Tucker Carlson was guest on C Span Washington Journal in the 8:45 am slot. His performance was lackluster, jerky.
The last comment of his interview was a response to an email question:
Question: "Where do you think the US is headed?"
Carlson: Many people believe US is on the wrong track. In a few years we'll have debt that's greater than our GDP -- that's not a nation that's third world. Something will have to give -- Social Security and Medicare will have to be cut. And we've lost the willingness to take risks -- there's a kind of greyness about America. We're all going to die, so why not live a little more fully? We should be more like Israel.
Does C Span prepare its guests to mention Israel favorably? Has Carlson been on a trip to Israel, like my next door neighbor who came back from a trip to Israel hugely impressed, because Israel sent out representatives to overwhelm him with pro-Israelness. A love-bomb.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Monday, June 14, 2010
"An American Killed by a Stray Bullet" - C Span June 14 2010
John Negroponte was guest on Washington Journal.
At about 8:15 am, a caller said "looking at the video it's obvious that the passengers were intending violence. Israel is always criticized; the Muslim street is inflamed. A stray bullet killed an American.
Isn't there some way US can work with moderate Muslims?
Negroponte: "When I was in UN Israel constantly criticized. We had to use a few votes to oppose the anti-Israel resolutions...."
8:27 am: Call pushing back against Negroponte's comment about Israel in the UN.
Negroponte deflects it: "there were resolutions against Israel in the UN stacked up like airplanes on the runway. It's a question of balance: Palestinians do bad things too, they fire rockets.
9:20 am, Ryan Crocker. First Question: Hezbollah: "we must engage them; best way to mess with their minds."
9:48 am: caller, Lech: I am a Polish American, I just listened to Polish news; Poland is pulling its troops out of Afghanistan because the war is being managed badly. Instead of killing people we need to be building the country and giving the people control over their own country.
9:50 am: caller: We gave nukes to Pakistan, India, Israel, but condemn Iran.
Crocker: "We sanctioned Pakistan; we disengaged and 9/11 happened. It was a failure of engagement based on a failure of imagination. "we know how that movie goes and I don't want to see it again."
9:55 am: "I am infuriated with our country. Our troops are protected the drug lords. We started the Taliban, Israel started Hamas. [says something obscene, is cut off.]
9:56 am: I love Bush, most people feel there were weapons in Iraq, Bush should have done something sooner. Just because they didn't find WMD doesn't mean they weren't there.... I hope the school does well.
9:57 am: "Papa Bush started this by bombing Reagan created Osama...fact that you can casually defend your ridiculous behavior no business
we're using israel as our hezbollah [cut off]
Crocker: I was director of Iraq task force, I take a different view: Bush decision to liberate Kuwait was a critical step in establishing that US would be decisively engaged in a post Cold war world order: we would not stand back and emphasize that adversaries of our would Persian Gulf war was important, Papa bush got it exactly right and I'm glad he did."
At about 8:15 am, a caller said "looking at the video it's obvious that the passengers were intending violence. Israel is always criticized; the Muslim street is inflamed. A stray bullet killed an American.
Isn't there some way US can work with moderate Muslims?
Negroponte: "When I was in UN Israel constantly criticized. We had to use a few votes to oppose the anti-Israel resolutions...."
8:27 am: Call pushing back against Negroponte's comment about Israel in the UN.
Negroponte deflects it: "there were resolutions against Israel in the UN stacked up like airplanes on the runway. It's a question of balance: Palestinians do bad things too, they fire rockets.
9:20 am, Ryan Crocker. First Question: Hezbollah: "we must engage them; best way to mess with their minds."
9:48 am: caller, Lech: I am a Polish American, I just listened to Polish news; Poland is pulling its troops out of Afghanistan because the war is being managed badly. Instead of killing people we need to be building the country and giving the people control over their own country.
9:50 am: caller: We gave nukes to Pakistan, India, Israel, but condemn Iran.
Crocker: "We sanctioned Pakistan; we disengaged and 9/11 happened. It was a failure of engagement based on a failure of imagination. "we know how that movie goes and I don't want to see it again."
9:55 am: "I am infuriated with our country. Our troops are protected the drug lords. We started the Taliban, Israel started Hamas. [says something obscene, is cut off.]
9:56 am: I love Bush, most people feel there were weapons in Iraq, Bush should have done something sooner. Just because they didn't find WMD doesn't mean they weren't there.... I hope the school does well.
9:57 am: "Papa Bush started this by bombing Reagan created Osama...fact that you can casually defend your ridiculous behavior no business
we're using israel as our hezbollah [cut off]
Crocker: I was director of Iraq task force, I take a different view: Bush decision to liberate Kuwait was a critical step in establishing that US would be decisively engaged in a post Cold war world order: we would not stand back and emphasize that adversaries of our would Persian Gulf war was important, Papa bush got it exactly right and I'm glad he did."
Sunday, June 13, 2010
"I'm a veteran. If I lose my ", we will do what Uncle Sam trained us to do" June 13 2010
C Span Washington Journal, Sunday June 13 2010 Steve Scully
Karim Sadjapour spewing absolute bullshit with unquestioning validation from Scully.
last segment: representative of pensions board. Many government pension funds defaulting. To pay pension obligations, municipalities will be forced to cut back on schools, libraries, etc.
caller: I'm a veteran. We are the generation that made this country great. We made it possible for Bill Gates to make a fortune. Then he goes to China, takes our jobs away. If I lose my pension, we will do what Uncle Sam trained us to do.
--> what would veterans think if they knew that 'Uncle Sam' spends more money on Israel than on PTSD treatment for returning vets?
Karim Sadjapour spewing absolute bullshit with unquestioning validation from Scully.
last segment: representative of pensions board. Many government pension funds defaulting. To pay pension obligations, municipalities will be forced to cut back on schools, libraries, etc.
caller: I'm a veteran. We are the generation that made this country great. We made it possible for Bill Gates to make a fortune. Then he goes to China, takes our jobs away. If I lose my pension, we will do what Uncle Sam trained us to do.
--> what would veterans think if they knew that 'Uncle Sam' spends more money on Israel than on PTSD treatment for returning vets?
Monday, June 7, 2010
re Helen Thomas: Pavlov's Dog Didn't Bark June 7 2010
June 7 2010
Question of the morning on Wash Journ was, Should Helen Thomas be asked to resign from the White House press pool because of her response to an anonymous blogger's question about Jews in Israel.
C Span pivoted from a statement by Lani Davis that Thomas was an anti-Jewish bigot. In other words, C Span focused on whether Thomas could continue as an impartial reporter from the White House because she made a statement that was not supportive of Jews.
I think the question about Helen Thomas's capacity to report from the White House should be whether she is mindful of American interests, rather than Jewish or Israel's interests.
I further think that the Question and reaction of the blogger who asked the question is an essential part of the story. After Ms. Thomas made her first statement, that Jews should leave Palestine because they were occupying land stolen from Palestinians, the blogger said, "Whoa...." He did not anticipate that response. In other words, his was not a question to elicit an authentic opinion, it was the lab technician checking on whether Pavlov's dog was still trained. He rang the bell, Helen Thomas did not bark.
That non-bark, that failure of the 63 years of Jewish sensitivity training of the American people is the silence heard round the country.
C Span moderator was out of his depth as a journalist; his listeners and callers were far better informed than he is. For example, the Moderator tried several times to beat back the caller who stated that a member of AIPAC spies on the US. The caller said, "I read it in the Washington Post; don't you know about that?" He said, "It's Steve Weissman" [actually Keith Weissman]." Which is correct.
The Moderator terminated the call at that point.
The question is, can C Span be educated?
If not C Span, then WHO can guide the United States through an honest and vigorous discussion of the US relationship with Israel, with AIPAC, with Jews in the United States, with zionism?
To stifle that conversation is precisely the approach that will result in more, not less, harm to Jews in America. Most people will automatically point to Germany as an example of a situation where "antisemitism got out of hand and resulted in the Holocaust of 6 million Jews." That would be inaccurate. That response would be the Pavlovian response.
Hitler's first major piece of writing was an exploration of "principled antisemitism." Renan's was much the same. Why were the German people resentful of Jews? Both Renan and Hitler concluded that the old, religious issues, that "Jews killed Christ," were bogus. The complaints of the German people involved economic and financial issues, matters of Jewish dominance of German institutions and media. Hitler tried to defuse the anger of the people.
AISH, Rabbi Ken Spiro.... "Jews expect to be persecuted again."
US must do things differently. We must not allow the United States to be led by zionists down the same path that Germany was led by zionists. We must call to account Israel and the Jews in the US who have suborned the interests of the United STates in preference for the interests of Israel.
I suggest several action to take:
1. A truth and reconciliation commission.
2. Seize the assets of zionist billionaires who support activities that work against the interests of the US -- Schusterman, Adelson, Haim Saban,
3. Dismantle the US Treasury office of antiterrorism. US Treasury should be focusing on US economy, not attempting to destroy Iran's economy for the benefit of Israel.
4. Close the Holocaust Museum
5. Demand that lobbyists for Israel register as foreign agents.
6. Include Israel and Israel lobbyists in the Campaign reform rules of _____ .
7.
The question is,
Question of the morning on Wash Journ was, Should Helen Thomas be asked to resign from the White House press pool because of her response to an anonymous blogger's question about Jews in Israel.
C Span pivoted from a statement by Lani Davis that Thomas was an anti-Jewish bigot. In other words, C Span focused on whether Thomas could continue as an impartial reporter from the White House because she made a statement that was not supportive of Jews.
I think the question about Helen Thomas's capacity to report from the White House should be whether she is mindful of American interests, rather than Jewish or Israel's interests.
I further think that the Question and reaction of the blogger who asked the question is an essential part of the story. After Ms. Thomas made her first statement, that Jews should leave Palestine because they were occupying land stolen from Palestinians, the blogger said, "Whoa...." He did not anticipate that response. In other words, his was not a question to elicit an authentic opinion, it was the lab technician checking on whether Pavlov's dog was still trained. He rang the bell, Helen Thomas did not bark.
That non-bark, that failure of the 63 years of Jewish sensitivity training of the American people is the silence heard round the country.
C Span moderator was out of his depth as a journalist; his listeners and callers were far better informed than he is. For example, the Moderator tried several times to beat back the caller who stated that a member of AIPAC spies on the US. The caller said, "I read it in the Washington Post; don't you know about that?" He said, "It's Steve Weissman" [actually Keith Weissman]." Which is correct.
The Moderator terminated the call at that point.
The question is, can C Span be educated?
If not C Span, then WHO can guide the United States through an honest and vigorous discussion of the US relationship with Israel, with AIPAC, with Jews in the United States, with zionism?
To stifle that conversation is precisely the approach that will result in more, not less, harm to Jews in America. Most people will automatically point to Germany as an example of a situation where "antisemitism got out of hand and resulted in the Holocaust of 6 million Jews." That would be inaccurate. That response would be the Pavlovian response.
Hitler's first major piece of writing was an exploration of "principled antisemitism." Renan's was much the same. Why were the German people resentful of Jews? Both Renan and Hitler concluded that the old, religious issues, that "Jews killed Christ," were bogus. The complaints of the German people involved economic and financial issues, matters of Jewish dominance of German institutions and media. Hitler tried to defuse the anger of the people.
AISH, Rabbi Ken Spiro.... "Jews expect to be persecuted again."
US must do things differently. We must not allow the United States to be led by zionists down the same path that Germany was led by zionists. We must call to account Israel and the Jews in the US who have suborned the interests of the United STates in preference for the interests of Israel.
I suggest several action to take:
1. A truth and reconciliation commission.
2. Seize the assets of zionist billionaires who support activities that work against the interests of the US -- Schusterman, Adelson, Haim Saban,
3. Dismantle the US Treasury office of antiterrorism. US Treasury should be focusing on US economy, not attempting to destroy Iran's economy for the benefit of Israel.
4. Close the Holocaust Museum
5. Demand that lobbyists for Israel register as foreign agents.
6. Include Israel and Israel lobbyists in the Campaign reform rules of _____ .
7.
The question is,
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Cracks revealing feet of clay June 3 2010
Psychopathic god June 3, 2010 at 10:32 am
C Span Washington Journal is my ‘beat.’
I consider C Span the ‘Colin Powell’ of cable media: people trust C Span to be impartial.
And yesterday, the tipping point was approached: a caller said,
“oil, oil, oil; that’s all you talk about. It’s very important but the flotilla is extremely important too, why don’t you talk about the flotilla? You cut off callers who say things critical of Israel.”
So today C Span Moderator Susan Swain took the bull by the horns: You, dear listeners, tell us what is most important to you.
Then Swain read the headlines of a number of national newspapers. I lost count; most of them lead with oil spill stories.
C Span Washington Journal frequently explains to its listeners that it tries to be ‘balanced’ by reading NYT AND Washington Times; that is, it thinks its covering the spectrum of print media.
But C Span does not get the larger point: ALL of the media is either bought or cowed to presenting ONLY what certain interests permit to be presented, and only in the way that those interests prefer. Nobody wants to think about it, including trustworthy C Span.
I’m still having a hard time categorizing the calls — twenty of them came in; most mentioned the oil spill as being very important; several mentioned pressing issues like immigration; pressing economic issues including employment/unemployment, finance reform. A few off-the-wall calls occupy the tails of the curve. Perhaps four or five callers mentioned Israel/Gaza and the flotilla.
Two calls regarding Israel laid bare the divide; one of those calls represented a major tipping point in US dialog about Israel. That caller said he thought the most important issue the US has to confront is the media. He said that C Span represented the best that the media spectrum has to offer, but that C Span seemed to pull its punches when the topic was Israel. He asked this question twice, and squeezed a response from Ms. Swain: “When C Span producers have their directors’ meetings, do they say, ‘Don’t talk about Israel or Jews?’ Because that what it seems like.”
(Swain replied softly and rather embarrassed, “No, of course we don’t eliminate any topic from discussion.”)
The caller spoke further (and to her credit, Swain was generous with time and did not interrupt or censure): “Many times when people say things critical of Israel, they are accused of antisemitism. Some seem antisemitic. But it is possible to talk about Israel without being antisemitic, and it’s important.”
The caller’s remarks were in the same vein of thought as one of . Stephen Walt’s three question of Peter Beinart:
Some months ago, Michael Scheuer caused a mild stir when he said, on C Span Washington Journal, that Americans needed to, and deserved to, have a frank conversation about the US-Israel relationship. Scott Ritter has said the same thing on numerous occasions, including on C Span.
Starting at least three years ago, a network of some dozens of us low-life low-impact keyboard warriors have tried to raise the issue on numerous fora, perhaps with more passion than tact; we’ve been banned, censored, and vilified as vicious antisemites.
Who knows how many Palestinians, who knows how many Afghanis, who knows how many American soldiers, have died since Michael Scheuer and Scott Ritter stirred the waters.
Three days ago nine more people died– is it nine? we don’t know! Israel retains control of bodies, wounded, information, evidence, and the right to be its own judge and jury, by decree of Hillary Clinton, who is in thrall to Haim Saban who has stated that “he’s a one-issue guy and that issue is Israel,” and that he cares for the US so little that his businesses are incorporated in Cayman Islands so that he can avoid US taxes.
It’s time. NOW. Time for a vigorous all-American debate on the US-Israel relationship.
