wormhole’s posterous

The Consequences are Tragic
 
There is no monopoly on extremism. The wing-nuts are both left and the
right. Many of us have been saying for years (I've been saying it for over
40 years) that differences between parties and the wing-nuts on both the
left and the right are so miniscule to be barely noticeable.
 
Politics and Political campaigns are a scam. Voting is invariably
a vote AGAINST someone, for a personality or an amorphous idea, i.e.
"change and hope."
 
Politics is public relations and benefits accrue to the over-lords; the
wealthy and the privileged class. It is a con game and apparently it
works.
 
Hank Roth
 
----------------
 
The Bloodthirsty Left, Extreme Rhetoric, and Murder
 
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | June 15, 2009
 
The Wright comments undercut the left-wing campaign to depict Von Brunn as
a right-winger and blame conservatives for inspiring him.
 
James Von Brunn, who believed that "Obama does what his Jew owners tell
him to do," attacked the Holocaust Museum and killed a guard on the same
day it was being reported on a national basis that Obama's former pastor
Jeremiah Wright had said that "Them Jews ain't going to let him [Obama]
talk to me." It sounded as if they were reading from the same tract.
 
The Wright comments undercut the left-wing campaign to depict Von Brunn as
a right-winger and blame conservatives for inspiring him. It seems like
Von Brunn's anti-Semitic views are shared by some on the political left,
even those backing and very close to Obama himself.
 
Wright had actually made the statement one day earlier, on June 10, to
David Squires of the Daily Press of Newport News, Virginia. Wright also
said the "Jewish vote" and the "AIPAC vote," referring to the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee, are "controlling" him, and that Obama was
in danger of becoming a "puppet."
 
If Von Brunn's anti-Semitism is shared by Jeremiah Wright, a left-winger
who was Obama's pastor for 20 years, then anti-Semitism is not a
right-wing phenomenon. That is why the attempts by various "progressives"
to blame the Holocaust Museum murder on the right-wing are political
nonsense and flat-out dishonest.
 
As veteran investigator Herbert Romerstein points out, anti-Semitism is a
condition that affects the left as well. In fact, he points out that "Some
Weather Underground activists were born into Jewish families, but they
were as anti-Semitic as their gentile born colleagues." Their
anti-Semitism seems to have been an outgrowth of their anti-Americanism.
They despise Israel because it is an ally of the United States.
 
This is critical because Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and
Bernardine Dohrn were also political associates and backers of Barack
Obama. The wall outside Ayers' university office depicts Israel as an
imperialist lackey of the U.S., as an "American-made missile" falls on
"Palestinian youth."
 
However, Joan Walsh of the far-left Salon.com has reportedly been on MSNBC
trying to blame "extreme right-wing rhetoric" for the murder at the
Holocaust Museum. She decries this "ugly rhetoric." This claim reminded me
of something that one of her staffers had written personally to me several
weeks ago.
 
I had asked Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com about his acceptance of an "Izzy"
award named after communist and Soviet agent-of-influence I.F. Stone, and
what he would say of the article in Commentary magazine about new evidence
linking Stone to Soviet intelligence.
 
Part of Greenwald's response was an attack on Commentary. He said, "The
fact that Stone is being smeared by the likes of the consummately
chicken-hawk, nepotistic, bloodthirsty Podhoretz family and the truly
deranged, sex-obsessed, conspiracy-monger Cliff Kincaid will make me place
my Izzy Award on an even more prominent shelf in my office."
 
The term "sex-obsessed" was apparently a reference to my opposition to
giving special rights to practitioners of the homosexual lifestyle. It
turns out that Greenwald is gay and has a "lover" in Brazil but I didn't
know that at the time. I hadn't thought about commenting on the
"bloodthirsty" comment until the attack on the Holocaust Museum and the
controversy over whether anti-Semitism is a right- or left-wing
phenomenon, and whether right-wingers are too "extreme."
 
Norman Podhoretz is the editor-at-large of Commentary and the author of
the book World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism. He was not
one of the authors of the piece on I.F. Stone in Commentary, and his
family had nothing to do with writing it. The authors were John Earl
Haynes, Harvey Klehr, and Alexander Vassiliev. Haynes and Klehr are
historians and Vassiliev is a Russian journalist who worked for the Soviet
KGB.
 
Members of AIM who had received our AIM Report on this matter have
been encouraged to contact Joan Walsh, editor-in-chief of Salon.com,
with postcards that read:
 
  Dear Ms. Walsh:
 
  One of your bloggers, Glenn Greenwald, reacted with vile
  insults when questioned about his acceptance of an award named after
  Soviet agent I.F. Stone. Why would a staffer for Salon.com accept
  such an award? If there is any doubt in your mind about Stone's
  service to the old Soviet Union, we suggest you consult the new book,
  Spies, by Haynes, Klehr, and Vassiliev. The section on Stone begins
  on page 126, in the chapter titled "The Journalist Spies." Does
  Greenwald also believe that Soviet spy Alger Hiss was innocent of the
  charges against him? Would he accept an Alger Hiss award? What would
  be your opinion on that?
 
  Note that Greenwald's natural impulse, in response to an article in
  Commentary attacking his icon, was to smear Podhoretz as
  "bloodthirsty." This speaks volumes about the "rhetoric" of the left.
 
  What makes this even more interesting is where the Greenwald comments
  ended up first. Before I even had a chance to comment, they surfaced
  on the blog of someone named Jane Hamsher, who advertises herself as
  "the author of the best-selling book Killer Instinct" and the producer
  of such films as "Natural Born Killers."
 
  Directed by Oliver Stone, "Natural Born Killers" is about two
  psychopathic killers who thrive on media attention. The two characters
  "travel across Route 666 conducting psychedelic mass-slaughters not
  for money, not for revenge, just for kicks," noted one review.
 
  I'll never forget Jeff Cohen, the founder of Fairness and Accuracy in
  Reporting (FAIR) -and the one who would subsequently give Greenwald
  his "Izzy"-once telling me that he rejected Stone's idea of holding a
  fundraiser for FAIR by showing the film "Natural Born Killers" because
  he found it too gruesome.
 
  Hamsher's Killer Instinct book is said to be the story of how she came
  to be involved in "Natural Born Killers." Defenders of the film said
  it was a commentary on media violence. But it inspired real life acts
  of violence. Indeed, a study, The Influence of Technology, Media, and
  Popular Culture on Criminal Behavior, found that the 1994 movie was
  linked to a dozen murders and the 1999 Columbine school massacre (the
  killers who killed 12 students and wounded another 24 were reportedly
  fans of the film). The academic study was by Jacqueline Helfgott, an
  associate professor at Seattle University who specializes in "the
  criminogenic effects of pop culture."
 
  A lawsuit was filed, Byers v. Edmondson, alleging that Sarah Edmondson
  and her boyfriend, Benjamin Darrus, went on a crime spree after
  watching the film. The suit claimed that the film producers were
  liable to the victims for distributing a film "which they knew or
  should have known would cause and inspire people" to acts of violence
  by "glorifying" such violence and "treating individuals who commit
  such violence as celebrities and heroes."
 
  The suit was filed on behalf of Patsy Byers, who was shot during an
  armed robbery of a convenience store where she worked in Ponchatoula,
  Louisiana. As a result of the shooting, Patsy Byers was rendered a
  paraplegic. Another victim was William Savage, who was murdered. The
  suit was dismissed when a court ruled that there was no evidence that
  the producers of the film had knowingly intended to incite violence.
 
  But in an affidavit, Edmondson admitted that "During the two weeks
  prior to the robbery and shooting of Mr. Savage on March 7, 1995 and
  the robbery and shooting of Mrs. Byers on March 8, 1995, Benjamin
  Darrus [and] I watched Natural Born Killers several time[s] in
  Oklahoma. We also ingested a quantity of LSD, a hallucinogen, during
  this time. Had we not seen the movie repeatedly we would not have
  taken a gun. It wouldn't have occurred to me. As well, had we not been
  under the influence of LSD; we never would have left Oklahoma. The
  movie did have a numbing influence concerning the effects of violence
  and a desire to experience it. The shooting did not take place as much
  from a need for money as from a desire to experience the power of
  violence."
 
  Despite her proud role in producing "Natural Born Killers," Hamsher
  wants us to believe she is against real-life violence and thinks that
  the right-wing should be blamed for the attack on the Holocaust
  Museum. She is recommending as a TV guest somebody named David Neiwert
  who has written a book on How Hate Talk Radicalized the Radical Right.
 
  "If any media folks need contact info for David, drop me a line," she
  said. BINGO. Just like that, he was on Anderson Cooper's CNN show on
  June 12.
 
  Neiwert runs his own website called "Crooks and Liars." This seems
  somehow appropriate.

 Here is an interesting resource in regards to taqiyya - deception by Muslims. Pretending to be a Christian can be an act of taqiyya.
 
"Falsehoods told to prevent the denigration of Islam, to protect oneself, or to promote the cause of Islam are sanctioned in the Qur'an and Sunna, including lying under oath in testimony before a court, deceiving by making distorted statements to the media such as the claim that Islam is a "religion of peace". A Muslim is even permitted to deny or denounce his faith if, in so doing, he protects or furthers the interests of Islam, so long as he remains faithful to Islam in his heart." (http://www.islam-watch.org)
 
"Like many Islamic practices, taqiyya was formed within the context of the culture of Arab tribalism, expansionary warfare, Bedouin raiding and inter-tribal conflict. Taqiyya has been used by Muslims since the 7th century to confuse, confound and divide `the enemy'." (Islam Watch)
 
I admit, I didn't expect that Jews would vote for Obama in such overwhelming numbers. It has been estimated by some pollsters that as many as 78% of the Jews voted for Barack Hussein Obama in the last election. Only the Blacks voted in greater numbers; almost 98%, for Obama.
 
I don't know how many Jews today support Israel, but I suspect about as many as concern themselves with their history and the Holocaust while most of the Jews alive today do not have much knowledge of their 2,000 year history in the Diaspora nor were most of them around during the Nazi Holocaust.
 
And, there is a third factor - overwhelmingly Jews support Democrats.
 
Marc Stanley (chairman of the National Jewish Democratic Council) in an Op-Ed published by JTA in November 2008, wrote: "In fact, since 1972, when exit polls were first instituted, the Republican nominee has averaged only 27 percent of the Jewish vote. In recent elections, the Republican nominee has received even less, with Jewish support at 22 percent for Bush in 2004 and 19 percent in 2000, and 16 percent for Bob Dole in 1996. In 2006, the Jewish support of Democratic congressional candidates reached 87 percent."
 
Even Jews like Dershowitz, who fancies himself a Centrist Democrat but has written mediocre books and articles supporting Israel (though considered right wing by extreme left wing and anti-Zionist Jews, i.e. Finklestein, Chomsky et al) - is opposed to Israeli policies which have been so important to their survival, a halt to natural expansion of the "so-called" settlements and Israel's hawkish governments, which would also include the Labor wing with regard to military and security decisions.
 
Many Jews I have talked to doubt the accuracy of the 78% polling estimate. I doubt the accuracy of the election. The caucuses were rigged. There is little doubt that if the truth about Obama was ever disclosed by a media willing (and able) to report the truth about Obama he may not have won the election at all. I don't need to go into all the reasons for my views about this here; I have done so before (see TheCrypt at http://inyourface.info/crypt/).
 
The choice should have been to vote for the hero, not the zero. Obama's record is capricious and disgraceful; his friends antisemitic and anti-Israel - and Barack Hussein Obama is now on the job in training. OJT doesn't cut it in this job - and his words are an affront to Jews and a betrayal of the American partnership with the only democracy in the Middle East, Israel.
 
For older American Jews it just still about Israel, but for most of them who are younger Jews it was not about Israel.
 
In Commentary ( http://www.commentarymagazine.com ), "Why Jews Are Voting Obama," Shmuel Rosner - 10.22.2008 wrote:
 
"Commentators have suggested that Jews' concern for Israel may well serve to diminish their enthusiasm for the Democratic candidate. Indeed, Jews do care about the Israel-Palestine conflict more than other Americans. Yet, with that said, the Israel issue ranked 8th out of 15 issues in importance as a presidential election consideration for Jewish respondents. Aside from the economy (a prime issue of concern for the vast majority of respondents), ahead of Israel on Jewish voters' minds were such matters as health care, gas prices and energy, taxes, and education. Ranking just below Israel in importance for Jewish respondents were appointments to the Supreme Court and the environment. In fact, when asked to name their top three issues, just 15% of Jewish respondents chose Israel as one of the three, and these were heavily Orthodox Jews."
 
He continues, "While their political views tending in the liberal direction help explain their support for Obama, and their concern for Israel may actually pull them in the other direction, political views alone cannot explain their high levels of Democratic vote intention. Neither can the major socio-demographic variables. Rather, their vote intentions are a product of their political identities - their long-standing association with the liberal camp and the Democratic Party."
 
Obviously many Jews have not been thinking about the implications of their vote for Obama. They assimilate and become too comfortable. No matter that antisemitism is on the increase and their vote for Obama was a betrayal of Israel just as Obama is demonstrating his incompetence as president and disregard for Israeli security. He placates and appeases enemies and imposing his will on Israel to give up land for peace is a prescription for the destruction of the State of the Jews, not their survival.
 
There may have been other reasons for Jews to vote for a Democrat, but Obama wasn't one of them. Obama is a pretender to the job. But lest we forget, George W. Bush was not so terrific for Israel either. He was the first president to declare a two state solution and to call on Israel to stop settlement activity. It is not certain that any candidate would be good for the Jews, but Obama would be far worse; just look at who he has associated with, Jew-haters from Ayers, Rev Wright, General Merrill McPeak, Rashid Khalidi and dozens of others. You can know a lot about a person by the company he keeps. Having Jewish advisers doesn't make up for (nor cancel out) antisemitic mentors, friends and supporters. He didn't throw them under the bus; he just doesn't mention them now. It will be the Jews he throws under the bus. His style might be compelling but his actions are ignorant of Israel's existential risks and a substantial disadvantage to Israel's ability to survive.
 
Joseph Farah in "Between the Line" at WorldNet Daily says, "It's the 1930s all over again. This time, it's the enlightened liberal voices of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama who are telling Jews where they can live, how they can live and how far they must bend if they want to live at all."
 
He is right; it is the 30s all over again.......
 
Farah also says,
 
"Think about what I am saying: It is the official policy of the Palestinian Authority that all Jews must get off the land! Why is the United States supporting the creation of a new, racist, anti-Semitic hate state? Why is the civilized world viewing this as a prescription for peace in the region? Why is this considered an acceptable idea?"
 
Joseph Farah writes:
"I hope my Jewish friends remember this well. Many of them voted for Barack Obama. Many of them voted for Hillary Clinton. These are not your friends. These are the same kinds of people who turned away ships of Jewish refugees from Germany in the 1940s. These are the same kinds of people who appeased Adolf Hitler at Munich. These are the same kinds of people who made the reformation of the modern state of Israel so difficult."
 
He continues, "No more ethnic cleansing. No more official anti-Semitism accepted. No more Jew-bashing. No more telling Jews where they can live, how they can - and if they can live."
 
Obama refuses to disclose his birth certificate (which is not a certificate of live birth - not the forged document which appeared on his website). Where are his college records and his Illinois Senate records. What do you think Obama is hiding? It seems clear to me.
 
His grandmother said she was present at his birth in Kenya. Why is she now guarded and not being allowed to talk to reporters or investigators? Why has Barack Hussein Obama spent over a million dollars for just to conceal the truth about his part? How could he travel to Indonesia in 1981 if he only had an American passport - when it was impossible to travel in Indonesia on an American passport?
 
Barack Hussein Obama refuses to release the following documents:
 
  1. Occidental College records
  2. Columbia College records
  3. Columbia Thesis
  4. Harvard College records
  5. Selective Service Registration
  6. Medical records
  7. Illinois State Senate schedule
  8. Your Illinois State Senate records
  9. Law practice client list
  10. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate
  11. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth
  12. Record of baptism -- what else is he hiding? --
 
(also see excellent source and open discussion at:  http://opengov.ideascale.com/ ).
 
Some people call Andy Martin (author of the book, Obama: the Man Behind The Mask, a nutcase. Some agree with that assessment; others say it is because he asks tough questions. Andy Martin at ContrarianCommentary.Com is saying that Barack Obama "owes me an apology." Does he? Andy writes, (June 3, 2009) - "Almost five years ago I wrote the first stories focusing attention on Barack Obama's family roots. I pointed out that Obama's father and grandfather were Muslims. Under traditional Islamic law, Obama himself was therefore considered a Muslim." [ibid]
 
See:  www.pr-inside.com
 
"Islam is the polar opposite of Judaism. Under Judaism, religion descends through the mother. Under Islam, the father transmits religion. Obama's thugs responded with a firestorm of smears and attacks on me.
[ibid]
 
(See  www.thenation.com )
 
"Obama called my stories about his religious "heritage" smears, and said, "Who, my father? Didn't know him. He was an agnostic." But as Tapper at ABC news points out, Obama has now become "President Muslim," bragging about his Muslim dad:" [ibid]
 
I can't say with certitude that Obama is a Muslim, even if he appears to be. I can't say positively that he intends to destroy America from the inside even if it appears that way and what he is doing to American is intentionally orchestrated by him and others to tear this country down but it most certainly appears that way. You and I will have to wait and see and we MUST continue to challenge his destructive positions and demand also that he establish his bone fides, that he is who he says he is even though he appears not to be; he is a pretender who has managed to obscure truth. I think we do need hope and change, - "hope" we can survive Barack Hussein Obama and "change" to be safe through strength, a vanguard for democracy and freedom. I also "hope" it isn't too late.
 
Hank Roth
 
http://inyourface.info
 
 Permalink: http://inyourface.info/ArT/Chi/GeT.shtml