Treason in America

phrodeau

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jan 2, 2002
Posts
78,588
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/284979-ajt.html

Atlanta Jewish Times editor Andrew B. Adler's editorial of 1/13/12 speaks to P.M. Netanyahu, and offers options for Israel if Iran gets a nuclear bomb. Option three:
...give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vice president to take his place, and forcefully dictate that the United States' policy includes its helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies.

Yes, you read "three" correctly. Order a hit on a president in order to preserve Israel's existence.
 
*waits for all the right wingers to flood in and condemn a foreign terrorist threat to the USA*
 
I'm not sure why this would be such a surprise?
Israel will do whatever it takes, and everyone has known that for a long time.
 
i like how he "quit" after people got pissed. of course, he owns the fucking paper, so he didn't really quit shit. fucking moron.
 
Well I'll be damned !

First person I've heard say he was worth...
 
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/284979-ajt.html

Atlanta Jewish Times editor Andrew B. Adler's editorial of 1/13/12 speaks to P.M. Netanyahu, and offers options for Israel if Iran gets a nuclear bomb. Option three:

Andrew B. Adler is an American citizen who is the editor of an obscure weekly published in Atlanta. In a column he asked a hypothetical question, and came up with three possible answers. The last one was that the president of the United States should be assassinated if he is considered to be insufficiently committed to the defense of Israel.

This is the first time I have heard of Andrew B. Adler or the Atlanta Jewish Times. He is an obscure journalist writing for an obscure journal. Nevertheless, the OP, and several contributing to this thread seem to think that option three is official Israeli policy, and that this demonstrates the perfidy of the Jews. What it demonstrates is that there are some people who look for any excuse they can find to hate Jews and Israel.
 

I particularly liked this bit:

Anyone who has spent any time talking to some of the more vociferous detractors of Obama, Jewish or otherwise, has inevitably encountered those nasty nutters - and there are many - who still believe he is a Muslim, who are utterly convinced that he wants to destroy Israel, and who seriously debate whether he is more like Ahmadinejad than Arafat or - and I heard this one with my own ears - more like Hitler than Haman.

Remind you of anyone?
 
The Protocols were a fake made by a group of anti semites, Mr Adler is of a different stripe.

I know that they were fake. The link tells us that they were.

Mr Adler is a nutcase. Anyone advocating assassination should know that the public reaction would be fatal to the cause of the instigators.
 
Did you read the Haaretz piece kippies linked?

Yes. I also re-read the Zimmerman Telegram sent by Germany to Mexico during WWI. That wasn't fake even if at the time people had difficulty believing it.

The Zimmerman Telegram suggests that yes, governments can be that stupid. That is what is so dangerous about Mr Adler.
 
Andrew B. Adler is an American citizen who is the editor of an obscure weekly published in Atlanta. In a column he asked a hypothetical question, and came up with three possible answers. The last one was that the president of the United States should be assassinated if he is considered to be insufficiently committed to the defense of Israel.

This is the first time I have heard of Andrew B. Adler or the Atlanta Jewish Times. He is an obscure journalist writing for an obscure journal. Nevertheless, the OP, and several contributing to this thread seem to think that option three is official Israeli policy, and that this demonstrates the perfidy of the Jews. What it demonstrates is that there are some people who look for any excuse they can find to hate Jews and Israel.

:confused:
I feel like we are not reading the same thread

Where the hell are you getting "anti-Semitic" in this thread??

No one is saying the article is an Israeli policy, or suggesting the man is anything other then a nutcase. However, he is a nutcase, with money, a newspaper and readers to spew his brand of crazy to, who wrote an article about assassinating the president of the united states.

Worth a thread, sure
but nothing more then that
 
:confused:
I feel like we are not reading the same thread

Where the hell are you getting "anti-Semitic" in this thread??

No one is saying the article is an Israeli policy, or suggesting the man is anything other then a nutcase. However, he is a nutcase, with money, a newspaper and readers to spew his brand of crazy to, who wrote an article about assassinating the president of the united states.

Worth a thread, sure
but nothing more then that

You'll have to forgive Le Trousers, he's on record as saying he thinks Jews are genetically superior to other "races". He's also a big fan of Hitler. Quite how he reconciles the two positions, I'm not entirely sure.
 
Quote:
...give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vice president to take his place, and forcefully dictate that the United States' policy includes its helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies.

Yes, you read "three" correctly. Order a hit on a president in order to preserve Israel's existence.

The whole problem with this discussion is that even if Iran does wish to develop nuclear weapons capability, there is no reason to assume it has ANY intention of using the capability to initiate a first strike against Israel. Frankly, it flies against all reason to assume they would even consider such a thing, and yet we hear this as a given fact by so much of our media, our politicians, and the Netanyahu government. In fact, its actually quite a ridiculous assumption.

First off, even assuming Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons capabilities, it has plenty of enemies besides Israel. In fact, it is surrounded by enemies. Sure, its good domestic propaganda to talk smack about Israel in any Muslim country, but the leaders of Iran, despite what our media tells us, are in fact reasonably sane. They don't really care much about Israel one way or the other. Believe it or not, the entire world does not revolve around Israel.

Secondly, a nuclear attack on Israel would be responded to by an overwhelming response from Israel and the US that would virtually annihilate Iran. Again, the leaders there certainly don't want this. Thirdly, this hypothetical first strike attack on Israel would kill countless numbers of Palestinians which would not be in Iran's interest in terms of its image in the Muslim world.

The main justification for the idea that Iran wishes to "attack Israel" with nuclear weapons seems to be from one speech that Amahdinejad gave years ago in which some people claim he made some statement that Israel should be wiped off a map or something. If you read about this more closely, many people say first off that this translation of his statement is not necessarily correct, and it might actually not have been what he really said. Also, even if it were the correct interpretation, it was certainly not made clear what the means of this would be anyway. One could argue it could refer to a peaceful dismantling of Zionism similar to the dismantling of apartheid in South Africa (I'm not saying this myself, only saying it could certainly be one interpretation of the alleged statement). Finally, there are Knesset members and other Israelis who have at various times called for Iran to be wiped off the map as well. This is never given the same level of publicity, in fact, its completely ignored by the western media.

If Iran does wish to develop nuclear weapons capability, and that is still questionable, it is much more reasonable to assume it is for deterent purposes similar to the way in which North Korea has used its weapons to ensure that other countries leave it alone. Nuclear capabilities are primarily used as deterence in strategic thinking. It would probably lower the risk of war in the region.

To blindly accept the idea that a nuclear weapon Iran would inherently lead to an attack on Israel is living in a fantasy world.
 
Obama has been well paid for by Israeli lobbyist just like Bush was...just like Israel is playing both sides in US and China showdown coming...
 
Back
Top