Category Archives: Israel

This time, the sky really IS falling

Li’l Lindsey Graham is once again doing what he does best, and that’s to terrify Americans into supporting yet another war. From Fox News:

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM sounds the alarm about the growing threat of the Islamic State, the militant group formerly known as ISIS, launching an attack on American soil unless President Obama takes more decisive action to stop terror group’s surge across Iraq and Syria.

And as we all know, by “decisive,” Li’l Lindsey means “doing what Bill Kristol and Bibi Netanyahu want us to do.” So let’s all run around the room screaming, then take DECISIVE action and beg our Congress to do the one thing it’s capable of doing, and that’s to vote money for Israel and the Pentagon. Otherwise the Islamic State armored division will sprout wings and swoop out of the skies and spray Des Moines with 30mm shells.

What will the outcome be? We know that: Armaments industries and AIPAC will shower Li’l Lindsey and his friends with generous campaign contributions. After a decade or so, the guerrillas will out-maneuver the invaders, and we’ll have NO CHOICE but to grant citizenship to the Syrian and Iraqi Muslims who collaborated with US forces.


New Word: Likudzi

The pejorative “Nazi” is said to derive from the German word “ignatz”, simpleton. Many abusing this word “Nazi”, against others who are not Nazis, are themselves Jewish, and even Zionist. The most aggressive of these Zionists are those following the Likud Party of Israel, which many of the American neocons, and perhaps the Israeli lobbies (multiple and powerful), support.

And so I suggest, in light of recent barbarity in Israel (1, 2), adopting the pejorative “Likudzi” in defence from the mighty pejorative, “Nazi”.

Anyone to the right of Bill Ayers is frequently slurred as a “Nazi”, which our society perceives as the ultimate evil. If asking a modern American to give an example of pure evil, he’ll likely mention Hitler. All values opposing Hitler then are good, so for modern America perhaps Ayers is an example of pure good. Unfortunately, nearly all Americans are somewhere in the grey area between. And so, we’re attacked with the slur “Nazi” for being to the right of Bill Ayers.

In closing, if attacked with the dreaded word “Nazi”, or its terrifying twin “racist“, by a person who happens to be Jewish, I recommend happening to counter with, “Likudzi”.

Note though: This is a defensive action. And pejoratives are powerful, very powerful. What Zionists do to Arabs on the other side of the globe is really none of my business. I wish for peace, but I don’t pretend to have the right to meddle there. Greater Israel, Lesser Israel, no Israel, none of my business.

Disturbing Dual-Morality in Israeli Mob Song

According to The Electronic Intifada, the following video with subtitles is accurate.:

Lyrics include:

“In Gaza there’s no studying. No children are left there”
“I hate all the Arabs.”
“Tibi, Ahmed Tibi, I wanted you to know: The next kid to be hurt will be your kid. I hate Tibi. I hate Tibi the terrorist. Tibi – is dead! Tibi – is dead! Tibi – is dead!”
“Gaza is a cemetery.”


And yes, I take pleasure revealing the hate from these Zionists. So many of them (eg. Kristol, who is pro-mass immigration) support “nationalism for me, not for thee” throughout Europe and America. Look at how twisted and extreme these men have taken it in the video!

It’s as shocking as the ANC’s folk song, “Kill the Farmer, Shoot the Boer“, which lyrics repeat “shoot the Boer”. Now that the ANC has power, we see the benevolent results there.

Never again should a Zionist be free to condemn nationalism anywhere else in the world. Also though, never should nationalism be taken to such an extreme. The few in the US Right who’ve gone as far (become as twisted) as the men in the Zionist video, tend to be false flags (worked for FBI, lawyer defended him as only pretending to be hateful as part of job). The real nationalists in the US are never so hateful, so it’s shocking for me to see such authentic hate among Israeli nationalists.

Addendum: The ADL has a hate report on the CofCC, though the CofCC has often supported Israel’s attempts at defending its own borders from mass immigration. Similarly Jared Taylor’s AmRen has long striven to be friendly to Jews, Taylor is of course condemned in that report. Nationalism for me, not for thee.

Biden went too far off the plantation last year, quote: “Think — behind of all that, I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media, are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry.” Immigration too.

Israel Attacks Third UN School in Gaza, Dozens Killed.

France welcomes in Iraqi Christians: Christians who had endured everything, until Bush and Obama drove them from Iraq. I imagine the Palestinian, and perhaps Israeli, Arabs will also eventually be removed to Europe or the US, to make way for Greater Israel. After all, Europe and America are “ideological nations“. Africa for Africans, Asia for Asians, Israel for Zionists, white polities for… everyone.

U.S. could free Israeli spy in deal to save peace talks

One thing’s for sure: The U.S. most definitely has a “special relationship” with Israel. It’s similar to the kind of relationship you see in the beaten wife syndrome, as this nauseating news nugget makes clear:

An Israeli spy serving a life sentence in the United States and groups of Palestinian prisoners could be freed under an emerging deal to salvage Middle East peace talks, sources close to the negotiations said on Monday.

The sources, who spoke as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry prepared to meet Israeli and Palestinian leaders, said under the proposed arrangement that Jonathan Pollard, a former U.S. Navy analyst caught spying for Israel in the 1980s, could be released by mid-April.

In addition, Israel would go ahead with a promised release of a fourth group of Palestinians, among the 104 it pledged to free in a deal that led to the renewal of peace talks last July. Another group of jailed Palestinians would also go free – and the peace talks would be extended beyond an April 29 deadline, the sources said.

What a deal – Israel gets its hero, the Palestinians get their people, and we get the greatest prize of them all: We get to maintain our “special relationship” with Israel. Win-win-win!

In case you’ve forgotten, here’s what Jonathan Pollard – an American citizen, at least on paper, if not in terms of loyalty – did to his country:

Pollard did more damage to the United States than any spy in history. And it was genuine damage, not just a mass of documents that had been routinely classified. Pollard’s Israeli handler, aided by someone in the White House who has up until now evaded arrest, was able to ask for specific classified documents by name and number. The Soviets obtained US war plans, passed to them by the Israelis in exchange for money and free emigration of Russian Jews without any regard for the damage it was doing to the United States. The KGB was able to use the mass of information to reconstruct US intelligence operations directed against it and a number of Americans and US agents paid with their lives. Pollard also revealed to the Israelis and Soviets the technical and human source capabilities that US intelligence did and did not have, which is the most critical information of all as it underlies all information collection efforts. Compounding the problem, the United States has never actually been able to accurately ascertain all of the damage done by Pollard because the Israeli government has refused to cooperate in the investigation and has not returned the documents that were stolen.

But what do you want to bet that the Israel-Firsters will meekly accept this outrage while screaming for Edward Snowden’s head?

ADL Attacks Ron Unz

The ADL has published a hit piece on Ron Unz. The article is dated Jan 20, 2014. My attention was drawn to it by this condensed version which appeared on their blog today (Jan 23, 2014). The article refrains from calling Unz personally anti-Semitic, but  states “he pro­vides sup­port to extreme anti-Israel ide­o­logues and his writ­ings res­onate with and are reg­u­larly cited by anti-Semites.” Curiously, the article does not mention that UNZ IS JEWISH, which seems a relevant piece of information in an article accusing him of giving safe harbor to anti-Semites. Of note, the article does outright call Paul Craig Roberts an anti-Semite.

Israel to State Fund Even More Abortions – Someone Call John Hagee

Israel will now be state funding even more abortions. This is from Dr. Joel McDurmon at American Vision:

What will the dispensational, pro-Israel-no-matter-what Christian-Right say now? According to Israeli mainstream news, Haaretz, God’s allegedly chosen-forever-people have just returned wholly unto passing their children through the fires of Moloch—and state-funded at that.

The PC Thought Police Go After Jack Hunter (a.k.a. the Southern Avenger)

The Cultural Marxist PC Thought Police are frothing at the mouth again. They’ve identified a new thoughtcriminal for their Two Minutes Hate, Jack Hunter, a.k.a. the Southern Avenger.

Here is the Washington Free Beacon fatwa … err … article that got the jihad started. When I first heard rumblings that the PC Gestapo was going after Jack, I suspected the author might be the loathsome PC enforcer Jamie Kirchick, but it wasn’t. It’s some writer I’ve never heard of named Alana Goodman. Here is Goodman’s bio per the Free Beacon:

Alana Goodman is a staff writer for the Washington Free Beacon. Prior to joining the Beacon, she was assistant online editor at Commentary (neocon alert!). She has written for the Weekly Standard, the New York Post and the Washington Examiner. Goodman graduated from the University of Massachusetts in 2010, and lives in Washington, D.C. Her Twitter handle is @alanagoodman. Her email address is

Jonathan Chait picked up on the story here. Chait isn’t someone I normally associate with this type of PC Thought Enforcement campaign (I could be wrong), but this drive by smear job is inexcusable. He says this:

But his son and progeny Rand Paul also has a close aide who is a huge racist, reports Alana Goodman.

A “huge racist?” Actually Chait, Goodman isn’t even shameless enough to say that in so many words even though her “article” is a transparent PC/neocon rightthink enforcement hitpiece. (I say neocon in addition to PC because she heavily focuses on foreign policy and highlights among other things his belief that the nuking of Japanese civilians was unjustified.)

Salon piles on here.

What’s noteworthy about the Goodman piece is just how lame the allegations are. Anyone who has followed Jack’s career at all knows that he is pro-South and supports the right of secession. As Dave Weigle points out in a semi-snarky pile on of his own, this is not news, but the PC Rightthink Enforcers thinks this is a scandalous revelation. Beyond that she presents a laundry list of statements and policy positions that are supposed to scandalize all decent rightthinkers. I could defend each of Hunter’s statements individually, but I don’t have time for that now. In general, taken together the quotes and positions place Hunter in an identifiable paleocon/paleolibertarian sphere, but there is nothing here that is not routine opinion in those circles and each individual opinion can be found in mainstream conservatism as well.

Looked at as objectively as I can as an interested co-combatant, the thing that might be most shocking to the ears that the Rightthink Enforcers are aiming to prick is his use of the word terrorism to describe the nuking of Japanese civilians and his comparison of that act to 9/11. (FTR, I don’t think terrorism is the right word to describe our use of nukes against the Japanese civilian population. It is needlessly inflamatory and isn’t really an accurate word choice. It is more accurate to describe it as a war crime, but that is for a separate thread.) Beyond that Hunter is accused of saying that there is a double standard against whites. Other races can celebrate their race but whites can’t celebrate theirs. Well no duh! This is a thoroughly mundane and unarguable observation. He’s also acused of saying our foreign policy in the Middle East is influenced by Israel. Is there anyone who seriously denies this? In fact, the interventionist at the Free Beacon celebrate this as right and good. He is excoriated for suggesting that immigration alters the culture. Again, no duh! Does anyone seriously deny this? In fact, immigration boosters celebrate the fact that immigration brings about change in the culture. You know, that whole “Diversity is our greatest strength” mantra.

I could go on, but you get the point. Unfortunately, Jack concedes too much in what was I’m sure a damage control interview with the Free Beacon. Those of us who have followed Hunter’s career for a while have recognized that he has become more politically pragmatic over the years, thus his defense of some of Rand Paul’s misguided concessions. But I have always hoped that that old self-described “right-wing radical” still lurked beneath the surface. But this is not the time to criticize Hunter. Now is the time to defend him against the baying PC Rightthink mob. They’ll be time for dragging him fully back into the fold once the PC Enforcers have been called out for their rightthink policing shenanigans.

Stop Iran? Sign Petition and Get US and Israel Flag Pin?

We have no control over the banner ads that run at this site. They are just generated I assume by some algorithm based on the content of the site. So I guess since our site is labeled conservative some program assumed our readers would be interested in “stopping” Iran.

So when I surfed to CHT today, the ad that greated me was as the title above, without the question marks of course. I couldn’t resist commenting. Isn’t that ad a microcosm of what is wrong with our foreign policy? It is assumed that I am supposed to want to “stop” Iran because I have some particular affinity for Israel. Ugh! There is no need for further comment. The commentary writes itself.

Rand Paul, our hero?

Hardly. As I’ve previously argued (see here and here), I see Rand Paul as yet another deceptive politician who intends to save the Empire by nullifying its critics. He mouths the words that attract critics of militarism, but turns around and pledges support for even more military adventures. Here’s one admirer who supports Rand Paul for just that reason:

While Sen. Paul has fought to de-authorize the War on Terror and explicitly delink sanctions from war as a response to Iran’s nuclear ambitions, he also voted yes on the sanctions. While he repeated Ron Paul’s position about ending foreign aid to Israel, he has prioritized ending foreign aid and military sales to Israel’s enemies first and even declared in January that an attack on the Jewish state should be treated as an attack on the United States. In a major foreign policy address in February, he made clear he was not a carbon copy of his father. “There are definite differences,” he declared.

When Neocons and faux libertarians make love eyes at the same politician, something’s up.

Rand Paul Clarifies His Israel Security Guarantee

Apparently Rand has felt enough heat for his recent statement that he felt compelled to have his team do some damage control. The clarification helps a little.

Doug Stafford, Sen. Paul’s Chief of Staff, recently clarified the remarks in an e-mailed statement.

“The questions asked of Senator Paul in recent days were regarding an unprovoked attack on Israel.  In one case the question was regarding a nuclear attack on Tel Aviv from another state,” explained Stafford. “Senator Paul believes that if another country launched an all out war with Israel that the United States should and would assist them in some way.”

Stafford notes that Sen. Paul’s views on the matter are consistent with the approach he has taken during his tenure in the Senate, noting, “He was not discussing any offensive or preemptive war, nor was he describing the skirmishes that come up from time to time in that region. He was discussing a hypothetical all-out attack on Israel by her neighbors.”

He explained that Sen. Paul believes that approval to go to declare or engage in war only “lies with Congress,” noting that making such a strong statement “is likely to lead to a smaller chance of such attack ever taking place.” Stafford also noted that Sen. Paul “never has war as a goal or a preferred policy, only as a last resort.”

First of all, the best part of this is that he felt the need to clarify his statement at all. That means there is at least a small counter balance developing. If you’re someone in the Paulist orbit you can’t just make shameless pledges of fidelity to Israel without there being some pushback. (Hopefully Ted Cruz will get some pushback for his shameless grandstanding at the Hagel hearing.)

That said, this clarification is only slightly helpful. I don’t think anyone believed that Paul was pledging US help if Israel is attacked by Hezbollah. So clarifying that he was only talking about a major attack doesn’t really help. The problem of the security guarantee still remains. Ideally, America would consider Israel a friendly nation, no less “special” but no more “special” than any other. We shouldn’t offer Israel a security guarantee unless we offer every friendly country a security guarantee, which would be a bad idea and totally unworkable. We must change the presumption of the “special relationship.” This doesn’t do that.

Rand’s choice

The confirmation of Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense maybe the toughest vote Rand Paul will have taken so far as a U.S. Senator.

Paul has made no secret of his Presidential ambitions and in case there was any doubt his recent trip to Israel with several Christian Zionists in tow. He’s also been having private, unpublicized meeting with prominent neocons like Dan Senor. The reason for this is transparently political. Paul wants to, at the very least, reduce the intensity of opposition to him, such groups showed his father Ron Paul when he ran for President in 2008 and 2012.

But will Rand’s new friends influence the way he will ultimately vote on Hagel? Someone who his father probably would not have had trouble voting for if he was a Senator given the similarity of their foreign policy views and their views on the defense budget. Indeed, Rand himself has called for similar reductions in the Pentagon budget,

Some necons are calling this vote a “litmus test”. It will be interesting to see if Rand Paul feels the same way as far as 2016 is concern.

Bill Kristol Celebrates His Purges

Recently Bill Kristol was crowing about how he purged the “Arabists” from the Republican Party.

I first became aware of this story from Mondoweiss. Sorry but I don’t recall how I was directed there. I must have been though because I don’t generally surf to Mondoweiss.

I am still reeling from seeing Bill Kristol hold forth at a debate at Bnai Jeshurun synagogue on the Upper West Side last Tuesday [a short portion of which is above]. He came off as what he is, a Republican Party warlord; and he was treated like royalty. The rabbi said he was proud to host Kristol, and Jeremy Ben-Ami of J Street said he wanted to take Kristol with him to the West Bank, and moderator Jane Eisner of the Forward was very respectful, though she got in a jab at Kristol’s “smear” tactics at the Emergency Committee for Israel.

When Kristol gave the self-congratulatory riff from which I’ve gotten my headline—about how all the elements hostile to Israel inside the Republican Party were purged over the last 30 years – no one dared to question the power of the Israel lobby.

An incidental run in with Kristol occasioned this Buchanan editorial on the smarmy Kristol’s claims.

“The big story in the Republican Party over the last 30 years, and I’m very happy about this,” said Kristol, is the “eclipsing” of the George H.W. Bush-James Baker-Brent Scowcroft realists, “an Arabist old-fashioned Republican Party … very concerned about relations with Arab states that were not friendly with Israel… .”

That Bush crowd is yesterday, said Kristol. And not only had the “Arabists” like President Bush been shoved aside by the neocons, the “Pat Buchanan/Ron Paul type” of Republican has been purged.

“At B’nai Jeshurun,” writes Weiss, “Kristol admitted to playing a role in expelling members of the Republican Party he does not agree with.” These are Republicans you had to “repudiate,” said Kristol, people “of whom I disapprove so much that I won’t appear with them.”

“I’ve encouraged that they be expelled or not welcomed into the Republican Party. I’d be happy if Ron Paul left. I was very happy when Pat Buchanan was allowed — really encouraged … by George Bush … to go off and run as a third-party candidate.”

Kristol’s point: Refuse to toe the neo-con line on Israel, and you have no future in the Republican Party.

Here are a couple of other mentions of this story that I got from a yahoo search.

The Kansas Citian

The Southern Nationalist

When some people say … HA…HA…HAAA… SAVROLACHEWWWW………!!!! Oh, excuse me … that paleos spend too much times nursing old grudges, I’ll tell them to read this story and tell me it doesn’t make their blood boil. If Kristol still gets to crow about 15 give or take year old purges, then I claim the right to still grouse about them.

The feisty intellectual pugilist in me tells me that the way to respond to such pompous crowing is with defiance. He may have purged the Republican party (this claim is largely true), but he didn’t purge real conservatism, and he sure as heck didn’t purge me. For our paleo critics, what do you suggest?

Of course the sweatest revenge would be to take the Party back, but that is not within my power. Shouting from the rooftops is.


Should the US go to war for Israel?

Here’s Ron Paul, speaking on the House floor:

While I absolutely believe that Israel – and any other nation – should be free to determine for itself what is necessary for its national security, I do not believe that those decisions should be underwritten by US taxpayers and backed up by the US military.

This bill states that it is the policy of the United States to “reaffirm the enduring commitment of the United States to the security of the State of Israel as a Jewish state.” However, according to our Constitution the policy of the United States government should be to protect the security of the United States, not to guarantee the religious, ethnic, or cultural composition of a foreign country. In fact, our own Constitution prohibits the establishment of any particular religion in the US.

Of course the people of Israel have the right to protect their culture – that’s the soul of their nation; keeping that alive means the country they fought for will live into the future. Every people has that right.

But the cultural preservation of a foreign nation is not any of our business. Worse, the entire debate takes on a bizarre aspect when you recall that the official policy of the US is to depose its own majority culture.

Think I’m exaggerating? Check out this “anti-racist” screed:

What is racism? Racism is more than individual prejudice based on race. Racism is the power of a dominant group, through its systems and institutions, to enforce the dominant culture’s history, values, practices and beliefs. It advantages those in the dominant group and disadvantages those who are not. It results in disparities.

I’ve racked my brain, and can imagine nothing more insane than a government that openly undermines the traditional culture at home while upholding the culture of a foreign nation.


Mitt Romney’s Israel First foreign policy

Pandering to different groups is a standard operating practice of most politicians. Mitt Romney is as good as anyone at doing this which is why he is one of the top candidates in polls. But even Mitt’s pandering reached the level of pornographic when he stated in an interview in an Israeli newspaper that Israel should be the one to dictate what U.S. policy should be towards it.

So if Mitt becomes Commander-in-Chief of the world’s most powerful nation, one which for years has subsidized Israel’s economy and its military machine, the relationship between the U.S. and Israel will not be based on mutual interests, which is usually how foreign policy is made between nations, but one in which Israel itself determines what the relation ship is and how it should be conducted. Romney is proposing to give away U.S. control of its own policy to that of a foreign nation. So much for “American Exceptionalism” We give them money and they tell us what to do. That’s a strange policy.

Granted Romney is employing a fair number of neocons to his campaign team but I wonder if even they would say things so outlandish and outrageous about U.S.-Israeli relations (even if they believe the same in their hearts).  It makes one wonder who Romney is trying to impress but it also shows the desperate depths he’ll sink to in order to do so. Some Conservatives, who may well have been resigned to a Romney nomination, are beginning to wonder if just giving it to the next guy in line is such a good idea.


In Search of Anti-Semitism II – The Jeffery Lord hit piece on Ron Paul

Jeffery Lord‘s ridiculous piece in the American Spectator cannot be taken seriously as an intellectual argument.  Using an early 1980s term which once described Democrats like Gary Hart and Paul Tsongas  and which came to fruition in the Clinton/Blair era to try and make Ron Paul be the “other”, as it were in our modern politics, has nothing to do with trying to make people think. But Lord knows this as well as anyone because it is not his intention to make a cohesive argument for opinion makers. Instead he is making a political argument with a specific purpose in mind. He is trying to discourage the presumably conservative readers of the magazine and others who will read the article online from even considering Paul as a second or third choice among many, but to rule him out completely. And he is doing so with similar tactics one finds by reading SPLC manifestos or listening to Cultural Marxian critics within the academe.

Then again, being “politically correct” has never been the sole discretion of Left. It is a tactic which can be employed by any ideologue of any persuasion wishing to damage a political opponent or cause or movement by separating the candidate or activists as individuals and making them part of something bigger, more sinister in its design by either the company they keep, intentional or not; by what they’ve written, even if out of context or long ago (or in the case of Ron Paul not at all) and by their supposed place in history and what they connect back to. Lord employed the entire arsenal in order to go after Paul and no doubt the people who published this article thought they were getting “In Search of Anti-Semitism II” referring back to infamous essay written by National Review founder and editor William F. Buckley whose basic design, like Lord’s, was to forever connect Buchanan with fever swamps of anti-Jewish conspiracy mongers regardless that Buchanan, the so-called extremist, worked for two Presidents, had a syndicated column and was a pundit for many media shows.

Buckley’s smears did not keep Buchanan from the mainstream (although that wasn’t true for Joe Sobran)  anymore than Lord’s load of filth will affect Ron Paul’s impact on politics. But having insulted the Lord’s piece from being anything worth reading, I wish to dwell upon it if only to marvel at the obsession those within the “conservative establishment” (or as I have called it “Conservative INC.“) with anything which has to deal with the state Israel and or anti-Semitism. Like the Left when it comes to race, those who would call themselves conservatives seem to have their ears more wide open on this topic than anything else.

Continue reading

Michele Bachmann and “The Cursers”

Bachmann is, what should be called a “Curser” (to go along with Birthers and Truthers). That’s a person who believes that U.S. foreign policy should be based around the old line in Genesis where God says to Abraham “I will bless those that bless you and curse those that curse you.” So the U.S. must support Israel not just because is it in our foreign policy interest but because if we don’t God will curse us.

Now I wouldn’t say this is exactly Dispensationalism because her religion is Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS), which is a very fundamentalist Protestant sect (they believe the Pope is the Anti-Christ) but is made up largely of conservative German Lutherans (the Bachmann clan is originally from Wisconsin in a little German-dominated farming village called Waumundee in Buffalo County). They’re not the kinds of people who buy into the flights of fantasy of Dispensationalism (they’re Lutherans after all). Dispensationalism is a British import from dissenter sects which fits more in with the more charismatic Scots-Irish than the more reserved German or Scandinavian Lutheran sects

But you can see the evangelical influence given their born-again conversion in the mid-1970s. If she and her husband Marcus had done nothing they still would have been fairly conservative by the tenants of their faith. Being born-again however, transformed them down more activist and more millenarian paths as anyone who was “born again” during this period of time would have been whether they watching the movie How Should We Live Then? or reading the book The Late Great Planet Earth. The Jesus Freaks like Marcus and Michele were looking for something more punchy than “Eine grossen berg ist ein Gott.” Being born again in the 1960s and 70s and early to mid-80s was statement of rejection against the conventional, mainstream religion of that time. It was their own counter-cultural rebellion.

Because she expresses the “Curser” rhetoric, she already has the Dispensationalist market-cornered. Thus, attacking Iran is consistent with her viewpoints which are religiously orientated. Iran threatens Israel, ergo Iran must be dealt with. Libya on the other hand, is no threat to Israel nor is Afghanistan so it’s easy for her to say bring the troops home because neither has anything to do with Israel’s security which would be the centerpoint of her foreign policy.

So to sum it up, a Bachmann Presidency would akin to electing Netanyahu as President. Hordes of neocons and other hawks will be called back from exile to staff the Pentagon and this time the State Department (John Bolton for Secretary of State anyone?) Will we attack Iran if Bachmann becomes President? In two words: hell yes.

Why Netanyahu treated Obama like his personal dogwalker

From Steve Sailer:

A reader sends photos of Bibi Netanyahu and Barack Obama as young men, with the implication that these might shed light on why the head of a country of 6 million treated the head of a country of 300 million like his personal dogwalker.

If only we had a leader like Bibi Netanyahu — one who actually cares for the welfare of his own people.  Imagine that.

Steve Sailer’s open letter to Bibi:

Dear Prime Minister Netanyahu:

Congratulations on your triumphal tour of Washington D.C. You have emerged as the de facto leader of anti-Obama sentiment in America.

In return for all that America has done for you, may I ask, in all seriousness, that you do a favor for America?

Namely, please come to America again and deliver a high profile speech and slide show explaining the rapid construction and strong success of Israel’s border security fence. Point out that a properly made border fence has been shown to deter not only drug smugglers and illegal immigrants, but even suicide bombers. Then, compare Israel’s success at rapidly securing its borders to the American government’s dithering and ineffectualness at constructing its own border security fence. Please point out that this kind of defeatism and corruption is unworthy of Israel’s ally. You could conclude by offering to send Israeli experts to the American border to advise Americans on how to build the American fence.

Thank you very much.

Steve Sailer

Nationalism in Israel and the West

This categorization, by Ellison Lodge,  may be a little unfair to Buchanan and perhaps a little too generous to Michael Savage, but it succinctly captures the mixed positions on nationalism in Israel and the West:

If one were to try to sort out views on nationalism in Israel and the West, it could be neatly split into four categories:

1) Those who support ethno-politics for Israel but not for Europeans and the West. (neoliberals and neoconservatives like Abe Foxman, Alan Dershowitz, Bill Kristol et al.)
2) Those who oppose ethno-politics for Israel and the West (Noam Chomsky, Max Blumenthal et al.) [and politically correct libertarians]
3) Those who support ethno-politics in the West and in Israel (Lawrence Auster, Diana West, Michael Savage)
4) Those who oppose ethno-politics for Israel but support it for the West (Pat Buchanan, Kevin MacDonald)

Like the author, I would include myself in category #3. I have no problem with Israel promoting ethno-nationalist policies or taking a hardline stance on immigration (these are things any sane nation should do), but I think Israel should have to do these things on its own dime, and we don’t need overseas partisans of Israel (e.g. Bill Kristol or Joseph Lieberman) trying to prevent Western nations from pursuing much-needed immigration enforcement and reduction.  That said, unlike Larry Auster, I don’t think one’s position on Israel should be the deciding factor in assessing his political views.  Frankly, I don’t care whether another Westerner is pro- or anti-Israel; I do, however, care whether he’s pro-Western.  Lodge says it best:

The idea that the fate of European or American Civilization is somehow tied up in Israel, as Geert Wilders & Co. often claim, has absolutely no basis in reality; the same goes for the ahistorical, made-up term “Judeo-Christian tradition.”

Read the rest of Ellison Lodge’s article here.


Haley Barbour Kisses the Ring

For those who thought Haley Barbour might be different, he’s not.

He’s headed to Israel to kiss the rin… err… I mean speak with Netanyahu.

The blurb also informs us that Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee have already met with Netanyahu. Check.

But I’m sure this is just because Barbour wants to meet a lot of different foreign leaders in preparation for a potential run for President. I’m sure we will soon be hearing about his plans to travel abroad to meet with the leaders of Moldova and Burkina Faso as well, no doubt accompanied by the Republican Moldovan Coalition and the Republican Burkina Faso Coalition respectively. I anxiously await reports of these subsequent trips in Town Hall.

Netanyahu determined to deport African immigrants from Israel

The cabinet on Sunday apppointed a committee to determine criteria for the estbalishment of an “open detention center” for infiltrators who entered Israel illegally through Egypt. The government stated that the committee would complete its work within 60 days and that the facility would be built within six months.

Ministers Benny Begin (Likud), Avishay Braverman (Labor) and Yitzhak Ahronovitch (Yisrael Beiteinu) voted against the decision. The latter said, “I don’t know what an open facility means,’ adding that the government should invest resources in enforcement, legislation and the immediate construction of a barrier on the Israel-Egypt border. He also suggested stationing additional Border Guard officers on the borderline.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explained why he supports the idea. “There is a growing wave threatening Israeli’s workplaces, a wave of illegal infiltrators which we must stop due to the harsh implications on the State’s character,” he said at the start of the weekly cabinet meeting.

Addressing the necessity of the prison, which he defined as a facility, the prime minister said that “we must create a humane response of lodging, food and nursing services until the infiltrators are removed from the country. People have been talking for years about stopping the wave of illegal infiltrators. Now we are no longer talking – this government, as opposed to previous ones, is doing.”

Netanyahu said the State would discuss imposing large fines on employers hiring illegal workers. He said the suggested detention facility was similar to facilities in Holland, Italy and Spain.

The refugees will stay in the facility temporarily “and will be returned to their homelands and interim countries from there,” he said. He added that “this is a combined national plan which will change the direction of the mass entry.” ~ YNet News

Good news for Israel. I hope it works out.  Like any nation, Israel has the duty to defend its borders and deport unwanted immigrants.

If only we could have such determined leadership in opposition to the Third World invasion of the U.S.!

Sadly, we have the Obama regime which currently is working to ram through Congress the DREAM Act amnesty.  If you haven’t already, join NumbersUSA so you can send free faxes to oppose this amnesty.