Mark Krikorian proposes a novel argument for keeping the Mexicans out -- their grandchildren might be insufficiently supportive of Israel. His Corner colleague John J. Miller's not buying it but does dub it "creative." I'll agree with that.
« Show Me The Attack Ads | Main | Blurbs »
A New Gambit
11 Apr 2008 10:03 am
Comments (22)
1) When did developing unquestioning loyalty to the Likud -- a foreign political party whose leaders helped lie us into an unnecessary, bloody war -- become a requirement for becoming an American citizen?
2) Since when did support of Likud aggression become a defining mark of Christianity?
In Matthew 25:41-46, Jesus said that those who ignore the plight of the sick, the poor, the hungry and the oppressed will be condemmed to hell. The last time I checked the Palestinians --due to the efforts of our government -- were not lacking in poor, sick, hungry and oppressed people.
I wonder why he thinks our ability to protestantize Hispanic immigrants has declined. The fact is, Protestantism is doing quite well both in Latin America and among Hispanic immigrants. As the saying goes, "The Catholic Church has chosen the poor, but the poor have chosen the Pentecostals."
Who is this John J. Miller, and why is he being allowed to post on Th Corner?
From the article: The survey found that 82 percent of American Christians felt they had a "moral and biblical" obligation to support Israel, including 89 percent of evangelicals, but also 76 percent of Catholics.
What a screwed up country we live in.
Christian Zionism is essentially a Protestant phenomenon
Just as I thought. Christians are dupes of da Joos!
Re shecky's comment "Just as I thought. Christians are dupes of da Joos!"
------------
Well, dupes of one Jew, according to the athenists.
Payback on the Roman Empire for the Diaspora, according to others.
I think Krikorian was trying to say that feelings of guilt concerning the holocaust will not affect these new immigrants from Mexico and central America. These new Americans have no ties to Europe and will not have to visit a museum funded by the American govt every four years to prove that "they get it, Israel is a special place because of what our Euro ancestors have done to them since the Dark Ages."
These new Americans, in say 100 years, may not wish to fund a small colonial outpost in the heart of the Islamic world. Therefore, since they are immune from the cudgel of anti-semitism, their immigration must be curtailed.
I won't point out that theory to my most Republican friend, who used to oppose Catholic Mexican immigration but now welcomes it because he thinks the alternative would be Muslims and Arabs.
Re Don Williams
1. Once again, Mr. Williams repeats the same old lie about Israel being responsible for the US attack on Iraq. Like his hero, Josef Goebbels, he hopes that if he repeats the lie ofter enough and loud enough, people may come to believe it. Of course, the testimony of Lawrence Wilkerson that, in fact, the Israeli government didn't think the attack on Iraq was a good idea totally demonstrates the lie that fucktard Williams attempts to perpetrate. Once again, he will repeat his claim that Bibi was sent over to help convince the US Congress. Of course, that was done at the urging of the Bush administration and agreed to by then Prime Minister Sharon after it became clear that the Israeli advice was going to be ignored. If Sharon and Bibi are to be criticized, it would be for supinely going along with the Bush Administration after their advice was brushed aside, just as they have gone along with the Clinton and Bush administrations orders to refrain from applying Hama Rules to the terrorists from Gaza.
2. Mr. Williams once again whines about Israeli beastliness toward the Palestinians. Just to show how stupid his whining is, we need only read about the attack from the Gaza Strip on an Israeli fuel terminal which was supplying to fuel to the Palestinians for their power plant. I would like Mr. Williams to tell us what the purpose of this attack was since, aside from the two Israeli workers who were murdered, the only people being hurt by the attack are the Palestinians who have had their fuel cut off. In fact, had the attack been more successful, the terminal might have been destroyed which certainly wouldn't have helped the Palestinians.
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Security/12776.htm
Actually, the easy and obvious solution to this long-term problem is simply to make evidence of "insufficiently pro-Israel" sentiment an American felony, punishable by 10 years imprisonment. And a second offense leads to permanent loss of American citizenship, whether native-born or naturalized, and immediate deportation.
Admittedly, this might violate the U.S. Constitution and also the Bill of Rights, but since the neocons and their Bushist stooges have already thrown those in the trash, why not go whole-hog?
An NY Post columnist today writes that we're ok: Now that the economy is ruined we aren't going to have an illegal immigration problem.
Wow, that blog post is ripe for some serious analysis from your favorite critical theorist.
If there's anything that unites as Americans, it's our shared love of Israel.
Re SLC's comment "Once again, Mr. Williams repeats the same old lie about Israel being responsible for the US attack on Iraq. Like his hero, Josef Goebbels, he hopes that if he repeats the lie ofter enough and loud enough, people may come to believe it."
---------------------
For the latecomers:
Bibi Natanyahu addressing the American people when he appeared before our Senate in Spring 2002 as a representative of Ariel Sharon's Government:
Extract 1:
NATANYAHU: "First, I must state clearly that the need to topple Saddam is paramount. I think the commitment of America and Britain to dismantle this terrorist dictatorship before it obtains atomic bombs, before it obtains nuclear weapons, deserves the unconditional support of all sane governments and all sane people around the world. "
Extract2:
NATANYAHU: "I must tell you that the charge that Israel, of all countries, is hindering the war against Saddam is woefully unjust, because I think that my country, more than any other, has done more to make victory over Saddam possible. 21 years ago, Prime Minister Menachem Begin sent the Israeli Air Force on a pre-dawn raid hundreds of miles away, on one of the boldest military missions in our nation's history. When our pilots returned, we had successfully destroyed Saddam's atomic bomb factory, and crippled his capacity to build nuclear weapons. Israel was safer, and so was the world. "
A transcript of the speech is available here:
http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0204/10/se.02.html
Re SLC's comment "Once again, Mr. Williams repeats the same old lie about Israel being responsible for the US attack on Iraq. Like his hero, Josef Goebbels, he hopes that if he repeats the lie ofter enough and loud enough, people may come to believe it."
--------------
From August 2002 broadcast of Voice of America:
"Israel is urging the United States to move swiftly and decisively against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, saying that delay will only give him more time to acquire weapons of mass destruction.
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon sent a message to Washington this past week, telling the Bush Administration that any delay in dealing with Saddam Hussein will only give him more time to develop weapons of mass destruction.
Sharon spokesman Ra'anan Gissin said Israeli intelligence officials believe the Iraqi leader is stepping up efforts to produce biological and chemical weapons.
In an interview with the American cable television network, CNN, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres had much the same message. Mr. Peres said a military operation against Saddam Hussein will be dangerous, but he said it would be more dangerous to postpone such action. "
Ref: http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2002-08/a-2002-08-16-29-Israel.cfm
Just as third-graders go on field trips, MattY should take fun field trip of his own, this time to aztlan.net. Then, he can find out who they have a link to (hint: he's a UCR prof) and who, in turn, that prof is linked to (hint: major Dem pols).
Nothing MattY writes on this issue should be trusted because he knows very little about it and he's not willing to present an honest argument.
It makes me wonder how well Jews fare in this poll? After all, very large proportion of American Jews is not seeing Israel as a religious cause. Original Zionists were clearly not motivated by religion. So I would not be surprised if fewer than 50% would see moral AND BIBLICAL reasons to support Israel.
I will never get the obsession with Israel, either. They shouldn't be our problem.
From the article: The survey found that 82 percent of American Christians felt they had a "moral and biblical" obligation to support Israel, including 89 percent of evangelicals, but also 76 percent of Catholics.
What a screwed up country we live in.
Posted by Jim W | April 11, 2008 10:30 AM
The American military is in the Middle East to control the oil trade. The DC foreign policy elite exploits this immensely popular Christian Zionism to obtain domestic support for huge military expenditures and endless wars that give the DC elite global power and an almost unlimited opportunity for oil and war profiteering, but which accomplish nothing at all for us ordinary citizens. That's what we should be complaining about. But useful idiots complain instead about nonsense like "Jewish money."
Check out MJ Rosenberg over at TPM. He rips Krauthammer a new one over Krauthammer's demand that the US guarantee that if Israel is ever attacked by Iran that Iran will be nuked by the US.
Considering that Israel has an estimated 200-400 nuclear weapons - including cruise missiles on submarines - and Iran doesn't even have a nuclear weapons program, that's pretty clearly signs of advanced lunacy, as MJ points out.
As for the SLC loon, once again he spouts his tripe about Wilkerson, when it has been established by Flynnt Leverett that Israel wanted to attack IRAN first, THEN attack Iraq. This was in early 2002, when Wilkerson was talking to them. After Israel was assured by the neocons that Iran would be attacked after Iraq, they THEN became big supporters of attacking Iraq in later 2002 and 2003. Had the US attacked Iran in 2003 as Israel wanted, we would now be in even WORSE shape than we are in Iraq.
RSH,
I dunno if attacking Iran first would have left us worse off. Clearly it would have left IRAN worse off, that's why they were feeding us false flag intel via the Iraqi National Congress about Iraq's (nonexistent) WMDs and ties to Al Qaida.
On the other hand, our interests were clearl aligned with Saddam Hussein's:
1. He had that country locked down. It was safe for Wessterners to walk the streets of Baghdad without dire risk of kidnapping.
2. He could have dramatically increased oil input, pre-invasion OPEC quotas and UN sanctions forced Iraq to pump less oil than they otherwise could. Post-invasion insurgent activity has kept Iraq from easily pumping or shipping oil. The US Army has to import oil INTO Iraq... talk about shipping coals to Newcastle.
3. Al Qaida hated Saddam, and Saddam hated them back. If we had asked nicely through back channel diplomacy, there's no question he would have cooperated in the War on Terrorism tm.
3. As a secular Shiite Muslim, he was a political and military counterweight to both Wahhabi Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shiite Iran.
So if we had gotten bogged down in an Iran invasion, we could bribed him to open a second front by invading Iran again, this time with the assistance of the US Air Forces (the USAF is the largest air force in the world, the second largest is the US Navy). And the bribe would have been simple, we'll buy every damn barrel of oil you can pump, even if we had to pay highway robbery rate like, say, $50 a barrel. In 2002, oil was around $30 a barrel, who knew it'd more than triple that in 6 years?
With the combination of American airpower and Iraqi cannon fodder, we'd crush an enemy AND make a friend.
Comments closed April 25, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
"Fifty-first state" jokes as foreign policy. (See, also, Krauthammer.) Fantastic. Jeebus.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | April 11, 2008 10:18 AM