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.
