Survey: Argentinians hold anti-Semitic beliefs

September 28, 2011

(JTA) — A majority of Argentinians hold anti-Semitic beliefs, according to a new study.

The study, “Attitudes Towards Jews in Argentina,” was commissioned by the Anti-Defamation League and the Delegation of Argentinian Jewish Associations.

The opinion survey of 1,510 adults in eight Argentina cities found that more than half of Argentinians believe that Jews are more loyal to Israel than Argentina, and more than 80 percent believe that Jews are largely interested in making money.

Nearly 70 percent also believe that Jews have “too much power” both in the business world and international financial markets, with 41 percent blaming Jews for various degrees of responsibility for the financial crisis.

“The survey shows that anti-Semitic attitudes are deeply ingrained in Argentina,” Abraham Foxman, ADL’s national director, said in a statement.

“It is disturbing that such a large portion of the Argentinian population buys into classical anti-Semitic stereotypes. The notions that Jews have too much power in business, are too concerned with making money or are not loyal to their country are traditional anti-Semitic motifs that have contributed to centuries of persecution against the Jewish people.”

American Jewish Committee behind “humanitarian intervention” in Libya

In his recent article, “Libya and the Big Lie: Using Human Rights Organizations to Launch Wars,” Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya writes:

One of the main sources for the claim that Qaddafi was killing his own people is the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR). The LLHR was actually pivotal to getting the U.N. involved through its specific claims in Geneva. On February 21, 2011 the LLHR got the 70 other non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to sent letters to the President Obama, E.U. High Representative Catherine Ashton., and the U.N. Secretary-General Ban-ki Moon demanding international action against Libya invoking the “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine.

Philip Giraldi on the embassy wiretap revelations

Former CIA officer Philip Giraldi discusses his article “Tapping the Israeli Embassy” about what Shamai Leibowitz learned while working as an FBI counterintelligence translator; the allied groups that make up the “Bomb Iran” lobby; catching Jane Harman and an unnamed congressman from Indiana acting like Israeli operatives; and how Israel’s “perception management” campaign makes Americans believe Iran is a dire threat and must be defeated in war.

Listen here.

An American Spring in 2012?

Writing in The Daily Beast, John Avlon publicises a new group, Americans Elect, which by the end of July had “quietly collected enough signatures to secure a 2012 ballot line in eight states.” According to Avlon:

Like Egypt’s leaderless Facebook revolution, this is a movement without a candidate, happy to create a platform via wiki, and identify potential presidents the way Pandora figures out whether you like Kanye West or Johnny Cash.

The money behind Americans Elect understands disruptive business models. The group’s founder, entrepreneur Peter Ackerman (father of Elliot), started FreshDirect.com, which has upended the New York grocery business by letting customers order food and basics online, delivered straight from a warehouse. He and some 50 other initial donors have loaned the organization $20 million, out of an eventual $30 million budgeted, to be repaid if small donors join on.

Doubts on “Official Story” of Bin Laden Killing; Official Chronicler’s Interesting Connections

Investigative journalist Russ Baker has written an intriguing analysis of Nicholas Schmidle’s much-heralded account in The New Yorker of the Abbottabad raid. Summing up the story’s main weaknesses, Baker writes:

It is based on reporting by a man who fails to disclose that he never spoke to the people who conducted the raid, or that his father has a long background himself running such operations (this even suggests the possibility that Nicholas Schmidle’s own father could have been one of those “unnamed sources.”)

It seems to have depended heavily on trusting second-hand accounts by people with a poor track record for accurate summations, and an incentive to spin.

The alleged decisions on killing bin Laden and disposing of his body lack credibility.

The DNA evidence that the SEALs actually got their man is questionable.

Though certain members of Congress say they have seen photos of the body (or, to be precise, a body), the rest of us have not seen anything.

Promised photos of the ceremonial dumping of the body at sea have not materialized.

The eyewitnesses from the house—including the surviving wives—have disappeared without comment.

Biggest Losers in Palestine Veto? The American People

By Philip Giraldi
Antiwar.com
September 22, 2011

If the Palestinian application for United Nations full membership actually takes place Friday and the United States uses its Security Council veto to stop the process, it will be the final step in a predictable and preventable tragedy playing out. Some are arguing that Washington might actually abstain, thereby gaining considerable favorable sentiment from much of the world and also sending a signal to Israel that there are limits to the bilateral relationship. But it is far more likely that President Barack Obama, who has stated over and over that he will protect Israel in international forums, will not flinch when he calls on Susan Rice to cast the fatal vote. Any expectation that the president might hesitate either because it is the right thing to do or because it benefits the United States is fanciful, particularly with a presidential election looming in 2012.

AIPAC: Where it came from, how it works, and how to defeat it

Last Sunday the Council for the National Interest’s Alison Weir offered “The Nitty-Gritty of AIPAC” program to a national gathering of hundreds of Middle East activists at the Thurgood Marshall Center. Although the packed session was not recorded, audio from the main panel presentations at the 5/21/2011 “Move Over AIPAC” event in Washington is now available for download:

No Turkey This Thanksgiving

By Philip Giraldi
Council for the National Interest
September 21, 2011

The United Nations’ annual opening of the General Assembly each September affords heads of state and heads of government the opportunity to meet both formally and informally. The upcoming meeting between President Barack Obama and Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan promises to be particularly contentious. How exactly it plays out will inevitably demonstrate the astonishing power of Israel and its Lobby. Obama is expected to rebuke Erdogan over the issue of Palestinian statehood, which Turkey supports, and over the willingness of Ankara to use its own warships to protect Turkish vessels in international waters that are seeking to sail to Gaza. They have good reason to do so. In June 2010, the Israelis boarded a Turkish ferry in international waters and killed nine Turks, one of whom was also an American citizen, most of whom were shot execution style.

Why are we still waiting for Wikileaks to release its top secret Israel files?

Blaming the media’s Jewish “sensitivities” for Wikileaks’ curious lack of disclosures regarding Israel, Julian Assange promised to release top secret American files concerning Israel in the next six months… almost nine months ago:

In an excusive interview with Al Jazeera, Assange said only a meagre number of files related to Israel had been published so far, because the newspapers in the West that were given exclusive rights to publish the secret documents were reluctant to publish many sensitive information about Israel.

“There are 3,700 files related to Israel and the source of 2,700 files is Israel. In the next six months we intend to publish more files depending on our sources,” said Assange in the nearly one-hour interview telecast live from the UK.

Asked if Israel had tried to contact him though mediators, Assange said, “No, no contacts with Israel but I am sure Mossad is following our activities closely like Australia, Sweden and the CIA.

“The Guardian, El-Pais and Le Monde have published only two percent of the files related to Israel due to the sensitive relations between Germany, France and Israel. Even New York Times could not publish more due to the sensitivities related to the Jewish community in the US,” he added.

Wikileaks puts spotlight on Al Jazeera’s role in Arab Spring

The New York Times reports on recent Wikileaks disclosures of Al Jazeera’s susceptibility to U.S. pressure:

Al Jazeera is under intense scrutiny in the Middle East over its varying coverage of the Arab Spring revolts. Although the network is nominally independent — and its degree of autonomy was itself a revolution in the context of the region’s state-controlled news media when it began in 1996 — many people contend that its coverage of the region still reflects the views of its Qatari owners.

Al Jazeera played an early and influential role in covering — some would say encouraging — the unrest in Tunisia and Egypt last winter. It was even more aggressive in its focus on the regime of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi and the struggles of what it called “freedom fighters” in Libya, where Qatar came to play a major role in supporting the rebellion.

But some people now cite what they see as a double standard in the network’s sensational coverage of the unrest in Syria on the one hand, and its relatively negligible coverage of the strife in Bahrain, Qatar’s Persian Gulf neighbor.

United States diplomatic cables disclosed recently by WikiLeaks appear to open a new window into the network’s interactions with Qatar and other governments.