Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

August 25, 2006
By: Suzanne Nossel

Sixty-three percent of Israelis reportedly want Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to resign in the wake of what's perceived to be a failed operation in Lebanon. They're outraged that Israel's revered military somehow faltered in dislodging Hezbollah's leadership and securing the return of two captured soldiers.

One interesting point of comparison is to President Bush - we've now been in what a majority of Americans have perceived for some time to be a failed military operation, yet no majority has coalesced in favor of the President's stepping down. In fact, Bush was reelected nearly two years ago despite serious signs that the Iraq mission was going poorly.

Why the differences?

- The Iraq Operation did get rid of Saddam Hussein

- Part of its the structure of Israeli politics, where governments come and go based on tenuous coalitions and votes of no confidence

- The role of the military in Israeli life is far more preeminent than it is for Americans - the vast majority of citizens serve not just for an initial 3 year stint, but also thereafter in regular reserve duty. Citizens perceive themselves to rely on the Israeli army daily for the survival of the state. So the Israeli public's stake in matters of military performance is much deeper and more direct than Americans'

- With rockets raining on Northern Israel, the threat posed by Hezbollah to Israel is much more live and in closer proximity than that posed by the Iraqi insurgency to the American public - the failure to deal decisively with it is thus all the more unacceptable. Whereas a large percentage of Americans don't follow the news from Iraq, Israelis don't have the luxury of tuning out

But, on the flip side:

- Whereas the Israeli operation in Lebanon was based on widely recognized provocation, the US invasion of Iraq was based on misleading and false intelligence

- Whereas 157 Israelis were killed in a month-long operation, the Iraq war has lasted three and a half years and resulted in nearly 3,000 deaths at a cost of hundreds of billions

- The Lebanon war still has the potential to culminate in a stable, UN enforced ceasefire and a defanged Hezbollah. No comparably optimistic scenario has yet manifested in Iraq.

Your thoughts?

Suzanne Nossel 11:50 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (71)

Bookmark and Share

Three reasons:

(a) The Israeli's were better informed about why they went to war with Lebanon.
(b) The Israeli media is not anywhere nearly as jingoistic even in times of war, and
(c) Most americans, whether they think it or not, implicitly buy into the notion that US always acts only with "good" intentions, and when things go wrong, it is because US intentions are misunderstood by others. So, there is no intense pressure for any accountability of our politicians for failed strategies. Most Israeli's do not suffer from such delusions.


Posted by: Kari on August 26, 2006 at 12:03 AM | PERMALINK

Israel has a parliamentary system, in which it is quite possible to force the Prime Minister out at any time. In the United States the only option is impeachment, which the Constitution made so difficult that it's never removed a president yet (though in Nixon's case it might have, had he not resigned).

Congressional races are unlike parliamentary contests. For a variety of reasons turnover is rare. One main reason is that congressional elections are decoupled from presidential elections; my neighbors don't show their disapproval of the president by voting for a congressman of the other party.

As to why we don't have a peace movement here, I have nothing to offer, except that too few seem to care enough.

Posted by: bad Jim on August 26, 2006 at 12:04 AM | PERMALINK

Perhaps it's also because US pollsters don't ask if Bush should step down.

If those who disapprove of Bush are assumed to want him to step down, then he beats Olmert.

Posted by: JS on August 26, 2006 at 12:05 AM | PERMALINK

You forgot to say that Israel's democracy is much more robust than the US's, where 2/3 of the country would have just named George Bush king in 2003 and repealed the Bill of Rights if the matter were put to a referendum. For all its flaws, I respect Israel for its tradition of dissent, even on national security matters.

Israel's population is 1/50 that of the US, roughly, so 150 Israelis is equivalent to 7500 Americans. That's 2.5 9/11s.

Israel was provoked, but it had a choice as to how to respond. It decided to put into effect a full-scale destroy-Lebanon plan that had been on the table internally for about a year, instead of, say, grabbing a couple of Hezbollah officials, or shelling Hezbollah missile sites instead of bombing the entire country, including Christian areas that had been pro-Israel in the past.

The Lebanon war isn't going to result in a defanged Hezbollah, and the myth of the IDF's invulnerability has been shattered. That could mean that Israel will now face more threats. Or it could mean that the Sharon/Olmert concept of unilaterally imposing conditions by force, and refusing to negotiate with Israel's enemies, will become obviously untenable, which might advance the cause of peace.

Posted by: Joe Buck on August 26, 2006 at 12:07 AM | PERMALINK

How about - Americans aren't really paying attention, and when they are, their media are struggling mightily to portray Republicans as serious and Democrats as unserious.

How about "serious" == "randomly violent" is a pernicious problem in the American psyche?

Posted by: craigie on August 26, 2006 at 12:16 AM | PERMALINK

I wonder...how differently is the media constituted in Israel? I can't imagine it is MORE corporate. Also, war is not an abstraction to your average Israeli. It sure is to your average American.
How much of the Israeli economy is tied directly into its defense industry?
The political elites in the US are pretty unreachable, politicallly speaking. They are remote and suffer few consequences of their policies. Could this be said about Israel?

Any ideas?

Posted by: higtaper on August 26, 2006 at 12:39 AM | PERMALINK

3,000 *U.S.* deaths. At this point it's becoming untenable to completely ignore all the Iraqi deaths we're responsible for.

Posted by: Cliff on August 26, 2006 at 12:41 AM | PERMALINK

The Iraq war did not "result in nearly 3,000 deaths." It resulted in more than 100,000 deaths when the Iraqis are counted. It is common to see mainstream journalists and right-wing bloggers ignore this but it is even more shocking to see it here.

Posted by: erasma on August 26, 2006 at 12:49 AM | PERMALINK

I wonder...how differently is the media constituted in Israel? I can't imagine it is MORE corporate. Also, war is not an abstraction to your average Israeli. It sure is to your average American.
How much of the Israeli economy is tied directly into its defense industry?
The political elites in the US are pretty unreachable, politicallly speaking. They are remote and suffer few consequences of their policies. Could this be said about Israel?

Any ideas?

Posted by: higtaper on August 26, 2006 at 12:51 AM | PERMALINK

American soldiers in Iraq have been struggling and often failing with nation-building tasks they had not trained for. What they were trained for, they have generally done well.

Israel's military in Lebanon failed at a task it had had years to prepare for. It showed complacency in letting Hezbollah get an initial success, confused strategy, and faulty tactics. Even after years in Iraq, no one doubts American soldiers' combat prowess or their commanders' proficiency in combined arms operations. That isn't true of the Israeli military, at least not for the time being, and for a country in Israel's position this is a very serious matter indeed.

Posted by: Zathras on August 26, 2006 at 12:51 AM | PERMALINK


The understated tone of your post really caught my attention. I think the US is truly hurt politically because of Iraq and Afghanistan and this combined with Israel's newly discovered military vulnerability will unsettle the region.
I do think that the threat from Iran is hugely overstated. Iran is a serious player and has been shafted repeatedly by the West. It may overplay its hand. But I think its interests as a state lie more with stability than chaos.
I don't think I can say that about the Bush Administration.

Posted by: higtaper on August 26, 2006 at 12:57 AM | PERMALINK

American soldiers in Iraq have been struggling and often failing with nation-building tasks they had not trained for. What they were trained for, they have generally done well.

Well, from what I saw from 1998-2003 (when I was able to get out, thank the good Lord), was that the US Army was very aware that dealing with local populations and insurgencies was very much part of any campaign. And the Army was trying to catch up with the Marine Corps, who had much more developed doctrine.

The generals and colonels had a hard time training it - because it was hard. A lot harder than force-on-force manuever, and certainly harder to grade objectively in exercises.

So the previous commenter does has a point - the Army focused a lot of training effort on maneuver warfare, at the expense of everything else. Now they're faced with everything else.

But why didn't they train it? They knew it was there - and after Bosnia and Somalia they should have know it was the most likely mission.

I think that some officers *cough*General Franks and others*cough* built their careers on manuever warfare and weren't willing to go away from what had made them successful. My two cents.

Posted by: Wapiti on August 26, 2006 at 1:09 AM | PERMALINK

That "defanged" Hizbollah may very well wind up being the gov't of Lebanon.

Posted by: basilbeast on August 26, 2006 at 1:17 AM | PERMALINK

The difference of course is that Olmert is going to be replaced by a more hardline PM, not exactly what the liberals are looking for.

Posted by: Freedom Fighter on August 26, 2006 at 1:17 AM | PERMALINK

Duh. The difference is that the Israeli populous knows that they "lost" this war, whereas the US population thinks that we're winning, or that it's still winnable.

Posted by: Michael on August 26, 2006 at 1:23 AM | PERMALINK

The idea of comparing the two situations is misguided, because the systems are obviously far different. So the post was a way to present some anti Bush points in a more thoughtful and restrained way. But I must say that Ms. Nossell writes well and with a much more measured and artful tone than typical liberal posting.

Posted by: brian on August 26, 2006 at 1:24 AM | PERMALINK

"Why the differences?"

Jews and Israelis aren't going to take shit from no one about how argument and dissent is somehow unpatriotic or treasonous.

The other obvious difference is that the war with Hezbollah is 5 to 100 miles away while the war in Iraq is 12,000 miles and many reality shows and shopping malls away. Israelis ain't dumbshits, this really is life and death shit.

Posted by: jerry on August 26, 2006 at 1:27 AM | PERMALINK

Perhaps the Israeli public is showing its displeasure for a Prime Minister who was apparently more concerned with the opinion of the world community and the pictures being shown on the media instead of fully committing to the objective of destroying Hezbollah once he made the decision to use military force.

Since the American public is convinced that Bush is fully committed to the goal of destroying the terrorist organizations that want to do damage to the nation, they maybe prepared to cut him some slack over the fact that the war in Iraq is not going well. Another factor maybe the absence of an alternative strategy about how to fight the GWOT than the one being pursued by Bush.

Posted by: Chicounsel on August 26, 2006 at 1:32 AM | PERMALINK

No, the Israeli public hasn't turned against Olmert because he stopped the war before Israel could "win."

The Israeli public saw a promised "one week" offensive grow to two weeks, and then four weeks, without accompishing the stated goals Olmert's government announced it would accomplish in one week.

The Israeli public saw a possible repeat of the 1982 occupation of Lebanon, and lost faith in the leadership because they (unlike some Americans) were unwilling to buy a pig in a poke *twice.*

If Americans had anywhere near the intelligence and toughness of Israelis, and esp. if American politicians had anywhere near the intelligence and toughness of Israeli citizens, Bush would have been removed from office long before the 2004 election.

It helps that, for Israelis, military service is indeed not an abstraction - something "other people" do while allowing everyone else to stick yellow ribbons on their cars and call that "supporting the troops" - and that wasting soldiers' lives on bad strategy is therefore not perceived as "strength."

Posted by: CaseyL on August 26, 2006 at 1:59 AM | PERMALINK

Wapiti >"...I think that some officers *cough*General Franks and others*cough* built their careers on manuever warfare and weren't willing to go away from what had made them successful..."

Gen Pace is a disgrace to the uniform he wears; he has totally failed his responsibilities as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs PERIOD and should be removed, right after Field Marshal Rumsfeld.

[Don`t like it ? Screw off, I wore the same uniform once & Pace`s performance has been disgusting & totally unacceptable for a Marine; I wouldn`t follow him to the corner drug store]

CaseyL >"...If Americans had anywhere near the intelligence and toughness of Israelis, and esp. if American politicians had anywhere near the intelligence and toughness of Israeli citizens, Bush would have been removed from office long before the 2004 election..."


Few Americans have any clue at all & boy, does it show; GET IT Freedom Phoney ?

"Patriotism is not a short and frenzied outburst of emotion but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime." - Adlai E. Stevenson, Jr.

Posted by: daCascadian on August 26, 2006 at 3:05 AM | PERMALINK

bad Jim wrote "In the United States the only option is impeachment, which the Constitution made so difficult that it's never removed a president yet (though in Nixon's case it might have, had he not resigned)."

There can be no doubt that Nixon would have been forced out in an overwhelming bipartisan vote in both the House and the Senate.

Back then, Congress and the voters were outraged by the president's scandals. But something happened in America. Reagan's Iran-Contra scandal didn't generate the outrage that it should have. Bush's scandals haven't generated the outrage that they should have. Sad.

Posted by: Joel Rubinstein on August 26, 2006 at 3:30 AM | PERMALINK

Olmert can't be considered in isolation; he is a continuation of Sharon et. al. The track record has not been stellar. Also, as has been pointed out by others, military duty in Israel is not something for someone else; it's something that touches everyone closely. It took a very short period of time after the start of the Lebanon conflifct for criticism to surface that the IDF had been shorted by politicians over the last several years.

Posted by: has407 on August 26, 2006 at 3:31 AM | PERMALINK

the Israeli operation in Lebanon was based on widely recognized provocation

This statement is a bit ambiguous. Does widely recognized mean just an accepted platitude that Israel would never provoke or does it mean logical, rational pro-American people know for certain explicit overwhelming evidence exists that the Israeli attacks on civilian targets in Lebanon were based on provocation? I think Ms. Rossen means the latter.

Israel has done more to provoke retaliation than any of its adversaries. Israel has made many more incursions into Lebanon and assassinated and kidnapped Hezbollah leaders much more than Hezbollah has done violence towards Israel.

The above statement reflects what the mass media has tried and succeeded into making Hezbollah's guilt instigating the provocation of Israel's wrath a common knowledge, despite its mendacity. I am glad to make the point, but having Ms. Nossel try to emphasize it demonstrates how deeply ingrained the neo-con talking points have become. I do not know anything about Ms. Nossel, but Mr. Drum must read Nossel's rationalizations for Israel's crimes, killing mostly unarmed civilians, and deeply consider the framing of the conflict in the kind of strategic and security policy arena she inhabits. This framing is not correct and more than deeply saddens me.

Israel holds Lebanese lands, obtained because of superior military strength, and makes many incursions into Lebanon and asserts its authority to designate people as a threat to its security, either kidnaping or assassinating them, with absolute authority and moral righteousness. When the only functioning Lebanese political organization that represents the poorest and largest faction of the Lebanese population, the Si'a, reacts in kind, Ms. Nossel makes a determined effort to condemn Hezbollah and defend the massive murderous response of Israel, which is subsidized by the US. Because moderates consider people who accept the moral authority of Israel's and the US's military hegemony worthy of attention and a place at the table of discussion, we are at war.

Posted by: Hostile on August 26, 2006 at 4:00 AM | PERMALINK

My personal contribution to the anti-war movement is largely confined to displaying the bumper sticker "I'm already against the next war", for which I've been congratulated too many times, as though that was actually courageous.

The thought that it might be true, that flaunting a provocative opinion is too risky for most people to contemplate, is profoundly depressing.

I've yet to find it an issue, by the way. They seem to be more afraid of us than we are of them.

Posted by: bad Jim on August 26, 2006 at 4:25 AM | PERMALINK


Perhaps the difference is that the Israelis, being much more familiar with their military and its capabilities than Americans are with theirs, were more ready to judge the facts on the ground. With Iraq, though a majority of Americans think the war was a mistake, most realise that they cannot come up with an alternative that is guaranteed to be better.

I believe Olmert is in trouble with the Israeli public because the public is asking exactly the same questions that military observers around the world are asking. For example:

1. Why so clumsy with the their use of airpower? Not clumsy in the sense that they were inept - they mostly hit what they were aiming at. But why use a target set that included so much of the Lebanese transportation system. Their targeting choices went far beyond simply isolating the battlefield and hitting Hezbollah wherever found. Why target roads and bridges far in the north? Why waste sorties trying to chase rocket launchers? After all, it was an Israeli who coined the saying, "The best way to counter a missile battery is to roll a tank over it."

2. Why the delay in ground operations and why so limited? Normal Israeli practice would have been to use combined arms to break through the weak spots in the enemy defenses (there are always some), exploit the breakthough, and then clean up the pockets of resistance. Classic combined arms blitzkrieg, at which they excel. Instead, they gradually pushed not much more than two brigades forward, in direct frontal assaults on the strongest of Hezbollah defenses. One would have expected them to use multiple divisions, rather than a few brigades.

I suspect that the Israeli public is upset because they've come to the conclusion that PM Olmert wasn't committed to the struggle and sought to get what he wanted through airpower, instead of ground forces. I don't believe the Israeli public has doubts about what its military can do. I think they're coming to the same conclusion that many foreign military experts have arrived at. That being the Israeli campaign was ill-conceived and ill-led, rather than an actual failure of capability.

Posted by: Trashhauler on August 26, 2006 at 5:23 AM | PERMALINK

So, the problem is that Lebanon wasn't bombed into the stone age?

Consider that Hezbollah was the instigator, the provacateur, and now serves as the nation-builder, the fixer, butcher/baker/rocket-maker. The guy with the hammer, the nail and the gun.

Surely the only argument can be that Beirut should have been bombed into the Paleocene instead of the Pleistocene.

Or maybe, just maybe, this was a really stupid thing to do. A crazy thought. Sort of like the invasion of Iraq, but done with enough self-control that only the sheets get sprinkled.

Posted by: bad Jim on August 26, 2006 at 5:49 AM | PERMALINK

Trashhauler -- Per your point 2, the seemingly half-hearted ground operation was criticized in the Israeli press within a couple weeks of the start of the conflict.

The criticism at that time was not so much that the campaign was ill-conceived, as ill-led. There was plently of popular support, but IIRC, there were doubts that Halutz, the IDF Chief of Staff, who hails from the IAF, was too reliant on the IAF. (And IIRC there were doubts expressed about Halutz before the conflict started.)

As it turns out those doubts appear to have been correct; specifically, the dependence of the campaign on air power and the hesitancy to commit ground forces.

Posted by: has407 on August 26, 2006 at 6:15 AM | PERMALINK

If Olmert resigns, the Israelis have another election. If Bush resigns, we get President Cheney. Who in his right mind wants President Cheney?

Posted by: tomeck on August 26, 2006 at 7:11 AM | PERMALINK

It's all about public's investment in military: if you or someone you know and love stand a real chance of facing live fire you tend to care a great deal about the competence of the people putting you in that position. Professional soldiers have this second guessing trained out of them, they make commitments that act to suppress individual conscience. But soldiers drawn from the citizenry do not think that way: they have to come to a personal understanding, an individual belief in the value of the mission and those leading them to it. It's a completely different dynamic.

The belief that all Israelis could and, given their tenuous situation, needed to buy into with conviction was the credo "woe to anyone who fucks with us". Motivated citizens are much more pliable than incorporated soldiers when it comes to questioning the efficacy of such a credo if given the opportunity. Olmert has given opportunity.

And of course it raises the interesting question: can America hope to survive as an empire when the overwhelming majority of its citizenry is fundamentally detached from the reality of the sacrifice required to defend that empire?

Posted by: Louis XIII on August 26, 2006 at 7:29 AM | PERMALINK

1. There is no accountability for a Republican president protected and coddled by a Republican media, especially after 9/11 changed everything.

2. See 1.

Posted by: grytpype on August 26, 2006 at 7:33 AM | PERMALINK

I attribute the fact that Bush even remains in one piece to the inherent ignorance and apathy of many Americans and the persuasiveness of the most fearsome fascist propaganda machine (i.e. FoxNews, Washington Times, New York Post, Clear Channel radio, and on and on), that have taught Americans to live in constant fear of an enemy they cannot see and do not understand. Otherwise, he would have been drawn and quartered long ago....

Posted by: The Liberal Avenger on August 26, 2006 at 7:54 AM | PERMALINK

Im my opinion, the Dems could do a lot worse than to say that, win or lose this fall, they will call for the resignations of both Bush and Cheney once the new Congress is seated, based on the Bush Administration's fuckup of Iraq, its disastrous response to Katrina, and its mismanagement of the War on Terror.

They could say, let the people decide whether they'd rather have President Hastert or President Pelosi, but the failures of Bush and Cheney are so enormous that they ought to have the decency to quit out of sheer embarrassment, even if they don't give a flip for the well-being of their country.

Posted by: RT on August 26, 2006 at 8:32 AM | PERMALINK

I don't think any poller has asked whether Bush or Cheney should resign.

They have asked if Congress should consider impeachment if Bush mislead America in the case for war, in October 05, and that was favored 50-44.

But as far as I know, no one has asked about resignation. Which is a way different question.

Posted by: grytpype on August 26, 2006 at 8:47 AM | PERMALINK

If Bush resigns, we get President Cheney. Who in his right mind wants President Cheney?

I won't make the obvious quip that we already have President Cheney...

"How much can Bush take before he cracks" is a fair question. Even though he's the most coddled and protected president we've ever had -- we mustn't hurt his feelings because that would be treason and blasphemy -- I think he's starting to understand he really screwed the pooch on Iraq.

How much can a man take? Even a blockhead like Bush must have limits.

Posted by: grytpype on August 26, 2006 at 8:53 AM | PERMALINK


I won't make the obvious quip that we already have President Cheney...

Good point, but I think it would actually be worse if he had the title as well.

