The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 John Pilger Archive
Assange: Clinton Is a Cog for Goldman Sachs & the Saudis
John Pilger Exclusive Video and Transcript
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, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

Whistleblower Julian Assange has given one of his most incendiary interviews ever in a John Pilger Special, courtesy of Dartmouth Films, in which he summarizes what can be gleaned from the tens of thousands of Clinton emails released by WikiLeaks this year.

John Pilger, another Australian émigré, conducted the 25-minute interview at the Ecuadorian Embassy, where Assange has been trapped since 2012 for fear of extradition to the US. Last month, Assange had his internet access cut off for alleged “interference” in the American presidential election through the work of his website.

‘Clinton made FBI look weak, now there is anger’

John Pilger: What’s the significance of the FBI’s intervention in these last days of the U.S. election campaign, in the case against Hillary Clinton?

Julian Assange: If you look at the history of the FBI, it has become effectively America’s political police. The FBI demonstrated this by taking down the former head of the CIA [General David Petraeus] over classified information given to his mistress. Almost no-one is untouchable. The FBI is always trying to demonstrate that no-one can resist us. But Hillary Clinton very conspicuously resisted the FBI’s investigation, so there’s anger within the FBI because it made the FBI look weak. We’ve published about 33,000 of Clinton’s emails when she was Secretary of State. They come from a batch of just over 60,000 emails, [of which] Clinton has kept about half – 30,000 — to herself, and we’ve published about half.

Then there are the Podesta emails we’ve been publishing. [John] Podesta is Hillary Clinton’s primary campaign manager, so there’s a thread that runs through all these emails; there are quite a lot of pay-for-play, as they call it, giving access in exchange for money to states, individuals and corporations. [These emails are] combined with the cover up of the Hillary Clinton emails when she was Secretary of State, [which] has led to an environment where the pressure on the FBI increases.

‘Russian government not the source of Clinton leaks’

JP: The Clinton campaign has said that Russia is behind all of this, that Russia has manipulated the campaign and is the source for WikiLeaks and its emails.

JA: The Clinton camp has been able to project that kind of neo-McCarthy hysteria: that Russia is responsible for everything. Hilary Clinton stated multiple times, falsely, that seventeen U.S. intelligence agencies had assessed that Russia was the source of our publications. That is false; we can say that the Russian government is not the source.

READ MORE: Assange: WikiLeaks did not receive Clinton emails from Russian govt (JOHN PILGER EXCLUSIVE)

WikiLeaks has been publishing for ten years, and in those ten years, we have published ten million documents, several thousand individual publications, several thousand different sources, and we have never got it wrong.

‘Saudi Arabia & Qatar funding ISIS and Clinton’

JP: The emails that give evidence of access for money and how Hillary Clinton herself benefited from this and how she is benefitting politically, are quite extraordinary. I’m thinking of when the Qatari representative was given five minutes with Bill Clinton for a million dollar cheque.

JA: And twelve million dollars from Morocco …

JP: Twelve million from Morocco yeah.

JA: For Hillary Clinton to attend [a party].

JP: In terms of the foreign policy of the United States, that’s where the emails are most revealing, where they show the direct connection between Hillary Clinton and the foundation of jihadism, of ISIL, in the Middle East. Can you talk about how the emails demonstrate the connection between those who are meant to be fighting the jihadists of ISIL, are actually those who have helped create it.

JA: There’s an early 2014 email from Hillary Clinton, not so long after she left the State Department, to her campaign manager John Podesta that states ISIL is funded by the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Now this is the most significant email in the whole collection, and perhaps because Saudi and Qatari money is spread all over the Clinton Foundation. Even the U.S. government agrees that some Saudi figures have been supporting ISIL, or ISIS. But the dodge has always been that, well it’s just some rogue Princes, using their cut of the oil money to do whatever they like, but actually the government disapproves.

But that email says that no, it is the governments of Saudi and Qatar that have been funding ISIS.

JP: The Saudis, the Qataris, the Moroccans, the Bahrainis, particularly the Saudis and the Qataris, are giving all this money to the Clinton Foundation while Hilary Clinton is Secretary of State and the State Department is approving massive arms sales, particularly to Saudi Arabia.

JA: Under Hillary Clinton, the world’s largest ever arms deal was made with Saudi Arabia, [worth] more than $80 billion. In fact, during her tenure as Secretary of State, total arms exports from the United States in terms of the dollar value, doubled.

JP: Of course the consequence of that is that the notorious terrorist group called ISIl or ISIS is created largely with money from the very people who are giving money to the Clinton Foundation.

JA: Yes.

JP:That’s extraordinary.

‘Clinton has been eaten alive by her ambition’

JA: I actually feel quite sorry for Hillary Clinton as a person because I see someone who is eaten alive by their ambitions, tormented literally to the point where they become sick; they faint as a result of [the reaction] to their ambitions. She represents a whole network of people and a network of relationships with particular states. The question is how does Hilary Clinton fit in this broader network? She’s a centralising cog. You’ve got a lot of different gears in operation from the big banks like Goldman Sachs and major elements of Wall Street, and Intelligence and people in the State Department and the Saudis.

She’s the centraliser that inter-connects all these different cogs. She’s the smooth central representation of all that, and ‘all that’ is more or less what is in power now in the United States. It’s what we call the establishment or the DC consensus. One of the more significant Podesta emails that we released was about how the Obama cabinet was formed and how half the Obama cabinet was basically nominated by a representative from City Bank. This is quite amazing.

JP: Didn’t Citybank supply a list …. ?

JA: Yes.

JP: … which turned out to be most of the Obama cabinet.

JA: Yes.

JP: So Wall Street decides the cabinet of the President of the United States?

JA: If you were following the Obama campaign back then, closely, you could see it had become very close to banking interests.

JA: So I think you can’t properly understand Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy without understanding Saudi Arabia. The connections with Saudi Arabia are so intimate.

‘Libya is Hillary Clinton’s war’

JP:Why was she so demonstrably enthusiastic about the destruction of Libya? Can you talk a little about just what the emails have told us – told you – about what happened there? Because Libya is such a source for so much of the mayhem now in Syria: the ISIL, jihadism, and so on. And it was almost Hillary Clinton’s invasion. What do the emails tell us about that?

JA: Libya, more than anyone else’s war, was Hillary Clinton’s war. Barak Obama initially opposed it. Who was the person championing it? Hillary Clinton. That’s documented throughout her emails. She had put her favoured agent, Sidney Blumenthal, on to that; there’s more than 1700 emails out of the thirty three thousand Hillary Clinton emails that we’ve published, just about Libya. It’s not that Libya has cheap oil. She perceived the removal of Gaddafi and the overthrow of the Libyan state — something that she would use in her run-up to the general election for President.

So in late 2011 there is an internal document called the Libya Tick Tock that was produced for Hillary Clinton, and it’s the chronological description of how she was the central figure in the destruction of the Libyan state, which resulted in around 40,000 deaths within Libya; jihadists moved in, ISIS moved in, leading to the European refugee and migrant crisis.

Not only did you have people fleeing Libya, people fleeing Syria, the destabilisation of other African countries as a result of arms flows, but the Libyan state itself err was no longer able to control the movement of people through it. Libya faces along to the Mediterranean and had been effectively the cork in the bottle of Africa. So all problems, economic problems and civil war in Africa — previously people fleeing those problems didn’t end up in Europe because Libya policed the Mediterranean. That was said explicitly at the time, back in early 2011 by Gaddafi: ‘What do these Europeans think they’re doing, trying to bomb and destroy the Libyan State? There’s going to be floods of migrants out of Africa and jihadists into Europe, and this is exactly what happened.

‘Trump won’t be permitted to win’

JP: You get complaints from people saying, ‘What is WikiLeaks doing? Are they trying to put Trump in the Whitehouse?’

JA: My answer is that Trump would not be permitted to win. Why do I say that? Because he’s had every establishment off side; Trump doesn’t have one establishment, maybe with the exception of the Evangelicals, if you can call them an establishment, but banks, intelligence [agencies], arms companies… big foreign money … are all united behind Hillary Clinton, and the media as well, media owners and even journalists themselves.

JP: There is the accusation that WikiLeaks is in league with the Russians. Some people say, ‘Well, why doesn’t WikiLeaks investigate and publish emails on Russia?’

JA: We have published about 800,000 documents of various kinds that relate to Russia. Most of those are critical; and a great many books have come out of our publications about Russia, most of which are critical. Our [Russia]documents have gone on to be used in quite a number of court cases: refugee cases of people fleeing some kind of claimed political persecution in Russia, which they use our documents to back up.

JP: Do you yourself take a view of the U.S. election? Do you have a preference for Clinton or Trump?

JA: [Let’s talk about] Donald Trump. What does he represent in the American mind and in the European mind? He represents American white trash, [which Hillary Clinton called] ‘deplorable and irredeemable’. It means from an establishment or educated cosmopolitan, urbane perspective, these people are like the red necks, and you can never deal with them. Because he so clearly — through his words and actions and the type of people that turn up at his rallies — represents people who are not the middle, not the upper middle educated class, there is a fear of seeming to be associated in any way with them, a social fear that lowers the class status of anyone who can be accused of somehow assisting Trump in any way, including any criticism of Hillary Clinton. If you look at how the middle class gains its economic and social power, that makes absolute sense.

‘US attempting to squeeze WikiLeaks through my refugee status’

JP: I’d like to talk about Ecuador, the small country that has given you refuge and [political asylum] in this embassy in London. Now Ecuador has cut off the internet from here where we’re doing this interview, in the Embassy, for the clearly obvious reason that they are concerned about appearing to intervene in the U.S. election campaign. Can you talk about why they would take that action and your own views on Ecuador’s support for you?

JA: Let’s let go back four years. I made an asylum application to Ecuador in this embassy, because of the U.S. extradition case, and the result was that after a month, I was successful in my asylum application. The embassy since then has been surrounded by police: quite an expensive police operation which the British government admits to spending more than £12.6 million. They admitted that over a year ago. Now there’s undercover police and there are robot surveillance cameras of various kinds — so that there has been quite a serious conflict right here in the heart of London between Ecuador, a country of sixteen million people, and the United Kingdom, and the Americans who have been helping on the side. So that was a brave and principled thing for Ecuador to do. Now we have the U.S. election [campaign], the Ecuadorian election is in February next year, and you have the White House feeling the political heat as a result of the true information that we have been publishing.

WikiLeaks does not publish from the jurisdiction of Ecuador, from this embassy or in the territory of Ecuador; we publish from France, we publish from, from Germany, we publish from The Netherlands and from a number of other countries, so that the attempted squeeze on WikiLeaks is through my refugee status; and this is, this is really intolerable. [It means] that [they] are trying to get at a publishing organisation; [they] try and prevent it from publishing true information that is of intense interest to the American people and others about an election.

JP: Tell us what would happen if you walked out of this embassy.

JA: I would be immediately arrested by the British police and I would then be extradited either immediately to the United States or to Sweden. In Sweden I am not charged, I have already been previously cleared [by the Senior Stockholm Prosecutor Eva Finne]. We were not certain exactly what would happen there, but then we know that the Swedish government has refused to say that they will not extradite me to the United States we know they have extradited 100 per cent of people whom the U.S. has requested since at least 2000. So over the last fifteen years, every single person the U.S. has tried to extradite from Sweden has been extradited, and they refuse to provide a guarantee [that won’t happen].

JP: People often ask me how you cope with the isolation in here.

JA: Look, one of the best attributes of human beings is that they’re adaptable; one of the worst attributes of human beings is they are adaptable. They adapt and start to tolerate abuses, they adapt to being involved themselves in abuses, they adapt to adversity and they continue on. So in my situation, frankly, I’m a bit institutionalised — this [the embassy] is the world .. it’s visually the world [for me].

JP: It’s the world without sunlight, for one thing, isn’t it?

JA: It’s the world without sunlight, but I haven’t seen sunlight in so long, I don’t remember it.

JP: Yes.

JA: So , yes, you adapt. The one real irritant is that my young children — they also adapt. They adapt to being without their father. That’s a hard, hard adaption which they didn’t ask for.

JP: Do you worry about them?

JA: Yes, I worry about them; I worry about their mother.

‘I am innocent and in arbitrary detention’

JP: Some people would say, ‘Well, why don’t you end it and simply walk out the door and allow yourself to be extradited to Sweden?’

JA: The U.N. [the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention] has looked into this whole situation. They spent eighteen months in formal, adversarial litigation. [So it’s] me and the U.N. verses Sweden and the U.K. Who’s right? The U.N. made a conclusion that I am being arbitrarily detained illegally, deprived of my freedom and that what has occurred has not occurred within the laws that the United Kingdom and Sweden, and that [those countries] must obey. It is an illegal abuse. It is the United Nations formally asking, ‘What’s going on here? What is your legal explanation for this? [Assange] says that you should recognise his asylum.’ [And here is]

Sweden formally writing back to the United Nations to say, ‘No, we’re not going to [recognise the UN ruling], so leaving open their ability to extradite.

I just find it absolutely amazing that the narrative about this situation is not put out publically in the press, because it doesn’t suit the Western establishment narrative – that yes, the West has political prisoners, it’s a reality, it’s not just me, there’s a bunch of other people as well. The West has political prisoners. Of course, no state accepts [that it should call] the people it is imprisoning or detaining for political reasons, political prisoners. They don’t call them political prisoners in China, they don’t call them political prisoners in Azerbaijan and they don’t call them political prisoners in the United States, U.K. or Sweden; it is absolutely intolerable to have that kind of self-perception.

JA: Here we have a case, the Swedish case, where I have never been charged with a crime, where I have already been cleared [by the Stockholm prosecutor] and found to be innocent, where the woman herself said that the police made it up, where the United Nations formally said the whole thing is illegal, where the State of Ecuador also investigated and found that I should be given asylum. Those are the facts, but what is the rhetoric?

JP: Yes, it’s different.

JA: The rhetoric is pretending, constantly pretending that I have been charged with a crime, and never mentioning that I have been already previously cleared, never mentioning that the woman herself says that the police made it up.

[The rhetoric] is trying to avoid [the truth that ] the U.N. formally found that the whole thing is illegal, never even mentioning that Ecuador made a formal assessment through its formal processes and found that yes, I am subject to persecution by the United States.

(Republished from RT by permission of author or representative)
Hide 20 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. The top people in each federal agency are political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the President. All the others are career government employees who are expected to follow laws and not abuse their job politically. Thus the conflict between Obama’s FBI Director and his Attorney General, and actual FBI agents.

    Everyone has forgot that Obama pardoned Clinton last April, when he publicly proclaimed her innocent:


    The president went in depth in his defense of his former secretary of state, even after saying he had to be careful because of the ongoing investigations in the Department of Justice and Congress.

    “I continue to believe that she has not jeopardized America’s national security,” Obama said.

    Obama was confronted about 2,000 email exchanges that had to be redacted for containing classified information when they were released by the State Department. Those emails were found to have passed through Clinton’s private email server.


    So Obama admitted that he shouldn’t comment, but went ahead and declared her innocent with bizarre logic that her e-mails really didn’t contain classified information, but that info cannot be made public, because it’s classified. Others argued that she “accidentally” hired someone to install an insecure e-mail server in her private home, and “accidentally” used it thousands of times over many years. She also had her maid, who is not even a government employee or a citizen, handle classified info.

    When career FBI agents privately complained, they were called unprofessional anti-Clinton zealots.

  2. I reread Greg Hood’s excellent article in an April 2015 issue of Radix Journal (“The President America Deserves”). He pointed out then, and we’re seeing now, that the Clintons are never stronger than when embroiled in scandal–it is a feature, not a bug, to a wide portion of the Democratic constituency.

    Fasten your seatbelts, fellow alt-righters; We’re in for a long, rough ride.

  3. Greg Bacon says: • Website

    The fix is in, has been since the Wicked Witch of the East announced her candidacy, but only after seeking approval from the real powers in the USA, Wall Street casinos and Israel.

    They know Hillary has bigger balls than Mr. Peace Prize and will gladly finish razing Syria, then it will be off to carpet bomb Iran to smithereens.

    If you think Bush, then Obama were terrible presidents, wait until the psycho-killer from Arkansas gets her bloody paws on the Justice D and the Pentagon.

  4. Rehmat says:

    I’m surprised a veteran journalist like John Pilger needed Julian Assange, a former CIA-Mossad (claimed by Gordon Duff while rejected by former Israeli and ex-Jew Israel Shamir, Counterpunch, October 2, 2012), to Clinton family’s DARK HISTORY.

    I remember Assange’s interview with the leader of Lebanese Islamic Resistance Hizbullah, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah at RT in April 2012.

    In the interview, Sheikh Nasrallah called Israel an illegal entity built on Palestinian land. And just because the Jews are occupying the land by force – it doesn’t make it their country under international and moral laws.

    “The Palestinian land is the property of the Palestinian people. The passage of time does not turn the right into wrong. If the house was your property, and I occupied it by force, this doesn’t make it my property even after 50 or 100 years. Anyway this is our ideological and legal opinion, ”said Nasrallah.

    Nasrallah said Hizbullah believes in one state solution for the occupied Palestine with equal rights for both foreign Jews and the native Muslims and Christians under a democratically elected government……

    You can listen to the entire interview alive below.

    • Replies: @Sherman
    , @Ace
  5. Ram says:

    As Assange reiterated, Trump will NOT BE ALLOWED to win by the NWO. The plebs will have to learn to live with it.

  6. vonCol says:

    One myth often told, in the US and Europe, refugees are after government handouts and they come to take our jobs.

    Before US led NATO invasion and murdering Gaddafi, the Libyan government offered free health care, free education and for a lot people their home was half paid by the government.

    Libyans once enjoyed a higher standard of living than two-thirds of the planet. Now their country is terrorist stronghold ruled by competing warlords

    How did it come to this?

    • Replies: @Rehmat
    , @Ace
  7. Thank you, sir, for substantiating many of my suspicions, not that they were ever in doubt.

    …but banks, intelligence [agencies], arms companies… big foreign money … are all united behind Hillary Clinton, and the media as well, media owners and even journalists themselves.

    … the Obama cabinet was formed and how half the Obama cabinet was basically nominated by a representative from City Bank.

    Under Hillary Clinton, the world’s largest ever arms deal was made with Saudi Arabia, [worth] more than $80 billion. In fact, during her tenure as Secretary of State, total arms exports from the United States in terms of the dollar value, doubled.

    Yet vast portions of the “do gooder” ‘Merkin public will vote for the Harpy Harridan nevertheless. Go figure.

  8. “For who can be so tolerant of this monstrous city, who so iron of soul, as to contain himself …?”

    ” If you want to be anybody nowadays, you must dare some crime that merits narrow Gyara[23] or a gaol; honesty is praised and left to shiver.

    It is to their crimes that men owe their pleasure-grounds and palaces, their fine tables and old silver goblets with goats standing out in relief. For when was Vice more rampant? When did the maw of Avarice gape wider? When was gambling so reckless? Men come not now with purses to the hazard of the gaming table, but with a treasure-chest beside them. ”

    Juvenal, SATIRE I, ~ 100AD

    Difficile Est Saturam Non Scribere

    11Like a partridge that hatches eggs it did not lay
    are those who gain riches by unjust means.
    When their lives are half gone, their riches will desert them,
    and in the end they will prove to be fools.

    -Jeremiah 17:11

  9. mcohen says:

    the names are falling out of julians sky but for what purpose.the 17 the novemb er will be an indication of that

  10. Rehmat says:

    Huffington Post being a Ziocon propaganda outlet is hiding the real culprit behind the destruction of the Africa’s richest and socialist regime and Nazi-style murder of Qaddafi – the Zionist entity.

    “I have made myself a rule. Whnever I hear a person speak in the name of ‘Jewish values’ or ‘as a Jew’, I immediately seek cover. I suggest you do the same,” Gilad Atzmon, Israeli-born Jewish writer, author, musician and blogger, September 14, 2012.

    French Jewish journalist and political activist, Bernard-Henri Levy, was the driving force behind the former French half-Jewish President Nicolas Sarkozy’s war on Libya to remove Qaddafi from power. Last November, speaking at the first national convention in Paris, organized by the French Israel Lobby, the Council of Jewish Organization of France, Levy boasted that he lead the anti-Qaddafi campaign because it was a Jewish thing to do.

    “What I have done all these months, I did as a Jew. And like all the Jews of the world, I was worried. Despite legitimate anxiety is an uprising to be welcomed with favor, we were dealing with one of the worst enemy of Israel,” said Levy.

    Levy has even produced a documentary on French attack on Libya, ‘The Oath of Tobruk’ which was premiered at Cannes June 2012. The documentary shows Levy’s contributions towards the destruction of the richest Muslim-majority African country. Levy attended the premiere along with four Libyan rebel leaders.

  11. Sherman says:

    Hey Homer

    What exactly does this rant of yours have to to do with topic of article?

    Anyway, perhaps the inhabitants of Occupied Palestine should enjoy the same high quality of life and freedoms as the citizens of Pakistan do.


    • Replies: @Rehmat
  12. Rehmat says:

    I know Sharon, every Israeli coward is irked by the very mention of Hizbullah name – because no other armed group has kicked Jewish army’s AZZ as hard as Hizbullah did in 2006.

    Pakistanis have not sucked $3 trillion from the US taxpayer since 1970s – but their 34% children don’t live in poverty as Jewish children in Israel (Ha’aretz, 2011).


  13. Eric Zuesse says: • Website

    Julian Assange is a hero.

    • Replies: @Chuck Orloski
  14. @Eric Zuesse

    “Julian Assange is a hero.”

    Hold on, partner?

    As Americans cast votes tomorrow for either Trump or Hillary, few are aware of the fact that both candidate claim to be opposed to passage of the Trans Pacific Partnership, until of course one of them takes office and the T.P.P. proceeds under a different brand name.

    Maybe Assange is a real hero, but if only he would “blow the whistle” on email exchanges transpiring between Wall Street mandarins and Forbidden City money changers?

    Grant it… maybe Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s encryption is too difficult for Wikileaks to access, but in the meantime, it’s informational to look at today’s WSJ front page article (below) and learn what “riches are there to be pursued by unjust means” & going on behind the Big 6 Media silk screens.–wsj-20161107-00067

    Thank you!
    “The world is full of cunning;” a lyric from Tom Waits song “The fall of Troy.”

  15. Ace says:

    You have sovereign rights to what you can take and hold militarily. Period.

    Legal opinions from august tribunals can be delivered to the army of the now-sovereign state all day every day.

    If Arabs think the Israeli presence is intolerable or “illegal” let them defeat the Israelis militarily. Until that happens their whining is boring, especially coming from people whose nations are the product of naked Muslim aggressions themselves.

    • Replies: @Rehmat
  16. Ace says:

    Not all “refugees” are from Libya.

  17. Primary analysis: Fake interview

    The subject and the interviewer never appear in the same shot. The answers to questions are disconnected. Interviewer uses the trick of asking questions that frame the interview event to specific dates e.g. post internet cutoff, but the answers are general and never provide the same sort of time stamping.

    Interesting question: obviously a compromised WL and a fake Assange (remember the fake Osamas?) will prove useful, but why is a state actor (who else?) using an Assange machine to communicate this specific disinfo?

  18. JohnDough says:

    I saw this video and it supports other things I’ve read. Very strange times but something fishy is going on! Often people want someone close by to keep an eye on their expenditures to make sure they get their money’s worth. Emails help in this capacity. Weiner also had a possible motive for selling or trading government emails.

  19. Rehmat says:

    What a moronic comment.

    Palestinians have being fighting Europe’s UNWANTED JEWS who are supported by the US, UK, Germany, Russia, France, and China since the 1940s.

    And why those so-called militarily powerful civilized nations are supporting Jewish occupation of Palestine – because they suffered at the hands of Jewish elites just like Palestinians in the past.

    On September 16, 2014, Janet C. Phelan, an investigative journalist and author, published an informative post, entitled, The United States and Israel: A Dance of Deception in which she shed some light over the European’s hatred towards Jews, Zionism, Israel, Israel’s Dumb Iron Dome and the new Jewish religion, the Holocaust.

    “To understand the dysfunctional US-Israel relationship which has been plagued with self-deception, betrayal and false intent from its inception. To begin with, one must understand that the state of Israel was in large part created by those who despised Jews,” Phelan said.

    “In fact, Roosevelt’s own personal racial ideas might be considered to be somewhat aligned with Hitler’s. His refusal to raise immigration quotas for Jews helped to ensure that Jews would be trapped in Eastern Europe. As reported by Rafael Medoff, director of the David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies in an article for the Los Angeles Times: “In 1923, as a member of the Harvard board of directors, Roosevelt decided there were too many Jewish students at the college and helped institute a quota to limit the number admitted. In 1938, he privately suggested that Jews in Poland were dominating the economy and were therefore to blame for provoking anti-Semitism there. In 1941, he remarked at a Cabinet meeting that there were too many Jews among federal employees in Oregon. In 1943, he told government officials in Allied-liberated North Africa that the number of local Jews in various professions “should be definitely limited” so as to “eliminate the specific and understandable complaints which the Germans bore towards the Jews in Germany,” Phelan said.

    • Replies: @Ace
  20. Ace says:

    Wow. Talk about harshing my mellow, Rehmat.

    That’s all very interesting. And the Arabs propose to recover the lands of Israel how?

    Or are they going to parse commas in U.N. resolutions and engage in pointless rocket attacks and suicide bombings forever?

    Just curious.

Current Commenter

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 have been licensed to 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 John Pilger Comments via RSS