Mr.Smartypants wrote:
>On May 16, 4:51 am, E. Barry Bruyea <lobbyi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 May 2008 13:49:42 -0500, "Anarchore" <e...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> There must a site that exploits the torture of babies and young
>>girls you can get your teeth into, maybe even torturing the
>>disabled. Give it a try.
>>
>
>
>
>What the Jews are doing to the Palestinians ranks right up there with
>anything Stalin did to the Ukrainians or Hitler did to Jews, gypsies,
>gays, Slavs, etc.
Except Hitler didn't have his agents owning the press and controlling
the political life of western countries.
>
>Zionist Israel has to be done away with, just like Hitler's Germany
>was.
But where would we send the Zionofascists to then?
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> >A great new(to me) anti-Zionist site, in this age of appeasement
>>of >terror, at:http://www.gregfelton.com
>>
>> >"We are to admire a state that tortures children, ransacks
>>orphanages, >humiliates and terrorizes non-Jews as a matter of
>>national policy, and >has openly threatened genocide against
>>Palestinians if they stand up >for themselves??!!"
>>
>> >http://www.gregfelton.com/int_politics/2008_05_13.htm
>>
>> >The world marks 60 years of zionist terror made possible by a
>>corrupt >U.S. president
>> >Canadian Arab News
>> >May 13, 2008 (expanded)
>>
>> >Over the past few weeks, The Lobby and its Christian acolytes in
>> >government and the media have been forcing the world’s
>>governments to >celebrate 60 years of Israeli “statehood.” Even
>>the three U.S. >presidential [sic] nominees are falling over
>>themselves to pay homage >to their political master.
>>
>> >I said “forcing” because I find it impossible to believe that any
>> >law-abiding democratic government would of its own free will
>>celebrate >a geopolitical perversity founded on torture, theft,
>>murder, >gangsterism and blackmail. If that were not the case we
>>should have >seen official celebrations of:
>>
>> >• Nazi Germany (Jan. 30, 1933);
>> >• Chile’s military dictator****p (Sept. 11, 1973); or
>> >• Democratic Kampuchea (April 17, 1975).
>>
>> >These tyrannies, fortunately, have all wound up on the ash heap of
>> >history. The fact that the same fate has not befallen the Jewish
>> >tyranny in Palestine is entirely due to the coercive power of The
>>Lobby >and the corruption of President Harry Truman, who, 60 years
>>ago, sold >the U.S.’s political soul for the sake of re-election.
>>
>> >The following account from Edwin Wright, Middle East specialist
>>for >Near East-South Asian-African Affairs, shows what sort of
>>soul-selling >coercion was put on Truman:
>>
>> >“When the election was coming up in 1946 in New York, [a] group
>>of New >York Jews called upon Mr. Truman. Emmanuel Cellar was the
>>head of this >committee. Rabbi Steven Wise and several others were
>>in it. They called >upon Mr. Truman and said, ‘We have just been
>>talking with Mr. [Tom] >Thomas Dewey. He is willing to come out
>>and declare for a Jewish state, >and we are going to turn our
>>money and urge the Jews to vote for him >unless you beat him to
>>it.’ Then Emmanuel Cellar pounded upon Mr. >Truman’s desk and
>>said, ‘And if you don't come out for a Jewish state >we’ll run you
>>out of town.’”*
>>
>> >Against his better judgment Truman capitulated, but his statement
>>on >the founding of Israel is anything but a ringing endorsement.
>> >Truman’s Act of Betrayal
>> >The handwritten edits belong to presidential advisor Clark
>>Clifford, >who was pre-occupied with Truman's chances for
>>re-election.
>>
>> >• “Provisional” is added to the description of the new government,
>> >thereby distancing the U.S. from full recognition and endorsement;
>> >• “Jewish state” is crossed out in favour of “State of Israel.”
>>
>> >Based upon this do***ent it’s hard to tell that the U.S. even
>> >recognized Israel as a legitimate state. In fact, the creation of
>> >Israel is mired in so much coercion, blackmail and bribery that
>>any >reasonable student of the event would have to conclude that
>>Israel has >never had a moral right to exist. For The Lobby,
>>therefore, the >historical record is very much something to be
>>feared since it contains >the truth about Israel’s origins.
>>
>> >Since this history is accessible to any discerning scholar via the
>> >Internet, the Lobby has to do more than spread lies about Jews
>>finding >“empty” Palestine, censor of contrary information, and
>>smear those who >stand up for honest scholar****p. History, itself,
>>has to be torqued to >sup****t the myths of Israeli legitimacy and
>>necessity.
>>
>> >A May 7 opinion piece by former U.S. diplomat and Wa****ngton Post
>> >columnist Richard Holbrooke is an excellent example of the kind of
>> >slick, tendentious dissembling that masquerades as plausible
>> >scholar****p.
>>
>> >As Holbrooke describes the matter, Truman and his neophyte
>>domestic >political advisor Clark Clifford, who would later make
>>the textual >changes to Truman's statement, were virtually alone
>>in sup****ting >partition and recognition of Israel, whereas the
>>highly respected >Secretary of State George C. Marshall and almost
>>the entire foreign >policy establishment wanted Palestine to be
>>placed under UN trustee****p.
>>
>> >The big problem for the reader is less what Holbrooke says but
>> >Holbrooke himself. How far can he be trusted? What is he not
>>telling? >Is the picture he paints believable? On the one hand,
>>Holbrooke has >great credentials and intimate knowledge of the
>>event. On the other >hand, he co-authored Clifford’s memoirs,
>>which means his version of >events is biased.
>>
>> >This bias comes through in his subtle denigration of the foreign
>>policy >establishment. He praises Marshall and the “wise men” who
>>formulated >“the great Truman foreign policy of the late 1940s”
>>but he never gives >us insight into their arguments. They are
>>mentioned only to be >attacked. Holbrooke even invokes the canard
>>of “anti-Semitism” to >condemn Defence Secretary James Forrestal
>>for having pointed out the >uselessness of sacrificing the
>>interests of 30 million Arabs for the >sake of 600,000 Jews.
>>
>> >For Holbrooke, the anti-recognition side was driven by the
>>parochial >interests of “oil, numbers and history.” Those for
>>recognition were all >sweetness and light. Not surprisingly,
>>Holbrooke makes no mention of >zionist strong-arm tactics, the
>>corrupting influence of zionists on the >1948 election, or the
>>electoral imperative of selling out. According to >Loy Henderson,
>>director of Near Eastern and African Affairs:
>>
>> >“If Truman had taken positions that would have resulted in a
>>failure to >establish the Jewish State, he would almost certainly
>>have been >defeated in the November elections, since the Zionists
>>had almost the >full sup****t of the Congress, the United States
>>media and most of the >American people.Ӡ
>>
>> >Against this observation and the abovementioned re****ts of zionist
>> >threats, Holbrooke offers this weak apologia: “Clifford insisted
>>to me >and others in countless discussions over the next 40 years
>>that >politics was not at the root of his position—moral
>>conviction was.”
>>
>> >If that be the case, how does Holbrooke explain what happened to
>> >Henderson (and doubtless others) who championed UN trustee****p
>>out of >moral conviction? As Edwin Wright recounted:
>>
>> >“The Zionists went to various people like Drew Pearson and Walter
>> >Winchell and said, ‘Smear this fellow. Destroy his character and
>>get >him out of Government.’… The result was Mr. Henderson became
>>the target >of Zionist attacks. All kinds of false stories were
>>told about him in >these columns by Walter Winchell and others. I
>>was at that time Mr. >Henderson’s assistant and I answered many
>>of the letters, because he >didn’t have time to do it himself. I
>>was his sort of alter ego in >handling much of this
>>correspondence, and I saw the kind of letters >that he got. They
>>were vituperative. Walter Winchell accused him of >crucifying the
>>Jews the way that the Jews had been crucified earlier, >and so
>>forth, and so on…”§ > If Truman had taken positions that would
>>have resulted in a failure to >establish the Jewish State, he
>>would almost certainly have been >defeated in the November
>>elections, since the Zionists had almost the >full sup****t of the
>>Congress, the United States media and most of the >American people.
>> >Loy Henderson
>> >Holbrooke presents Truman’s decision to recognize Israel as a
>>rational >choice between two alternatives, but rationality had
>>nothing to do with >it. Truman caved under pressure. Contrary to
>>Holbrooke's assertion, >Truman was neither wholly opposed to UN
>>trustee****p of Palestine nor >wedded to the idea of partition. In
>>a March 25, 1948 statement, Truman >declared sup****t for
>>trustee****p, albeit tem****arily, to stabilize the >region and
>>maintain law and order:
>>
>> >“It has become clear that the partition plan cannot be carried
>>out at >this time by peaceful means. We could not undertake to
>>impose this >solution on the people of Palestine by the use of
>>American troops, both >on Charter grounds and as a matter of
>>national policy. The United >Kingdom has announced its firm
>>intention to abandon its mandate in >Palestine on May 15. Unless
>>emergency action is taken, there will be no >public authority in
>>Palestine on that date capable of preserving law >and order.…
>>
>> >“The United States has proposed to the Security Council a
>>tem****ary >United Nations trustee****p for Palestine to provide a
>>government to >keep the peace. Such trustee****p was proposed only
>>after we had >exhausted every effort to find a way to carry out
>>partition by peaceful >means. Trustee****p is not proposed as a
>>substitute for the partition >plan but as an effort to fill the
>>vacuum soon to be created by the >termination of the mandate on
>>May 15.”
>>
>> >Besides painting a false black-and-white view of conflict over
>>Israel, >Holbrooke commits serious errors of omission. He causally
>>speaks of the >partition of Palestine as if it were a legitimate
>>option, but the UN’s >Partition Plan passed by the General
>>Assembly on Nov. 29, 1947, was not >legitimate. The UN had no
>>authority to take land from one people to >give to another, and
>>even if it had, the plan was not ratified by the >Security
>>Council, which means it does not exist. Since the plan was >never
>>ratified, partition was never a legitimate option; because
>>>partition was never a legitimate option, Truman had no legal basis
>>for >recognizing Israel.
>>
>> >Now, watch as Holbrooke tries to trick the reader: “To this day,
>>many >think that Marshall and Lovett were right on the merits and
>>that >domestic politics was the real reason
>>
>> ...
>>
>> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
--
If you're thick enough to believe that Jews are your enemy why the
**** would I want to have anything to do with you.
Consider me a Jew.
Consider me a fag.
Consider me an immigrant.
|
