... it saddens me a bit to think of George as a media pundit.
Maybe his next stop will be on Bill O'Reilly's show. (just kidding)
Hehe! He's actually been on The Bill O'Reilly Factor and Bill was his usual, predictably moronic self. Granted, he was just being interviewed rather than appearing as a pundit... The clip is on YouTube:
Joined: 02 Feb 2007 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 8:57 pm Post subject:
Faceless Wrtoe: If you look at the other threads in this section you'll see one all about the Doha Debate.
Holy Jeeze! I must of spent 2 hours yesterday searching the BBC site because I was confused with the name of the show. I had thought it was Davos and not Doha.
And, to find out that the info was here in another thread!! Oh! I must of O.D.'d on stupidity last evening.
Anyways; I'll search UseNet later today and keep yuh tuned. I already searched Google and YouTube.
Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy
Council on American-Islamic Relations
Awad, Nihad Co-Founder and Exec. Dir., Council on American-Islamic Relations
Walt, Stephen M. Professor, Harvard University, Kennedy (J.F.) School of Government
Saylor, Corey Director, Council on American-Islamic Relations, Government Affairs
Mearsheimer, John J. Co-Director, University of Chicago, International Security Policy Program
Two international affairs experts discussed pro-Israel lobbying and its influence on U.S. attitudes toward the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Topics included Israel and international law, U.S. neutrality, defining terrorism, and $3 billion per year U.S. aid to Israel. They said there is a loose coalition of individuals and groups lobbying Congress for U.S.-Israel policy. They also said most mainstream media are strongly pro-Israel. U.S. aid to Israel in the recent Hezbollah-Israel military action was described. After their presentations the panelists responded to audience members’ questions.
Walt and Mearsheimer wrote an article in the March London Review of Books that raised questions about the power the Israel lobby wields over U.S. foreign policy, saying that the lobbyists try to prevent criticism by claiming anti-Semitism. Their article was also the cover story in the July-August issue of Foreign Policy Magazine.
C-Span-2
August 28, 2006
(RealPlayer Presentation)
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14752.htm
Israel's influence of US policy & the Israeli lobby
Scott Ritter describes Israel's role in shaping U.S. Foreign policy
C-Span2 BookTV Interview
October 16, 2006
(YouTube Video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O125hGt9qt4&eurl=
Jim Condit Jr. For Congress
The Radio Ads Campaigns
Four 60 second ads
Exposing the Neo-Con Zionist Jewish network that is manipulating America and offering a Positive Action Plan to everyday Americans to reclaim our destiny
http://www.realnews247.com
This Israeli Lobby leading US policy issue is very interesting, as it would seem to be contra Galloway’s contention that Israel is actually doing what the US wants, and not the other way around.
I actually believe that this is a false dichotomy, as both views can be correct if both parties’ interests coincide in the main, which I believe they do. By supporting the creation, maintenance, and military superiority of the State of Israel, the US has a loyal & unsinkable base in the Middle East, in which only last year it was revealed that it has established a number of top secret bases. Being on top of the massive oil reserves is the main incentive of the US interest in having a presence there, (but there are other reasons as well), and the main area of mutual interest overlap is in ensuring that only “Pro-Western” Arab regimes are allowed to exist, which means propping up corrupt Puppet dictatorships that sell out their countries interest by providing cheap oil for the US & it’s allies. The “Pro-Western” euphemism includes by definition, if not exactly Israeli friendly, at least non aggressive regimes that recognize the State of Israel. So Israel has gradually seen all it's regional enemies been turned around or neutralized, one by one by it’s Superpower Benefactor, but of course it is always pushing for the US to act faster and/or more aggressively in pursuing their joint interests.
Anyhow this is how I see it, ….I think !
By the way I have no problem with GG becoming a bit of a media pundit, because as I see it, the more exposure & chance he has to air his views the better, as not only do they mostly coincide with mine, but I trust him not to water down his views or principles.
Hehe! He's actually been on The Bill O'Reilly Factor and Bill was his usual, predictably moronic self. Granted, he was just being interviewed rather than appearing as a pundit...
Thanks for the link. I didn't know this. Bill was being his regular blow-hard self, but was a bit more polite than I've seen him in the past (probably because of the potential bloodline gauntlet thrown down by George).
Do you know how recent that appearance was? It seems especially interesting on the subject of North Korea based on events this week (North Korea agreeing in principle to eliminate its nuclear weapons program in exchange for $). Whether that will be lasting is anyone's call.
One thing I rarely hear mentioned when discussing nuclear weapons, Iran and Israel is that Iran is a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (which voices their commitment to not develop nuclear weapons) but Israel is not. But when it comes to coverage of the Middle East, it rarely includes applying the same rules to all sides.
I’ve seen GG respond better to those “Isn’t a good thing to have got rid of Saddam” infantile questions. He sometimes answers by talking about choosing the lesser of two evils, or using a cost benefit analyses, which I believe is the correct response. If it was me being questioned, I would point blank asked any interviewer who posed such loaded & meaningless question, if they had hear of the infamous US military statement from Vietnam, “we had to destroy the village in order to save it”, and if they agreed with it, as their question would imply that they did. Having hopefully cause them to pause for a second, I would then elaborate that their question is so far unrelated to reality that it is rather pointless asking it never mind answering it, because we don’t half a magic wand to wave at people we don’t like in order for them to disappear, and for this magic act to happen in isolation without causing negative consequences. In the real world every action has a consequence, and if the results of that consequence are worst than the consequences of not taking that action, then clearly that action should not be taken. The attack on Iraq is a tragic & prime example, especially tragic as the consequences were foreseen by anybody who knew anything about Iraq, and the perpetrators deliberately ignored & brush these warnings aside in order to pursue their real agenda.
O'Reilly really is moronic. He seems to think "radical" is a term of abuse, I remember seeing him use it to attack grieving mother Ciny Sheehan, a lot of us might think Bush's policies and style are radical in the worst way. Anyway radical just means taking it up by the roots.
Anyway this is a good show of his ass being kicked
Seeing Phil Donohue in this form is always surreal to me. He was the man I watched when I was home from school sick doing what Maury Povich does now. But seeing him shout down Billy O'Reilly does the heart good.
I just posted a url link, as primitive as you can get. Whoever brought the download into my post, I don't know how you did it, but I'm impressed.
when you go to any Youtube page there is an "embed source" link on the right hand side - you can post that whole bit into a post here and it will show...
Seeing Phil Donohue in this form is always surreal to me. He was the man I watched when I was home from school sick doing what Maury Povich does now. But seeing him shout down Billy O'Reilly does the heart good.
Seeing Phil Donohue in this form is always surreal to me. He was the man I watched when I was home from school sick doing what Maury Povich does now. But seeing him shout down Billy O'Reilly does the heart good.
he was excellent eh?
He and Galloway should team up...
Now that would be good to watch. I know that they did try to set up a show for Phil over here but I don't think he really had the energy anymore for that type of schedule so it never went far.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
