The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPaul Craig Roberts Archive
The Genocide of a Land
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


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

In our days of darkness, spreading ignorance, and absence of serious debate in public forums, we can take hope from the fact that some scholars still produce serious and informative books on the most critical issues of our time. If in the future policymakers again seek the guidance of truth, they will have the information at hand. One such book of truth is Jeremy R. Hammond’s just published Obstacle to Peace, a closely reasoned, heavily documented (68 pages of footnotes), fully indexed, readable book with a Foreword by Richard Falk, an Introduction by Gene Epstein, and an endorsement by Noam Chomsky.

The obstacle to peace is the United States government, which has consistently opposed the entire world’s decades long effort to stop the Zionist genocide of a land called Palestine.

Palestine is a stolen and oppressed land. Israel’s greatest leaders themselves acknowledge the fact. Tom Are quotes David Ben-Gurion:

“If I were an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural, we have taken their country. Sure God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We came from Israel, it’s true, but that was two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?”

What once was a country consists today of a few small isolated Palestinian ghettos in the West Bank surrounded by Israeli settlements and an open air prison known as Gaza. Periodically Israel launches military assaults on the civilian population of Gaza, destroying the lives of the people and the infrastructure of the prison camp.

Israel then prevents outside efforts from sending supplies to the suffering people in Gaza. “Freedom flotillas” crewed by Nobel Laurates, present and former members of US and European legislative bodies, and even members of the Israeli Knesset set sail with supplies for Gaza and are pirated and captured in international waters by the Israeli Navy, which, as a warning to others, kills some of the delegation in “self-defense.” The United States steadfastly defends Israel’s criminal behavior with its UN veto and other governments, though disapproving, are unwilling to confront Washington and force a change.

Washington’s 21st century wars in the Middle East were initiated by neoconservative regimes whose principal policymakers are tightly allied with Israel. The wars focused on Arab nations—Iraq, Libya, and Syria—that were supportive of the Palestinians and had foreign policies independent of Washington. Washington succeeded in destroying two of the countries and has not given up on destroying Syria despite the risk of confrontation with Russia.


The risks that Washington is imposing on Americans and Europeans in order to advance Israeli expansion in the Middle East are horrific. Zionists claim a “greater Israel” from the Nile to the Euphrates. Washington’s wars in the Middle East are designed to remove obstacles to “greater Israel.” For example, on past occasions Israel has attempted to seize southern Lebanon for the water resources, but were driven out by Hezbollah, a militia supplied by Syria and Iran. This is one reason Syria and Iran are on Washington’s target list.

To achieve its or Israel’s goals, Washington uses jihadists. Russia sees the jihadists as threats that could spread to the Muslim areas of the Russian Federation, and Russia acts to protect itself. China also has realized that its province bordering Kazakhstan is subject to jihadist destabilization and appears to be aligning with Russia, Iran, and Syria against Washington’s effort to overthrow the Syrian government and install in its place chaos as Washington has done in Iraq and Libya, thus removing another constraint on Israel’s expansion and the restraint of a secular Syrian government on jihadism.

To get all of this from Hammond, you might have to connect some dots. But what you will get is a massive amount of verbatim dialogue that documents beyond all doubt the conspiracy between Israel, Washington, and the US presstitutes to get rid of “the Palestinian problem” by getting rid of Palestinians.

What does emerge strongly from Hammond’s book is that justice is not a thriving characteristic of the Israeli government, US foreign policy, or the media. The United Nations has produced report after report documenting the extermination of a people, but is powerless to act because of Washington’s veto.

What has happened to Palestinians is a replay of what happened to the native inhabitants of North America and Australia. Palestinians have been dispossessed and murdered. For this crime, the United States shares responsibility with Israel.

Become informed while you still can. Propaganda is turning truth-tellers into “conspiracy theorists” and “domestic extremists.” We can’t take the continued presence of truth-tellers for granted. When one appears support him or her. Order Hammond’s book here:

You will never regret being informed.

(Republished from by permission of author or representative)
• Category: History • Tags: Israel/Palestine 
Hide 41 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Gaza gets hit because Arabs are firing missiles into Israel from there. It is utter stupidity to keep poking Israel in such a way, not to mention immoral, when you know you do not have the power to take Israel out.

    Also, as Aba Eben put it quite well, “The Palestinians have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” The Arabs have oppressed themselves through their own idiocy.

  2. I’ll cry for Arabs when they give Egypt back to the Copts. And Hippo back to Augustinians. Until then, they’re the last people who have any right to complain about displacement.

    How about banning anyone who rejects the divinity of Christ from the West Bank? Or at least those parts where Christ walked.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  3. Marcus says:

    Our God is not theirs

    Muslims would disagree. I’d be careful with quotes attributed to early Israeli leaders btw, lots of fakes floating around

  4. @Quartermaster

    why not give america back to the natives? btw, there is no evidence for an historical jesus. jesus never walked anywhere except in the minds of blind belief.
    but if you do believe, jesus was a dark-skinned palestinian jew. i doubt that jesus would agree with the oppression & slaughter of the people who came after him.

