Thursday, March 31, 2011

Hard core Jewish Zionists declare even unabashed Israel-first neocons "anti-Semitic" for not viewing geopolitics entirely through Israeli eyes

Jihad Hunters vs. the Neocons

( -- by Kelley B. Vlahos

When David Horowitz starts throwing around the label “neoconservative” as if it were a four-letter word, you know a real schism is at hand.

That’s because right-wing jihad hunters like Horowitz, Caroline Glick and others are reaching levels of near hysteria over the prospect of Islamic movements gaining political power in a post-revolution Middle East, particularly right now in Egypt. Sure, they believe everyone has the inalienable right to freedom, but not if they live on “hostile soil” or when it is not in America’s “core regional interests.” Under those circumstances, the despots and dictators—as long as they are pro-western and maintain vital security agreements with Israel—are always preferred.

“The neoconservatives are not motivated to act by concern for the US’s core regional interests. What motivates them is their belief that the US must always oppose tyranny,” writes Glick, an American who emigrated after college to Israel, where she joined the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), retired at the rank of captain and worked in the Israeli government. She is now the managing editor of The Jerusalem Post and a senior fellow at the D.C-based Center for Security Policy, which was founded by Frank Gaffney, yet another hyperbolic jihad hunter who recently declared that the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) had been infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood.

“In some cases, like Iran and Iraq, the neoconservatives’ view was in consonance with US strategic interests and so their policy recommendation of siding with regime opponents against the regimes was rational,” Glick wrote in a March 21 column. However, “the problem with the neoconservative position is that it makes no distinction between liberal regime opponents and illiberal regime opponents. It can see no difference between pro-US despots and anti-US despots.”

In other words, neoconservatives, at least in her mind, have no concept of freedom a la carte.

Glick calls President Obama’s response to the Arab revolutions—particularly in Egypt and Libya— a “descent into strategic dementia,” and “insanity.” She blasts Obama for hewing to an “anti-imperialist” agenda that would end “US global hegemony.” Of course such “irrationality,” as she puts it, puts at risk those important “core interests” in the Middle East, which she defines as cheap oil, deterring enemies and fighting “pan-Arabists and the jihadists that advance a political program inherently hostile to US power.”

She doesn’t invoke Israel, but she doesn’t really have to. Others do that for her. Horowitz jumped in immediately in a blog post stating that “if Caroline Glick is correct in this analysis of what is happening in the Middle East,” it in part, “signals the beginning of the next war with Israel.”

Horowitz continued on this thread the next day. “The reality is that a totalitarian Islam is the vibrant and increasingly dominant movement in the Arab world,” he wrote under the headline “Why I am not a Neoconservative,” on his own FrontPageMag, a roiling cauldron of Islamophobia and second only to Atlas Shrugs as the boobyhatch of unreconstructed right-wing weblogs.

Not entirely unlike when he rejected his Marxist loyalties 40 years ago, Horowitz wrote that he was regretfully “swept up” into the neoconservative vision during the Bush years and in the run up to the Iraq War, by far the biggest and most expensive American foreign policy disaster since the Vietnam War (at least when Horowitz was “swept up” then, it was in opposition to the war. Perversely, he now blames the antiwar protesters for prolonging Vietnam).

Horowitz on Iraq:

“Bush did the right thing. When he named the campaign Operation Iraqi Freedom, I was also an enthusiast. It put the Democratic Party, which soon betrayed the war, and the political left, which instinctively supports America’s enemies, on the defensive. When he said he was going to establish democracy in Iraq, I almost believed him. And that seemed to put me in the camp of the neo-conservatives for whom democracy in Iraq was not only a wish but an agenda. In any case, people labeled me that not least because I am a Jew and ‘neo-conservative’ functions for the ominously expanding anti-Semitic Left as a code for self-serving Jews who want to sacrifice American lives for Israel.”

(One wonders, if “Neoconservative” is merely “Anti-Semitic Left” code, why does Horowitz use it to describe his former compatriots, as well as himself?)...MORE...LINK

Chris Moore comments:

Horowitz and Glick are where U.S. Zionism taken to its natural conclusion ends: railing that any American who isn't an Israel-firster at levels approaching treason is "anti-Semitic." (Ironically, the neocons are now getting bit by their own bad will and manipulative, extortionist rhetorical device, and they well deserve it.)

It's not just Jewish Zionists and neocons who eventually become neurotic, latent Jewish supremacists perpetually gnashing their teeth and wringing their hands about the plight of wicked little Israel, though; it's Judeo-Christian Zionists and politically correct, statist-liberal Judeophiles, as well.

Through media propaganda, political co-dependence indoctrination, Hollywood drama and popular culture brainwashing, and general mass manipulation, the lot of them are seduced into becoming pathetic, modern day Oskar Schindler clones, wailing and sobbing like hysterical little girls about "I didn't do enough" for the Jews.

Horowitz is well past the point where he should simply move to Israel and enlist in the IDF just as Glick did; doing so might be the only way to save what's left of his sanity.

Perhaps all these other hysterical, sobbing, Israel-first clowns should do the same. Israel can take care of itself; Jewry always manages to find a way to land on its feet, and with a thick-wallet, to boot.

Let the Zionist swindlers and their political bootlickers pay the price for Israel for once instead of honest, average, hard-working Americans.

No comments: