Cynthia McKinney Abducted By Israeli Thugs

I hear you. It IS insane.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkPvzSZRuDo
(audio clip on Youtube)

A phone call by Cynthia McKinney while still being held hostage

but I got zero hits

 link to www.dailykos.com

Obama and the ("Christian") Democrat-controlled Congress are cutting the checks. You can "eliminate" all the Zionists, and you will still have to deal with the continuing history of U.S. imperial slaughter and torture. What causes you to think that, absent Israel and the lobby, the U.S. would seek to support national liberation in the Third World?

"It is perhaps of some interest that the advocates of the claim that the Lobby determines US policy do not adopt the tactics implied: to put on ties and jackets, go to the corporate headquarters of Lockheed-Martin, Intel, Warren Buffett, ExxonMobil, etc., and politely explain to them something they failed to notice: that their interests are being harmed by a lobby that they utterly overwhelm in political and economic clout." (Noam Chomsky)

"There is something very easy - and all-too familiar - about Gentiles in powerful positions maintaining that it is not they who are responsible for their actions, but a cabal of rich and influential Jews manipulating events behind the scenes. Indeed, such claims constitute classic anti-Semitism: scapegoating Jews for unpopular actions by exaggerating Jewish economic and political power." (Stephen Zunes)

The reality is, we, "the people," have very limited means of determining who runs things for us in the U.S. Most probably, the people who really run things are well hidden. My guess is that something like the Bilderburgs are at the top, and their membership probably is not predominantly Jewish, or zionist, etc.

That said, there is still an enormous amount of evidence that the zionists hold vast power, even outright veto power over U.S. policy. And if someone is of the opinion that Israel is the predominant power in the U.S., that is a fairly credible personal opinion. And having a fairly credible personal opinion is certainly not tantamount to being anti-Jewish. It's just a personal estimate of the situation. Consider:
________________
|

Counterpunch: Black Caucus Muzzled
 http://www.counterpunch.org/mokhiber07032009.html


Got to hand it to J. Jioni Palmer.

He's learned the ropes of Washington well.

Palmer is the spokesperson for the Congressional Black Caucus.

Rang up Palmer on Wednesday.

Wanted to know whether the Congressional Black Caucus and
Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-California), it's chair, had any comment on the hijacking of the Free Gaza boat - the Spirit of Humanity.

On board - a former Congressional Black Caucus member - Cynthia McKinney.

On June 30th 2009 Israeli Occupation Forces forcibly boarded the boat.

They kidnapped McKinney, Nobel peace prize laureate Mairead Maguire and
19 other human rights workers and journalists who were on their way to
deliver much needed humanitarian and reconstruction supplies to
besieged Gaza.

So, I just wanted to know from Jioni Palmer - uh, given that McKinney
is a former member of the Congressional Black Caucus, you have a
comment on the hijacking, right?

No comment, Jioni said.

Okay, Jioni, how do I spell your name.

What, you are going to quote me saying no comment?

|________________

What does that say to you? What it says to me is that even the Congressional Black Caucus is afraid of the zionists. So that must tell me that the zionists have a huge amount of raw power over the Congress. It could easily persuade a lot of rational people that the zionists enjoy an fairly absolute veto power. And the quantity of concurring anecdotes is simply vast. So as to the question; is holding that opinion in itself evidence of anti-Judaism? Doesn't seem like it.

As far as Chomsky is concerned, many people have suggested that he has done more to hinder social progress than to help it. He acts as if he is always 100% certain of everything he claims. That is not the signature of a person who is being totally sincere. He constantly advocates "organization," and I have not once observed him describe how that could actually be accomplished. My experience of protesting the Vietnam debacle has taught me that any organization of more than a dozen or so individuals is bound to be infiltrated and destroyed.

Also, at the strong suggestion of some university professors, I have contacted Chomsky by email about my own work in linguistics. His return email was callously dismissive, and That is just what I had anticipated. He is famous for this behavior. So if he says:

"There is something very easy - and all-too familiar - about Gentiles in powerful positions maintaining that it is not they who are responsible for their actions, but a cabal of rich and influential Jews manipulating events behind the scenes. Indeed, such claims constitute classic anti-Semitism: scapegoating Jews for unpopular actions by exaggerating Jewish economic and political power."

— I am not persuaded very much.

Prof. Chomsky is what I believe. has the effect of disassembling the opposition by claiming the people aren't really working hard enough [ this may be true but I'm not sure ] to effect change. It's a common comment from him that if other countries can effect political change, then why can't we; the implied deduction being that we haven't the will socially to correct the system by political action.
Although there is great evidence that his thesis has substance, he avoids one critical issue.
This political system is the most sophisticated and most pervasive control matrix there has ever been developed.
The full spectrum of compliance protocols that the overclass has had time to develop over the last century has been fully researched, implemented and refined until its influence is the air we breath.
Everything from calming fluorides in most drinking water systems to commercial indoctrination to social conformity and selective rewards for compliance is now being augmented by exotic technologies that directly affect our environment electro-magneticly.
The world has never seen this level of external and internal control systems in the entire recorded history of man.
To dig into the rabbit hole on these subjects is to have access to a view into hell.
Chomsky wants everyone to look at the surface and play the game by pretending that the surface framework of political process is the operational framework rather than a fool's circus to cheer or boo at while the real process is hidden and out of reach for most of us.

Re: "It could easily persuade a lot of rational people that the zionists enjoy an fairly absolute veto power."

This is bigotry at its most obvious. I hope I don't have to explain it to the "progressives" who think Chomsky is a "media gatekeeper". Chomsky doesn't own any media company; they are the "gatekeepers".
------------------------------------------

Re: "So if he says:

"There is something very easy - and all-too familiar - about Gentiles in powerful positions maintaining that it is not they who are responsible for their actions, but a cabal of rich and influential Jews manipulating events behind the scenes. Indeed, such claims constitute classic anti-Semitism: scapegoating Jews for unpopular actions by exaggerating Jewish economic and political power."

blues: You don't read very well, and maybe that's why you're a failure in academia. The quote is from Stephen Zunes, as anyone who can read can see.
------------------------------------------------


Re: "I have contacted Chomsky by email about my own work in linguistics. His return email was callously dismissive"

This is what "blues"'s problem with Chomsky is really about. He disagreed with his linguistic analysis. Chomsky is one of the greatest social scientists in the history of the world, but "blues" thinks he's smarter.
----------------------------------------

Notice that blues doesn't engage in debate on the arguments listed. By the way, my primary argument, "You can "eliminate" all the Zionists, and you will still have to deal with the continuing history of U.S. imperial slaughter and torture. What causes you to think that, absent Israel and the lobby, the U.S. would seek to support national liberation in the Third World?" was drawn from the classic Joseph Massad (a Palestinian) article, "Blaming the Lobby",  http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/787/op35.htm:

"...when and in what context has the United States government ever supported national liberation in the Third World? The record of the United States is one of being the implacable enemy of all Third World national liberation groups, including European ones, from Greece to Latin America to Africa and Asia, except in the celebrated cases of the Afghan fundamentalists' war against the USSR and supporting apartheid South Africa's main terrorist allies in Angola and Mozambique (UNITA and RENAMO) against their respective anti-colonial national governments. Why then would the US support national liberation in the Arab world absent the pro-Israel lobby is something these studies never explain."