Thursday, July 24, 2008

Israelis Come Before US Voters In This Election

What_they_really_think_at_memorial_
July 23, 2008


Elaine Meinel Supkis


Both McCain and Obama are in a race to Armageddon, Bush continues to menace Iran. The world price of oil is dropping though, so I presume this is all bluster to please the Israeli taskmasters who control the US media and Congress. The rest of the world knows this is all fake. The two US candidates are in the very embarrassing position of being forced to desert the US in its hour of agony and rush over to Israel to swear fealty. This is treason. But since the media heaps praise on them the more they do this, neither one gets any negative numbers from such obvious pandering. I want both men to move to Israel since this is their sole concern anyhow. Yup.


Obama Meets Israeli and Palestinian Leaders

Mr. Obama, who shuttled between morning meetings at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, also visited the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial. Wearing a white yarmulke, he rekindled a flame and paused for a few moments of quiet reflection as he laid a wreath on a tomb that contains ashes from Nazi extermination camps.

“At a time of great peril and promise, war and strife, we are blessed to have such a powerful reminder of man’s potential for great evil, but also our capacity to rise from tragedy and remake our world,” Mr. Obama said after visiting the memorial. “Let our children come here, and know this history, so they can add their voices to proclaim “never again”. And may we remember those who perished, not only as victims but also as individuals who hoped and loved and dreamed like us, and who have become symbols of the human spirit.”
*snip*
“The most important idea for me to reaffirm is the historic and special relationship between the United States and Israel,” Mr. Obama said as he arrived here on the latest leg of a weeklong trip to the Middle East and Europe. “One that cannot be broken. One that I have affirmed throughout my career and one that I will intend to not only continue but actually strengthen in an Obama administration.”


Seig Heil! Sieg Heil! We all will tie our entire diplomacy and the welfare of the US to this ethnic cleansing scheme. Obama knows that there is a lot of very bad blood between the Jewish and black communities at home. This isn't being addressed. He figures, the black community will vote for him even as he avoids making even the smallest promises to them. All his major promising efforts are focused mainly on the wealth Jewish community that has a stranglehold on our media. Like McCain, he knows that any friendliness in the press will vanish in a flash the instant the owners suspect the candidate won't totally grovel at their feet.


This is why I sense that most Americans don't respect our political leaders. They are not leaders, they are dogs on a chain. On top of the US public not respecting our chained leaders, neither does anyone ruling any country. The idea that we are led by buffoons, jerks, idiots and drunks pleases our enemies no end. I remember when people running for president had to go about America appealing to various voting blocks. But imagine if someone was running and had to go to Mexico and swear fealty to Mexican expansionist aims in say, Central America or the Caribbean? And then announce that all Mexicans could be dual citizens and cross borders without hinderance and more: vote in both elections? Isn't this just impossible to imagine?


It is around the corner! As with any lousy system, once one group gets to do something very naughty, everyone wants the same rights. The entire concept of being able to swear fealty to two countries is pure madness. During much of the primary season, Hillary Clinton and a headlock on the Jewish money vote. Even with this, she ran deep in the red. The media storyline was all about how poor white workers in the rust belt/ Appalachian sectors were for Hillary. In reality, the struggle for power was in the media. At no point did the media hound Hillary to quit due to running deeply in the red. Never in my life have I seen the media honor and promote a candidate running so deep in trouble. Often, when talking about the election, only videos of her or pictures of her were used. This is a classic clever ploy that 'wipes out' the image of candidates the media wants to remove.


They do this all the time. They did this to me! They do this to anyone like Ron Paul, for example. The camera will pan right past him and linger on the crowd, for example. Or if there is a desire to hide popularity, the crowd won't be shown. Just like when they wanted to stop Howard Dean's candidacy, they eliminated the sound of the crowd roaring for him to keep on running and televised only his hoarse answering yell. Then, the media tools went on and on about how stupid he sounded. When Al Gore debated Bush, Bush stumbled, made hideous sucking, slurping sounds from fear and at one point, Gore sighed as he was stuck in this horrible, stupid debate.


The media seized on this one thing and hammered it home. This was due to Bush promising the Jewish lobby the moon. He delivered, in spades, by the way. Even when he went to the UN to promise the Muslims Palestine, he had a secret deal going whereby this would be prevented at all costs. This is why things got progressively worse in Palestine after 9/11.


War crime suit filed against Israelis

A Palestinian human rights group has brought war crime charges against former high ranking Israeli officials in a Spanish court.

The Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) filed lawsuit in the National Criminal Court of Spain against the Israeli officials who authorized the al-Daraj bloodshed.

The list includes former Israel's war minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, his former military advisor Michael Herzog, former chief of staff Moshe Ya'alon, and former air force commander Dan Halutz, Ma'an News Agency reported on Tuesday.

The National Criminal Court of Spain has agreed to consider the case for further examination that may lead to a formal prosecution. Those charged would then be arrested upon entering the Spanish territory if the case is won by the Palestinians, the news agency added.

The Spanish court is not alone in hearing a case against the Israeli war criminals; the courts of Britain, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and New Zealand had all previously accepted cases against the Israeli military.


But not here! The payroll in Israel is paid by US taxpayers. The IDF's entire fund is funded by the US. Israel's economy has grown by over 5% a year these last 5 years. Ours has grown only 3% or less. And now, ours is shrinking and Israel's is still growing. The US government is cutting budgets left and right while doubling the money flowing to our masters in Israel. The entire will of Congress is bent on this. Congress struggles to raise funds for US children but when a bill comes poking along to double aid to Israel, it sails through without a hitch.


The pretense that the US cannot find money drops like a rock. Suddenly, money flows like the River Nile. Indeed, money for occupations of Muslim neighbors also flows! Nonstop. Only what, 4 in the House and 2 in the Senate oppose any of this? INSANE. Nor are there any headlines about this strange situation: nearly a trillion dollars this last 8 years spent in the Middle East while telling us we can't fund schools at home?


THIS IS TREASON. We will starve American children so we can control the entire Middle East at tremendous expense is treason.


From the Press TV article:

McCain once again laid out his policy toward Iran, but now there is doubt about whether the candidate knew exactly which country he was referring to, as

In another interview with ABC's Good Morning America the Arizona senator raised eyebrows once again when he talked about the Iraq-Pakistan border, excluding Iran which is located between the two countries
*snip*
“But I have to look you in the eye and tell you that the United States of America can never allow a second Holocaust,” said the candidate, who has among his staunch supporters figures like John Hagee.

A leader of the US evangelical movement, Hagee, has said that Hitler acted as God's agent, and that the Holocaust was the will of God.


The media has been attacking Hagee like crazy lately. They are cutting him from the herd of Apocalyptic believers and leaving him out in the cold. McCain is OK with this because NOW he doesn't need Hagee. NOW, there are no more choices for the millions of Christians lusting to see all the Jews killed by their Jesus. Now, they have to vote to send our money to Israel and for them to send their children to die in wars against Muslims. All, while getting nothing in return. As the price of oil has totally ravaged our economy, the media has been immensely clever to blame the Muslims for this, not our warmongering. Like a drunk trying to navigate home in the fog, the US public stumbles along, being yanked forwards by the media.


Now that Obama is locked in his dog carrier crate along with McCain, we will be allowed to pick whichever one the media wants us to allow into the White House. Since the public is fed up with the Bush regime, the media figures it has to be Obama. So the next step is to have a running mate who will prevent Obama from changing direction when in office. Probably a Zionist in the House will be chosen. Like Hoyer Stenys, a dual citizen. Just like they used Lieberman with Gore. Lieberman showed no stomach for fighting off the good deal that Bush and Cheney offered AIPAC. This is why the Lieberman/Cheney debate was no debate at all but a love fest with Lieberman kissing up to Cheney.


U.S. military says Iraq troop "surge" has ended

The remaining troops from that brigade departed over the weekend, leaving just under 147,000 American soldiers in Iraq, the spokesman said.

"The final elements of the surge brigade have now left, getting out a few days ahead of schedule," he said.

The U.S. military had 20 combat brigades in Iraq at its peak in 2007, with troop levels around 160,000-170,000.

The current number is well above the 130,000 troops in Iraq when Bush ordered the deployment in January 2007. The Pentagon said last February it expected 140,000 troops to be in Iraq once the five brigade drawdown had finished.


HEADLINE CLASH! The headline is about how the 'surge' ended but in the end of the story, it is admitted that the surge continues! Gads. 10,000 troops left behind means the surge continues, eh? This is typical of the confused, misinformation poured out by our main media outlets. I used to read 'Pravada' in translation when I was young. It was quite similar. Just enough truth in a story so it was slightly believable. So it is here: the truth can be put in the story so they can say, with a straight face, 'We aren't liars'. But this is false. They know that the headline beats all. So this is often where the lies are concentrated.


