The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPhilip Giraldi Archive
AIPAC Discovers 47 Useful Idiots
Money talks and even writes letters
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_218485894

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

March 2015 is a month that should live in infamy. The month started out with the revolting spectacle of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressing a joint session of Congress for the third time, having been invited by the Speaker of the House without the courtesy of seeking any input from the White House or State Department. The National Review was quick to declare Bibi “leader of the free world,” surely one of the most ridiculous claims ever made by a once respectable magazine that has increasingly become a reliable mouthpiece for the Israel Lobby. It was all part of a carefully orchestrated deliberate affront to President Barack Obama, who like it or not, is responsible for the conduct of foreign affairs. It also challenged the White House’s role in dealing with visiting heads of state and government as a matter of both protocol and common sense, one of the traditional duties of the Chief Executive.

Netanyahu characteristically lied about the threat posed by Iran and was greeted by fifty rounds of applause for his lucidly expressed insights into why the United States should again be prepared to go to war on Israel’s behalf. Five days later 47 Republican United States Senators signed a letter allegedly written by Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas and then sent it to the Iranian government directly, warning that any agreement over that country’s nuclear program reached with President Barack Obama will likely be overturned by the Congress. The letter was signed by the entire Republican Party leadership in the Senate and also included presidential contenders Rand Paul, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.

Were the two events connected? You bet they were as they both had the same objective – to end talks with Iran and commit the United States to a more aggressive confrontation with the Mullahs, as Israel has been demanding.

The invitation and the letter were both unprecedented, far exceeding previous stunts by the ubiquitous GOP “maverick” Senator John McCain cavorting with terrorists in Syria or appearing in Tbilisi or at Maidan Square in Ukraine to instigate either a new war or a change of government. McCain’s hubris, as well as that of other peripatetic Congressmen prowling the world looking for an audience, was on display “over there” where he had no real authority and no one would listen to him anyway but the current incarnation of Republican leadership was and is, unfortunately, doing its damage over here.

The visit and letter were together an assault on how American democracy is supposed to work. Retired Major General Paul Eaton summed up the impact of the letter succinctly: “…to directly engage a foreign entity, in this way, undermining the strategy and work of our diplomats and our Commander in Chief, strains the very discipline and structure that our foreign relations depend on to succeed. The breach of discipline is extremely dangerous, because undermining our diplomatic efforts, at this moment, brings us another step closer to a very costly and perilous war with Iran. I think Senator Cotton recognizes this, and he simply does not care.”

The most significant damage is to the separation of powers under the Constitution of the United States. One might argue reasonably that executive authority has increased dramatically in Washington since 9/11 and should be rolled back by the legislature and judiciary. But the GOP is not addressing the issues that it should be confronting like war powers, immigration, state secrecy privilege, illegal spying and death by drone. It is instead seeking to challenge Article 2 of the Constitution, which specifies that the executive is the lead agency in dealing with foreign governments. The House of Representatives can choose to defund presidential programs and the Senate can refuse to “consent” to treaties that the executive has entered into, but the actual work of diplomacy and protecting Americans overseas is the responsibility of the president.

The presidential prerogative was accepted by the Founding Fathers and George Washington, in his first address to Congress made clear that while the legislative branch had responsibility for funding both diplomacy and an army, it was up to the executive branch to carry out policy in both areas. At the time, Thomas Jefferson was Secretary of State. The Supreme Court has since several times upheld that perception, ruling that “foreign policy is the province and responsibility of the executive.”

And then there is the Logan Act, passed in 1799, which specifically declares it illegal for any citizen, including Congressmen, to engage in “any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government . . . with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government . . . in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States.” The last indictment submitted under the Act was in 1803, which means that legal experts might well consider it to be unenforceable due to the judicial doctrine of desuetude, or lack of use, but the law is still on the books and one might reasonably argue that both the Netanyahu invitation and the Senate letter to the Iranian government would be considered felonious violations.

Leaving aside the damage that would be done to America’s reputation by repudiating an agreement hammered out not only with Iran but also with five other countries, there is a common thread running through the attempt by the Congress to assert control over some aspects of foreign policy and it is, of course, Israel. And there is also a back story. The Netanyahu visit was planned by the Israeli Ambassador in Washington Ron Dermer in collusion with Speaker of the House John Boehner. It was clearly intended to embarrass President Obama while also motivating the Congress and media to do everything possible to derail a possible agreement with Iran, which Netanyahu has been warning about since 1993. Netanyahu was also banking on his speech to shore up his credentials as a tough-talking guarantor of Israeli national security to include having Washington in his pocket. He hoped to benefit in the impending national elections, which are taking place today.

But Netanyahu may have received more blowback than benefits from his maneuvering with the U.S. Congress. His formulaic speech was heavily criticized even by Israel’s friends, damaging Tel Aviv’s relationship with the Democratic Party and possibly even dooming his chance for reelection due to the adverse reaction to the visit among Israelis.

And the letter to Iran’s appearance five days after the speech certainly hints at collusion and possibly more than that. It suggests that nearly half of the United States Senate, having received its marching orders from Netanyahu, was prepared to go forth and tighten the screws on Iran. The letter states, inaccurately, “that anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement [that] the next president could revoke…with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify…” It advises that “any unilateral executive agreement is one the [the Iranians] accept at their own peril.”

The letter, which undercuts the authority of the American president before an international audience, is undeniably a threat intended to derail negotiations. It was responded to by Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif, who called the letter a “propaganda ploy” observing that “it is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history…If the current negotiation with P5+1 results in a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, it will not be a bilateral agreement between Iran and the US, but rather one that will be concluded with the participation of five other countries, including all permanent members of the Security Council, and will also be endorsed by a Security Council resolution.” He added that the “letter in fact undermines the credibility of thousands of such mere executive agreements that have been or will be entered into by the US with various other governments” and concluded that revoking an agreement would be a “blatant violation of international law.”

The letter’s alleged author, 37 year old freshman Senator Cotton, had been in office all of 62 days when the document was sent directly to the government in Tehran on March 8th. He had started circulating the draft for signatures the day after Netanyahu spoke, suggesting that it was already prepared and not a spontaneous act. An Army veteran with combat tours, Cotton is a hardliner chickenhawk though minus the chicken, which makes him a valuable commodity in the exclusive armchair warrior club that some call the Republican Party. But even that fraternity has sometimes found him too extreme. In 2014 he told voters that ISIS was working with Mexican drug cartels to stage attacks in Arkansas and while a Congressmen he sought to imprison the entire families of those suspected of violating Iran sanctions, to include the grandchildren of the convicted.

Cotton is inevitably very fond of Israel. Whether it is genuine, opportunistic or just a quid pro quo is difficult to say. In January he tried to strengthen sanctions against Iran and he stated his belief that the talks over the nuclear program should be abandoned. It has been observed that most of the defenders of his letter are also leading components of the Israel Lobby, but there is more to it than that. In his Senatorial campaign last year Cotton received $960,250 from Bill Kristol’s Emergency Committee for Israel plus $165,000 from Paul Singer’s Elliott Management hedge fund. Both Kristol and Singer have been active in opposing Iran talks and it should be noted also that neither lives in Arkansas.

There have also been suggestions that Cotton did not in fact write the letter. Former American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) staffer M.J. Rosenberg believes that it was produced by that organization, which appears probable as 46 Senators would have been unlikely to sign on to a letter produced by a new and untested Senator otherwise. Some others look to Kristol, who regards Cotton as a protégé much as he once nurtured the unforgettable Sarah Palin. Rosenberg explains “nothing happens on Capitol Hill related to Israel unless and until Howard Kohr (AIPAC chief) wants it to happen. Nothing.”

More than 165,000 Americans have signed a petition calling Cotton’s letter treasonous. Behind that outrage we have a speech, a letter and the usual banal tale of corruption, opportunism and money. And it is all starts with Israel, a foreign country that has somehow inserted itself into the American political DNA. Interestingly, the Cotton letter hit the news cycle on the very day that Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman were in the news in Israel. Netanyahu announced that there would be “no withdrawals” from the Israeli occupied West Bank and no “concessions” to the Palestinians. Even the generally supine New York Times had to opine that it cast doubts about “his declared commitment to the two-state solution.”

Lieberman meanwhile called for the beheading of Israel’s Arab citizens who “oppose us.” So much for the billions of dollars given to Israel and the irreparable damage to American interests. All successive administrations in Washington have succeeded in doing is empowering racist fanatics like Lieberman while the American people have gained nothing. And as often happens when the Palestinians are on the business end of the Israeli boot the Netanyahu and Lieberman comments were hardly noticed in the U.S. mainstream media, conveniently overshadowed by the bigger story of Iran and the Senator Cotton letter.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: AIPAC, Bill Kristol, Israel Lobby, Tom Cotton 
Of Related Interest
Bad_Moon_Rising (1)
A new cabinet will mark neocon ascendancy
shutterstock_131500409
Pledges of loyalty to Israel are un-American
Kristol
Shouldn't they recuse themselves when dealing with the Middle East?
Hide 79 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Patriot says:

    The traditional penality for treason is death by firing squad.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    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
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /pgiraldi/aipac-discovers-47-useful-idiots/#comment-898643
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. donut says:

    “Five days later 47 Republican United States Senators signed a letter allegedly written by Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas and then sent it to the Iranian government directly, warning that any agreement over that country’s nuclear program reached with President Barack Obama will likely be overturned by the Congress. The letter was signed by the entire Republican Party leadership in the Senate and also included presidential contenders Rand Paul, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.”

    Dachau was opened in 1933 to hold political prisoners , maybe now with traitors like this in our midst it doesn’t seem so unreasonable . Unfortunately we’ll never get the chance to do likewise , more likely your readers will find themselves in camps first .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:

    “The most significant damage is to the separation of powers under the Constitution of the United States.”

    Valid point, and I despise the 47 clowns who, like the 47 ronin, should commit seppuku.

    But does the Constitution matter with Obama himself? Didn’t he use executive order to push amnesty?
    Where in the Constitution is there anything that would allow an abomination like ‘gay marriage’?

    And haven’t a bunch of presidents taken this country without Congress declaring war?

    So, if Congressional clowns act this way, they aint breaking anything that isn’t already broken.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Aaron Klein
    Humm, Speaking of " gay marriage" does anyone know where Tom Cotton is on that issue? Maybe he and Lyndsey Graham could get behind that, so to speak.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. The turn of the 18th century Alien and Sedition Act, along with the Logan Act, are of the ilk of the 1917 Espionage Act, radical departures from democratic governance that criminalize political opinion and democratic accountability. One just has to imagine how it would go over indicting and imprisoning opposition party politicians for the executive. It’s about as likely as subjecting Gen. Betrayus to any serious consequences for divulging state secrets to his lover/biographer/journalist adulteress, instead of inviting him back into official White House confabs to give more advice on the latest failed Mideast wars, he apparently being such an expert on losing them.

    The real undermining of good governance is the donorism behind this stunt, such as that of gambling don Sheldon Adelman whose vigorish buys undue influence in both Israel and America with his ill gotten gains. One might say power has passed from a moral majority to the immoral minority, the Sheldon and Soros one per centers. From the gamers to the war gamers, it’s another ploy to “Make Money Fast” for the military-industrial-financial complex in both countries, with the 47 useful idiots a trivial expense.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. Truth says:

    Well, they are viruently anti-Barry.

    Do you guys think you are too good for “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” around here?”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. Jim says:

    As a real country the US is basically disintegrating. Internal conflict such as is exemplified in this matter will play an increasing role in our politics in our multicultural future as any sense of a common American identity evaporates.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. It’s great that US Congress and Senate have re-discovered that they have a role to play in reviewing treaties.

    Surely, Mr. Cotton, as a Harvard-trained lawyer, can explicate for all Americans as well as Iranians precisely what treaty allies Israel to the United States.

    In that explanation, Cotton & cohort will detail the national debate that took place to approve or disapprove that “special relationship.”

    Cotton will also explain how the “will of the people” is expressed in a context where only 16% of US population approves of US legislators but 100% of Congress “approves” of Netanyahu) and Israel-ish issues frequently get overwhelming majority votes..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. Kristol, who regards Cotton as a protégé much as he once nurtured the unforgettable Sarah Palin.

    No doubt Cotton is cheaper to keep — wardrobe and makeup expenses are minimal for the gawky, long-necked Cotton.

    btw, Cotton just celebrated his first wedding anniversary (paper is the appropriate gift for anniv. #1). Cotton’s wife, Anna nee Peckham, a native of Nebraska, went to Cardozo Law School at Yeshiva University. Did Cotton marry him a nice Jewish goil? If so, she’s not in the mold of Betty Friedan or Bella Abzug; she has made it clear that she will be called Anna Cotton. No hyphenated feminist nonsense for this wumin.

    Cotton wouldn’t have it.

    In 1997 he made his views on feminism known in an article in Harvard Crimson — http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1997/10/3/promises-and-covenants-pmen-are-simple/

    QUOTE: “Couples who choose a covenant marriage undergo counseling before they marry and can divorce only with fault, defined as abandonment, physical abuse, adultery or conviction of a capital crime. State legislator Tony Perkins, the author of the law (and an active member in PK [Promise Keepers] ), expects covenant marriages will soon account for half of all new marriages in Louisiana. Many states are expected to follow Louisiana’s lead.
    Presumably, women should encourage such developments since divorce leads to their “greatest fear in life.” And most women probably do support them, but not the putative potentates of feminism.

    The National Organization of Women (NOW) has dedicated itself, nationally and in its state chapters, to “exposing” both PK and covenant marriage as a thinly veiled attack by the Religious Right on women’s rights, or as an attempt to re-establish patriarchy. An example of the fanaticism with which NOW follows this course is its powest subdivision, the “Promise Keepers Mobilization Project.”

    Feminists understandably view movements like PK and covenant marriage with anxiety. They undermine what feminists consider a crowning achievement, no fault divorce. Feminists say no fault divorce was a large hurdle on the path to female liberation. They apparently don’t consult the deepest hopes or greatest fears of young women.

    Nor do they consult the data on no fault divorce. This data says that 62 percent of divorced women used to receive permanent alimony, whereas now only 13 percent receive any alimony. It says that only 25 percent of divorced women with child custody receive child support, and only one-half of that is ever paid. It says that after divorce, men see their standard of living increase by 42 percent, while women see their’s fall by 73 percent. It says, in short, that divorce is a leading cause of poverty among American women.
    Feminists might say that these figures show a need to crack down on “deadbeat dads.” That blithely misses the point. As revolutionary patriot, jurist and marriage counselor James Wilson said,

    “When divorces can be summoned to the aid of levity, of vanity or of avarice, a state of marriage becomes frequently a state of war or stratagem; still more frequently, a state of premeditated and active preparation for successful stratagems and war.”

    END QUOTE

    That last line offers a fascinating insight into Cotton’s psyche, and his warmongering: it comes from the heart: shattered male-female relationships, or the failure of females to adequately and perpetually control the “reckless and restless” nature of “simple men” lays the ground for war.

    I wonder if Cotton tripped over a copy of Gilgamesh while he was in Iraq, the cradle of civilization.

    In the epic of Gilgamesh, Shamhat, a prostitute, has sex with the wild-man Enkidu which civilizes him. http://www.shmoop.com/gilgamesh/shamhat.html
    But emphasize: Shamhat was a prostitute, not a “covenanted wife.” Wow, the complexities keep piling on.

    Other prostitutes have played critical roles in the mytho-history of the region Cotton is so eager to obliterate.

    The prostitute Rahab (nee Rodham-Clinton) betrayed her city, Jericho, to the invading and destroying spies and army of Joshua — http://biblehub.com/niv/joshua/6.htm

    Esther (Victoria Nuland? Jane Harman?) prostituted herself to gain the favor of King Ahasueras in order to take over the Persian empire, place her ‘uncle’ (handler?) Mordecai in the place of the foreign minister Haman, and slaughter Haman, his ten sons, and 75000 innocent Persians who had donated their treasure and political support for the return of Jews to holy Zion.

    Or — a far more basic question: were Cotton’s parents divorced? Did it hurt like hell?

    Recall that when Joseph and Edith Coors divorced in 1988, the by-then grown children of the family were deeply affected and destabilized. That’s the same Joseph Coors who started the right-wing ball rolling by funding uber-conservative Paul Weyrich and the Heritage Foundation. The hypocrisy, it burns.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Cotton's wife is a gentile.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Don Nash says:

    The US Congress’ fealty to Israel is disgraceful. Arkansas Cotton and his gang of 46 should be marched out onto the National Mall and made to face a military firing squad.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. just more proof yet again that our leaders do not work for the American people..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. Mr. Giraldi,

    Please get somebody to challenge your articles before you publish. This one, as with previous ones of yours I’ve read, is largely comprised of broad suspicions conceived without your having bothered to substantiate a lot of particulars. If your intent is to convince an impartial reader that the 47 senators who signed Cotton’s letter are Israeli tools, then you really haven’t gotten started on that yet.

    What we really know from your article is that you are passionately suspicious of Israel and any American politicians who support Israel.

    So, okay, we get that — just like we got that from any article you’ve ever written on this subject.

    Oh, and some guys got campaign contributions. But for that to mean much of anything, we’d need you to have done some homework on who else got contributions, from whom, how much, and how they all voted. Because if I turn pages to another article, I’m going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I’ll start wondering why you’re so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can’t spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes.

    If this were my Freshman Comp 101 class, and if I were feeling particularly merciful toward a struggling student with a good writing style but poor reasoning skills, I’d return this paper to you with an “incomplete.”

    So, got anything else?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    "Because if I turn pages to another article, I’m going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I’ll start wondering why you’re so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can’t spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes."

    Democracy lends itself to lying and corruption. Just one more reason why it doesn't work.
    , @Art
    ”Because if I turn pages to another article, I’m going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I’ll start wondering why you’re so fired upon about Israel buying politicians”

    Professor – you fail both ethics and logic – one wrong does not justify another wrong – never has never will.

    Both Hillary and Israel have done wrong by America.
    , @Philip Giraldi
    Thanks Grate, but I think you are a bit confused. I am not writing term papers. I am limited to something like 1700 words in which I have to make an argument that is reasonably sound, which means I cannot explain every point that I make. I do include links to issues that I believe might be contested but I cannot provide a precis of the Mearsheimer and Walt book every time I refer to the pernicious influence of the Israel Lobby. I assume the reader will have sufficient background to understand what I am referring to, but apparently that is not true in your case. Yes, the 47 Senators who signed the Cotton letter are "Israeli tools" as you put it and I would recommend that you do a little Googling on the issue to find the many observers from all across the political spectrum who are saying the same thing. And yes I am suspicious of any American politician who supports Israel uncritically to the detriment of our own national interests. And yes Bill/Hillary are totally corrupted money whores who will take cash from anyone but I do not see Saudi Arabia or Qatar interfering in our political process like Israel does. Oh by the way you don't have to read my stuff if you don't like the way I write or "reason."
    , @Anonymous
    "If your intent is to convince an impartial reader that the 47 senators who signed Cotton’s letter are Israeli tools, then you really haven’t gotten started on that yet."

    If you do not yet recognize the obvious fact that these 47 senators -- and most, if not all, of the other 53 -- are run by AIPAC and the rest of the "Lobby" (OC Family a more apt description), then surely it is you who should get the input of others before posting your comments.

    My God. You are still in denial over this? In 2015"? How is that possible? Please tell me you used to go to Israel Camp as a child so at least you can be excused due to the brainwashing that goes on there
    , @Anonymous
    Yours is an overused boring pseudo intellectual reply. Nobody needs to prove that Sun is shining when it's sunny and bright. You are not an impartial reader but deeply pro 'Israel can do no wrong' and no amount of evidence will be enough for you. The 47 republicans have committed treason, let the existing laws apply the way they are and let the punishment follow in accordance of these laws.
    , @KA
    1- Saudis didn't want the 1st Gulf war.It tried to mediate the disputes .US told him to quit.It quit
    2 It did not support continued sanction
    3 It did not support 2nd war against Saddam, It resisted openly but without any effects
    3 It was providing supports to Hamas and PA until 2002 openly and explicitly advocating theirs causes . Then something started happening- a) Pearle _Wolfowitz gang started spreading rumors b),started threatening, c) started making policy speeches for regime changes , d)started focusing on passports of the hijackers and the confessions of KSM under duress ,e),started referring to flights of Saudi national .
    4 And next day :Poof! Saudi changed .It changed so much that it started supporting the removal of Syrian soldiers from Lebanon ( the arrangement was the fruit of its own initiative in 1990 ) .
    and condemned Hizbullah and Hamas for Israel initiated violence in Gaza and Lebanon in 2006, it condemned Hamas for wars in 2009 , 2011 and 2014. Saudi found themselves as booby trapped by Israel
    as US had found itself since the death of Kennedy .The threat of 911 hangs on its head with the image of the Star of David in the halo around the scimitar. Meanwhile it stopped talking about comprehensive peace deal that it has earlier raised in 2000 and 2002 -- This is where the periodic demands for release of the remaining 41 pages of 911 come from- to keep the fear alive. To keep it in line .

    (One wonders why focus on those pages when the whole 911 investigation and the subsequent report are compromised,patently incomplete,based on dubious sources and method and managed by insiders .
    No eye witness was called .
    No reference to 5 Dancing Israelis or Israeli Art Student , or to Urban Moving Van was made,
    No mention of the actual seizures of Israelis with box cutter, maps, multiple passports and with cash were made.
    No mention of e mail alert of possible attack on Twin Towers
    And no mention of the frantic efforts of intelligence to warn Bush Cabinet members of attacks from April 2001 to Aug 2001 that were dismissed by the same Neocons Cabinet members who jumped to the conclusion after 911 that Saddam had done it )

    While Saudis keep their billions in Treasury earning peanut as interests

    Zionist say Saudi has lobby in US. Show me one that does anything other than periodically saying " we are co-operating with US against Islamist " or pleads occasionally US to restrain the routine excesses of Israel against the vulnerable .
    , @KA
    Iran's nuclear activities interface with many opposing and variegated surfaces that form the bulk of the political problems in ME. The Gulf Sheiks and the Royals have lost the popular support of the citizen .Their survival depends on more arms and less foreign intervention. So they go extra length to satisfy Israel and US.
    They parrot Israeli lines on Iran ,Hizbullah,Hamas,and Syria.
    They repeat when told to do so :"Nuclear Iran isn't acceptable to Arab citizen", by Israel and by WSJ/CNN/FOX/NYDaily/NYPost/Telegraph (UK) ,BBC.

    Bahrain is an example of how these Sheikhs use the weapons . Israel coming to defense of Saudi following Egyptian revolution is an example of the exploitative relationship between Israel and Arab countries .(Israel pressured US to pay attention and help prevent any similar situation n Saudi ).

    Vast majority of the citizen ,on the other side identifies Israel with or without nukes as a threat. Vast majority of Arabs don't identify Iran with or without nukes as a threat -Foreign Policy
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Realist says:

    AIPAC has a hell of a lot more than 47 useful idiots in the U. S. Congress. It’s closer to 535.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Drizzay
    "Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I’ll start wondering why you’re so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can’t spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes."

    Because the Saudis havent pushed any American representative to put Saudi interest in front of American nor do they fund other candidates in America who doesnt tow the line. What power does Saudi Arabia hold in America. Nice try but back to the drawing board for you you zionist clown. To compare Saudi Arabia to Israel lol zionist love to make deflections but never refute anything.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Realist says:
    @The Grate Deign
    Mr. Giraldi,

    Please get somebody to challenge your articles before you publish. This one, as with previous ones of yours I've read, is largely comprised of broad suspicions conceived without your having bothered to substantiate a lot of particulars. If your intent is to convince an impartial reader that the 47 senators who signed Cotton's letter are Israeli tools, then you really haven't gotten started on that yet.

    What we really know from your article is that you are passionately suspicious of Israel and any American politicians who support Israel.

    So, okay, we get that -- just like we got that from any article you've ever written on this subject.

    Oh, and some guys got campaign contributions. But for that to mean much of anything, we'd need you to have done some homework on who else got contributions, from whom, how much, and how they all voted. Because if I turn pages to another article, I'm going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I'll start wondering why you're so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can't spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes.

    If this were my Freshman Comp 101 class, and if I were feeling particularly merciful toward a struggling student with a good writing style but poor reasoning skills, I'd return this paper to you with an "incomplete."

    So, got anything else?

    “Because if I turn pages to another article, I’m going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I’ll start wondering why you’re so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can’t spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes.”

    Democracy lends itself to lying and corruption. Just one more reason why it doesn’t work.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    Jennifer Rubin writes:

    In an extraordinary report that has not yet been fully digested, the Wall Street Journal tells us that the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation has received millions from foreign governments including Qatar, a prominent backer of Hamas
     
    Jennifer Rubin did not write (but someone else did, some Phil Giraldi-type, no doubt, who couldn't pass a Freshman Comp class):

    Haim Saban Says He’ll Contribute ‘As Much As Needed’ to a Hillary Clinton Campaign
    , @The Grate Deign
    Dear Realist,

    I fear you are correct. But what would you propose in its place? Churchill's dictum may apply here, that democracy is the worst form of government except for all others.

    Until voters learn the counsel of Moses and elect men who "hate covetousness," we'll have to contend with bribery in some form.

    But if I must choose between puppet masters, I'd rather they were Israeli than Saudi.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Drizzay says:
    @Realist
    AIPAC has a hell of a lot more than 47 useful idiots in the U. S. Congress. It's closer to 535.

    “Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I’ll start wondering why you’re so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can’t spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes.”

    Because the Saudis havent pushed any American representative to put Saudi interest in front of American nor do they fund other candidates in America who doesnt tow the line. What power does Saudi Arabia hold in America. Nice try but back to the drawing board for you you zionist clown. To compare Saudi Arabia to Israel lol zionist love to make deflections but never refute anything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    "...zionist clown..."

    What did I write that would make you say that? You're one dumb bastard....and Zionist is capitalized.
    , @solontoCroesus
    Benjamin Wittes works for the Brookings Saban Institute, the one that Haim Saban bought with his cartooning wealth.

    Wittes's wife Tamira is also a director of some element of Brookings - Saban. She's also a member of The Israel Project.

    Wittes (Ben) was on C Span the other day to explain in a way that mimicked legal analysis (tho Wittes is a journalist and not trained as a lawyer) the ins-and-outs of AUMFs and declaring war.
    Wittes explained that the 2001 AUMF was not truly a declaration of war; declaring war is not done so much anymore, Wittes said.

    A caller asked Wittes why, if the men responsible for 9/11 were predominantly from Saudi Arabia, why the US did not attack Saudi Arabia.

    Wittes responded:


    Um, the U.S. - Saudi relationship is extremely complicated. [code word for "corrupt."] And um there are a lot of factors in there [synonym for complicated; see also corrupt] other than one’s sense of whether the Saudi regime are a bunch of nice people, whether you think that is a good thing or a bad thing. We have all kinds of strategic energy relations with the Saudi's, and I don't think the possibility of military action against Saudi Arabis was ever seriously entertained.
     
    Hillary Clinton is twice-bought -- Saban owns her, and KSA owns her. How does that work? "It's complicated."


    It seems to me that if Iran really, truly wants to get out from under sanctions and the thumbs of U.S. and Israel aggression, all they really need to do is buy a senator or two, or maybe a secretary of state.

    Lot cheaper than paying to support the widow of Mohammad Roshan and to educate his son, who was 3 years old when Mossad assassinated his father.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @Realist
    "Because if I turn pages to another article, I’m going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I’ll start wondering why you’re so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can’t spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes."

    Democracy lends itself to lying and corruption. Just one more reason why it doesn't work.

    Jennifer Rubin writes:

    In an extraordinary report that has not yet been fully digested, the Wall Street Journal tells us that the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation has received millions from foreign governments including Qatar, a prominent backer of Hamas

    Jennifer Rubin did not write (but someone else did, some Phil Giraldi-type, no doubt, who couldn’t pass a Freshman Comp class):

    Haim Saban Says He’ll Contribute ‘As Much As Needed’ to a Hillary Clinton Campaign

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    I have no idea why you are writing this to me....do you?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @Realist
    "Because if I turn pages to another article, I’m going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I’ll start wondering why you’re so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can’t spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes."

    Democracy lends itself to lying and corruption. Just one more reason why it doesn't work.

    Dear Realist,

    I fear you are correct. But what would you propose in its place? Churchill’s dictum may apply here, that democracy is the worst form of government except for all others.

    Until voters learn the counsel of Moses and elect men who “hate covetousness,” we’ll have to contend with bribery in some form.

    But if I must choose between puppet masters, I’d rather they were Israeli than Saudi.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    "Until voters learn the counsel of Moses and elect men who “hate covetousness,” we’ll have to contend with bribery in some form."

    Yes. Integrity is a human quality at least as important as intelligence.

    I suggest Meritocracy as one form of government better than Democracy.

    You may find the writings of Hans-Hermann Hoppe interesting.
    , @Druid
    You mean Moses the mass murderer!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Realist says:
    @Drizzay
    "Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I’ll start wondering why you’re so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can’t spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes."

    Because the Saudis havent pushed any American representative to put Saudi interest in front of American nor do they fund other candidates in America who doesnt tow the line. What power does Saudi Arabia hold in America. Nice try but back to the drawing board for you you zionist clown. To compare Saudi Arabia to Israel lol zionist love to make deflections but never refute anything.

    “…zionist clown…”

    What did I write that would make you say that? You’re one dumb bastard….and Zionist is capitalized.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Drizzay
    Sorry was aimed @ The Grate Deign. First time commenting here and hit the reply button to the wrong person
    , @solontoCroesus
    ever notice how techie (midwest US dialect for "touchy") zios get when one spits up the force-fed Kool-Aid?


    --

    How should one write this statement to pass a Freshman comp class:

    "The holocaust is a lie," or "The Holocaust is a lie" ??

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @Drizzay
    "Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I’ll start wondering why you’re so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can’t spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes."

    Because the Saudis havent pushed any American representative to put Saudi interest in front of American nor do they fund other candidates in America who doesnt tow the line. What power does Saudi Arabia hold in America. Nice try but back to the drawing board for you you zionist clown. To compare Saudi Arabia to Israel lol zionist love to make deflections but never refute anything.

    Benjamin Wittes works for the Brookings Saban Institute, the one that Haim Saban bought with his cartooning wealth.

    Wittes’s wife Tamira is also a director of some element of Brookings – Saban. She’s also a member of The Israel Project.

    Wittes (Ben) was on C Span the other day to explain in a way that mimicked legal analysis (tho Wittes is a journalist and not trained as a lawyer) the ins-and-outs of AUMFs and declaring war.
    Wittes explained that the 2001 AUMF was not truly a declaration of war; declaring war is not done so much anymore, Wittes said.

    A caller asked Wittes why, if the men responsible for 9/11 were predominantly from Saudi Arabia, why the US did not attack Saudi Arabia.

    Wittes responded:

    Um, the U.S. – Saudi relationship is extremely complicated. [code word for "corrupt."] And um there are a lot of factors in there [synonym for complicated; see also corrupt] other than one’s sense of whether the Saudi regime are a bunch of nice people, whether you think that is a good thing or a bad thing. We have all kinds of strategic energy relations with the Saudi’s, and I don’t think the possibility of military action against Saudi Arabis was ever seriously entertained.

    Hillary Clinton is twice-bought — Saban owns her, and KSA owns her. How does that work? “It’s complicated.”

    It seems to me that if Iran really, truly wants to get out from under sanctions and the thumbs of U.S. and Israel aggression, all they really need to do is buy a senator or two, or maybe a secretary of state.

    Lot cheaper than paying to support the widow of Mohammad Roshan and to educate his son, who was 3 years old when Mossad assassinated his father.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @Priss Factor
    "The most significant damage is to the separation of powers under the Constitution of the United States."

    Valid point, and I despise the 47 clowns who, like the 47 ronin, should commit seppuku.

    But does the Constitution matter with Obama himself? Didn't he use executive order to push amnesty?
    Where in the Constitution is there anything that would allow an abomination like 'gay marriage'?

    And haven't a bunch of presidents taken this country without Congress declaring war?

    So, if Congressional clowns act this way, they aint breaking anything that isn't already broken.

    Humm, Speaking of ” gay marriage” does anyone know where Tom Cotton is on that issue? Maybe he and Lyndsey Graham could get behind that, so to speak.

    Read More
    • Replies: @solontoCroesus
    see http://www.unz.com/article/aipac-discovers-47-useful-idiots/#comment-899029
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Drizzay says:
    @Realist
    "...zionist clown..."

    What did I write that would make you say that? You're one dumb bastard....and Zionist is capitalized.

    Sorry was aimed @ The Grate Deign. First time commenting here and hit the reply button to the wrong person

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    My most sincere apology.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @Realist
    "...zionist clown..."

    What did I write that would make you say that? You're one dumb bastard....and Zionist is capitalized.

    ever notice how techie (midwest US dialect for “touchy”) zios get when one spits up the force-fed Kool-Aid?

    How should one write this statement to pass a Freshman comp class:

    “The holocaust is a lie,” or “The Holocaust is a lie” ??

    Read More
    • Replies: @Carroll Price
    A very apt observation. There is absolutely no reason why the world holocaust should ever be capitalized.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Art says:
    @The Grate Deign
    Mr. Giraldi,

    Please get somebody to challenge your articles before you publish. This one, as with previous ones of yours I've read, is largely comprised of broad suspicions conceived without your having bothered to substantiate a lot of particulars. If your intent is to convince an impartial reader that the 47 senators who signed Cotton's letter are Israeli tools, then you really haven't gotten started on that yet.

    What we really know from your article is that you are passionately suspicious of Israel and any American politicians who support Israel.

    So, okay, we get that -- just like we got that from any article you've ever written on this subject.

    Oh, and some guys got campaign contributions. But for that to mean much of anything, we'd need you to have done some homework on who else got contributions, from whom, how much, and how they all voted. Because if I turn pages to another article, I'm going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I'll start wondering why you're so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can't spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes.

    If this were my Freshman Comp 101 class, and if I were feeling particularly merciful toward a struggling student with a good writing style but poor reasoning skills, I'd return this paper to you with an "incomplete."

    So, got anything else?

    ”Because if I turn pages to another article, I’m going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I’ll start wondering why you’re so fired upon about Israel buying politicians”

    Professor – you fail both ethics and logic – one wrong does not justify another wrong – never has never will.

    Both Hillary and Israel have done wrong by America.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @Aaron Klein
    Humm, Speaking of " gay marriage" does anyone know where Tom Cotton is on that issue? Maybe he and Lyndsey Graham could get behind that, so to speak.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @The Grate Deign
    Mr. Giraldi,

    Please get somebody to challenge your articles before you publish. This one, as with previous ones of yours I've read, is largely comprised of broad suspicions conceived without your having bothered to substantiate a lot of particulars. If your intent is to convince an impartial reader that the 47 senators who signed Cotton's letter are Israeli tools, then you really haven't gotten started on that yet.

    What we really know from your article is that you are passionately suspicious of Israel and any American politicians who support Israel.

    So, okay, we get that -- just like we got that from any article you've ever written on this subject.

    Oh, and some guys got campaign contributions. But for that to mean much of anything, we'd need you to have done some homework on who else got contributions, from whom, how much, and how they all voted. Because if I turn pages to another article, I'm going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I'll start wondering why you're so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can't spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes.

    If this were my Freshman Comp 101 class, and if I were feeling particularly merciful toward a struggling student with a good writing style but poor reasoning skills, I'd return this paper to you with an "incomplete."

    So, got anything else?

    Thanks Grate, but I think you are a bit confused. I am not writing term papers. I am limited to something like 1700 words in which I have to make an argument that is reasonably sound, which means I cannot explain every point that I make. I do include links to issues that I believe might be contested but I cannot provide a precis of the Mearsheimer and Walt book every time I refer to the pernicious influence of the Israel Lobby. I assume the reader will have sufficient background to understand what I am referring to, but apparently that is not true in your case. Yes, the 47 Senators who signed the Cotton letter are “Israeli tools” as you put it and I would recommend that you do a little Googling on the issue to find the many observers from all across the political spectrum who are saying the same thing. And yes I am suspicious of any American politician who supports Israel uncritically to the detriment of our own national interests. And yes Bill/Hillary are totally corrupted money whores who will take cash from anyone but I do not see Saudi Arabia or Qatar interfering in our political process like Israel does. Oh by the way you don’t have to read my stuff if you don’t like the way I write or “reason.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Grate Deign
    Dear Mr. Giraldi,

    It's astonishing, in light of Kuwait and the two and a half wars for oil in the middle east, and the 9-11 attacks, that you cannot see any Saudi interfering in our political process. Since you're clearly an avid follower of conspiracy theories, you cannot be unaware of the connection between the House of Saud and the copious funding of the 9-11 attacks.

    Of course, you'd expect a Zionist to say this, right?

    But face facts, my fellow patriot. Where'd almost all those dudes with box cutters hail from? And if an attack on the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, and a failed attack on the White House don't constitute "interfering" in our political process, what would it take to qualify? Maybe an attempt to kill off domestic oil production?

    I'm all for free markets, mind you. And if the Saudis want to give oil away for free, that's their look-out. But it's a mighty blind eye that can't see any of this as meddling in America's domestic politics.

    Which all goes back the issue I posed previously: What's up with the Israel thing? How'd they get to be the only turd in your punch bowl?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. geokat62 says:

    @ The Grate Deign

    This one, as with previous ones of yours I’ve read, is largely comprised of broad suspicions conceived without your having bothered to substantiate a lot of particulars.

    If you’re truly interested in substantiation (which as a Zio troll, you’re clearly not), the lobby’s nefarious activities have all been documented in The Israel Lobby, by Mearsheimer and Walt. Why don’t you give it a read and advise us where they fall short?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. ” Oh by the way you don’t have to read my stuff if you don’t like the way I write or ‘reason.’”

    The problem for some is that is it so reasonable that reasonable people are becoming convinced.

    I am glad that the issue is not being anti-Israel, but asking the reasonable question of why American governance can’t make the interests of 300 million Americans the priority, which doesn’t have to involve going to war, nor especially going to war to satisfy some other country’s current leaders’ whims.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. We know that Hillary is bought, by both Saudis & Israel firsters, maybe others.

    We know that Cotton is bought, by Israel firsters.

    We know that most of US legislators are bought, predominantly by Israel firsters.

    Cotton and the 47 are incensed that Obama has not bargained hard enough with the Iranians. He has poor negotiating skills, they bray.

    But — what about Cotton? Did he take the first offer, Kristol’s offer, that came down the pike? Did he look around to try to negotiate a better deal, one that did not sell out his own country and the people who voted for him? Or, hell, maybe Putin would have paid him more if he’d negotiated better. Did he try? Or is Cotton a wuss negotiator who fell for the first bit of lucre dangled before his short-sighted little eyes?

    It may be that the answer to the corruption among US legislators is not reform but more competition. Let’s get the Russians and Iranians in there buying senators (any who are left for sale, that is).

    How about a new marketplace — maybe Obama’s ACA team can set it up — the US legislator Market, buy a representative, but buy now; this is a bidding war and the price will only go up.

    US can piggy-back on the decision that Supreme Court will render on State vs Fed funding of ACA marketplace — How should US senators be sold to China, in dollars or rinminbi? Should reps demand rupees from India and rubles from Russia, or should it be dollars and only dollars?

    Hey, this is getting better and better — inasmuch as the petrodollar is under threat, what with the Saudis having decided that lowering the price of oil is in their own interest as it undercuts the (formerly) burgeoning fracking industry in US (ask North Dakota about the bust cycle of boom-and-bust in a market where the floor falls out from below oil prices). Instead of petrodollars, US can peg its dollar to “Legislator-dollars” — buying of US legislators shall now and forever more be strictly in US dollars.

    Besides, everybody who’s anybody has been to Israel at least twice: once to get set up for blackmail, the second time to be shown how the blackmail is going to destroy his marriage, his career, his kid’s future.

    Isn’t it time to see another part of the world?

    Iran in the (Washington) winter is terrific.

    Petersburg in the summer is beautiful.

    Italy is great off-season — can’t the Italians scrape up some funding to buy a few representatives or senators? Toss in a few days in a quaint village house in the Romagna and you might be able to get one cheap.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. Stan says:

    Jews and Arabs ought to take their quarrels to the Levant and leave Americans alone.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Druid
    your ifnorance is astounding. We took our troubles and Zionist madmen to to the Levant to the detriment of the Arabs
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. @Philip Giraldi
    Thanks Grate, but I think you are a bit confused. I am not writing term papers. I am limited to something like 1700 words in which I have to make an argument that is reasonably sound, which means I cannot explain every point that I make. I do include links to issues that I believe might be contested but I cannot provide a precis of the Mearsheimer and Walt book every time I refer to the pernicious influence of the Israel Lobby. I assume the reader will have sufficient background to understand what I am referring to, but apparently that is not true in your case. Yes, the 47 Senators who signed the Cotton letter are "Israeli tools" as you put it and I would recommend that you do a little Googling on the issue to find the many observers from all across the political spectrum who are saying the same thing. And yes I am suspicious of any American politician who supports Israel uncritically to the detriment of our own national interests. And yes Bill/Hillary are totally corrupted money whores who will take cash from anyone but I do not see Saudi Arabia or Qatar interfering in our political process like Israel does. Oh by the way you don't have to read my stuff if you don't like the way I write or "reason."

    Dear Mr. Giraldi,

    It’s astonishing, in light of Kuwait and the two and a half wars for oil in the middle east, and the 9-11 attacks, that you cannot see any Saudi interfering in our political process. Since you’re clearly an avid follower of conspiracy theories, you cannot be unaware of the connection between the House of Saud and the copious funding of the 9-11 attacks.

    Of course, you’d expect a Zionist to say this, right?

    But face facts, my fellow patriot. Where’d almost all those dudes with box cutters hail from? And if an attack on the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, and a failed attack on the White House don’t constitute “interfering” in our political process, what would it take to qualify? Maybe an attempt to kill off domestic oil production?

    I’m all for free markets, mind you. And if the Saudis want to give oil away for free, that’s their look-out. But it’s a mighty blind eye that can’t see any of this as meddling in America’s domestic politics.

    Which all goes back the issue I posed previously: What’s up with the Israel thing? How’d they get to be the only turd in your punch bowl?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Where’d almost all those dudes with box cutters hail from? And if an attack on the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, and a failed attack on the White House don’t constitute “interfering” in our political process, what would it take to qualify?
     
    Dude, if you reread the 9/11 Commission Report, you would know that the mastermind of these attacks, KSM, who was water boarded 183 times to confess he had conspired with Saddam in planning the attacks, gave the following explanation for attacking the U.S.:

    "By his own account, KSM's animus toward the United States stemmed not from his experiences there as a student, but rather from his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel."
     
    So, as M&W demonstrated in The Israel Lobby, they're over here, because we are over there!
    , @SolontoCroesus

    Where’d almost all those dudes with box cutters hail from? And if an attack on the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, and a failed attack on the White House don’t constitute “interfering” in our political process, what would it take to qualify?
     
    Benjamin Wittes of Saban Center at Brookings Institute was asked a similar question.

    His answer was stunning.

    http://www.unz.com/article/aipac-discovers-47-useful-idiots/#comment-899173

    Why would someone whose paycheck, as well as, apparently, his wife's paycheck, derives from an organization established to support Israel's interests, provide cover for Saudi Arabia?

    If you truly believe, Grate Deign, that Saudi Arabia is the biggest baddest threat to the world and the USA, why does Benjamin Netanyahu spend so much time demanding that Americans become convinced that Iran is the greatest threat to world peace? Those box cutters were not stamped "Made in Iran" and the passports miraculously found in the dust & debris of the three (count 'em, three towers, two planes) towers were not printed in Farsi.

    Five years ago Mitchell Bard, another person whose paycheck derives from promoting Israel's interests while enjoying the protections of American taxpayers, told a Jewish audience in California that the Arab lobby had overwhelming power over the US, and posed a major threat to the region and to the US.

    Bard's comments relegated the "threat" of Iran to de minimus status.

    What has changed?

    These days, Israelis are embracing KSA.

    Is a plan forming whereby Israel and KSA will coalesce to dominate the region? Is Israel playing on KSA's alleged enmity with Iran to exacerbate divisions between Iran and KSA (silly question).

    Is Israel so concerned that it might actually be called to fulfill the promise made in 1995 to the Arab states, including KSA, Egypt, as well as Iran, that the region be made a nuclear-free zone, meaning that the only nuclear-weaponized state in the region, Israel, would be required to give up its weapons, its Third Temple, and sign the NPT?

    KSA is, one should acknowledge, sharply divided between the monarchy and the so-called Arab Street. It has been the Jewish habit through much of its history to associate with the elites, the "monarchy" rather than the common people. KSA is growing ever more fearful of losing control over its monarchical privileges, and Israel's leaders recognize that Israel's situation was and is better when surrounding states are either ruled by tyrants or in chaos. Rule that genuinely answers to the will of the people in Arab states has not been found to be Israel's best situation.

    So it seems to me that Ben Wittes's straight-forward response to the question, "Why not attack Saudi Arabia" rests on the three-pillared foundation that all US policy in the region rests upon:

    1. US will not attack Saudi Arabia because it is not good for Israel.

    2. US will not call Saudi Arabia to account because the US petrodollar depends on the deal Kissinger brokered with KSA: in exchange for KSA selling oil in petrodollars, US will ensure the "security" of the kingdom (not necessarily the people) of Saudi Arabia. This deal is essential to maintaining US dollar hegemony worldwide. It is eroding, but will persist until China's military becomes strong enough to challenge US military. see What the BRICS plus Germany are really up to?

    3. KSA is richer than god and will buy all the weaponry USA can sell to it. In this role, KSA replaces the Shah of Iran who was the dream customer to many, many US weapons merchants during his reign.


    ---

    Why does everybody pick on Israel?

    KSA does not have a dominating influence over US media. Israel firsters use that power that they have over US media (and entertainment, and education) to distort American values; disinform Americans; demonize others: I'm not aware of Saudi Arabian media outlets that promote anti-Jewish memes, but there are plenty of Jewish media outlets and persons who actively promote anti-Muslim themes and demand that US policy makers and elected persons speak in terms of "Islamic terror."

    Finally, there's an entire industry of holocaust 'museums' that form a belt across the USA as well as throughout Europe. I'm not aware of similar museums to lies and disinformation that create of KSA a perpetual and incontestably innocent victim.

    Nobody likes a liar. The American people (among others) have been played by the holocaust industry and its beneficiaries. In a talk in Washington several years ago Jeremy ben Ami, founder of J-Street, was asked by the teacher of his children, who was in the audience, "What shall we teach our children [about Palestine, etc.]? Ben Ami responded, "We must tell them the truth. If they find out later that they have been lied to, there will be resentment."

    The ball of string that is the holocaust narrative is coming unwound at an accelerating pace. Hard to see how this can end well. Saudi Arabia does not have quite the same problem.

    , @schmenz
    "What’s up with the Israel thing? How’d they get to be the only turd in your punch bowl?"

    By observation, a modicum of logic and simple common sense.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Anonymous says: • Website • Disclaimer
    @The Grate Deign
    Dear Mr. Giraldi,

    It's astonishing, in light of Kuwait and the two and a half wars for oil in the middle east, and the 9-11 attacks, that you cannot see any Saudi interfering in our political process. Since you're clearly an avid follower of conspiracy theories, you cannot be unaware of the connection between the House of Saud and the copious funding of the 9-11 attacks.

    Of course, you'd expect a Zionist to say this, right?

    But face facts, my fellow patriot. Where'd almost all those dudes with box cutters hail from? And if an attack on the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, and a failed attack on the White House don't constitute "interfering" in our political process, what would it take to qualify? Maybe an attempt to kill off domestic oil production?

    I'm all for free markets, mind you. And if the Saudis want to give oil away for free, that's their look-out. But it's a mighty blind eye that can't see any of this as meddling in America's domestic politics.

    Which all goes back the issue I posed previously: What's up with the Israel thing? How'd they get to be the only turd in your punch bowl?

    Where’d almost all those dudes with box cutters hail from? And if an attack on the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, and a failed attack on the White House don’t constitute “interfering” in our political process, what would it take to qualify?

    Dude, if you reread the 9/11 Commission Report, you would know that the mastermind of these attacks, KSM, who was water boarded 183 times to confess he had conspired with Saddam in planning the attacks, gave the following explanation for attacking the U.S.:

    “By his own account, KSM’s animus toward the United States stemmed not from his experiences there as a student, but rather from his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel.”

    So, as M&W demonstrated in The Israel Lobby, they’re over here, because we are over there!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Washington DC really is a really is a stinkingly vile Necropolis nowadays with the rotting dead likes of Insane McCaine shuffling around spewing their poison.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Orville H. Larson
    Washington, District of Corruption is hopelessly lawless and warmongering. If and when Vlad Putin vectors an ICBM onto D.C. . . . hey, I understand. . . .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. geokat62 says:

    Just want to clarify that I am responsible for posting comment #30, not Anonymous.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. @The Grate Deign
    Dear Mr. Giraldi,

    It's astonishing, in light of Kuwait and the two and a half wars for oil in the middle east, and the 9-11 attacks, that you cannot see any Saudi interfering in our political process. Since you're clearly an avid follower of conspiracy theories, you cannot be unaware of the connection between the House of Saud and the copious funding of the 9-11 attacks.

    Of course, you'd expect a Zionist to say this, right?

    But face facts, my fellow patriot. Where'd almost all those dudes with box cutters hail from? And if an attack on the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, and a failed attack on the White House don't constitute "interfering" in our political process, what would it take to qualify? Maybe an attempt to kill off domestic oil production?

    I'm all for free markets, mind you. And if the Saudis want to give oil away for free, that's their look-out. But it's a mighty blind eye that can't see any of this as meddling in America's domestic politics.

    Which all goes back the issue I posed previously: What's up with the Israel thing? How'd they get to be the only turd in your punch bowl?

    Where’d almost all those dudes with box cutters hail from? And if an attack on the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, and a failed attack on the White House don’t constitute “interfering” in our political process, what would it take to qualify?

    Benjamin Wittes of Saban Center at Brookings Institute was asked a similar question.

    His answer was stunning.

    http://www.unz.com/article/aipac-discovers-47-useful-idiots/#comment-899173

    Why would someone whose paycheck, as well as, apparently, his wife’s paycheck, derives from an organization established to support Israel’s interests, provide cover for Saudi Arabia?

    If you truly believe, Grate Deign, that Saudi Arabia is the biggest baddest threat to the world and the USA, why does Benjamin Netanyahu spend so much time demanding that Americans become convinced that Iran is the greatest threat to world peace? Those box cutters were not stamped “Made in Iran” and the passports miraculously found in the dust & debris of the three (count ‘em, three towers, two planes) towers were not printed in Farsi.

    Five years ago Mitchell Bard, another person whose paycheck derives from promoting Israel’s interests while enjoying the protections of American taxpayers, told a Jewish audience in California that the Arab lobby had overwhelming power over the US, and posed a major threat to the region and to the US.

    Bard’s comments relegated the “threat” of Iran to de minimus status.

    What has changed?

    These days, Israelis are embracing KSA.

    Is a plan forming whereby Israel and KSA will coalesce to dominate the region? Is Israel playing on KSA’s alleged enmity with Iran to exacerbate divisions between Iran and KSA (silly question).

    Is Israel so concerned that it might actually be called to fulfill the promise made in 1995 to the Arab states, including KSA, Egypt, as well as Iran, that the region be made a nuclear-free zone, meaning that the only nuclear-weaponized state in the region, Israel, would be required to give up its weapons, its Third Temple, and sign the NPT?

    KSA is, one should acknowledge, sharply divided between the monarchy and the so-called Arab Street. It has been the Jewish habit through much of its history to associate with the elites, the “monarchy” rather than the common people. KSA is growing ever more fearful of losing control over its monarchical privileges, and Israel’s leaders recognize that Israel’s situation was and is better when surrounding states are either ruled by tyrants or in chaos. Rule that genuinely answers to the will of the people in Arab states has not been found to be Israel’s best situation.

    So it seems to me that Ben Wittes’s straight-forward response to the question, “Why not attack Saudi Arabia” rests on the three-pillared foundation that all US policy in the region rests upon:

    1. US will not attack Saudi Arabia because it is not good for Israel.

    2. US will not call Saudi Arabia to account because the US petrodollar depends on the deal Kissinger brokered with KSA: in exchange for KSA selling oil in petrodollars, US will ensure the “security” of the kingdom (not necessarily the people) of Saudi Arabia. This deal is essential to maintaining US dollar hegemony worldwide. It is eroding, but will persist until China’s military becomes strong enough to challenge US military. see What the BRICS plus Germany are really up to?

    3. KSA is richer than god and will buy all the weaponry USA can sell to it. In this role, KSA replaces the Shah of Iran who was the dream customer to many, many US weapons merchants during his reign.

    Why does everybody pick on Israel?

    KSA does not have a dominating influence over US media. Israel firsters use that power that they have over US media (and entertainment, and education) to distort American values; disinform Americans; demonize others: I’m not aware of Saudi Arabian media outlets that promote anti-Jewish memes, but there are plenty of Jewish media outlets and persons who actively promote anti-Muslim themes and demand that US policy makers and elected persons speak in terms of “Islamic terror.”

    Finally, there’s an entire industry of holocaust ‘museums’ that form a belt across the USA as well as throughout Europe. I’m not aware of similar museums to lies and disinformation that create of KSA a perpetual and incontestably innocent victim.

    Nobody likes a liar. The American people (among others) have been played by the holocaust industry and its beneficiaries. In a talk in Washington several years ago Jeremy ben Ami, founder of J-Street, was asked by the teacher of his children, who was in the audience, “What shall we teach our children [about Palestine, etc.]? Ben Ami responded, “We must tell them the truth. If they find out later that they have been lied to, there will be resentment.”

    The ball of string that is the holocaust narrative is coming unwound at an accelerating pace. Hard to see how this can end well. Saudi Arabia does not have quite the same problem.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Dear Solon,

    To pull out the core of your treatise, I do not believe Saudi Arabia is the biggest or the baddest threat. I just think they’re no less a threat to America than you think Israel to be.

    Read More
    • Replies: @solontoCroesus
    You and I and the facts of the situation differ.

    1. Israel has unmonitored nuclear weapons. KSA does not.

    2. KSA does not censor US speech & publishing and media; Israel advocates do.

    3. KSA is not the object of special protections afforded by US State Department; Israel and Jews are.

    4. KSA does not demand and receive billions of US tax dollars to support its oppression of Palestinians; Israel does.

    5. While the leaders of other Arab states have, like Benjamin Netanyahu, addressed the US Congress, to the best of my knowledge none has urged the Congress, in no uncertain terms, to wage war on Iraq. Benjamin Netanyahu did, on Sept. 12, 2002 and again on Mar 3, 2015. ( In fact, in the run-up to the Persian Gulf War 1990, Arab leaders pleaded with the G H W Bush administration to allow them to settle the conflict by their own means. USA refused. Dennis Ross was a key advisor to that decision.)

    6. KSA did not (wantonly) bomb Osirak in Iraq, setting in motion a state of fear that induced Saddam Hussein to ramp up an alleged nuclear weapons project that was, in fact, a bluff to frighten Iran; Israel did. The consequences of that act of macho recklessness led to the destruction of a country and generations of death, destruction, displacement and heartache for Iraq's 50 million people.

    7. KSA deals with its restive population by giving them goodies -- buying them off. It can afford to do so. Israel deals with Palestinians by killing them -- "mowing the lawn;" denying them educational opportunities -- see, for example, The dismal lives of students locked in Israeli prison.

    8. KSA occupies its own land and sustains and promotes its own culture. Israel steals other people's lands and culture.

    , @Jake 'the snake' Roberts

    I do not believe Saudi Arabia is the biggest or the baddest threat. I just think they’re no less a threat to America than you think Israel to be.
     
    Carefully written. Meaning you take no issue at all with Israeli influence. You are merely pointing out that you consider KSA to be a big a threat to America as the commenter that you were addressing believes Israel to be.

    I see KSA as a problem but I think that you are wrong that they represent a serious threat to the USA. The US government has been using terrorists to destabilize countries for decades, and even supported jihadists like Al Qaeda in certain contexts, even after 9/11. Can't blame the Saudis for providing material support to terrorist movements when the USA does the same thing.

    You are also overlooking the very similar interests of KSA and Israel. KSA and Israel are very close these days.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Realist says:
    @Drizzay
    Sorry was aimed @ The Grate Deign. First time commenting here and hit the reply button to the wrong person

    My most sincere apology.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @The Grate Deign
    Dear Solon,

    To pull out the core of your treatise, I do not believe Saudi Arabia is the biggest or the baddest threat. I just think they're no less a threat to America than you think Israel to be.

    You and I and the facts of the situation differ.

    1. Israel has unmonitored nuclear weapons. KSA does not.

    2. KSA does not censor US speech & publishing and media; Israel advocates do.

    3. KSA is not the object of special protections afforded by US State Department; Israel and Jews are.

    4. KSA does not demand and receive billions of US tax dollars to support its oppression of Palestinians; Israel does.

    5. While the leaders of other Arab states have, like Benjamin Netanyahu, addressed the US Congress, to the best of my knowledge none has urged the Congress, in no uncertain terms, to wage war on Iraq. Benjamin Netanyahu did, on Sept. 12, 2002 and again on Mar 3, 2015. ( In fact, in the run-up to the Persian Gulf War 1990, Arab leaders pleaded with the G H W Bush administration to allow them to settle the conflict by their own means. USA refused. Dennis Ross was a key advisor to that decision.)

    6. KSA did not (wantonly) bomb Osirak in Iraq, setting in motion a state of fear that induced Saddam Hussein to ramp up an alleged nuclear weapons project that was, in fact, a bluff to frighten Iran; Israel did. The consequences of that act of macho recklessness led to the destruction of a country and generations of death, destruction, displacement and heartache for Iraq’s 50 million people.

    7. KSA deals with its restive population by giving them goodies — buying them off. It can afford to do so. Israel deals with Palestinians by killing them — “mowing the lawn;” denying them educational opportunities — see, for example, The dismal lives of students locked in Israeli prison.

    8. KSA occupies its own land and sustains and promotes its own culture. Israel steals other people’s lands and culture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Grate Deign
    Dear Solon,

    I believe you are quite mistaken about the support we provide to Saudi Arabia. It is not direct cash subsidies. But it is greater by far than what has been provided to Israel. The United States intervened in Saddam Hussein's war on Kuwait so it would not spread to their desert kingdom. The amount spent by Americans keeping their oil-igarchy alive dwarfs anything ever given to Israel.

    All this is simply to say that you anti-Zionists types have such a case of target fixation for Israel that you're blind to much bigger threats.

    Fact is, the country that is most harmfully influential in America is Mexico. And no, I don't have anything against Mexicans any more than I have against Jews or Arabs. I'm just determined not to fall into this ludicrous and self-defeating trap of blaming Jews for every pothole in the highway. If Israel is guilty of every offense you claim and a thousand more besides, they would not be in the same class of damage as what's happening with millions of invaders stealing over the southern border.

    Hopefully you will not say that is all a vast Jewish plot, too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @The Grate Deign
    Dear Solon,

    To pull out the core of your treatise, I do not believe Saudi Arabia is the biggest or the baddest threat. I just think they're no less a threat to America than you think Israel to be.

    I do not believe Saudi Arabia is the biggest or the baddest threat. I just think they’re no less a threat to America than you think Israel to be.

    Carefully written. Meaning you take no issue at all with Israeli influence. You are merely pointing out that you consider KSA to be a big a threat to America as the commenter that you were addressing believes Israel to be.

    I see KSA as a problem but I think that you are wrong that they represent a serious threat to the USA. The US government has been using terrorists to destabilize countries for decades, and even supported jihadists like Al Qaeda in certain contexts, even after 9/11. Can’t blame the Saudis for providing material support to terrorist movements when the USA does the same thing.

    You are also overlooking the very similar interests of KSA and Israel. KSA and Israel are very close these days.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Grate Deign
    Dear Snake,

    You are quite right that Israel and Saudi Arabia are currently experiencing a confluence of interests. Both see Iran as an existential threat.

    There are those who believe the Iranians, for all their bellicose words, would not really attempt to nuke Israel or Riyadh. The people who actually live in Israel or Riyadh, however, are unwilling to gamble their lives on the Iranians not being suicidal fanatics. The memories of the Iran/Iraq war are still too fresh for people who live in the region to doubt what the Iranians are capable of doing.

    Personally, I do not believe either Israel or Saudi Arabia is a threat to the United States. They both do what Americans also do, which is to use every tool at their disposal to advance the interests of the power brokers in their countries. Why anyone would expect either country to stop doing this is completely opaque to me. But at least in Israel and Saudi Arabia, their power brokers are in favor of their own nations. It is almost impossible to make that same statement about our president, the Congress, or many of the denizens of the corporate boardrooms.

    To return to the subject of Israel and the KSA, even putting the worst possible construction on both nations -- that Israel connives for its self-interest with bribery and subterfuge while Saudi Arabia dispatches madmen to the WTC -- it's still puzzling why people would wish to vilify the connivers and excuse the killers.

    But they do.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Realist says:
    @The Grate Deign
    Dear Realist,

    I fear you are correct. But what would you propose in its place? Churchill's dictum may apply here, that democracy is the worst form of government except for all others.

    Until voters learn the counsel of Moses and elect men who "hate covetousness," we'll have to contend with bribery in some form.

