← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Rudel
Thread ID: 10138 | Posts: 17 | Started: 2003-09-30
2003-09-30 07:55 | User Profile
Is it just me, or is Bush being quietly pushed aside by his Jewish kingmakers? Until 3-4 weeks ago, everything seemed to indicate that Bush would retain his position as a neocon facade for another 4 years. There was soviet-like unanimity in the Democrat and Republican wings of the US one party system on the usefulness, moral uprightness and the conduct of the war. Then something happened - it was as if the Democrats (and some Republicans too) received the green light to start atacking Bush on Iraq and the deconstruction started. Even Ed Kennedy joined the fry. The latest attack is this one year old CIA leak ( [url]http://www.msnbc.com/news/973047.asp?0cv=CA01[/url] ) that is conveniently being brought up now by the media. I guess we will now be fed a steady diet of stories like this from now to November 2004. What happened? It seems that his role as a weak-minded brain-dead receptacle of his neocon consiglieri's ideas has exhausted its relevance - the US military is in Iraq en force to stay and serve the interests of Israel - mission accomplished. Now he has become much more useful as a perfect scapegoat for everything that is going wrong in Iraq, together with Rumy, some CIA people ('weak intelligence'), etc. The real culprits (the Jewish neocons and their collaborators) will probably come out of this affair pretty much unscathed - I could even predict some of them venting their 'frustrations' in NYT I-told-you-so interviews. One thing worth noticing is that the attacks on Bush are centered either around secondary issues (the State of the Union Address, the reconstruction planning, 'poor intelligence') or around simptoms (war costs etc.), not causes. Nobody is talking about about the real reasons for war or the possibility of bringing the troops home as fast as possible. Israel, of course, is never even mentioned. This means that his successor will continue where Bush left, everything will be the same - no drastical moves, but the new guy will probably be more articulate, telegenic and will not have the political liability of having started the war in the first place. General Clark seems the perfect candidate.
2003-09-30 10:08 | User Profile
Kerry, Lieberman, Clark are Jewish warmongers. Kucinich is kosherwhipped and may be the worst of the lot.
WhoEVER you vote for in 2004 is a guarantor of continued Zionist dominance. With Bush being more and more of a buffoonish liability to his pork-fearing puppeteers with every passing day; the field seeded with Jews; and the fix most assuredly IN.....why not abandon the Drooling Dauphin?
After all, as we were all warned way back when, once we're deep in TWAT (The War Against Terror), there's no such thing as just pulling out. So the time is perfect for the Jews to do the one trick they're really, really good at - and betray their loyal dupe.
Can you say "Al D'Amato", boys and girls?
2003-09-30 19:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]After all, as we were all warned way back when, once we're deep in TWAT (The War Against Terror), there's no such thing as just pulling out. So the time is perfect for the Jews to do the one trick they're really, really good at - and betray their loyal dupe.
Can you say "Al D'Amato", boys and girls?[/QUOTE]I will never forget the look on Al D'Amato's face when he finally realized the Jews of New York betrayed him and voted for one of their landsmen, Chuckie Smiles. He set back Amercan foreign relations for the sake of Israel and his loyal Jewish friends. Very, very few commented on the betrayal of Al. If he had any integrity he would have commited [I]seppuku[/I] and died a horrible death. As it was, he deserved to have been dragged to the Yidderbund and have the Hasidics while laughing and taunting him, drip snot all over his entire body, then kick him to death.
2003-09-30 20:59 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Kerry, Lieberman, Clark are Jewish warmongers. Kucinich is kosherwhipped and may be the worst of the lot.
WhoEVER you vote for in 2004 is a guarantor of continued Zionist dominance. With Bush being more and more of a buffoonish liability to his pork-fearing puppeteers with every passing day; the field seeded with Jews; and the fix most assuredly IN.....why not abandon the Drooling Dauphin?
After all, as we were all warned way back when, once we're deep in TWAT (The War Against Terror), there's no such thing as just pulling out. So the time is perfect for the Jews to do the one trick they're really, really good at - and betray their loyal dupe.
Can you say "Al D'Amato", boys and girls?[/QUOTE]
Indeed, the challengers are all as worthless as the incumbent if not worse, so I will not vote. I don't want to contribute to the legitimacy of this farce called 'democracy', whch is nothing else than a system of manipulated consent. The real power does not rest with the politicians - they are there for mere window dressing and depend heavily on the unelected media and financial potentates for their political survival. Since the advent of the TV as the most powerful mind control tool in history, a real leader such as Hitler could be never be elected. When the big crisis hits and people actually start thinking with their own heads and the so called 'voting rights' starts packing some punch, our Judeocratic elites will simply find a pretext and abolish it. Since I posted my thoughts, there have been some new developments in the CIA leak story. There are now calls for an independent council to investigate the affair. For example, our friend Chuck Shumer from New York, who didn't have anything against Bush during the 'hock and awe' campaign, commented: "[If true, the leak would constitute] one of the most dastardly, despicable things I have seen in my more than 20 years in Washington," (captain Renault: "I am shocked, shocked..."). The chorus has now being joined by Joseph Lieberman, Carl Levin etc. All in all, a nice little media chiffonade for the masses... As for Bush himself, he is a moron all right and I don't feel any simpaty for him, but I don't see him as a diabolical conspirator or as a despicable power-hungry opportunist with no scruples ala D'Amato - he's way too dim-witted and naive for these roles. I see him as a Forrest Gumpish character whose family connections, lack of qualities and zeitgeist made him traipse into the presidency. For example, I don't see him humiliating his family by publicly sporting his Jewish mistress to convince the tribe of his unshakable loyalty as Al D'Amato did.