    • Replies: @Marcus
  5. Marcus says:
    @Lawrence Fitton

    Tacitus’ mention of JC is considered authentic, and there are plenty of levantines who are not “dark-skinned” (probably more so back then, since that was before the Arab migrations).

  6. Heymrguda says:

    This is the PCR I know and love.

  7. Cut the crap, Roberts. When are you going to hand back your property to the Amerindians and return to Wales where your ancestors came from. Of course, the Welsh authorities may not want to accept a geriatric coffin dodger like you, as is their prerogative.
    While we’re at, remove all Muslims, and non-whites from Europe. By Europe, I mean Anatolia and Armenia as well, which were its borders for millennia until the disaster at Manzikert ( 1071 )

  8. alexander says:

    Very fine article, Mr Roberts.

    The idea that Israels expansionist tendencies eastward into Palestine echo the “manifest destiny” that pushed early American settlers westward across North America is a welcome comparison by many of Israels most ardent supporters of the “settlement projects” currently underway, beyond the green line.

    Its a valid argument up to a point, beyond which Israeli thinkers, admirers and benefactors will not cross.

    The main distinction, which is never spoken, is that when the westward expansion of American Settlers was underway, and the subsequent conflicts and conquests of the Native Americans led to their eventual defeat,200 years ago..there was no INTERNATIONAL LAW restricting or defining such behavior as a SUPREME INTERNATIONAL CRIME.

    Whereas precisely such laws came into existence, right after the fall of NAZI GERMANY, when the very same horror of expulsion and extermination befell the Jewish people during the HOLOCAUST.

    Herein lies the greatest single contradiction at the heart of Israels expansionist project, for it echo’s more fully, in it contemporaneity, the central tenet of Nazism’s, “lebensraum”in its conquest of Palestinian land, (and the Holocaust itself, in its expulsion and killing of Palestinians), than the much earlier westward expansion of Europeans into North America.

    This profound hypocrisy, lies at the very core of the “Greater Israel “project.

    How can one denounce with resounding moral authority the horrific fate that befell the Jews under the hands of the Nazis, while celebrate the exact same fate befalling the Palestinians under the hands of the Jews ?

    It is the most bizarre form of “holocaust denial” one can bear witness to.

    If two wrongs can never make a right, then the wrongness of property confiscations, expulsions and ethnic cleansing’s of Palestinians today, is no less morally obscene than the property confiscations, expulsions and ethnic cleansing’s of the Jews during the rise of the Third Reich.

    The scaly truth, Mr Roberts , is the more Israel succeeds in becoming its Greater State , the more it is forced to become everything it has always most despised.

  9. The protests against the genocide and those trying to suppress such protest mirror the split between the corrupt establishment and the grass-roots.

    The Soccer elites in Europe continue to push the lie that Israel is in Europe.

  10. Patriot says:

    Gaza is the largest and longest-running concentration camp in Earth’s history. Shame on the Jews. Of all people, they should know better.

    Shame, shame, shame!

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    , @Reg Cæsar
  11. Patriot says:

    Israel much prefers that American soldiers fight and die protecting Israel, than Israeli soldiers.

    Israel also prefers that American taxpayers pay for the wars and afterwards take in the displaced Muslims resulting from these wars, in order to ethnically cleanse the land for Israeli expansion.

  12. Patriot says:

    I know that here in the Midwest USA farm country, the greatest honor for American parents is to have their children die while trying to kill Muslims so that Israelis can continue to genocide Palestinians.

  13. @alexander

    However much you flog this dead horse, Alexander, it ain’t gonna get up and trot because you’ve failed to notice the jockey who was riding the zionist horse, and the sequence of events that led to the finish line.

    The zionist project was well underway well before any (alleged) event branded as The Holocaust.

    FACT: Zionist officials delegated Arthur Ruppin to tour Palestine in 1907 and assess the progress of zionist settlers.

    FACT: By the time WWI broke out, several groups of Eastern European Jews had “made aliyeh” to lands in Palestine where Arthur Ruppin created both agricultural settlements and had built Tel Aviv on land close by the Arab port at Jaffa, so that Jewish settlers could undermine Arab trade in oranges as well as other established Arab commercial endeavors.

    FACT: “Within a fortnight of Hitler’s nomination of chancellor” (that is, by Feb. 14, 1933), Louis Brandeis, whom Jeffrey Rosen credits as being more influential than anyone else in creating the Jewish state in Palestine, Brandeis directed Rabbi Stephen Wise that “All Jews must leave Germany.” The NSDAP may have been pleased with the “horror of expulsion” that Brandeis called for, but the plan, the goal, the objective was initiated by, and in service of the zionist agenda and carried out under the direction of a key leader of zionism, Louis Brandeis, by one of his most fervent and zealous acolytes (and propagandists), Rabbi Stephen Wise.

    FACT: Edwin Black notes in The Transfer Agreement that as a result of the migration of wealthy German Jews to Palestine, by 1935 the Jewish settlements in Palestine were the most prosperous in the world, which was then in the throes of the Great Depression.

    FACT: By 1937 – 38 Erich Mendelsohn, “the Jewish architect,” had completed construction of luxury residences in Rehovath for the Shocken family and for Chaim Weizmann, who had acquired the Balfour Declaration by 1917 and was later to become the first president of Israel. Also by 1938 Mendelsohn built Hebrew University — in August 1933 Samuel Untermyer spoke at fundraisers for that building project, laced with lies and and anti-German atrocity propaganda.

    The scaly [sic] truth is, Alexander, the zionist project was in full force, and had achieved a tipping point of development, well before the alleged event marketed as The Holocaust.

    The scaly [sic] truth is that zionists brought about war against Germany, that resulted in the deaths of many otherwise undesirable Jews (see Etan Bloom’s Arthur Ruppin and the Production of Hebrew Culture in Palestine, esp. wrt to Ruppin’s eugenic theories about appropriate “human material” for the “new Jew”; as well as Michael Ledeen’s recitation of the actions of Moses in killing undesirable Jews, and his pride in being among the Levites who carried out those murders) in order to bring about fulfillment of the zionist utopian project. The zionist project and its completion came before the alleged holocaust; it was not the result of an event later marketed as The Holocaust (see, for example, David Engel, “ The Holocaust, the Third Reich and the Jews : “What we now know as The Holocaust came to be known as such only after about 1961 . . .”)

    Jewish zionists rode the stalking horse that drove desirable Jews to Palestine (or to their new power center, USA), and that horse pulled the war chariots that left Germany a ruins in its wake.

    Try to revise your one-trick pony argument to account for these facts, Alexander.

    • Replies: @alexander
    , @helena
  14. @Reg Cæsar

    Divinity of Christ? Thanks for the chuckle. As long as dummies continue to believe that blatantly false nonsense there will never be peace.

    • Replies: @RobinG
  15. @alexander

    There are additional reasons why the comparison to German quest for Lebensraum is a far less apt comparison to the zionist conquest of Palestine, and more closely comparable to Manifest Destiny:

    The North American (United States) land mass is vast, fertile, resource-rich, and virtually unassailable.
    Germany in 1933 was shrunk to a size nearly incapable of sustaining both its agricultural needs and capacities for continuation of industrial activity.

    Germany in 1933 had the present memory of seeing 800,000 of its citizens starved to death as a result of blockade by the British during WWI; and to have been forced to sign a humiliating treaty under the duress of continuation of that blockade — and starvation — until the Versailles Treaty was signed.

    Germany sought Lebensraum, to the extent that the quest was more than a plan on the shelf, in order to protect its people from a similar blockade and subsequent starvation. Appropriate agricultural land was chosen that was beyond the reach of a future British blockade.

    Among the lands ceded from Germany by that treaty were resource-rich lands that reverted to French control. Although Hitler made the determination not to provoke the French on Germany’s border, the French were incapable of restraining themselves from bullying a weakened adversary.

    Germany also lost lands to Poland. The conflict over the Danzig corridor was crucial because Germany was dependent on transit of coal across the corridor. Coal was essential to heat the homes of German civilians, and to keep the wheels of German industry turning. Cutting off transit of coal was the equivalent of the Straits of Hormuz or the Suez Canal being blockaded: USA (and earlier, Britain) has expended much of its defense budget to ensure free passage over those crucial energy pathways.

    As vast and resource-rich as USA was, even its people suffered as a result of drought in its agricultural regions, and through the manipulation of credit which caused many farmers to lose their stakes, thereby their livelihoods, thereby their ability to feed themselves. But they had other places on the North American land mass whence they could flee, the benefit of Manifest Destiny.

    The zionist project in Palestine is more comparable to the American/Manifest Destiny situation than to the Lebensraum scenario, inasmuch as the zionist project was the conscious quest and decision of Jewish people to remove from lands where they had found accommodation and could have remained in peace and security if they had not made demands, and attempted to exert overbearing control over, the natives to the land. Zionism emerged in Russia/Poland/Lithuania etc. where the “Jewish revolutionary spirit” became unleashed and, as Anonymous explained @ 22, here, a quirk of the Jewish psyche brought many Jewish people into violent conflict with the indigenous peoples in lands where they dwelt. That conflict was exacerbated by the efforts of very wealthy Jews who, in their acts of financing violence against indigenous peoples and their attempts to reform and re-establish their form of government, created chaos rather than resolve conflict.
    That pattern is repeated by such individuals as George Soros, Haim Saban and Sheldon Adelson, who use their wealth to sow conflict rather than resolve problems, and by the United States itself, which engages in much the same behavior, inasmuch as the USA finances and politically supports the violence-prone patterns of zionist oppression of Palestinians.

    Mass psychotherapy to beat the impulse to build out of people who are “makers,” like the Germans (as well as Iranians, as Talha noted elsewhere) having been implemented not once but several times and failed in the long run, the remaining options seem to be Mass Psychotherapy to resolve Jewish quirks, or stopping at least the flow of US money and protection to individuals and organizations who evidence the inability to curb their destructive ardor.

    Or we can continue to wail hysterically (histrionically?? a- historically??) Lebensraum!! Nazis!! Holocaust!!

    • Replies: @alexander
  16. alexander says:


    I know how much it pains you to the core to recognize, even just a smidge , the horror of the holocaust.

    I suspect ,also, you must spend days and nights seeking out obscure documentation, which lends some legitimacy to your claims.

    I understand in your heart of hearts, how you are driven to rescue your idol , Adolph Hitler, from the trash heap of history’s fallen dictators.

    I read your comments, and I note your talking points.

    Do you think there has been anything I have written which suggests the migration of Jews into Palestine, between 1870 and 1948, did not occur ?

    Is there anything I have written to suggest that the Zionist project of returning to Palestine and recreating the state of Israel ,did not “exist” prior to WWII and the Holocaust ?

    Is there anything I have written to suggest the creation of Israel was not very much in the minds of many Jews for quite some time, before the rise of Nazi Germany ?

    I still believe, that after two thousand years of Life in the Diaspora, and after centuries of persecution, the Jews had every right to return to the land of their ancestors and recreate their home.

    This is a fantastic story, all the more resonant for the Holocaust having happened and for Jews to have endured and overcome it.

    if there was a crime (and a heinous one) in the creation of their state, it was that it occurred on the backs of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who were brutally forced from their homes into exile during Israels birth.

    That is not okay, and it will never be okay, and Israel needs to dig deep and find its best way to compensate the Palestinians for the tragedy they endured.(and stop compounding it, today)

    But so WHAT if Justice Brandeis was a big supporter of Israel, and encouraged Jews to go there ?

    So WHAT ?

    Your suggestion he was responsible for the forced expulsion of Jews from Nazi Germany is bogus revisionist clap trap.

    Judge Richard Goldstone is a Zionist too, but that did not prevent him from condemning the brutal attacks on Gaza as an act of collective punishment designed to terrorize the civilian population residing there.

    Perhaps you are going to suggest that Judge Goldstone ordered the missile launch that vaporized the Palestinian kids playing soccer on the beach ?

    I have read your anecdotes, but the conclusion you draw from them are decidedly designed to deconstruct the criminality of the Nazi era and reconstitute it as some form of grand misunderstanding .

    Mu goal is not to deconstruct it,but acknowledge it, see its evil, and recognize, too, the evil perpetrated against the Palestinians, which was shamefully denied by Israel for over forty years.

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  17. RobinG says:

    Indeed, the “Divinity of Christ” was invented by Paul of Tarsus.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  18. @alexander

    But so WHAT if Justice Brandeis was a big supporter of Israel, and encouraged Jews to go there ?

    So WHAT ?

    The point is, Alexander the grape, that Brandeis directed that GERMAN Jews leave Germany and take their wealth to Palestine.

    GERMAN Jews were not threatened; they were actually protected by Hitler and Nazis — if you can find your way out of your own nether regions and consult a book or two, you may read Jewish authors who provide evidence for this fact.

    On the other hand, Polish, Russian and Hungarian Jews — the ones who died in the largest numbers — were very much threatened, and not as much by Germans and NSDAP as by their fellow Poles, Russians and Hungarians.

    People write and study history in an attempt to understand how catastrophes came about in an attempt to avoid the same mistakes. The condition the world is in today seems to indicate that important lessons have not been adequately learned. The lesson of Croesus is unforgiving: If you misinterpret the oracle (or the history), you lose your country. It’s not a game, Alexander.

    You appear to believe that giving strident expression to the voices in your head is equivalent to listening to the voices of persons who experienced, or studied the documents, of what actually happened. So far, the voices in your head have not served to refute the “obscure documentation, which lends some legitimacy to [my] claims.” I would welcome an honest critique and refutation on the facts and logic, but that is not what you offer; you merely bray and hyperventilate, and pseudo- moralize, but you display neither logic nor any attempt at gathering evidence and assessing it objectively.

    Ad hominem is not an argument. In my opinion, dismissively demonizing Hitler is lazy, stupid, and counter-productive: Hitler and the Third Reich were not cartoon characters, they were real people, in real circumstances, with all the human weakness — as well as strengths — as most of the rest of us.

    • Replies: @RobinG
  19. Patriot says:

    Israel is the new Nazi Germany.

    Both favored eugenics. Jewishness is inherited from mother, rabid support for only Jew-Jew marriages, Jewish-only immigration, and egregious secret sterilization of Black African Jews.

    Both practiced Lebensraum, and by military means.

    Both ran concentration camps (i.e., Gaza).

    Both believed they were the master race.

    Israel is just like Nazi Germany.

    The Jews are the greatest hypocrites on earth!

    • Replies: @alexander
    , @SolontoCroesus
  20. RobinG says:

    Ah, brilliant…..

    “…Hitler and the Third Reich were not cartoon characters, they were real people, in real circumstances, with all the human weakness — as well as strengths — “

    Well then, isn’t it also possible to condemn Brandeis for improper abuse of his position to advocate for a Jewish state, etc., and at the same time recognize his role in reinstituting the 1st Amendment …. thus enabling you (us) to criticize our government in this public forum?

    Glad you’re pressing Alex. He really likes a good Hollywood yarn, eh? “I still believe, that after two thousand years of Life in the Diaspora, and after centuries of persecution, the Jews had every right to return to the land of their ancestors and recreate their home. This is a fantastic story, all the more resonant for the Holocaust having happened and for Jews to have endured and overcome it.” He might reflect on how much his mind has been massaged to lap up that plot.

    Very apropos post from Gilad today… here are 2 excerpts…

    “Nolte, found himself in a ferocious battle with the academic establishment in 1986 for suggesting that the Germans’ inclination towards National Socialism was a natural response to the ‘existential threat’ posed by Bolshevism. He also compared Hitler’s brutality towards Jews and other minorities with Stalin’s mass killings. Nolte was correct that Stalin’s brutality towards mass populations predated Hitler’s oppressive measures towards people he identified as enemies of the state. “Did the ‘Gulag Archipelago’ not exist before Auschwitz?” Nolte asked in his 1986 Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) article.

    Unlike Wilhelm Riech and the Frankfurt School enthusiasts who came to the ludicrous conclusion that Germans favoured National Socialism over Marxist revolution because they were ‘sexually repressed’ and inclined towards authoritarianism, Nolte bravely revisited the past and discovered that it made a lot more sense than most of us were willing to admit at the time.”

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  21. helena says:

    Are you saying that when Hitler got into power (which I think was somewhat of a political accident wasn’t it?) he found himself in the middle of a pre-existing and powerful quagmire that he wasn’t able to cope with through intellectual/diplomatic/strategic/logistic means and he resorted to authoritarianism as the only way he could think of for dealing with the situation?

  22. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Lawrence Fitton

    Victims may have contributory negligence or a share of responsibility in some cases.

    Saying ‘blame the victim’ just whitewashes the matter and redirects discussion to an emotionally charged argument with less if any acceptance of any factual basis of any issues. It is a method of killing discussion.

  23. helena says:

    “…Hitler and the Third Reich were not cartoon characters, they were real people, in real circumstances, with all the human weakness — as well as strengths — “

    Unfortunately he sported a moustache, salutes, uniforms and flags that lend themselves very well to cartoonism. Could this nonsense really have carried on so long if that were not so. Hitler is the very personification/embodiment/epitomy of a cartoon character.

    What Alexander has not grasped is that purely in terms of flesh, Jewish people suffered about the same as Europeans, Russians, Chinese, SouthEast Asians. The difference, the H, is specifically directed at the concept of ‘specialness’. It’s a branding exercise par excellence.

    • Replies: @alexander
  24. alexander says:


    This is becoming the scary truth of the matter, with each passing day.

  25. alexander says:

    It really eats you up inside,that Adolph Hitler sought to conquer ALL the Slavic regions.

    Doesn’t it ?

    It really eats you up inside that Adolph Hitler viewed the Poles, the Russians and the Serbs as the Untermenchen and conversely the German race as the Ubermenchen, who had the right, by their innate genetic superiority, and master race status, to expand eastward, conquer and invade the entire Eastern half of Eurasia.

    Doesn’t it ?

    And it really gnaws at you, the fact that many Israeli’s have adopted the exact same supremacist,militaristic and expansionists views towards the Palestinians and their lands east of the green line.

    Doesn’t it ?

    And it really drives you crazy when any comparisons between Hitlers occupation of Eastern Europe and Israels occupation of the Golan Heights and the Palestinian territories is made.

    Doesn’t it ?

    And it really drives you up the wall, when comparisons between Israels desire to “conquer and take” and Nazi Germany’s desire to “conquer and take” are fleshed out and examined.

    Doesn’t it ?

    I suppose your passion for all things Nazi, leads you to function as an eternal apologist for any act of Lebensraum, cruelty, and mass murder that the Fuhrer may have undertaken.

    According to your revisionist bent, Hitler could do NO wrong, and its your sole purpose on earth to reconstruct the past to elucidate this, declaring any act of aggression initiated by the Third Reich, towards anyone , as a wholly bogus ad hominem attack against the very truth itself.

    • Replies: @helena
    , @SolontoCroesus
  26. helena says:

    What it amounts to is,

    “Israeli’s have adopted…Hitlers” apostrophe.

    Doesn’t it ?

    • Replies: @alexander
  27. alexander says:

    Where is it, in any statement I have written that shows a predilection to granting an exclusive “special-ness” to the genocide suffered by the Jews, beyond any other “genocide” that has occurred in history?

    I think you should take the time to actually read my comment(#9), in this thread, before you make such bogus allegations…..because it argues, quite persuasively, the exact “opposite” position.

  28. @Patriot

    Gaza shares a border with Egypt. Egypt can let whoever or whatever they want in and out of Gaza. Are the Egyptians also monsters? (They are, but not for that reason).

    Neither the Egyptions nor the Israelis want the Gazans because the Gaza is nothing but a breeding ground for violence, crime and terrorism. At every opportunity they’ve been given to show good faith, they’ve spat in Israel’s face (usually in the form of rockets and bullets).

    The West Bank shares a border with Jordan. Jordan can let whoever or whatever they want in and out of the West Bank. Are Jordanians also monsters? (They are, but not for that reason).

  29. @alexander

    Don’t your fingernails ever wear down to flesh from dragging them across the chalkboard so relentlessly?

    And does it ever occur to you to spend less energy pop-psychologizing and mind-reading people you know nothing about, and addressing, instead, the ideas, the statements, the literature and refuting it as factually in error or illogical, or countering it with superior research and logic?

    Your archive reveals you are incapable of doing the latter, operate in the world of ideas, evidence and logic, hence your resort to attacks on personality.

    wrt your #17,

    “I have read your anecdotes, but the conclusion you draw from them are decidedly designed to deconstruct the criminality of the Nazi era and reconstitute it as some form of grand misunderstanding .

    Mu goal is not to deconstruct it,but acknowledge it, see its evil, and recognize, too, the evil perpetrated against the Palestinians, which was shamefully denied by Israel for over forty years. “

    I think I’ve been forthright in stating as much: I believe it is essential to deconstruct the dogmatized narrative of the holocaust (or The Holocaust, as iffen and David Engel demand). But you foolishly mischaracterize a close examination of history in order to achieve “accurate scholarship” as an equally unbalanced tilt in the opposite direction. Depictions of the Scales of Justice hold the point of equality as the ideal, and in my view that is how the history of the Allied and Axis powers should be measured.

    Your preference to “not deconstruct it to but to acknowledge it, see its evil . . .” reflects precisely the critique David Campbell brought to bear upon the George H W Bush administration in choosing to wage war against Iraq in 1990-91.
    I spoon fed the critical passages to you, twice, Alexander; did you open your lips/mind?

    One more time–

    [the Bush administration’s discourse] obscured the issues involved in the Gulf region and moved the crisis toward conflict.
    In particular, it probes the discourse of moral certitude through which the United States and its allies located with Iraq – in unambiguous ethical terms – the responsibility for evil.

    George H W Bush followed almost in lockstep the behaviors of FDR and Churchill (and their camp) who
    –>“obscured the issues involved” — even though Herbert Hoover pointed out precisely what Hitler’s three idees fixes were, and they did not involve France, Britain or the USA (at the risk of relying on “obscure sources” to “legitimize” information, the reference is to Freedom Betrayed);

    –> “moved the crisis toward conflict “ — as Pat Buchanan and Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof have argued, the crisis over Danzig could have been settled nonviolently, but the British, and Jews, forced the situation to conflict. That is irrefutable.

    –> FDR & Churchill excelled in the “discourse of moral certitude,” even though they based that “discourse” on a foundation of lies, as even Irving Kristol has acknowledged; character assassination, fear-mongering, and the crudest forms of propaganda.

    –> FDR & Churchill “located with Iraq Germany – in unambiguous ethical terms – the responsibility for evil,” even as they were lying to their people, giving financial and political support to the most egregious mass murderer in history (Stalin), and acting contrary to- and outside of the governmental mandates and institutions they were sworn to uphold.

    You, too, seem incapable — actually, you declare yourself dead set against — self-reflection as to any evil that might taint your moral purity (much less your fingernails).

    Does this teaching from Matthew’s gospel ring a bell?

    Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
    Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

    • Agree: Jacques Sheete
    • Replies: @alexander
  30. @RobinG

    Thank you Thank you, RobinG, for the injection of sanity.
    Gilad Atzmon has a knack for deconstructing bogus and pedestrian discourse.

  31. alexander says:


    I think you have lost it.

  32. alexander says:


    I think you have lost it, Dude.

    But for arguments sake ,in regards to Iraq 91, I can tell you I read Campbell’s statement.

    And it was duly noted.

    Does it pull back the curtain, for me , on the deep mechanisms of evil circulating through the mind of Bush Sr when he chose to push Saddam OUT of Kuwait, by force ?

    No, it really doesn’t.

    What it shows is “Campbells view” of Bush sr’s decision making process, which is neither definitive or conclusive, but informative and worth reading.

    And it seems to have conveniently LEFT OUT the part about the US being on the front line of maintaining the international laws and treatises we had committed ourselves to, in the post WWII era.

    I don’t see that as the cornerstone of deviant thought, S2C. Sorry.

    Can either you or I say to a certainty that a “negotiated” agreement among the Arab countries, would not have languished for months, if not years, in perpetual banter and concessionary mis-steps ?

    No. we can’t.

    And if mr Gorbachev was so opposed to “forcing” Saddam out, why didn’t he VETO any of the Security Council resolutions, when they came up for a vote ?

    It seems that the entire WORLD, not just Mr. Bush Sr, were unanimous in the condemnation of Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.

    This is clearly what the record shows (maybe you should take the time to read it)

    It obviously never occurred to YOU, the remote possibility that Saddam thought we were bluffing, and that we would never engage him militarily to force him back to his borders.

    So maybe he could just SIT there,indefinitely listening to our meaningless, toothless ‘saber rattling ” for decades ?

    Not a possibility , huh ?

    Furthermore, Saddam made a rather outrageous and definitive claim that Kuwait was part of a “Greater Historic Iraq”, and that it was his destiny to take it and keep it.

    Sounds kinda like he was staking his claim in the ground, and challenging everybody to DO something about it?


    The gist I got from ambassador Joe Wilson’s testimony was this…”if you want to negotiate, negotiate, but GET THE HELL OUT of Kuwait, FIRST and then we can negotiate.

    Basically, first comply with the law, or face the consequences.

    That is not the epitome EVIL,(in my book) that is hard politics at the waters edge of engagement.

    If there was an “unjust” element to Desert Storm it was that it was such a “bone-crushing” rout.

    We really dished it out, hard…..No games…We decimated the ENTIRE Iraqi Army faster than you can spell Baghdad.

    Furthermore, if you are so convinced of Bush Sr’s “unjust-ness” in either engaging or prosecuting 91, why didn’t he force the conflict (and the killing ) to rage on for years ?

    Isn’t that what “evil” does ?

    Why didn’t he , overcome by the deep malevolence you are so willing graft onto his persona, continue the conflict until Saddam,as well as tens of millions of Iraqis, were dead and buried ?

    The argument he made at the time NOT TO DO IT was a good one..Namely that .the removal of Saddam from power would precipitate a civil war and destabilize the entire region.

    Real EVIL thinking , huh?

    Furthermore,It was never authorized to remove Saddam FROM POWER, just from KUWAIT.

    So there was no MISSION CREEP, to Desert Storm, we achieved our objectives and got out.

    This was a war designed around a mission, when the mission was complete ,so was the war.

    Nor were there massive scores of US soldier suicides, numbering over twenty a day, after Desert Storm.

    I recall hardly any.

    If it was the epitome of the unjust slaughter of innocents, as you claim, why didn’t that manifest itself with unrelenting PTSD”s in our soldiers psyche’s when they got home ?

    You have a right to make your arguments for what you believe, S2C. Everybody does. But I certainly don’t have to buy into them on YOUR say so ?

    Quoting scripture, to drive home your banal and unthinking arguments doesn’t impress me.

    In fact ,it makes you look like quite the fool.

  33. @RobinG

    At least the new rule will keep the two of you off the West Bank.

  34. @Patriot

    Gaza is the largest and longest-running concentration camp in Earth’s history. Shame on the Jews. Of all people, they should know better.

    Yes, living in the midst of millions of Arabs would indeed be a concentration camp. That’s why the Iberians pushed them out.

  35. Furthermore, if you are so convinced of Bush Sr’s “unjust-ness” in either engaging or prosecuting 91, why didn’t he force the conflict (and the killing ) to rage on for years ?
    Isn’t that what “evil” does ?
    Why didn’t he , overcome by the deep malevolence you are so willing graft onto his persona, continue the conflict until Saddam,as well as tens of millions of Iraqis, were dead and buried ?

    The argument he made at the time NOT TO DO IT was a good one..Namely that .the removal of Saddam from power would precipitate a civil war and destabilize the entire region.
    Real EVIL thinking , huh?

    According to Jeffrey Engel, who studied the Bush records on the event, that is NOT the argument that the Bush 41 team made.
    Here’s what Engel said to an audience at Texas A&M (he was introduced by Andy Card, who had been Bush Jr’s Chief of Staff):

    There’s a very important distinction here which I would like to make which I think was a revelation to me within the archives and that — there has always been a question when the decision comes — when the study of the decision comes up about whether or not American forces should have continued on to Baghdad in 1991.

    This was not a discussion within the White House for a very important reason: The ultimate goal or one of the the ultimate goals beyond the liberation of Kuwait was the removal of Saddam Hussein from power. There was a 100 percent certainty on the part of high level American officials that this was going to happen anyway.

    Saddam Hussain had been embarrassed; his own people rising up against him, his own army was out to get him. If he lived weeks it would have been a shock instead of days. 999 times out of 1,000 I think that is exactly how things would have played out, that Saddam would not have survived.

    Unfortunately from the Bush administration’s perspective, George H. W. Bush’s perspective, Saddam rolled the dice and made it. But I think that given the question and those odds again I suspect they would take the same bet again.

    You seem to have different information. If so, play your cards.

    Furthermore,It was never authorized to remove Saddam FROM POWER, just from KUWAIT.
    So there was no MISSION CREEP, to Desert Storm, we achieved our objectives and got out.
    This was a war designed around a mission, when the mission was complete ,so was the war.

    What do you call 12 years of sanctions and no-fly zone, and bombing campaign that cost the lives of 1 million Iraqis? In 1999, to draw attention to the injustices being visited upon the Iraqi people, Pope John Paul II visited Iraq, a visit which Jewish organizations strenuously criticized

    How gratifying that US soldiers did not suffer PTSD and that you are not aware of suicides among Gulf War veterans.

    No doubt the Iraqi people wish they could say that their people are experiencing similar psychological and physical well-being, but unfortunately, they can’t: their newborn babies are born hideously deformed, they professional class has fled the country (Iran has sheltered perhaps 2 million Iraqis for over a decade; I’ve spoken with some of them). Their culture has been shattered.

    George H W Bush set that ball rolling, his son accelerated its devastating slide to the destruction of the Iraqi state.

    Your “what if” queries re scenarios that might have developed had the Arabs resolved the conflict in their own way suggest a disregard of what had been for a thousand years a consensus among civilized nations; namely, that all options be exhausted before war is wage; war should always be a last resort. The “what if s” should have been given every opportunity to play themselves out.

    You can sling about all the epithets you wish, Alexander; your hyperventilating does not change by one hair’s breadth the fact of what Iraq has become today is the direct the result of G H W Bush’s evil — yes, evil — decision to invade an otherwise intact nation, to swing his own pathetic dick and aggrandize American power.

    • Replies: @alexander
  36. alexander says:

    Listen to the usual bromides of a true charlatan who cannot help but conflate 91 and 03 ?

    The true hallmark of a fallacious fraud.

    “Bush senior never said he refrained from finishing Saddam off precisely because it feared it would lead to a civil war and destabilize the region ”

    Of COURSE he said it , you ignorant fool , you pathetic, ignorant fool.

    And I also recall, how he even left the Kurds to be slaughtered by Saddam , rather than continue the invasion. He had to walk away because maintaining regional stability was MORE IMPORTANT than salvaging the Kurdish revolt…..Tough hard decisions at the time, but the right ones , you lying shmuck.

    and I ALSO recall none other than “Dick Cheney”himself stating for the record, that removing Saddam Hussein from power was not worth the life of ONE US Serviceman, when he was questioned about it shortly after desert storm was complete.

    I suppose he never said that either, right, you fatuous cad ?

    What changed our policy ? .

    The 2001 NEOCON COUP changed it..the Neocons changed it, you TOAD !

    Wake up, smell the coffee.!

    If Bush Sr had been re-elected he probably would have been sanctioning ISRAEL for its land grabbing in Palestine, he certainly had every intention of withholding ALL loans to Israel until it fully complied with international law, which is precisely why the Neocons drove so hard to get Clinton in and Bush Sr.OUT !

    I suppose he never said THAT either ?..Right, you fraudulent toad ?

    The neocons forced 03 to happen , to do EXACTLY what bush senior feared would happen.

    CREATE A CIVIL WAR and Destabilize the ENTIRE REGION.

    It was THEIR goal, not Bush sr.’s

    What a shmuck you are, S2C, what a total misinformed shmuck !

    Thank the lord there are so few of you around.

    • Agree: SolontoCroesus
  37. @alexander

    Code Blue @ #39.

    Is there a psychiatrist in the house, preferably burly enough to apply a strait jacket tout suite.

  38. @alexander

    Feeling better, sweetheart?
    You had a bit of a meltdown & we were worried about you.

    Don’t let it trouble you too much — we all lose it from time to time.
    We’re all sure you’ll be back in stride soon.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Paul Craig Roberts Comments via RSS