Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Kerry and Hagel: Hardly Israel’s preferred choices

E' un articolo un po' datato ma di lettura molto istruttiva per capire 
una certa mentalità "sionista", egemone in USA.
 
Kerry "preoccupa" per una sua certa indipendenza di giudizio (!) 
riguardo al M.O.
Ma Hagel preoccupa molto di più. Addirittura l'arcinemico professor 
Walt, coautore con Mearsheimer di un ben documentato studio sui metodi 
di influenza della Lobby, ritiene che Hagel *non* (!) si sia dimostrato 
un completo zerbino della Lobby "sionista" e addirittura si è dichiarato 
contrario alla guerra contro l'Iran!
 
E' facile immaginare cosa siano i politici statunitensi (la stragrande 
maggioranza) che non preoccupano la Lobby...
 
---------------------------------
Kerry and Hagel: Hardly Israel’s preferred choices
By HERB KEINON
12/17/2012 00:43
Analysis: US President Barack Obama's probably choices for the top US 
cabinet posts may worry Israelis.
 
If, as widely expected, US President Barack Obama later this week 
nominates Sen. John Kerry as secretary of state and former senator Chuck 
Hagel as secretary of defense, then those already worrying about 
US-Israeli ties under a second Obama term will have even more to worry 
about.
 
Less because of Kerry, even though he is considered a man of independent 
ideas on the Middle East who feels – thanks to his many years in the 
Senate working on foreign policy – that he knows perhaps better than 
Israelis themselves what is good for them, and more because of Hagel.
 
Hagel, a former Nebraska senator, is a Republican. But he is what some 
described as a Brent Scowcroft Republican, a so-called “country club” 
Republican not endowed with the pro-Israel reflexes that so many 
officeholders in the Republican party have come to possess since the 
days of Ronald Reagan.
 
Rather, Hagel is a Republican with a problematic voting record on Israel.
 
One sign that worries about Hagel may be well-founded is that one of 
those backing his appointment is Stephen Walt, co-author with John 
Mearsheimer of a book bashing both Israel and AIPAC, The Israel Lobby 
and US Foreign Policy.
 
In his blog Friday on the Foreign Policy website, Walt said appointing 
Hagel would be a perfect way for “Obama to pay back [Prime Minister] 
Binyamin Netanyahu for all the ‘cooperation’ Obama received from him 
during the first term, as well as Bibi’s [Netanyahu’s] transparent 
attempt to tip the scale for [Republican presidential candidate Mitt] 
Romney last fall.”
 
In his piece listing the “top five reasons” Obama should pick Hagel, 
Walt wrote on his blog, “Unlike almost all of his former colleagues on 
Capitol Hill, he hasn’t been a complete doormat for the Israel lobby. In 
the summer of 2006, for example, he incurred the lobby’s wrath by 
calling for a joint cease-fire during Israel’s war with Hezbollah.”
 
Walt wrote that Hagel has been “outspoken in calling for the United 
States to be more evenhanded in its handling of the peace process, and 
he’s generally thought to be skeptical about the use of military force 
against Iran.”
 
“Generally thought to be skeptical about the use of military force 
against Iran” might be an understatement.
 
In his 2008 book, America: Our Next Chapter, quoted Friday on the 
Foreign Policy website, Hagel wrote of Iran, “Isolating nations is 
risky. It turns them inward, and makes their citizens susceptible to the 
most demagogic fear-mongering.”
 
Hagel prefers engagement.
 
“Distasteful as we may find that country’s rulers, the absence of any 
formal governmental relations with Iran ensures that we will continue to 
conduct this delicate international relationship through the press and 
speeches, as well as through surrogates and third parties, on issues of 
vital strategic importance to our national interests. Such a course can 
only result in diplomatic blind spots that will lead to 
misunderstandings, miscalculation and, ultimately, conflict.”
 
In that book, he also raises the idea of living with a nuclear Iran, an 
idea Obama has on many occasions roundly rejected.
 
“The genie of nuclear armaments is already out of the bottle, no matter 
what Iran does,” he wrote.
 
“In this imperfect world, sovereign nation-states possessing nuclear 
weapons capability (as opposed to stateless terrorist groups) will often 
respond with some degree of responsible, or at least sane, behavior. 
These governments, however hostile they may be toward us, have some 
appreciation of the horrific results of a nuclear war and the 
consequences they would suffer.”
 
In a May interview with Foreign Policy’s Josh Rogin, Hagel said, “The 
two options – attack Iran or live with a nuclear-armed Iran – may be 
eventually where we are. But I believe most people in both Israel and 
the United States think there’s a ways to go before we get to those. I 
think Obama is handling this exactly the right way. I can understand 
differences between Obama and the Israeli prime minister, but we have 
differences with all our allies.”
 
In 2001, Hagel was one of two senators who voted against renewing the 
Iran-Libya sanctions act, in 2007 he voted against placing the Iran 
Revolutionary Guards Corps on America’s list of terrorist organizations 
and in 2008 he voted against Iran sanctions.
 
Other problematic positions taken by Hagel include being one of only 
four senators in October 2000 who would not sign a letter of support for 
Israel during the second intifada, being only one of 12 senators in 2006 
who refused to sign a letter calling on the EU to place Hezbollah on its 
terrorist lists and signing a 2009 letter – after he retired from the 
Senate – urging Obama to negotiate with Hamas.
 
William Kristol of the conservative Weekly Standard wrote Friday that 
when Hagel was appointed to an advisory board at the beginning of 
Obama’s first term, Ira Forman, Obama’s 2008 campaign’s Jewish outreach 
director and former head of the National Jewish Democratic Council, 
acknowledged, “If [Hagel] was taking a policy role, we’d have real 
concerns.”
 
“Well,” Kristol wrote, “secretary of defense is a policy role.”
 
Kerry, in comparison to Hagel, has a spotless voting record on Israel. 
Yet he too is causing some anxiety because of his affiliation with the 
Center-Left of the Democratic party, not these days perceived as widely 
sympathetic to Israel’s arguments.
 
Unlike outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, perhaps burned by 
experience trying to get the Palestinians and Israel to negotiate, Kerry 
– even though he is a long-time senator and chairman of the Senate’s 
Foreign Relations Committee – does not have the experience of being 
involved “in the trenches,” and as a result may not understand the 
limits of what may be achieved.
 
The concern among some is that Kerry may come to the State Department 
convinced he knows what is best for Israel and set about “rediscovering 
the wheel.”
 
Clinton, who lived through Obama’s setbacks in the Middle East, was 
mellowed – perhaps jaded – to some extent by those setbacks, and 
adjusted her expectations accordingly. This learning curve will start 
anew with Kerry.
 
While Kerry – who ran unsuccessfully for president in 2004 – always 
voted for Israel in the Senate, he never was perceived as a leader on 
pro-Israel issues. He also broke with conventional wisdom at times, 
leading him – for instance – to place a lot of time and energy during 
the end of the Bush administration and the early days of Obama’s first 
term trying to engage with Syria.
 
Of the three names mooted for the job of secretary of state a few weeks 
ago – Kerry, US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice and National Security 
Adviser Tom Donilon – Israel, according to a senior diplomatic source, 
was rooting for Donilon, someone considered as having a good rapport 
with the Prime Minister’s Office and a good and sympathetic understating 
of Israel’s position and concerns.
 
For better or worse, forget Donilon. Jerusalem – it seems – is going to 
have to get used to working with Kerry... and, quite possibly, with Hagel.
http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=296204
 
-- 
Sostieni Rete ECO: 
http://rete-eco.it/2012/sostienici.html
 
 

 E' un articolo un po' datato ma d
 
http://allegrofurioso.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/chuck-hagel.html
 
 
 Non e' proprio chiarissima la ragione per cui la sbroccosfera avesse
cosi' tanta fiducia  nel probabile nuovo segretario della difesa
americano,  il senatore repubblicano del Nebraska, Chuck Hagel. Il
Nebraska e', ricordiamo, uno degli Stati in cui vige la pena di morte,
dove il 90% dei cittadini abita in paesini con meno di 3000 abitanti,
paesini in cui l'edificio piu' importante e' una chiesa  (dove
predicano, incontestati, pastori creazionisti e contrari all'aborto).
Il paradiso dei  diritti individuali e delle minoranze, insomma.
 
