Jeb Bush, James Baker, and the Pro-Israel Mega-Donors

Jeb Bush, James Baker, and the Pro-Israel Mega-Donors

What is the issue, that gets little attention in the mainstream, is that the presidential candidates find it necessary to pay obeisance to ultra-powerful individuals who represent the interests of Israel, not the United States.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush waits backstage before speaking at the Iowa Agriculture Summit, Saturday, March 7, 2015, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

The Making of the Republicans’ Middle East Policy

by Dr. Stephen Sniegoski 

Addressing leading Manhattan financiers at a private meeting in the Metropolitan Republican Club on May 5, Jeb Bush (who is doing everything possible to act like a presidential candidate without yet officially making such an announcement) stated that former President George W. Bush (his brother) is his major advisor on Israel and the Middle East.

[1]The mainstream media has been focusing on a related utterance—Jeb’s initial claim that he would have done the same thing as his brother in attacking Iraq, a claim that he has been in the process of qualifying and requalifying. But it is the broader claim that deserves more analysis. It is equally outrageous just on its face, but there is much more to it.For while the mainstream media is analyzing in microscopic detail Jeb’s stumbling over his Iraq war response, it naturally ignores that third rail in contemporary American politics, the power of the Israel lobby.

Now anyone who would admit relying on foreign policy advice from Dubya should be automatically excluded from any position of authority, and most certainly from the presidency. Upon entering the White House, George W. Bush admitted he did not know much about the Middle East and most of what he would claim to be true has been thoroughly disproven. More than this, however, there is no evidence that George W. had much knowledge of anything. The late political commentator Christopher Hitchens described George W. in 2000 as

“unusually incurious, abnormally unintelligent, amazingly inarticulate, fantastically uncultured, extraordinarily uneducated, and apparently quite proud of all these things.”[2]

To understand the meaning here it is necessary to understand the context in which Jeb Bush was acting. The event was organized by GOP mega-donor Paul Singer,whom antiwar commentator Justin Raimondo aptly describes as

“one of the richest men in the world, whose financial interests and devotion to Israel combine to produce what can only be characterized as a singular obsession. ”[3]

Paul Singer’s billions are feeding America a diet of lies — Justin Raimondo, Chief Editor,
Paul Singer’s billions are feeding America a diet of lies — Justin Raimondo, Chief Editor,

The following is an abbreviated litany of Singer’s neocon-Israel lobby credentials: member of the board of directors of Commentary magazine and the Republican Jewish Coalition and a former member of the board of directors of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs; and major funder of the Middle East Media Research Institute, Center for Security Policy, and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Moreover, his foundation, the Paul E. Singer Foundation, has funded the American Enterprise Institute (which has been called “neocon central”) and The Israel Project.[4]

It is apparent that the rather intelligent (compared to George W.) Jeb is not going to rely on his know-nothing older brother for advice, but rather wanted to signal that he would follow his brother’s policies towards Israel and the Middle East and rely on advisors who were very similar, if not the same: namely the neocons.[5] The special reason Jeb considered it necessary to identify with his brother was to fend off fears on the part of the Israel lobby arising from the fact that James Baker had been included on a long list of possible political consultants released by the Jeb Bush team in February. Baker is a very close friend of the Bush family, and as secretary of state under the elder Bush, he had pursued policies diametrically opposed to the wishes of Israel and its American lobby.

I am sometimes asked if I have any regrets about publishing our book. As of today, my only regret is that it is not being published now. After the humiliations that Obama has endured at the hands of the Israel Lobby and the Hagel circus, we would sell even more copies and we would not face nearly as much ill-informed criticism. — Stephen Walt, co-author of the book.
I am sometimes asked if I have any regrets about publishing our book. As of today, my only regret is that it is not being published now. After the humiliations that Obama has endured at the hands of the Israel Lobby and the Hagel circus, we would sell even more copies and we would not face nearly as much ill-informed criticism. — Stephen Walt, co-author of the book.

The Israel lobby’s animosity to Baker had been rekindled in March when the former secretary of state, in a speech at a J Street (a liberal Zionist organization) meeting, castigated Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s rejection of a two-state solution and his policy of expanding Jewish settlements on the West Bank, which would be a vital part of any viable Palestinian state.

Faced with the outrage of wealthy pro-Likud Republicans, Bush quickly authorized a spokeswoman to state that Bush disagreed with Baker’s speech and that the unannounced candidate was actually giving “unwavering” support for both Israel and Netanyahu.[6]

Peter Baker in the New York Times wrote that “[a]lthough Bush had authorized his spokeswoman to publicly differ . . . Mr. Adelson and other pro-Israel donors are said to remain incensed at Mr. Bush for not stopping the speech or dumping Mr. Baker.”[7] Baker intensified the problem for Jeb Bush when on Fareed Zakaria’s CNN program Global Public Square(televised on April 5), he stated that he was “going to be working hard for Jeb Bush” to become president.[8]

To understand what makes Baker such a demonic figure to hardline members of the Israel Lobby, a quick flash back to Bush the Elder’s administration is needed.

George H. W. Bush, who entered office in 1989, continued the Reagan administration’s policy of providing military hardware and advanced technology to Iraq, which it had begun during the Iran-Iraq war, in the belief that this would cause Iraqi ruler Saddam Hussein to support the status quo. With the end of that war, however, tensions between Israel and Iraq worsened. Israel, which perceived Iraq as its greatest enemy, had covertly aided Iran in the aforementioned war.

US Media Barons
US Media Barons

The U.S. media, especially the pro-Israel media, was reporting that Iraq was rapidly producing nuclear materials, chemical weapons, and guided missiles. For example, U.S. News and World Report, a major news magazine at the time, owned by the pro-Israel Mortimer Zuckerman, titled its June 4, 1990 cover story about Saddam Hussein, “The World’s Most Dangerous Man.”[9]

The Bush administration, however, firmly resisted efforts to alter its relatively benign policy towards Iraq until the latter’s invasion of Kuwait on August 2, 1990 when it quickly performed a complete volte-face. Even then pro-Israel war hawks saw Baker as trying to temper American policy, first in terms of allowing Saddam a way to avoid being attacked by the U.S.and then, once the actual fighting started in January 1991, in refusing to go all out and remove Saddam and destroy Iraq’s military capacity, which reflected Israel’s goal of removing a regional rival.[10]In his 1995 memoirs, James Baker explained why the United States did not pursue such a hardline position, maintaining that the administration’s “overriding strategic concern in the [first] Gulf war was to avoid what we often referred to as the Lebanonization of Iraq, which we believed would create a geopolitical nightmare.”[11]

Obviously, this “political nightmare” was brought about by the George W. Bush administration, led by the pro-Israel neocons, and was exactly what the Israeli Likudniks sought in their goal of weakening all of their country’s enemies—one person’s nightmare is another person’s dream.

Zionists Architects of war
Zionists Architects of war

Problems between Israel and the United States also intensified over Israel’s housing expansion on the West Bank, which was undermining Baker’s effort to bring about a solution to the Palestine-Israel conflict. In line with most members of the traditional foreign policy establishment, Baker saw the solution of this conflict as essential to establishing stability in the entire Middle East region since it was the Israeli oppression of the Palestinians that created a major Arab grievance exploited by radical anti-American elements.

Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, a hardline Likudnik, had insisted on January 14, 1990, that the influx of Soviet Jews necessitated Israel’s retention of the West Bank. On March 1, 1990, Baker stipulated that American loan guarantees to Israel for new housing for the Soviet immigrants hinged on the cessation of settlements in the occupied territories. And on March 3, President Bush adamantly declared that there should be no more settlements in the West Bank or in East Jerusalem.[12]

Jimmy Carter unveils truth about Israel on Hardball
Jimmy Carter unveils truth about Israel on Hardball

Shamir, however, rejected the Bush administration’s entire effort to bring about a solution to the Palestinian problem. And Israel’s American supporters, especially of the right, were thoroughly on the side of the Israeli prime minister.[13]New York Times pro-Israel columnist William Safire complained that

“George Bush is less sympathetic to Israel’s concerns than any U.S. President in the four decades since that nation’s birth.”

Safire continued:

“Mr. Bush has long resisted America’s special relationship with Israel. His Secretary of State, James Baker, delights in sticking it to the Israeli right. His national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft, and chief of staff, John Sununu, abet that mind-set.”[14]

While American pressure on Israel had abated during the move to war with Iraq, with the end of that conflict the Bush administration returned with vigor to its pre-war effort of trying to curb Israeli housing expansion in the occupied territories. It focused on a demand that Israel stop constructing new settlements in the occupied territories as a condition for receiving $10 billion in U.S. loan guarantees for the resettlement of hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the former Soviet Union.

Israeli Settlements in Occupied Palestine
Israeli Settlements in Occupied Palestine

Despite Washington’s objections, Israel had launched a building boom in the occupied territories, intended by Shamir’s rightist government to ensure permanent Israeli control there. The plan would boost the Jewish settler population by 50 percent in two years. Asked in early April 1991 how Israel would respond to a U.S. request to freeze Jewish settlement activity, Ariel Sharon, then the housing minister, adamantly stated that “Israel has always built, is building and will in future build in Judea, Samaria [biblical names for the West Bank] and the Gaza Strip.”[15]

More Israeli settlements in Occupied Palestine
More Israeli settlements in Occupied Palestine

In May 1991, Secretary Baker harshly condemned the Jewish settlements in testimony before the Foreign Operations Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, asserting that “I don’t think that there is any bigger obstacle to peace.”[16]

Shamir’s Likud government and Israel’s American supporters strongly resisted the Bush administration’s efforts. In his September 12, 1991 news conference, Bush went before the television cameras to ask Congress to delay consideration of the $10 billion in loan guarantees being sought by Shamir. Bush dared to speak directly of the pro-Israel pressure on this measure, saying that

“I’m up against some powerful political forces, but I owe it to the American people to tell them how strongly I feel about the deferral. . . . I heard today there was something like a thousand lobbyists on the Hill working the other side of the question. We’ve got one lonely little guy down here doing it.”[17]

Since the lobbyists were obviously lobbying for Israel and the “lonely little guy” was the president of the United States, George H. W. Bush was essentially saying that the Israel lobby in the United States was more powerful than the president, at least on issues dealing with Israel, which was something that no mainstream person had ever dared to state in public.

Jewish-Americans of almost all persuasions, not just hardline Zionists, were enraged by the President’s statement, assuming that Bush was tapping into latent anti-Semitism,[18]though he was only referring to the lobby for a foreign country.

A poll showing that 86 percent of the American people supported the president on the housing issue might have made some members of the Bush administration, including James Baker, overly complacent about Bush’s ability to withstand an all-out onslaught by the Israel lobby.

When, in a private conversation, the danger of alienating Jewish Americans was broached to Secretary of State Baker, he was alleged to have uttered that most taboo-shattering of profanities: “F*ck the Jews. They didn’t vote for us.”[19] Obviously, the publication of this alleged statement greatly intensified the opposition of Jewish Americans to the Bush administration, and especially towards Baker. As an interesting side note that would seem to militate against any charge of anti-Semitism, J. J. Goldberg in Jewish Power: Inside the Jewish Establishment pointed out:

“In 1991, at the height of the Bush administration’s confrontation with Israel, no fewer than seven of the nineteen assistant secretaries in the State Department were Jews.”[20]

Bush’s popularity, however, turned out to be far less than solid. And as the 1992 presidential election approached, the Bush administration, seeing its popularity melt away, would try to mend fences with its pro-Israel critics. In July, Bush announced that the U.S. would provide the loan guarantees after all. His concession won him no pro-Israel support. Bush, of course, went down to defeat in his quest for a second term to Bill Clinton, who was backed by AIPAC with even some neocons defecting to him, and those who remained loyal to Bush did so in a lukewarm fashion. One of Bush’s remaining neocon backers, Daniel Pipes, acknowledged the difficulties in supporting the president.

“If there’s a lot of agreement on anything this election year,” Pipes wrote, “it’s that friends of Israel should not vote to re-elect George Bush. The mere mention of his name in Jewish circles evinces strong disappointment, even anger.”[21]

Jewish anger toward George H. W. Bush, however, paled compared to that directed toward James Baker.[22]

Now to return to the present. At the May 5, 2015, meeting, Jeb Bush said that he respected Baker but maintained that he was not part of his foreign-policy team and that the list of figures made public in February, which included Baker, was not indicative of the people he consults when he considers issues related to Israel. Jeb Bush also publicly embraced Israel’s Middle East policy, writing a piece in the National Journal condemning Obama’s talks with Iran as “risky” and saying that White House comments on Israeli leaders are “no way to treat an ally.”[23]

Obvious Jewish Influence in America
Obvious Jewish Influence in America

However, it is not simply Jeb Bush but all Republican candidates who are paying obeisance not simply to Israel but also to Netanyahu’s policies.  An article in the New York Times by Peter Baker was appropriately labeled,

“For G.O.P., Support for Israel Becomes New Litmus Test.”[24]

In a reference to the New York Times article, neocon luminary Bill Kristol tweeted on March 25, in one of his infrequent strays into the domain of truth, that “Bibi would probably win the Republican nomination if it were legal.”[25]

What has caused the Republican Party to be so infatuated with Likudnik Israel?   The cause usually given in the mainstream media, when this issue is addressed at all, is the Christian evangelicals.

Political commentator Jim Lobe, however, depicts the role of the big money pro-Israel donors as paramount in shaping the Middle East positions of Republican presidential aspirants. “Now, it may be,” Lobe opines, “that Bush feels he has to say such things in order to appeal to the Republican base constituencies, including ardent Christian Zionists who are most likely to vote in the party’s presidential primaries.

But I sense that this is more about campaign finance and wooing [Sheldon] Adelson and very wealthy colleagues, such as Paul Singer, in the Republican Jewish Coalition.

Readers of this blog, of course, remember last year’s so-called ‘Sheldon Primary’ at Adelson’s Venetian casino resort in Las Vegas where a sizable number of presidential hopefuls ‘kissed the ring’ of a man who probably contributed more money to defeating Obama in 2012 than any other. It was also where Chris Christie, that tough guy from New Jersey, felt obliged to personally apologize to Adelson for referring to the West Bank as ‘occupied territories.’”[26]

For Adelson, Koch brothers, buying a politician is good business.
For Adelson, Koch brothers, buying a politician is good business.

The actions of Jeb Bush would seem to confirm Lobe’s view that support for Israel has more to do with the pro-Zionist mega-donors than the Christian evangelicals. For Bush simply does not kowtow to the Christian evangelicals to the same degree that he does to the Israel lobby magnates. For instance, in regard to same sex marriage, the opposition to which is a key issue for conservative evangelicals, Bush has two public supporters of that issue, David Kuchel and Tim Miller, on his team. And it has been reported that when Bush announces his presidential run, Kochel is slotted to lead his national campaign and Miller would be the communications director. However, despite strong criticism about these two individuals from evangelicals, Bush has resisted removing them even though they are far closer to holding positions where they could influence his policies than would have been Baker, whose name was merely on a list that included numerous individuals.[27]

In sum, it would seem that Bush and other Republican candidates face a difficult but not insurmountable task in trying to win over the hardline pro-Zionist mega-donors without alienating a significant number of the Republican primary voters opposed to unnecessary wars.

The unexpected Baker brouhaha caught Bush and his team unprepared. Baker obviously carries weight in the mainstream, being selected by Congress to head the Iraq Study Group in 2006. Moreover, as a close friend of the Bush family, it would seem quite reasonable for him to be listed as one of the foreign policy experts behind Bush—and it might even raise questions if he were omitted.

James Baker III served as Secretary of State in the George H. W. Bush administration.
James Baker III served as Secretary of State in the George H. W. Bush administration.

It was the outright fear of being rejected by the mega-donors that caused Bush and his team to focus on the immediate problem and have him make some unqualified statements that have caused political trouble.

But backtracking, qualifying previous statements, and holding outright contrary positions at the same time is quite common for political candidates. And successful presidential candidates tend to be those who best manage to bridge over seemingly contrary positions. Since it is still very early in the 2016 campaign, there is no reason to think that the Jeb Bush team would not be able to do this.

In short, what has been made a major issue by the mainstream media is really a non-issue.

What is the issue, that gets little attention in the mainstream, is that the presidential candidates find it necessary to pay obeisance to ultra-powerful individuals who represent the interests of Israel, not the United States.

George Washington in his Farewell Address wrote of the grave danger posed by Americans who had such a “passionate attachment” to a foreign country; what exists now is a “passionate attachment”on steroids that undercuts American security.

See:  For G.O.P., Support for Israel Becomes New Litmus Test


[1] Robert Costa and Matea Gold, “One of Jeb Bush’s top advisers on Israel: George W. Bush,” May 7, 2015,

[2] Molly Driskoll, “10 of the more memorable quotes from journalist and author Christopher Hitchens,” Christian Science Monitor,

[3] Justin Raimondo, “Follow the Money,”, May 11, 2015,

[4]“Paul Singer,” Right Web, Last updated May 15, 2015,

[5]Ed O’Keefe, “The world according to Jeb Bush,” Washington Post, April 16, 2015,

[6] Jim Lobe, “Another Likud Republican: Jeb Bush Pledges ‘Unwavering’ Support for Bibi,” March 24, 2015, LobeLog,

[7]Peter Baker, “For G.O.P., Support for Israel Becomes New Litmus Test,” New York Times, March 27, 2015,

[8] Kevin Bohn, “James Baker’s Netanyahu comments cause headaches for Jeb Bush,” CNN, April 6, 2015,

[9] “The World’s Most Dangerous Man,” U.S. News and World Report, May 16, 2008 (story originally appeared in the June 4, 1990, issue of U.S.News & World Report),

[10] Avi Shlaim, The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001), pp. 473-74, 483-84.

[11] James A. Baker III, with Thomas M. DeFrank, The Politics of Diplomacy: Revolution, War, and Peace, 1989–1992 (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1995), p. 435.

[12]Steven Hurst, The Foreign Policy of the Bush Administration (London: Cassell, 1999), pp. 29-34, 72-76.


[14] William Safire, “Bush versus Israel,” New York Times, March 26, 1990, p. A-17.

[15]Tom Diaz, “Israelis aren’t making Baker’s job any easier,” Washington Times, April 8, 1991, p. A-9.

[16] Warren Strobel, “Baker condemns Israeli settlement policy,” Washington Times, May 23, 1991, p. A-8.

[17] George H. W. Bush, The President’s News Conference, September 12th, 1991, Public Papers of George Bush: 1989-1993, The American Presidency Project,; Warren Strobel, “Bush won’t back loan to Jewish state,” Washington Times, March 18, 1992, p. A-7; Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), pp. 218-23.

[18] J. J. Goldberg, Jewish Power: Inside the Jewish Establishment (Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1996), pp. xxii.

[19] Warren Strobel, “Bush won’t back loan to Jewish state,” Washington Times, March 18, 1992, p. A-7; Michael Hedge, “Israeli lobby president resigns over promises,” Washington Times, November 4, 1992, p. A-3; “Loan Guarantees for Israel,” Washington Times, September 11, 1992, p. F-2; Frank Gaffney, Jr., “Neocon job that begs for answers,” Washington Times, October 13, 1992, p. F-1; Andrew Borrowed, “Group counters Bush on Israel,” Washington Times, February 27, 1992, p. A-1; Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), pp. 218-23; Baker quoted in John Herman, The Rise of Neo-conservatism: Intellectuals and Foreign Affairs, 1945-1994 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995), p. 197 

[20]J. J. Goldberg, p, 234.

[21] Daniel Pipes, “Bush, Clinton, and the Jews: A Debate,” Commentary, October, 1992,

[22]Saul Jay Singer, “George Bush, James Baker, and the Jews,” Jewish Press, March 12, 2015,

[23]Philip Weiss, “Jeb Bush bashes Iran talks as ‘foolish’ and hails Israeli settlements as ‘new apartment buildings in Jerusalem,’” Mondoweiss, March 25, 2015,

[24] Peter Baker, “For G.O.P., Support for Israel Becomes New Litmus Test,” March 27, 2015,

[25]Bill Kristol, “Bibi would probably win the Republican nomination if it were legal,” Twitter, March 28, 2015,

[26]Lobe, “Another Likud Republican: Jeb Bush Pledges ‘Unwavering’ Support for Bibi,” March 24, 2015,

[27] Ralph Halliwell, “Jeb Bush misfires with evangelicals over gay marriage supporters in inner circle,” Washington Times, May 5, 2015,;Jennifer Jacobs,“Iowa’s David Kochel goes all in for Jeb Bush,” Des Moines Register, January 29, 2015,

Previous articleIsrael's Descent into Barbarism -- Norman Finkelstein
Next articleSix banks fined $5.8 billion for market rigging
Dr. Stephen J. Sniegoski, Ph.D. earned his doctorate in American history,with a focus on American foreign policy, at the University of Maryland. His focus on the neoconservative involvement in American foreign policy antedates September 11, 2001. His first major work on the subject, “The War on Iraq: Conceived in Israel” was published February 10, 2003, more than a month before the American attack. He is the author of “The Transparent Cabal: The Neoconservative Agenda, War in the Middle East, and the National Interest of Israel”. Read more articles by Stephen J. Sniegoski at:


  1. Obama’s inability to effect CHANGE on his watch, if that was in fact really his intention, has exposed to the world the powerlessness of the office of the President of United States.

    Unfortunately, the obvious power of the pro-Israel mega-donors (which of only a part of what James Petras aptly describes as the Zionist Power Configuration) is not given the attention it deserves in the mainstream, and is usually not mentioned at all on mainstream TV news. One has to look hard to see it even in the major newspapers such as the Washington Post.

    The mainstream continuously distracts the sheeple, focuses on Hillary Clinton’s emails or even the millions that the Clinton’s have received for their foundation without pointing out the huge amounts Haim Saban (“I’m a one-issue guy, and my issue is Israel) has provided, which I have always tried to highlight here at MCS at every opportunity.

    Most American voters are completely unaware of the fact that people with a “passionate attachment” to a foreign country (the grave danger that George Washington in 1796 warned about) are determining US Middle East Policy—in regard to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, this is completely the case.

    No potential presidential candidate says that Israel oppresses the Palestinians and that this is not only immoral but does severe harm to American interests. Former Congressman Ron Paul might have been the best in terms of being opposed to intervention in the Middle East. However, he has been shunned and not mentioned much in the US media.Then there’s a former Senator Jim Webb, you hardly hear of him.

    Here is an exception:

    He is noticed in Israel:

    The American people are totally distracted by MSM every election year and focused on other issues—the economy (spending, taxation, jobs, minimum wage, and trade policies), immigration (especially in regard to currently illegal immigrants), morality issues (same-sex marriage, abortion), women’s issues, Medicare and Social Security benefits, education (the college debt) and fighting terrorism (but no connection to Israel—Iran, though, is often described as the principal perpetrator of terrorism).

    Maybe, the power of Israel over the US policy might be noticed by the American people some day, but I don’t think it will be 2016. ?

    The world can’t wait! Putin and Xi are offering the world a positive strategic shift. The world must seize this moment and move on.

    • Debbie wrote: “Putin and Xi are offering the world a positive strategic shift. The world must seize this moment and move on.”

      Fascinating article by Peter Lee on the importance of the Belgrade bombing — Lee argues that USA’s “accidentally” sending 5 planes that dropped bombs on the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999 was a game-changer for Chinese people who had had a rosy image of US.

      • Obama is charged with having no foreign policy. That is wrong. His policy is to withdraw America from world obligations as much as possible in order to open up the vast funds released by such a withdrawal to create a social welfare state for the benefit of the black population. What shall American spend their money on? Futile efforts to nation build abroad? Or futile efforts to civilize the savage blacks who have resisted improvement for centuries? Take your pick.

        • Norman,

          Who said Obama lacks a foreign policy ? I spoke of the Powerlessness of the office of the US President to effect change, due to Zionist power and infiltration in the US government and all influential institutions in America. Intentionally or not Obama has done a good job exposing Zionist power in Washington.

          Diverting attention away from the real target, is now a well known Hasbara tool Norman!

          Returning to Zionist influence in USG watch this video.

          An Open Letter to Senator Harry Reid:

          It requires distribution and dissemination across the length and breadth of North America. Every American should know the truth.

  2. The pro-Israel Lobby in America puts in jeapardy the bulk of American Jews who for the first time may be guilty of dual loyalty. The policies of Israel’s Fascistic Likud Party and the support for these policies by the Israel Lobby and its stooges among American Jews and evangelicals are mother’s milk for antisemites who can now find justification for their most outrageous claims. Indeed, Hitler would be joyful if he could see how the Elders of Israel operate in the United States which he, falsely but now perhaps accurately, could be seen as dominated by Jews and their narrow interests.

    • @ norman ravitch

      People are responsible for the things which they do not do as well as for the things which they do do, and in moral as well as statutory codes, one can be just as guilty by inaction as one can be by action.

      One cannot thrive off the benefits of Empire and Imperial Citizenship, without paying the Imperial Tax, and answering for the Imperial crimes against humanity.

      And btw, it might help to watch this video:

      Anti-Semitism: Zionism’s Indispensable Alibi

      • there seem to be some disparities between the video’s version of Ben Hecht’s zionist activities and those reported about Hecht on wikipedia.

        The latter says:

        QUOTE: His indifference to Jewish issues changed when he met Hillel Kook, who was drumming up American assistance for the Zionist group Irgun under the name “Peter Bergson.” Hecht wrote in his book, Perfidy, that he used to be a scriptwriter until his meeting with Bergson, when he accidentally bumped into history – i.e. the burning need to do anything possible to save the doomed Jews of Europe (paraphrase from Perfidy). As Hecht relates it in Child of the Century, he didn’t feel particularly Jewish in his daily life until Bergson shook him out of his assimilated complacency: Bergson invited Hecht to ask three close friends whether, in their opinion, Hecht was an American or a Jew. All three replied that he was a Jew, Hecht says.

        Like many stories Hecht told about his life, that tale may be apocryphal, but after meeting Bergson, Hecht quickly became a member of his inner circle and dedicated himself to some of the goals of the group, particularly the rescue of Europe’s Jews.

        Hecht “took on a ten year commitment to publicize the atrocities befalling his own religious minority, the Jews of Europe and the quest for survivors, to find a permanent home in the Middle East.”[27] In 1943, during the midst of the Holocaust, he predicted, in a widely published article in Reader’s Digest magazine, “Of these 6,000,000 Jews [of Europe], almost a third have already been massacred by Germans, Romanians, and Hungarians, and the most conservative of scorekeepers estimate that before the war ends at least another third will have been done to death.”[29]

        Also in 1943, “out of frustration over American policy and outrage at Hollywood’s fear of offending its European markets,” he organized and wrote a pageant, We Will Never Die, which was produced by Billy Rose and Ernst Lubitsch and with the help of composer Kurt Weill and staging by Moss Hart. The pageant was performed at Madison Square Garden for two shows in front of 40,000 people in March, 1943. It then traveled nationwide, including a performance at the Hollywood Bowl. Hecht was disappointed nonetheless. As Weill noted afterward, “”The pageant has accomplished nothing. Actually, all we have done is make a lot of Jews cry, which is not a unique accomplishment.”[30]:237

        New York City opening of A Flag is Born at the Alvin Playhouse
        Following the war, Hecht openly supported the Jewish insurgency in Palestine, a campaign of violence being waged by underground Zionist groups (the Haganah, Irgun, and Lehi) in Palestine. Hecht was a member of the Bergson Group, an Irgun front group in the United States run by Peter Bergson, which was active in raising money for the Irgun’s activities and disseminating Irgun propaganda.

        Hecht wrote the script for the Bergson Group’s production of A Flag is Born, which opened on September 5, 1946 at the Alvin Playhouse in New York City. The play, which compared the Zionist underground’s campaign in Palestine to the American Revolution, was intended to increase public support for the Zionist cause in the United States. The play starred Marlon Brando and Paul Muni during its various productions. The proceeds from the play were used to purchase a ship that was renamed the SS Ben Hecht, which carried 900 Holocaust survivors to Palestine in March 1947. The Royal Navy captured the ship after it docked, and 600 of its passengers were detained as illegal immigrants and sent to the Cyprus internment camps. The SS Ben Hecht later became the flagship of the Israeli Navy. The crew was imprisoned by the British authorities in Acre Prison, and assisted in the preparations for the Acre Prison break.[31][32][33]

        His most controversial action during this period was writing an open letter to the Jewish insurgents in May 1947 which openly praised underground violence against the British. It included the highly controversial passage: “Every time you blow up a British arsenal, or wreck a British jail, or send a British railroad train sky high, or rob a British bank, or let go with your guns and bombs at the British betrayers and invaders of your homeland, the Jews of America make a little holiday in their hearts.”[34][6][35][36][37]

        Six months after the establishment of Israel, the Bergson Group was dissolved, followed by a dinner in New York City where former Irgun commander Menachem Begin appeared, saying, “I believe that my people, liberated and re-assembled in its country, will contribute its full share toward the progress of all mankind … [and predicted] that all of Palestine eventually would be free and that peace and brotherhood would prevail among Arabs and Jews alike.”[38]

        Thanks to his fund-raising, speeches, and jawboning, Sternlicht writes, “Ben Hecht did more to help Jewish refugees from the Holocaust and to ensure the survival of the nascent state of Israel than any other American Jew in the twentieth century”. As much as anything, it was the abiding love of his Jewish parents and Rose Hecht that motivated the writer to become arguably “the most effective propagandist the Jewish state ever had.” In 1964, at Hecht’s funeral service at Temple Rodeph Shalom in New York City, among the eulogists was Menachem Begin.[4] ” END QUOTE

        I’m not willing to climb aboard that movement that holds “the bulk of American Jews” to be ‘victims’ of zionism.

        The narrator’s assertion that “Jews are the yeast of civilization” is a bridge too far. In fact, in my view, such claims of specialness are the heart of the problem.

        If “the bulk of American Jews” perceive themselves to be as dramatically different from “zionists” as the video narrator and N Ravitch claim, then it is their job to put THEIR “lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor” on the line to demand that their erstwhile ‘fellow’ Jews-zionists stop their evil behavior.

        I’m an American.
        My job is to defend my country against what I perceive as threats to the American commonweal.

        As I observe the situation, the most critical of those threats to the USA is zionist Israel. There is no way that I can know if a Jewish person that I encounter is zionist or not.

        I didn’t create that situation.

        Nobody in my group — non-Jews — is provided special protection such as is provided by the US State Department Office that monitors antisemitism.

        Nobody in my group — non-Jews — ever collected massive reparations from a war that was started by Jews.

        Jewish people created these situations.

        I didn’t create the situation nor, in fact and reality, did my group — non-Jews.

        For almost ten years I have been arguing on forums like this that we must confront this problem and resolve it in a different way than has been done before: I have argued for a “truth and reconciliation” process whereby zionists-Jews acknowledge their acts and make reparation, with the counterbalancing promise that no further punishment would be exacted.

        For my pains I have been called an antisemite times beyond counting.

        About 8 years ago, on one forum, someone wrote, “Why do you hate Jews?”

        I’ve thought and thought and thought about that question.
        My automatic response was and remained: I do NOT hate Jews. I was raised not only to not hate Jews but to hold them in special regard. My Mother would reach down and clobber me if I expressed any negative sentiment toward Jews.

        “Why do you hate Jews”?

        The question nags and nags, and as the years roll by and the research-produced evidence piles up, it terrifies me to think that I have come to hate Jews, not qua Jews, but as the complicit-perpetrators of not just one but several of history’s most egregious and on-going crimes against humanity, the willful destruction of Germany, of Palestine, of Iraq, of Syria, with Iran in the crosshairs.

        I hate those who have committed these crimes against humanity not only because they have done so, killing many people, destroying many dreams, futures, cultures and possibilities, but also because the culture and vision of the US Constitutional republic has been distorted beyond recognition in service to that destructive force.

      • @ Chas Mark.

        The person on Youtube– who looks to be a gentile– criticizing Harry Reid probably felt he had to make a statement about the good Jews coming to Israel. He might not have known what he was saying. Yes, Ben Hecht, whom he seemed to idolize, was an Irgun terrorist.

    • Let’s examine your comment bit by bit, N Ravitch —

      “The pro-Israel Lobby in America puts in jeapardy the bulk of ***American Jews who ***for the first time *** may be guilty of dual loyalty.*** ”

      Hardly the “first time” Jews, especially East European-origin and zionist Jews have used the USA to pursue Jewish benefits, advantage and interests, at the cost of American lives and treasure:

      –Louis Brandeis used his positions in US government to gain advantages for zionist Jews from at least the WWI era.

      –Harry Dexter White was the ‘brains’ behind US Secretary of Treasury Henry Morgenthau Jr. White and Morgenthau funneled money and weapons to Stalin’s Russia at a time when Bolsheviks were killing Ukrainians and fellow Russians by the millions — well before Hitler was in power.

      White was employed by Stalin’s Russia to spy on USA even as he led the Bretton Woods talks that defined how US economy would function, from 1944 to today (more or less).

      –Benzion Netanyahu, Bibi’s father & model, was a keen admirer of Vladimir Jabotinsky, the father of revisionist zionism, the hyper-militant version of an already racist political movement that has only increased in its hold over the Israeli-Jewish modus operandi and weltanshauung. Benzion worked side-by-side with Jabotinsky as the terror gang’s leader traveled throughout the USA in the years preceding and during World War II, drumming up support and funding for Jewish terror activities geared to the displacement of Arabs and Christians in Palestine.

      Israel’s Likud party’s racist, terrorist, militaristic policies that embrace mass murder in imitation of Moses are not something the world is seeing “for the first time.” They are part and parcel of the foundational ideology of zionism.

      I suppose one could quibble semantically about the term “dual loyalty.” People like Brandeis, White, Morgenthau, Netanyahu had only one loyalty, to Jewish interests and advantage. The USA was simply an instrument used to bring about Jewish benefits.

      Jews have been a migratory people since their beginning in Ur, when Abraham smashed the icons of other people’s gods, then fled, seeking greener pastures where he would be called to account for his offense against the “homeland.” If things go badly for Jews in the USA, they will leave. Genuine loyalty to the USA means that a patriot stands by his homeland even when it is in a state of distress; he does what he can to heal the situation rather than flee to another place where his own advantages can be pursued.

      nb. Please refrain from applying “fascistic” willy-nilly to Israel’s Jewish zionist behavior. Fascism was Mussolini’s program for bringing about Italian unity and prosperity; it was based on classical Roman and Italian political concepts and forthrightly applied in a disciplined fashion. Zionism is its own breed of evil, it’s most reprehensible feature being its ineluctable foundation in deception — everything about zionism is based on lies.

      re: “mother’s milk for antisemites who can now find justification for their most outrageous claims. ”

      Let’s start with definitions: “antisemitism” is most appropriately defined as “hatred of Jews JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE JEWS.” By definition, antisemitism is an “uncaused” reaction.
      Therefore, if one reacts negatively to the “policies of Likud and Israely lobby,” they are reacting to SOMETHING: true to Newton, they are obeying the laws of nature and reacting to a CAUSE. The reaction is NOT, therefore, “antisemitism.” Rather, it is the eminently rational and natural reaction to an action that poses a threat to their own well-being.

      N Ravitch, you would have to provide more detail for “outrageous claims” before that portion of your comment can be adequately addressed.

      re: “Indeed, ***Hitler*** would be joyful if he could see how the Elders of Israel operate in the United States which he, ***falsely but now perhaps accurately, could be seen as dominated by Jews and their narrow interests.*** ”

      There are three books on my desk at the moment:

      “The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda during World War II and the Holocaust,” by Jeffrey Herf;

      “The Jew Who Defeated Hitler: Henry Morgenthau, Jr …” by Peter Moreira;


      “How the Jews Defeated Hitler,” by Benjamin Ginsberg

      All three authors make these similar, self-contradicting claims:

      1. Hitler repeatedly but fallaciously claimed that Jews were trying to destroy Germany economically;
      2. Jews were actively involved in financial activities designed to destroy Germany and their success in pursuing these activities resulted in the defeat of Germany in World War II.

      Do you see the contradiction here, N Ravitch?

      By Morgenthau’s and Ginsberg’s own accounts, Hitler was NOT speaking falsely when he said that US policy was “dominated by Jews and their narrow interests” in destroying Germany. — With this caveat: Charles Lindbergh was more accurate than Hitler when he said that “three groups sought war against Germany: FDR’s administration; Churchill’s Britain; and Jews.” Then again, Jews were active participants in the war-making activities of each of those three categories, and Felix Frankfurter acted as the ringmaster.

      So what has become of your comment, N Ravitch:
      — it’s not antisemitism if there is a cause, and there is now, as there was then, a cause for people to register negative reactions to Jews.

      The solution, therefore, seems to reside in the causal behavior: if Jews do not wish to find themselves on the receiving end of negative reactions, they should stop the behavior that provokes that negative reaction.

      The core behavior that provokes negative reactions is lying.

      Jews, or especially zionists, should stop lying to themselves, first and foremost, as well as to the rest of the world about their deeply embraced sense of moral superiority, as well as their unique victimhood, as well as their astonishing claims to innocence in the deaths of so many millions of Russians, Germans, Palestinians, Iraqis, Syrians, etc.

      • Chas Mark,

        If you stop to engage guys like this (ravitch) you will never get anywhere. You will still be dealing with him when they pull all of the rest of the buildings, and you will go down in the collapse.

  3. Norman,

    I think you should realise that your efforts to stir up the anti-Semite holocaust deniers is patently obvious to all who read and understand all that your ?well-planned comment portrays.

    It is clear why this is being done. However, you are somewhat naive if you don’t realise that the true-blue and dedicated anti-Semites are somewhat more learned than they used to be, based on past failures, so your efforts are seriously wasted on this exercise.

    One is a poor observer if one cannot read between the lines and time, the best educator of all, provides the ability to tell fish from fowl.

    • rexw — I’ve said before and I will repeat and repeat until it takes hold:

      The holocaust narrative is a lie.
      To allow oneself to be named a “holocaust denier” buys into the holocaust “frame,” the pre-assumption that the holocaust narrative as handed down from on high is “true” but that This, That or the Other person irrationally “denies” this truth.

      I don’t allow myself to be bounded by that frame; it closes off the much larger context of the entire history.

      Ben MacIntyre’s “Operation Mincemeat” describes the psy-ops/propaganda operation devised and carried out by the British to try to conceal from the Germans the site of the planned Allied landings in Italy. In the opening pages of the book MacIntyre informs readers that he gathered the information from the papers of the Jewish man, Ewen Montagu, who was a director of the office of propaganda. MacIntyre wrote that:

      “Montagu referred to “some memoranda which, in very special circumstances and for a very particular reason, I was allowed to keep.” . . . I could think of no other case in which a former intelligence officer had been “allowed to keep” classified documents. Indeed, retaining top secret material is exactly what intelligence officers are supposed not to do. And if Ewen Montagu had kept them for so many years after the war, where were they now?” [pp. 3-4]

      Indeed: where were the papers NOW, and also: If Montagu and his cohort participating in building what Churchill called a “bodyguard of lies” to surround the invasion of Italy to the extent of finding a corpse and attaching a completely fictionalized identity to it, is it reasonable to assume that a similar “bodyguard of lies” was created by Britain’s propaganda ministry to conceal the firebombing campaign that US and British forces were carrying on against German civilians by falsely claiming that Jews were being “incinerated” by industrial means?

      Is evidence of that propaganda campaign still hidden among Ewan Montagu’s purloined papers?

      I have better things to do with my life than speculate on the hiding place of evidence of the propaganda campaign that created the holocaust narrative. My life is richer without that hate-seeking missile.

      But Jews can’t seem to let it go.

      Yesterday as we were on our way to a Memorial Day picnic on the lake, we turned on the radio to check on traffic. It was NPR, and the piece that greeted us was an interview of a woman of 80-or so years who had just returned from “bearing witness” against Oskar Groening, “accused Nazi death camp guard.”
      The woman said that as a ten-year old she, her twin sister and other family members were taken to Auschwitz. She became ill and, as she said she recalls, “Dr. Mengele stood by her bed and said she would not live for more than two weeks.” He had a smirk on his face, she said.

      The woman then said that had she NOT survived, Dr. Mengele would have killed her twin sister ” — something about using her sister’s organs to compare to her own — I don’t recall the words exactly.

      The woman and her NPR interviewer engaged in several minutes of moralizing about forgiving and not forgiving; demanding accountability of all Nazis everywhere, no matter how old; giving her a chance to confront Germans with their hatred of Jews, etc.

      The segment made me angry.
      The woman is, after all, alive; she has been alive for 70 or more years after this experience of having been cared for in a hospital run by Germans at which “Dr. Mengele” smirked at her bedside at the prospect of her death.

      The accusations leveled at “Dr. Mengele” are pure speculation: “he WOULD HAVE done this IF I had died . . .”

      She was ten years old. She had so serious a fever that her life was threatened. She survived. Due to the care received in a German hospital where “Dr. Mengele” presided.

      Where did that woman come up with the bullshit logic that “they would have killed my sister;” why did a lawyer think it was appropriate to present that bogus testimony in a case against O. Groening; why does NPR continually pollute its airways with this garbage; what makes NPR think its audience is so stupid that it can’t see through this shit; and when are Jews going to wake up to the fact that we are sick and tired of their lies?

      “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” Exodus 20:16

      “Who is my neighbor?” Luke 10:29

      Dual loyalty.

      80 +- years on this earth and she learned NOTHING about the human community. That 80ish year old Jewish woman was willing to lie through her dentures if it was “good for the Jews” and could heighten hatred of the Other.

      Still obscure? Still delphic?

      • @ Chas Mark.

        Returning to the enormous influence Zionist/Jews wield in the USG and some so-called anti-Zionists in the ‘Liberation of Palestine Movements’, you might find interesting this comment on a thread debating the issue, by none other than a Jew himself, a brave and honest man Jeff Blankfort :


        While being Jewish and being Zionist are not necessarily the same thing, most Jews are philosophically Zionists, although the majority is not part of the Israel Lobby. On the other hand, anyone reading the Old Testament, our friends in Neturie Karta not withstanding, can see that there is a direct connection between Orthodox or Fundamentalist Judaism and Zionism; that the mentality that created the Jewish god who then, we were told, ordered the early Jews to commit the most violent of genocides against people who never harmed them, is the same mentality that lies at the root of Zionism as practiced in modern day Israel. To repeat, it is also true that despite its well publicized crimes the vast majority of Jews and virtually the entire organized Jewish community in the US, Western Europe, South Africa,and Australia, support the Zionist Jewish state. To pretend that those of us who seriously oppose Zionism and the existence of a Jewish state are anything other than a relatively small handful is to deceive ourselves and others.

        To pretend that Judaism can be separated from Zionism is also a deception.Just take a look, for example, at three Jewish holidays, all of which celebrate death, not of Jews but of others. Passover memorializes the story of the angel of death passing over the Jewish homes while marking those of innocent Egyptians for death. Who was that angel working for, if not Yaweh, the Jewish god?

        Then we have Purim in which Jewish children dress up as clowns and everyone has fun. What are they celebrating? The massacre of 75,000 Persians by the Jews (an early pre-emptive strike since we are told, as we have been told lies about Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon) that they were ready to do the same to the Jews). Finally, there is Hannukah which celebrates the bloody victory of the Jewish fundamentalists over the Jewish secularists, called Hellenists at the time. Frankly, there is something wrong with a religion that celebrates such holidays, the authenticity of the stories being irrelevant.

        There was a time, when I was much younger and thought much as you did, because I was raised in an atmosphere where Jews were in the leadership and predominant in the ranks of virtually every progressive political struggle. That was my parents generation. But then I discovered to my horror, when I returned from my first visit to the ME in 1970, that when it came to the Palestinians, almost all of them were transformed into racist, screaming Afrikaners, my parents being a rare exception. I know since I experienced their venom.

        I also take serious issue with you and Mick discounting the number of Jews in the Obama administration as a distraction and that it “takes us toward the extreme right.” Rather, it points us towards the truth. If it was only the number of Jews we are considering I would agree but in the case of the Obama administration we have what the Israelis consider to be “warm Jews,” those strongly pro-Zionist, in a number of key State Dept. positions as well as in the Treasury including Stuart Levey and David Cohen, the top two men deciding what Muslim groups will be put on department’s “terrorist list,” Daniel Benjamin, in charge of “counter-terrorism” for the National Security Council, and Kenneth Katzman, in charge of analyzing the Persian Gulf region for the Congressional Research Service. The head of that department in Treasury, Levey frequently speaks before Zionist organizations where he brags, as he does to the mainstream media, that he is “the decider.”

        Not a word of criticism let alone mention of his name and what he does have I heard from any Jewish anti-zionist other than Phil Weiss on his Mondoweiss blog. It was, in fact, Malcolm Hoenlein, executive director of the Conf of Presidents of Major Jewish American Organizations, who bragged to the Jewish weekly Forward in 1995 how he helped to formulate the first Effective Death Penalty and Counter Terrorism Act under Bill Clinton which initiated the economic war against Palestinian institutions. Is speaking about that and Levey’s role in enforcing the law a dangerous distraction or an important fact everyone should know in waging a serious struggle for Palestinian rights? Passionate rhetoric, on the other hand, such as what we hear and read from Chomsky and Finkelstein, who also never mention the role of Levey and the history of Hoenlein, leaves me cold. Particularly when they oppose BDS targeting Israel.

        Should we be concerned about oil company insiders and pharmaceutical drug lobbyists getting jobs with the government but keep silent when it comes to pro-Israel Jews in Washington and try to silence others who raise the issue? Is it not of historical importance that the election to presidency of Bill Clinton led to what an Israeli journalist described as a Judaization of the State Dept., a situation that has not only not changed but grown more serious with each successive administration? Does IJAN not take any interest in that? Is it “anti-semitic” to bring it up? I am not only bringing this up because I unconditionally support the rights of the Palestinian people to regain and return their ancient homeland but I am also concerned with what the American Jewish Establishment, through its ham handed support for Israel and its stranglehold on Congress and on the White House have done to undermine what is left of our democracy. Does IJAN taken a position on that?


        Jeff Blankfort


        • “that the mentality that created the Jewish god who then, we were told, ordered the early Jews to commit the most violent of genocides against people who never harmed them”

          We now know that the Joshuan conquest story is only a fantasy. And the Bible is a myth.

          • Of course much of the Bible is myth. The Jews wrote the Bible, so when they tell you God choose them and gave them Palestine should they be believed? What if some German came along with a manuscript allegedly from Wotan which gave all of Poland and the Baltic to Germany? Would you accept it?

            The bible contains much of value and food for thought. But the idea that God wrote it or dictated it is absurd. Charles Maurras, that old right-wing scoundrel in France, once wrote that the Gospels were written by four obscure Jews. Wasn’t he right?

  4. Thanks Debbie.

    I met Jeff Blankfort at National Summit 2014.

    He was disparaged by none other than Justin Raimondo!

    Phil Weiss, the antizionist who runs the website that has banned Blankfort, said at Nat Summit 2014 that the people of USA “owe Jews a debt for the holocaust, and thereby, they owe Palestinians a debt as well.”

    I am sick of that kind of BullStones and I will not sit still for it any more.

    Even the alleged ‘good guys’ are compelled to curtsy to the zionists, and the fact that Nat Summit 2015 was NOT carried by C Span should suggest that not even those gestures toward the I lobby were adequate.

    What zionists — JEWS — are doing to Palestinians is 100% the responsibility and culpability and crime against humanity of JEWS.

    I didn’t do it. In fact, my well-being and that of those dear to me is in jeopardy because of actions engineered by Israeli and American JEWS.

    I played NO PART whatsoever in strangling the German economy to provoke an already prostrate nation; no part in manipulating FDR’s government, no part in propagandizing the American people to cause them HATE Germans, and now Iranians (as well as Muslims/Arabs/Palestinians) so much that they were willing to kill them on a mass scale.

    I play NO PART in what JEWS in Israel are doing to Palestinians, and also what is being done to most of the people of the Middle East by my government at the behest of Israeli JEWS.

    Damned if I will placate the “good Jews” and do the work that THEY MUST do if they want to live at peace in the United States or anyplace else.

    While you and I and the legion of non-Jews who research and write and speak out on these issues spend their time and risk their careers and relationships, JEWS are cashing in. People like us have to keep our heads down; don’t have access to media or publishing houses. Most blogs of any substance have Jewish gatekeepers.

    I’m fed up. I will not play that game anymore.

    Go ahead and scream antisemite. As for the “whole building collapsing,” how would I know the difference? The government and most of the major institutions of the USA no longer functions to serve the American people as a whole nor are they responsive to the expressed demands of the American people.


    Jews are on their own.

    I work to restore my nation and to protect the innocent in those states that the USA now threatens — on behalf of Jews.

    I owe absolutely nothing to any Jewish person. I will do nothing to protect their ideology. In my view, to take any other course of action amounts to further infantilizing Jews. I will not do it.

    PS Several years ago Richard Silverstein hosted a conference at which speakers included the AIPAC agent who drafted the 1995 Libya-Iran Sanctions executive order that Bill Clilnton signed. I forget his name — he was one of the two accused of spying for Israel, but got let off the hook. Iranian grandmas go without their medicine and Jewish agents avoid appropriate accountability for their acts and instead jet around the country speaking at conferences, jeering at us suckers. What’s wrong with that picture????

    • @ Chas Mark

      Blankfort, who is obviously very knowledgeable, is correct on the fact that most Jews support Israel today.

      In the US, Jews can get away with a little more criticism of Israel and other Jews than can non-jews (gentiles). Non-jew (gentile) supporters of Israel will not call them anti-Semites.

  5. I see what any rational person is faced with here! Let me just remind y’all that American evangelicals are just as guilty of putting their American loyalty second to their irrational religious mania as the Zionist Jews are.

  6. Debbie said

    “The world can’t wait! Putin and Xi are offering the world a positive strategic shift. The world must seize this moment and move on.

    This is the best option around today but you won’t read of it in the MSM, such is the way the US has such media controlled. So it is a harder job to make some of the

    points. It is almost the case that stories all go through the AIPAC approval process and there wouldn’t be anyone in that organisation who would have even considered the merit in Washington’s comment about becoming too close to a foreign power. Too late for that one, I’m afraid. The opposite applies in fact.

    As I have read in some other place, the Memorial Days in 2015 and 2016 should be celebrated while they last because come 2017 the US will be a different country with the leadership decidedly controlled by Israel and with the high profile Zionists and subservient politicians becoming targets on the streets of America. There is no other solution for the great majority of Americans than to do what the government has refused to do and that is to take back the government and to govern for the majority of real patriotic Americans. This would not include the Israeli citizens-of-convenience with their distinct lack of interest in anything but the promotion of the Zionist cause and all that means, to the obvious detriment of the people of America.

    The mistake is seeing these people as Americans. THEY ARE NOT!

    Just as the early decent Americans got out from under the yoke of the British rule through warfare and showed again in 186i that any move to break up the Union was not well regarded, so they will do so again, because the Zionists threat is the equal of those two examples and then some. The difference is that Zionists don’t give a fig about anyone but their own breed and that’s the one thing which will bring them undone. Too arrogant to see that as well.

    The master race philosophy, alive and well. They believe they are exceptional. Psychotic is a more apt deinition.

    One thing is a certainty. Decent Americans who have fought for the country through the many non-stop iterations of ‘saving the world from terrorism’, or ‘good old democracy’, those tired old whores, made something of a sick joke by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, will not tolerate government from a psychotic middle east upstart with a record of almost 70 years of being an inhumane occupying jackboot regime in Palestine. Even Hitler or any other arrogant dictatorship over time was not guilty of such a crime. Nazi Germany and all that meant over a 6 year period, does not compare to the ambitions for world domination through 400 nuclear warheads and the control of money through “owning” what the Zionists obviously see as a country that is able to be bent to their dictates. The USA. Think on that for a second.

    These Zioinists now see the American people as a pushover supported in reality by their compliant 80% elected representatives, those who attended the Netanyahu ‘Lecture to the USA’ on 3 March at AIPAC. The message was very clear….attend or find your own election funding in 2016. Yes. They attended.

    Live that one down if you can.

    • I shall not call this publication and its supporters antisemitic because they would love it, since they glory in being antisemitic. It is a shame that the issue here is between Zionists who do not really love America without Israel and antisemites who do not love America with Jews. So adios amigos!

      • @ ravitch.

        You should know better than to come here, stamp on the passionate. You are speaking to mature readers of this blog who recognize “diversionary fire” intended to draw fire and attention away from the real target.

        You could go home and do some self-criticism and let people work.



    “So don’t hesitate! Take advantage NOW of this revolutionary rhetorical system that will make YOU a great apologist for Israel in less time than it takes to shoot a Palestinian toddler in the eye.

    Ready? 1..2..3..GO!

    You need to understand just one principle:

    The case for Israel is made of four propositions that should always be presented in the correct escalating order.

    We rock
    They suck
    You suck
    Everything sucks

    That’s it. Now you know everything that it took me a lifetime to learn. The rest is details; filling in the dotted lines.”

  8. re “It is a shame that the issue here is between Zionists who do not really love America without Israel and antisemites who do not love America with Jews. So adios amigos!”

    The German people worked very hard, in a period and context in which their children had been starved to death, their economy destroyed, their moral and cultural values subverted. Post-WWI and Weimar Germany was chaotic and unstable. The NSDAP brought order out of chaos; as Breitman and Lichtman record in “FDR and the Jews,” NSDAP actually quelled violence toward Jews.

    The rules that NSDAP crafted made every effort to recognize and protect “Jews who loved Germany.”

    Many, many German Jews supported the NSDAP measures:

    “Declares Germans Justified in Stemming Jewish Influence
    March 7, 1933
    Berlin (Mar. 6)
    Considerable comment has been aroused here by the publication of a statement in the “Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung”, the organ of von Papen, over the signature of Max Naumann, leader of the National German Jewish Union, which is the most extreme body of Jewish assimilationists in Germany.
    Max Naumann declares that the desire manifested among Germans to stem Jewish influence is justified. He adds that German Jewish emancipation had assumed in 1918 a further growth which had been “exploited by improper elements, and the justified repulse had now unfortunately hit also the better elements among German Jews.”


    “News Brief
    March 7, 1933 5:00am
    “If Jews remain loyal, they may pursue their business without fear,” is the statement reported to have been made by Minister Goering to a special correspondent of the “Svenska Dagbladet,” one of the most important newspapers in Sweden. ”


    But Jews in New York, London and elsewhere imposed their ideology even on Jews who sought to remain in the country where they were born — Germany; Rabbi Stephen Wise noted in his Autobiography that he discarded without opening the many letters he received from German Jews pleading with that zionist demagogue to cease his provocations of Germany. After reading the first few such letters, Wise framed the excuse that “Jews were being forced to write these letters,” that countered the massive atrocity propaganda being produced and disseminated by the British and American-Jewish press and Hollywood — Ben Hecht was one of Hollywood’s premier anti-German propagandists.

    In other words, N Ravitch, we’ve seen this scenario before; this plea for the “good Jews” as wanting nothing to do with the “bad Jews.” It did not end well for the German people. Their nation and many of its cultural aliments were destroy; as many as 9 million Germans died; 15 million Germans were removed from the land of their birth and roots.

    It would be foolish to ignore that terrible historic precedent.
    “Never again.”

  9. ‘The US Pivot on Israel and the Israeli Lobby/Jewish Lobby in the US’

    ‘The Reset of US-Israeli Relations’

    WHEN: June 10th, Wed evening, 6:00 – 7:00pm

    WHERE: Classroom 214, West Wing, Santa Fe Community College,

    WHO: Dr Lance Dale Call SFCC@ 505-428-1000 to find classroom

    A talk providing description and context of 2 root strategic US policy resets on Israel,

    3 advancing and unstopped existential crises for Israel – as well at the resulting fresh conversations, vantage points, and facts on the ground arising therefrom

    US Strategic Pivots:

    The Pivot on Israel’s strategy on Iran

    The Pivot on Israel’s strategy on Palestine

    3 Advancing Israeli ‘existential crises’:

    The 3 dispositive and concurrent existential crises seen as such by Israel itself:

    Crisis #1: The Iran Nuclear Deal: signed sealed and delivered June 30

    Crisis #2: Successfully advancing Palestinian case at the ICC

    Crisis #3: Catastrophic reversal of US Diplomatic cover at UN/international forums

    – ‘Concurrency and synergy of crises and Strategic Collapse of Israeli Apartheid/Strategic Collapse of the Israeli Lobby’

    American Political Consequences and Resets:

    Battle Royale – Obama’s Legacy vs Hillary’s Presidency

    Sheldon Adelson’s ‘Chinese Mafia links’ US Court Case

    ‘The Israel Lobby of Post-Apartheid What*?’ *1P1V1S

    ‘CHECKMATE: Queen Hillary on an AIPAC Horse’


    Goals: General familiarity with current US and Israeli policy position and state of play amidst rapidly evolving events and importance of consumption of Israeli media to understanding above