ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, September 24, 2012

WND column

Foreigners First

Paul had been filibustering the Senate for days, delaying action by requiring the maximum amount of time be spent on each vote until he got a vote on his own bill, which failed, 10-81.  Numerous Republican senators stood up in opposition to Paul’s bill, calling it dangerous and irresponsible, especially to Israel.
 
Keep in mind that this vote took place 11 days after the U.S. ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens, was murdered along with three other U.S. diplomats in Libya. The federal government is sending money that it doesn’t have to declared and undeclared enemies alike, to countries that Barack Obama has openly declared are not U.S. allies, while simultaneously refusing to re-enact the Bush tax cuts because the country supposedly cannot afford them.

Labels: ,

21 Comments:

Anonymous Outlaw X September 24, 2012 4:14 AM  

Anyone who can't see that they are looking for a new great war is a fool. Not only are they funding it they are using propaganda and subversion to start it.

Being in the saet furthest away from the "game" gives one the best view of it all.

Anonymous zen0 September 24, 2012 4:31 AM  

To continue to pay protection money to the governments of the Ummah is in the interest of neither Americans nor Israelis.
- VD

Neo-Zionists agree:

Forge a new basis for relations with the United States—stressing self-reliance, maturity, strategic cooperation on areas of mutual concern, and furthering values inherent to the West. This can only be done if Israel takes serious steps to terminate aid, which prevents economic reform.

From a report prepared by the conservative Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’

"Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000."

Apparently they have been predicting the convergence of Islam and Western elites for a quarter century.

Blogger Rantor September 24, 2012 5:58 AM  

Rand spoke about this when he addresse Liberty Political Action Conference last week. Rand said he was the most hated man in the Senate since he was preventing the other kids from going to recess. What he did was great at pointing out the stupidity of all Democrats and most Republicans.

Zeno, thanks for the link, that will be my next read this morning.

Blogger stats September 24, 2012 6:32 AM  

Do I take the subtext of your article to mean that you now believe the US actually faces a real threat from the Middle East? I took it from your past writings that you believed the threat from the Muslim Middle East was little more than propaganda generated by Israeli firsters (Neo-cons) in hope of embroiling us in further military adventures there.

Anonymous VD September 24, 2012 7:06 AM  

Do I take the subtext of your article to mean that you now believe the US actually faces a real threat from the Middle East?

Not today. Not in the next decade. But potentially, down the road, most certainly.

Anonymous scoobius dubious September 24, 2012 7:13 AM  

While I think that VD's primary critique does have merit, it's worth pointing out that the Titanic doesn't turn on a dime.

By that I mean that a government decision to continue practicing cynical dollar diplomacy with dollars that it a) doesn't have, and b) have a prior claim on them by the taxpayers, isn't necessarily a contradiction, nor prima facie evidence of corruption: it is in fact (or at least can be) statecraft. In this instance it's foolish and ridiculous statecraft, but still.

Unless and until the USA adopts a more reasonable and affordable neo-isolationist framework for its foreign policy (which I would support), it's simply the day-to-day case that the US has all sorts of tangled obligations and connections and under-the-table debts to foreign entities which it has to meet, simply in order to keep the global status quo going. Eventually the whole house of cards is going to fall no matter what, but there are people who prefer a natural big boom, people who prefer a controlled demolition, people who prefer slow unnoticeable rot, etc etc. There's a sense in which the US resemble Wotan in the Ring with too many contradictory treaties carved on his spear. And of course, the endgame is liable to look an awful lot like Gotterdammerung.

Giving priority to Israeli interests is both scandalous and also appears so in broad daylight, and I certainly wish we were not handcuffed to the Israelis as well as on their leash. But the realistic fact is, today, right now, that we are. And the further fact is that, thinking several chess-moves ahead, practical Israeli interests become the same as certain American interests, in the sense that keeping Israel out of regional brawls lessens the chances of escalation and our own catastrophic involvement. It may not be fun to wait on Israel hand and foot, and we should certainly be looking for a way out of it; but if the alternative is World War III, then we assess our material interests accordingly.

As regards an inevitable East-West clash, well, it's already underway, and we are losing, badly. Militarily of course a revived caliphate will be negligible: of Islamic powers, only Turkey is capable of credible military power projection into Europe, and it wouldn't win. Iran and Indonesia can cause giant headaches by disrupting shipping; and that's about it.

As VD correctly notes, the real threat from Islam is demographic and cultural, through mass NW immigration, weak Western indigenous demographics, and loss of cultural confidence. White people have been snookered into believing not only that they have no genuine rights or interests as a people; they've been hypnotized into believing that they don't even exist.

If Western whites could revitalize their own family formation, end immigration, begin the serious and steady deportation of Muslims and other non-whites, and rediscover the dignity and self-evident value of their own ancient ways of being, then the threat from Islam would be laughable.

But of course we remain stuck on this trajectory, with no serious change of course in sight. Hmm, I wonder why.

Anonymous CMC September 24, 2012 7:52 AM  

I agree it's Danegeld now, but to try to play Devil's Advocate for a moment...

Isn't the aid to at least Egypt tied to the Camp David Accords and other treaties/agreements? So cutting it would impact, if not violate (abrogate) those agreements which affect other, 3rd party countries/peoples (including Israel, of course, but also, probably, the Palestinians, etc. etc.)? And isn't it the case that the aid to those others is connected in similar ways, if not directly, at least to the overall US security strategy or whatever you might call it, in that basing rights and such are connected to those payments?

So the bind we put ourselves in --or that our government has put us in, is how to unravel the whole mess of aid, from essentially Danegeld payments, to quid pro quo lease-type payoffs (leaving aside the usefulness of the leases for a moment), to "charity" type payments to poor countries to gain general goodwill in the area?

And doesn't that suggest, at least as one idea, the simple --not easy, not painless, not without consequences, but simple in terms of concept, idea of eliminating all foreign aid to all countries, across the board?

[Now for the rhetorical part.] It's a wonder, given the increasing hostility from these ostensible muslim allies that no presidential candidate even floated that idea?

Anonymous zen0 September 24, 2012 8:20 AM  

It may not be fun to wait on Israel hand and foot, and we should certainly be looking for a way out of it; but if the alternative is World War III, then we assess our material interests accordingly.

And, as the quote I supplied suggests, the way out starts with terminating the aid.

Anonymous hood September 24, 2012 8:31 AM  

VD,
Do you think it could be considered Jizya or Zakat?

Blogger James Dixon September 24, 2012 9:08 AM  

Since Vox is quoting Kipling, I should note in passing that I consider Kipling to be the greatest English writer of modern times.

Anonymous scoobius dubious September 24, 2012 9:16 AM  

RUPERT: Do you like Kipling, dove?
EDWINA: Why, I don't know! I've never kippled.

Since it's Danegeld that's being discussed, it's worth noting overtly that it's not even our own Danes we're paying the geld to. We get very little out of the payments, and somebody else gets quite a lot.

And then they turn around and show their immense gratitude by suing us every time somebody puts up a Christmas tree in public. Some friends.

Anonymous DonReynolds September 24, 2012 10:31 AM  

Vox, this is all about Hillary Clinton. Unless she paid tons of cash to sit with the men, they would never let her in the room, except as a bellydancer. Hillary needs the fat gifts to get in the door with her lesbian girlfriends, otherwise she would have zero influence as secretary of state....her diplomatic skills being non-existent. The biggest reason for voting against Obama is so Hillary Clinton will no longer be jetting over the globe dabbling in her personal vision. She is why the Middle East is in flames today.

Anonymous Stilicho September 24, 2012 11:02 AM  

Don, we've been paying the Dane geld longer than Hillary has been involved in politics. Oh, it can certainly grease the skids for her, but it just as certainly predates her tenure. She's just the current beneficiary.

Anonymous Sam Scott September 24, 2012 11:24 AM  

scoobius dubious,

Since it's Danegeld that's being discussed, it's worth noting overtly that it's not even our own Danes we're paying the geld to. We get very little out of the payments, and somebody else gets quite a lot.

And then they turn around and show their immense gratitude by suing us every time somebody puts up a Christmas tree in public. Some friends.


You know that you can't paint any religious, ethnic, or other group with a single brush as if they are a single, monolithic entity, right? That's how it appears when people say things like "they."

For everyone Jew who complains about Christmas trees, there is another who likes the decorations and yet another who doesn't care one way or the other. Our old joke: three Jews, four opinions -- on any topic.

Would you like it if I would cite some idiotic, extreme Christian and then say, "See what they do!"

Blogger James Dixon September 24, 2012 11:43 AM  

> Would you like it if I would cite some idiotic, extreme Christian and then say, "See what they do!"

It's not like you'd be either the first or the last.

Anonymous rienzi September 24, 2012 11:55 AM  

I have no problem at all with sending aid to these countries as long as it takes the form of hardcore porn, meth, crack, chips, and 40 ouncers of malt liquor.

Its worked pretty well here in keeping huge swaths of the population from being any kind of a threat at all to the PTB.

Anonymous JCB September 24, 2012 12:11 PM  

Since so much of the "aid" ends up being spent with U.S. arms manufacturers/Big Agra/*insert corporation here* of course this welfare isn't going anywhere. This should be the easiest non-partisan vote ever. Most voters on both sides of the aisle would surely agree that in the current economic climate, borrowing billions to giveaway overseas is a pretty dumbass idea. If it isn't clear to everyone who really calls the shots around here it probably never will be. Maybe they'll have time for reflection in the FEMA camp.

Anonymous scoobius dubious September 24, 2012 12:56 PM  

See, "Christmas trees" here is what a rhetorician would call synecdoche -- referencing the whole by indicating only the part. It's not just creches that I'm concerned about.

"Would you like it if I would cite some idiotic, extreme Christian and then say, "See what they do!"

Gee, sounds like just another fine day here in the good ol' NewUSA --- "under new management since 1965!"

See, but it's not some "idiotic, extreme" Jew saying and doing these things, now is it. It's the cat's-paws and the well-funded organizations and the institutional structures of just about any institution worth taking over, right? I'm not worried about the Meir Kahanes of the world, I'm thinking of US Senators and giant law firms and so forth. Yes, I'm perfectly aware that 'not everybody is like that' --no group is ever perfectly consistent-- in fact from experience I'd go so far as to say that the majority of Jews are not "like that." And yet, somehow, some mysterious way, day in, day out, the job gets done, dunnit. Besides, I love how the strongest denunciation we ever get from your side in these matters is not "You're right, it's an outrage, and I'm gonna stop writing checks to the NJC!" All we get is "[sputter] How dare you! We're not all like that!"

Pretty weak tea.

Ah, but PDHIP -- Plausible Deniability Has Its Privileges. And many other privileges, too, and if you discuss any of them out loud, you'll never work in this town again.

Anonymous Gen. Kong September 24, 2012 1:46 PM  

scoobius doobious:
Unless and until the USA adopts a more reasonable and affordable neo-isolationist framework for its foreign policy (which I would support), it's simply the day-to-day case that the US has all sorts of tangled obligations and connections and under-the-table debts to foreign entities which it has to meet, simply in order to keep the global status quo going. Eventually the whole house of cards is going to fall no matter what, but there are people who prefer a natural big boom, people who prefer a controlled demolition, people who prefer slow unnoticeable rot, etc etc. There's a sense in which the US resemble Wotan in the Ring with too many contradictory treaties carved on his spear. And of course, the endgame is liable to look an awful lot like Gotterdammerung.

Scoobius gets a double gold star for the Wagner analogy. As Mark Twain noted over a century ago, Wagner's music is much better than it sounds.

Anonymous scoobius dubious September 24, 2012 1:54 PM  

"Wagner's music is much better than it sounds."

Who was it that said, (equally funny) that "Puccini is the Wagner of opera"?

Actually though, there are a lot of passages in Wagner that are pretty damn good. It's the hunting for them that's exhausting.

Anonymous Gen. Kong September 24, 2012 2:15 PM  

scoobius doobious:
See, but it's not some "idiotic, extreme" Jew saying and doing these things, now is it. It's the cat's-paws and the well-funded organizations and the institutional structures of just about any institution worth taking over, right? I'm not worried about the Meir Kahanes of the world, I'm thinking of US Senators and giant law firms and so forth. Yes, I'm perfectly aware that 'not everybody is like that' --no group is ever perfectly consistent-- in fact from experience I'd go so far as to say that the majority of Jews are not "like that." And yet, somehow, some mysterious way, day in, day out, the job gets done, dunnit. Besides, I love how the strongest denunciation we ever get from your side in these matters is not "You're right, it's an outrage, and I'm gonna stop writing checks to the NJC!" All we get is "[sputter] How dare you! We're not all like that!"

Pretty weak tea.

Ah, but PDHIP -- Plausible Deniability Has Its Privileges. And many other privileges, too, and if you discuss any of them out loud, you'll never work in this town again.


You don't even have to discuss the privileges to lose your job. Discussing any member of the tribe in a less than obsequious manner will bring the same result. A good example was the reaction of the non-existent lobby which cannot be named to Glen Beck's series on the interesting origins of George Soros' vast fortune. Beck is one of the more obsequious bovine step-n-fetchits for the tribe to be found on the planet, so he does a series which highlights the betrayal of Hungarian tribesmen by Soros and his father to the Nazis along with their attendant wholesale looting of the unfortunates who were shipped off to the rendering plants. Did the ADL, AJC et al turn on Soros for this massive betrayal and looting of his own people? Nope. Not a breath of criticism. (Indeed the only tribesmen who've expressed animosity towards Soros are the marginalized Kahane types). Instead they launched a very successful agitprop campaign at Faux-News to get Beck removed. It seems that as long as one is a member of the tribe - even if you're an avowed atheist like Soros who betrayed fellow tribesmen to real Nazis who murdered them and looted their assets - you are quite exempt from all criticism, especially any coming from the bovine peanut gallery. Very strange indeed.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts