Bibi drops by to rally the wild-eyed, Israel-first, AIPAC jackals, and Obama rightfully snubs him

This is not a phony crisis
(Mondoweiss) -- by Jeffrey Blankfort --

This is not a phony crisis, as a number of critics have been saying. I think the Obama administration has gotten the word from Petraeus and Mullen that Israel has become a liability and it is not about to let Israel’s government of right wing crazies continue to harm US interests in the Middle East. Even former Israeli consul in NY, Alon Pinkas told Ynets News yesterday that to sum up the criticism coming from the US, "Israel is turning from an asset to a burden."

Obama was not even supposed to be in the country when Bibi came and I suspect one of the reasons he stayed was that he did not want to give the impression that he was running away from someone that few in the Democratic ranks, going back to Clinton, really like. Had Obama not been there he would have been seen in some quarters as surrendering Washington to Netanyahu and having the latter’s triumphant appearance at AIPAC be the story instead of the snub.

The press has been treating Netanyahu’s visit to the White House as if it had been a planned visit and it wasn’t and Obama, wisely, made sure that everyone, including Netanyahu, knew who was in charge, at least for that moment. What no one has yet mentioned because the "Israeli exception" has become so routine and internalized is that other than attending sessions at the UN, almost no other country’s head of state comes to the US, as Netanyahu did for AIPAC, unless it is an official visit at the invitation of the POTUS which Netanyahu’s most definitely wasn’t...

...Bringing a head of state to Washington requires considerable security planning and is usually formally announced by the White House.

Now,there are reportedly over 327 signatures on a House letter that Hoyer mentioned at the AIPAC dinner but which was actually dated on March 19, and a letter from the Senate, dated the 29th, just yesterday, that was co-signed by Barbara Boxer for the Dems and John Issakson for the Repubs calling on Clinton to keep our disputes with Israel under wraps. The decision to address the letters to Clinton rather than Obama I find interesting and a sign that the members of Congress who initiated it, with AIPAC’s help (LOL), of course, think she’s an easier and safer target at this moment than Obama, going into the election season...MORE...LINK

"Nutz"? Zionist paranoids in Israel and at News Real Blog see an anti-Israel conspiracy behind recent diplomatic fiasco, all engineered by...Israel!

Has Obama Joined Hands With Livni’s Kadima To Topple Netanyahu?
(News Real Blog) --

...Over in Israel Caroline Glick makes a strong case that the Obama Administration has joined hands with Tzipi Livni’s (photo with Obama above) liberal, jihad-conciliatory Kadima party to topple Binyamin Netanyahu from power. On her blog Glick, a former Captain in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) for over five years, and Deputy Managing Editor of The Jerusalem Post, lays out the carefully-planned sequence of events that led up to the beginning of Obama’s diplomatic assault on Israel and his snubbing of Netanyahu at The White House.

It is a convoluted, complicated, and believable scenario construct worthy of an Academy Award-quality movie script, wherein the announcement of the now-infamous and contentious housing construction was precisely and deliberately timed to coincide with Vice President Joe Biden’s recent visit with Netanyahu in Israel. Netanyahu was blind-sided by the torpedo and was never in any legal position to intervene in the construction project. He is not a dictator. He is the Prime Minister in a functioning democratic republic. The “surprise” announcement triggered a major Obama diplomatic offensive against Netanyhau, designed to turn the entire World against Israel...MORE...LINK
-------------------------

Chris Moore comments:

Here was the best remark in the "comments" section at David Horowitz's News Real Blog following the article linked above:

DRight: David, you say "The man is a brilliant political strategist, surrounded by like-minded anti-American men and women of exceptional intellect and political acumen." I agree, and those men and women that surround Obama are for the most part Jews, and yes they are anti-American. My question is if the Jews are running America and the Jews are running Israel, and both are subsidized by AIPAC and 3 billion dollars a year from American Taxpayers, isn't it about time that you all practice what you believe, whatever you believe, and leave us alone. Where do you fit in among this grand scheme of things. Are you the poor me the world is persecuting me, or are you the brave Jew standing up for Zion? You all are nutz.

Sadly, it's true...these Judeofascist are indeed nuts -- functionally insane, but insane nonetheless. And they have far too much power in both Israel and America, which explains the many problems that have afflicted both since their rise to power.

Is their insanity the result of nature or nurture? It's probably a combination of inbreeding along with religo-cultural paranoia, chauvinism, and racism that triggers the mental illness in such significant percentage of their collective, but who's to know or say? Whatever the case, DRight's sage appeal from his comment above is sensible: "Isn't it about time that you all practice what you believe, whatever you believe, and leave us alone."

In other words, believe whatever the hell you want, but just go away and quite dragging the rest of us into your insane, murderous, melodrama. We don't need your warmongering, we don't need your head case "visions", and we don't need the ugly Gentile ideologues of Left and Right that your ugly Zionist ideology brings to the fore of our own societies.

Just...leave. After all, that's why Israel was created...your very own Shutter Island. So bugger off, you crazy buggers.

Shutter Island...er...Israel: "A convoluted, complicated, and believable scenario construct worthy of an Academy Award-quality movie script..."

In financial crisis' wake, formerly Judeophile Chinese now see Jewish supremacist hand behind meltdown; Jewish press shrieks "anti-Semitism"

Anti-Semitism makes it to China?
Book alleging Jews run the world and control global wealth becomes bestseller in country
(ynet) -- By Boaz Arad --

BEIJING – Who's to blame for the current global financial crisis? According to a bestselling book in China, which is leading the sales charts in the country, the answer is clear: The Jews.

In the eyes of most Chinese, Jewish people are considered "smart," "rich" and "good at making money." Bookstores in China offer a variety of self-help books titled, "How to make money like Jews," and "The secret of Jews' global success."

Until recently, the notion that Jews and money were inseparable carried no anti-Semitic undertone in the country, but a relatively new book called "Currency Wars" threatens to change all that.

The book's author, Song Hongbing, claims that behind world-changing events like the battle of Waterloo, Adolf Hitler's rise to power, President Kennedy's assassination, and the deep recession in Asia during the 1990s stood an intricate conspiracy aimed at increasing Jews' wealth and influence.

Song, a Chinese computer engineer and history buff who resides in the United States, writes that almost every defining historical moment has been instigated by Jewish bankers, and mainly the Rothschild family, which Song says dominates the global banking system, including the US Federal Reserve System.

'important publication' or 'nonsense'?
Song's book was published in China about a year and-a-half ago, and initially sold an insignificant number of copies. But in recent months the global crisis has turned the book into a hit. Estimates put sales of "Currency War" well over a million, not including hundreds of thousands of illegal copies that can also be downloaded off the net...

Song's publishers, a subsidiary of a state-owned publishing house, boast the fact that the book has been read by all leading financial executives in the country, as well as state leaders.

Song himself has become a local celebrity in China, and is often invited to lecture at financial conventions and is interviewed on TV as a famous financial analyst...MORE...LINK

New York Times’ Jewish columnists just keep churning out ever more Jewish supremacist-agenda propaganda...

How’s life on the planet of Israeli hasbara, Thomas Friedman?(Mondoweiss) -- by Alex Kane --

Thomas Friedman lives on a different planet, that of Israeli hasbara.

In an Op-Ed piece today for the New York Times about Israeli-American relations and different perceptions on the “peace process,” Friedman repeats standard Israeli talking points. Let’s take a look.

Friedman writes:

"The collapse of the Oslo peace process, combined with the unilateral Israeli pullouts from Lebanon and Gaza — which were followed not by peace but by rocket attacks by Hezbollah and Hamas on Israel — decimated Israel’s peace camp and the political parties aligned with it.

"At the same time, Israel’s erecting of a wall around the West Bank to prevent Palestinian suicide bombers from entering Israel (there have been no successful attacks since 2006), along with the rise of the high-tech industry in Israel — which does a great deal of business digitally and over the Internet and is largely impervious to the day-to-day conflict — has meant that even without peace, Israel can enjoy a very peaceful existence and a rising standard of living."

If I didn’t know better, I would think that the Palestinians caused the collapse of the Oslo “peace process,” that Israel’s “unilateral pullouts” were really about making peace with Israel’s Arab neighbors, that the wall is only innocently “around” the West Bank in order to protect from suicide bombing attacks, and that Israel is an amazing country to live in because of their “high-tech industry.”

On the planet of reality, we can see that Israel had no intention of making peace with the Palestinians during the “peace process,” as they accelerated the building of illegal Jewish-only settlements in the West Bank. We can see that Israel never “pulled out” of Gaza and instead redeployed around the periphery but remains the occupying power and imposes a crippling blockade. We can see that those nefarious rocket attacks have killed a much smaller number of Israelis compared to the high number of innocent Lebanese and Gazans killed by one of the most advanced armies in the world. During "Operation Cast Lead," the proportion of Palestinians killed to Israelis killed was a stunning 100:1, and the majority of Palestinians who died were innocent civilians...MORE...LINK

NYT columnist Frank Rich: Big Government "liberal," Jewish, and a Ron Paul/Tea Party hater; No wonder he takes diction from Israel-first neocons

New York Times' Frank Rich attacks Ron Paul movement
(By Kinetic Reaction) --

Frank Rich, a writer for the New York Times, wrote an article attacking Ron Paul and his supporters a couple of days ago, called The Axis of the Obsessed and Deranged.

In it he laments that the status quo big government Republicans are being replaced by "Glenn Beck, Ron Paul and Sarah Palin".

