Quoting Post Archived Topic: It will not be bumped to the top of the forum. Topic Was the Iraq war pushed for Jewish interests? Membername   Not a member? Sign Up Free (takes 20 seconds) Password   Forgotten your password? Post Font: Verdana Arial Black Georgia Comic Sans Impact   Size: Tiny Normal Big Huge   Color: Default Dark Red Red Orange Brown Green Olive Cyan Blue Dark Blue Indigo Black [ Check Spelling ] [ Post Preview ] [ LiveTags ] Quote: from [m]lollerwhat[/m] at 11:05 pm on June 19, 2012[quote]Quote: from [m]Bud2400[/m] at 9:45 pm on June 19, 2012[quote]Taking Saddam Hussein out was certainly a benefit to Israel, I'll say that much.[/quote] well that was the thought in the late 90s early 00s, but after the fact we now have Iran as the only 'power' in the neighborhood[/quote] FAQ Keyword Search: Post Options Favorites Manager Notify me of new replies to this topic by email Notify me of new replies to this topic by private message Original Post kidd rune Posted at 6:49 pm on June 19, 2012 According to former White House official Ann Lewis, "The role of the president of the United States is to support the decisions that are made by the people of Israel." According to Wikipedia, "Ann Lewis is an American political advisor who was Senior Advisor for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. She has served as the Director of Communications for HillPAC and Friends of Hillary 2005-2007 and from 1997-2000 as Director of Communications and then Counselor to Bill Clinton." Anyone know about the Jew Richard Perle, one of Bush's foreign policy advisors, who was caught passing Highly-Classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli Embassy and appointed Douglas Feith as a chairman of the Defense Policy Board, who was fired for also distributing confidential materials to an Israeli embassy official? Paul Wolfowitz, according to Wikipedia, "a major architect of President Bush's Iraq policy and ... its most hawkish advocate." is a Jew. From 'The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy', a scholarly paper authored by Stephen Walt of Harvard University and John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago: "Wolfowitz is ... committed to Israel. The Forward once described him as "the most hawkishly pro-Israel voice in the Administration," and selected him in 2002 as the first among fifty notables who "have consciously pursued Jewish activism." At about the same time, JINSA gave Wolfowitz its Henry M. Jackson Distinguished Service Award for promoting a strong partnership between Israel and the United States, and the Jerusalem Post, describing him as "devoutly pro-Israel," named him "Man of the Year" in 2003." So basically "a major architect of President Bush's Iraq policy" has been described as having "consciously pursued Jewish activism" and is "devoutly pro-Israel" and is "the most hawkishly pro-Israel voice in the Administration" From a letter to Bush, from PNAC, which, according to wiki, "exerted influence on high-level U.S. government officials in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush and affected the Bush Administration's development of military and foreign policies, especially involving national security and the Iraq War": "Furthermore, Mr. President, we urge you to accelerate plans for removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. .. Saddam, along with Iran, is a funder and supporter of terrorism against Israel. ... the damage our Israeli friends and we have suffered until now may someday appear but a prelude to much greater horrors.... Israel's fight against terrorism is our fight. Israel's victory is an important part of our victory." Seems like they got what they wanted! And finally, according to retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark: "Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel."

Replies SwampPig Posted at 7:20 pm on July 22, 2012 Yes, no Arabs in Israeli government.   kidd rune Posted at 1:07 pm on July 21, 2012 Yet only Jews have government positions and political power. Real democracy SwampPig Posted at 1:05 pm on July 21, 2012 The partition plan created the Jewish homeland where Arabs and Jews would both live in - there was also a Palestinian state which some Jews would also live. kidd rune Posted at 12:48 pm on July 21, 2012 Quote: from SwampPig at 3:04 pm on July 21, 2012 Funny how you're trying to justify ethnic cleansing What ethnic cleansing am I justifying? There was no ethnic cleansing for the plan to create a Jewish homeland. How exactly did they create this so-called Jewish homeland? SwampPig Posted at 12:04 pm on July 21, 2012 Funny how you're trying to justify ethnic cleansing What ethnic cleansing am I justifying?  There was no ethnic cleansing for the plan to create a Jewish homeland. kidd rune Posted at 11:41 am on July 21, 2012 Selfish is only caring about yourself. This obviously doesn't apply to me because I'm actively promoting policies that are good for my entire race. What Whites in 3rd world countries? Generally Whites live in White countries, and there are absolutely no White 3rd world countries. Israel may not be a 3rd world country but it also has a negative effect on the USA. Israel is a terrorist state that the US sends billions of dollars to a year, even a retard like you should see the stupidity in that. skaterofthefuture Posted at 1:26 am on July 21, 2012 Not caring about how the other guys do is the definition of selfishness however you want to sugarcoat it or justify it. You use a word like "selfish" on other people you can't be made of glass. Sorry buddy. So when you call people 3rd world trash you included all the whites who live in 3rd world countries right? Riiiight... Israel is not a 3rd world country so I am still not sure why you even bother mentioning them here. Maybe you would care to explain that reference. kidd rune Posted at 11:18 pm on July 20, 2012 So you admit that you don't care that EVERYONE has a high standard of living but ONLY whites. Yep you confirmed you are selfish. If a group is unable to create or maintain a high standard of living on their own because of some inherent inability then why should Whites and Whites specifically be forced to help them? I also had no idea that Jews were "3rd world trash" but I guess when you are jealous of Zuckerberg and Savarin then you have to put them down somehow. If you spent more time actually developing a company of your own and doing something constructive instead of trashing other people's origin and ethnicity on the internet then maybe you'd be something else than a pathetic loser. As it is all you can fall back on is your affiliation to a larger group because on your own you simply SUCK. How many years and you still haven't gotten the message? I do not trash anyone's origin or ethnicity, not once have I told anyone they are shit solely because of their race. Not once. I simply point out that diversity has a negative impact on Whites and no race should be forced to lower their quality of life for another. It was wrong when Whites exploited their Black slaves but it's not wrong when Whites are being exploited by other races? Where is the sanity? Why shouldn't Whites have their own living spaces and self-government so they can avoid exploitation and discrimination? skaterofthefuture Posted at 10:10 pm on July 20, 2012 So you admit that you don't care that EVERYONE has a high standard of living but ONLY whites. Yep you confirmed you are selfish. I also had no idea that Jews were "3rd world trash" but I guess when you are jealous of Zuckerberg and Savarin then you have to put them down somehow. If you spent more time actually developing a company of your own and doing something constructive instead of trashing other people's origin and ethnicity on the internet then maybe you'd be something else than a pathetic loser. As it is all you can fall back on is your affiliation to a larger group because on your own you simply SUCK. kidd rune Posted at 11:36 am on July 20, 2012 So basically Laurence can only use his own biased observations instead of what the actual statistics show - that diversity overwhelmingly increases the rate of conflict: Funny how tehre is a strong correlation between ethnic diversity and conflict, and even those who have low diversity and high conflict such as Israel, Rwanda, and Croatia have these problems based on ethnicity as well. And although Laurence tries to see the best in people, he refuses to acknowledge the undeniable and irrefutable fact that Hispanics and Blacks have significantly lower IQ's than Whites, which lower the average IQ of the nation and thus the living standards and quality of life. Laurence cannot actually give one single benefit that diversity has over ethnic uniformity. Sure, other races all have their good qualities, nobody claimed otherwise, but to pretend that those are the only ones that exist and affect our nation is pure lunacy. You can't even argue against the fact that Blacks and Hispanics - around 1/4 of our nation - significantly increase the crime rates and lower the national IQ. The fact of the matter is that diversity overwhelmingly does not benefit White people. This is why nobody else - not the Japanese, Chinese, or Israelis want diversity. Because it's irrational, it makes no sense. Why create more divisions in your society? Why displace your original population with more primitive and/or lower IQ peoples? Why subject your population to ethnic conflict? It makes no sense at all, none. Also you state that diversity improves the world. You're right. But that doesn't necessarily mean that we have to import it all into the USA instead of letting India be Indian, Africa be African, Mexico be Mexican, and American be American. America was founded as a White/Western/European country and the majoirty pretty much always (until recently) wanted it to stay that way. By next century Europeans should be minorities in their countries too and Whites will be a small % of the world population. But we should just trust all the other races to accept us and be nice to us? Look at Haiti, Rhodesia, South Africa - clearly that doesn't happen. Name one single country where Whites became the minority and were treated as "Equals". Laurence Posted at 4:17 am on July 20, 2012 I live with someone whom you probably would not view as "my own kind," since she is Asian. In fact she is my wife. Our relationship is very much to our mutual benefit. In a larger context I live in a city which is racially diverse and we do seem to benefit from one another precisely because we are different. I would say that many Asians contribute their hard work ethic and their love and respect for extended family ties and their respect for all elderly people (of any race). Hispanics  contribute theirlove of family as well, their sense of fun and willingness to work for lower wages. Blacks contribute their own culture and their strength both physical and spiritual and their highly religious devotion. Immigrants of all nations contribute their own cultures and perspective. I do not see that this diversity detracts from our life, to the contrary. It brings spice and great interest to the world we live in. Life would be drab if we all thought alike or behaved alike or had the same background or ideas. Yes there might be conflict and friction at times, but so is there even within families. In fact the strongest frictions can be found sometimes among siblings, including twins.   kidd rune Posted at 1:12 pm on July 19, 2012 Quote: from skaterofthefuture at 10:50 am on July 19, 2012 Swampig only mentioned that he had no problems with it. You do have a problem with it and want to impose your views on him and then call him selfish. Get your head screwed on right and realize that the problem is you and not the others. You do not want *everyone* to have a high standard of life since you have clearly stated that nonwhites are incapable of having a high living standard without whites. So using your own statements you want *only* whites to have this high standard of living. Pretty selfish attitude. In other words you think Whites should be forced to suffer at the cost of improving the lives of other races? Yeah, real fair     Maybe the 3rd world trash should actually try to improve their own people's lives instead of just immigrating to White nations and coasting off the accomplishments of the majority. Really sad, I cannot respect even one single person who chooses to not live with their own kind just for their own benefit. If Britain was 3rd world wasteland and everyone was White, I'd be the first person on a plane to go there and help them because the living standards of my race triumph over my own personal living standards. I don't know what kind of pathetic, selfish trash would leave their people in poverty just so they can have a better life because of White ingenuity. skaterofthefuture Posted at 7:50 am on July 19, 2012 Swampig only mentioned that he had no problems with it. You do have a problem with it and want to impose your views on him and then call him selfish. Get your head screwed on right and realize that the problem is you and not the others. You do not want *everyone* to have a high standard of life since you have clearly stated that nonwhites are incapable of having a high living standard without whites. So using your own statements you want *only* whites to have this high standard of living. Pretty selfish attitude. kidd rune Posted at 9:15 pm on July 17, 2012 Since you want to impose your own view on the rest of the country regardless of what they want it is certainly more selfish than those who say they are personally happy to live with others. So idiots imposing the destructive and irrational ideology of diversity and integrationism aren't doing the same thing? Those people that leave their own racial groups behind to come to the US just so they can have a better life (because of all the hard work of Americans for centuries) aren't "Selfish"? Well since your criteria is how close your genes are to other whites then yeah you guys might as well be! :P That's not my criteria at all, it's basically what is most beneficial for society to have a high living standard and a high quality of life. Racial diversity brings the exact opposite to a high degree. skaterofthefuture Posted at 8:37 pm on July 17, 2012 Quote: from kidd rune at 3:05 am on July 16, 2012I don't see how allowing every race to have their own living space, self-government, and the ability to preserve and cherish their own culture corresponds to selfishness. Perhaps you can explain? Since you want to impose your own view on the rest of the country regardless of what they want it is certainly more selfish than those who say they are personally happy to live with others. Only people that look like me? Oh of course, every White person is a complete clone of the other Well since your criteria is how close your genes are to other whites then yeah you guys might as well be! :P Most recent 15 of 141 previous replies displayed.