The U.S. policy against Israel has been in effect since Truman's mistake . You purpously ignore that the U.S. is a superpower bully trampling Israel's sovereignty and threatening Israel as they did with Yitzak Shamir. Bush did the same when Sharon came to Washington .He was a changed man after that and immediately implememted the Gaza surrender. But you are too loyal to the Empire to see this .That is my problem with you phony,shallow supporters of Israel It's always been the same restraint . Look how long it took for Golda to get past Kapo Kissinger during the Yom Kippur war. She had to threaten to use nukes to get Nixon's attention.I know ,i was in the USAF at the time. So many of you are stuck in the left right dead end debate the politicians use to decieve the dumb sheep. Bush is far to the Left of Clinton on Israel,spending,globalism ect.. He's a phony thru and thru and many of you like that because you are doubleminded,confused and decieved. Look at Malcom ,he's afraid to point the finger at Bush and has only the courage to point the finger at the girls implementing the Bush Road Map to Holocaust. How pathetic and weak and confused and loyal lap dogs you are to the evil man who endangers Israel with his agenda.

This is directly attributable to the leftist Democratic Party in the U.S., and their incessant, whining criticism of every action taken by the current administration to defend civilized society. The U.S. government is now unwilling to make reasonable judgements based on reasonable intelligence information, unless there is absolutely concrete, judicial-quality proof beyond all doubt that action must be taken. This will get us killed.

First, and answer yes or no: did the Empire determine that only 25% of Likudniks would vote for Feiglin? Yes or no. Don't dodge the question. Second, did the Empire prevent Israel from debunking the al-dura fraud immediately? Yes or no. The US policy regarding Israel has actually changed a lot. Early on, Israel was considered a problem because of its Bolshevism, its connection to USSR, and its antagonistic relations with Muzzies. Serious support came only after 1967, when Israel showed it could be strategically useful against the USSR because it was a winner. For the so-called realists, that made Israel useful. The US DOES have oil-related interests, not just Israel-related interests. If that makes the country "monstrous" in your eyes, oh well. However, I notice that the only country that the US seems able to bully so spectacularly well is ... Israel. I'd say that requires an explanation. And don't say that Israel has no other friends, as that shows yet another problem with ISRAEL'S foreign policy efforts. Finally, your reference to Golda is quite relevant. She "dared" to put nukes on the table to move Nixon. Well now, was Israel such a puppet back then? Right now, Israel has great resources for leverage with the US. One great resource is that the mass by and large dislikes the Pals and likes the Jews. Your reference to Sharon is also telling. We know now that Sharon followed his buddy Weissglass's advice for buying his freedom: he kicked Jews out from Gaza. But what did Sharon do earlier, when his position was more secure? He retook Judea and Samaria--and Bush was very, very displeased. How does your "puppets on strings" model deal with such events, Marcel?

I'm so sorry ,I was wrong Bush is so innocent and he is God like in all his acts and to be revered. Not one word of dishonor or disrespect for the Furher. He is above reproach and all blame lies with Israel. Let them get what they deserve.America comes first even if she has to betray a an ally for oil. Thats ok. Only those slimey weak Jews are to be blamed for everything and of course the Road Map is what they have brought on themselves for being so obedient to the one whose boot you lick.

sk ,Did you happen to read #32's TB ? It's the democrats fault . It's never Bush's fault . Your demi-god is a pure as the driven snow and yet he rewardss the Islamic terrorists by stealing Jewsih land . What pompous arrogance your devil displays... oops ,I mean your demi-god. So much for your worthless commander in chief

They were yes or no questions, Marcel. You are being evasive, as you usually are when your flat earth theory fails to account for endless anomalous facts. You think in purely religious terms regarding what is right and wrong; I do not. I do not think that W's main priority should be to advantage Israel. You don't like my position? Tough. My complaint is that W is DISADVANTAGING both Israel and the US, in favor of Islam, and this is just stupid. When I become an Israeli citizen, my priorities will of course change somewhat. Would I prefer W to support the Feiglin wing of the Likud party? You bet. Do I think that W would have any chance to prevail in Israel? No. Do I think the US should risk such an adventure, with all of its costs? Not a chance. I don't even know that Israel can be saved from itself. Would I prefer W to have already waged war on Iran? Yes. Could he have done so when he went after Iraq? Yes. Could he do so now? Probably yes. Has he made a catastrophic error if he does not flatten the mullahs? Yes. Does this mean that I am a mindless lackey for Bush? Nope. And, as with Osirak, Israel has a role to play in its own defense by creating facts on the ground that position the US to make decisions that are better for both countries. The US can more easily do this when Israel is not being a public lapdog. But Israel WANTS to be a lapdog. It's leadership likes to blame things on foreigners. It is THAT which has changed since Golda's time. Politicians bend to countervailing forces. For example, Republican biggies threatened Bush when he was going to appoint Harriet Myers to the US Supreme Court. He backed down. It was a stupid idea, motivated not by evil but by personal loyalties. Yes, I do expect the government of Israel to be independent enough to act on Israel's self-interest. Oh, and yes, I did read #32. Burkcke is almost certainly right that the Dems are making it tougher for Bush to do what he would like to do. This is how an OPPOSITION works. Frankly, though, I think the problem is that Bush is trying to split a difference that can't be split. E.g. taking on Iraq but not Iran. Won't work. Ultimately, my dear Floridian, Bush's mistake is not to have launched in the post-9/11 period a war against the spread of Islam and Islamofascism to the West. THAT has been his catastrophic mistake, and THAT is something he could have done. All the risks would have been worth it. And if you had any sense you would see this. Enough, Marcel. Say something interesting, or I shall ignore you from now on.

Whoever thought we would see the day that Hillary Clinton fully supported Israel and Condi Rice Did not. oh wait, condi rice has always criticized israeli action against her enemies.