Frank Rich is worried, because this new type of Republican doesn't just want to make cosmetic changes to the federal government, it wants to cut out every thing that he loves about the federal government:

"The Tea Partiers want to eliminate most government agencies, starting with the Fed and the I.R.S., and end spending on entitlement programs. They are not to be confused with the Party of No holding forth in Washington — a party that, after all, is now positioning itself as a defender of Medicare spending. What we are talking about here is the Party of No Government at All."

He then mentions Ron Paul winning the CPAC straw poll, and goes on to quote the far right Israel-firster, Dorothy Rabinowitz, to describe Ron Paul's supporters as "conspiracy theorists, anti-government zealots, 9/11 truthers, and assorted other cadres of the obsessed and deranged."

Dorothy Rabinowitz, a senior member of the Wall Street Journal's editorial board, is one of Israel's fiercest and most pro-war advocates in the American media. She, along with other staff at the Wall Street Journal, have regularly railed against the Ron Paul movement and its position of non-intervention in the middle east. For example Bret Stephens made a series of ridiculous attacks back in February 2008 about Ron Paul in an article called "Ron Paul and Foreign Policy".

Frank Rich, the self-described liberal, is giving credit to an assessment of Ron Paul's supporters by a pro-war Israeli lobbyist, and in the process, demonstrating an absence of principles and judgment. It would require extreme naivete on Frank Rich's part to not realize that Dorothy Rabinowitz has a vested interest in trying to smear Ron Paul and his supporters due to her support for Israel. It's more likely that he realizes this, but does not care, in which case it demonstrates a lack of character. Either way, it does not bode well for his judgment and long term strategic vision.

To him, the idea of cutting back on federal spending that is unsustainable, and returning America to a limited Constitutional model where states, rather than a single all-powerful federal government, make policy, is so intolerable, that he would prefer pro-war neocons who promote a foreign policy for the benefit of a foreign country to be in power...MORE...LINK

Report: "American" Jewish Zionist Dennis Ross taking Israel's position against U.S. interests in White House debate vis-à-vis Palestinians, Iran

Fierce debate on Israel underway inside Obama administration (UPDATED)
(Politico) -- By Laura Rozen --

Since Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s tense visit to the White House last week, an intense debate inside the Obama administration about how to proceed with Netanyahu to advance the Middle East peace process has grown more heated, even as Israeli officials are expected to announce they have reached some sort of agreement with Washington as soon as tonight.

Sources say within the inter-agency process, White House Middle East strategist Dennis Ross is staking out a position that Washington needs to be sensitive to Netanyahu’s domestic political constraints including over the issue of building in East Jerusalem in order to not raise new Arab demands, while other officials including some aligned with Middle East peace envoy George Mitchell are arguing Washington needs to hold firm in pressing Netanyahu for written commitments to avoid provocations that imperil Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and to preserve the Obama administration's credibility.

POLITICO spoke with several officials who confirmed the debate and its intensity. Ross did not respond to a query, nor did a spokesman for George Mitchell.

“He [Ross] seems to be far more sensitive to Netanyahu's coalition politics than to U.S. interests,” one U.S. official told POLITICO Saturday. “And he doesn't seem to understand that this has become bigger than Jerusalem but is rather about the credibility of this Administration.”

What some saw as the suggestion of dual loyalties shows how heated the debate has become.

[UPDATE]: NSC Chief of Staff Denis McDonough fiercely rejected any such suggestion. "The assertion is as false as it is offensive," McDonough said Sunday by email. "Whoever said it has no idea what they are talking about. Dennis Ross's many decades of service speak volumes about his commitment to this country and to our vital interests, and he is a critical part of the President's team."

Last week, during U.S.-Israeli negotiations during Netanyahu’s visit and subsequent internal U.S. government meetings, the first official said, Ross “was always saying about how far Bibi could go and not go. So by his logic, our objectives and interests were less important than pre-emptive capitulation to what he described as Bibi's coalition's red lines.”

When the U.S. and Israel are seen to publicly diverge on an issue such as East Jerusalem construction, the official characterized Ross's argument as: "the Arabs increase their demands ... therefore we must rush to close gaps ... no matter what the cost to our broader credibility.”

A second official confirmed the broad outlines of the current debate within the administration. Obviously at every stage of the process, the Obama Middle East team faces tactical decisions about what to push for, who to push, how hard to push, he described.

As to which argument best reflects the wishes of the President, the first official said, “As for POTUS, what happens in practice is that POTUS, rightly, gives broad direction. He doesn't, and shouldn't, get bogged down in minutiae. But Dennis uses the minutiae to blur the big picture … And no one asks the question: why, since his approach in the Oslo years was such an abysmal failure, is he back, peddling the same snake oil?”

Other contacts who have discussed recent U.S.-Israel tensions with Ross say he argues that all parties need to keep focus on the big picture, Iran, and the peace process as being part of a wider U.S. effort to bolster an international and regional alliance including Arab nations and Israel to pressure and isolate Iran. This is an argument that presumably has resonance with the Netanyahu government. But at the same time, Arab allies tell Washington that Israeli construction in East Jerusalem inflames their publics and breeds despair and makes it hard for them to work even indirectly and quietly with Israel on Iran. They push Washington to show it can manage Israel and to get an Israeli-Palestinian peace process going that would facilitate regional cooperation on Iran...MORE...LINK

Hypocritical Jewish Zionists who push multiculturalism for US, apartheid and ethnic cleansing for Israel, can't suppress the truth forever

The Netanyahu-Obama Flap
(The Occidental Observer blog) -- By Kevin MacDonald --

Michael Oren, the Israeli Ambassador to the US, says that the US-Israel relationship is at its lowest ebb in 35 years. Well, maybe, but the Israel Lobby is far from dead. Half of Congress turned out at the recent AIPAC convention in Washington, and there were pledges of eternal support by Hilary Clinton, followed up by a host of politicians. In the conflict between the Obama administration and Netanyahu, the media was solidly lined up on the side of a foreign country. Indeed, as Philip Giraldi notes, “The Washington Post led the charge, calling on ‘expert’ analysis of the situation from Elliot Abrams, Danielle Pletka, David Makovsky, Aaron David Miller, Daniel Curter, Martin Indyk, and Charles Krauthammer while excoriating the White House with its own lead editorials.”

Dominating the mainstream media definitely has its advantages.

Meanwhile, more than 3/4 of the House of Representatives signed on to a statement asserting “unbreakable bonds” between the US and Israel and ludicrously asserting that “A strong Israel is an asset to the national security of the United States and brings stability to the Middle East.”...

There is a long history in which Congress is far more susceptible to pressure from the Israel Lobby than the administration. Congress understands that opposition to the lobby means that their opponents will suddenly have a great deal of money donated by Jews who live outside their districts and they will have far less positive media coverage...

The clincher from the House statement is: “Above all, we must remain focused on the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear weapons program to Middle East peace and stability.” And therein lies the rub for AIPAC. For all its influence on Congress, it will be much more difficult to get an angry Obama and his administration fully on board with the Israel Lobby’s project of destroying Iran. The reality of the Lobby’s power even in presidential politics, as indicated by what happened to George H. W. Bush, is doubtless sobering to the Obama administration. But it’s one thing to effectively turn a blind eye to Israeli colonization and apartheid (as, in the end, all US administrations have done). It’s quite another ball of wax to get the US to lead the charge in a confrontation with Iran after 5000 deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan and a $3 trillion price tag just for the war in Iraq — in an era where the federal deficit is already through the roof. Doing the Israel Lobby’s bidding on Iran requires a great deal of pro-active effort in getting international cooperation in the teeth of Israeli intransigence on settlement issues and the spectacle of Israel as an apartheid state for all the world to see.

Indeed, in her speech to APIAC Hilary Clinton pointedly noted that “We cannot escape the impact of mass communications” — perhaps a comment that the reality of Israel’s brutal program of expansion is a very hard sell to the rest of the world, especially in the age of the Internet when there is more and more leakage in Jewish control of the media in the US and elsewhere...

With information about Israel more available than ever, with the costs of doing Israel’s bidding ever more prohibitive, and with Israel getting ever uglier with the passage of time, the job ahead for the Israel Lobby is going to be increasingly difficult. And Israel can’t escape its ugliness. The slow motion ethnic cleansing and land grabbing, the apartheid, the vast open air prisons for 3.8 million Palestinians simply can’t be stopped by any force within Israeli society. And it certainly won’t be stopped by the Jewish Diaspora no matter how much hypocrisy that entails given its commitment to multiculturalism and its opposition to White ethnonational interests. The racialist and religiously fundamentalist right is firmly in charge in Israel, and all the Jewish demographics are on their side. The extremists, as always, will win the day. And that forecasts a very bloody future in the Middle East and beyond...MORE...LINK
-------------------------

Chris Moore comments:

There is certainly an apparent hypocrisy in U.S. Jewish Zionists prescribing multiculturalism for America while simultaneously being the linchpin factor in enabling apartheid and ethnic cleansing in Israel -- that is, until one realizes that organized Jewry is consistently racist in both cases. It’s just that in the U.S., the primary target of their racism is Gentile “whites,” whereas in Israel, the primary target of their racism is Gentile “browns.” In both cases, disenfranchisement of the majority to Jewish advantage is the goal (remember, Arabs were once the majority in Palestine), with the constant “value” being Jewish supremacism, which can easily be traced to their religious documents and cultural ethic.

