• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

RE: Pardalis: "anti-semitic garbage"

MaGZ said:
America has been under Jewish control since FDR became president in 1933.
Click to expand...

Hey Oliver, MaGZ is a twoofer. His screen name stands for Missiles at Ground Zero - he thinks 9/11 was a conspiracy. I wouldn't bother trying to get his opinion about Jewish influence, because he's bound to fall for the same sort of insane conspiracy theories there too.
 
Texas said:
I seems counter-intuitive to me that Israel wanted us take out Iraq instead of Iran.
Click to expand...

At the time Sadam was considered the greatest threat to Israel. After the invasion of Iraq, the plan was to have the American military to conquer the rest of the middle east–all for the security of Israel. Iran was on the list, perhaps after Syria and southern Lebanon.
 
Ziggurat said:
Hey Oliver, MaGZ is a twoofer. His screen name stands for Missiles at Ground Zero - he thinks 9/11 was a conspiracy. I wouldn't bother trying to get his opinion about Jewish influence, because he's bound to fall for the same sort of insane conspiracy theories there too.
Click to expand...


Well, I'm open to listen if he has credible evidence for his claims about the Jewish lobby - no matter if he's Jewish, a Nazi or a Truther. Or all of that. :D No kidding, I remember such a case.
 
Gurdur said:
Eh?
Iraq has actually sent troops into Israel (1948), sent money to the families of suicide bombers till Iraq was invaded, and actually rocketed Israel (Iraq1 war). Iran only came into the game very late in the day, and only through proxies. Saddam Hussein was a far greater potential threat to Israel than Iran was right up till when Iraq was invaded.

As for lobbying:
ssheeeeeeeeeesh, every man and his dog has an official lobby in Washington. It's hardly any secret that the neocons made a special point of the alliance with Israel; but you could just as easily claim that therefore the bloody Brits are controlling Washington policy, since the Special Relationship between the USA and the UK is still very much on the agenda.

Actually, it's a shame that the bloody Brits aren't controlling Washington policy; they could hardly do worse than the present incumbants.
Click to expand...

Countries like Iraq and Saudi Arabia sent money to the families of suicide bombers because the Israelis practiced collective punishment: destroying the homes of the bomber's family. The aid was a humanitarian gesture, not one of support of the bomber's actions. This important point never seems to get though our Jewish controled media.

The Israeli Lobby is the largest most powerful lobby in America; nothing comes in as a close second.
 
Oliver said:
If the two Senators you mentioned would have been Anti-Israel, that would make an interesting Aspect. But besides that - and I also have a hard time to consider the Anthrax attacks as being an Islamic-Extremists attack-wave, can you provide credible evidence confirming this since the final report about the Anthrax incidents isn't published yet?
Click to expand...

Oliver said:
Feel free to add your evidence within the Thread I started about the jewish Lobby. But please restrain from unnecessary controversies and ignore possible attacks. Also: Make sure your evidence isn't refutable from others, if possible.

Pro-Israel Propaganda? - Powers of a Lobby
Oliver (Today)
Click to expand...


*Bump* for MaGZ
 
MaGZ, may I sincerely again hope that black Moslem & Jewish lobbyists really pack their penguins hard to enhance your body fluids.
 
Gurdur said:
You seem to be confused.
  • You said to me that it was amusing how the term neocon came to meant Zionist.
    .
  • I pointed out to you that I do NOT mean Zionist when I use the term neocon. And most people, like me, mean "neocon" when they say neocon, and NOTHING more.
    .
  • You then answered by asking me my definition.
    .
  • I answered you.
Your question here does not make much sense to me.
Click to expand...

All neocons put Israel first in their world view.
The neocon movement is just the latest edition of the Zionist Conspiracy.
 
Texas said:
I have watched the debate and have read the paper. It is obvious to any fair minded person that the paper was written to focus on the Israel/Palestinian problem and that their example of the Iraq War and the "Israeli lobby" is just a thinly veiled propaganda piece to do what the authors claim the IL is doing i.e. change US foreign policy towards the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to force Israel to make whatever concessions the authors believe will bring their definition of "justice" to that conflict. American academia is almost monolithically aligned with the Palestinians on this issue. That is beyond dispute.

The authors made some really rookie mistakes in making their points. The first being that somehow GW Bush was beholding to this "lobby" and that he was taking orders from AIPAC. That is, on its face absurd, as the dissenting panelists pointed out. GW Bush had less than 25 percent of the Jewish vote in both elections.

When it comes down to the Middle East it is always distilled down to the I/P issue by the left. When you bring it down to that narrowly defined focus the solution is simple. Get rid of Israel and all the problems go away. The Authors made the exact point in their paper.



What these authors are advocating is that the United States align itself with European policy regarding the I/P conflict. To do so guarantees the destruction of Israel.
Click to expand...

So you think if the US abandoned support for Israel then that country will be destroyed? Please tell me how you think this could happen. Israeli propagandists like you think America must support Israel forever or Israel will die.
 
MaGZ said:
So you think if the US abandoned support for Israel then that country will be destroyed? Please tell me how you think this could happen. Israeli propagandists like you think America must support Israel forever or Israel will die.
Click to expand...
What do you think would happen to Israel if we abandoned support?
 
Oliver said:
If the two Senators you mentioned would have been Anti-Israel, that would make an interesting Aspect. But besides that - and I also have a hard time to consider the Anthrax attacks as being an Islamic-Extremists attack-wave, can you provide credible evidence confirming this since the final report about the Anthrax incidents isn't published yet?
Click to expand...

The Anthrax Mystery: Solved
http://irish-nationalism.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2082

A motive for Israel in launching the anthrax attacks would be to bring America into war against Iraq and to remove that country as a potential threat to the Jewish state. When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, the United States Senate was thrown into a heated debate as to whether or not this country should go to war. Senator Tom Daschle took the lead in being against American involvement. In order for Israel to achieve her war objective, this time Senator Daschle would have to be removed—or turned toward Israel’s position. Either way, Israel would win.

Likewise, Senator Patrick Leahy ran afoul of the Israelis when he introduced his Leahy Amendment to the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act. The Leahy Amendment, also called the Leahy Law, prohibits American arms sales to foreign security or military units that systematically violate human rights. The Israeli military routinely tortures Palestinian prisoners, assassinates Arab political figures, and fires American-made rockets and missiles into civilian crowds and apartment buildings. If an American administration ever decided to enforce the Leahy Law, Israel would find herself under an arms embargo. Eliminating or ‘turning’ her Senatorial adversaries—a gamble she couldn’t lose— would be powerful motives for Israel to target Senators Daschle and Leahy for political assassination by anthrax.
Click to expand...
 
Ziggurat said:
Hey Oliver, MaGZ is a twoofer. His screen name stands for Missiles at Ground Zero - he thinks 9/11 was a conspiracy. I wouldn't bother trying to get his opinion about Jewish influence, because he's bound to fall for the same sort of insane conspiracy theories there too.
Click to expand...

I think 9/11 is more of a government coverup of events that happened than a government conspiracy or inside job. I am no twoofer. Unlike those in the so-called Truth Movement, I can think for myself.
 
Ziggurat said:
I actually disagree. The results would be far bloodier than the current state of affairs, and much less likely to produce the kinds of results leftists are likely to appreciate, but I believe Israel would survive. If Israel needs a major power sponsor and cannot find it in the US or Europe, there's another option: China. Israel has a lot of high-tech weapons development experience, which is exactly what China is looking for, and will pay quite a bit to get. And unlike the US, China is not likely to have any qualms about how their clients behave "internally", or even towards neighbors. Israel will do what it must to survive, but without US backing, what it will have to do will likely be far more ruthless, and if leftists are actually interested in the welfare of Palestinians (rather than just using that cause as a tool for their own purposes), abandoning Israel is frankly the LAST thing they should wish for.
Click to expand...
I'm gonna nominate this post. I think this is insightful commentary. Nicely done, Zig. We may be worlds apart on our political views, but I think you've nailed this one.

ETA: Well, I lied; it's a nomination for the Language Award, and I wish there was something else I could do about it. Hey mods, admins, we need another award, or something, for posts that are insightful and well-written, but not necessarily the Language Award. That's for good writing style, in my mind; have I misinterpreted?
 
Last edited:
Texas said:
What do you think would happen to Israel if we abandoned support?
Click to expand...

She would probably finally realize that the entire world has turned against her. Israel will be forced to make peace with the Palestinians and accept a settlement brokered by the Europeans.
 
Oliver said:
SO WHAT? :confused:

Personally I hate intolerance and as such, many aspects of Neo-Nazism.
Do I have a problem to talk to people who think this way nevertheless? No
Do I think all they say is crap and I refuse to understand their PointOfView? No
Am I afraid that they could say something that would change my POV? No
Click to expand...

Which aspects of Neo-Nazism do you not hate?
 
MaGZ said:
She would probably finally realize that the entire world has turned against her. Israel will be forced to make peace with the Palestinians and accept a settlement brokered by the Europeans.
Click to expand...
"Probably" is not good enough when dealing with survival. How many times are people going to have to hear from Middle Eastern leaders that Israel must be wiped off the map to believe them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom