of the six-day war and Mosche Dyan's desire to seize the Golan Heights. A lot of people in America's military establishment suspected, and more than suspoected, that it was a deliberate act by Dyan. You evidently know nothing about the incident, beyond the name of it. As I said, you're a liar or a fool. However, unlike you, I am not sorry for it, rather I don't give a damn.

    I have read academic articles on it. I just never bothered with the tomes which are to military history what David Lifton’s work is to political history or biography.

    Again, Syria was a willing participant in Nasser’s schemes and no military objectives were enhanced by attacking the Liberty.

    This remains an issue due to the animosities of certain people, not because anything particularly untoward happened.

  102. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “I’m not getting how the Jewish farmers and tradesmen in that part of the Levant – who made up half the population and produced the bulk of the goods and services therein every year – can be said to have ‘stolen’ it from an Arab population who elected to cut and run and rely on armies from surrounding Arab states to clear the Jews out”

    Okay, you’re clearly just agit-prop all the way. You’re not getting it because you never will get it. You can’t get it. You don’t want to get it under any circumstances. As they say, you’re part of the problem, not the solution.

    I don’t have any dog in this fight and am no expert, but your claim is just way to over the top.

    One way it can be said to have been stolen was Israel didn’t respect the UN resolution on the division of Palestine:

    “…the State of Israel kept the area that had been recommended by the UN General Assembly Resolution 181 but also took control of almost 60% of the area allocated to the proposed Arab state… No Arab Palestinian state was created.”

    Then there’s the problem that a lot of the 700,000 or so Palestinians who were expelled (why don’t we just go ahead and call it what it was, ethnic cleansing) had title deeds to their houses, land, and farms. They owned the place. All that was stolen from them. They were never paid back. Many of them still have the paperwork and are interested in reparations, at least, right of return, at most.

    “Around 700,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from the area that became Israel and they became Palestinian refugees”

    “On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution …

    With about 32% of the population, the Jews were allocated 56% of the territory. It contained 499,000 Jews and 438,000 Arabs… The Palestinian Arabs were allocated 42% of the land, which had a population of 818,000 Palestinian Arabs and 10,000 Jews.”

    So at the time of the UN resolution, there were about 500,000 Jews and 1,355,000 Arabs.

    And concentrating on the population at this time skips, or sweeps under the rug, the real problem. The Jewish population was new, an immigrant population. Perhaps one reason Jews today are so pro–illegal-immigration. For instance a 1920 League of Nations (a precursor to the UN) report says this:

    “There are now in the whole of Palestine hardly 700,000 people

    …Four-fifths of the whole population are Moslems. A small proportion of these are Bedouin Arabs; the remainder, although they speak Arabic and are termed Arabs, are largely of mixed race. Some 77,000 of the population are Christians, in large majority belonging to the Orthodox Church…

    The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews”

    So you could say the Palestinian problem is an immigration problem, a lot of it illegal Jewish immigation. Only 76,000 Jews in Palestine in 1920, out of a population of 700,000. What changed?

    And about those invading Arab armies… how long had any of those Arab countries been independent countries? How long had they had their own armies? Weren’t some of them, in theory, still colonial possessions? (The whole place was still under European control at the end of WWII, in 1945…)

    The only army that gave Israel any real problem was Jordan’s. Jordan likely would have defeated Israel if Israel hadn’t received a large amount of supplies, half-way though the 1948 war, from Communist Czechoslovakia. Jordan’s army performed so well because it was led by a mercenary British general John Glubb, who had been with the largely Bedouin Arab Legion military force (a British proxy force in WWII) since 1930 and led it after 1939. The Arab Legion went on to become the core of Jordan’s army. Glubb also formed the real Desert Patrol.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    I don’t have any dog in this fight

    Uh huh.

    --

    The Jew ethnic cleansers were remarkably lacking in thoroughness. The Galilee has had an Arab majority since 1949, minding their own business.


    had title deeds to their houses,

    Allodial and fee simple tenures are atypical in the area and even today only about 7% of the land area within the 1949 armistice lines is privately owned. There's a bloc owned by the Jewish National Fund purchased over the years. The bulk is state land which is leased - mostly trash land in the Negev.

    In order to return their property, there would have had to be some sort of general settlement between the contending parties. After more than twenty-five years of conflict, Israel was not anxious to re-incorporate Hajj Amin al-Husseini and his followers and any kind of political settlement was off the table after 1954. It was not until 1971 that the Egyptian government began making overtures. The Syrian government has never been willing to deal. The P.L.O. never engaged in any negotiating until 1993 (and it was all part of a long con).


    So at the time of the UN resolution, there were about 500,000 Jews and 1,355,000 Arabs.

    The UN resolution allocated to the Jewish state those areas where Jews were in the majority. They allocated the rest to an Arab state which was never constructed.


    So you could say the Palestinian problem is an immigration problem, a lot of it illegal Jewish immigation.

    Jewish immigration was not debarred until the 1939 White Paper.

    Did it ever occur to you that it was odd that the two most prominent 'Palestinians' you've heard of, Edward Said and Yasser Arafat, grew up in Egypt? Or that the definition of a 'refugee' eligible for aid from UNRWA need only have lived in mandatory Palestine for two years? Or that the Anatolian component of the Ottoman Empire (later Turkey), the Mesopotamian vilayets, Persia, and Egypt all saw demographic growth (best anyone can discern) of 15% to 35% between 1911 and 1931 and the area of the former Vilayet of Beirut and Sanjak of Jerusalem saw a growth rate of 70%? It might occur to someone else that Egyptian and Syrian Arabs were not altogether adverse to moving from one place to another.
  103. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “The thesis that Israel would attack a naval vessel of a friendly country a propos of nothing in particular was never plausible to begin with…”

    It’s worth bearing in mind that the US being firmly allied to Israel against the Soviet-backed Arabs was not that old in 1967. In 1956 the US had frustrated Israeli (and British and French) military success during the Suez war:

    “..an invasion of Egypt in late 1956 by Israel, followed by Britain and France. The aims were to regain Western control of the Suez Canal and to remove Egyptian president Nasser from power…

    …it became clear that the invasion and its consecutive Anglo-French attack had been planned beforehand by the three powers.

    …The three allies initially attained their military objectives…”

    But the US (with the help of the USSR at the UN), led by Eisenhower, slapped Israeli, Britain, and France down and they were forced to withdraw (UN resolutions, threats of sanctions). One reason for this was that in 1956 the Arabs were “still in play”:

    “..it was Eisenhower’s belief that if the United States were seen to acquiesce in the attack on Egypt, that the resulting backlash in the Arab world might win the Arabs over to the Soviet Union.”

    I’m not sure if the following has ever been a theory in the Liberty case, but it may simply have been that some pilots had long memories and may have even lost buddies in 56. They may have felt cheated:

    “…On 7 November, David Ben-Gurion addressed the Knesset and declared a great victory, saying that the 1949 armistice agreement with Egypt was dead and buried, and that the armistice lines were no longer valid and could not be restored. …”

    This was not just a “show war”:

    “British casualties stood at 16 dead and 96 wounded, while French casualties were 10 dead and 33 wounded. The Israeli losses were 231 dead and 899 wounded. The number of Egyptians killed was “never reliably established”. Egyptian casualties to the Israeli invasion were estimated at 1000–3000 dead and 4,000 wounded, while losses to the Anglo-French operation were estimated at 650 dead and 900 wounded. 1000 Egyptian civilians are estimated to have died.”

    It’s not inconceivable that some Israeli pilots bore a grudge against the US for snatching their earlier victory away from them, especially if they had lost comrades, and ten years later they found themselves in a position to do something about it. Not saying this is what happened, it’s just one more possibility, or perhaps contributing factor, to consider.

  104. “Art Deco says:

    Steve, the attack did not go on for two hours and there is no ‘consensus explanation’. Read Michael Oren on the precise timeline.”

    Why? Who says that he is the final authority on the matter? You? Oren is hardly a disinterested party – what he has written about the Liberty incident is in the service of an Israeli agenda.

    “This remains an issue due to the animosities of certain people, not because anything particularly untoward happened.”

    Nothing untoward?

    I used to think you were merely an arrogant prick. Now I also think that you are a shameless liar.

  105. @anonymous
    "I’m not getting how the Jewish farmers and tradesmen in that part of the Levant – who made up half the population and produced the bulk of the goods and services therein every year – can be said to have ‘stolen’ it from an Arab population who elected to cut and run and rely on armies from surrounding Arab states to clear the Jews out"


    Okay, you're clearly just agit-prop all the way. You're not getting it because you never will get it. You can't get it. You don't want to get it under any circumstances. As they say, you're part of the problem, not the solution.



    I don't have any dog in this fight and am no expert, but your claim is just way to over the top.

    One way it can be said to have been stolen was Israel didn't respect the UN resolution on the division of Palestine:

    "...the State of Israel kept the area that had been recommended by the UN General Assembly Resolution 181 but also took control of almost 60% of the area allocated to the proposed Arab state... No Arab Palestinian state was created."

    Then there's the problem that a lot of the 700,000 or so Palestinians who were expelled (why don't we just go ahead and call it what it was, ethnic cleansing) had title deeds to their houses, land, and farms. They owned the place. All that was stolen from them. They were never paid back. Many of them still have the paperwork and are interested in reparations, at least, right of return, at most.

    "Around 700,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from the area that became Israel and they became Palestinian refugees"


    "On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution ...

    With about 32% of the population, the Jews were allocated 56% of the territory. It contained 499,000 Jews and 438,000 Arabs... The Palestinian Arabs were allocated 42% of the land, which had a population of 818,000 Palestinian Arabs and 10,000 Jews."


    So at the time of the UN resolution, there were about 500,000 Jews and 1,355,000 Arabs.

    And concentrating on the population at this time skips, or sweeps under the rug, the real problem. The Jewish population was new, an immigrant population. Perhaps one reason Jews today are so pro--illegal-immigration. For instance a 1920 League of Nations (a precursor to the UN) report says this:

    "There are now in the whole of Palestine hardly 700,000 people...

    ...Four-fifths of the whole population are Moslems. A small proportion of these are Bedouin Arabs; the remainder, although they speak Arabic and are termed Arabs, are largely of mixed race. Some 77,000 of the population are Christians, in large majority belonging to the Orthodox Church...

    ...The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews"


    So you could say the Palestinian problem is an immigration problem, a lot of it illegal Jewish immigation. Only 76,000 Jews in Palestine in 1920, out of a population of 700,000. What changed?


    And about those invading Arab armies... how long had any of those Arab countries been independent countries? How long had they had their own armies? Weren't some of them, in theory, still colonial possessions? (The whole place was still under European control at the end of WWII, in 1945...)

    The only army that gave Israel any real problem was Jordan's. Jordan likely would have defeated Israel if Israel hadn't received a large amount of supplies, half-way though the 1948 war, from Communist Czechoslovakia. Jordan's army performed so well because it was led by a mercenary British general John Glubb, who had been with the largely Bedouin Arab Legion military force (a British proxy force in WWII) since 1930 and led it after 1939. The Arab Legion went on to become the core of Jordan's army. Glubb also formed the real Desert Patrol.

    I don’t have any dog in this fight

    Uh huh.

    The Jew ethnic cleansers were remarkably lacking in thoroughness. The Galilee has had an Arab majority since 1949, minding their own business.

    had title deeds to their houses,

    Allodial and fee simple tenures are atypical in the area and even today only about 7% of the land area within the 1949 armistice lines is privately owned. There’s a bloc owned by the Jewish National Fund purchased over the years. The bulk is state land which is leased – mostly trash land in the Negev.

    In order to return their property, there would have had to be some sort of general settlement between the contending parties. After more than twenty-five years of conflict, Israel was not anxious to re-incorporate Hajj Amin al-Husseini and his followers and any kind of political settlement was off the table after 1954. It was not until 1971 that the Egyptian government began making overtures. The Syrian government has never been willing to deal. The P.L.O. never engaged in any negotiating until 1993 (and it was all part of a long con).

    So at the time of the UN resolution, there were about 500,000 Jews and 1,355,000 Arabs.

    The UN resolution allocated to the Jewish state those areas where Jews were in the majority. They allocated the rest to an Arab state which was never constructed.

    So you could say the Palestinian problem is an immigration problem, a lot of it illegal Jewish immigation.

    Jewish immigration was not debarred until the 1939 White Paper.

    Did it ever occur to you that it was odd that the two most prominent ‘Palestinians’ you’ve heard of, Edward Said and Yasser Arafat, grew up in Egypt? Or that the definition of a ‘refugee’ eligible for aid from UNRWA need only have lived in mandatory Palestine for two years? Or that the Anatolian component of the Ottoman Empire (later Turkey), the Mesopotamian vilayets, Persia, and Egypt all saw demographic growth (best anyone can discern) of 15% to 35% between 1911 and 1931 and the area of the former Vilayet of Beirut and Sanjak of Jerusalem saw a growth rate of 70%? It might occur to someone else that Egyptian and Syrian Arabs were not altogether adverse to moving from one place to another.

  106. @Art Deco
    Let’s make that when Palestine was stolen from the Palestinians.

    There were no 'Palestinians' in 1948 unless you mean the Jewish population who made occasional use of variants of the term. Use of the term is anachronistic in referring to any period of time prior to 1968.

    That aside, I'm not getting how the Jewish farmers and tradesmen in that part of the Levant - who made up half the population and produced the bulk of the goods and services therein every year - can be said to have 'stolen' it from an Arab population who elected to cut and run and rely on armies from surrounding Arab states to clear the Jews out (and, in the process, learning the hard way that the Hashemite clan are unusual among Arab rulers for their talent at building an armed force which accomplishes something). Those who've remained in the area have spent sixty-odd years doing nothing sensible about their situation (those remaining in Israel the exception). You can look at Gaza and see where six decades of collecting the UNRWA dole, striking attitudes and deferring to crime bosses and stupid teenagers gets you.

    ArtDeco – Sir, I salute your indefatigability.

  107. @Steve Sailer
    Covering up the Golan attack seems like the consensus explanation today. I can remember me and a friend going over possible explanations for the Liberty attack a decade ago and being stumped. The attack went on for two hours in sunny weather on a ship flying a big American flag, so it's hard to say it was unintentional, but what the desired advantage was is not crystalline either.

    As a follow-up:

    http://www.ussliberty.org/submarine.txt

    Apparently, there was a USN submarine – perhaps the USS Amberjack (SS-522), a Tench-class boat, on the scene. It apparently filmed the attack. Who knows – maybe the film (and perhaps other records) survive somewhere, in unexpurgated form.

  108. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “I don’t have any dog in this fight

    Uh huh.”

    No, I don’t. I care about the US. I don’t particularly care about Israel or the Palestinians, any more than I care, say, about Honduras or Burundi. But you were being disingenuous with your implications about Jewish population in Palestine. The effect is that you are, if not lying, at least painting the consistently rosy picture. When churned out enough, this amounts to a biased attempt to alter US politics in your own group’s interest. That’s surely a legitimate activity, but pointing out that your position is not objective, but is in fact advocacy, is also legitimate for me.

    “The Jew ethnic cleansers were remarkably lacking in thoroughness.”

    Doesn’t matter that they failed. They tried.

    “In order to return their property, there would have had to be some sort of general settlement between the contending parties.”

    Why yes, that’s true. Do you think Israel wants peace? I no longer believe that Israel really wants peace, unless it’s on their terms. I don’t find that too surprising in any government or state.

    “They allocated the rest to an Arab state which was never constructed.”

    And why was that, pray tell?

    “It might occur to someone else that Egyptian and Syrian Arabs were not altogether adverse to moving from one place to another.”

    It might occur to yet someone else that you are trying to avoid talking about the Palestinians, perhaps even avoid thinking about them. Can you put yourself in the Palestinians shoes and debate their side?

  109. @Art Deco
    Let’s make that when Palestine was stolen from the Palestinians.

    There were no 'Palestinians' in 1948 unless you mean the Jewish population who made occasional use of variants of the term. Use of the term is anachronistic in referring to any period of time prior to 1968.

    That aside, I'm not getting how the Jewish farmers and tradesmen in that part of the Levant - who made up half the population and produced the bulk of the goods and services therein every year - can be said to have 'stolen' it from an Arab population who elected to cut and run and rely on armies from surrounding Arab states to clear the Jews out (and, in the process, learning the hard way that the Hashemite clan are unusual among Arab rulers for their talent at building an armed force which accomplishes something). Those who've remained in the area have spent sixty-odd years doing nothing sensible about their situation (those remaining in Israel the exception). You can look at Gaza and see where six decades of collecting the UNRWA dole, striking attitudes and deferring to crime bosses and stupid teenagers gets you.

    “there were no Palestinians in 1948..”

    Yeah your ‘right’. Palestine was just an empty country that Jews just accidentally fell into.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS