web analytics
December 3, 2016 / 3 Kislev, 5777

Posts Tagged ‘AUDIO’

What Steve Bannon Really Believes About Alt-Right and the Jews [audio]

Wednesday, November 16th, 2016

Back in 2014, Steve Bannon laid out his worldview for all to see. It’s a complex vision, based on his notion of “Judeo-Christian” values, appreciative of Jewish contributions to the world, and believing the West faces a “crisis of capitalism” and a battle with radical Islam.

If you really want to know what the man believes and stands for, read the full transcript of Bannon’s talk , or listen to it at the bottom of this article and decide for yourself.

Fast forward to the present and the question everyone is asking: “Is Steve Bannon an anti-Semite?”

Actually, no one is asking that question, people’s minds have already been made up based on what they’ve heard second hand.

In August 2016, Bannon gave an interview to Mother Jones where he explicitly stated that Breitbart News, which he ran at the time, was “the platform for the alt-right”.

Responding to the accusations that alt-right are a bunch of white-nationalists, anti-Semites, neo-Nazis and homophobes, Bannon “dismisses the alt-right’s appeal to racists as happenstance” and told Mother Jones:

“Look, are there some people that are white nationalists that are attracted to some of the philosophies of the alt-right? Maybe. […] Are there some people that are anti-Semitic that are attracted? Maybe. Right? Maybe some people are attracted to the alt-right that are homophobes, right? But that’s just like, there are certain elements of the progressive left and the hard left that attract certain elements.”

Bannon acknowledges there are very bad elements in alt-right (as there are on the progressive and hard left), yet he still gives them a platform.

How does Bannon dismiss them so nonchalantly?

The answer appears in his 2014 discussion as transcribed by Buzzfeed:

“The central thing that binds that all together is a center-right populist movement of really the middle class, the working men and women in the world who are just tired of being dictated to by what we call the party of Davos.”

He seas the Tea Party, alt-right and others as center-right groups made up of middle class Americans.

But he acknowledges that bad people do hitch a ride on the coattails of these movements.

“I’m not an expert in this, but it seems that they have had some aspects that may be anti-Semitic or racial [in the European far-right groups]. By the way, even in the tea party, we have a broad movement like this, and we’ve been criticized, and they try to make the tea party as being racist, etc., which it’s not. But there’s always elements who turn up at these things, whether it’s militia guys or whatever. Some that are fringe organizations.

But Bannon doesn’t believe there is an issue here of whether or not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. He believes that, over time, the radical elements will disappear.

My point is that over time it all gets kind of washed out, right? People understand what pulls them together, and the people on the margins I think get marginalized more and more. […] I think when you look at any kind of revolution — and this is a revolution — you always have some groups that are disparate. I think that will all burn away over time and you’ll see more of a mainstream center-right populist movement.”

Bannon clearly believes that the populist rightwing groups are primarily made up of good, middle-class, working-class Americans, with some fringe fellow travelers. Eventually those anti-Semites and white nationalists who are hanging on will be marginalized even further until they “wash out” and “burn away.”

The question one should really ask is, “Are Bannon’s presumptions about the fringe alt-right members accurate?”

When it comes to amorphous groups without real leadership to guide them, specifically alt-right which is primarily internet-based and anonymous (which always brings out the worst), it would be more accurate to assume that whomever is the most active, most vocal and most committed will be those who direct that movement and set its tone.

Bannon before the brouhaha of alt-right sees fringe haters as temporary and irrelevant anomalies that will eventually burn away as the groups becomes more mainstream. He acknowledges their anti-Semitism, but does not see them as defining the majority.

He also values the Jewish contributions to Western society and Capitalism as being extremely valuable. He believes those “Judeo-Christian” values should be restored in modern capitalism.

Those don’t sound like the words and beliefs of an anti-Semite.

But in the case of alt-right, Bannon has gotten it wrong about the haters eventually being marginalized and washed away. The inmates have already taken over the asylum, and that’s because alt-right is primarily anonymous and Internet based, where real-world rules and civility don’t apply.

Let us know what you now think of Bannon in the comments section below, but please listen and read first.

Jewish Press News Briefs

Phantom Nation – The US Deserves This Election [audio]

Tuesday, November 8th, 2016

The candidates reflect a culture in decline.

Phantom Nation 07Nov – SHOW

Israel News Talk Radio

Beyond The Matrix – An Israeli Yankee in King Arthur’s Court [audio]

Wednesday, November 2nd, 2016

Ira and Rod discuss what it is like for Ira to be in America after the Jewish holidays, and dealing with the commercialism of Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and the upcoming U.S. presidential election.