Posted by: tomeck on August 26, 2006 at 9:03 AM | PERMALINK

The structural issues are pretty blatantly the main issue here. In a parliamentary system, a prime minister resigning over some scandal is not a particularly rare thing. In the US, one president ever has resigned, and over massive, massive corruption.

I hate Bush, and tire of the public's patience with him as much as anyone, but this is really not that difficult to explain.

Posted by: John on August 26, 2006 at 9:06 AM | PERMALINK

What I find extraoardinary is that no one, apparently, especially the Israelis, seems to be willing to acknowledge a more obvious explanation of the failure of the Israeli effort: that Hezbollah was vastly better prepared, and, relatively, better armed than any Arab army in the past.

Instead, the focus is entirely on the weakness, poor leadership, and flaccidity of the Israeli military. Yet I doubt that the difference on the Israeli side is very significant; I'd expect that their preparations and training and weaponry are not significantly different from the past, though they may have been too smug in their sense of military superiority.

It's just interesting how blind people seem to be to the alternative explanation. It's worth pondering why that alternative explanation is so completely unthinkable by everybody involved -- except, of course, by the Arabs themselves.

Posted by: frankly0 on August 26, 2006 at 9:29 AM | PERMALINK

the big one for the US is that

the President LIED to the nation about invasion.

Even if there was now a proud and stable secular democracy in Iraq, bush should not have been re-elected. He betrayed the basic trust between the government and the people about the most critical area of the President's responsibilities.

It is damning of the media that was so critical in in spreading the disinformation that was essential for getting him elected, but mostly it is damining of the American people that either didn't have the fortitude, interest, or the "core values" to understand the truth about what bush had done or to do something about it.

Then on top of the big one, throw in the crimes against humanity, torture, rendition, domestic spying, and the trashing of the constitution, and the fact that bush isn't in prison is an obvious and blatant travesty and as poor a reflection on the American people as there ever could be. It exposes America's arrogance in its own greatness as a beacon of the rule of law, honesty, and integrity as a compelte farce.

Posted by: gak on August 26, 2006 at 9:38 AM | PERMALINK

Why? We're the dumbest country on the planet.

Posted by: Jeffrey Davis on August 26, 2006 at 9:42 AM | PERMALINK

frankly0 wrote:

"What I find extraoardinary is that no one, apparently, especially the Israelis, seems to be willing to acknowledge a more obvious explanation of the failure of the Israeli effort: that Hezbollah was vastly better prepared, and, relatively, better armed than any Arab army in the past."

That's probably because Hezbollah was not particularly well armed, frankly0. Israel has fought conventional armies of vastly greater relative strength than Hezbollah and won.

Remember, we don't know (and won't ever know if Hezbollah has their way) how many Hezbollah fighters were lost.

Though Hezbollah had taken on some of the trappings of an army, they lacked most of the equipment that would enable them to successfully confront Israel in open battle. They lacked any effective anti-air capability, which severely restricted their tactical mobility. They had no artillery, few crew-served weapons, and a haphazard logistical corps. What they did have were plenty of rocket launchers which were relatively useless against the Israeli army, an ample supply of small arms, and very many anti-tank rockets of the latest type. Hezbollah was also aided by being on the defensive in positions they had years to improve.

In other words, Hezbollah was armed for exactly their intended method of fighting - long range rockets to hit the Israeli homeland and small weapons for combat in built-up areas that limited the Israel superiority in arms. In a full-blown war, they couldn't defeat Israel that way, but they could cause a lot of casualties, whilst working public opinion for everything it was worth.

Again, the wonder is that Israel played right into their hands. First, by not bypassing strong points and cutting them off. Second, by sending an inferior force into battle when Israel had hugely greater force available.

Posted by: Trashhauler on August 26, 2006 at 10:38 AM | PERMALINK

I hate Bush

Hate the strategists who give cover to Bush.

Posted by: Hostile on August 26, 2006 at 11:02 AM | PERMALINK

Israel cannot sustain war with its neighbors because its benefactor is out of money. Bush has driven monetary policy to Argentinian proportions, and a big fat recession is coming [from Forbes, WSJ and USA Today]

Israel's tourist business is dead - merchants in the north are bankrupt [this from the jew post]- and without all those dumb goy dollars... well, it's coitans...

and not a moment too soon...

Hasta la vista you miserable Israeli fucks - I hope Iran burns your children and your dreams - EXACTLY the way you've done to your neighbors since 1948,.

Posted by: trevor on August 26, 2006 at 11:03 AM | PERMALINK

It is particularly hard to understand since Baghdad hasn't yet given up their uranium enrichment activities.

At least that's what Nossel is still saying, in her last, still uncorrected post.

The Lebanon war still has the potential to culminate in a stable, UN enforced ceasefire and a defanged Hezbollah. ...

Your thoughts?

I suppose it must be hard to find good guest bloggers around here.

Posted by: Lobster on August 26, 2006 at 11:03 AM | PERMALINK


I see nothing in your account that really cuts against the idea that Hezbollah was much better prepared than Arab armies in the past, and that that was the true basis of the their relative success and Israel's relative failure.

I'm sure that Hezbollah lost far more fighters than Israel; just relatively less than in past wars. And the ineffectiveness of many of their arms is mostly irrelevant, compared to what they clearly were now good at: namely, taking out a sizable number of Israeli tanks with effective anti-tank rockets. And if they use their knowledge of the locales in Lebanon to good effect, that too is a military advantage they likely did not have in the past, and a strength, not a weakness.

In short, it seems to me that Hezbollah has done very well to adjust to its environment and its particular strengths and limitations, and that has everything to do with its success. Why should it be otherwise? Only Israelis and fools would assume that Arabs are incapable of cleverness and discipline and strategy.

Indeed, this prejudice more than anything else no doubt accounts for the inability of Israelis to acknowledge that their relative failure in Lebanon was due to the current strength of Hezbollah, and not the weakness of Israel's military.

Posted by: frankly0 on August 26, 2006 at 11:09 AM | PERMALINK

Dontcha just love the way these forums are steering blame away from Israel and treasonous American neocon [J's] and toward Bush and big oil.

I mean, it's positively Machiavellian how Israel set the scene with 9/11...enlisting brand new Islamophobes to fight 'terror'...terror being defined as Islamic resistance to American/Jewish hegemony.

Now with Bush bogged down in Iraq, the press is blaming it all on the dumb shits in the white house. Bush has outlived his usefullness, so now the neocons will switch parties and impeach him.

I'm having a Mel Gibson moment here - but isn't this why the Germans and others throughout history threw these bums out? Jews are and have always been the hidden hand, the enemy within.

Now that Bush is past his use date - they take him down, using their mags, TV stations and newspapers.

Look out Dems... dem Jews gonna turn you into the war party next.

Posted by: Charles on August 26, 2006 at 11:09 AM | PERMALINK

One other point.

A number of people are arguing that the Israeli military has become soft because of its involvement in the occupied territories.

But there's another way of looking at this. Namely, the act of occupation may very much have the effect of allowing one to despise one's enemies and trivialize their capabilities. Hence, when confronted with an organized confrontation with those enemies, one is caught off guard by their ability to fight back.

Unfortunately, this is the lesson that Israel is NOT learning. It continues to despise its enemies, assuming without question that the strength of Arabs can't possibly have been the cause of Israel's failure.

In this sense, the damage done to the Israeli military by occupation continues unabated; their arrogance and inherent sense of tremendous superiority abides.

Posted by: frankly0 on August 26, 2006 at 11:30 AM | PERMALINK

frankly0 wrote:

"In short, it seems to me that Hezbollah has done very well to adjust to its environment and its particular strengths and limitations, and that has everything to do with its success."

Oh certainly, Hezbollah did well, frankly0. But it helps when your opponent decides not to use most of their strength and, further, uses tactics which maximized Hezbollah's few advantages.

In all probability, the Israelis are going to realize just how badly their leadership screwed the pooch on this one. Far from concluding that war is something to avoid, they are far more likely to nurture the wish to try again some time in the future - with reasonable tactics and using an order of magnitude greater strength.

Posted by: Trashhauler on August 26, 2006 at 12:20 PM | PERMALINK


Don't be so sure that Hezbollah even lost "far more fighters" than Israel. Even the IDF only claims about 500 dead Hezbollah, and armies routinely over-estimate the enemy body count. I doubt we'll ever really know how many Hezbollah fighters died, but I would not be shocked if it were actually less than the number of dead IDF.

Even if the IDF figure of 500 or so is correct, a 1:5 kill ratio for a guerrilla army is unheard of. That would be an unprecedented success, even in purely military terms.

Posted by: kokblok on August 26, 2006 at 12:48 PM | PERMALINK

Freedom Fighter is on the right track, Suzanne. There are more similarities than differences, but both Bush and Olmert have been crippled. Olmert was never truly of the right - he was a Likud apostate, talking about abandoning settlements. The putsch against him now is part the inherent instability of Israeli governments, part the nation as a whole being mugged by the reality of their declining military dominance, but also in large part, the never-really-ended latent hostility of Israel's rabid right wing.

In America, the right wing embraced GWB so fully that it has entangled itself too deeply to pull out. There can't be any genuine, coherent right-wing drive to replace George Bush with someone more right-wing.


I agree that the Israeli strike wasn't as well-led as it could have been, but I also think it's a mistake - that Israeli public opinion at large is making - to blame that utlimate queasy stalemate on Olemrt or Halutz. The IDF could not have destroyed Hizballah with a change in tactics. They tried every tactic in the book from 1985 to 2000 and were not capable. There's no decisive victory against a guerilla organization - just steady attrition. Israel's campaign was going to look worse the longer it went, even if George Patton himself was leading it.

Posted by: glasnost on August 26, 2006 at 1:36 PM | PERMALINK

Unfortunately, the majority of my friends don't keep track of our failed policy war in Iraq nor do they have any interest in it. With this prevailing attitude, we'll ultimately receive exactly what we deserve. God help us from the great American pandemic: APATHY!

Posted by: Jean Dulaney on August 26, 2006 at 1:47 PM | PERMALINK

The parliamentary system is definitely the reason. Sort of a silly question, if you ask me.

Posted by: Chris O. on August 26, 2006 at 2:48 PM | PERMALINK

Hate the strategists who give cover to Bush.


Why draw a distinction?

Posted by: chockfullofheadygoodness on August 26, 2006 at 5:42 PM | PERMALINK

Just a reminder that costs in blood and treasure must be calibrated relative to the nation: e.g. 157 deaths in Israel is equivalent (? - I know, that's been criticised) to many thousands in the USA.

Posted by: Neil' on August 26, 2006 at 8:19 PM | PERMALINK

Olmert pussy-footed around the first 2 or 3 weeks of his attacks on Hezbollah.

Bush's first 2 or 3 weeks of the Iraq campaign were Shock And Awe.

Bush has always seemed serious about winning. Olmert seemed more focused on not offending "the global community."

It's obvious to me that Bush is a better war president than Olmert.

Posted by: Frequency Kenneth on August 26, 2006 at 9:09 PM | PERMALINK

One of your assumptions is probably incorrect at worst, suspect at best: Bush's re-election.

It's unclear that Bush would have been re-elected without the massive vote suppression and intimidation that went on in Ohio and 11 other states as documented extensively by Kennedy's article in Rolling Stone. There's a highly plausible, fact-based argument to be made that the 2004 and 2000 elections were stolen given these tactics and the closeness of the vote tallies (not to mention the 2004 irregularties between exit polls and vote results in some cases).

My hunch is that, 50 years from now, historians will view both elections as effectively stolen (although you can't prove it since we're not talking about vote tampering per se, you know, dead people voting, fixing ballots) and that this Administration pursued a set of policies pushed by a vocal minority that were questioned if not roundly rejected by a majority of Americans.

This is a huge difference between what just happened in Israel. Because of the way the media reported the 2004 election here, most Americans believe that was an honest election across the board and, therefore, they should shut up. Israeli elections, far as I can tell, have been more honest and transparent and reflective of the public will than our recent elections.

Finally, I'd add that this Administration uses terrorism for political gain (which Democrats could do, I'm not picking favorites). Bush and crew eagerly talk up terrorism and drive up fear levels for their own gain instead of bucking up Americans, getting them to work together to reduce fear and, therefore, the psychological impact of terrorism. I suspect that's also an important difference betwen our country, and why we've not had a legitimate debate, and Israel's experience.

Posted by: Joe on August 26, 2006 at 9:24 PM | PERMALINK

I still have a hard time believing that adults who are intelligent enough to enter and use a voting booth did not laugh Bush all the way out of the White House and did not oppose the Iraq invasion from the get-go.

I was vehemently opposed to the invasion of Iraq from the first mention of it. I added Bush's history of corruption and incompetence, and I integrated the fact that everything that they said about Iraq that could be checked out was a lie, and I came to the conclusion that only a complete idiot would have supported the invasion.

How many of you are complete idiots? When Bush et al were caught lying repeatedly about the reasons to go to war with Iraq, WHY DIDN'T IT MATTER TO YOU?

Just don't tell me that you didn't realize they were lying. No one could be that stupid.

Posted by: Repack Rider on August 26, 2006 at 10:20 PM | PERMALINK

Thanks, Joe.
The contention that "it can't ever be proven" makes me wonder, though, about the various degrees of certitude required by different courts of opinion. I have no doubt it was stolen, so it has been proved to me. O.J. got off in the criminal court, but lost his civil case. Have you seen the ballots the Columbus Free Press got their hands on days before they were slated to be destroyed? And on and on. RFK Jr. says the same thing "it cannot be proven," but I have to wonder.

Posted by: Cassandro on August 27, 2006 at 5:14 AM | PERMALINK

"It's obvious to me that Bush is a better war president than Olmert."

Do you actually hear yourself, FK?

Posted by: Kenji on August 27, 2006 at 7:51 AM | PERMALINK

Shield and Standard
The Aryan Nations Shield
Its Very Meaning Is What the Jews Hate!

1. THE CROWN: The symbol of our Father's complete and Immutable sovereignty over all things, the one and only God. whose name is YAHWEH.

2. THE THREE JEWELS: Of the Crown symbolize the Divine and complete perfection of the Triune absolute of our Father the Everliving God. The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit.

3. THE SHIELD: A symbol of our Christian Faith and trust in His perfect Law and Covenants He made to them that keep the faith.

4. THE TWO-EDGED SWORD: A symbol of truth and proceeds forth solely from Him and shall by His Divine sovereign will, be the instrument of His vengeance upon all that hate Him.

5. THE REVOLVING RESURRECTION CROSS: Centered on the Sword of Truth, symbolizing the returning to righteousness of our Race, who yet one day will be placed on the right hand of Christ in faith of the sure promise of resurrection.

6. THE CROSS of JACOB: Symbolizing the blessings to Israel centers on the Sword of Truth and Resurrection Cross. The Three bars on each of the four corners symbolize the Twelve Tribes of His Racial Nations; inheritance in His Kingdom.

7. THE SQUARE: Outline symbolizes the Divinely appointed four-square formation and order commanded by YAHWEH of Hosts for the armies of the tribes of Israel in the beginning as His Nation and the symbol of the four-square city of His new Jerusalem with twelve gates for the tribes of Israel, the Adamic Aryan Race of God.

www.aryannationsrecords.com www.aryan-nations.org/holyorder/ www.aryanyouth.com

Posted by: Ishmael on August 27, 2006 at 9:33 AM | PERMALINK

Dale Johnsen: "Throughout Yah'shua' life (JesusChrist' life) on earth, He obeyed all of God's law perfectly. Of all the 613 commands [in the Mosaic code], He obeyed every single one that applied to Him. He is the only One who ever did this. Thus, through His perfectly sinless life, fulfilled the law on behalf of a sinful human race which was unable to keep it."


To state that the Messiah did not bring a new religion almost feels like stating the
obvious. Sadly though there seem to be many that think that is exactly what He did
do. Why is that?

A misunderstanding of what Torah is, is the basis of this idea. Also the mixing of
pagan worship into Messianic teaching has led to a religion that is entirely different
to the teaching given to Moses. The Messiah(Yah'shua;known to most in the west by the latinized name of Jesus.We only use his correct Hebrew name, the name given by God to his only begotten son) followed the Law of Moses perfectly.
The Torah (law) given to Moses was a Living Law that was put in motion by YHWH.
Following that law was designed to give the whole nation of Israel a life of peace,
prosperity and joy. Please understand this Torah Lives, like the law of gravity it is in
motion all the time. You cannot change the law of gravity, you cannot change Torah.
Only YHWH can modify His Torah. Torah was the terms of the Covenant with Israel
(all 12 tribes) Yah'shua(Jesus Christ) brought us a Renewed Covenant out of Love, the basic
Torah was not changed. His death on the stake brought us forgiveness for breaking
Torah, if we accept His shed Blood for forgiveness, repent and are baptised.
With the laying on of hands following baptism we receive the Ruach Ha Qodesh (Set
Apart Spirit), why do we need the Ruach Ha Qodesh?
Without the Ruach Ancient Israel was unable to live by Torah, they backslid all the
time, the Ruach is given to us, upon repentance and baptism, to help us to live
by Torah and to lead us into all Truth.
Before we can repent properly we first have to know what we need to repent of.
The Pharisaical Judaism that Messiah complained about has Talmudic teachings that
are not Torah any more than Modern day,westernized 'Christianity' is. That is why they needed to repent, not
because Yah'shua Ha Mashiach brought a new religion. HE did NOT!
To learn more about the true followers of Yah'shua(Jesus Christ)
go to ; www.congregationofyhwhnz.org.nz

Other sites we endorse;www.armyofgod.com
Google the following;
Richard Kelly Hoskins.
Vigilantes of Christendom.
Phinehas Priesthood.
Christian identity Churches.
Eric Rudolf.
Paul Hill.
The Turner Diaries.

Posted by: Ishmael on August 27, 2006 at 9:34 AM | PERMALINK


You despise men of faith because you despise the word !
You despise the word because you despise your creator !
You depise your creator because he expects you to follow laws and statutes, things that define an individual as man rather than beast !
But you want to lead selfish and degenerate lives,immoral filth that you are , so you have become God haters and you have forfeited your right to be defined as human, you are now mere apes !
Your hearts are black,calloused sores, your eyes are blind ;dark and sordid worm holes !
You are already dead, you know that this is not a life.
Everyday you die,only to wake the next morning and commit the same acts of self-destruction and feel the pain of death upon you again.
For those who wanted to break this vicious cycle,who want to be liberated from the chains of sin that are dragging you deeper into hell with each passing day, who want true life because your sick of what you've seen,go to ;
Google the following;
Richard Kelly Hoskins.
Vigilantes of Christendom.
Phinehas Priesthood.
Christian identity Churches.
Eric Rudolf.
Paul Hill.
The Turner Diaries.
Nauvoo militia.
Read.... ultimate questions by John Blanchard.

To those who are unrepentant, you are handed over to Satan and may the death of a thousand cuts be upon you and hell consume your bodies ! AMEN.