2003-10-01 02:51 | User Profile
[QUOTE=edward gibbon]I will never forget the look on Al D'Amato's face when he finally realized the Jews of New York betrayed him and voted for one of their landsmen, Chuckie Smiles. [/QUOTE] It's amazing how many well-connected men like D'Amato can suffer this fate without making the effort to do what Ginsberg so deeply fears: consolidate their power at the expense of the Jews.
2003-10-01 12:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]After all, as we were all warned way back when, once we're deep in TWAT (The War Against Terror), there's no such thing as just pulling out. [/QUOTE]
Vagina dentata?
2003-10-01 13:09 | User Profile
Perfect. Clark is the one I fear the [B]most[/B]; a one-man Apocalypse waiting to happen.
2003-10-01 13:31 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Perfect. Clark is the one I fear the [B]most[/B]; a one-man Apocalypse waiting to happen.[/QUOTE]
Of what are you talking? Clack is an idiot. If he gets to powerful, the Clintons (also the ones who rule the D party) will tell their hounds to go for the throat. And he would be gone before one could say hypocrite. It is all about Hillary, getting the presidency; either in 2004 or 2008. In '08 she wont have to worry about an incombant R president, so that is when she is making her move. Untill then the Ds are just putting those 10 losers to be sacrifical lambs.
2003-10-01 17:23 | User Profile
And Hillary is the one I fear the [I]least.[/I]
Even if/when she demands blood for Tel Aviv. The phenomenon known as 'neoconservatism' is built squarely upon delegitimizing her (at least, on the surface: recall how many ZioPatriots blamed her and Bill for 9/11 and , on a slow news day, still do). Simply put, the FoxNews lemmingry has been programmed to feel no compunction about resisting and even combatting the Federal Govt so long as it's left in the care of a "Clintoon". Yet they are simultaneously hardwired to remove their hat and hold hand on heart in the presence of that same Fed when manned by a mestizo-hugging Republican or military representative of ZOG's New World Order. It won't take very much spin to turn Clark's near-brush with gotterdamerung re the arriving Russian forces in Kosovo into "standing tall" and "bringing it on". Role, letz.
Should Hillary ascend to power and take the [B]very same [/B] marching orders from the [B]very same [/B] Podhoretzim, not even the massed agitprop of all the Limbaughs and O'Reillys will be sufficient to countermand the existing directives they've drilled into Joe Sixpack re "Hitlery".
A Hillary administration guarantees dissension and division in America - and open emnity towards an all-powerful Federal branch - at precisely the moment in which Israel will require glazed-eye unaninimity in the bovocracy to proceed with the current Pax Judaica.
Bring it on, indeed.
2003-10-02 23:06 | User Profile
To ALL: where does this thing about Wesley Clark being a Jew come from? And if he is, so what? Do you think that EVERY Jew thinks alike? Does it not occur to any of you that people of All races are individuals and think differently?
I sincerely would like to know the sources for the Clark charges...what is the main source for this?
Thanks.
2003-10-04 17:15 | User Profile
[QUOTE=arjurg]To ALL: where does this thing about Wesley Clark being a Jew come from? And if he is, so what? Do you think that EVERY Jew thinks alike? Does it not occur to any of you that people of All races are individuals and think differently?
I sincerely would like to know the sources for the Clark charges...what is the main source for this?
Thanks.[/QUOTE] Clark has stated that he is the oldest son of the oldest son... for at least five generations, and that they were all rabbis. Run a search on google. He identifies strongly with the Jewish community -- by his own admission.
As for the "so what?" -- being a Jew means working to advance the agenda of the Jewish community. A Jew can disagree with other members of the Jewish community regarding how best to achieve the group's goals, but the primary goal is always the same (even if there are different views on how to achieve it): the well-being of the Jewish group. That's what it means to be a Jew. And, no, it does not occur to me that people of all races are individuals ... because that IS NOT TRUE. Most Jews are not individuals in any meaningful sense of the word, and they are certainly not "individuals" as that term is used in Western political philosophy. Yes, whites are individuals, and (arguably) blacks are even more individualistic, but you need to be careful to avoid engaging in "egomorphism" -- the assumption that everyone is the same as you.
Even if you're not convinced of the above (and I'm sure you're not), just look at Clark's views, and you will see that he supports the Jewish agenda across the board: on multiculturalism ("There is no place for mono-ethnic states in Europe"), separation of church and state, abortion, etc. It's all a matter of record.
2003-10-04 17:22 | User Profile
[QUOTE=arjurg]To ALL: where does this thing about Wesley Clark being a Jew come from? And if he is, so what? Do you think that EVERY Jew thinks alike? Does it not occur to any of you that people of All races are individuals and think differently?
I sincerely would like to know the sources for the Clark charges...what is the main source for this?
Thanks.[/QUOTE] [url]http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:M75paY3HPOMJ:www.jewishtimes.com/News/3330.stm+clark+rabbis+five+%22jewish+times%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8[/url]
The article is no longer at the Jewish Times website, apparently, but it is cached by Google at the above link, and has been reprinted widely. The topic has been broached before, but this is the first time I have seen Clark's own comments on it.
2003-10-04 17:46 | User Profile
I think that the change of heart may have started by this Plame flap.
Jewish power isn't monolithic, as many of us here tend to assume.
The gentiles in the FBI, NSA, DIA and CIA must know the score.
Gentile FBI agents know damned well that MOSSAD was behind the 9-11 attacks, and that the Neo-Con Cabal quashed their own field reports that could have easily foiled the plot. This is a matter of public record, of course, not that our media stay on that particular story. But everybody who cares knows that this is the case.
Gentile CIA agents know damned well that the Neo-Con Cabal perverted and even falsified their intelligence reports (the Niger yellow cake thing was exposed as a "crude forgery" according to the BBC), and then they get blamed for leading the President and the nation astray.
Gentile diplomats in the State Department know damned well that they could make peace with the affable Arabs and avoid a clash of civilizations if they didn't have to do Israel's bidding all the time at the behest of the Neo-Con Cabal.
Gentile Generals in the Pentagon know damned well that the Neo-Con Cabal got them into a no-win quagmire in Iraq that's preventing them from defending the nation against its real enemies and killing several soldiers every week, leaving them holding the bag.
Gentile Congressmen and Senators and Cororate CEO's and bureaucrats know damned well that the Neo-Con Cabal is ruining the economy with aid to Israel and pursuing this War on Israel's enemies.
There's a lot of seething anger out there.
Everybody's too scared of them to say ITZ now, but many, many deeply pissed-off gentiles would dearly love to do just that.
I think that we're catching a glimpse of that anger. The gentiles in the CIA are saying "enough, you don't get to out our agents and get them killed just for your short term political gain."
Walter
2003-10-05 15:40 | User Profile
Thanks for the morale-booster, Walter. That all makes sense.
2003-10-05 19:12 | User Profile
mwdallas: I did the Google search and came up with the information that Wesley Clark is, indeed, descended from Jews...his grandfather, Jacob Nemerovsky, escaped from the pogroms of Czarist Russia in about 1894-95. He remembers his father, Benjamin Kanne, a lawyer who served in Chicago's Corporation Counsel, as "a happy man who loved life."
When he was in his 20s Clark learned that he descends from "generations of rabbis" from Minsk.
He credits his Jewish background with raising his consciousness to the civil rights movement. He also cited his Jewish background in relation to his feeling "sick" that in 1994 the "U.S. didn't encourage the UN to stop the genocide" in Rwanda. "When you can make a difference, you should" he said.
Well, I'm not a Jew and I think much the same as Wesley Clark, who, by the way, was raised a Baptist by his mother after his father died (Wesley was 4 at the time).
It is your assertion, it seems, that All Jews Think Alike. I don't agree.
2003-10-07 05:21 | User Profile
[QUOTE]It is your assertion, it seems, that All Jews Think Alike. I don't agree. [/QUOTE]No, that is not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that all Jews have the same goal: the success of the Jewish group. It's a tautology -- that's what it means to be a Jew.
You keep asking questions, but you ignore the answers.
2003-10-10 22:00 | User Profile
The CIA undercover leaking is an extortion.
It's not a big deal. There is no danger for the exposed CIA undercover officer. But when they make it a big topic, there is something in it.
I think it maybe an extortion on Bush administration. For the security of Israel, The insider group wants more war in Mid-east. Iran is their next target because Iran has the ability to develop nuclear weapon. Bush Sr. and Kissinger visited Russia on Sept. 10. Then Putin came to US meeting Bush. Bush request Russia dropping out its nuclear reactor aiding project but was refused. Or a secret deal to take Iran was not succeeded with Russia? CIA case out broke right away after that.
Israel poised to attack Syria and Iran, or better, let US start another war for Israel. Bush, embarrased by failure to find WMD in Iraq and downward economy in domestic, unwill to start another war in Mid-east. That's why he is extorted. Israel's recent attack on Syria might be an erge.