The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.
Updated May 3:
Via Philip Weiss, who gets the scoop from Electronic Intifada, and thence to Joachim Martillo for final comment, it seems the paranoid and delusional world that I revealed in Wikipedia, Ziopedia or Judeopedia fully two years ago is finally starting to be proven true. But of course. I saw it with my very eyes.
I saw the Jewish Nationalist cabal on there and got nailed, run up by admins and then banned by them. Then I wrote about it. I don't see how anyone could spend much time on Wikipedia and not notice these wicked little toads running amok all over that precious online encyclopedia.
The Electronic Intifada piece reveals a concerted effort by CAMERA, a rightwing Zionist lobby in the US, to infiltrate Wikipedia surreptitiously, ingratiate themselves with editors, get all pro-Palestinian editors run up on fake charges and hopefully run out, and to eventually move on up into the ranks of administrators. So my paranoid delusions about Jewish conspiracies on Wikipedia were proven true after all.
I can tell you flat out that the Administrators are already chock full of either members of this Jewish Cabal or rightwing libertarians allied with them. Jimmy Wales himself is a rightwing libertarian who has strong pro-Zionist views that he does not hide. The administrators are chosen well to carry out a specific agenda.
No one has ever run up these cackling criminal Heckles and Jeckles in this Jewish Cabal on anything yet, and anyone who mentions a peep about it gets put on their creepy neo-Nazi list (I made it on) which I guess has hundreds of names on it, in typical Jewish paranoid fashion.
Not only that, but the Jewish Cabal runs around crowing and bragging about their very project all the time; they call themselves The Cabal, The Jewish Cabal, and other names, so they are totally blatant about what they are doing. But if anyone dares to notice this and points it out, onto the neo-Nazi list you go, and soon you will be run up to Administrators on totally faked charges and then run out of Wikipedia.
I don't think I have ever seen a Jewish-critical or pro-Palestinian editor who lasted long there. It's been two years since I wrote that post, and I keep hoping things have changed, but I keep getting emails from pro-Palestinian folks who just got run out of Wikipedia.
On Phil's post, the truly disgusting Richard Witty, "Peace Now Zionist - Jewish nationalist - defender of the Jews" who seems to inhabit all of Phil's threads is squirming around as usual. One gets the impression he is writing on a pincushion. This crap is getting harder and harder for the Richard Witty's of the world to deny.
The usual rejoinders are employed by Witty - this happens all over the web, this is the problem with open source editing, there are cabals all over the place in our world, including the Internet.
Sure, I saw plenty of cabals trying to form on Wikipedia, usually on nationalistic or political issues. And they were crushed, one by one, but conscientious editors. However, curiously, the sickening little Jewish cabal was allowed not only to survive but to run amok across all of Wikipedia! Riddle me that!
And recently, a particularly vile and scummy Hindutva - Hindu Nationalist - Indian Nationalist Cabal has formed and this cabal has also been allowed to run wild all over all of the India and Pakistan articles on Wikipedia. The result is that most of the articles on India and Pakistan have been totally destroyed by stinking fascist Hindutva worms.
The Hindutva Cabal, of course, has formed an alliance with the Jewish Cabal, Jewish fascist dogs with Indian fascist dogs, all in one kennel, crapping on the floor, humping each others' legs and yip-yapping away, just like in real life.
One Jayg is mentioned in the article as not a member of the CAMERA cabal, but instead a sympathetic outsider. Actually, Jayg is one of the leading members of the Jewish Cabal on Wikipedia. He's one of the worst Jewish POV-pushers of them all.
Zeq, the leader of the CAMERA cabal, is also a well-known member of the Jewish Cabal on Wikipedia. The reason Zeq speaks poor English, I believe, is because he is an Israeli.
I am familiar with both of these sociopathic runts.
I believe they are both admins too, but I may be wrong.
Repeat after yourself: cabals exist, cabals exist, cabals exist.
Anyway, over and out. Writing this is starting to make me really angry all over again.
P. S. I would like to point out that a huge percentage of White Nationalists support Zionism (Jewish nationalism). That right there ought to stop anyone in their tracks and make them wonder why. When you finally figure it out, if you have any decency, you will realize even more than ever that WN is bad news.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Showing posts with label Joachim Martillo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joachim Martillo. Show all posts
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Monday, February 11, 2008
The Israeli Lobby and American Society
The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.
Updated February 13, 2008:
Joachim Martillo has posted a lengthy and excellent opus, Judonia Rising: The Israeli Lobby and American Society, on one of his websites, an encyclopedic analysis of the US Israeli Lobby and its effects on US society. Noam Chomsky offered a critique (see the first comment at the end of the post for details), and afterwards, Joachim rewrote several pages. I have also been asked to offer a critique.
This is a very important work that ought to be read in full by anyone interested in the subject. It deserves to be widely disseminated and commented on, dissected and analyzed.
First of all, I agree with much of what he has written so there is no need to comment on what I agree on. If I don't mention it in what follows, that probably means I agree.
I do disagree with certain things.
Obviously, as a Commie, I have serious issues with the whole Bolshevik Jew killers thing. It's hard to argue that people who reduced the death rate by 70% in Russia were the worst killers to ever set foot in Russia. I'm so tired of debating the Bolshevik Jew killer thing that I don't even want to get into it anymore.
Now, for the rest.
It is incorrect to say that Jewish values include early age of sexual initiation and serial polygamy. Kevin MacDonald notes that US Jews have sex at the latest age of any ethnic group. They also have some of the most stable marriages last time I checked.
It's difficult to lump Abigail Thornton, a rightwing Jewish Republican opposed to civil rights, in with a US Jewish agenda that relentlessly promotes civil rights. Martillo fails to note that the Jewish neocons are actually opposed to civil rights law in the US, either by promoting Supreme Court justices sworn to dismantle it or by cheering on Republicans who have been refusing to enforce civil rights laws for almost 30 years now.
It's very hard to say that Friedmanite freemarketeer neoliberalism is part of the US Jewish agenda, as most US Jewish organizations are agnostic on economics and if anything, promote more state intervention, regulation of business, socialist redistribution programs, socialized medicine and education, etc.
Friedmanism is part of the agenda of the neocons, but the neocon agenda in whole is embraced by only at most 20% of US Jews who vote Republican. This is where the equation of Jewish neoconservatives with US Jews gets dangerous and wrong. US Jews vote up to 80% Dem in recent years.
Neocons are best seen as a rightwing split-off of Republican Jews whose views in whole are rejected by the overwhelming majority of US Jews. However, on Israel, many liberal US Jews are becoming neocons in whole or in part, but the average US Jew is still pretty diverse on Israel. It is better to say that the large US Jewish organizations have gone over to neoconservatism on Israel.
I am still not sure that the US media can be painted as 100% Jewish owned, as there are large media firms still run by old WASP money. Murdoch is apparently Jewish, but that goes way back. Here is a summary from the web on Murdoch's Jewish connection. It sounds reasonable:
Martillo fails to discuss the theory of the Jewified US Gentile, as Albert Lindemann coined the term in his book Esau's Tears, Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews. This is also a theme of Yuri Slezkine's Jewish Century, the theme of which is best described as "we are all Jews now". Many US Gentiles are Jewified via marriage to or deep friendship with ethnocentric Jews.
This aspect of US politics is overlooked in folks trying to "blame it all on the Jew". Americans support Jews and support Israel. We are Jewified. I believe Karl Marx said that in 100 years the US would be a Jewish country. He was correct.
How those Gentiles got Jewified is open to debate.Perhaps they became Judeophiles and Zionists by brainwashing. Well, so what? Most of our political views are due to propaganda of some sort. Any analysis of US Jewry, the Lobby, etc, that does not take into account all of the Gentile support for Israel is bound to fail.
US Jews have plenty of money, but it is mostly in certain parts of economy. They were run out of the banks long ago and the Holocaust finished off the rest of Jewish banking power. Banks are now run by international corporations out of Japan, Hong Kong, Europe and the US. The ones in the US are not noticeably Jewish-owned.
It is true that Jews are important in investment banking. They made serious gains in this area in 1910-1920 but the effort to take over the regular banks was resisted by Gentile ethnic warfare. Jews also tried to take over the stock market at that time but were rebuffed similarly.
All of this is documented extensively in Henry Ford's The International Jew, an excellent book that is often not really anti-Semitic in any way, and at any rate is essential reading for documentation of US Jewish ethnic warfare in the US from 1900-1920. It was during this period that the Jewish Hollywood and media dominances were created.
I do not believe that the US financial or high tech industries are run by Jews at all. US Jews are huge in retail department stores, especially clothing, and also in jewelry, furs and a few other things. They don't really dominate real estate at all.
I also disagree that a US Jewish or Zionist elite is set to take over a rather democratically diminished US. There will be some Jews in such a setup, mostly neoconservatives, but most will be White Gentiles like Bush, Rumsfeld, Rove and Cheney, with some Blacks like Condoleeza Rice and the Powells and some Latinos like Alberto Gonzales.
Increasingly, the US is becoming a caste society based on income alone, and members of any race may join these hard rightwingers in their elitist project. It's all about money, not race, religion or ethnicity.
This undemocratic, quasi-fascist project will be resisted by many, and I assure you that liberal US Jews will be leading the charge to oppose this nightmare. People see Jews leading contrary movements going head to head with each other and think it's all part of an exceptionally devious and convoluted Jewish plot.
The truth is so much more mundane: Jews simply lead movements, and are also disproportionately attracted to fanaticism and extremism in general, in part due to the nature of Judaism itself, as Kevin MacDonald points out.
In related news, Tom Lantos, longtime Congressman from San Mateo, is dead. A Hungarian Jew and a Holocaust survivor, he has been a longtime, very strong supporter of the Israeli government. He led the charge to invade Iraq and promised an Israeli legislator that the US would take out Saddam for the benefit of both countries in 2002.
He helped rally Congressional Democrats to go along with Bush's mad war. Lantos is a good example of some of the very liberal California Jews who represent us Californians. They are superb on most liberal issues and get high marks from most liberal organizations on their voting records.
But on Israel, they are often surprisingly hawkish. Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein are good examples, as is Brad Sherman. As a progressive, I would probably vote for them, as the Republican running against them would be just as pro-Israel, if not more, along with being wrong about all the domestic stuff. Politics is so complicated.
As'ad AbuKhalil of the Angry Arab blog has a great article up about George Habash of the PFLP in the Electronic Intifada, who we wrote about previously. The lead photo is really nice too; I would run it here but I'm unsure about rights issues. EI, run by Ali Abunimah, is a great publication with superb views on the conflict.
It's run by reasonable Palestinians, exemplified by Abunimah, and their supporters, and it's as far from Hamas and Islamic Jihad as it is from Zionism. Zionists, mostly Jews, have been running a vicious campaign against Abunimah for years calling him an anti-Semite (What else?) but there's nothing to it.
To what extent the views of EI represent those of the average Palestinian on the street is not known. My worry is that as this conflict festers idiots like Hamas and IJ and bigger idiots like Al Qaeda will gain increasing power in Palestine. They won't achieve their goals, and I would not want them to anyway, but a lot more people, mostly Palestinians, are going to die.
AbuKhalil is wrong about one thing in his piece - that the PFLP hardly exists anymore.
While dwarfed by Hamas and Fatah, it's still a large and powerful organization with at least 80,000 active supporters, plenty of money, a fully armed guerrilla force that carries out regular attacks, a busy propaganda faction with websites, a newspaper and magazines, and up to a dozen above-ground organizations for everything from youth to women to workers.
Islamic Jihad gets way more press, but they are not much bigger than the PFLP. As an example, the PFLP fired 7 missiles on February 5th and 2 rockets on February 6th, all from Gaza and aimed at Sderot and Ashkelon. I think shooting these rockets is idiotic, but it's kind of hard to understand how a nonexistent army can fire 7 rockets in 2 days. They also fought a battle with Israeli forces in Gaza on February 5th.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Updated February 13, 2008:
Joachim Martillo has posted a lengthy and excellent opus, Judonia Rising: The Israeli Lobby and American Society, on one of his websites, an encyclopedic analysis of the US Israeli Lobby and its effects on US society. Noam Chomsky offered a critique (see the first comment at the end of the post for details), and afterwards, Joachim rewrote several pages. I have also been asked to offer a critique.
This is a very important work that ought to be read in full by anyone interested in the subject. It deserves to be widely disseminated and commented on, dissected and analyzed.
First of all, I agree with much of what he has written so there is no need to comment on what I agree on. If I don't mention it in what follows, that probably means I agree.
I do disagree with certain things.
Obviously, as a Commie, I have serious issues with the whole Bolshevik Jew killers thing. It's hard to argue that people who reduced the death rate by 70% in Russia were the worst killers to ever set foot in Russia. I'm so tired of debating the Bolshevik Jew killer thing that I don't even want to get into it anymore.
Now, for the rest.
It is incorrect to say that Jewish values include early age of sexual initiation and serial polygamy. Kevin MacDonald notes that US Jews have sex at the latest age of any ethnic group. They also have some of the most stable marriages last time I checked.
It's difficult to lump Abigail Thornton, a rightwing Jewish Republican opposed to civil rights, in with a US Jewish agenda that relentlessly promotes civil rights. Martillo fails to note that the Jewish neocons are actually opposed to civil rights law in the US, either by promoting Supreme Court justices sworn to dismantle it or by cheering on Republicans who have been refusing to enforce civil rights laws for almost 30 years now.
It's very hard to say that Friedmanite freemarketeer neoliberalism is part of the US Jewish agenda, as most US Jewish organizations are agnostic on economics and if anything, promote more state intervention, regulation of business, socialist redistribution programs, socialized medicine and education, etc.
Friedmanism is part of the agenda of the neocons, but the neocon agenda in whole is embraced by only at most 20% of US Jews who vote Republican. This is where the equation of Jewish neoconservatives with US Jews gets dangerous and wrong. US Jews vote up to 80% Dem in recent years.
Neocons are best seen as a rightwing split-off of Republican Jews whose views in whole are rejected by the overwhelming majority of US Jews. However, on Israel, many liberal US Jews are becoming neocons in whole or in part, but the average US Jew is still pretty diverse on Israel. It is better to say that the large US Jewish organizations have gone over to neoconservatism on Israel.
I am still not sure that the US media can be painted as 100% Jewish owned, as there are large media firms still run by old WASP money. Murdoch is apparently Jewish, but that goes way back. Here is a summary from the web on Murdoch's Jewish connection. It sounds reasonable:
Rupert (actually Keith Rupert) Murdoch's father was Keith Murdoch (died 1952), his mother Elisabeth Joy (nee Greene) and yes her mother, Marie Grace de Lancey Forth was born from a Jewish mother.It's downright bizarre the way so many ethnocentric voraciously attack the notion that Murdoch is Jewish. You would think they want to claim him.
Rupert's paternal grandfather, Patrick John, was a reverend, the maternal grandmother was Marie Grace de Lancey Forth, who was born in Warnambool, Victoria (Australia), HER mother Caroline Jemima (nee Sherson) was born to a Jewish family, hence by "Jewish law", making Rupert Jewish.
Also for the record, it was not unheard of "way back then" for Protestants or Catholics to marry Jews, and I know this as my grandparents are prime example. My grandfather, born in Ireland in 1895 to a prominent protestant family, married a Jewish woman, making my father and all his siblings Jews.
The Jewish ancestry comes purely from the MATERNAL line and has squat to do with the paternal.
It should also be noted that many Jewish families settled in Australia post 1788.
Martillo fails to discuss the theory of the Jewified US Gentile, as Albert Lindemann coined the term in his book Esau's Tears, Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews. This is also a theme of Yuri Slezkine's Jewish Century, the theme of which is best described as "we are all Jews now". Many US Gentiles are Jewified via marriage to or deep friendship with ethnocentric Jews.
This aspect of US politics is overlooked in folks trying to "blame it all on the Jew". Americans support Jews and support Israel. We are Jewified. I believe Karl Marx said that in 100 years the US would be a Jewish country. He was correct.
How those Gentiles got Jewified is open to debate.Perhaps they became Judeophiles and Zionists by brainwashing. Well, so what? Most of our political views are due to propaganda of some sort. Any analysis of US Jewry, the Lobby, etc, that does not take into account all of the Gentile support for Israel is bound to fail.
US Jews have plenty of money, but it is mostly in certain parts of economy. They were run out of the banks long ago and the Holocaust finished off the rest of Jewish banking power. Banks are now run by international corporations out of Japan, Hong Kong, Europe and the US. The ones in the US are not noticeably Jewish-owned.
It is true that Jews are important in investment banking. They made serious gains in this area in 1910-1920 but the effort to take over the regular banks was resisted by Gentile ethnic warfare. Jews also tried to take over the stock market at that time but were rebuffed similarly.
All of this is documented extensively in Henry Ford's The International Jew, an excellent book that is often not really anti-Semitic in any way, and at any rate is essential reading for documentation of US Jewish ethnic warfare in the US from 1900-1920. It was during this period that the Jewish Hollywood and media dominances were created.
I do not believe that the US financial or high tech industries are run by Jews at all. US Jews are huge in retail department stores, especially clothing, and also in jewelry, furs and a few other things. They don't really dominate real estate at all.
I also disagree that a US Jewish or Zionist elite is set to take over a rather democratically diminished US. There will be some Jews in such a setup, mostly neoconservatives, but most will be White Gentiles like Bush, Rumsfeld, Rove and Cheney, with some Blacks like Condoleeza Rice and the Powells and some Latinos like Alberto Gonzales.
Increasingly, the US is becoming a caste society based on income alone, and members of any race may join these hard rightwingers in their elitist project. It's all about money, not race, religion or ethnicity.
This undemocratic, quasi-fascist project will be resisted by many, and I assure you that liberal US Jews will be leading the charge to oppose this nightmare. People see Jews leading contrary movements going head to head with each other and think it's all part of an exceptionally devious and convoluted Jewish plot.
The truth is so much more mundane: Jews simply lead movements, and are also disproportionately attracted to fanaticism and extremism in general, in part due to the nature of Judaism itself, as Kevin MacDonald points out.
In related news, Tom Lantos, longtime Congressman from San Mateo, is dead. A Hungarian Jew and a Holocaust survivor, he has been a longtime, very strong supporter of the Israeli government. He led the charge to invade Iraq and promised an Israeli legislator that the US would take out Saddam for the benefit of both countries in 2002.
He helped rally Congressional Democrats to go along with Bush's mad war. Lantos is a good example of some of the very liberal California Jews who represent us Californians. They are superb on most liberal issues and get high marks from most liberal organizations on their voting records.
But on Israel, they are often surprisingly hawkish. Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein are good examples, as is Brad Sherman. As a progressive, I would probably vote for them, as the Republican running against them would be just as pro-Israel, if not more, along with being wrong about all the domestic stuff. Politics is so complicated.
As'ad AbuKhalil of the Angry Arab blog has a great article up about George Habash of the PFLP in the Electronic Intifada, who we wrote about previously. The lead photo is really nice too; I would run it here but I'm unsure about rights issues. EI, run by Ali Abunimah, is a great publication with superb views on the conflict.
It's run by reasonable Palestinians, exemplified by Abunimah, and their supporters, and it's as far from Hamas and Islamic Jihad as it is from Zionism. Zionists, mostly Jews, have been running a vicious campaign against Abunimah for years calling him an anti-Semite (What else?) but there's nothing to it.
To what extent the views of EI represent those of the average Palestinian on the street is not known. My worry is that as this conflict festers idiots like Hamas and IJ and bigger idiots like Al Qaeda will gain increasing power in Palestine. They won't achieve their goals, and I would not want them to anyway, but a lot more people, mostly Palestinians, are going to die.
AbuKhalil is wrong about one thing in his piece - that the PFLP hardly exists anymore.
While dwarfed by Hamas and Fatah, it's still a large and powerful organization with at least 80,000 active supporters, plenty of money, a fully armed guerrilla force that carries out regular attacks, a busy propaganda faction with websites, a newspaper and magazines, and up to a dozen above-ground organizations for everything from youth to women to workers.
Islamic Jihad gets way more press, but they are not much bigger than the PFLP. As an example, the PFLP fired 7 missiles on February 5th and 2 rockets on February 6th, all from Gaza and aimed at Sderot and Ashkelon. I think shooting these rockets is idiotic, but it's kind of hard to understand how a nonexistent army can fire 7 rockets in 2 days. They also fought a battle with Israeli forces in Gaza on February 5th.
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Friday, January 04, 2008
Ron Paul as Israeli-Lobby Killer
The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.
Updated January 18:
Via fellow blogger Joachim Martillo. Martillo dissects the Ron Paul phenomenon, then follows with a piece by his wife, Karin Friedemann. Both are Jews who converted to Islam.
Martillo makes some interesting points.
First of all, Paul obviously has serious xenophobic tendencies. It's preposterous to eliminate all student visas from "terrorist nations", whatever that means. It's hard enough to get any kind of a visa from the Muslim World these days anyway.
Martillo seems to be correct that Paul used to be a segregationist, and it is very disturbing that Paul is the favorite candidate of the White Racist Far Right. Paul has made some statements against Blacks that were regarded as racist in 1992. I have reviewed those remarks and do not find them to be racist, in general, though I am not certain that "95% of young Black males in Washington, DC are semi-criminal or criminal".
Of course free market libertarianism not only leads to monopolies, but it is also impossible. At least Marxism can be implemented. Libertarianism simply cannot be implemented, due to its internal contradictions.
While promoting laissez faire capitalism, it opposes imperialism. Yet all major capitalist nations must be imperialist, as all major transnational corporations must support imperialist foreign policies of various types. A major capitalist nation that renounces imperialism would be gobbled alive by the other capitalist states that quite reasonably refuse to renounce imperialism, their best weapon.
Foreign policy is but a battle for markets, and alliances between nations are no more possible than alliances between competing corporations. Wars for resources and markets are not only inevitable but are actually mandated by capitalism.
The sad realization that capitalism is not possible without imperialist appendages is one of the reasons I think that the whole system must be junked as fatally flawed, regardless of how poorly the competing models produce wealth and grow the economy.
How many proponents of capitalism realize this? How many know that capitalism mandates imperialism? How many know that a libertarian philosophy of non-aggression is as logically impossible in capitalism as it is in house full of cats? Capitalism leads inexorably to war with no exceptions.
The brutal analysis of capitalism above, which is utterly factual, by the way, is one reason that anyone interested in capitalism needs to understand Marx. Marx was wrong about a lot of things in his analysis of capitalism, but on the score above, he hits it right on target.
To be a capitalist nowadays is to be a deluded human being. The modern capitalist rejects the necessary linkage of capitalism and imperialism in the same way man rejects his mortality - spitting in the face of the obvious.
A return to the Gold Standard and getting rid of the Federal Reserve, which Paul advocates, will not do anything positive. We went off the standard and set up the reserve for some excellent reasons. Diving off Paul's radical rightwing deep end is like diving into a pool blindfolded. One that may have been drained.
Mr. Paul also hates gay marriage and Roe vs. Wade. That is, he wants to throw all this back to the states. While in the case of gay marriage that may be positive, it runs afoul the Truth in Credit aspects of the Constitution, whereby states must recognize things, like marriages, recognized in other states. So gay marriage can't be tossed back to the states without a Constitutional amendment, which is not forthcoming.
Tossing abortion back to the states would of course be a total disaster, but I guess that is what the reactionaries want.
Friedemann's column is naive at best. Muslims make alliance with White racists and fascists at their severe peril. Some of my friends, one of whom is still a Communist though he just implausibly converted to Islam, are also supporting Ron Paul for the same cynical and what-the-heck reasons that Friedemann espouses.
To these folks, the Israel-Palestine conflict is all, Israel needs to be screwed, and Paul is the man to do it. Forget it. The Israeli Lobby runs this damned country, and opposition to it is no more than ~15% of the population. Paul doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of getting in. How a Communist could vote for any reactionary is beyond me, but converting to Islam does funny things to your brain.
If you hate Israel (or even Jews) more than anything else in the US, go ahead and waste a vote on Ron Paul, a man who cannot but lose anyway. Personally, my votes are guided by progressive radar, and you can't pay me enough to vote for any reactionary, and this is clearly what Mr. Paul is.
I mean, come on, look at Ron Paul's MySpace page. He proudly states that he has a 100% rating from the John Birch Society! A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for the Birchers. Those of you who are ok with Birchers will find that cheering, but why would anyone even remotely liberal, Centrist, not to mention progressive, throw their vote away in the chilling direction of, of all things, the John Birch Society?
I have to admit some reservations about Ron Paul.
This video evinces xenophobic tendencies.The promise to eliminate student visas from terrorist nations is the sort of sloganeering that I expect from Neocons. In other contexts, Paul has rejected the concept of a terrorist nation and has shown good understanding of the hatred and blowback that US foreign policy has created over the last 60 years.
Paul supports free market libertarian capitalism even though mathematical analysis can demonstrate that such economic systems lead to monopoly dominance and exploitation. Some of his supporters seem to argue from the standpoint that the power of big business is okay while the power of government is not. The belief is at best naive.
I doubt that a return to the gold standard and the elimination of the Federal Reserve will bring economic salvation.
I suspect Ron Paul was a segregationist in the 60s, but such was the nature of southern US culture back then, and he has probably changed. His intention to remove US troops from Iraq as quickly as possible is as pro-minority as it gets because of the disproportionately large representation of African and Hispanic Americans in the military.
I am less concerned about Roe vs. Wade and gay marriage than most of the progressive Boston Cambridge crowd, but making abortion and marriage matters of state legislation -- as Paul wishes -- probably means that freedom of choice and gay marriage might survive in various states in the USA while any attempt at national legislation or constitution change in these areas could easily backfire.
At this point, I would probably support a candidate that opposed women's suffrage and supported a new prohibition as long as he would end the Iraq occupation and work for the repeal of the Patriot Act. On these questions Ron Paul is the only game in town.
November 18, 2007
Muslims discover Ron Paul
by Karin Friedemann
After the Republican debate on Tuesday evening in Dearborn, Mich., a reporter from the Arab-American News asked Ron Paul what he thought of the term “Islamic fascism.”
“It’s a false term to make people think we’re fighting Hitler,” Paul responded. “It’s war propaganda designed to generate fear so that the war has to be spread.”
The call has gone out to all the Muslim Americans to hurry up and register to vote Republican so that they can vote in the Republican Primary to support Ron Paul, the anti-interventionist, non-isolationist candidate for President of the United States. Muslims are opening their wallets and joining teaparty07.com as well.
An anonymous Ron Paul supporter posted the following message on the internet:
Ron Paul:
There is general frustration with politicians these days, and the unwillingness to believe that supporting a particular candidate will make a difference.
But whether Ron Paul wins or loses, Ron Paul's Meetup site is a great way to meet your neighbors who are against the war and organize the community on a grassroots level. If something like Katrina ever happened to us, knowing our neighbors could mean the difference between life and death to our families.
The common thread I’ve been reading lately about leftists and Jews is that they are having trouble getting more than a dozen people to come to their stuff (whether anti-Zionist or Zionist). The anti-Israel movement is not moving forward, because “protest Zionist imperialism” is just not a catchy slogan.
By contrast, there are over 400 RP activists against war taxes in Boston alone. Every day the list of passionate anti-war activists grows. Very few of them agree with every single RP position, they just want to get the Lobby out of the way and pull the troops out of Iraq.
One reason it’s working is because of the software. They made the Meetup site almost like a dating site, where you can make friends with people in or near your zip code. They made it very easy to get together with new people to join the activism. You can’t beat technology, may as well use it.
In the event that RP actually won the election and got the Hamas treatment, his supporters are fully in support of the Right to Bear Arms. It would be interesting to see what followed.
If anti-war protesters want to continue to focus on the genocidal machinations of the global Zionist-imperialist military, industrial, financial, political, neoliberal, media complex, they have to be willing to meet with anyone any time to hear what ideas people have to address this, which is our primary responsibility - even if they are Republicans.
If you ever saw Ron Paul in an interview it cannot be said that he avoids discussing vital issues. He is someone who is willing to make a statement and stick by it even when no one agrees with him. I don’t “believe” in electoral politics but it’s not that much sweat off my brow to go and vote to end war.
I think the fact that NO pro-Israel group will let Ron Paul speak at their convention, not even peace Zionists, is evidence enough that he is the only person to put in charge as commander-in-chief. And, even if he loses, making all these contacts with local anti-interventionists is priceless.
If you want to expand the peace movement so that it overlaps with the freedom movement like ripples in a pond, you just have to respect the fact that people might agree with you, but for different reasons.
Ron Paul's Muslim Supporters Yahoo Group
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Updated January 18:
Via fellow blogger Joachim Martillo. Martillo dissects the Ron Paul phenomenon, then follows with a piece by his wife, Karin Friedemann. Both are Jews who converted to Islam.
Martillo makes some interesting points.
First of all, Paul obviously has serious xenophobic tendencies. It's preposterous to eliminate all student visas from "terrorist nations", whatever that means. It's hard enough to get any kind of a visa from the Muslim World these days anyway.
Martillo seems to be correct that Paul used to be a segregationist, and it is very disturbing that Paul is the favorite candidate of the White Racist Far Right. Paul has made some statements against Blacks that were regarded as racist in 1992. I have reviewed those remarks and do not find them to be racist, in general, though I am not certain that "95% of young Black males in Washington, DC are semi-criminal or criminal".
Of course free market libertarianism not only leads to monopolies, but it is also impossible. At least Marxism can be implemented. Libertarianism simply cannot be implemented, due to its internal contradictions.
While promoting laissez faire capitalism, it opposes imperialism. Yet all major capitalist nations must be imperialist, as all major transnational corporations must support imperialist foreign policies of various types. A major capitalist nation that renounces imperialism would be gobbled alive by the other capitalist states that quite reasonably refuse to renounce imperialism, their best weapon.
Foreign policy is but a battle for markets, and alliances between nations are no more possible than alliances between competing corporations. Wars for resources and markets are not only inevitable but are actually mandated by capitalism.
The sad realization that capitalism is not possible without imperialist appendages is one of the reasons I think that the whole system must be junked as fatally flawed, regardless of how poorly the competing models produce wealth and grow the economy.
How many proponents of capitalism realize this? How many know that capitalism mandates imperialism? How many know that a libertarian philosophy of non-aggression is as logically impossible in capitalism as it is in house full of cats? Capitalism leads inexorably to war with no exceptions.
The brutal analysis of capitalism above, which is utterly factual, by the way, is one reason that anyone interested in capitalism needs to understand Marx. Marx was wrong about a lot of things in his analysis of capitalism, but on the score above, he hits it right on target.
To be a capitalist nowadays is to be a deluded human being. The modern capitalist rejects the necessary linkage of capitalism and imperialism in the same way man rejects his mortality - spitting in the face of the obvious.
A return to the Gold Standard and getting rid of the Federal Reserve, which Paul advocates, will not do anything positive. We went off the standard and set up the reserve for some excellent reasons. Diving off Paul's radical rightwing deep end is like diving into a pool blindfolded. One that may have been drained.
Mr. Paul also hates gay marriage and Roe vs. Wade. That is, he wants to throw all this back to the states. While in the case of gay marriage that may be positive, it runs afoul the Truth in Credit aspects of the Constitution, whereby states must recognize things, like marriages, recognized in other states. So gay marriage can't be tossed back to the states without a Constitutional amendment, which is not forthcoming.
Tossing abortion back to the states would of course be a total disaster, but I guess that is what the reactionaries want.
Friedemann's column is naive at best. Muslims make alliance with White racists and fascists at their severe peril. Some of my friends, one of whom is still a Communist though he just implausibly converted to Islam, are also supporting Ron Paul for the same cynical and what-the-heck reasons that Friedemann espouses.
To these folks, the Israel-Palestine conflict is all, Israel needs to be screwed, and Paul is the man to do it. Forget it. The Israeli Lobby runs this damned country, and opposition to it is no more than ~15% of the population. Paul doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of getting in. How a Communist could vote for any reactionary is beyond me, but converting to Islam does funny things to your brain.
If you hate Israel (or even Jews) more than anything else in the US, go ahead and waste a vote on Ron Paul, a man who cannot but lose anyway. Personally, my votes are guided by progressive radar, and you can't pay me enough to vote for any reactionary, and this is clearly what Mr. Paul is.
I mean, come on, look at Ron Paul's MySpace page. He proudly states that he has a 100% rating from the John Birch Society! A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for the Birchers. Those of you who are ok with Birchers will find that cheering, but why would anyone even remotely liberal, Centrist, not to mention progressive, throw their vote away in the chilling direction of, of all things, the John Birch Society?
I have to admit some reservations about Ron Paul.
This video evinces xenophobic tendencies.The promise to eliminate student visas from terrorist nations is the sort of sloganeering that I expect from Neocons. In other contexts, Paul has rejected the concept of a terrorist nation and has shown good understanding of the hatred and blowback that US foreign policy has created over the last 60 years.
Paul supports free market libertarian capitalism even though mathematical analysis can demonstrate that such economic systems lead to monopoly dominance and exploitation. Some of his supporters seem to argue from the standpoint that the power of big business is okay while the power of government is not. The belief is at best naive.
I doubt that a return to the gold standard and the elimination of the Federal Reserve will bring economic salvation.
I suspect Ron Paul was a segregationist in the 60s, but such was the nature of southern US culture back then, and he has probably changed. His intention to remove US troops from Iraq as quickly as possible is as pro-minority as it gets because of the disproportionately large representation of African and Hispanic Americans in the military.
I am less concerned about Roe vs. Wade and gay marriage than most of the progressive Boston Cambridge crowd, but making abortion and marriage matters of state legislation -- as Paul wishes -- probably means that freedom of choice and gay marriage might survive in various states in the USA while any attempt at national legislation or constitution change in these areas could easily backfire.
At this point, I would probably support a candidate that opposed women's suffrage and supported a new prohibition as long as he would end the Iraq occupation and work for the repeal of the Patriot Act. On these questions Ron Paul is the only game in town.
November 18, 2007
Muslims discover Ron Paul
by Karin Friedemann
After the Republican debate on Tuesday evening in Dearborn, Mich., a reporter from the Arab-American News asked Ron Paul what he thought of the term “Islamic fascism.”
“It’s a false term to make people think we’re fighting Hitler,” Paul responded. “It’s war propaganda designed to generate fear so that the war has to be spread.”
The call has gone out to all the Muslim Americans to hurry up and register to vote Republican so that they can vote in the Republican Primary to support Ron Paul, the anti-interventionist, non-isolationist candidate for President of the United States. Muslims are opening their wallets and joining teaparty07.com as well.
An anonymous Ron Paul supporter posted the following message on the internet:
Muslims and Americans have an unique window of opportunity for the 2008 election. There is a candidate running as a Republican that would work to completely cut off the funding to Israel, remove ALL US troops from Arab lands, and repeal the Patriot Act. He’s a Republican with Libertarian views named Ron Paul. Ron Paul’s policies ranging from monetary to foreign are top notch.Ron Paul stood up in Congress in 2006 and opposed a resolution that sided with Israel in the Lebanon-Israel conflict. He stated the following.
Till now Muslims and Americans have not had an American Presidential candidate that really suited their best interests. This election is unique in that we have a man running as a Republican that speaks the truth…We know the current policies in the Middle East are failing, not only making it less safe in the world but hurting and killing innocent Muslims, which our media callously calls collateral damage.
It is our duty as Muslims to follow the truth regardless of how futile it may seem. Ron Paul is the only candidate that does not seem to be swayed by the influential lobbies that the other candidates are catering to.
Ron Paul:
Mr. Speaker, I follow a policy in foreign affairs called non-interventionism. I do not believe we are making the United States more secure when we involve ourselves in conflicts overseas. The Constitution really doesn’t authorize us to be the policemen of the world, much less to favor one side over another in foreign conflicts.Ron Paul has also sponsored a bill to overturn the Patriot Act. He is one of the few members of Congress from either of the major houses that is speaking rationally about these issues. How can we get everyone, and I mean everyone, to join the Ron Paul Republican voter sign-up campaign?
It is very clear, reading this resolution objectively, that all the terrorists are on one side and all the victims and the innocents are on the other side. I find this unfair, particularly considering the significantly higher number of civilian casualties among Lebanese civilians. I would rather advocate neutrality rather than picking sides, which is what this resolution does.
There is general frustration with politicians these days, and the unwillingness to believe that supporting a particular candidate will make a difference.
But whether Ron Paul wins or loses, Ron Paul's Meetup site is a great way to meet your neighbors who are against the war and organize the community on a grassroots level. If something like Katrina ever happened to us, knowing our neighbors could mean the difference between life and death to our families.
The common thread I’ve been reading lately about leftists and Jews is that they are having trouble getting more than a dozen people to come to their stuff (whether anti-Zionist or Zionist). The anti-Israel movement is not moving forward, because “protest Zionist imperialism” is just not a catchy slogan.
By contrast, there are over 400 RP activists against war taxes in Boston alone. Every day the list of passionate anti-war activists grows. Very few of them agree with every single RP position, they just want to get the Lobby out of the way and pull the troops out of Iraq.
One reason it’s working is because of the software. They made the Meetup site almost like a dating site, where you can make friends with people in or near your zip code. They made it very easy to get together with new people to join the activism. You can’t beat technology, may as well use it.
In the event that RP actually won the election and got the Hamas treatment, his supporters are fully in support of the Right to Bear Arms. It would be interesting to see what followed.
If anti-war protesters want to continue to focus on the genocidal machinations of the global Zionist-imperialist military, industrial, financial, political, neoliberal, media complex, they have to be willing to meet with anyone any time to hear what ideas people have to address this, which is our primary responsibility - even if they are Republicans.
If you ever saw Ron Paul in an interview it cannot be said that he avoids discussing vital issues. He is someone who is willing to make a statement and stick by it even when no one agrees with him. I don’t “believe” in electoral politics but it’s not that much sweat off my brow to go and vote to end war.
I think the fact that NO pro-Israel group will let Ron Paul speak at their convention, not even peace Zionists, is evidence enough that he is the only person to put in charge as commander-in-chief. And, even if he loses, making all these contacts with local anti-interventionists is priceless.
If you want to expand the peace movement so that it overlaps with the freedom movement like ripples in a pond, you just have to respect the fact that people might agree with you, but for different reasons.
Ron Paul's Muslim Supporters Yahoo Group
Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