Posted by: Ishmael on August 27, 2006 at 9:35 AM | PERMALINK

Sermon and declaration of Crusade ( holy war) in Britain. Issued by the Lions of Yah'shua in alliance with the brothers in the Army of God and Phinehas Priesthood in the U.K
My christian brothers and sisters;
The execution of the infidel , is a gift to you the world over.
It is a declaration to the heathen , permissive , dissolute and irreverant savages with whom we have been both deceived and mercilessly coerced into accepting as our compatriots,( by the satanic empirialists that govern this once great nation of ours) ; that we will no longer idly accept the degradation of our glorious faith.
What a squalid little husk this nation of great britain as become when compared to the land that was given by God (Yahweh)to our fore-fathers.This is a nation whose soil is pervaded by the blood of martyrs;who died for the principles that once made this country the most advanced , powerful , moralizing and civilized nation on the face of the earth.our martyrs died for the values that the heavenly father has revealed to us through the mouths and written words of his holy prophets, in his glorious gift to man kind ; the holy bible.
The lord taught us that there can be no society without order; and there can be no order without law.I am not talking about the collection of arbitrary, impotent and spurious laws ; that this secular society imposes ( or in the case of the faithful , attempts to impose ) upon us..Secular law is nothing more than a conglomerate of of limp wristed , left-wing propagander excerps. They have been contrived by a coterie of lesbian feminists , freemasons, gay rights activists , the multi-cultural parasites of globalized capitalism and myriad other scandalizers of this nations ( britain) vulnerable and impressionable youth.This afore mentioned coterie of demons have found that the most efficacious tactic in regard to waging their terrorist campaign against the last bastions of traditional values, is by hijacking the modern phenomenon of of a multi-media society.They have proceeded to mutilate what had the partential to be an instrument of the commendable ideals of education, communication and understanding ; into nothing more than a conduit for smut and profanity , alien creeds and concepts, disrespect for authority and others, and the most heinous crime of all ; the crime of blasphemy.
This legion of the condemned as helped swallow up a once decent , cohesive nation and as spat out a malignant rabble in it's stead.This rabble possesses nothing but malice and scorn for anything deemed to be pure and without covert motive.They regard nothing as sacred other than their self-gratifying, consumerist mantra , of ; 'do what thou will ' and their perceived right to so called ; 'freedom of speech'.This so called freedom of speech is ; in reality , nothing more ( and indeed nothing less) than a government sanctioned mandate to act as social iconoclasts; denegrating , scurrilizing and ultimately ( in it's insidious manner), to destroy the values, beliefs and principles which were once held with the deepest regard by this nation .They seek to replace these standards with an anarchistic , darwinistic, dog -eat-dog society.Let he who as eyes see and he who as ears hear ,this is the truth face this satanic mish-mesh of selfisfh and unscrupulous apes , that now occupy this land of ours.
The infidel is a product of this society, which is being held captive to the spells and illusions created ; and cast by secularist so called laws, which are in fact no laws at all.The infidel does the will of this society , which in turn does the will of it's master ; Satan.In the architype of their master (Satan), the infidel is a blasphemer, a liar, a corruptor and a false prophet..
In their insane arrogance and delusions of grandeur , they have fixed their beady ,black eyes upon the kingdom of heaven.They open their mouths ; thoughs cradles of death and deceit , against it's majestic, holy and mighty king, the king that reigns supreme for ever and ever amen.With ravenous hatred they degradate the crowned prince of glory as he patiently awaites his time to make his enermies his foot-stool.
The infidel believes that they ( mere apes) , can show such reprehensible insolence with impunity.But thanks be to God(Yahweh) that he as decreed in his righteousness , that the infidel be recompensed with the just penalty for his crimes. The infidel will now recieve the punishment prescribed by God's law , blasphemers are to be rooted out, quelled and erased with immediate effect.We shall do as we are commanded as written in hebrews 12:15 , we quote hebrews 10:26-30 'if we deliberatley keep on sining after we have received the knowledge of the tuth, no sacrifice for sins is left,but only a fearful expectation of judgement and of raging fire that will consume the enermies of god.Anyone that rejected the law of moses died without mercy on the testimony of 2 or 3 witnesses.How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who as trampled the son of God under foot, who as treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covernant that sanctified him and who as insulted the spirit of grace'.
We also remind you of the words of christ in regard to corruptors ' things that cause others to sin are bound to come , but woe to him through whom they come. It would be better for him to have a large mill-stone tied around his neck and to be drown in the sea, than to be allowed to cause one of these little ones who believes in me , to sin' . Christ also likens false prohets to bad trees which are to be 'cut down and thrown into the fire' , in other words ; executed.
To conclude this aspect of the sermon , we now remind you of the words spoken by saint Paul in romans 1:18-32 , when he speaks of godless men and the fate that awaits them ; 'the wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God as made it plain to them.For since the creation of the world Gods invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature- have been clearly seen, being understood from what as been made, so that men are without any excuse.
For although they knew God, they neither gloryfied him as God nor gave thanks to him,but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.Although they claimed to be wise,they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal men and birds and animals and reptiles.
Therefore God gave them over to the sinful desires of their hearts, to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.They exchanged the truth of God for a lie,and worshipped and served created things rather than the creator-who is forever praised , amen.
Because of this,God gave them over to shameful lusts.Even thier women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.Men committed indecent acts with other men,and receive in themselfs the just penalty for thier perversion.
Furthermore,since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.They have become filled with every kind of wickedness,evil, greed and depravity.They are full of envy,murder, strife, deceit and malice.They are gossips, slanderers, god-haters,insolent, arrogant and boastful;they invent ways of doing evil;they disobey thier parents;they are senseless, faithless,heartless, ruthless.Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these every things, but also approve of those that practise them'.
We now proceed to give a synopsis of our paramount aims.
We are sworn to bring this nation back under Gods(Yahweh) law(or to die trying) and to bring the following into practise ;
The complete abolition of abortion and the execution of those that violate that ban .
To bring about capital punishment for the following crimes ; blasphemy, murder, rape, paedophilia,bestiality , the propagation of homosexuality,cross dressing,the practise of the black arts, abduction , and proven accounts of adultary and all sexual immorality.
We believe that the mode of execution to be employed by the state , should be in the form prescribed by the mosaic civil code and by christ ;execution by stoning,drowning , beheading or death by fire,(false prophets being likened to bad fruit trees which are to be cut down and thrown into the fire).
Imprisonment for the distribution and retail of contraception , robbery and the dishonour of elders.
We believe in public flogging for anti-social behaviour and petty crime.We also advocate the reintroduction of the corporal punishment into our nations schools ( it's time to take this nation back from the selfish and disrespectful hoodlums that are atrophying it).
We seek the total abolition of the establised church of england.
Why the abolition of the church of england?
The church of england is the bane of the christian movement in this land.It is a humiliating ,cancerous sore on the backs of all true christians.
It as been hijacked and mutilated into nothing more than a mouth piece for the left-wing, who employ it to propagate there own depraved ,liberal agenders. The arch-bishop of canterbury himself describes himself as a bearded ' welsh-lefty'.
The spurious brand of 'religion' that the C of E racket , in no way represents the true character of the faith or the christ ,nor their tenets .The C of E is the popinjay for the likes of peter tatchel ( activist pursuing the so called 'right' for homosexuals to spread thier corruptive influence unopposed) , germaine greer ( who like all feminists has the primary objective of destroying the traditional and biblically instituted family unite of a father , mother and children), and to propagate subjugation to the armies of the islamic barbarian at the gates of our nation.
They have utterly and mercilessly mutilated the christian faith inorder to make it conform to their debauched left-wing conspiracy.They have ,without mitigation, distorted the nature of christ inorder to dupe christians into beleiving that they are too be pacifist in regards to their faith, satan could wish for now better 'christian' than the depraved hyprocrites of the C of E.
They are ashamed of the more challenging aspects of christs ministry, they would never quote such passages as thoughs in which christ speaks , 'think not that i have come to send peace into the world , i came not to send peace ; but a sword'. The church of England are afraid of the demands of the faith , again at the last supper , christ tells his follows too prepare for armed conflict , with these words ; ' if you don't have a sword , sell your cloak and buy one'.
Now add to this the two separate occasions on which christ physically cleansed the temple of traders , making a scourge to lash them out , over throwing the tables and breaking their goods , plus the proclamation of the death penalty for corruptors ( mentioned earlier) , and it becomes glearingly obvious that the christ the C of E profess to teach , in no way bears any resemblence to the Yah'shua Messiah (Jesus christ) of the bible.
The church of england pedal a caricature of christ , they need a 'wimp in a white nighty' , in order to fulfil thier evil machinations. not the saviour in the bible , the one that told us not too fear wars and revolutions , telling us that they are necessary.
They never so much as even speak of the book of Revelation in which christ(Yah'shua Messiah) returns as the warrior king for the battle of armageddon.
Hear our words, oh ye infidels ! , spend your days trembling in shadows , shiver and weep in the small hours of morning and know terror , for you have but a short time . The axe is impending !
we are messengers. we bring you tidings of peace and brotherly love if you approach our table with offerings of the same. However , approach with dishonour and insult , covert motive and insidious tongues ;then ye shall know that our God is a consuming fire , for you shall be the chaff that is incinerated .Heed these words . And to the faithful ; christian , do thy duty !
As you well know dear brothers,the only aspect of the law that passed away with the crucifixion of Christ were aspects of the levitcal priesthood concerning animal sacrifice(due to the fact that Christ performed the role of the ultimate sacrificial lamb).These things were always considered as compromises for truth faith,God stated this on a number of occasions before the redemption through christ.However all the aspects of civil law still remain ,letter for letter and word for word.The civic laws in the bible express directly how God feels about certain issues (whether it be crime,inheritance,war etc) and if anyman does not abide by the law ; may he be numbered with the dogs cast outside the gates of the new Jerusalem ! .
As Yah'shua Messiah( Jesus christ) states with absolute clearity in the book Matthew 5,17-19 ; ''Think not that i have come to destroy the law,or the prophets;i am not come to destroy,but to fulfil !For verily i say unto you ,till heaven and earth pass,one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law,till all be fulfilled.Whosoever therefore shall break one of the least commandments,and shall teach men so,he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven ;but whosoever shall do and teach them,the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven !

Besides these facts,we are well aware that Christ had taught the widely misinterpreted 'turn the other cheek' policy only to thoughs disciples which he had chosen to send out on missionary duty.This was a strategic decision taken by Yah'shua for the simple reason that the Jewish authorities were awaiting any opportunity,any excuse;to arrest him and his disciples.Therefore it was only logical not to afford them such an opportunity !
You will notice that later in scripture,Christ goes on to revoke the 'Turn the other cheek' policy by stating the command to his follows, ''If you do not have a sword,sell your cloak and buy one'' ! This is just one of many examples. Also, it is important to point out that the only enemies we were asked to have love for, are thoughs whom are wayward brothers and only for minor issues.This is yet another example of the liberals exploiting (by wilfull misinterpretation)a passage of scripture to suit their own agenders.
This more than adequately hammers the final nail into the coffins of the liberals and their filthy mutilation of scripture,the heresy which they call ''the social Gospel''.
Brethren,follow the God and Christ of scripture,not the inventions and distortions of the left-wing !
May Yahweh bless and keep the faithful and the grace of his only begotten son be with you.

Therefore ye Lions of Yahushua,ye Phinehas priests; you are to conduct holy war ,but with the strictest observance of the law.You are to conform to the law of war has given by God(Yahweh). (read Deuteronomy 20;1-20 , Numbers 25;1-8 , Numbers 25;11-14 ,1 Samuel 15;1-28).
Take your stand therefore brothers and trust in the lord.The strong amongst us must act as shepherds to the sheep.Christ tells us in no uncertain terms that to be a good shepherds you must stand in defence of the sheep,the good shepherd does not flee when he sees the wolf approaching !Those of you who are strong (shepherds)are there-by commanded to defend the weak (sheep). Your are the modern day Phinehas priesthood and you know what God commands of you as such !

Peace be upon the Brothers.Selah, Amen and Amen .

(This was a confederate statement issued on behalf of the Lions of Yah'shua,Phinehas priesthood and Army Of God In The UK)

Websites we endorse; www.armyofgod.com
Google the following;
Richard Kelly Hoskins.
Vigilantes of Christendom.
Phinehas Priesthood.
Christian identity Churches.
Eric Rudolf.
Paul Hill.
The Turner Diaries.

Posted by: Ishmael on August 27, 2006 at 9:37 AM | PERMALINK


How do I get on your list of the condemned? It looks like pretty good company.

Mark Twain: "Heaven for the view, Hell for the company."

Posted by: Repack Rider on August 27, 2006 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

Repack Rider, you lack the profile, it's very exclusive and high payoff targets only.

But just for the record,you are already condemned with all the rest of your Godless and lawless society of unrepentants. Have a nice day .

Posted by: Ishmael on August 27, 2006 at 1:09 PM | PERMALINK

Or perhaps it could just be that the last US election was rigged by a few key people in a few key areas...


Posted by: Anonymous on August 27, 2006 at 3:20 PM | PERMALINK

I've never seen a poll that asked if Bush should leave office. I think a significant number of people would answer yes to that question - especially if the proposal included Cheney stepping down at the same time.

As to Bush being reelected, there's a simple one-word answer: Diebold.

Posted by: cmac on August 27, 2006 at 3:33 PM | PERMALINK


Posted by: qq on August 28, 2006 at 10:08 AM | PERMALINK

免费铃声下载 手机铃声免费下载 mp3铃声 免费手机铃声 mp3铃声下载 三星手机铃声 三星铃声 诺基亚铃声 诺基亚手机铃声 移动铃声下载 nokia铃声 波导手机铃声 手机游戏免费下载 免费手机游戏 手机小游戏 诺基亚手机游戏 三星手机游戏下载 nokia手机游戏 摩托罗拉手机游戏 手机小电影 mp4手机电影下载 手机看电影 免费手机电影 手机视频下载 nec手机铃声 联想手机铃声 摩托罗拉铃声 amr铃声 手机彩铃下载 移动彩铃 免费彩铃 炫铃 移动炫铃 手机酷铃 手机电影 夏新手机铃声 联通铃声下载 联通手机铃声 联通彩铃下载 联通炫铃下载 特效铃声 midi铃声 和弦铃声 搞笑铃声 原唱铃声 mid铃声 cect手机铃声 和炫和旋铃声 海尔手机铃声 索爱手机铃声 飞利浦手机铃声 康佳手机铃声 真人真唱铃声 mmf铃声下载 lg手机铃声 诺基亚手机铃声 短信铃声 来电铃声 西门子铃声 小灵通铃声下载 tcl手机铃声 手机图片 手机铃音 手机动画 图铃下载 手机游戏 手机炫铃下载 手机彩信 手机铃声图片 免费黄色电影 最新电影 成人性爱电影 免费小电影 免费性电影 免费成人电影 免费电影在线观看 宽带电影 经典电影 恐怖电影 免费影片 免费影院 最新大片 十八电影网 美女写真 免费电影下载 两性生活 性教育片 两性知识 性爱图片 激情电影 免费电影下载 免费在线电影 看免费电影 免费电影网站 韩国电影 人体艺术 美女图片 美女走光 美腿图片 三级片 强奸电影 美女祼体图片 美女自拍 黄色电影下载 免费色情电影 激情图片 激情小电影 性感美女图片 漂亮妹妹图片 做爱图片 美少女图片 日本av女优 情色电影 同志电影 激情视频下载 明星露点图片 写真电影 阴部图片 乳房图片 明星裸照 性爱视频 偷拍图片 美眉图片 泳装美女 美女内裤 性爱贴图 情趣内衣图片 性生活图片 作爱图片 艳情小说 性交姿势 做爱电影 性福联盟 人体摄影 明星裸照 裸女图片 黄色小说 成人小说 乱伦小说 强暴电影 轮奸视频 性虐待电影 迷奸图片 妓女日记 写真集 全裸美女 淫荡小说 淫乱小说 淫书 舒淇写真 美女脱衣图片 裸体女人图片 人体写真 女性手淫电影 美女波霸 美女淫水 阴户阴道阴毛屁股 美女图库 口交肛交图片

Posted by: qq on August 28, 2006 at 10:10 AM | PERMALINK



Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM

buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly