Atlanta Jewish Times: Assassinate Obama To Save Israel

[phk]

Atlanta Jewish Times: Assassinate Obama To Save Israel

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/worldview/assassinate-obama-if-he-wont-attack-iran-for-israel-jewish-monthly-suggests/article2310783/

...Last week, the idea reached horrific proportions when Andrew Adler, the owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times wrote a list of things that should be done to protect Israel.

“Three, give the go-ahead for U. S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vice-president to take his place, and forcefully dictate that the United States policy includes hits helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies.”....

[Frodo]

Atlanta Jewish Times: Assassinate Obama To Save Israel

http://lezgetreal.com/2012/01/atlanta-jewish-times-assassinate-obama-to-save-israel/

...Last week, the idea reached horrific proportions when Andrew Adler, the owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times wrote a list of things that should be done to protect Israel.

“Three, give the go-ahead for U. S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vice-president to take his place, and forcefully dictate that the United States policy includes hits helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies.”....

If having Ziva David assassinating President Obama doesn't revive anti-semitism in this country, I don't know what will.   

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Ironically, Obama has a better favorable rating in Israel than the US.

[2952-0-0]

If any Muslim wrote this sort of thing he would already be in Guantanamo Bay by now.

[minionofmidas]

Writing things like this is, of course, unequivocally illegal under US law.

[ag]

What an idiot. If there is anything that could permanently break the US-Israeli alliance, that would be it. If that were to actually happen and Israeli role were to come out, all hell would break loose.

[BigSkyBob]

What an idiot. If there is anything that could permanently break the US-Israeli alliance, that would be it. If that were to actually happen and Israeli role were to come out, all hell would break loose.

Seems "our special relationship with the only democracy in the Middle-East" survived the Israelis strafing the Liberty. They killed 34 American sailors in cold blood, including the generally acknowledged war crime of strafing the lifeboats.

Sure, murdering an American President would be a public relations nightmare, but, so was the Liberty. Just lie, conceal, and, accuse anyone too interested in the Truth of "antisemitism." If such rebukes don't work, is not their critic's assassination another option?

What I find most interesting about the article is the assumption that the replacement Vice-President would toe a more pro-Israeli line. Could that be under the threat that he'd better least he be the next target on the list?

What I find most interesting about Ag's comment is not that he directly objects to the sedition, but, rather, he merely notes that treason advocated might not have the desired practical result. Apparently, he is trying to pragmatically appeal to people for whom treason is an option.

That is the real lesson we should draw from this incident.

[Mechaman]

What an idiot. If there is anything that could permanently break the US-Israeli alliance, that would be it. If that were to actually happen and Israeli role were to come out, all hell would break loose.

Seems "our special relationship with the only democracy in the Middle-East" survived the Israelis strafing the Liberty. They killed 34 American sailors in cold blood, including the generally acknowledged war crime of strafing the lifeboats.

Sure, murdering an American President would be a public relations nightmare, but, so was the Liberty. Just lie, conceal, and, accuse anyone too interested in the Truth of "antisemitism." If such rebukes don't work, is not their critic's assassination another option?

What I find most interesting about the article is the assumption that the replacement Vice-President would toe a more pro-Israeli line. Could that be under the threat that he'd better least he be the next target on the list?

What I find most interesting about Ag's comment is not that he directly objects to the sedition, but, rather, he merely notes that treason advocated might not have the desired practical result. Apparently, he is trying to pragmatically appeal to people for whom treason is an option.

That is the real lesson we should draw from this incident.

To be fair to the article author Joe Six Pack had a more friendly record towards Israel while in the US Senate.
Probably not friendly enough to invade Iran though.

Yeah the suggestion is just kind of ludicrous really.  I mean I know there is a pro-Israel lobby in this nation but damn........kill the President?  I didn't think that was legal.

[Sbane]

What an idiot. If there is anything that could permanently break the US-Israeli alliance, that would be it. If that were to actually happen and Israeli role were to come out, all hell would break loose.

Seems "our special relationship with the only democracy in the Middle-East" survived the Israelis strafing the Liberty. They killed 34 American sailors in cold blood, including the generally acknowledged war crime of strafing the lifeboats.

Sure, murdering an American President would be a public relations nightmare, but, so was the Liberty. Just lie, conceal, and, accuse anyone too interested in the Truth of "antisemitism." If such rebukes don't work, is not their critic's assassination another option?

What I find most interesting about the article is the assumption that the replacement Vice-President would toe a more pro-Israeli line. Could that be under the threat that he'd better least he be the next target on the list?

What I find most interesting about Ag's comment is not that he directly objects to the sedition, but, rather, he merely notes that treason advocated might not have the desired practical result. Apparently, he is trying to pragmatically appeal to people for whom treason is an option.

That is the real lesson we should draw from this incident.

I think the article is calling for Mossad agents, who presumably would be Israeli citizens, to carry this out. So it wouldn't be treason for them to carry it out. The guy who wrote this is treasonous though. Calling for the murder of the President is illegal and hopefully the Secret Service pays this guy a visit.

[BigSkyBob]

What an idiot. If there is anything that could permanently break the US-Israeli alliance, that would be it. If that were to actually happen and Israeli role were to come out, all hell would break loose.

Seems "our special relationship with the only democracy in the Middle-East" survived the Israelis strafing the Liberty. They killed 34 American sailors in cold blood, including the generally acknowledged war crime of strafing the lifeboats.

Sure, murdering an American President would be a public relations nightmare, but, so was the Liberty. Just lie, conceal, and, accuse anyone too interested in the Truth of "antisemitism." If such rebukes don't work, is not their critic's assassination another option?

What I find most interesting about the article is the assumption that the replacement Vice-President would toe a more pro-Israeli line. Could that be under the threat that he'd better least he be the next target on the list?

What I find most interesting about Ag's comment is not that he directly objects to the sedition, but, rather, he merely notes that treason advocated might not have the desired practical result. Apparently, he is trying to pragmatically appeal to people for whom treason is an option.

That is the real lesson we should draw from this incident.

To be fair to the article author Joe Six Pack had a more friendly record towards Israel while in the US Senate.
Probably not friendly enough to invade Iran though.

Yeah the suggestion is just kind of ludicrous really.  I mean I know there is a pro-Israel lobby in this nation but damn........kill the President?  I didn't think that was legal.

It's not just murder, it's treason. Advocating debating his murder is sedition.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Honestly, I really do have somewhat of a personal dislike towards Obama, but this is so over the top. And Israel wonders why the world hates them!

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Where's the news on this? If this was a conservative paper it would be the top story on MSNBC.

[Stranger in a strange land]

If any Muslim wrote this sort of thing he would already be in Guantanamo Bay by now.

^true that. This guy at least deserves a visit from the FBI.

Honestly, I really do have somewhat of a personal dislike towards Obama, but this is so over the top. And Israel wonders why the world hates them!

I don't hate Israel, but I really can't stand some of their supporters.

What an idiot. If there is anything that could permanently break the US-Israeli alliance, that would be it. If that were to actually happen and Israeli role were to come out, all hell would break loose.

Seems "our special relationship with the only democracy in the Middle-East" survived the Israelis strafing the Liberty. They killed 34 American sailors in cold blood, including the generally acknowledged war crime of strafing the lifeboats.

Sure, murdering an American President would be a public relations nightmare, but, so was the Liberty. Just lie, conceal, and, accuse anyone too interested in the Truth of "antisemitism." If such rebukes don't work, is not their critic's assassination another option?

What I find most interesting about the article is the assumption that the replacement Vice-President would toe a more pro-Israeli line. Could that be under the threat that he'd better least he be the next target on the list?

What I find most interesting about Ag's comment is not that he directly objects to the sedition, but, rather, he merely notes that treason advocated might not have the desired practical result. Apparently, he is trying to pragmatically appeal to people for whom treason is an option.

That is the real lesson we should draw from this incident.

To be fair to the article author Joe Six Pack had a more friendly record towards Israel while in the US Senate.
Probably not friendly enough to invade Iran though.

Yeah the suggestion is just kind of ludicrous really.  I mean I know there is a pro-Israel lobby in this nation but damn........kill the President?  I didn't think that was legal.

It's not just murder, it's treason. Advocating debating his murder is sedition.

Calling on a foreign power to assassinate the president is treason. It may not meet the constitutional definition of such, but it certainly is illegal.

[Simfan34]

Didn't Ehud Barak go on CNN and say Obama's the best president, in terms of sharing and advancing the interests of Israel, that the U.S. has had for some time? I don't get this line of reasoning- nor why Obama hasn't blasted that on the airwaves.

Oh, and he should be arrested. This is sedition, to the word.

[Lambsbread]

Yeah I don't like Obama, but I'd never call for his assassination...that's extremely over the line...

[Mechaman]

Honestly, I really do have somewhat of a personal dislike towards Obama, but this is so over the top. And Israel wonders why the world hates them!

Don't get me wrong I do not really care for Israel and think the billions of dollars we sent over there would've been better spent elsewhere (like on infrastructure) but how do you go from "over the top" to "Israel is shocked the world hates them because they have idiot supporters!"

For one thing, a crazy rant by an American Jew does not equal an entire nation's opinion on an issue.  Just saying.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Insert the same sense of outrage as everyone else about here.

Honestly, I really do have somewhat of a personal dislike towards Obama, but this is so over the top. And Israel wonders why the world hates them!

In a few years time you are going to be seriously embarrassed by the content (and implications) of a lot of your posts, the one above included.

[ag]

What I find most interesting about Ag's comment is not that he directly objects to the sedition, but, rather, he merely notes that treason advocated might not have the desired practical result. Apparently, he is trying to pragmatically appeal to people for whom treason is an option.

Now, this is extremely offensive. If you ever bothered to read what I usually say about Israel, you'd know I am not at all sympathetic to that state, which I don't even consider friendly to Jews. If anything, I normally tend to do my best to annoy Israel's defenders ) I wouldn't even consider it to be something undesirable, if Israeli-American alliance were to be broken.

But that's beyond the point: I said what I said, and there is no need to impute anything. This guy is an idiot even on his own, twisted criteria of what is good. That you immediately try to interpret my words this way just would have indicated to me that you harbor a certain unpleasant prejudice if I were in any need of such an indication: as it is, your profound anti-semitism is, of course, not in doubt based on our previous conversations.

Finally, on a more amusing note, of course, the charge of treason would be misplaced here even if your interpretation were correct (which it is, emphatically, not). I am a Mexican citizen, not an American. Try as I might, I cannot "betray" the US: if I choose to betray a country, it would have to be your southern neighbor. Having already "betrayed" mother Russia, it won't be a particularly novel experience. Nevertheless, let me state unequivocally: I would certainly not condone any violence toward the president or any other office-holder of the neighboring country.

And, finally, let me repeat. This guy is a twisted idiot.

[Simfan34]

Insert the same sense of outrage as everyone else about here.

Honestly, I really do have somewhat of a personal dislike towards Obama, but this is so over the top. And Israel wonders why the world hates them!

In a few years time you are going to be seriously embarrassed by the content (and implications) of a lot of your posts, the one above included.

I wish I understand what you meant.

[minionofmidas]

Insert the same sense of outrage as everyone else about here.

Honestly, I really do have somewhat of a personal dislike towards Obama, but this is so over the top. And Israel wonders why the world hates them!

In a few years time you are going to be seriously embarrassed by the content (and implications) of a lot of your posts, the one above included.

I wish I understand what you meant.

You will in a few years time, at which point you are going to be seriously embarrassed by the content (and implications) of a lot of your posts, the one above included.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Insert the same sense of outrage as everyone else about here.

