Israel in control of US nukes?? Could this be true?????

by **Sweejak** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 12:33 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>the word "zionism" is inflammatory and ambiguous in many ways, I agree. The "issue" is politics, money, state sponsored terror and the loss of American democracy Darkbeforedawn.<hr></blockquote> There is always the clumsy "Israel Firsters", which would include Christian Zionists and others who project Israeli interests above all else, for whatever reason... including the the idea of eventual destruction of Israel. Of course that would also catch just regular Israeli patriots. Barry Chamish defines "them" as "Labour Zionists" but that pretty much leaves out Christian Zionists. Some just call them Globalists referring to Neo Liberals as well as Neo Cons and International corporations etc. Some; The Elites, Satanists, Crypto Fascists, and The NWO. Hell, there is room for just about everybody. Someone asked "why the obsession with Jews?" First off the "obsession" is with Israel, secondly, who is obsessed? What happens, IMO, is that anytime someone brings up Israeli spying, False Flag ops, or other instances of Israeli or some version of Zionist complicity they are slammed down with the anti-semite tag, This happens first and only later, rarely, is the actual evidence addressed. This happens to posters as well as whole internet sites, hence those tagged with that label find it incumbent to defend themselves. Voila! You now have your irrational "obsession". This happens concurrently with those using the anti-semite tag complaining about anti zionism being the oldest divide and conquer tactic! Personally I think the "left/ right" straightjacket is, maybe not the oldest, but the most intractable one. Anyway this gets so bad that you can't even use the word "Neo Con". Justin has hit the nail on this: <blockquote>Quote:<hr> What is particularly loathsome about Hitchens is that his "argument" consists entirely of epithets: to speak of "neocons," he avers, is to speak of a "Jewish cabal." But why is that? Most American Jews are vastly unsympathetic to George W. Bush, his party, and his war. Aside from that, however, is neoconservatism suddenly and inexplicably disappeared, even as one of its leading exponents triumphantly brays that the "neoconservative movement" has succeeded? Sheehan never once used the word "Jew" to describe anyone or anything for the simple reason that "neocon" is not a synonym for a person of the Jewish faith. Hitchens himself is a living example of why this is true. There are others: Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Michael Novak, Victor Davis Hanson, and Bill Bennett, not to mention former Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin, indicted spy for Israel and devout Catholic. You don't have to be Jewish to put Israel first, even over and above your own country... <a href="http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=6975">antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=6975</a> <hr></blockquote> ================================== Makow? <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Oh, but the Jewish conspiracy, he assures us, are not simply Jews, but really the Royal Family...who, in actuality have Jewish blood! <hr></blockquote> Makow If I recall correctly, and you seem to agree, has traced some of the intermarriage between the wealthy elites and he says in this article <a href="http://www.rense.com/general53/brith.htm">www.rense.com/general53/brith.htm</a> that: <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Like blind men examining an elephant, we attribute this conspiracy to Jews, Illuminati, Vatican, Jesuits, Freemasons, Black Nobility, and Bildersbergs etc. The real villains are at the heart of our economic and cultural life. They are the dynastic families who own the Bank of England, the US Federal Reserve and associated cartels. They also control the World Bank and IMF. Their identity is kept secret but Rothschild is certainly one of them. <hr></blockquote> Well that should be enough to satisfy anyone who wants to pin all of this on Anglo Amerikkan CIA MI6 grounds because the headline clearly says "The 'Jewish' Conspiracy Is British Imperialism." But that is not good enough because he has mentioned Jews. Ah Ha, another anti Semite and whoa, ... a self hating Jew. And there we are again... "obsessed". Give me a break. About Makow's take on Feminism, pretty gutsy and highly unpopular, but his article on CIA and Feminism is, IMO, pretty good and frankly it fits well in a forum that discusses parapolitics. Could it be that a legitimate social cause has been hijacked? Never happened. Look, Makow has some peculiar views based apparently in "old fashioned" fundamental beliefs which I find vastly less threatening than the current mainstream fundamentalist CryptoChristianWarPartyZionazis. Still, I don't agree with some of them. Ask me. Using a letter to Makow is about as compelling as using a link on a link to a link. What the hell is wrong with that letter anyway? Does Makow advocate lower pay for women? Does he advocate slave status? or does he cling to the idea that men and women have different roles. So what. Is there a global war going on about this? Do you have to live like this? He's entitled to his views. I'll tell you what, you go and write Mr. Makow henry@savethemales.ca and ask him what his current views are, He actually answers emails and his views do change, one of the reasons I happen to like him in spite of my disagreements. Finally. <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Just about EVERYONE on this thread has acknowledged Israeli connections. We KNOW the US works closely with them, especially when it comes to Middle East issues. Yet this acknowledgment is not enough. You want more. What exactly, do you want? To focus on Jews and de-emphasize a much larger and complex picture <hr></blockquote> Yes it's enough to move on I think, assuming of course that when something is posted from the vast array of information that mentions Israel is dealt with without reframing the evidence on race, whatever that is. JMO

by **Qutb** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 4:36 pm

Sweejak: Well, this surely is a contentious issue. I agree that neo-cons and spies for Israel are fair game, of course. I'm certainly not accusing posters here of having racist or ulterior motives (except for a couple of unregistered newbies that stopped by and didn't stay for long). I'm simply disagreeing with the assumption that Zionism is a big part of the troubles we are in, globally and in America. I think it's a red herring. A distraction. That doesn't mean Jews don't play important roles, but not qua Jews, for the most part. And I certainly think we should discuss those people. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>anytime someone brings up Israeli spying, False Flag ops, or other instances of Israeli or some version of Zionist complicity they are slammed down with the anti-semite tag<hr></blockquote>That describes some very active posters on Democratic Underground, but not many here. Personally, I'm tired of being called a "gatekeeper" and so on when I disagree with someone's theories or assumptions about Israel or Jews. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>it's enough to move on I think<hr></blockquote> Yes, I think it is. Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **Sweejak** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 4:52 pm

Qutb, I guess I will have to agree to agree. LOL I probably place a higher level of importance on Israel and whatever flavor of Zionism we are talking about but really I think in essence we are all pretty much in agreement. That is why a while back I wanted to do a poll on this so that we can stop getting caught in this, to me, recursive whirlpool. I'm sure this won't be the end as everyone quite naturally will resonate with information that supports their angle. That's the hard one to overcome. Heading up to Crawford again. ....... out.

by **darkbeforedawn** » Mon Aug 22, 2005 5:32 pm

A poster asked me why assumed our media has prevented open minded inquiries into 911. I read this about "media ownership" on Canadian Spectator. I think the same could be said and MORE about the ownership of US media...."Accusations Against Jews It is a strange complaint to say of someone that they "accuse Jews of controlling the U.S. media." Either Jews do, or they do not, have control over the majority of the U.S. media. This is a question of fact, not a matter for accusations or complaints of accusations, except perhaps, in the minds of media owners who wish to impose a sense of guilt on anyone inquiring into media ownership. But media ownership is something that should be very public knowledge, for without knowing who owns the media, one has no idea what bias to anticipate in the presentation of news. Thus, for example, if we consider media ownership in Canada, it is of interest to know whether Canwest Global Communications, which owns the Ottawa Citizen (in which the above report appears) and numerous other Canadian media outlets is controlled by the Jewish and staunchly Zionist Asper family? Apparently it is. Is that a big deal? Judging by the defensive tone of the Ottawa Citizen article, it is. And with that I agree. In a free society, there is nothing wrong with Jewish Zionists owning a newspaper. There is, however, something seriously wrong if Jewish Zionists own or control the majority of media outlets, just as it would be wrong for Roman Catholics or Quakers or vegans or any other single interest group to control most media outlets and hence the way in which the news is presented. But Ottawa is already largely in the pocket of big money, which means that the idea of enacting a law limiting media ownership to one outlet per owner -- a return in other words to a free press -- is out of the question.

Israel in control of US nukes?? Could this be true?????

Re: evidence of complicity in 911

Re: evidence of complicity in 911

Re: evidence of complicity in 911

Re: evidence of complicity in 911

Who is online