Jewish Smear Tactics

I posted this elsewhere, but I just can't get over it. The damned hypocrisy of the jew. The damned lying vile pathetic sonofbitchin jew! This is a prime example of the jew game of "Double Standards". Read how they are smearing Freeman. How they are accusing him of something they are IN FACT guilty of!!!! Damned to hell hypocrites!

By Alan M. Dershowitz aka "douchebag"

FrontPageMagazine.com

Monday, March 16, 2009

Those who successfully challenged the nomination of Charles W. Freeman, Jr. to become chairman of the National Intelligence Council should be praised for an act of high patriotism. It would have been disastrous for the United States to have, as the person responsible for overseeing “policy-neutral intelligence assessments” for the President, a zealot who is anything but policy-neutral when it comes to two of the most important areas of international conflict.

Freeman not only has extremist views regarding the Middle East and China, but he has been beholden to lobby groups (No it's you jew! With your AIPAC)that are anxious to influence intelligent assessments regarding Saudi Arabia and China. Freeman bowed out when it became clear that his highly questionable financial ties to the Saudi and China lobby would be deeply probed by inspectors general, congressional staffers and the media. He couldn’t handle the truth about his financial ties to these lobbies which do not serve the interests of the United States.(Oh and "AIPAC" does? LIAR!) The heavy thumbs of the powerful Saudi and Chinese lobbies (Gimme a break)would have subtly, and perhaps invisibly, weighed on Freeman’s intelligence assessment.

Freeman is an ideologue who apparently believed that China should have been more aggressive in its crackdown on the peaceful Tiananmen Square protestors.(blah blah blah) (Now here is the gist of their angst)At the same time, he has been critical of American support for Israeli efforts to stop violent terrorists from blowing up Israeli schools busses and firing rockets at Israeli kindergartens.(Where's my violin?) There is only one rational explanation for why a smart intelligence official would be so irrational as to express more sympathy for brutal Chinese repression of peaceful dissent than for Israeli self-defense against violent terrorism: Freeman has been bought and paid for by lobbies that he does not wish to alienate.(Hahahah..good one jew, he has NOT been bought and paid for and that is what pisses you off) He has a long history of playing the tunes selected for him by those who have paid him.(No he is not a "shabbos goy, 'useful idiot') He is an ideological zealot when it comes to the Middle East. Senator Charles Schumer correctly characterized his views as “over the top” and an “irrational hatred of Israel.”

Freeman acknowledged that he is deeply and emotionally committed to a fundamental change in US policy toward Israel. That is certainly his right as a private citizen or even as an elected official. But his extremist views would not have served him, or our nation well, as the person responsible for what are supposed to “policy-neutral intelligence assessments.” An ideologue with such heavy financial baggage is simply incapable of policy-neutrality, and he should have known that. ( Say what??? Last time I checked, being a "dual citizen" is in direct conflict with the best interest of America)

If there was ever any doubt about his neutrality, he eliminated it by his over-the-top reaction to those who challenged his qualifications for the job based on his record. He railed against “the Israel lobby” blaming it, and it alone, for his failure to get the job. He ignored those human rights advocates who were outraged by his defense of the Chinese repression of the Tiananmen demonstrators and his unwavering support for the most repressive regime in the Middle East. He ignored environmentalists who worried that he was far too beholden to oil interests. And he ignored patriotic Americans who support the U.S. policy in the Middle East because they believe it is good for America, for democracy and for the war against terrorism. (Shut the hell up you lying jew)

Freeman was not alone in invoking the “power” of the Israel lobby and accusing it of unpatriotic actions. He teamed up with Stephen Walt, the discredited academic who has recently made a career of blaming all of America’s ills on “The Lobby.” Here is how Walt gleefully put it: “For all of you out there who may have questioned whether there was a powerful ‘Israel Lobby’ or admitted that it existed but didn’t think it had much influence…think again.” Walt ignored the fact that the powerful Saudi, China and foreign oil lobbies were supporting Freeman because they believed, quite correctly, that his assessment of intelligence would be anything but neutral when it came to protecting their interests. He also ignored the fact that AIPAC—which Walt considers the puppet master of the Jewish Lobby—took no position on the Freeman nomination, and that those who opposed it included critics of Israeli policies.

So let me understand the Freeman-Walt position. When the Saudi’s, the Chinese and foreign oil lobbies (with a small “l”) exercise their influence, that is freedom of speech and the right to petition the government. But when the Israel Lobby (capital “L”) challenges an appointment, such action is “dual loyalty,” “un-American” and “unpatriotic.” Their other position is that any time people of diverse backgrounds and views independently challenge a government decision that relates to the Middle East, this represents the collective action of the notorious and powerful Israel Lobby, rather than the heartfelt views of individual patriotic Americans.

The truth is that the Freeman appointment was bad for America, bad for peace in the Middle East, bad for human rights in China, bad for Tibet, bad for the environment, and bad for “policy-neutral intelligence.” Those who challenged it performed a patriotic duty. They should be praised for helping the Obama Administration avoid a serious blunder that threatened to compromise the President’s ability to act in the interest of the United States (IsraLIE) on the basis of policy-neutral intelligence. All Americans owe them a debt of gratitude.

To hell with you quickly scourge of the earth.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...B-8475774EA436

Here is what Freeman said:

Freeman speaks out on his exitTue, 03/10/2009 - 5:35pm

Retired Amb. Chas Freeman, who said today that he no longer accepts an offer to chair the National Intelligence Council, has just sent this message:
You will by now have seen the statement by Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair reporting that I have withdrawn my previous acceptance of his invitation to chair the National Intelligence Council.

I have concluded that the barrage of libelous distortions of my record would not cease upon my entry into office. The effort to smear me and to destroy my credibility would instead continue. I do not believe the National Intelligence Council could function effectively while its chair was under constant attack by unscrupulous people with a passionate attachment to the views of a political faction in a foreign country.I agreed to chair the NIC to strengthen it and protect it against politicization, not to introduce it to efforts by a special interest group to assert control over it through a protracted political campaign.

As those who know me are well aware, I have greatly enjoyed life since retiring from government. Nothing was further from my mind than a return to public service. When Admiral Blair asked me to chair the NIC I responded that I understood he was “asking me to give my freedom of speech, my leisure, the greater part of my income, subject myself to the mental colonoscopy of a polygraph, and resume a daily commute to a job with long working hours and a daily ration of political abuse.” I added that I wondered “whether there wasn’t some sort of downside to this offer.” I was mindful that no one is indispensable; I am not an exception. It took weeks of reflection for me to conclude that, given the unprecedentedly challenging circumstances in which our country now finds itself abroad and at home, I had no choice but accept the call to return to public service. I thereupon resigned from all positions that I had held and all activities in which I was engaged. I now look forward to returning to private life, freed of all previous obligations.

I am not so immodest as to believe that this controversy was about me rather than issues of public policy. These issues had little to do with the NIC and were not at the heart of what I hoped to contribute to the quality of analysis available to President Obama and his administration. Still, I am saddened by what the controversy and the manner in which the public vitriol of those who devoted themselves to sustaining it have revealed about the state of our civil society. It is apparent that we Americans cannot any longer conduct a serious public discussion or exercise independent judgment about matters of great importance to our country as well as to our allies and friends.

The libels on me and their easily traceable email trails show conclusively that there is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East. The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth. The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views, the substitution of political correctness for analysis, and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those that it favors.

There is a special irony in having been accused of improper regard for the opinions of foreign governments and societies by a group so clearly intent on enforcing adherence to the policies of a foreign government – in this case, the government of Israel. I believe that the inability of the American public to discuss, or the government to consider, any option for US policies in the Middle East opposed by the ruling faction in Israeli politics has allowed that faction to adopt and sustain policies that ultimately threaten the existence of the state of Israel. It is not permitted for anyone in the United States to say so. This is not just a tragedy for Israelis and their neighbors in the Middle East; it is doing widening damage to the national security of the United States.

The outrageous agitation that followed the leak of my pending appointment will be seen by many to raise serious questions about whether the Obama administration will be able to make its own decisions about the Middle East and related issues. I regret that my willingness to serve the new administration has ended by casting doubt on its ability to consider, let alone decide what policies might best serve the interests of the United States rather than those of a Lobby intent on enforcing the will and interests of a foreign government.

In the court of public opinion, unlike a court of law, one is guilty until proven innocent. The speeches from which quotations have been lifted from their context are available for anyone interested in the truth to read. The injustice of the accusations made against me has been obvious to those with open minds. Those who have sought to impugn my character are uninterested in any rebuttal that I or anyone else might make.

Still, for the record: I have never sought to be paid or accepted payment from any foreign government, including Saudi Arabia or China, for any service, nor have I ever spoken on behalf of a foreign government, its interests, or its policies. I have never lobbied any branch of our government for any cause, foreign or domestic. I am my own man, no one else’s, and with my return to private life, I will once again – to my pleasure – serve no master other than myself. I will continue to speak out as I choose on issues of concern to me and other Americans.
I retain my respect and confidence in President Obama and DNI Blair.

Our country now faces terrible challenges abroad as well as at home. Like all patriotic Americans, I continue to pray that our president can successfully lead us in surmounting them.
SOURCE

For an excellent commentary on this story

http://incogman.wordpress.com/

Blood is Thicker Than Water. Or Is It?

I have read Jayne's work before, and she has wonderful insight.
After reading this latest essay, I am sure you know someone, many who you have encountered, that have reacted in this very same way. I have had a similar experience with my own sister.

To quote a discussion from two friends regarding this mindset:

"Again and again, If you have to make laws outlawing the discussion of history, you have something to hide. I just don't realize why more people don't realize that I think a LOT of people are just totally oblivious to the whole thing."

"If all they've gotten is a publik school education and only know life through the jewtube and Hollywood movies they've never even been introduced to any alternative thinking. All they know is to fear being called a racist or antisemite. They are taught to never question conventional thinking and so basically just go along to get along. Fear of being called a naziwhowantstokill6millionjews for even daring to look into the facts, stops them from ever inquiring further. I mean really... how many people could you go up to and tell them to go to David Dukes site and read his articles? First off, they would look at you like you had three heads. ALL they know is what mainstream media has told them about Duke. They think they would turn into a three headed monster if they even read anything there without even knowing the truth about him or that he is a well spoken and rational person."

Folks this IS severe brainwashing.

By Jayne Gardener

When my children made mistakes while they were growing up, especially if those mistakes had unpleasant consequences for them, I often reassured them that it was okay, that some lessons just seemed to need to be learned the hard way. Truer words were never spoken.One lesson I learned recently is that if you're going to broach "the Jewish question" with someone, don't start with the Holocaust. I know, I know! I should have known better, in fact, I did know better. I just couldn't seem to hold myself back.

I was having lunch with my sister as I have been doing every Monday for the past 20 years. In the course of our conversations during that time, we have covered just about every topic under the sun. Husbands, children, movies, books, the weather, politics, our gardens, her boss.....you name it, we've discussed it. But on this particular occasion we found ourselves talking about the Holocaust.Now, my sister knows that I read a lot of the Holocaust books growing up, including Anne Frank's Diary, Rudolph Vrba's I Cannot Forgive as well as more than a few others, plus she knew that I had seen all the movies. I remember talking to her in depth about Schindler's List after we had both seen it at the movies just as we had talked quite a lot about the Holocaust after we had seen the television miniseries by that very title back in the 70s.I first remember learning about the Holocaust in the early 60s when the news was full of details about the capture and subsequent trial and execution of Adolph Eichmann for his "crimes against humanity." I remember asking my mother what it was all about and she explained it to me. I recall being horrified by the details and my mind boggled trying to picture 6 million people suddenly gone from the planet in such an inhumane and ghastly manner.

Since then I had read as much information as I could find on the subject and often did papers on it from various angles for History class in high school. I read the books and I watched the movies and I cried. When I was 17, I started a relationship with a Jewish boy that lasted the better part of 5 years and he and I would often talk about what had happened to the Jews of Europe. No one was more of a believer than I.Anyway, I digress.

I believe the subject came up this time because my sister and her husband had just returned from a vacation in Europe. They had visited one of the Holocaust memorials and she was describing it to me as I glanced through her photograph album of the trip. We began talking about the Holocaust as we had many times before but this time, unbeknown to her, I no longer shared her view of it, having learned what I believe to be the truth from reading a lot of the so-called historical revisionist sites online.My "awakening," to steal the term from David Duke, began a few years ago when I had questions concerning the Holocaust for which I could find no good answers. I started going to different sites online dealing with the issue and with each word I read I experienced a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach, a dawning, creeping horror of realization that, in all likelihood, I had been mislead, most likely deliberately. I didn't want to believe it. I couldn't believe it. But I couldn't deny the ring of truth in my discoveries and gradually, over weeks and months, I came to accept what I believe to be the truth. I had indeed been lied to.

I sat and listened patiently to my sister for as long as I could before I felt I was about to explode and then, even though my internal voice was shouting "Don't Say It!" I heard the words come out of my mouth. "I don't think we've been told the truth about the Holocaust."There it was, hovering in the air between us, like a bullet forcefully ejected from the muzzle of a gun, unable to be called back. I had arrived at the edge of the precipice and like a fool, I had jumped.I watched as a look of sheer disbelief crossed her face, her eyes narrowing as she stared at me as though she was just seeing me for the first time in her life and wasn't at all pleased with what she saw."What?" she finally sputtered out, looking at me as though I were a creature to be pitied.

