Comments on: Don’t Be So Sure About Haass, Holbrooke and Ross

By: Harvey

Harvey — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 00:51:03 +0000

Michael Mukasey the last U.S. Attorney General under President George W. Bush recused himself from the investigation into the Bernard Madoff 50 BILLION Ponzi Scheme because his son Marc Mukasey is representing a Madoff official in the investigation..

To recuse is to disqualify or seek to disqualify from participation in a decision on grounds such as prejudice or personal involvement.

A normal practice except for Jewish Americans who dominate amongst American Politicians involved with Middle East Affairs !!!

A dual loyalty of Jewish Americans towards Israel is well known by their long time support of Israel and AIPAC etc etc.

After over 60 years it is time to take the gloves off on this "not for discussion" topic and to save the USA and the World from a "never ending war" seemingly promoted by Jewish American neocon/Zionists like Mr. Ross.

To have American interests under the control of naturally biased towards Israel, Jewish Americans , may have prevented peace and has definitively been the cause of much damage to America's image in the World at large and further violence.

It seems amazing that the USA is not ethically powerful enough to recognize this "conflict of interest" question and that Jews and Zionists themselves do not have the integrity to recuse themselves from the Israeli/Palestinian conflict !!!!

Mr. Ross a Jewish American with longtime business interests in Israel besides a dual loyalty which should OBVIOUSLY rescuse his SHAMEFUL participation on behalf of the USA AND THE WORLD !!!

Or is the USA deaf dumb and blind

The Jewish Holocaust in WWII was a tragedy but its use to prevent further discussion is insulting to any serious researcher who knows that the 6 Million figure is highly exaggerated and to ban research and open discussion is also insulting.

http://tinyurl.com/2scazt

By: David O'Neill

David O'Neill — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 05:27:02 +0000

And if it's true, I have to say bluntly, how wise to put three Jewish guys in the lead of negotiations involving Iran, Pakistan and Palestinine, who will inevitably view them as less than honest brokers. All three are talented public servants, if a little overexposed by now, but really, aren't there any Catholic, Protestant or simply non-Jewish talents for these sensitive regional assignments? These men are people described by Ambinder as “realists” in foreign policy, so even they should realize they'd be better used in China, South America, or Africa, since Muslim/Arab/Iranian communities view them with distrust despite their shiny diplomatic medals? I thought we were getting new blood with Obama, but this is the same old Council on Foreign Relations crowd lobbying Clinton to get them a place at the Obama table. Samantha Power, please stop this! But then, Holbrooke just came to your wedding, so that's out…

By: Quint

Quint — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 20:22:23 +0000

I agree absolutely. Ross did not accomplish anything in eights years of talking to Israel and the Palestinians. He is extremely biased towards Israel. His only solution to the fictional problems about Iran are more sanctions. Look at what 50 years of sanctions have accomplished in Cuba. It is time to stop pushing other countries around and to begin to treat them as equals. How about Israel disbanding their nuclear weapons?

By: Geographer

Geographer — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 17:39:20 +0000

I object, Palestine, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India are not “hellholes”.

By: Cernig

Cernig — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 17:02:10 +0000

If Ross gets the Iran brief then good-faith negotiations will be a myth.