Beyond The Matrix 01Nov – PODCAST

Israel News Talk Radio

Tamar Yonah Show – Will Russian Forces Threaten Israel? [audio]

Tuesday, November 1st, 2016

Russian troops, ships, planes and missiles are either already in the area of Israel, or on their way to the region. Will the Russian presence stifle Israeli security? Will Russian intelligence gathering of Israeli troops and missions endanger Israel’s security? Will Israel and Russia ultimately clash with eachother’s forces? These are important questions that must be asked. Shifra Hoffman of VictimsOfArabTerror.org and Shuva.net talks about politics in Israel, and Tamar’s second guest, Jeremy Man Saltan, Knesset Insider and leading political analyst talks to Tamar about the build-up of Russian forces in the region due to it’s involvement in the Syrian Civil war, and talks about what it means to Israeli security. Visit his website at: www.jeremysaltan.com

Tamar Yonah 30Oct2016 – PODCAST

Israel News Talk Radio

Phantom Nation – Jerusalem Denial [audio]

Tuesday, November 1st, 2016

Holocaust Denial, Jerusalem Denial and Palestinian Nationalism. Three similar faces of antiJew evil.

Phantom Nation 31OCT2016 – PODCAST

Israel News Talk Radio

The Jewish Press Conspiracy to Protect Hillary Clinton and the Rigged Elections [audio]

Sunday, October 30th, 2016

The Observer wrote a fascinating article about the tape from an interview given by Hillary Clinton to The Jewish Press back in 2006.

What makes it so interesting or “relevant” to the public right now is that in the interview, Clinton explicitly talked about the mistake she felt the United States made by not rigging the Palestinian Authority elections to ensure that Hamas didn’t win – which it did, winning 74 seats to Fatah’s 45 seats on the Palestinian Legislative Council, and then eventually taking over Gaza by throwing Fatah officials off the roofs of Gazan buildings.

Clinton didn’t use the word “rig” but it is clear that this is what she meant.

 

The Observer found it odd that the story was no longer available on JewishPress.com, and we discovered that the antisemitic conspiracy theorists on the Internet are trying to create an entire backstory as to why The Jewish Press (and the Jews) censored, suppressed and hid an interview where Clinton discusses rigging an election, in light of Trump’s accusations against her in the current US elections.

Unfortunately for the conspiracy theorists, the answer is simply a technical one.

When we rebuilt the JewishPress.com website in 2011 and migrated it over to a new platform, that article was one of several that didn’t survive the migration process due to some odd character codes in the text.

But the article wasn’t lost.

Thanks to the technology of the WayBackMachine, the original article was preserved and archived on the Internet, untouched by human hands, odd � characters and all.

Last night, we republished the Hillary Clinton interview back onto the JewishPress.com website.

For those that believe The Jewish Press hid the entire story about Clinton wanting to rig the Palestinian Authority elections, they can now actually see for themselves that this was, in fact, her first answer that was posted in the original article.

The Jewish Press: Israel recently concluded its war against Hizbullah in what many consider to be a stalemated position. How do you see things right now?

Sen. Clinton: First, I don’t think we should have pushed for an election in the Palestinian territories. I think that was a big mistake. If we were going to push for an election, we should have made sure we did something to determine who was going to win instead of signing off on an electoral system that advantaged Hamas.

Original copy of the interview with Hillary Clinton as preserved on the WayBackMachine.

Original copy of the interview with Hillary Clinton as preserved on the WayBackMachine.

Nothing was hidden. Back in 2006, Hillary Clinton did talk about desiring to rig an election of a foreign government, a government with no democratic traditions, but with a rather strong history of supporting terrorism, and we published it.

Without delving into the politics of it, some might even find the idea of ensuring that radical Islamic terrorists don’t take charge of an already moderate-terrorist laden government to be a commendable goal – unlike when the US State Department, under President Obama, funded OneVoice and V-15 in an attempt to manipulate democratic Israel’s recent elections.

Stephen Leavitt

Exclusive Interview: Hillary Clinton On Israel, Iraq And Terror [archive]

Saturday, October 29th, 2016

Originally Published:  Wednesday, October 25, 2006 [Restored from Archive]

On the eve of her expected reelection victory, New York Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton met with the editorial board of The Jewish Press.

The former first lady (and current front-runner in opinion polls for the Democratic Party’s 2008 presidential nomination) spoke at length about Israel, the ongoing war in Iraq, and the war on terror. Following are highlights of the discussion:

The Jewish Press: Israel recently concluded its war against Hizbullah in what many consider to be a stalemated position. How do you see things right now?

Sen. Clinton: First, I don’t think we should have pushed for an election in the Palestinian territories. I think that was a big mistake. If we were going to push for an election, we should have made sure we did something to determine who was going to win instead of signing off on an electoral system that advantaged Hamas.

That, to me, was a first step that led Hizbullah to take the actions that it took [killing and kidnapping Israeli soldiers and firing missiles into Israeli population centers]. What has concerned me is that I don’t think our or Israel’s intelligence was very good at uncovering what Hizbullah had developed in the last six years.

Frankly, the American intelligence didn’t know how dug in Hizbullah was, how many rockets they had, where they were going to be launched from and what the range was.

I think, based on what I know, that a lot of damage was inflicted on Hizbullah’s capacity. But that capacity is not destroyed and has not disappeared. Thus, Hizbullah, the Syrians and the Iranians have been emboldened.

This was a problem of situational awareness and about what we were up against. This is a longer-term issue for us and for Israel as we try to figure out how we’re going to get a better grasp of what we’re up against.

Do you think the peacekeeping forces on the Israeli-Lebanese border will be effective?

I don’t have a lot of confidence in what the peacekeeping forces will do, because nobody’s willing to say that they’re willing to disarm Hizbullah. That’s the problem. UN Resolution 1701 [which ended the war] originally said that you had to go in and disarm Hizbullah — but there was no effort to do this at the time, and now we’re trying to play catch-up. They initially said the Lebanese army’s going to do it, but that’s not going to happen.

Is it worth talking to Syria, from the perspectives of the U.S. and Israel?

You know what? I’m pretty much of the mind that I don’t think it hurts to talk to people as long as you’re not stupid in giving things away. I would argue that we don’t know what’s going on inside Iran and Syria. I just want us to get better info. We don’t have good info. I asked the Israelis if [Syrian President Bashar] Assad is really in charge. They said they weren’t sure. So I suggested that we get something going to see who is pulling the levers of power in order to try and figure out how we can influence them.

Please explain your strong criticism of President Bush’s Iraq war strategy after you voted to give him authorization to topple Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship.

I guess I hae been more willing to criticize the administration’s conduct of the war than some [of my Democratic colleagues]. I don’t know why they wouldn’t put in more troops.

Why wouldn’t they follow the military plans that had been drawn up previously by Gen. [Anthony] Zinni and others? Why did they create this awkward entity known as the Coalition Provisional Authority, which was a disaster, diplomatically and strategically?

But I voted to give the president authority and I’ve said many times that I regret the way he used the authority. I haven’t said I made a mistake or I wouldn’t have given it to him again. I made the best decision I could at the time, based on my assessment.

I think my position differs with the administration largely with respect to the execution and implementation of the policy, which I think has been a terrible series of blunders.

There are many people in the Democratic Party who are pushing for the U.S. to leave Iraq. What about those folks who say “cut and run”?

Well, I’m not saying that. I’m saying that if we don’t change what we’re doing, our chances for success are pretty limited. This undermines our capacity to take action that is in our interest and in the interest of Israel and our other allies.

I’ve joined onto a very reasonable proposition put forward by Senators Carl Levin (D-MI) and Jack Reed (D-RI), which says we’ve got to do three things: You’ve got to have an internal political process in Iraq. We haven’t told the Iraqi government, “You’ve got to deal with the unfinished business, and we’re going to push you to do it and we’re going to help you do it, but we’re not going to stand by and have you ignore doing it.”

Second, why haven’t we done more to put Iraq’s neighbors on the spot? This international process would say, “You have a big stake in the survival and stability of this regime — you, Saudi Arabia; you, Jordan; you, Kuwait.”

And third, we have to send a message to the Iraqis that they’ve got to do a better job of securing themselves, which is where this concept of phased redeployment comes.

But this proposal says nothing about cutting and running. It says to the Iraqi government, “You’ve got to disarm your militias. You’ve got to rein in your Interior Department, which has been a haven for death squads. You’ve got to get the Islamic clerics, both Sunni and Shi’ites, to issue fatwas (Islamic decrees) against this sectarian violence.”

There’s a lot we could be doing. And you know what? I don’t see it.

How do you view the war on terror?

In this new type of war, we have several big tasks ahead of us. First, we must do everything possible to prevent any of them — Iran, Al Qaeda and the like — from getting nuclear weapons or other types of weapons of mass destruction. That’s the ballgame.

I don’t think our strategy is working. Six years ago, North Korea and Iran were not as close as they are today to having nuclear weapons. Let’s ask ourselves, “What do we need to do differently to be more effective?” Let’s get the best people we can to deal with this problem. And let’s have a robust discussion and not shut people’s ideas down because they don’t agree with yours.

That’s one of my criticisms of the administration, which has the attitude that it’s their way or no way. I’m not sure any of us have the way. That’s why we need, in a democracy, a vigorous debate. There are a lot of people who may have some good ideas that have basically been ignored up until now.

 

Eli Chomsky

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/interviews-and-profiles/exclusive-interview-hillary-clinton-on-israel-iraq-and-terror-archive/2016/10/29/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: