Saturday, June 07, 2008

Saturday, June 7, 2008

Saturday, June 7, 2008:
  1. I hardly ever agree with classic lite Zionist Stephen Zunes, but his column on Hillary is quite good. Of course, Zunes can't bring himself to state the real reason why Hillary engaged in such bizarre voting behavior (hint, it was money and not some vague philosophical problems with international law).
  2. An interview by Frank Barat of the outstanding Israeli scholar Ilan Pappé and some guy they found wondering around on the street. Notice the classic Dershowitzean bullshit argument against boycotts:
    "Selective boycotts could also be effective against states with a far worse record of violence and terror than Israel, such as the US. And, of course, without its decisive support and participation, Israel could not carry out illegal expansion and other crimes. There are no calls for boycotting the US, not for reasons of principle, but because it is simply too powerful - facts that raise some obvious questions about the moral legitimacy of actions targeting its clients."

    This encapsulates the essential immorality of lite Zionism.
  3. Just how close is Ledeen to going to jail? In the current Zionist political context, it would be ironic if he faced a trial over his treasonous dealings with Iran. The most obvious reading of the Niger forgery scandal is that Ghorbanifar was working for the Iranian government, who saw an opportunity to use the Zionists traitors in the American government to fool the Americans into fighting a War For The Jews, one disastrous for the United States but the best thing that could possibly happen to increase Iranian power.
  4. The attempted "security pact" that Cheney wants to force on the Iraqis won't go any farther than the hydrocarbon bill - which is to say, nowhere - and just proves how weak the American Empire has become, laid low by fighting Wars For The Jews.
  5. If you read Obama's speech to AIPAC, it really isn't all that bad. It is chock full of code words, most of which involve diplomacy, and none of which will be pleasing to the blood-dripping-from-the-fangs crowd (a funny note on Obama's email problem). They weren't applauding him or the speech; they were applauding themselves for having the power to force him to abase himself before them. Even the seemingly disheartening line:
    "And Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided."
    it is completely ambiguous. Jerusalem can't be the capital of Israel until East Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine, and 'undivided' can easily mean 'not physically divided by an Apartheid wall'. Wall Street, at least the Old American Establishment part of it, which is throwing oodles of money at Obama in order to fix America's 'brand', would be horrified to hear him enrage the world again by continuing the unsavory process of following the trail of blood dripping from the fangs of the Zionists. That's what wrecked the 'brand' in the first place.
  6. The Obama-McCain race is starting to look like Clinton-Dole, with the Republicans running a guy who is simply too old, and obviously so. The Republicans fear being wiped out in the next election. When the polling results get out of hand, might they try to encourage their voters in the Congressional races with the threat that the Democrats might end up controlling everything? Is running a terrible Presidential candidate part of a strategy to at least keep the possibility of a filibuster in the Senate?