Monday, 1 November 2010

Shoot this guy. Now!

David Broder is possibly the most prestigious journalist in the US. ‘Dean of the Washington Press Corps’, he’s a Pulitzer Prize winner and the recipient of countless awards and honourary degrees. He’s also a hypocrite and a sociopath.

A hypocrite because he’s been taking fellow journalists to task for accepting fees over and above their salaries, suggesting, correctly, needless to say, that this impairs theire objectivity. ‘Shape up guys’. However, shortly afterwards he was outed as doing exactly the same thing himself, incognito, and following up by writing puff pieces for his benefactors.

I say he’s also a sociopath because he…. Well, let the man himself explain. “The economic situation in America is presenting a daunting situation that could prevent President Barack Obama from storming back to win a second term in 2012."

And his solution?

Start a war with Iran!

“With strong Republican support in Congress for challenging Iran's ambition to become a nuclear power, he can spend much of 2011 and 2012 orchestrating a showdown with the mullahs. This will help him politically because the opposition party will be urging him on. And as tensions rise and we accelerate preparations for war, the economy will improve.”

What a swell idea! After all, look how well the US is doing with its current wars. A third one would be the icing on the cake.

But forget about the economy. This creature thinks it’s fine to start a conflagration with the strongest power in the Middle East, in the full knowledge of the human and material cost incurred by the Iraq and Afghanistan adventures. There’s also the little matter of its being criminal and immoral.

You know, the more I see the harder I find it to take a benign view of what top Jews in the US are doing. It seems clearer than ever that for many if not most their first loyalty is to Israel, and that to them the cost to America in blood and treasure is immaterial.

45 comments:

missingwmd said...

Broder sells printing machines for living. More wars need more $ printing.

Get lost Broder

Anonymous said...

Definite Israeli lobby connection here. Sometimes, its just so brazen. Onward Christian Soliders.

tsnamm said...

and all of this just so he can get his brown "savior' re-elected...so much for "objective" journalism....

kulak said...

It seems clearer than ever that for many if not most their first loyalty is to Israel

And yet.. they were not always so hostile. Or at least not so blatantly hostile.

Is it mean reversion after 2-3 generations? Or generic in some other sense? Don Corleone and other aggressive minorities love America, when they don't run the show.

I wonder about that sometimes. But less than I used to. I just want the crap to stop, leave the why for them to sort out. Their business.

Californian said...

What a swell idea! After all, look how well the US is doing with its current wars. A third one would be the icing on the cake.


There's no sense of proportion here. The US invasion of Afghanistan, which was originally to take out Al Qaeda, morphed into a war with the Taliban and then with elements in Pakistan. The military term for this is "mission creep."

It's as if once a war has started, it does not count as long as it is not on the evening news. Well, perhaps it is time for Oceania to switch from war with Eurasia to war with Eastasia.

Anonymous said...

Most Jews in America don't give a fuck about Israel. Just like liberal-left American Jews in the 1940s did sod-all to help their cousins in Europe...something which is rarely mentioned.
A war with Iran could be hugely damaging for Israel. They'd be attacked by Hizbollah and Hamas at least, possibly Syria and Iran as well.

Nemesis said...

Well kulak it's our business too. If this cabal (and I certainly don't include all or even most American Jews in this) manages to get war with Iran going, the whole world will suffer.

Bemused stare said...

And that right there is a MAJOR part of the problem. You have a warmachine commanded by assholes who ought to be running an advertising agency.

They keep coming up with all these wonderful euphimisms like "collateral damage, mission creep, etc. All of which can be covered in essence by such blanket terms as, "it's a FUCKUP" or "YOU DUN GOOFED, CONSEQUENCES WILL NEVER BE THE SAME"

On to the topic, we have shitwits like Broder that cheerlead for this crap with nary a consideration of "the law of unintended consequences." From there we go to "mission creep" often helped along by "collateral damage" and before you know it, we are all sitting on that nuclear shitpile we have been trying to avoid since my Mom was a schoolkid.

Anonymous said...

kulak said...

"It seems clearer than ever that for many if not most their first loyalty is to Israel

And yet.. they were not always so hostile. Or at least not so blatantly hostile ..."

You want blatant hostility, Kulak? I recommend you read this:-

http://www.davidduke.com/general

SCroll down to "Edwin Wright: Zionist Jews Worked to Capture US Government"

Edwin M. Wright was a State Department employee in the 1940s and 1950s, excerpts from his recollections concerning the Zionist takeover of America make for some absolutely eye opening reading —

Here's just one quote:-

"…when the election was coming up in 1946 in New York, the group of New York Jews called upon Mr. Truman. [Alan Taylor, op. cit. p.93] Emmanuel Cellar was the head of this committee. Rabbi Steven Wise and several others were in it. They called upon Mr. Truman and said, ‘We have just been talking with Mr. [Tom] Thomas Dewey. He is willing to come out and declare for a Jewish state, and we are going to turn our money and urge the Jews to vote for him unless you beat him to it.’ Then Emmanuel Cellar pounded upon Mr. Truman’s desk and said, ‘And if you don’t come out for a Jewish state we’ll run you out of town."

Here we have a New York hooknose threatening the future president of the United States.

... not always so hostile. Or at least not so blatantly hostile ..."

Hmmmm.

Cheers,

Uncle Nasty

kulak said...

OT

Just a quick reminder for readers in the U.S that today is election day.

(Long but good.)

Rob said...

Iran is getting uppity and wants a nuclear deterrent. Someone somewhere once put it this way: if Iran invaded Mexico and Canada, wouldn't America be getting ready for war? That's precisely the position Iran is in: America has invaded countries on either side of it.

Robert said...

I have known exactly one Jewish person who did not support Israel.
His mother did not visit him while he was dying. She did wear a new mink coat for his funeral.

rebelliousvanilla said...

tsnamm, exactly what I was thinking.

I do think that disarming Iran is a legitimate thing, but you don't need to go to war with them over it. How about making other Muslim countries fight them? It's not that hard since they don't mind doing it.

And I'm not sure why people mind what the Jews do. I like what they do - screw stupid white people who trust outsiders. It's not their fault white people are idiots.

Anonymous said...

He says it so much better.

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you’d be cracking the skull of a cutthroat. Or what about the Black Maria sitting out there on the street with one lonely chauffeur – what if it had been driven off or its tires spiked? The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! “If. . . if . . . We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation. We spent ourselves in one unrestrained outburst in 1917, and then we hurried to submit. We submitted with pleasure! . . . We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

The Gulag Archipelago, Vol 1 | Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn

That could be us. That can still be us.

Cheers,

Uncle Nasty

Anonymous said...

He says it so much better.

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you’d be cracking the skull of a cutthroat. Or what about the Black Maria sitting out there on the street with one lonely chauffeur – what if it had been driven off or its tires spiked? The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! “If. . . if . . . We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation. We spent ourselves in one unrestrained outburst in 1917, and then we hurried to submit. We submitted with pleasure! . . . We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

The Gulag Archipelago, Vol 1 | Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn

That could be us. That can still be us.

Cheers,

Uncle Nasty

kulak said...

@U.N.

Don't they get any points for Buddy Clark (Samuel Goldberg)?

O.K., so the actual Linda grew up to be yet another in a long line of wackos and married Paul McCartney. Still.

havbrush said...

Most historians have eschewed that argument. What ended the Depression was spending. FDR was on the right track and the economy was beginning to respond with the government sponsored programs like the CCC and the WPA but the repugs then, just as now, were all up in arms about too much spending and the deficit. Because of that FDR pulled back and the economy slumped again. He began more programs after that and the economy started to come around again, then the massive war SPENDING began and of course, the economy came around like gangbusters.

My point is it can be any kind of SPENDING that spurs the economy as long as it's large-scale and lasts long enough. WE DON'T HAVE TO START WARS. We can, for instance, start a 21st century CCC to get people working, we can began the high-speed rail corridors proposed around the country, we can fund alternate energy projects. We can put millions to work for years with infrastructure rebuilding projects, i.e. bridges, roads, power grids, schools, things that we'll have something to show for after the spending is done besides, thousands of dead and wounded and worldwide resentment.

Too many people believe the old notion that wars help the economy. IT'S SPENDING THAT HELPS THE ECONOMY, so since so many are eager to spend, even on war, let's spend our treasury on sensible, tangible projects that help our country and don't destroy another country

rebelliousvanilla said...

havbrush, spending doesn't help the economy. This is why the crisis of 1929 took over 10 years to resolve, while the crisis of 1920 was over fairly quick. I'm not going to bother to explain the economics behind it because I chose not to entertain debates with arm chair economists anymore. The school of thought in economics that says that also said that after the WW2 the US will have a horrible depression due to cuts in spending, that communism is better and that we should consider the trade off of political liberty for better economic growth and so on. I could make a list of 20 such predictions, the USSR winning the cold war being the most amusing.

Anonymous said...

Please forgive the double post. Fucking Google.

And, KULAK, I'm afraid the references to Linda Eastman and Buddy Clark (Samuel Goldberg) have gone right over my head.

However, havbrush said...

Most historians have eschewed that argument. What ended the Depression was spending. FDR was on the right track ..."

'Fraid not, havbrush. The myth that FDR pulled America out of the depression, is just that -- myth. You would do well to read about the 1920 depression.

There was a depression in 1920?

Damn right, there was. It's the one that politicians left thoroughly alone. Firms -- and banks -- that were shaky were left to implode. The market shook itself and started the process that markets do so well, it got to its knees and then its feet.

Whereas now, the situation - in a nutshell - is that the banks and buddies get trillions ... and we all get fucked -- without foreplay, lubricant or even a murmured word of affection.

http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0903e.asp

Cheers,

Uncle Nasty

kulak said...

It was a nice song.

kulak said...

@Nemesis

the whole world will suffer

The world? Really? Even Bolivia?

Like George Carlin said, "the world" will do just fine.

kulak said...

@vanilla

And I'm not sure why people mind what the Jews do. I like what they do - screw stupid white people who trust outsiders.

That's exactly what the rabbis say, in reverse.

A few moons ago, an underage Irish girl here in the U.S. -- a real one, ignorant and here only temporarily -- was invited to a party by a female black acquaintance she knew from school.

She was gang raped for hours in bathroom, while the party rolled.

Do you also like what blacks do?

rebelliousvanilla said...

kulak, Jews act like any sane group of people do - push their interests. While rape is cruel, I don't really feel sad for people who volunteer for it by trusting the wrong people. For example, I don't really feel bad for what happened to Katie Piper, despite being a horrible thing. They volunteer to be hurt by trusting outsiders. I refuse to take cab drives from nonwhite drivers, for example, unless I have male friends with me(this is quite common in my country and most of my classmates do it).

In the same sense, I don't really feel bad for white men. IT's not like they lost a war against nonwhites and women.

Magnum, this is why we dislike foreigners here too, except Germans, who were pretty cool. A lot of people are actually sad that they left, me included.

kulak said...

Jews act like any sane group of people do - push their interests.

That's as good of an explanation as any I guess for why so much that is putrid and bad for whites emanates from the Jewish Quarter.

We'll pursue our interests, too. That's where we're the same.

And on that note, I'm in favor of a homeland for Jews :)

While rape is cruel, I don't really feel sad for people who volunteer for it by trusting the wrong people.

And that's where we're different.

My wife and I were talking with some friends of ours, all of whom have kids. We all agreed that before we had kids, when we heard of a child being hurt, no we didn't like it and thought it was sad, but it didn't really hit us like it does today, now that we have children of our own. And that there is no way for the barren to really know what we were talking about.

It's no surprise the Jewish birthrate is lower than ours.

Anonymous said...

Must see video, proof of insane jews and their insane ruining of Europe thru immigration.
Must see.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJjSzXkm55o&feature=bulletin
!!

rebelliousvanilla said...

http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2010/11/04/letter-from-tim-wise/
How about that guy? Or Noel Ignatiev? It's funny though how people whine about the Jews though. Sure, they hate us and enjoy promoting stupid things against us. But if we would be sane, we wouldn't have problems from them because they'd be marginalized and irrelevant.

rebelliousvanilla said...

kulak, there's a difference in between children who are the responsibility of some and adult people. No offense, I am intelligent, but I'm not really Einsteineque. A lot of people could understand what I say, if they did some soul searching and they'd get to the truth if they cared about it. So as an adult person, I expect things from you.

There aren't other reasons for which Jews hate us. There are other reasons for which they act in the way they do. Think of it this way. Since the 7th century, the Muslims moved their rock where the center of the Jewish spiritual life was and danced on the remains of the Jewish temple, while the Jews lived as a banished diaspora. Are you really surprised that they have an internationalist outlook? Also, Judaism is the same as Christianity in terms of universalism. They see the world through universalist eyes and as the chosen people, they have to make people see the world in the same way. It's not just that they hate us because we're white, just like we didn't banish them for almost 50 times from Europe in the last 1000 years just because they're Jews.

And I'm a Zionist too - I actually would support Israel kicking all the Arabs out of Israel. Just like I'd banish a lot of people from Europe.

Shoot this guy now, I wish David Duke would pull his head out of his behind because he ruins the points people that aren't obsessed with Jews try to make.

Anon, the Gypsies are moving there because picking pockets is more productive. It's not like the military investigates crimes. Sure, the ones that cause mayhem get a special forces dose(who are even cooler than the Gendarmerie), but besides this, they're free to roam. Also, Gypsies who work hard and so on(I'm yet to meet one and they're about 10% of my country) don't really experience problems.

Anonymous said...

"And I'm a Zionist too - I actually would support Israel kicking all the Arabs out of Israel. Just like I'd banish a lot of people from Europe." - rebellious vanilla

Why be a Zionist, they're usually just as much pro-immigration into white countries as Marxist Jews. Zionists want a Jewish Israel but oppose an Irish Ireland, English England, German Germany, French France....They're not Europeans so why should we care about them.

rebelliousvanilla said...

Anonymous, the attitudes that Jews have are inconsequential to me. The way I see it, they shouldn't be citizens, just like any outsider and hence have no influence on the policies of other people. I'd also ban lobbying by foreigners.

I'm a Zionist(in the sense of wanting Israel to exist) because for one, it already exists and another reason is that you'd have to deal with all the mess created by it not existing. I don't care about them in the sense that I'd defend Israel with blood and treasure. They should do that, not us. For instance, if I was the German Chancellor, I'd stop all payments made to Israel in any form or shape, but I'd support their sovereign right to kick every single Arab out from Israel.

Obviously though, I'd piss off the Arabs anyway considering I'd invade the Middle East and take their oil for free.

Anonymous said...

@vanilla - that's all very fine. But, fortunately or unfortunately, jews don't take the same hands-off approach to the rest of us. They hold the levers of control in most western countries and therefore what they think and do are VERY important to us, whether you think so or not.

rebelliousvanilla said...

Anon, they hold control because we let them. It's that simple. Also, the most destructive thing to have happened to America, for example, was the 1865 making slaves citizens laws. Jews hardly did those.

Anonymous said...

rebelliousvanilla said...

"... Also, the most destructive thing to have happened to America, for example, was the 1865 making slaves citizens laws. Jews hardly did those."

I think, RV, that you like many others have fallen into the trap of thinking that jews only had an influence in the 20th century.

A few quotes from major US Civil war figures:-

Ulysses S. Grant, the 19th century American general and politician. While in command of the 13th Army Corps, headquartered at Oxford, Mississippi, became so infuriated at Jewish camp-followers attempting to penetrate the conquered territory that he finally attempted to expel them.

"I have long since believed that in spite of all the vigilance that can be infused into post commanders, the special regulations of the Treasury Department have been violated, and that mostly by Jews and other unprincipled traders.

So well satisfied have I been of this that I instructed the commanding officers at Columbus to refuse all permits to Jews to come South, and I have frequently had them expelled from the department, but they come in with their carpet-sacks in spite of all that can be done to prevent it.

The Jews seem to be a privileged class that can travel anywhere.

They will land at any woodyard on the river and make their way through the country.

If not permitted to buy cotton themselves, they will act as agents for someone else, who will be at military post with a Treasury permit to receive cotton and pay for it in Treasury notes which the Jew will buy up at an agreed rate, paying gold.

(Letters to C. P. Wolcott, assistant secretary of war, Washington, December 17, 1862)

*Note Grant's reference to carpet-sacks ... they were later referred to as "Carpetbaggers".

End Part 1

Uncle Nasty

Anonymous said...

The Jews in the US Civil war Part 2

Ulysses S. Grant's orders, continued:-

1). The Jews, as a class, violating every regulation of trade established by the Treasury Department, and also Department orders, are hereby expelled from the Department.

2). Within twenty-four hours from the receipt of this order by Post Commanders, they will see that all of this class of people are furnished with passes and required to leave, and anyone returning after such notification, will be arrested and held in confinement until an opportunity occurs of sending them out as prisoners, unless furnished with permits from these headquarters.

3). No permits will be given these people to visit headquarters for the purpose of making personal application for trade permits. By order of Major Gen. Grant Jno. A. Rawlings, Assistant Adjutant General (General Order Number 11, December 17, 1862)

The expulsion order was immediately countermanded by the general-in-chief, H. W. Halleck, in Washington. Apparently the expelled Jews had immediately contacted their kinsmen there and had pressure brought to bear.

William Tecumseh Sherman, the other notable Civil War general, In a letter from Union-occupied Memphis, July 30, 1862, wrote:

"I found so many Jews and speculators here trading in cotton, and secessionists had become so open in refusing anything but gold, that I have felt myself bound to stop it. The gold can have but one use -- the purchase of arms and ammunition . . . Of course, I have respected all permits by yourself or the Secretary of the Treasury, but in these new cases (swarms of Jews), I have stopped it."

(The Sherman Letters)

Anonymous said...

"but I'd support their sovereign right to kick every single Arab out from Israel."

Their soveregn right?

LOL, This silly girl has not a clue whats going on.

Its the Arabs sovereign right to kick every kike out of their land.

Read history sweetheart, before you make an ass out of yourself.

I wonder if Savant regrets his praise towards this ninny.

SAVANT said...

"I wonder if Savant regrets his praise towards this ninny."

I think you're falling into what I call the SAS Syndrome. In other words, on that blog unless there's total agreement there's a flameout between all parties. There are times when I think flamouts are necessary - IMHO this isn't one of them.

Anonymous said...

@14.14, the Jewish displacement of the Palestinians is a fine example of how mass immigration can change things. What started with a small trickle of Zionist settlers 100 years ago is now the state of Israel. The US is becoming Hispanic. Europe should learn by stopping African, Muslim and Asian immigration into Europe and repatriating those already here.

rebelliousvanilla said...

Uncle Nasty, any proper group living in the midst of another group of people has to do what the Jews do. I'd like to point out that asking for gold and not accepting governmental notes with no backing is something normal. I'm not Jewish and if I lived then, I wouldn't accept anything but gold in those times either.

Anonymous, sovereignty is backed by tanks and guns. History is irrelevant. And if we go back throughout history enough, it's the Arabs who have nothing to do where Israel is now. Also, if we're to follow your logic, it's the sovereign right of Amerindians to kick all white people out of the US too. lol

joelgp said...

Very good response miss RV!

joelgp said...

Very good response miss RV!

Anonymous said...

@RV I didn't say the Arabs had the right to kick the Jews out of Israel but so what if they do. The Americans should stop supporting Israel and worry about their own borders instead. History is very relevant. It might be too late for the Palestinians but Europe still has a chance. What good has support for Israel done Americans? Zionist Jews are usually as pro-immigration as Marxist Jews. As an Eastern European and you should know all about the Bolshevik Jews. History will be irrelevant if the Muslims took over Europe by outbreeding, immigration and their 'facts on the ground' got control of the tanks and guns. The Zionists use 'history' themselves to appeal to white Christian Zionists. Not that I care much about the Palestinians, among their biggest defenders in the west are left wing non-Zionist Jews (as much good to them as the Zionists are to the USA). Of course if the Palestinians had real support like tanks and guns the situation could be reversed. I'm neutral. May the best side win.

rebelliousvanilla said...

Anonymous, are you that dense? I support the right of all sovereign states to do whatever they want, as long as they don't fuck around with white people. I don't care what Israel does to the Arabs and I support them expelling the Arabs because it would be the best way to solve the insanity in that region. I don't even know why you care if it's too late for the Palestinians. I don't care about them. And I didn't say the US should spend money on Israel - I wouldn't if I was the president nor would I give a dime to Israel as the German Chancellor(including the retirements for whatever).

While I do mind Jews being hypocrites as a group(multiculturalism abroad and Jewish Israel), Israel isn't really that pro Jewish. They're fairly proud of Jerusalem being 'multicultural'. Their nationalism isn't really that strong. It's this simple: nobody has a right to be sovereign. Sovereignty is given by military might and all rights come down from that sovereignty and I pretty much support whatever sovereign states want to do on their territory as long as it doesn't bother my ethnic kin.

And yes, history is irrelevant in terms of who has a right to a land. The people who can keep it do. And I'd like to point out that the Jews got displaced by the Arabs in what's Israel now, so I hardly see how they can whine about being displaced by making the argument that they were there.

Anonymous said...

@ I never said I cared for the Palestinians but there is a difference of 2000 years in the displacement. The Palestinians have themselves to blame for selling land to Zionist settlers in the early days. Right or wrong it is an example of one ethnic group replacing another ethnic group. Look at Kosovo where Albanians displaced Serbs or Southall, London where Punjabi Sikhs displaced English. Please don't call me dense, you're mixing me up with the other anonymous. Jews displacing Arabs or Arabs displacing Jews, its all the same. And why should you care about 'insanity' in the region. Its only a bunch of hook-nosed Semites killing each other. And so what if I did like Palestinians. Maybe I have a soft spot for Palestinian Christians. That's right, kick the Jews and Muslims out and give Palestine to the Christians. LOL. Sure one can admire the Israelis for building their nation up from the desert. But so what. Sovereign states rise and fall.

Dr.Wassel said...

Sure one can admire the Israelis for building their nation up from the desert.

Ok, but Germany and the US paid for it.

Anonymous said...

Good point, Dr. Wassel. @RV I'm a different anonymous from the one who called you a ninny. I'm the one who made the last few comments. From now I'm to be known as Nutzi.

rebelliousvanilla said...

Anon, I hardly feel any pity for Christians. After all, all our problems come from Christian ethics. And I care about that region because the thing can affect the price of oil for one and Israel being a better place would mean that Jews would move there when I'd strip them off citizenship as the empress. :P