Doesn’t every culture or religion consider itself to be supreme? Indeed, but only organized Jewry systematically, consciously and methodically goes about subverting and co-opting “host” societies by means of infiltration, subjugation and coercion, as do organized Jewish interests. This modus operandi has been consistent, from the Jewish Zionists back through the white-hating Jewish Bolsheviks (who murdered millions of Christians) all the way back to, say, Esther.

It's also evident today in the Jewish media's racist hostility to the "mostly white" Tea Party movement.

Jewish Zionists might reply that their “survival” is at stake, so it’s all justified. But the problem with this line is that it’s their consistent racism (which, after all, is simply vicious tribalism of which multiculturalism is ancillary) that, over time, jeopardizes their survival to begin with.

Did Netanyahu orchestrate the rift with U.S. to facilitate free hand for attacks on Palestinians and Iranians?

Samson and the second Nakba: a short history of the Jewish Hercules
(Redress) -- By Gilad Atzmon --

The current crisis in US-Israeli relations may lead to some devastating consequences as far as Palestine, Iran and the Middle East are concerned.

“Netanyahu and Obama are at a point of no return,” claims Haaretz writer Akiva Eldar. “As far as President Barack Obama and his senior advisers are concerned, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is to blame for nothing less than damaging the standing of the US in the Middle East and the Muslim world.”

It may be possible that the Americans have started to understand that there is no partner for peace in Israel. America clearly has had to shun its “kosher ally”. The American military and political elite have already acknowledged that Israel is a strategic burden on the US. Seemingly, the only people who genuinely believe in the American-Israel strategic bond are those of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and its list of obedient “Sabbath goyim congressmen”. But, unfortunately, this is just one side of the story.

A deeper reading of recent events would suggest that the latest American-Israeli rift is actually led by Netanyahu’s political partners. Interestingly enough, as much as America is showing growing disapproval of Israeli policy, the anti-American attitude of Netanyahu’s allies at home is overwhelming. It doesn’t take a genius to grasp that some of Netanyahu’s cabinet members are doing everything in their power to fire up a storm between Israel and its “closest ally”.

Interior Minister Eli Yishai, the man behind the decisions that sparked the recent diplomatic crisis, has said that “Israelis voted for this government's path, according to which there will be no compromises on [the] Jerusalem issue”. He also used the opportunity to thank his creator for giving him “the privilege to be the minister who approves the construction of thousands of housing units in Jerusalem". During his latest disastrous visit to Washington, Prime Minister Netanyahu found time to consult with his foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman. According to Ynet, Lieberman advised his prime minister “not to capitulate in face of American pressure”.

I guess that most political analysts fail to understand the depth of the Israeli right wing expansionist and racist conviction. Unlike Ariel Sharon, Shimon Peres, Tzipi Livni, Yitzhak Rabin, Ehud Olmert, Ehud Barak and even Netanyahu himself, who over the years has paid limited respect to the West and the US in particular, Netanyahu’s cabinet is dominated by right wing Zionist hawks. They follow David Ben Gurion’s old mantra: “It doesn't matter what the Goyim(Gentiles) say, the only thing that matters is what the Jews do.” Netanyahu’s political partners are not willing to compromise or acquiesce to American conditions.

Netanyahu’s political allies are convinced that at least momentarily they will do better without Uncle Sam. They realize that the days of the “Jew-only state” are numbered unless some radical moves are put into action. They understand that unless the Jewish state implements measures that would push the entire Palestinian population out of Israel, the Zionist dream will come to an end pretty soon.

Those hawks also realize that once Iran acquires a nuclear capability, Israel’s ability to maintain its status as a “regional terror-inflicting power” would disappear overnight. Netanyahu’s cabinet members know that if Israel wants to survive as a Jewish ethnocracy and a regional superpower, Israel must confront Iran soon and ethnically cleanse Palestine of its indigenous population, in an act that will complete the objectives of the 1948. Nakba. Israeli hawks who currently dominate Netanyahu’s government and Israeli politics believe that a bond with America can only restrict and even jeopardize their sinister plans for the region...MORE...LINK

Are the nearly 300 members of Congress who signed a pledge of allegiance to Israel guilty of treason?

Treason by Members of the United States Congress
(You Tube) -- By alawson911 --



It must have been realised that the letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, signed by nearly 300 members of the U.S. Congress, affirming their commitment to Israel, would be widely publicised and fall into the hands of that illegal Apartheid State, so the writing and signing of that letter should be considered an act of treason.

The letter has totally undermined the power of the President of the United States by virtually telling Israel: "It does not matter what you do to the Palestinians, how many illegal structures you build on the territory you stole from them; how you behave towards the Lebanese, or what you have in mind for Iran, we, the signatories on this letter are with you, all the way."

I am not a citizen of the United States, I am a citizen of a world that is being ruined by Zionism and its practitioners' thirst for power and greed for land that does not rightly belong to them. Having goaded the United States to attack Iraq, it is now attempting to draw it into a pre-emptive attack on Iran, while continuing to lie about the reason. The Iranian president did not threaten to "Wipe Israel off the map". Juan Cole, a professor of Middle Eastern studies at University of Michigan who reads Persian, has explained that President Ahmadinejad actually stated (quoting the late Ayatollah Khomeini): "The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] from the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad)."

What Israel and the perverse mainstream media has turned this into can be compared to a Farsi speaker saying: "Nothing lasts forever." And having this turned into, by the likes of the BBC and CNN and the press: "I'm going to kill you."...LINK

Bi-partisan treachery: Pelosi, Boehner and bought-off Congress all in agreement: Israelis before Americans

PELOSI & BOEHNER BACK BEBE NETANYAHU.MOV
(You Tube) -- by borisgaydos...LINK

Corrupt Congress sides with Israel lobby over U.S. military; Another unnecessary war next?

The Crisis That Wasn’t
(AntiWar.com) -- by Philip Giraldi --

It might have seemed a no-brainer that the vital security interests of the United States would eventually trump the demands of a small client state that lately has not been much given to rational behavior. But in the latest showdown between the friends of Israel and the Obama Administration the President of the United States blinked first, demonstrating once and for all that no one in the US has the power to say no to Israel. And the truly amazing part was that the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was so confident of the outcome that it didn’t even bother to hide very much of what it was doing, hardly deigning to engage in its usual clandestine arm twisting and slipped under the door "position papers." It immediately issued a public statement slamming the White House, asserting that "The Obama Administration’s recent statements regarding the US relationship with Israel are a matter of serious concern. AIPAC calls on the Administration to take immediate steps to defuse the tension with the Jewish State." It then unleashed its friends in Congress and the media. Its brazen campaign against the American president was executed all out on public view, right up front and recorded on the AIPAC website.

Lest there be any confusion about what happened, the White House said "Thou shalt not" and Bibi Netanyahu responded "I shall" with Bibi left standing at the end. AIPAC managed to get the support of nearly every congressman who mattered, including many leaders from Obama’s own party. Half of the entire Congress attended the Monday evening gala dinner where Bibi Netanyahu was the guest speaker and there was what amounted to a bipartisan love fest when the Israeli Prime Minister visited Capitol Hill on the following day. Many legislators wrote statements affirming the US-Israeli relationship, carefully recorded by AIPAC in a 39-page document on its website. House Minority Leader John Boehner weighed in with a comment that might have been composed by a twelve year old, which means that he probably actually wrote it, and was echoed by Republican stalwarts Eric Cantor, John McCain, and Sarah Palin. Other commentary repeated the same themes: a threatening Iran, Palestinian intransigence, and Israel as a staunch ally. It all read as if from a script, suggesting a common source. Israel’s apologists never took Tel Aviv to task for anything, not even for being rude to the Vice President of the United States. Meanwhile the media was on board the trashing of the White House right from the start, supporting the perceived interests of a foreign country against those of the US. The Washington Post led the charge, calling on "expert" analysis of the situation from Elliot Abrams, Danielle Pletka, David Makovsky, Aaron David Miller, Daniel Curter, Martin Indyk, and Charles Krauthammer while excoriating the White House with its own lead editorials...

At the AIPAC conference on Monday, Hillary Clinton agreed to the terms of the final surrender by the United States, telling the assembled friends of Israel that American commitment to Tel Aviv is "rock solid, enduring, unwavering and forever." Her entire speech portrayed Israelis and even the despicable Netanyahu in purely positive terms while blaming all violence in the region on the Arabs. She peppered her oration with commentary that is palpably ridiculous, like "The United States has long recognized that a strong and secure Israel is vital to our own strategic interests…And we firmly believe that when we strengthen Israel’s security, we strengthen America’s security."...

Clinton did make one intriguing comment, perhaps not completely understanding the implications of what she was saying: "We cannot escape the impact of mass communications." She meant that many people have now become concerned about what is going on in Israel and Palestine because of what appears on the internet. But if Israel were truly the cowboy in the white hat upholding truth and justice that would hardly matter, would it? In reality, the narrative of Israeli exceptionalism and entitlement that has been carefully shaped by the Israeli government and its friends in the mainstream media has been thoroughly discredited by alternative sources of information made available through the internet. Once upon a time, only a very narrow audience that could easily be dismissed as "kooks" was aware of the Israeli repression of the Palestinians because the news was carefully filtered, particularly in the US. Today anyone with a computer and interest in the subject can become well-informed very quickly. If there was one hopeful aspect of Hillary’s speech, that was it. The rest was depressing, scripted, and did absolutely nothing to address the real issues...

Now that we have returned to the status quo ante of wag the dog, it is perhaps a good time to consider if anything positive has resulted from the American-Israeli crisis that never was. The disagreement revealed the utter impotence of the American government in dealing with Israel, even when national security issues are raised. For those who care about the future of the United States, it’s really past time to get hopping mad. The US government has effectively been held hostage to uncritically support a foreign government that engages in both apartheid and ethnic cleansing, something that few Americans would endorse if they were ever allowed a voice in shaping foreign policy. The presence of half of the US Congress at a dinner paying tribute to a foreign leader who is pursuing policies damaging to the United States is little more than a shameless spectacle, but no less than what we have come to expect from the Quislings on the Potomac. And then there is the fighting and dying in what is fashionably referred to as the "long war." Israel and its lobby were undeniably significant players in contriving the case that led to war with Iraq. The propaganda spewed at the current AIPAC conference makes it equally clear that Israel and its supporters are the leading advocates of an attack on Iran and their victory over Obama will only embolden them. Israel can trigger a war by bombing Iran and provoking retaliation that will draw the United States in and there is nothing Washington can do to stop that. When war happens and the awful consequences become clear Obama and Hillary will wish that they had stood up to Israel and AIPAC this week and stopped the madness. But by then it will be too late...MORE...LINK

The true face of organized Jewry: benign liberal mask, or undisguised Judeofascist Zionism?

The complicated faces of anti-Semitism
(Salem-News.com) -- By *Alan Sabrosky --

I cannot speak for the situation elsewhere, but in the US I doubt if there is a another definable group that equals or surpasses Jews in their achievements in so many different fields, their support for civil liberties and civil rights and their philanthropy or general support of charitable causes.

But when Israel enters the equation, those truly admirable qualities are often set aside. Israeli bigotry, atrocities and crimes against humanity are largely ignored, excused or vociferously supported, and Jewish-dominated institutions such as the mainstream media pointedly refrain from publishing or reporting blatant contemporary examples of Israeli misconduct.

And it brought to mind a conversation a few years ago with a Jewish friend whose parents met in a Nazi concentration camp. We were discussing something historical, and she remarked that Jews had been persecuted by almost everyone throughout their history. Said I (paraphrasing), well, what's wrong with you? Said she, what's wrong with us? Sure, I replied, it simply isn't natural for any people to be so consistently disliked. Look at it in personal terms. If a few people I meet don't like me, I can easily say the problem is with them. But if virtually everyone I meet hates or despises me, it is pretty hard to escape the conclusion that there is something fundamentally wrong with me, or with how I behave.

The basis of anti-Semitism
Now, Jews inveigh often and loudly against anti-Semitism, which is itself a bit odd, coming from a people whose – well, "anti-Gentilism" (i.e. everyone else) for lack of a better term – seems embedded in their religion and culture. The Book of Judges and the Book of Deuteronomy are awash in bloodshed, with Deuteronomy endorsing the slaughter of people who worshipped a different God. Now, those people were not threatening Jews; they just had chosen a different way to seek answers to the eternal questions of life and death. But to Jews, at least in their core scripture, this sufficed for their extermination, and their livestock and possessions as well. This trait alone would make Jews unwelcome – how many people willingly reside next to their own executioners, simply for the crime of existing?

Then there is the problem of dealing with a people whose religion includes a major holiday – Passover (or Pesach) – based on mass infanticide. True, the side of the Passover coin presented to the world is that of God "passing over" the Jewish homes en route to punish the Egyptians for keeping them in captivity. But the other side of that Passover coin is the punishment itself, the killing on behalf of the Jews of all of the first-born of Egypt: not just of Pharaoh, or of Pharaoh's priests and ministers and generals, who might reasonably have been held responsible for that captivity, but of the poor peasants and fishermen and even prisoners as well, who had no conceivable role in it at all. Hating people who praise their God for murdering your children is not at all irrational – it would be as if America made the firebombing of Dresden and the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki into national holidays, and added some divine glorification to it as well. Not pretty, to say the least...MORE...LINK

*Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D., University of Michigan) is a writer and consultant specializing in national and international security affairs. In December 1988, he received the Superior Civilian Service Award after more than five years of service at the U.S. Army War College as Director of Studies, Strategic Studies Institute, and holder of the General of the Army Douglas MacArthur Chair of Research. He is listed in WHO'S WHO IN THE EAST (23rd ed.). A Marine Corps Vietnam veteran and a 1986 graduate of the U.S. Army War College, Dr. Sabrosky's teaching and research appointments have included the United States Military Academy, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Middlebury College and Catholic University; while in government service, he held concurrent adjunct professorships at Georgetown University and the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS).

Liberal fascism: No light between right-wing AIPAC and Judeofascist liberals in Congress when it comes to warmongering against Iran

Lobby’s Iran game is dangerous
(Mondoweiss) -- by Jeffrey Blankfort --

What follows is an excerpt from a long piece in the Jewish Journal of LA that demonstrates how there is really no line between AIPAC and most pro-Israel Jewish members of Congress, even liberal ones...

Frankly, I think these members of Congress who are pushing for a confrontation with Iran are courting political suicide and maybe worse. Should they get their way and Iran is attacked either by Israel or the US, this time the finger of not just the Mearsheimers, Walts, and Blankforts will be pointing at organized American Jewry.

On Tuesday — traditionally the conference’s concluding day, when AIPAC members visit Capitol Hill to lobby their legislators — Los Angeles attendees were scheduled to gather en masse in the House of Representatives foreign affairs committee hearing room to meet Reps. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks), Howard Berman (D-Van Nuys), Henry Waxman (D-Los Angeles), Jane Harman (D-Venice) and Adam Schiff (D-Pasadena). Earlier that morning, Senator Barbara Boxer was to address the group at the convention center.

In a session Monday that dealt with imposing sanctions on Iran, Sherman, a foreign affairs committee member, noted that all 10 of his addresses to AIPAC policy conferences have been on Iran.

Because time appears to be short for enacting sanctions to deter Teheran from completing development of nuclear weapons, the United States “now needs to put the pedal to the metal” rather than continue driving at five miles per hour, Sherman said. He urged AIPAC members to lobby for a sanctions bill “without any weakening” or “adulteration.”

...MORE...LINK

Like so much of the corrupt liberal and Jewish supremacist MSM, Paul Krugman plays dumb when it comes to the Israel lobby

Brainy Krugman can’t catch a clue when the answer is: Israel lobby
(Mondoweiss) -- by Philip Weiss --

This one’s not too hard to follow. Here’s Tom Shales attacking Christiane Amanpour as the choice to host "This Week" on ABC because, gulp, she’s considered critical of Israel. Shales is pretty explicit about this. Notice the automatic gravitas he grants a pro-Israel website:

'Supporters of Israel have more than once charged Amanpour with bias against that country and its policies. A Web site devoted to criticism of Amanpour is titled, with less than a modicum of subtlety, "Christiane Amanpour’s Outright Bias Against Israel Must Stop," available via Facebook.'

Now here’s Danny Shea at Huffpo picking up the Israel angle in the opposition to Amanpour.

OK. And now here’s Amanpour’s associate, Paul Krugman, rising to Amanpour’s defense, "Hating on Christiane Amanpour." Good for you, Krugman!

Wait, a second, why are people hating on Amanpour? Krugman resorts to mystification:

'Weird attack from Tom Shales, who’s supposed to be a TV reviewer, on the choice of Christiane Amanpour as the new host of “This Week”. I have a stake in all this, since I’m a regular on the show. But even if I weren’t, I think I’d see this attack as distinctly off…I don’t really understand what’s going on here.'

Krugman, do you really not understand what’s going on here? Are you being sincere?

Do you think it’s possible to fight a beast if you won’t say what that beast is?

(Put another way, do you think it’s possible to effectively oppose the Iraq war if you mystify one of the primary causes of that war– as just about everyone in the liberal MSM has done, and probably Krugman too?)

And wouldn’t all readers be better served if Jewish writers actually spoke openly about the strains over Zionism inside the establishment media?...MORE...LINK

Concluding Zionists are implicated in organized crime, British government kicks "diplomat" believed to be Mossad agent out of country

Britain kicks out Mossad chief
(War in Context) -- by Paul Woodward --

After a recent warning from US military leaders that Israel is putting at risk the lives of American soldiers in the Middle East, the British government has warned that actions by Israel present “a hazard for the safety of British nationals in the region.”

This latest warning comes after a criminal investigation has concluded that Israel stole the identities of 12 British citizens in order to murder the Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai in January. As a result of that investigation Britain today expelled an Israeli diplomat from London who is understood to be the UK-based Mossad chief.

From London, the Daily Telegraph reports:

An investigation by the Serious and Organised Crime Squad (SOCA) has concluded that there are “compelling reasons” to believe that Israel was responsible for the “misuse” of a dozen British passports.

A senior diplomat at the Israeli Embassy in London – widely believed to be a member of Mossad, the feared Israeli secret service agency – is being expelled from the Untied Kingdom as a result.

As the diplomatic row escalated, Mr Miliband told the House of Commons that he had demanded that the Israeli government give assurances that British citizens will never again be drawn into such an operation.

Describing the passport holders as “wholly innocent victims,” the Foreign Secretary aid that the fact that Israel was a “friend” of the United Kingdom added “insult to injury.

The British government has also taken the unusual step of warning British passport holders not to hand over their passports to Israeli officials unless “absolutely necessary.”

Since it’s impossible to enter any country without handing over your passport, perhaps this advice should be interpreted to mean that British citizens should only travel to Israel when absolutely necessary...MORE...LINK

Former US Army War College director says only Mossad/Israel had "incentive, expertise, assets, access, and political protection to execute 9/11"

Treason, Betrayal and Deceit: 9/11 and Beyond
(Information Clearinghouse) -- By *Dr Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D, University of Michigan) *a ten-year US Marine Corps veteran and a former director of studies at the US Army War College

The attacks on September 11, 2001 have been a defining moment for America. The political and psychological impact on Americans of a concerted and visible attack in America was enormous -- indeed, it is an interesting "coincidence" that the attacks occurred on the one day of the year whose mention reinforces a public sense here of danger and emergency: 9-1-1.

A significant development in the 1990s was the formation of the neo-conservative think tank known as PNAC (Project for a New American Century), whose members prepared position papers for the Israeli government and for a future US Administration sharing their views. That happened in 2000 with the election of George W. Bush, and a contemporary writer summarized the tip of the neo-conservative iceberg in his first Administration this way:

The "outsiders" from PNAC were now powerful "insiders," placed in important positions from which they could exert maximum pressure on US policy…PNAC had a lock on military policy-creation in the Bush Administration.

Especially significant in terms of subsequent events was the acknowledgement in one of PNAC's own documents that their program for America (and Israel) would not readily be accepted by the American people. What this meant, PNAC opined in 2000, was that "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor."

9/11 Reconsidered

On September 11, 2001, the PNAC people in and out of government -- and by extension AIPAC and Israel -- "coincidentally" got the event they needed, barely eight months after coming into office. Most people are familiar with the basic details of that day -- two commercial aircraft crashing into the two tallest buildings in New York City's World Trade Center (WTC), a third striking the Pentagon, and a fourth ending up in a Pennsylvania field. Few people will forget the images of the burning buildings, their collapse, the casualties, and the sense of shock and tragedy that ensued.

The official 9/11 Commission's work and report were at best an incomplete exercise. Many people dismiss the findings of the Commission, and that includes its co-chairs. Many others who utterly distrust the 9/11 Commission report, dismiss the US Government’s explanation of it, and point to both an official cover-up and an “inside job,” include veteran fighter pilots, EMTs (Emergency Medical Technicians), air defense experts, experienced commercial pilots, demolition experts, architects and civil engineers – none of them professions that inherently attract and retain the gullible and credulous.

Several things are very clear to me from a careful assessment of both official and critical evaluations of the 9/11 attacks. First, the striking aircraft alone simply could not have brought down either of the two buildings in the manner in which they fell, much less a third building which was not hit by a plane (I expect the one intended to do that as a "cover" had ended up in that Pennsylvania field), given the available physical evidence and a wealth of expert testimony. This means the attackers had assistance on the ground, and it had to have been active before the attacks occurred: preparing buildings for controlled demolition is not something done haphazardly in the midst of chaos.

Second, only two intelligence agencies had the expertise, assets, access and political protection to execute 9/11 in the air and on the ground: our CIA and Israel's Mossad. Only one had the incentive, using the “who benefits” principle: Mossad. And that incentive dovetailed perfectly with the neo-con’s agenda and explicitly expressed need for a catalytic event to mobilize the American public for their wars, using American military power to destroy Israel’s enemies. Only the unexpected strength of the Iraqi resistance kept Syria and Iran from being attacked in the second Bush Administration. Thus, the evidential trail for 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq run from PNAC, AIPAC and their cohorts; through the mostly Jewish neo-cons in the Bush Administration; and back to the Israeli government. None of the denials and political machinations can alter that essential reality. Terms such as treason, betrayal and deceit do not overstate the case against them.

Finally, we need to take a hard look at why the mainstream media (MSM) have paid more attention to Sarah Palin’s wardrobe than they have to dissecting blatant falsehoods, discrepancies and inconsistencies in the US Government’s treatment of 9/11 and its aftermath. And the reason is that on this issue, all are on the same side, and the official line is the one they all prefer – “all” meaning the PNAC alumni who took over the Bush Administration’s national security apparatus and their counterparts in the Obama administration, AIPAC and the rest of the numerous Jewish PACs, the MSM owners and Israel. The depiction of the media management in America in 2002 is especially informative, and has not changed significantly since then:

CEOs and Directors of companies change as often as Boards of Directors vote. But if we could “freeze frame” the CEOs of the largest US Media companies in mid 2002, we would find that ten Jewish American men ran the vast majority of US television networks and other media companies including movies, radio, and publishing at that time. Not much has changed today.

Looking Ahead

Today we are getting the same line on Iran, from the same type of people -- Obama himself tries to be more independent, but most of the key staff and national security people in his Administration do not differ greatly on Israel and the Middle East from those of his predecessor. And the Congress has shown itself to be even more of AIPAC's lap-dog than the preceding Congress, an exercise in self-serving cowardice that admittedly has taken some doing...MORE...LINK

Stick with arch-Zionist elders: Dershowitz lobbies J Street to join AIPAC so organized Jewry can continue to "speak with one voice"

MVI_9227.MOV
(You Tube) -- Posted by oshomron --

Alan Dershowitz versus Hadar Susskind...LINK

Where's the uproar? Zionists and Judeophiles have successfully engineered Jewish supremacist double standards in the UK (and America, too)

Jewish or British?
(By hotterthanapileofcurry) --

Why is it that Muslims here in the UK are constantly harangued to pledge and show their undying love and commitment to Great Britain, especially whenever there’s a political storm caused by yet another staged terrorist act.

Reading the Guardian recently, I chanced upon the following;

The prospect of Britain and Israel going to war is an unlikely one. At the orthodox Jewish school that I attended, however, it must have seemed like a distinct possibility. We used to regularly debate which side we would fight for.

Although steeped in religious observance, we had been born in England, grew up here, and developed strong allegiances to English football teams. We spoke little modern Hebrew and had been to Israel just a handful of times.

Nevertheless, the feeling was unanimous: we would take up arms on behalf of the Jewish state.

Many of my schoolmates volunteered for the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) after completing their A-levels and my younger brother, Zack, was among them.

So, where’s the uproar?

Why aren’t the Jewish members of our community held to the same standards you set for the Muslims?

There are plenty of dual izzy/brit passport holders that have represented the IDF and have served in campaigns of terror to kill and brutalise the indigenous population of Palestine, and yet there’s never any finger waving in their direction.

Doesn’t Tebbit’s cricket test apply to them?

Or perhaps Britain still remembers when it’s army was literally slaughtered by Jewish terrorists whilst it was supposed to be protecting Palestine.

All this at a time when the izzies have given a middle finger salute to the UN, Europe, Australia – and now the USA.

The zionist state does not care one iota about anyone but itself, it is a state founded on terror and continues to be a state sponsor of international terrorism.

It thrives on continuing theft of lands seized from its neighbours at gun-point, and will stick two fingers up at all international laws and contraventions that remind it of its illegal occupation.

All these obfuscatory hasbara attempts at creating a decent image for the zionist regime are minimal no matter how clever the spin.

Your lies and deceit are too obvious and people are wising up to see through them...LINK

British Muslims increasingly realize warmongering Judeofascist agitators and their political Zionism collaborators are enemy #1

Zionist Hate Preacher David Toube Goes Mental on Camera
(MPAC UK) --


(By MPAC UK) -- This insightful video which seems to have gone around the Muslim circuit and has finally appeared on the MPACUK website, shows the owner of one of Britain's largest anti-Muslim hate sites called Harry's Place, trying to hijack an event that highlighted the suffering of Muslim victims of torture. Note: how he attacks Palestinian groups and then claims he is outraged about Muslim extremism.

Pretty rich for a supporter of the Nazi-state of Israel.

The owner, a chap called David Toube, is a Jewish Zionist, now seems pretty embarrassed by his antics and was so desperate this video not see the light of day that he even threatened Muslim sites with legal action if they did not remove it!

This Islamophobic bigot is well known to Muslim groups, but little known to the wider community (thanks to Muslim groups being more interested in talks about leather socks). His site however is a perfect insight into the Zionist mind, a thin cover of respectability in order to mask the strategic agenda of Israel's propagandists.

Well worth a trip to his site, just so you can see how much a pro-Israeli extremist like Toube really hates us. The site is constantly pushing hatred against Muslims and is not only large but well organised. Check out some of the hundreds of vile Islamophobic hate-filled comments posted by the many Zionist fanatics who visit his site too! (Islamophobia that far out does anything that you have seen by the far right).

David Toube seems not to want to get this video out. Let's see how long before he contacts us demanding we take it down.

Till then, enjoy!

Worth noting: Muslims need to wake up to the hatred against their community by Zionists, who are far more dangerous and active then the BNP and yet less spoken about and less well known...LINK

ADL targets Petraeus for putting America and its troops first

The ADL targeting ….Gen. Petraeus?
(AntiWar.com blog) -- Kelley Beaucar Vlahos --

As tensions escalate between the administration and Israel, there seems to be growing concern that the American people at large are getting wise to their own interests; an anxiousness over whether we will start looking more closely at whether Israel’s national security interests are in fact, American national security interests. Mostly because the protracted conflict could be putting our troops overseas risk. As John Mearscheimer wrote this week, “if that message begins to resonate with the American public, unconditional support for the Jewish state is likely to evaporate.”

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s treatment of visiting VP Biden in announcing new settlements crossed a line, critics have pointed out across the board. Neoconservative hawks here in the U.S are playing those implications down, of course, seeming very sensitive right now to the suggestion that American-Israeli interests in the region may be diverging.

Thus, the ADL’s curious rebuke of Gen. David Petraeus after he testified this week regarding the consequences of a failed peace mission:

"The assumptions Gen. Petraeus presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee wrongly attribute “insufficient progress” in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and “a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel” as significantly impeding the U.S. military mission in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and in dealing with the Iranian influences in the region. It is that much more of a concern to hear this coming from such a great American patriot and hero.

"The General’s assertions lead to the illusory conclusion that if only there was a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the U.S. could successfully complete its mission in the region."

Funny this doesn’t sound much different from what David Makovsky of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy said on PBS’ News Hour on Tuesday:

"…This is a very contested point that General Petraeus raised today, because, look …nobody serious believes that, if you solve this conflict, it is an open sesame, and it unlocks all the other or any conflicts in the Middle East… Where our disagreement is whether this will fundamentally make a difference in the way America is perceived. I mean, we all would agree, I would think, that, you know, if people are shooting at America in Iraq or Afghanistan, it’s because of that local conflict…

"[Extremists] don’t say, oh, there was progress on the Arab-Israeli front, no shooting today. So, that’s not the issue. The issue is, is this a layer of anti-Americanism that is fundamental? And I would argue that there is like 20 layers there. This might be one out of 20, and it should be resolved for its own reasons, but it’s not decisive in these other theaters.

"But does any of us think that al-Qaida will go away if this issue is solved? They never cared about this issue at all. They’re a Johnny-come-lately to this question."

Oh really? Is that why a U.S military commission at Guantanamo Bay convicted this al Qaeda PR man, for editing and disseminating this video in before his capture in 2004? Because al Qaeda was a ‘Johnny-come-lately’ to the Palestinian cause? Maybe I missed something.

Furthermore, I think it is disingenuous to suggest that the longstanding partnership between the U.S and Israel has not fomented extremism in the region, when it was a primary goal of the neoconservative war planners to overthrow Saddam Hussein as part of a greater vision of “securing the realm” just a decade ago. And whatever happened to ‘The road to peace in the Middle East goes through Baghdad’?

A little jingle that’s lost its juice, I guess, now that there is a pro-Iranian government in Iraq, which no matter how the elections shake out, does not seem to be going anywhere...LINK
-------------------------

Chris Moore comments:

This is how the Jewish lobby preys upon its "enemies" who attempt to put American interests and the American people (in this case, the lives of U.S. troops) ahead of Jewish Zionists and their agenda of Israeli expansionism and conquest: its sends a few "hunters" to single critics out from the herd through a process of nudging and harassment, jackal-style, and once the critics have been separated, the entire band comes in for the kill.

What's going on here with Petraeus is the first stage -- the Jewish lobby attempting to nudge him away from the protection of the larger institution of the U.S. military so that once he's been isolated, they can attack him mercilessly and destroy his career. This will serve to eliminate a critic who is fed up with bought-off politicians getting Americans killed by sending them to fight wars for the Jewish nationalist agenda, and it will serve as a warning to other members of the military that even a patriot as respected and esteemed as Petraeus can and will be taken out if he resists the Jewish supremacist agenda.

Unless the U.S. military wants to be sacrificed to Zionism (and make no mistake, the warmongering Zionists will unconscionably continue to agitate for U.S. wars against their trumped-up "existential enemies" down to the last American soldier, and the corrupt, post-Christian U.S. political class will happily accommodate them), it better begin circling the wagons, identify the real enemy (the Jewish supremacists and their collaborators) and start to fight back, because this group and its agenda aren't just going to go away -- particularly since they increasingly believe themselves to be invincible.

New hipster liberal AIPAC president, an ex-Obama aid and buddy of Emanuel and Axelrod, will "manage" rough spot in US relations with Israel

Former Obama Aide New Head of AIPAC
(IsraelNN.com) -- by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu --

Lee “Rosy” Rosenberg, a jazz recording industry veteran capitalist who accompanied U.S. President Barack Obama on his campaign trip to Israel two years ago, takes over on Sunday as the new president of American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Rosenberg also served on the president’s national campaign finance committee.

The new AIPAC president hails from Chicago, the home state of President Obama, and also is on first-name terms with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod, President Obama’s senior advisor.

Steve Rosen, a former 23-year, high-ranking AIPAC official, told the Chicago Tribune, “I don't think AIPAC has made any secret of the reality that his friendship with the president played a role in Rosy's rise. He's a guy who works very hard at fundraising [and] in the political arena. It was not as if he was plucked out of nowhere. He paid his dues. But I'm sure nobody was blind to the fact that he's from Chicago.“

Rosenberg is known as an expert in bringing in big money from powerful people who generally are not outwardly committed to Israel.

AIPAC claims more than 100,000 members and is considered the most powerful Jewish lobby in Washington. It opens its annual three-day conference Sunday and will hear addresses from Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Their relationship has been sorely tested the past two weeks because of American and Arab opposition to Israel’s building for Jews in long-established Jewish neighborhoods in parts of Jerusalem that were resorted to Israel in the Six-Day War in 1967...MORE...LINK

After cynically pandering to Jewish lobby all through 90's because she could, Hillary finally delivers some geopolitically-driven reality

Hillary tells AIPAC, the occupation is hurting the US around the world
(Mondoweiss) -- by Philip Weiss --

I think there was much to celebrate in Hillary Clinton’s speech to AIPAC. Couched in the usual pandering of the special relationship forever, and sanctions that "bite" Iran, she made a point of breaking the news to American Jews that the "status quo is unsustainable." Yes, she said this had to do with "demographics," a veiled form of racism involving the Palestinian birthrate, but she mentioned the "occupation," and the "humanitarian crisis" in Gaza, and the inhuman blockade, and the need for Palestinians to have a "partner" for negotiation.

Most significant, it seemed to me, was her statement that in the ’90s she traveled the world and no one talked about the Israel-Palestine conflict. Now everywhere she goes it’s all that other countries want to talk about, first or second or third on the list of issues. "We cannot escape the impact of mass communications." The internet. You and me…

I don’t have her words in front of me, but the clear implication was that Americans are at risk. If Palestinians are allowed to govern themselves — oh what a radical concept! — it undermines the "appeal" of extremists across the region. Failure to make progress on this issue arms extremists, she said. This is the Petraeus position, of course. Oh now I have a transcript:

"[W]e cannot be blind to the political implications of continued conflict. There is a struggle between those in the region who accept peace and coexistence with Israel, and those who reject it and seek only continued violence. The status quo strengthens the rejectionists who claim peace is impossible and weakens those who would accept coexistence. That does not serve Israel’s interests or our own. Those willing to negotiate need to be able to show results for their efforts. And those who preach violence must be proven wrong. All of our regional challenges — confronting the threat posed by Iran, combating violent extremism, promoting democracy and economic opportunity – become harder if rejectionists grow in power and influence."

When you consider that AIPAC’s feverish executive director Howard Kohr had just said that a "reductivist" belief that resolving the Palestinian conflict is essential is simply wrong… When you consider that Alan Dershowitz last night and British Colonel Richard Kemp said that AIPAC must simply dismiss the Petraeus statement that the Palestinian issue endangers Americans… Well, Hillary was bringing cold hard truth to the AIPAC faithful. She went on at some length, in a vigorous, direct manner. By such fits and starts, Americans may at last reckon with the reality of the occupation...MORE...LINK

Even former AIPAC stooge Wolf Blitzer can't spin-away average America's growing disgust for Israel in critical CNN report

Public Opinion Shifts On U.S. Relationship With Israel
(You Tube) -- By MediaMattersAction...LINK

Childishly sabotaged Biden visit: Insular, paranoid Zionist deliberately manipulating Israel back to their own shtetl mentality

Broken glass
(Haaretz) -- By Ari Shavit --

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu handed U.S. Vice President Joe Biden broken glass. Netanyahu had not intended to do so, of course. He wanted to give Biden a tree-planting certificate in honor of Biden's mother. But his need to lean on the podium while addressing his guest caused the certificate's glass frame to shatter silently. When the festive moment arrived to proffer the gift to Israel's greatest friend, it turned out it was broken to pieces. The only thing the prime minister could offer the vice president was broken glass.

The moral is clear, but unforgivable. There has been tension between Washington and Jerusalem for a whole year. At a time when the two countries should be coordinated against the Iranian threat, they are having trouble functioning as allies. In recent months a major effort has been made to ease the tension and restore the intimacy between the governments. Biden's visit was to have been the peak of renewed rapprochement and the turning over of a new leaf in the relationship between Netanyahu and U.S. President Barack Obama.

It started out on the right foot and created a real feeling of closeness. But on Tuesday evening, the Jerusalem District Planning and Building Committee approved the construction of 1,600 new apartments in Ramat Shlomo, beyond the Green Line. Thus the committee made clear that there are more important things than the Iranian threat and the alliance with the United States. The committee spit in the face of both the friendly vice president and the friendly superpower. It disfigured the face of the State of Israel with acid...

Netanyahu washed his hands of it: He did not know, he had no intention, he just leaned on the glass. But this time Netanyahu can't run from responsibility. Biden's visit is of strategic importance. Jerusalem is an issue of strategic sensitivity. Ahead of a visit of strategic importance, the prime minister must ensure that a matter of strategic interest is properly managed. On his own initiative, he should speak with Interior Minister Eli Yishai and Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat to ensure that there are no surprises. If Netanyahu did not hold such conversations, he made a serious mistake. If Netanyahu did hold such conversations, he's not really in control of the government and state. Either way, the outcome is grave. Netanyahu's country did not resemble a Silicon Valley country this week. It seemed like a miserable and shameful shtetl of a country. A Chelm of a country...

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has no better ally today than the loony Israeli right. No one is helping the Shi'ite zealots more than the Jewish zealots. Day after day, the settlements in the West Bank serve the centrifuges in Natanz. If sane Israel does not wake up, it will be defeated by the metastasizing of the occupation and the lack of the central government's ability to stop it. When the test comes, the national body could be found cancerous to the marrow...MORE...LINK

Netanyahu camp (predictably) plays (tired) anti-Semitism card against Obama; Bibi plays coy

Benjamin Netanyahu's brother-in-law calls Barack Obama anti-Semitic
(Telegraph) --

The rhetoric highlighted a week-long spat Israel touched off with the Obama administration when it announced during a visit by US Vice President Joe Biden that it planned to build 1,600 more homes for Jews near East Jerusalem, angering Palestinians.

During what is seen as one of the most tense periods in US-Israeli ties, Mr Netanyahu had to distance himself from comments by his brother-in-law, an ultranationalist, who called the president an anti-Semite in a radio interview.

"I have a deep appreciation for President Obama's commitment to Israel's security, which he has expressed many times," Mr Netanyahu said in a statement, and also disavowed himself from all comments made by Hagai Ben-Artzi, his wife's brother.

Despite the rebuke, Ben-Artzi repeated the insult in an interview with Israel's Channel 2 television, telling a reporter who asked if he really thought the US leader was an anti-Semite: "I have thought this for a long time."

"I had no doubt someone who could sit 20 years with an anti-Semitic minister, who preaches the destruction of Israel, had absorbed something," Ben-Artzi said of Reverend Jeremiah Wright once a mentor of Obama's, who Obama has since denounced.

"I had expected an outburst (from Obama) and here it was," Ben-Artzi said of Washington's objections to Israel's plans for new housing in territory it captured in a 1967 war and annexed...MORE...LINK

MSM Jewish Zionist apparatchiks masquerading as "journalists" have been going to work on Israel's critics in America for years

Cpl. Jeffrey Goldberg, Guarding the Prison of the Nationalist Mind
(Informed Comment) -- By Jaun Cole --

As a Middle East expert who lived in the Muslim world for nearly 10 years, travels widely there, speaks the languages, writes history from archives and manuscripts, and follows current affairs, I found that none of that counted for much when I entered the public arena in the United States. It isn't that I am thin-skinned or can't dish it out as good as I get it. Rather, it is like being a professional baseball player ready for the World Series, who gets in the van and instead of being delivered to Yankee Stadium is blindfolded and taken to a secret fight club where people are betting on whether he can go 12 rounds with a giant James Bond villain. And he says, "But I'm not a boxer, I bat .400." And they sneer, "You will pay for insulting our great aunt."

This is an arena where vehement partisans are honored as "journalists," where ability to speak languages or engage in cultural interaction counts for nothing, and where rich and powerful patrons make reputations rather than any real knowledge. NYT columnist David Brooks slammed me for not having recognized Ariel Sharon's potential as a peace-maker with the Palestinians and for not seeing how positive the Iraq War was for resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian crisis. (???) I was routinely denounced by David Horowitz, who used to be an insufferable leftist in the 60s when he edited Ramparts and now is an insufferable rightwinger, but who knows nothing at all about the Middle East (and what he thinks he knows is wrong). Marty Peretz, who married into the Singer Sewing Machine fortune and then used his wife's money to buy and ruin The New Republic, turning it into pro-Contra, pro-war rag, was annoyed to see me on television because of his vast fund of knowledge about Arabic hollow verbs. Michael Oren, a bad, partisan historian and Israeli army reservist (who fought in the Gaza War); who revived the Gobineau Orientalist tradition in his book on the US and the Middle East; and who is now the Israeli ambassador to Washington-- weighed in against my receiving an appointment to the Yale History Department. Princeton-trained Martin Kramer until recently of Tel Aviv University, who recently advocated using the Gaza blockade to force small families on the half-starving Palestinians, made a cottage industry of snarky and mostly false remarks about Informed Comment; and has a relationship with the so-called "Middle East Forum", which runs the McCarthyite 'campus watch' and which was part of a scheme to have me cyber-stalked and massively spammed.

More recently I have provoked the ire of a burly former Israeli military prison guard at the notorious Ketziot detention camp during the first Intifada, who is among our foremost journalists of the Middle East and given a prominent perch at The Atlantic magazine-- Jeffrey Goldberg...MORE...LINK

Israeli thug state sending ominous gangster threats to Obama, Biden with broken glass "gift" gambit?

NETANYAHU WARNS BIDEN WITH ‘BROKEN GLASS’
(Real Zionist News) -- By Brother Nathanael Kapner --

“I HAVE NOTHING TO OFFER YOU BUT BROKEN GLASS,” Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu addressed US Vice President Biden during an after-dinner ceremony in Jerusalem on March 9, 2010.

Netanyahu had prepared a symbolic gift for visiting Vice President Joe Biden: a framed document announcing that several trees were planted in Jerusalem in memory of Biden’s mother, a loyal supporter of Israel.

But with Biden’s mission to persuade the Israeli government to begin shrinking Greater Israel back to its pre-1967 borders, Netanyahu leaned on the present (NOT “accidentally” as reported by the Jew-owned press) and shattered the glass frame.

Then came Netanyahu’s cyptic warning and by way of indirection, a threat to Obama: “I have one thing to offer you right now, and it’s broken glass.” View Full Photo Here.

It got worse. At a later tour of Israel’s Holocaust memorial museum, Yad Vashem, the lights in the Hall of Remembrance “unexpectedly” went out as a prayer for the dead was chanted.

Catching Biden’s security detail by surprise as they anxiously stood for over 60 seconds in utter darkness, only the “eternal fire” that honored the Jewish dead spread its ominous light upon the Biden contingent.

By the time the lights flickered back on, Biden’s Middle East fortunes were sealed with an Israeli announcement that it would build 1,600 new homes for Jewish settlers, ignoring US and Palestinian objections. On Biden’s departure for Jordan, Ha’aretz reported that Israel plans to build 50,000 new homes in East Jerusalem over the next three years.

The “broken glass” and the “moments of darkness” that Biden experienced were not chance events. Nothing happens at official Israeli gatherings that is not carefully planned and orchestrated in advance. And in spite of Biden’s groveling before Netanyahu and Peres, with vows of Israel being the “centerpiece of US policy,” the Vice President’s cowering was met with glassy eyes by the leaders of the “master race.”

Symbolic acts, such as the breaking of a glass by a Jewish groom before making vows of faithfulness to his bride at every Jewish wedding, are part of Jewish tradition. When the Jewish groom crushes the glass beneath his right foot, he silently pledges to avenge the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem and wage war on all those who would perpetuate that destruction.

David Wilder, spokesman for Jewish settlers in the West Bank city of Hebron, said he did not necessarily believe “all of this happened during Biden’s visit to Israel because of divine intervention” but he saw the mishaps as “very symbolic.”

“When the United States doesn’t play its cards right, Wilder said, “it gets a gift of broken glass,” noting also that “one of the plagues in Egypt was darkness.”

Surely none of this was lost on Biden who is well aware of the Mossad’s assassination teams who rove throughout the world targeting for the dung heap those it deems to be Israel’s enemies. Netanyahu has made it known through Jewish-styled symbolism that both Biden and Obama could be next on the Mossad’s hit list...MORE...LINK
-------------------------
Death stare? Netanyahu glares at Biden after presenting his broken glass "gift"

Zionist situational ethics: Link Israel fight against Palestinians to War on Terror, but dismiss blowback against US troops it inspires

The linkage fantasy
(Mondoweiss) -- by Anonymous --

Israel-supporters in the U.S. know they will lose if the issue is framed as a linkage: Palestinian grievances are endangering our troops. Jeffrey Goldberg does some digging: "I called the White House to ask if Biden actually said this. It would be quite something, of course, if he did."

There’s no problem, man. The press misquoted Biden.

However, the leading US blog dealing with counterinsurgency strategy (very close to McCrystal) says that if Petraeus did wish to bring I/P into his mandate then it would be a good thing. I presume that this is something that the IDF and their supporters (the Lobby) would not like: US military scrutiny of their operations in Gaza and Lebanon.

US military doctrine in spite of high civilian casualties in Afghanistan doesn’t deliberately target civilian categories, unlike Israel (a point that Richard Goldstone also disputed). US actually works to explore how this can be mitigated. When civilians are killed then a US commander arrives and apologizes and attempts to make reparations.

Abe Foxman calls the charge that the special relationship is endangering Americans "anti-Semitic."

What is ironic is that neoconservatives painted a seamless picture of a common Islamic threat facing America and its favorite partner in the region. Now when the linkages are made in a way that isn’t helpful to the Golden Calf Merkava state they backpedal and say Hey buddy there is no linkage. ..MORE...LINK

Goldstone Report marks end of the road for phony "liberal" Jewish Zionists and their crocodile tears

Israel Crackdown Puts Liberal Jews on the Spot
(Truthdig) -- By Chris Hedges --

The Israeli government, its brutal war crimes in Gaza exposed in detail in the U.N. report by Justice Richard Goldstone, has implemented a series of draconian measures to silence and discredit dissidents, leading intellectuals and human rights organizations inside and outside Israel that are accused—often falsely—of assisting Goldstone’s U.N. investigators. The government of Benjamin Netanyahu is attempting to shut down Israel’s premier human rights organizations, including B’Tselem, the New Israel Fund (NIF) and the Association for Civil Rights in Israel. It is busy expelling or excluding peace activists and foreign nationals from the Palestinian territories. The campaign, if left unchecked, will be as catastrophic for Palestinians as it will be for Israel.

The Goldstone report, which is over 500 pages, investigated Israel’s 22-day air and ground assault on Gaza that took place from Dec. 27, 2008, to Jan. 18, 2009. The United Nations and the European Parliament have endorsed the report. The report found that Israel used disproportionate military force against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip while failing to take adequate precautions to protect the civilian population against the military assault. The Israeli attack killed 1,434 people, including 960 civilians, according to the Palestinian Center for Human Rights. More than 6,000 homes were destroyed or damaged, leaving behind some $3 billion in destruction in one of the poorest areas on Earth. No Israelis were killed by Hamas rockets fired into Israel during the assault. The report did not limit itself to the 22-day attack; rather, it went on to indict the occupation itself. It examines the beginning of the occupation and condemns Israel for the border closures, the blockade and for the wall or security barrier in the West Bank. It has two references to the right of return, investigates Israeli torture and criticizes the willful destruction of the Palestinian economy.

“The impact of the Goldstone report is tremendous,” the Middle East scholar Norman Finkelstein said when I reached him in New York. “It marks and catalyzes the breakup of the Diaspora Jewish support for Israel because Goldstone is the classical Diaspora Jew. He is a lawyer and upholder of human rights and a liberal. He has distinguished himself in the field of law and he is also a lover of Zion. He calls himself a Zionist. His mother was an activist in the Zionist movement. His daughter did aliyah. He sits on the board of governors of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. He has an honorary degree from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. He has said over and over again that he is a Zionist. He believes Jews have a right to a state in Palestine. His is a mostly emblematic profile of the classically liberal Jew.”

“Liberal has a distinct connotation,” Finkelstein went on. “It means to believe in the rule of law. It means to believe in international institutions. It means to believe in human rights. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are liberal organizations. What the Goldstone phenomenon registers and catalyzes is the fact that it is impossible to reconcile liberal convictions with Israel’s conduct; too much is now known about the history of the conflict and the human rights record and the so-called peace process. It is impossible to be both liberal and defend Israeli policy. That was the conflict that confronted Goldstone. I very much doubt he wanted to condemn Israel.”

“Israeli liberalism always had a function in Israeli society,” said Finkelstein, whose new book, “This Time We Went Too Far,” examines the Israeli attack a year ago on Gaza. “When I talk about liberals I mean people like A.B. Yehoshua, David Grossman and Amos Oz. Their function was to issue these anguished criticisms of Israel which not only extenuated Israeli crimes but exalted Israeli crimes. ‘Isn’t it beautiful, the Israeli soul, how it is anguished over what it has done.’ It is the classic case of having your cake and eating it. Not only were any crimes being committed extenuated, but they were beautiful. And now something strange happened. Along comes a Jewish liberal and he says, ‘Spare me your tears. I am only interested in the law.’ ”

“Goldstone did not perform the role of the Jewish liberal,” Finkelstein said, “which is to be anguished, but no consequences. And all of a sudden Israeli liberal Jews are discovering, hey, there are consequences for committing war crimes. You don’t just get to walk into the sunset and look beautiful. They can’t believe it. They are genuinely shocked. ‘Aren’t our tears consequences enough?’ Aren’t our long eyes and broken hearts consequences enough?’ ‘No,” he said, ‘you have to go to the criminal court.’ ”...MORE... LINK
-------------------------
Below: Sensitive "liberal" Jewish Zionist pleading for heroic, embattled Israel, or actress? Who can tell? Is there a difference?

David Broder rips his own newspaper, The Washington Post, for being a tool of Machiavellian back-stabber Rahm Emanuel

The fable of Emanuel the Great
(The Washington Post) -- By David S. Broder --

In the space of 10 days, thanks in no small part to my own newspaper, the president of the United States has been portrayed as a weakling and a chronic screw-up who is wrecking his administration despite everything that his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, can do to make things right. This remarkable fiction began unfolding on Feb. 21 in the Sunday column of my friend Dana Milbank, who wrote that "Obama's first year fell apart in large part because he didn't follow his chief of staff's advice on crucial matters. Arguably, Emanuel is the only person keeping Obama from becoming Jimmy Carter," i.e., a one-term failure.

A week later, presumably the same anonymous sources persuaded Milbank to pronounce that Obama "too often plays the 98-pound weakling; he gets sand kicked in his face and responds with moot-court zingers."

And on Tuesday, The Post led the paper with a purported news story by Jason Horowitz saying that a president with Obama's "detached, professorial manner" needed "a political enforcer" like Emanuel to have a chance of succeeding, "because he [Emanuel] possessed a unique understanding of the legislative mind." Unfortunately, the story said, "influential Democrats are -- in unusually frank terms -- blaming Obama and his closest campaign aides for not listening to Emanuel." It sounded, for all the world, like the kind of orchestrated leaks that often precede a forced resignation in Washington.

Except that the chief of staff doesn't usually force the president out. When George H.W. Bush had had enough of John H. Sununu, of course it was Sununu who walked. Maybe the sources on these stories think Obama is the one who should leave...

None of this would rise above the level of petty Washington gossip except that some of Emanuel's friends are so eager to exonerate him that they are threatening to undermine the president. Milbank, presumably reflecting what he hears, calls Obama "airy and idealistic" and says he readily succumbs to "bullying" from Republicans and Democrats alike. I hope the mullahs in Iran don't believe this.

From too many years of covering politics, I have come to believe as Axiom One that the absolute worst advice politicians ever receive comes from journalists who fancy themselves great campaign strategists.

Milbank now is urging Obama to emulate Gordon Brown, who is probably just weeks away from being voted out as Britain's prime minister, and start bullying people himself...MORE...LINK

Commentary urges Democrat Party's "wildly disproportionate" Jewish donor base to withhold thirty pieces of silver for hesitating on Zionist supremacy

(By Chris Moore) -- The neocon editor of Commentary magazine, John Podhoretz, is calling for the "wildly disproportionate" Jewish donor base to the Democratic Party to punish the Obama administration for the few tepid criticisms that it leveled against the Jewish state after the Israeli government's blatant slap in the face to an embarrassingly servile Joe Biden during his recent trip to Israel (Jews to Obama and Israel: Not Smart, by John Podhoretz). Podhoretz starts out by saying that even though he views the recent controversy through the Israel-first lens of a Jewish nationalist residing in America, he can understand why the Obama administration was upset with Israel's behavior:

"...Let's start out by acknowledging that what happened during Vice President Biden's trip last week — the announcement of new housing starts in East Jerusalem — was an affront to the United States. I believe Israel has every right to do what it is doing, but the view of the visiting representative of the administration is that what it is doing is wrong and injurious to future prospects for peace, and this conflict of visions is not going to be resolved. Biden was embarrassed, his visit overshadowed, and expressions of diplomatic dismay appropriate as a result..."

Podhoretz then goes on to exaggerate the fury of the Obama administration's reaction, which given the degree of insult, could best be described as wimpy (I seriously doubt Hillary Clinton reacted the way Podhoretz claims, as follows):

"...Hillary Clinton called up Bibi Netanyahu on Friday and, if one reads between the lines in the reporting on their conversation, basically screamed at him for 45 minutes. Then her spokesman went out and told the world she had done so, and used startlingly violent language — calling the announcement a "deeply negative signal." That is the kind of talk a country uses against an enemy, and that is why the reaction to it from the Jewish community has been so stark. AIPAC issued a statement the likes of which I'm not sure we've ever seen before, a directly confrontational take on the administration..."

Hence, having established that the Obama administration has undertaken allegedly unprecedented rhetorical criticism of Israel, Podhoretz then goes on to urge rich Jewish donors to withhold their political "donations" (which in our corrupt system amounts to the purchase of government policy) from the Democratic Party, with an unspoken corollary that they should go through the corrupt neocon Right to purchase government policy favorable to their Zionist agenda instead:

"...It's no secret that a wildly disproportionate part of the Democratic donor base is Jewish. While Jews are almost certain to continue to vote lopsidedly for Democrats, that doesn't mean Jewish donors are going to open their checkbooks as widely as they have in the past three election cycles. A diminution in Jewish enthusiasm for Obama and the Democrats is a problem for them. This is not a good moment to be picking fights on an issue of major emotional concern to a key Democratic constituency, even if you know that many of its members are not disposed to support the building program..."

There is one positive component to the fact that Zionists are such megalomaniacal "big shots" that they simply can't help their own nakedly craven appeals, manipulations and chicanery of the type that has brought this country so low, nor contain their avaricious desire to degrade the American system beyond all respectability and hope for salvation: their unabashed corruption lays bare the morally and ethically bankrupt obsequiousness of the modern political class as it panders to the absolute worst elements of society in exchange for a few pieces of silver wrapped in a "political donation" envelope. It's not enough for Zionists to corrupt any lingering hint of Christian ethos of character and integrity within the systems they infiltrate and attack, but ultimately their egomania drives them to also make it known that it is they who are behind its degradation, and that anyone who doesn't like it can go take a flying leap.

Both the Democratic Party and the neocon Right have a big problem, because they have each been so long in bed with Zionist anti-Christians who are today emboldened to lower their masks further and further out of sheer chutzpah and megalomania that the the revelation of the fact of their common corruption of both ethics and character, and their agenda of Jewish supremacism, is all but inevitable.