Avid Editor's Insights

Archive for May 27th, 2008

Obama Adviser Brzezinski Says Jewish Lobby Practices McCarthyism: More evidence of Obama’s hatred of the Jews

Posted by avideditor on May 27, 2008

Here is more evidence that Obama hates the Jews. We need to prevent this anti semite from bamboozling the American people into electing him.  I found this story at Yid With A Lid


Brzezinski is someone I have learned an immense amount from”, and “one of our most outstanding scholars and thinkers–Senator Barack Obama

The march of of Senator Obama’s Anti-Jew crew continues:

A foreign policy expert consulted by presidential hopeful Barack Obama has accused members of the American Jewish establishment of “McCarthyism” in its attitude towards critics of Israel. Former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski says that the pro-Israel lobby in the US is too powerful, while the slur of anti-Semitism is too readily used whenever its power is called into question.

Presenting a solution for the Middle East, he listed historical compromises that had to be made by Israelis and Palestinians but accused the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) — the largest and most influential lobby group — of obstructing peace efforts. He said: “AIPAC has consistently opposed a two-state solution and a lot of members of Congress have been intimidated and I don’t think that’s healthy.” Source

It is interesting that Obama adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, is using anti-Jewish stereotypes to make his point. What he doesn’t realize is that Jews welcome criticism (it helps us with our daily ration of guilt). What we don’t welcome are the stupid stereotypes which bigots like Brzezinski use. That secret cabal of the Jewish lobby making all of the US foreign policy decisions. There is no Jewish lobby, believe me if there was my wife would have it painted. 

Brzezinski even lied about the real facts. AIPAC does support the two state solution, it may not agree with the Israeli government on everything but there is a list of Pro-two state solution documents on its website. 

Zbigniew Brzezinski, as you may remember, was part of the Jimmy Carter administration (no surprise). And is a foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama. Folks Do I see a trend in Obama advisers, or is this one of those guilt by association things? Senator, tell me again how you support Israel, I love tall tales.

Posted in Obama | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Great News Even Israel’s Left sees appeasing the “Palestinians” doesn’t work

Posted by avideditor on May 27, 2008

This is some great news from Israel from Israel Matzav.

Even the left is getting tired of the ‘Palestinians.’

Anyone who has read this blog for any period of time has seen me refer to Haaretz as Israel’s ‘Hebrew ‘Palestinian’ Daily‘ (a term which was not coined by me, but by Steven Plaut). Bradley Burston is one of Haaretz’s most left-wing writers. But look what he’s telling the ‘Palestinians’ now.

We in the post-modern West have spent years educating ourselves to believe that all cultures are equally valid – with the possible exception, of course, of our own. We have taken it on faith that to criticize the culture of an indigenous people is obscenely imperialist, paternalist.

Read the rest here

Posted in Israel | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Obama and the Jews: Don’t buy into Obama’s Lies

Posted by avideditor on May 27, 2008

Obama is now trying to hid his true identity and lie to jewish voters in an attempt to decieve them. 10 year ago he was at a dinner with a radical “Palestinian” group which called for the destruction of the state of Israel. 

Sultan Knish presents a great piece on this topic. I wish I could write as well as him. But since I can not enjoy his great work. 


Obama and the Jews

The part time occupation of the part time Jews in the major media outlets for the last week or so has been to tackle Obama’s Jewish problem head on, in the same way that major corporations tackle the public revelation their product is fatally toxic to babies– by shaking their heads, smiling weakly and assuring us that it’s all in our heads. 

If we’re to believe the New York Times, the Washington Post and the rest of the good people at Media Central, the whole Jewish problem with Obama is the result of some provocative emails sent out by Karl Rove in his spare time that unfairly paint Obama as a Muslim to some gullible senior citizens.

“There, there,” the media assures these elders, “Obama isn’t a Muslim. He’s the Messiah come to lead us to the promised land of big government, Cuban quality health care and environmental taxes on every ounce of bread we eat.” And on the way there he may stop by the Middle East to lead Hamas to Jerusalem.

“Hasn’t Obama said that he’s Pro-Israel,” the columnists bewails, “how many times does he need to say it.” They don’t stay to hear the reply that he doesn’t need to say it, he needs to be it. For a skeptical profession they seem oddly offended that anyone is taking a politician’s statements in an election year with a grain of salt. “Listen to the man,” they say, “pay no attention to the Zbigniew Brzezinski, George Soros, Tony Lake, Samantha Power and Robert O. Malley behind the curtain.”

Hasn’t Obama already fired Samantha Power who wanted an invasion of Israel and Robert O’ Malley who was already privately meeting with Hamas, they protest. That just leaves George Soros without whom Obama would be just another junior Senator angling for an entry level spot on a committee, Brzezinski who helped bring Iran and Al Queda into existence and the rest of Obama’s radicals, both from his Chicago Wright days and his Harvard period, who are all too full of thoughts on what should be done with America and Israel.

The media which until recently was doing its best to pretend that the only people who could possibly oppose Obama were Satanists or worse yet Christians, has decided to believe that the only Democrats who oppose Obama are the senile elderly, hysterical feminists or rednecks. And the media is sure that once Obama is officially anointed at the convention, they along with the Jews will learn to fall into line behind the Kossacks, just like their ancestors did in Eastern Europe. If not, there’s always a cavalry charge.

While the leaders of major Jewish organizations are being called on the carpet by the Democratic leadership and told that they will lose influence and face a major backlash and the destruction of the “Black-Jewish alliance” if they don’t get behind Obama right now and leap into action to reassure their communities that Obama is A-OK; the Jewish public’s concerns are being poo-poohed by the press which is certain those ignorant folks in Brooklyn and Miami Beach will follow marching orders at the polls as soon as their own leadership does. For now some of the Jewish organizations are holding out for assurances that will no doubt fall away once Obama stops by for a meet and greet over bagels and lox and assures them how much he enjoyed Fiddler on the Roof.

As the ultimate outsider who belongs nowhere Obama has shown a great talent for repackaging himself into a dozen ethnic and racial identities. Obama can be white or black. He can be Christian or Muslim. He can be a wealthy Harvard educated professional or a street level community activist. Like an MC Escher picture, he’s a collection of impossibly intersecting levels that seem oddly out of perspective for reasons that aren’t apparent until you try to follow his contradictions. With all that in mind, there’s no reason that Obama can’t also repackage himself as a Jew.

To that end, Obama is already reimagining himself as a Zionist thanks to a Jewish sixth grade camp counselor and speaking of his love for the writings of Leon Uris and Philip Roth. While it’s safe to assume that Obama won’t be giving any readings of Leon Uris’ The Haj, a book that captured with unnerving accuracy the psychological fault lines of Arab culture, he is displaying a talent more worthy of the literary works of other writers such as F. Scott Fitzgerald or Theodore Dreiser. The talent of recreating himself into what people most want to see, the gift of the true con artist.

Obama hasn’t begun name dropping Uris and Roth out of a sudden love for old Jewish writers. Instead he’s discovered a sudden love of the same things that elderly and middle aged Jewish voters who have jilted him are interested in. Like the cynical suitor who studies a girl’s habits to discover her tastes and mirrors them to seduce her, Obama has made it his practice to jump in and out of identities and personas. Today Obama is reading Leon Uris. Tomorrow there’s a rally in San Francisco and he’s reading Amy Tan. The day after that he will be connecting to Feminists by namedropping some Erica Jong. Which selection in the infinitely expandable Obama Book Club best reflects who he is? The answer is none of them. The only thing that reflects on Obama is that he is determined to be President and willing to say anything to make it happen.

Jewish voters are nothing more to him than another breed of cattle to be coaxed through the gates of the polling centers to vote for him. The Democratic party relies on a varied and diverse herd led by Judas Goat community leaders to win office and they’re good at managing the herd. Stop by for a pizza in Little Italy, a bagel on the Lower East Side, some won ton in Chinatown and a burger in Harlem. Shake everyone’s hand, smile, relate and then slip some assurances and earmarks under the table to the community leaders. The herd sighs. The herd is happy as they led back to the barn until the next milking or slaughter.

In making the choice to break with Obama. Jewish voters are being given the chance to allow a larger moral reckoning to win out over this cheap type of ethnic pandering that the Obama campaign is engaging in. It is not guilt that should motivate Jewish voters to reject Obama. There will be plenty time for guilt after 8 years of Obama have done their damage just as there was after 1946. Guilt is the luxury of those who made an unforgivable mistake. This is the year when we can prevent the mistake from being made. Guilt is the refuge of those who know that what they are doing is wrong but refuse to change. This is the year when we can change.

Obama is not our savior. Obama is no one’s savior but his own. As his cult of personality spreads, millions of Americans are throwing reason and rationality out the window to embrace the promise of a one man solution to all their problems. But Obama’s background has left him with two poisoned outsider’s gifts, a legacy of hatred for America and the ability to camouflage his real feelings to blend in anywhere.

When a nation brings a cult of personality leader to power, it is typically at a low point in its national self-confidence and finds an outsider to rule over them in the hope he will save them from themselves. Just as Hitler was an Austrian ruling over Germany, Stalin was an Ossetian ruling over Russia, Obama is an African Arab with a Muslim background positioning himself for the White House. With a slim record and a campaign built primarily around his outgoing personality, Obama is America’s biggest mistake waiting to be made. Let’s not play any part in making it.

We don’t need to be saved from ourselves. We need to be saved from leaders who think that we rather than they are the problem. We need to be saved from leaders who imagine that disarming America and destroying Israel will make our enemies love us. We need to be saved from leaders who have more empathy for the enemy than they do for the citizens they rule over.

We don’t need to be saved by a lifelong con artist with a manufactured biography who repackages himself to appeal to everyone while concealing his real sympathies behind a facade of multilevel marketing outreach. We need to be saved from him and only we can save ourselves from him.

Posted in Obama | Tagged: , , , , | 4 Comments »


Posted by avideditor on May 27, 2008

I think Barack Obama shares the same views on foreign policy as his preacher. Obama as president would not only destroy America but it will destroy the world. The only reason radical jihadi islamist are running Iran is due to Carter. I think Obama is much worse than Carter. 

HT Pat Dollard


Stupid, stupid Hussein……

Stockton Record

By Charles Krauthammer
Washington Post Writers Group

When the House of Representatives takes up arms against $4 gas by voting 324-84 to sue OPEC, you know that election-year discourse has gone surreal. Another unmistakable sign is when a presidential candidate makes a gaffe, then, realizing it is too egregious to take back without suffering humiliation, decides to make it a centerpiece of his foreign policy.

Before the Democratic debate of July 23, Barack Obama had never expounded upon the wisdom of meeting, without precondition, with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Bashar al-Assad, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong Il or the Castro brothers. But in that debate, he was asked about doing exactly that.

Unprepared, he said sure – then got fancy, declaring the Bush administration’s refusal to do so not just “ridiculous” but “a disgrace.”

After that, there was no going back. So he doubled down. What started as a gaffe became policy. By now, it has become doctrine. Yet it remains today what it was on the day he blurted it out: an absurdity.

Should the president ever meet with enemies? Sometimes, but only after minimal American objectives – i.e. preconditions – have been met. The Shanghai communique was largely written long before Richard Nixon ever touched down in China. Yet Obama thinks Nixon to China confirms the wisdom of his willingness to undertake a worldwide freshman-year tyrants tour.

Most of the time you don’t negotiate with enemy leaders because there is nothing to negotiate. Does Obama imagine that North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cuba and Venezuela are insufficiently informed about American requirements for improved relations?

There are always contacts through back channels or intermediaries.

Iran, for example, has engaged in five years of talks with our closest European allies and the International Atomic Energy Agency, to say nothing of the hundreds of official U.S. statements outlining exactly what we would give them in return for suspending uranium enrichment.

Obama pretends that while he is for such “engagement,” the cowboy Republicans oppose it. Another absurdity. No one is debating the need for contacts. The debate is over the stupidity of elevating rogue states and their tyrants, easing their isolation and increasing their leverage by granting them unconditional meetings with the president of the world’s superpower.

Obama cited Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman as presidents who met with enemies. Does he know no history? Neither Roosevelt nor Truman ever met with any of the leaders of the Axis powers. Obama must be referring to the pictures he’s seen of Roosevelt and Stalin at Yalta, and Truman and Stalin at Potsdam. Does he not know that at that time Stalin was a wartime ally?

During the subsequent Cold War, Truman never met with Stalin. Nor Mao. Nor Kim Il Sung. Truman was no fool.

Obama cites John Kennedy meeting Nikita Khrushchev as another example of what he wants to emulate. Really? That Vienna summit of a young, inexperienced, untested American president was disastrous, emboldening Khrushchev to push Kennedy on Berlin – and then near fatally in Cuba, leading almost directly to the Cuban missile crisis. Is that the precedent Obama aspires to follow?

A meeting with Ahmadinejad would not just strengthen and vindicate him at home, it would instantly and powerfully ease the mullahs’ isolation, inviting other world leaders to follow. And with that would come a flood of commercial contracts, oil deals, diplomatic agreements – undermining precisely the very sanctions and isolation that Obama says he would employ against Iran.

As every seasoned diplomat knows, the danger of a summit is that it creates enormous pressure for results. And results require mutual concessions. That is why conditions and concessions are worked out in advance, not on the scene.

What concessions does Obama imagine Ahmadinejad will make to him on Iran’s nuclear program? And what new concessions will Obama offer? To abandon Lebanon? To recognize Hamas? Or perhaps to squeeze Israel?

Having lashed himself to the ridiculous, unprecedented promise of unconditional presidential negotiations – and then having compounded the problem by elevating it to a principle – Obama keeps trying to explain. Recently, he declared in Pendleton, Ore., that by Soviet standards Iran and others “don’t pose a serious threat to us.” (On the contrary. Islamic Iran is dangerously apocalyptic. Soviet Russia was not.) The next day in Billings, Mont.: “I’ve made it clear for years that the threat from Iran is grave.”

That’s the very next day, mind you. Such rhetorical flailing has done more than create an intellectual mess. It has given rise to a new political phenomenon: the metastatic gaffe. The one begets another, begets another, begets …

Posted in Obama | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Carter Says EU Is Colluding In A Human Rights Crime: Dhimmi Carter thinks it is a human right for the jihadis to kill jews

Posted by avideditor on May 27, 2008

Super dhimmi Carter thinks it is the jihadi human right to kill jews. I think it is all the oil money he is receiving. Will some one please do something to shut this terrorist loving mad man up. He should be tried for treason. 

HT Pat Dollard


The Guardian – Monday May 26 2008 Article history

Britain and other European governments should break from the US over the international embargo on Gaza, former US president Jimmy Carter told the Guardian yesterday. Carter, visiting the Welsh border town of Hay for the Guardian literary festival, described the EU’s position on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute as “supine” and its failure to criticise the Israeli blockade of Gaza as “embarrassing”.

Referring to the possibility of Europe breaking with the US in an interview with the Guardian, he said: “Why not? They’re not our vassals. They occupy an equal position with the US.”

The blockade on Hamas-ruled Gaza, imposed by the US, EU, UN and Russia – the so-called Quartet – after the organisation’s election victory in 2006, was “one of the greatest human rights crimes on Earth,” since it meant the “imprisonment of 1.6 million people, 1 million of whom are refugees”. “Most families in Gaza are eating only one meal per day. To see Europeans going along with this is embarrassing,” Carter said.

He called on the EU to reassess its stance if Hamas agreed to a ceasefire in Gaza. “Let the Europeans lift the embargo and say we will protect the rights of Palestinians in Gaza, and even send observers to Rafah gate [Gaza’s crossing into Egypt] to ensure the Palestinians don’t violate it.”

Although it is 27 years since he left the White House, Carter recently met Hamas leaders in Damascus. He declared a breakthrough in persuading the organisation to offer a Gaza ceasefire and a halt to Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel if Israel stopped its air and ground strikes on the territory.

Carter described western governments’ self-imposed ban on talking to Hamas as unrealistic and said everyone knew Israel was negotiating with the organisation through an Egyptian mediator, Omar Suleiman. Suleiman took the Hamas ceasefire offer to Jerusalem last week.

Israel was still hesitating over the ceasefire, Carter confirmed yesterday. “I talked to Mr Suleiman the day before yesterday. I hope the Israelis will accept,” he said.

While being scrupulously polite to the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, and prime minister, Salam Fayyad, who represent the Fatah movement, he was scathing about their exclusion of Hamas. He described the Fatah-only government as a “subterfuge” aimed at getting round Hamas’s election victory two years ago. “The top opinion pollster in Ramallah told me the other day that opinion on the West Bank is shifting to Hamas, because people believe Fatah has sold out to Israel and the US,” he said.

Carter said the Quartet’s policy of not talking to Hamas unless it recognised Israel and fulfilled two other conditions had been drafted by Elliot Abrams, an official in the national security council at the White House. He called Abrams “a very militant supporter of Israel”. The ex-president, whose election-monitoring Carter Centre had just certified Hamas’s election victory as free and fair, addressed the Quartet for 12 minutes at its session in London in 2006. He urged it to talk to Hamas, which had offered to form a unity government with Fatah, the losers.

“The Quartet’s final document had been drafted in Washington in advance, and not a line was changed,” he said.

Earlier, Carter, told Sky News that Hillary Clinton should abandon her battle to become Democratic presidential candidate after the last round of primaries in early June. Like many superdelegates, he has yet to declare his support for either Clinton or Barack Obama, but he suggested the outcome of the race was a foregone conclusion. “I think that a lot of us superdelegates will make a decision … quite rapidly, after the final primary on June 3,” he said. “I think at that point it will be time for her to give it up.”

Last night, before a packed crowd at Hay, Carter spoke of his “horror” at America’s involvement in torturing prisoners, saying he wanted the next US president to promise never to do so again.

He left an intriguing hint that George Bush might even face prosecution on war crimes charges once he left office.

When pressed by Philippe Sands QC on Bush’s recent admission that he had authorised interrogation procedures widely seen as amounting to torture, Carter replied that he was sure Bush would be able to live a peaceful, “productive life – in our country”.

Sands, an international legal expert, said afterwards that he understood that to be “clear confirmation” that while Bush would face no challenge in his own country, “what happened outside the country was another matter entirely”.

Posted in America, Israel | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

%d bloggers like this: