If true, Obama is guilty of treason.

President Drone is just doing the obvious equating of peace activists to terrorists. Once that's the formula, he could even pitch in himself. Why let the Israelis have all the fun?

BTW, I don't see how there could be anything more mendacious than Clinton's statement. It's record setting!

President Drone is just doing the obvious equating of peace activists to terrorists. Once that's the formula, he could even pitch in himself. Why let the Israelis have all the fun?

BTW, I don't see how there could be anything more mendacious than Clinton's statement. It's record setting!

I'm a Jewish Voter and I say, (feel free to quote me)" Outing a CIA Agent in time of war IS TREASON AGAINST THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA." Just because he's black, is thinking about treason a crime? I mean its all good for the WHITE guys to commit HIGH TREASON and not get punished or impeached. HOW'S ABOUT GITMO that looks kinda treasonous too. Deadeye and his pet goat, Codpiece, have PROVEN and given precedent to "TREASON IS OK in America", and possibly even legal as of The Patriot Act.

As for Obama and Clinton, they're Republicrats, what did YOU expect?

Mr. Meyers:

You are the wrong kind of Jew, dontcha know.

Even whenever pro-Palestinian survival Jews are the majority, you will still be the wrong kind of Jew.

All ethnicities and religions have acceptable and unacceptable variants. Rev. Wright is the wrong kind of black, for example.

The most powerful privilege of all is the ability to determine the identity of everyone else.

Mr Durata:

"I don't see how there could be anything more..." is a statement of someone who isn't paying attention. There can always be more and worse lies.

nice illiteration in the middle of that post

There has always been an open season on americans on the wrong side of government policy--whether labor activists, civil rights activists, commies, central american activists, the lincoln brigade, black panthers, pacifists, etc. Nothing new in this latest stain on our history.

And every President has been bloated with amoral ambition.

Mr. Schwab, I absolutely agree, I'm not paying attention.

Still, Clinton's sentence was a powerful, and very concise distillation of US/Israeli fairy tales, disguised as policy. I love the word 'helpful'.

If you can quote something better, fire it on over.
Cheers!

"Dead Americans Jews could really help..."

Killing Jews for Zionism is not actually new; the Zionists actually lobbied the Roosevelt administration to deny entry to Jews fleeing from the Nazis so they could only go to Palestine.

The irony in this is that I think U.S. politicians would just as easily condemn the Israelis to death if the lobbying situation were somehow reversed.

Anyway, its pretty galling.

I think what we have here is another illustration that the U.S. is not much of a democracy. For the most part, the politicians work for the people who will get them elected. They are perfectly happy sacrificing the public interest for their donor's interests, as we have witnessed in the reponse to the financial crisis.

Our government is also riddled with "regulatory capture"; the so-called "Arabists" have been purged from the state department and replaced with people without knowledge of the Middle East. Many congressional offices are staffed with people provided by Zionist groups. According to economist Michael Hudson, Wall Street makes sure that regulators of finance do not understand economics. Its a pretty bleak situation.

You're confusing AIPAC, which is a Jewish organization, with the Jewish VOTE.

No. What AIPAC approves of today is preached in the media pulpits tomorrow. The only "vote" here is winning over the media.

"There can always be more and worse lies."

Mr. Schwab:

Nonetheless, Madam Clinton's statement is justification for her immediate removal from office. Apparently, no one explained to her that her job was to go to extraordinary lengths to protect U.S. citizens, not to invite other governments to kill them.

I too am not entirely sure that this sort of behavior is primarily about courting the Jewish vote. One thing the Wikileaks cable data makes clear is that the primary role these people (e.g. Clinton) serve is as sales associates for weapons makers. Having an unstable, bellicose ally in the region is greatly in aid of that purpose. E.g., I read a cable where the UAE orders up a bunch of Patriot missile batteries after Netanyahu is elected, because they're worried Iran could respond to an Israeli preemptive strike by attacking US allies in the region.

My reference to the Jewish vote is just a restatement of the source's claim that Obama feels that going along with a flotilla attack would give him a chance to confirm his pro-Israeli credentials ahead of the 2012 election. And I agree with Obama that defending Israel after an attack on the flotilla--up to and including fatalities--would generally improve his standing with Jewish voters in America, who tend to be even more hawkish than Israelis. That's one of the many reasons why AIPAC is so powerful in the first place, and why even slightly more moderate organizations like J Street don't represent much of a threat to it.

American Jews are further away from the situation then Israeli Jews are. It's safer to want endless war for someone not on the front and it's easier to marginalize atrocities when they occur half a world away.

John:

Is it really the majority of Jews in the U.S. who are anti-Palestinian?*

The culture barrier put up by Repugs makes it silly to think that Jews will move en masse to back them, regardless of the Israel policy in the U.S. -- I tend to agree with this. Is Obama trying to court Jews or is he supporting AIPAC? I submit that the two are separate and he's doing the latter because the former don't need courting.

*I think this is the best terminology. I'm not a big fan of Zionism because of what the movement does, but being down on that can piss off people who care about what the movement is supposed to be for -- pretending for a moment that even that is sweetness and light. I no longer like to call them "Israeli hawks" because that implies a pro-war footing. They're not merely pro-war, they're pro-murder, torture, and so on. Their defining feature isn't belligerency; they stand out because they are bigoted against Palestinians to the point that they can murder them without remorse.

I doubt it catches on, though.

BASchwab:
While I agree many U.S. anti-Palestinians have not experienced the discrimination and oppression in person, I suspect that the real source of their confidence is the fact that people in the U.S. are less likely to have lost a loved one to the conflict. Israelis have good reason to be afraid to get on a fucking bus because of their government's policies. It's nowhere near as brutal as what the Palestinians have to fear, but it would be a lie to say it isn't scary. If the price of freedom from fear is peace with neighbors, the common man will pay it. As the article I cite in the other thread suggests, conversely, if the price is paid by someone else -- no matter how high -- then, well, fuck 'em.

As the great Mel Brooks put it: "Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open sewer and die."

An addendum, then: an asshole is a person who doesn't get the joke.

i imagine there will be some sort of real-time syncing of live video to the cloud, so we'll have documentation that doesn't come from the IDF. one would hope.

Maybe it's the font but this is one hard string to follow.

Flotilla sabotage.

Sabotage is one avenue, but the example of the Rainbow Warrior debacle is still an illustration of what can happen when lives are lost. But now the Greek authorities are apparently not permitting vessels to weigh anchor and sail towards Gaza; this works, too. Reportedly, they even compelled a vessel already at sea to return to port under threat of forcible boarding. This current flotilla may be thwarted before it can even get close to Gaza. Governments (and particularly the Greek government, which right now is in the throes of a fiscal crisis and subject to the tender mercies of pro-Zionist powers), are susceptible to pressures to fall into compliance with the Zionist line. Any subsequent attempt to stage such an event might have to originate in international waters with the aid of tender ships to service the vessels of the flotilla.

Goldman-Sachs (where the magic in AIPAC comes from)has the world by the nuts it seems. Maybe Brother John Birch was right about the Jew Bankers.
I'm thinking this floatilla won't leave port or even have a mid-ocean rendezvous without "somebody's" navy putting a stop to it. Maybe a Berlin airlift or a Columbian submarine although one would have to for go the publicity which IS the whole flotilla reason.

Want to help The Gazans? STOP PAYING to have them stuffed in a sardine can with no way out. STOP ARMING the neighbors and PAYING them to shoot fish in a barrel.