FACEBOOK
TWITTER
ALAN HART: Obama Has Signalled His Coming Complete Surrender to Zionism and Its Lobby
Obama has signalled his coming complete surrender to Zionism and its lobby
By Alan Hart for Veterans Today
He did it with seven words. “Ultimately the U.S. cannot impose a solution.”
He was speaking at the White House the day before the start of the new round of direct talks between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, after he had met with them and Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan’s King Abdullah II. (In my last post I anticipated Obama saying at the point of his complete surrender that “America can’t want peace more than the parties.” He also said that – ahead of schedule!)
Today there is a growing number of seriously well informed people of all faiths and none (including me) who believe there will only be peace if it is imposed.
Among those who have dared to say so in public is one of the most eminent Jewish gentlemen of our time, Henry Siegman. A former national director of the American Jewish Congress, he is president of the U.S./Middle East Project, which was part of the Council on Foreign Relations from 1994 until 2006 when it was established as an independent policy institute. He is also a research professor at the Sir Joseph Hotung Middle East Programme of the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London. During his more than 30 years of involvement in the Middle East peace process, he has published extensively on the subject and has been consulted by governments, international agencies and non-governmental organizations involved in the peace process. In a comment piece for the Financial Times on 23 February 2010, (quoted in Conflict Without End? the Epilogue to Volume 3 of the American edition of my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews), he wrote this:
“The Middle East peace process and its quest for a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict that got under way nearly 20 years ago with the Oslo accords has undergone two fundamental transformations. It is now on the brink of a third.
“The first was the crossing of a threshold by Israel’s settlement project in the West Bank; there is no longer any prospect of its removal by this or any future Israeli government, which was the precise goal of the settlements’ relentless expansion all along. The previous prime minister, Ehud Olmert, who declared that a peace accord requires Israel to withdraw ‘from most, if not all’ of the occupied territories, ‘including East Jerusalem,’ was unable even to remove any of the 20 hilltop outposts Israel had solemnly promised to dismantle.
“A two-state solution could therefore come about only if Israel were compelled to withdraw to the pre-1967 border by an outside power whose wishes an Israeli government could not defy – the US. The assumption has always been that at the point where Israel’s colonial ambitions collide with critical US national interests, an American president would draw on the massive credit the US has accumulated with Israel to insist it dismantle its illegal settlements, which successive US administrations held to be the main obstacle to a peace accord.
“The second transformation resulted from the shattering of that assumption when President Barack Obama – who took a more forceful stand against Israel’s settlements than any of his predecessors, and did so at a time when the damage this unending conflict was causing American interests could not have been more obvious – backed off ignominiously in the face of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s rejection of his demand. This left prospects for a two-state accord dead in the water.”
On 16 August in a piece for the Huffington Post which was originally published by Ha’aretz in Hebrew, Siegman added this:
“Most Israelis, particularly the present government, have been blithely indifferent to repeated international condemnations of Israel’s systematic theft of Palestinian territory on which it has been settling its own Jewish population in blatant violation of international law. Yet their reaction to what they see as an attack on the “legitimacy” of the State of Israel, a concept foreign to international law, seems to bring them to the edge of hysteria.
“In fact, Israel’s legitimacy within its 1967 borders has never been challenged by the international community. It is its behavior on territory beyond its own borders to which the international community – including every U.S. administration – has objected. To construe the condemnation of violations of international law as anti-Semitism is absurd.
“It was not an anti-Semite seeking to delegitimize the Jewish state, but Theodore Meron, an internationally respected jurist and the legal advisor to Israel’s Foreign Ministry, who following the war of 1967 conveyed the following legal opinion to Israel’s Foreign Minister Abba Eban: ‘Civilian settlement in the administered territories contravenes explicit provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention,’ to which Israel is a signatory. That Convention’s ban on population transfer is ‘categorical and not conditional upon the motives for the transfer or its objectives. The Convention’s purpose is to prevent settlement in occupied territory of citizens of the occupying state.’”
So yes, Israel’s leaders knew that settlements on Arab land occupied in 1967 are illegal. They simply didn’t give (and still today don’t give) a damn about international law. But this attitude, a mixture of extreme arrogance and insufferable self-righteousness, does not make them the main villains in the story of what happened after June 1967. The main villains were (and still are) the governments of the major powers and the one in Washington DC above all.
What they should have said to Israel in the immediate aftermarth of the 1967 war is: “You are not to build any settlements on occupied Arab land. If you do, you’ll be demonstrating your contempt for international law. In this event the international community will declare Israel to be an outlaw state and subject it to sanctions.”
If something like that riot act had been read to Israel there would have been peace many, many years ago. The pragmatic Arafat was reluctantly reconciled to the reality of Israel’s existence inside its pre-1967 borders as far back as 1968. In his gun and olive branch address to the UN General Assembly on 13 November 1974 he said so by obvious implication. Thereafter he put his credibility with his leadership colleagues and his people, and his life, on the line to get a mandate for unthinkable compromise with Israel. He got it at the end of 1979 when the Palestine National Council voted by 296 votes to 4 to endorse his two-state policy. What he needed thereafter was an Israeli partner for peace. He eventually got a probable one, Yitzhak Rabin, but he was assassinated by a Zionist fanatic. The more it became clear that Israel’s leaders were not interested in a genuine two-state solution for which Arafat had prepared the ground on his side, the more his credibility with his own people suffered.
It is in the context briefly sketched above that Obama’s seven words have their real meaning.
At the time of writing it seems reasonably clear that Obama is hoping that Abbas and his equally discredited Fatah leadership colleagues can be bribed and bullied into accepting what Netanyahu will eventually offer – crumbs from Zionism’s table. (My guess is that Abbas at a point will resign rather than trigger a Palestinian civil war). THE question is what will Obama do when Israel refuses to give enough to satisfy the demands and needs of the Palestinian people for a just about acceptable measure of justice?
We already know the answer. “Ultimately the U.S. cannot impose a solution.”
Effectively those seven words tell Israel’s leaders that they can go on imposing their will on the occupied and oppressed Palestinians with the comfort of knowing that Obama is not going to use the leverage he has, and every American president has had, to cause them, or try to cause them, to be serious about peace on terms virtually all Palestinians and most other Arabs and Muslims everywhere could accept, and which a rational Israeli government and people would accept with relief.
Put another way, those seven words are effectively a green light for Zionism alone to determine the future of the Palestinians, a future which at some point will most likely see the final ethnic cleansing of Palestine, followed by another great turning against the Jews (provoked by the Zionist state’s behaviour) and a Clash of Civilizations, Judeo-Christian v Islamic.
In his analysis on the day Obama delivered his seven words, Jeremy Bowen, the BBC’s admirable Middle East Editor, offered this thought. “There might not be room for many more failures. The conflict is changing. A religious war is now being grafted on what used to be fundamentally a competition for territory between two national movements. You can make deals with nationalists. It’s much harder with people who believe they’re doing God’s work.”
The next question asks itself. Why won’t Obama be the president to call and hold the Zionist state to account for its crimes, even when doing so is necessary for the best protection of America’s own interests?
Part of the answer is, of course, that he is no more willing than any of his predecessors to have a showdown with the Zionist lobby and its stooges in Congress and the mainstream media.
But there might be more to it.
In the privacy of his own mind Obama probably understands better than any of his predecessors how the conflict was created and what has sustained it. If that is the case, he will also know there’s no guarantee that real American-led pressure on Israel to be serious about peace would work and that it could be counter-productive.
I am a supporter in principle of the case and the need for the Zionist state of Israel to be totally isolated, boycotted and sanctioned as Apartheid South Africa was, eventually. But… The danger is that even the credible threat of a real boycott and sanctions could play into the hands of those Israeli leaders – Netanyahu has long been their standard bearer – who have brainwashed Israelis, most if not quite all, into believing that the world hates Jews, always has and always will, and that Israeli Jews have no choice but to tell the world to go to hell. In this context (and as I note in the Epilogue of the American edition of my book), I think it could and should be said that Zionism succeeded, probably beyond its own best expectations, in transforming the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust from a lesson against racism and fascism and all the evils associated with them into an ideology that seeks to justify anything and everything the Zionist state does. War crimes and all.
So it could be that in the privacy of his own mind, Obama knows it is already too late (not to mention too dangerous) to try to push Israel’s leaders much further than they are willing to go.
What, I wonder, will honest historians of the future make of what is happening right now? My guess is that they will conclude that when Obama launched his push for peace, the Zionist state was already a monster beyond control.
