“Obama will win the nomination but lose the election.”

50 Comments / 143 Comments

1. Miami Beach is like Israel without the problems. What’s not to like?

2. Yambo, your capacity for subtlety of thought and expression never fail to impress me. Perhaps it’s time for you to consider retirement…in someplace relatively safe, like Miami Beach.

3. All this is rather fun, but let’s get back to Ted’s initial assertion: Obama will win the nomination for the Democrats, but will lose the election.

   That sounds like IsraPundit wishful thinking to me.

   As my perennial favorite, Ralph Nader, put it succintly enough in an interview with the BBC: “I am no threat to the Democrats this time. If the Democrats can’t win this election by a landslide, then they ought to wrap up, close down, and reconstitute themselves as something else.”

   Ralph’s right. The current President is the least popular in living memory, perhaps in all time. Inevitably, both his own philosophy of “Big Government” conservatism, and the Republican Party, have been badly tarnished by his decisions, the ways he implemented them, and the ways in which they are coming home to roost.

   He has lied to the American people on more occasions and about more subjects than Clinton or any other Democrat (including FDR and LBJ, both of whom were liars par excellence) ever dreamt of doing. He took us into a needless and unjustified war (for which he fabricated a need and a justification) that he and his Secretary of Defense assured Americans “would cost 50-60 billion dollars and would largely pay for itself by our access to increased oil revenues.” That “cheap and easy” war has so far cost at least 1 trillion dollars (one Nobel Prize winning economist has just published a book explaining why he thinks the number is actually more than 3 trillion), and it will be paid for almost entirely NOT by the generation that decided to go to war, but by future generations, since it has been funded by debt, which is what happens when you go to war while lowering taxes. As the Nobel Prize winner put it: “The only honest way to wage war is by paying for it in the same generation that chose to go to war, which inevitably means by raising taxes to pay current expenses. Waging war on credit is the worst way to do it. It makes war seem free or cheap, distorting the decision-making processes by under-counting the true costs, and it means that people who had no say in the matter must eventually pay the price. Furthermore, it substantially increases the costs, as anyone who has bought anything on credit should know.”

   Add to that the fact that the Republican field has winnowed itself down to the man who is, I suggest, probably the Democrats’ dream choice for the Republic nomination. McCain is perceived even by many Republicans to be too old. The Christian Right don’t like him. He has said some pretty daft things in his time, for which he is going to have to come up with explanations. And by his own admission he knows almost nothing about economics at a time when most Americans can tell you what matters most to them in four words: “It’s the economy, stupid.”

   Finding Osama bin Laden is yesterday’s project. “Winning” the war in Iraq is yesterday’s project. These are continuations of policies that people no longer get worked up about. Call it short memories, if you like, but that’s how it is. The average American does not feel personally threatened by terrorism. He does not hate or fear Arabs. He’s pretty sure that no one is going to make him or his children convert to Islam. He does feel threatened by falling house values, fewer jobs, expensive gas, a weak dollar, Asian manufacturing, and so on.

   The fact that IsraPundit sees fervent anti-terrorism and winning in Iraq as policies benefiting Israel is just dandy, but most people in America don’t vote based on what benefits Israel, nor is IsraPundit going to convince them that they should. They want what benefits them, not what benefits Israel, and though you can argue that they are the same thing, you aren’t going to convince many people. Israel, too, is yesterday’s project. Most Americans are tired of hearing about a country that can’t manage without Uncle Sam’s constant contributions of money and armaments. John McCain is not going to convince anyone that he can fix the economy. If he can’t convince them of that, he won’t win.

   After 4 March we should know a lot more — but if I were a betting man, I’d be betting that Clinton, even if she wins in both Texas and Ohio, will not do so by a wide enough margin to turn her campaign around and regain the momentum. If she can’t do that, then she won’t attract sizable amounts of money, and she will eventually have to call it quits. She has already had to lend $5 million of her own money to her campaign. She and her husband are rich, but not Mitt Romney or Dick Cheney rich. They might lend the campaign another $5 million, but that will be it. Ten million is a lot to spend on losing.

   So it will come down to Obama versus McCain. No matter how many faults and gaffs and Muslim costumes people find between now and November, there is simply no way that John McCain can beat Barrak Obama unless al Quaida manage to bomb the Hoover Dam or blow up Microsoft’s Headquarters, or something equally spectacular. And why would al Quaida do that now? It would only help McCain, and they have no interest in doing that.

   I think IsraPundit and Israel itself had best get ready for Obama in the White House. Personally, I still prefer Nader, but I am starting to see Obama as nearly invincible. I don’t find that so bad. Even if he’s bad, he ain’t half as bad as Clinton.

4. Peskin: War is hell ain’t it? Better them than us! Last man standing wins and gets to write the History< aint’t that a bitch?

5. Now that we have turned Obama into a virtual Hitler and condemned him to eternal damnation, I reflect how eager we are to eulogies our heros and satanize ( if there is such a word ) our real and perceived enemies. Case in point Chemical Ali.Few will shed a tear upon hearing his coming execution- for gassing all those Kurds.

   Winston Churchill on the other hand remains our iconic hero. His inspirational leadership saved the allied cause during the second world war. Moreover he was a friend of the Jews.he warned us of the evils of Communism well before anyone else in the west. I was therefore a bit disturbed while reading an obscure footnote in one of Martin Gilbert’s biography on this great man

   Winston Churchill’s Secret Poison Gas Memo

   [stamp] PRIME MINISTER’S PERSONAL MINUTE

   [stamp, pen] Serial No. D. 217/4

   [Seal of Prime Minister]

   10 Downing Street, Whitehall [gothic script]

   GENERAL ISMAY FOR C.O.S. COMMITTEE [underlined]

   1. I want you to think very seriously over this question of poison gas. I would not use it unless it could be shown either that (a) it was life or death for us, or (b) that it would shorten the war by a year.

   2. It is absurd to consider morality on this topic when everybody used it in the last war without a word of complaint from the moralists or the Church. On the other hand, in the last war bombing of open cities was regarded as forbidden. Now everybody does it as a matter of course. It is simply a question of fashion changing as she does between long and short skirts for women.

   3. I want a cold-blooded calculation made as to how it would pay us to use poison gas, by which I mean principally mustard. We will want to gain more ground in Normandy so as not to be cooped up in a small area. We could probably deliver 20 tons to their 1 and for the sake of the 1 they would bring their bomber aircraft into the area against our superiority, thus paying a heavy toll.

   4. Why have the Germans not used it? Not certainly out of moral scruples or affection for us. They have not used it because it does not pay them. The greatest temptation ever offered to them was the beaches of Normandy. This they could have drenched with gas greatly to the hindrance of the troops. That they thought about it is certain and that they prepared against our use of gas is also certain. But they only reason they have not used it against us is that they fear the retaliation. What is to their detriment is to our advantage.

   5. Although one sees how unpleasant it is to receive poison gas attacks, from which nearly everyone recovers, it is useless to protest that an equal amount of H. E. will not inflict greater casualties and sufferings on troops and civilians. One really must not be bound within silly conventions of the mind whether they be those that ruled in the last war or those in reverse which rule in this.

   6. If the bombardment of London became a serious nuisance and great rockets with far-reaching and devastating effect fell on many centres of Government and labour, I should be prepared to do [underline] anything [stop underline] that would hit the enemy in a murderous place. I may certainly have to ask you to support me in using poison gas. We could drench the cities of the Ruhr and many other cities in Germany in such a way that most of the population would be requiring constant medical attention. We could stop all work at the flying bomb starting points. I do not see why we should have the disadvantages of being the gentleman while they have all the advantages of being the cad. There are times when this may be so but not now.

   7. I quite agree that it may be several weeks or even months before I shall ask you to drench Germany with poison gas, and if we do it, let us do it one hundred per cent. In the meanwhile, I want the matter studied in cold blood by sensible people and not by that particular set of psalm-singing uniformed defeatists which one runs across now here now there. Pray address yourself to this. It is a big thing and can only be discarded for a big reason. I shall of course have to square Uncle Joe and the President; but you need not bring this into your calculations at the present time. Just try to find out what it is like on its merits.

   [signed] Winston Churchill [initials]

   6.7.44 [underlined]

   Source: photographic copy of original 4 page memo, in Guenther W. Gellermann, “Der Krieg, der nicht stattfand”,
   Item 2

   BACKGROUND: In 1917, following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, the British occupied Iraq and established a colonial government. The Arab and Kurdish people of Iraq resisted the British occupation, and by 1920 this had developed into a full scale national revolt, which cost the British dearly. As the Iraqi resistance gained strength, the British resorted to increasingly repressive measures, including the use of posion gas.] NB: Because of formatting problems, quotation marks will appear as stars * All quotes in the excerpt are properly footnoted in the original book, with full references to British archives and papers. Excerpt from pages 179-181 of Simons, Geoff. *IRAQ: FROM SUMER TO SUDAN*. London: St. Martins Press, 1994:

   Winston Churchill, as colonial secretary, was sensitive to the cost of policing the Empire; and was in consequence keen to exploit the potential of modern technology. This strategy had particular relevance to operations in Iraq. On 19 February, 1920, before the start of the Arab uprising, Churchill (then Secretary for War and Air) wrote to Sir Hugh Trenchard, the pioneer of air warfare. Would it be possible for Trenchard to take control of Iraq? This would entail *the provision of some kind of asphyxiating bombs calculated to cause disablement of some kind but not death…for use in preliminary operations against turbulent tribes.*

   Churchill was in no doubt that gas could be profitably employed against the Kurds and Iraqis (as well as against other peoples in the Empire): *I do not understand this sqeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes.* Henry Wilson shared Churchills enthusiasm for gas as an instrument of colonial control but the British cabinet was reluctant to sanction the use of a weapon that had caused such misery and revulsion in the First World War. Churchill himself was keen to argue that gas, fired from ground-based guns or dropped from aircraft, would cause *only discomfort or illness, but not death* to dissident tribespeople; but his optimistic view of the effects of gas were mistaken. It was likely that the suggested gas would permanently damage eyesight and *kill children and sickly persons, more especially as the people against whom we intend to use it have no medical knowledge with which to supply antidotes.*

   Churchill remained unimpressed by such considerations, arguing that the use of gas, a *scientific expedient,* should not be prevented *by the prejudices of those who do not think clearly*. In the event, gas was used against the Iraqi rebels with excellent moral effect* though gas shells were not dropped from aircraft because of practical difficulties […..]

   Today in 1993 there are still Iraqis and Kurds who remember being bombed and machine-gunned by the RAF in the 1920s. A Kurd from the Korak mountains commented, seventy years after the event: *They were bombing here in the Kaniya Khoran…Sometimes they raided three times a day.* Wing Commander Lewis, then of 30 Squadron (RAF), Iraq, recalls how quite often *one would get a signal that a certain Kurdish village would have to be bombed…*, the RAF pilots being ordered to bomb any Kurd who looked hostile. In the same vein, Squadron-Leader Kendal of 30 Squadron recalls that if the tribespeople were doing something they ought not be doing then you shot them.*

   Similarly, Wing-Commander Gale, also of 30 Squadron: *If the Kurds hadn’t learned by our example to behave themselves in a civilised way then we had to spank their bottoms. This was done by bombs and guns.

   Wing-Commander Sir Arthur Harris (later Bomber Harris, head of wartime Bomber Command) was happy to emphasise that *The Arab and Kurd now know what real bombing means in casualties and damage. Within forty-five minutes a full-size village can be practically wiped out and a third of its inhabitants killed or injured.* It was an easy matter to bomb and machine-gun the tribespeople, because they had no means of defence or retalitation. Iraq and Kurdistan were also useful laboratories for new weapons; devices specifically developed by the Air Ministry for use against tribal villages. The ministry drew up a list of possible weapons, some of them the forerunners of napalm and air-to-ground missiles:

   Phosphorus bombs, war rockets, metal crowsfeet [to maim livestock] man-killing shrapnel, liquid fire, delay-action bombs. Many of these weapons were first used in Kurdistan.

   H PESKIN’s comment

   SO MUCH FOR OR GREAT HEROS AND VILLIANS

6. Andrew:

   He who joyfully marches to music rank and file, has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice
   If A equals success, then the formula is _ A = _ X + _ Y + _ Z. _ X is work. _ Y is play. _ Z is keep your mouth shut.

   Jeremy Bentham was a philosophisical garbage collector of all concepts based on ideas and laws contrary to human nature. Thats why he and you were and are both failures! His advocacy of the legalization of Homo rights I expect explains why you have gravitated to his ideas and pseudo philosophy. I do however agree with is efforts re: animal rights though but not yours. As I would not know how to classify one who is neither human nor animal.Lets just say that some things are not important enough to contemplate.

7. To Jeremiah Wallis #90

   Thank you for your response. I always like to see the personal touch in places like this. You certainly have lived an interesting life; and I’m sorry I can’t claim you as a fellow Midwestern expatriate. You are so very different from me in so many ways (with the BIG exception, that we both love to toot our horns). I really do think you’ve “done well”, by making it through law school while you were still young — not because you may have made good money at it, but simply because you were savvy enough to make good use of your talents in a timely way. The fact that you are dedicating your later years to helping the poor is also commendable.

   As for those fat ladies you mentioned (“rotund” means exactly the same thing as “fat” — I just like to call a spade a spade, not a “hand-held excavation tool”), I make no apologies: It is true, that I was not on the spot to make a “perfect” judgment of what you said; but whether those women were black or white, tall or short, fat or skinny, locals or tourists, the fact remains that you judged them hastily, without really getting to know them (interestingly, the very things you have accused me of doing) and made a very wrong assesment of our democratic system as a consequense. I knew I was opening myself up to accusations in this area, and I don’t suppose you’re finished upbraiding me on the issue. In the best of worlds, we will both be more careful to get our facts straight; but don’t waste your time building a legal case with me: I’m more interested in where your heart is, than with what sort or “brief” you can prepare against what I say.

   This thread is quickly getting old, so I suppose we’ll meet next on another. Again, the best of wishes to you.

   Shalom shalom

   BlandOatmeal 🙂

   Our country

   Needs a Prez

   Who’s lived a life

   Of what he says

   John McCain

8. Obama supports Palestinian state cutting Israel in half
   By Israel Insider staff January 29, 2008

   Palestinian refugees do not have a “literal” right of return to Israel, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Monday. He did not clarify whethered that implied they had a moral, metaphorical, legal or other non-literal right to return to Israel.

   More controversially, Obama said he supported the division of Israel into at least two parts by a Palestinian state.

   The stunning comment came as Obama struggled to articulate his stance on key Mideast issues in dispute. “The right of return [to Israel] is something that is not an option in a literal sense,” Obama said, but then went on to say that “The Palestinians have a legitimate concern that a state have a contiguous coherent mass that would allow the state to function effectively.”

   A land corridor between Gaza and the West Bank would effectively cut Israel in half, making it incoherent and non-contiguous, divided into northern and southern portions by the Palestinian land-mass Obama supports. The Democratic candidate didn’t explain why it was legitimate for the Palestinians to have a coherent and contiguous territory at Israel’s expense.

   “The outlines of any agreement would involve ensuring that Israel remains a Jewish state,” Obama said, but provided no details about how that would be achieved. He reiterated his support for a two-state solution, but said, “We cannot move forward until there is some confidence that the Palestinians are able to provide the security apparatus that would prevent constant attacks against Israel from taking place.” He provided no details on how that would be achieved.

   Obama complained that “There has been a constant and virulent smear campaign via the Internet that has been particularly targeted against the Jewish community. It is absolutely false. I have never practiced Islam. I was raised by my secular mother, and I have been a member of the Christian religion and an active Christian.” Obams did not deny that he was considered a Muslim as a child, that biological father was a Muslim, nor that he was also raised in his childhood by a devout Muslim. But neither did he mention it, and tried to gloss over his background by separating his later Christian practice from his Muslim origins.

   Regarding Iran, Obama called for more pressure on the regime, but didn’t mention the possibility of using force if diplomatic pressure failed. He called for “carrots” to be offered to the Iranian regime, which his spokesman said referred to diplomatic contacts between the United States and Iran. He did not mention what the stick would be.

   He saw no harm in engaging in talks with the Iranian regime. “Diplomacy is not just talking with your friends, but talking to our enemies,” Obama said. “We want to send a signal to the Iranian people that we are reasonable. We are not looking to impede Iran’s legitimate national aspirations, but they have to change their behavior.”

   Iranian national aspirations, as articulated by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, include wiping Israel off the face of the earth. He did not say what he would do if the Iranians did not change their behavior and continued to work for Israel’s eradication.

9. Teshuvah,

   I am surprised: you managed to get through a posting without a Biblical citation of some kind. Bravo.

   The news is the news. What I mean is this: the mainstream media define what is news, and also what is not news. What is written in the NYT is important simply because it appears in the “paper of record.” Fortunately, there are standards, ethics, guidelines. Not all papers follow them, but all those I mentioned do.

   For those who care about Israel enough to devote a lot of time to the details, I would gladly add to my list Ha’aretz, by far the more interesting and challenging of the two main Israeli papers in English.

   Anyone who believes the Telegraph is a liberal paper by any measure is a fool. Ditto for The Economist. Both are generally considered Right Wing, at least in the Thatcherite, free-market sense of the term. Of the papers I listed, only The Guardian is clearly a liberal or left-wing paper, and even then only sometimes. It was once the paper of the Labour Party, but that has not been true for at least 20 years. It has been consistently critical, often highly critical, of the New Labour governments of Blair and Brown. It’s coverage of world news, like the coverage of world news in most British newspapers, is excellent. No American paper comes close. I expect this is a holdover from the days of Empire, and a result of the influx of Commonwealth citizens into the UK starting in the 50s. Worldly people want world news.

   If you aren’t reading the mainstream news, you aren’t reading the news. The mainstream news media define the issues, frame the debate, and ultimately steer the ship. If you want to clutter your mind with conspiracy theories and crackpot nonsense, no one will stop you, but if you want to make informed decisions about the things that matter, then start with the mainstream press, and if you have time and energy read the fringe press afterward.

   A communist? Moi? I am a Benthamite — a Utilitarian, one guided by Bentham’s views on the Greatest Good for the Greatest number. I am a strong believer in Free Markets, including Open Immigration, an obsessive defender of the Freedoms of Speech and Association, a devout atheist (because anything else strikes me as stupid, parasitic, and a waste of time). I am politically a Social Democrat in the European tradition. I think the most admirable countries in terms of striking a reasonable balance between individual rights and societal needs are the Scandanavian countries, Canada, Holland, and the UK. At one time Israel would have been included in that group, but then along came Likud and turned a great country into a snarling, grasping, corrupt and duplicitous one. A country that put Begin, Shamir, Sharon, and Netanyahu into office deserves its fate, which I suspect will be oblivion. Fortunately, the Jews will not come to an end when Israel comes to an end. Jews will have another chance to get things right. But for now it seems the Zionists have botched their opportunity this time around.

   As for you Teshuvah, I have no idea why Ted permits you to post on this blog either, for, as Ted himself once wrote to me, “Andrew, your problem with Teshuvah is that you bother to read what he writes.”

   So much for the esteem in which you are held — even though you are a Right Winger.

   — Good night and good luck.

10. Jeremiah (#90): Only a fool or a communist who loves totalitarianism would make a main course of the news sources you favour along with anything on television. Absolutely the worst source for news is the mainstream media particularly the globalist papers you listed. They are liberal, pro-globalist, pro-Muslim, anti-Jewish and anti-Christian. Lastly, I have no idea why Ted allows you to continue to post on this board as there isn’t a liberal cause you don’t hold.

11. Yep, h peskin, and by extension the close connections of McCain with those presently advancing Bush/Cheney policy…but for whatever reason Israpundit’s focused on Obama for now–maybe because they see the GOP race as locked up already, having fallen for the whole “presumptive nominee” and “mathematical impossibility” line–though, there’s still one decent chance for Huckabee this Tuesday to turn things around and perhaps take the GOP to a brokered convention (please!).

    Anyway, Obama’s already denounced Farrakhan, and anti-Israel, anti-America Jeremiah Wright is now Obama’s ex-pastor, having resigned a week or so ago, but I have to wonder what it says about Obama that he chose to feed his mind with this hate and ignorance for 20 years.

12. peskin our comments and ref to Bush and the Saudis have been a never ending subject here on Israpundit hardly a week goes by where it has not been dissected evaluated gurgitated and regurgitated. we are now onto the coming primaries and the Nov. elections with emphasis as to who will be best and worst for the Jews and of Course Israel. This is an Israel advocacy blog I believe. Notice I did not say good just best. A mans race should not be the reason for or against but it does matter even in our enlightened day and times. A mans religion should matter as it defines him as well as his beliefs. We the public would like to know, what the leaders we chose believe! A person’s beliefs may determine how and what we might expect from him or her after we elect them. If I can get his h.school transcripts and college transcripts why not his religious transcripts so to speak? A persons beliefs in total are what defines them, we have a right to know as much about those who seek out votes as possible. Not a perfect system but thats what we got right now! My suggestion is that you quit that cold place and move to warmer climate like Israel it is never boring here.

13. It is amazing to me that there is such an outcry regarding Obama’s meeting with such anti-semites as Farrakham. And nothing of course with respect to the very close business and social contacts that the Bush/Cheney family have with the Saudi Royal family and the Saudi oil tycoons. You could not possible get more anti-semitic than these guys and nary a peep from the Jewish-American community. Perhaps a liberal “schvatse” is held to a much higher standard.

    Several weeks ago there was a very good doc on P.B.S. relating to the Jewish history and experience in the U.S. It mentioned a very prominent Jewish family living in Alabama. On Passover, the evening seder was held commemorating the freeing of the children of Israel from slavery in Egypt. And ironically the sumptious meal for the seder was being served by black domestics who just happened to be slaves owned by the very same family.

    This might illustrate the type of hypocrisy that governed and still governs the relationship of Jews with Blacks in America.

    And for your information I am a Jew living in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

    H. Peskin

14. I continue to look for confirmation of the above quote from The Audacity of Hope. In checking it out,I came upon the following

    Why I wont vote for Obama and I a from Illinois
    Feb 17, 2008
    In Obamas book, DREAMS OF MY FATHER..and THE AUDACITY Of HOPE

    In Obama’s book THE AUDACITY Of HOPE

    * He wrote “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”

    In Obama’s book, DREAMS OF MY FATHER..

    * “I FOUND A SOLACE IN NURSING A PERVASIVE SENSE OF GRIEVANCE AND ANIMOSITY AGAINST MY MOTHER’S RACE”

    * “I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites”

    * “That hate hadn’t gone away,” he wrote, blaming “white people — some cruel, some ignorant, sometimes a single face, sometimes just a faceless image of a system claiming power over our lives.”

    However, while campaigning in Kansas, Obama frequently emphasized that his mother was white, and that he had grown up in a predominantly white world.

    * (Obama) vowed that he would “never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn’t speak to my own. It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.”

    * “I was trying to raise myself to be a black man in America, and beyond the given of my appearance, no one around me seemed to know exactly what that meant.” Honolulu’s paucity of African-Americans meant he had to learn to be black from the media: “TV, movies, the radio; those were places to start. Pop culture was color-coded, after all, an arcade of images from which you could cop a walk, a talk, a step, a style.”

    * About student life and race at Occidental College Obama wrote “There were enough of us on campus to constitute a tribe, and when it came to hanging out many of us chose to function like a tribe, staying close together, traveling in packs,” he wrote. “It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.” He added: “To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists.”

    * While in college, Obama wrote(he) disapproved of what he called other “half-breeds” who gravitated toward whites instead of blacks.

    Again, from Colonel Ray

    “And after college, he once fell in love with a white woman, only to push her away when he concluded he would have to assimilate into her world, not the other way around. He later married a black woman.”

    * After making his first visit to Kenya, Obama wrote of being disappointed to learn that his paternal grandfather had been a servant to rich whites. The revelation caused “ugly words to flash across my mind. Uncle Tom. Collaborator. House *igger.

    Some tough words for someone who wants to embrase us all.

    This post was dated long before I wrote my article. It also paints a picture of Obama and his anti white views that support his liberation theology.

15. Re. Number 91…

    Wow, and I thought Yamit82 was a nut.

    “Jews must support Obama or face grave consequences. You cannot afford not to.
    Africans have been nice and helped Jews for more than 2000 yrs.”

    I hope this catches on. Anyone, anything but Hillary Rodham Clinton. No more political dynasties in America.

16. Jews Cannot Afford Not To Support Obama

    OBAMANISM IS THE CURE FOR CLINTONITIS AND MIDDLE EAST STRIFE.

    Obamanism is the cure for Clintonitis that has devastated America and I hope Jews all over US rally around Obama and support him to win both the nomination and the Presidency because after he wins, he would help the Jews and Israel as well as settle the Middle East problems.

    However, if Jews betray Obama and he loses, Africans worldwide would consider it a betrayal to the whole African people and will never forgive world Jewry.

    In retaliation, (eye for eye, remember!) Africa would consider expelling all Jews from Africa who have been mining African Gold and Diamond and enriching themselves for many centuries.

    It was African gold and diamond that built international finance, trade and banking that the Jews (Rothschild, Warbug, Rockefeller and others) dominate.

    It was African gold and diamond that built Jewish banks and wealth worldwide.

    Thousands of years ago, when Jews were starving and nearly perished in Palestine, they took refuge in Egypt, Africa.

    If Egypt and Africa did not feed the Jews, perhaps there would be no Jews today.

    Jews also took all Egyptian and African science, technology and religious knowledge that have helped them to develop themselves and to get to where they are today: on top of most of the industries and corporations all over the world.

    Jews owe Africa and Africans everything they have today because if Africa did not shelter them when they were homeless and starving, they would not be here today.

    If Africa did not give them their religion, Judaism and science and technology of the ancient astronaut Anunnaki’s gods, they probably would have not prospered.

    If Jews betray Africans by betraying Obama, there would be grave consequences that would shake the foundation of Earth.
    
    Let Jews remember who their best friend is!

    Hundreds of years ago during the Inquisition in Europe, the Catholic Church slaughtered Jews in Spain and all over Europe and forced most of them to convert to Christianity to stay alive.

    Moreover, during World war 2, Hitler and his Nazi regime gassed and slaughtered them too.

    When they escaped to America, they met opposition and discrimination everywhere.

    They had to hustle to survive.

    Again, Africa helped them by allowing them to continue mining all their gold and diamond.

    African gold and diamond are the foundation of the wealth of world Jewry.

    Abraham Foxman, we hope you remember that!

    The only people who have been nice to Jews have been Africans.

    It is now payback time and Africans hope you would not bite the hands that fed you and made you rich and the envy of the world today.

    Billary is divisive, cannot beat senator McCain!!!

    During their 30 yrs in Politics, they never solved even one single problem despite all their experience and slick Willie’s ingenuity.

    The best things that they gave America were endless scandals and the destruction of American reputation all over the world.
    (Sex and drugs in the White House)

    This empowered terrorists to attack America because they felt America had become weak and an easy target.

    Does anyone still remember 9/11???

    McCain is a nice man. Great man. War Hero! Very respectable and likable man.

    But he is too old. He has no juice or fire. He has no agenda to fix American problems.

    The only issue he is passionate about is Iraqi war and he plans to keep America in Iraq for 100 yrs, while American economy and Americans keep suffering and languishing, as India, China, Japan, Korea and Singapore keep progressing and are now manufacturing and exporting all the consumer goods needed in America.
    
    It is an outrage that America is now being forced to borrow money from Communist China to buy oil from Saudi Arabia.

    Almost all American banks are controlled by Saudi Arabian money invested there.

    If they pull their money out, American banking system and economy would collapse.

    And Hugo Chavez would party all day and night.

    America is slowly becoming a nation of consumers and sliding into a third world status.

    Osama Bin Laden is still free roaming the world.

    They have not arrested him. Why?

    But they feel fine squandering trillions of dollars in Iraq while Iran works hard daily to acquire nuclear weapon that they plan to use to wipe Israel out.

    Something is very wrong and dreadful with the priorities of American foreign policy.

    Billary is part of the problem, not the solution and her presidency will be a continuation of her husband’s presidency that was scandal ridden.

    She is just a well informed candidate who is capable of crying to get sympathy and votes.

    If America puts her in White House, whenever there is a crisis, she would be crying instead of using her brains to figure out the solution.

    Can America afford a President who melts down and cry like a 16 yrs old girl, when she is faced with a challenge?

    Being the President of America is the most challenging job in the world!!!

    America would lose complete respect and it would amount to an open invitation to world terrorists to hit America more.

    Has Americans not learned any lessons? Has America not suffered enough?

    Does America need more terrorist attacks because their enemies perceive them as weak by putting a crying President in the White House?

    She will not have any nerve or ability to solve one problem in America because she is part of the problem, part of Washington gridlock, with a lot of obligations to special interests and PAC.

    Billary have been in politics for 30 yrs.

    They should retire because their brains are old and dried up and devoid of any new and fresh ideas.

    If they could not help America for 30 yrs that they were in office, they will never do it now they are older and getting senile.

    Enough is enough.

    America has suffered enough of Clintonitis.

    Americans have spoken loud and clear: they do not want political business as usual that Clintonitis represent.

    They want change and they want it fast.

    They have chosen and anointed Obama as the agent of change.

    He is the new political Messiah who shall continue where JFK stopped.

    Americans seem to be in slumber and in complete denial of the present dangerous and volatile world situation.

    This is where Jews can help.

    By supporting Obama to win, they would cure America of Clintonitis and thereby be able to find a permanent solution to the Arab-Jewish problem in the Middle East.

    Jews must support Obama or face grave consequences. You cannot afford not to.

    Africans have been nice and helped Jews for more than 2000 yrs.

    Now, I say to Jews all over the world, it is time to show your gratitude.
    secret33.com
    

17. Re. 86 —

    A study in unjustified assumptions.

    BlandOatmeal, The content of your message cannot be judged, because the methods underlying it are so backasswards that you ought to go back to school — perhaps to law school, where such sloppy thinking will be drummed out of you in short order.
    Lesson 1. Never put words in someone else’s mouth. If you are criticizing a person for what he has said or written, use that person’s words and no others. I never called the women in the BBG fat. I used the much less pejorative term rotund. I merely wanted to give some sort of visualization to the story. I knew that I was making, depending on the mind of the reader, that had socio-economic implications, but I left that up to the reader. You chose to draw meaning from those implications, while other may not have. But I only used the word “rotund” — all the rest you spun out for yourself. By the way, I left out that these women spoke with strong Brooklyn accents and were black. Had I included them, your thesis about tourists would have evaporated, but you would, I am sure, drawn out silly and unfounded stories about my obvious racism. Hyde Park is a long, long way from the Brooklyn Botantical Gardens — I hope someday you are able to visit both.
    Lesson 2. “he [Bush] was my only practical choice.” Odd how many people think that the two biggest parties are the only two parties. There are dozens. They don’t get elected, but as often as not they aren’t setting out to get elected. They set out to put items on the agenda, to force the more likely candidates to take positions on tough issues. It’s the small parties that, historically, have led, while the large ones (cautious by nature) have followed. Small parties, unelectable but noisy and persistent, have led on some of the most important issues: abolition of slavery, minority rights in general, women’s voting rights and women’s rights in general, limits on campaign finance, freedom of information. In each case some scrappy “crank” stood up amidst howl of ridicule and made a point. Eventually people heard that point; sometime after than they were pursuaded by it; and eventually it became the law of the land. Between Bush and Gore, you saw only two choices. I voted for Nader, unashaedly, and I still think I was right. Fortunately, I did so in California, where it didn’t matter. Gore won California without breaking a sweat.
    Lesson 3. Midwestern city boy? Moi? I spent 3 and a half years in Chciago at the University of Chicago Law School. I flew into Chicago from Paris, France, where I had been living before then, and I flew out to New York City, where I began my practice of law. I felt no love for the Midwest while I was there. I might feel differently now, but since I never go back, I don’t know. As an aside and in Chicago’s favor, I loved Harold’s Fried Chicken, which kept us law students going through many a long winter. I also loved the Lyric Opera, the Chicago Symphony (at the time probably the best in the country), Buddy Guy’s Checkerboard Lounge, the Art Institute, and the “shotgun” or “railway” style apartments — based on a long corridor with all the rooms branching off it. I went to the University of Chicago Law School because it was small (only 150 students in a class), controversial, was ranked Number 2 (at the time Yale was first, and Harvard, Stanford, and Chicago were all co-ranked second, and most decisive of all, because it gave me a very sizable scholarship. I long considered myself “bi-coastal” living either in New York or in California at various times. Then I moved to the UK, of which I am a citizen thanks to my father. My feelings for America began to change, darken, become more critical. Now I live in Central Europe — western Poland, which is probably as much German as Polish, though one can be shot for saying so — where I practice US immigration law, run a small foundation dedicated to the preservation of an historically important local sysnagogue (www.pozsynpro.org) and generally make a nuisance of myself.

    Anyway, BlandOatmeal, I hope you get the point. Don’t take small bits of information and spin out of control with them. If you want to make assumptions (it’s unavoidable at times), then test them with as much rigor as you can. And force yourself to start reading newspapers — read them online if you must. They are still the best source of reliable news. Blogs, on the other hand, are the best source of hearsay, speculation, misinformation, misquotation, and generally harebrained conspiracy theories. Read blogs for amusement. Read newspapers for information. I recommend the New York Times, the [London] Telegraph, the [London] Times, the [UK] Guardian, the Los Angeles Times, Slate [online newspaper founded by Bill Gates but now owned by the Washington Post]. If you haven’t time for a newspaper everyday, then read The Economist once each week — by far the most reliable source of well-written and well-analyzed news avaiable in English.

    I think your assumption that I am somehow successful (at least in terms of money) is perhaps the most misguided of all. I am a lawyer for the poor, not the rich. I was once a lawyer for the rich, but now I am deliberately and consciously atoning for the “sins” I committed while that was true.

    I will probably vote for Nader again, which indicates how much I like both the Republican and the Democratic candidates on offer. In the UK, where I am also allowed to vote, I consistently vote for the Liberal Democratic Party. So I guess one could say I am a Third Party sort of guy, never happer with the conventional choices.

18. Soren you shamefully continue to use your broad brush to paint all who acknowledge the Israelite origins of the West, our Hebrew roots, as Nazis and such, when clearly Brit Am, founded by Torah-observant Israeli Jews, and Herbert W. Armstrong – friend of every Israeli prime minister from Golda Meir to Yitzhak Shamir, as well as Mayor Teddy Kollek (who had a banquet for him in Jerusalem, presenting him with an expensive Israeli sculpture of David fighting Goliath, appreciating Mr. Armstrong considered himself a descendant of King David through his descent from the British Royal Family) – and Orde Wingate, among many others, prove otherwise for those truly interested in the facts.

    Such a false assertion against Bible-believers is as dishonest as those who condemn all Jews as liberals or Khazars, and isn’t Christian, but then the plain truth is you’re an idolatrous traditional “Christian” anyway, something completely foreign to the early Church of God.

    Misguided (at best) folks like you, undoubtedly consider the ethnocentric Bible, any mention of the Promised Land of ISRAEL (not Ishmael or Esau), the prophets and patriarchs, as “racist” too. Regardless of those shackled on the PC plantation, I’m as “racist” as the Bible teaches me to be.

    Barack Hussein Obama isn’t fit to be president in any manner, shape or form, due to his race and his religion (which includes his left-wing politics), as the Bible commands Israelites to only elect one of our own to rule our country. If you have a problem with that, it’s your problem. I seek to please God, not those who try to be more righteous than Him.

    FYI the Danes are primarily of the Tribe of Dan. 🙂

19. Your (#87) outreach/e-vangelism to the Aryan Phineas Priesthood guy proves my point on your being a white-Farrakhan by the commonalities you mentioned w/the Aryan–racism. You said:

    “Your vain attempt to falsely associate all those who know there are 12 Tribes of Israel, and that the Anglo-Saxons are the Tribe of Joseph, with a minority who are the black sheep of the family, and dishonestly compare us to Nation of Islam, isn’t very Christian of you.”

    But my comment in #81 in light of your own link (thanks for the back-up), speaks for itself, that I was fair and not falsely accusing in recognizing both the differences as well as the similarities between your Armstrongism version of British-Israelism and that of the neo-nazis. It most certainly is Christian to fulfill the biblical command to warn and expose unsound doctrine and false teachers. I have nothing more to say, but will provide the ADL link that explains British-Israelism/neo-nazi/Christian Identity connections.
    Jeremiah Wright or David Duke, skin color no matter, I’m an equal opportunity racist exposer.

20. Soren says he “admires Orde Wingate despite his bad theology,” when it is precisely such excellent theology – embracing the Israelite origins of the West, the Hebrew roots of British-Israelites – that inspired Orde Wingate to act on behalf of our Jewish brethren.

    Your vain attempt to falsely associate all those who know there are 12 Tribes of Israel, and that the Anglo-Saxons are the Tribe of Joseph, with a minority who are the black sheep of the family, and dishonestly compare us to Nation of Islam, isn’t very Christian of you. Such folks, the ones who give British-Israelites a bad name (as liberal and self-hating Jews give Judah a bad name), also profess to be Christians. Will you throw out the baby with the bathwater and condemn Christianity too?

    Torah-observant Israelis like Yair Davidiy, founder of Brit Am Israel, and Avraham Feld, a rabbi, expose how careless such hateful assumptions are against those who recognize Joseph.

    The plain truth remains that the Anglo-Saxons and white peoples of NW Europe alone bear the biblical birthmarks of fulfilled prophecies whether some remain in denial of this fact or not, often due to their idolatrous traditional Christianity that prefers to associate with Babylon rather than Jerusalem, unlike Herbert W. Armstrong and the Sabbath-keeping Church of God.

    David Ben-Ariel Faces the Aryan Nations

21. A couple of comments by/for Jeremiah Wails:

    Last things first. Jeremiah, you said:

    64… After a while of looking at the labels on the plaques next to the rose bushes, one of them said to the other, “Imagine that. Eleanor Roosevelt is buried here.” At that very moment I began to think that the one-person one-vote “we all equal” version of democracy probably needed some tweaking. I still think so.

    The comment about Eleanor Roosevelt was made by two fat ladies who were visiting the park — ladies about whom you were forming opinions based on their fatness. From what you described about your first sight of them, you were apparently equating fatness with stupidity and inability to make proper voting judgments; but like a true “enlightened person”, you generously chose not to pass judgment. When the ladies made the “Eleanor Roosevelt” comment, you decided to abandon your enlightened generosity in favor of “rational judgment”.

    But was your judgment rational? You said you were in the Brooklyn Bontanical Gardens — a lovely spot, it seems, since you visited it with your girlfriend. No doubt, its loveliness is also a draw for tourists, many of them fat ladies. Such fat female tourists no doubt would not confine their visits to New York City to places such as Brooklyn: They would likely have visited other points of interest as well, such as Hyde Park in Dutchess County — which, if you had done any careful research, you might know to be Eleanor Roosevelt’s final resting place.

    Jeremy, you are a lawyer from Chicago, a Midwestern city boy who’s “done well”. I congratulate you on this — I also am from a big Midwestern city, and I only attained to a Master’s Degree, at the age of 58. I spent most of my younger years doing menial jobs — trying to support my small family, on the one hand, and a church that reached out to poor people on the other. I don’t regret the experience: I don’t have to go around looking for girlfriends, because my beautiful wife has been faithful to me for 34 year. So you see, I am a very happy man; but I am not what a Big City lawyer with a pretty girlfriend would call “successful”. Moreover, at 365 pounds, I am overweight for my 6’6″ frame — which means that you might consider me too fat to make sound voting judgments. I am also a genealogy nut; and if I ever found myself in the truly alien surroundings of New York City, I would give a great deal to be able to combine the trip with a visit to Hyde Park — where my distant cousin, Eleanor Roosevelt, is buried. She was a favorite of my aunt, you see, as she was of many common Americans.

    Forgive me if I misread you, Jeremiah. All I had to go on was what you said; and by what you said, it seemed you needed an attitude adjustment. No doubt, you will repay me the favor in due course by correcting my own failings (which are many). But if what I’ve said has awakened your judgment a bit, it would be good to move on now to the next business at hand:

    61… Remember all the flak and fluff about “compassionate conservatism” in 1998-99? People who believed it and voted according to their beliefs have had nearly a decade to repent their gullible natures. What about the traditional Republican core principles of small government, balanced budgets, and colleagial government? Anyone who voted for the so-called Republican, George W. Bush, in reliance on those core-principles (unchanged in decades of Republicanism) is now watching helplessly as his country’s reputation and influence in the world are eroded on all sides, as the economy crumbles under the weight of smoke-and-mirrors schemes of funding debt with more debt, rather than with taxes (the only legitimate way to finance them), and so on.

    Ah yes, good old George! I must admit, that I never heard any comments about “compassionate conservatism”. My wife and I watch very little television; and I leave the newspaper reading to her, so we don’t miss important local news. For myself, I was surfing the internet for my news during the 2000 election year, news about Israel; and the presidential election was low on my agenda. Who ran against Bush? Let me see… ah yes, Al Gore. I had just gone through eight years of a corrupt Arkansas governor running the country. My daughter was a young adult at that time, working her way into the job market — a beautiful young girl, entering into a world run by lecherous men, abusing their positions of power to victimize their female employees. I didn’t know the “real” George Bush and I didn’t know the “real” Al Gore, any more than anyone here really knows beans about the hidden agendas of the candidates today. But I did know what the Democratic Party stood for, when poll after poll showed their support of Lecher Bubba actually INCREASING with every revelation of his debauchery. I am interested in politics; but far ahead of my political interests is my care for my family; and it sickened me to see a political party so insensitive to people like my daughter.

    I voted for George W. Bush, therefore, because he was my only practical choice. When he assumed office in 2001, I hoped the best concerning him, just as I had in 1992 when Bill Clinton took office. I was amazed at his tepid response to the goings-on in Israel (I didn’t know, at the time, how much MORE tepid was the attitude of most Jews and even Israelis concerning the same!), and rather dismayed that he returned, much too soon after the pizzaria bombing in Jerusalem, to the insane line of “moral equivalence” being put forth by the press. When the UN convened the “Conference for the Promotion of Anti-Semitic Racism” in Durban in August of that year, I gave a sigh of relief that Bush showed some moral backbone and boycotted the meeting. Then came 9/11, and the unspeakable disappointment of seeing our President, while 3000 Americans were still awaiting proper burial because of an Islamic attack on New York, calling Islam a “religion of peace” and calling for the creation of a terrorist state in a dismembered Israel.

    Yes, I was disappointed with Bush; but it wasn’t because I had expected some sort of “compassionate conservativism”. I grew up in a city that had Socialist mayors for 60 years, living with a “pink collar” mother and a blue collar step-father — both of them union members. I am well aware that the unions have been raped by administration after administration since those days, and that jobs have fled America as our economy has “globalized”. I voted for Ross Perot in 1992, because he was the ONLY candidate actually addressing this issue. When Bubba came into office, he sent out the call to “Let the good times roll” for CEOs around the country who were getting increasingly wealthy while American college graduates had to settle for jobs at taco stands. I knew there was no “compassionate conservatism” at work, when both my children went to live in China because there were no job opportunities for them in America. I love my country — my family roots here literally go back thousands of years — so don’t think for a moment that this didn’t hurt.

    Presidents don’t make economies; these things are caused by other factors. Since the 1960s, the conditions or ordinary workers in our have been on a steady decline through both Democrat and Republican administrations. Moreover, Herbert Hoover did not create the Great Depression, nor was Franklin D. Roosevelt responsible for getting us out of it: it kept dragging on for years, and it took a war economy to get us out of it. But FDR did something that Hoover, who had an excellent humanitarian record to his credit, was unable to accomplish: The great optimist on crutches gave Americans hope in the midst of their trials; and when they had put their trust in him, he didn’t disappoint them. This is the place and responsibility of an American President.

    In the current election, I favor John McCain because he has proven loyalty to America, and has demonstrated unwavering leadership ability in crisis. In my years of ministering to desperately poor, homeless people, I got to know a man who had been a POW in Cambodia for several years. Of dozens of inmates who came into the camp, whose screams my friend had to endure night after night, as they were tortured, only seven men escaped. Of these, my friend was the only one left, in the late 1990s, who had not committed suicide because of the continuing nightmares of their ordeals. He died a few years ago, after having been driven from his homeless camp by a coalition of big businessmen and environmentalists. John McCain has my deepest respect, because he endured something few of us can even imagine, and continued in a career of decades of public service. Do you think I would want to throw away a chance at such a leader, in favor of young junior senator of questionable background?

    So you are correct, Jeremiah, that we should not be thrown by campaign slogans: We need to consider the depth of character of the candidates, their leadership abilities, their attitude toward Israel and the Jewish people, and their party’s track record. Whether they are women or blacks or whites or skinny or fat are red herrings that lead many voters astray, clouding their judgments. In this time of war against Islamic fanatics, it IS prudent to consider whether their loyalty is divided between Christianity and Islam, or between America and Africa. It is also prudent to look for age and experience. But depth of character, PROVEN character, ought to be the bottom line.

    I could say more, but I may have said too much already. You’re still a big city Midwestern boy who’s made good, Jeremiah, and you have my respect for it. I hope you will indeed look deeply into the candidates in this election, as you have so wisely advocated that we do; and I wish you every happiness.

    Shalom shalom 🙂

22. To suggest that Lincoln had an easier time of things that modern Presidents is so foolish a statement that I find it difficult to believe that someone could make it.

    Sure, there was a tremendous war on but if you think that the world today is much more simple than back then, you’re really out of touch with reality. It is far more complex. The US was not a world power back then and most of the world did not hate us; the economy of the US was not tied to the entire world; if the economy fell in another country it didn’t have 1/10th the impact it has today. The White House was still sitting in a swamp! Boy, it must be nice to think all is beautiful and the worst is over. I don’t know how one can possible think that, unles they live in a cave, deep in the woods somewhere. Wake up, man!

23. aitlaasot, shalom lecha: I believe leaders are less important that most of us might assume. Even seemingly mediocre leaders with small challenges may not rise above them but for big challenges sometimes rise to meet those challenges successfully. who can say? Toynbee likened history as a matter of challenge and response. I think there is much truth in this! Shas who gave us Oslo for a few silver shekels can still partially redeem themselves if not I can blame them more than even Rabin and Peres for the deaths of almost 2000 Jews. The stupid followers of R, Ovadia Yosef still do not connect and still think of him as a Gadol Hador, G-d help us all in that case!

24. b”h

    Before anybody gets mental orgasm’s at the prospect of a defeat of Barak Hussain Obama, we see situation where the current president, who had been 1000% behind Israel, now calls for the surrender of more land & the division of Jerusalem w/o evidence that peace will really take place. Just as important of who will be in the White House is who will be the Prime Minister of Israel. Unless Israel has a strong PM who can say “NO”, Israel willl be forced into more concessions w/o any peace.

25. Andrew you anti semitic, cwel,dupek,gowno, spierdalaj:

    somethings black can never be made to be white like your mind. I would call it a black hole full of nothingness.

    And then there is Yamit82, who simply likes to argue. He can argue the pants off McCain, Clinton, and Obama, and still have energy left for more. He can insist that black is white, and demonstrate why, and that Israel is a superpower in waiting, and that a country the size of a football field can and should take on the whole world if necessary.

    I have an easier suggestion. The Jews should leave Israel, close up and give up, and return to the Diaspora. Bingo. No more problems. No more Qassams. No more suicide bombers. No more worries about Iran or Iraq or Syria or Hezbollah. No more Kadima. No more Likud. No more macho rhetoric. No more wasted money. Problem solved. Israel had a good chance, but then the Six Day War twisted its thinking, and the constant flow of American money spoiled it rotten. If it can be redeemed, that would be great. But it looks increasingly unlikely. Wait for the Messiah and try again. In the meantime, get on with life.

    Judging from the quantity of your comments here it seems that it is you who enjoys the argument and the provocations you hope to elicit reactions too. It appears judging from the lack of response to you here that you have lost your general appeal as you are by now a known quantity and I guess most readers feel you are not worth the energy of a response. I am a bit quirky here in that I hate you, so I feel sort of a compulsion, to at least give you a response suitable to my feelings toward you. I never back away or back off especially from the likes of you. It isn’t every misfit American who would choose to live in that mecca of western civilization POLAND and then have the conjoles to belittle someone else for choosing to live in his cultural and historical homeland. There is a school of thought that a person can never feel really alive until his life is in mortal danger or if somebody is shooting at him in order to kill. Man it gets the adrenalin really perking believe me when I say that most of us are getting on with life and death as well.

    Today even with our problems which I must admit we have an abundance of we can put Poland with a population 10 times ours in our hip pockets without a thought. I can tell you one thing , we won’t have to confront the world only those who wish us harm and we can take care of them. Its a matter of will and conception as well as belief in ourselves. You think otherwise fine so why concern yourself with Israpundit there are a myriad of forums that think just like you and you would fit in seamlessly? even with your large girth!

26. David BenAriel (#77,78), I’m actually an admirer and student of Orde Wingate despite his bad theology and am well aware of the British-Israelism adherents who 60-100 years ago were more benign than those who adhere to British-Israelism today and its various Christian Identity spinoffs–again, it’d be hypocritical to be pointing fingers at refusing to denounce Farrakhan while not distancing oneself from a white-Farrakhan like yourself, that’s one reason I denounced your theology–so no one could point to Israpundit and charge it w/hypocrisy for Obama/Farrakhan bashing while allowing a white racist cultist to post unchallenged. Fact is many people from your type of Armstrongism have taken your theology a step further and ended up supporting real apartheid in South Africa or ended up as neo-nazi Aryans…it’s just a step away. And, no, I’m not saying you’ll take that step, just pointing out that others have and do, and not only that, your fringe endtimes agenda-driven beliefs cause Jews to question the motives of Christians in general, who overwhelmingly consider British-Israelism to be a cult that’s long past having been refuted.

27. Davidstil

    Let me be perfectly clear. I do not oppose Obama because he is black or because he is Arab. I oppose him because of the people he surrounds himself with and because he is favourably inclined to the Palestinian cause and because he is favourably inclined to Islam.

    Is that too difficult to understand.

28. Israels tactical goals should partially agree with a major aim of American anti-Semites: divestment from Israel. For utterly different reasons we, too believe that Israel must abandon the US aid and live on her own. This would force Israel to live according to her means and to become at last a frugal nation. This would demand a change of political system to accommodate the new realities, the return to Israel’s fundamental political doctrine: Only the IDF is responsible for Israel’s safety.

    The US needs to show the Arabs that she controls Israel, and make us appear like poor beggars just for the fun of it: witness the American demand over a few dozen illegal caravans perfidiously dubbed “illegal outposts.” As if the Arab attacks on Israel from 1929 onwards have anything to do with unauthorized settlements and outposts built mainly because of the Oslo capitulation. American politicians betray our friendship to placate Arabs, such as resurrecting the peace process after they saw Iraq war going badly. The stupid American Presidents use Israel to vindicate their silly theories, or repay entities like the Saudis. Clinton pushed for the peace process to get the press off his ass over monica scandal. If not for US pressure, Israeli governments wouldn’t even think of giving the Arabs Judea and Samaria and partitioning Jerusalem.

    From 1948 to 1972, Israel survived while having no Superpower Sponsor. We had a fexable foreign policy dealing in kind with France, Germany, America, even the Soviet front Romania, and survived quite well. Paying off International Blackmail to the Arabs is very expensive in more ways than one, many countries would find it cheaper to buy regional influence by aiding Israel than the Arabs. America aids Israel to control her, and to leverage that contro with the Arabs by extracting concessions from them. Aid to Israel is an excellent investment. Not only the US, but other countries, as well,who might realize that and would ally themselves with Israel. In the show of absurd loyalty, Israel sticks to America, even though America sells her out at every opportunity – for oil and other |Big business reasons. I do not rule out a degree of antisemitism here as well.

    Russia cannot give Israel much aid, but can supply advanced weapons much cheaper than America, and provide excellent support in the UN. The Arabs fear the ruthlessness of the Russians more than the libral wusses who run America , so America is more vulnerable to Arab duplicity and attack than Russia.

    There is also France, full of themselves with imperial ambitions but unable to pry the Arabs countries away from America. Through an alliance with France, Israel can extract diplomatic support and considerable aid from the EU.

    China and India provide unlimited potential once outside of Americas constraints.

    tough, self-reliant, arrogant Israel has a good chance for a lasting armistice with neighboring Arabs. Israel as the vassal American client has no chance for lasting peace.

    I still think Obama is the one to support for all of the above reasons.

29. Soren is woefully or willfully ignorant of the Israelite origins of the West, the Hebrew roots of the Anglo-Saxon and white peoples of NW Europe. Nothing new under the sun, as Joseph stood before his brethren and they were blind to his identity!

    Some prefer to deny their Hebrew roots that they may continue as Gentilized Israelites, wandering in their spiritual bewilderment, shamefully preferring Babylon to Jerusalem.

    Orde Wingate was also a Christian Zionist who embraced the truth he was a British-Israelite. Imagine the consequences for the Jewish people, the Jewish Homeland, Israel, if Orde Wingate had been foolishly dismissed because of his biblical beliefs. Thankfully, reason prevailed and Israel and Judah worked together wonderfully and were blessed.

30. Soren says: British-Israelism, that he considers himself an Israelite and the consequences that stem from it

    I know I’m an Israelite, and unlike Israel that has practically begged for others to recognize them as an official state, I don’t feel the need for your approval. It appears you’re either woefully or willfully ignorant of the Israelite origins of the Anglo-Saxons and the Hebrew roots of many of the white peoples of NW Europe. Nothing new under the sun, as Joseph stood before his brethren and they were blind to his identity and it had to be revealed – as it has been again, as prophesied.

    How has it been revealed? We the People (British-Israelites and Jews, NW Europeans) alone bear the many biblical birthmarks of fulfilled prophecies that none of the other claimants do.

    Ever hear of Orde Wingate? He was a Christian-Zionist and also understood and embraced the fact that he was indeed a British-Israelite. Just think of the consequences the Jews would have suffered if they rejected his invaluable assistance because of his biblical beliefs concerning his people! Biblical beliefs that are being shared by a growing number of Jews, such as Torah-observant Yair Davidy of Brit Am Israel and Rabbi Avraham Feld – both of Jerusalem. You do realize, don’t you, there are Twelve Tribes of Israel?

    What’s this got to do with the leftist, undoubtedly closet Muslim, racist Barack Hussein Obama (BHO)? For me, everything. Israelites are not to elect a Gentile leader to rule over them. Not only does BHO present a threat to the United States (Menashe ben Yosef), he would aid and abet the sworn Muslim enemies of Israel (Yehudah), and is a Gentile in every sense of the word.

    You say of yourself, I’m neither Jewish nor an Israelite. You may still be lost to your possibly Israelite origins (the Danish are the tribe of Dan, in large part), wandering as a Gentilized Israelite, but some of us know who we are and won’t deny it to remain stuck in the muck of Babylon rather than return to Jerusalem. The truth has set us free.

31. Oh, not really African American? ok–back to Hitlers blood tests

    You still don’t get it do you? Obama is the one using his supposed African American heritage to propel his campaign. This is why he is receiving greater than 80% of the black vote. If he is actually Arab, then that fact is relevant in this case. If he himself wasn’t using the race card, then it wouldn’t be an issue.

32. There was some mention of game theory here and for those who mentioned it superciliously I would recommend the following clip as it has much relevance I think to Israel and all those who may be for and against us.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJAFRF75OVA

33. 66 & 67 & a bit of 69 —

    David Still, Good for you. A man who believes in something other than Israel. Not that you don’t believe in Israel — I hope you do — but just that you don’t appear to think that the ends justify the means. Thank you for standing up for principles that used to matter in America more than they seem to today. And thank you also for pointing out that Lincoln had had similar experience when he entered the Oval Office. Of course, Washington had had no political experience. The “experience” charade can be played every which way, and in the end character and convictions will matter more. Truman had had little real experience — Vice Presidents in his day had nothing, literally nothing, to do. Kennedy was in much the same position as Obama. Certain people grow into the job amazingly well. Bush didn’t, but others have.

    As for LeeU’s apparent dismissal of the complexity of the country in the time of Lincoln, I can’t imagine how he came to the conclusion that Lincoln had an easier time of things that present day Presidents. There was a little matter of The Civil War, still by far the bloodiest military experience America has ever been in. (A single day in the worst Civil War battles saw more casualties than all of Iraq and Afghanistan put together. And they were all Americans.) Lincoln was faced not only with the worst domestic problems of any President to date, but also with plenty of foreign affairs problems — since half of Europe was willing to run the blockades that were part of his strategy for dealing the Confederacy. The country was smaller, also poorer, also at least as divided and quarrelsome and angry. The legal basis for the war was contested (sound familiar), and the President had for much of the war very little faith in his generals.

    To suggest that Lincoln had an easier time of things that modern Presidents is so foolish a statement that I find it difficult to believe that someone could make it.

    And then there is Yamit82, who simply likes to argue. He can argue the pants off McCain, Clinton, and Obama, and still have energy left for more. He can insist that black is white, and demonstrate why, and that Israel is a superpower in waiting, and that a country the size of a football field can and should take on the whole world if necessary.

    I have an easier suggestion. The Jews should leave Israel, close up and give up, and return to the Diaspora. Bingo. No more problems. No more Qassams. No more suicide bombers. No more worries about Iran or Iraq or Syria or Hezbollah. No more Kadima. No more Likud. No more macho rhetoric. No more wasted money. Problem solved. Israel had a good chance, but then the Six Day War twisted its thinking, and the constant flow of American money spoiled it rotten. If it can be redeemed, that would be great. But it looks increasingly unlikely. Wait for the Messiah and try again. In the meantime, get on with life.

34. davidstil

    We who express concerns about Obama have done our homework. You have not. You have to be willfully blind to ignore our facts and arguments. On the balance of probabilities our rejection of Obama is a no-brainer.

    If you want to make your point you will have to address all our arguments rather than advance platitudes and know nothing thinking.

    Either make a case or stop sliming.

35. On the other hand, unlike Hillary he has not been investigated for his involvement in such smelly business as Whitewater, the White House Travel Office scandal, the dubious suicide of a chief aide, the deplorable association and friendship with Web Hubble, a completely unqualified boob whom she pushed in a Attorney General. Perhaps lack of experience is a good thing in this election. Everyone else has a smelly history.

    Stop drinking the kool-aid. He hasn’t been around long enough to be investigated. But make no mistake, this obama boy is as corrupt as they come. But its only a matter of time before his ties to the Syrian businessman, I can’t recall his name, comes to light. Oh, and your sqeaky clean boy obama sued to win his first election: http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-02-28/news/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/4

36. I therefore proffer that we should advocate the worst apparent candidate who might force Israel off the American political umbilical cord since it appears none on our side is willing or capable of doing it voluntarily.

    My sentiments exactly. Well put, yamit82!

37. Many of us here on Israpundit think the worst thing for Israel is to be a client state of America. I for one am in this camp. A lot of what has been posted here re: Jews in the negative can historically be substantiated, and that is why we have 14 million Jews in the world and not 500 million, pogroms and holocausts not withstanding. Jews who are really Jews are stalwart in their conviction to remain Jews no matter what the others will go. This has been the case through out our history, especially since the emancipation. Whoever gets the nod in the next presidential elections will in one way or another be bad for the Jews and especially for Israel.

    Thus said I will offer a different take from our view here. I will assume Obama will be the worst for America and the Worst candidate for Israel or the worst of the worst options available assuming Blumberg doe not jump in at the last min.

    I therefore proffer that we should advocate the worst apparent candidate who might force Israel off the American political umbilical cord since it appears none on our side is willing or capable of doing it voluntarily.

    For Israel it will be harder psychologically more than any other tangible effect. We can whether that also in time. The big concern should be Americas but I am here now and not there so I primarily look to see what best for us first just like Americans do the same or at least should!

    Obama is a Racist for sure thats America problem, No great public track record , Americas problem, Fuzzy positions on anything and everything again Americas problem.

    If A president Obama turns out to be good for the Jews and Israel we would have lost nothing if as I suspect he will be the opposite than that would be the best thing that could happen to us since we invented CHICKEN SOUP(It would be as that I forgot his name said ) a win , win situation for Israel.

    Do not fear it will force us to be practical, thrifty and aggressive. Unify the country and those of world Jewry that still care, find out if those Christian Zionists are really our friends,. Things might get so bad we decide finally to leave the UN which would take us out of the legalistic constraints of that August body of snakes and rats.

    We could save billions in Hitec toys which we thought we needed to reduce enemy civilian casualties, and use Napham instead which should be enough against the Palis and if attacked by Arab armies just Nuke em. Since America seemingly won’t deny Iran her nukes we can do by using our own first . That should put the ball squarely in the Liberal Wuss court in America and the world. Israel alone can be a very worthy and dangerous enemy with a no choice situation.

    Now: H Peskin and A.Hingston lets go at it fellas!

38. Davidstill,

    I concur that Obama’s familial background should not mean anything per se. Whether that background has influenced his thinking can only be discerned from his words and deeds. On that score, I have not seen much if anything.

    As to his long and continued affiliation with the Chicago South Side Holy Trinity Church led by Pastor Jim wright Jr., who has certainly distinguished himself as being completely anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian and made the case with his words and deeds that he is a highly probable anti-Semite and anti-white racist, that is an entirely different matter.

    Just as most people are judged in part at least by whom they associate with, so too should Obama. Obama says he against all forms of racism, including anti-semitism. In doing so, Obama’s thinking on the matter is only making him move his lips.

    In such situation, Obama’s stance on racism and anti-semitism in particular would have been far more credible, had he long before entering this race to be the Democratic candidate for President in the upcoming election, moved his feet right out of his Church led by the highly probable bigot Jim Wright Jr.

    As for his message of change, while it has inspired and captured the imagination of a nation so desperate for change for the better, Obama has failed to provide any clear message on how to effect that change, and what he has said to that end in terms of health care and in foreign policy, sure sounds lke a recipie for a change for the worse.

39. You think he has not enough time in congress? the same exact amount as Lincoln when that guy became president.

    Yes, but Lincoln didn’t have the same size country with the large population, nor the international events of today. There is no comparison whatsoever. That’s like saying that we are all are qualified because we have as much experience in the US government as George Washington. A little more complex today than in the time of Lincoln.

    I do agree about the hatred, as well as some of the language.

40. as A Jew, I am Ashamed of some of the hatred here expressed! That some members of Obama’s family might have or may still be Muslim means he can not run? But this iks not nazi Germany and Joe Lieberman a Jew can run? Oh, it is ok if he has Muslim members in his background but his church is….? in other words, whatever he is or does he is bad bad bad. Oh, not really African American? ok–back to Hitlers blood tests

    You think he is all rhetoric? google his record then. You think he has not enough time in congress? the same exact amount as Lincoln when that guy became president.

41. It’s interesting that, here is a man that two years ago 95% of the nation had never heard of; now, many of you are defending him more rigorously than God Himself. You would think that someone said something about your mother. I believe it is true, Obama is a messiah … for the left. How does a man, whom nobody knew, suddenly become “loved” by millions? I’d call it demonic charisma, just like George W. Bush. Whoever gets elected you can bet that the US deserves him/her. Who knows what God has in store, He raise up whom He please, and crushes those He choses. Believe me, your vote doesn’t matter, one way or another. Has it made a difference in the past? Either God will choose the one He wants or He will allow the nation to have who it deserves.

    An example: Bush spent the first four years of his presidency showing everyone how he was not accountable to anyone, and that he would decide the borders of Israel, not God. Then, four years later, the Christians (who “say” they love Israel) voted him back in, the lesser of two evils, they said. How screwed up is that? The lesser of two evils? Where does God say to choose the lesser of two evils? Evil is evil is evil is evil. The problem is that Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and others deceived the Christians into believing that they HAVE to vote. Politicians are no different than whores, they both sell their bodies for money and power.

42. Re. 47.

    
    “My opinion is as relevant as anybody else’s.”

    That’s an interesting proposition, but not an obvious truth.

    In 1982 I moved from Chicago, where I had gone to law school, to New York, where I had taken a job. I wanted to see all the things NYC is famous for.

    Among the notable sites I visited early in my life as a New Yorker were the Brooklyn Botonical Gardens.

    There I was sitting with my girlfriend on a bench in the rose garden. A couple of rather rotund middle aged women came waddling by, not obviously mentally impaired and probably just as likely to vote as anyone else.

    After a while of looking at the labels on the plaques next to the rose bushes, one of them said to the other, “Imagine that. Eleanor Roosevelt is buried here.”

    At that very moment I began to think that the one-person one-vote “we all equal” version of democracy probably needed some tweaking. I still think so.

43. Re. 47.

    Obama is responsible for what his wife says? For what Oprah says? You seem to suggest that he’s responsible as well for what Bill Clinton says. No one held Ronald Reagan responsible for the inanities of his daft wife (Renmember “Just say ‘No’.”) Nor does anyone seem to remember that 18 months ago Laura Bush was loudly trumpeting the idea of Condi Rice becoming both the first woman and the first Black President. Talk about a non-starter. Oprah gets paid in direct proportion to her ratings, not her measured wisdom or political acuity. Same as Bill O’Reilly. Neither of them is demonstrably brighter than Sean Penn or Mia Farrow. If you care what any of them says, then shame on you for being so gullible.

    I care about what Hillary says (not her husband, still less her daughter), about what McCain says (when one can make sense of it), and what Obama says (not his pastor, not his wife). The rest is just noise.

    All this noise about experience, for instance. Hillary is in her 8th year as a Senator (in a seat handed to her on a silver platter), not exactly a lot of experience, not exactly a lot of hard work. Not when compared to the people I wish were running (Sen. Patrick Leahey, for example). Prior to that, her experience was either nil or negative. Every initiative she’s ever championed has been a failure. Her previous attempt at healthcare reform was such a disaster that it’s taken everyone more more than a decade to forget about it. John McCain is, frankly, a lightweight — a mental lightweight and despite his long service an experiential lightweight. He knows a lot about a few things, and nothing at all about a lot of things, including the economy. He looks smart and principled next to Dubbya, but not otherwise.

    That leaves Obama. He’s definitely smart and well educated — but then so is Hillary. On the other hand, unlike Hillary he has not been investigated for his involvement in such smelly business as Whitewater, the White House Travel Office scandal, the dubious suicide of a chief aide, the deplorable association and friendship with Web Hubble, a completely unqualified boob whom she pushed in a Attorney General. Perhaps lack of experience is a good thing in this election. Everyone else has a smelly history.

    Arab? How did you reach that conclusion? His mother is a white Christian American. His father is a black Kenyan, not an Arab and not a Muslim. Kenyans are sub-Saharan Africans, not Arabs. A few of them are Muslims (not very many), but not all Muslims are Arabs. There would appear to be no more Arab blood in Obama’s viens than in yours. His mother, following divorce from his father, married a Muslim, not an Arab.

    So, according to your groundless reasoning, not only is he guilty for Oprah’s beliefs, he is also guilty for those of his step-fathers? My step-father was a pro-Reagan Republican. I never understood how an educated person living in an enlightened liberal city like San Francisco could reach such absurd conclusions, but at the same time I never thought of his benighted views as any taint on me.

    You really ought to check these silly things you write with such unfounded self-assurance before making such an open and incontestable idiot of yourself in public. You would save yourself much embarrassment and the rest of us a lot of time.

44. Soren (#60): One can have his DNA checked to see if he is a member of the Tribe. That scientific result should satisfy everyone. Simply because a prophetic event happened once doesn’t mean it can’t happen again, i.e. “Babylon is fallen, is fallen.” This shows it is going to happen twice, just for one example. The desecration and destruction of the Temple in 70 AD is another example.

    I’ve read differing views on Japheth and as it can’t be known for a certainty at this point, I’ll let God decide. Here is a link about the basic Chinese language and its likely biblical background from Genesis. The true God worshipped by ancient Chinese.

    From seeing many videos and information from Israel, although many are semitic, many others look as blonde and blue-eyed as any European or American.

45. Does anyone check these things?

    From Number 42 — “In addition to Obama’s ties with the church and what you have discussed, the fact that he chairs a subcommittee on Afghanistan affairs and has not presided over one meeting….”

    A freshman senator chairing a senate subcommittee? I didn’t think so. So I went to see. http://obama.senate.gov/committees/

    With the Internet, Google, and other search enginges, and only a little perseverance and a few seconds of effort, it is possible to check most of the assertions made about the presidential candidates, from so-called quotations to so-called committee memberships. It’s not about Obama, it’s about whether we want to know the truth about the three people likely to assume the Presidency, and thus make informed judgments, or whether we’ve already made up our minds (based one what?) and just want to confirm our decisions while attempting to get others to join us.

    I have not actually made up my mind, and I would like the best person (from my moderately left-of-center, European-style Social Democratic viewpoint) to have the job. To do that, I need accurate information. Presumably, those of you right-of-center also want accurate information. Otherwise mistakes — very expensive mistakes — are sure to be made.

    Remember all the flak and fluff about “compassionate conservatism” in 1998-99? People who believed it and voted according to their beliefs have had nearly a decade to repent their gullible natures. What about the traditional Republican core principles of small government, balanced budgets, and colleagial government? Anyone who voted for the so-called Republican, George W. Bush, in reliance on those core-principles (unchanged in decades of Republicanism) is now watching helplessly as his country’s reputation and influence in the world are eroded on all sides, as the economy crumbles under the weight of smoke-and-mirrors schemes of funding debt with more debt, rather than with taxes (the only legitimate way to finance them), and so on.

    More of those sorts of surprises are not what is needed. So we had better work a little harder to get our facts straight. Because next November we can be absolutely sure of only one thing: America will have got the President it has earned.

46. Teshuvah (#57), his whole comment is based on a mangling of scripture; first, note he says about Genesis 9:27 that “Japheth is Asian, not European,” note how he’s talking in the present tense–this presents another issue that I won’t digress much on, but let me say he’s living in the past–his theology views events of the Tanakh that in reality are historical as still yet to be fulfilled, and BenAriel views those he wrongly calls “Israelites” (Anglo-Saxons) as playing a role in fulfilling them. Noah’s 3 named sons are Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and the corresponding adjectives are semitic, hamitic, and japhetic. For the same reason it’s inaccurate to say Shem is Israeli (reading the present into the past), it’s inaccurate to say Japheth is Asian(and, btw, for space I’m not even getting into the historical fact that Europeans very much descended from Japheth, contrary to what BenAriel says, since it doesn’t fit in with his theological presuppositions). Correct biblical application to present reality and history would be to say, “most Israelis (as in national Israel) are semitic,” “many, probably most, Europeans (until recently) were japhetic,” and, “some Asians are japhetic.” BenAriel’s next statement is also based on a twisting, wresting, denying and perversion of the totality of scripture (seeing as how so much of it is about Israel): “Many of the white peoples of NW Europe and within the British Isles are Israelite.” You can’t just make Israel mean what you want (in his case, Anglo-Saxons), the name didn’t come out of a hat, but was the new name given to Jacob and from there used to refer to all descendants of Jacob and at times used to describe the northern tribes, as opposed to the southern tribes of Judah (the pretext for BenAriel’s cultic distinction between Israelites and Jews). It’s all a big hermeneutical disaster that needs some serious deprogramming and a start from scratch when it comes to the Bible.

47. Soren (#54): The study of Genealogy has really only taken off in the last 20 years with the widespread use of computers, precisely when G-d has been regathering the Jews to Israel. That regathering is Zionism. I suggest that heightened awareness is a calling by G-d for people to discover their roots, particularly their Jewish roots. Messianic Congregations have sprung up as a result of it, although many are too Christian in that they are Antinomian (against the Law, i.e. antichrists), rather than holding to Messianic Judaism.

    Many people have thought they had a Jewish ancestor and have been studying their own lineage. Others feel compelled, as if by a scarlet thread, to find out. The Jews who escaped the Catholic Inquisition went to the Americas and became Converso or Sephardic Jews. Some “converted” to Catholicism but retained Jewish customs in secret. Eventually some forgot their Jewish heritage. If God can bring the Converso and Sephardic Jews back, He can also jog the memories of Christians who have a Jewish heritage. Even some the Scots and some North American Indians are descended from Jews, notably the Cherokee! If it is too far back not to count in the State of Israel, it at least gives one comfort to know they have an additional reason for support Israel. I have not seen any White Supremacism in my reading that you assign to David.

    Yamit provided these and other links a few weeks ago:

    Cherokee Jewish Indians
    When Scotland Was Jewish
    The Influence of Sephardic Jews and Moors on Southeastern Indian Cultures – by Donald Panther-Yates
    Melungeons: The Last Lost Tribe in America
    Melungeons.com – Jewish Indians

48. Reply to #33:

    Jeremiah, you fit perfectly with the last sentence of my posting. It’s a pity you can’t see it.
    And quoting you from another one of your postings on this page:
    “We can all agree that people who make up lies [about the Palestinians] are morally repugnant and grossly irresponsible”

49. Soren (#55): What scriptures in #45 did David BenAriel twist?

50. Sorry about the bold (not shouting, just forgot the end bold mark after “British-Israelism”).