Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

Quotes - Jewish and American.


  • Please log in to reply
431 replies to this topic

#101 HAZ

HAZ

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6377 posts

Posted 25 April 2003 - 12:49 AM

Saddam, thanks, incredible information cous....think there's an opening on Fox News, (the fair and balanced:p ) folks, maybe you should apply, not sure about the pay, but think the percs, may have promises....:D
  • 0

#102 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 25 April 2003 - 02:24 AM

"Importing" Jews, even if they weren't Jews

Since its founding one of Israel's main goals was to change the demography of Palestine and Jerusalem, by luring --even by forcing-- Jews to emigrate to Israel, (over other countries,) hence, dispossessing more Palestinians. In a visit to the U.S. in Feb 1987 Yitzhak Shamir asked secretary Shultz to stop offering special refugee status to Soviet Jews. (See New York Times article Israel Asking U.S. to Bar Soviet Jews by Ari Goldman 03/01/1987) Hence, once again Zionism is interested in Jews as number-boosters rather than caring about their well being and "freedom." In addition, there were indications that Israel's madness in forcing Jews (especially Arab Sephardic ones) to go to Israel, have reached the level of sending Israeli secret agents to terrorize some Arab Jewish communities in their countries. Examples of this are in the case of Iraqi Jews, 125,000 of whom (97%) fled to Israel in the early 50's. (See David Hirst The Gun and the Olive Branch pp. 155-64, 1984 quoted in Ruether's The Wrath of Jonah, 1989).

"Nahum Goldman, an eminent Zionist Leader, suggested in 1971 that rather than stressing the emigration [of Russian Jews to Israel] issue, the Zionist movement should concentrate on securing human rights for Jews remaining inside the USSR. His invitation to address the World Zionist Congress was promptly withdrawn" -- p. 187 A&L Cockburn Dangerous Liaison, 1991, quoting p. 737 of Howard Sacher's A History of Israel, 1988.
  • 0

#103 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 25 April 2003 - 03:40 AM

"I know how at least 80% of all the incidents with Syria started. We were sending a tractor to the demilitarized zone and we knew that the Syrians will shoot. If they did not shoot, we would instruct the tractor to go deeper, till the Syrians finally got upset and start shooting. Then we employed artillery, and later also the air-force... I did that... and Yitzhak Rabin did that, when he was there..." -- Moshe Dayan in a 05/1997 revelation

"Is this a way to occupy Hebron? A couple of artillery bombardments on Hebron and not a single 'Hebronite' would have remained there. Is this a way to occupy Jerusalem [without driving the Arabs out]?" --Yigal Allon, Labor deputy Prime minister of Israel chiding the IDF leadership.
  • 0

#104 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 25 April 2003 - 04:22 AM

Dayan Admits Israel Attacked Syria in Land Grab
By Prof. Tanya Reinhart*
[Translated from Hebrew - Yediot Aharonot, 5/6/97]
In June, it would be 30 years to the war of 1967 - the war that brought about the occupation. Governments have changed from Labor to Likud and back several times since then, and what has changed?

Yediot Aharonot of April 27 has published an 1976 interview with Moshe Dayan (which was not previously published). Dayan, who was the defense minister in 1967, explains there what led, then, to the decision to attack Syria. In the collective consciousness of the period, Syria was conceived as a serious threat to the security of Israel, and a constant initiator of aggression towards the residents of northern Israel. But according to Dayan, this is 'bull-shit' - Syria was not a threat to Israel before 67. "Just drop it" - he says as an answer to a question about the northern residences - "I know how at least 80% of all the incidents with Syria started. We were sending a tractor to the demilitarized zone and we knew that the Syrians will shoot. If they did not shoot, we would instruct the tractor to go deeper, till the Syrians finally got upset and start shooting. Then we employed artillery, and later also the air-force... I did that... and Itzhak Rabin did that, when he was there (as commander of the Northern front, in the early sixties)".

And what has led Israel to provoke Syria? According to Dayan, this was the greediness for the land - the idea that it is possible "to grab a piece of land and keep it, until the enemy will get tired and give it to us". The Syrian land was, as he says, particularly tempting, since, unlike Gaza and the West bank it was not heavily populated.

The 67 war has brought the big chance to grab the land, and along with the land, the water of the of the Jordan Riverheads. Dayan insists that the decision to attack Syria was not motivated by security reasons: "You do not attack the enemy because he is a bastard, but because he threatens you, and the Syrians in the fourth day of the war were not threatening us". He adds that the initiative of Colonel David Elazar to open the Syrian front was assisted by a delegation sent to prime-minister Eshkol by the Northern kibbutz's, "who did not even try to hide their greediness to that land".

In 1973, the Israeli society has paid, for the first time, a heavy price for the occupation - in the 'Yom Kippur' war. The interview with Dayan was held three years after the defeat, and in that atmosphere, he explains that the decision to attack Syria was a mistake that will disable, in the future, peace with Syria.

One could infer from Dayan's words that he would have, perhaps, supported, withdrawal from the Golan heights, but Rabin, his partner to the road of the Labor, has never changed his skin. At the first period of his term as prime-minister, many believed that he is seeking an agreement with Syria. But behind the halo of our saviour the peace-maker, there was the same land-greedy commander who sent the tractors to provoke the Syrians in the early sixties.

In the tradition of all his predecessors, Rabin used the tactics of dragging negotiations: He agreed to discuss everything (the location of inspection points, the dates of opening embassies) except for the one issue that Syria was interested in - which lands Israel is willing to give up in the Golan. While Rabin's one hand was spreading rumors about secret agreements, to pacify public opinion, his other hand was pouring unprecedented budgets for developing the Israeli settlements in the Golan Heights. Apartments previously frozen were sold to anyone interested, and huge amounts of money were invested in developing foundation work and industry. All Netanyahu had to do is pick the fruits.

Thirty years after, the land-greedy are still stealing and appropriating it wherever possible - in the Golan heights, as in the West Bank. What we are left with are the words of Yifat Kastiel, whose twin sister was murdered recently in Wadi Kelet: "They fight here all the time over pieces of land. But what importance could the land have, when the people who live here are so miserable?"


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Professor Reinhart teaches Linguistics at Tel Aviv University and is a member of the Advisory Committee of the Committee On the Middle East (COME).
  • 0

#105 Houlin

Houlin

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 47 posts

Posted 25 April 2003 - 03:52 PM

I remember I was in the UN at the time when they took Golan with the US tank forces at their disposal. It was a lightening strike and an Israeli blitzkrieg. Arthur Goldberg was the US representative to the UN and he was calling everyone antisemites. He was so diplomatic that if anyone disagreed with him, he would tell them to "shut up" you this or you that.It was rather humorous. And shocking. While everyone was calling for Israel to cease and desist, he was telling everyone to shut up. He was speaking for Israel and supporting this invasion.

I was more amused by the way the US papers portrayed this war. Here, the victim of the Hollocaust, the underdog in the region, was merely defending herself by a bunch of attacking nazi regimes, the arab horde, and they, the israelis, the damsel in distress, meek as Israel appeared in press, were just defending themselves. You would have thought that poor israel would be wiped out in a flash, if you read these newspapers. I also took the time to buy a newspaper from every city in America and in England. I also purchased the papers in the major cities of Germany and Japan. The same essential story appeared. Namely, Israel was being attacked and Israel was defending herself.

Whenever you would speak to an american or someone else about this war, it was always "Poor Israel...
They have all these arab countries surrounding them. They all want to destroy Israel. These countries were always causing trouble. What was Israel to do?"

When the General Assembly passed Resolution 242, it had essentially admitted to a truth "Israel siezed a lot of territories and for making war it should withdraw back to its original borders." This is what this resolution is really saying. That Israel started this war. This resolution says that Israel should not be rewarded by allowing it to keep the territories.

The US has always tried to get around this resolution by making Arafat go to this peace treaty or that but always dodging the provision of this UN resolution which calls for withdrawel. Instead, they have these phony Peace arrangements where they try to get Palesinians to reward these thieves and to make them accept defeat disguised as Oslo or Camp David.

In addition, Israel has a larger vision of itself and does not recognize its boundaries as Israel. It claims that all of Iraq and Iran and all the territories surrounding them belongs to Israel. It will come to pass that Iraq will become Israel and part of the oldBabylonian empire of Israel. What do you think?

Just hashing some ideas you probably are already aware of.
  • 0

#106 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 25 April 2003 - 11:19 PM

Houlin , I'd like to thank you for posting and writing some of the facts not many people are aware of.
History taught in the USA regarding especially ME is screwed up by Zionists who write history books for US schools. So children are taught mostly lies they believe in as facts.



1967 War (Six-Day War)

"In June l967, we had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him." -- Menachem Begin in The New York Times, August 21, 1982

"To solidify their gains after the 1967 war, according to UN figures, the Israelis destroyed during the period between June 11, 1967 and November 15, 1969 some 7,554 Palestinian Arab homes in the territories seized during that war; this figure excluded thirty-five villages in the occupied Golan Heights that were razed to the ground. In the two years between September 1969 and 1971 the figure was estimated to have reached 16,312 homes." --from The Zionist Connection II, by Alfred Lilienthal, p.160. 1978
  • 0

#107 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 26 April 2003 - 12:19 AM

"Israeli forces occupied [the Golan Heights] during the 1967 war. With its occupation of the Golan Heights, Israel expelled over 120,000 inhabitants - mostly Syrians but also several thousand Palestinian refugees. At the same time, Israel destroyed two cities, 133 villages and 61 farms. After this devastation, only 6,396 inhabitants remained in the six villages left standing. On December 14, 1981, the Israeli Knesset unilaterally annexed the Golan Heights in clear contravention of international law. The UN Security Council subsequently declared the annexation illegal and, to date, not a single state has recognized it. Israel has so far built more than 40 settlements, housing over 15,000 settlers in the Golan Heights."
  • 0

#108 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 26 April 2003 - 01:19 AM

1948, Israel's Birth Myths, the "New Historians", and the Palestinian Nakba (Catastrophe)


"Jews came and took, by means of uprooting and expulsion, a land that was Arab. We wanted to be a colonialist occupier, and yet to come across as moral at the same time... The Arab armies -- chiefly from Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Transjordan, now Jordan -- totaled just over 20,000 men. The core of the Arab nations' fighting forces remained behind, in part to ensure the internal stability of their own fledgling regimes.... Crucially, Israel had a quiet agreement with Transjordan that its Arab Legion, the strongest of the invading armies, would take over only the West Bank, which the U.N. partition plan had intended as the center of a Palestinian Arab State." -- Ilan Pappe', Israeli Historian at Haifa University.

"Till then everyone in Israel spoke about Arabs who had just run away in 1948, but there existed no real historical research on it. There were two conflicting propaganda versions, one Arab and another Jewish. As one who received his education in Israel, I thought I knew that the Arabs had 'run away.' But I knew nothing else. The Jewish generations of 1948, however, knew the truth and deliberately misrepresented it. They knew there were plenty of mass deportations, massacres and rapes . . . . The soldiers and the officials knew, but they suppressed what they knew and were deliberately disseminating lies." -- Israeli Historian Benny Morris in an interview with Rami Tal published in Israeli Daily Yediot Ahronot December 1994.
"For it was precisely the unignorable plight and suffering of the Palestinian Arabs during April-May of that year that forced the hand of the reluctant Arab political and military leaders to take the plunge and invade Palestine on 15-16 May. -- Israeli Historian Benny Morris in an 03-04/1998 article in Tikkun available here.

"in 1948, we deliberately, and not just in the heat of the war, expelled Arabs. Also in 67 after the Six-Day War, we expelled many Arabs." -- Tzvi Shiloah, a senior veteran of the Mapai Party and a former deputy mayor of the town of Hertzeliyah. (Modelet, no.12, October 1989)
  • 0

#109 Houlin

Houlin

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 47 posts

Posted 26 April 2003 - 01:54 AM

About 6 months ago, I read a book "The Beggars Cup" which was about a guy who started out in one business and then made it big in Hollywood. It is really an autobiography but the book is suppossed to be a fiction. There are a lot of these kinds of so called fictions which are a minefield of information about what happened or what is going on. I like to get a hold of these kinds of books because they are honest and they tell it like it is. There are people for example who write about the Moscow under siege, or Lenningrad, or My time in Guam, etc. which are personal stories of guys who wrote a book. They tell it like it is. But only about their experience. Nothing else. In this book, we have a movie producer who wants to film the life of theodore Herzl. He seems to think that Theodore was either Mohammed himself or Jesus Christ. But in the telling, he brings out all the so called atrocities committed against the Jews over the millenium and how they had to fight their way out Germany after WWI and into America where they made it big.Its a real zionist cries the blues then sings mammy type of book. This guy started out in scrap metal and became a big shot movie producer. His story is how he was connected to anyone that was anyone in Israel and in the US and how they succeeded in creating Israel.

The book is code for the story of how Israel was born and it is really a biography of Herzl and his attempt to buy Israel from the Ottoman empire as well as an autobiography. There is also a story of Areal Sharon and it describes his role in the Egyptian takeover of the Sainai. But it is also a prediction and an exact blueprint of what Israel was going to do 10 years before it happened. The book was written in 1992 I believe. There is a lot of minutae on gun running, the role of the US GOVERNMENT, the double standards ....But I think it is an honest copy of zionist intent and activity over the last century to be regarded as a funny kind of history. I just bring this to your attention for all of the bull you have to wade through to get to the truth. You can plod through two lifetimes or more before you realize that all the junk you thought was true is bull. If I didn't know, the book was an advance copy of Israeli foreign policy 10 years before the making.
  • 0

#110 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 26 April 2003 - 07:46 PM

"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. ... Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice." -- David Ben Gurion. Quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan's "Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.
  • 0

#111 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 27 April 2003 - 04:06 AM

Likud vs. Labor:

Many are fooled to think that there is a real difference between Likud and Labor, as far as the Palestinians are concerned. Although Likud might have a slightly larger resume of anti-Palestinian oppression, both have similar stand on all the main issues, such as settlements, refugees, Jerusalem, Abou Ghoneim (Har Homa), and house demolition. While Likud (Netanyahu, Shamir, Begin) does things in-your-face style, Labor (Rabin, Peres, Barak) is more soothing and diplomatic in its rhetoric, says one thing but does the complete opposite, maneuvers more skillfully around the media to avoid raising many flags, and speaks with a more mellow tone, giving the false impression that it is more for peace than Likud.
____________________________________________

Have you noticed a similarity between Republican and Democratic Party regarding Middle East ?.
  • 0

#112 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 27 April 2003 - 07:19 AM

"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. ... Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice." -- David Ben Gurion.
  • 0

#113 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 27 April 2003 - 06:12 PM

USS Liberty

The American ship bombed mercilessly for over an hour by Israeli war planes and torpedo boats during a cease-fire accepted by all countries except Israel on June 8 during the June 1967 Middle East war, right before Israel's conquest of the Golan heights. The result: 34 Americans dead and 171 wounded. The survivors were never given a congressional hearing/a serious full investigation and were only honored away from mainstream cameras in obscure places. The U.S. government under president Johnson, refused to fully or seriously investigate and accepted Israel's "mistaken identity" excuse almost instantly. Prior to the attack, the Israeli planes circled the ship on and off for over four hours. The ship flew a clear American flag, identified itself as American to the Israelis, and was in international waters. U.S. planes from neighboring USS Saratoga were dispatched for help, but were later ordered back by Washington before reaching the USS Liberty. In the words of George Ball, What followed the attack "was an elaborate charade. The United States complained pro forma to Israel ... which reacted by blaming the victims. [Israel made a] reluctant and graceless apology.... American leaders did not have the courage to punish Israel for the blatant murder of its citizens."
  • 0

#114 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 27 April 2003 - 06:34 PM

http://www.nytimes.c...rld/23LIBE.html


Book Says Israel Intended 1967 Attack on U.S. Ship
By JAMES RISEN, New York Times April 23, 2001

WASHINGTON, April 22 - Israel's attack in 1967 on the intelligence ship Liberty, which killed 34 American sailors and wounded 171 others, was deliberate, according to a new book on the National Security Agency, disputing the longstanding Israeli claim that the attack was accidental.

The book, "Body of Secrets," by James Bamford, provides a detailed recounting of the Israeli attack on the American eavesdropping ship, along with new evidence in an incident that has been debated ever since. Mr. Bamford wrote an earlier book on the security agency, "The Puzzle Palace," published in 1982.

The Liberty, a slow, lightly armed Navy ship that was working with the security agency to monitor the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, was attacked from both the air and sea by Israeli forces off the Sinai coast on June 8.

While the Israeli government said the incident was an accident, it did pay modest reparations to the victims and their families. But Mr. Bamford writes that the Israeli explanation is a cover story for a deliberate attack meant to prevent the United States from eavesdropping on its military activities. And the book provides evidence from crew members of an American spy plane that overheard the attack.

While Israeli planes and boats were attacking the Liberty, the American plane, a Navy EC-121 intelligence-gathering aircraft, was far overhead, and recorded Israeli conversations, Mr. Bamford wrote.

And the crew heard Israeli pilots talking about seeing an American flag.

The Israelis did not have any idea "that witnesses were present high above," Mr. Bamford writes in "Body of Secrets," which Doubleday is to publish on Tuesday. The National Security Agency "has hidden the fact the one of its planes was overhead at the time of the incident, eavesdropping on what was going on below," he wrote. "The intercepts from that plane, which answer some of the key questions about the attack, are among N.S.A.'s deepest secrets."

The aircraft crew did not hear the Israelis mention the Liberty by name, but did hear enough to piece together the fact that Israeli forces were attacking a ship flying the American flag.

"Although the attackers never gave a name or hull number, the ship was identified as flying an American flag," one air crew member recalled in an interview with Mr. Bamford. "We logically concluded that the ship was the U.S.S. Liberty."

Surviving crew members of the Liberty also believed that the Israeli attack was deliberate, according to those interviewed in Mr. Bamford's book. Before the attack, Israeli planes flew over the Liberty repeatedly, they noted, and could have clearly seen what it was. During the attack, they could also see that it was flying an American flag, they told Mr. Bamford.

Mr. Bamford argues that the Liberty attack came at a time when President Lyndon B. Johnson was anxious to avoid worsening relations with Israel in the midst of the Middle East crisis. The Israeli government gave Washington a classified report to show that the attack was a mistake, and the Johnson administration then discounted the incident.

"Despite the overwhelming evidence that Israel had attacked the ship and killed the American servicemen deliberately, the Johnson administration and Congress covered up the entire incident," Mr. Bamford wrote.

But security agency officials never believed the Israeli excuses, Mr. Bamford said. "The senior leadership of N.S.A. officials who had unique access to the secret tapes and other highly classified evidence was virtually unanimous in their belief that the attack was deliberate," he wrote.

Walter Deely, who was a senior N.S.A. official at the time of the attack and who was ordered to conduct a secret study of the Liberty for the agency, told Mr. Bamford that his review showed "there is no way they didn't know that the Liberty was American."

John Morrison, an Air Force major general who was deputy chief of the agency's operations at the time of the attack, told Mr. Bamford that "nobody believes that explanation."
  • 0

#115 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 27 April 2003 - 07:08 PM

Israel's 1967 attack on U.S. ship deliberate, book says
From David Ensor
CNN National Security Correspondent April 23, 2001

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A new book quotes U.S. officials around during the 1967 Israeli attack on a U.S. surveillance ship as saying the attack was not an accident -- as Israel has always claimed -- but deliberate.

The attack, in which 34 American sailors died, was carried out to prevent the United States from eavesdropping on Israeli military activities, author James Bamford writes.

The USS Liberty was attacked during the Six Day War on June 8 by air and sea forces off the Sinai coast. Israel said the ship was mistaken for an Egyptian one and U.S. President Lyndon Johnson then accepted the explanation.

Israel later paid modest reparations to the families of the 34 Americans killed, and to the 171 others who were injured.

What the Israelis did not know, according to "Body of Secrets" -- published by Doubleday and scheduled for release Tuesday -- is that the U.S. National Security Agency had a surveillance plane flying above the Liberty.

The book quotes by name a Hebrew-English translator on that U.S. plane as saying the Israeli pilots talked about completing an attack. He said "they mentioned an American flag" -- suggesting the Israelis knew they were attacking a U.S. ship.

Bamford's other named sources include a former top N.S.A. official who conducted a review of the attack and an Air Force major general.

Israeli officials have not responded to CNN calls seeking comment.

Bamford writes that National Security Agency intercepts of the Israeli pilots and sailors remain secret to this day, although his sources say the communications would clearly show the Israelis attacked the U.S. ship deliberately.

As for motive, Bamford speculates in the book that the Israelis may not have wanted the United States to know that "at that same moment, a scant dozen or so miles away, Israeli soldiers were butchering civilians and bound prisoners by the hundreds, a fact that the entire Israeli army leadership knew about and condoned, according to the army's own historian."

Survivors of the attack on the USS Liberty have long argued that the Israelis had to know they were attacking an American ship, since the ship was circled repeatedly at a low altitude by Israeli aircraft before the attack and the ship was flying U.S. flags.

Bamford is an intelligence specialist and the author of a previous best-selling book about the NSA called "The Puzzle Palace."
  • 0

#116 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 27 April 2003 - 09:06 PM

"I've never seen a president --I don't care who he is-- stand up to them [the Israelis]. It just boggles your mind. They always get what they want. The Israelis know what's going on all the time. I got to the point where I wasn't writing anything down. If the American people understood what grip those people have on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens don't have any idea what goes on." --Admiral Thomas Moorer of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (See Washington Report 12/1999, p.124 quoting from Andrew Hurley's book, "One Nation Under Israel")



"There is definitely an anti-Arab bias in America, and I regret it" --Peter Jennings cited in Alfred Lilienthal's 1982 Zionist Connections II, p.273, citing Edmund Ghareeb, The American Media and the Palestine Problem, Journal of Palestine Studies, Autumn 1975, Winter 1976.
  • 0

#117 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 27 April 2003 - 09:28 PM

"The Israeli Prime Minister has a lot more influence over the foreign policy of the United States in the Middle East than he has in his own country." -- Former Congressman Paul Findley, in his book They Dare to Speak Out, p. 92.
"The Israelis control the policy in the congress and the senate ... somewhere around 80 percent of the senate of the United States is completely in support of Israel -- of anything Israel wants...." -- Chairman Senator Fullbright, 10/07/1973 on CBS' "Face the Nation".
  • 0

#118 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 27 April 2003 - 09:39 PM

"We have exhausted our requests. President Clinton has answered all our needs. There has been no American president in history like President Clinton, in his support of Israel and the Jewish people." --Shimon Peres (From Washington Report, July 1996, pg. 17)

"President Clinton behaves like an obedient child of Israel and does not know how to say `No.'" -- Nahum Barnea, Israeli writer (From Washington Report, July 1996, pg. 17)

"The Capitol Hill is an Israeli occupied territory". -- Patrick Buchanan (St. Louis Dispatch, 10/20/1990).
  • 0

#119 HAZ

HAZ

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6377 posts

Posted 27 April 2003 - 09:48 PM

Saddam, just read on Teamsters Voice (http://www.Voicve.ds101.net) where the Israeli people, have FREE healthcare!...here in The U.S., millions have NO healthcare and we, (the average WORKERS-pensioners) support this country, with billions of dollars, extracted weekly or monthly by the Department of the Treasury, to sustain the Israel welfare package! Whats the deal? Why would our politicians stand up for these mid-sand cops, yet ignore the plight of the uninsured here? The American Constitution says ; the government is suppose to " promote the general Welfare" do belive they had the citizens of this country, on their minds, when this great document was written! :rolleyes: .......HAZ
  • 0

#120 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 28 April 2003 - 07:54 PM

HAZ thanks for your post. Interesting I'd say. Unfortunately I couldn't use the link you posted. It's been removed.


"I am aware how almost impossible it is in this country to carry out a foreign policy [in the Middle East] not approved by the Jews. [Former Secretary of State George] Marshall and [former Defense Secretary James] Forrestral learned that" -- Sec. of State John Foster Dulles in Feb. 1957 quoted on p.99 of Fallen Pillars by Donald Neff

"... terrific control the Jews have over the news media and the barrage the Jews have built up on congressmen .... I am very much concerned over the fact that the Jewish influence here is completely dominating the scene and making it almost impossible to get congress to do anything they don't approve of. The Israeli embassy is practically dictating to the congress through influential Jewish people in the country" -- Sec. of State John Foster Dulles in Feb. 1957 quoted on p.99 of Fallen Pillars by Donald Neff

"I know I was elected by the votes of American Jews. I owe them my victory. Tell me, is there something I ought to do?" -- U.S. President John F. Kennedy speaking privately to Ben-Gurion (p.90 A & L Cockburn 1991).
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru