Page 1 of 1

Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 9:49 pm
by ygalg
Secret US State Department docs released for publication indicate Jewish-American politician suffered from Jewish lobbyists' pressure prior to Yom Kippur War; reveal he suggested to divide Sinai Peninsula into 'security zones'
Yitzhak Benhorin

WASHINGTON – Confidential files released for publication in the United States on Friday reveal a new side to the Jewish-American politician Henry Kissinger, which might anger the Jewish community.

Kissinger, who served as the United States National Security Advisor and later as Secretary of State in the administrations of Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, had demanded to divide the Sinai Peninsula into "security zones" prior to the Yom Kippur War in 1973.

According to the secret documents released by the State Department, back in 1972 Kissinger wished to put economic and ethical pressure on Israel, calling American Jewish groups lobbying the Nixon White House self-serving "bastards."

The files also show that Russia had claimed the "Arabs" were willing to recognize the State of Israel at that time.

Kissinger had a huge impact on American foreign policy, helping reach certain degree of conciliation between Washington and Moscow during the cold war. As the relations between both countries grew warmer, the Jewish American lobbyists amped up the pressure on Washington in an attempt to aid their Soviet brothers.

One of Nixon's advisors, Leonard Garment, reported he was flooded with letters and phone calls from Jews and asked for Kissinger's advice on the matter.

According to the transcripts, Kissinger, who is Jewish, replied to Garment: “Is there a more self-serving group of people than the Jewish community?”

In response, Garment, also Jewish, said: “None in the world.”

Kissinger responded: “What the hell do they think they are accomplishing? You can’t even tell bastards anything in confidence because they’ll leak it.”

Despite these remarks, Kissinger said he would bring up the issue during his meeting with Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin and also meet again with Jewish leaders.

"They ought to remember what this administration has done,” he added.

Dividing Sinai?

The State Department documents also reveal that a year before the Yom Kippur War, Kissinger had suggested to divide the Sinai Peninsula into "security zones" between Israel and Egypt as part of a temporary agreement. He spoke of the issue during his meetings with the Soviet Foreign Minster Andrei Gromyko.

Gromyko had demanded the US force Israel to return to 1967 borders and resolve the Palestinian issue. Kissinger warned that this all or nothing policy plays into the hands of the Israeli government. The US was willing to pressure Israel economically, but had refused to any military sanctions or any kind of commitment to the United Nations.

During one particular meeting between Kissinger and Gromyko in Washington, on October 2 1972, the two discussed the matter further.

"Our view is that it is important to make an initial major step with respect to Egypt," said Kissinger. "The longer it stays the way it is, the harder it will be... Without a final determination, we should approach the problem from a standpoint of security, of security zones, without raising the issue of sovereignty.

"For example, the notion that Egyptian sovereignty extends up to the 1967 borders but for a certain period the Sinai will be divided into zones—one zone where both sides can station their forces, other zones where there can be some patrolling but no stationed forces, and maybe a buffer zone between them. Thus, for example, Sinai could be divided into five regions. In that event Egyptian civil administration would extend immediately to the borders."

Kissinger continued, saying: "I doubt Israel would accept this. In fact I am sure Israel would not accept this without massive pressure. If it is conceivable we could perhaps apply something like it to the Golan Heights. The major problem is to get some movement, or else the situation will be frozen so no movement can ever get started. Once movement starts, other pressures can continue to work."

Gromyko replied: "The Suez Canal cannot be separated from withdrawal and the Palestinian Question."

Kissinger: We would like to separate out the question of the Canal, but I see that the others are related to each other.

"But in my view the only justified solution is one all sides can accept. We would like to make progress towards a settlement. If it can be achieved only by a global approach, we will consider a global approach. Our view up to now, which has not changed, is that we should see if we can get a settlement on the Suez Canal first."

http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-4150018,00.html

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 2:46 pm
by marduk
At least Kissinger was honest about his brothers in Israel. He of all people should know their true nature. It's true, in Judaism it's all about the Jews. Everybody else are dogs. Look at this quote from the Babylonian Talmud. If a non-Jew ever rests for a day he is allowed to be murdered by a Jew. They have to keep working 7 days a week, apparently.

Resh Lakish also said: A heathen who keeps a day of rest, deserves death, for it is written, And a day and a night they shall not rest,36 and a master has said: Their prohibition is their death sentence.37 Rabina said: Even if he rested on a Monday. Now why is this not included in the seven Noachian laws? — Only negative injunctions are enumerated, not positive ones.
http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/ ... in_58.html


It's also okay for Jews to employ a non-Jew and then not bother to pay him.

R. Huna, Rab Judah, and all the disciples of Rab maintained: A heathen is executed for the violation of the seven Noachian laws; the Divine Law having revealed this of one [murder], it applies to all. Now is a heathen executed for robbery? Has it not been taught: 'With respect to robbery — if one stole or robbed30 or [seized] a beautiful woman,31 or [committed] similar offences,32 if [these were perpetrated] by one Cuthean33 against another, [the theft, etc.] must not be kept, and likewise [the theft] of an Israelite by a Cuthean, but that of a Cuthean by an Israelite may be retained'?34 But if robbery is a capital offence, should not the Tanna have taught: He incurs a penalty? — Because the second clause wishes to state, 'but that of a Cuthean by an Israelite may be retained,' therefore the former clause reads, '[theft of an Israelite by a Cuthean] must not be kept.'35 But where a penalty is incurred, it is explicitly stated, for the commencing clause teaches: 'For murder, whether of a Cuthean by a Cuthean, or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred; but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty'?36 — How else could that clause have been taught? Could he state, 'forbidden' … 'permitted'? Surely it has been taught; A Cuthean and a [Jewish] shepherd of small cattle [sheep, goats, etc.]37 need neither be rescued [from a pit] nor may they be thrown [therein]!38 'And similar acts.' To what can this apply in the case of robbery? — R. Aha b. Jacob answered: To a worker in a vineyard [who eats of the grapes]. When so? If his is the finishing work, it is permitted?39 If it is not the finishing work, is it not actual robbery?40 — But R. Papa said: This applies to [the theft of] an article worth less than a perutah.41 But if so, why say that such robbery of a Jew by a Cuthean must not be kept: does he not forgive him?42 — Though he later forgives him, he is grieved when it occurs [therefore it is prohibited] — But how can you say that such robbery by one Cuthean from another is but a 'similar act' [i.e., bordering on robbery]: since a Cuthean does not forgive,43 is it not actual theft? — But R. Aha, the son of R. Ika answered; It applies to the withholding of a labourer's wage.44 One Cuthean from another, or a Cuthean from an Israelite is forbidden, but an Israelite from a Cuthean is permitted.45 To what can 'a similar act' apply in the case of a beautiful woman? — When R. Dimi came,46 he said in the name of R. Eleazar in the name of R. Hanina: To a heathen who allotted a bondwoman to his slave [for concubinage] and then took her for himself, for this he is executed.47
http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/ ... in_57.html

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:25 am
by Gaia
I agree that it's true. Sure, Islam can be much worse in many regards, but if we're going to criticize Muslims for being inhumane and anti-democratic, we should be able to criticize Jews for being far too insular. From my experience, Jews bring up their identity much more often than other groups-- which only serves to reinforce the divide between them and Gentiles. There's nothing wrong with being proud of your culture, but when you do it the point that other people feel excluded, you breed anti-Semitism.

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:34 pm
by marduk
Gaia wrote:I agree that it's true. Sure, Islam can be much worse in many regards, but if we're going to criticize Muslims for being inhumane and anti-democratic, we should be able to criticize Jews for being far too insular. From my experience, Jews bring up their identity much more often than other groups-- which only serves to reinforce the divide between them and Gentiles. There's nothing wrong with being proud of your culture, but when you do it the point that other people feel excluded, you breed anti-Semitism.


They also play the antisemitism card far too often. There aren't enough actual antisemites around that all criticism of anyone who happens to be Jewish can be attributed to it. People saying that the Jews control most of the entertainment and news media aren't being antisemitic, they are stating a rather obvious fact. The producer of Live with Regis and Kelly is named Gelman, not O'Leary.

I think they should just get over themselves and stop identifying themselves with a religion that may have made sense a few thousand years ago but is just silly now like Islam. Sorry, Jews, but you're not really the chosen people of God. You're just a bunch of deluded weirdos with odd eating habits and wacky customs. I know you like to feel superior by imagining that there is only one god and he chose your ancestor to reveal himself to and his descendants to bestow his favors upon but get real. If there was really one god and he was going to choose a certain ethnic group as his favorite, trust me it wouldn't be the Semites. Why would it? Are they supposed to be the genetic high point of the species? I find that rather doubtful. They have some serious nasal issues, for one thing. Why would God want to multiply that? Welcome to reality. Jews are a rather common gene line, seriously degraded by inbreeding, like the Arabs. Simple statements of fact. If you don't like it prove the statement wrong.

Like the Quran, all the Bible is is a record of the weird ideas people had in the early days of civilization about how the universe works. It's not applicable now. Would you believe the ancients when they told you that the sun revolved around the earth? Then why would you believe them about the nature of the Divinity? They thought some guy was sitting on a throne in the sky somewhere controlling everything, yet for some reason allowing complete chaos in the world. They thought all you had to do was worship some deity, either physical or purely imaginary, and it would cause the deity to bring them good fortune. Of course, we know now that things aren't quite that easy and simple. We couldn't help notice that it doesn't matter how much we worship our imagined deity, it has no benefit whatsoever. Most people stop the pointless worship after a few years of it but some really dumb people keep at it their whole lives. They just think their deity is very slow in responding. Yeah, so slow they die before getting any results. Or maybe their faith level is too low. But then, wouldn't it be expected that constant lack of response to prayers and supplications would lead to lack of faith? If Allah delivered on even just 50% of all supplications then EVERYBODY would be praying to Allah. A 0% success rate is a real good reason to simply stop. A stupid person is a person who keeps doing the same thing and expects a different result. Prayer number 50,000 was also unsuccessful, maybe prayer number 50,001 will be the one. OMG people are idiots.

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:53 pm
by ygalg
what??? I'm not the chosen one...? I'm sure this morning I wake up with S on my chest wearing spandex and a cape. can't you see I'm flying, flying; believe it or not its just me.
up and away :superman:

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 2:38 am
by Yohan
Gaia wrote:I agree that it's true. Sure, Islam can be much worse in many regards, but if we're going to criticize Muslims for being inhumane and anti-democratic, we should be able to criticize Jews for being far too insular. From my experience, Jews bring up their identity much more often than other groups-- which only serves to reinforce the divide between them and Gentiles. There's nothing wrong with being proud of your culture, but when you do it the point that other people feel excluded, you breed anti-Semitism.

Mostly true. For too many jews, jewishness is their only identity, no matter where they live. Everything else comes a distant second. There are multiudes of reasons for this behavior, all related to their religion that tends to control both their religious and temporal lives so much.

Actually muslims aren't that different either, probably worse.

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:22 pm
by ygalg
religious or ideological indoctrination do that.

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2011 3:25 am
by marduk
When will the Jews admit that this "YHWH" business is a complete sham? From my reading of the Bible it is very clear that the world was supposed to end and the "Kingdom of God" was supposed to be established like about a few thousand years ago. Rather obvious now that it was all a big delusion. So why are they continuing with the charade? I really don't get it.

If the Torah is true, as the Jews must believe, then they have to sacrifice a lamb every single day. This is known as the "daily sacrifice". YHWH never rescinded that command. So where's the sacrifices? Let's face it, the whole thing is just stupid and juvenile. These are grown people we're talking about, even political leaders. That's downright scary. If they believe that crap then they are extremely dangerous because they clearly have some serious problems with differentiating fantasy from reality. By continuing to act like the god of Abraham is a real entity they are only encouraging the Muslims. When the Jews admit that they made the whole thing up then Islam will fall like a house of cards. Right now they are saying "oh yeah, Allah is real, yup". Those idiots. They're validating and enabling the Muslims.

Here's what I want to hear from Netanyau on worldwide news; "Okay, you got us, our ancestors made that whole YHWH thing up. When we saw that it was catching on, we thought we'd just keep it going, what the hell. Our conscience is getting to us now so it's time we came clean about the joke." Instead, all we get is "Israel is the Jewish State". Grow up, Yahu. The guy must be in his 50's. Make believe time is over. Somebody should tell him.

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2011 2:24 pm
by ygalg
the sacrifice implemented in the temple. the temple does not exit, therefor no requirement of the sacrifice.

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2011 7:10 pm
by Yohan
ygalg wrote:the sacrifice implemented in the temple. the temple does not exit, therefor no requirement of the sacrifice.

This is a silly excuse. Animal sacrifice could still be done in front of the wailing wall. YHWH needs blood sacrifce, and he badly needs it. So when will jews have the courage to please their own God?

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2011 9:03 pm
by ygalg
Yohan wrote:
ygalg wrote:the sacrifice implemented in the temple. the temple does not exit, therefor no requirement of the sacrifice.

This is a silly excuse. Animal sacrifice could still be done in front of the wailing wall. YHWH needs blood sacrifce, and he badly needs it. So when will jews have the courage to please their own God?

jews are very meticulous in regard rituals. what relevance courage has to do with rituals? when messiah arrives and invite us to smoke a weed. :lol:

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:22 am
by marduk
Yeah, that's a pretty weak excuse. When there's a temple you sacrifice at the temple. When there's not a temple you don't just get out of the sacrificing. That would be too easy. Here's a quote which I will discuss.

We stopped offering sacrifices because we do not have a proper place to offer them. The Torah specifically commands us not to offer sacrifices wherever we feel like it; we are only permitted to offer sacrifices in the place that G-d has chosen for that purpose. Deut. 12:13-14. It would be a sin to offer sacrifices in any other place, akin to stealing candles and wine to observe Shabbat.

The last place appointed by G-d for this purpose was the Temple in Jerusalem, but the Temple has been destroyed and a mosque has been erected in the place where it stood. Until G-d provides us with another place, we cannot offer sacrifices. There was at one time an opinion that in the absence of an assigned place, we could offer sacrifices anywhere. Based on that opinion, certain communities made their own sacrificial places. However, the majority ultimately ruled against this practice, and all sacrifice ceased.
http://www.jewfaq.org/qorbanot.htm


Okay, so God apparently didn't see the destruction of the Temple coming at all, because he commanded that the daily sacrifice be continued forever, or until the Last Day.

"Now this is that which thou shalt offer upon the altar; two lambs of the first year day by day continually. The one lamb thou shalt offer in the morning; and the other lamb thou shalt offer at even" (Exodus 29:38-39 KJV)


Note that it doesn't say continual until the temple is destroyed in 70 AD, because God has no knowledge of future events, apparently. Not much of a god really, but the Jews have very low standards. Of course, the Muslims are preventing the Jews from accessing the Rock as a sacrifice site, because they hate God and want him to go without. God hates them back, because of that, and is currently engaged in punishing the hell out them. Just look at the mess their countries are in. Inshallah.

Re: Kissinger in '72: Jews 'self-serving bastards'

PostPosted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 5:11 pm
by Yohan
marduk wrote:Yeah, that's a pretty weak excuse. When there's a temple you sacrifice at the temple. When there's not a temple you don't just get out of the sacrificing. That would be too easy. Here's a quote which I will discuss.

Okay, so God apparently didn't see the destruction of the Temple coming at all, because he commanded that the daily sacrifice be continued forever, or until the Last Day.

Note that it doesn't say continual until the temple is destroyed in 70 AD, because God has no knowledge of future events, apparently. Not much of a god really, but the Jews have very low standards. Of course, the Muslims are preventing the Jews from accessing the Rock as a sacrifice site, because they hate God and want him to go without. God hates them back, because of that, and is currently engaged in punishing the hell out them. Just look at the mess their countries are in. Inshallah.

This God could not only see the coming destruction of his temple, but couldn't even prevent it when it happened. So what good is this God? What good is being the chosen people of such an idiot useless God? I hope jews get rid of this God and move on!