    But if I must choose between puppet masters, I'd rather they were Israeli than Saudi.

    “Until voters learn the counsel of Moses and elect men who “hate covetousness,” we’ll have to contend with bribery in some form.”

    Yes. Integrity is a human quality at least as important as intelligence.

    I suggest Meritocracy as one form of government better than Democracy.

    You may find the writings of Hans-Hermann Hoppe interesting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Realist says:
    @SolontoCroesus
    Jennifer Rubin writes:

    In an extraordinary report that has not yet been fully digested, the Wall Street Journal tells us that the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation has received millions from foreign governments including Qatar, a prominent backer of Hamas
     
    Jennifer Rubin did not write (but someone else did, some Phil Giraldi-type, no doubt, who couldn't pass a Freshman Comp class):

    Haim Saban Says He’ll Contribute ‘As Much As Needed’ to a Hillary Clinton Campaign

    I have no idea why you are writing this to me….do you?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Marissa says:

    I’m not aware of Saudi Arabian media outlets that promote anti-Jewish memes, but there are plenty of Jewish media outlets and persons who actively promote anti-Muslim themes and demand that US policy makers and elected persons speak in terms of “Islamic terror.”

    Who cares? I’m happy to see the politically correct “religion of peace” nonsense go by the wayside. Europeans and their descendants are finally waking up to at least one of their two historical mortal enemies. What I don’t like about the Jews controlling Hollywood is how much they vilify and mock Christianity. The phrase “Islamic terror” goes together like bread and butter and my Christian European ancestors knew it very well. If Jews really didn’t like Islamic terror, they’d be fighting ISIS (or at least get their American lapdogs to do it). If they didn’t like Islamic terror, they’d be producing movies where the bad guy is a Muslim instead of a straight, white, male Christian (see Chappie and Kingsman for the most recent examples). If they didn’t like Islamic terror, they wouldn’t have had to reckon with the Reconquista.

    Read More
    • Replies: @solontoCroesus
    Marissa,

    Sr. Luke used to say, "Take it to its logical conclusion."

    How did it come about that Christian Europe is experiencing demographic decline?

    A: Charles Lindbergh was right: FDR, Churchill, and Jews wanted war in Germany. Germans did not want war, not with USA and not with Britain. The Germans, who perceived Russian & Polish & Bolshevik Jews as what Machiavelli would have referred to as an invading force that was destroying the culture of Florence/Germany, acted to remove that invader. They did so nonviolently and with the acquiescence and cooperation of zionists and Jews in Germany.
    But certain Jews (and the other two groups) demanded and needed war; their intention, well before Sept 1939, was to destroy Germany. And so they did. A nation as defeated as was Germany is at a demographic disadvantage.

    B. Muslims were 'defeated' in World War I, most pointedly at Versailles, where Wilson betrayed his promise of self-determination to the states of the former Ottoman empire. Disaffected Muslims began filling the vacuum in Europe's demography.

    C. As Israel grew in arrogance; as its zionist aims became more clearly revealed; and as its military strength appeared to the US to be useful, the Middle East became increasingly unstable. More Muslims fled their homes for the relative safety of Europe.

    D. The same people who created the vacuum in Europe also created the circumstances that caused targeted people to flee to Europe to fill that vacuum.

    E. Finally, does anyone actually think that persons who migrate from their ancient homelands do so willingly or gladly? Does anyone ever think about the pain of leaving a land, home, family, surroundings that have been your life, your matrix for generations, perhaps as far back as your family's memory can reach?

    PS. I join you in distress that Hollywood and numerous other sources attack and seek to destroy Roman Catholicism.

    , @annamaria
    Dear Marissa, please take genetic test to enlighten yourself on your Christian European ancestry.
    , @Pshr
    Marissa,

    Never-mind about Islam being the religion of peace or not. Is Christianity a religion of peace? Judaism? Hinduism? "Oriental-isms"? Open your eyes and see what these people have done or doing.

    The basic truth is, in this day and age, the world is mainly being terrorised by 'christian terror' and 'jewish terror' groups. The muslims are simply responding feebly, in a self defeating manner. How much of these responses are orchestrated by the 'good christian\jewish guys', who knows?

    The christian and jewish terror groups, along with their mighty armies, also happen to be equipped with the best propaganda tools. So... the muslims are currently screwed in every way. We wait for divine intervention.

    PS: It is amazing how a people who profess to following a pure spirit such as Christ, can play such havoc on other human beings. You really think your 'lord' Jesus Christ will condone these actions, and your superiority complexes? What kind of 'lord' is that???

    You deluded fools.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @Marissa
    I’m not aware of Saudi Arabian media outlets that promote anti-Jewish memes, but there are plenty of Jewish media outlets and persons who actively promote anti-Muslim themes and demand that US policy makers and elected persons speak in terms of “Islamic terror.”

    Who cares? I'm happy to see the politically correct "religion of peace" nonsense go by the wayside. Europeans and their descendants are finally waking up to at least one of their two historical mortal enemies. What I don't like about the Jews controlling Hollywood is how much they vilify and mock Christianity. The phrase "Islamic terror" goes together like bread and butter and my Christian European ancestors knew it very well. If Jews really didn't like Islamic terror, they'd be fighting ISIS (or at least get their American lapdogs to do it). If they didn't like Islamic terror, they'd be producing movies where the bad guy is a Muslim instead of a straight, white, male Christian (see Chappie and Kingsman for the most recent examples). If they didn't like Islamic terror, they wouldn't have had to reckon with the Reconquista.

    Marissa,

    Sr. Luke used to say, “Take it to its logical conclusion.”

    How did it come about that Christian Europe is experiencing demographic decline?

    A: Charles Lindbergh was right: FDR, Churchill, and Jews wanted war in Germany. Germans did not want war, not with USA and not with Britain. The Germans, who perceived Russian & Polish & Bolshevik Jews as what Machiavelli would have referred to as an invading force that was destroying the culture of Florence/Germany, acted to remove that invader. They did so nonviolently and with the acquiescence and cooperation of zionists and Jews in Germany.
    But certain Jews (and the other two groups) demanded and needed war; their intention, well before Sept 1939, was to destroy Germany. And so they did. A nation as defeated as was Germany is at a demographic disadvantage.

    B. Muslims were ‘defeated’ in World War I, most pointedly at Versailles, where Wilson betrayed his promise of self-determination to the states of the former Ottoman empire. Disaffected Muslims began filling the vacuum in Europe’s demography.

    C. As Israel grew in arrogance; as its zionist aims became more clearly revealed; and as its military strength appeared to the US to be useful, the Middle East became increasingly unstable. More Muslims fled their homes for the relative safety of Europe.

    D. The same people who created the vacuum in Europe also created the circumstances that caused targeted people to flee to Europe to fill that vacuum.

    E. Finally, does anyone actually think that persons who migrate from their ancient homelands do so willingly or gladly? Does anyone ever think about the pain of leaving a land, home, family, surroundings that have been your life, your matrix for generations, perhaps as far back as your family’s memory can reach?

    PS. I join you in distress that Hollywood and numerous other sources attack and seek to destroy Roman Catholicism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @solontoCroesus
    You and I and the facts of the situation differ.

    1. Israel has unmonitored nuclear weapons. KSA does not.

    2. KSA does not censor US speech & publishing and media; Israel advocates do.

    3. KSA is not the object of special protections afforded by US State Department; Israel and Jews are.

    4. KSA does not demand and receive billions of US tax dollars to support its oppression of Palestinians; Israel does.

    5. While the leaders of other Arab states have, like Benjamin Netanyahu, addressed the US Congress, to the best of my knowledge none has urged the Congress, in no uncertain terms, to wage war on Iraq. Benjamin Netanyahu did, on Sept. 12, 2002 and again on Mar 3, 2015. ( In fact, in the run-up to the Persian Gulf War 1990, Arab leaders pleaded with the G H W Bush administration to allow them to settle the conflict by their own means. USA refused. Dennis Ross was a key advisor to that decision.)

    6. KSA did not (wantonly) bomb Osirak in Iraq, setting in motion a state of fear that induced Saddam Hussein to ramp up an alleged nuclear weapons project that was, in fact, a bluff to frighten Iran; Israel did. The consequences of that act of macho recklessness led to the destruction of a country and generations of death, destruction, displacement and heartache for Iraq's 50 million people.

    7. KSA deals with its restive population by giving them goodies -- buying them off. It can afford to do so. Israel deals with Palestinians by killing them -- "mowing the lawn;" denying them educational opportunities -- see, for example, The dismal lives of students locked in Israeli prison.

    8. KSA occupies its own land and sustains and promotes its own culture. Israel steals other people's lands and culture.

    Dear Solon,

    I believe you are quite mistaken about the support we provide to Saudi Arabia. It is not direct cash subsidies. But it is greater by far than what has been provided to Israel. The United States intervened in Saddam Hussein’s war on Kuwait so it would not spread to their desert kingdom. The amount spent by Americans keeping their oil-igarchy alive dwarfs anything ever given to Israel.

    All this is simply to say that you anti-Zionists types have such a case of target fixation for Israel that you’re blind to much bigger threats.

    Fact is, the country that is most harmfully influential in America is Mexico. And no, I don’t have anything against Mexicans any more than I have against Jews or Arabs. I’m just determined not to fall into this ludicrous and self-defeating trap of blaming Jews for every pothole in the highway. If Israel is guilty of every offense you claim and a thousand more besides, they would not be in the same class of damage as what’s happening with millions of invaders stealing over the southern border.

    Hopefully you will not say that is all a vast Jewish plot, too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    Dear Grate Deign,

    re


    "The United States intervened in Saddam Hussein’s war on Kuwait so it would not spread to their desert kingdom."
     
    No, it did not. That argument served the same purpose as babies tossed from incubators.

    In a talk at Texas A&M Jeff Engels discussed the results of his research into G H W Bush's archives on the decision-making process that led to US invasion of Iraq in 1990-91. Engel said:


    "We should be frank about what moved [Bush's security team] to act. It was NOT the argument that Kuwaiti independence mattered much at all. Neither was it that Hussein’s particular brand of evil and tyranny required an American response. Nor was Bush persuaded that Iraq’s aggression carried immediate concerns [threats to oil supply or Saudi Arabia], or that Iraq might someday turn its oil wealth into dangerous weapons of mass destruction.
    Each of these reasons, in time, influenced Bush’s thoughts, his actions and his statements in the months to come.
    None, however, not freedom, evil, human rights, democracy or WMDs affected thinking in those first fateful days of August. Bush was instead, and this is important, Bush was instead persuaded by the growing realization that he stood at a pivot moment in the course of history. . . .

    [Bush's advisors told him], Quote: 'This is the first test of a post-war system [the Berlin wall having fallen the year earlier], as a bipolar world is relaxed it permits this, perhaps giving more flexibility [i.e. US is unconstrained by USSR]. . .. If Saddam Hussein succeeds others may try the same thing [i.e. exercise autonomy & sovereignty and resist US hegemony] and it would be a bad lesson." END QUOTE.

    This argument persuaded Bush, who endorsed the fateful decision from which Washington’ subsequent entanglements in the Middle East derived.
    . . .
    Why did Bush go against decades of American policy, injecting force into a region like was never done before?. . .
    I argue Bush took the dramatic step into the Gulf Crisis because he saw it as a bridge to a better world . . . a New World Order [with US in charge]. "
     

    ---

    G D wrote:


    The amount spent by Americans keeping their oil-igarchy alive dwarfs anything ever given to Israel.
     
    This statement demands substantiation. The assertion as it stands is risible.

    Fact is, the country that is most harmfully influential in America is Mexico. . . .. I’m just determined not to fall into this ludicrous and self-defeating trap of blaming Jews for every pothole in the highway. If Israel is guilty of every offense you claim and a thousand more besides, they would not be in the same class of damage as what’s happening with millions of invaders stealing over the southern border.
     
    What an amusingly self-defeating argument.

    Mexican "invaders" who are "stealing over the southern border" are doing precisely what zionists claim they are doing: reclaiming their ancestral land! Mexicans are zionists!! One difference is that the Mexican claim is more immediate and more provable in fact rather than mythology.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @Jake 'the snake' Roberts

    I do not believe Saudi Arabia is the biggest or the baddest threat. I just think they’re no less a threat to America than you think Israel to be.
     
    Carefully written. Meaning you take no issue at all with Israeli influence. You are merely pointing out that you consider KSA to be a big a threat to America as the commenter that you were addressing believes Israel to be.

    I see KSA as a problem but I think that you are wrong that they represent a serious threat to the USA. The US government has been using terrorists to destabilize countries for decades, and even supported jihadists like Al Qaeda in certain contexts, even after 9/11. Can't blame the Saudis for providing material support to terrorist movements when the USA does the same thing.

    You are also overlooking the very similar interests of KSA and Israel. KSA and Israel are very close these days.

    Dear Snake,

    You are quite right that Israel and Saudi Arabia are currently experiencing a confluence of interests. Both see Iran as an existential threat.

    There are those who believe the Iranians, for all their bellicose words, would not really attempt to nuke Israel or Riyadh. The people who actually live in Israel or Riyadh, however, are unwilling to gamble their lives on the Iranians not being suicidal fanatics. The memories of the Iran/Iraq war are still too fresh for people who live in the region to doubt what the Iranians are capable of doing.

    Personally, I do not believe either Israel or Saudi Arabia is a threat to the United States. They both do what Americans also do, which is to use every tool at their disposal to advance the interests of the power brokers in their countries. Why anyone would expect either country to stop doing this is completely opaque to me. But at least in Israel and Saudi Arabia, their power brokers are in favor of their own nations. It is almost impossible to make that same statement about our president, the Congress, or many of the denizens of the corporate boardrooms.

    To return to the subject of Israel and the KSA, even putting the worst possible construction on both nations — that Israel connives for its self-interest with bribery and subterfuge while Saudi Arabia dispatches madmen to the WTC — it’s still puzzling why people would wish to vilify the connivers and excuse the killers.

    But they do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. annamaria says:
    @Marissa
    I’m not aware of Saudi Arabian media outlets that promote anti-Jewish memes, but there are plenty of Jewish media outlets and persons who actively promote anti-Muslim themes and demand that US policy makers and elected persons speak in terms of “Islamic terror.”

    Who cares? I'm happy to see the politically correct "religion of peace" nonsense go by the wayside. Europeans and their descendants are finally waking up to at least one of their two historical mortal enemies. What I don't like about the Jews controlling Hollywood is how much they vilify and mock Christianity. The phrase "Islamic terror" goes together like bread and butter and my Christian European ancestors knew it very well. If Jews really didn't like Islamic terror, they'd be fighting ISIS (or at least get their American lapdogs to do it). If they didn't like Islamic terror, they'd be producing movies where the bad guy is a Muslim instead of a straight, white, male Christian (see Chappie and Kingsman for the most recent examples). If they didn't like Islamic terror, they wouldn't have had to reckon with the Reconquista.

    Dear Marissa, please take genetic test to enlighten yourself on your Christian European ancestry.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. @The Grate Deign
    Dear Solon,

    I believe you are quite mistaken about the support we provide to Saudi Arabia. It is not direct cash subsidies. But it is greater by far than what has been provided to Israel. The United States intervened in Saddam Hussein's war on Kuwait so it would not spread to their desert kingdom. The amount spent by Americans keeping their oil-igarchy alive dwarfs anything ever given to Israel.

    All this is simply to say that you anti-Zionists types have such a case of target fixation for Israel that you're blind to much bigger threats.

    Fact is, the country that is most harmfully influential in America is Mexico. And no, I don't have anything against Mexicans any more than I have against Jews or Arabs. I'm just determined not to fall into this ludicrous and self-defeating trap of blaming Jews for every pothole in the highway. If Israel is guilty of every offense you claim and a thousand more besides, they would not be in the same class of damage as what's happening with millions of invaders stealing over the southern border.

    Hopefully you will not say that is all a vast Jewish plot, too.

    Dear Grate Deign,

    re

    “The United States intervened in Saddam Hussein’s war on Kuwait so it would not spread to their desert kingdom.”

    No, it did not. That argument served the same purpose as babies tossed from incubators.

    In a talk at Texas A&M Jeff Engels discussed the results of his research into G H W Bush’s archives on the decision-making process that led to US invasion of Iraq in 1990-91. Engel said:

    “We should be frank about what moved [Bush's security team] to act. It was NOT the argument that Kuwaiti independence mattered much at all. Neither was it that Hussein’s particular brand of evil and tyranny required an American response. Nor was Bush persuaded that Iraq’s aggression carried immediate concerns [threats to oil supply or Saudi Arabia], or that Iraq might someday turn its oil wealth into dangerous weapons of mass destruction.
    Each of these reasons, in time, influenced Bush’s thoughts, his actions and his statements in the months to come.
    None, however, not freedom, evil, human rights, democracy or WMDs affected thinking in those first fateful days of August. Bush was instead, and this is important, Bush was instead persuaded by the growing realization that he stood at a pivot moment in the course of history. . . .

    [Bush's advisors told him], Quote: ‘This is the first test of a post-war system [the Berlin wall having fallen the year earlier], as a bipolar world is relaxed it permits this, perhaps giving more flexibility [i.e. US is unconstrained by USSR]. . .. If Saddam Hussein succeeds others may try the same thing [i.e. exercise autonomy & sovereignty and resist US hegemony] and it would be a bad lesson.” END QUOTE.

    This argument persuaded Bush, who endorsed the fateful decision from which Washington’ subsequent entanglements in the Middle East derived.
    . . .
    Why did Bush go against decades of American policy, injecting force into a region like was never done before?. . .
    I argue Bush took the dramatic step into the Gulf Crisis because he saw it as a bridge to a better world . . . a New World Order [with US in charge]. “

    G D wrote:

    The amount spent by Americans keeping their oil-igarchy alive dwarfs anything ever given to Israel.

    This statement demands substantiation. The assertion as it stands is risible.

    Fact is, the country that is most harmfully influential in America is Mexico. . . .. I’m just determined not to fall into this ludicrous and self-defeating trap of blaming Jews for every pothole in the highway. If Israel is guilty of every offense you claim and a thousand more besides, they would not be in the same class of damage as what’s happening with millions of invaders stealing over the southern border.

    What an amusingly self-defeating argument.

    Mexican “invaders” who are “stealing over the southern border” are doing precisely what zionists claim they are doing: reclaiming their ancestral land! Mexicans are zionists!! One difference is that the Mexican claim is more immediate and more provable in fact rather than mythology.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Karl says:

    >> Israel steals other people’s land

    For us, it is quite clear from PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, that we are the indigenous tribe here. Arabics, of course, are indigenous to Arabia.

    I guess we have to agree to disagree.

    Meanwhile, we are being fairly successful in restoring local Christians to THEIR indigenous language…. Aramaic.

    Christianity is indigenous to this land, and it will be strong here long after North America has gone COMPLETELY hippy-ish.

    By the time the author’s great-grandchildren are studying Ebonic literatured classics in school, we will have restored Gaza to its indigenous Coptic-speakers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @solontoCroesus
    Eliezer Ben Yehuda wrote:

    For us, it is quite clear from PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, that we are the indigenous tribe here.
     
    1. Canaanites notwithstanding --- or was that whole Joshua destroying Jericho thing just a bedtime story?

    2. Wasn't Abraham from Ur? Doesn't that make "us" -- I guess you mean Jews/zionists -- indigenous to the land of Ur, and Canaanites indigenous to the land of Cannan.

    3. What about those pesky Phoenicians (aka Palestinians)-- they migrated to the lands of the Levant just as surely as did the tribe of Abraham migrate from Ur.

    4. "agree to disagree" is an irrational statement, akin to "don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up." The rational man assesses facts and evidence logically then assents to the conclusion that that process points to. You presented no facts or evidence you merely made an assertion. The professor would have to place a red mark that Freshman Comp effort.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @Karl
    >> Israel steals other people’s land


    For us, it is quite clear from PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, that we are the indigenous tribe here. Arabics, of course, are indigenous to Arabia.

    I guess we have to agree to disagree.

    Meanwhile, we are being fairly successful in restoring local Christians to THEIR indigenous language.... Aramaic.

    Christianity is indigenous to this land, and it will be strong here long after North America has gone COMPLETELY hippy-ish.

    By the time the author's great-grandchildren are studying Ebonic literatured classics in school, we will have restored Gaza to its indigenous Coptic-speakers.

    Eliezer Ben Yehuda wrote:

    For us, it is quite clear from PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, that we are the indigenous tribe here.

    1. Canaanites notwithstanding — or was that whole Joshua destroying Jericho thing just a bedtime story?

    2. Wasn’t Abraham from Ur? Doesn’t that make “us” — I guess you mean Jews/zionists — indigenous to the land of Ur, and Canaanites indigenous to the land of Cannan.

    3. What about those pesky Phoenicians (aka Palestinians)– they migrated to the lands of the Levant just as surely as did the tribe of Abraham migrate from Ur.

    4. “agree to disagree” is an irrational statement, akin to “don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up.” The rational man assesses facts and evidence logically then assents to the conclusion that that process points to. You presented no facts or evidence you merely made an assertion. The professor would have to place a red mark that Freshman Comp effort.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. redwood says:

    Tom Cotton is out of his cotton picking mind. Giraldi mentioned the Republican useful idiots but not the Democratic useful idiots such as Chuck Schumer the tumor. Netanyahu should have taken the people listening to his speech back to Israel.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  49. @Bill Jones
    Washington DC really is a really is a stinkingly vile Necropolis nowadays with the rotting dead likes of Insane McCaine shuffling around spewing their poison.

    Washington, District of Corruption is hopelessly lawless and warmongering. If and when Vlad Putin vectors an ICBM onto D.C. . . . hey, I understand. . . .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @solontoCroesus
    ever notice how techie (midwest US dialect for "touchy") zios get when one spits up the force-fed Kool-Aid?


    --

    How should one write this statement to pass a Freshman comp class:

    "The holocaust is a lie," or "The Holocaust is a lie" ??

    A very apt observation. There is absolutely no reason why the world holocaust should ever be capitalized.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. [Bush's advisors told him], Quote: ‘This is the first test of a post-war system [the Berlin wall having fallen the year earlier], as a bipolar world is relaxed it permits this, perhaps giving more flexibility [i.e. US is unconstrained by USSR]. . .. If Saddam Hussein succeeds others may try the same thing [i.e. exercise autonomy & sovereignty and resist US hegemony] and it would be a bad lesson.” END QUOTE.

    And who were the “advisors” who talked the first Bush into expelling Hussein from Kuwait after ambassador, April Gillespie had suckered him into it? A little research will show that the advisors were the same group of Zionist Jews who authored the PENAC document, made arrangements for the 9/11 false-flag attacks, and talked the useful idiot, Bush Jr. into invading Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein, along with weapons of mass destruction that did not exist. And it’s the same group of fifth- columnist advisors who make every decision that’s supposedly being made by their front-man, Hussein Obama.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  52. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @The Grate Deign
    Mr. Giraldi,

    Please get somebody to challenge your articles before you publish. This one, as with previous ones of yours I've read, is largely comprised of broad suspicions conceived without your having bothered to substantiate a lot of particulars. If your intent is to convince an impartial reader that the 47 senators who signed Cotton's letter are Israeli tools, then you really haven't gotten started on that yet.

    What we really know from your article is that you are passionately suspicious of Israel and any American politicians who support Israel.

    So, okay, we get that -- just like we got that from any article you've ever written on this subject.

    Oh, and some guys got campaign contributions. But for that to mean much of anything, we'd need you to have done some homework on who else got contributions, from whom, how much, and how they all voted. Because if I turn pages to another article, I'm going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I'll start wondering why you're so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can't spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes.

    If this were my Freshman Comp 101 class, and if I were feeling particularly merciful toward a struggling student with a good writing style but poor reasoning skills, I'd return this paper to you with an "incomplete."

    So, got anything else?

    “If your intent is to convince an impartial reader that the 47 senators who signed Cotton’s letter are Israeli tools, then you really haven’t gotten started on that yet.”

    If you do not yet recognize the obvious fact that these 47 senators — and most, if not all, of the other 53 — are run by AIPAC and the rest of the “Lobby” (OC Family a more apt description), then surely it is you who should get the input of others before posting your comments.

    My God. You are still in denial over this? In 2015″? How is that possible? Please tell me you used to go to Israel Camp as a child so at least you can be excused due to the brainwashing that goes on there

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @The Grate Deign
    Mr. Giraldi,

    Please get somebody to challenge your articles before you publish. This one, as with previous ones of yours I've read, is largely comprised of broad suspicions conceived without your having bothered to substantiate a lot of particulars. If your intent is to convince an impartial reader that the 47 senators who signed Cotton's letter are Israeli tools, then you really haven't gotten started on that yet.

    What we really know from your article is that you are passionately suspicious of Israel and any American politicians who support Israel.

    So, okay, we get that -- just like we got that from any article you've ever written on this subject.

    Oh, and some guys got campaign contributions. But for that to mean much of anything, we'd need you to have done some homework on who else got contributions, from whom, how much, and how they all voted. Because if I turn pages to another article, I'm going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I'll start wondering why you're so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can't spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes.

    If this were my Freshman Comp 101 class, and if I were feeling particularly merciful toward a struggling student with a good writing style but poor reasoning skills, I'd return this paper to you with an "incomplete."

    So, got anything else?

    Yours is an overused boring pseudo intellectual reply. Nobody needs to prove that Sun is shining when it’s sunny and bright. You are not an impartial reader but deeply pro ‘Israel can do no wrong’ and no amount of evidence will be enough for you. The 47 republicans have committed treason, let the existing laws apply the way they are and let the punishment follow in accordance of these laws.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Grate Deign
    Dear Bothersome,

    If you read the text of the Logan Act (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/953), you'll see it's so poorly written that it actually forbids the president himself from conducting foreign policy unless some unspecified "authority of the United States" says he can do it. "Any citizen... wherever he may be..." is forbidden to do certain things. Tell me which citizen is excluded from this, including Mr. Obama.

    If you read the text of the Cotton letter (http://www.cotton.senate.gov/sites/default/files/150309%20Cotton%20Open%20Letter%20to%20Iranian%20Leaders.pdf), you'll see it is a statement of constitutional facts worthy of a middle school civics lesson.

    It is not treason to tell the ayatollah that the consent of the Senate is required for Mr. Obama's prospective treaty to be binding upon the United States.

    So your post is clearly overwrought. Why does this upset you so much?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Pshr says:
    @Marissa
    I’m not aware of Saudi Arabian media outlets that promote anti-Jewish memes, but there are plenty of Jewish media outlets and persons who actively promote anti-Muslim themes and demand that US policy makers and elected persons speak in terms of “Islamic terror.”

    Who cares? I'm happy to see the politically correct "religion of peace" nonsense go by the wayside. Europeans and their descendants are finally waking up to at least one of their two historical mortal enemies. What I don't like about the Jews controlling Hollywood is how much they vilify and mock Christianity. The phrase "Islamic terror" goes together like bread and butter and my Christian European ancestors knew it very well. If Jews really didn't like Islamic terror, they'd be fighting ISIS (or at least get their American lapdogs to do it). If they didn't like Islamic terror, they'd be producing movies where the bad guy is a Muslim instead of a straight, white, male Christian (see Chappie and Kingsman for the most recent examples). If they didn't like Islamic terror, they wouldn't have had to reckon with the Reconquista.

    Marissa,

    Never-mind about Islam being the religion of peace or not. Is Christianity a religion of peace? Judaism? Hinduism? “Oriental-isms”? Open your eyes and see what these people have done or doing.

    The basic truth is, in this day and age, the world is mainly being terrorised by ‘christian terror’ and ‘jewish terror’ groups. The muslims are simply responding feebly, in a self defeating manner. How much of these responses are orchestrated by the ‘good christian\jewish guys’, who knows?

    The christian and jewish terror groups, along with their mighty armies, also happen to be equipped with the best propaganda tools. So… the muslims are currently screwed in every way. We wait for divine intervention.

    PS: It is amazing how a people who profess to following a pure spirit such as Christ, can play such havoc on other human beings. You really think your ‘lord’ Jesus Christ will condone these actions, and your superiority complexes? What kind of ‘lord’ is that???

    You deluded fools.

    Read More
    • Replies: @David
    I meant to reply to you with comment 59.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. orly says:

    im curious if any of those in the christian circle jerk, islam is the devil crowd can explain one thing to me.

    how is it that in every land that came under tolerant caring righteous christian rule every other religion has been completely annihilated.

    and yet in the the lands under the rule of islam, who are the most barbaric blood thirsty people on earth who want nothing but to destroy everything nonislamic, hundreds of religions and sects have survived for more than 2 millennia?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tom
    I can't think of any lands that have come under Christian Rule outside of the medieval age or prior. Before Christianity "overruning" Europe, it was largely a loose amalgamation of viciously warring tribes. Specifically, in what nations is Christianity the official and only-surviving religion? You are likely referring to non-European lands that were taken over for economic reasons by people who were from a Christian dominant land that was often also top heavy with Jews (Spain, the Netherlands, Britain, etc). It's a common mistake in historical perspective, usually made by anti-Christians or pro-Muslims.

    This year, soldiers of a state that is expressly Islamic have made a strong effort to ethnically cleanse Christians from their territory and have widely used decapitation as a motivator. If you were to visit a place like Pakistan, you would see much less religious diversity and tolerance than your social justice textbook informs you about. Islam has a long, bloody history of enslaving wherever it goes, both physically and spiritually. The history of Islamic slaving off of the coast of Europe is enough to decree Islam a historical enemy of Europeans, not to mention the history if Islam in what is modern day Turkey as well as Spain. Much of Islam is "tolerant" as long as you worship a monotheistic god that resembles Allah. That's not tolerance. That's "good enough" Islam. There are more moderate expressions of Islam, but the truth is that the core ideology encourages hard-line intolerant Islam and will always present such a danger. Ask the Indian Hindus about tolerant Islam and the land called Pakistan that used to be India.

    Also, I'm confused at the widespread defense of Islam. Not all Nazis murdered Jews, right? Only some. Yet, we are to throw the entirety of National Socialism out. So, it follows, if we are to be morally, intellectually and politically consistent, that if some Islamists have decapitated and otherwise continuously murdered other people as a direct result of their ideology over a long course of time (NS was only a short time), then we should also toss out their ideology as well and the people who follow it from polite society. No?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. David says:

    One thing I’ve gotten out of reading and posting comments on this site is learning better the uselessness of calling people I disagree with names. I still have room to grow.

    Most of the people you’re addressing know what you’re describing as well as you do. They would agree that making the world safe for democracy is just a line. They share your infinitesimal of the divine understanding.

    Maybe a useful way to think of religion is as the impractical things that bind us together as a community. If there were more religion in this sense it would be harder to buy our congress and shanghai our military. I kind of like the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence as candidates for a national religion.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  57. @Anonymous
    Yours is an overused boring pseudo intellectual reply. Nobody needs to prove that Sun is shining when it's sunny and bright. You are not an impartial reader but deeply pro 'Israel can do no wrong' and no amount of evidence will be enough for you. The 47 republicans have committed treason, let the existing laws apply the way they are and let the punishment follow in accordance of these laws.

    Dear Bothersome,

    If you read the text of the Logan Act (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/953), you’ll see it’s so poorly written that it actually forbids the president himself from conducting foreign policy unless some unspecified “authority of the United States” says he can do it. “Any citizen… wherever he may be…” is forbidden to do certain things. Tell me which citizen is excluded from this, including Mr. Obama.

    If you read the text of the Cotton letter (http://www.cotton.senate.gov/sites/default/files/150309%20Cotton%20Open%20Letter%20to%20Iranian%20Leaders.pdf), you’ll see it is a statement of constitutional facts worthy of a middle school civics lesson.

    It is not treason to tell the ayatollah that the consent of the Senate is required for Mr. Obama’s prospective treaty to be binding upon the United States.

    So your post is clearly overwrought. Why does this upset you so much?

    Read More
    • Replies: @solontoCroesus
    What treaty allies the USA and Israel?

    Did the US Senate debate and approve the treaty? When?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @The Grate Deign
    Dear Bothersome,

    If you read the text of the Logan Act (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/953), you'll see it's so poorly written that it actually forbids the president himself from conducting foreign policy unless some unspecified "authority of the United States" says he can do it. "Any citizen... wherever he may be..." is forbidden to do certain things. Tell me which citizen is excluded from this, including Mr. Obama.

    If you read the text of the Cotton letter (http://www.cotton.senate.gov/sites/default/files/150309%20Cotton%20Open%20Letter%20to%20Iranian%20Leaders.pdf), you'll see it is a statement of constitutional facts worthy of a middle school civics lesson.

    It is not treason to tell the ayatollah that the consent of the Senate is required for Mr. Obama's prospective treaty to be binding upon the United States.

    So your post is clearly overwrought. Why does this upset you so much?

    What treaty allies the USA and Israel?

    Did the US Senate debate and approve the treaty? When?

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Grate Deign
    Dear Solon,

    What treaty allies the USA and Israel? Answer: None.

    Why would you think there is a treaty with them? Why should there be?

    Besides, if a treaty were written, for example, guaranteeing their security, do you have any serious doubt that the Senate would consent to it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. David says:
    @Pshr
    Marissa,

    Never-mind about Islam being the religion of peace or not. Is Christianity a religion of peace? Judaism? Hinduism? "Oriental-isms"? Open your eyes and see what these people have done or doing.

    The basic truth is, in this day and age, the world is mainly being terrorised by 'christian terror' and 'jewish terror' groups. The muslims are simply responding feebly, in a self defeating manner. How much of these responses are orchestrated by the 'good christian\jewish guys', who knows?

    The christian and jewish terror groups, along with their mighty armies, also happen to be equipped with the best propaganda tools. So... the muslims are currently screwed in every way. We wait for divine intervention.

    PS: It is amazing how a people who profess to following a pure spirit such as Christ, can play such havoc on other human beings. You really think your 'lord' Jesus Christ will condone these actions, and your superiority complexes? What kind of 'lord' is that???

    You deluded fools.

    I meant to reply to you with comment 59.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @solontoCroesus
    What treaty allies the USA and Israel?

    Did the US Senate debate and approve the treaty? When?

    Dear Solon,

    What treaty allies the USA and Israel? Answer: None.

    Why would you think there is a treaty with them? Why should there be?

    Besides, if a treaty were written, for example, guaranteeing their security, do you have any serious doubt that the Senate would consent to it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @solontoCroesus
    If there be no treaty, then what is the basis of the US - Israel "alliance" that US & Israeli politicians insist exists?

    If it is not a "treaty," then it can be dispensed with at any moment, by the stroke of a pen. Israel has no more reason to trust USA than does Iran, according to the 47.

    Similarly, US has absolutely no reason to trust Israel as an "ally."

    States do not make security arrangements on the basis of pinkie-swear; they commit themselves to contracts -- exchanges of promises that honorable men keep.
    "International law recognises only three lawful justifications for waging war: self-defence, defence of an ally required by the terms of a treaty, and approval by the United Nations." Absent a treaty, US may not legitimately guarantee Israel's security.

    "Do you have any serious doubt that the US Senate would consent to it?"
     
    First of all, the US Senate may notapprove a treaty of alliance with Israel because
    1. Israel's borders are ill-defined: for example, may or should US guarantee the security of Israelis in the Golan, which is territory that belongs to Syria but is illegitimately occupied by Israel?

    2. Second, the US may not engage in a treaty with a state that is not a signatory to the NPT.

    --
    In the past week or ten days, two former diplomats who are now professors at Harvard and Georgetown, respectively, stated that "US is allied to Israel by shared values and by reason of the holocaust."
    The holocaust narrative is a lie propagated by Hollywood. A lie is not a sound basis for an alliance, much less a treaty.


    I think -- in fact I insist -- the US-Israel relationship is a conversation that the American people are entitled to have.

    The US Congress/Senate enjoy the support of 16% of the American public.
    Their fecklessness has forfeited their right to act as the representatives of the American people, particularly in view of the near-100% support they give to a foreign leader whose war-making 'advice' has brought about the "greatest blunder in US history."

    It is time for the American people to claim their rights and sound their voices as to whether they should continue to be "allied" to a pariah state that disdains -- when it is not intentionally seeking to erode -- international law.

    The American people are told by Israelis and Jews that Americans "love" Israel.
    That's big talk when its voiced at an AIPAC conference convened by Jews and gate-kept by Jews.
    It's big talk when its voiced in a US Congress that is bought by Israeli interests.

    What happens if the proposition is put to the test of a referendum of the American people as a whole?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @The Grate Deign
    Dear Solon,

    What treaty allies the USA and Israel? Answer: None.

    Why would you think there is a treaty with them? Why should there be?

    Besides, if a treaty were written, for example, guaranteeing their security, do you have any serious doubt that the Senate would consent to it?

    If there be no treaty, then what is the basis of the US – Israel “alliance” that US & Israeli politicians insist exists?

    If it is not a “treaty,” then it can be dispensed with at any moment, by the stroke of a pen. Israel has no more reason to trust USA than does Iran, according to the 47.

    Similarly, US has absolutely no reason to trust Israel as an “ally.”

    States do not make security arrangements on the basis of pinkie-swear; they commit themselves to contracts — exchanges of promises that honorable men keep.
    “International law recognises only three lawful justifications for waging war: self-defence, defence of an ally required by the terms of a treaty, and approval by the United Nations.” Absent a treaty, US may not legitimately guarantee Israel’s security.

    “Do you have any serious doubt that the US Senate would consent to it?”

    First of all, the US Senate may notapprove a treaty of alliance with Israel because
    1. Israel’s borders are ill-defined: for example, may or should US guarantee the security of Israelis in the Golan, which is territory that belongs to Syria but is illegitimately occupied by Israel?

    2. Second, the US may not engage in a treaty with a state that is not a signatory to the NPT.


    In the past week or ten days, two former diplomats who are now professors at Harvard and Georgetown, respectively, stated that “US is allied to Israel by shared values and by reason of the holocaust.”
    The holocaust narrative is a lie propagated by Hollywood. A lie is not a sound basis for an alliance, much less a treaty.

    I think — in fact I insist — the US-Israel relationship is a conversation that the American people are entitled to have.

    The US Congress/Senate enjoy the support of 16% of the American public.
    Their fecklessness has forfeited their right to act as the representatives of the American people, particularly in view of the near-100% support they give to a foreign leader whose war-making ‘advice’ has brought about the “greatest blunder in US history.”

    It is time for the American people to claim their rights and sound their voices as to whether they should continue to be “allied” to a pariah state that disdains — when it is not intentionally seeking to erode — international law.

    The American people are told by Israelis and Jews that Americans “love” Israel.
    That’s big talk when its voiced at an AIPAC conference convened by Jews and gate-kept by Jews.
    It’s big talk when its voiced in a US Congress that is bought by Israeli interests.

    What happens if the proposition is put to the test of a referendum of the American people as a whole?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Slightly off-topic but extremely important:

    Dan Joyner at Arms Control Law noticed a piece in the LA Times titled
    “Top-Secret U.S. Replica of Iran Nuclear Sites Key to Weapons Deal.”

    Dr. Joyner wrote:

    After talking with friends, the paragraph that strikes me most in this story is this one, with my added emphasis:

    U.S. officials won’t comment on the classified research, which is being conducted at an undisclosed location in the United States. But former officials and private analysts say American agencies have constructed models of the Iranian facilities, relying on informants in Iran, information from foreign governments and voluminous data about Iran’s program collected by the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog.

    Joyner goes on to explain that IAEA disclosure of safeguards data violates that agency’s rules of engagement.

    It is not unlikely that precisely such impermissible disclosures of information obtained by IAEA in the course of monitoring Iranian nuclear sites that facilitated the assassination of four or five of Iran’s nuclear scientists.

    Will the US Senate include this information in their “debate” on the trustworthiness of the US in a nuclear deal with Iran?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @solontoCroesus

    Kristol, who regards Cotton as a protégé much as he once nurtured the unforgettable Sarah Palin.
     
    No doubt Cotton is cheaper to keep -- wardrobe and makeup expenses are minimal for the gawky, long-necked Cotton.


    btw, Cotton just celebrated his first wedding anniversary (paper is the appropriate gift for anniv. #1). Cotton's wife, Anna nee Peckham, a native of Nebraska, went to Cardozo Law School at Yeshiva University. Did Cotton marry him a nice Jewish goil? If so, she's not in the mold of Betty Friedan or Bella Abzug; she has made it clear that she will be called Anna Cotton. No hyphenated feminist nonsense for this wumin.

    Cotton wouldn't have it.

    In 1997 he made his views on feminism known in an article in Harvard Crimson -- http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1997/10/3/promises-and-covenants-pmen-are-simple/ --


    QUOTE: "Couples who choose a covenant marriage undergo counseling before they marry and can divorce only with fault, defined as abandonment, physical abuse, adultery or conviction of a capital crime. State legislator Tony Perkins, the author of the law (and an active member in PK [Promise Keepers] ), expects covenant marriages will soon account for half of all new marriages in Louisiana. Many states are expected to follow Louisiana's lead.
    Presumably, women should encourage such developments since divorce leads to their "greatest fear in life." And most women probably do support them, but not the putative potentates of feminism.

    The National Organization of Women (NOW) has dedicated itself, nationally and in its state chapters, to "exposing" both PK and covenant marriage as a thinly veiled attack by the Religious Right on women's rights, or as an attempt to re-establish patriarchy. An example of the fanaticism with which NOW follows this course is its powest subdivision, the "Promise Keepers Mobilization Project."

    Feminists understandably view movements like PK and covenant marriage with anxiety. They undermine what feminists consider a crowning achievement, no fault divorce. Feminists say no fault divorce was a large hurdle on the path to female liberation. They apparently don't consult the deepest hopes or greatest fears of young women.

    Nor do they consult the data on no fault divorce. This data says that 62 percent of divorced women used to receive permanent alimony, whereas now only 13 percent receive any alimony. It says that only 25 percent of divorced women with child custody receive child support, and only one-half of that is ever paid. It says that after divorce, men see their standard of living increase by 42 percent, while women see their's fall by 73 percent. It says, in short, that divorce is a leading cause of poverty among American women.
    Feminists might say that these figures show a need to crack down on "deadbeat dads." That blithely misses the point. As revolutionary patriot, jurist and marriage counselor James Wilson said,


    "When divorces can be summoned to the aid of levity, of vanity or of avarice, a state of marriage becomes frequently a state of war or stratagem; still more frequently, a state of premeditated and active preparation for successful stratagems and war."
     
    END QUOTE
     
    That last line offers a fascinating insight into Cotton's psyche, and his warmongering: it comes from the heart: shattered male-female relationships, or the failure of females to adequately and perpetually control the "reckless and restless" nature of "simple men" lays the ground for war.

    I wonder if Cotton tripped over a copy of Gilgamesh while he was in Iraq, the cradle of civilization.

    In the epic of Gilgamesh, Shamhat, a prostitute, has sex with the wild-man Enkidu which civilizes him. http://www.shmoop.com/gilgamesh/shamhat.html
    But emphasize: Shamhat was a prostitute, not a "covenanted wife." Wow, the complexities keep piling on.

    Other prostitutes have played critical roles in the mytho-history of the region Cotton is so eager to obliterate.

    The prostitute Rahab (nee Rodham-Clinton) betrayed her city, Jericho, to the invading and destroying spies and army of Joshua -- http://biblehub.com/niv/joshua/6.htm

    Esther (Victoria Nuland? Jane Harman?) prostituted herself to gain the favor of King Ahasueras in order to take over the Persian empire, place her 'uncle' (handler?) Mordecai in the place of the foreign minister Haman, and slaughter Haman, his ten sons, and 75000 innocent Persians who had donated their treasure and political support for the return of Jews to holy Zion.

    Or -- a far more basic question: were Cotton's parents divorced? Did it hurt like hell?

    Recall that when Joseph and Edith Coors divorced in 1988, the by-then grown children of the family were deeply affected and destabilized. That's the same Joseph Coors who started the right-wing ball rolling by funding uber-conservative Paul Weyrich and the Heritage Foundation. The hypocrisy, it burns.

    Cotton’s wife is a gentile.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. […] 18, 2015 “ICH” – “Unz” – March 2015 is a month that should live in infamy. The month started out with the […]

    Read More
  65. schmenz says:
    @The Grate Deign
    Dear Mr. Giraldi,

    It's astonishing, in light of Kuwait and the two and a half wars for oil in the middle east, and the 9-11 attacks, that you cannot see any Saudi interfering in our political process. Since you're clearly an avid follower of conspiracy theories, you cannot be unaware of the connection between the House of Saud and the copious funding of the 9-11 attacks.

    Of course, you'd expect a Zionist to say this, right?

    But face facts, my fellow patriot. Where'd almost all those dudes with box cutters hail from? And if an attack on the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, and a failed attack on the White House don't constitute "interfering" in our political process, what would it take to qualify? Maybe an attempt to kill off domestic oil production?

    I'm all for free markets, mind you. And if the Saudis want to give oil away for free, that's their look-out. But it's a mighty blind eye that can't see any of this as meddling in America's domestic politics.

    Which all goes back the issue I posed previously: What's up with the Israel thing? How'd they get to be the only turd in your punch bowl?

    “What’s up with the Israel thing? How’d they get to be the only turd in your punch bowl?”

    By observation, a modicum of logic and simple common sense.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Druid says:
    @The Grate Deign
    Dear Realist,

    I fear you are correct. But what would you propose in its place? Churchill's dictum may apply here, that democracy is the worst form of government except for all others.

    Until voters learn the counsel of Moses and elect men who "hate covetousness," we'll have to contend with bribery in some form.

    But if I must choose between puppet masters, I'd rather they were Israeli than Saudi.

    You mean Moses the mass murderer!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Druid says:
    @Stan
    Jews and Arabs ought to take their quarrels to the Levant and leave Americans alone.

    your ifnorance is astounding. We took our troubles and Zionist madmen to to the Levant to the detriment of the Arabs

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. KA says:

    During Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu‘s speech before Congress on Tuesday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) failed to applaud with enough enthusiasm to cause a mini-earthquake, thereby hinting that he cannot be trusted when he says he appreciates the Israeli leader. At least that’s the concept being propagated by several conservative blogs.

    CNN cameras caught the senator clapping at a slower pace than his fellow Republicans, staring in a rather ponderous manner:

    Naturally, because the senator represents a more hesitant, non-interventionist wing of the Republican Party (and he’s more supportive of current Iran negotiations), the more hawkish elements of the party’s go-to blogs jumped right on it.

    “Unenthused Rand Paul Lifelessly Applauds Netanyahu Speech” wrote the National Review Online, citing a handful of conservative tweeters to bolster the claim that his slow-clap must mean something. The Washington Free Beacon, known for its barrage of attacks on the senator and his staffers, posted the GIF without comment.

    During an appearance Wednesday morning on Fox & Friends, the senator hit back at the suggestion that this GIF shows he is secretly anti-Israel:

    “You have these gossipy websites who really demean themselves by putting stuff like that out. I gave the prime minister 50 standing ovations, I co-sponsored bringing him here, and on the day that I also decide to co-sponsor the Corker bill saying that any final deal has to be approved, we have gossipy websites looking at, you know, the metric of how fast you clap. I mean, I think they demean themselves by putting that out.”[ Rand Paul]

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rand-paul-hits-back-at-conservative-faux-outrage-over-his-unenthused-claps-for-netanyahu/

    – –
    >http://reason.com/blog/2015/01/20/a-rand-paul-blogger-opposes-wars-this-is

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  69. Tom says:
    @orly
    im curious if any of those in the christian circle jerk, islam is the devil crowd can explain one thing to me.

    how is it that in every land that came under tolerant caring righteous christian rule every other religion has been completely annihilated.

    and yet in the the lands under the rule of islam, who are the most barbaric blood thirsty people on earth who want nothing but to destroy everything nonislamic, hundreds of religions and sects have survived for more than 2 millennia?

    I can’t think of any lands that have come under Christian Rule outside of the medieval age or prior. Before Christianity “overruning” Europe, it was largely a loose amalgamation of viciously warring tribes. Specifically, in what nations is Christianity the official and only-surviving religion? You are likely referring to non-European lands that were taken over for economic reasons by people who were from a Christian dominant land that was often also top heavy with Jews (Spain, the Netherlands, Britain, etc). It’s a common mistake in historical perspective, usually made by anti-Christians or pro-Muslims.

    This year, soldiers of a state that is expressly Islamic have made a strong effort to ethnically cleanse Christians from their territory and have widely used decapitation as a motivator. If you were to visit a place like Pakistan, you would see much less religious diversity and tolerance than your social justice textbook informs you about. Islam has a long, bloody history of enslaving wherever it goes, both physically and spiritually. The history of Islamic slaving off of the coast of Europe is enough to decree Islam a historical enemy of Europeans, not to mention the history if Islam in what is modern day Turkey as well as Spain. Much of Islam is “tolerant” as long as you worship a monotheistic god that resembles Allah. That’s not tolerance. That’s “good enough” Islam. There are more moderate expressions of Islam, but the truth is that the core ideology encourages hard-line intolerant Islam and will always present such a danger. Ask the Indian Hindus about tolerant Islam and the land called Pakistan that used to be India.

    Also, I’m confused at the widespread defense of Islam. Not all Nazis murdered Jews, right? Only some. Yet, we are to throw the entirety of National Socialism out. So, it follows, if we are to be morally, intellectually and politically consistent, that if some Islamists have decapitated and otherwise continuously murdered other people as a direct result of their ideology over a long course of time (NS was only a short time), then we should also toss out their ideology as well and the people who follow it from polite society. No?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. KA says:
    @The Grate Deign
    Mr. Giraldi,

    Please get somebody to challenge your articles before you publish. This one, as with previous ones of yours I've read, is largely comprised of broad suspicions conceived without your having bothered to substantiate a lot of particulars. If your intent is to convince an impartial reader that the 47 senators who signed Cotton's letter are Israeli tools, then you really haven't gotten started on that yet.

    What we really know from your article is that you are passionately suspicious of Israel and any American politicians who support Israel.

    So, okay, we get that -- just like we got that from any article you've ever written on this subject.

    Oh, and some guys got campaign contributions. But for that to mean much of anything, we'd need you to have done some homework on who else got contributions, from whom, how much, and how they all voted. Because if I turn pages to another article, I'm going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I'll start wondering why you're so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can't spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes.

    If this were my Freshman Comp 101 class, and if I were feeling particularly merciful toward a struggling student with a good writing style but poor reasoning skills, I'd return this paper to you with an "incomplete."

    So, got anything else?

    1- Saudis didn’t want the 1st Gulf war.It tried to mediate the disputes .US told him to quit.It quit
    2 It did not support continued sanction
    3 It did not support 2nd war against Saddam, It resisted openly but without any effects
    3 It was providing supports to Hamas and PA until 2002 openly and explicitly advocating theirs causes . Then something started happening- a) Pearle _Wolfowitz gang started spreading rumors b),started threatening, c) started making policy speeches for regime changes , d)started focusing on passports of the hijackers and the confessions of KSM under duress ,e),started referring to flights of Saudi national .
    4 And next day :Poof! Saudi changed .It changed so much that it started supporting the removal of Syrian soldiers from Lebanon ( the arrangement was the fruit of its own initiative in 1990 ) .
    and condemned Hizbullah and Hamas for Israel initiated violence in Gaza and Lebanon in 2006, it condemned Hamas for wars in 2009 , 2011 and 2014. Saudi found themselves as booby trapped by Israel
    as US had found itself since the death of Kennedy .The threat of 911 hangs on its head with the image of the Star of David in the halo around the scimitar. Meanwhile it stopped talking about comprehensive peace deal that it has earlier raised in 2000 and 2002 — This is where the periodic demands for release of the remaining 41 pages of 911 come from- to keep the fear alive. To keep it in line .

    (One wonders why focus on those pages when the whole 911 investigation and the subsequent report are compromised,patently incomplete,based on dubious sources and method and managed by insiders .
    No eye witness was called .
    No reference to 5 Dancing Israelis or Israeli Art Student , or to Urban Moving Van was made,
    No mention of the actual seizures of Israelis with box cutter, maps, multiple passports and with cash were made.
    No mention of e mail alert of possible attack on Twin Towers
    And no mention of the frantic efforts of intelligence to warn Bush Cabinet members of attacks from April 2001 to Aug 2001 that were dismissed by the same Neocons Cabinet members who jumped to the conclusion after 911 that Saddam had done it )

    While Saudis keep their billions in Treasury earning peanut as interests

    Zionist say Saudi has lobby in US. Show me one that does anything other than periodically saying ” we are co-operating with US against Islamist ” or pleads occasionally US to restrain the routine excesses of Israel against the vulnerable .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Not all Nazis murdered Jews, right? Only some. Yet, we are to throw the entirety of National Socialism out.

    Curious thing is, even organizations like the Wyman Institute and the USHMM state that Jews were not sent to camps until late in 1938, and as late as June 1944 David Ben Gurion himself and the Jewish Agency he led believed that Auschwitz was a labor camp. Yet “International Jewry Declared War on Germany” in March 1933, and Rabbi Stephen Wise was telling crowds and government officials as early as 1940 that “Nazis are making soap and lampshades out of Jewish flesh.”

    That was a lie.

    How can we believe the other lies Rabbi Wise and his colleagues & fellow zionists told, then and now?

    We have been conditioned to “throw the entirety of National Socialism out” by what is perhaps the world’s most relentless campaign of state-sponsored propaganda and brainwashing in history, and resisting it or even seeking the full context of events surrounding the rise and fall of National Socialism is forbidden.

    Michael Ledeen stated that the genocidal principles laid down by Moses were followed to eradicate an entire generation of German people who might be closet Germans rather than subscribe to the first New World Order imposed by USA.

    So, it follows, if we are to be morally, intellectually and politically consistent . . .

    The West is being “morally [term used loosely], intellectually and politically consistent” inasmuch as it has followed the same strategy and tactics that were used against NSDAP Germany (which, as Ledeen said, were based on Hebrew scripture) to demonize, lie about, provoke, throw sand in the gears of honest negotiations, preemptively target, attack, kill, destroy, and then, when the target sets up a defense, the aggressor claims victimhood and wages all out war!

    The pattern is so transparent — it’s no wonder the enforcement mechanisms of the state must be used to shield this schtick from exposure.

    . . .that if some Islamists have decapitated and otherwise continuously murdered other people as a direct result of their ideology over a long course of time (NS was only a short time), then we should also toss out their ideology as well

    The timeline and evidentiary basis of claims in the above statement are suspect, and the writer fails to examine actual causality, instead ascribing the violent actions to “ideology.”

    What came before the alleged “decapitations and continuous murders” — did the USA & others or did not the USA and others spend as many as 25 years starving, killing, and destroying the people and culture of Iraq and Afghanistan?

    What would you do if your wife, mother, children were starved to death; bombed out of their home?
    What if the electrical, water, and sanitation systems in your town were destroyed and you were forced to live in sweltering heat without water and with sewage in the streets for 15 years?

    What if you were unable to complete your college courses because your university was reduced to rubble by USA-made and paid for bombs?

    Would you retaliate? Would you react with joy, or with rage? Would your reaction be strictly based on ideology, or on the characteristic of human nature that W H Auden described:

    You and I and the people know what all schoolchildren learn:
    Those to whom evil is done do evil in return.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  72. KA says:
    @The Grate Deign
    Mr. Giraldi,

    Please get somebody to challenge your articles before you publish. This one, as with previous ones of yours I've read, is largely comprised of broad suspicions conceived without your having bothered to substantiate a lot of particulars. If your intent is to convince an impartial reader that the 47 senators who signed Cotton's letter are Israeli tools, then you really haven't gotten started on that yet.

    What we really know from your article is that you are passionately suspicious of Israel and any American politicians who support Israel.

    So, okay, we get that -- just like we got that from any article you've ever written on this subject.

    Oh, and some guys got campaign contributions. But for that to mean much of anything, we'd need you to have done some homework on who else got contributions, from whom, how much, and how they all voted. Because if I turn pages to another article, I'm going to find Hillary taking millions from the Saudis, at which point I'll start wondering why you're so fired upon about Israel buying politicians but can't spare a sentence to ask who else is being bought, by whom, for how much, and for what purposes.

    If this were my Freshman Comp 101 class, and if I were feeling particularly merciful toward a struggling student with a good writing style but poor reasoning skills, I'd return this paper to you with an "incomplete."

    So, got anything else?

    Iran’s nuclear activities interface with many opposing and variegated surfaces that form the bulk of the political problems in ME. The Gulf Sheiks and the Royals have lost the popular support of the citizen .Their survival depends on more arms and less foreign intervention. So they go extra length to satisfy Israel and US.
    They parrot Israeli lines on Iran ,Hizbullah,Hamas,and Syria.
    They repeat when told to do so :”Nuclear Iran isn’t acceptable to Arab citizen”, by Israel and by WSJ/CNN/FOX/NYDaily/NYPost/Telegraph (UK) ,BBC.

    Bahrain is an example of how these Sheikhs use the weapons . Israel coming to defense of Saudi following Egyptian revolution is an example of the exploitative relationship between Israel and Arab countries .(Israel pressured US to pay attention and help prevent any similar situation n Saudi ).

    Vast majority of the citizen ,on the other side identifies Israel with or without nukes as a threat. Vast majority of Arabs don’t identify Iran with or without nukes as a threat -Foreign Policy

    Read More
    • Replies: @solontoCroesus
    Hyde Park, Illinois, native, now resident of Tel Aviv, Israel's Caroline Glick gives an informative review of Israeli relations with Egypt and Israel's Arab neighbors --

    http://mondoweiss.net/2011/04/glickism-and-feithism

    watch & retch
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @KA
    Iran's nuclear activities interface with many opposing and variegated surfaces that form the bulk of the political problems in ME. The Gulf Sheiks and the Royals have lost the popular support of the citizen .Their survival depends on more arms and less foreign intervention. So they go extra length to satisfy Israel and US.
    They parrot Israeli lines on Iran ,Hizbullah,Hamas,and Syria.
    They repeat when told to do so :"Nuclear Iran isn't acceptable to Arab citizen", by Israel and by WSJ/CNN/FOX/NYDaily/NYPost/Telegraph (UK) ,BBC.

    Bahrain is an example of how these Sheikhs use the weapons . Israel coming to defense of Saudi following Egyptian revolution is an example of the exploitative relationship between Israel and Arab countries .(Israel pressured US to pay attention and help prevent any similar situation n Saudi ).

    Vast majority of the citizen ,on the other side identifies Israel with or without nukes as a threat. Vast majority of Arabs don't identify Iran with or without nukes as a threat -Foreign Policy

    Hyde Park, Illinois, native, now resident of Tel Aviv, Israel’s Caroline Glick gives an informative review of Israeli relations with Egypt and Israel’s Arab neighbors –

    http://mondoweiss.net/2011/04/glickism-and-feithism

    watch & retch

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    She is not crazy.She is criminally insane who hears voices of Israeli God
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. KA says:
    @solontoCroesus
    Hyde Park, Illinois, native, now resident of Tel Aviv, Israel's Caroline Glick gives an informative review of Israeli relations with Egypt and Israel's Arab neighbors --

    http://mondoweiss.net/2011/04/glickism-and-feithism

    watch & retch

    She is not crazy.She is criminally insane who hears voices of Israeli God

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. KA says:

    “Israel is concerned over a possible Iranian nuclear weapon, but when asked in 2011 whether Iran would drop a nuke on Israel, former Defense Minister Ehud Barak responded “Not on us and not on any other neighbor.” In December 2010 former Mossad head Meir Dagan said that Tehran’s Islamic government is “rational” and “considering all the implications of their action.” Israeli Defense Force’s Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz made a similar point: “I think the Iranian leadership is comprised of very rational people.” Who would recognize Israel’s overwhelming retaliatory capacity.”

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2015/03/24/u-s-should-make-nuclear-deal-with-iran-americans-must-insist-that-washington-choose-peace/

    Attention defict Americans may not take any notice but one expects these 47 idiots will at least have some kind of barin activities on EEG .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  76. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    If, as in countless times in the past, a tiny minority of cunning, manipulative, underhanded, shamelessly self-interested, closely-knit, well-coordinated and focused cabal of puppet-masters and instigators were to be discovered hijacking the Great Ship America, concentrating their efforts on the true levers of power, involving America in fighting their wars, controlling American opinion through media dominance, spying on America’s industrial, military, foreign policy and research centers, cleverly bilking America out of billions per year in “tributes”, courting favorable American congressional members while bribing others — and pretending to be (once again) the innocent victim — be rest assured it is the Zionist infection that has methodically inserted itself deeply into America’s DNA.
    With a long and detailed history, that’s just what “they” do. Pretending to assimilate, gravitating to the centers of power, the enemy among us — the enemy within.
    But extreme caution is warranted. With the so-called holocaust now at the center of Israel’s state religion and Jewish identity (worn proudly like a badge by some), open discussion or public debate is forbidden. We all know it; it’s the elephant in the room, behind the bulging curtain, and out of fear, everyone diverts their eyes — in a continuous ruse to pretend it’s not there.
    The cancer is deep in the body America — and like a team of doctors surrounding the succumbing patient and knowing the disease well, no one dares speak of it above a whisper.
    After all, they wouldn’t dare risk offending the disease — right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Philip Giraldi Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
A Modern Guernica Enabled by Washington
Pressuring Candidates Even Before They Are Nominated
But is it even a friend?
The gagged whistleblower goes on the record.
Today’s CIA serves contractors and bureaucrats—not the nation.
Pay no mind to the Mossad agent on the line.