Castles in the Sand

We’ve had some back & forth on the Israeli war.  Looking at articles I came across  something of interest.  The history of Tel Aviv.  Imagine it as it was, nothing but sand dunes.  The Arab’s had no use for it, so were happy to sell the useless land to the Jew’s


 the Jews of Yaffo, tired of Arab anti-Semitism and needing more land for their growing families, petitioned the governor of Palestine, then ruled by Ottoman Turkey, for permission to build a Jewish suburb in the neighboring sand. The governor considered the request such a hot potato that he sent it to Constantinople for the Sultan to decide. The Sultan said yes.

The second questioner, a Palestinian teaching at a British university, complimented me for the accuracy of my brief answer to an unexpected question. “But,” he said, “you committed a sin of omission. You failed to tell our British and European colleagues that the Jews built Tel Aviv on my sand. I know the area. I was born there. I speak Hebrew. I and most other Palestinians want our sand, and everything that the Jews put on it, back. And we shall continue to fight until we get our sand back.”


“I do not know why you Westerners cannot comprehend that the basic issue is not the size of Israel. It is not the boundaries of Israel. It is not the policies of Israel. It is not about the status of Jerusalem. It is not about the Palestinian Right of Return. It is not about a one- or a two-state solution. And it is certainly not about how the Israelis treat or mistreat their Arab minority. 

“The basic issue is the existence, the location, and the sovereignty of Israel. I and most Palestinians will never accept the permanence of this infidel state in the Muslim Middle East, even if it is no larger than the smallest postage stamp. “

That was said some 30 years ago.  Think anything has changed?  Here are the words of a man raised by Hamas.

YOUSEF: Well, Hamas movement is not a national organization and it’s not a humanitarian organization. Hamas is a terrorist organization with a humanitarian face to it. Basically, Hamas hijacked what’s so-called the Palestinian cause to push their political and religious, most importantly ideological agendas. Hamas does not care. If tomorrow Israel comes to Hamas and say, we give you the 1967 borders, Hamas is not going to agree for that.


YOUSEF: Basically, because they don’t have political boundaries to their ideology. They want to destroy the state of Israel. They want to destroy any country that does not believe in their ideology.

Read more:

And here the simple question is asked, “what would you do?”  How would you or the United States respond to thousands of rockets fired at a major city?


And a point not made enough.  Multiple nations are deliberately forcing these wars.  None of the Arab nations will allow the Palestinians citizenship.  Thousands live in countries surrounding Israel in UN “camps”.  There is a constant effort to smuggle in more & better weapons to attack the Jew’s.  None of them care how many die on either side.  A large part of their plan is to provoke Israel into waging a war of genocide just as Hamas  has declared.  They hope to force the US & western powers from supporting Israel.  And why should we support Israel?  I think it’s better for us if they get themselves killed over there than coming here.  The simple reality is these fanatics want to & intend to conquer the world.  The smart ones want to start with the Jews and then the Christians.   If they ever do win those “battles”, they can then concentrate on the main event.  The “true” followers of Allah will only be known after they slaughter all the other Muslims…..



  1. gmanfortruth says:

    I’ve been hearing about this issue all my life, frankly, I’m tired of it. If these folks can’t get along, then maybe they should just kill each other until only one group is left standing. That’s my disgust with the continued actions of both sides.

    But, let’s look at things in a slightly American way. Remember when blacks were not really welcome to move into white neighborhoods? Those who dared buy and move into white neighborhoods weren’t treated very well, and in some cases, this was violent. All they wanted was a nice safe place to live with good schools etc. It took some time, several decades in some cases, but the issue is no longer an issue (as far as I can tell).

    In Youngstown Ohio, the history of black neighborhoods over the decades is well documented. But that’s for you to research. It’s a very telling historical look, one that isn’t very pretty. It is also somewhat similar in nature to the Israel issue with the Palestinians, except with a religious side.

    I can explain more later 🙂

  2. gmanfortruth says:
  3. gmanfortruth says:
  4. gmanfortruth says:

    Obama in a nutshell:

    There are a lot of things to understand about sociopaths, and we can’t cover them all in one column, but I will give you the basics, which are these:
    • Sociopaths have a profound lack of empathy for the feelings of others. They lack the internal feedback system by which normal people monitor themselves. (Most people call this “conscience,” which is probably as useful a term as any.) Sociopaths do not have this and don’t feel bad about abusing other people. It’s not that they feel bad and ignore it—they don’t feel it at all.
    • Sociopaths understand that they are different from normal people and learn to mimic normal behavior. This mimicry has a purpose: It gets the sociopath what he or she wants.
    • The sociopath hides his or her difference. After letting it show a time or two—and probably being punished by a parent as a result—the sociopath covers up the truth and keeps it covered. But the reason for hiding it is not embarrassment (the sociopath doesn’t feel embarrassment), but because it hinders him from getting what he want.
    • Since sociopaths have no empathy for others, making use of normal people feels just fine to them. Likewise, they feel no remorse.
    • Empathy, as viewed by the sociopath, is a weakness, and he considers himself superior, because he isn’t burdened by it.
    • Because they lack an internal feedback system, sociopaths are excellent liars. For example, they can often pass lie detector tests, since those tests register the effects of our internal feedback system, which they don’t have.
    • A sociopath is likely to maintain a group of people who believe whole-heartedly that he is a good, kind, honest person. He’ll work in calculated ways to create and maintain that opinion in them.

    Here is what Hervey Cleckley wrote about sociopaths in his classic text on the subject, The Mask of Sanity:

    Beauty and ugliness, except in a very superficial sense; goodness, evil, love, horror and humor have no actual meaning, no power to move him.

    • Your brain on drugs.

    • Been saying this before he was elected. Congratulations! A psych profile would be very interesting. I’ve always found it funny that both in O’s and Clinton’s case, there is very, very little about his early years up to and including college. We are treated to just glimpses rather than have friends, classmates and acquaintances dragged out to talk about him. We’ve heard about Bush the younger as a frat boy, Bush the elder, Gerry Ford the Eagle Scout and loads about Reagan. Some about Carter and everything in the universe about Nixon. But Obama and Clinton? Next to nothing.

  5. “In large part the coolness toward Hamas results from the belated realization that Islamists pose a greater threat than Zionists. ”

    Seems reasonable to me that Egypt is not speaking out against Israel. They have their own problems with Islamists. Better for them if the militant minded seek to destroy the Jews first, before staging another revolution in Egypt.

    Was 9/11 not partly a result of the Saudi’s encouraging their troublemakers to leave & make trouble elsewhere?

  6. You can’t write a better script…….Senators are all upset about CIA spying on their emails….the same Senators that passed the Patriot Act !

    And then this…..

    Senators are upset that the head of CIA assured them that there was no way that we ( the CIA) would spy on the Senate members…….let me get this straight, in an administration that makes Nixon look like a saint…..the Senate is upset that they were lied to? OMG….the shock ! Senate democrats want his head……

    But, the IRS is blameless…….sigh…………

  7. The whole subject of Israel is a minefield. As a teen I remember reading “Exodus” and seeing the movie. Now, while some would consider it propaganda written by a Jew no less, there is a lot of truth in it.

    We are rapidly approaching a time when no one alive would have been around for the founding of the state . In Trynosky’s world that’s when all things change and all questions are settled. The sons are NOT responsible for the sins/crimes of the father (if any).

    As with slavery and westward expansion in the US, get over it! You can’t re-write history, live with it, continue on and at least try to prosper.

    • Hohoho!

      Yep, I expected SK to get his “history” by watching Hollywood.

      There is not a “lot of truth” in it at all. It is a lot of half-truths and fantasy.

      Get some real historical knowledge, SK, and stop pretending hollywood, in any fashion, gives it to you.

      • Listen Do-Do, I know a whole lot of Israeli’s. If you have spent your entire life reading nothing but history you have missed a whole lot. The joy of literature is exploring things that you might not find elsewhere presented in a different way.

        Jonathan Shea MD is my prime example. He wrote two fascinating books (non-fiction) Achilles in Vietnam and Odysseus in America. Shea is a shrink, treating PTSD participants for the VA since the ’70’s. What he did and few others have even thought of is to link the classics of Homer, recounting actual events in a fictionalized manner to war psychosis from then to now. Guess what, nothing changes.

        Could say the same about Stephen Crane and “The Red Badge of Courage”. Fiction by a non-vet yet rang true to tghose who saw the elephant 1861-65.

        Leon Uris was a WW 2 Marine and a Jew. “Exodus”, fiction? Yes but based on what?

        I guess in the world of Black Flag, the only illegal aliens are Israelis!

        • SK,

          Listen, oh brain-less one

          I, too, know a whole lot of Israelis. And if you even read a thread of history, you’d actually learn something. But keep watching your movies. You like fairy tales.

          Exodus IS fiction. This what you confuse so badly. You believe that a slice of an event, twisted and turned into a propaganda film somehow represents TRUTH.

          And don’t even pretend you know anything about Black Flag. You don’t. Keep your rabid racism for yourself.

  8. Saw the son of the founder of Hamas on Hannity the other night. It’s worth watching the entire segment.

    BF..I’ll conceed that the Palestinian people MAY be victims…but it’s not the regular ol’ average citizen of Palestine who is waging the war on Israel. It’s Hamas…a terrorist organization…leading the charge, and they are state funded.. If you consider Hamas victims,,,well’s YOU who is INSANE! 😉

    • Israel is a terrorist state.

      Hamas is not leading a damn thing. They have no army, no air force, no navy and they are not “State” funded.

      Israel is State funded for God’s sake! Your tax dollars doing a lot of that funding.

      Palestinians are the victim – you, as usual, blame the victim and YOU are irrational.

  9. It really makes you wonder-how much could this couple actually love or care about either of these babies-that they just had to have-if they not only could so easily have one aborted before it was born but actually walk away from their supposed child after it was actually born. Hell they didn’t even care enough to put the child up for adoption they just left him not knowing if anyone would even take care of him-Totally selfish from the get go-but now they are raising one child that they supposedly love-you just have to ask-what if something was wrong with both of them-Can these people really claim to love the child they decided to take?

    Abandoned Baby With Downs Syndrome Highlights Dark Side of Surrogacy in Thailand
    Christine Rousselle | Aug 01, 2014
    Christine Rousselle

    Share on Facebook 2

    A surrogate mother in Bangkok is facing unexpected parenthood after she refused to abort a surrogate baby after he was prenatally diagnosed with Down syndrome. Pattharamom Janbua was paid the equivalent of $10,000 to carry a set of twins for an Australian couple. Following the Down syndrome diagnosis of Gammy, the male twin, the couple refused to parent him and instead took only the healthy female twin. A fund has been set up to assist Pattharamom with the medical costs associated with raising a special needs child.

    The Telegraph reports on this tragic story:

    Pattharamon Janbua, 21, was left to care for her critically ill son after the Australian couple who could not have a baby paid her about £6,400 to be a surrogate mother.

    The son, named Gammy, was separated from his twin sister, who is healthy and was taken by the Australians.

    Mrs Pattharamon, who is married, said she became pregnant via IVF and four months later learnt that one of her children had Down’s syndrome. Doctors told the Australian parents of the baby’s condition, and they then said they wanted her to have an abortion.

    Pattharamom, a Buddhist, said that abortion violated her religious convictions. She had never met the couple who paid her for her surrogacy, and was set up through an agency. Commercial surrogacy is illegal in Australia.

    This situation is equal parts heartbreaking and infuriating. Pattharamom reportedly did not even fully understand how the process of IVF worked, but desperately needed money. The per capita gross national income of Thailand is 5,370 USD, and it’s completely understandable how tempting an offer of 10,000 USD would be to an impoverished woman. Additionally, having a baby shouldn’t be like picking out a car. Every child has a unique set of abilities and challenges. Although the Australian couple surely did not anticipate or desire a child with Down syndrome, it was quite cowardly and selfish of them to demand Pattharamom have an abortion. Using a woman for her womb should be an outrage, and commercial surrogacy needs to be better regulated to protect everyone involved.

  10. gmanfortruth says:

    Barack Obama, the most useless idiotic piece of human shit to ever hold the highest office in the US. Shame on America for voting for such garbage:

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I can say this, because it’s NOT about skin color, but about actions and ability. I’m watching the NFL Hall of Fame induction ceremony. I was in Canton with my son when Dan Marino was inducted, a wonderful time for my son Chris and I. The NFL is one thing where the whole “racist” bullshit Liberal mantra dies, because it don’t exist with the fans. Great players are all treated equal, skin color be damned. I never did understand that skin color racist thing, because I always never cared about it……like the way the way the true racists talk about it, and claim the higher ground. Those who claim that others are racists are the true racists, bar none. They hold that trophy. Those of us who believe in liberty and freedom don’t see skin color, we see character!

  11. gmanfortruth says:

    Interesting thoughts on the drought crisis in Cali :

    Just don’t bring your Liberal BS here, we don’t want you.

  12. Just A Citizen says:

    An example of what can happen when people decide to organize for violence in the absence of any real functioning Govt. The point being not about Govt but about the nature of some humans. These gangs apparently have not studied the philosophies which state that criminals and violent men cannot maintain organizations strong enough to overrun the peaceful.

  13. One must wonder who she is trying to convince-she knows she’s doing the right thing for her. She obviously doesn’t care what some pro-lifer thinks of her actions beyond it just making her mad-she declares that it is nothing more than a zygote-she is so angry about the laws in Texas-is it because they are simply inconvenient or because she is afraid that something might convince her she isn’t doing the right thing -for her, the baby, or any other woman-so where does all this angst come from-could it be that all her justifications simply don’t have the power to overcome what she as a woman knows-that this is not only a baby -it is her baby. Is she afraid that after the fact-all those justifications that allowed her to decide it was okay to abort her child-won’t work anymore?

    Friday, Aug 1, 2014 06:00 PM CST
    I’m having an abortion this weekend
    When I went looking for other women’s stories, they were all about the aftermath. What about the week before?
    Jenny Kutner

    I’m pregnant. I just found out. I’m having an abortion on Saturday at 10 a.m.

    Those are three text messages I sent to my closest friends, in that order, last weekend, a few hours after I went to the Rite Aid near my boyfriend’s apartment to buy an at-home pregnancy test. I’d walked to the pharmacy in a pair of awkwardly fitting denim cutoffs and the shirt I slept in the night before, with the singular goal of ruling out pregnancy as an explanation for why my period still hadn’t shown up a week after it was supposed to. I had all my usual pre-period symptoms — cramps, sore breasts, insatiable hunger — but no period. I assumed the lateness had something to do with my horrific and sporadic eating habits, as I subsist mostly on Hot Cheetos and red licorice. That probably seems delusional; it probably seems less so when I mention I’ve had a copper IUD for a year.

    So, no, it didn’t seem outrageous to think my period was just reconfiguring itself, as it has many times in the past. What did seem outrageous, though, were the two blue lines that showed up on the first pregnancy test I took when I got home — the ones that indicated I was pregnant, making my heart start pounding so loud I really could hear it in my ears, just like in the movies. I left the bathroom with the test in my hand and went to go show my boyfriend, who held me while I cried and shook and tried to catch my breath. I took the second test to be sure, then sent those first two text messages to my sister and my friends. I sent the third one after I went to Planned Parenthood to book an appointment I hoped I’d never have to make.


    Those three text messages are also the sentences that best describe my current situation, in the days before I’m scheduled to have an abortion. I’m pregnant. I just found out. I’m having an abortion on Saturday at 10 a.m.

    I have no idea what Saturday will be like because it’s not Saturday yet. Just as I’ve had no psychic abilities at any other point in my life, I have no way to predict what I’ll be thinking or feeling immediately before or after my arrival at the clinic this weekend. I assume I’ll wake up early, wonder what I should wear because I’ve never had an abortion before, pick something in a rush and then hold hands with my boyfriend as we make our way to Planned Parenthood. I’ve stopped trying to think past those mundane actions, though, because no amount of surmising will get me any closer to knowing how Saturday will feel before it’s Saturday.

    And, it seems, no amount of background information — no critical mass of other women’s stories or screenings of “Obvious Child” — will give me much insight into how I, Jenny Kutner, will feel about my abortion when it happens. Still, I have been looking for background information, and I briefly tried to defy my stubbornly non-psychic brain by reading what other women have written about their abortion experiences.

    There is, of course, a sort of collective narrative that has formed, especially amongst pro-choice women like myself. Here’s what I noticed about that larger collective narrative: It contains very few stories about what women experience just before their abortions. Mostly we only hear about a procedure in its aftermath. Right now, I do need to hear about the aftermath. I need to be reminded that on Saturday I will wake up pregnant and on Sunday I will not; I need to be reminded that my life will go on once I carry out this decision that is totally and completely right for me, not everyone, and that is totally and completely right for so many other women who have made or will make the same choice. But right now I’m not in the aftermath. I’m in a part of the abortion experience that feels just as crucial as the abortion itself.

    I understand why people might not want to write about this part. To talk about having an abortion before it’s happened is to open oneself up to personal attacks at an already vulnerable time. After all, to tell any part of a personal abortion story is to portray oneself to anti-choicers as a “baby-killing slut,” as one friend put it. That shouldn’t be. But, what’s more, the crux of pro-choice thinking is that what a woman does with her body is personal and private and subject to no one else’s input. As Internet trolls will inevitably offer their thoughts, an abortion story told in advance of an abortion might seem a plea for another opinion, which undermines the pro-choice logic behind it.

    I’ll say now that I’m genuinely not seeking out or accepting additional input, just as I don’t think any other woman who tells her story is asking for the two cents of hostile strangers. No thanks in advance for any efforts to make me change my mind, “choose life” or what have you. I am resolute in my decision, because it is the right decision for me.

    That’s not to say I don’t feel as if I’m between a rock and a hard place. I don’t want to have an abortion, which is why I got an IUD — to give myself a 99 percent chance of not having to consider the procedure for a decade, or ever. (Clearly the IUD failed, so I guess I’m the 1 percent.) What I definitely, definitely don’t want, immeasurably more than I don’t want to have an abortion, is to be pregnant or have a child.

    So I’m not going to. At least, not right now.


    I was always going to have an abortion in the case of a hypothetical pregnancy. Now, I’m having an abortion in the case of a real one. There is nothing, logistically or financially, getting in the way of me having the procedure, something I kept reminding myself while I sat at Planned Parenthood last weekend. For too many women, mine is an unimaginable opportunity. That’s especially true in Texas, where I was born and raised, and where some of the harshest abortion restrictions in the country have decimated access to reproductive healthcare. That’s why, after having the initial thoughts of, How the fuck did this happen and Why me, why me, why me, my only other thought was, Thank goodness I’m not at home.

    I moved to New York nearly a year ago, but before that I lived in Austin for four years. Last summer, on a day at the end of June not long before I moved, I waited in line for a gallery seat inside the Texas Senate chamber, where Wendy Davis had spent nearly 11 hours filibustering a bill that would require the state’s abortion clinics to meet the standards of ambulatory surgical centers. The bill was intended to force abortion providers to close their doors, and was then the latest in a series of right-wing efforts to prevent Texas women from accessing healthcare. Two years earlier, during the previous legislative session, Governor Rick Perry had signed a coercive “emergency” measure requiring women to submit to invasive transvaginal sonograms and patronizing explanations of fetal development 24 hours before getting an abortion.

    The sonogram bill, along with H.B. 2 — the bill that was eventually passed after Davis’s filibuster — diminish the rights of more than 10 million Texas women. I was at the capitol last summer, wearing orange, because I am a Texas woman — but I could not consider myself one of the women under attack. In a practical sense, H.B. 2 never would have limited my access to an abortion because of privilege.

    When H.B. 2’s requirements go into effect in September, only six abortion clinics will remain open in Texas, all of them concentrated in the major cities east of the Panhandle, West Texas desert and Rio Grande Valley. I lived in one of those cities; my parents live in another. Women who live in those three massive, unserved regions, however, will have to travel several hundred miles for two appointments in two days to get an abortion. Many don’t have cars; I did. Many can’t take off work; I could have. Many can’t find or afford childcare for their kids; that wouldn’t have been one of my concerns. The restrictions make getting an abortion financially and logistically unfeasible not for someone like me, but for women who are without the money, support, transportation and proximity to a major city that one needs to meet state requirements. I was at the capitol last year to stand in solidarity with them.


    If I still lived in Texas, I would still have access to all those same means. So I’d face fewer impediments to an abortion than most, but that doesn’t mean I’d face zero. I would still have to have a sonogram, and I would have to hear about the development of the zygote inside me.

    As I waited to speak with a counselor at a New York Planned Parenthood last weekend, I felt a wave of relief at the thought of being so far from home. Really, it was relief at the thought of being trusted to make my own decision, at being able to avoid having a probe shoved inside me in an effort to make me question, regret or alter that choice. There are no mandated ultrasounds in New York; no condescending scripts for the doctors to read; no increasing shortage of clinics because of legal entrapments that endanger women’s health. I thanked my lucky stars, for maybe the first time in my life, that I was not in Texas.

    Just as I did, a counselor called my name and asked me to follow her down a hall to a small, carpeted room with a desk and no windows. On the desk sat a plastic-encased model of a ParaGard IUD, the little copper “T” with which I had entrusted my reproductive health for exactly a year. I stared at it while the counselor confirmed that I was, indeed, pregnant — about five weeks, judging by the start of my last period.

    She then presented me with several options. I told her I wanted to have an abortion. She did not tell me that I would have to come back for another appointment before the abortion and she did not try to talk me into another course of action. Instead, she asked when I could come in for the procedure and put it on the calendar. Then she sent me on my way.

    I wasn’t sure what to feel after I made the appointment, so I just stood still on the sidewalk for a few minutes and cried. I cried because I was overwhelmed and confused, although I wasn’t at all confused about my decision. What I felt most strongly when I left the clinic, aside from the need to pull it together and go take a nap, were two feelings that have stuck with me all week. The first was acute anxiety that seven days was too long to let two incompatible objects (an IUD and a zygote) occupy my uterus at the same time. The second was complete certainty that I was making the right decision. I don’t want a child yet, and I’m not at all ready to have one.

    That’s why an abortion is the right choice for me, and I don’t think much else matters. I keep repeating that and it’s not because I’m insecure, but rather because I doubt I could be more firmly convinced. Thankfully, in addition to feeling so strongly about my choice, I have received all the support I could possibly ask for — from my boyfriend, who is in complete agreement about my decision, but also from my sister and my parents, my aunts, uncles, friends, co-workers and even two relative strangers I met at a picnic on Sunday.

    Several of the people I’ve told have made this one obvious observation over and over: I took strict precautions not to get pregnant. They’ve reminded me that I did what I could by getting an IUD — did more than many women do. But, by some strange fate or rearrangement of the universe, doing what I could wasn’t enough. So, of course I’ve decided to have an abortion — duh! What’s more, it’s okay that I’m having an abortion, since I made clear long ago that I don’t want to have children anytime soon. I’ve already tried to prevent that from happening, so an abortion is just one more step in that prevention process — one I’m more entitled to take because it’s a process I’ve already begun.

    Wrong. Having an IUD that failed without my knowledge does not make me any more entitled than any other woman to terminate a pregnancy I don’t want. When I hear people raise the point that I did what I could, it sounds to me like a justification, but it’s not one you’ll ever hear me offer. I’m more than willing to explain why I’ve decided to have an abortion, because my reasons are justified on their own. Nonetheless, an abortion isn’t something that needs to be justified. Women are entitled to the procedure if they decide that having one is right for them — all women, not just the ones with ParaGard, Mirena or Implanon, NuvaRing, birth control pills or the Depo-Provera shot.

    I am no better or worse than, say, a woman who gets pregnant when she wasn’t on the pill, had sex without a condom and, for any number of reasons — lack of information, lack of transportation, lack of funds or just plain old stigma — didn’t take Plan B. She is just as entitled as I am to make my same decision or a different one, and she deserves the same access to a safe abortion that I do if she chooses one, free of judgment — because this is not a question of who is better or worse. It’s a question of who should get to exercise their rights, and the answer is every single woman.


    Despite all the support I’ve received, I have walked around furious for the past week at the thought of those anonymous people who would tell me I’m wrong not to stay pregnant. I’ve tried to analyze my rage in an effort to cope with it, and I’m sure it has something to do with my ardent conviction that women deserve the right to choose what happens to their bodies. Usually, my rage compels me toward something productive. But I don’t have time for that at the moment, because I’m having an abortion on Saturday at 10 a.m.

    So being angry hasn’t done much for me this week. I’m still pregnant and don’t want to be. My IUD still doesn’t work and needs to be removed from my uterus, and I still don’t know what my next form of birth control will be, or if I’ll ever feel comfortable trusting any contraceptive again. I hope this experience will make me a better activist, but I can’t foresee if it will just yet.

    Right now I don’t feel like an activist at all, just a woman who’s having an abortion. I’m a woman fortunate enough to have so much love and support I don’t know how to process it all. That’s rare and special, but still it feels like no one can help me much at the moment. This weekend the people who love me will sit in the waiting room while I walk into my abortion by myself. I don’t know what comes next, how or if this will change who I am. Maybe it will, maybe it won’t. I can’t know that now. It isn’t Saturday yet.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      It is the standard list of rationalizations. Coming from someone who is seeking public attention because she is in fact an activist and wants to use this to further her mission.

      She has one very valid point depending on your view of her “women are entitled” comment.

      If abortion is legal then it matters not how a woman gets pregnant. Whether out of stupidity or failure of birth control, the choice is theirs to make. The situation, that is the intent or responsibility does not dictate the right, or entitlement.

      This goes to your question about the recent court cases. The muddled reasoning of the courts on this and other issues is created when they first step outside the solid ground created by the original principles as expressed in the Constitution.

      There is NO RIGHT to an abortion. There is NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY in the Constitution.

      There was a RIGHT to be protected from unreasonable search and seizure. The constraint placed on Govt was specific to our persons and personal affects, and property. The laws banning abortions, or sodomy, did not include anything to do with searching private property, people or papers and other affects. They were laws dealing with the action of humans.

      When the court expanded this constraint to SELECTIVE personal actions it opened the door to ACTIVISM of all shades and colors. That being left or right.

      Thus we get these ridiculous rulings parsing whether the constraint on a freedom is broad, general vs. specific, or an “undo constraint”.

      Kind of like the parsing of the wording in the Second Amendment. What part of “shall not” is subject to the caveat of the Wizards in Black Robes? NONE.

      But they take it upon themselves to decide this because they have swallowed the “P”rogressive theory of “living document”.

    • Somebody ought to tell the dumbass that life is tough……and then you die. Hopefully she can get some closure by suing somebody.

  14. Just A Citizen says:

    A lot of food for thought in this article.

    I urge everyone to take the time to read it CLOSELY. You will find that all is not as is often claimed by the “blame America” crowd when it comes to Russia. You will also find some real jewels regarding views on States, Nations, Empires, etc, etc, that affect the minds of those who become tyrants.

    • More nonsense.

      Putin is in power directly because the US squandered its opportunity and betrayed Gorbachev.

      Broke the promise of not advancing into the freed Eastern Bloc, it merely confirmed the deep suspicion that Russia had of the US intentions, destroyed Gorbachev and advanced the power of those who, correctly, predicted the duplicitous actions of the US – that group who is now in control under Putin.

      Putin would not be there if US kept promises – but when has ever the US done that?

  15. Just A Citizen says:

    Time for a little legal history lesson mixed with reality, by a Liberal law professor who chastises Obama and the “uber Presidency”.

  16. Just A Citizen says:

    Mr. Buchanan captures some of the key components in the issue of “how much immigration” a nation can take before it ceases to exist.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      And along the same theme. Note he is a DEMOCRAT and is running on a platform of the incumbent liberal Democrat has not done enough to get us FREE COOKIES in OUR town:

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Comment clipped from elsewhere:

      “Native Americans came from Asia. The Brits took what is now the US. The Normans (France) invaded the Brits. The Romans took France. The Vandals (Germany) invaded Rome. Prussia invaded Germany. Russia invaded Prussia. Eastern Europe once part of Russia was invaded by the Mongol Hoard – which were Asians.

      Now who owes what to whom? Who was the original “illegal alien”?

      The only lesson here is that if you don’t successfully defend your country from invasion, you will lose it and your culture, and have done great harm to your descendants.”

      To quote our resident Communist………..Bada Boom Bada Bing.

  17. Just A Citizen says:

    Wow, nothing but crickets.

    Somebody break SUFA while I was gone?

    • I don’t think it’s broke-but I don’t really have time to both think and talk right now 🙂 -maybe others are having a similar problem at the moment.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Good morning JAC 🙂

      Busy times here. It’s all about deer hunting and gardening. Putting in new ground blinds and moving two others, then adding a couple tree stands. Lots of quality time in the woods 🙂

      On the gardening front, all is great except the beans, which have been attacked by cottontail rabbits. Tried everything, and I want my beans back, so grabbed the .22 Marlin and now have rabbits in the freezer (i’ll get my beans one way or the other) 🙂 A few more to go and the problem will cease to exist for a few years or so. What a life 🙂

      It’s been raining a lot. Way too much. Would like to give some to California 🙂 Ebola is in the news, which takes the coverage away from Obamabola and all his criminals. Folks in this area are all but hatin this clown 🙂

      Gonna put in a new blind today (completely home mead structure). The frame is painted and ready, the trail is put in and the mineral blocks have been put in place.. Hope to beat the rain coming our way, more storms, yippee, just what we don’t need.

      Hope all is well in JAC land 🙂

    • David Skekabim says:

      Why bother? What is there to stand up for?

      …land of the free to be a forced and divided consumerist theocratic war mongering tax slave?, or home of the virtual police state of complacent sheeple?

      Wake up. Your nation sucks.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        I think you missed a few adjectives in your rant. The anarcho leftists have a much larger selection than that. I suggest you try again.

        MY Nation does not suck, not even close. It certainly has its issues, as do all nations. I am hopeful that as we continue down our path of evolution we are able to expunge the cynics and heretics who would reduce the people to mushy brained robots. You see that is the net affect of cynicism. It destroys the will to act to correct wrongs when we see them.

        I must presume that since you claimed it as my nation and not yours, you do not reside in the United States. No worries. Your comments here are still welcome. It would be helpful, however, if you offered some real commentary instead of the standard list of disconnected adjectives used as nouns.

        • JAC… many times do I need to tell you to quit being logical… are making heads explode….

        • It is the sheep, well represented by your commentary, JAC, that David points to.

          You cannot discern between fact and fiction, lie and truth – because the fiction and the lie appear, to you, a happier place.

          Time is not on the US side.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            TIME is not on anyone’s side. So that is a very hollow argument.

            Just a bunch of babbling until cogent points are made specific to an issue or topic.

            To simply declare that the USA Sucks is a childish argument.

            And I still can’t help but notice how many people in the world want to come to this sucky place and leave behind their not so sucky place.

            When are you going to build the case that the problems are global and not limited to the USA?

            • Struggling again with coherency, ol’ JAC?

              I will help you.
              The “Time not on your side” is infers that the end is coming faster then you understand.

              The empty headed “boo hoo” you posted after that deserves no further comment.

              • Just A Citizen says:


                You make no attempt to know what I understand. YOU simply throw accusations and make claims of certainty.

                And when it comes to the accuracy of making predictions about the demise of the USA I don’t think you want to go back to the beginning of SUFA and compare our statements.

                I noticed that this past week while I was gone you stopped this tactic and actually provided some good discussion around your points.

                So why is it that my mere presence causes you to fall back into this mode of making accusations against another person’s intellect, understanding, motivations, etc, etc.??

                You should know full well from prior discussions that your statements are false. Yet you continue to make them. It is your strategy to use me and others to make a broader point? If so I suggest you try making the point and leave the personal insults to the more challenged.

              • Your puerile attempt to lecture me is pointless.

                You have completely fallen off the tracks. You gave up any search for fact and truth the moment it touched a lie in your head that you hold so valuable.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        David, This is a great country full of great people. Our problem isn’t the country or the people, but the piss poor Government that has been hijacked by two criminal cartels known as political parties. The government has gone astray of their powers and they need reeled in and basically shut down. A do over is needed in a big way, as it seems many nations have the similar issues with their elected criminals.

        We have problems, nothing that will not eventually be overcome. Criminals always end up behind bars or dead, that will likely be the fate of many in DC one day. Being patient is important and the right time to act will be thrust upon the people by the criminals in DC one day, then things will change 😀

  18. gmanfortruth says:

    Second, there’s the profit-incentive for states to lock up large numbers of Americans in private prisons. Just as police departments have quotas for how many tickets are issued and arrests made per month—a number tied directly to revenue—states now have quotas to meet for how many Americans go to jail. Having outsourced their inmate population to private prisons run by corporations such as Corrections Corp of America and the GEO Group, ostensibly as a way to save money, increasing numbers of states have contracted to keep their prisons at 90% to 100% capacity. This profit-driven form of mass punishment has, in turn, given rise to a $70 billion private prison industry that relies on the complicity of state governments to keep the money flowing and their privately run prisons full. No wonder the United States has the largest prison population in the world.

    Very good read. The question is……when do we fight back and end this BS?

  19. gmanfortruth says:

    HMMM, Seems reasonable to me (except we have way too many laws)

  20. Hi JAC……not broken but been out of town….

    Border is interesting…heavy machine gun fire from across the river…. (.51 cal ) This was being disputed by the Feds where they were claiming that there is no way that anyone would have a 51 cal……until we produced the projectile that penetrated the humvee and stuck in the sand bags that we added to it. Now, there is an eerie silence from the feds…..

    They also cannot explain the parachute flares that are constantly being fired from the Mexican side of the border….reminiscent of the Vietnam War….

    Thought that I would also mention that the State of Texas has hired some….ummmm… to train certain National Guard units in the art of…ummm….Guerilla Warfare…..The most interesting point is that the contractors are all over age 60 because that is the last of the trained Guerilla warfare experts…..with all the technology available, the art of mano y mano is not taught much any longer except to specific Special Forces units….Soldiers have forgotten how to fight hand to hand….and in the bush.

    Governor Brown is very upset with Texas as well…..seems that our procedures are making the influx of immigrants change to California….where they can get over $60,000 worth of welfare….compared to Texas’ $18,000 and that is tied to job seeking and it is limited.

    Let’s see….that is about it… son is up there Portland where I hoped to be….but cannot….seems that my talents are needed elsewhere.

    How are you doing sir?

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Glad you are well. The border has become a metaphor for the state of the Nation I fear.

      I watch pro Amnesty types on TV at night, obviously organized professionally. Every attempt to enforce our laws is met with Racist or some other name calling. The Dems are all giddy because they think the R’s have killed their chances with the rhetoric about sending them all home. We will see just where the American People stand in November.

      Sorry I missed you in Portland. We are now back in CdA. Lil JAC had a great time at his camp, with no incidents. They said he even helped the counselors out from time to time.

      Went camping in the high Cascades and just chilled out for a few days. It was nice getting away from my “project”. But now I am back to chasing contractors, painting and installing trim. Got to get the guest rooms done so you and the missus can come visit.

      Keep yer head down my Texican friend.

      • I did not go to Portland but my son is there now……playing in the tournament.

        One thing that I have noticed about the left….it is a constant scream of racist… matter the argument. If you disagree with them, you are a racist. Down here, it is the “chicken little” syndrome. You can holler racist all you want but it means nothing because we hear it all the time. Want to limit EBT cards, they scream racists when it is NOT racist….( more whites on EBT than any other race)…but somehow it is still racist. But it means nothing any more.

        The left has also basically destroyed the law and the Constitution with selective law enforcement and as it has turned out, when Holder chooses not to investigate the IRS and the CIA when they abused separation of powers for political whim….that is a gross violation of the Constitution and you do not have to be a Constitutional lawyer to know that.

        Gov Perry hit it on the head last week when he said that the Federal Government has no standing in Texas in view of their selective enforcement proceedings. We will do just like the Feds…..we will do what we want….and we are.

  21. Just A Citizen says:

    A new crop of people who have decided to tackle public life in hopes of making a difference.

    Like em’ or not, you have to admire their courage. Because that is certainly what it takes for anyone calling themselves “conservative” to enter public life.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      good article

    • Idiotic.

      ‘Here is a question for those who grew up in the Middle East and other Muslim-majority countries like I did: if Israel withdrew from the occupied territories tomorrow, all in one go — and went back to the 1967 borders — and gave the Palestinians East Jerusalem — do you honestly think Hamas wouldn’t find something else to pick a fight about?’

      Rephrase it.

      If a bunch of Chinese, who converted to Iroquois religion, came over and claimed all of New York, pushed Americans into a corner, then said “we’ll give you back a shred of your land if you give up any claim to New York” – would you accept?.

      I doubt it.

      Hypocrisy at its worse.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        It is not hypocrisy. As you often do you have changed the point of the comment to fit your own.

        His comment was in response to the many “others” who claim that if only Israel would go back to the original boundaries all would be peaceful. He in fact makes the same point you do.

        There will never be peace as long as the State of Israel exists. At least not in the minds of a large number who inhabit that part of the world.

        • It is hypocrisy – you can’t see it because, well, it points at you.

          And Israel will never go back. Not because of the Palestinians, but because Zionist doctrine, which absolutely controls the politics of Israel, has outlined what those borders are and Israel will not stop until 1) it is crushed disastrously or 2) it achieves those borders.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            It is not hypocrisy and once again the author makes the same point you just did about Israel.

            Nothing in this points to me either. I have not staked a view on this except to state I thought it a good article. Which I still view as true.

            • It is hypocrisy, but you obviously do not understand what the word means.

              By blaming the victim, and reversing the onus of action, he presents exactly what I posted “hey, agree to giving up everything and you get a piece” places the onus of blame on the victim when the victim says “no way”.

              It is a weak-minded tactic to then blame the victim for not “compromising”, when, if it was YOU in that position, you’d disclaim the tactic for what it is. But its not you, so you accept the tactic.

              And you fall for it every time.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                I have NOT fallen for anything.

                In fact, it is time for you to prove that I have fallen for this supposed argument.

                I understand hypocrisy my friend, and this fellows points are not hypocrisy. I find it interesting that you, like others that commented on his piece, immediately assume he is supporting Israel and “only” condemning Hamas.

                The whole point was that at this point in history there is plenty blame to go around and that the issue of gaining peace if far more complex than the rhetoric and talking points put out by those who support one side or the other.

                And as I stated here a very long time ago. This is a TRIBAL struggle that dates back thousands of years. It has since been complicated by the “teachings” of the two religious factions involved.

              • JAC,

                Of course you have fallen for it.

                Look, you wouldn’t dare ask that question of the Russians, nor Chinese, nor Vietnamese, nor Chechens, nor Armenians, nor of the Pashtun, nor the Japanese, nor Koreans, nor the English, nor the French, nor….(fill in the blank).

                And you would not at all ever ask that question of yourself.

                But you have already accepted that question when its the Palestinians.

                You have entertained the idea, you have proliferated the idea, and you have blamed the Palestinians for their nonacceptance.

                You would not even consider the thought, but blame them for not accepting it

                Hypocrisy at its worse.

              • And you repeat lie after lie.

                Their is not “plenty” of blame to go around, and it is not complex.

                You want to make it complex so to hide the lie. Truth is not complex.

                It is a group of Russians who converted to Zionism with the force of arms your tax dollars pay for obliterating an entire nation of people.

                You want peace there? Stop funding the criminal State there.


              • Way to defend the terrorists! Your victims. Don’t want a fight with Israel? Don’t pick one.

              • What bullshit.

                A criminal state steals your land and you blame the victims for “starting it”.

                Typical brain fart.

              • Who is picking the fight, Anita.

                Use your brain for once.

              • Israel aphobe! The guy who says there should be no imaginary lines on a map is mad because some Jews decided to live where they live. Then you defend the bullies/hamas/terrorists who want to wipe the Jews off the map. Bizarre!

              • What a mental fart you are having.

                Jews were living there peacefully for hundreds of years.

                There is a difference between people living there and a declaration of a theocracy whose goal is the expulsion of the indigenous people living there.

                But I know in your screwed up mind-set, you’re blind to this.

              • Anita,

                It is you whose is defending the bullies and terrorists and blaming the victims of this terror, not I.

                One merely needs to look at the map to see how utterly senseless you are.

              • Maybe your victims just want employment!

              • “The state of Israel must invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the methods of provocation and revenge… And above all, let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space.” — From the diary of Moshe Sharett, Israeli’s first Foreign Minister from 1948-1956, and Prime Minister from 1954-1956

              • For your “Christian” eyes.

                Titus 1:10-16

                For there are many rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach for the sake of sordid gain.

                One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” This testimony is true.

                For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith, not paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn away from the truth.

                To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled.

                They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny Him, being detestable and disobedient and worthless for any good deed.

            • So, who in hell owns Spain? Sicily? Greece? Who are the rightful heirs of the original occupants?

              • Who owns the US? Not you. You own your house.

                Your continuing belief that a government is you

              • With the possible exception of “native Americans” whatever the hell they are, The other areas I mentioned have people who claim connection to the GPS coordinates for millennia.

              • Black Flag® says:

                That’s my point.

                So they pick a GPS location based on a conversion to a religion. To you, that gives them Right to your land.

                Oh wait, you won’t accept that! But that is what you demand of others.

                Evil hypocrisy in action.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            “You have entertained the idea, you have proliferated the idea, and you have blamed the Palestinians for their nonacceptance.”

            See this is how your viewpoint becomes tainted by your hatred of the Jewish STATE. Which you seem to despise more than even the US version of a STATE.

            I have never “blamed” the Palestinians for anything. I have stated they are responsible for the outcome of their actions.

            Thus they bear some responsibility for their current situation. I have stated that the dispute is over the same tribal claims to the lands of the region that existed thousands of years ago.

            The Palestinians and the Israelis don’t live in the region of a thousand or even hundred years ago. They live in a region where the WORLD governing bodies agreed to allow a Jewish State to exist. From the get go, neither side agreed to the terms of this dictated arrangement.

            So both sides have a choice. Accept the current situation, or continue their fighting and killing. The choice is theirs. So there is no “blame” so to speak. But there is the inevitable outcome of their decisions and actions.

            If I decide to fight back against what I perceive as a bully, then I must accept the consequences of my action. I may be justified in my eyes, or maybe others. But the outcome of my action is mine to bear. I would hope to win, but if I lose I cannot simply blame the other guy for me losing the fight or me getting hurt in the process.

            So you see, your accusations against me regarding Palestinians or Israelis is WRONG.

            They are free to keep fighting if they wish. And they will have to live with the outcomes.

            I have no interest in their damn squabbles and I do not support the USA funding or supporting either side in the matter. I never have in case you missed that some time back.

            You make the serious mistake of confusing my views with my pointing out when I think you are cherry picking history to fit your narrative. My dispute with an argument does not mean I necessarily disagree with an underlying point. Which by the way is what I got from the fellow’s article I copied here. Most of his remarks were really addressing the various arguments presented by the TWO SIDES.

            • Black Flag® says:


              You continue with your bizarre nonsense. Your whole rant is to strawman, violently, another position.

              All you do is show you are an idiot.

              The Zionist doctrine is repulsive. But you think it is an act of good, since you defend it.

              The Palestinians are not “responsible” for the outcome of their actions. They are REACTING. But you can’t tell the difference between those that initiate violence and those that react to the initiation.

              To you they are the same thing, thus, you blame the victim because you do not blame the perpetrator.

              “The Palestinians and the Israelis don’t live in the region of a thousand or even hundred years ago.”


              You have no concept of history or the region. You make up bizarre stories to support your bizarre world view.

              You believe that if the Chinese invade, and the UN say “Well, JAC, give up half your land” you’d agree??? – but that is what you demand of the Palestinians.

              As I said You are a hypocrite

            • Black Flag® says:


              You are no different then anyone who claims a rape victim is “responsible” because she “dressed” a certain way.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                So now you argue that wearing a short dress is equivalent to hitting someone in the nose?

              • But who hit who in the nose?

                The Zionists are the ones doing the hitting, JAC.
                Review the map – only the willing intellectually blind can ignore who is doing what to who.

      • So, Jews are not Jews? Perhaps they are secretly Christians who converted to Judaism to reap the huge historical benefits Jews have always gotten from Eastern Europeans, English, Middle Europeans, Western Europeans. If I get your drift on the “Chinese” angle, you are saying that the Jews who have resettled are not in any way, shape or form related to those cast out in the diaspora?

        • So you do believe that the Chinese who adopt Native religion can steal your house?

        • Again, because you have no knowledge, you do not know anything about the Khazar “Jews”, their origin, their Zionism doctrine.

          Even when I post the information, I know you did not even look at it.

          The lies in your head are too valuable to you.

        • SK,

          “I get your drift on the “Chinese” angle, you are saying that the Jews who have resettled are not in any way, shape or form related to those cast out in the diaspora?”

          Unless you believe converts are part of this diaspora….

          “The Khazars (Greek: Χάζαροι, Hebrew: כוזרים (Kuzarim),[4] Turkish: Hazarlar, Tatar: Xäzärlär, Arabic: خزر‎ (khazar), Russian: Хазары, Persian: خزر‎,Latin: Gazari[5][6]/Cosri[7]/Gasani[8][9]) were a semi-nomadic Turkic people who created what for its duration was the most powerful polity to emerge from the breakup of the western Turkish steppe empire, known as the Khazar Khanate or Khazaria.

          Astride a major artery of commerce between northern Europe and southwestern Asia, Khazaria became one of the foremost trading emporia of the medieval world, commanding the western marches of the Silk Road and played a key commercial role as a crossroad between China, the Middle East, and European Russia.For some three centuries (c. 650–965) the Khazars dominated the vast area extending from the Volga-Don steppes to the eastern Crimea and the northern Caucasus

          Khazaria long served as a buffer state between the Byzantine empire and both the nomads of the northern steppes and the Umayyad empire, after serving as Byzantium’s proxy against the Sassanid Persian empire. The alliance was dropped around 900. Byzantium began to encourage the Alans to attack Khazaria and weaken its hold on Crimea and the Caucasus, while seeking to obtain an entente with the rising Rus’ power to the north, which it aspired to convert to Christianity.Between 965 and 969, the Kievan Rus ruler Sviatoslav I of Kiev conquered the capital Atil and destroyed the Khazar state.

          Beginning in the 8th century, Khazar royalty and notable segments of the aristocracy converted to Judaism; the populace appears to have been multi-confessional—a mosaic of pagan, Tengrist, Jewish, Christian and Muslim worshippers—and polyethnic.

          A modern theory, that the core of Ashkenazi Jewry emerged from a hypothetical Khazarian Jewish diaspora, is now viewed with scepticism by most scholars,

          • I imagine some DNA testing might be in order here. All I know, and it just from rumor among my own clan as well as Jews that I know was that throughout history, Jews have been easy pickins. That includes their women. So, I imagine that the Jewish gene pool is fairly diverse. Could be wrong but somehow I doubt it.

            “Jewishness is passed on through the mother. You can’t always be sure who the father is but you are always sure of the mother”. -Michael Edelstein

            • Black Flag® says:


              Been done already. Don’t ya think they would do that??? And it show that they are Khazar’s – nomads not dislike the Pashtun. As I posted, they are nothing more than a Rus tribe who decided to pick Judaism whilst under pressure from the North by Christians and the South by Muslims. They picked the middle – but because it happened to be Jewish that makes them special, huh?

              All religions have been “easy pickings” of other religions – why do YOU believe the Jews are so special???

              Millions of Protestants died in the 30 years war – don’t see you making them “special”.

              • To think, most Jews don’t even know that! Of course maybe they secretly do, and talk about it around the table as they eat their matzoh made with the blood of Christian babies!

                Good to know that since my forebears were Rus and persecuted the Jews too, I am at least genetically related. Wish I could have used that line as a teen in Washington Heights when I tried to unsuccessfully date Jewish girls.

              • Black Flag® says:

                Most Christians don’t know their “bible” is myth either. Such is the irrational religious – what do you expect? They have committed their brains to a fairy tale – kinda tells you what kind of thinking they have to begin with.

                I mean, if someone said they believed in Peter Pan, you’d think them crazy. Well, it is utterly no different

  22. What nonsense.

    As already posted, “The Truth about Palestine” – it has nothing to do with Jews living there; they’d been doing that for centuries.

    It has to do with a bunch of Russian Khazars under the doctrine of Zionism to establish a State, whose stated and repeated (and proven by action) claim that non-Jews are “cattle”.

  23. moo…..

  24. Dear Mr. Obama:

    I’m planning to move my family and extended family into Mexico for my
    health, and I would like to ask you to assist me.

    We’re planning to simply walk across the border from the U.S. into Mexico,
    and we’ll need your help to make a few arrangements.

    We plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration
    quotas and laws because we all know that borders are just imaginary lines.

    I’m sure they handle those things the same way you do here. So, would you
    mind telling your buddy, the President of Mexico , that I’m on my way over?

    Please let him know that I will be expecting the following:

    1. Free medical care for my entire family.

    2. English-speaking Government bureaucrats for all services I might
    need, whether I use them or not.

    3. Please print all Mexican Government forms in English.

    4. I want my grandkids to be taught Spanish by English-speaking
    (bi-lingual) teachers.

    5. Tell their schools they need to include classes on American
    culture and history.

    6. I want my grandkids to see the American flag on one of the flag
    poles at their school.

    7. Please plan to feed my grandkids at school for both breakfast and lunch.

    8. I will need a local Mexican driver’s license so I can get easy access to
    government services.

    9. I do plan to get a car and drive in Mexico, but I don’t plan to purchase
    car insurance, and I probably won’t make any special effort to learn
    local traffic laws.

    10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from
    their president to leave me alone, please be sure that every patrol
    car has at least one English-speaking officer.

    11. I plan to fly the U.S. flag from my housetop, put U.S. flag decals
    on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any
    complaints or negative comments from the locals.

    12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, or
    have any labor or tax laws enforced on any business I may start.

    13. Please have the president tell all the Mexican people to be
    extremely nice and never say critical things about me or my family, or about the
    strain we might place on their economy.

    14. I want to receive free food stamps.

    15. Naturally, I’ll expect free rent subsidies.

    16. I’ll need income tax credits so that although I don’t pay Mexican
    taxes, I’ll receive money from the government.

    17. Please arrange it so that the Mexican Government pays $4,500.00 to
    help me buy a new car.

    18. Oh yes, I almost forgot, please enroll me free into the Mexican
    Social Security program so that I’ll get a monthly income in retirement.

    I know this is an easy request because you already do all these things
    for all of his people who walk over to the U.S. from Mexico. I am sure that the
    President of Mexico won’t mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely.


    Logic is dead.
    Excellence is punished.
    Mediocrity is rewarded.
    And dependency is to be revered.
    This is present day Progressive America.
    When people rob banks they go to prison.
    When they rob the taxpayer they get re-elected.

  25. One indication of possible opportunities to blunt the threat was a remarkable proposal by Soviet ruler Joseph Stalin in 1952, offering to allow Germany to be unified with free elections on the condition that it would not then join a hostile military alliance. That was hardly an extreme condition in light of the history of the past half-century during which Germany alone had practically destroyed Russia twice, exacting a terrible toll.

    Stalin’s proposal was taken seriously by the respected political commentator James Warburg, but otherwise mostly ignored or ridiculed at the time. Recent scholarship has begun to take a different view. The bitterly anti-Communist Soviet scholar Adam Ulam has taken the status of Stalin’s proposal to be an “unresolved mystery.” Washington “wasted little effort in flatly rejecting Moscow’s initiative,” he has written, on grounds that “were embarrassingly unconvincing.” The political, scholarly, and general intellectual failure left open “the basic question,” Ulam added: “Was Stalin genuinely ready to sacrifice the newly created German Democratic Republic (GDR) on the altar of real democracy,” with consequences for world peace and for American security that could have been enormous?

    Reviewing recent research in Soviet archives, one of the most respected Cold War scholars, Melvyn Leffler, has observed that many scholars were surprised to discover “[Lavrenti] Beria — the sinister, brutal head of the [Russian] secret police — propos[ed] that the Kremlin offer the West a deal on the unification and neutralization of Germany,” agreeing “to sacrifice the East German communist regime to reduce East-West tensions” and improve internal political and economic conditions in Russia — opportunities that were squandered in favor of securing German participation in NATO.

    Under the circumstances, it is not impossible that agreements might then have been reached that would have protected the security of the American population from the gravest threat on the horizon. But that possibility apparently was not considered, a striking indication of how slight a role authentic security plays in state policy.

    The Cuban Missile Crisis and Beyond

    That conclusion was underscored repeatedly in the years that followed. When Nikita Khrushchev took control in Russia in 1953 after Stalin’s death, he recognized that the USSR could not compete militarily with the U.S., the richest and most powerful country in history, with incomparable advantages. If it ever hoped to escape its economic backwardness and the devastating effect of the last world war, it would need to reverse the arms race.

    Accordingly, Khrushchev proposed sharp mutual reductions in offensive weapons. The incoming Kennedy administration considered the offer and rejected it, instead turning to rapid military expansion, even though it was already far in the lead. The late Kenneth Waltz, supported by other strategic analysts with close connections to U.S. intelligence, wrote then that the Kennedy administration “undertook the largest strategic and conventional peace-time military build-up the world has yet seen… even as Khrushchev was trying at once to carry through a major reduction in the conventional forces and to follow a strategy of minimum deterrence, and we did so even though the balance of strategic weapons greatly favored the United States.” Again, harming national security while enhancing state power.

    U.S. intelligence verified that huge cuts had indeed been made in active Soviet military forces, both in terms of aircraft and manpower. In 1963, Khrushchev again called for new reductions. As a gesture, he withdrew troops from East Germany and called on Washington to reciprocate. That call, too, was rejected. William Kaufmann, a former top Pentagon aide and leading analyst of security issues, described the U.S. failure to respond to Khrushchev’s initiatives as, in career terms, “the one regret I have.”

    The Soviet reaction to the U.S. build-up of those years was to place nuclear missiles in Cuba in October 1962 to try to redress the balance at least slightly. The move was also motivated in part by Kennedy’s terrorist campaign against Fidel Castro’s Cuba, which was scheduled to lead to invasion that very month, as Russia and Cuba may have known. The ensuing “missile crisis” was “the most dangerous moment in history,” in the words of historian Arthur Schlesinger, Kennedy’s adviser and confidant.

    As the crisis peaked in late October, Kennedy received a secret letter from Khrushchev offering to end it by simultaneous public withdrawal of Russian missiles from Cuba and U.S. Jupiter missiles from Turkey. The latter were obsolete missiles, already ordered withdrawn by the Kennedy administration because they were being replaced by far more lethal Polaris submarines to be stationed in the Mediterranean.

    Kennedy’s subjective estimate at that moment was that if he refused the Soviet premier’s offer, there was a 33% to 50% probability of nuclear war — a war that, as President Eisenhower had warned, would have destroyed the northern hemisphere. Kennedy nonetheless refused Khrushchev’s proposal for public withdrawal of the missiles from Cuba and Turkey; only the withdrawal from Cuba could be public, so as to protect the U.S. right to place missiles on Russia’s borders or anywhere else it chose.

    It is hard to think of a more horrendous decision in history — and for this, he is still highly praised for his cool courage and statesmanship.

    Ten years later, in the last days of the 1973 Israel-Arab war, Henry Kissinger, then national security adviser to President Nixon, called a nuclear alert. The purpose was to warn the Russians not to interfere with his delicate diplomatic maneuvers designed to ensure an Israeli victory, but of a limited sort so that the U.S. would still be in control of the region unilaterally. And the maneuvers were indeed delicate. The U.S. and Russia had jointly imposed a cease-fire, but Kissinger secretly informed the Israelis that they could ignore it. Hence the need for the nuclear alert to frighten the Russians away. The security of Americans had its usual status.

    Ten years later, the Reagan administration launched operations to probe Russian air defenses by simulating air and naval attacks and a high-level nuclear alert that the Russians were intended to detect. These actions were undertaken at a very tense moment. Washington was deploying Pershing II strategic missiles in Europe with a five-minute flight time to Moscow. President Reagan had also announced the Strategic Defense Initiative (“Star Wars”) program, which the Russians understood to be effectively a first-strike weapon, a standard interpretation of missile defense on all sides. And other tensions were rising.

    Naturally, these actions caused great alarm in Russia, which, unlike the U.S., was quite vulnerable and had repeatedly been invaded and virtually destroyed. That led to a major war scare in 1983. Newly released archives reveal that the danger was even more severe than historians had previously assumed. A CIA study entitled “The War Scare Was for Real” concluded that U.S. intelligence may have underestimated Russian concerns and the threat of a Russian preventative nuclear strike. The exercises “almost became a prelude to a preventative nuclear strike,” according to an account in the Journal of Strategic Studies.

    It was even more dangerous than that, as we learned last September, when the BBC reported that right in the midst of these world-threatening developments, Russia’s early-warning systems detected an incoming missile strike from the United States, sending its nuclear system onto the highest-level alert. The protocol for the Soviet military was to retaliate with a nuclear attack of its own. Fortunately, the officer on duty, Stanislav Petrov, decided to disobey orders and not report the warnings to his superiors. He received an official reprimand. And thanks to his dereliction of duty, we’re still alive to talk about it.

    The security of the population was no more a high priority for Reagan administration planners than for their predecessors. And so it continues to the present, even putting aside the numerous near-catastrophic nuclear accidents that occurred over the years, many reviewed in Eric Schlosser’s chilling study Command and Control: Nuclear Weapons, the Damascus Accident, and the Illusion of Safety. In other words, it is hard to contest General Butler’s conclusions.

    Survival in the Post-Cold War Era

    The record of post-Cold War actions and doctrines is hardly reassuring either. Every self-respecting president has to have a doctrine. The Clinton Doctrine was encapsulated in the slogan “multilateral when we can, unilateral when we must.” In congressional testimony, the phrase “when we must” was explained more fully: the U.S. is entitled to resort to “unilateral use of military power” to ensure “uninhibited access to key markets, energy supplies, and strategic resources.” Meanwhile, STRATCOM in the Clinton era produced an important study entitled “Essentials of Post-Cold War Deterrence,” issued well after the Soviet Union had collapsed and Clinton was extending President George H.W. Bush’s program of expanding NATO to the east in violation of promises to Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev — with reverberations to the present.

    That STRATCOM study was concerned with “the role of nuclear weapons in the post-Cold War era.” A central conclusion: that the U.S. must maintain the right to launch a first strike, even against non-nuclear states. Furthermore, nuclear weapons must always be at the ready because they “cast a shadow over any crisis or conflict.” They were, that is, constantly being used, just as you’re using a gun if you aim but don’t fire one while robbing a store (a point that Daniel Ellsberg has repeatedly stressed). STRATCOM went on to advise that “planners should not be too rational about determining… what the opponent values the most.” Everything should simply be targeted. “[I]t hurts to portray ourselves as too fully rational and cool-headed… That the U.S. may become irrational and vindictive if its vital interests are attacked should be a part of the national persona we project.” It is “beneficial [for our strategic posture] if some elements may appear to be potentially ‘out of control,’” thus posing a constant threat of nuclear attack — a severe violation of the U.N. Charter, if anyone cares.

    Not much here about the noble goals constantly proclaimed — or for that matter the obligation under the Non-Proliferation Treaty to make “good faith” efforts to eliminate this scourge of the earth. What resounds, rather, is an adaptation of Hilaire Belloc’s famous couplet about the Maxim gun (to quote the great African historian Chinweizu):

    “Whatever happens, we have got,

    The Atom Bomb, and they have not.”

    After Clinton came, of course, George W. Bush, whose broad endorsement of preventative war easily encompassed Japan’s attack in December 1941 on military bases in two U.S. overseas possessions, at a time when Japanese militarists were well aware that B-17 Flying Fortresses were being rushed off assembly lines and deployed to those bases with the intent “to burn out the industrial heart of the Empire with fire-bomb attacks on the teeming bamboo ant heaps of Honshu and Kyushu.” That was how the prewar plans were described by their architect, Air Force General Claire Chennault, with the enthusiastic approval of President Franklin Roosevelt, Secretary of State Cordell Hull, and Army Chief of Staff General George Marshall.

    Then comes Barack Obama, with pleasant words about working to abolish nuclear weapons — combined with plans to spend $1 trillion on the U.S. nuclear arsenal in the next 30 years, a percentage of the military budget “comparable to spending for procurement of new strategic systems in the 1980s under President Ronald Reagan,” according to a study by the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies.

    Obama has also not hesitated to play with fire for political gain. Take for example the capture and assassination of Osama bin Laden by Navy SEALs. Obama brought it up with pride in an important speech on national security in May 2013. It was widely covered, but one crucial paragraph was ignored.

    Obama hailed the operation but added that it could not be the norm. The reason, he said, was that the risks “were immense.” The SEALs might have been “embroiled in an extended firefight.” Even though, by luck, that didn’t happen, “the cost to our relationship with Pakistan and the backlash among the Pakistani public over encroachment on their territory was… severe.”

    Let us now add a few details. The SEALs were ordered to fight their way out if apprehended. They would not have been left to their fate if “embroiled in an extended firefight.” The full force of the U.S. military would have been used to extricate them. Pakistan has a powerful, well-trained military, highly protective of state sovereignty. It also has nuclear weapons, and Pakistani specialists are concerned about the possible penetration of their nuclear security system by jihadi elements. It is also no secret that the population has been embittered and radicalized by Washington’s drone terror campaign and other policies.

    While the SEALs were still in the bin Laden compound, Pakistani Chief of Staff Ashfaq Parvez Kayani was informed of the raid and ordered the military “to confront any unidentified aircraft,” which he assumed would be from India. Meanwhile in Kabul, U.S. war commander General David Petraeus ordered “warplanes to respond” if the Pakistanis “scrambled their fighter jets.” As Obama said, by luck the worst didn’t happen, though it could have been quite ugly. But the risks were faced without noticeable concern. Or subsequent comment.

    As General Butler observed, it is a near miracle that we have escaped destruction so far, and the longer we tempt fate, the less likely it is that we can hope for divine intervention to perpetuate the miracle.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Been waiting all day for you to post that here.

      For those who don’t know, this was an editorial written by Noam Chomsky and published on Huff Po, among other places, I assume.

      • Chomsky did leave several other facts out of his editorial. Even if he did not leave the facts out……somebody….anybody…tell me what is wrong with being the biggest baddest kid on the block and using whatever leverage you have that goes with it?

        But, it really does not matter now… 2016, just watch who the hegemonic power is going to be… will not be the US.

        • Black Flag® says:

          It is always wrong to be bad, no matter how big you are.

          Worse, when playing around with nukes, this bad has the potential of human extinction. Kinda very bad.

          What ever the year, no one else will fill the global gap. No else wants it. No one will spend the money to it. Only the US is/was capable of it, and the Nation State, everywhere, is crumbling.

          The deep centralization of the Nation state that is required to be a global hegemony has passed. In a hundred years the concept of the State will be as bizarre to the living as praying to cows to you today.

        • Black Flag® says:


          Let’s review some numbers.
          Of the nations I assume you think are capable, the list is short.
          Russia and China.

          US Military Spending – alone – is $664.84 billion.
          The Russian government – total – spent $469 billion, all in. The US spent more on its military then the Russians entire government budget.

          Chinese government spent $1.7 trillion – compared to the US $3.5 trillion.

          China already has a tax rate (max) of 45%. They would need to more then triple the tax rate – that is, over 100% to match the tax revenue of the US.

          Russia has a tax rate of 13% – even if they tripled it to US standards (and cripple their economy), they would not come close to the US expenditures.

          Neither of these two countries have sufficient economic resources to squander on a global hegemony. The US has spent tens of trillions of dollars over the course of a couple of decades to be such. For any country in the world, this would be economic suicide, as the US is amply showing now.

          England was devastated by its attempt to be the global power. Today, it barely can keep the lights on.

          There will be only one, true, global superpower in history, and its reign will be blessedly short.

          • Black Flag® says:

            Maybe you might add Japan, but it is an economic basket case, in many ways worse then the US … and any attempt by Japan to be the hegemony will invoke a response by China so severe… well, the Japanese ain’t that stupid.

            • Hiya, BF……We need to understand or agree on two concepts here….I was not talking about global hegemony ( although regional does often turn to global aspirations ) and you and I are going to have to come to some agreement on hegemony….you are always pointing to military expenditures and the size of military to project hegemony. This is where you and I will disagree…..hegemony is not military power alone nor the size of a defense or military budget.

              I contend that economics can be and will be a more powerful weapon that 10,000 nukes pointed at you. I think that you are going to see three powers and China is not going to be one of them…I see them collapsing within a decade. This sphere that we live on… going to be regional again….it is fast going that way. I am not even looking at military presence.

              So…can we agree that hegemony takes many forms…military being one of them in the projection of power…but these times have changed.

              • “I was not talking about global hegemony”

                That’s the only one that counts.

                Regional hegemonies are utterly minor in comparison – and are incredibly unlikely to be significant.

                There is no way and no how a regional would bother with “global” aspirations. It simply makes no sense. It is economically disastrous. The only way the US became such was by the fluke of the way the world wars turned out – leaving the rest of the world in carnage and destruction and the US essentially untouched.

                There is no way a modern war would do this again. Every major power has global reach in its destructive capability. The next world war will utterly touch everyone.

                So “global” aspirations will not exist. Global interests perhaps, but that isn’t hegemony.

                And no, there is no such thing as economic hegemony – it is a perversion of economic theory to believe this. Trade is not a weapon, it is a choice

                Without military hegemony to back it up, economic sanctions are moot

                Thus, it is ALWAYS a military hegemony

                England’s hegemony was absolutely based on her navy. Without the navy, there was no hegemony.

                US hegemony is absolutely based on US military power. As that become muted, so does the hegemony.

                Military spending absolutely is the measure. Expenditures in military absolutely and directly makes military power.

                Look, see Russia. It don’t matter how many tanks, men, ships, planes you have if you have no money to maintain them or fuel them or operate them.

              • All but one regional hegemony will be insignificant.

                They are such because all but one butts up against another regional hegemony.

                Russia faces Europe and China and Japan
                China faces Russia India and Japan.
                Japan faces Russia and China.

                None can “maneuver” in one flank without exposing the other flanks. Unlike the present US global hegemony which could operate in 3 theaters simultaneously – unprecedented.

                The only regional hegemony that will have more range will be the US – it will continue to dominate the Americas uncontested. We will see in the future if the US once again is unsatisfied with that as it was in 1914.

              • So much for having one of the largest armies if you can’t afford it.


  26. Just A Citizen says:

    Wow, Baseball snuck one by me. I must hang my head in shame because as a fan of the game I did not know that the ASTROS were now in the AL West. What the hell are both Texas teams doing in the same league??

    Just another slight to Texas perhaps??? Heh, heh, heh.

    • Hell, JAC…..and it wasn’t even a fast ball……the Astros came over last year…..AND I hear rumbles of another Texas team starting in baseball to be part of the AL West, from San Antonio….I also hear of another NBA Team wanting to start up in Texas..which would make four and another NHL team which would make two.

      As to the Astros……..the Rangers needed another team to dwell in the cellar with them.

  27. gmanfortruth says:

    Many of you will remember my stating that Saudi Arabia funded the 911 attacks and that info will be released soon with the declassification of 28 pages of the 911 commission report. This will happen.

    I have (as well as Black Flag, I believe) have always contended that 911 was an inside job. Build 7 should have never come down, ever, due to fire, but that’s another issue. Here’s a good article with a bunch of videos worth watching on the subject of the release of this information about 911:

    • Just A Citizen says:


      This accusation needs to recognize the difference between individuals within the Saudi ruling class and the official govt. Nobody has ever disputed that money came from some high ups in the family.

  28. gmanfortruth says:

    Socialized medicine, just what the Liberals asked for (they should have been more careful)

    • Come on Gman,…..this was a no brainer. Even the countries out there that have single payer are refusing treatments and are letting the aged die.

  29. Just A Citizen says:

    Good Mooooooooooooooo rning fellow SUFA cattle.

    Lets explore the notion that any person or group that decides to retaliate against another has zero responsibility for the outcome.

    So the Blackfeet start shooting white folks, it is the fault of white folks.

    The Scotts start killing French, it is the Normans fault.

    Where and when, under what conditions does this standard cease to apply???

    • “Lets explore the notion that any person or group that decides to retaliate against another has zero responsibility for the outcome.”

      By what principle are you invoking here? To you, the principle of defense has been vacated.

      To equate ancient grievous action in attempt to validate action occurring presently is extreme intellectual dishonesty.

      I punched you in the nose 10 years ago, with you justifying your punch today is bizarre.

      You responding to my punching you in the nose right now, with me then blaming you for the blood is your root argument here – equally bizarre.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        I am confused by your answer. My statement was based on the principle you included in your argument that the Palestinians have NO blame nor RESPONSIBILITY for what happens to them when they fire rockets into Israel.

        So this is actually not my argument but yours.

        If it is not then you need to provide a better explanation.

        • JAC,

          Your argument is victim blame.

          You blame a response to a provocation to have the same responsibility

          We do not have the same argument at all.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            So your argument seems to now rest on the assertion that since the Palestinians, and some neighbors, never accepted Israel’s existence, and because there has never been a cessation of violence long enough, the Palestinians are still just retaliating.

            So now answer my question relative to your viewpoint. HOW LONG must peace or some stable situation exist before the “oppressed” are not justified in their “retaliation”?

            Why is there even an expiration date, if one does exist?

            What is the mechanism for identifying such a point in time?

            And for the record, I do not blame the victims. No matter how many times you repeat this lie it won’t make it true.

            • “So your argument seems to now rest on the assertion that since the Palestinians, and some neighbors, never accepted Israel’s existence, and because there has never been a cessation of violence long enough, the Palestinians are still just retaliating.”

              You have serious comprehension issues.

              The argument is that since the criminal State is seizing territory and practicing ethnic cleansing upon a population to expect it is the fault of the victims is perverse.

              ” HOW LONG must peace or some stable situation exist before the “oppressed” are not justified in their “retaliation”?”

              There is no time limit, long or small. How long must you go without your house, stolen by thieves, family murdered, before you no longer seek retribution and justice?

              You do so blame the victims because you do not assign the responsibility to the perpetrator.

              “Just-World Phenomenon”

              The Just-World Phenomenon is when witnesses of an injustice, in order to rationalize it, will search for things that the victim did to deserve it. This eases their anxiety and allows them to feel safe; if they avoid that behavior, injustice will not happen to them. This peace of mind comes at the expense of blaming the victim.

              • Just A Citizen says:


                It is you who is not comprehending simple English here. I clearly stated that EVERYONE is responsible for their actions.

                This statement contains no judgment about right or wrong. That is all I have ever said.

                Israel has not acted in good faith since the UN gave them this piece of land. The resulting actions against them are their responsibility.

                And if you read my prior post more closely you will see that I used the same statement of responsibility for both justified and unjustified actions.

                ALL the parties in the region are responsible for their own actions.

                How often do you quote Ghandi and his non violent revolution? Yet you do not assign any “responsibility” to the Palestinians, well actually the PLO and now Hamas, for their decision to follow a different path than Ghandi.

                It is not a matter of assigning BLAME for the conflict in the region. But those parties who take action, especially violent action, are responsible for those actions.

                You posted the other day how Israel was falling into the trap of attacking Gaza. Well why cannot the same be said of Hamas or the Palestinian leadership?

                Simple claiming that it must always be the stronger power does not make it true. After all, Ghandi was not the hegemonic power when he stood against Great Britain.

              • Black Flag® says:


                “I clearly stated that EVERYONE is responsible for their actions.”

                To claim there is no right and no wrong is perverse. Again, it blaming the victim for his reaction to the violence he is subjected to by the aggressor

                By making both parties equal, you invalidate the victim and promote the perpetrator

                “How often do you quote Ghandi and his non violent revolution?”

                This is not a revolution. This is ethnic cleansing
                “It is better to be violent, if there is violence at our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence.”

                “I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence… I would rather … resort to arms in order to defend… than that she should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness to [one’s] own dishonor.”

                “I have, therefore, said more than once….that, if we do not know how to defend ourselves, our women and our places of worship by the force of suffering, i.e., nonviolence, we must, if we are men, be at least able to defend all these by fighting.”

                Mahatma Gandhi

                “Well why cannot the same be said of Hamas or the Palestinian leadership?”
                It is quite true that the Palestinians have been badly led.
                Arafat was not Palestinian.
                Hamas is an Israeli creation.

                “After all, Ghandi was not the hegemonic power when he stood against Great Britain.”

                You are violently mistaken in your review.

                It was GB who stopped, not the Indians. And when GB stopped so did the discourse and violence.

                It is ALWAYS the hegemony acts, the weaker power REACTS

                As long as GB acted, the Indians reacted. The moment GB ceased, only then did the Indians change their methodology.

              • Just A Citizen says:


                Oh, and you previously ridiculed me for claiming that a response to an affront made decades ago was justified, but now you say that there is in fact no time limit.

                So which is it in your view point? Explain further please.

              • Black Flag® says:


                No, I asked you what is your time limit after your house has been stolen or destroyed and your family murdered for you to move on and accept such injustice.

  30. @ BF ( since this will tie in ) You stated…. “I punched you in the nose 10 years ago, with you justifying your punch today is bizarre”

    You often state that conflicts are deeply rooted in the past… seems to me that this statement contradicts that.

    • The conflict is NOT “deeply rooted”.

      The historical fact, sir, is that Jews lived in Palestine for hundreds of years peacefully beside Muslims.

      It is current issue, right now of Zionists doing ethnic cleansing of the indigenous peoples.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Seems like the Palestians are much like our American Indians. Immigration precluded the existence of the State of Israel. When the State was declared, 6 Arab nations attacked, leading to their defeat and the eviction of the Palestinians. Unlike our Indians, the Palestinian group Hamas has declared that Israel be wiped from the face of earth. They are the elected leaders of the Palestinians.

        Hamas, instead of trying to make life better for the Palestinians have instead spent money on missiles and a vast network of deep tunnels. The purpose of both is to kill the Jews in Israel (although not all Israelis are Jews). In response, Israel is now conducting a ground offensive to destroy the tunnels and missiles. Having read some recent history on this matter, Hamas needs to go away and quit putting the innocent in danger (a typical Nazi propaganda tool). The only way Israel will not exist is total destruction, but that’s not going to happen. The terrorist actions of the PLO and Hamas will disallow the Palestinians to ever return to the land they were evicted from.

        Violence will never accomplish anything there. The methods used by Hamas will only get more innocents killed. Apparently, they seem to think that doing the same thing over and over will achieve a different result. Their tactics are the actions of the insane. Only peace and accepting the reality that Israel is there to stay will ever solve this problem. Peace will never happen, just more death because one group can’t figure out they lost, plain and simple.

        I wonder, would things be different had not Arab States attacked Israel on occasions? I would venture to say possibly. The rift between the Jews and the Palestinians started long before 1948. I also have not seen one article that stated that the Palestinians were ever in control of this area, in 1948 is was run by the Ottoman empire (Turks).

        I just hope that reason will take hold and the violence will stop. Doubt it.

        • “Seems like the Palestians are much like our American Indians.”

          Similar in the genocide, but not similar in ideology.

          Immigration was a tactic which, by the way, failed. Jews remained less than 20% of the population. The idea was to create a population mass enough to invoke the State, but by the end of the WW2 it was shown not to be possible.

          “When the State was declared, 6 Arab nations attacked, leading to their defeat and the eviction of the Palestinians.”

          Bullshit. More sickening revisionism.
          Zionists were at war against the Arabs since 1946. The Arab nations were held in check by British colonial military power – and it matters not if there were “6 nations”. The combined military strength of all six was puny – the British made this so on purpose so not to give rise to revolt against the British.

          You pretend it was 1 against many – it wasn’t.

          “Unlike our Indians, the Palestinian group Hamas has declared that Israel be wiped from the face of earth. They are the elected leaders of the Palestinians.”

          Zionists long declared, decades before that the Palestinians needed to be wiped out.

          PS: Hamas was created by Israel.

          “Hamas, instead of trying to make life better for the Palestinians have instead spent money on missiles and a vast network of deep tunnels.”

          Again more idiocy. You demand upon others what you would not accept – surrender.


        • “the rift between Jews and Palestinians started well before 1948”

          Yeah, in 1946 … geez….

          Your historical knowledge is pathetic.

          So your utterly toopsy turvy thinking is because Palestine was a province of the Ottoman Empire, and peaceful, it should be given to Russian Zionists and the indigenous people should be expelled by force.

          The mental disease of many Americans is astounding.

        • For the classically historically ignorant

          1948 War

          Israel: 29,677 initially rising to 117,500 by March 1949. This includes the entire military personnel count—both combat units and logistical units.Israel: 29,677 initially rising to 117,500 by March 1949. This includes the entire military personnel count—both combat units and logistical units.

          Egypt: 10,000 initially, rising to 20,000[citation needed]
          Iraq: 3,000 initially, rising to 15,000–18,000[citation needed]
          Syria: 2,500–5,000[citation needed]
          Transjordan: 8,000–12,000[citation needed]
          Lebanon: 1,000
          Saudi Arabia: 800–1,200 (Egyptian command)
          Yemen: 300[citation needed]
          Arab Liberation Army: 3,500–6,000.

          At maximum, not half of the forces of the Israelis

          By September 1947 the Haganah had “10,489 rifles, 702 light machine-guns, 2,666 submachine guns, 186 medium machine-guns, 672 two-inch mortars and 92 three-inch (76 mm) mortars”.[40]

          Importing arms

          In 1946, Ben-Gurion decided that the Yishuv would probably have to defend itself against both the Palestinian Arabs and neighbouring Arab states and accordingly began a “massive, covert arms acquisition campaign in the West”, and acquired many more during the first few months of hostilities.

          The Yishuv managed to clandestinely amass arms and military equipment abroad for transfer to Palestine once the British blockade was lifted. In the United States, Yishuv agents purchased three B-17 bombers, one of which bombed Cairo in July 1948, some C-46 transport planes, and dozens of half-tracks, which were repainted and defined as “agricultural equipment”. In Western Europe, Haganah agents amassed fifty 65mm French mountain guns, twelve 120mm mortars, ten H-35 light tanks, and a large number of half-tracks. By mid-May or thereabouts the Yishuv had purchased from Czechoslovakia 25 Messerschmidt ME-109s, 200 heavy machine guns, 5,021 light machine guns, 24,500 rifles, and 52 million rounds of ammunition, enough to equip all units, but short of heavy arms.[41] The airborne arms smuggling missions from Czechoslovakia were codenamed Operation Balak.

          The Yishuv also had “a relatively advanced arms producing capacity”, that between October 1947 and July 1948 “produced 3 million 9 mm bullets, 150,000 Mills grenades, 16,000 submachine guns (Sten Guns) and 210 three-inch (76 mm) mortars”,[40] along with a few “Davidka” mortars, which had been indigenously designed and produced. They were inaccurate but had a spectacularly loud explosion that demoralized the enemy. A large amount of the munitions used by the Israelis came from the Ayalon Institute, a clandestine bullet factory underneath kibbutz Ayalon, which produced about 2.5 million bullets for Sten guns. The munitions produced by the Ayalon Institute were said to have been the only supply that was not in shortage during the war. Locally-produced explosives were also plentiful. After Israel’s independence, these clandestine arms manufacturing operations no longer had to be concealed, and were moved above ground. All of the Haganah’s weapons-manufacturing was centralized and later became Israel Military Industries.[42]


          In November 1947, the Haganah was an underground paramilitary force that had existed as a highly organized, national force, since the Arab riots of 1920–21, and throughout the riots of 1929, Great Uprising of 1936–39,[40] and World War 2. It had a mobile force, the HISH, which had 2,000 full-time fighters (men and women) and 10,000 reservists (all aged between 18 and 25) and an elite unit, the Palmach composed of 2,100 fighters and 1,000 reservists. The reservists trained three or four days a month[citation needed] and went back to civilian life the rest of the time. These mobile forces could rely on a garrison force, the HIM (Heil Mishmar, lit. Guard Corps), composed of people aged over 25. The Yishuv’s total strength was around 35,000 with 15,000 to 18,000 fighters and a garrison force of roughly 20,000.[40][43]


          The Irgun, whose activities were considered by MI5 to be terrorism, was monitored by the British.[44] There were also several thousand men and women who had served in the British Army in World War II who did not serve in any of the underground militias but would provide valuable military experience during the war.[45] Walid Khalidi says the Yishuv had the additional forces of the Jewish Settlement Police, numbering some 12,000, the Gadna Youth Battalions, and the armed settlers.[46] Few of the units had been trained by December 1947.[40] On 5 December 1947, conscription was instituted for all men and women aged between 17 and 25 and by the end of March, 21,000 had been conscripted.[47] On 30 March, the call-up was extended to men and single women aged between 26 to 35. Five days later, a General Mobilization order was issued for all men under 40.[48]

          By March 1948, the Yishuv had a numerical superiority, with 35,780 mobilised and deployed troops for the Haganah,[49][50] 3,000 of Stern and Irgun, and a few thousand armed settlers.[51]

          Arab forces

          According to Benny Morris, by the end of 1947, the Palestinians “had a healthy and demoralising respect for the Yishuv’s military power” and if it came to battle the Palestinians expected to lose.

          By March 1948, the effective number of Arab combatants numbered 12,000.[52] The Yishuv had a numerical superiority.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Reads like Wikilpedia, which is what I read quite a bit this morning. Based on your unlinked post, the Jews weren’t stupid and prepared for a war.

            • Gman,

              Absolutely right – they were ready to make war because they had the plan long prepared to achieve the Ersatz Israel. As I’ve already quoted from the Zionist doctrine, they would expel the Arabs and they knew do so required violence.

              Vladimir Jabotinsky (the founder and advocate of the Zionist terrorist organizations), Quoted by Maxime Rodinson in Peuple Juif ou Problem Juif. (Jewish People or Jewish Problem):

              “Has any People ever been seen to give up their territory of their own free will? In the same way, the Arabs of Palestine will not renounce their sovereignty without violence.”

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Sounds like the folks have been conquered. That was then. To take one of your best arguments about unemployment snd moving to where there is work, apply to those who have been conquered snd face genocide (as you proclaim). Move away from the genocide to a safer place, they ain’t getting there shit back, move on and live to fight another day. To remain , based on your claims, is suicide.

              • So, you would have advised the countries conquered by Nazis to have given up, since “that was then”.

                No, Gman, it is now and it is a war crime.

                Again, your hypocrisy. You advise others to do what you would not.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                I didn’t say quit, I said live and fight another day. You sound just like the typical MSNBC liberal whiny asses every day, you don’t read posts very well, you are so book smart your an idiot. No wonder you want cheap immigrant labor, you don’t know which end of a hammer is to hit the nail with, genius my ass! Narcisstic sociopath who could hurt himself patting himself on the back. Don’t hurt yourself kissing the mirror.

              • Black Flag® says:


                But that is what they are doing.

                When do you think they should pick up the fight?

                If not now, when?

              • PS: They are fighting another day, today and will fight tomorrow too. Yet, you complain. Yet, you tell them this is what they must do.

                You are quite confused, aren’t you?

              • gmanfortruth says:

                You claim they are being ethnically cleansed, not I. If you are correct, which I doubt, then getting to a safer place is a wise, life saving choice. They can stay, I tell them nothing, because they don’t hear or know I exist. If your correct about the cleansing, then you want them to stay and get wiped out, so be it.

                When overwhelmed, move on, come back stronger later. Or die.

              • Black Flag® says:


                Look at the map I posted. What do you call it?

                Further, the Zionists clearly stated that is their goal and they are acting on it.

                Are you so blind to reality, you cannot see?

              • Black Flag® says:


                So in your upside-down wisdom, you want them to surrender, acquire an army and nukes, then attack.

                This is your peace plan.

              • Black Flag® says:


                And once again, you ask of them what you would not do


  31. @ BF…you stated above “And no, there is no such thing as economic hegemony – it is a perversion of economic theory to believe this. Trade is not a weapon, it is a choice”

    Agreed as far as trade is concerned with reservations. Trade does become a weapon if denial of trade creates consequence….example: Hypothetically speaking here….if, through regional agreements where the land of BF controls a natural resource to the point that it dictates price and demand……and the land of the Colonel needs that natural resource but all sources are dried up because you control it… then becomes a weapon to me. You do not have to fire a shot to bring me to my knees…..if your desire is to control a resource I need for survival. You are then in a position to demand capitulation if I want that resource or you can dictate trade terms to me. I can either accept or reject….but the gun is still at my throat…..

    Damn…..more later.

    • No such thing occurs. Economic resources are fungible and dispersed. There is no economic resource – not one – which is singularly located.

      Further, such denial requires armed force – again – no matter what, hegemony requires military power

    • For your scenario to occur, a coalition of nations need to operate in unison. All producing nations would have to agree to act against “you”.

      What scenario would promote such a thing where nearly every nation refuses trade and willingly suffer a loss of their own economic well being?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Excuse me, but wasn’t it you who raised the prospect that the USA was RESPONSIBLE for Japan attacking us because the USA had halted trade of key goods??

        How does this now square with your current argument?

        • “Excuse me, but wasn’t it you who raised the prospect that the USA was RESPONSIBLE for Japan attacking us because the USA had halted trade of key goods??
          How does this now square with your current argument?”

          Try reading the argument, not cherry pick.

          I said without military hegemony, economic sanction is moot.

          If there was no US Navy, the US could not “halt” trade.

          By its naval forces, no oil was flowing to Japan.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            The USA was NOT the Global Hegemonic power of that time. The USA did try to assert regional dominance in the South Pacific but Japan and Russia were already players.

            I am not aware of our Navy acting to stop oil from flowing to Japan. And what about all the other materials they required? Like the metal they were getting from the USA until we imposed an embargo.

            • “The USA was NOT the Global Hegemonic power of that time. The USA did try to assert regional dominance in the South Pacific but Japan and Russia were already players.”

              Au contraire.

              In alliance with the British fleet, it was the hegemonic power.

              Historical Background

              With an eye to the worsening situation in Europe, the United States authorized expansion to a “two ocean Navy” in July 1940, which led to rapid and massive increases in numbers of ships and personnel. The Navy’s ranks totaled 126,418 in September 1939. By the time Pearl Harbor was attacked on 4 December 1941, this had more than doubled to 325,095. By the end of the war, that number would increase more than 10 times to over 3.4 million. In that final total, from 2 September 1945, 93,064 were women.

              December 1941 — 291,359 including 1,500 pilots.

              The Imperial Japanese Navy in World War II was the second most powerful navy in the Pacific War, after the United States Navy

              Japan (Entire war)
              Battleships 12
              Fleet carriers 21
              Light carriers 4
              Cruisers 44
              Destroyers 169
              Submarines 171

              USA (just 1941)
              Battleships 17
              Carriers, Fleet 7
              Carriers, Escort 12
              Cruisers 37
              Destroyers 171
              Submarines 112
              Mine Warfare 135
              Patrol 100
              Auxiliary 210

              British Navy
              The Royal Navy, still the largest in the world in September 1939, included:

              15 Battleships & battlecruisers, of which only two were post-World War 1. Five ‘King George V’ class battleships were building.

              7 Aircraft carriers. One was new and five of the planned six fleet carriers were under construction. There were no escort carriers.

              66 Cruisers, mainly post-World War 1 with some older ships converted for AA duties. Including cruiser-minelayers, 23 new ones had been laid down.

              184 Destroyers of all types. Over half were modern, with 15 of the old ‘V’ and ‘W’ classes modified as escorts. Under construction or on order were 32 fleet destroyers and 20 escort types of the ‘Hunt’ class.

              60 Submarines, mainly modern with nine building.

              45 escort and patrol vessels with nine building, and the first 56 ‘Flower’ class corvettes on order to add to the converted ‘V’ and ‘W’s’ and ‘Hunts’. However, there were few fast, long-endurance convoy escorts.

              Commonwealth Navies

              Included in the Royal Navy totals were:

              Royal Australian Navy – six cruisers, five destroyers and two sloops;

              Royal Canadian Navy – six destroyers;

              Royal Indian Navy – six escort and patrol vessels;

              Royal New Zealand Navy, until October 1941 the New Zealand Division of the Royal Navy – two cruisers and two sloops.

              In 1940 Japan invaded French Indochina in an effort to embargo all imports into China, including war supplies purchased from the U.S. This move prompted the United States to embargo all oil exports and freezing Japanese assets in U.S. banks, leading the Imperial Japanese Navy to estimate that it had less than two years of bunker oil remaining and to support the existing plans to seize oil resources in the Dutch East Indies.

              The United States embargoed scrap metal shipments to Japan and closed the Panama Canal to Japanese shipping.[7] This particularly hit Japan’s economy hard because 74.1% of Japan’s scrap iron came from the United States, documented in 1938. Japan’s main source for copper was also heavily dependent on American trade; 93% of Japan’s copper in 1939 came from the United States.[

              “I am not aware of our Navy acting to stop oil from flowing to Japan.”

              There was no interdiction. Simply, the Indonesians refused to sell. The US ordered the Dutch government in exile to obey the embargo, ending the Indonesian exports to Japan.

              • December 1941 — 291,359 including 1,500 pilots. *** This was the Japanese navy – missed placing a title above it.

              • Just A Citizen says:


                OK, so lets review your original claim that the USA caused Japan’s attack.

                Since Japan was acting against the US and its allies due to them supporting China, how is it that the USA is the initiator in this?

                And now you are claiming hegemonic power because one nation acts with another. Yet the definition of hegemony involves a single power.

                Perhaps it is the overuse of the word Hegemony that causes the confusion.

                Why not simply deal with projections of power and other such more descriptive and meaningful terms?

              • Black Flag® says:


                “Since Japan was acting against the US and its allies due to them supporting China, how is it that the USA is the initiator in this?”

                How was Japan acting against USA or its allies?

                Japan invaded China. US had no treaty at all with China for defense or anything.
                From the beginning the United States considered Japan the aggressor, but refused to take any direct action beyond issuing diplomatic denunciations, sending small amounts of aid to the Chinese government, and imposing very limited economic sanctions against Japan

                US had no real interest in the Sino conflict. For the pre-war years, the US shrugged.

                Only when Britain was under threat of capitulating to the Nazis did the US begin its war footing and the necessary intrigue to bring the US into the war politically. The “anti-war” mentality was overwhelming, and Roosevelt had made a political promise that was suicide to reverse.

                The opportunity to exploit the Japanese in China offered such a path politically.

                The US were actively interdicting German naval units and escorting British convoys under the flag of neutrality trying to goad Germany into a major blunder. It didn’t work.

                The German/Japan alliance was such a chance. If Japan, who had no interest in US territories, could be -somehow- induced into attacking US interests, the fall of the dominoes would be solve Roosevelt’s problem.

                Hitler fell for the bait. Thinking Japan would reciprocate and declare war on Russia, aiding the German Army bogged down after the Fall offensive, Hitler declared war on the US.

                Roosevelt was successful.

                He abandoned the Pacific and sent the troops across the Altantic. The Pacific was essentially on its own.

                “Why not simply deal with projections of power and other such more descriptive and meaningful terms?”

                Fair enough.

            • JAC…some time back, I already posted the history of Japan and its growing hegemony starting in the late 20’s and 30’s…the conquering of regions and holdings greater than anything the United States has done….ever. The raping and pillaging of many countries for their resources…..Japan was already at war with most of the world…just not us. Dutch Harbor and oil did not start anything with Japan…..the US was beginning to buildup to be able to fight Japan because war was inevitable,

              The United States started embargoes ay the request of many nations. We did not have a navy big enough to enforce anything against Japan….we did not have an army big enough to enforce territorial gain….so……..the US did not start the war with Japan, nor did it start the war with Germany nor did it start the war with Korea. I will end there….

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Here comes the fairy dust bullshit from Mr, Neverwrong. 🙄 Get ready!

              • Just A Citizen says:


                Mooooooo back at you Sir.

                I know and understand. I was doing a little fishing…….. 😉

              • Black Flag® says:

                “We did not have a navy big enough to enforce anything against Japan’


                The US had the largest navy in the Pacfic bar none.

              • Black Flag® says:


                Oh such intellectual blindness.

                The Pacific is not a land battle.

                It has been well documented that Roosevelt saw an opportunity to enter the war – he could not politically enter it directly, and required the indirect route.

                By goading Japan, he calculated that Germany would follow. They did. He had his war.

                In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.
                Franklin D. Roosevelt

              • Black Flag® says:

                What nations demanded an embargo?
                Not Holland.
                Not UK.
                Not Japan.
                Not French Indochina.

                Oh, China. That is your “lots” argument?

              • Black Flag® says:

                “Japan was already at war with most of the world…just not us. Dutch Harbor and oil did not start anything with Japan”

                Historical Dumbfoundary.

                Japan was at war with most of the world? Who?

                Nothing but utter nonsense.

  32. 1. “There is a huge gap between us (Jews) and our enemies, not just in ability but in morality, culture, sanctity of life, and conscience. They are our neighbors here, but it seems as if at a distance of a few hundred meters away, there are people who do not belong to our continent, to our world, but actually belong to a different galaxy.” Israeli president Moshe Katsav. The Jerusalem Post, May 10, 2001

    2. “The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more”…. Ehud Barak, Prime Minister of Israel at the time – August 28, 2000. Reported in the Jerusalem Post August 30, 2000

    3. ” [The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs.” Menahim Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, “Begin and the Beasts”. New Statesman, 25 June 1982.

    4. “The Palestinians” would be crushed like grasshoppers … heads smashed against the boulders and walls.” ” Isreali Prime Minister (at the time) in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988

    5. “When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.” Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.

    6. “How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to.” Golda Maier, March 8, 1969.

    7. “There was no such thing as Palestinians, they never existed.” Golda Maier Israeli Prime Minister June 15, 1969

    8. “The thesis that the danger of genocide was hanging over us in June 1967 and that Israel was fighting for its physical existence is only bluff, which was born and developed after the war.” Israeli General Matityahu Peled, Ha’aretz, 19 March 1972.

    9. David Ben Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): “If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti – Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?” Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.

    10. Ben Gurion also warned in 1948 : “We must do everything to insure they ( the Palestinians) never do return.” Assuring his fellow Zionists that Palestinians will never come back to their homes. “The old will die and the young will forget.”

    11. “We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves.” Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983.

    12. “Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it.” – Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001, to Shimon Peres, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio. (Certainly the FBI’s cover-up of the Israeli spy ring/phone tap scandal suggests that Mr. Sharon may not have been joking.)

    13. “We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel… Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours.” Rafael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces – Gad Becker, Yediot Ahronot 13 April 1983, New York Times 14 April 1983.

    14. “We must do everything to ensure they [the Palestinian refugees] never do return” David Ben-Gurion, in his diary, 18 July 1948, quoted in Michael Bar Zohar’s Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet, Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157.

    15. ” … we should prepare to go over to the offensive with the aim of smashing Lebanon, Trans-jordan and Syria… The weak point in the Arab coalition is Lebanon [for] the Moslem regime is artificial and easy to undermine. A Christian state should be established… When we smash the [Arab] Legions strength and bomb Amman, we will eliminate Transjordan, too, and then Syria will fall. If Egypt still dares to fight on, we shall bomb Port Said, Alexandria, and Cairo.” ” David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.

    16. “We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population.” Israel Koenig, “The Koenig Memorandum”

    17. “Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.” Moshe Dayan, address to the Technion, Haifa, reported in Haaretz, April 4, 1969.

    18. “We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?’ Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said ‘Drive them out!'” Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979.

    19. Rabin’s description of the conquest of Lydda, after the completion of Plan Dalet. “We shall reduce the Arab population to a community of woodcutters and waiters” Uri Lubrani, PM Ben-Gurion’s special adviser on Arab Affairs, 1960. From “The Arabs in Israel” by Sabri Jiryas.

    20. “There are some who believe that the non-Jewish population, even in a high percentage, within our borders will be more effectively under our surveillance; and there are some who believe the contrary, i.e., that it is easier to carry out surveillance over the activities of a neighbor than over those of a tenant. [I] tend to support the latter view and have an additional argument:…the need to sustain the character of the state which will henceforth be Jewish…with a non-Jewish minority limited to 15 percent. I had already reached this fundamental position as early as 1940 [and] it is entered in my diary.” Joseph Weitz, head of the Jewish Agency’s Colonization Department. From Israel: an Apartheid State by Uri Davis, p.5.

    21. “Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours… Everything we don’t grab will go to them.” Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998.

    22. “It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism,colonialization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands.” Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, of 14 July 1972.

    23. “Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment… Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.” Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist Organization, speaking of the Arabs of Palestine,Complete Diaries, June 12, 1895 entry.

    24. “One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail.” — Rabbi Yaacov Perrin, Feb. 27, 1994 [Source: N.Y. Times, Feb. 28, 1994, p. 1]

    25. “We Jews, we are the destroyers and will remain the destroyers. Nothing you can do will meet our demands and needs. We will forever destroy because we want a world of our own.” (You Gentiles, by Jewish Author Maurice Samuels, p. 155).

    26. “We will have a world government whether you like it or not. The only question is whether that government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” (Jewish Banker Paul Warburg, February 17, 1950, as he testified before the U.S. Senate).

    27. “We will establish ourselves in Palestine whether you like it or not…You can hasten our arrival or you can equally retard it. It is however better for you to help us so as to avoid our constructive powers being turned into a destructive power which will overthrow the world.” (Chaim Weizmann, Published in “Judische Rundschau,” No. 4, 1920)

    28. “Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves.” – Israeli prime Minister Menachem Begin in a speech to the Knesset [Israeli Parliament] quoted by Amnon Kapeliouk, “Begin and the Beasts,” New Statesman, June 25, 1982

    29. “Tell me, do the evil men of this world have a bad time? They hunt and catch whatever they feel like eating. They don’t suffer from indigestion and are not punished by Heaven. I want Israel to join that club. Maybe the world will then at last begin to fear us instead of feeling sorry. Maybe they will start to tremble, to fear our madness instead of admiring our nobility. Let them tremble; let them call us a mad state. Let them understand that we are a savage country, dangerous to our surroundings, not normal, that we might go wild, that we might start World War Three just like that, or that we might one day go crazy and burn all the oil fields in the Middle East. Even if you’ll prove to me that the present war is a dirty immoral war, I don’t care. We shall start another war, kill and destroy more and more. And do you know why it is all worth it? Because it seems that this war has made us more unpopular among the civilized world.We’ll hear no more of that nonsense about the unique Jewish morality. No more talk about a unique people being a light upon the nations. No more uniqueness and no more sweetness and light. Good riddance.” –Former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon

    30. “The Modern Age is the Jewish Age, and the twentieth century, in particular, is the Jewish Century.” -Yuri Slezkine, Professor of History at University of California, Berkeley, “The Jewish Century”; Princeton University Press

    31. “What shocks and worries me is the narrow-mindedness and the shortsightedness of our military leaders. They seem to presume that the State of Israel may or even must-behave in the realm of international relations according to the laws of the jungle- -the long chain of false incidents and hostilities we have invented, and so many clashes we have provoked;” – From Diary of Moshe Sharett, former Primer Minister of Israel in Livia Rokach, Israel’s Sacred Terrorism published 980

    32. Hebrew essayist Achad Ha-Am, after paying a visit to Palestine in 1891: “Abroad we are accustomed to believe that Israel is almost empty; nothing is grown here and that whoever wishes to buy land could come here and buy what his heart desires. In reality, the situation is not like this. Throughout the country it is difficult to find cultivable land which is not already cultivated.”

    33. The Balfour Declaration to Baron Rothchild, on the 2nd of November, 1917: “His Majesty’s Government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

    34. Lord Sydenham, Hansard, House of Lords, 21 June 1922: “If we are going to admit claims on conquest thousands of years ago, the whole world will have to be turned upside down.”

    35. Vladimir Jabotinsky, The Iron Wall, 1923: “Zionist colonization must either be terminated or carried out against the wishes of the native population. This colonization can, therefore, be continued and make progress only under the protection of a power independent of the native population – an iron wall, which will be in a position to resist the pressure to the native population. This is our policy towards the Arabs…”

    36. Vladimir Jabotinsky, founder of Revisionist Zionism (precursor of Likud), The Iron Wall, 1923: “A voluntary reconciliation with the Arabs is out of the question either now or in the future. If you wish to colonize a land in which people are already living, you must provide a garrison for the land, or find some rich man or benefactor who will provide a garrison on your behalf. Or else-or else, give up your colonization, for without an armed force which will render physically impossible any attempt to destroy or prevent this colonization, colonization is impossible, not difficult, not dangerous, but IMPOSSIBLE!… Zionism is a colonization adventure and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force. It is important… to speak Hebrew, but, unfortunately, it is even more important to be able to shoot – or else I am through with playing at colonizing.”

    37. David Ben Gurion, future Prime Minister of Israel, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985: “We must expel Arabs and take their places.”

    38. Joseph Weitz, head of the Jewish Agency’s Colonization Department in 1940. From “A Solution to the Refugee Problem”: “Between ourselves it must be clear that there is no room for both peoples together in this country. We shall not achieve our goal if the Arabs are in this small country. There is no other way than to transfer the Arabs from here to neighboring countries – all of them. Not one village, not one tribe should be left.”

    39. Israeli official Arthur Lourie in a letter to Walter Eytan, director general of the Israeli Foreign Ministry (ISA FM 2564/22). From Benny Morris, “The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem 1947-49”, p. 297: “…if people become accustomed to the large figure and we are actually obliged to accept the return of the refugees, we may find it difficult, when faced with hordes of claimants, to convince the world that not all of these formerly lived in Israeli territory. It would, in any event, seem desirable to minimize the numbers…than otherwise.”

    40. David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben- Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978: “We should prepare to go over to the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria and Sinai.”

    41. David Ben-Gurion, one of the father founders of Israel, described Zionist aims in 1948: “A Christian state should be established [in Lebanon], with its southern border on the Litani river. We will make an alliance with it. When we smash the Arab Legion’s strength and bomb Amman, we will eliminate Transjordan too, and then Syria will fall. If Egypt still dares to fight on, we shall bomb Port Said, Alexandria and Cairo… And in this fashion, we will end the war and settle our forefathers’ account with Egypt, Assyria, and Aram”

    42. [Begin, and Yitzhak Shamir who were members of the party became Prime Ministers.] Albert Einstein, Hanna Arendt and other prominent Jewish Americans, writing in The New York Times, protest the visit to America of Menachem Begin, December 1948: “Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our time is the emergence in the newly created State of Israel of the Freedom Party (Herut), a political party closely akin in its organization, method, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties.”

    43. Martin Buber, Jewish Philosopher, addressed Prime Minister Ben Gurion on the moral character of the state of Israel with reference to the Arab refugees in March 1949. “We will have to face the reality that Israel is neither innocent, nor redemptive. And that in its creation, and expansion; we as Jews, have caused what we historically have suffered; a refugee population in Diaspora.”

    44. Moshe Dayan (Israel Defense and Foreign Minister), on February 12 1952. Radio “Israel.”: “It lies upon the people’s shoulders to prepare for the war, but it lies upon the Israeli army to carry out the fight with the ultimate object of erecting the Israeli Empire.”

    45. Martin Buber, to a New York audience, Jewish Newsletter, June 2, 1958: “When we [followers of the prophetic Judaism] returned to Palestine…the majority of Jewish people preferred to learn from Hitler rather than from us.”

    46. Aba Eban (the Israeli Foreign Minister) stated arrogantly. New York Times June 19, 1967: “If the General Assembly were to vote by 121 votes to 1 in favor of “Israel” returning to the armistice lines– (pre June 1967 borders) “Israel” would refuse to comply with the decision.”

    47. Dr. Israel Shahak, Chairperson of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights, and a survivor of the Bergen Belsen concentration camp, Commenting on the Israeli military’s Emergency Regulations following the 1967 War. Palestine, vol. 12, December 1983: “Hitler’s legal power was based upon the ‘Enabling Act’, which was passed quite legally by the Reichstag and which allowed the Fuehrer and his representatives, in plain language, to be what they wanted, or in legal language, to issue regulations having the force of law. Exactly the same type of act was passed by the Knesset [Israeli’s Parliament] immediately after the 1067 conquest granting the Israeli governor and his representatives the power of Hitler, which they use in Hitlerian manner.”

    48. Joseph Weitz, Director of the Jewish National Fund, the Zionist agency charged with acquiring Palestinian land, Circa 194. Machover Israca, January 5, 1973 /p.2: “The only solution is Eretz Israel [Greater Israel], or at least Western Eretz Israel [all the land west of Jordan River], without Arabs. There is no room for compromise on this point … We must not leave a single village, not a single tribe.”

    49. Israeli Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, Inferring that killing isn’t murder if the victim is Gentile. Jerusalem Post, June 19,1989: “Jewish blood and a goy’s [gentile’s] blood are not the same.”

    50. Benyamin Netanyahu, then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, former Prime Minister of Israel, tells students at Bar Ilan University, From the Israeli journal Hotam, November 24, 1989: “Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories.”

    51. Former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir declares at a Tel Aviv memorial service for former Likud leaders, November 1990. Jerusalem Domestic Radio Service: “The past leaders of our movement left us a clear message to keep Eretz Israel from the Sea to the Jordan River for future generations, for the mass aliya [immigration], and for the Jewish people, all of whom will be gathered into this country.”

    52. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, quoted in Associated Press, November 16, 2000: “If we thought that instead of 200 Palestinian fatalities, 2,000 dead would put an end to the fighting at a stroke, we would use much more force….”

    53. Ben Gurion: In 1899, Davis Triestsch wrote to Herzl: ” I would suggest to you to come round in time to the “Greater Palestine” program before it is too late… the Basle program must contain the words “Great Palestine” or “Palestine and its neighboring lands” otherwise it’s nonsense. You do not get ten million Jews into a land of 25,000 Km2″. ” The present map of Palestine was drawn by the British mandate. The Jewish people have another map which our youth and adults should strive to fulfill — From the Nile to the Euphrates.”

    54. Vladimir Jabotinsky (the founder and advocate of the Zionist terrorist organizations), Quoted by Maxime Rodinson in Peuple Juif ou Problem Juif. (Jewish People or Jewish Problem): “Has any People ever been seen to give up their territory of their own free will? In the same way, the Arabs of Palestine will not renounce their sovereignty without violence.”

  33. President Carter wrote yesterday:

    This tragedy results from the deliberate obstruction of a promising move toward peace in the region, when a reconciliation agreement among the Palestinian factions was announced in April. This was a major concession by Hamas, in opening Gaza to joint control under a technocratic government that did not include any Hamas members. The new government also pledged to adopt the three basic principles demanded by the Middle East Quartet comprised of the United Nations, the United States, the European Union, and Russia: nonviolence, recognition of Israel, and adherence to past agreements. Tragically, Israel rejected this opportunity for peace and has succeeded in preventing the new government’s deployment in Gaza.

    • No matter what, Israel will never allow peace until Ersatz Israel has been seized and occupied.

      It will provoke, intimidate, terrorize, stall, avoid, instigate – anything and everything until the Zionists achieve their ends.

      This plan has been at work since 1885. The details well documented, and the plan executed. No matter what, until achieved or Zionism crushed, there will be no peace possible.

      • “The Jewish people have another map which our youth and adults should strive to fulfill — From the Nile to the Euphrates.”

      • Just A Citizen says:


        For your statement about the “intentions” of Israel TODAY you need to show us that Israel TODAY is governed by the very same beliefs of those expressed in the past.

        While this does appear to be the motives of some, and maybe the “conservatives” it is certainly not shared by all or maybe even a majority of the populations.

        So why don’t the Palestinians, with Arab support, launch the necessary media and public relations campaign that would solidify the anti Zionists within Israel?

        Wouldn’t this be the more moral and ethical approach rather than using your own as cannon fodder to inflame public outrage against Israel??

        By the way, what is your take on why Hammas did not use its funding sources to arm the “population” against further Israeli aggression?

        • Black Flag® says:


          “For your statement about the “intentions” of Israel TODAY you need to show us that Israel TODAY is governed by the very same beliefs of those expressed in the past.”

          I did. Review the posted map. Review the continuation of settlements. Review the continuation of destruction of Palestinian homes in the West bank.

          Are you so vastly ignorant?

          “While this does appear to be the motives of some, and maybe the “conservatives” it is certainly not shared by all or maybe even a majority of the populations.”

          I agree. There are lots of anti-Zionist Jews. But they have little political power.
          The two major parties in Israel are both Zionists.

          “So why don’t the Palestinians, with Arab support, launch the necessary media and public relations campaign that would solidify the anti Zionists within Israel?”

          They do, but you are deaf as are most Americans.

          You do not hear them, you do not accept the truth, you do not accept the facts.

          “Wouldn’t this be the more moral and ethical approach rather than using your own as cannon fodder to inflame public outrage against Israel??”

          As long as the US funds the criminal State, there is no end to the carnage

          “Many occasions I’ve sat down with Israelis to say, where do you see your country in 10 years time, and work me back, so we can figure out the synergies and the connections between Israel and the rest of the Arab world. No Israeli has ever been able to answer that question.”
          Abdallah II of Jordan

          • Black Flag® says:

          • Black Flag® says:

          • Just A Citizen says:


            “You do not hear them, you do not accept the truth, you do not accept the facts”

            If that was directed at me personally then you are a liar. I use that term only because you know better.

            I have presented enough here that such an accusation should not even enter your mind.

            As for “hearing” them, you post a bunch of politicians making statements against Israel.
            This is not the PR campaign nor peaceful approach by the Palestinians I was alluding to. It is simply the outrage towards Israel. I am not talking about others but the Arab world and the Palestinians themselves. They do not do a good job of capturing the media attention.

            So lets explore that idea further. Why fire rockets on Israel at all? Why not use the media and hundreds of NGO’s to present the Israeli AGGRESSION. This used to be one of the major tools of the PLO, along with their violence. And of course their corruption, which helped destroy the sympathy they were building at the time.

            This goes to my prior comment about being responsible for one’s actions.

            The Palestinian cause has been gaining ground in terms of understanding and sympathy in the world. Even the USA was starting to get a little tougher with Israel. So why do anything to provoke Israel that can then be used to twist the situation around to “We were just defending ourselves” by Israel??

            I do not pretend to know what these people actually think. But it certainly looks as though they think provoking Israel into killing thousands is their best political play. I happen to think other options are available.

            You cannot claim that they are just retaliating with the rocket fire when they have to know the rockets do little except give Israel an excuse. As I mentioned elsewhere, why not take the Ghandi approach?

            Could it be that it is just not in Hammas’ nature?

            Finally we have reached agreement on one particular. As I said earlier, the US must stop funding/supplying weapons to the region. Including Israel. I am not sure, however, that this would allow the violence to stop or the issue to be resolved once and for all. There is always somebody willing to play off the situation to their benefit.

            • Black Flag® says:


              “If that was directed at me personally then you are a liar. I use that term only because you know better.”

              It is directed at you. You do not accept the facts, nor the truth. You promote the perpetrator by deeming the victim.

              I do not accuse lightly.

              I do, thus, accuse nonetheless.

              “I have presented enough here that such an accusation should not even enter your mind.”

              I don’t fall for your weak sophistry. You want the blame to be shared. It isn’t, never was, never will be.

              You pretend to sit on the fence, pretending some sort of shared responsibility.
              Ding Dong – there isn’t. One side is ethnically cleansing and the other is resisting the destruction of their homes, their families, their lives.

              You are deaf. This has been 40 years of atrocity, and still you defend the atrocity.

              If you were not deaf, you would be outraged.
              But you are not.

              “So lets explore that idea further. Why fire rockets on Israel at all?”

              As Gandhi, said, it is better to react with violence then submit to it, because submission will not yield peace.

              Get a brain, JAC.

              The Zionist will not stop until Ersatz Israel is achieved. Get that FACT through your thick skull.

              This plan has been created and executed for over 100 years. It will continue until achievement or disaster.

              ” I am not sure, however, that this would allow the violence to stop or the issue to be resolved once and for all. There is always somebody willing to play off the situation to their benefit.”


              No nation stands by Israel except the US and its puppets.

              Check the UN resolutions.

              It is everyone against Israel except two or three and the others sans US are irrelevant.

              The Human Rights vote in the UN – had one “no”… guess who?

              Those that abstained are all under the umbrella of the US hegemony – it is all they could do as they could not vote “Yes” and provoke the ire of the US, but could not vote “No” out of conscience.

              • Black Flag® says:

                The United Nations General Assembly Resolution 43/177 of 15 December 1988 was a resolution in which the United Nations General Assembly acknowledged the proclamation of the State of Palestine

                The resolution was adopted with 104 votes in favour and 36 abstentions. Israel and the United States were the only states that voted against the resolution.

                So who is this “other” that will play?

              • Black Flag® says:

                The United Nations General Assembly Resolution 43/176 of 15 December 1988 was a resolution in which the General Assembly called for the convening of an International Peace Conference on the Middle East, under the auspices of the United Nations.

                The resolution was adopted with 138 votes in favour and 2 abstentions. Israel and the United States were the only states that voted against the resolution.

                So who is this “other” that will play?

              • Black Flag® says:

                Need I go on?

              • Black Flag® says:

                What am I saying?
                This has been 40 years of atrocity, and still you defend the atrocity.

                No, it has been 70 years of atrocity – but you are still deaf and blind.

              • Black Flag® says:


                ” I am not sure, however, that this would allow the violence to stop or the issue to be resolved once and for all.”

                It would.

                By the fact Israel, by their own admission, is a crazy mad dog with nukes, but now economically vacated without the US, and the Palestinians with decades of State terror in their memory, but sans nukes would force Israel to abandon its Zionist claims and the Palestinians to accept some sort of “deal” or risk nuclear annihilation.

                As you correctly pointed out, most Jews are not Zionists.
                Most Jews want Palestinians to have the same legal status as Jews.
                Most Jews want to end the slaughter of the Palestinians and want to end the terrorism.

                And, so do most Palestinians agree to all of the above.

                Hundreds of years of peaceful coexistence is their history, not the lies promoted by here of the parroting “that they were always fighting”

                The Zionists of America fund the Zionist of Israel by seizing your tax dollars and by indenture of your grandchildren.

                Without that money, Zionism dies.

                It simply cannot survive without State violence, and State violence needs that money. Your money.

                No other nation funds Israel.

                The risk is that the Zionists know they will never hold power if the Palestinians in Israel if Israel is a democracy, just as happened in South Africa with the Blacks vs the Whites.

                Zionists will do everything to prevent this,even under economic vacancy.

                But it is the only path out, even if one suggests allowing the ethnic cleansing of an entire population.

                But a nation like the Soviet Union, in their attempt at the same, utterly failed because one day the money runs out to fund the violence necessary to enforce it, and the terrorized population returns with terrible vengeance.

                The Zionists have pledged the Jews of Israel onto a incredibly dangerous path.
                Failure in their goal risks a terrible disaster.
                Success in their goal risks even a more terrible disaster.

                The US, the idiot bumpkin, cast a terrible quandary of “Tails Israel probably loses, Heads Isreal likely loses” for that nation.

                Time is growing desperately shorter and shorter to undo the quandary.

            • Black Flag® says:

              “As for “hearing” them, you post a bunch of politicians making statements against Israel.”

              Yep, and you will find no politicians other than the US and its puppets saying otherwise and even its puppets, like Ireland and Britain are muted.

              Yet the global community – across the whole spectrum, condemns.

              But because you are so glued to the State that is America, who is so glued to the State that is Israel, your brain is so twisted that the world – essentially united against these atrocities, but impotent against the hegemony of the US – can only condemn with words and not action.

              Pray for yourself when their words become action, JAC.

              • Just A Citizen says:


                Your pig headedness is showing and seriously affecting your eyesight. I was going to provide further evidence of your FALSE accusations but it has become obvious that your ARROGANCE has once again gotten the best of you. So nothing I can say would wake you from your self loving stupor. So I leave you with this:

                I am betting you are the only one on this site that thinks I am condoning or supporting Israel’s behavior, whether now or anytime since the day of its inception.

              • Black Flag® says:


                “I am betting you are the only one on this site that thinks I am condoning or supporting …”

                Why would I be surprised?

                The vast American attitude is sickening, so why would the participants of this site represent something less?

                It is because you are not outraged, JAC.

                A reasoned, learned man would be outraged – you are not.

                Thus, you are neither reasoned nor learned nor both.

              • Black Flag® says:

                *The vast American attitude is sickening, so why would the participants of this site represent something else?*

              • Black Flag® says:

              • Black Flag® says:


                Have the guts to watch this video above?

  34. Just A Citizen says:

    Why do the Palestinians need a better approach to their PR problem? Because the USA must change its views before any real change can occur. And they are LOSING that battle.

    So tell me, what person running for public office in this country is going to go on an Israel bashing rant during their campaign. Who will propose cutting them off when it comes to financial support or aid?

    Elections matter and to those running, polling data matters as well:

    • Just A Citizen says:
    • Black Flag® says:


      “Why do the Palestinians need a better approach to their PR problem?”

      What approach do you council other than the truth?
      Since the truth does not matter to you -as a typical American- what do you want?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        They need to find ways to cut through the fog created by the captured media. They now have greater opportunity thanks to the internet and expansion of independent media. Conduct large peaceful demonstrations, like MLK, let the new media cover the brutality against UNARMED Palestinians. It eliminates the Israeli argument of “collateral damage” in a “defensive response”.

        Sean Hannity this week in Israel, nothing but State sponsored propaganda. The Arab world needs a counter weight to such bull dookey.

        One thing they really, really need is more people like the General’s son, ie JEWS, who will speak the truth in rebuttal to the standard public defenders and propagandists. It is simply to easy to tie almost any Palestinian spokesperson to some support of terrorism and thus use the Strawman to destroy the presentation.

        Sorry it grates on you but it is the reality. And every time they fall into the habit of striking against Israel they damage their chances of making this happen. Cold, hard, not fair but true. In fact South Africa does provide a model. I suggest they start using it.

        Sympathy for the Palestinians was probably the highest when we were exposed to the plight of the refugee camps on the nightly news. This was cutting into Israel’s arguments. Until some nut cases decided to take violent revenge against Israelis. Again, responsibility for one’s actions.

        Often the desire to strike back by hurting someone must be overridden by Reason and the understanding of a “long game”.

        By the way, I had the GUTS to listen to the General’s Son a couple years ago. He had nothing to say that I did not know nor were his conclusions much different than my own.

        Apparently you were not paying attention when I posted here that Israel would never settle for anything less than the “historical Kingdom of David”. Or that the real issue was the Freedom and Liberty of Arabs living within Israel or that this was the REAL challenge. Getting the Jews to accept minority status in a SINGLE Unified State based on Democratic principles.

        That is also why I have stated there is little chance for success. Not until the US Halts its military support and starts placing demands on Israel to change. Sanctions if needed should be on the table.

        Have you not noticed that I complimented Obama on his “rhetoric” in this regard. Unfortunately the man has the spine of an earthworm…………..NONE.

        • Black Flag® says:

          “They need to find ways to cut through the fog created by the captured media”

          Instead of empty words, explain – other than the truth – how they would do this?

          The information is everywhere already. I’ve posted a few. It bounces off of the American mind.

          The do conduct large peaceful demonstrations. They are suppressed and ignored. You don’t even know they do such demonstrations – a demonstration of the fact of blindness.

          “Sean Hannity this week in Israel, nothing but State sponsored propaganda. The Arab world needs a counter weight to such bull dookey.”

          You demand that the Arabs, who have no voice and are ignored in their plea, should – by magic I assume – find such a voice and not be ignored.

          Again I ask, if Americans cannot accept the truth, what do you suggest otherwise?

          You may have known about the General’s son yet I posted it.How is it that me – a radical – was necessary to present it?

          That’s the problem. It is your ilk that is the problem.

          You are not outraged. You blissfully motor around, nod or shake your head, and end up defending the evil and deeming the victim.

          The truth is out there, but if you do not seek it, what do you expect find?
          And few Americans seek the truth – as well exampled here.

          Look, without a doubt the community here on this blog is above the norm. Most of the comments here are thoughtful, though most of the time on irrelevant things, like federal politics and sports.

          Yet! Astoundingly, the issue of Palestine is so beyond their comprehension, the lies so deep, that demonstration of such lies provokes a level of irrationality that is stunning.

          If opinion here is immune to change, what about the 80% of Americans that are not nearly as competent?

          No, it will not change until the US government goes broke.
          Then the change will be dramatic, devastating and dangerous for Israel.

          Until the American idiots, like most here on this issue, come to realize that now the outrage against Israel is necessary, when the inevitable happens otherwise, the disaster will be incomprehensible.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Why should I be OUTRAGED at Israel, Arabs or anyone else who is killing each other half a world away?

            My “outrage” has and remains in the fact that my country spends my hard earned money funding the mess and getting us mired in the squabble of others that go back thousands of years.

            How am I to be outraged by the behavior of those I do not even know?

            These issues are not beyond comprehension of the American public. However, as with all things in this country HOW you say things affects your ability to get the message across.

            I guarantee you that accusing Israel of “genocide” or “ethnic cleansing” is NOT going to get you anywhere. Notice how well it has worked for you here? Or how has calling people stupid or hypocrite worked in getting them to change their minds?

            Sorry my friend but the style of the message matters in American politics.

            Talk instead about the unjust “taking of private property”, killing without cause, undo harassment, etc, etc. Cite FACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE data, times, locations, etc, etc, WITHOUT the emotional rhetoric.

            As I said, they need alternative media to get the pictures of the PEACEFUL demonstrations to the American public. Then people can start to use it to ask hard questions of opinion leaders.

            Oh, and don’t put up people who like the General’s Son, twist the truth just enough that someone can pick it apart. For example, claiming that the mere fact Israel could beat 4 Arab armies in 1967 is NOT proof that Israel conducted a planned war to take back Ersatz Israel. A general stating that a first strike would give them the chance to take territory where they were already fighting is NOT proof of some devious scheme. Even if one does exist, it is the failure of the argument that damages the message.

            I remember at the time that we all knew Israel struck FIRST. But you see, we also knew about the tensions that led to the Egyptian buildup on the border which would most likely result in Israeli action. I remember how my father and many other WWII vets danced a jig over the “jews” success. Never quite understood that then, nor now.

            In fact, you may be the first person I ever heard claim that the six day war was ONLY AFTER Israel was attacked by Four Arab Armies. I had never heard anyone else use that argument to justify or rationalize the war or its outcome. But you assigned that argument to me and others here. You know what the affect is? TURNED OFF listening and started reacting to the attacks themselves. END OF LEARNING.

            • Black Flag® says:

              “Why should I be OUTRAGED at Israel, Arabs or anyone else who is killing each other half a world away?”

              Because you are funding it

              If this is not enough to seek justice of the oppressed, you are truly sad.

              “As I said, they need alternative media to get the pictures of the PEACEFUL demonstrations to the American public. Then people can start to use it to ask hard questions of opinion leaders.”

              You keep saying empty nonsense, but provide nothing

              As I said, they do. Your ilk ignore it
              You say “Hell, I don’t care”. And the abuse and terror continues

              Because of your vile attitude, you continue to fund it because you are not outraged

              You are sickly complacent.

              “67 is NOT proof that Israel conducted a planned war to take back Ersatz Israel.”

              No, in your twisted mind, the amount of documentation of the Zionists, the execution of the plan, the consistency in the execution is never enough for you

              ” END OF LEARNING.”

              You do not learn, and will pay dearly.

              • Just A Citizen says:


                Like I said before, your reading is impacted by your attitude. From above:

                “My “outrage” has and remains in the fact that my country spends my hard earned money funding the mess and getting us mired in the squabble of others that go back thousands of years”

                See that? I am OUTRAGED over MY GOVT’s involvement and use of MY MONEY to fund Israel or anyone else in that part of the world. Yet you ignore this so you can keep up the ranting.

                People do not ignore videos of the Palestinians. They DO NOT SEE THEM. This may surprise you but having a bunch of left wing America Hating web sites posting videos of Israeli atrocity is NOT how you get your message to everyday America. Nor is posting on sites dominated by the 20% who support Palestine. Talking to themselves is not helping.

                Especially when all the OUTRAGE comes across as hatred and quite frankly anti-Semitism.

                True or not does not matter. The fact is that it often comes across that way.

              • Black Flag® says:


                ““My “outrage” has and remains in the fact that my country spends my hard earned money funding the mess and getting us mired in the squabble of others that go back thousands of years””

                First, you lie
                There was no squabble. The Jews and Muslims lived together in peace for hundreds of years

                Such lie, deems the victims.

                You are not outraged, You are rationalizing the evil

    • Black Flag® says:

      Regarding Terrorism

      Reporter to an Algerian freedom fighter against the French:

      “Why are you placing bombs in baby carriages, and leaving them amongst French people?”

      “When the French give us bombers and tanks to fight them, we will give them our baby carriages”

      The essence of Terrorism: the tool of the oppressed against the superior force.

  35. Black Flag® says:

    This is what the Palestinians endure every day.

    • Black Flag® says:

      Every day…

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Is peace in a nation controlled by an invading force which treats you as a second class citizen a True Peace in your view? To use the “peace” that existed between muslims and jews in Palestine after the 1500’s is the type of distortion I warned against earlier.

      Yes, they were not murdering each other by the thousands. And the Jews were “TOLERATED” by the Ottoman rulers and Muslim majority. Until the next ruler decided not to. As I said, squabbles dating back thousands of years.

      Unless you want to argue that the Zionist defense that “god gave us this land” is not rooted in ancient history. Good luck with that argument.

      “History of the Jews in the Ottoman Empire

      From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

      Jump to: navigation, search

      See also: History of the Jews in Turkey

      Jews lived in the geographic area of Asia Minor (modern Turkey, but more geographically either Anatolia or Asia Minor) for more than 2,400 years. Initial prosperity in Hellenistic times faded under Christian Byzantine rule, but recovered somewhat under the rule of the various Muslim governments which displaced and succeeded rule from Constantinople. For much of the Ottoman period, Turkey was a safe haven for Jews fleeing persecution, and it continues to have a small Jewish population today.

      At the time of the Battle of Yarmuk when the Levant passed under Muslim Rule, thirty Jewish communities existed in Haifa, Sh’chem, Hebron, Ramleh, Gaza, Jerusalem, and many in the north. Safed became a spiritual centre for the Jews and the Shulchan Aruch was compiled there as well as many Kabbalistic texts. The first Hebrew printing press, and the first printing in Western Asia began in 1577.

      The situation where Jews both enjoyed cultural and economical prosperity at times but were widely persecuted at other times was summarised by G.E. Von Grunebaum :

      It would not be difficult to put together the names of a very sizeable number of Jewish subjects or citizens of the Islamic area who have attained to high rank, to power, to great financial influence, to significant and recognized intellectual attainment; and the same could be done for Christians. But it would again not be difficult to compile a lengthy list of persecutions, arbitrary confiscations, attempted forced conversions, or pogroms.”[1]

      The status of Jewry in the Ottoman Empire often hinged on the whims of the Sultan. So, for example, while Murad III ordered that the attitude of all non-Muslims should be one of “humility and abjection” and should not “live near Mosques or tall buildings” or own slaves, others were more tolerant.[2]

      Although the status level of the Jews in the Ottoman Empire may have often been exaggerated,[3] it is undeniable that the tolerance was enjoyed. Under the millet system they were organized as a community on the basis of religion, alongside the other millets (e.g. Orthodox millet, Armenian millet, etc.). In the framework of the millet they had a considerable amount of administrative autonomy and were represented by the Hakham Bashi, the Chief Rabbi. There were no restrictions in the professions Jews could practice analogous to those common in Western Christian countries.[4] There were restrictions in the areas Jews could live or work, but such restrictions were imposed on Ottoman subjects of other religions as well.[5] Like all non-Muslims, Jews had to pay the harac (“head tax”) and faced other restrictions in clothing, horse riding, army service etc., but they could occasionally be waived or circumvented.[6]

      Jews who reached high positions in the Ottoman court and administration include Mehmed II’s minister of Finance (“defterdar”) Hekim Yakup Pasa, his Portuguese physician Moses Hamon, Murad II’s physician Ishak Pasha and Abraham de Castro, the master of the mint in Egypt.

      • JAC
        “Is peace in a nation controlled by an invading force which treats you as a second class citizen a True Peace in your view?”

        No. Hence the Palestinian plight.

        ” To use the “peace” that existed between muslims and jews in Palestine after the 1500’s is the type of distortion I warned against earlier.”

        It is your distortion, not mine. They were not “second class” citizens – that is your lie

        “During the Classical Ottoman period (1300–1600), the Jews, together with most other communities of the empire, enjoyed a certain level of prosperity. Compared with other Ottoman subjects, they were the predominant power in commerce and trade as well in diplomacy and other high offices.

        In the 16th century especially, the Jews rose to prominence under the millets, the apogee of Jewish influence could arguable be the appointment of Joseph Nasi to Sanjak-bey (governor, a rank usually only bestowed upon Muslims) of the island of Naxos.[8] Also in the first half of the 17th century the Jews were distinct in winning Tax farms, Haim Gerber describes it as: “My impression is that no pressure existed, that it was merely performαnce that counted.”[9]

        Again, you merely parrot the ignorance of others, instead of history, JAC. You do not even read your own quote:
        Although the status level of the Jews in the Ottoman Empire may have often been exaggerated,[3] it is undeniable that the tolerance was enjoyed.

        “Unless you want to argue that the Zionist defense that “god gave us this land” is not rooted in ancient history. Good luck with that argument.”

        It isn’t!!!

        That’s the point, JAC.

        It is a Zionist Ideology formed in the mid-1800, based on a mythical kingdom of David

        You are pretending a fairy tale is good enough reason to kill and steal.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Re: “You are pretending a fairy tale is good enough reason to kill and steal.”

          With all due respect………..BULL SHIT!

          • Black Flag® says:


            Prove King David historically.

            You are so engaged in myth, fact and fiction has merged for you

            • Just A Citizen says:

              I do not need to prove things I did not claim. You really need to start reading and digesting all that is posted before spouting off with your BULL SHIT accusations.

              • Black Flag® says:

                “Unless you want to argue that the Zionist defense that “god gave us this land” is not rooted in ancient history. Good luck with that argument.”

                Eat your words

              • Just A Citizen says:


                Put the quote in its proper context. Nothing in that statement claims that King David was real, or that I personally was claiming such.

                As I said, your arrogance has impeded your reading comprehension.

                Besides, whether King David was real or not is NOT SETTLED SCIENCE>

              • Black Flag® says:

                Look, you claimed some “ancient history” regarding Zionism, not me – the ONUS IS ON YOU to provide it.

                There is NO EVIDENCE of David. The onus is on YOU to find it, not me.

                So, eat your words.

  36. Catching up……and there is no way that I am going to argue with BF on this one….it is futile….but…….BF……it appears to me that you are a supporter of the United Nations…..could this be true? Or am I misreading you?

    • D13,

      Are you so stuck in your head, you have to make up stories about my position? You are doing this more often then ever.

      Think, man. I know you can.

      Do you believe a Black Flag that is anti-State would support a State organized union for themselves??

      You are letting your irrational dogma get in the way of facts and truth.

      You are afraid of the truth because you have carried the lies for so long.

      Time for you to be as courageous with your mind as you were with your body.

  37. gmanfortruth says:

    Listen to what this says:

    If police feel this way, and act this way, what recourse do the people have? Court battles have been fought and won, it hasn’t mattered, apparently. The government folks, at all levels, are starting to act as they are above the law. This will only lead to one eventual reaction, and it won’t be pretty 🙄

  38. Not Holland.
    Not UK.
    Not Japan.
    Not French Indochina.

    The Dutch requested embargoes. the British requested Embargoes, the French requested embargoes and all 0f South east Asia requested embargoes. The Japanese not only invaded China but also the whole of Southeast Asia and India.

    But I am sure that you are going to call this a “reaction” to embargoes…..

    And while we are at it…..what is wrong with embargoes if you disagree with a direction that someone is taking? ie Japan in WWII…..

    You are clamoring for an embargo against Israel right now….so I know you support them (embargoes). I do not argue your Zionist approach because some of it is true. I do not argue that the United Nations, that you somehow support in part, really screwed up the mid-east and there never should have been a 1947/48 resolution in favor of Israel. The greatest majority of Americans that I know also believe this and are not ardent supporters of Israel….but neither are they ardent supporters of Palestine and should not be. I have never agreed with the divisions of Europe after WWII…..although there is, somewhat, legitimate reason to believe…..”to the victor go the spoils”…..but in applying that principle, there goes with it the resistance and that is also understandable. The loser of wars and conflicts always has an axe to grind and the winners of same always have extended egos.

    You seem to be claiming that Roosevelt’s attempt at his failed revision of the Neutrality Act was the precursor to WWII and that Germany and Japan, (1) would have never formed an alliance and (2) would have never entered a war, and (3) had no other options….does not wash.

    Japan wanted unfettered access to China, Southeast Asia, and the South Pacific. Japan tried diplomacy to negotiate with the United States and failed. The United States, rightly so, withdrew from the Commerce Treaty Act of 1911. There is no problem here and the US should have done so….for you to argue that it was ok for Japan to invade China, India, Southeast Asia…with eyes on Australia and others and that it was none of our business is ludicrous at best. The US actually hesitated at embargoes for fear that it would drive Japan to a more aggressive stance. But, in 1940. when the Japanese cabinet became militarized, and the wars in China and India and Southeast Asia were going to continue and get more aggressive, the US made a move. Then in 1941. the United States enabled the 1917 Trading With the Enemy Act.

    Now, if you want to claim that the Axis powers had no choice but to form alliances, you can try but there are several schools of thought on that one as well and not Wikipedia….that does more cherry picking than anyone alive.

    Do not over look the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere and Japan’s desire that began pre-1917…….Don’t forget Japan’s withdrawal from the League of Nations in the 30″s in response to world condemnation of its conquest of Manchuria and its expansionists (hegemony) policies towards Russia and that part of the world.

    Japan had been planning SE Asia, China (SINO), French Indochina…..long before beginning in 1921.

    NOw, BF, I ask this question…….since Japan was using US exports ( oil, copper, rubber, etc) to fuel and fund an expansionist policy and you disagreed with that policy and felt it would weaken your position….why would you not use the embargo ( non military response ) to do so? Where is the evil you so despise? ( Japans expansionism or embargoes? ) By your definition, both are evil.

    • Good! But you forgot the annexation of Korea, the subsequent drafting of Koreans into the Japanese Army and Korean “comfort” women. No doubt these things were caused by some type of embargo by westerners.

      Is funny how by subtle variances in language one can twist things any way they want. When coupled by outright omissions of contrary views they make your argument a slam dunk! The Japanese were not nice people in the first half of the 20th Century and cultural differences as an excuse be damned!

    • D13,
      You have your history ass-backwards, as usual lately.

      “On 24 July 1941 Roosevelt requested Japan withdraw all its forces from Indochina. Two days later the USA and the UK began an oil embargo; two days after that the Netherlands joined them.”

      No one asked the US. The US proceeded with others following.

      • And I guess to your surprise, UK and Netherlands followed, huh?

        Had nothing to do with the fact that Holland was under Nazi occupation and England was hanging on by a thread… and US entry into the European War might help these guys?

        Nah, right? Nuthin’ at all to do with those facts…

    • D13,

      More ass-backwards history from you

      “The Japanese not only invaded China but also the whole of Southeast Asia and India.”

      Yes they did AFTER THE US EMBARGO. They didn’t invade India nor Southeast Asia before Pearl Harbor, D13.

    • D13,
      “You are clamoring for an embargo against Israel right now….so I know you support them (embargoes).”

      More strawman and lies – so unbecoming of you, D13.

      Please quote me where I “clamored” for embargo of Israel.

      I do not support the UN.

      I use it as an argument of global world opinion against the actions of US and Israel.

      “Victor goes the spoils” is a war crime – the Nuremberg Doctrine and International Law. If you want to apply that principle, you are a war criminal.

      “You seem to be claiming that Roosevelt’s attempt at his failed revision of the Neutrality Act was the precursor to WWII and that Germany and Japan, (1) would have never formed an alliance”

      They formed an alliance not in response to Roosevelt, but as a response to Russia. Both Japan and Germany had a common enemy, Russia – both needed the other to split the Russian forces.

      “would have never entered a war”

      Germany had no want of US entry into the European War, hence why he did not fail for the baiting of US deliberate war actions against Germany prior to 1942.

      “had no other options….does not wash.”

      What other options do you think the Japanese had other than capitulation of Japanese gains in China? Bizarre that you assert without any and pretend they existed.

  39. gmanfortruth says:
  40. Opinions

    Will the West stand by and watch the slaughter of Yazidis, and cleansing of Christians, in Iraq?
    posted at 10:01 am on August 7, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

    Remember the R2P Doctrine? The Obama administration, led by Samantha Power, justified Western intervention in Libya against Moammar Qaddafi in 2011 because of the global “responsibility to protect” civilians threatened by Qaddafi’s forces in Benghazi. As J. E. Dyer wrote in 2011, “by the R2P formulation, endangered civilian populations … trump sovereignty. … According to this text, it is indeed possible to bomb another country for three months without being in “hostilities.”” We deliberately decapitated the Qaddafi regime and turned Libya into the Somalia of the Mediterranean based on the supposed threat to civilians in eastern Libya, which in retrospect looks more like a threat to the same terrorist networks that now operate with impunity there.

    What about where a terrorist state actually threatens genocide and ethnic cleansing? Where is R2P when you need it? Jacob Siegel asks that question in The Daily Beast about the shameful inaction of the West as tens of thousands of Yazidis starve and thirst to death while waiting for a rescue:

    One week is as long as the average person can survive without water. In extreme temperatures, it may be less. So time is running out for the 10,000 to 40,000 Iraqis, mostly religious minorities, who have been trapped for days in barren mountains without food or water. They face a choice: return to their towns captured by ISIS forces and risk being slaughtered or stay in the mountains and slowly die of thirst.

    The slow-motion massacre of the Yazidis, members of a small, ancient religious community who escaped to the mountains along with other groups after ISIS overran their towns, began with a military defeat for the Kurds, one of the closest U.S. allies in the region. The Kurds’ losses, and the subsequent plight of the Yazidis, call into question what role, if any, America is willing to play in Iraq. …

    U.S. attention, of course, is stretched thin with Gaza and Ukraine. But the near silence on Iraq is hard to square with the severity of the crisis and the initial decision to send military forces there.

    If the American public and political class won’t bear any U.S. military involvement in Iraq, why were troops dispatched to the country? And if ISIS overrunning the Kurds, taking control of key infrastructure, and carrying out a deliberate slaughter of the Yazidis isn’t enough to get the U.S. forces involved, is there anything that would force a U.S. military response?

    Siegel notes that direct aid to the Kurds, who have the best angle for a response, is diplomatically difficult since we do not recognize Kurdish independence. But did we respect the diplomatic niceties in Libya? The point of R2P, at least as formulated by Power and Obama, was that it bypassed those relationships and international constraints, especially when a genocide is about to take place. That condition was arguable in Libya, but it certainly isn’t with ISIS in Iraq. And it’s not just the Yazidis, either:

    Jihadists have taken over Iraq‘s largest Christian town, Qaraqosh, and the surrounding areas sending tens of thousands of residents fleeing towards autonomous Kurdistan, according to officials and witnesses.

    Islamic State (Isis) militants moved in overnight after the withdrawal of Kurdish peshmerga troops, who are stretched thin across several fronts in Iraq, residents said.

    “I now know that the towns of Qaraqosh, Tal Kayf, Bartella and Karamlesh have been emptied of their original population and are now under the control of the militants,” Joseph Thomas, the Chaldean archbishop of Kirkuk and Sulaimaniyah, told AFP.

    Qaraqosh is an entirely Christian town that lies between Mosul, the jihadists’ main hub in Iraq, and Arbil, the Kurdish region’s capital. It usually has a population of around 50,000.

    “It’s a catastrophe, a tragic situation. We call on the UN security council to immediately intervene. Tens of thousands of terrified people are being displaced as we speak, it cannot be described,” the archbishop said.

    Tal Kayf, home to a significant Christian community as well as members of the Shabak Shia minority, also emptied overnight.

    ISIS has conducted ethnic/religious cleansing on a massive scale for months, and is about to commit pure genocide on Mount Sinjar. The Telegraph’s Dan Hodges calls it the Rwanda of our time:

    Mount Sinjar is not downtown Baghdad. Or even downtown Gaza. Here is an instance – a very rare instance – where the good guys and the bad guys are very clearly defined. …

    We can start to airdrop emergency aid. We can provide arms to the Yazidi and their defenders. We can provide air support to drive Isis form the immediate area. We could, heaven forbid, provide ground troops to construct an impromptu safe haven.

    All of those things are in our power. But we chose not to do them. Why? Because we are paralysed by our perverse new morality. “We killed innocent people in Iraq,” we say to ourselves, “so to atone we must stand back and let innocent people get killed in Iraq.”

    For once, just for once, can we actually do something? The UN, Nato, the US and the UK. It doesn’t really matter whose umbrella its under. For once let’s demonstrate that the billions of pounds we spend on the most powerful military forces in human history can actually stand up to a bunch of petty hoodlums with machetes, or AK47s, or Toyota 4x4s.

    Just this once let’s not wait. For the book. And then the film. And then the hand-wringing and empty pledges that “we will ensure this never happens again”.

    Just this once let’s actually stop them being killed with their families.

    Paul Mirengoff wrote yesterday about the hypocrisy and cowardice of the Obama administration on R2P:

    In my opinion, the U.S. is responsible for the plight of these families for two reasons. First, if the President Obama had not pulled out of Iraq, it’s unlikely that ISIS would ever have reached the point where it can commit atrocities against this population. Second, if Obama had provided military supplies to the Kurds of northern Iraq, they probably would have been able to defend Sinjar — a town they reportedly abandoned because they ran out of ammunition.

    ISIS is, of course, the sworn enemy of the United States. Even Eric Holder finds it frightening. Thus, in protecting the Yazidis, we would also be advancing our interest in combatting some of the world’s worst, most threatening terrorists.

    But for Team Obama, R2P is just a catch phrase. It sounds good and is easy to type, but that’s about it. So far, the Yazidis rate a shout out from Jen Psaki — who intones “focusing on towns and villages populated by vulnerable minorities, demonstrates once again that this terrorist organization is a dire threat to all Iraqis, the entire region and the international community” — and nothing more.

    As for fighting ISIS, or even providing substantial assistance that would enable others to fight these terrorists, Obama lacks the stomach for it.

    Maybe they can come up with a hashtag. It’s very revealing that R2P was good enough to knock out a dictator who was at least cooperating with the West on terrorism, but somehow inapplicable when dealing with the terrorists themselves.

    • Chaos in Iraq’s north as Yazidi refugees starve and Islamic State presses Kurds


      Displaced families from the minority Yazidi sect fled the violence in the Iraqi town of Sinjar, just west of Mosul, and took refuge at Dohuk province on Aug. 4. (Ari Jala/Reuters)
      By Loveday Morris August 6 at 7:49 PM

      BAGHDAD — Politicians appealed Wednesday for emergency aid for thousands of minority Iraqis who have been stranded with little food on a mountaintop in the country’s northwest, surrounded by al-Qaeda-inspired rebels.

      For nearly two months, Kurdish forces had managed to protect the area from the Sunni extremists who have rampaged through much of northern Iraq, slaughtering opponents, destroying ancient shrines and demanding that people of other religions convert or die. But last weekend the famously tough Kurdish fighters suffered their first setbacks in the Sinjar region, prompting hundreds of thousands of civilians to flee.

      An estimated 10,000 to 40,000 of them sought refuge on the craggy peaks of Mount Sinjar — largely members of the minority Yazidi sect. They fear death if they descend into areas controlled by the extremist rebels, who consider them apostates. Kurdish forces have so far failed to break through the militants’ lines to reach them, despite launching a counteroffensive early this week.

      The Iraqi government conducted two airdrops of aid to the desperate refugees on Wednesday, but humanitarian workers said they did not come close to meeting the growing need. Some of the water bottles in the aid bundles cracked open.

      “Is help coming?” one of those trapped on the mountain, 23-year-old Shihab Balki, asked when contacted by cellphone — one of the few belonging to the refugees that still had battery life. He said that at least 17 children have died on the mountain because of the inhospitable conditions.
      Iraqi politician Vian Dakhil makes a raw, emotional plea for the protection of the Yazidi people before Iraqi parliament. (YouTube/Al Sumaria TV)

      “I’m standing here next to an old lady and a child lying on the ground. They are not dead, but we fear they are dying,” Balki said.

      UNICEF says it has confirmed that children have perished on Mount Sinjar but does not have verified up-to-date figures.

      Balki said later Wednesday that he had managed to secure about four gallons of water for his family of seven from one of the day’s airdrops — not nearly enough in the hot Iraqi summer. Many of the bottles dropped in a wooden crate had cracked, their precious contents spilling onto the rocks, he said. Earlier airdrops included food and milk, but the cartons of milk also smashed on the mountainside, he said.

      Haji Ghandour, a Yazidi member of parliament in Baghdad, said the shortage of aid was acute.

      “There are some airdrops, but they aren’t even covering half the need,” he said. “Most of these supplies fall near to [Islamic State fighters], others break and are ruined. The operation is not accurate.”

      The United Nations says the Iraqi government has yet to take up an offer of technical assistance for airdrops, which are being coordinated with local authorities in the semiautonomous Kurdish region in northeastern Iraq.

      Falah Mustafa Bakir, the Kurdistan region’s foreign minister, argued that Iraq simply lacks the capacity to provide aid and needs international help. “This is not a time for technical assistance,” he said. “This is a time for immediate action. Children are dying.”

      Displaced families from the minority Yazidi sect take refuge Aug. 4 in Dohuk province. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has ordered his air force to back Kurdish forces against Islamic State fighters. (Ari Jala/Reuters)

      In Washington, Obama administration officials did not respond Wednesday to queries about whether the U.S. government was considering providing assistance.
      Trouble on several fronts

      Meanwhile, tens of thousands of newly displaced people have flooded into the Kurdish region, which Bakir said lacks the finances to assist them. The region, which is home to just over 5 million residents, is now hosting an additional 1.5 million people — refugees from the Syrian war and internally displaced Iraqis, he said.

      Kurdish officials had warned for weeks that they were unable to maintain the fight along the semiautonomous region’s 650-mile-long front with the militants, unless the Kurds got outside support. A lack of ammunition and advanced weaponry forced the retreat from Sinjar, Kurdish officials say.

      The Kurds say they are trying to put out fires on multiple fronts, trying to recapture land only to be attacked elsewhere as the Islamic State continues to jab at its boundaries.

      That threat was underscored on Wednesday when, as Kurdish forces continued their counter­offensive near Sinjar, they were forced to send reinforcements 150 miles east to Makhmur and Gweir as militants attempted to push closer to their regional capital, Irbil.

      “It’s not fair that we are left fighting these terrorists alone,” said Bakir, the Kurdistan region’s foreign minister. “We need immediate action. We look to the United States, we look to NATO.”

      “The West have armed many groups around the world. Why not help us be in the front against terrorism?” Bakir said. “We don’t understand.”
      Kurds receive air cover

      The Kurds are supposed to receive a share of weapons and budgetary outlays from the national government in Baghdad. But relations between the two governments have soured, as some prominent Kurdish leaders have called for independence.

      In recent days, however, the Iraqi military has started providing air cover to Kurdish security forces known as pesh merga.

      Still, Kurdish troops have not been paid for months because of the suspension of budget payments from Baghdad, and the northern region has struggled to procure military supplies. Those relations are likely to worsen if Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki stays in power, with a change in leadership seen by many as the only way of keeping the north from splitting away. Maliki has held the country’s top political job since 2006.

      Maliki appeared defiant on Wednesday, even though the country’s religious authorities and his own party are indicating he should step aside. He argued that his political bloc had won the largest share in the elections in April and should be allowed to nominate the prime minister.

      If the constitution is ignored, it will “open the gates of hell” in Iraq, he said.

      • Watched one of Obama’s former stooges yesterday on O’Reilly, “It’s all Bush’s fault!”

        • Well, if that’s their belief- wouldn’t that make it even more our responsibility to help these people now?

          August 6, 2014
          A Friend Flees the Horror of ISIS
          By George Packer

          Credit Photograph courtesy Reuters.

          A humanitarian crisis that could turn into a genocide is taking place right now in the mountains of northwestern Iraq. It hasn’t made the front page, because the place and the people are obscure, and there’s a lot of other horrible news to compete with. I’ve learned about it mainly because the crisis has upended the life of someone I wrote about in the magazine several weeks ago.

          Last Sunday, Karim woke up around 7:30 A.M., after coming home late the night before. He was about to have breakfast when his phone rang—a friend was calling to see how he was doing. Karim is a Yazidi, a member of an ancient religious minority in Iraq. Ethnically, he’s Kurdish. An engineer and a father of three young children, Karim spent years working for the U.S. Army in his area, then for an American medical charity. He’s been waiting for months to find out whether the U.S. government will grant him a Special Immigrant Visa because of his service, and because of the danger he currently faces.

          Karim is from a small town north of the district center, Sinjar, between Mosul and the Syrian border. Sinjar is a historic Yazidi area with an Arab minority. Depending on who’s drawing the map, Sinjar belongs to either the northernmost part of Iraq or the westernmost part of Kurdistan. Since June, when extremist fighters from the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham captured Mosul, they’ve been on the outskirts of Sinjar, facing off against a small number of Kurdish peshmerga militiamen. ISIS regards Yazidis as devil worshippers, and its fighters have been executing Yazidi men who won’t convert to Islam on the spot, taking away the women as jihadi brides. So there were many reasons why a friend might worry about Karim.

          “I don’t know,” Karim said. “My situation is O.K.” “No, it’s not O.K.!” his friend said. “Sinjar is under the control of ISIS.”

          Karim had not yet heard this calamitous news. “I’ll call some friends and get back to you,” he said.

          But the cell network was jammed, so Karim walked to his father’s house. His father told him that thousands of people from Sinjar were headed their way, fleeing north through the mountains to get out of Iraq and into Kurdistan. It suddenly became clear that Karim would have to abandon his home and escape with his family.

          ISIS had launched its attack on Sinjar during the night. Peshmerga militiamen were outgunned—their assault rifles against the extremists’ captured fifty-caliber guns, rocket-propelled grenades, mortars, anti-aircraft weapons, and armored vehicles. The Kurds began to run out of ammunition, and those who could retreated north toward Kurdistan. By dawn, the extremists were pouring into town. Later, ISIS posted triumphant photos on Twitter: bullet-riddled corpses of peshmerga in the streets and dirt fields; an ISIS fighter aiming his pistol at the heads of five men lying face down on the ground; Arab locals who stayed in Sinjar jubilantly greeting the new occupiers.

          Karim had time to do just one thing: burn all the documents that connected him to America—photos of him posing with Army officers, a CD from the medical charity—in case he was stopped on the road by militants or his house was searched. He watched the record of his experience during the period of the Americans in Iraq turn to ash, and felt nothing except the urge to get to safety.

          By 9:30 A.M., Karim and his extended family were crowded into his brother’s car and his father’s pickup truck. They’d had no time to pack, and for the drive through the heat of the desert they took nothing but water, bread, canned milk for Karim’s two-year-old son, and their AK-47s. At first, Karim’s father refused to go along. A stubborn man, he said, “Let them kill me in my town, but I will never leave it.” Fortunately, the father’s paralyzed cousin, who had been left behind by his family, pleaded with him, and at the last minute the two old men joined the exodus. Karim’s twenty or so family members were the last to get out of the area by car, and they joined a massive traffic jam headed northwest. Thousands of other Yazidi families had to flee on foot into the mountains: “They couldn’t leave. They didn’t know how to leave. They waited too long to leave,” Karim said.

          Karim drove in a convoy of two hundred and fifty or three hundred cars. They stuck together for safety. The group decided against taking the most direct route to Kurdistan, which would have taken them through the Arab border town of Rabiya. ISIS wasn’t the only danger—Yazidi Kurds have come to regard Sunni Arabs generally as a threat. So they drove across the border at an unmarked point into Syria, where Kurdish rebels—who form one side in the complex Syrian civil war—were in control of the area. The rebels waved the convoy on, while Syrian Arab villagers stared or took videos with their mobile phones. A relative of Karim’s happened to be a cigarette smuggler and knew the way across the desert once the roads disappeared. (“Everyone and everything has his day,” Karim told me.) The undercarriage of Karim’s car began to break off in pieces. They drove for hours through Syria, crossed back into Iraq, and shortly afterward reached a checkpoint into Kurdistan, where the line of cars was so long that they had to wait for hours more. It wasn’t until nightfall, nearly twelve hours after they had fled their home, that Karim and his family reached the Kurdish town of Dohuk, where he happened to have a brother who gave them shelter in his small apartment.

          “Compared with other people here, I’m in heaven,” Karim said by phone from Dohuk. “Some are in camps for refugees. It’s very hot and very hard. We are safe, but thousands of families are in the mountains. Thousands.”

          Karim heard that one young man had been executed by ISIS for no reason other than being Yazidi. A friend of Karim’s was hiding in the mountains, running low on supplies, and out of battery power in his phone. Another friend, an Arab (“He is not a religion guy, he’s open-minded, it doesn’t matter if you’re Christian or Yazidi,” Karim said), had stayed in Sinjar and was trapped in his home. Now ISIS was going house to house, with information provided by locals, looking for Iraqi soldiers and police, for people with money, for Kurds. They had already taken away the friend’s brother, a police officer. No one knows for sure how many people ISIS has killed since the attack on Sinjar. Karim heard that it is many hundreds.

          Prince Tahseen Said, “the world leader of the Yazidis,” has issued an appeal to Kurdish, Iraqi, Arab, and European leaders, as well as to Ban Ki-moon and Barack Obama. It reads: “I ask for aid and to lend a hand and help the people of Sinjar areas and its affiliates and villages and complexes which are home to the people of the Yazidi religion. I invite [you] to assume [your] humanitarian and nationalistic responsibilities towards them and help them in their plight and the difficult conditions in which they live today.”

          It’s hard to know what, if anything, is left of the humanitarian responsibilities of the international community. The age of intervention is over, killed in large part by the Iraq war. But justifiable skepticism about the use of military force seems also to have killed off the impulse to show solidarity with the helpless victims of atrocities in faraway places. There’s barely any public awareness of the unfolding disaster in northwestern Iraq, let alone a campaign of international support for the Yazidis—or for the Christians who have been driven out of Mosul or the Sunni Arabs who don’t want to live under the tyranny of ISIS. The front-page news continues to be the war in Gaza, a particular Western obsession whether one’s views are pro-Israel, pro-Palestinian, pro-peace, or pro-plague-on-both-houses. Nothing that either side has done in that terrible conflict comes close to the routine brutality of ISIS.

          Karim couldn’t help expressing bitterness about this. “I don’t see any attention from the rest of the world,” he said. “In one day, they killed more than two thousand Yazidi in Sinjar, and the whole world says, ‘Save Gaza, save Gaza.’ ”

          Yesterday, a senior U.S. official told me that the Obama Administration is contemplating an airlift, coördinated with the United Nations, of humanitarian supplies by C-130 transport planes to the Yazidis hiding in the Sinjar mountains. There are at least twenty thousand and perhaps as many as a hundred thousand of them, including some peshmerga militiamen providing a thin cover of protection. The U.N. has reported that dozens of children have died of thirst in the heat. ISIS controls the entrance to the mountains. Iraqi helicopters have dropped some supplies, including food and water, but the refugees are hard to find and hard to reach.

          It was encouraging to learn that humanitarian supplies might be on the way, but we always seem to be at least a step behind as ISIS rolls over local forces and consolidates power. ISIS is not Al Qaeda. It operates like an army, taking territory, creating a state. The aim of the Sinjar operation seems to be control of the Mosul Dam, the largest dam in Iraq, which provides electricity to Mosul, Baghdad, and much of the country. According to one expert, if ISIS takes the dam, which is located on the Tigris River, it would have the means to put Mosul under thirty metres of water, and Baghdad under five. Other nearby targets could include the Kurdish cities of Erbil and Dohuk. Karim reported that residents of Dohuk, inundated with refugees, felt not just a sense of responsibility for Sinjar but also alarm, and that they were stocking up on supplies in case of an attack.

          One way to protect the innocent and hurt those who are terrorizing them would be for the U.S. to launch air strikes on ISIS positions. That option has been discussed within the administration since the fall of Mosul, in June, but it runs against President Obama’s foreign-policy tendencies. “The President’s first instinct is, ‘Let’s help them to do it,’ ” the official told me. “The minute we do something, it changes the game.” This time, unlike in Syria, it isn’t hard to figure out how to “help them to do it”: send arms to the Kurds, America’s only secular-minded, pluralistic Muslim allies in the region, and the only force in the area with the means and the will to protect thousands of lives. (Dexter Filkins wrote, on Monday, about the possibility of American military aid to the Kurds.) Perhaps the U.S., Europe, and the U.N. can’t or won’t prevent genocide in northwestern Iraq, but the Kurds can. The fact that the peshmerga were outgunned by ISIS and ran out of ammunition in Sinjar says that we are a step behind on this front, too. According to the Times, Washington has turned down Kurdish requests for American weapons for fear of alienating and undermining Iraq’s central government in Baghdad.

          It seems delusional to imagine that there is such a thing as an Iraqi central government that should be given priority over stopping ISIS and preventing a massacre. That dream of the American project in Iraq is gone. But perhaps the Obama Administration is being more realistic. Yesterday, I also learned that the U.S. is, in fact, sending arms to the Kurds—just not openly. This was even more welcome news, though it’s too bad that the weapons didn’t reach the peshmerga in time to defend Sinjar. The U.S. Joint Operation Center in Erbil is helping peshmerga ground troops and the Iraqi air force to coordinate attacks on ISIS, providing intelligence from the sky. It’s a breakthrough that the Kurds and the Iraqis are cooperating at all. “For the moment,” the senior official said. “And it could all fall apart, because it’s lightning in a bottle.”

          The official said that peshmerga forces are organizing to retake Sinjar. Karim heard the same thing in Dohuk, and he said that he wants to be in the first group that returns to his hometown. Meanwhile, he’s volunteering with the American medical charity he used to work for, helping other refugees in Dohuk. He told his children that they’re on an extended vacation in Kurdistan.

      • Okay-Good for Obama-but lets actually make a decision and not just “weigh” on it until it’s too late to actually help.

        Obama Weighs Airstrikes or Aid to Help Trapped Iraqis, Officials Say

        By HELENE COOPERAUG. 7, 2014

        WASHINGTON — President Obama is considering airstrikes or airdrops of food and medicine to address a humanitarian crisis among as many as 40,000 religious minorities in Iraq who have been dying of heat and thirst on a mountaintop after death threats from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, administration officials said on Thursday.

        The president, in meetings with his national security team at the White House on Thursday morning, has been weighing a series of options ranging from dropping humanitarian supplies on Mount Sinjar to military strikes on the fighters from ISIS now at the base of the mountain, a senior administration official said.

        “There could be a humanitarian catastrophe there,” a second administration official said, adding that a decision from Mr. Obama was expected “imminently — this could be a fast-moving train.”

        The administration official said that “the president is weighing both passive and active options,” defining passive action as dropping humanitarian supplies. He added, using an alternative name for ISIS, “More active, we could target the ISIL elements that are besieging the base of the mountain.”

        The White House declined to say whether Mr. Obama was weighing airstrikes or airdrops in Iraq, but the press secretary, Josh Earnest, said the United States was disturbed by what he described as “cold and calculated” attacks by ISIS on religious minorities in Iraq.

        “These actions have exacerbated an already dire crisis, and the situation is nearing a humanitarian catastrophe,” Mr. Earnest told reporters. The campaign of attacks by ISIS, he said, “demonstrates a callous disregard for human rights and is deeply disturbing.”

        Asked specifically about military options, Mr. Earnest said, “I’m not in a position to rule things on the table or off the table.” But he reiterated that there would be no American combat troops in Iraq and that any military action would be extremely limited.

        “There are many problems in Iraq,” he said. “This one is a particularly acute one, because we’re seeing people persecuted because of their ethnic or religious identities.”

        Mr. Earnest added: “There are no American military solutions to the problems in Iraq. These problems can only be solved with Iraqi political solutions.”

        Mr. Obama made no mention of imminent military action as he traveled to Fort Belvoir in the Virginia suburbs on Thursday to sign legislation to overhaul the troubled Department of Veterans Affairs. Top officials were in the meantime gathering at the White House to discuss the possible Iraq action.

        The administration had been delaying taking any military action against ISIS until there is a new Iraqi government. Both White House and Pentagon officials have said privately that the United States would not intervene militarily until Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki stepped down.

        But administration officials said on Thursday that the crisis on Mount Sinjar may be forcing their hand. About 40 children have already died from the heat and dehydration, according to Unicef, while as many as 40,000 people have been sheltering in the bare mountains without food, water or access to supplies.

        The administration officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. One official said that any military action would be “limited, specific and achievable,” noting that Mr. Maliki’s political party was supposed to announce a new candidate for prime minister on Thursday, but had not yet.

  41. I am so glad that this Islamic State is a “flash in the pan” rogue group….this same group that filled the vacuum left by the US ( yes, BF, it is the US fault on this one )…..but they are nothing to worry about….no backers…….

    Wait a minute…this is the same group that is executing Christians by the hundreds, confiscating their homes, burning churches and now Mosques that harbor Christians, have successfully taken over oil fields and the largest Iraqi dam……..

    the same group that is now attacking 2 towns in Lebanon and one town in IRAN claiming that they are not “true believers”………their stated desire this morning is to conquer Lebanon in its entirety.

    Interesting how an underfunded rogue unit is organized enough to do all of this……..

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Nonsense! ISIS is a peaceful Muslim group spreading peace and love throughout the region. The lies and propaganda against them is just so the US can have another war to fight. ISIS, like all Muslim’s are a peaceful group and other thinking is bizarre. 😀

    • But D-they aren’t Israel or officially a STATE-so their actions, shrug shoulders, who cares.

      • But they are poor third world people whose lives have been ruined and futures thwarted forever by white colonialist oppressors. What they do, they need to do and, all right thinking people everywhere know it!

        Reminds me of a Jane Fonda comment regarding the Cambodian Pol Pot holocaust while it was going on. Paraphrasing, she said something like, “You can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs”.

        As my Nam vet friends used to say, “Don’t mean nothin, don’t mean nothin!”

      • V.H.

        You are a hypocrite.

        You condemn one group – created by Mossad – doing exactly what another group you are married to – Israel – does daily.

  42. Lord help us-and there are two innocent babies in the middle of this unholy mess-but I guess that’s what happens when you turn children into a product to be marketed and sold in the market place.

    Officials Find Missing Couple Who Wanted Surrogate to Abort Twin Baby With Down Syndrome

    by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | | 8/7/14 1:22 PM

    Australian authorities said Thursday they had finally contacted the father of the twin baby Gammy who he and his wanted a surrogate to abort because he was diagnosed with Down Syndrome.

    The story is sending shockwaves throughout the pro-life community as it highlights the problems associated with abortion, surrogacy and the targeting of babies with Down Syndrome, 90% of whom die in abortions, according to some reports.

    gammy5Meanwhile, the surrogacy agent in the case has spoken out about what happened.

    David and Wendy Farnell had not been seen since it emerged they abandoned Gammy in Thailand and returned to Australia with his healthy twin sister. Child protection officials had been trying to touch base with the man and his wife since Tuesday but visits to their home in Bunbury, south of Perth, went unanswered. An investigation was launched this week into the safety and welfare of the twin sister but authorities were unable to find the family.

    Now, according to a Bangkok Post article, he’s been found.

    But Western Australia Child Protection Minister Helen Morton said her department had now made phone contact with the biological parents.

    “This family needs the opportunity to have the considerations around the safety and well-being of that child undertaken in a really private, comfortable environment for them,” she told Fairfax Radio.

    Morton gave no details about the nature of the discussion or the welfare of the baby girl and said no further comment would be made while an investigation was underway.

    Meanwhile, the Thai surrogate mother, Pattaramon Chanbua, says she is shocked to hear that David Farnell had been convicted previously on child sexual abuse charges. David and Wendy Farnell were married in 2004 in Jianjiang and they met through a matchmaking agency after Farnell’s first marriage ended. He was jailed in late 1990s for sexually molesting two girls under age of 10 and, in 1998, he was charged with six counts of indecently dealing with a child under the age of 13 and was convicted and sentenced again.

    But one of Farnell”s adult sons says he is a changed man who is much different from when he was a sexual predator.

    “I can tell you how good of a father my dad was towards us. He’s amazing. He’s brought the best out of all of us kids,” the son, who did not want to be named, told Fairfax Media.

    “He’s just got a massive heart. He’s made mistakes, we’ve accepted it… He’s made up for them.

    “For everything to be brought back up is pretty heartbreaking to be honest.”

    New reports also indicate Chanbua herself worked as a booking agent for a surrogacy agency. She has been praised for her decision to keep now seven-month-old Gammy, after she claimed the Down syndrome infant boy had been abandoned by his Australian biological parents.

    But, police are already investigating her role as birth mother in the scandal and Thai Health Ministry general secretary Samphan Komrit said yesterday: “If it is found she is involved (as an agent) that will be investigated.”

    Click here to sign up for daily pro-life news alerts from

    As the Australian reports:

    Questions about Ms Pattaramon’s recent past were raised this week by a Thai newspaper, which reported what it claimed were postings on her Facebook page on May 16 and April 25, several months after Gammy’s birth.

    The first message appears to call for sperm or egg donors, specifying age, height, weight, and blood type and offering between 20,000 baht and 50,000 baht cash ($670-$1670) for the genetic material, according to Kom Chad Luek newspaper. There was a conversation on the page apparently between Ms Pattaramon and a potential donor. The second Facebook message said: “We are looking for many surrogate mothers, in and out of Bangkok. If you are interested, please leave your message.”

    The message asked for details of potential mothers’ names, blood type, nationality, date of birth, height, weight and other physical details, as well as education and hobbies. One reply was from a 17-year-old, who was asked to give details to be forwarded to a “client”, Kom Chad Luek reported.

    Those two messages, if they were genuine, have since been deleted from Ms Pattaramon’s Facebook page.

    However, The Australian has found on Facebook what appears to be a page section under construction by her husband, Uan Janbua, under the pseudonym (in Thai) Bat Cave Thamen Team.

    Both Ms Pattaramon’s page and Bat Cave have photos of the couple and their marriage certificate.

    The husband’s page has a collage of photographs of pregnant Western women and a message: “Surrogate mother, a job with attractive pay.”


    The former employee at US National Security Agency (NSA), Edward Snowden, has revealed that the British and American intelligence and the Mossad worked together to create the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

    Snowden said intelligence services of three countries created a terrorist organisation that is able to attract all extremists of the world to one place, using a strategy called “the hornet’s nest”.

    NSA documents refer to recent implementation of the hornet’s nest to protect the Zionist entity by creating religious and Islamic slogans.

    According to documents released by Snowden, “The only solution for the protection of the Jewish state “is to create an enemy near its borders”.

    Leaks revealed that ISIS leader and cleric Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi took intensive military training for a whole year in the hands of Mossad, besides courses in theology and the art of speech.

    • Started reading after seeing this and can find no documents that were released. Found stuff like this- Waldo Lydecker • 20 days ago

      The original source of this story is not the July 15, 2014 Gulf Daily News article linked to above, but an article published seven days earlier at the Arabic website of Iran’s semiofficial Fars News Agency, whose headline translates as “Snowden: Baghdadi underwent an intensive course at the hands of Mossad.”

      FNA attributes its story to “The Andreasept” [The Intercept], but significantly does not provide a single hyperlink to either The Intercept or any Snowden documents. After researching this at some length, I am forced to conclude that FNA simply fabricated this story.

      Why would Iran’s propaganda arm concoct and disseminate such lies? It’s not hard to understand. About 90% of Iranians are Shia, which is the official state religion; only 9% are Sunni or Sufi. ISIS, by contrast, grew out of Sunni insurgent groups, and became known for its brutal violence directed at Shia Muslims. It stands to reason that Iran will go to any lengths—even lying—to discredit ISIS and al-Baghdadi through association with Israel.

      Finally, I leave you with this thought. On January 12, 2014, Fars New Agency published an article titled “Snowden Documents Proving ‘US-Alien-Hitler’ Link Stun Russia” claiming that space aliens run the United States government. And, like its latest fiction about Mossad training al-Baghdadi, FNA cited unidentified Snowden documents as its source.

      Am I the only one who detects a pattern here?”

      and this:

      “dagox • 22 days ago

      So… Were are the cables? I dont see any of the only 3 journalists in the world who received them talking about this… No source over the world wide web can provide the cables for review… Im starting to realize this is not true specially because of the source…”

      Now I don’t know if these people know what their talking about and I find it hard to research it because I can’t read the language.But I could find the “The Andreasept”-they simply repeated the same claim-no documents-no proof-just words someone wrote.

      So lots of questions surrounding this claim-Did Snowden actually say this-you know the Snowden that currently lives in Russia-and if he did-where are the documents that back it up. At this point, I’m figuring this is a lot of propaganda -so show me some real proof before you start claiming Mossad created ISIS.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Good reply VH! But, let’s put things into what we know is fact. 1. ISIS originated in Syria, part of the group that is fighting the Assad regime,
        2. The US has admitted funding and aiding these people in Syria.
        3. It doesn’t matter who trained them, the US is already guilty of arming them. This is Obamabola in a nutshell.

        • Hi G,

          Did ISIS originate in Syria-I thought they were originally a part of al qaeda.

          Have no idea why Obama got involved in these civil wars but I have a hard time believing it was based on his wanting to help Israel.

      • “The validity of the document mentioned below cannot be verified due to the exclusivity of the Snowden cache. Cryptome sent a letter to various sources in possession of the documents, including The New York Times, Washington Post, The Guardian, Barton Gellman, Laura Poitrias, Glenn Greenwald, ACLU, EFF and others demanding an accounting. The allegation about ISIS and al-Baghdadi, however, pairs up with other information demonstrating ISIS is an intelligence asset. “

        • BF-do you have any links you can attach to these claims? I’d like to read them.

          • Use Google, V.H. – the web is full of the story.

            • I am BF-but so far all I’ve found out is that Cryptome isn’t in possession of any of the documents. They are just arguing that they should all be released. So this is no way proves that the documents this claim is based on even exist.

              I question this: “The allegation about ISIS and al-Baghdadi, however, pairs up with other information demonstrating ISIS is an intelligence asset. “ I don’t have all the time in the world to research your claims -so provide the link-IF it has additional information that explains just what this information happens to be. Or don’t, if your intent is just to be a smart ass instead of actually providing the truth as you constantly claim you are doing.

              • V.H.
                “I am BF-but so far all I’ve found out is that Cryptome isn’t in possession of any of the documents. They are just arguing that they should all be released. So this is no way proves that the documents this claim is based on even exist.”

                True, hence the demand.

                “The allegation about ISIS and al-Baghdadi, however, pairs up with other information demonstrating ISIS is an intelligence asset.”

                Earlier this month Nabil Na’eem, the founder of the Islamic Democratic Jihad Party and former top al-Qaeda commander, told the Beirut-based pan-Arab TV station al-Maydeen all current al-Qaeda affiliates, including ISIS, work for the CIA. [just like Qari Zainuddin revealed that TTP Mehsud is CIA and like Siebel Edmons revealed Bin Lade was CIA until 9/11]

                In June a Jordanian official told Aaron Klein of WorldNetDaily ISIS members were trained in 2012 by U.S. instructors working at a secret base in Jordan. In 2012 it was reported the U.S., Turkey and Jordan were running a training base for the Syrian rebels in the Jordanian town of Safawi.

                Al-Baghdadi was reportedly a “civilian internee” at Camp Bucca, a U.S. military detention facility near Umm Qasr, Iraq. James Skylar Gerrond, a former U.S. Air Force security forces officer and a compound commander at Camp Bucca in 2006 and 2007, said earlier this month the camp “created a pressure cooker for extremism.”

                “Circumstantial evidence suggests that al-Baghdadi may have been mind-controlled while held prisoner by the US military in Iraq,” writes Dr. Kevin Barrett.


                The hornet’s nest strategy was designed to create the perception that Israel is threatened by an enemy near its borders.

                According to the personal diary of former Israeli prime minister Moshe Sharett, however, Israel never took seriously an Arab or Muslim threat to its national security.

                “Sharett’s diary reveals in explicit language that the Israeli political and military leadership never believed in any Arab danger to Israel,” writes Ralph Schoenman. “They sought to maneuver and force the Arab states into military confrontations which the Zionist leadership were certain of winning so Israel could carry out the destabilization of Arab regimes and the planned occupation of additional territory.”

                In 1982 Oded Yinon, an Israeli journalist with links to the Israeli Foreign Ministry, wrote The Zionist Plan for the Middle East.

                The white paper proposed “that all the Arab states should be broken down, by Israel, into small units” and the “dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unique areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run.”

                The destruction of the Arab and Muslim states, Yinon suggested, would be accomplished from within by exploiting their internal religious and ethnic tensions.

              • I still didn’t get any links but you did provide information I can use as a starting point.

  44. D13,

    More ass backwards history from you.

    “And while we are at it…..what is wrong with embargoes if you disagree with a direction that someone is taking? ie Japan in WWII…..”

    The US had no interest in Japan’s wars.

    “From December 1937 events such as the Japanese attack on the USS Panay and the Nanking Massacre swung public opinion in the West sharply against Japan and increased their fear of Japanese expansion, which prompted the United States, the United Kingdom, and France to provide loan assistance for war supply contracts to the Republic of China. Australia also prevented a Japanese government-owned company from taking over an iron mine in Australia, and banned iron ore exports in 1938.[38]

    However in July 1939, negotiations between Japanese Foreign Minister Arita Khatira and the British Ambassador in Tokyo, Robert Craigie, led to an agreement by which Great Britain recognized Japanese conquests in China. At the same time, the U.S. government extended a trade agreement with Japan for six months, then fully restored it.

    It had nothing to do with Japan’s military goals.

    It had to do with US need to enter the war in Europe to save Britain. By 1940, the US needed to provocate some event to enter the war. Prior to 1940, they didn’t give a damn about Japan.

  45. That’s something to ask of the author, not me.

  46. In a discussion about the use of the bomb to end the war,

    (Pacific War)

    1 JULY 1946


    “Nevertheless, it seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion.

    Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated. “

%d bloggers like this: