Even if the list was factually right, you failed to indicate how it matters. You explicitly suggested that the mere fact that so many people in Hollywood and Washington and the media are Jews somehow is meaningful beyond insinuating they must all be part of some secret cabal intent on ruling the world and enslaving us all or somesuch.
Better clean out your ears, bubbie. I did not "fail to indicate how it matters", YOU failed to hear anything that contradicts your fanatic world-view.
This could be a symptom of brainwashing. Maybe you don't mind having been brainwashed. Maybe you love to be a good little foot-soldier, getting your thoughts, your principles and your facts second-hand, with a ready-made response for any information that contradicts the wisdom handed down to you by your betters ("You're an anti-semite! He's an anti-semite! She's an anti-semite! They're all anti-semites!")
In case anybody else missed it, here is where I indicated how it matters, about 3 pages ago:The corporate media has played a crucial role in normalizing the racist view of Arabs as subhuman and evil, and therefore undeserving of human rights. It is too pervasive, too systematic, too monolithic, in popular books, movies, tv and newspapers, especially when contrasted with the adulation and prominence given to fanatic zionist clowns like Daniel Pipes, Michael Ledeen, William Kristol and Alan Derschowitz, in that same media.
Muslims make up around the same proportion of the U.S. population, 2-3%, as Jews. I'm going to ask you ANOTHER question that you will not answer, Professor Pan (your buddies are welcome to answer as well):
If it were Muslims instead of Jews, who wielded such power in the U.S. corporate media;
and if the corporate media were as viciously anti-Jewish as it currently is anti-Muslim;
if a Muslim-supremacist, expansionist state were committing genocide against Jews in the Middle East during this same period, with the support of powerful Muslim organizations in the U.S., and in the name of all Muslims:
would you similarly wet your pants if someone posted a list of all the Muslim decision-makers in the U.S. corporate media, as context for this phenomenon?
Let's see if you can come up with an answer that passes the giggle test...
Like I said before, if I post inaccurate information, go ahead and correct it. You disagree with my logic, explain why. Just ignoring arguments and blowing a lot of hot air to distract attention away from facts is a cheap and transparent tactic of bullies who know that they have no case.
Speaking of which, what IS your case? I have been very clear, very precise and very unambiguous about my hypothesis, and I've worked hard to supply the logical and factual bases for every argument I've made.
These wars that we have been driven into have taken away the crumbs and the crusts from the mouths of the weakest and least supported members of our society--the mentally ill, the aged, the impoverished single mother....all suffer a great deal more.
And who, may I ask, planned and plotted for decades to bring these about?
Wasn't it the great Neocons and the acolites of Levi Strauss? And were not the vast majority of these zionists?
I have seen the homeless poplulation of my town double and then triple. I watch their plight with anquish every single day.
10 years ago, we had enough surplus in our treasury to care for all of these with beds and meals.
Now many have neither.
All our resources now buy guns, bombs, tanks, napalm and our tax money lines the coffers of Haliburton, the Carlyle group and yes, Israel "defense funds"
What she (?
) said is correct:Michael Ledeen, Neocon (2002)
: One can only hope that we turn the region into a cauldron, and faster, please. If ever there were a region that richly deserved being cauldronized, it is the Middle East today. If we wage the war effectively, we will bring down the terror regimes in Iraq, Iran, and Syria, and either bring down the Saudi monarchy or force it to abandon its global assembly line to indoctrinate young terrorists.
That's our mission in the war against terror.
The most dangerous course of action is Scowcroft's: Finesse Iraq, and squander our energies fecklessly trying to broker peace between Israel and the terrorists. 2001
:We dealt with the original kamikazes by improving our defenses so as to kill them before they hit us, and by destroying the country that launched them. We have to do that again.
Unless you have been gulled by the leaks from the misnamed intelligence community, you know that the terrorists represent the long arm of evil regimes. We therefore have a dual task: Kill the terrorists, and destroy the regimes that provide them with the critical infrastructure — training, safe havens, travel documents, technology, and all the rest — they need to operate.
The hunt for the terrorists is a technical matter, and we must hope that our military has enough virtue left from the Clinton ravages to do the job. But we should have no misgivings about our ability to destroy tyrannies. It is what we do best. It comes naturally to us, for we are the one truly revolutionary country in the world, as we have been for more than 200 years. Creative destruction is our middle name. We do it automatically, and that is precisely why the tyrants hate us, and are driven to attack us.
So we begin with an enormous advantage. The tyrants fear us, and their oppressed peoples want what we have to offer: freedom...
...when America abandons its historic mission, our enemies take heart, grow stronger, and eventually begin to kill us again. And so they have, forcing us to take up our revolutionary burden, and bring down the despotic regimes that have made possible the hateful events of the 11th of September.
The only consolation is that we know how to do it. And, miraculously, we have some leaders who understand the historic opportunity they hold in their hands.
[Michael Ledeen] was a contract employee of the Office of Special Plans in Douglas Feith’s “separate government” at the Pentagon, the “Lie Factory” where the talking points were put together to frighten the American people into supporting the invasion of Iraq.
His ties to SISMI, the Italian intelligence agency which gave the forged documents back to the US in 2002 go way back.
He attended a series of meetings in Italy with Israeli spy Larry Franklin, Harold Rhode, who “practically lived out of Ahmad Chalabi’s office,” Ledeen’s old Iran-Contra buddy (and Mossad asset - Alice), Manucher Ghorbanifar, and SISMI’s director around the time that the information surfaced.
Who is Michael Ledeen? Who are the neocons? What qualifies them for such power and influence? Are they brilliant? No. Many of them are demonstrably dumb, and have been spectacularly wrong in ways that have exacted a staggering cost in human lives, in the U.S.'s global credibility, and economically. All these costs will continue to be paid for generations to come.
They lie, all the time. Their lies are immediately and unquestioningly picked up and repeated over and over in the media, until they are established as fact in people's minds.
Their middle name is "fabrication", indeed, in some ways they themselves are fabrications. "Experts" on the Middle East who know nothing beyond Israel's hallucinations of the Middle East; analysts who do nothing but shill forged evidence; "legal specialists" who dream up sophistries to get around the Bill of Rights, the Geneva Conventions and other international laws; "journalists" who report propaganda and suppress important facts; "National Security Advisors" whose advice is leading America to economic, political and social ruin.
They are buoyed along on a cushion of air by a complicit, discredited media that preserves the fiction that these individuals are independent, respectable and wise, rather than the corrupt moral and intellectual midgets that they are.
'Wash Times' Columnist Uses Fabricated Abraham Lincoln Quote
By E&P Staff
Published: February 14, 2007 9:00 AM ET updated 9:00 PM Thursday
NEW YORK The drive by some political and military figures -- and pundits -- to paint those who oppose the war in Iraq as traitors or at least not supporting the troops has hit another low, with a Washington Times columnist trumpeting an incendiary quote from Abraham Lincoln shown to be a fabrication last year.
Frank Gaffney, Jr. opened his latest column with this: "Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged." — President Abraham Lincoln.
He continues: "It is, of course, unimaginable that the penalties proposed by one of our most admired presidents for the crime of dividing America in the face of the enemy would be contemplated — let alone applied — today. Still, as the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate engage in interminable debate about resolutions whose effects can only be to 'damage morale and undermine the military' while emboldening our enemies, it is time to reflect on what constitutes inappropriate behavior in time of war."
One problem: Lincoln never said it.
Brooks Jackson at FactCheck.org, the Annenberg Public Policy Center group, studied the sudden appearance of the quote last August. Why? He had found that his Web search "brought up more than 18,000 references to it."
He reported: "Supporters of President Bush and the war in Iraq often quote Abraham Lincoln as saying members of Congress who act to damage military morale in wartime 'are saboteurs, and should be arrested, exiled or hanged.'
"Republican candidate Diana Irey used the 'quote' recently in her campaign against Democratic Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, and it has appeared thousands of times on the Internet, in newspaper articles and letters to the editor, and in Republican speeches.
"But Lincoln never said that. The conservative author who touched off the misquotation frenzy, J. Michael Waller, concedes that the words are his, not Lincoln's. Waller says he never meant to put quote marks around them, and blames an editor [at the magazine Insight] for the mistake and the failure to correct it. We also note other serious historical errors in the Waller article containing the bogus quote."
Jackson later provided this update: "Candidate Irey retracted the quote and apologized hours after this article appeared."
Waller wrote to Jackson concerning the 2003 article: "Oddly, you are the first to question me about this. I'm surprised it has been repeated as often as you say. My editors at the time didn't think it was necessary to run a correction in the following issue of the magazine, and to my knowledge we received no public comment."
Gaffney is a regular columnist at the Washington Times.
UPDATE: As of Thursday night, The Washington Times had neither removed the quote from the Gaffney column nor run a correction.
On Thursday, Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) cited the quote on the floor of the House during the debate on the Iraq war "surge."
They are warmongers and racists, advocates of torture and opponents of international law. Yet they continue to enjoy enormous prestige in the corporate media and in the corridors of power. They are never held accountable for their crucial role in promoting disastrous policies, nor for the lies they constantly spout. They continue to grow rich, and conceited, while they relentlessly whip their exhausted American horse (donkey?) to follow to the letter
, the plans formulated by and for Israel.
To sum up, the "neocon" zionists (for that is what they are) share certain characteristics:
1) They are warmongers, shrieking dire warnings of terrible consequences unless a war of aggression is launched immediately, always against a much weaker country on Israel's list of "enemy states".
2) They sneer at the very idea of human rights for those whom they have designated as "terrorists", whom they regard as subhuman, to be killed at will and without remorse.
3) They rarely bother with evidence, and demand that their word be accepted as fact. On the very rare occasions that they do present evidence to back up their allegations, it is almost always fabricated, extracted through torture, and/or supplied by other zionist agents.
4) Boiled down to its essence, their philosophy is based on the principle that Israel and its pet global superpower, the U.S., should and must rule the world absolutely, control its resources, and subjugate its peoples.
5) Those who try to expose them, or who try to resist the neocon-led foreign aggression, are either "anti-semites" or "terrorists", generally depending on whether they are First World or Third World-type individuals, although since there are only those two arrows in the neocons' quiver, very often both are used at the same time.
6) Did I mention that they lie? And lie, and lie...