Valerie Plame: You Know, American Jews Are Responsible For Most of American Wars

You remember Valerie Plame, right? She suggested her husband for the job of debunking Bush's claims about Iraqi weapons research.

The media made her a hero when she was "outed" -- in the context of letting the world know how her husband had gotten this job -- even though she wasn't really "in" in the first place. She worked out of Langley -- actual covert spies avoid Langley, for obvious reasons.

Since then she had a movie made about her, glamorizing her and indeed beatifying her. She's also a big supporter and fundraiser for Hillary Clinton, and is on the board of Ploughsares, a key part of Ben Rhodes'/Obama's "echo chamber" to give Iran the nuclear bomb so that it can wipe Israel off the map:

So, that background established, here's what Valerie Plame decided to retweet today:

Now you might charitably think: "Well, maybe she was just retweeting it to alert people to this writer's anti-semitism."

But your charity would be misspent. Here she doubles down and calls the article "very provocative, but thoughtful." (Emphasis added.)'

And she adds: "Many Neocon hawks ARE Jewish." (Emphasis in original.)

Then she tells people to set aside their preconceptions and just read the article and think about it "clearly:"

More below...

Here's one of the key claims of the article she finds "thoughtful:" that Jewish pundits should be specifically labeled as Jews -- with the equivalent of a yellow star -- to make sure they don't trick gentiles into any more wars:

Warning the public that Jews are in fact (((Jews))), this "thoughtful" article opines, is like labeling rat poison as rat poison.

The article then went on to make the totally-not-antisemitic claim that Jews Control the Media and Politicians. You know -- ZOG. The Zionist Occupied Government.

Now, after having called the article "thoughtful" and imploring people to just read it and think about it "clearly" -- about the ideas that Jews Control the Media and Government and Start All Wars-- she does an about face and claims she didn't even really read it and so she didn't realize the article had "undercurrents" of antisemtism:"

Honeydoll, that wasn't an "undercurrent," that was an overcurrent. It was the main current. It was the only current.

I love how now that she's been caught tweeting antisemitic propaganda, she uses the Social Justice Warrior buzzwod "problematic" (indeed, "problematic AF") as a Get Out of Jail free card, to say "Hey, Progz, I'm still down with the struggle against Nazis."

She then claims she missed the "gross undercurrents" of the piece:

Compare and contrast her first statements -- before the pushback -- to her subsequent claims that she just didn't see this carefully-hidden antisemitic messaging:

So, several problems with this "I just skimmed it and didn't pick up on the carefully-hidden cryptonazi messaging" claim.

First of all, she already told people to just read it carefully and think clearly about it, implying she already has given it such a read herself.

Second of all, the massage here isn't very well hidden. "I just skimmed it" is no defense when the "undercurrents" are right there in the HEADLINE:

American Jews are Driving America's Wars

Oh, and if she missed that "undercurrent," here is the sub-hed:

Shouldn't Jews recuse themselves when dealing with the Middle East?

Subtle, I know. But if you read between the lines a bit, you might be able to detect the faintest ripples of an "undercurrent."

So she's claiming "I didn't read the headline. Jeeze, no one reads the headlines! This is the internet, after all."

Further, the whole article is about this. Which parts of the article did she skim which do not make the claim announced in the headline? It's all about this. There is no part of the article you can read where you don't see the plaintext message that Jews drive America's wars.

Even further, she immediately doubled down and insisted that yes, "Most Neocon hawks ARE Jewish."

She knew exactly what the article was claiming. She emphatically agreed with it.

But now she's seen the pushback -- and probably gotten calls from media buddies and Democrat Operatives telling her to go into damage control mode if she wanted their continuing proection -- and she claims she didn't read what she already declared she did read.

Lastly: She has a history of animosity to Jews, and has made no big secret of it:

So she also retweeted another story by this Philip Geradi -- stating that she, too, "didn't like" Israel.

Got the message yet?

Maybe you don't yet -- so here's Plame retweeting the same author writing an article about the "Dancing Israelis" on 9/11-- suggesting, it seems, that the Jews did 9/11 and then celebrated their Jew Coup.

The headline there?

The Dancing Israelis

Trump was right about 9/11, but they weren't Muslims

That is, it wasn't Muslims celebrating: It was Jews.

The article claims "to be sure" this doesn't prove Jewish complicity in 9/11, but then allows: "There are Israeli fingerprints all over the place."

Very provocative -- but thoughtful, I think you'll agree.

In fact, Jeff B. says she links this same guy a lot, always for the proposition that Jews start American wars:

I'm sure she just "skimmed" all those articles too, and totally missed the "undercurrents" so slyly hidden in the headlines, sub-heds, and first paragraphs.

Prediction: despite the media's go-to Narrative being all about the "mainstreaming" of Naziism and Nazi memes, they will play this story down, and only feature her claiming she didn't mean what she plainly (repeatedly) meant, and will take her apologies as authoritative and the end of the matter.

Bonus: This isn't from the same writer, but it is from the same site that Valerie Plame finds so valuable.

posted by Ace at 01:57 PM

| Access Comments