Pat Buchanans obssesion with Israel he'll even

[mord]

quote leftists in the the left wing nation magazine  http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54779

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The AIPAC girl

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 20, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern



If George W. Bush launches a pre-emptive war on Iran, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will bear full moral responsibility for that war.

For it was Pelosi who quietly agreed to strip out of the $100 billion funding bill for Iraq a provision that would have required President Bush to seek congressional approval before launching any new war on Iran.

Pelosi's capitulation came in the Appropriations Committee.

What went down, and why?

"Conservative Democrats as well as lawmakers concerned about the possible impact on Israel had argued for the change in strategy," wrote ghe Associated Press' David Espo and Matthew Lead.

(Column continues below)


"Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said in an interview there is a widespread fear in Israel about Iran, which ... has expressed unremitting hostility to the Jewish state.

"'It would take away perhaps the most important tool the U.S. has when it comes to Iran,' she said of the now-abandoned provision.

"'I don't think it was a very wise idea to take things off the table if you're trying to get people to modify their behavior and normalize in a civilized way,' said Gary Ackerman of New York."

According to John Nichols of The Nation, Pelosi's decision to strip the provision barring Bush from attacking Iran without Congress' approval "sends the worst possible signal to the White House."

"The speaker has erred dangerously and dramatically," writes Nichols. Her "disastrous misstep could haunt her and the Congress for years to come."

Nichols does not exaggerate.

If Bush now launches war on Iran, he can credibly say Congress and the Democrats gave him a green light. For Pelosi, by removing a provision saying Bush does not have the authority, de facto concedes he does have the authority.

Bush and Cheney need now not worry about Congress.

They have been flashed the go sign for war on Iran.

Pelosi & Co. thus aborted a bipartisan effort to ensure that if we do go to war again, we do it the constitutional way, and we do it together.

Nothing in the provision would have prevented Bush, as commander in chief, from responding to an Iranian attack or engaging in hot pursuit of an enemy found in Iraq. Nor would the provision have prevented Bush from threatening Iran. It would simply have required him to come to Congress – before launching all-out war.

Now Pelosi has, in effect, ceded Bush carte blanche to take out Iran's nuclear facilities. It's all up to him and Cheney.

For this the nation elected a Democratic Congress?

Why did Pelosi capitulate? Answer: She was "under pressure from some conservative members of her caucus, and from lobbyists associated with neoconservative groups that want war with Iran and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)," writes Nichols.

The Washington Times agrees as to who bully-ragged Nancy into scuttling any requirement that Bush come to the Hill before unleashing the B-2s on Arak, Natanz and Bushehr:

"Last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi received a smattering of boos when she bad-mouthed the war effort during a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and the Democratic leadership, responding to concerns from pro-Israel lawmakers, was forced to strip from a military appropriations measure a provision meant to weaken President Bush's ability to respond to threats from Iran."

This episode, wherein liberal Democrats scuttled a bipartisan effort to require Bush to abide by the Constitution before taking us into a third war in the Middle East, speaks volumes about who has the whip hand on Capitol Hill when it comes to the Middle East.

Pelosi gets booed by the Israeli lobby, then runs back to the Hill and gives Bush a blank check for war on Iran, because that is what the lobby demands. A real candidate for Profiles in Courage.

As for the presidential candidates, it is hard to find a single one willing to stand up and say: If Bush plans to take us into another war in the Mideast, he must first come to Congress for authorization. And if he goes to war without authorization, that will be impeachable.

All retreat into the "all-options-are-on-the-table" mantra, which is another way of saying, "It's Bush's call."

The corruption of both parties is astonishing. Republicans used to be the party of the Constitution: "No more undeclared wars! No more presidential wars!"

Democrats used to be the party of the people. The people don't want this war. They don't want another. The Jewish community voted 88 percent for Democrats in November, and 77 percent oppose Iraq.

So says Gallup. Yet, just because the Israeli lobby jerked her chain, the leader of the Peoples' House has decided she and her party will leave the next war up to Bush.

Sam Rayburn must be turning over in his grave.

[MassuhDGoodName]

Very tricky editorial, in which Pat Buchanan, once again, bashes "The Jews".

Only this time, he does it in a roundabout way.

Patrick jumps right in to claim that Nancy Pelosi alone will be to blame if Bush attacks Iran.

Then, once Buchanan has the proper attention of the conservatives who despise Pelosi, as well as the Marxists who worship Pelosi, he drops his very clever "JEW HATER" bomb:

Good Ole' Pat (GOP ? ) states that the reason that Pelosi will be to blame is because....

she listened to THE JEWS!  a/k/a AIPAC a/k/a NEO-CONS a/k/a [The Republican Party under President George W. Bush/b]

Patrick J. then reiterates his hidden agenda, by quoting an editorial written by one John Nichols, published in the Globalist/Internationalist/ Marxist magazine The Nation, who claims that Pelosi was seduced by AIPAC into siding with the Jews to launch a war against peaceful Iran.

Of course, with old Pat, the actual fact that Pelosi was nearly booed off the podium when she faced the AIPAC convention last week matters not.

Sooner or later,  Patrick J. Buchanan always gets around to his actual agenda, and that unfailingly amounts to this:

"IT'S BECAUSE OF THE JEWS!...THE JEWS!...THE JEWS!"

(...As previously stated here on the JTF Forum by MassuhDGoodName, the profession of earning a great livelihood by assigning "THE JEW!" blame for every injustice, wrong, and evil in our world, is known in the West as "Anti-Semitism".

This business description is a misnomer; it should actually be called "Professional Anti-Jew".

It's the oldest trick in the world...when all else fails, when business is slow, when a war is simmering, when economies boom and bust....one will earn a living and get a lot of attention in Christendom, by repeating the age old canard that "The Jew is pulling the strings...manipulating each and every action!...all for their own secret greed and evil plans!....everywhere you look!...Jew!  Jew!  Jew!")

DON'T WORRY PAT!

SOON YOU CAN ADDRESS YOUR NEW MEXICAN "FRIENDS", AND GET A WHOLE NEW AUDIENCE, AS WELL AS GREATLY INCREASED INCOME, INFORMING THEM OF HOW "JEW" IS THE ONLY THE REASON FOR THEIR ABOMINABLE IGNORANCE, POVERTY, DISEASE, AND CRIME.

YOU'LL MAKE THE SWITCH...JUST AS SURELY AS YOU MADE THE SWITCH FROM THE GOP PAYROLL AND PUBLIC MEDIA TELEVISION FIGURE, TO YOUR CURRENT IDENTITY AS "PATRICK J. BUCHANAN:  HE WAS ALWAYS RIGHT!".

PAT BUCHANAN...WHAT A GREAT WASTE OF INTELLECT.

[mord]

...WHAT A GREAT WASTE OF INTELLECT

Thats true!! and his niece is such a nice person

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Fag Buchanus IS a leftist, and would be in love with Pelosi if he wasn't such a faggot.

[Fruit of thy loins]

I think he is a major flip-flopper.  I bought a copy of his book 'The Death of the West' after seeing it referenced in an academic book, and from it I thought he was quite pro-white.  He even talked about Israel's problem of a rapidly expanding Arab population.  As far as I can remember he made no antisemitic remarks in that book.

But apparently he was among the architects of the 1965 immigration act and only later changed his mind of the dubious benefits of Third World immigration.

So I can well imagine that he has changed his opinions on Israel and many other things.

What a dirt bag.

[Lisa]

Fruit, where did you read of Pat Buchanan being involved in the 1965 Immigration Act?

[Fruit of thy loins]

Fruit, where did you read of Pat Buchanan being involved in the 1965 Immigration Act?

I can't find a link but I thought he said he regretted his support of the 1965 piece of legislation.

I could be wrong.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Buchanus would love to see this country overrun with Mexicockroaches if they would wipe out the Jews for him. (And I have no doubt that they want to.) 

[Shoshana]

Buchanan is a waste of space and very dangerous.

[EuroAmerican]

Pat is one of those 1930's isolationist anti-Semites who never woke up to the kind of world we live in.


I wish America would take a page out of the Amish book and shun him.

[EagleEye]

I think Buchanan is entirely misguided on the Israel issue but on domestic issues, I do approve of him condemning diversity.

[RationalThought110]

Buchanan aligns with liberals when they bash Jews and when they do foolish things.  He stated that the one agreement he has with Pelosi was when she visited Syria.

[RationalThought110]

...WHAT A GREAT WASTE OF INTELLECT

Thats true!! and his niece is such a nice person

Who is his neice?

[mord]

My friend went out with her for about a year and half