Realists Urge Bush to Drop Iran Precondition
by Jim Lobe

Two of Washington's most prominent foreign policy graybeards praised Saturday's direct participation in multinational talks with Iran by a senior U.S. diplomat but called on the administration of President George W. Bush to drop his demands that Tehran freeze its uranium enrichment program as a precondition for broader negotiations.

Retired Gen. Brent Scowcroft, who served as national security adviser under Republican presidents Gerald Ford and George H. W. Bush, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, who held the same post under Democratic President Jimmy Carter, urged Bush to go further by offering immediate rewards to Tehran in exchange for such a freeze.

And both men warned that repeated U.S. threats to use military force against Iran were counterproductive and strengthened hard-line forces in the regime led by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. They said an actual military attack – whether by the U.S. or by Israel – would likely be disastrous for U.S. interests in the region.


This story made the Antiwar.com news pages but not the NYT. This is another 'Pravda' trick: to simply not report news at all. The US media owners conspire to do this constantly. The internet is a problem for them, of course, we can read news all over the planet. But most Americans don't bother doing this. So mindlessly, they are herded along. Missing vital facts means an ignorant public is made the laughing stock of the entire planet. We are supposed to be a global empire. And we are viewed as just so many dupes and fools.


For this reason alone, it is vital to NOT allow ANYONE to lead us by the nose! Just for the sake of appearances, we have to show independence. We are NOT independent of Israel. Not at all. Before the Iraq adventure, many an astute former official in the State Department and the Pentagon came out of the shadows of retirement to beg us not to do this invasion. Now, we see a repeat. And of course, they are not heard by the US public nor are they debated by pro-war Zionists. They, like myself, are kept in the dark.


And this darkness will be Stygian if we go to war with Iran. Literally, the US will shut down. Oil rationing, raging inflation and the possible collapse of all our finances, bankruptcy and starving children begging on street corners and perhaps WWIII and the destruction of all our cities? This should be debated and quite loudly.

Source:

http://elainemeinelsupkis.typepad.com/war_and_peace/2008/07/elaine-meinel-6.html

2 comments:

  1. Senator Obama is turning out to be a real disappointment and a very dangerous man. Moving the war on terror to Pakistan could have disastrous consequences on both the political stability in the region, and in the broader balance of power. Scholars such as Richard Betts accurately point out that beyond Iran or North Korea, “Pakistan may harbor the greatest potential danger of all.” With the current instability in Pakistan, Betts points to the danger that a pro-Taliban government would pose in a nuclear Pakistan. This is no minor point to be made. While the Shi’a in Iran are highly unlikely to proliferate WMD to their Sunni enemies, the Pakistanis harbor no such enmity toward Sunni terrorist organizations. Should a pro-Taliban or other similar type of government come to power in Pakistan, Al-Qaeda’s chances of gaining access to nuclear weapons would dramatically increase overnight.

    There are, of course, two sides to every argument; and this argument is no exception. On the one hand, some insist that American forces are needed in order to maintain political stability and to prevent such a government from rising to power. On the other hand, there are those who believe that a deliberate attack against Pakistan’s state sovereignty will only further enrage its radical population, and serve to radicalize its moderates. I offer the following in support of this latter argument:

    Pakistan has approximately 160 million people; better than half of the population of the entire Arab world. Pakistan also has some of the deepest underlying ethnic fissures in the region, which could lead to long-term disintegration of the state if exacerbated. Even with an impressive growth in GDP (second only to China in all of Asia), it could be decades before wide-spread poverty is alleviated and a stable middle class is established in Pakistan.

    Furthermore, the absence of a deeply embedded democratic system in Pakistan presents perhaps the greatest danger to stability. In this country, upon which the facade of democracy has been thrust by outside forces and the current regime came to power by coup, the army fulfills the role of “referee within the political boxing ring.” However, this referee demonstrates a “strong personal interest in the outcome of many of the fights and a strong tendency to make up the rules as he goes along.” The Pakistani army “also has a long record of either joining in the fight on one side or the other, or clubbing both boxers to the ground and taking the prize himself” (Lieven, 2006:43).

    Pakistan’s army is also unusually large. Thathiah Ravi (2006:119, 121) observes that the army has “outgrown its watchdog role to become the master of this nation state.” Ravi attributes America’s less than dependable alliance with Pakistan to the nature of its army. “Occasionally, it perceives the Pakistan Army as an inescapable ally and at other times as a threat to regional peace and [a] non-proliferation regime.” According to Ravi, India and Afghanistan blame the conflict in Kashmir and the Durand line on the Pakistan Army, accusing it of “inciting, abetting and encouraging terrorism from its soil.” Ravi also blames the “flagrant violations in nuclear proliferation by Pakistan, both as an originator and as a conduit for China and North Korea” on the Pakistan Army, because of its support for terrorists.

    The point to be made is that the stability of Pakistan depends upon maintaining the delicate balance of power both within the state of Pakistan, and in the broader region. Pakistan is not an island, it has alliances and enemies. Moving American troops into Pakistan will no doubt not only serve to radicalize its population and fuel the popular call for Jihad, it could also spark a proxy war with China that could have long-lasting economic repercussions. Focusing on the more immediate impact American troops would have on the Pakistani population; let’s consider a few past encounters:

    On January 13, 2006, the United States launched a missile strike on the village of Damadola, Pakistan. Rather than kill the targeted Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda’s deputy leader, the strike instead slaughtered 17 locals. This only served to further weaken the Musharraf government and further destabilize the entire area. In a nuclear state like Pakistan, this was not only unfortunate, it was outright stupid.

    On October 30, 2006, the Pakistani military, under pressure from the US, attacked a madrassah in the Northwest Frontier province in Pakistan. Immediately following the attack, local residents, convinced that the US military was behind the attack, burned American flags and effigies of President Bush, and shouted “Death to America!” Outraged over an attack on school children, the local residents viewed the attack as an assault against Islam.
    On November 7, 2006, a suicide bomber retaliated. Further outrage ensued when President Bush extended his condolences to the families of the victims of the suicide attack, and President Musharraf did the same, adding that terrorism will be eliminated “with an iron hand.” The point to be driven home is that the attack on the madrassah was kept as quiet as possible, while the suicide bombing was publicized as a tragedy, and one more reason to maintain the war on terror.

    Last year trouble escalated when the Pakistani government laid siege to the Red Mosque and more than 100 people were killed. “Even before his soldiers had overrun the Lal Masjid ... the retaliations began.” Suicide attacks originating from both Afghan Taliban and Pakistani tribal militants targeted military convoys and a police recruiting center. Guerrilla attacks that demonstrated a shocking degree of organization and speed-not to mention strategic cunning revealed that they were orchestrated by none other than al-Qaeda’s number two man, Ayman Al-Zawahiri; a fact confirmed by Pakistani and Taliban officials. One such attack occurred on July 15, 2007, when a suicide bomber killed 24 Pakistani troops and injured some 30 others in the village of Daznaray (20 miles to the north of Miran Shah, in North Waziristan). Musharraf ordered thousands of troops into the region to attempt to restore order. But radical groups swore to retaliate against the government for its siege of the mosque and its cooperation with the United States.

    A July 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) concludes that “al Qaeda is resurgent in Pakistan- and more centrally organized than it has been at any time since 9/11.” The NIE reports that al-Qaeda now enjoys sanctuary in Bajaur and North Waziristan, from which they operate “a complex command, control, training and recruitment base” with an “intact hierarchy of top leadership and operational lieutenants.”

    In September 2006 Musharraf signed a peace deal with Pashtun tribal elders in North Waziristan. The deal gave pro-Taliban militants full control of security in the area. Al Qaeda provides funding, training and ideological inspiration, while Afghan Taliban and Pakistani Tribal leaders supply the manpower. These forces are so strong that last year Musharraf sent well over 100,000 trained Pakistani soldiers against them, but they were not able to prevail against them.

    The question remains, what does America do when Pakistan no longer has a Musharraf to bridge the gap? While Musharraf claims that President Bush has assured him of Pakistan’s sovereignty, Senator Obama obviously has no intention of honoring such an assurance. As it is, the Pakistanis do just enough to avoid jeopardizing U.S. support. Musharraf, who is caught between Pakistan’s dependence on American aid and loyalty to the Pakistani people, denies being George Bush’s hand-puppet. Musharraf insists that he is “200 percent certain” that the United States will not unilaterally decide to attack terrorists on Pakistani soil. What happens when we begin to do just that?

    ReplyDelete
  2. John,
    Thanks for your insightful and detailed analysis.

    ReplyDelete