ABOUT ALAN HART:
Alan Hart has been engaged with events in the Middle East and their global consequences and terrifying implications – the possibility of a Clash of Civilisations, Judeo-Christian v Islamic, and, along the way, another great turning against the Jews – for nearly 40 years…
- As a correspondent for ITN’s News At Ten and the BBC’s Panorama programme (covering wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world).
- As a researcher and author.
- As a participant at leadership level, working to a Security Council background briefing, in the covert diplomacy of the search for peace.
He’s been to war with the Israelis and the Arabs, but the learning experience he values most, and which he believes gave him rare insight, came from his one-to-one private conversations over the years with many leaders on both sides of the conflict. With, for example, Golda Meir, Mother Israel, and Yasser Arafat, Father Palestine. The significance of these private conversations was that they enabled him to be aware of the truth of what leaders really believed and feared as opposed to what they said in public for propaganda and myth-sustaining purposes.
It was because of his special relationships with leaders on both sides that, in 1980, he found himself sucked into the covert diplomacy of conflict resolution…
President Carter had been prevented by Prime Minister Begin from involving the PLO in the peace process, an opening made possible because Arafat had signalled, secretly and seriously, that he was ready to make peace with an Israel inside more or less its pre-1967 borders. Carter was in despair and said, in private, that events had once again proved that it was impossible to advance the peace process by institutional diplomacy (because of the pork-barrel nature of American politics and the Zionist lobby’s awesome influence). It was then suggested to Alan that he should undertake an unofficial, covert diplomatic mission to get an exploratory dialogue going between Arafat and Peres, with himself initially the linkman. The assumption at the time was that Peres would win Israel’s next election and deny Begin a second term. The initiative was funded by a small number of wealthy British Jews led by Marcus Sieff (the Chairman of Marks and Spencer) with the approval of Lord Victor Rothschild…. It happened and enough progress was made to get Peres and Arafat into public dialogue in the event of Peres winning the 1981 election. Unfortunately, and against all expectations, he did not.
In the course of this mission, Alan learned two things. The first was the truth about the miracle of Arafat’s leadership – his success in persuading his side (most of it) to be ready for unthinkable compromise with Israel for peace. (Which was why Alan wrote his first book Arafat: Terrorist or Peacemaker). The second was why it is difficult to impossible for any Israeli prime minister, even a rational, well-motivated one, to make peace on any terms the Palestinians can accept.
A decade later, this initiative became the Oslo process, which might have delivered peace if Prime Minister Rabin had not been assassinated by a gut-Zionist.
Alan has long believed that what peacemaking needs above all else is some TRUTH-TELLING, about many things but, especially, the difference between Zionist mythology and real history, and, the difference between Jews and Judaism on the one hand and Zionists and Zionism on the other. (The Zionism of the title and substance of Alan’s latest book is, of course, political Zionism or Jewish nationalism as the creating and sustaining force of the Zionist state, not what could be called the spiritual Zionism of Judaism).
Alan is also credited with having played a leading role in getting the ‘North-South’ issue onto the agenda for political and public debate throughout the Western world and beyond. In 1973, frustrated by the mainstream media’s refusal to come to grips with issues that really matter, he set up his own independent production company (World Focus) to research, film, edit and promote the first ever documentary on the full and true dimensions of global poverty and its implications for all.
The end product, a two-hour film titled FIVE MINUTES TO MIDNIGHT, had its world premiere, hosted by Secretary General Kurt Waldheim, at the formal opening of the 7th Special session of the UN General Assembly, (called to discuss the need for a New World Economic Order); was screened on television in most countries of the North; was versioned for schools in many countries; and became something of a standard work of reference. (The visual impact of the production was supplemented by statistics then new to the world including, for example, the estimate that, in the South, 15 million children under five were dying each year from a combination of malnutrition and easily preventable diseases – in a word, poverty).
To make the project work, Alan, on the strength of his international reputation, raised £1 million in grants from international development institutions and governments and put together a think-tank of world leaders to advise him.
Alan is a fiercely independent thinker. He hates all labels and isms and has never been a member of any political party or group. He prefers to judge issues on their merits. When asked what drives him, he used to say: “I have three children and, when the world falls apart, I want to be able to look them in the eye and say, ‘Don’t blame me. I tried.’” Today he gives an improved answer, one borrowed from a conversation with Dr. Hajo Meyer, a Nazi holocaust survivor and a passionate anti-Zionist. When Alan asked him why he was still campaigning at the age of 82 even though he was being reviled by Zionism, he replied: “The first person I see when I get up in the morning is me.” Alan, too, has to be able to live with himself. He believes that heaven and hell are states of mind. Hell, he says, “is when you know that the end of your life is approaching and that you have not used your talents and resources as well as you could have done to make a difference – i.e. when you realise upon reflection that you have wasted your life. Heaven is contemplation of the approach of death without fear because you know that, on balance, you’ve done your best to make a difference.”
Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=47745
Posted by Alan Hart on Sep 4 2010, With 0 Reads, Filed under Israel, Palestine, World. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
COMMENTS
To post, we ask that you login using Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail in the box below.Don't have a social network account? Register and Login direct with VT and post.
Before you post, read our Comment Policy - Feedback
Interesting how the US can “impose” solutions, violence, puppet governments, sanctions and all other manner of detriment upon other nations (notably those who don’t agree with our imperialist/corporatist aims), but it “can’t impose a solution” when it comes to Israel.
The excuse rings hollow indeed.
You mean it is not the end of US global imperialism, ‘imposing solutions’ in Iraq and Afghanistan having had to be the last lesson in arrogant madness?! ‘Hollow’ is very kind. How about ‘chicken-hearted hypocrisy’ or a ‘surrender note from the Zioval Office’? Franz (below) seems spot on. Please get a grip of this guy or the whole world is in trouble.
“…Why won’t Obama be the president to call and hold the Zionist state to account for its crimes…”
Golly I like easy ones: American presidents are Israeli contractors. I swear, the last three guys (Clinton, Bush, Obummer) looked to me exactly like somebody in Langley called Molly Maids and said, “Oh shucks we need a prez… any ideas?” And they didn’t have too many ideas. So we got the Monica’s boyfriend, the Chimp and Slick Barry.
I like that there’s guys here who seem to know this. After three phony presidents (at least), lots of us have no political party, even in our dreams. We got tired of voting for third party candidates because “protest votes” in this country make no sense. But keep it up and maybe we can work on that. The alternative is despair which is a sin even for people who got no religion.
Franz, you are hilarious. It’s hard to find a good laugh these days if you are a serious and well informed person!
Thank You,
Mike
Those words, “I cannot impose a solution” were probably VERY HARD to swallow for him. He probably still thinks he’s the “messiah”. It must have really killed his ego (for maybe ten minutes, even) to admit he’s just a “community organizer” and not a “world organizer”.
You guys are making my day! More great humor based on serious facts! He is a distant cousin and I wish him the best but facts are facts!
Thanks !
Mike
“IF OBAMA EVER CROSSES THE JEWS, an army of Jewish publishers, journalists and lobbyists will destroy him instantly. The Jews know of Obama’s alleged homosexual activities and his presidential ineligibility due to his birth in Kenya. In other words, the Jews who own America’s mainstream media, could ruin Obama in a minute.
Thus, the Jewish banking elite who work closely with their synagogue buddies at ABC, NBC, and CBS, have decided FOR Obama those whom he appoints as his key advisers and those whom he confirms as heads of the institutions connected with the White House.
A key component of Obama’s rise to power is rooted in Chicago, the Jewish breeding ground of Obama’s political career. A prime Jewish patron of Obama’s political ambitions was and remains, Abner Mikva, former Chicago Congressman, Federal judge and White House counsel to Bill Clinton.
Mikva is one of many influential Chicago Jews who have been among Obama’s earliest and most ardent backers. Through their large financial contributions and influence peddling, Obama’s Chicago enablers insured for themselves both a place in his administration and political leverage serving Jewish interests. These include the following, all of whom, are inter-connected:
-1- Bettylu Klutznik Saltzman, whose father, Phillip Klutznik (d 1999), served as President of B’nai B’rith
-2- Rahm Emanuel, former partner in Chicago’s branch of Wasserstein Investments, currently White House Chief of Staff
-3- Penny Pritzker, heiress to the Chicago-based Hyatt Hotel fortunes, now member of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board
-4- Lester Crown, Chairman of Chicago’s Crown Investments,
-5- Valerie Jarrett, former Chairman of the Chicago Stock Exchange, currently Obama’s Senior Adviser for Intergovernmental Affairs
-6- David Axelrod, founder of Axelrod & Associates which ran Obama’s senate and presidential campaigns, now Special Adviser to Obama.
As listed in the publication, The Barack Book, Jews have played and continue to play a key role in propping up Obama as a puppet for Jewish interests. Also listed in The Barack Book as amongst Obama’s Chicago ‘friends’ is The Joyce Foundation, a Gentile-sounding foundation, but is actually a Jewish organization that lobbies for gun confiscation of Gentiles, funded by the Jewish billionaire, George Soros.
Noted for his takeover of the Democratic party, Soros was the major financial contributor of Obama’s presidential campaign through his huge network of PACs and civic groups.
THERE ARE PRESENTLY 3 JEWS who have infiltrated the Obama administration, and for all practical and Jewish purposes, run the White House: George Soros, Larry Summers, and Timothy Geithner.”
(from “How the Jews Took the White House” by Nathanael Kapner at Real Zionist News)
They can pull the plug on him at any given moment and he knows it! Will it be assassination or revelation of his dirty laundry?
They outed Kennedy,Nixon and Clinton!
Mike
PS,
What the poor man doesn’t realize is they will pull his plug if that suits their agenda whether he does everything they tell him or not.
The jews are not the saviors of “black” America. Ask Cythia Mckinney who has a brain and can think for herself!
Mike
This website is little more than Saudi-sponsored anti-Semitic trash.
Puleeeze, readers/sponsors, don’t bore me with your crocodile tears of righteous indignation, “Oh, just because we criticize Israel, we’re anti-Semites, huh?”
Well, yes you are. Not so much because you criticize Israel, but because your criticism is informed by a moral standard that is not applied to any other country.
Even the EU’s working definition of anti-Semitism defines criticism of Israel in this context as anti-Semitism.
The fact is that in the original “Mandate of Palestine”, present-day Jordan was included. There were no “Palestinians” as a distinct national ethnic group then; “Palestinians” were anyone who lived in the mandate, Arab or Jew. However, to the extent that one can identify Palestinians as a distinct group warranting national self-determination, Jordan – part of the orginal Mandate, remember – is overwhelmingly populated by Palestinians.
The Palestinians often cite their majority status in the West Bank as grounds for sovereignty there. If that is so, why is the basic principle of “majority rule” of such vital importance in the West Bank….but utterly ignored right next door in Jordan?
I’m not saying Israel should hang onto the West Bank entirely. I’m for a confederation of Palestinian-majority and contiguous West Bank areas with Jordan, the REAL Palestinian state, plus confederation of Jewish-majority areas of the West Bank with Israel, and the whole of the West Bank maintained as a DMZ, policed not by foreign troops, but by joint Israeli-Palestinian police forces.
But before any of that can happen, the Palestinian leaders – credible leaders – have to amend the Palestinian National Charter so as to remove the language that declares the idea of Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people to be illegitimate. In other words, the Palestinians must indeed recognize Israel’s legitimacy as as Jewish state.
Abbas says it is not his “job” to define the national character of Israel. But if that were true, why does the very founding documents of his political movement make it his business to define Israel in the negative with respect to the Jews?
His failure to recognize Israel as a Jewish state makes about as much sense as Russia not recognizing Poland as a Polish state, or Turkey not recognizing Greece as a Greek state. But if this does not change, then no matter what is agreed to otherwise, it will be worthless. For when – not if – the Palestinian renege and renew fighting, as they always have, they will be able to say to the world community, that they cannot be held to the terms of an agreement with an “illegitimate” entity.
Netanyahu – as well as past Israeli leaders such as Olmert – have stressed the recognition issue. It was so important back at Oslo in 1993 that Arafat indeed promised to amend the Palestinian National Charter accordingly, and then predictably, he reneged. But your “Jewish dominated press” – what a joke – never reports on this. Instead, all we ever hear from national level print and broadcast media the world over is that this is all about “settlements”; i.e., everything is stalled because of “Israeli intransigence”.
Some Israelis may not have wanted to hang onto the West Bank in the wake of the 1967 war. But they were unanimous about hanging onto Jerusalem, and why shouldn’t they have been, after Jews were ethnically cleansed from there by the Jordanian Army in 1948? In 1967, the Israeli government in fact offered the Arabs the rest of the West Bank, minus Jerusalem, in return for peace. But instead she got the “three no’s of Kharthoum” – no recognition, no peace, no negotiations.
Now, no country in history – ever – has been compelled by a third party to return all lands obtained in the course of a defensive war. It is beyond dispute that the Jordanian Army attacked Israel without provocation in 1967 from that land. So, your interpretation of international law is completely backward: Israel is under NO LEGAL OR MORAL OBLIGATION WHATEVER to concede ONE SQUARE CENTIMETER of land to the Palestinians.
Moreover, international law only defines territory as “occupied” if it was, prior to hostilities, under someone else’s internationally recognized sovereignty. But this was not the case in the West Bank. Jordan’s occupation of the West Bank in the wake of the 1948 war was considered illegal by the UN, and was only recognized by Pakistan and Britain. It is not “occupied territory”, but rather, “disputed territory”.
Consider, for example, the territories of Alsace-Lorraine in France and Silesia in Poland. These were areas of mixed ethnicity claimed by both Germany and France in the former case and Germany and Poland in the latter case. Because of German aggression in both cases, she forfeited any claims to these territories. So, why should Israel – the target of Arab aggression – be compelled to give up the West Bank any more than Poland would be compelled to cede Silesia or France Alsace-Lorraine? As a practical matter, due to demographics, some part of the West Bank, perhaps, but again, legally and morally, based on clear historical precedents, they don’t have to give up anything.
And, even if Israel does cede the West Bank, why do the Jews who live there have to leave? That is what the PA requires. But Arabs can live in Israel – they make up 20% of the population. But in Palestinian lands, there can be NO JEWS. But that’s OK with you guys at this site, for that is your ultimate aim as well: NO MORE JEWS….except passive, “happy darkey”, “good nigger”-style Jews who know their place, this place being a perpetual minority, to be harassed and bullied whenever convenient. And what really tees you off about Israel – never mind any of your phony b.s. revisionist historical rationalizations – is that Israel and her Diaspora Jewish supporters are, so far as you are concerned, analogous to “uppity niggers”.
Oh, sure, you can easily dig around and find this Jew or that who hates Israel. Just like in the antebellum South, some blacks could be found who liked their masters, who thought slavery was just dandy. You can take the Jew out of the Ghetto, but you can’t always take the Ghetto out of the Jew, and there will always be some who are cowardly collaborators. And a lot of them work for Obama, as some of you have figured out! Know what that is, boys and girls? “Camouflage”, that’s what.
It’s all about “access”…and these pathetic examples of my ethnic brethren working for Obama demonstrate the delusion of so many subject peoples that if they have “access”, then everything is going to be OK. It hasn’t occurred to these fools that the Jewish Police in the Warsaw Ghetto had plenty of “access” to the local Nazi authorities….but I digress.
But, let’s cut the crap, shall we, Mr. Duff? How much are the Saudis stuffing in a Swiss bank account of yours to disseminate this garbage? Your military pension not enough, or are you just doing this for fun, because you just never could stand those darned Joos, especially the “uppity” ones who have the temerity to defend themselves? As long as we’re like Woody Allen or Jerry Seinfeld, we’re OK, someone wimpy and neurotic who entertains you and you can feel superior to, but if we hit back, ohh, that just makes your blood boil, doesn’t it? I must say, the most blatant anti-Semitism I’ve ever experienced was in the U.S. military, and I know your type real well, pal.
This site is pretty slick, I have to admit, though. Very nice, “patriotic” theme. “Veterans Today”…well, who could argue with “veterans” without being “unpatriotic”? I see you have links supporting the Ground Zero mosque…I have to wonder how many veterans – especially of Iraq and Afghanistan – like the idea of a Islamist triumphalist mosque being built next to Ground Zero, where there isn’t even a significant Moslem community to serve, led by a Kuwaiti-born Imam who said that Osama Bin Laden was “made in U.S.A.” I know a lot of veterans – I’m a veteran, by the way – and I’d hazard a highly educated guess that whoever is behind this site does not exactly have the best interests of the U.S. at heart.
Yeah, we gotta “put those uppity Zionists in their place”, eh? And then do what? Back the Arabs?
What do we stand for in this country? What do we fight for, what have we fought for? Not always the purest of motives in every case, but the two biggest and most expensive wars we ever fought – both in blood and treasure – were the Civil War and WW2. In both of these cases, we could have easily avoided war in the short term, and “cut a deal” that would have saved money and lives in the here and now. But our leaders wisely determined that the principles at stake were larger than that, and so we chose to fight. How many today would say that we should not have fought WW2? Or I suppose that was “for the Zionists too”, huh? Well, it wouldn’t surprise me if that were the position of this site…it is well-documented that the governments of most of Moslem SW Asia today can trace their political roots to leaders who openly sided with the Nazis.
All the same, we should abandon those pesky Zionists and side with some of the most backward and repressive regimes in the world, whose values fly in the face of everything we stand for, where there is no freedom of religion, no free press, no women’s rights, no labor rights, where child molestation is institutionalized (the UN estimates that there are 50 MILLION – YES, MILLION – child brides in SW Asia/NE Africa, between the ages of ten and fourteen, and some even younger than that. Yes, this sick society is who we should side with against those “evil Zionists”. I’m not saying Israel is perfect – what country is? – but compared to who they are fighting, they practically are.
You all disgust me, both the sponsors of this site, and most of the cretins posting above. Hey, I’ll make a deal with the lot of you, though. I’m a Jewish-American veteran of the U.S. Army. You other veterans on this site who hate Israel so much, you’ll probably say that people like me should “go back to Israel, if you love it so much.” (Of course, German-Americans who love Germany, Irish Americans who love Ireland, Polish Americans who love Poland, Greek Americans who love Greece, that is all OK, they can stay here…only Jews who love Israel have no right to be here, according to your ilk…).
BUT….I’ll tell you what. How about we ALL go to the places we are advocating for? YOU go to Gaza, or Jordan, or Egypt, or Iraq, or Saudi Arabia (they’re paying your bills, right, Mr. Duff?), and I’ll go to Israel. How’s that sound? I’ve been to Israel, it is very nice. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, I dunno…maybe you guys also like little girls and you’d be right at home there, for all I know….But just say the word if you want to take me up on this, willya? Not holding my breath….
Robman,
You have done a moderately good job of putting out the ADL talking points. As for accusing me of taking money from the Saudis….and you being a Zionist stooge and small time suckup to a nation of sociopaths…please.
Next time the Mossad phones for advice, I will tell them to talk to the dumb shit on Bordeaux Place in Norfolk.
g
BiBi NuttyYuHu? Dishonest Abe Fuxman? is that you? People who have awakened don’t want to hear the same cr_p they have been hearing 24/7 on the mainstream mass media (jew owned & controlled, i might add) for 60 years!
Read Weakly (non) Standard and have a good day.
You are the reason VeteransToday.com exists! Buy them out and control all the media! I hope Gordon then starts a new site, oriented towards the best interests of the USA!
Mike
PLEASE GO TO ISRAHELL ASAP! SOME AMERICANS ARE WAKING UP! A FRIEND OF MINE, A FORMER F-14 PILOT HAS AWAKENED, MADE FIENDS WITH A SAUDI AND IN FACT IS CONSIDERING A JOB POSITION IN SAUDI ARABIA. YOUR TALL TALES WON’T HOLD MUCH WEIGHT WITH HIM!
HE HAS REEDUCATED HIMSELF OUTSIDE JEW MIND PROGRAMMING.
BE CAREFUL WHEN REAL AMERICANS WAKE UP! GO TO ISRAHELL BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE!
THE TRUTH IS YOUR WORST ENEMY. GENERATIONS OF MONKEY BUSINESS IS HARD TO UNDO!
MIKE
GORDON, ROBMAN DOESN’T REALLY CARE ABOUT ISRAHELL. HE JUST NEEDS A JOB! WHO ELSE WOULD DEFEND THE INDEFENSIBLE?
MIKE
‘Freedom of Speach oblige’, as the Frenchmen would say, Robman, you sound like a bad copy of Mitchell’s rethoric, the one from the ‘Jewish Library’.
Robman,(& God) “Puleeeze”, relieve of your jewish supremacist garbage! This is a small oasis of sanity in a ziotrash exploding world! Have a nice fatty corn beef or tongue sandwich on a well toasted poppy bagel and quit listening to you “smart” jewish doctor! That will make you live longer and be happier! Some good split pea soup with it will be good if it has plenty of grease–pork or beef!
Mike
Robman, the antisemite charge is loosing it’s sting. Very big of you to admit israhell is not a “perfect” country (to say the least).
Mike
Arafat, a man of peace? Jimmy Carter? Dang, having lived through all of this particular era, and more, I can’t say I agree. Someone once, warned me about the “pretty words” of liberals, trying rewrite history. Dang! This does it in spades.
DANG, WHAT AN IDIOT!
MIKE
you have to get out of the box
Israel doesnot have to give enough to satisfy the demands and needs of the Palestinian
its the other way around
as the palest continue their killings of jews and doing their suicide bombings
it is up to palest to fulfill the security needs of Israel
Every kid knows that within a short time after Israel pulls back the
Iranians through hamas will kick out PLO just as they did in Gaza and
install a religious muslim rule that will start shooting at Israel
Everybody knows that including Obama
Therefore the security needs of Israel are the no. 1 priority
GIVE ME A BREAK!
MIKE
AT LEAST YOU ARE USING A REAL JEW NAME! I RESPECT YOU FOR THAT ABE!
MIKE
Well Abe, you guys own the POTUS so all should be well as long as he he keeps his hands on the fake “kiddy” steering wheel and doesn’t grab the real steering wheel from Emanuel! He said his number one priority is israhell. Can’t ask for more than that! Keep cranking the organ grinder so he doesn’t miss a step!
Mike
Man, you guys are hardly worth the time of day.
Abe, these are a bunch of trailer trash losers, no doubt (well, except for Gordon, whose petrodollar sugar daddy likely has him living in the lap of luxury).
I relish a good debate, but this is all you’ve got, Mike? Gordon?
Oh, I’m sure the F-14 pilot will do very well. The Saudis pay very nicely, I hear. Not sure what he “awakened” to, except perhaps his wallet. Anyway, somebody has to teach the Arabs how to fly; they’ve proven again and again that they can’t get the hang of it. Good luck to him…..But I wouldn’t stay there too long if I were him. In the next ten-twenty years, when America really does wake up, after a few more 9-11s, they are finished in a very big way (and Gordon will have to find a new sugar daddy, if he isn’t in jail for treason by then). Better take the money and run, is what he should do.
Rob
Please stick to AIPAC talking points. When you stray, you blither.
g
Well Robman, you guys own the POTUS so all should be well as long as he he keeps his hands on the fake “kiddy” steering wheel and doesn’t grab the real steering wheel from Emanuel! He said his number one priority is israhell. Can’t ask for more than that! Keep cranking the organ grinder so he doesn’t miss a step!
Mike
What do you have to say about about Dr Alan Sabrosky? Is he trailer trash too! You seem to be good at calling names and presenting the same tired diatribe as your fellow tribesmen,
on all mainstream mass media 24/7.
There is plenty of information on this site you can refute if you are able but name calling seems to be your favorite approach to dealing with people you don’t like; what comes after name calling? Harassment and assassination?
Mike
This site is for veterans? I don’t think so. This site is for Jew haters who probably have never spent a minute in uniform in the service of their country. I spent 39 years in uniform and saw the evidence of hatred of the Jews. I say to all of you with this Jewish chip on your shoulder, wake up. The Jews are not your problem. Hatred is your problem. As long as you focus your hatred on the Jews you will never see that your true enemy is the Muslims which would lovingly remove your head from your body in spite of your fawning support of their hatred. I suggest you change the name of this newsletter to “Non-Veterans who hate Israel.”
Top,
Good to see you onboard. Are you a Vietnam combat vet…grunt? If so, you earned the right to whine….as many of the rest of us are just that. Glad to see a living angry and sadly deluded Vietnam vet still alive.
In 39 years, the uniform must have gotten awfully smelly.
g
Is there any mandatory retire age Gordon? Most guys leave long before they’re sixty.
Mike
Grundoon, at first I thought you were seriously concern about hate in the world but after reading your entire post it looks to me like you would probably OK a little hate of muslims.
Am I correct?
By the way, I like most of the jews I have met in my life but get accused of hate when I argue or criticize them.
Mike