Posted on 07/19/2006 7:59:25 PM PDT by rcocean
No he is not kidding...he has a long history of defending Jew haters here.
Just another shallow rant by Buchanan who is ignorant about the the enemy Israel is dealing with. An enemy that has bunkers underneath civilans and hides behind civilians. Unfortunately there will be collateral damage in taking out this enemy. Instead of blaming Israel, a smart rational person would blame the terrorists.
Not true. It's just that Pat IS one, that's all.
"Diesel engines do not emit enough carbon monoxide to kill anybody." -- Pat Buchanan, expressing his revisionist views, challenging the fact that diesel exhaust was used to gas thousands of Jews at Treblinka, and discussing "group fantasies of martyrdom" in The New Republic, October 22, 1990
Glad I could clear that up for ya! :)
Lebanon does not deserve to exist if it can't expel the Terrorists Thugs among them, and Hezbollah is the epitome of the term "Terrorist"
They assemble no army, they confront nobody honorably, their leaders promote suicide bombing, unless of course, it's their turn to strap on the suicide vest.
The bottom line is Terrorists are cowards who exploit their flock to advance their dark agenda. Those who harbor them should be put on notice, and Israel is issuing the notice as we speak
Israel is not America, nor is it Christian.
Regardless, the Christian knows that those who side with Israel are blessed, and those who side against Israel are cursed. Pat curses the deeds of the Jews.
and they had "big teeth." :)
sorry about that
The UN instructed Lebanon to do this. By international treaty. So it does NOT violate international law. I don't think he knows what he is talking about.
Typical "paleocon" BS.
Sure, if you hate Israelis.
" find it interesting that all Americans at times freely criticize our own country's foreign policy and they are not called anti-American for doing so.. However, if anyone around here dares to criticize Isreal's foreign policy, he is immediately branded an anti-Semite."
Not at all, plenty of people have critized the "Land for Peace" foreign policy of the Israelis without being called anti-Semitic.
It's only when people critize Israel for defending herself and her people, thus demonstrating a desire to see the perpetrators escalate their destructive ways, are those people correctly labeled as being anti-Semitic.
Buchanan is a cowardly bastard. I regret ever having supported that pos.
I am ashamed to say I voted for this guy in 1992. I used to think that the liberal media's attacks on Buchanan calling him an anti-Semite were just their usual ad hominem ad absurdum - calling everyone on the right Nazis, racists, and fascists. Sadly it appears that at least in Buchannans case the mud sticks. Pat's foreign policy just doesn't add up unless you accept that the man just doesn't like Jews. Then it all makes sense.
He's been much more open about it ever since his failed Presidential campaigns, which he of course blamed (and continues to blame) on "the neocons." Now he's just a Sobran clone. ....and about as irrelevant.
I have come to the conclusion that indeed almost all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic. Why?
Because one can reframe all criticism to comparable crisis historically and in the present which resemble the Israeli Palestinian conflict. And in almost any case one can name, the criticisms of Israel would appear absurd in any other context. The only reason these criticisms hold is because it is a government of "Joooos."
France provides a great introspection to this absurdity. In January of 2006, while touring a nuclear sub base in France, Chirac announced to the world that he reserved the right to use nuclear missiles against terrorists if missiles were ever used against his state.
He urges restraint from Israel and an immediate cease fire?!
The absurd contradiction cannot be reconciled outside of anti-semitism.
When al-Qaida captured two U.S. soldiers and barbarically butchered them, the U.S. Army did not smash power plants across the Sunni Triangle
When al-Qaida captured two U.S. soldiers and barbarically butchered them, the U.S. Army did not smash power plants across the Sunni Triangle
Yes, frankly his anti-Semitism has become so notorious and widely known among all parties and political movements that his bigotry is almost a joke.
He's totally predictable on all his comments regarding Israel and the Palestinian jihadists - that in that respect he's also become a bore!
Why does the MSM even give this has-been his 15 minutes of ignominy?
A little background on Pat written by a CA Jewish Weekly paper when Pat was running for President in 1996:
Friday February 16, 1996
Pat Buchanan's anti-Semitism: an American tradition?
Earl Raab
Pat Buchanan's political trail is worth watching.
He is not a conservative. He has staked out a territory where edges of the left wing and the right wing meet. But a young American priest, Father Charles Coughlin -- to whom Buchanan bears some resemblance -- pioneered that turf.
Those of you not yet on social security might not know that in the 1930s, Coughlin led the largest anti-Semitic movement in American history. Of course the 1990s is not the 1930s, and Buchanan is not Coughlin. But it is worthwhile to compare the two men's trails as Buchanan's presidential forays continue and after he's won two minor GOP primaries.
As a professed working-class champion, Coughlin denounced rich Easterners who embodied, in his words, "the luxury of Park Avenue, Wall Street attorneys, the erudition of Harvard, of Yale." This philosophy was in the classic populist tradition, which Buchanan upholds with his attacks on big business, high finance, the elite and the intellectual class, purportedly on the workers' behalf.
Coughlin was an isolationist, attacking the League of Nations and our entry in World War Two. Since the end of the Cold War, Buchanan has also been an isolationist, attacking the United Nations and our involvement overseas. He says President Franklin Roosevelt acted "unconstitutionally" by supporting England and "plotting" to get us into the war against Hitler before Pearl Harbor.
In his early years, Coughlin's anti-Semitism was of the indirect, vaguely obscure, name-dropping variety. He snidely referred to Alexander Hamilton, "whose original name was Alexander Levine." Attacking the "international bankers," he cited "the Rothschilds and Lazards Freres, the Morgans, the Kuhns and the Loebs." Later, he attacked the Jews directly, stating that "Jews as Oriental Freemasons are the powers behind the throne of darkness."
Buchanan remarked in 1990 that "there are only two groups beating the drums for war in the Middle East: the Israeli Defense Ministry and its amen corner in the United States." This is exactly the kind of covertly anti-Semitic comment the younger Coughlin was likely to make. It was not the kind of explicit attack on the Jews that the priest made in his later years, and on which an anti-Semitic movement such as Coughlin's is built.
Whether Buchanan moves into a later stage of explicit and unapologetic public anti-Semitism remains a question, and we should beware. But it is instructive to note the difference between our era and Coughlin's, and to watch how Buchanan's Coughlinesque tendencies are curbed in modern America.
On the face of it, there is a pervasive mainstream sensitivity and opposition even to hooded anti-Semitism in the 1990s; such resistance did not exist 60 years ago. The godfather of American conservative thought, William F. Buckley, wrote, "I find it impossible to defend Pat Buchanan against the charge" of anti-Semitism.
When Buchanan, as an aide to President Ronald Reagan, wrote a memo that the president was "succumbing to the pressure of the Jews," he was roundly attacked in the media, and soon was eased out of the administration. By no means was anti-Semitism such a bugaboo in the 1930s -- a time when American anti-Jewish sentiments were at high tide.
However, research showed that most of Coughlin's millions of followers were not particularly anti-Semitic in their attitudes. The majority were attracted to Coughlin because of his political views on this country's economic and social breakdown -- and they went along with him on his anti-Semitism.
The "underclass" represented a different sector of the population in the 1930s than it does in the 1990s. But if a large proportion of today's white Americans were to grow frustrated enough to adopt Buchanan's extreme views, they could also conceivably "go along" with a more upfront brand of bigotry, which is what happened in Coughlin's time.
We are scarcely at such a danger point right now. But if we keep Coughlin in mind, then Buchanan's trail is worth watching.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.