"You can't possibly mean that.""I'm afraid I do mean it," I responded. "I've spent the last two or three years reading everything I could lay my hands on regarding the Holocaust and I think we've been lied to."Oh come on, Jayne," she said in her most patronizing voice. "We've all seen the pictures.""Of course we have," I told her. "And we've been lied to as to what they represent. Jews were interned by the Germans just as we interned the Japanese but unfortunately the rail lines in Germany were bombed, stopping the flow of supplies....plus there was a typhus epidemic.....many Jews died of either starvation or typhus, but not by gassing......at least there's no conclusive evidence of that.""Stop it," she said, an angry look crossing her face. "Let's just drop it. This is very upsetting for me."

"It just doesn't add up," I continued, forgetting that retreat is sometimes the greatest form of valor. "To have killed that many people in that manner in such a short time is simply not possible. The Nuremberg trials were a joke.....people were executed simply on so-called eye witness testimony......confessions extracted by torture......It makes no sense. They are jailing people for disagreeing with the official version. Doesn't that prove they're hiding something?""Just stop it!" she repeated.

"I don't want to have this conversation. It upsets me.""It's upsetting for me too, I replied. "I've had to rethink everything I learned about the Holocaust. Do you think I wanted to believe what I've come to believe? Learning this has been very disturbing for me, but I've done the research and I'm convinced. We've been lied to and if you listen to at least part of what I have to say I think you'd see where I'm coming from.""Stop it," she said, her face visibly tinged with an angry red color. "This is just too upsetting for me and I love you. I don't want to fight.""Fine," I said.

"It's upsetting you. It upsets me too. But this is silly that we can't even talk about it. Are there any other periods in history we can't talk about or is this the only one?""Maybe it is silly," she replied with a cold, steely glare. "But it upsets me and I am done talking about it. I can't believe you of all people..........you dated a Jewish man for five years....how can you?"

Perhaps I shouldn't have, but I dropped the subject and tried to direct it toward lighter things. But I was hurt, deeply hurt. I can admit that. What my sister was basically telling me was that she would rather believe that I am a horrible person than to even conceive of the notion that Jews might have lied about and/or exaggerated the Holocaust to a political or financial end.I had been tried, judged and convicted in her eyes without even being allowed to make my case. This is how good the brainwashing has been. This is what has been achieved by all the books, movies, museums and television programs ad nauseum that have led most people to believe in the hyperbolic and in some cases totally fallacious view of the treatment of Jews by the Germans in the second World War.I had been allowed no legal representation, no plea of innocence, no fair hearing. Nothing. I was condemned simply because I uttered the most horrid of words. "I think we've been lied to about the Holocaust." I had committed the unpardonable sin, one that was unforgettable and unforgivable. I stood condemned.

In the weeks that have passed since that day, my sister and I continue to meet over lunch when our schedules permit but there is a palpable difference in our relationship. I feel wounded, disappointed and yes, angry, that my own sister is not open-minded enough to even listen to what I have to say and she is disappointed in me (and probably disgusted by me) because I have decidedly and unequivocally stated out loud that I believe the Holocaust did not happen in the way in which the history books have claimed.My own sister. The one with whom I shared a room for the first fifteen years of my life. The one who told me the facts of life. The one who stood up for me when I got married.They say blood is thicker than water. I used to believe that.

But then, I used to believe a lot of things.

LINK

And the Blind Will Still Refuse to See...

Israeli Spokesman Says We Control Stupid Americans "Another Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache, stated that she was not worried about negative ramifications the Israeli onslaught on Gaza might have on the way the Obama administration would view Israel. She said "You know very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What can they (Americans) do to us? We control congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything in America. In America you can criticize God, but you can't criticize Israel."

http://www.daily.pk/world/americas/9334-israeli-spokesman-says-we-control-stupid-americans.html

Kikes call this "chutzpah". Jews always over reach. They are more brazen and more out in the open than they have ever been in modern times. Their greed and hubris is beginning to attract more and more attention. The survivors of the economic tsunami are going to be left in the debris of their lives wondering what- or who- was responsible. They will likely take to the internet to find those answers. People like us are going to be here to give it to them. It will not end well for "G_d's Self Chosen." I have never been more confident or absolute in my belief that we are going to get out from under the iron heel of ZOG as I have been these past 5 months. The more ZOG begins to lose its grip, the more wild and reckless it becomes. Victory, friends and fellow Patriots, is within reach!

LINK