Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

whats the difference between bosnia & the holocaust?

Steroid_Virgin

New member
I see a lot of libertarians around here support a very isolationist vision when it comes to the military... We should stay out of wars, ethnic battles etc.. why was it a moral obligation to save the jews during the world war?? what made that different then say.. the otrocities in bosnia? it's only ok if we are saving jews?? the way I see it, you either support using the military as wedge between parties in civil war, or you dont... what makes the ethnic cleansing of any race worse than any other??
 
letting countries do their own thing is one thing, but letting people go fucking insane is another all together.
Let's face it , shit happens. Sometimes people who are not nice come to power and do crazy shit. Sometimes you have to step in. I am more of an isolationist, but i know when people need help.
 
Jews have always had alot of power and influence, that's the only difference. Plus, there are no natural resources of any consequence in Bosnia. Unfortunately it's a case of 'what's in it for us' mentality when it comes to supporting a particular cause
 
There have been PLENTY of "Ethnic Cleansings" where we havn't gotten involved. Take the reign of the Khmer Rouge in the late 1970's right after the Vietnam War ended. Pol Pot made everyone move out of the city & into Countryside "Killing fields" where the citizens were litterally worked to death. Other(mostly Doctors, Teachers, and educated people) were taken to be tortured as a means of political rehabilitation. I have read stories about people being tied down and having Scorpions put all over them until they were stung to death. We never did JACKSHIT about that, and it was actually the Vietnamese Army who rolled in there to break up that party. Pol Pot was never even brought to any Warcrimes Tribunal for fucks sake. That episode was WAY worse in history than the one in Bosnia.
 
vinylgroover said:
Unfortunately it's a case of 'what's in it for us' mentality when it comes to supporting a particular cause

Nothing wrong with this in my opinion. The US should not be involved in any type of situation unless we can benefit.
 
JohnyJuice said:
letting countries do their own thing is one thing, but letting people go fucking insane is another all together.
Let's face it , shit happens. Sometimes people who are not nice come to power and do crazy shit. Sometimes you have to step in. I am more of an isolationist, but i know when people need help.

LOL.. you have no idea what's going on, do you?
 
2Thick said:


LOL.. you have no idea what's going on, do you?

What the fuck are you talking about. I was stating my stance on whether to get involved in world affairs or to isolate oneself. Read my post again, slower this time. Sound it out.
 
vinylgroover said:


So no 'humanitarian' assistance at all?

Not from the federal government. It should all be from charitable organizations. If I decide to give money then it should be MY decision where that money goes. I do not want gov.org deciding who gets my money.
 
BO-CEPHUS said:


Not from the federal government. It should all be from charitable organizations. If I decide to give money then it should be MY decision where that money goes. I do not want gov.org deciding who gets my money.

Sorry i should have been clearer. I was referring to military assistance to prevent 'humanitarian' disasters such as genocide as opposed to financial aid
 
nordstrom said:



But i do. Go UN.

I have a great idea for you then. Give every single penny you earn to the govenment and then let them decide where your money goes. Hopefully, you will get some after they redistribute to all their wortless programs and personal agendas.

:)
 
vinylgroover said:


Sorry i should have been clearer. I was referring to military assistance to prevent 'humanitarian' disasters such as genocide as opposed to financial aid

I have gone back and forth on this issue for awhile now. I am leaning towards "no" we should not be there. I do not think it is our job to police the world.
 
I don't think the West actually cared that much for the Jews in WWII. There were anti-Jewish laws in the US and Canada (like Jewish only benches in the parks of Toronto). True, there were no extremes here that basically stripped Jews of citizenship, and they were obviously not herded off to camps, but they were second-class citizens nonetheless.

In fact, many prominent families in the US and Canada were basically pro-Nazi prior to WWII (and even during).

FDR could've had concentration camps bombed, but he chose not to.

I think the main difference between the Bosnian genocide and the Nazi Holocaust is that both the Bosniaks (Muslim Bosnian Slavs) and the Croatians (99.9% Catholic) who were slaughtered by the Serbs had millions of people sympathize with their plight. All of Western Europe basically was behind the Croatians, and all of the Muslim world, Turkey especially (because of their historic ties to the region), was behind the Bosniaks.

No one gave a shit about the Jews in WWII. They were (are) seen as a foreign population with no ethnic ties to any European state, and they have with a long history of getting slaughtered. That's why the Nazis killed them - because there was already a lot of anti-Semitism in Europe and nobody cared.

There's a reason why Israel exists.
 
Steroid_Virgin said:
I see a lot of libertarians around here support a very isolationist vision when it comes to the military... We should stay out of wars, ethnic battles etc.. why was it a moral obligation to save the jews during the world war?? what made that different then say.. the otrocities in bosnia? it's only ok if we are saving jews?? the way I see it, you either support using the military as wedge between parties in civil war, or you dont... what makes the ethnic cleansing of any race worse than any other??

At what point did we go into WWII to "save the Jews"? I thought that Pearl Harbor had something to do with it.

If you wanna play that game, why did we not intervene in the Ukraine, when Stalin starved about 2-3 times more Ukrainians than Hitler killed in Jews and Gypsy's?

Matter of fact, why not in nearly every case of Communist takeover, which always resulted in massive slaughter of political adversaries?
 
vinylgroover said:
Jews have always had alot of power and influence, that's the only difference.

That is such a myth (invented by anti-Semitic governments). If Jews had any actual power, there would've be no Holocaust.

Do you realize that Jews were barely tolerated in much of Europe (they were legally non-citizens) until the 19th century, and even then they were emancipated only in some parts of western, central, and southern Europe?

That's like believing that African-Americans have a lot of power in the US.
 
No, it's not a myth.

They have always had power and influence, but prior to the holocaust, they were splintered and fragmented. The events of the holocaust brought them together as a group and in most countries of the world, the jewish communities exert great influence particulalry with regard to finance.
 
The United States did not enter WWII to "save the jews". Pearl Harbour brought us into the fight. England then convinced the US that they should adopt a policy in which the Germans were seen as the primary threat. In this manner, the Pacific became a secondary theater with the bulk of US resources allocated to defeating the Germans.

The holocaust was not the only incident in which people are murdered in vast numbers. Stalin wiped out over 20 million of his own people before WWII. The Japanese killed 10 million Chinese civilians during this same period. The United States cannot be responsible for the protection of the entire human race.
 
vinylgroover said:
No, it's not a myth. They have always had power and influence, but prior to the holocaust, they were splintered and fragmented.

Did you read my previous post? Prior to the middle of the 19th century, most Jews in Europe (from West to East) were forced to live in segregated communities. Most of them had no legal status. They were only emancipated, i.e. given basic legal rights, in the 19th century, and even then only in theory. In eastern Europe, they were not granted legal rights until the 20th century.

The great bulk of Jews in Europe (from East to West) just prior to the Nazi takeover of Germany were either working-class, middle-class, and some upper-middle-class. Very few of them were rich, very few. Anti-Semitic elites in various European countries propagated this myth of "Jewish power" to the ignorant masses to divert attention and have the masses take their anger out on a powerless minority (usually in the form of organized massacres).

Unfortunately, these myths have not disappeared.


vinylgroover said:
The events of the holocaust brought them together as a group and in most countries of the world, the jewish communities exert great influence particulalry with regard to finance.

See my previous sentence.
 
Re: Re: whats the difference between bosnia & the holocaust?

cockdezl said:
If you wanna play that game, why did we not intervene in the Ukraine, when Stalin starved about 2-3 times more Ukrainians than Hitler killed in Jews and Gypsy's?

I know it wasn't enough, but the US did not recognize the USSR until 1934.

Oh, and following the Revolution of 1917 and the Russian Civil War (1917-1921), millions of middle-class and upper-middle-class Russians were forced to flee their homeland (emigrating to Germany, France, USA, UK, China, etc.), leaving behind mostly the uneducated lower class. That basically resulted in the collapse of Russian society. They're only starting to recover now. I'm not going to even touch upon the rape of the rest of eastern Europe.

How anyone can be Marxist/Communist or even be sympathetic to their cause is completely beyond me.
 
Stumpy said:


The great bulk of Jews in Europe (from East to West) just prior to the Nazi takeover of Germany were either working-class, middle-class, and some upper-middle-class. Very few of them were rich, very few. Anti-Semitic elites in various European countries propagated this myth of "Jewish power" to the ignorant masses to divert attention and have the masses take their anger out on a powerless minority (usually in the form of organized massacres).

Unfortunately, these myths have not disappeared.




See my previous sentence.

Stumpy, at the turn of the century and into the war years, mostly everyone was working class. Unlike today, the rich were but few.
 
the jews had more influence than stumpy is letting on. Jews had great influence in science and medicine.

http://jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v280n12/ffull/jbk0923-1.html

http://www.yale.edu/yup/books/061129.htm

and I think there were more bankers than he let on too, considering for a long time christians weren't allowed to be money lenders due to biblical constraints.

http://www.cyberroad.com/poland/jews.html

http://www.eijsbroekcourant.com/kcg/Yad Vashem/Yad Vashem2.htm

http://www.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/Shokel/980903_Banks.html

http://www.huc.edu/aja/97-1.htm

searching for this didn't take me very long. so it's not like I dug up some obscure anti-jewish propaganda.
 
The Nature Boy said:
the jews had more influence than stumpy is letting on. Jews had great influence in science and medicine.

http://jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v280n12/ffull/jbk0923-1.html

http://www.yale.edu/yup/books/061129.htm

Those two links that you're provided are not articles - one is a general book review, the other - a brief synopsis of a book followed by snippets of favorable reviews from scholarly journals (might as well post links to book reviews at amazon.com). Both books sound interesting, but I fail to see how they disprove what I was saying. I never said that there were no rich or powerful Jews, just that they were/are a minority of the Jewish population.

Second, I don't really think your second sentence conflicts with what what I've said previously, and I'll quote myself, "The great bulk of Jews in Europe (from East to West) just prior to the Nazi takeover of Germany were either working-class, middle-class, and some upper-middle-class."

Doctors and scientists are professionals - that means they're solidly middle or upper-middle-class.

A quote from your second link provides a brief glimpse into the social conditions that I described:

"A common motif is physicians' struggle against antisemitism and institutional discrimination. The response of Jewish physicians in Europe in the 19th and early 20th centuries was to work in private clinics, form Jewish hospitals, and in many cases emigrate."


The Nature Boy said:
and I think there were more bankers than he let on too, considering for a long time christians weren't allowed to be money lenders due to biblical constraints.

http://www.cyberroad.com/poland/jews.html

http://www.eijsbroekcourant.com/kcg/Yad Vashem/Yad Vashem2.htm

http://www.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/Shokel/980903_Banks.html

http://www.huc.edu/aja/97-1.htm

I didn't even mention Jewish bankers, but I hope you realize that Jews in medieval Europe were forced into usury. They were not able to do much else in western and central Europe prior to the Enlightenment- they were laws that prohibited them to own land and to work on the land; most professions were closed to them. They were restricted to commerce, usury, and medicine - so that's what they did. Things started to slowly change during the Age of Mercantilism.

But let's look at your links:

The first one is a general historical outline of the Jewish experience in Poland. Interesting. Seems like it was written by a decent historian. Jewish bankers are mentioned in one sentence. Overall, an OK read.

__________________________________


The second one is more interesting. It's not an article or a book review, but more of a journal entry. Jewish bankers are mentioned in one sentence. No sources given anywhere (can't really give out sources in a journal entry).

__________________________________


The third link contains interesting info - it's a little story on the Canadian banking system and how similar it is, somewhat, to what was happening to Italy in the early modern era. Here's a good sentence from the story:

"The toleration of their [Jews] own presence in medieval Europe had derived largely from their usefulness as suppliers of credit, since church law had not permitted Christians to lend money at interest."

The rest of the story talks about the evolution of a modern banking system in Italy, and how "the hard economic and political realities [of the day] ... express[ed] themselves ... in the removal of Jews from several Italian states in order to clear the way for the rise of a native middle class."

__________________________________


The fouth link is to an actual historical work that written by someone who was trained in the field. Good article, though it doesn't contradict what I was saying at all. As I've said before, "The great bulk of Jews in Europe (from East to West) just prior to the Nazi takeover of Germany were either working-class, middle-class, and some upper-middle-class. Very few of them were rich, very few." Now I'll add that the majority of Jews in the US and Canada were/are also in a similar income bracket. Few are very rich. Most are middle-class.

Of course there are rich Jews, but they're a minority. Every single other group/ethnicity in the world is just as economically and socially stratified.

The Nature Boy said:
searching for this [the linked info] didn't take me very long. so it's not like I dug up some obscure anti-jewish propaganda.

No offense, but I would recommend actually reading the info that you find before linking it.
 
Stumpy said:


That is such a myth (invented by anti-Semitic governments). If Jews had any actual power, there would've be no Holocaust.

Do you realize that Jews were barely tolerated in much of Europe (they were legally non-citizens) until the 19th century, and even then they were emancipated only in some parts of western, central, and southern Europe?

That's like believing that African-Americans have a lot of power in the US.

This is a black faced lie...

no pull huh? What about the Russian Revolution? What about the destruction of the USS Liberty?

You are about as full of shit a Christmas Goose!!!
 
No pull huh?????



The Cost of Israel to U.S. Taxpayers:


True Lies About U.S. Aid to Israel


By Richard H. Curtiss


For many years the American media said that "Israel receives $1.8 billion in military aid" or that "Israel receives $1.2 billion in economic aid." Both statements were true, but since they were never combined to give us the complete total of annual U.S. aid to Israel, they also were lies--true lies.

Recently Americans have begun to read and hear that "Israel receives $3 billion in annual U.S. foreign aid." That's true. But it's still a lie. The problem is that in fiscal 1997 alone, Israel received from a variety of other U.S. federal budgets at least $525.8 million above and beyond its $3 billion from the foreign aid budget, and yet another $2 billion in federal loan guarantees. So the complete total of U.S. grants and loan guarantees to Israel for fiscal 1997 was $5,525,800,000.

One can truthfully blame the mainstream media for never digging out these figures for themselves, because none ever have. They were compiled by the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. But the mainstream media certainly are not alone. Although Congress authorizes America's foreign aid total, the fact that more than a third of it goes to a country smaller in both area and population than Hong Kong probably never has been mentioned on the floor of the Senate or House. Yet it's been going on for more than a generation.

Probably the only members of Congress who even suspect the full total of U.S. funds received by Israel each year are the privileged few committee members who actually mark it up. And almost all members of the concerned committees are Jewish, have taken huge campaign donations orchestrated by Israel's Washington, DC lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), or both. These congressional committee members are paid to act, not talk. So they do and they don't.

The same applies to the president, the secretary of state, and the foreign aid administrator. They all submit a budget that includes aid for Israel, which Congress approves, or increases, but never cuts. But no one in the executive branch mentions that of the few remaining U.S. aid recipients worldwide, all of the others are developing nations which either make their military bases available to the U.S., are key members of international alliances in which the U.S. participates, or have suffered some crippling blow of nature to their abilities to feed their people such as earthquakes, floods or droughts.

Israel, whose troubles arise solely from its unwillingness to give back land it seized in the 1967 war in return for peace with its neighbors, does not fit those criteria. In fact, Israel's 1995 per capita gross domestic product was $15,800. That put it below Britain at $19,500 and Italy at $18,700 and just above Ireland at $15,400 and Spain at $14,300.

All four of those European countries have contributed a very large share of immigrants to the U.S., yet none has organized an ethnic group to lobby for U.S. foreign aid. Instead, all four send funds and volunteers to do economic development and emergency relief work in other less fortunate parts of the world.

The lobby that Israel and its supporters have built in the United States to make all this aid happen, and to ban discussion of it from the national dialogue, goes far beyond AIPAC, with its $15 million budget, its 150 employees, and its five or six registered lobbyists who manage to visit every member of Congress individually once or twice a year.

AIPAC, in turn, can draw upon the resources of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, a roof group set up solely to coordinate the efforts of some 52 national Jewish organizations on behalf of Israel.

Among them are Hadassah, the Zionist women's organization, which organizes a steady stream of American Jewish visitors to Israel; the American Jewish Congress, which mobilizes support for Israel among members of the traditionally left-of-center Jewish mainstream; and the American Jewish Committee, which plays the same role within the growing middle-of-the-road and right-of-center Jewish community. The American Jewish Committee also publishes Commentary,one of the Israel lobby's principal national publications.

Perhaps the most controversial of these groups is B'nai B'rith's Anti-Defamation League. Its original highly commendable purpose was to protect the civil rights of American Jews. Over the past generation, however, the ADL has regressed into a conspiratorial and, with a $45 million budget, extremely well-funded hate group.

In the 1980s, during the tenure of chairman Seymour Reich, who went on to become chairman of the Conference of Presidents, ADL was found to have circulated two annual fund-raising letters warning Jewish parents against allegedly negative influences on their children arising from the increasing Arab presence on American university campuses.

More recently, FBI raids on ADL's Los Angeles and San Francisco offices revealed that an ADL operative had purchased files stolen from the San Francisco police department that a court had ordered destroyed because they violated the civil rights of the individuals on whom they had been compiled. ADL, it was shown, had added the illegally prepared and illegally obtained material to its own secret files, compiled by planting informants among Arab-American, African-American, anti-Apartheid and peace and justice groups.

The ADL infiltrators took notes of the names and remarks of speakers and members of audiences at programs organized by such groups. ADL agents even recorded the license plates of persons attending such programs and then suborned corrupt motor vehicles department employees or renegade police officers to identify the owners.

Although one of the principal offenders fled the United States to escape prosecution, no significant penalties were assessed. ADL's Northern California office was ordered to comply with requests by persons upon whom dossiers had been prepared to see their own files, but no one went to jail and as yet no one has paid fines.

Not surprisingly, a defecting employee revealed in an article he published in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs that AIPAC, too, has such "enemies" files. They are compiled for use by pro-Israel journalists like Steven Emerson and other so-called "terrorism experts," and also by professional, academic or journalistic rivals of the persons described for use in black-listing, defaming, or denouncing them. What is never revealed is that AIPAC's "opposition research" department, under the supervision of Michael Lewis, son of famed Princeton University Orientalist Bernard Lewis, is the source of this defamatory material.

But this is not AIPAC's most controversial activity. In the 1970s, when Congress put a cap on the amount its members could earn from speakers' fees and book royalties over and above their salaries, it halted AIPAC's most effective ways of paying off members for voting according to AIPAC recommendations. Members of AIPAC's national board of directors solved the problem by returning to their home states and creating political action committees (PACs).

Most special interests have PACs, as do many major corporations, labor unions, trade associations and public-interest groups. But the pro-Israel groups went wild. To date some 126 pro-Israel PACs have been registered, and no fewer than 50 have been active in every national election over the past generation.

An individual voter can give up to $2,000 to a candidate in an election cycle, and a PAC can give a candidate up to $10,000. However, a single special interest with 50 PACs can give a candidate who is facing a tough opponent, and who has voted according to its recommendations, up to half a million dollars. That's enough to buy all the television time needed to get elected in most parts of the country.

Even candidates who don't need this kind of money certainly don't want it to become available to a rival from their own party in a primary election, or to an opponent from the opposing party in a general election. As a result, all but a handful of the 535 members of the Senate and House vote as AIPAC instructs when it comes to aid to Israel, or other aspects of U.S. Middle East policy.

There is something else very special about AIPAC's network of political action committees. Nearly all have deceptive names. Who could possibly know that the Delaware Valley Good Government Association in Philadelphia, San Franciscans for Good Government in California, Cactus PAC in Arizona, Beaver PAC in Wisconsin, and even Icepac in New York are really pro-Israel PACs under deep cover?

Hiding AIPAC's Tracks

In fact, the congressmembers know it when they list the contributions they receive on the campaign statements they have to prepare for the Federal Election Commission. But their constituents don't know this when they read these statements. So just as no other special interest can put so much "hard money" into any candidate's election campaign as can the Israel lobby, no other special interest has gone to such elaborate lengths to hide its tracks.

Although AIPAC, Washington's most feared special-interest lobby, can hide how it uses both carrots and sticks to bribe or intimidate members of Congress, it can't hide all of the results.

Anyone can ask one of their representatives in Congress for a chart prepared by the Congressional Research Service, a branch of the Library of Congress, that shows Israel received $62.5 billion in foreign aid from fiscal year 1949 through fiscal year 1996. People in the national capital area also can visit the library of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) in Rosslyn, Virginia, and obtain the same information, plus charts showing how much foreign aid the U.S. has given other countries as well.

Visitors will learn that in precisely the same 1949-1996 time frame, the total of U.S. foreign aid to all of the countries of sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean combined was $62,497,800,000--almost exactly the amount given to tiny Israel.

According to the Population Reference Bureau of Washington, DC, in mid-1995 the sub-Saharan countries had a combined population of 568 million. The $24,415,700,000 in foreign aid they had received by then amounted to $42.99 per sub-Saharan African.

Similarly, with a combined population of 486 million, all of the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean together had received $38,254,400,000. This amounted to $79 per person.

The per capita U.S. foreign aid to Israel's 5.8 million people during the same period was $10,775.48. This meant that for every dollar the U.S. spent on an African, it spent $250.65 on an Israeli, and for every dollar it spent on someone from the Western Hemisphere outside the United States, it spent $214 on an Israeli.

Shocking Comparisons

These comparisons already seem shocking, but they are far from the whole truth. Using reports compiled by Clyde Mark of the Congressional Research Service and other sources, freelance writer Frank Collins tallied for theWashington Report all of the extra items for Israel buried in the budgets of the Pentagon and other federal agencies in fiscal year 1993.Washington Report news editor Shawn Twing did the same thing for fiscal years 1996 and 1997.

They uncovered $1.271 billion in extras in FY 1993, $355.3 million in FY 1996 and $525.8 million in FY 1997. These represent an average increase of 12.2 percent over the officially recorded foreign aid totals for the same fiscal years, and they probably are not complete. It's reasonable to assume, therefore, that a similar 12.2 percent hidden increase has prevailed over all of the years Israel has received aid.

As of Oct. 31, 1997 Israel will have received $3.05 billion in U.S. foreign aid for fiscal year 1997 and $3.08 billion in foreign aid for fiscal year 1998. Adding the 1997 and 1998 totals to those of previous years since 1949 yields a total of $74,157,600,000 in foreign aid grants and loans. Assuming that the actual totals from other budgets average 12.2 percent of that amount, that brings the grand total to $83,204,827,200.

But that's not quite all. Receiving its annual foreign aid appropriation during the first month of the fiscal year, instead of in quarterly installments as do other recipients, is just another special privilege Congress has voted for Israel. It enables Israel to invest the money in U.S. Treasury notes. That means that the U.S., which has to borrow the money it gives to Israel, pays interest on the money it has granted to Israel in advance, while at the same time Israel is collecting interest on the money. That interest to Israel from advance payments adds another $1.650 billion to the total, making it $84,854,827,200.That's the number you should write down for total aid to Israel. And that's $14,346 each for each man, woman and child in Israel.

It's worth noting that that figure does not include U.S. government loan guarantees to Israel, of which Israel has drawn $9.8 billion to date. They greatly reduce the interest rate the Israeli government pays on commercial loans, and they place additional burdens on U.S. taxpayers, especially if the Israeli government should default on any of them. But since neither the savings to Israel nor the costs to U.S. taxpayers can be accurately quantified, they are excluded from consideration here.

Further, friends of Israel never tire of saying that Israel has never defaulted on repayment of a U.S. government loan. It would be equally accurate to say Israel has never been required to repay a U.S. government loan. The truth of the matter is complex, and designed to be so by those who seek to conceal it from the U.S. taxpayer.

Most U.S. loans to Israel are forgiven, and many were made with the explicit understanding that they would be forgiven before Israel was required to repay them. By disguising as loans what in fact were grants, cooperating members of Congress exempted Israel from the U.S. oversight that would have accompanied grants. On other loans, Israel was expected to pay the interest and eventually to begin repaying the principal. But the so-called Cranston Amendment, which has been attached by Congress to every foreign aid appropriation since 1983, provides that economic aid to Israel will never dip below the amount Israel is required to pay on its outstanding loans. In short, whether U.S. aid is extended as grants or loans to Israel, it never returns to the Treasury.

Israel enjoys other privileges. While most countries receiving U.S. military aid funds are expected to use them for U.S. arms, ammunition and training, Israel can spend part of these funds on weapons made by Israeli manufacturers. Also, when it spends its U.S. military aid money on U.S. products, Israel frequently requires the U.S. vendor to buy components or materials from Israeli manufacturers. Thus, though Israeli politicians say that their own manufacturers and exporters are making them progressively less dependent upon U.S. aid, in fact those Israeli manufacturers and exporters are heavily subsidized by U.S. aid.

Although it's beyond the parameters of this study, it's worth mentioning that Israel also receives foreign aid from some other countries. After the United States, the principal donor of both economic and military aid to Israel is Germany.

By far the largest component of German aid has been in the form of restitution payments to victims of Nazi attrocities. But there also has been extensive German military assistance to Israel during and since the Gulf war, and a variety of German educational and research grants go to Israeli institutions. The total of German assistance in all of these categories to the Israeli government, Israeli individuals and Israeli private institutions has been some $31 billion or $5,345 per capita, bringing the per capita total of U.S. and German assistance combined to almost $20,000 per Israeli. Since very little public money is spent on the more than 20 percent of Israeli citizens who are Muslim or Christian, the actual per capita benefits received by Israel's Jewish citizens would be considerably higher.

True Cost to U.S. Taxpayers

Generous as it is, what Israelis actually got in U.S. aid is considerably less than what it has cost U.S. taxpayers to provide it. The principal difference is that so long as the U.S. runs an annual budget deficit, every dollar of aid the U.S. gives Israel has to be raised through U.S. government borrowing.

In an article in the Washington Report for December 1991/January 1992, Frank Collins estimated the costs of this interest, based upon prevailing interest rates for every year since 1949. I have updated this by applying a very conservative 5 percent interest rate for subsequent years, and confined the amount upon which the interest is calculated to grants, not loans or loan guarantees.

On this basis the $84.8 billion in grants, loans and commodities Israel has received from the U.S. since 1949 cost the U.S. an additional $49,936,880,000 in interest.

There are many other costs of Israel to U.S. taxpayers, such as most or all of the $45.6 billion in U.S. foreign aid to Egypt since Egypt made peace with Israel in 1979 (compared to $4.2 billion in U.S. aid to Egypt for the preceding 26 years). U.S. foreign aid to Egypt, which is pegged at two-thirds of U.S. foreign aid to Israel, averages $2.2 billion per year.

There also have been immense political and military costs to the U.S. for its consistent support of Israel during Israel's half-century of disputes with the Palestinians and all of its Arab neighbors. In addition, there have been the approximately $10 billion in U.S. loan guarantees and perhaps $20 billion in tax-exempt contributions made to Israel by American Jews in the nearly half-century since Israel was created.

Even excluding all of these extra costs, America's $84.8 billion in aid to Israel from fiscal years 1949 through 1998, and the interest the U.S. paid to borrow this money, has cost U.S. taxpayers $134.8 billion, not adjusted for inflation. Or, put another way, the nearly $14,630 every one of 5.8 million Israelis received from the U.S. government by Oct. 31, 1997 has cost American taxpayers $23,240 per Israeli.

It would be interesting to know how many of those American taxpayers believe they and their families have received as much from the U.S. Treasury as has everyone who has chosen to become a citizen of Israel. But it's a question that will never occur to the American public because, so long as America's mainstream media, Congress and president maintain their pact of silence, few Americans will ever know the true cost of Israel to U.S. taxpayers.

Richard Curtiss, a retired U.S. foreign service officer, is the executive editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.


Benefits to Israel of U.S. Aid Since 1949 (As of November 1, 1997)

Foreign Aid Grants and Loans: $74,157,600,000
Other U.S. Aid (12.2% of Foreign Aid): $9,047,227,200
Interest to Israel from Advanced Payments: $1,650,000,000
Grand Total: $84,854,827,200
Total Benefits per Israeli: $14,630

Cost to U.S. Taxpayers of U.S. Aid to Israel

Grand Total (from above) $84,854,827,200

Interest Costs Borne by U.S. $49,936,680,000

Total Cost to U.S. Taxpayers $134,791,507,200

Total Cost per Israeli $23,240
 
Would you say this carries any weight Stumpy???

Ari Fleischer
Official White House Spokesman.
Prominent in the Jewish community, he reportedly holds Israeli citizenship.

Richard Perle
Foreign Policy Advisor and chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board.
He had worked as Bush's Jewish national security campaign advisor. A very likely Israeli agent, Perle was expelled from Senator Henry Jackson's office in the 1970's after the National Security Agency (NSA) caught him passing Highly-Classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli Embassy. He later worked for the Israeli weapons firm, Soltam.

Paul Wolfowitz
Deputy Secretary of Defense, Bush's Jewish foreign policy campaign advisor.
Is a close associate of Israeli agent Richard Perle, and has close ties to the Israeli military.

Douglas Feith
Under Secretary of Defense, and Policy Advisor at the Pentagon.
He is a close associate of Perle and served as his Special Counsel. Like Perle and the others, Feith is a pro-Israel extremist, who has advocated anti-Arab policies in the past. He is closely associated with the extremist group, the Zionist Organization of America, which even attacks Jews that don't agree with its extremist views. Feith frequently speaks at ZOA conferences. Feith runs a small law firm, Feith and Zell, which only has one International office, in Israel. The majority of their legal work is representing Israeli interests. His firm's own website stated, prior to his appointment, that Feith "represents Israeli Armaments Manufacturer." Feith basically represents the Israeli War Machine.

Elliott Abrams
National Security Council Advisor.
He previously worked at Washington-based "Think Tank" Ethics and Public Policy Center. During the Reagan Adminstration, Abrams was the Assistant Secretary of State, handling, for the most part, Latin American affairs. He played an important role in the Iran-Contra Scandal, which involved illegally selling U.S. weapons to Iran to fight Iraq, and illegally funding the contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua's Sandinista government. He also actively deceived three congressional committees about his involvement and thereby faced felony charges based on his testimony. Abrams pled guilty in 1991 to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to a year's probation and 100 hours of community service. A year later, Bush Sr. granted Abrams a full pardon. He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Reagan Administration's State Department.

Dov Zekheim
Under Secretary of Defense.
He was Bush's Jewish foreign policy advisor and reportedly holds Israeli citizenship.

Richard Haass
Director of Policy Planning at the State Department and Ambassador at large.
He is also Director of National Security Programs and Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the first Bush (Sr) Administration who sat on the National Security Council,
and who consistently advocates bombing Iraq.

Henry Kissinger
Sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board.
For detailed information about Kissinger's evil past, read Seymour Hersch's book. Kissinger had a part in the Watergate crimes, Southeast Asia mass murders, Chile dictatorship and reaped investment profits in Yugoslavia. He consistently advocates bombing Iraq. Kissinger is the Ariel Sharon of the U.S.

James Schlesinger
Sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board.
and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor. He consistently advocates bombing Iraq.

Robert Zoellick
U.S. Trade Representative, a cabinet-level position.
He is also one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Bush (Jr) Administration who advocated invading Iraq and occupying a portion of the country in order to set up a Vichy-style puppet government. He consistently advocates bombing Iraq.

Marc Grossman
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs.
He was Director General of the Foreign Service and Director of Human Resources at the Department of State.
Grossman is one of many of the Jewish officials from the Clinton Administration that Bush has promoted to higher posts.

Robert Satloff
National Security Council Advisor.
Satloff was the executive director of the Israeli lobby's "think tank," Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Many of the Israeli lobby's "experts" come from this front group, like Martin Indyk.

Mel Sembler
President of the Export-Import Bank of the United States.
A Prominent Jewish Republican and Former National Finance Chairman of the Republican National Committee. The Export-Import Bank facilitates trade relationships between U.S. businesses and foreign countries, specifically those with financial problems.

Joshua Bolten
Bush's Chief Policy Director, banker and former legislative aide.
Prominent in the Jewish community.

Steve Goldsmith
Senior Advisor to the President, and Bush's Jewish domestic policy advisor.
He also serves as liaison in the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (White House OFBCI) within the Executive Office of the President. He was the former mayor of Indianapolis. He is also friends with Israeli Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert and often visits Israel to coach mayors on privatization initiatives.

Daniel Saul Goldin
Head of NASA, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
A leftover from the Clinton Administration, Golding is frequently praised by the Israeli media as a friend of Israel.

Adam Goldman
White House's Special Liaison to the Jewish Community.

Joseph Gildenhorn
Bush Campaign's Special Liaison to the Jewish Community.
He was the DC finance chairman for the Bush campaign, as well as campaign coordinator, and former ambassador to Switzerland.

Christopher Gersten
Former Executive Director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, husband of Labor Secretary, Linda Chavez,
and reportedly very pro-Israel. Their children are being raised in the Jewish faith.

Mark Weinberger
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

Samuel Bodman
Deputy Secretary of Commerce.
He was the Chairman and CEO of Cabot Corporation in Boston, Massachusetts.

Bonnie Cohen
Under Secretary of State for Management.

Ruth Davis
Director of Foreign Service Institute.
Reports to the Office of Under Secretary for Management. This Office is responsible for training all Department of State staff (including ambassadors).

Lincoln Bloomfield
Assistant Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs.
 
The Nature Boy said:
dballer, be careful. you're going to get labeled as an anti semite.

dude.. they have hung so many labels on me here.. it does not matter. You know me.. people are just people to me. When I see somthing I wanna talk about.. I say it. I could care less what people think. You know me.. and the people who know me know what I am about.. the rest can go get fucked if they don't like it.


can you dispute those facts?
 
The Nature Boy said:


no offense, but you don't get your own country created having no influence.

Actually, you do. None of the European countries wanted Jews to stay around after the war. They were happy to see them go. we didn't exactly want them here either.

There is an Israel because no one else wanted the Jews in their country. European anti jew sentiments go all the way back to the Roman empire and the rise of Christianity.

Dballer - your list is as valuable as saying that every US President has been Christian. (JFK was Catholic). So I guess they worship Jews then? is that how it works?
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


Dballer - your list is as valuable as saying that every US President has been Christian. (JFK was Catholic). So I guess they worship Jews then? is that how it works?

Can you quote me the spot that says... or in ANY way hints to the above slander?
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


Actually, you do. None of the European countries wanted Jews to stay around after the war. They were happy to see them go. we didn't exactly want them here either.

There is an Israel because no one else wanted the Jews in their country. European anti jew sentiments go all the way back to the Roman empire and the rise of Christianity.



I know that they weren't well liked.

But you mean to tell me that the colonial powers just decided to make a homeland for the jewish people? Just because they felt like it? There was no Zionist influence at all?????? Certainly there had to be someone who at least put the idea in someone's mind, right? I think you're selling the zionist influence a little short. I'm sure they were quite vocal after the holocaust.
 
dballer said:


Can you quote me the spot that says... or in ANY way hints to the above slander?

Are you debating that Jesus was Jewish?

That all Presidents weren't Christian?

What can I do for you?
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


Are you debating that Jesus was Jewish?

That all Presidents weren't Christian?

What can I do for you?

where were we talking about Jesus in this thread?

Then prove to me that there is no pull for the jews in our government.

or you could continue to throw facts about another thread in my face.
 
dballer said:


where were we talking about Jesus in this thread?

Then prove to me that there is no pull for the jews in our government.

or you could continue to throw facts about another thread in my face.

They have some "pull". Many Jews are successful here.

In the US, money = pull. Jews with money have pull. Jews without, don't. italians with money have pul. Italians witrhout, don't.
 
The Nature Boy said:



I know that they weren't well liked.

But you mean to tell me that the colonial powers just decided to make a homeland for the jewish people? Just because they felt like it? There was no Zionist influence at all?????? Certainly there had to be someone who at least put the idea in someone's mind, right? I think you're selling the zionist influence a little short. I'm sure they were quite vocal after the holocaust.

Not a homeland. An "awayland", as in "away from Europe they will go, if we give them this:.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


They have some "pull".

"Some Pull??"

can you name 1 country that we give 1/2 of what we give Israel in aid each year?

How about for as long... make this country that you name.. make sure they have been recieving 1/2 as much aid as Israel gets.. and for as long.
 
dballer said:


"Some Pull??"

can you name 1 country that we give 1/2 of what we give Israel in aid each year?


Egypt gets more than half as much. Interestingly, that is a term of the peace agreement after Israel defeated them in war.

Can you name a country of greater significance to our foreign policy efforts than Israel?
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


Egypt gets more than half as much. Interestingly, that is a term of the peace agreement after Israel defeated them in war.

Can you name a country of greater significance to our foreign policy efforts than Israel?

"There are many other costs of Israel to U.S. taxpayers, such as most or all of the $45.6 billion in U.S. foreign aid to Egypt since Egypt made peace with Israel in 1979 (compared to $4.2 billion in U.S. aid to Egypt for the preceding 26 years). U.S. foreign aid to Egypt, which is pegged at two-thirds of U.S. foreign aid to Israel, averages $2.2 billion per year."

next!!!!

We have been paying Israel since 1948.. or is it 1947. Either way.. Egypt has a LONG way to go before they get what we have given to Israel.

And what do we get from them? I know we got a free torpedo and a off shore attack in 1967.. but lets sweep that under the rug.


I find no significance in a county who attacked one of the US Navy ships. Killed 34 of our men.. sells nuclear weapons to the Chinese..
 
dballer said:


I find no significance in a county who attacked one of the US Navy ships. Killed 34 of our men.. sells nuclear weapons to the Chinese..

You don't see the value in having some friends in the Middle East that aren't Muslim?
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


You don't see the value in having some friends in the Middle East that aren't Muslim?

I see the value... but I also see the glint of the knife blade.

What reason did they have to sell China all of it's Nuclear secrets?
Despite the remarkably generous treatment given to Israel by the United States government, Israel consistently has abused its relationship with Washington and has shown blatant disregard for U.S. laws.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


Actually, you do. None of the European countries wanted Jews to stay around after the war. They were happy to see them go. we didn't exactly want them here either.

There is an Israel because no one else wanted the Jews in their country. European anti jew sentiments go all the way back to the Roman empire and the rise of Christianity.


wtf? you're still playing up the jews as victims... I'm sorry but that argument won't fly anymore
 
The_Mexican said:


wtf? you're still playing up the jews as victims... I'm sorry but that argument won't fly anymore

I'm not playing anything. These are historical facts sir. Read a history book.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


I'm not playing anything. These are historical facts sir. Read a history book.

Israel's retransfer of U.S. defense technology, virtually all of which is provided to Israel by U.S. taxpayers, threatens U.S. national security, creates unfair competition for U.S. defense firms, and has strengthened regimes guilty of serious human rights abuses or actively working against U.S. national interests. Israel's supporters in Congress, however, do not seem to care.
 
dballer said:


I see the value... but I also see the glint of the knife blade.

What reason did they have to sell China all of it's Nuclear secrets?
Despite the remarkably generous treatment given to Israel by the United States government, Israel consistently has abused its relationship with Washington and has shown blatant disregard for U.S. laws.

Israel is a fierce nation, made up of tough people. They were criminals when they sunk the Liberty, and they were great when they blew up Iraq's nuclear reactor.

They sell shit to China for the same reason we sold weapons to Iraq, Nicaragua, and numerous African dictators: Money. It really is that simple, and we all do it. We're no different than they are in that regard.

While they at times have abused our generosity, we have also (numerous times) intervened in their politics. Their responses to terrorism, even under the hawk Sharon, have always been tempered by US desires. In 1991 during Desert Storm, we took steps to keep the Israelis out of the war, even as they wanted to join.

Israel is independent and does not like to be fucked with. Sometimes I wish our leaders would show more resolve.
 
I wish we would detach.

I do not want to see my money going to put guns in the hands of butchers. There are countries out there that REALLY do need our help.

Why is it that we will get into a Holy War for Isreal.. but on the streets of Ulster.. people have been dying daily.. Busses in London being targeted? We do nothing.

It goes back to that political pull. Under the Arms Export Control Act, military hardware provided by FMS funds can be used only for defensive purposes or to maintain internal security. Israel violated this agreement during its 1982 invasion of Lebanon when it used U.S.-made cluster bombs against both military and civilian targets in Lebanon. In response.... Congress suspended the sale of cluster bombs to Israel, a ban that remains in effect today. In reality however..... Congress suspended only the sale of cluster bomb casings to Israel, not the bomb components themselves!!!!!

Now Israel manufactures its own casings, and procures the rest of the cluster bomb components from the United States. So far this circumvention of U.S. law has not been challenged!!! Why?
 
I'm split on this issue. On one hand I don't think that the US soldiers need to be peacekeepers for the world. When we raise our hands at MEPS we swear to defend the US not any other county. But........

I've been to Bosnia and it is such a sad sight. The buildings are in ruins. They're big holes in the ground from where the mortar shells hit. I don't know how people can actually make a living there. The children come up to your convoy and beg for food and you can't give them anything. It's really depressing and there is really no right answer in my opinion.
 
dballer said:
I wish we would detach.

I do not want to see my money going to put guns in the hands of butchers. There are countries out there that REALLY do need our help.

Why is it that we will get into a Holy War for Isreal.. but on the streets of Ulster.. people have been dying daily.. Busses in London being targeted? We do nothing.

It goes back to that political pull. Under the Arms Export Control Act, military hardware provided by FMS funds can be used only for defensive purposes or to maintain internal security. Israel violated this agreement during its 1982 invasion of Lebanon when it used U.S.-made cluster bombs against both military and civilian targets in Lebanon. In response.... Congress suspended the sale of cluster bombs to Israel, a ban that remains in effect today. In reality however..... Congress suspended only the sale of cluster bomb casings to Israel, not the bomb components themselves!!!!!

Now Israel manufactures its own casings, and procures the rest of the cluster bomb components from the United States. So far this circumvention of U.S. law has not been challenged!!! Why?

American dollars have been putting guns in the hands of butchers since forever. We have sold or provided weapons to such human rights luminaries as Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.

Saudi Arabia has bought $270BILLION worth of American weapons since Desert Storm, mostly tanks and planes. Arms sales generate big bucks for American companies, who pay big taxes. Anyone who can afford weapons can buy them from us.

The cluster bomb case is the same thing. Do you think American companies are going to overlook all that revenue? The government won't say anything - that's a lot of tax dollars paid by American companies.

The political pull goes back to money too, bro. Money is power in this country, and if you want to talk about the government's injustices in its policies, or favoritism of wealthy interests, it's going to be a long night. This Karzai guy in Afghanistan is a former executive of Unocal, the company that is building a huge gas pipeline right through Afghanistan. How shady is that?? Unocal has money.

As to the Middle East, look at it this way:

We give Israel enough money and sell enough weapons to stay militarily ahead of its neighbors. Arab nations, despite superior populations, cannot overrun Israel. Israel is well-armed. Then we intervene with Israel and use our influence to stop them from aggressively policing their neighbors.

Meanwhile, we are selling huge amounts of weapons to both sides. Nice, isn't it? If it costs us some tax dollars to Israel to keep the weapons pipeline going, that's OK. The government is great at spending other people's money, particulalrly when it increases the revenues of big donors.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:

As to the Middle East, look at it this way:

We give Israel enough money and sell enough weapons to stay militarily ahead of its neighbors. Arab nations, despite superior populations, cannot overrun Israel. Israel is well-armed. Then we intervene with Israel and use our influence to stop them from aggressively policing their neighbors.



I think you just solved the riddle to 9-11.

good evening.
 
I said:



As to the Middle East, look at it this way:

We give Israel enough money and sell enough weapons to stay militarily ahead of its neighbors. Arab nations, despite superior populations, cannot overrun Israel. Israel is well-armed. Then we intervene with Israel and use our influence to stop them from aggressively policing their neighbors.



Dballer:

I think you just solved the riddle to 9-11.




Is that how you see it?

Arabs feel such a need to overrun Israel, that after 4 failed invasions, they will attack us to try to keep us from selling weapons to Israel?

So it was the Arabs' need to destroy the Jewish state that led to 9/11?

Right on.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:
Can you name a country of greater significance to our foreign policy efforts than Israel?

Could you please explain to me how a patch of dirt the size of small state could be most significant when it comes to foreign policy.

I would argue that the UK would be far more significant (if not Canada).
 
2Thick said:


Could you please explain to me how a patch of dirt the size of small state could be most significant when it comes to foreign policy.

I would argue that the UK would be far more significant (if not Canada).

Roughly New Jersey :)

Canada? Come on?! Thanks for the Molson. Good stuff!Especially that Molson XXX, 7.3% alcohol by volume. LOL

The importance of the UK is apparent. We need a global "yes man" and they conveniently speak our language. :)

Anyway, my contentions

1. Israel is located in the Middle East, a region that, unlike any other, contains virulent Anti-American sentiment. We may not be crowd pleasers everywhere, but we are truly hated in the Middle East.

2. The Middle East is the oil-richest area on Earth. Oil is the lifeblood of the economy - I don't think I need to talk a lot about the significance of oil to the US economy.

3. Israel is the only democracy in the region, the only place in the Middle East where a native born Arab can vote. The rest of the countries are theocratic or dicataorships.

We are in the somewhat precarious position that we need the cooperation of people that hate us. Most Middle Eastern countries need the revenue derived from the US buying their oil, but theocracies and dictatorships have been less than compassionate about their own people. As we have already learned, Middle Eastern states will reduce production and it will hurt our economy.

They way I see it, Israel is our counterbalance to that scenario. We arm them with weapons comparable to our own. Israel buys them, but we give them a lot of money to do so. They are nuclear capable. They can fly across the Middle East and destroy Iraq's nuclear reactor, and they have withstood numerous invasions. Middle Eastern countries know of our alliance with them, and they know that Israel will act (or not act, as in during Desert Storm) at US behest.

Lastly, if something "bad" ever happened in teh Middle East, like extremists taking power in Saudi (possible), and reducing oil production really low, Israel would be our staging area for invasion.

We would be in a wolrd of shit if that country disappeared, despte dballer's insistence to the contrary.

I'd like to hear what Stumpy thinks also.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


You don't see the value in having some friends in the Middle East that aren't Muslim?

there's no value. Some European countries don't and guess what they live happy.

To answer the question: the difference is of course how you run your mouth about some topics and the influence you have. We didn't talk about Staline/Mao genocides cause media usually have a marxist approach for many issues.

In Bosnia those who were killed were mainly muslims. In Rwanda they were black. Blacks killing blacks is not a big newspaper seller....
 
2Thick said:
Could you please explain to me how a patch of dirt the size of small state could be most significant when it comes to foreign policy.

I would argue that the UK would be far more significant (if not Canada).

Actually, it's not "a patch of dirt" at all. It's a very green country, especially its northern part. It has a beautiful coastline with world-class beaches; the desert areas are in some parts of the east and in the south.

I agree with you regarding the UK, though. They're obviously America's number one ally, but they're not in the Middle East. The two states that the US considers its strongest allies in the Middle East are Turkey and Israel.
 
The Nature Boy said:
I know that they weren't well liked.

That's quite an understatement.

They were systematically exterminated on a massive scale by a major Western power - hunted down and murdered like animals all over Europe for simply existing, often with active support from the locals.

Oh, and there were massacres in Poland after WWII.

The Nature Boy said:
I'm sure they were quite vocal after the holocaust.

Who wouldn't be?
 
The Nature Boy said:
no offense, but you don't get your own country created having no influence.

Sound logic.

What about Moldovans, Slovenians, and Kuwaitis? Do they have a lot of power, too?
 
dballer said:
Would you say this carries any weight Stumpy???

Ari Fleischer
Official White House Spokesman.
Prominent in the Jewish community, he reportedly holds Israeli citizenship.

Richard Perle
Foreign Policy Advisor and chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board.
He had worked as Bush's Jewish national security campaign advisor. A very likely Israeli agent, Perle was expelled from Senator Henry Jackson's office in the 1970's after the National Security Agency (NSA) caught him passing Highly-Classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli Embassy. He later worked for the Israeli weapons firm, Soltam.

Paul Wolfowitz
Deputy Secretary of Defense, Bush's Jewish foreign policy campaign advisor.
Is a close associate of Israeli agent Richard Perle, and has close ties to the Israeli military.

Douglas Feith
Under Secretary of Defense, and Policy Advisor at the Pentagon.
He is a close associate of Perle and served as his Special Counsel. Like Perle and the others, Feith is a pro-Israel extremist, who has advocated anti-Arab policies in the past. He is closely associated with the extremist group, the Zionist Organization of America, which even attacks Jews that don't agree with its extremist views. Feith frequently speaks at ZOA conferences. Feith runs a small law firm, Feith and Zell, which only has one International office, in Israel. The majority of their legal work is representing Israeli interests. His firm's own website stated, prior to his appointment, that Feith "represents Israeli Armaments Manufacturer." Feith basically represents the Israeli War Machine.

Elliott Abrams
National Security Council Advisor.
He previously worked at Washington-based "Think Tank" Ethics and Public Policy Center. During the Reagan Adminstration, Abrams was the Assistant Secretary of State, handling, for the most part, Latin American affairs. He played an important role in the Iran-Contra Scandal, which involved illegally selling U.S. weapons to Iran to fight Iraq, and illegally funding the contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua's Sandinista government. He also actively deceived three congressional committees about his involvement and thereby faced felony charges based on his testimony. Abrams pled guilty in 1991 to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to a year's probation and 100 hours of community service. A year later, Bush Sr. granted Abrams a full pardon. He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Reagan Administration's State Department.

Dov Zekheim
Under Secretary of Defense.
He was Bush's Jewish foreign policy advisor and reportedly holds Israeli citizenship.

Richard Haass
Director of Policy Planning at the State Department and Ambassador at large.
He is also Director of National Security Programs and Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the first Bush (Sr) Administration who sat on the National Security Council,
and who consistently advocates bombing Iraq.

Henry Kissinger
Sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board.
For detailed information about Kissinger's evil past, read Seymour Hersch's book. Kissinger had a part in the Watergate crimes, Southeast Asia mass murders, Chile dictatorship and reaped investment profits in Yugoslavia. He consistently advocates bombing Iraq. Kissinger is the Ariel Sharon of the U.S.

James Schlesinger
Sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board.
and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor. He consistently advocates bombing Iraq.

Robert Zoellick
U.S. Trade Representative, a cabinet-level position.
He is also one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Bush (Jr) Administration who advocated invading Iraq and occupying a portion of the country in order to set up a Vichy-style puppet government. He consistently advocates bombing Iraq.

Marc Grossman
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs.
He was Director General of the Foreign Service and Director of Human Resources at the Department of State.
Grossman is one of many of the Jewish officials from the Clinton Administration that Bush has promoted to higher posts.

Robert Satloff
National Security Council Advisor.
Satloff was the executive director of the Israeli lobby's "think tank," Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Many of the Israeli lobby's "experts" come from this front group, like Martin Indyk.

Mel Sembler
President of the Export-Import Bank of the United States.
A Prominent Jewish Republican and Former National Finance Chairman of the Republican National Committee. The Export-Import Bank facilitates trade relationships between U.S. businesses and foreign countries, specifically those with financial problems.

Joshua Bolten
Bush's Chief Policy Director, banker and former legislative aide.
Prominent in the Jewish community.

Steve Goldsmith
Senior Advisor to the President, and Bush's Jewish domestic policy advisor.
He also serves as liaison in the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (White House OFBCI) within the Executive Office of the President. He was the former mayor of Indianapolis. He is also friends with Israeli Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert and often visits Israel to coach mayors on privatization initiatives.

Daniel Saul Goldin
Head of NASA, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
A leftover from the Clinton Administration, Golding is frequently praised by the Israeli media as a friend of Israel.

Adam Goldman
White House's Special Liaison to the Jewish Community.

Joseph Gildenhorn
Bush Campaign's Special Liaison to the Jewish Community.
He was the DC finance chairman for the Bush campaign, as well as campaign coordinator, and former ambassador to Switzerland.

Christopher Gersten
Former Executive Director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, husband of Labor Secretary, Linda Chavez,
and reportedly very pro-Israel. Their children are being raised in the Jewish faith.

Mark Weinberger
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

Samuel Bodman
Deputy Secretary of Commerce.
He was the Chairman and CEO of Cabot Corporation in Boston, Massachusetts.

Bonnie Cohen
Under Secretary of State for Management.

Ruth Davis
Director of Foreign Service Institute.
Reports to the Office of Under Secretary for Management. This Office is responsible for training all Department of State staff (including ambassadors).

Lincoln Bloomfield
Assistant Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs.

Nice list. Where did you find it, bro?
 
MattTheSkywalker said:
I said:



As to the Middle East, look at it this way:

We give Israel enough money and sell enough weapons to stay militarily ahead of its neighbors. Arab nations, despite superior populations, cannot overrun Israel. Israel is well-armed. Then we intervene with Israel and use our influence to stop them from aggressively policing their neighbors.



Dballer:

I think you just solved the riddle to 9-11.




Is that how you see it?

Arabs feel such a need to overrun Israel, that after 4 failed invasions, they will attack us to try to keep us from selling weapons to Israel?

So it was the Arabs' need to destroy the Jewish state that led to 9/11?

Right on.

wrong.. you missed my point in that. I mean.. if WE (USA) attack and destroy Arabs.. they cannot overtake Israel. .. correct?

Now.. if WE (USA) have a reason (9-11) to HATE Arabs.. that would be a blessing in disguise for old Israel wouldn't it?
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


1. Israel is located in the Middle East, a region that, unlike any other, contains virulent Anti-American sentiment. We may not be crowd pleasers everywhere, but we are truly hated in the Middle East. WHY?

2. The Middle East is the oil-richest area on Earth. Oil is the lifeblood of the economy - I don't think I need to talk a lot about the significance of oil to the US economy. And WHO sells us this OIL?? Could it be the ones who Israel does not like?? (Arabs?)

3. Israel is the only democracy in the region, the only place in the Middle East where a native born Arab can vote. The rest of the countries are theocratic or dicataorships. Tell that to the PLO.. and all of the Arabs who are being slaughtered daily by Saron and his Gestapo

We are in the somewhat precarious position that we need the cooperation of people that hate us. WHY? did you ever read why Bin Laden hates us? It IS for our support of Israel.
Most Middle Eastern countries need the revenue derived from the US buying their oil, but theocracies and dictatorships have been less than compassionate about their own people. As we have already learned, Middle Eastern states will reduce production and it will hurt our economy.

They way I see it, Israel is our counterbalance to that scenario. Tell that to the people of Jenin.. well of course not them.. they are all dead. Thanks Ariel!
We arm them with weapons comparable to our own. Israel buys them, but we give them a lot of money to do so. WHY? we give them money to buy our weapons.. then they turn around and sell them to China.. can ANYONE else see how fucked up this sounds?? They are nuclear capable. NO SHIT!!!
They can fly across the Middle East and destroy Iraq's nuclear reactor, and they have withstood numerous invasions. WHY were we helping during the Gulf War if they are sooo bad? HMMM could it be we fight their wars for them.. then pay off the damages afterward??
Middle Eastern countries know of our alliance with them, (and fly commercial jets into our buildings for it) and they know that Israel will act (or not act, as in during Desert Storm) at US behest.

Lastly, if something "bad" ever happened in teh Middle East, like extremists taking power in Saudi (possible), and reducing oil production really low, Israel would be our staging area for invasion. or would they use it to milk more money out of the American Taxpayer??

We would be in a wolrd of shit if that country disappeared, despte dballer's insistence to the contrary.

I'd like to hear what Stumpy thinks also.
WHY?
 
Stumpy said:


Nice list. Where did you find it, bro?

That is collective data that is of public record.... these are public officials.

care to elaborate on your earlier statement of "having no pull"???
 
maybe i'm mistaken but i thought stumpy was saying that jews had no "pull" back in the WWII era.

clearly, there are a lot of jews with political influence nowadays, but thinking back to the forties i doubt that they were prevalant...remember what a stir it was when felix frankfurter was appointed to the supreme court?
 
runner said:
maybe i'm mistaken but i thought stumpy was saying that jews had no "pull" back in the WWII era.

clearly, there are a lot of jews with political influence nowadays, but thinking back to the forties i doubt that they were prevalant...remember what a stir it was when felix frankfurter was appointed to the supreme court?

go back to page one and re-read.
 
dballer said:


wrong.. you missed my point in that. I mean.. if WE (USA) attack and destroy Arabs.. they cannot overtake Israel. .. correct?

No.

I mean that as long as we sell Israel the world's best weaponry, the Arabs, depsite their superior population, cannot overrun Israel. Depsite attacking 4 times sicne 1948, the Arabs can't defeat Israel.

We also do not allow Israel to strike back the way it wants against aggression. We kept them out of Desert Storm (believe me, they wanted in), and we have tempered the responses of Sharon numerous times. He'd hit much harder if we let him. You know that.

So - in conclusion (to this part) the US makes sure Israel can't be overrun by seling them weapons, and then makes sure they don't use those weapons to destroy Arabs.




Now.. if WE (USA) have a reason (9-11) to HATE Arabs.. that would be a blessing in disguise for old Israel wouldn't it?

Not really. If we get embroiled in a confrontation with an Arab power such as Iraq, Iraq is liklely to lash out against Israel. Additionally, there is the ever-present talk of Muslim unity (to date, a myth, but still talk) and that unity would be focused on Israel as an enemy. Hardly a blessing.

I know what you are getting at, but it doesn't make sense. whether we love or hate Arabs, we are selling weapons to Israel for the money, not for the jewish-ness of the place.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:


we are selling weapons to Israel for the money, not for the jewish-ness of the place.

Anyone speaking out against Israel of course is a racist. I dislike it (Israel) for it's politics. You can try to play that Jewish card with me.. but I could really give a fuck. That is a cop-out.
 
dballer said:


go back to page one and re-read.

i did. stumpy has two posts there, the first talks about the west caring for jews in WWII and the other talking about the holocaust and feelings for jews in the 19th century.
 
runner said:


i did. stumpy has two posts there, the first talks about the west caring for jews in WWII and the other talking about the holocaust and feelings for jews in the 19th century.

ahhh haaa!!!

ok.. you did get me there. I guess I was misled at his direction.
 

WHY? (are we hated in the Middle East)?

Look at the economic conditions of the area. Let's use Saudi as an example. 50 years ago, Saudi had enough money for all of its people to live in great comfort.

The kingdom was so rich, that they were able to hire foreginers to do a lot of "menial" jobs: hotel bellhops, waiters, etc. Saudis lived really well. But as the population has increased, there suddenly is not enough money. There is 30% unemployment and per capita income has fallen 80% in 20 years. Saudis are faced with the "daunting" prospect of having to take those 'menial' jobs.

The royalty is literally paying as many people as it can to prevent revolt. (There are roughly 30,000 'members' of the royal family.) This is the kind of climate that allows extremism to grow and fester. (It was abject poverty and depression that gave rise to the Nazis also). The royal family is not going to step in and stop it, because the extremists are distracting the population from abject poverty, while the king lives, well, like a king.

Things are similar in most Middle Eastern countries. Hatred of Israel and the US diverts hostility away the king, or dictator, or whatever entity is looting the national treasury while the people starve.

And WHO sells us this OIL?? Could it be the ones who Israel does not like?? (Arabs?)

Do you think the reason Israel may not like them is due to the 4 times they invaded Israel? You never talk about that one, yet Arabs invaded in 1948 after the inception of Israel. They invaded in 1967 too. That's when the occupation started. So Israel gave them two chances before taking action. In 1973 they attacked Israel on a religious holiday.

Israel said "enough is enough". Who could blame them?


Tell that to the PLO.. and all of the Arabs who are being slaughtered daily by Saron and his Gestapo

I don't have to tell the PLO. They alaready know. Did you know the the disputed areas have the *highest* birth rates in the world? Palestinians have already figured out that votes matter in Israel. The rest of your statement is just inflammatory crap.



WHY? did you ever read why Bin Laden hates us? It IS for our support of Israel.

Well, I am glad you understand his motives. why don't you tell us where he is? OK I'll be serious. So the US should let a terrorist dictate our foreign policy? Who cares what Osama bin Laden thinks of our policy?

Tell that to the people of Jenin.. well of course not them.. they are all dead. Thanks Ariel!

This is probably not verififable by any source other than straight propaganda. Even if it were true, they are just as dead as the 227 people killed on Passover by a car bomb.

WHY? (do we give Israel money to buy weapons)?

Asked and answered. Money for defense contractors. Counterblanace in the Middle East. Yawn.


we give them money to buy our weapons.. then they turn around and sell them to China.. can ANYONE else see how fucked up this sounds??


Yes it is the sale of weapons to China that has you all worked up. Right :)

WHY were we helping during the Gulf War if they are sooo bad? HMMM could it be we fight their wars for them.. then pay off the damages afterward??

An American solider has never fought side by side with an Israeli soldier. We actually kept them out of teh Gulf war. Israel wantde to join in. We forbade them, but we had to agree to place Patriot missile batteries in Israel to get their cooperation. We kept Israel out. The Gulf war was our war.


or would they use it to milk more money out of the American Taxpayer??


If you are really upset about the allocation of US tax dolalrs, know this: the amount of US aid given to Israel, IN TOTAL, since its inception, is less than

1. Social Security in a year
2. Medicare on a year
3. The defense budget in a year
4. The annual interest on our debt.

It is roughly equal to the amount of money Congress authorized post 9/11. (about $100B) Israel is not breaking the bank.

Are you a Muslim?
 
dballer said:


no.. are you a jew?

No. :) I play one on TV though.

Actually I am not. I hope you'll respond to my other post though.
 
Pretty much everything you posted in reponse to my post was opinion. WHY do I say that? Well because there are 2 sides to every story... you choose one I choose the other.

I am not Pro-Arab... and I am not Pro-Israel.. I dislike both. But I feel the greater of the evil is Israel. If we are gonna help someone.. anyone.. it should be us (USA)

Again. I am not pro Arab.. and calling me Muslim (or suggesting it at such a conveinant time) is kinda lame too. I feel that our only intrest in the Mid East is Oil. Who cares who we buy it from? We constructed Israel. What is enough? With all of the unemployment and disease in this country.. not to mention the power shortages out west.. and the droughts in the east...

do we really.. REALLY need to be giving them billions of dollars per year?
 
MattTheSkywalker said:

If you are really upset about the allocation of US tax dolalrs, know this: the amount of US aid given to Israel, IN TOTAL, since its inception, is less than

1. Social Security in a year
2. Medicare on a year
3. The defense budget in a year
4. The annual interest on our debt.

It is roughly equal to the amount of money Congress authorized post 9/11. (about $100B) Israel is not breaking the bank.

i don't have a position on this issue one way or another (though instinctively i cringe at the thought of all the taxpayers' money we send throughout the world) but i don't think the fact that the total is less than the 4 things you mentioned makes it any more right.

all four of those are money repositories which should be cut or eliminated. i tend to think that money for foreign aid should be cut as well, but admittedly i'm not steeped in the geopolitical ramifications of such a policy, though the world certainly didn't fall apart during the isolationist period in US history.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:




If you are really upset about the allocation of US tax dolalrs, know this: the amount of US aid given to Israel, IN TOTAL, since its inception, is less than

1. Social Security in a year
2. Medicare on a year
3. The defense budget in a year
4. The annual interest on our debt.

It is roughly equal to the amount of money Congress authorized post 9/11. (about $100B) Israel is not breaking the bank.

Are you a Muslim?

Do you think that maybe even putting more of this money into social security and Medicare would be better than putting it into the hads of a country that has attacked one of out ships less than 40 years ago?

I feel we need to keep our money in our counrty. As long as we have problems that need to be addressed. We need to address them.

This argument is getting tired. We have not even mentioned the scale of destruction during the holocaust or in bosnia since the first page.

the debate has been fun!!!
Good day.
 
dballer said:


This argument is getting tired. We have not even mentioned the scale of destruction during the holocaust or in bosnia since the first page.

the debate has been fun!!!
Good day.

Word.
 
Matt as a libertarian you act pretty weird. Aren't you suppose to be isolationist and just care about your country ? Just wondering.
 
manny78 said:
Matt as a libertarian you act pretty weird. Aren't you suppose to be isolationist and just care about your country ? Just wondering.

he has extreme ties with Israel. He defends it as if it were his homeland. I thought this was weird too.
 
dballer said:


he has extreme ties with Israel. He defends it as if it were his homeland. I thought this was weird too.

I wish I ahd extreme tiesd to Israel. If they had as much pull as you suggest they do, I'd haev teh President's ear. I just try tro put their actions in cotnext. Seems like you have a hard time evaluating teh Middle aEast situation in any means other than absolutes. Perhaps that is why in over a dozen posts you never adderssed the 4 invasions of Israel by Arab nations. I don't know, and don't care. :) You said "good day" so I was content to leave it at at that. Apparently you weren't. Whatever.



Manny - thanks for telling me what I am supposed to think. :)

If you want to add to the conversation then go ahead. Another partiocdipant besides me and dballer would be kinda cool. If you just want to make nonsense statements, I would prefer if you put on your silly little mountie suit and arrest somebody for unauthorized ice fishing. :)

No thinking person of any political affiliation can "ignore" the Middle East.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:

Manny - thanks for telling me what I am supposed to think. :)

If you want to add to the conversation then go ahead. Another partiocdipant besides me and dballer would be kinda cool. If you just want to make nonsense statements, I would prefer if you put on your silly little mountie suit and arrest somebody for unauthorized ice fishing. :)

No thinking person of any political affiliation can "ignore" the Middle East.

Ice fishing. Poor you. That's Fisheries and Oceans Canada which is in charge of that. But you're american so I forgive you. Just like I forgave those who thought Montreal was in Wisconsin lol

And why you can't ignore the Middle East ? many countries do. Please tell me why.
 
Top Bottom