 Hagel, lui, ha un curriculum adatto al suo elettorato. Veterano del
Vietnam, favorevole alla guerra in Irak e in Afghanistan, un falco in
materia di sicurezza interna, diffidente verso i gay. Ma tant'e'.
Hagel si era lasciato sfuggire, una volta, l'espressione "lobby
ebraica" e questo bastava a scatenare fantasie di riscatto da parte
dei soliti "critici di Israele".
 
Che ora, dopo la prima audizione di Hagel al Senato, stanno
masticando  amarissimo. Hagel ha ripetuto le solite ovvieta' che ci si
aspetta da un segretario USA alla difesa, e Mondoweiss (dove da tempo
e' in corso il festival delle accuse di doppia lealta') annega nella
bile:
 
 I thought he was named to be United States Secretary of Defense, not
Israel's defense [...] Hagel repeatedly asserted that he regards
Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Revolutionary Guard of Iran as terrorist
organizations.  [...] This hearing is a wonderful event because it
demonstrates the naked influence of the Israel lobby in our political
life. [...] I think Zionism has so influenced the American political
culture, via political money and thinktanks and columnists and
editors, that it has folded Israel's war against Hezbollah, Hamas, the
Palestinians and Iran into our outlook on the Middle East. The
conflation of American and Israeli interests has become an article of
faith in the establishment. [....]  Pathetic.
[poverino, questo qua. Gli hanno appena detto che Babbo Natale non
esiste, e lui si aspettava una vagonata di regali].
 
i’m so disgusted i can’t bear to watch him grovel before the world on
israel’s behalf. what a low point in american history.  We can only
hope there will come a tipping point. When I watched the  old
establishment guard gang up on Hagel this morning, it reminded me
of the scenes from Egypt earlier in the morning where the old guys in
the halls of power there were looking a little worried and unsure,
while the youth raged and demanded change out on the streets.
Hopefully, we’ll take back our country sometime during my lifetime.
[perche' la rivoluzione oggi no, domani nemmeno, ma dopodomani....]
 
[ E finalmente, ecco la parola che inizia con la J: ]   What we have
is a group presented to the world as ‘Jewish’ leadership, speaking for
Jews. They have set about doing in the US the very things Jews were
accused of in the past, literally acting out the Jewish disloyalty and
the nation within a nation, the Jews ‘qua nation’   problem.
AND while they are doing this they accuse everyone of anti semitism
for asking them what the hell they think they’re doing…like they think
we’re all suppose to be blind.
It’s so bizarre there is no way to explain it except that they are so
high on holocaust success hubris they are totally convinced that no
one will ever go thru the Jews they’ve established as a front line
shield to get to them.
That is their method of operation and strategy to get away with what
they are doing.
[ricordatevi che queste delizie compaiono in un sito di sinistra,
liberal, e contrario ad ogni guerra]
 
Oh, e a proposito della Jewish lobby. Godetevi questo passaggio della
audizione di Hagel
 
    Graham: Name one person in your opinion who’s intimidated by the
Jewish lobby in the US Senate.
    Hagel: I don’t know...
    Graham: I cant think of a more provocative thing to say about the
relationship of the U.S. and Israel…
    Hagel: I have already stated that I regret [the statement].
    Graham: You can’t name one senator intimidated [or] give me one
example of dumb things pressured to do... One thing!...
    Hagel: Well I can't give you an example.
    Graham: Do you agree with me that you shouldn’t have said that?
    Hagel: Yes I agree with you.

contrario alla guerra contro l'Iran!
 
Tipico degli Ebrei, si infiltrano come parassiti, poi pretendono di svolgere 
le funzioni cerebrali della vittima.
Causa la Bibbia.
 
Finisce con un pogrom e la espulsione, costante storica.
 
 
 
 
 

 Finisce con un pogrom e la espulsione, costante storica.
 
