PDA

View Full Version : Organized Jewish Community Almost Unanimously Condemns Trump



EE_
18th December 2015, 09:22 AM
Organized Jewish Community Almost Unanimously Condemns American Hero Donald Trump
December 17, 2015 Realist Report

The various organizations and institutions comprising the organized Jewish community will at times disagree on certain public policy and religious and/or cultural issues. However, on critical issues pertaining to the overall agenda of the international Jewish community – namely, the cultural perversion and destruction of Western civilization, the promotion of “diversity” and massive Third World immigration to the West, and White genocide generally – organized Jewry will come together and stand united. There are many examples I could cite.

For instance, the organized Jewish community almost unanimously supported the proposed invasion of Syria just over a year ago, a topic Dr. Kevin MacDonald highlighted and discussed in an important article. The Jewish Daily Forward has published rather revealing articles documenting the overwhelming Jewish support for both homosexual rights and gay “marriage” as well as amnesty for illegal aliens occupying and parasitizing off of the

American taxpayer, subjects I have written about in the past. More recently, I have highlighted and exposed the organized Jewish community’s demand that America and Europe accept an unlimited number of Middle Eastern “refugees” (read: invaders) into their countries. On all of these critical issues, the Jews stand together united and determined.

The Jewish Telegraph Agency recently provided us with yet another example of the organized Jewish community standing united on a key issue: the condemnation of American hero and leading GOP presidential contender Donald Trump.

Donald Trump’s call last week to bar all Muslims from entering the United States “until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on” has set off a deluge of criticism in America and around the world, from U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“Prime Minister Netanyahu rejects Donald Trump’s recent remarks about Muslims,” Netanyahu’s office said in a statement. “The State of Israel respects all religion and strictly adheres to the rights of all its citizens.”

Trump’s Dec. 7 remark also spurred numerous Jewish organizations to speak up. Here’s a roundup of some of the more notable Jewish organizational responses, as well as some of those that have stayed silent.

Jewish defense organizations:

Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt: “A plan that singles out Muslims and denies them entry to the U.S. based on their religion is deeply offensive and runs contrary to our nation’s deepest values.”

American Jewish Committee Associate Executive Director for Policy Jason Isaacson: “We are deeply disturbed by the nativist racism inherent in the candidate’s latest remarks.”

B’nai B’rith International: “Singling out an entire religious community for diminished rights amounts to bigotry, and it should not be accepted.”

Umbrella organizations:

Jewish Council for Public Affairs, the public affairs arm of the organized Jewish community: “There is no place in America, a nation founded on religious freedom, for discrimination on the basis of religion — or any other immutable characteristic, for that matter. … Recent statements are misleading to voters, because they imply that sacrificing our values will advance our security, which is a fallacy.”

Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the umbrella organization of the American Jewish community on foreign policy matters, did not issue any public statement after Trump’s remarks. But reached by telephone, Executive Vice Chairman Malcolm Hoenlein told JTA, “Obviously we reject what he said. It’s a given.”

Religious organizations:

Orthodox Union Executive Vice President Allen Fagin: “We call on all Americans to reaffirm that discrimination of any group solely upon religion is wrong and anathema to the great traditions of religious and personal freedoms upon which this country was founded.”

Rabbinical Council of America (Orthodox) President Rabbi Shalom Baum: “The complex issues that face us in ensuring the safety and security from terror of innocents and free societies throughout the world need to be addressed, but need to be done in sober and responsible ways. We call upon all Americans and the United States government to recognize the threats posed by radical Islamists, while preserving and protecting the rights of all people who seek peace, no matter how they worship God.”

Rabbinical Assembly (Conservative): “We recognize the need to be vigilant in providing security and protection from those who seek to do our country harm, but discriminating against an entire religion is wrong and dangerous.”

Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism Director Rabbi Jonah Dov Pesner: “While we take no position on Mr. Trump’s candidacy for president, we condemn in the strongest terms his comments calling for barring the entry of Muslims into the United States. As Jews who too often suffered persecution because of our faith, we cannot abide religious bigotry.”

Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association: “We call on all Jews and all Americans to denounce hate speech and fear-mongering against Muslims in politics and the media, and to reach out in support of Muslim Americans in every way that we can.”

Political organizations:

J Street, the “pro-Israel, pro-peace” lobbying group that has positioned itself as a left-wing alternative to AIPAC: “Donald Trump’s statement today calling for a ‘total and complete shutdown’ of Muslim immigration to the United States is repugnant and unacceptable. This statement is the latest in a string of deeply bigoted and Islamophobic remarks by Mr. Trump and others seeking to stoke and take political advantage of rank hatred.”

National Jewish Democratic Council: “It is long past time for leading Republicans, especially Jewish Republicans, to strongly speak out against the bigotry coming from its leading candidate. No single religion is our enemy — terrorists and all those who seek to destroy us are our enemies.” […]

I’ve been writing about the hysterical assault on Donald Trump by the mainstream political establishment generally and the organized Jewish community specifically (see here and here) somewhat regularly.

As I noted in a blog post just over one week ago highlighting the efforts of the Jewish mayor of St. Petersburg, Florida to ban Trump from the city:

It’s very clear the mainstream mass media and political establishment – which of course are entirely dominated and controlled by organized Jewish interests hostile to the well-being and future prospects of the White race – absolutely hate Donald Trump. Everything Trump stands for runs contrary to the Jewish agenda to destroy the sovereignty of the United States, which at this point has largely been accomplished.

The Jews see in Trump a man who has the potential to redirect American policy on matters pertaining to immigration, trade, and foreign policy in a direction that actually serves the interests of America, rather than international Jewry and the Jewish state of Israel.

A Donald Trump presidency would throw a major wrench in the Jewish agenda to demographically and racially destroy the White race and its traditions, history, and culture in the United States. That should be clear to all at this point.
http://therealistreport.com/organized-jewish-community-almost-unanimously-condemns-american-hero-donald-trump/

EE_
18th December 2015, 09:27 AM
They should quit now...once Trump is in, he will say, "YOUR FIRED!"

Pentagon Officers: We Quit if Trump Wins

The plans of the next president are personal to the officers of the Pentagon, who are threatening to retire if The Donald becomes commander-in-chief.
Republican presidential candidate and business mogul Donald Trump has repeatedly vowed to build up the U.S. military if elected president.

But it is not clear he will have the experienced commanders within the ranks to do it.

In the halls of the Pentagon, there is a different plan afoot for the Trump presidency. Here, officers are privately contemplating what they would do should Trump become their commander-in-chief. And more often than not, they proclaim they will leave.

“By 2016 I will have my 20 years in and can get out of here,” one military official said, referring to the amount of time a service member needs to collect retirement pay.

Spend enough time with a service member, and the topic of Trump comes up, always unsolicited. It is far less political than it sounds. Trump’s attack plans for the so-called Islamic State widely known as ISIS—his call to ban Muslims from the United States, his suggestions that cutting off the flow of information through the Internet can protect the homeland—many said, are an affront to the values they vowed to die to defend.

Each one of them took an oath to defend the Constitution, which protects freedom of speech and gives Congress, not just one person, the power to send the nation to war. They also swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”

In other words: The plans of the next president are personal to them.

Some said repeatedly hearing Trump and the other GOP candidates spelling out a plan that is only a more brazen—and perhaps reckless—version of the current strategy was not reassuring. They noted that for all the talk of supporting the troops, Congress has yet to pass an updated Authorization of the Use of the Military Force, which would in effect mark a congressional buy-in to the war effort. That some of the candidates have said they support a new AUMF, but have yet to pass one, was only moderately reassuring, they said.

This Daily Beast correspondent has heard such sentiments from at least a dozen commanders in the past few months. Such conversations can also be heard at common areas—in cafeteria lines and around lunch tables.

There are fears of being asked to carry out futile war plans that would bring instability. Almost all of today’s commanders are veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They all know someone who died in combat; indeed, they may have sent someone on a mission that ended with death. And because of that they bring a unique vantage point to lessons learned, from the frontlines where the cruelty of warfare is impossible to miss. Those who send them, meanwhile, sit thousands of miles away and learn what is happening through the filter of distance.

The U.S. military still is rebuilding after a decade of repeated deployments and overworn equipment. And the prospect of endless quasi-war thousands of miles away—even if it’s fought mostly by drones and elite special operations forces—is not tenable, they argue. These commanders are too focused on recovering from the last war to hear politicans talk about the prospect of a future one.

And so in the course of conversation, plots of a different kind emerge—contingencies in case Trump really is elected to the White House.

“By 2016 I will have my 20 years in and can get out of here,” one military official said, referring to the amount of time a service member needs to collect retirement pay.
“This is not the country I joined to defend.”

“I am turning in my papers.”

“I’m moving to a farm.”

The words broadly echoed what flag officers have said in the past about the reality show star: “Personally, I hope no one will be called upon to serve under a President T… I can’t bring myself to type the words,” retired Rear Admiral John Hutson, who once served as the Navy’s top lawyer, told The Daily Beast in July.

To be sure, those views are not uniform. Commanders deployed outside the Pentagon said they hear enlisted troops enthusiastically support Trump. Some describe enlisted service members fighting with family or other soldiers in defense of the real talk from the real estate mogul. But the Pentagon is an unusual military posting, one where it is easier to spot a general than a corporal. And if the divide between the enlisted and officers is true, the former—the base of Trump’s military support—are not a well-represented population within the headquarters of the United States military.

Regardless, such fervor about political matters is a jarring thing to hear at first from those in uniform; they serve in a part of government that urges service members to drop any sense of identity or partisan politics. It is unusual to see someone in uniform even say whether they are Republican or Democrat, and if they do, often it is whispered like a secret; the final case of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” if you will.

Soldiers will spend years with a comrade and never know his political leanings. Some generals refuse to vote, a signal that they will obey whoever is commander-in-chief.

But in the course of the 2016 campaign it is clear that the nation’s political polarization has seeped into the military, particularly after Wednesday’s debate, which focused on national security.

None of the candidates’ proposals appeared to gain traction at the building Wednesday.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz announced that he wanted a bombing campaign on places like Raqqa, Syria—ISIS’s capital—that was both indiscriminate—he used the term “carpet bombing”—and ultra-precise.

“You would carpet bomb where ISIS is, not a city, but the location of the troops. You use air power directed—and you have embedded special forces to direction the air power. But the object isn’t to level a city. The object is to kill the ISIS terrorists,” Cruz said.

“Did you hear what Cruz said? How the hell do we do prick point carpet bombing?” asked one service member Wednesday to a colleague.

“Like we can just level a city,” responded another.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said he would shoot down Russian jets flying in a no-fly zone that would be in place over Syria under his presidency.

“I remember the no-fly zone over Iraq [during the 1990s]. That was so expensive,” one Air Force officer responded about the proposal.

Neurosurgeon Ben Carson suggested that flattening ISIS-controlled cities would be “merciful,” even if it killed civilians as it would eliminate the threat.

“How does brain surgery prepare you to be president?” one Marine asked.

And Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said “we need to destroy ISIS in the caliphate” by investing in the military, but didn’t spell out how that would happen.

Still another soldier said, “Good luck with that.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/16/pentagon-troops-it-s-us-or-trump.html

Horn
18th December 2015, 10:13 AM
Pentagon Officers: We Quit if Trump Wins

They won't have anyone to attack their building with box cutters, if Trump wins...they'll have to do it themselves.

Ponce
18th December 2015, 10:26 AM
They will blame Trump for the next "Jewish" so called holocaust when five of them get killed by angry Arabs.

V

Neuro
18th December 2015, 10:31 AM
Several hundred thousand Iraqi's has died due to the US invasion and its following unrest, planned and executed by the very same asshats that now condemn Trumps proposal for a complete stop of Muslim immigration. They created the fucking situation these millions of people attempt to flee from. They don't have the moral high ground to say anything they should be court martialed for high treason and crimes against humanity, and shot. Leave the fucking Middle East alone! No more wars for the international Jew.

vacuum
18th December 2015, 10:58 AM
I really hope Trump picks a good VP.

I don't want to see this hit the fan, but I'm worried it will.

mick silver
18th December 2015, 04:57 PM
http://uziiw38pmyg1ai60732c4011.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/dropzone/2015/11/dj-hillary-resize.png (http://store.counterpunch.org/product/queen-of-chaos/)

Ponce
18th December 2015, 05:38 PM
I really hope Trump picks a good VP.

I don't want to see this hit the fan, but I'm worried it will.

Well, I am here waiting for his phone call.......Ponce the VP.....I like the sound of that :)

V