Those who want to see Barack Obama out of the White House have a tough, no-holds-barred ally in Las Vegas-and Israel-based billionaire gambling tycoon Sheldon Adelson, who some call “the modern-day Meyer Lansky,” recalling the longtime head of the national crime syndicate.
The New York Timesreported on June 17 that Adelson—a key ally of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is himself a close, longtime friend of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney—has said he is prepared to spend $100M of his own money this year to defeat Obama and help elect Republicans.
SHELDON ADELSON & LYNN DE ROTHSCHILD
Two of the big names working to oust Obama
Adelson’s friend Fred Zeidman—a prominent figure in the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai B’rith and a major player in the GOP in Texas—told the Times that Adelson is “fully committed to beating Barack Obama,” adding that the $100M Adelson is willing to spend is “a meaningless amount of money” to super-rich Adelson.
Reportedly worth some $25B, Adelson once referred to himself as “the richest Jew in the world.”
This past year, the American-born gambling chief and his Israeli wife gave $20M to a so-called superPAC supporting the presidential ambitions of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who loudly echoed Adelson’s hard-line support for Israel.
A superPAC refers to a new breed of political action committee that was spawned from an infamous 2010 Supreme Court ruling, which allowed corporations to spend unlimited sums of money to influence elections. With federal election law loopholes in place, superPACs can avoid disclosing the names of their contributors. But unlike regular PACs, superPACs cannot donate funds directly to politicians. What they do is hire propagandists, and spend their millions buying commercials on television and placing advertisements in newspapers backing one politician over another.
Now the casino kingpin is going all out to make sure the GOP not only take theWhite House but also Congress, leading the Times to refer to Adelson’s “growing role as one of the country’s leading political financiers”—referring to Adelson’s clout here in America, rather than to his equally considerable impact in Israel.
Adelson has not only pledged an additional $10M to a superPAC supporting Mitt Romney but he has also dropped $5M into the coffers of the Congressional Leadership Fund, a superPAC that supports GOP candidates for Congress.
And it has been reported that Adelson has given even more millions to other superPACs, some $5M going to Young Guns, a front for Rep. Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, who shares Adelson’s devotion to Israel, as well as $10M to the Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies run by GOP operative Karl Rove. He has even talked of handing $10M to fellow billionaires Charles and David Koch, key figures behind the tea party movement, to assist in their pro-GOP endeavors.
If Adelson lives up to his promises, this is just the start.
Adelson joins Lady Lynn Forrester de Rothschild of the international banking dynasty and a member of the influential Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in lining up behind Romney, another of the big names who says “Obama must go.”
Recently, Leslie Gelb, the former president of the CFR, complained to writer Edward Klein, author of the new book The Amateur (highly critical of Obama) that no president had taken more personal control over foreign policy than Obama. Klein quoted Gelb as having stated:
“This is an Obama-centric decision-making operation. In other administrations, a lot of decisions were made below the presidential level. But Obama shapes most policies. He takes pen to paper and writes decision papers. Usually presidents have other things to do than sit down and write a document that takes an inordinate amount of time. But Obama makes the calls on most every subject and with a degree of personal intensity.”
Klein suggests that Obama’s policies—especially his stance toward Israel—are “a rupture with the past” betraying the bipartisan consensus forged on foreign policy issues and carried out by officials in Republican and Democratic administrations alike.
That Klein is also taking on Obama may spell a public relations danger to the president.
Klein has been a key figure in three of the most powerful Zionist media dynasties: He was editor-in chief of The New York Times Magazine, published by the Sulzberger family; former foreign editor of Newsweek, published by the Meyer-Graham family (of Washington Post fame); and is the author of the “Walter Scott” column in the weekly Parade, owned by S.I. Newhouse, who famously saved then-Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) from election defeat by cutting off “Jewish lobby” money to Helms’s opponent, after which Helms became fervently pro-Israeli.
Michael Collins Piper is an author, journalist, lecturer and radio show host. He has spoken in Russia, Malaysia, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Japan, Canada and the U.S.
No More No-Win Wars
• Is Obama the reason we haven’t attacked Iran?
By Willis A. Carto
There are many things that an alert American may criticize President Barack Obama for, but these failings are not the subject of this commentary. Instead, we wish to congratulate him for his surprising statesmanship and guts for resisting the Israeli lobby in a matter of vital national interest.
No one may doubt that what Israel wants, Israel gets. It is estimated by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, the authors of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, that Israel has received more than $140 billion in financial and other benefits from U.S. taxpayers since 1949. And yet, in spite of this proof of Israel’s political power in this “democracy,” President Obama has so far rejected Israel’s efforts to do the one thing that Israel craves above everything else—to attack Iran.
Israel-firsters (and by the use of this term the Judeo-Christians under the sway of such racketeers as John Hagee must be included) claim Iran is an existential threat to Israel. At any moment, they fear, Iran will lob hundreds of missiles at the poor Israelis. Iran must be stopped before it’s too late.
And Israel must have the full cooperation—monetary as well as military—of the United States to forestall or avenge this fate.
But here’s the rub. Has Obama turned a deaf ear to the Israel-firsters? Could he be cognizant of the advice of this country’s Founding Father, George Washington and the other God-inspired men who created this nation, to avoid foreign wars? Could Obama actually be rejecting the internationalists, such as Mitt Romney, John McCain, Joe Lieberman and other war maniacs and acting in the best interests of America, and damn the industrialists, bankers and lunatics who want perpetual war for America?
Could Obama realize that an American attack on Iran—even if Israel could procure the consent of Congress—would be a strategic disaster for this nation no matter if endorsed by multitudes of TV talking heads and scribblers who can be counted to bark obediently every time Israel gives the signal?
Such an attack would beyond question constitute the greatest no-win war yet for our country.
Such an attack would mean bombing Tehran and other Iranian cities with nuclear warheads. This would be a major atrocity and war crime. We would kill many thousands of Persians but only an invasion by infantry wins wars, and deploying a minimum of 15 million infantrymen (not girls and fairies) along with sufficient tanks, cannon, rockets, airplanes, ammunition and materiel to do the
job would be impossible, as would be our Navy aking control of the Persian Gulf.
An attempted invasion of Iran would be the greatest favor we could possibly do for Russia and China. U.S. embarrassment at the outcome of such an ill-conceived venture would follow, and Russia and China could be counted on to rub it in on the international stage. Goodbye, American prestige and all the billions the taxpayers have contributed for the past 50 years to make people love us.
Willis A. Carto is a longtime nationalist writer and editor, who has also published hundreds of books of interest to populists. He was the founder of LIBERTY LOBBY and is currently the editor of THE BARNES REVIEW (TBR) history magazine. If you’ve never seen TBR, write P.O. Box 15877,Washington, D.C. 20003 for a free sample issue.
• Conservatives, radicals, centrists, birthers, Zionists join to challenge president By Michael Collins Piper
Barack Obama’s fight to win reelection just got tougher. One of his biggest critics, one of the world’s richest, most powerful women—Lady Lynn de Rothschild of New York and London—has not only endorsed Republican Mitt Romney, but she also pulled the plug on Americans Elect (AE), the proposed “centrist” third party of which she was one of the chief sponsors.
Although the establishment media loudly noted in recent reports that AE folded up shop after having spent at least $35M in Wall Street-financed organizing efforts, those reports did not mention that the primary reason AE collapsed was because Lady de Rothschild—the American-born wife of Sir Evelyn Rothschild of the international banking dynasty and a key figure in the global elite in her own right—had decided Romney was acceptable as the GOP’s nominee.
While AE postured as a “grass-roots” effort to break partisan gridlock in America, the truth is that Lady de Rothschild and a clique of elite figures from the Rothschild sphere of influence on Wall Street and in the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)—of which she is a member—had set AE in motion in the first place.
The intent of such a centrist party at the time was to defeat Obama and any potential GOP nominee, who did not meet the standards of the Rothschild family and its circles.
While Lady de Rothschild had backed former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman—a fervent internationalist—for the GOP nomination, his campaign was fading well before the first primary battle. As far back as Dec. 19—while both promoting Huntsman’s aspirations and providing pivotal support for AE’s centrist party efforts—Lady de Rothschild publicly told the popular news website the Huffington Post she would back Romney if Huntsman eventually withdrew.
Not a month later, while holding a fundraiser for Huntsman at her apartment in Manhattan, she told The Washington Post she would support Romney if he did win the GOP nomination, which, at that point, was still not assured.
On Jan. 13, the Post—owned by investors such as Warren Buffett and the Graham family who have long been closely intertwined with the Rothschilds—reported Lady de Rothschild’s endorsement of Romney, describing Lady de Rothschild as “a glamorous and die hard Hillary Rodham Clinton supporter whose antagonism toward Barack Obama has led her across the partisan aisle.”
Romney, in fact, prevailed over his challengers, and Lady de Rothschild and her allies decided to pull the plug on the centrist third party they were holding in reserve. Their big aim now is to deny Obama a second term, and Romney is clearly their chosen candidate to do it.
Lady de Rothschild had supported Mrs. Clinton for the 2008 Democratic nomination. She then vocally endorsed Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain over Obama, who she said was too “ideological” (that is, too liberal). This surprised many who perceived Obama as the Rothschilds’ golden boy.
As president, Obama confirmed Lady de Rothschild’s worst suspicions. As early as Feb. 28, 2010, writing on the Daily Beast, Lady de Rothschild said that “After watching President Obama in office for more than a year, it is clear to me that . . . we already knew what kind of president he would become. . . . Perhaps the biggest fabrication of the Obama candidacy was his claim of being a centrist.” Accusing Obama of being “beholden to the left,” Lady de Rothschild said he had “misled” the American people during the 2008 campaign about his “real plans for America.” She added that “his cynical use of centrist language as a tool to get elected does not change the fact of his true objectives.”
In the wake of her attacks on Obama, Lady de Rothschild began publicly promoting the AE centrist movement—along with a host of other influential figures, including veteran Democratic Party pollster Doug Schoen. They saw AE as both a tool to remove Obama from the White House and to prevent the rise of a serious populist and nationalist challenger from GOP ranks.
As recently as Dec. 5, the billionaire aristocrat published a screed at The Huffington Post, hailing AE, actually suggesting the new party—representing what she called “the radical center”—would “take on all the vested interests and the extremists in the political parties, in the media, in the streets and in the guts of Washington.”
Now that the power elite have thrown AE to the side, a remarkable coalition including the Rothschilds, the “birther” movement led by former Israeli Orly Taitz, white separatists joined with hardline Zionists, as well as many self-styled “patriots” and “conservatives” and others—are joining behind Romney—long seen as a “moderate” and “centrist” and even as a “liberal”—to put Obama out of the White House.
—— Michael Collins Piper is an author, journalist, lecturer and radio show host. He has spoken in Russia, Malaysia, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Japan, Canada and the U.S.
• Populists concerned about Republican candidate’s rabid internationalism, unabashed love for Israel By Michael Collins Piper
If Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) hopes to mold the Republican Party’s 2012 national campaign platform into a document of nationalism and non-interventionism, he has a tough job ahead, for the global outlook of all-but-certain GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney is firmly internationalist and interventionist.
In fact, as AFP noted on Oct. 24, 2011, Romney’s first major foreign policy address delivered on Oct. 7 at the Citadel was a declaration of budget-busting, round-the-planet meddling, a promise of unending wars against an array of perceived enemies, ranging from Iran, Russia, China, Pakistan and billions of Muslims across the Earth.
“Endless trillions,” concluded AFP, “will continue to go down the black holes of the military-industrial banking police state.”
A rabid call for U.S. adventurism, Romney’s speech was full of rhetoric that, on its face, had a lot of energetic fervor that appealed to many good American patriots. He declared:
This century must be an American century. In an American century, America leads the free world and the free world leads the entire world. God did not create this country to be a nation of followers. America is not destined to be one of several equally balanced global powers. America must lead the world, or someone else will. Without American leadership,without clarity of American purpose and resolve, the world becomes a far more dangerous place, and liberty and prosperity would surely be among the first casualties.
However, while the language reflects the views expressed in Romney’s campaign book No Apology: The Case for American Greatness, there’s much more to it than meets the eye. And this is what is important for real patriots to understand:
The concept of an “American century”—a catchphrase of American internationalists of the Council on Foreign Relations school of thought going back to the post-World War II era—has seen its most recent incarnation in the theme of “American greatness”—also known as “American exceptionalism”—bandied about by the ex-Trotskyite hard-line pro-Israel neo-conservatives who orchestrated the United States into the no-win war in Iraq and who now push for a war against Iran.
Romney’s linguistics constitute a modern-day propaganda cover for old-fashioned Trostkyite communism: rapacious imperialism and internationalism wrapped in the American flag, but no different from the age-old dream of a world imperium—a global government—a New World Order.
The specific foreign policy aims expressed by Romney were a virtual wish list for warmongers and profit-driven plutocrats. Although none of Romney’s five sons served in uniform, their father calls for a significant—some say “muscular”—role for the U.S. military abroad. Romney said, in part:
We are at war with Islamic fundamentalism. We must fight against the most ancient of prejudices: anti-Semitism.
In my first 100 days in office, I will . . . announce an initiative to increase the shipbuilding rate from nine ships per year to 15 [ships per year].
I will begin . . . the full deployment of a multi-layered national ballistic missile defense system. I will enhance our deterrent against the Iranian regime by ordering the regular presence of aircraft carrier task forces, one in the Eastern Mediterranean and one in the Persian Gulf region.
I will begin discussions with Israel to increase the level of our military assistance and coordination . . . an Iranian nuclear weapon is unacceptable. I will launch a campaign to advance economic opportunity in Latin America . . . free trade . . . I will reaffirm as a vital national interest Israel’s existence as a Jewish state. I will count as dear our special relationship with the United Kingdom. . . .
Romney’s saber-rattling against Iran, ritually embracing the mantra that Iran is a threat to not only Israel but to the United States, has been supplemented with equally dangerous bombast.
On CNN, Romney actually described modern Russia as America’s “number one geopolitical foe,” charging Russia “lines up with the world’s worst actors,” and that “Russia is not a friendly character on the world stage.”
That these words sound familiar is no surprise, considering those who constitute Romney’s most intimate advisors.
Notable among those whispering in Romney’s ear is Eliot A. Cohen—a longtime and foremost figure in military and geostrategic affairs, one of the most influential of the Zionist neo-conservative internationalists active today. A founding member of the neo-conservative Project for the New American Century—famed for suggesting America needed a “New Pearl Harbor” in order to jump-start U.S. involvement in new global military ventures—Cohen is one of multiple “neo-cons” who populate Romney’s inner circle.
But even more so, Romney prizes, in particular, an unusually close and long-standing personal (and political) alliance—going back 36 years—with no less than Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu.
First openly revealed in candid detail by The New York Times on April 7—to the genuine surprise of many who were confounded by the link between the Michigan-born former Mormon missionary and the cosmopolitan Israeli-born Jew who graduated from high school in suburban Philadelphia—the Times described the relationship as “a warm friendship, little known to outsiders, that is now rich with political intrigue.”
Emphasizing that the Romney-Netanyahu axis is additionally “strengthened by a network of mutual friends and heightened by their conservative ideologies” the Times commented frankly that “the ties between Mr. Romney and Mr. Netanyahu stand out because there is little precedent for two politicians of their stature to have such a history together that predates their entry into government.”
The two met in 1976 while working at the Boston Consulting Group. Remaining in close contact, they regularly advised one another after both went into government on both domestic and foreign policy, having absorbed, the Times said, “the same profoundly analytical view of the world.”
What is disturbing—at least to American nationalists—is that, as the Times noted, “Romney has suggested that he would not make any significant policy decisions about Israel without consulting Mr. Netanyahu.” Even the Times—a staunchly pro-Israel voice—noted that this was “a level of deference that could raise eyebrows given Mr. Netanyahu’s polarizing reputation.”
Michael Collins Piper is an author, journalist, lecturer and radio show host. He has spoken in Russia, Malaysia, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Japan, Canada and the U.S.
‘American Exceptionalism’ Just More NWO Rhetoric
By Michael Collins Piper
During the 2012 election campaign, you’ll probably be hearing a lot about “American exceptionalism,” particularly from the Republican presidential candidates. Newt Gingrich has made the concept a centerpiece of his campaign, and Gingrich’s wife—the current one, that is—has produced a documentary on the topic. Mitt Romney’s campaign book is entitled No Apology: The Case for American Greatness. Sarah Palin’s book, America by Heart, has a chapter entitled “America the Exceptional.” And former Sen. Rick Santorum and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty have also been heard touting the topic.
But don’t be fooled by rhetoric that has a lot of patriotic appeal. In fact, the concept of American exceptionalism— and a related theme known as national greatness conservatism—are really modern-day propaganda masks for old-fashioned Trotskyite communism: rapacious imperialism and internationalism now wrapped in the American flag, but no different from the age-old dream of a world imperium—a global government.
Many call it the New World Order. The wizards who conjured up these themes are three key figures in the so-called neo-conservative movement:
Sheldon Adelson now fighting a bribery probe after wasting over $150 million to buy Republicans By Michael Collins Piper For years, the name of international gambling tycoon Sheldon Adelson—who, with his Israeli wife Miriam, is worth $20.5B—was known only among the monied elite of Wall Street, London and Tel Aviv (and in the inner circles