“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Monday, June 29, 2015

The Saudi Cables: Is There Any Limit To US Dirty Dealing in The Middle East?

Published 29 June 2015 (8 hours 42 minutes ago)

Whistleblower Julian Assange implicated the United States – along with the Saudi Arabian government – in a plot to overthrow the Syrian government. 

Saudi Arabia, the United States, France, and Britain were involved in a secret 2012 deal to overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said Sunday. 

RELATED: Saudi Cables: We Have Ten Times More, Says Wikileaks ​“Saudi has been one of the dogs of the United States in the Middle East on a leash, and you think the man is walking a dog, but sometimes, if it is a big dog, the dog starts pulling a man," Assange told Russia 1 TV. 

Last week, Assange’s whistleblowing website WikiLeaks released a batch of more than 60,000 of what it said were classified Saudi diplomatic cables. ​The leak aimed to prove that Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey had a secret deal to topple Syria’s President Bashar Assad as far back as 2012. Among the revelations contained in the files, believed to have been leaked by a group which calls itself the Yemen Cyber Army, are details about the country’s focus on its strategic rival, Iran, and the uprising in Egypt. The leaked files also contain details about Saudi Arabia’s allies and clients in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen and other countries in the Middle East.

This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address: If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article.


  1. Who are these thugs in Washington to drag a country of 315 million into every sewer in the M.E.?

    Saudi Arabia maintained high-level contacts with one of the US' most dangerous opponents in Afghanistan throughout the American-led war in the country, Saeed Shah reports for The Wall Street Journal citing leaked Saudi diplomatic cables.

    The diplomatic cables, which have been published by WikiLeaks but have not been independently verified, purportedly show high-level contact between Saudi Arabia's ambassador to Pakistan and Nasiruddin Haqqani, the chief fundraiser for the Haqqani Network jihadist, group in 2012.

    "A document dated Feb. 15, 2012, and signed by the then-Saudi envoy to Islamabad, Amb. Abdul Aziz Ibrahim Saleh Al Ghadeer, says the diplomat met with Nasiruddin Haqqani, who asked the ambassador to convey to the Saudi king his father’s wish to be treated in a Saudi hospital," the WSJ notes. "The cable also mentions Jalaluddin Haqqani’s Saudi passport."

    An official from Saudi Arabia's foreign minister agreed that Haqqani should receive care in a Saudi hospital, although it is unclear if the hospital visit ever occurred.

    Both Jalaluddin and Nasiruddin Haqqani were on a UN terror watch list at the time of the alleged communication with the Saudi diplomat. The list is intended to freeze all funding for designated individuals as well as stop any international travel, according to the WSJ.

    The Haqqani Network has been one of the most brutal and effective fighting forces in Afghanistan. The group is closely affiliated with both al Qaeda and the Taliban, although it maintains its own independent control structure.

    Saudi Arabia and Pakistan originally funded the network in the 1980s, when it was one of the numerous anti-Soviet forces combating the USSR's invasion of Afghanistan. The Haqqani Network continues to operate mainly out of Pakistan's lawless border region with Afghanistan and was responsible for some of the most sophisticated attacks against NATO forces in the country.

    The Haqqani Network is still a danger in the country. On June 22, the Haqqani Network carried out a suicide car bombing on Afghanistan's parliament while it was in session. The attack killed two and injured more than 30 others.

    Wikileaks released the first cache of Saudi diplomatic cables on June 19, although the organization claims that it will publish additional leaked documents in the near future. Although a handful of documents have been shown to be authentic, the veracity of the entire cache has yet to be determined. Some Middle East analysts believe that Wikileaks may have obtained the documents as the result of an Iranian hack.

    Read more:

  2. The political unrest in Syria has killed more than 230,000 people since 2011. The U.S. government and its allies have been aiding militant groups in Syria in its fight against government forces.

    WikiLeaks also released documents claiming Riyadh had contacts with one of the most dangerous rivals of the United States in Afghanistan. Saudi Arabia has been a U.S. ally for years, but Washington has expressed concerns over allegations that Saudi donors sponsor the Afghan insurgency as well as other militant groups in the region, the Wall Street Journal reported.


    Saudi pumping millions to promote Wahhabism in India

    The diplomatic documents released by WikiLeaks last week have revealed that Saudi Arabia is pumping in millions of rupees into India for opening of religious trusts and non-governmental organisations.

    WikiLeaks have disclosed an undated document that contains a list of Indian institutions and societies that have applied for financial assistance from the Arab nation.

    The document suggests that the government of Saudi Arabia itself pledged donations to nine such institutions located across different states, including Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Kerala and Maharashtra.

    Saudi Arabia pledged 4.5 million Saudi Riyal (SR) to different institutions in Kerala only.

    Similarly, In Uttar Pradesh, 75,000 SR were pledged to two different societies for establishing a Madrasa building and a vocational centre for girls.

    The documents also reveal that the Secretariat General of the Muslim World League in Mecca, a controversial organisation with alleged links to terror funding, had requested Saudi Arabia to establish the organisation’s Salafi or Wahhabi centres in India.

    Wikileaks that has published more than 60000 leaked cables from Saudi Arabia, also revealed that the country was concerned about Iran’s “growing influence” and outreach to the Shia community in India.

    It is worth a mention that, India's Shia population is the world's second-largest after Iran. Unlike the Arab countries, differences between Shias and Sunnis in India are doctrinal, and mainly in areas such as ritual law, theology and religious organisation.

    “To counter the increasing Shia influence, a certain section in the Saudi establishment has been propagating Wahhabism in India," says an MHA official in an interview to Sunday Guardian.

    In the last three-four years there has been a steady rise in Wahhabi preachers coming to India to conduct seminars.

    "There is no doubt that Wahhabism is getting stronger in the country, especially in Kerala, mainly because of the radicalisation of a large number of local youth who are going to Saudi Arabia in search of employment. Kerala has been showing signs of sharp radicalisation. This was the only state where posters mourning the death of Osama Bin Laden had come up and a prayer for Ajmal Kasab was also held after he was hanged," warned the official.

    Donations from Saudi are pouring in and playing a key role in this process, which is being repeated across other parts of the country as well.

  4. The blowback is spreading:

    The Islamic State’s terror attacks on June 26 in Tunisia, France and Kuwait have made the Mediterranean the epicenter of violent Islamic radicalism. -

    See more at:

  5. A 12-Step Program to Cure America of Its War Addiction

    It’s time to admit we have a problem.

    War on drugs. War on poverty. War in Afghanistan. War in Iraq. War on terror. The biggest mistake in American policy, foreign and domestic, is looking at everything as war. When a war mentality takes over, it chooses the weapons and tactics for you. It limits the terms of debate before you even begin. It answers questions before they’re even asked.

    When you define something as war, it dictates the use of the military (or militarized police forces, prisons, and other forms of coercion) as the primary instruments of policy. Violence becomes the means of decision, total victory the goal. Anyone who suggests otherwise is labeled a dreamer, an appeaser, or even a traitor.

    War, in short, is the great simplifier -- and it may even work when you’re fighting existential military threats (as in World War II). But it doesn’t work when you define every problem as an existential one and then make war on complex societal problems (crime, poverty, drugs) or ideas and religious beliefs (radical Islam).

    America’s Omnipresent War Ethos

    Consider the Afghan War -- not the one in the 1980s when Washington funneled money and arms to the fundamentalist Mujahideen to inflict on the Soviet Union a Vietnam-style quagmire, but the more recent phase that began soon after 9/11. Keep in mind that what launched it were those attacks by 19 hijackers (15 of whom were Saudi nationals) representing a modest-sized organization lacking the slightest resemblance to a nation, state, or government. There was as well, of course, the fundamentalist Taliban movement that then controlled much of Afghanistan. It had emerged from the rubble of our previous war there and had provided support and sanctuary, though somewhat grudgingly, to Osama bin Laden.

    With images of those collapsing towers in New York burned into America’s collective consciousness, the idea that the U.S. might respond with an international “policing” action aimed at taking criminals off the global streets was instantly banished from discussion. What arose in the minds of the Bush administration’s top officials instead was vengeance via a full-scale, global, and generational “war on terror.” Its thoroughly militarized goal was not just to eliminate al-Qaeda but any terror outfits anywhere on Earth, even as the U.S. embarked on a full-fledged experiment in violent nation building in Afghanistan. More than 13 dismal years later, that Afghan War-cum-experiment is ongoing at staggering expense and with the most disappointing of results.


    By William Astore / Tom Dispatch June 28, 2015

    1. {...}

      While the mindset of global war was gaining traction, the Bush administration launched its invasion of Iraq. The most technologically advanced military on Earth, one that the president termed “the greatest force for human liberation the world has ever known,” was set loose to bring “democracy” and a Pax Americana to the Middle East. Washington had, of course, been in conflict with Iraq since Operation Desert Storm in 1990-1991, but what began as the equivalent of a military coup (aka a “decapitation” operation) by an outside power, an attempt to overthrow Saddam Hussein and eliminate his armed forces and party, soon morphed into a prolonged occupation and another political and social experiment in violent nation-building. As with Afghanistan, the Iraq experiment with war is still ongoing at enormous expense and with even more disastrous results.

      Radical Islam has drawn strength from these American-led “wars.” Indeed, radical Islamists cite the intrusive and apparently permanent presence of American troops and bases in the Middle East and Central Asia as confirmation of their belief that U.S. forces are leading a crusade against them -- and by extension against Islam itself. (And in a revealing slip of the tongue, President Bush did indeed once call his war on terror a “crusade.”) Considered in these terms, such a war is by definition a losing effort because each “success” only strengthens the narrative of Washington’s enemies. There’s simply no way to win such a war except by stopping it. Yet that course of action is never on the proverbial “table” of options from which officials in Washington are said to choose their strategies. To do so, in the context of war thinking, would mean to admit defeat (even though true defeat arrived the very instant the problem was first defined as war).


    2. {...}

      Our leaders persist in such violent folly at least in part because they fear the admission of defeat above all else. After all, nothing is more pejorative in American politics or culture than to be labeled a loser in war, someone who “cuts and runs.”

      In the 1960s, despite his own serious misgivings about the ongoing conflict in Vietnam, President Lyndon B. Johnson set the gold standard in his determination not to be the first American president to lose a war, especially in a “damn little pissant country” like Vietnam. So he persisted -- and the conflict turned him into a loser anyway and destroyed his presidency.

      Even as he waged war, as historian George Herring has noted, LBJ did not want to be known as a “war president.” Two generations later, another Texan, George W. Bush, grasped the “war president” moniker with genuine enthusiasm. He, too, vowed he would win his war when things started to go sour. Staring down a growing insurgency in Iraq in the summer of 2003, Bush did not shy from the challenge. “Bring ‘em on,” he said in what was supposed to be a Clint Eastwood/Dirty Harry-style moment. Now, Washington is sending troops back into Iraq for the third time to engage an even more intractable insurgency, the Islamic State's radical version of Islam, a movement originally fed and bred partly in Camp Bucca, an American military prison in Iraq.

      And just to set the record straight, President Obama, too, accepted the preeminence of war in American policy in his 2009 Nobel Prize acceptance speech in Oslo. There, he offered a stirring defense of America’s role and record as “the world’s sole military superpower”:

      “Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: the United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest -- because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other peoples' children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.”

      It was a moment that defined the Obama presidency as being remarkably in tune with America’s already omnipresent war ethos. It was the very negation of “hope” and “change” and the beginning of Obama’s transition, via the CIA’s drone assassination program, into the role of assassin-in-chief.


    3. {...}

      Everything Is Jihad

      Recent American leaders have something in common with their extremist Islamic counterparts: all of them define everything, implicitly or explicitly, as a jihad, a crusade, a holy war. But the violent methods used in pursuit of various jihads, whether Islamic or secular, simply serve to perpetuate and often aggravate the struggle.

      Think of America’s numerous so-called wars and consider if there’s been any measurable progress made in any of them. Lyndon Johnson declared a “war on poverty” in 1964. Fifty-one years later, there are still startling numbers of desperately poor people and, in this century, the gap between the poorest many and richest few has widened to a chasm. (Since the days of President Ronald Reagan, in fact, one might speak of a war on the poor, not poverty.) Drugs? Forty-four years after President Richard Nixon proclaimed the war on drugs, there are still millions in jail, billions being spent, and drugs galore on the streets of American cities. Terror? Thirteen years and counting after that “war” was launched, terror groups, minor in numbers and reach in 2001, have proliferated wildly and there is now something like a “caliphate” -- once an Osama bin Laden fantasy -- in the Middle East: ISIS in power in parts of Iraq and Syria, al-Qaeda on the rise in Yemen, Libya destabilized and divvied up among ever more extreme outfits, innocents still dying in U.S. drone strikes. Afghanistan? The opium trade has rebounded big time, the Taliban is resurgent, and the region is being destabilized. Iraq? A cauldron of ethnic and religious rivalries and hatreds, with more U.S. weaponry on the way to fuel the killing, in a country that functionally no longer exists. The only certainty in most of these American “wars” is their violent continuation, even when their original missions lie in tatters.


    4. {...} The very methods the U.S. employs and the mentality its leaders adopt ensure their perpetuation. Why? Because drug addiction and abuse can’t be conquered by waging a war. Neither can poverty. Neither can terror. Neither can radical Islam be defeated through armed nation building. Indeed, radical Islam thrives on the very war conditions that Washington helps to create. By fighting in the now familiar fashion, you merely fan its flames and ensure its propagation.

      It’s the mindset that matters. In places like Iraq and Afghanistan, places that for most Americans exist only within a "war" matrix, the U.S. invades or attacks, gets stuck, throws resources at the problem indiscriminately, and "makes a desert and calls it 'peace'" (to quote the Roman historian Tacitus). After which our leaders act surprised as hell when the problem only grows.

      Sadly, the song remains monotonously the same in America: more wars, made worse by impatience for results driven by each new election cycle. It’s a formula in which the country is eternally fated to lose.

    5. Two Curious Features of America’s New Wars

      Historically, when a nation declares war, it does so to mobilize national will, as the U.S. clearly did in World War II. Accompanying our wars of recent decades, however, has been an urge not to mobilize the people, but demobilize them -- even as the "experts" are empowered to fight and taxpayer funds pour into the national security state and the military-industrial complex to keep the conflicts going.

      Recent wars, whether on drugs or in the Greater Middle East, are never presented as a challenge we the people can address and solve together, but as something only those who allegedly possess the expertise and credentials -- and the weapons -- can figure out or fight. George W. Bush summed up this mindset in classic fashion after 9/11 when he urged Americans to go shopping and visit Disney World and leave the fighting to the pros. War, in short, has become yet another form of social control. Have a gun or a badge of some sort and you can speak forcefully and be listened to; otherwise, you have no say.

      In addition, what makes America’s new wars unique to our moment is that they never have a discernible endpoint. For what constitutes “victory” over drugs or terror? Once started, these wars by definition are hard to stop.

      Cynics may claim there’s nothing new here. Hasn’t America always been at war? Haven’t we always been a violent people? There’s truth in this. But at least Americans of my grandfather’s and father’s generation didn’t define themselves by war.

      What America needs right now is a 12-step program to break the urge to feed further our national addiction to war. The starting point for Washington -- and Americans more generally -- would obviously have to be taking that first step and confessing that we have a problem we alone can’t solve. "Hi, I’m Uncle Sam and I’m a war-oholic. Yes, I’m addicted to war. I know it’s destructive to myself and others. But I can’t stop -- not without your help."

      True change often begins with confession. With humility. With an admission that not everything is within one’s control, no matter how violently one rages; indeed, that violent rage only aggravates the problem. America needs to make such a confession. Only then can we begin to wean ourselves off war.

    6. William J. Astore, a retired lieutenant colonel (USAF), now teaches at the Pennsylvania College of Technology. His books and articles focus primarily on military history and include Hindenburg: Icon of German Militarism (Potomac Press, 2005). He may be reached at

  6. .

    Saudi Arabia has been a U.S. ally for years,...

    Now, that is funny.

    But not ha-ha funny.

    Reason #17 the US should not be in the ME.


  7. 2012


    I am trying to recall.....

    Who was President in 2012 ?

    What party controlled foreign policy in those days ?

    We need to wrap ourselves in sack cloth and ashes, whip our backs to a frothing bubbling bloody red, and grovel in abject humility and self confession.

    But wait, didn't we already do that in the Cairo Speech ?

    It's past time for the Casino......that wonderful refuge of sanity and good sense...........

    Cheers !!

    1. Quirk, you're a wonderful wonderful man. So compassionate and understanding, a mind so godlike, transcendentally brave, able to hold you liquor with Socrates, knowledgeable, insightful, poetic......

      Health & Behavior
      Detecting a Coming Betrayal
      Researchers use transcripts from online Diplomacy games to identify signs of imminent betrayal.

      Nathan Collins
      Jun 18, 2015

  8. Remember the dot connecting motherfuckers? A Decade of Dot On later and there is no escaping the ugly fact that US actions in the Middle East set up the creation of events that spawned ISIS. Obama as his predecessor, George the Lessor, was watch commander. It is an ugly legacy. It is a pitiful, sordid, criminal and blight on the US political establishment. It cannot be undone but it must be changed.

    The only thing that will change it is an exogenous social event that will bring ten million to DC and terrify the oligarchs.

    1. an exogenous social event

      Whatever that may be, it sounds uberinteresting, and, certainly, not a little terrifying, and I'm not even an oligarch.

      Hopefully I'll be fishing the Wenaha with my son at the time, and won't even hear about it.

      Will the ten million be armed ?

      Will they storm the Washington D.C. National Guard Armory ?

      Will they head to Virginia and occupy the Pentagon ?

      Will Quirk be doing the advertising for the 'event' ?

      Or has he better sense ?

  9. Defiance and Rebellion - Rebels and Revolutionaries - Chris Hedges at his best:

    1. My wife is of the opinion we should just skip the pure democracy/chaos step in Aristotle's devo cycle and just go to a military dictatorship now, then begin the slow process of restoring the Republic.

    2. Did I mention I had a wonderful call from my Niece today ?

      She is going to be able to get her Ph.D right there at Max Planck.

      She is going about 'improving the world' in the correct, and only, finally, fruitful manner.

    3. All this talk about 10 million marching on D.C. is simply third chakra development gone wrong.

      What is needed is to become master of oneself for the betterment of others - Dr. Ben Carson is an example - and not try to be master of others through some political/religious/philisophical hogwash scheme or other. That way always lies disaster. (See the history of Islam as a prime example)


      Cheers !

    4. Master of oneself? No wonder you have created a fairyland castle with an exotic princess niece who you can rescue time and time again.

      The 1969 Moratorium to End the War in Vietnam, with two million people across the country and 600,000 people in Washington, forced President Nixon to acknowledge the unpopularity of the Viet Nam war and was created without the benefit of social media. It scared the crap out of Washington. No matter, it is too late anyway.

      Your probably on to something with the Magical Niece Mystery Tour.

  10. Quirk wanted to know why the blockade - if he reads this article carefully he will become better informed and realize the blockade is a self defense measure in reaction to IRAN - the source of so many problems - smuggling arms and missiles into Gaza -

    Netanyahu to Gaza flotilla: Surely you got lost, meant to help butchered Syrians

    June 29, 2015 6:23 pm By Robert Spencer 17 Comments

    Gaza flotillaIsraeli aid to Gaza amounts to 500,000 times more than the flotilla aid. The supporters of “Palestine” are outrageous moral hypocrites.

    “Netanyahu to Gaza flotilla: Surely you got lost and meant to help the Syrians being butchered,” by Herb Keinon, Jerusalem Post, June 28, 2015 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

    Israeli officials reiterated on Sunday that Jerusalem has no intention to allow the boats to reach Gaza, and that the organizers are well aware that there is a legal naval blockade of the area.

    A “flotilla” of four small boats is expected to sail to the territorial waters outside Gaza by at least Wednesday, and possibly as early as Monday, with Israel making clear that it has no intention of allowing the vessels to break the naval blockade and reach the Gaza Strip.

    Among the passengers on the boats are Balad MK Basel Ghattas, whose presence has sparked a Knesset controversy, and former Tunisian president Moncef Marzouki.

    Israeli officials reiterated on Sunday that Jerusalem has no intention to allow the boats to reach Gaza, and that the organizers are well aware both that there is a legal naval blockade of the area, and that all humanitarian aid into Gaza can pass through established channels.

    “This is just a provocation,” one official said.

    The Prime Minister’s Office penned a letter to be given to the some 50 people on the boats expected to be towed into Ashdod, sarcastically welcoming them to Israel and saying that they apparently got lost.

    “Perhaps you meant to set sail for a place not far from here – Syria,” the letter reads.

    “There the Assad regime is slaughtering its own people every day with the support of the murderous regime in Iran.”

    By contrast, the letter reads, Israel is dealing with a reality whereby terrorist organizations like Hamas try to attack innocent civilians.

    “Against these efforts we are defending Israeli citizens in accordance to international law,” according to the letter.

    The letter spelled out the number of trucks, and tons of aid and material that go into Gaza each day, saying it adds up to about 500,000 times the number of boats in the flotilla. At the same time, he said, Israel is not willing to allow the smuggling of arms to the Gaza Strip via the sea, which has been done repeatedly in the past.

    Ann Ighe, a spokeswoman for Ship to Gaza Sweden, told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday that the flotilla did not expect to be met with aggression by the navy.

    “We are hoping for this to be recognized as it is – a political protest against a blockade,” she said from Greece, from where the Marianne av Göteborg – carrying some 18 people – recently embarked.

    She said those on board the boat took an oath not to engage in violence by signing contracts that they will resist confrontation in a passive, nonviolent manner. She added that the crew did not expect the vessel to be boarded by security forces, but that they would be prepared for the possibility. This is expected to be the first boat to reach the waters outside Gaza.

    1. If IRAN were to stop this sticking its nose into the affairs of other people in the region, things would be much better.

      IRAN is also arming Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon.

      IRAN'S aim in all this is the genocide of the Jews.

      They have said so many times, bragged openly about it.....

      Some here at this blog are extremely hard of hearing...

      IRAN is the direct cause of the blockade of Gaza at sea......

    2. I put IRAN in capitals so as to hopefully break through Quirk's extremely hard resistant skull and plant a thought in his brain.

    3. It's like driving a railroad spike into hard Idaho granite, this planting a thought in Quirk's brain.

      And you watch, he will have forgotten his lesson in less than two weeks....

    4. It is always just one more war, necessary to make things right. Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Iraq again but this one will be different. This time to save the Jews, in dire peril behind their phalanx of 300 nuclear missiles.

      Please, call your niece. Send her a Moneygram. You’ll feel better.

    5. I had asked my Niece what to do about this lack of retention of lesson information by Quirk.

      She replied:

      There really isn't much you alone can do, Uncle Bob. There is a dispersion or dissolution effect in some minds where information gets deleted, eroded, over a shorter time period than normal. We here at Max P are closing in on the mechanisms at fault in this.....there is a macro-molecule of the ekit chain that we think is involved in the conversion of.........

      It went on and on......the upshot, right now all we can do is keep repeating the same information over and over again to the sufferer......given a year, or two or three, a biochemical cure may be on the horizon.

      They do great work at Max Planck.

    6. She has analyzed you too, Deuce.

      She says you are a case of misplaced hatred, and a very confused man, perhaps under the influence of some exrtraneous emotional tidal tow, but intellectually capable if you would only be more honest with yourself.

    7. Put simply, you could be cured if you really wished, Quirk is in the tougher situation and must wait upon lab experiment results.

    8. She is certain that if you were given the choice between having your own daughter raised in Israel or Iran, you would, finally choose Israel, as you would ultimately wish for that which is your own daughter's best interests.

      She is certain you would wish your daughter to live to be a free woman, and not subject to all the detriments of life as a female in Iran.

  11. The Saudi Cables: Is There Any Limit To US Dirty Dealing in The Middle East?

  12. Deuce ☂Tue Jun 30, 06:48:00 AM EDT
    It is always just one more war, necessary to make things right. Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Iraq again but this one will be different. This time to save the Jews, in dire peril behind their phalanx of 300 nuclear missiles.

    Please, call your niece. Send her a Moneygram. You’ll feel better.

    Wow, Deuce you have jumped the shark.

  13. .

    I note 'AIPAC's Useful Idiot' (Idaho branch) speaks and the rest of the blog exits.

    Luckily, his work release program requires he soon pick up his equipment (read plastic garbage bags and nail-on-a-stick) and go to 'work'. Today he is scheduled to be 'working' between mile markers 153 and 158.

    Hopefully, with his exit, normal conversation can resume at the bar.


    1. Quirk, Interesting use of personal attacks….

      I guess you really don't understand the GOOD that aipac actually does and have bought into the propaganda that some here and others in the Jew hating press peddle….

      AIPAC, which is too liberal for my taste, advocates a 2 state solution.

      I no longer do.

      I advocate Israel, Jordan and Egypt, all being "states" as we speak, continue.

      The vast majority of the "west bank" or as it's historically called Judea and Samaria, (historic Jewish Lands dating over 3200 years) be given to the local arabs to be confederated with Jordan (as it was from 1948 to 1967) and Gaza be re-joined to Egypt, as it was from 1948-1967.

      Since the Palestinians (a group of local arabs no culturally different than any other arabs around them) will then make up the majority in Jordan, Jordan should move to a democracy and recognize it's historic role in the 1948 UN resolution and become the confederation of Jordan and Palestine.


    2. No shark. No one is exterminating Jews. No one is going to nuke Israel unless ISIS gets its hands on one, but then Israel gives ISIS succor by killing those trying to kill ISIS, so there must be no problem.

    3. .

      Unfortunately, your vision isn't shared by the government of Israel,or even AIPAC if the truth be told. All of their actions argue against it. You were in AIPAC long enough that you must know this.

      Netanyahu doesn't want it. He has said it a number of times, some of them openly others in unguarded moments. His own father has said he doesn't want it. Every time he is pressured to come up with a deal he comes up with a new demand. And his current coalition and cabinet are to the right of him. Even the population of Israel is moving right and demographics suggest it will continue so.

      As for AIPAC, the two-state solution was hardly mentioned in this year's 'action principles'.

      For the first time in at least seven years, neither the U.S. president nor the Israeli prime minister will attend. In addition, for the second year in a row, no mention of the Palestinians, negative or positive, appears on the conference’s legislative agenda.


      This year’s “AIPAC action principles,” to be considered by the array of American Jewish groups that makes up AIPAC’s executive committee, mention the Palestinians only in the context of keeping them from advancing toward statehood outside the confines of negotiations but do not explicitly endorse the two-state solution. Most of the principles address the security relationship, as they did last year.

      Missing also, however, from the AIPAC legislative agenda is any effort to limit U.S. funding of the Palestinian Authority. AIPAC had pushed such efforts in December, after the U.N. General Assembly vote in which the Palestinians gained boosted recognition as a non-member state, but they fell by the wayside in part because of mixed signals from the Israeli government.

      The conference runs March 3-5, ending with the annual AIPAC lobbying blitz on Capitol Hill next Tuesday.

      (continued below...)


    4. .


      But these are just the current headlines. There are day to day actions that tell the story more clearly. For instance on the issue of the settlements, I recall a couple years ago a minority group on the AIPAC National Council suggested a simple resolution that merely said that AIPAC supports the dismantling of 'illegal settlements' in the West Bank, that is it dealt with wildcat settlements that Israel itself considers illegal'. The author of the proposed resolution was first pressured not to even bring it up. But once it was brought up, it was overwhelmingly rejected on the basis that AIPAC 'shouldn't be telling Israel what to do.'

      Compare this with what AIPAC is lobbying for?

      - Instead, the agenda will focus on the Congress enacting legislation that would designate Israel a “major strategic ally” of the United States -- a relationship not enjoyed by any other nation --

      - A nonbinding resolution that would call on the president to support Israel “if it is compelled to act against the Iranian nuclear threat” will be introduced in the Senate.

      - The House will consider legislation that would authorize the president to sanction any entity that trades with Iran.

      - The AIPAC official interviewed by JTA said that part of what motivates the push to name Israel a major strategic ally is an appeal to maintain defense assistance funding, averaging more than $3 billion annually,

      - We've just recently discussed the disgusting AIPAC sponsored amendment that was added to the 'fast-track' legislation that suppresses dissent and punishing those involved in the BDS movement.

      Great for Israel. But it's funny. I haven't seen any headlines on all the great things AIPAC is lobbying the US to do for Americans.

      AIPAC is constrained from even passing a resolution that would support Israel enforcing its own laws because it would somehow infringe on the Israeli government's prerogatives, but they are perfectly willing to instruct (demand) the US government take actions beneficial to Israel even to the point of interfering in a massive trade bill that Israel plays no part in.

      Disgusting, IMO.

      If AIPAC weren't so hypocritical, they would remove the 'A' from their name.


  14. Deuce ☂Tue Jun 30, 06:48:00 AM EDT
    It is always just one more war, necessary to make things right. Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Iraq again but this one will be different. This time to save the Jews, in dire peril behind their phalanx of 300 nuclear missiles.

    Please take note

    Deuce's usage of the term "Jew" is really his thought…

    Not Israel or Israeli….


    Shark jumping at it's finest.

    1. The comment was in response to your fellow traveller’s comment that, “IRAN’S aim in all this is the genocide of the Jews”. Is there a special approved way to write “Jew” that passes your sensitive smell test?

    2. Are we having another episodical reading comprehension problem or is this your standard default, no argument, better flash the Jew Card moment?

    3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  15. So Quirk, would you have your beloved daughter raised and live in Israel, or Iran ?

    Those are you only two options.

    What about you, Deuce ?

    If you don't wish to take part in the Thought Experiment, all readers will draw the proper conclusion, which is, you are couple of phony sonbitches.

  16. I am becoming truly worried about Deuce.

    There has been too much reference to violence lately, too many urges to go bang-bang, a unholy and unwise thirst to march on Washington D.C.

    Of one thing I am certain:

    Quirk ain't dumb enough to seriously entertain such errant non sense.

    He'd rather peacefully go about his daily business of milking the unwary consumers of USA.

    1. It is some kind of ego enhancement, ego enlargement, the last gasp of an aging man to finally find fulfillment by, he supposes, leaving his mark on things......

      I will ask Teeks about it. She might know of some kind of ego decompression program that would help out here.

      The return of a man or woman to sanity is always a wonderful thing to witness.

    2. The coming and return of the light after the storm, the reintegration of the personality on a higher in Roethke.....

    3. .

      Bob, you struggle to find two brain cells to rub together.

      What does your 'Thought Experiment' have to do with the issues raised above? Your primary concern is Israel. Mine is the US. You did the same yesterday when confronted with evidence you didn't like. You bring up the issue of women's rights as if that justifies every sin Israel commits, whether that is breaking international law or UN resolutions or treating the Palestinians as chattel or in the case of Gaza, prisoners.

      Come on, try and answer one question that has been raised here without trying to change the subject. How about that
      anti-BDS resolution sponsored by AIPAC that got added to the 'fast-track' legislation just passed by the 'US' Congress. What the hell is that doing in US legislation involving the TPP, TPIP, and other trade agreements when Israel isn't even amongst the countries involved in the agreements.


    4. .


      Or here's a thought experiment for you. If women's rights are the only positive you can hang your hat on regarding Israel tell me why the trend in Israel is in the wrong direction, why is it moving more towards the countries you abjure so much? When I mentioned that though Israel claims to be a 'secular democracy' perhaps the most important questions of their society are determined by religious beliefs and ruled on by the Chief Rabbinate, questions as basic as 'who is a Jew', crucial in a bifurcated system constructed to grant advantages to Jews over non-Jews.

      When I ask the question, where is the justice in denying a women a divorce if her husband refuses to allow it, you offer up this flaccid inanity, 'Well, gosh some people are talking about some ways to try to change this sometime in the future.'

      In 2006, the World Economic Council came up with way to measure gender inequality in the various countries around the world (about 148 of them). The 'Inequality Index' measures inequality for women across a number of categories. When it came out in 2006, Israel was the worst amongst developed countries. Further, the countries are ranked and since the initial report in 2006 through last year, Israel has dropped 30 positions and are moving towards not away from the Arab countries.

      While the various categories reflect Israeli society in general, the disparities seem to be most stark amongst the untra-orthodox and that is the way the country is moving at the moment. Currently, the Haredi represent about 12% of Israeli society; however, at the current birthrate that percentage will double in 17 years. Beyond that, their population is being fed by immigration and conversion. Their birthrate is about 4 times that of the non-Haredi population. Their influence is already larger than their numbers would suggest. It will only grow in the future.

      As for the Haredi and their respect for women, I came across this while googling Haredi population figures.;_ylt=A2KLqIPmOIhVmw8AWKssnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByZWc0dGJtBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQDBGdwb3MDMQ--?p=Fight+Breaks+Out+Between+Haredi+Jews+and+Gentiles&vid=558da79492611e8d488ad60c5ce4278c&

      In the future, try answering the questions raised and stop with the diversionary tactics. Start thinking of the USA first not some foreign country. Quit the pseudo-intellectual 'thought experiments' and simply argue your case. Read a book on logic to learn what the word 'argument' actually means in this context.


    5. .

      No doubt it's the culture.


    6. .

      Reason #18 on why the US should not be involved with any of the countries in the ME.


  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  18. .

    Well, time to walk the dogs.

    It's hard to debate comments like

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.


  19. Sorry, I am not going to allow outright lies about my posts. That is not a debate.