The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Daniel McAdams Archive
The Neocon Foreign Policy Walmart
🔊 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, 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
List of Bookmarks
Republican Candidate Scott Walker. Credit: The Ron Paul Institute
Republican Candidate Scott Walker. Credit: The Ron Paul Institute

One of the most depressing things about watching — even from a distance — the quadrennial race for the White House is seeing what passes for debate on the one area where the president does have some Constitutional authority: foreign policy.

Candidates who have spent little or no time studying or traveling to the rest of the world, and, in the fashion of many Americans in the age of Empire, see the rest of the world as just a series of US colonial outposts, apparently consider foreign policy unworthy of serious consideration.

So little do Republican candidates care about foreign policy that most of them have “outsourced” their foreign policy to a single neocon-dominated foreign policy shop called the “John Hay Initiative.” If you wonder why most Republican candidates sound exactly the same on foreign policy, it’s because they are nearly all getting their advice from the same people.

When nearly all candidates look to someone like Eliot Cohen, a founding member of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), to provide an off-the-shelf foreign policy, it should be no surprise that the “debate” in the Republican party is only over which country to attack first.

Any candidate who thinks so little about something so important as America’s place in the world should be automatically disqualified.

But the neocons love it! The “experts” who brought us the 2003 Iraq war and the Libya “liberation” are still in the driver’s seat when it comes to foreign policy.

“Jeb!” has John Hay Initiative members Michael Chertoff and Michael Hayden (remember those crooks?) on board as his advisors.

Marco Rubio reportedly draws from Hay Project member Roger Zakheim, the son of GW Bush administration “vulcan,” Dov Zakheim. Zakheim père, we remember, joined with his fellow neocons to lie the US into war with Iraq, enriching the military-industrial complex, before absconding to the “private sector” to make his millions from the same military-industrial complex. Zakheim quickly and quietly left his position as the Pentagon’s chief financial officer after a trillion dollars went missing and the Government Accountability Office was critical of his handling of matters.

Scott Walker, a soporific candidate who nevertheless still gives neocons like Bill Kristol the vapors, also shops the neocon Walmart of foreign policy, the John Hay Initiative. It should be no surprise, then, that at his big foreign policy coming out speech at the Citadel military college Friday, he unveiled an “aggressive” foreign policy — crying out “America will not be intimidated. And neither will I” — as he promised more war and vowed that “the retreat is over!”

Is this the retreat he is talking about?

Walker reportedly taps into the McCain Institute’s David Kramer, a John Hay member, for his foreign policy wisdom. Kramer is another PNAC alumni, also putting in time at the CIA-affiliated Freedom House and as director of the Bush State Department’s Office of Policy Planning. This must explain Walker’s obsession with taking out Iran. He vowed to “roll back the theocrats in Tehran,” but in fact unlike the US, Tehran has not invaded another country in hundreds of years. What’s to “roll back?”

If Walker actually paid any attention to the quality of advice he gets from his PNAC/John Hay gang he might call for his money back. Walker’s speech was peppered with macho language about “defeat[ing] the barbarians of ISIS,” while also vowing to destroy the two forces actually fighting ISIS — Syria and Iran! In fact, his vow to use the US military to overthrow the Syrian government would without question result in the greatest ISIS victory to date — control of Syria. One need not sympathize with Assad to recognize that he is literally the only thing keeping the whole of Syria out of the hands of ISIS.

John Hay Initiative “experts” also wrote the foreign policy speeches of candidates Carly Fiorina and Chris Christie. No doubt they were behind Fiorina’s astonishingly ignorant vow to make her first call as president to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to “to reassure him that we stand with the state of Israel” and to make her second call to Iran to “to tell him that whatever the deal is that he signed with Obama, there’s a new deal and the new deal is this: Until you submit every facility [where] you have nuclear uranium enrichment to a full set of inspections, we’re going to make it as hard as possible for you to move money around the global financial system.”

Pure PNAC.

These neocons should be in jail, not still deeply ensconced in the Beltway foreign policy halls of power, dining in sumptuous splendor while the rest of America is impoverished by the destructive wars they push. Their lies have cost millions of innocent lives overseas as well. They are a cancer on the country. Any candidate who cares so little about the issues as to accept a “virtual staff” of foreign policy “experts” from those who have gotten every single major foreign policy issue of our time totally and catastrophically wrong has no business holding any elected office.

John Hay? I’d rather shop for a foreign policy expert at Walmart.

(Republished from The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)
Of Related Interest
New think tank needs an Israel reality check
The foreign interventionists really hate Russia
A new front group preaches restraint while embracing interventionism
Hide 55 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. More like cancerous hemorrhoids on the ass of America. Just plain ol’ cancer doesn’t quite do the neocons justice. A minor quibble. Good piece.

  2. Tom_R says:


    Thanks for the interesting article, Sir. These people who advise these candidates are not really advisors but handlers working for the candidate’s real owners and operators–the Jewish Oligarchs who want to make sure that all Candidates are 100% pro-Israel.

    The neocons are basically Jewish liberals who infiltrated the Republican party, calling themselves “neo-conservatives”, because the Democratic party was not hawkish or Pro-Israel enough for them.

    The Judaists wanted to make sure they control both political parties and keep USA Israel’s banana republic.

    The Democratic party receives 50% of its campaign contributions from the Jewish Oligarchs, the Republican party 40%. These are just the official figures. Under the table, the numbers are probably 90% and 80%. So all candidates have to sell themselves and their country to the Lobby to win election.

    • Replies: @Existential Confusion
  3. KA says:

    Great article.Thank you for ratting them out .

    But I have one question – why do these 16 or so GOP hopefuls don’t wants George Bush Jr to be around them. It seems that they are all ready to embrace his policies and ready to complete the unfinished task from that administration .They even answer to the same neocons who shaped his policy . They are entirely comfortable to be around Cheney, Cohen and Abrams . Is this separation from Bush only for public consumption ? It is an interesting psychology .

  4. Let me sum up, if I may: (1) Piss on the John Hay Initiative, (2) piss on the bought-and-paid-for hacks running for President, and (3) piss on Israel-Firsters.

    There! I didn’t overlook anyone, did I?

    • Agree: Tom Welsh
    • Replies: @KA
  5. It’s bad enough that we are forced to support a seditious Jewish victim cult in America.

    Any Republican candidate that plays the Israeli victim cult foreigner support card is going straight to the electoral crapper.

    Count on it.

  6. KA says:
    @Orville H. Larson

    “”Speaking of things that are absolutely disgusting, the Weekly Standard, flagship publication of that nasty little sect known as the neoconservatives, is warming up to Donald Trump. Initially, editor Bill Kristol, who has been known to hitch a ride on any bandwagon as long as it’s moving, declared himself to be “anti-anti-Trump”

    In the most recent issue of his magazine, however, Kristol ran a piece by Julius Krein which praised the racist demagogue for demanding that the Mexican government pay for the giant wall he wants to build. He’s a ‘nationalist,” avers Krein, who would “take something from someone else in order to give it to the American people.” The neocons love his “Make America great again” bullshit, no doubt because it limns their own “national greatness” meme of days gone by. And the resemblance of Trump’s wall to the Israelis’ wall of shame can’t hurt, either….”

    Yes you will miss without knowing unless you keep the vigil on. These interconnected underworld cloaked and veiled forces will find the most promising moving parts and anchor them to that section of public sentiment which has the potential of growing into effective permanent movement. They will cure it,rebrand themselves,and then sell their products under new names and false ownership .
    They would join anti war forces,turn them into pro war forces ,they will cultivate the evangelicals devout but also foster the morbid sexualization of human experiences and natures or identities, they will push for diversity,but keep their quota,they will work for immigration reform and then one day will find a strong undercurrent against immigration and join Donald Trump.

    Years ago these forces had fought ( Podohoretz) against Vietnam war but soon started supporting American Militarism and robust defense spending whose products ended up in Israel. They supported civil right movement but benefitted by surfacing as establishment interlocutor of progressive policies both at home and abroad ,power broker within both pro and anti egalitarian movement.
    They supported New Deal but made sure the financial temples stay under its thumbs.
    Behind the wall of this overt gentile differences,they stayed connected . Behind this wall on Trump border,they will stay connected . They will carry on century old traditions of inserting themselves right in the center of what at any given time is pregnant with the potentialities of furthering their own interests . By jumping on Trump bandwagon,Kristol is making sure that the Zionism gets a new fresh leaf of mandate among the Tea Party and the faceless nameless red state heartland inhabitants whose life have been turned upside down by the same neoconservatism over last 6- 7 decades.

    • Agree: Bill Jones
  7. KA says:

    There is this article in Chicago Tribune’s Perspective section on Sunday 8/14/06 edition by EW Chamberlain III ,a retired Army colonel – Forces of politics,not warfare ,will bring Iraq pull out by 2006 .
    Their were many ideas,concepts,probabilities and dashed hopes in that article. But one thing emerges when it is re read and re visited against the post 2008 development . There was a great possibility of development of war fatigue and bipartisan consensus on no more war.Article did address various other developments and foresaw the other calamities
    ( Sunni attacking Shias and retreat of Sunni reeling from reactive state violence within Iraq ,flight of the Sunni to Saudi and possible further trouble for Saudi Arab . We have seen how Saudi managed that development – by exporting the violence abroad . But who started Sunni violence in Iraq? Was it that Anbar awakenings,deal with local chiefs,and fomenting trouble through false flags ? No one answer fits all sizes of questions . But this whole cauldron of violence was predicted and welcomed by neocons . This Shia Sunni fight doesn’t and can’t hide the faces of the real architects of the mayhem. ) but there was a good chance of antiwar mentality taking hold of both parties .
    What happened.

    That is the war party didn’t allow anti war democrat to prevail but allowed pro war democrat to capture the power . This way they eliminated this war as a factor . Republicans who were at that time were worried of using anti war sentiment by Democrats and accordingly started moving out of Bush Cheney war camps soon found out that they didn’t have to worry of being identified as too eager for more wars . Neocons have created a third rail and that is firm support for any war against any country in the Middle East .
    It was Rahm Emmanuel who made pro wars stance safe among the Democrats. Same time the coals were added to the fire from Lebanon to Somalia through to Gaza and West Bank. So the atmosphere never cooled . It was never allowed to cool.

  8. Mark Green says: • Website

    This is an excellent article. It reminds us that the neocons have no intention of ever leaving Washington, since their plans for a makeover of the Middle East are far from realized. Peace deal or not, Iran still has plenty to worry about. Regime change is still on the PNAC agenda. And after Iran is liberated, it’s on to Putin’s Russia!

    It doesn’t matter how many lives the neocons destroy, how many nations are ruined, or how many battles they lose. The PNAC neocons are unimaginably well-funded, connected at the very highest levels, unscrupulous, uncompromising, and unaccountable.

    If not for the calculated and breathtaking murder sprees they’ve recently orchestrated (otherwise known as the Iraq War and the ‘liberation’ of Libya and Syria) ISIS would not even exist–and Libya and Iraq would be still be functioning societies. In a normal world, these trillion-dollar disasters would inspire some level of reflection (if not indictments). But America is ‘exceptional’.

    Neocon plotters have spawned a host of cancers, most prominently, national disintegration throughout the Middle East. Despite this track record, these armchair warriors are still riding around in limos, giving speeches, signing books, and appearing on TV. How do they get away with it?

    Indeed, what does their bulletproof status tell us about the nature (and role) of our dominant news media?–that they are all co-conspirators.

    PNAC neocons are a kind of predatory chameleon. When worse comes to worse, they simply reinvent themselves, like the Trotsky-ites who–under the instruction of Leo Strauss–morphed into think tank ‘conservatives’ and gradually took over Washington.

    Now this cabal has elevated itself into become America’s permanent regime.

    Neocon colors may change but their ruthless objective remains the same: the acquisition of political power by any means necessary.

    • Agree: geokat62
  9. @Mark Green

    They and their ilk have always needed functioning societies to prey upon.
    The two million of them imported from the oblasts of Eastern Europe between 1880 and 1920 was a massive mistake more terrible than Teddy the drunk Kennedy’s 1965 treason.

    • Agree: Marian
    • Replies: @Rurik
  10. The Neoconservatives also have influence with the Democrats (the Neocons are leftists, after-all). Hillary’s foreign policy record–her support for the Iraq War in 2003, the intervention in Libya, her vocal support for the “moderate” rebel in Syria, and her extreme rhetoric about Putin–makes her indistinguishable from a Neocon. Liberal interventionism, as embodied by Samantha Power and Susan Rice, also strikes me as being quite similar to Neoconservatism.

    • Agree: Orville H. Larson
  11. annamaria says:
    @Mark Green

    “It doesn’t matter how many lives the neocons destroy, how many nations are ruined, or how many battles they lose. The PNAC neocons are unimaginably well-funded, connected at the very highest levels, unscrupulous, uncompromising, and unaccountable.”
    If only that was an epitaph.
    For some reason, there has never been a campaign of making a connection between the visuals of war (mutilated human beings of all ages, ruined cities) and specific people pushing for the wars. It is safe to say that the Lobby and its funders are made of yesterday’s “good Germans” that do not take personal responsibility for the bloody mayhem. PNAC is just a collection of nowadays’ Adolph Eichmanns.

  12. Tom Welsh says:

    Why on earth have they named this “initiative” after John Hay? He was calm, patient, educated, and always ready to see the other person’s (or nation’s) point of view. Although handicapped by his mortal illness, Hay did a lot to moderate the lunatic impulsiveness of President Theodore Roosevelt. He was certainly one of the USA’s most civilized and humane foreign policy leaders, and would have hated today’s Republican policies.

    If you want to get some sympathetic insight into Hay’s life and nature, you could do a lot worse than to read Gore Vidal’s superb novels “Lincoln” and “Empire” (the second and fourth of his six-book series “Narratives of Empire”, stretching from 1776 to 1945).

  13. The reason that The Lobby is pushing so hard for continuing the sanctions again Iran might not have anything to to do with Israel’s fears about its security.

    During the Iraq sanctions that began in earnest during the Bill Clinton era in the 1990s, The Lobby was in the forefront of those pushing for continuation of the genocidal sanctions. Curiously enough, these very same sanctions allowed Israel to get an effective monopoly over the supplying of Iraq with sanctioned items. The sanction allowed Israel, for instance, to gain an effective monopoly over the supply, among many other things, fresh eggs into Iraq during this period.

    Maybe just maybe, the reason that Israel is pushing for the continuation of sanctions against Iran is that the sanctions against the Iranians have allowed Israel to gain a veritable monopoly over Iran’s foreign trade by being heavily involved in the trans-shippping of banned goods both in and out of Iran and therefore very profitably bypassing the very same sanctions it supposedly supports.

    • Replies: @Minnesota Mary
  14. Rurik says:
    @Bill Jones

    But how do you write something cogent and worthwhile and entertaining and to a purpose ..

    when the point seems to be that , based on your general gist , that Hitler was right?

    who want’s to be the one to say that?

    Hitler and the Nazis were vile and arrogant and ultimately led the German people off a cliff

    Yet, one of their tenants was that the Jews (collectively speaking) in their society were not loyal to Germany, but rather were hostile.

    Is it possible to take this one facet of what the Nazis were on about and perhaps look at it through the lens of our own contemporary experience? Would it be prudent for Americans and others especially in the dying West to consider the possibility that some Jews will always work for and towards what they perceive as being ‘good for the Jews’, even when the sum of that equation equals something that is decidedly not good for the rest of us; wars, debt., more debt., immigration, trashed morality, 911, Orwellian surveillance / police state, etc..

    Obviously there are very many Jews of noble intent and exponentially more gentiles of malicious bent- to ever make the evil mistake of a blanket curse upon any race or religion. But as long as the Fed is in the hands of a few Jews, it gives those few such unimaginable and complete power over everything in our society, allowing them to buy everything and everyone of consequence, (media, politicians, academia) that their very worst tribal antipathies and pettiness’s are allowed full and unbridled expression. If you or I had such God like power, we too would abuse it.

    • Replies: @Epaminondas
  15. Marian says:

    I don’t disagree with any of this. However I notice that not once the word Zionist is used. Zionism, neoconservative, and Trotskyism are all interrelated to the point they actually seem one and the same. I read a former insider, whose name currently escapes me, once referred to Zionism as a white supremacist death cult. That would make neoconservatives a death cult on steroids.

    It seems the way to rid the neocon menace is in the hands of countries like China who can cause havoc by mass liquidation of debt. That in turn will send the neocon rats fleeing to their next destination of wealth and privilege. Let’s just hope they don’t use the nukes on their way out the door.

  16. @rabbitbait

    Rabbitbait, I totally agree with you. Israel is not afraid of Iran getting a nuke. They are afraid that Iran’s economy will thrive if the sanctions are lifted. Israel wants to be the sole super economy and power in the Middle East, and the best way to accomplish that is to shut out competition for a bogus reason.

  17. Well, well, well. I just answered the phone, the call was for my wife, When I asked who it was, I was told it was “Americans for a nuclear free Eyeran” I told the treasonous piece of Zionist filth to go fuck himself.

    The Neo-cons are desperate to get their war on.

    • Replies: @Orville H. Larson
  18. @Rurik

    I think you must realize by now that the Jew is intent on destroying the Gentile. Hitler’s failed attempt to get them before they get us will reverberate in the future among our dwindling descendants. And then go silent.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  19. @Mark Green

    Best summary yet of the Neocon “problem”. They won’t stop until jailed when possible and forced to register as foreign agents when not jailable.

  20. annamaria says:

    The heart of the monster explained.
    The following was posted as a comment on Sic Semper Tyrannis

    “…our [US] objective since the fall of the USSR has never been to integrate Russia, but to weaken it, and possibly break Russia up further. I’ll illustrate this with a short excerpt from an article by Richard F. Starr “Russia and the West”, Mediterranean Quarterly, Fall 1995 pgs 76-77:

    The Most Hopeful Scenario
    This would include a genuine transition to democracy and economic relations, based on private enterprise. A ten-year projected decline of the Russian population by 16.5 million to 131.5 million by the year 2005, coupled with about four hundred thousand tons of grain exported for 1996, suggests that the country finally would become able to feed itself. The military-industrial complex is closed down and the armed forces reorganized into a constabulary force, without offensive combat capabilities.
    After the young economist Grigory A. Yavlinsky has been elected president and proclaims a Compact with Russia, an enormous rescue operation is mobilized by the industrialized world. It dwarfs the Mexican bailout. Moscow offers as collateral its natural resources, valued at $29 trillion. The World Bank, International Monetary Fund, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the G-7 organization of seven leading economic powers, and (a – We especially loved this part) private banks in the West and Japan all join in support of this largest assistance program in history.
    The new leadership in Moscow proposes to transform the Federation of Russia, with its twenty-one republics, into a United States of Russia that would encompass forty-six territorial units. Five of the latter are Cossack republics, named after historic military settlements along the border of the former tsarist empire. A continental congress, convened at St. Petersburg, drafts a new constitution and a bill of rights.”

    The important points of this plan were:
    1) Decline of Russia’s population to ~130 million.
    2) Elimination of Russia’s military-industrial sector.
    3) Elimination of Russian military capabilities.
    4) Western control of Russia’s then-$29 trillion natural resources sector, at a price of ~$100 billion (The Mexican bailout Our good Professor Starr referred to came to about $50 billion).
    5) The multiplication of territorial units in Russia, to ensure when that Russia fell apart there would be as many small pieces as possible.

    I recall Frank Gaffney in the 1970s saying that until Russia is reduced once more to the Grand Duchy of Muscovy, it will remain a threat to the United States. Yes, Russia must be broken up until it has no coastline and has a territorial extent of a couple hundred miles radius from Moscow.

    Jeff Sachs, an early advisor to the Soviet then Russian governments on economic reform, notes that in late 1991 the Bush administration made the delivery of food aid conditional on the Soviet government continuing debt repayments even though it was approaching total bankruptcy. This demand was continued until February 1992 when the new Russian government had totally exhausted all of its foreign exchange reserves. Sachs has concluded after long reflection on this and other US policies that were greatly damaging to Russia and her future prospects that succeeding at reforming the Russian economy and democratizing Russian politics was never a US objective.

    Weakening Russia to the maximum extent possible was.

    Russians are well aware of this, and the coup in Kiev last February was the final straw. They have given up their last remaining hope in a non-hostile relationship with the US, and are psychologically prepared for war with the US, even nuclear war. I don’t think this is understood in Versailles-on-the-Potomac. It looks like its denizens expect Putin to be as lethargic in his waging of this conflict as the post-WWII Soviet leadership was.

    Delusion runs deep in Versailles-on-the-Potomac.”

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
  21. @Tom_R

    The Democratic party receives 50% of its campaign contributions from the Jewish Oligarchs, the Republican party 40%. These are just the official figures. Under the table, the numbers are probably 90% and 80%.

    Could you supply some source material for those figures?

    • Replies: @Art
    , @shk12344
    , @Tom_R
    , @Tom_R
  22. Art says:

    I cannot resolve in my mind what evil possessed the Gentiles Cheney and Rumsfeld to embrace the warmongering Jew PNAC gang.

    The best that I can come up with that they were old world Nixonian throwbacks, champions of great power world domination politics. The only people on the planet who really shared that evil intent were the Jews and their fascist Zionism. So they formed an evil cabal.

    When Soviet Russia collapsed the world had a chance for true world peace between the major nations of the world.

    But NO – with an anti-goodness, hell bent on war mindset – Cheney and Rumsfeld and Zionism took over. The price of this is staggering. Democracy itself is failing as a result.

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  23. Art says:
    @Existential Confusion

    “Could you supply some source material for those figures?”

    No we cannot – because American Jews will murder the career of any media person that would provide those figures.

    You know that – so that makes your misleading question very very dishonest — you are part of the Jew cabal that is killing free speech in America.

    In no uncertain terms – you are killing my country.

    • Replies: @Existential Confusion
  24. Realist says:

    To my knowledge all neocons are Jewish. Does anybody know different?

    • Replies: @Realist
  25. Tom_R says:
    @Existential Confusion


    There is a long list of references to MAINSTREAM media sources in this article. Just scroll down the article and you will see the links (ignore the top):

    That article quotes the following sources thus:

    Jewish Power in America: Myth and Reality by Henry L. Feingold

    “The role of campaign contributions given by Jews deserves special mention. Over 60 percent of the campaign funds collected by the Democratic Party and a respectable percentage of Republican campaign funds stem from Jewish sources.” (Feingold, 4)

    The Jerusalem Post

    “IN THIS CONTEXT, the support of American Jewry is enormously important. Obama would presumably seek to avoid alienating his Jewish constituency, 80 percent of whom voted for him and also contributed more than 50% of Democrat campaign funding.”

    Jewish Power by J.J. Goldberg

    Jews account for 20% of campaign contributions to the Republican Party. (Goldberg, 277)

    The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt

    “Indeed, the Washington Post once estimated that Democratic presidential candidates “depend on Jewish supporters to supply as much as 60 percent of the money raised from private sources.” Other estimates are lower, but contributions from Jewish Americans form a substantial share – between 20 and 50 percent – of the contributions made to the Democratic Party and its presidential candidates.”

    The Washington Post

    “In states such as Florida and New York, Jewish voters are a large enough percentage of voters to play a crucial role in election outcomes. In presidential elections, Democratic candidates depend on Jewish supporters to supply as much as 60 percent of the money raised from private sources. Any significant reduction in the financial support will weaken Democratic candidates and the Democratic Party organizations.”

    The Washington Post

    “Jews provided at least half the money donated to the DNC in the 1998 and 2000 election cycles.”

  26. Realist says:

    I am going to amend my comment to:
    To my knowledge the vast majority of neocons are Jewish.

    Since Ronald Reagan was clearly a neocon and not Jewish

    • Replies: @Rurik
  27. Rurik says:

    the Jew is intent on destroying the Gentile

    perhaps, some Jews are, but they would get absolutely nowhere without the eager and enthusiastic participation of a majority of the gentiles. How far would the Jewish agenda have gone without Churchill and FDR? Or without Pres. Wilson for that matter?

    There are some 70 to 80 million “Christian” Zionists in America alone. Men like Hagee are more important to the designs of Jews than the Jews themselves.

    • Replies: @Art
    , @Realist
  28. Rurik says:

    To my knowledge the vast majority of neocons are Jewish.

    as Art mentioned above

    what evil possessed the Gentiles Cheney and Rumsfeld to embrace the warmongering Jew PNAC gang.

    gentile neocons are legion

    I’ve always considered the former Director of the CIA, James Woolsey to be the worst, as in most rabid traitor to this country and its people and eager lickspittle of Zionists, of all the gentile neocons out there. George Will as runner up.

    But for all practical purposes, every single member of the GOP in good standing is a neocon stooge for Israel and traitor to our republic. Ditto every non-Jewish talking head on Faux News or any of the other mainstream (kosher) media.

    They’re at the pulpits of our churches and board rooms of our corporations. They sit on school boards and infest the government of this country at every level.

    The challenge isn’t to find where are the gentile “conservatives” who are neocons, the challenge is to find the ones who aren’t.

    It isn’t that all these minions are ideologically committed to use up every last drop of American blood and treasure for the sake of wars for Israel. It’s just that they know which side of the bread is buttered. They know the noises they’re supposed to make to earn acceptance – and slurp at the trough of lucre that flows to those who make the right sounds.

    • Replies: @Realist
  29. Art says:

    “Men like Hagee are more important to the designs of Jews than the Jews themselves.”

    BS – that is a false story — Hagee would not be on TV if he did not spout the Zionist line 100%.

    He tells the Jews nothing – they tell him. They pat him on the head and say “good little lap dog” as they give him money.

    It is impossible to be a true Christian and not support the poor Palestinian people in their quest for freedom from the evils of Jew Zionism.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  30. Realist says:

    Neocon means a new conservative. Someone who use to be a liberal and is now a conservative.
    The meaning of neocon has been bastardized to mean all most everything.

    James Woolsey, George Will, Dick Chaney would better be described as lickspittles for Zionism, warmongers or hegemons.

    My point was most converts from liberalism to conservatism are Jews and Zionists to boot.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  31. Rurik says:

    Hagee would not be on TV if he did not spout the Zionist line 100%.

    ahh, but you’re making my point sir

    Hagee doesn’t admonish his flock to suckle at the feet of Jews and Israel out of a biblical fervor. Hardly. He does it so his corpulent, waddling waves of ass blubber can be seated in a nice private jet in between whores and feasts.

    Of course it’s impossible to be a Christian and not support the (often Christian) people of Palestine. But my point (and my lament) is that it’s all too easy for the money men to purchase men like Hagee (or almost virtually every single evangelical preacher- and “conservative” politician and “conservative” pundit, etc..) to do their bidding.

    They have to lick that fetid hand if they want fame and fortune. And so we get the ones who lick it clean. Because the other ones are banished. Like Chuck Baldwin for instance.

    • Replies: @Orville H. Larson
  32. Rurik says:

    My point was most converts from liberalism to conservatism are Jews and Zionists to boot.

    I guess you’re right vis-à-vis the Straussian Trotskyists

    but “conservative” whores of Zion (the contemporary neocon, cuckservative) have always been with us

    perhaps the most notorious (and contemptible) was the inimitable William F. Buckley, Jr himself

    • Replies: @Mark Green
  33. @Rurik

    “Hagee doesn’t admonish his flock to suckle at the feet of Jews and Israel out of a biblical fervor. Hardly. He does it so his corpulent, waddling waves of ass blubber can be seated in a nice private jet between whores and feasts.”

    I laughed so Goddamn hard at this, I almost fell out of my chair!

    Yeah, Hagee’s an unprincipled, self-serving hack.

  34. @Bill Jones

    May I infer from your earthy response, Mr. Jones, that you’re an America-Firster, and not an Israel-Firster?!

  35. the crazy fuckers is like “push till someone pushes back” don’t they fucking realize once that happens it would not end with a simple oh well I am sorry.

    I think I am crazy/sadistic as I can’t wait to see the push back happen. it will be epic. history in the making. I want to witness it.

  36. @Art

    You know that – so that makes your misleading question very very dishonest — you are part of the Jew cabal that is killing free speech in America.

    In no uncertain terms – you are killing my country.

    So, in your twisted world, asking for the source of a statistic makes me part of the Jew Cabal, murdering “your” country?

    Your hatred has made you into a caricature. What happened to make you such an idiotic seething mess, Art? Did a Jew beat you up and take your lunch money? Your one redeeming characteristic is that you are so crazy that you do provide moments of comic relief, like some kind of rabid weasel spinning in circles trying to bite its own ass.

    • Replies: @Art
  37. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website

    Walmart? No. Good Will, maybe and even that is a stretch. A defining characteristic of neocons is their militant incompetence.

  38. norm741 says:


  39. @Art

    The only people on the planet who really shared that evil intent were the Jews and their fascist Zionism. So they formed an evil cabal.

    The Saker termed the cabal that is fubaring the world the “Anglo zionists.”

    The same group that Charles Lindbergh identified on Sept 11, 1941 in Iowa.

    Brits are capable of viciousness and mendacity that can make the worst neocon blue with envy — well, maybe not the worst neocon but certainly your rank-and-file Jewish Israel-firster neocon hasbarat.

    The British taught Jews some of their best propaganda tricks — like causing “Josef Goebbels” to become the equivalent of propaganda-master. In fact, the Germans were not that good at propaganda — too rational, not sufficiently emotional.

    The British taught Moshe Dayan practices like home demolitions and starvation practices to subjugate a people. Jews learned well.

    There’s a case that can be made that Henry Morgenthau, Jr. plagiarized his eponymous plan to destroy the German people from Lord Robert Vansittart.
    speaking of plagiarism, — cut-and-pasted from the Wikipedia entry on Sir Robert Vansittart,

    “a senior British diplomat in the period before and during the Second World War. He was Principal Private Secretary to the Prime Minister from 1928 to 1930 and Permanent Under-Secretary at the Foreign Office from 1930 to 1938 and later served as Chief Diplomatic Adviser to the British Government.”

    In Black Record: Germans Past and Present (1941), Vansittart portrayed German history from the time of ancient Rome as a continuous record of aggression. Nazism was just the latest manifestation. Therefore, after Germany was defeated, it must be stripped of all military capacity, including its heavy industries. The German people enthusiastically supported Hitler’s wars of aggression, just as they supported the Franco-Prussian War in 1870 and the First World War in 1914. So they must be thoroughly re-educated under strict Allied supervision for at least a generation. De-Nazification was not enough. The German military elite was the real cause of war, especially the “Prussianist” officer corps and the General Staff: both must be destroyed. In 1943 he wrote:

    In the opinion of the author, it is an illusion to differentiate between the German right, centre, or left, or the German Catholics or Protestants, or the German workers or capitalists. They are all alike, and the only hope for a peaceful Europe is a crushing and violent military defeat followed by a couple of generations of re-education controlled by the United Nations.

    He also wrote “the other Germany has never existed save in a small and ineffective minority”. In other occasions he has also made similar sayings:

    We didn’t go to war in 1939 to save Germany from Hitler…or the continent from fascism. Like in 1914 we went to war for the not lesser noble cause that we couldn’t accept a German hegemony over Europe.

    That very last point is extremely important for at least three major reasons, not least being Allied culpability for crimes against humanity in the firebombing of Germany.

    There’s no statute of limitations on acts of murder.
    Moreover, recently a Jewish woman from Britain was successful in a suit to reclaim the property of her great-great-grandparents that was taken from them through methods that included involvement of the German government during the war.

    If mere property can be the subject of an extensive lawsuit and be recovered after 70 years, how much more important is it that (the survivors of) persons who were wrongfully killed in that same war should be allowed to prosecute their murderers.

  40. KA says:

    “As we reported on Friday, a ham-handed attempt by appeasement-minded liberals to undermine additional sanctions on Iran resulted in a furious push-back from pro-Israel groups. The left-wing Ha’aretz’s story purportedly revealing a 60-day moratorium on further lobbying for sanctions was refuted by the two most prominent Jewish groups, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the American Jewish Committee. Feeling heat for its inaccurate reporting, Ha’aretz doubled down, running another story insisting a moratorium had been agreed to.”

    -AIPAC supports diplomatic efforts to achieve an end to Iran’s nuclear program. Diplomatic talks have been made possible because of the strong
    sanctions passed by Congress and implemented by the Administration. Until Iran suspends its enrichment program, additional sanctions are vital for
    diplomacy to succeed. AIPAC continues to support congressional action to adopt legislation to further strengthen sanctions and there will absolutely
    be no pause, delay or moratorium in our efforts.–[AIPAC]

    “That defiant statement underscores both the seriousness of the Iran sanctions issue for the Jewish community and the community’s exasperation with an administration that has now lost the confidence of many pro-Israel activists in both parties. It is noteworthy that AIPAC, out of deference to the administration, would not publicly take a position or even comment on the nomination for secretary of Defense of Chuck Hagel, who was bitterly criticized for his anti-Israel and anti-sanctions sentiments. Kassen’s blast signals there is no such reticence to publicly engage the Congress and the president when it comes to Iran.”

  41. Art says:
    @Existential Confusion

    “asking for the source of a statistic makes me part of the Jew Cabal, murdering “your” country?”


    Absolutely you are a traitor – YOU already know the answer, it is that the general American public does not know the truth of the Jew cabal that funds our politics. It is not reported by the Jew owned MSM. That makes you an evil traitorous person to the country you reside within or a evil fascist Israeli.

    I am not crazy – I am a good guy that does not buy into your mean tribal coercion – it is you who is the crazy one – it is you, who are mindlessly repeating history. Big Jews squat in a country, tell coercive lies and take money and power, and all you Little Jews follow them like lemmings. Then your tribal coercion is found out and all hell breaks loose. (And oh yes, your Big Jews run off with the big bucks and you Little Jews suffer the consequences – poor you).

    Enjoy it while it lasts – Art

    • Replies: @Existential Confusion
  42. Mark Green says: • Website

    I’m a bit surprised at the treatment that WF Buckley is getting these days. Having watched his program, Firing Line, on PBS for decades, and devoured his countless articles, as well as subscribed to his monthly magazine ‘National Review’; I don’t think the treatment he now gets is fully warranted.

    Granted, Buckley did fire the bold and brilliant Joe Sobran from National Review for upsetting his Jewish sponsors, but Buckley did do a lot of outstanding work to advance the (paleo) conservative movement all the same. During (and after) Reagan, the neocons simply took over Washington and infiltrated all major media, including virtually the major think tanks. Buckley simply threw in the towel at the end. He was gone just as the internet started to makes its mark. So Buckley was, in a way, isolated. But he wasn’t always a neocon. Buckley hired and supported Sobran (and other paleos) until his overlords simply turned up the heat too much. Only then did he cave.

    Sadly, Buckley got old and comfortable. And at the end of his career, he was surrounded by Zionists and their billionaire patrons. In the end, he chose security over principle. But disappointing transitions of this kind have happened to countless celebrities, politicians and public intellectuals. The neocons are nothing if not effective at twisting arms and intimidating those who oppose them. But many prominent conservatives today are far worse than Buckley ever was. This list of odious cuckservatives must include George Will, Sean Hannity and the majority of pundits who appear regularly on Fox News.

    In fact, Buckley actually had some good programs on Israel and the Palestinians back in the 70s and 80s. Some of his guests were highly critical of Israel. On American TV, this was extremely rare.

    I concede that Buckley had more than his share of pro-Israel advocates on Firing Line, but he was nevertheless an invaluable force in many issues of importance to paleo-conservatives. This included race (busing), ‘gay liberation’, immigration, feminism, judicial activism, communism, and many liberal movements which were otherwise given the Green light in elite media.

    In my opinion, Buckley became a reluctant neocon only towards the end of his career. But even then, Buckley wasn’t nearly as hard core as people such as David Brooks or Charles Krauthammer are today. So give WF Buckley a break. His legacy is a mixed bag. And he did a lot of very important work.

    • Replies: @Art
    , @Rurik
  43. @Art

    (And oh yes, your Big Jews run off with the big bucks and you Little Jews suffer the consequences – poor you)

    Christ, you really are nuts. Not that it matters, but I am neither little or Jewish.

    • Replies: @Art
  44. Art says:
    @Existential Confusion

    “I am neither little or Jewish.”

    I would not admit it if I were you – due to their rabid paranoid culture, Jews have something of an excuse for supporting fascist Zionism. A Gentile never.

    You either support fascism or you don’t. If you support a little bit of Zionism – you support it all.

    Israeli fascism — its racist apartheid, its militarism, and it nukes are a festering danger to humanity.

    The world has to put Zionist Israel on notice to cease and desist its anti-human anti-peace practices. Nothing short of that will do.

    You are Confusion – find a pair —- Art

  45. Art says:
    @Mark Green

    WF Buckley did major damage to America – he was the first to invited Jews into American conservatism. Today elite American conservatism is dominated by right wing Jew fascism. The Project for the American Century is the direct result of Buckley’s work. 9/11 and all our wars are because of our unjust support of fascist Israel.

    Few have done as much harm to America and its Christian heritage as Buckley – end of story.

  46. KA says:

    Neocon can do anything to another human being. They are the worst sadist.
    Conspiracy theory is the phrase they use to suppress and banish any discussion that have the potential to expose these vultures and these rabid dogs

    Here is some anecdotes-

    According to former French foreign minister Roland Dumas, Britain had planned covert action in Syria as early as 2009. He told French TV:

    “I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business… I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria. This was in Britain not in America. Britain was preparing gunmen to invade Syria.”

    Writing in The Guardian in 2013, Nafeez Ahmed discusses leaked emails from the private intelligence firm Stratfor, including notes from a meeting with Pentagon officials, that confirmed US-UK training of Syrian opposition forces since 2011 aimed at eliciting “collapse” of Assad’s regime “from within.”

    He goes on to write that, according to retired NATO Secretary General Wesley Clark, a memo from the Office of the US Secretary of Defense just a few weeks after 9/11 revealed plans to “attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years,” starting with Iraq and moving on to “Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.” Clark argues that this strategy is fundamentally about control of the region’s vast oil and gas resources.”

    Now -“Following his spring election victory, Cameron let it be known that he wanted Parliament to reverse its vote on Syria. It was then revealed that British pilots had been secretly involved in bombing Syria all along, in defiance of Parliament. Cameron was unrepentant. Like Blair, he craves covert liaison with Washington in matters of war and peace.”

    The vultures return to the same spot . Wesley Clarke spotted them in 1991 again in 2001 . Lo and behold ,those vultures came back again . They really love the taste of the dead children . Don’t they?

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  47. @KA

    According to former French foreign minister Roland Dumas, Britain had planned covert action in Syria as early as 2009.

    This time the evildoers did not have to manufacture a “Pearl Harbor/ 9-11 event;” nature cooperated and exacerbated drought in Syria:

    08/16/2012 –
    Climate change and the Syrian uprising
    by Shahrzad Mohtadi

    Among the many historical, political, and economic factors contributing to the Syrian uprising, one has been devastating to Syria, yet remains largely unnoticed by the outside world. That factor is the complex and subtle, yet powerful role that climate change has played in affecting the stability and longevity of the state.

    The land now encompassed by Syria is widely credited as being the place where humans first experimented with agriculture and cattle herding, some 12,000 years ago. Today, the World Bank predicts the area will experience alarming effects of climate change, with the annual precipitation level shifting toward a permanently drier condition, increasing the severity and frequency of drought.

    From 1900 until 2005, there were six droughts of significance in Syria; the average monthly level of winter precipitation during these dry periods was approximately one-third of normal. All but one of these droughts lasted only one season; the exception lasted two. Farming communities were thus able to withstand dry periods by falling back on government subsidies and secondary water resources. This most recent, the seventh drought, however, lasted from 2006 to 2010, an astounding four seasons — a true anomaly in the past century. Furthermore, the average level of precipitation in these four years was the lowest of any drought-ridden period in the last century.

    While impossible to deem one instance of drought as a direct result of anthropogenic climate change, a 2011 report from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration regarding this recent Syrian drought states: “Climate change from greenhouse gases explained roughly half the increased dryness of 1902-2010.” Martin Hoerling, the lead researcher of the study, explains: “The magnitude and frequency of the drying that has occurred is too great to be explained by natural variability alone. This is not encouraging news for a region that already experiences water stress, because it implies natural variability alone is unlikely to return the region’s climate to normal.” The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that global warming will induce droughts even more severe in this region in the coming decades.

    It is estimated that the Syrian drought has displaced more than 1.5 million people; entire families of agricultural workers and small-scale farmers moved from the country’s breadbasket region in the northeast to urban peripheries of the south.

    see also Water and Conflict in Syria


    Syria faced a devastating drought between 2006 and 2010, affecting its most fertile lands. The four years of drought turned almost 60 percent of the nation into a desert. It was a huge amount of land that could not support cattle trading and herding, Chanda says, killing about 80 percent of cattle by 2009. . . .

    The spark that started [the Syria conflict] is often traced back to the city of Dara’a, in February of 2011.

    A group of young people writing Arab Spring protest slogans on a wall are arrested and beaten.

    “When that news broke there was a massive demonstration on the street, and that was the first spark one can call of the Syrian uprising,” Nayan Chanda tells NPR’s Jacki Lyden.

    But long before a single shot was fired in Syria, there was drought in Dara’a, laying the groundwork for social unrest.

    The NPR article does not mention that when Hillary Clinton observed the situation in 2011, she sat back and passed the popcorn. Bolstering her bold declaration that “Assad must go,” Clinton observed that “it’s just the poor people who are protesting now, but before long the business class, Assad’s key supporters, will become discontent — already, some are leaving the country. When that support erodes, Assad will be replaced. He should step down sooner rather than later.”

    Does anyone know how Israel’s position in the Golan impacts Syrian water resources?

  48. Rurik says:
    @Mark Green

    I’m reminded of the story of a doctor in Michigan, you may have heard of him, Dr. Farid Fata

    anyways what this doctor did was tell healthy patients that they had cancer so he could profit from injecting them with chemo and other chemicals and pharmaceutical$

    he was paid and more importantly, trusted to help and to heal the people who came to him, and he took their money, looked them in the eye, and then set about doing them harm for the profits he could pocket

    I think there should be a special place in Hell for people who betray other people’s trust for profit (or prestige)

    And then there is the scale to consider. The doctor was only able to poison hundreds of patients- and his nefarious ministrations only could have destroyed tens of thousands of lives. Whereas the harm done by those who have betrayed Western Civilization and its people count in the hundreds of millions, and perhaps many more when the accumulated fallout from the generations to come is summed up.

    It’s kind of like a corrupt US Supreme Court Justice (redundant). Someone who’s trusted to take on that level of responsibility. Someone whose principles the people rely on to stand as a iron bulwark against the very forces of evil- to protect all that is sacred and good and that so many men bled their life-blood into the ground to bequeath to us, but then betrays it all for personal aggrandizement.

    Buckley to me for many years was just such a betrayer. A Judas to the people and principles of Western Civilization.

    His rotten betrayal does not descend to the level of someone like president Wilson, for instance, whose singular betrayal was the death knell of the West, but he was just as bad in principle, and far worse than your typical cuck whose betrayals are not quite so bewildering in their scope- because your typical cuck doesn’t position himself as the voice of conservatism, and then systematically betray those very values -and the people who depend on them- to their worst enemy.

    I guess he’s about at the level of your typical Tony Blair or George Bush. Rotten to the core and perfectly eager to betray those who trust them to the devil himself, if by doing so they can assuage their vanity by playing important politician or be a “respected” TV personality.

  49. @annamaria

    Back in 1998 The Nation ran this, and it’s worth a read.

    The great thing for Russia today is that the Harvard Boys are now Doing America.

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 Daniel McAdams Comments via RSS