Pray that the conversation can remain a conversation and not a confrontation.
C Span Washington Journal is my ‘beat.’
I consider C Span the ‘Colin Powell’ of cable media: people trust C Span to be impartial.
And yesterday, the tipping point was approached: a caller said,
“oil, oil, oil; that’s all you talk about. It’s very important but the flotilla is extremely important too, why don’t you talk about the flotilla? You cut off callers who say things critical of Israel.”
So today C Span Moderator Susan Swain took the bull by the horns: You, dear listeners, tell us what is most important to you.
Then Swain read the headlines of a number of national newspapers. I lost count; most of them lead with oil spill stories.
C Span Washington Journal frequently explains to its listeners that it tries to be ‘balanced’ by reading NYT AND Washington Times; that is, it thinks its covering the spectrum of print media.
But C Span does not get the larger point: ALL of the media is either bought or cowed to presenting ONLY what certain interests permit to be presented, and only in the way that those interests prefer. Nobody wants to think about it, including trustworthy C Span.
I’m still having a hard time categorizing the calls — twenty of them came in; most mentioned the oil spill as being very important; several mentioned pressing issues like immigration; pressing economic issues including employment/unemployment, finance reform. A few off-the-wall calls occupy the tails of the curve. Perhaps four or five callers mentioned Israel/Gaza and the flotilla.
Two calls regarding Israel laid bare the divide; one of those calls represented a major tipping point in US dialog about Israel. That caller said he thought the most important issue the US has to confront is the media. He said that C Span represented the best that the media spectrum has to offer, but that C Span seemed to pull its punches when the topic was Israel. He asked this question twice, and squeezed a response from Ms. Swain: “When C Span producers have their directors’ meetings, do they say, ‘Don’t talk about Israel or Jews?’ Because that what it seems like.”
(Swain replied softly and rather embarrassed, “No, of course we don’t eliminate any topic from discussion.”)
The caller spoke further (and to her credit, Swain was generous with time and did not interrupt or censure): “Many times when people say things critical of Israel, they are accused of antisemitism. Some seem antisemitic. But it is possible to talk about Israel without being antisemitic, and it’s important.”
The caller’s remarks were in the same vein of thought as one of . Stephen Walt’s three question of Peter Beinart:
Second, Beinart’s essay is primarily directed at the American Jewish community, which is understandable. Yet I’m curious as to whether he thinks this is a topic that all Americans should engage with, or whether he thinks (as some do) that it is a topic on which non-Jews should remain largely silent. My own view is that the special relationship has a profound impact on American foreign policy and therefore it is a subject that all Americans should care about very much and be able to discuss openly — without being unfairly attacked — even if they a critical of Israel’s actions and America’s unconditional support for them. No group should enjoy a privileged position in that debate. I wonder if Beinart would agree.
Some months ago, Michael Scheuer caused a mild stir when he said, on C Span Washington Journal, that Americans needed to, and deserved to, have a frank conversation about the US-Israel relationship. Scott Ritter has said the same thing on numerous occasions, including on C Span.
Starting at least three years ago, a network of some dozens of us low-life low-impact keyboard warriors have tried to raise the issue on numerous fora, perhaps with more passion than tact; we’ve been banned, censored, and vilified as vicious antisemites.
Who knows how many Palestinians, who knows how many Afghanis, who knows how many American soldiers, have died since Michael Scheuer and Scott Ritter stirred the waters.
Three days ago nine more people died– is it nine? we don’t know! Israel retains control of bodies, wounded, information, evidence, and the right to be its own judge and jury, by decree of Hillary Clinton, who is in thrall to Haim Saban who has stated that “he’s a one-issue guy and that issue is Israel,” and that he cares for the US so little that his businesses are incorporated in Cayman Islands so that he can avoid US taxes.
It’s time. NOW. Time for a vigorous all-American debate on the US-Israel relationship.
Pray that the conversation can remain a conversation and not a confrontation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)