2013-09-22

US($) rules the world
 by hook (traitor sell-outs)
  or by crook (kill all resistors)

@Sam, re Emmanuel Kant's "Zum ewigen Frieden," this might be the English language equivalent: "Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch" Thanks.

[A bit long; sorry, but not too sorry, it is not simple.]

@Raimondo: "The Romans exacted tribute from their conquered subjects: we have inverted that tradition, instead paying tribute - in the form of "foreign aid" - to our allies and satellite nations, even as they denounce us and their Washington lobbyists demand more."

Me: No. The US extracts 'tribute' all right, and by the bucketful; let me count some of the ways:

1) $US as 'world reserve currency,' #1. You may have heard of 'interest?' Well, $US is a fiat currency = they just print them. Digitally, of course - most $US (M2) exist as book-entries, mainly in 'trading' banks; and come into existence as loans issued at interest = %. Deposits in banks may 'earn' a pittance = min-% in interest; the loans are charged the max-% the market will bear. The banks insist on getting their %, so all of M2 is contributing *un-earned* income to the banks - mostly owned by the fat-cats = the <1% (in OWS-parlance). This 'loans at %' is an outright racket, it's a wicked tax with neither value for the people, nor representation, hence banksters (see CWA & BND below). Then the *un-earned* income $USs are forced upon the world. It gets worse.

2) $US as 'world reserve currency,' #2. Many (most?) commodities are traded in $US. You may have heard of 'petro-dollars' whereby oil producers accumulate $US? It works like this:

Any country needing oil (most), needs $US to pay for it, Germany, say. So they manufacture things (Mercedes, BMWs, VWs, Audis & Porsches, say), and sell some of those to the US. Then Germany uses the $US to buy oil, which they then burn for heating & transport - the oil 'disappears' into the air as CO2. Ooops (twice); having burned the oil, they need more, so repeat the loop - eternally. The oil producers get royalties (5%, say, or perhaps 16.7% - who knows, except it's usually a (very) low %). US$s retained by the producer-countries are petro-dollars which a) are income, which may be shared with the sovereign resource-owners = the people, but b) more generally accumulate - or are 'recycled' by buying (mainly) US arms, say. Think KSA = Saudi Arabia.

2a) The 'petro-dollars' process is repeated by most countries producing 'exports' for the US; #1 = China say, taken over from former #1 = Japan. China has as an enormous accumulation of what may be termed as 'electro-dollars,' which a) earn a pittance-% and b) can't easily be spent back into china (too much would cause (massive) inflation), can't easily be 'recycled' by buying anything from/in US, neither weapons nor by being invested - US 'national interests' prevent that, as they say.

3) $US as 'world reserve currency,' #3. The US insists on its vassal-states allowing FDI = foreign direct investment. This is part of the WC10Ps = Washington Consensus, Ten Points. Another part is 'independent reserve banks;' The banks in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Iran are(were!) not WC10Ps-conform. Notice anything? WC7in5, perhaps? Another part of the WC10Ps is privatisation; the FIRE = Finance, Insurance, Real Estate sector buys what were publicly owned enterprises, strips them lean&mean then turns them into toll-booth operations, usually then viciously ripping-off the former owners. Essentially, privatisation = theft. The WC10Ps are a) accepted 'willingly' by traitor govt.s (hence SQSHsO = snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on) or imposed by military conquest, see Perkins' "Economic Hit Man;" possibly 1st victim = Allende's Chile.

3a) There is an alternative to FDI and independent reserve banks (which are subject to lobbying, especially by the US), and it's called 'state-owned banks,' see Ellen Brown's "The Remarkable Model Of The Commonwealth Bank Of Australia" (now, sadly, criminally privatised as CWA) and the existing BND, "Public Sector Banks: From Black Sheep to Global Leaders."

4) $US as 'world reserve currency,' #4. The (mainly US) corporations' modus operandi is to 'buy low, sell high.' When the resulting profits exceed 'cost plus a fair mark-up,' such profits are termed 'super-profits' = *un-earned* income aka 'economic rent.' In Aus, for example, ~83% of mining revenue exits the country – a tax designed to recover some of this loss contributed to the downfall of the two immediate predecessors of the new Aus PM. The 'other side' of 83% is 17% = the Aus' people's share if it ever trickles down, remarkably close to the amount originally offered to (= forced upon?) Iran as royalty, back before or around WW1. Surprise? Hardly.

All along the production, distribution, wholesale & retail chains sit the banksters and/or FIRE blood-suckers, hence Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi's famous remark vis-à-vis Goldman Sachs; a "great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money."

Some figures: I saw one estimate that up to ~40% of any particular product's price could be bankster %, added at multiple steps. Apple is rumoured to mark-up some products by ~300%. Iraqi oil costs ~$US1,- to 'dig up;' imagine the potential super-profit = economic rent when oil 'wholesales' at $US101,- say. Hence Iraq; illegal "Shock'n whore" invasion = mass-murder for oil (literally millions dead since 1991), most if not all directly due to US-meddling. Recall Al-CIAda and NED&ilk fomenting, CIA&ilk subverting.

It's crooked business (enforced by mafia methods); the <1% clean up, and the 99% may get some crumbs if 'lucky.' It really does seem that the (mainly US) corporations make most of their profits by unfair means (when not outright cheating), and even segueing into murder for spoil = supreme international crime (Iraq, Libya, etc.). Then there's the criminal Z-tail, wagging the US-dog. We see it happening; the Empire in operation.

IF any(most?) of this sad story is news, THEN it's likely because of the corrupt&venal MSM+PFCBs *not* telling us 'the rest of the story' - see Bernays: "Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country."

2013-09-21

going from war to broke in a split second
 from killing Syrians to cutting health reform
  at last, people power vs. criminal psychopaths?

.. Newton said it first: ...

  .. No change without force ...

    .. So why was the attack stopped?

Thesis/Subtitle: most politicians are petty traitor-tyrants ...

Concomitant: going only where the $-winds blow them ...

Corollary: except if the electorate threatens revolt ...

-=*=-

Trigger article:

Is Peace Breaking Out?
War averted in Syria - can Iran escape the War Party’s wrath?
by Justin Raimondo, September 20, 2013
  «In short, it doesn’t matter what the intelligence is because it can always be massaged to come out how the politicians want it. With a powerful pro-Israel lobby in Washington, and fiercely loyal factions influential on both sides of the aisle, the War Party has always been able to impose its own version of reality on the national and diplomatic discourse.» 
[antiwar/Raimondo]

Comment 1: Good article plus some good comments; as usual, reading it all is recommended.

General comments:

Newton's first law says -

 no change without applied force.

The corrupt M/I/C/$4a†-plex factions rule.

The US is a command economy on the mafia model.

Empire is power; armed-force purchased with printed $s.

The politicians are corrupt whores, doing the dirty for dollars.

Add the I/J/Z-plex as a poison-arrow piercing the Arab/Muslim breast, murdering for spoil = soil, as the US murders for oil.

Under the above scenario, no extraneous ideology needed; looks to me like a democratic triumph; the electorate may have finally woken up. It beggars belief that the representatives would react to anything other than some 'superior shove.' Given the ghastly, salivating Kerry-led rush, none of the politicians' usual puppet-masters in the M/I/C/$4a†-plex, let alone the I/J/Z-plex would attempt to leash the dogs of war; look elsewhere.

The single thing that will shift corrupt politicians faster than $s is a credible threat to their re-election prospects. The electorate's roar of "No attack - or else!" must have been *very* convincing; same as in UK.

Some proof might come from the next story coming active, the deficit shenanigans. First item I heard was that funding for Obama's 'health reform' could be cut. Well, that threat, along with ~47mio US citizens already on food-stamps, might rev the electorate up a bit more.

Imagine - usually sham-democracy reacting to the people's views!

Bad news for petty traitor-tyrants ... *very* bad news.

Even worse news for the rhyming criminal group.

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] deceive  v. (-ving) 1 make (a person) believe what is false; purposely mislead. 2 be unfaithful to, esp. sexually. 3 use deceit.  deceive oneself persist in a mistaken belief.  deceiver n. [POD]

[2] lie2  -n. 1 intentionally false statement (tell a lie). 2 something that deceives. -v. (lies, lied, lying) 1 tell a lie or lies. 2 (of a thing) be deceptive.  give the lie to show the falsity of (a supposition etc.). [Old English] [ibid.]

[3] conspiracy  n. (pl. -ies) 1 secret plan to commit a crime; plot. 2 conspiring. [Latin: related to *conspire] [ibid.]

Abbreviations:

ELO/Os = erstwhile legal owner/occupiers

I/J/Z-plex; illegitimate IL squats on genocidally ethnically-cleansed = improperly alienated, mainly Palestinian ELO/Os' land/property = IL is an un-remedied crime-scene and *all* I/J/Z-plex (except any actively opposing) are guilty; sole remedy = reparations = revest where possible, adequate = acceptable recompense where not + *sincere* apology

M/I/C/$4a†-plex = military, industrial, Congress (US-speak for parliament); $ = banksters, 4 = 4th estate = MSM+PFBCs, 'a' = academia incl. think-tanks, † = the churches.

MSM = mainstream media (print and broadcast), aka 'corrupt&venal'

neoliberalism = 'economic rationalism,' 'supply-side,' (wicked) privatisations, 'small govt.' = minimised to no égalité etc. + globalisation = wage arbitration etc. = <1% rips off 99%+

PFBCs = publicly-financed broadcasters, like the AusBC

ppp-dd'd = pushed-propaganda paradigm dumbed-down

PRopaganda = PR + propaganda, usual qualifier: 'lying'

SQSHsO = snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on

the Enlightenment well summarised by liberté, égalité, fraternité

US-MMH = Media (aka press, radio + TV), Madison Ave., Hollywood

US&/Zs = the US of A and/or Zionists; sometimes indistinguishable

XS-CO2-C*4 = excess CO2 climate-change catastrophe cliff
 (suspected only one-way = spiral-down)

Zionism (latest post-Jabotinsky, '23) = perpetual aggressive war

2013-09-20

turns out clarence has 'been around'

 I thought I would try to see if Clarence was a recent blow-in; tried a google - About 475 results; not all 'this' Clarence. I selected *one* item, thinking it could be 'typical.' Well...

You can read the antiwar 'headline article' here. Note that there is a 'button' to click to see comments.

Note that after Clarence jumps in, there follows quite a long exchange, including Phil Giraldi.

As I read through it, I occasionally [Me: Added my own comments].

Note carefully, the 'thumbs up/down' counts:

Comments (32)


+15
Ben_C's avatar - Go to profile
Ben_C 83p · 5 weeks ago
And to think it seems like just yesterday ~ 70% of the "American people" thought Iran already had nukes...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/19/c...

And yet life went on...the incessant bitichng about completely unrelated trivial crap continued.. It wouldn't surprise me if most Americans didn't even think about this 'issue' at all...and of those who actually did, many probably still thought invading Iraq was a good idea and, at the same time, ridiculed North Korea's :nuclear program"...with its antiquated technology and limited delivery capabilities....as 'not serious' and/or a 'ridiculous and pathetic' attempt for attention and/or food subsidies...

So what has changed now other than Bibi's increasing shrill and frequent claims of imminent doom associated with a non-existent bomb which couldn't reach Israel in the first place, other than possibly through Syria...and even then, what is Iran going to do with it? If Syria theoretically already has stockpiles of chemical WMDs, wouldn't nukes simply be a much more expensive and gratuitous way to accomplish the same thing...and much more likely to kill Palestinians if used?

I'm guessing the use of nukes on Israel would most likely cross some sort of US and Israeli "red-line" too...and even if the entire territory commonly referred to as :"Israel" were immediately transformed into a radioactive waste land, Israel sill theoretically has nuclear armed submarines which could strike back.

All in all, this entire invented "threat" is ridiculous..and if you notice many pundits, including Bibi, will at times divert the 'issue' away form Iran potentially nuking Israel directly, and suddenly change to feigned concern about a potential attack on 'some Arab nations in the region' (wink, wink)...and 'we' all know what that means...

It's important to keep in mind the 'war' has already begun...and it's called "Syria"... The 'status quo' is completely unacceptable, as Lindsey Graham would say...

 
-31
Clarence's avatar
Clarence · 5 weeks ago
PG asks: "And who has started the most wars in the Middle East?"

If PG can't even answer that one honestly and accurately, he has no business writing about the Middle East.

The monomaniacs hopelessly obsessed with the Zionist entity must be having a hard time these days convincing people that the focus must remain on Israel. Everybody else is shocked at the carnage Arabs are inflicting on each other in Egypt and Syria and beyond, but PG pretends none of that is happening. Thankfully, he's here to remind us all who the "miscreant" is.

 17 replies · active 3 weeks ago
+32
Phil Giraldi's avatar
Phil Giraldi · 5 weeks ago
Sorry Clarence but I must have missed that part where the Arab countries you cite have been waging war against their neighbors. I also do not see Arab government sponsored op-eds in our leading newspapers or commentary on news shows calling on the United States to attack a foreign country. Israel has waged wars of aggression against all of its neighbors, or did you not notice? And it has a monopoly on providing its point of view in the American media, or did you miss that also? The fact is that the United States is de facto at war with half the world due to the Israeli connection, or is that another thing that you missed?

 
-27
Clarence's avatar
Clarence · 5 weeks ago
Arab massacres of Zionist immigrants in the 1920s and 1930s. Israel attacked by Arabs in 1948, 1973, provoked into war in 1967. Saddam attacked Iran in 1980, Kuwait a decade later. Tens of thousands of Arabs slaughtered by Hafez Assad in Syria and King Hussein in Jordan. Long, bloody civil war in Lebanon. Current civil war in Syria, possibly another one pending in Egypt. Plenty of aggressive actions by Arabs in the Middle East over the years.

"Iran, which has initiated no wars with anyone since the seventeenth century"

How conveniently you overlook their role in propping up Bashar Assad in Syria and aiding the brutal slaughter of its people. How conveniently you overlook their backing of Hezbollah and Hamas and the role they've played in international terrorism. Iran has plenty of blood on its hands.

"Israel has waged wars of aggression against all of its neighbors, or did you not notice?"

Distortion and monomania. You're the one who repeatedly fails to "notice" a great many things, such as the annihilationist wars the Arabs have waged against Israel (which caused the displacement of Arabs in 1948, by the way) [Me: Outright lie; see Plan Dalet/Deir Yassin & all etc., down to the 'current moment']. You also fail to "notice" their ubiquitous and institutionalized hatred (a violent, triumphalist intolerance with roots in centuries of imperialism that long predates the settlements you cite as being the number one obstacle to peace). Surely you won't be able to "notice" the hyperbolic propaganda contained in statements like "a monopoly" on media or "at war with half the world".

You ascribe far too much power to Israel when you blame it for having a stranglehold on American media. That smacks of a familiar canard. Perhaps you're not willing to accept that many Americans simply think differently than you do. When you hear pro-Israel views expressed on Fox News, for example, remind yourself that paying subscribers across the country -- not some shadowy cabal -- are the reason they're successful. Apparently, all those American viewers are seeing and hearing something they like and coming back for more. Nobody's forcing them to prop up Fox News and its pundits. Ask Roger Ailes (whose network is owned in part by rich Saudis) if he sees himself as a subservient cog in a giant pro-Israel machine.

It doesn't speak highly of you when you paraphrase the likes of a drunken Mel Gibson who claimed that Israel is responsible for "all the wars in the world." Al-Qaida terrorists bring down the WTC, killing 3000, and it's Israel's fault the USA attacks Afghanistan? [Me: Hijacks possibly; but jet-fuel fires did not cause the Oh, so neat collapse of *3* WTC towers in the exact manner of 'controlled demolition']. Can every drone strike everywhere be traced back to Israel, too? Will you lay NOTHING at the feet of Islamic radicals? Or have you somehow failed to "notice" all their outrageous, triumphalist, intolerant, barbaric behavior? Are they not aggressors with an aggressive, expansionist ideology? It's as if you write your columns in a vacuum.

You needn't descend into wild exaggeration to make the point that America shouldn't go to war with Iran. You might have made some valid points early on, but the end of your article and your response to me show that you're not above making overwrought claims and ignoring data which conflicts with your biases.

 
+7
rwe2late's avatar
rwe2late · 5 weeks ago
Clarence,
You wrote about bias and hyperbole. But is it not hyperbole to claim as you did Israel was "provoked" into several past wars as though Israel had done no "provoking" on its part?
Currently, the situation is that Israel is fully armed with conventional and nuclear weapons and "backed" by the US. Israel is an expansive apartheid state, and maintains guard over a Palestine ghetto, deprived and blockaded.
I agree that claims that Israel controls US policy are ridiculous [Me: Yet 'it is claimed' that the US-Congress is "Israeli occupied territory"]. However, that is difficult for some to see since Israeli leaders have wedded themselves to US policy so closely as though their own (as have leaders in Britain, Saudi Arabia, Kosovo, Georgia, etc.).
As for "Arab" terrorism and bloodshed, it is also worthwhile to consider the divide and conquer role played by the US and its dependent allies including Israel. ALL the history going back to at least WWI is relevant. There was the Shah coup in Iran, the support of Saddam, the promotion of Al Qaeda, the sponsorship of Saudi extremists, the attacks and invasions of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Egypt, Iraq. There was and is financial and military support given despotic leaders throughout the Middle East. There are the occupations and military bases.
By wedding themselves to the global policies of such a global cabal of militarists, spymasters, and profiteers, Israeli leaders have opened themselves to the charge of bearing more or less responsibility for much of the world's malaise [Me: Since the Zs were active since latest 1896, had decided on Palestine latest 1905, the Zs' coveting pre-dated the UK lust for oil, coincident with pre-WW1 conversion of British warships from coal to oil].

 
-3
Clarence's avatar
Clarence · 5 weeks ago
"is it not hyperbole to claim as you did Israel was "provoked" into several past wars" -- Israel was provoked into taking pre-emptive action in 1967. It wasn't provoked in 1948 and 1973; it was outright attacked by aggressors [Me: The aggressors were and still are the alien invader Zionists].

"an expansive apartheid state" -- Once again, tiny Israel is accused of being expansionist. Islam "expanded" out of the Arabian peninsula to the point that it now stretches from Morocco to Indonesia and beyond (always peacefully, of course), but in some unbalanced minds it's Israel that is "expansionist". As for "apartheid", I wonder if you're aware that the ethnic group that comprises the majority of Israel was expelled from Arab lands in 1948 and would suffer a fate far worse than apartheid if any of its members tried to return [Me: Apart from the few 'native' Jews (not particularly unwelcome), it's the invading Zionists causing the major problem, with their murdering to steal land/property]. Arabs enjoy more rights in Israel than than they do in any Arab nation, whereas a certain tribe isn't allowed to set foot in Saudi Arabia or exist at all in any future Palestinian state. You and others have accepted that this particular ethnic hatred is perfectly OK. Extreme, murderous intolerance by Arabs gets ignored, while Israel stands accused of apartheid [Me: After improper alienation of land/property, all discussion of how the Zs may treat natives is trivial to senseless].

"responsibility for much of the world's malaise" -- So terrorist enclaves should have been allowed to grow and operate unimpeded in some of the countries on your list? [Me: 99% of terrorism is an asymmetric response to extreme oppression - what else? Terrorists may be regarded as freedom-defenders without the 'benefits' of the US/Z arsenal - itself used only aggressively, 99% *against* freedom.]

 
+2
rwe2late's avatar
rwe2late · 4 weeks ago
Israel IS an apartheid state regardless how you think of other nations might compare.
Israel IS an expansionist state.

You completely ignored the main point of my comment, namely that Israeli leaders now adhere to a cabal of global militarists and swindlers. The only debate is about their degree of influence within that cabal.

 
+1
1/4horse's avatar - Go to profile
1/4horse 6p · 4 weeks ago
"I agree that claims that Israel controls US policy are ridiculous"

__had a response2this, since yesterday ======$#$%&%$#$==yet have not//////*\\\jus can not make it thru the checkpoint . . . [Me: here, I assume "checkpoint" = antiwar censor-bot/censor-person = un- & anti- free speech]

 
+1
richard vajs's avatar
richard vajs · 4 weeks ago
Actually, it is those Americans who care more about Israel than they care about their own country (America) that are screwing up our (foreign) policy. As a friend of mine used to put it, "we can deal with the Indians circling the wagon train, all-right, but it those Indians inside the wagon train that are going to get us!"

 
+1
1/4horse's avatar - Go to profile
1/4horse 6p · 4 weeks ago
. . . still can not get original message thru checkpoint . . . //////*\\\which's, BLOCKED: answering sorta its own both sordid points that now, again, finally, even online! 1Lie p r e e m p t s itself and thus everything else that can///&\\can not get said . . . and which, inside/outside, here again interfears with what you even fail to mention . . . its absence

nevertheless, outside/in, don't see How! ... you can again fail with the likes of just such an inept address ... 'we can deal with the palestinians circling the wagon train, all-right, but' . . .

 
+1
richard vajs's avatar
richard vajs · 4 weeks ago
1/4 horse ,
My "inept address" actually was aimed to be a parable - a story not meant to be factual. I was trying to make the point that honorable people should be loyal to their own country or in the case that they prefer another country to the extent that they are willing to be treacherous to their own, should leave or "make aliyah" and regain their honor. I know that I aimed low with that "Indians and wagon train" tale; but, obviously not low enough.

 
+1
1/4horse's avatar - Go to profile
1/4horse 6p · 4 weeks ago
"rwe2late" . . .

. . . waiting . . .

and waiting . . .

waiting4what . . . waiting@the checkpoint

. . .

 
+11
richard vajs's avatar
richard vajs · 5 weeks ago
Clarence,
I am not trying to respond to you in place of Mr. Giraldi (that is his privilege), but your line of bull is just too much to ignore. And, I would welcome your hatred on a personal level.
You needn't dump out everything in the book for novice practitioners of hasbra, that you were issued, all at one time. Spend a little at a time, won't you? You are all over the map. Don't worry about ancient injustices against the Israelis - that is ancient, who knows the truth? Maybe they did to the Arabs first?
We need to talk about the gross injustices, Israel is pulling on the Palestinians NOW - anyone with eyes can see that nastiness. Let's also talk about who keeps invading Lebanon - Iran or Israel? And believe me, for every Mel Gibson, there are are a dozen Avigdor Liebermans.
Finally, if America goes to war with Iran (as you seem to wish for), the body bag won't need to be any "wild exaggeration".

 
+18
Phil Giraldi's avatar
Phil Giraldi · 5 weeks ago
Clarence – A 1500 word article does not pretend to be a comprehensive history of the Middle East. And I have never said that there hasn’t been plenty of violence in the Arab world, just that the aggressors in the region since 1948 [Me: Looong before; see Herzl, Balfour, Jabotinsky, Ben-Gurion, Meir ... = means, motive, and opportunity etc.] have been for the most part Israel and the U.S. And if you have read any of my stuff you would know I have little sympathy for Islamists or political Islam. I don’t like anyone with a holy book in hand telling the rest of us how to live.
Your indictment of Iran for inciting violence is odd as Iran has been getting regularly threatened by both the U.S. and Israel since the 1990s [Me: Started with Britain's oil-lust, pre-WW1; then continued with UK/CIA coup against Mossadegh, 1953, etc.; Iran made itself free in 1979] and its ties to Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah are as nothing compared to what Tel Aviv and Washington have been up to. The rest of your argument consists of throwaway lines and the usual smearing. How can you seriously describe the all too evident Zionist control of what the media says about the Middle East as the public’s “seeing and hearing something they like and coming back for more.” And calling it a “familiar canard”, presumably means to imply that I am an anti-Semite, right? “Institutionalized hatred” seems to fit Arabs in your mind but not the Israelis. And yes, 9/11 was certainly in large part about Israel as is international terrorism in general, but maybe those constitute another thing you didn’t notice or don’t really care about. And what exactly does Mel Gibson have to do with this discussion, but I guess you hate him too.

 
-6
Clarence's avatar
Clarence · 5 weeks ago
"the aggressors in the region since 1948 have been for the most part Israel and the U.S." -- Arab armies attacked newborn Israel in 1948 (an act of aggression). Arabs again attacked in 1973 (an act of aggression). Saddam attacked Iran and later Kuwait (acts of aggression). Al-Qaida killed 3000 people in NYC (an act of aggression). You minimize Arab aggression and maximize that of the USA and Israel, even after repeatedly being provided with dates and examples.

"I have little sympathy for Islamists or political Islam" -- Nice to know, but that sentiment is muted in your articles compared to your insistence that Israel is to blame for everything. You don't present the everpresent backdrop to Israeli actions and policies, which is the ubiquitous, longstanding, exterminatory hatred and violence that have been directed against Israel since before 1948 -- before statehood, before settlements, before any "acts of aggression".

"the usual smearing" -- Can you back up the statement about Israel causing the USA to be "at war with half the world", or is that not a kind of smear itself? The point about Mel Gibson was simply that your words echoed his. He engaged in a similar-sounding hyperbole when he claimed that a certain ethnic group was responsible for "all the wars in the world". I mentioned Mel Gibson not because I hate him (considering your passionate obsession, you're certainly not one to call out anyone on hate), but because your words reminded me of the same ones he uttered in a rant that caused him public embarrassment.

You might not realize it, but you're not just smearing what you call the "Zionist-controlled media", you're also smearing the millions of people who consume it. The people I described as "coming back for more" are your fellow citizens, many of whom are bright, educated, and who presumably have access to alternative media including the internet and websites like this one. When you rail against the poison these hapless victims are being subjected to, you're implying that you stand above them with special knowledge of a secret cabal that tinkers with the news. What I'm saying is that many of those millions are equally well-informed yet they STILL opt to follow Fox News or talk radio [Me: There's an important point here; I'll continue it after the end of all the antiwar comments; keywords MSM/PFBCs.] or wherever else they might encounter pro-Israel voices they agree with. Your focus is entirely on the media, and not one iota on the millions of people who choose to consume it. Much like your focus is almost entirely on Israel, and barely an iota on Israel's enemies.

"9/11 was certainly in large part about Israel as is international terrorism in general" -- Ah yes. Rather than blame the barbarians who commit heinous acts, you echo and endorse their grievances. You blame Israel for the slaughter rather than the actual murderers who carried out the slaughter. Would you let any terrorist off the hook as long as his purported bete noire was the same place you hate too?

 
0
James's avatar
James · 3 weeks ago
Exactly Clarence. People should stop beating around the bush and acknowledge that 9-11 had Israeli fingerprints all over it. From Israeli operatives ' documenting the event ' to the obvious cover up by liberal zionist dominated media. You have all been discussing the consequences of this event for the last 10 years but of course, it was all just a massive coincidence. lol This has been a great education in mass manipulation.

 
+9
ML3's avatar - Go to profile
ML3 94p · 5 weeks ago
Holy troll for Israel, Batman! How much do they pay this sock puppet for his hasbara services?
You will never hear a bad word about Israel on FOX News, aka Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch's Israeli worshipping whorehouse. Not one SINGLE instance of criticism AT ALL. And who else is above abuse and reproach at Fox News? Anyone? Any other nation, even America? The answer is NO!!! Only Israel!
Ditto for all the Rightwing hate radio hosts who litter the airwaves like so much useless offal. It's like they hatch these retards out of the same egg - all given their marching orders and talking points, opinions spewed matching up with a startling glare of conformity.

 
0
james's avatar
james · 4 weeks ago
You are either a troll or an experiment on the total effect of idiocy in politics.[Me: The indenting - not reproduced here - shows this to be a response to the 1st Clarence comment.]

 
-1
Clarence's avatar
Clarence · 4 weeks ago
And you obviously have nothing, absolutely nothing, to add to any debate besides witless personal attacks. Congratulations. [Me. Note Clarence's allegation, "witless personal attacks" - then see Clarence's exchange with aletheia after attacking JJJihad.[ibid.]]

 
+18
JoaoAlfaiate's avatar
JoaoAlfaiate · 5 weeks ago
I wonder if there will ever be a time when Uncle Sam is not led around by the nose by these undesirable people. Their power over us waxes and waxes. Will it ever wane?

 
+12
richard vajs's avatar
richard vajs · 5 weeks ago
All of this bloodshed in Egypt right now owes its origin to the issue of whether the Egyptian military maintains a blockade of the Sinai-Gaza border or not. This is important to Israel because they want no relief for trapped people in Gaza. Israel (along with their US stooges) want no access for Gaza to Egypt, because Israel wants Gaza to slowly starve without interference from the Muslim World. So that is the deal - American aid for Egypt will continue as long as there is some militarized faction in Egypt willing to be bribed into serving as Israel's cats-paw in sealing off this border. Obviously, the Muslim Brotherhood wasn't bribable enough. [Me. IMHO, correct]

 
+14
Agvo's avatar
Agvo · 5 weeks ago
Speaking of wolves and the man who cried wolf once too often, when will the gullible West stop believing the Nut-n-yahoo and waste their resources to mullify this habitual liar who should be completely ignored.

[Me: 'The West,' usually US, F+UK/NATO & D (but only when the latter can fool their electorate), strangely enough, *all* support the *supreme international criminal* Zs - but I cannot see why.]

+7
ATM 's avatar
ATM · 5 weeks ago
The Israeli have been saying that the Iranians are a year from a bomb for 35 or more years. If that is even slightly true then the Iranian government has put no effort what so ever into the project.

[Me: The Zs have been at war with the entire ME (if not the world) latest since the Muslim/Arabs (M/As) refused to let the Zs buy into Palestine, following Herzl, Balfour & Jabotinsky, etc..]

+8
ML3's avatar - Go to profile
ML3 94p · 5 weeks ago
"Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been going around the world as well as regularly appearing on American television telling everyone who might be inclined to listen"

And if the places where he goes tell him to piss off , they are tired of hearing him run his mouth (make fun of him and treat him with ZERO respect - why not, Samson Option? pleeeeease) are they antisemites, or do are they just rightfully sick of this smug bloviating toilet licker? I don't see how disagreeing with Israel's policies could be antisemitic - let's see these racists have a NON-JEWISH PM and see what happens?

 1 reply · active 4 weeks ago
+5
ATM 's avatar
ATM · 5 weeks ago
The Likud party is so bigoted that they think that no one else in the world is a Jew;)

 
+7
rosemerry's avatar
rosemerry · 5 weeks ago
Why is the NYT called the paper of record? Record for Zionist propaganda? Record for bias? Record for correspondents chosen for their sympathies towards Israel? Record for employing "experts" like Thomas Friedman for objective reports?

 
+6
theo baumann's avatar
theo baumann · 5 weeks ago
Yes, Israel does want peace....a piece of land!

 
+1
1/4horse's avatar - Go to profile
1/4horse 6p · 5 weeks ago
Lying and Crime . . . accuse the other, innocent, as the fallguise for what you yourself have done, did, and do:

for Who knows better than U the in deed highly disturbed details of how it's pulledoff . . .

{the criminal mind: evil?genius! does in ffact habitually ffind itself, p r e e m p t i v e l y, far past such naive others around them = the socio.psycho.path2untold riches and, sobs, power
 
+2
cmichaelg's avatar - Go to profile
cmichaelg 81p · 4 weeks ago
I just love it when Philip Giraldi knocks one out of the ballpark!

 
0
Dan's avatar
Dan · 4 weeks ago
"One has to wonder why The New York Times believes that being "balanced" somehow requires it to replay Israeli propaganda."

Yes, we could call this the "Wonder Imperative" --related to the hypocrisy charge which we seem t think makes some sense. Better keep on wondering than reach a conclusion I guess.

 
-3
oioioi's avatar
oioioi · 4 weeks ago
antiwar is a brown shirt site [and oioioi is an idiot, seems like.]

[end of antiwar comments]

Me: Whatever else Clarence is, he's not very nice with it. Vis-à-vis the MSM/PFBCs, most people start out with trust, however naïve that may be, and many of them never twig that we are being lied to incessantly, mostly by people wishing to rip us off - it's a 'natural.' The lies often come so thick and fast, especially when there's a war in the offing, so that I call it the 'lie-cloud,' aka ppp-dd'ing = pushed-propaganda paradigm dumbing-down. But no worthwhile project needs an attempted lie-screen; here we have possibly the worst crime on the planet (perhaps excepting the aggressive side of WW2), namely the armed theft using murdering violence of approaching the entire area previously known as pre-UNGA Palestine, by aggressive, (lying, cheating, murdering to steal) alien invading Zionists. Clarence attempts to defend these people, this crime = makes him an apologist, sometimes called hasbara-ist. Shame on Clarence. Israel is a malignant cancer; time to cure = excise = completely remove the Zionist invaders, their heirs and successors from the ME (= resettle them, best in some place *without* immediate neighbours to vex - or for the Zs to hate). Then we might all be able to have a relax as truth + justice = peace takes precedence over lies, cheating and murdering for spoil.

an encounter with a nasty pro-Z troll

The following encounter occurred in the comments to this article:

We Beat the War Party
For now ...
by Justin Raimondo, September 11, 2013
  «The key development here wasn’t Kerry’s fumble and the Russian interception but the announcement by majority leader Harry Reid that the Senate vote on the war resolution would be delayed: the War Party simply didn’t have the votes. What the administration discovered, to their horror, was that the more they made their case to the American people the less support they had: every time Kerry opened his mouth, their poll numbers went down a few points, and a few more members of Congress came out against intervention.»
[antiwar/Raimondo]

Comment 1: Poll numbers *should* be respected (after all, the people *are* sovereign); when the world's publics clearly indicate majority no-war support, the warmongers should stop their march to yet another murder-for-spoil outrage.

Comment 2: Oddly enough, I read antiwar - for (amongst other reasons) its war news! There're often quite good reports and occasionally one may learn new things. As usual, I recommend reading the entire item; snips can hardly do justice to the original intended message.

Comment 3: Kerry still hasn't shut up; here's a report of his latest outrage: "John Kerry urges world leaders to 'speak out' on Syria's chemical weapons ahead of UN meeting"

Comment 4: More on this later, but so-called 'world leaders' = governments = regimes (some/many rogue) have to decide sooner or later, will they finally start properly representing the voters' wishes, or will they provoke a revolution? People *must* be able decide their own futures; those who make peaceful progress impossible ensure an eventual violent revolution.

Comment 5: But this blog-item is to reproduce one comment-encounter.

-=*=-


Comments (54 [total but 'only' 14 here])


+8
JJJihad's avatar - Go to profile
JJJihad 76p · 1 week ago
If Obama does not attack Syria, it will have nothing to do with Congress, or the "people," morality, military strategy, US interests--any of that crap. It will be because the Jews decided the time no longer was right. Their ultimate goal is to get the US to destroy the Islamic Republic and install a Shah for another 25 years or so, giving them more of a free hand to club Hezzbolah and Hamas to death as they steal all "Judea and Samaria" from nutless quislings like Abbas. The last thing the ZE wants is a US disaster in Syria. That will put US war on Iran that much farther out of reach. Besides, Zion is perfectly content to sit back and watch the Assad factions and the "rebel" gangs slaughter each other indefinitely. Nothing like a failed state tearing itself apart to give the History's Most Put Upon People opportunity for building Leibensraum.

13 replies · active 2 days ago
 
-1
Clarence's avatar
Clarence · 1 week ago
Delusional, paranoid bigotry masquerading as analysis.

It defies reason to claim "the Jews decided" everything. It flies in the face of the facts. One has to maintain a profoundly distorted version of reality driven by a vengeful agenda in order to support such obvious nonsense.

Nobody on Earth has such overwhelming power over events, yet this is precisely the power routinely attributed to "the Jews" by angry, delusional people who care much more about their own hateful agenda than they do about things like accuracy and truth.
+1
aletheia's avatar
aletheia · 1 week ago
@Clarence: "... angry, delusional people who care much more about their own hateful agenda than they do about things like accuracy and truth."

Me: No; there is nothing at all hateful about merely making neutral observations based on inspection of available facts (see #-points below), and the "hateful agenda" belongs to the aggressive alien Zionist invaders, illegally (not to mention immorally) squatting on improperly alienated land/property (ethnically cleansed by genocidal, murdering violence); by law land never to be theirs. If Clarence (or anyone else) can't see this, IMHO they must be totally blind, by physics, ideology and/or idiocy.

#-points; some *real* (= verifiable) accuracy and truth:

1. Herzl: "Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discretely and circumspectly ..."

2. Balfour: "For in Palestine we do not propose to even go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country ..."

3. Jabotinsky: "No native population would stomach the intrusion ... Unremitting force ... to Arab objections to Zionist control of the territory."

4. Immigration by Jews into Palestine (1934-48), partly illegal (Aliyah Bet) = alien invasion.

5. Ben-Gurion(1936-39): “We ... are the attackers and the Arabs are those defending ... [they] own the land ...”

6. The King David Hotel bombing was an attack carried out on July 22, 1946 by the militant right-wing Zionist underground organization the Irgun ...

7. Plan Dalet/Deir Yassin (1948) = ethnic-cleansing using genocidal attacks - plus all the other similar, down through the bloody years.

8. "On September 17, 1948, Cohen ... fired inside the car with a MP40 machine gun, killing Bernadotte and his aide, Andre Serot."

...

9 + a few squillions. The latest incursions by the IDF into Gaza; 2008/9 = ~1300 dead Palestinians, again in 2012 = between 158 and 177 Palestinians were killed in that operation.

=====

Here's another way of looking at it:

Consider a crime investigation; means, motive, and opportunity + modus operandi, presence & premeditation then cui bono?

means: Meir, ~$US50mio for arms

motive: Herzl, Zionism

opportunity: Balfour, Holocaust, UNGA181 (text: "an area ... shall be evacuated" - which *no* power on this planet may so order)

modus operandi: Jabotinsky = "Iron Wall" = perpetual aggressive war = murdering violence

presence: before Herzl little, then immigration, partly illegal = alien invasion

premeditation: latest 1897, 1st Z-conference Basel

cui bono? only Zs; US helps, partly against own interests

proof, Ben-Gurion(1936-39): “We must see the situation for what it is. ... But in the political field we are the attackers and the Arabs are those defending themselves. They are living in the country and own the land, ..."

proof, terrorism: King David Hotel bombing

proof, ethnic cleansing: Plan Dalet, ~700,000 forced from homes

proof, genocidal methods: Deir Yassin & etc., Gaza '08/9, continues

observation: erstwhile legal owner/occupiers displaced by violence

observation: Israel squats on improperly alienated land/property

observation: a war between recent immigrants and long-time natives is neither a 'civil' war, nor war of 'independence’ but aggressive invasion (partly by stealth) - see next

summary: fits description of "supreme international crime"

further;

UNGA181 specified Palestinian state, still none.

UNGA194 specified Palestinian right of return, still out.

UNGA273 cites 181 & 194, *accepted* by Israel, *still* not honoured

UNSC242 inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war

Q: What is wrong with this picture?

A: Israel is an active/un-remedied crime scene, of the Nuremberg-class.

Q: Why does the world tolerate it?

Q: What if anything am I missing?

Compare to a burglary/home invasion with deadly violence; SWAT teams are sent in, the perpetrators brought to justice and all stolen property revests, with reparations paid by those found guilty.

Q: Why are we kept waiting, for truth + justice = peace?

=====

The use of "hateful" is absolutely wrong vis-à-vis my work; "anger" is correct; anger that the Zs are so hateful as to mass-murder for spoil, then tell the most outrageous lies to try to disguise their vicious crimes. Enough.

=====

Clarence may be unfortunately ignorant, more likely an hasbarist, in any case has malice aforethought (proof = deploying "hateful") - care to confess? No? Thought not; another nail in the coffin.
0
Clarence's avatar
Clarence · 1 week ago
You can't refute a simple, straightforward point, so you create a diversion and throw the whole kitchen sink at me. It's clearly an indefensible falsehood to attribute world-dominating power to an entire ethnic group consisting of millions of people scattered around the world with the claim that "the Jews decided" the course of events. This is a wild distortion based in paranoia and hatred; if a mob believes this lie, history strongly suggests that, in the event of an economic or other calamity, such a mob will attack members of the ethnic minority being blamed. That's why I called attention to it.

All you're doing is expending a long-winded effort at justifying racial hatred and scapegoating which has led in the past to genocidal massacres. If you believe that Israel is a "crime scene", and you yourself are an apologist for disgruntled, hateful people who long for a different type of crime scene, then what your rant really amounts to is "two wrongs make a right".
+1
aletheia's avatar
aletheia · 1 week ago
@Clarence: "You can't refute a simple, straightforward point, ..."

Me: No.

Examine the words Clarence 1st posted: "Delusional, paranoid bigotry masquerading ... defies reason ... flies in the face of the facts ... maintain a profoundly distorted version of reality driven by a vengeful agenda ..." and so on, finishing with: "hateful agenda ... accuracy and truth." As if.

What Clarence 1st posted is not "a simple, straightforward point" but is itself 99% "hate speech," attacking JJJihad, who wrote approaching 100% truth.

What I wrote, what Clarence calls "the whole kitchen sink [thrown at him]" is a literal, but only a part-listing, of the villainy of the murdering thieves of the ELO/Os' = erstwhile legal owner/occupiers' land/property, in the place once referred to as Mandate Palestine. What I wrote is necessary information for people who otherwise get their information from the MSM+PFCBs, because those corrupt&venal news-gatekeepers have suppressed certain inconvenient truths since, say, Plan Dalet, inspired by Jabotinsky's perpetual aggressive war.

It is not a diversion, but the central theme. That some of the I/J/Z-plex (self-explanatory term) proudly boast that the US Congress is "Israeli occupied territory" - err ... actually gives a big part of the game away?

The *real* (= verifiable) "simple, straightforward point" is that a certain illegitimate entity, thrust into the ME by the I/J/Z-plex with UK and US assistance is *exactly* as described, namely an un-remedied, supreme international crime scene - and *not* incidentally, also the greatest self-inflicted humiliation the world is ever likely to see.

Imagine; the I/J/Z-plex' Lebensraum was not purchased in free and fair transactions, like the rest of the world has to do, but stolen at the point of guns, including vicious terrorism and mass-murder of innocent, legal residents. Guns purchased by Meir's $50mio, raised in the US, where the other half of the I/J/Z-plex lives - as parasites and puppet-masters both - and yes, directing the US war machine; Iraq & Libya smashed, now Syria in progress, Iran planned next. One half of the I/J/Z-plex living on stolen land, the other as 5th columnists, aiming the US' guns. JJJihad is correct. What I utterly despise is liars, cheats, thieves and murderers.
0
Clarence's avatar
Clarence · 6 days ago
Like I said, you can't refute a straightforward point. You still haven't even begun to defend the coherence and validity of JJ's wildly paranoid claim (i.e. that a small, scattered ethnic minority should be blamed for deciding the course of world events). You'd rather play visiting professor, digress and rant, and refer to me in the third person as if I'm Exhibit A for your students. Yet more proof of your deluded approach to political analysis, not that any more is necessary once you wrote, "JJJihad, who wrote approaching 100% truth".

"the greatest self-inflicted humiliation the world is ever likely to see"

Hysteria piled on top of delusional incompetence. The European genocide that made the case for Israel's founding more urgent was indeed a self-inflicted humiliation by Europeans, led by Germans. Sending boatloads of refugees back across the oceans to face the gas chambers -- because there wasn't yet an Israel to receive them, and the Brits had cut off immigration anyway -- was yet another self-inflicted humiliation, something John Kerry referred to with shame just a few days ago. Such are the self-inflicted humiliations that persist in the world, but you wouldn't understand because you've got everything precisely backwards!

According to wikipedia, aletheia means "the state of not being hidden; the state of being evident ... it also implies sincerity, as well as factuality or reality."

What a shame that you can't live up to your own chosen standard. There's nothing congruous with "factuality or reality" in JJ's paranoid, malicious claim, which you heartily endorse. And for someone whose moniker suggests he cares about things "not being hidden'', your unreadable writing style makes meaning obscure, not evident. Learn how to write clearly and address your opponents directly.
0
gand harrison's avatar
gand harrison · 5 days ago
Censorship (of fair comment) is a crime against democracy; practitioners a) kill their own credibility but worse b) make themselves part of the problem, c) compromising the quest for truth and justice.
[Note: the censored comment is copied in here.]

2013-09-14

antiwar censor-robot active - grrr!

Some keywords (hence the XXXs below) trigger the shunting of comment-input onto the 'moderation' queue; IF we knew THEN we could possibly avoid this annoyance. Of course, it's their right...

Update, 14Sep 08:51: Unfortunately, I overlooked "the Jews decided" in a Clarence quote, which triggered the antiwar censor-bot. But then some IMHO (un)democratic criminal person killed = deleted my input. You may read it for yourself and decide:

Input (to antiwar Raimondo We Beat the War Party - For now ... (re Clarence - aletheia exchange)):

The prime-crime (land/property theft by mass-murdering violence = ethnic cleansing by genocidal methods) is visible to all who look, as illustrated in the #-points above, along with means, motive, and opportunity etc.. Anyone is welcome to challenge anything with this advice: aletheia is dedicated to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and that truth to be exposed. I do my best.

Reviewing critical points:

From a book written in 1895-6, “The XXX-ish question persists wherever XXXs live in appreciable numbers. Wherever it does not exist, it is brought in together with XXX-ish immigrants.”

Observation: Wherever they go, they *cause* an hostile reaction. It's only natural, that they might seek relief. On the principal of 'prevention is preferred to cure,' one might expect relief to be sought somewhere *without* neighbours to vex, but no such cleverness. By 1905, the 'final destination' was chosen, but note: *Not* a 'land without people.' The vexing followed as night follows day (the natives were not only restless, but driven to rioting), the XXXs sought assistance by lobbying the British (lobbying = coercing, threatening, bribing etc., see Mafia-methods); result = the Balfour sell-out, 1917. That was obviously insufficient for Jabotinsky, ~1923: “only active retaliation would deter ... only ... armed force would ensure ...” = perpetual war (Sounds like Obama/Kerry; plus ça change). This was admitted and consolidated by Ben-Gurion(1936-39): “We ... are the attackers and the Arabs are those defending ... [they] own the land ...” Then add Plan Dalet/massacres (continuing sporadically to this day), and the rest is history.

Now, to JJJihad's «steal all "Judea and Samaria"» etc., which Clarence 1st *rewrote* as «It defies reason to claim "the Jews decided" everything. It flies in the face of the facts» and to prove that was no accident, Clarence then *reiterated* it as «i.e. that a small, scattered ethnic minority should be blamed for deciding the course of world events». Clarence demonstrates an active, if erring, imagination (and possibly megalomaniacal tendencies).

Given that neither of Clarence's rewrites were what JJJihad wrote, consider "straw man," "red herring" and "non sequitur" etc.. Clarence deploys fallacies along with bad words and attacks the messenger = "ad homiminem," another fallacy. This is not a surprise. Of course criminals lie, to do otherwise would be to self-convict. Note that along with lying, criminals are generally considered outcasts, and IMHO differ from normal, law abiding citizens so much, as to be considered ill (i.e. psychopaths). As the prime-crime is blindingly obvious (after circumventing the lie-cloud attempted disguise), so apologists must also lie, dissemble, obfuscate and generally attempt to deceive. Say "Hello," Clarence.

Briefly, to Clarence's own 'reason-defying' claim, consider that the ME countries on the WC7in5 list are all considered to be Z-enemies AND the US is working through that list, PLUS the US considers itself 'Lord of all creation,' THEN accusing Zs of "deciding the course of world events" is not at all far-fetched, even quite possible. The alternate thesis, that the US and Zs are only *coincidentally* on the same destructive, murdering for spoil (one soil, the other oil) path is disproven by the USS Liberty incident - where Zs mass-murdered US citizens with impunity, in the outrageous attempt to sink a US warship. The USS Liberty incident shows which is the tail and which the dog (recall Mafia-methods = coercing, threatening, bribing etc., add killing). But nevertheless, *the* substantial issue here is not who may run the world (or what a bad job they're doing), but the un-remedied Z-crime-scene; an entity illegally squatting on improperly alienated land has *no* legitimacy (and never did), and nothing the Zs do and/or their apologists say has any legitimacy either. Oh, and not so BTW, nobody may claim the right to defend stolen land/property; another deception bites the dust.

=====

0
aletheia · less than 1 minute ago
Your comment must be approved by the site admins before it will appear publicly.

grrr! 10:59.

Update: 1hr later; comment-count up by one, but comment still not there...
[Note: end censored comment.]
0
Clarence's avatar
Clarence · 3 days ago
Fascinating ... so you believe that anyone who says anything pro-Israel automatically becomes an apologist for crime. Folks can sing the praises of any country on Earth without becoming accomplices to criminal activity, but say one thing good about Israel and you're an outlaw. Convenient little double standard you're operating with there.

Just as convenient is your seeming pretense that Israel is the only nation born in controversy and war. Not like every other nation in the world, of course, which all came to be by the most peaceful, civilized, generous and humanitarian methods imaginable.

Your prejudiced double standards make your condescending commentary a joke.
0
richard vajs's avatar
richard vajs · 3 days ago
I too am an unapologetic critic of Israel. Also as you say, Israel is not the only nasty, apartheid state in the World, but - and this is a big but - we support this nasty country with its hateful attitude towards all of its neighbors. We didn't support the old South African apartheid governmen t, we don't support North Korea and their lunacy, so why do we have to support Israel. We support it with taxpayer's dollars, the blood of our military and our hypocritical diplomacy - sowing discord throughout the Middle East. That is the origin of your "double standards". Cut my country loose from serving the goals of your monstrous country and I would be content to see Israel just reap the seeds that it is sowing.
0
aletheia's avatar
aletheia · 2 days ago
@richard vajs: "I too am an unapologetic critic of Israel. ... Cut my country loose from serving the goals of your monstrous country ..."

Me: Yes; your criticism is well-founded, but in addition, consider this definition:

accomplice n. partner in a crime etc. [Latin: related to *complex]

As it stands, the US & Z rogue-regimes are accomplices, both murdering for spoil; one soil, the other oil - their criminality is complementary. Then, it's not up to the Zs to cut the US loose on two grounds a) the Zs cannot be asked for anything (understanding only power = force), and b) we can never expect the Zs to be nice anyway, it's simply not part of their make-up.

The US *Congress* could cut itself loose from the Z-criminals IF: a) they got some (good) morals and b) bipartisanly rejected all filthy 5th column lobbying = coercion and bribes OR c) the electorate rejected all sell-out, quisling traitors as representatives, see next.

The US *electorate* could cut itself loose from the Z-criminals IF: a) the US democracy worked 'as designed,' namely as a proper "of, by, for the people" democracy AND the people were not continually lied to by their so-called 'leaders' via, and often with *active assistance* from the US-MMH = Media (aka press, radio + TV), Madison Ave. and Hollywood.

As it is, we the people of the world must act resolutely; we must attempt a *total* BDS against Zs and their supporters, plus absolute, loud and continuous condemnation of their wicked crimes. The UN is the correct agency for bringing rogue-regimes to justice - but the UN, sadly, seems corrupt, proof: Ban Ki Moon sounds very much like he's preparing to 'bless' a US,F+UK aggressive attack on Syria. Ban Ki Moon's job is to *stop* war, so far no success, just like Annan before him, and of course, the UN has been particularly ineffective in stopping the Zs. Coming full-circle, a big reason for UN ineffectiveness is the US veto. The Zs cannot stand alone, they are both parasites and puppet-masters; the tail insults the dog as it wags it. Big humiliation, US.
0
Clarence's avatar
Clarence · 3 days ago
It's not "my" country. That's an assumption on your part. I'm just some guy saying things in defense of Israel while the rest of you play offense. You don't know who I am or where I'm from. Does your inaccurate assumption suggest that you believe only a resident of Israel would be willing to defend it?

Unlike the others in this thread, at least you admit the double standards are real. (Of course, that's like admitting the sun is real, but it's astounding how hard it is for some people to admit the obvious.) Israel is singled out for censure like no other nation, even though the origin of so many nations was bloody and horrific. It must be a blissful thing for your moralizing colleagues to be so self-righteously indignant while pretending they have a shred of credibility. I wonder what "monstrous" savagery lurks in their own heritage...

By the way, it's truly rich for you to claim that Israel has a "hateful attitude towards all of its neighbors". If you had any actual FACTS at your disposal, you'd know that Israel routinely saves the lives of sick and injured Palestinians, and lately they've been treating wounded Syrians too. You and your buddies constantly devour propaganda that makes demons out of Israelis, but you never hear any accounts of their humanity, so naturally you believe it's a "monstrous" place. You know only a caricature of Israelis, and that's all you're content to know, thus you consume news at sites where you'll have your biases (and your ignorance) reinforced.

Just read what Palestinians and their fellow Arabs learn in their schools and mosques and media about their Semitic cousins in Israel and then you'll know which side wallows in a "hateful attitude towards all of its neighbors". That's so self-evident I shouldn't even have to spell it out, but apparently you're so misinformed you actually think it's Israel that promotes hatred of its neighbors and not the reverse.
0
aletheia's avatar
aletheia · 3 days ago
@Clarence: “It's not "my" country.”

Me: Hmmm; so what's Clarence's angle?

Clarence: “I'm just some guy saying things in defense ...”

Me: Ah, a dabbler, defending continuing supreme international crime.

@Clarence: “while the rest of you play offense.”

Me: But this is not a game. Pardon me if I doubt Clarence's veracity, integrity and morals. We could discuss two options; a) Clarence is *not* a member of the I/J/Z-plex, or b) he is. Personally, I don't care, since it's usually not who says what, but what is said. But there is enough material here showing that Clarence catapults much of the standard Z-propaganda, more than enough to make one go "Hmmm." Take only one example, the direction of any purported 'hatred,' the word itself is a keyword more often used by one specific group than any other. On a different track, we could discuss three options; a) erring ideology (defending crime) b) outright ignorance (ignoring evidence) and/or or c) malice aforethought. (Proof of latter, Clarence's own very 1st words: "Delusional, paranoid bigotry masquerading as analysis.") Back at ya, Clarence; refer “First remove the beam out of your own eye, ...”

Readers will no doubt form their own conclusions as is usual, but as far as I'm concerned, there is a smoking gun:

Ben-Gurion(1936-39): “We must see the situation for what it is. ... But in the political field we are the attackers and the Arabs are those defending themselves. They are living in the country and own the land, ... ”

Plus “Iron Wall” confirmation of premeditated murdering violence, extending to perpetual, aggressive war. Ignoring evidence has a name (refer to '1st words' above); IMHO Clarence could not be further in the wrong; my sympathies lie with the victims, not the aggressive alien attackers.

To Clarence: "Be ashamed."
 [Note: this is where Clarence 'exited.']
0
richard vajs's avatar
richard vajs · 3 days ago
It's not "your" country - you fooled me. I know how the Israelis treat the Palestinians and it sure isn't with free medical care. My source is the Christian Peacekeepers and my personal interaction with some of those. They talk about the hateful things that the "settlers" do to Palestinian schoolchildren, to their animals, to what little land the Palestinians have left, their olive groves, etc. The Israeli settlers seize land that is not theirs, build their little stronghold, run around unarmed people with their machine guns and do cute stunts like pump their untreated sewage through long pipes to dump on Palestinian land for the Arab kids to play in.
Not that the Israelis neglect public relations - I distinctly remember the Israelis barging into the earthquake disaster in Haiti - they got early priority landing rights at the halfway functioning airport to set up their big tent to make a big splash and get on the news and then quickly folded their tent and left. Meanwhile dedicated doctors from Cuba actually treated the victims, before and after the Israeli PR stunt.
But as I said - I am willing to let Israel alone to reap the nasty crop that they are sowing - without US alliance. I would just feel cleaner if we could get out of any doings with them.
0
aletheia's avatar
aletheia · 3 days ago
@Clarence: "Fascinating ... so you believe ..."

Me: No. Clarence has a 'mind-reading' problem; s/he cannot possibly know what I may believe. Further, since 'belief' can be based on *zero* information (and/or likely to be outright wrong), I *do not* believe (or sing) as a rule, but prefer proof, via substantiable facts - as above.

Clarence: "anyone who says anything pro-Israel automatically becomes an apologist for crime."

Me: Yes. Proof: Zs squat on improperly alienated land/property = murder for spoil = crime, then look up 'apologist.'

Clarence: "without becoming accomplices to criminal activity, ...."

Me: No. Clarence morphing 'apologist' into 'accomplice' is another "straw man" fallacy.

Clarence: "... and [X is] an outlaw."

Me: Yes, for X = accomplice OR apologist. At any crime-scene, there are one or more perpetrators, possibly accessories, possibly apologists and possibly witnesses who, if they remain inactive ('duty to assist victims'), form part of the group of more or less guilty participants.

If the shoe fits (all I/J/Z-plex except active dissenters), wear it.

Clarence: "... seeming pretense [that Zs'] is the only nation born in controversy and war."

Me: Next fallacy, namely a form of tu quoque; the accused's guilt is not reduced by others' and I pretend nothing, see proof - as above.

Clarence: "... Your prejudiced double standards make ..."

Me: Ad hominem fallacy - again. Always, the abuse.

Just the one *gold* standard, truth + justice = peace - no joke.
-=*=-

Fazit: Of course, Clarence eventually decided shutting-up was his best option. But his comments, IMHO, are pretty standard for lying hasbarists.

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] deceive  v. (-ving) 1 make (a person) believe what is false; purposely mislead. 2 be unfaithful to, esp. sexually. 3 use deceit.  deceive oneself persist in a mistaken belief.  deceiver n. [POD]

[2] lie2  -n. 1 intentionally false statement (tell a lie). 2 something that deceives. -v. (lies, lied, lying) 1 tell a lie or lies. 2 (of a thing) be deceptive.  give the lie to show the falsity of (a supposition etc.). [Old English] [ibid.]

[3] conspiracy  n. (pl. -ies) 1 secret plan to commit a crime; plot. 2 conspiring. [Latin: related to *conspire] [ibid.]

Abbreviations:

ELO/Os = erstwhile legal owner/occupiers

I/J/Z-plex; illegitimate IL squats on genocidally ethnically-cleansed = improperly alienated, mainly Palestinian ELO/Os' land/property = IL is an un-remedied crime-scene and *all* I/J/Z-plex (except any actively opposing) are guilty; sole remedy = reparations = revest where possible, adequate = acceptable recompense where not + *sincere* apology

M/I/C/$4a†-plex = military, industrial, Congress (US-speak for parliament); $ = banksters, 4 = 4th estate = MSM+PFBCs, 'a' = academia incl. think-tanks, † = the churches.

MSM = mainstream media (print and broadcast), aka 'corrupt&venal'

neoliberalism = 'economic rationalism,' 'supply-side,' (wicked) privatisations, 'small govt.' = minimised to no égalité etc. + globalisation = wage arbitration etc. = <1% rips off 99%+

PFBCs = publicly-financed broadcasters, like the AusBC

ppp-dd'd = pushed-propaganda paradigm dumbed-down

PRopaganda = PR + propaganda, usual qualifier: 'lying'

SQSHsO = snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on

the Enlightenment well summarised by liberté, égalité, fraternité

US-MMH = Media (aka press, radio + TV), Madison Ave., Hollywood

US&/Zs = the US of A and/or Zionists; sometimes indistinguishable

XS-CO2-C*4 = excess CO2 climate-change catastrophe cliff
 (suspected only one-way = spiral-down)

Zionism (latest post-Jabotinsky, '23) = perpetual aggressive war