Honestly, I really do have somewhat of a personal dislike towards Obama, but this is so over the top. And Israel wonders why the world hates them!

In a few years time you are going to be seriously embarrassed by the content (and implications) of a lot of your posts, the one above included.

And what is so bad about that one? The Israeli Americans I know in the GOP are so willing to call Obama a Kenyan, and a Muslim, but they themselves are pretty open about their Israeli supremacist beliefs.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

How will Biden save Israel?

[Mechaman]

Insert the same sense of outrage as everyone else about here.

Honestly, I really do have somewhat of a personal dislike towards Obama, but this is so over the top. And Israel wonders why the world hates them!

In a few years time you are going to be seriously embarrassed by the content (and implications) of a lot of your posts, the one above included.

And what is so bad about that one? The Israeli Americans I know in the GOP are so willing to call Obama a Kenyan, and a Muslim, but they themselves are pretty open about their Israeli supremacist beliefs.

You seriously don't get the fallacy you just engaged in?

[BigSkyBob]

What I find most interesting about Ag's comment is not that he directly objects to the sedition, but, rather, he merely notes that treason advocated might not have the desired practical result. Apparently, he is trying to pragmatically appeal to people for whom treason is an option.

Now, this is extremely offensive. If you ever bothered to read what I usually say about Israel, you'd know I am not at all sympathetic to that state, which I don't even consider friendly to Jews. If anything, I normally tend to do my best to annoy Israel's defenders ) I wouldn't even consider it to be something undesirable, if Israeli-American alliance were to be broken.

But that's beyond the point: I said what I said, and there is no need to impute anything. This guy is an idiot even on his own, twisted criteria of what is good. That you immediately try to interpret my words this way just would have indicated to me that you harbor a certain unpleasant prejudice if I were in any need of such an indication: as it is, your profound anti-semitism is, of course, not in doubt based on our previous conversations.

Finally, on a more amusing note, of course, the charge of treason would be misplaced here even if your interpretation were correct (which it is, emphatically, not). I am a Mexican citizen, not an American. Try as I might, I cannot "betray" the US: if I choose to betray a country, it would have to be your southern neighbor. Having already "betrayed" mother Russia, it won't be a particularly novel experience. Nevertheless, let me state unequivocally: I would certainly not condone any violence toward the president or any other office-holder of the neighboring country.

And, finally, let me repeat. This guy is a twisted idiot.

This is pathetic, a man commits sedition, and, your response is try to distract attention from the fact that he committed sedition by falsely accusing me of accusing you of sedition. I didn't accuse you of sedition. I accuse you of ignoring the fact that he committed sedition. Sedition is completely unacceptable, and, any consideration of whether, or not, sedition is a practical alternative isn't even a tertiary concern.

Again, you have evaded the essential fact that he committed sedition by trying to characterized a serious felony as merely being the rantings of "a twisted idiot."

There is a process for handling sedition. He should be investigated. [Basically, proving that he wrote it] Then, he should be arrested, tried by a jury of his peers, and, if convicted, sentenced to prison proportionally to crime of sedition.

[ag]

There is a process for handling sedition. He should be investigated. [Basically, proving that he wrote it] Then, he should be arrested, tried by a jury of his peers, and, if convicted, sentenced to prison proportionally to crime of sedition.

My dearest JewScare Bob.

Yes, you are right, I am indifferent to the sedition aspect of this - and, most certainly, I am opposed to anybody being tried and/or imprisoned for this, unless it can be shown that there was a serious plot to commit violence. The laws that dictate such imprisonment are the gravest danger to liberty: much graver than ramblings of an idiot in Atlanta. He is not a danger to the US: imprisoning him, most surely, would be a direct threat to every American. So, I guess, I might go as far as accuse you of advocating a course of action injurious to the United States of America and all of its citizens. I don't know, whether this would qualify as sedition: nor, honestly, do I care.