Le ossa di Ben Gurion esulterebbero nella tomba se questo avvenisse:
"se sapessi di poter salvare tutti i bambini della Germania portandoli 
in Inghilterra o soltanto la metà di loro portandoli in Palestina, 
opterei per la seconda soluzione, perché noi non dobbiamo considerare 
soltanto il destino di quei bambini ma di tutto il popolo ebraico" 
David Ben Gurion -  1938
 
Certo, quelle parole dure risalgono a tempi duri, che sono passati ma, 
forse, non per tutti.  Ad esempio: tu, da quelli che non lasciano 
passare giorno senza chiedere guerra contro l'Iran, hai mai sentito una 
parola di preoccupazione per i 25.000 ebrei che in quel paese ci vivono? 
  Io no.


 Certo, quelle parole dure risalgono a tempi duri,
 
e, soprattutto, sono false.
 
The Ben Gurion quote is taken from comments he made to Mapai’s central
committee on December 7, 1938.  This followed Britain’s decision to
deny entrance into Palestine of 10,000 German Jewish orphans in the
wake of Kristallnacht,  instead offering them asylum within Great
Britain. It was almost a year before the Nazis launched World War II
and several years before the Final Solution (to annihilate the Jews)
was methodically  implemented.  Ben Gurion  had no way of predicting
the enormity of what was to follow.
 
The British offer to accept several thousand children appeared to be a
gesture of conscience allowing Britain to close the doors of Palestine
— not only  to those German orphans, but to future refugees as well.
 
According to the records of the Mapai meeting, Yitzchak Ben Zvi
immediately clarified Ben Gurion’s brusque remark, explaining “ten
thousand children are a small part of Germany’s [Jewish] children…They
[the British] don’t intend to save Germany’s Jews, and certainly not
all of them. The moment the Jewish State Plan [the Peel plan] was
shelved, the possibility of complete rescue of Germany’s Jews was
shelved with it.”
 
 Ben Gurion viewed the rescue of Jews as paramount. As early as 1936,
Ben Gurion told Palestine’s high commissioner, Sir Arthur Wauchope,
that “had  there been the possiblity of bringing Poland’s Jews to the
United States or Argentina, we would have done so regardless of our
Zionist beliefs. But the world was closed to us. And had there also
not been room for us in Palestine, our people would have had only one
way out: to commit suicide” (Ben Gurion,Memoirs, p.3:105, cited in
Shabtai Teveth, Ben Gurion and the Holocaust, pp xlix, 110). And in
November 1941, Ben Gurion argued that “the supremely important thing
now is salvage, and nation-building is incidental” (Teveth, ibid.
p.xlviii).
 

preoccupazione per i 25.000 ebrei che in quel paese ci vivono? Io no.
 
E' una questione di saggezza, uno prima di tutto cerca di starci a casa 
propria.
 
Andarsene a cercare una piantando grana in casa d'altri in giro per il mondo 
non e' da saggi.
C'e' il fottuto rischio di ritrovarsi con tutte le case occupate e sprangate 
mentre fuori grandina.
 
 
 

 una certa mentalità "sionista", egemone in USA.
 
Tanto egemone che John Forbes Kerry è il 68imo Segretario di Stato USA
e il Sen. Charles Timothy "Chuck" Hagel è sotto scrutinio del Senato
USA per essere nominato 23esimo Segretario alla Difesa.
 
Persio sei egemone tra i pirla
 
PP

 wrote in message



Un certo gruppo di persone lo aveva capito in tempi non sospetti.
 
 
-- 
“Those who expect to reap the blessings of  freedom, must, like men,
undergo the  fatigues of supporting it.”  - North Idaho 21st Batallion of
Light Foot

 Persio sei egemone tra i pirla
 
Ti ringrazio per la stima, ma la *eccezionalitï¿½* rilevata dall'articolo 
riguardo alle nomine dovrebbe farti capire che la *normalitï¿½* ï¿½ un'altra.
 
In sintesi: non hai capito un cazzo.



Come sempre, usa il cervello in modo segregato come i tifosi della Lazio.
 
Un tantino nobile Kerry, da pargolo giocava nel giardino del campidoglio o 
nella villa dei Forbes.
 
Il figlio di immigrati Hagel invece necessita di scrutinio, essendo mezzo 
tedesco e mezzo polacco/irish potrebbe darsi che geneticamente porti semi 
sntisemiti (scusate l'antinomia), e pure cattolici (dio che schifo), in 
sintesi il plebeo potrebbe non aver letto la bibbia a fondo come il Rambo 
dell'Alabama.