Friday, February 04, 2011

Jimmy Carter Sued by Dual Citizens and Jewish Lawyers For His Book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid"

Carter's status just went up several notches. The lawsuit may very well solidify him as the best U.S. president in the post Kennedy era, for what that may be worth.

The $5 million plus lawsuit can be read here. It's a class action for all who bought the book and want to join in. There is the demand for a jury trial.

Yes, 2 of the 5 named plaintiffs are admitted U.S./Israel dual citizens. They don't mind bragging about it.

I can't wait for the lawsuit against Bush and his book. It's filled with lies and a jury trial should be a slam dunk for the plaintiffs. How about suing the government for the inside Job of 9/11 Commission Report? The list of lying books from politicians, think tanks shills and media personalities is so extensive that an army of lawyers could make careers over several lifetimes taking the liars and manipulators to court.

Of course this is all about silencing critics of Israel. Make everyone afraid of putting into writing any condemnation of Israel's criminal endeavors. If dual citizens, AIPAC, ADL and their bought allies can't get the laws against free speech they want passed, then sue anyone who dares to speak up into financial oblivion.

Let's say that Carter did make some honest but very minor mistakes in his book. That's human.

Israel's blatant murderous disregard for international law in Lebanon for Decades, in Palestine, in Gaza and on the Mavi Marmara was no mistake. We call that barbaric by the war criminals of IDf and the Israeli Government, it's utterly inhuman, immoral, disgusting and cruel....

Are they deploying the Klayman pour encourager les autres maneuver...: ruin critics who do not have deep pockets or influential patrons by forcing them to defend against frivolous lawsuits....

One would think the FBI should be on this immediately as a threat and incitement to a former President of the United States....

One would think the IC would examine this case from the point of view of a hostile Israeli operation against the United States....

One would think the American Jewish "community" would be all over this and shut this agent provocateur up.... This operation is obviously intended to generate anti-Semitism in the US and David Duke et/all will have a field day....

Israel --- funny little place where some Jews live. A place with a racist government which thinks its a democracy. A funny little place which calls Cast Lead a war when in truth it was a slaughter by the most cowardly army in the world....and Israel is not the "center" of the World.

Israel is just like every other country on this planet about 5100 kilometers above Earth's inner core. Further, Earth is not the center of our solar system nor is our shared sun the center of the couple hundred billion other stars in our Milky Way Galaxy alone. And nor is our Milky Way remotely close to the center of the Universe. Do yourself a favor; stop reading the bible for a bit, and think things through before again preaching baseless mythological gibberish....

Nothing surprising in what is happening in the Middle East. Narrow interest of US - political, economic and military- has ignored masses and supported few who would take care of what US wants. It seems US and EU should not see Middle East from their interest point of view only. Cause and effect has to be addressed in the middle east which in other words is justice. Friends and not masters should be a guiding principle when you deal with nations....

The political crisis sweeping the Middle East is another part of Ronald Reagan’s dark legacy that is shattering into chaos even as the United States prepares to lavishly celebrate his 100th birthday....

A Different Narrative

Things could have been very different if Reagan had not succeeded in wresting the White House from Jimmy Carter in 1980.

Carter was pushing a starkly different approach to the region, pressuring Israel to surrender Arab lands conquered in 1967 in exchange for peace agreements with its neighbors.

In 1978, Carter secured the first step in this peace process, the Camp David Accords in which Israel’s Likud Prime Minister Menachem Begin agreed to return the Sinai to Egypt in a peace deal.

However, Begin was furious, feeling that Carter had bullied him into accepting the arrangement. Beyond that resentment, Begin feared that Carter would use his second term to push Israel into accepting a Palestinian state on West Bank lands that Likud considered part of Israel’s divinely granted territory.

Former Mossad and Foreign Ministry official David Kimche described Begin’s fury in the 1991 book, The Last Option.

Kimche wrote that Israeli officials had gotten wind of “collusion” between Carter and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat “to force Israel to abandon her refusal to withdraw from territories occupied in 1967, including Jerusalem, and to agree to the establishment of a Palestinian state.”

Kimche continued, “This plan – prepared behind Israel’s back and without her knowledge – must rank as a unique attempt in United States’s diplomatic history of short-changing a friend and ally by deceit and manipulation.”

However, Begin recognized that the scheme required Carter winning a second term in 1980 when, Kimche wrote, “he would be free to compel Israel to accept a settlement of the Palestinian problem on his and Egyptian terms, without having to fear the backlash of the American Jewish lobby.”

In his 1992 memoir, Profits of War, Ari Ben-Menashe, an Israeli military intelligence officer who worked with Likud, agreed that Begin and other Likud leaders held Carter in contempt.

“Begin loathed Carter for the peace agreement forced upon him at Camp David,” Ben-Menashe wrote. “As Begin saw it, the agreement took away Sinai from Israel, did not create a comprehensive peace, and left the Palestinian issue hanging on Israel’s back.”

So, in order to buy time for Israel to move more Jewish settlers into the West Bank, Begin felt Carter’s reelection had to be prevented. A different president also presumably would give Israel a freer hand to deal with problems on its northern border with Lebanon.

The evidence is now clear that Begin found that new partnership with Ronald Reagan and his foreign policy team. Begin would do what he could to help Reagan defeat Carter in 1980, finally sliencing Carter’s incessant nagging.

Though Carter may not have understood his predicament, his position was even more precarious because he had made other powerful enemies, including the CIA’s “Old Boys” network. His CIA director, Stansfield Turner, had reined in their operations and cashiered some of their leaders, the likes of Ted Shackley who left the operations directorate and went to work for the campaign of former CIA Director George H.W. Bush.

In the Republican primaries, Bush competed with Reagan for the nomination but ultimately accepted the second spot on the GOP ticket, bringing along Shackley and a host of other disgruntled CIA veterans who were itching for payback against Jimmy Carter.

Carter’s human rights lectures also had riled America’s right-wing and anti-communist allies, especially after the brutal Shah of Iran was driven from power by a popular uprising in late 1978 only to get replaced by the similarly brutal Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Carter was viewed as a bumbling do-gooder who needed to be shown the door for the good of the Western world. Reagan, a former B-movie actor, may not have been the optimal replacement, but he was surrounded by Republican national security experts, including Bush, who knew their way around the global chessboard.

‘CIA Within the CIA’

In 1990, looking back on those events, legendary CIA officer Miles Copeland told me that “the CIA within the CIA” – the inner-most circle of powerful intelligence figures who felt they understood best the strategic needs of the United States – believed Carter and his naïve faith in American democratic ideals represented a grave threat to the nation.

“Carter really believed in all the principles that we talk about in the West,” Copeland said, shaking his mane of white hair. “As smart as Carter is, he did believe in Mom, apple pie and the corner drug store. And those things that are good in America are good everywhere else. …

“Carter, I say, was not a stupid man,” Copeland said, adding that Carter had an even worse flaw: “He was a principled man.”

The anti-Carter sentiments of “the CIA within the CIA” and Begin’s Likudniks appeared to stem from their genuine beliefs that they needed to protect what they regarded as vital interests of their respective countries. The CIA Old Boys thought they understood the true strategic needs of the United States – and Likud believed fervently in a “Greater Israel.”

Both groups saw Carter as a dangerous threat.

But the lingering mystery of Campaign 1980 is whether these two groups followed their strongly held feelings into a secret operation in league with Republicans to prevent Carter from gaining the release of 52 U.S. hostages then held in Iran and thus torpedoing his reelection hopes.

Carter’s inability to resolve that hostage crisis did set the stage for Reagan’s landslide victory in November 1980 as American voters reacted to the long-running hostage humiliation by turning to a candidate they believed would be a tougher player vis-à-vis America’s enemies.

Reagan’s macho image was reinforced when the Iranians released the hostages immediately after he was inaugurated on Jan. 20, 1981, ending the 444-day standoff.

The coincidence of timing, which Reagan’s supporters cited as proof that foreign enemies feared the new president, gave momentum to Reagan’s larger agenda, including sweeping tax cuts tilted toward the wealthy, reduced government regulation of corporations, and renewed reliance on fossil fuels. (Carter’s solar panels were removed from the White House roof.)

Reagan’s victory also was great news for CIA cold-warriors who were rewarded with the choice of World War II spymaster (and dedicated cold-warrior) William Casey to be CIA director.

Casey then purged CIA analysts who were detecting a declining Soviet Union that desired détente. He replaced them with people like the young and ambitious Robert Gates, who agreed that the Soviets were on the march and that the United States needed a massive military expansion to counter them.

Casey also embraced old-time CIA swashbuckling in Third World countries and took pleasure in misleading or berating members of Congress when they insisted on the CIA oversight that had been forced on President Gerald Ford and had been accepted by President Carter. To Casey, CIA oversight became a game of hide-and-seek.

Time for Expansion

As for Israel, Begin was pleased to find the Reagan administration far less demanding about peace deals with the Arabs, giving Israel time to expand its West Bank settlements.

Reagan and his team also acquiesced to Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982, a drive north that expelled the Palestine Liberation Organization but also led to the slaughters at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Israel’s Lebanon invasion eventually drew U.S. troops into the Lebanese civil war, with 241 getting killed by a suicide bombing Made in Syria...on Oct. 23, 1983.

Behind the scenes, Reagan also gave a green light to Israeli weapons shipments to Iran (which was fighting a war with Israel’s greater enemy, Iraq). The weapons sales helped Israel rebuild its network of contacts inside Iran while creating large profits which helped finance West Bank settlements.

In another significant move, Reagan credentialed a new generation of pro-Israeli American ideologues known as the neocons. That paid big dividends for Israel as these bright operatives fought for Likud’s interests both inside the U.S. government and through their opinion-leading roles in the major American news media.

In other words, if the disgruntled CIA Old Boys and the determined Likudniks did participate in the so-called October Surprise scheme to sabotage Carter’s Iran-hostage negotiations and thus seal his doom, they surely got much of what they wanted.

Yet, while motive is an important element in solving a mystery, it does not constitute proof by itself. What must be examined is whether there is evidence that the motive was acted upon, whether Begin’s government and disaffected CIA officers covertly assisted the Reagan campaign in contacting Iranian officials to thwart Carter’s hostage negotiations.

This evidence is strong though perhaps not ironclad. A well-supported narrative does exist describing how the October Surprise scheme may have occurred with the help of CIA personnel, Begin’s government, some right-wing intelligence figures in Europe, and a handful of other powerbrokers in the United States. [See’s “CIA/Likud Sinking of Jimmy Carter” or Robert Parry’s Secrecy & Privilege.]

It’s also clear that Reagan – after becoming president – did nothing to retaliate against Iran for the hostage-taking and instead rewarded Khomeini’s regime by secretly approving Israeli arms shipments to Iran. That hidden reality became apparent to some U.S. government officials after one of Israel’s supply planes crashed just inside Soviet territory on July 18, 1981.

In a PBS interview nearly a decade later, Nicholas Veliotes, Reagan’s assistant secretary of state for the Middle East, said he looked into the incident by talking to top administration officials who insisted that the State Department issue misleading guidance to the press.

“It was clear to me after my conversations with people on high that indeed we had agreed that the Israelis could transship to Iran some American-origin military equipment,” Veliotes said.

In checking out the Israeli flight, Veliotes came to believe that the Reagan camp’s dealings with Iran dated back to before the 1980 election.

“It seems to have started in earnest in the period probably prior to the election of 1980, as the Israelis had identified who would become the new players in the national security area in the Reagan administration,” Veliotes said. “And I understand some contacts were made at that time.”

If the October Surprise narrative is true, then Reagan’s Iran-Contra arms deals in 1984-86 would have been essentially a sequel, not a stand-alone story, with Iran getting more weapons in exchange for its help in freeing other American hostages then held in Lebanon.

Yet, whatever one thinks of the October Surprise story – whether you believe that the Republicans sabotaged President Carter or not – there can be little doubt that the shattering events of that period propelled the Middle East down a course that changed the region’s history – and has today left the world at another dangerous crossroads.

A three-decade epoch was begun with the neocons and the Reaganites emerging as the dominant forces in Washington; with stepped-up security protecting autocratic Arab leaders from the angry “street”; with Shiite-ruled Iran supplying militant Muslim organizations to undercut the mostly Sunni autocrats and to pressure Israel; and with Likud and its vision of a Greater Israel guaranteeing little sustainable progress toward a Palestinian state.

It was an epoch that Ronald Reagan and his foreign policy team helped launched in 1980-81; it was an epoch that Jimmy Carter’s second term might have prevented; and it is an epoch that may be collapsing into violence and disorder now....

Link...The Ziocons will try to pull a Carter on Obumbler....Circa 1979/80....Will Obama pull a new False Flag attack, a la 9/11 ????

BEHIND THE CURTAIN -- CONSERVATIVES PLAN TO USE EGYPT TO ATTACK OBAMA NEXT WEEK – E-mail with subject line “Developing story idea for you,” from Joe Brettell of CRC Public Relations, which represents many conservative policy groups: “Dear Mr. Allen, Given the confluence of stories in the last couple weeks regarding Egypt and the Middle East, rising oil prices and challenging economic numbers, I wanted to suggest a story that looks at the parallels between the challenges faced by President’s Carter and Obama. Obviously, there have been whispers about the similarities, but not a lot of actual stories that have taken it on objectively; it’s a brewing angle and I think you should be the one to write it…. You can expect a big push on this from conservatives in the next week or so.”

The focus on Carter's "Evangelical" support was something of a buzz. Close observers, though, noted the presence of the pro-Israel Jerry Falwell Fundi/CZ types etal in the mix.

Some today assess about 30% of "Evangelicals" are moderate-liberal while about 70% fall into the Fundamentalist category.

Fundamentalists began to use the term "Evangelical" as something of a cover to mainstream themselves. The older term of art "Fundamentalist" is specific to particular theopolitical doctrine.

A Fundamentalist subset, the followers of John Nelson Darby's "Dispensationalist" cult, form the core of the hard-line pro-Israel Armageddonist phalanx.

President Carter's books present good detail on the takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention by the hard-line pro-Israel Darbyite Dispensationalists.

All this is important context for understanding the rise of the "Christian Right" and its penetration of the Republican Party.

Professor Clifford Kiracofe explains some of this in his book "Dark Crusade: Christian Zionism and United States Foreign Policy" (London: IB Tauris, 2009).

Rev. Stephen Sizer and Rev. Don Wagner have gone into the theological aspects of this subject in detail in their books on same.....

The whole gambit is about OIL & Israel since IKE...

Jinsa, AIPAC, WINEP, NED, ADL, JDL, BB, and the low-lifes who tag along with them, will bring a calamity upon USA, if it doesn't change course soonest....

AIPAC is a convenient Cover for CIA to hide behind...Hence no need to do any significant disclosures to Congress or its Intelligence Committees about any significant covert activities or extra-judicial operations spanning decades. The only exceptions, which won't be repeated anytime soon, were BCCI or Iran-Contra, to name a few ...

AIPAC is a perfect "cover", it gives overwhelming control of Congress to CIA without having to move a finger...and to Hell with the Foreign Policies of Foggy Bottom or any Justice for Palestinians, Lebanese, or Freedom, the rule of law, good governance and Democracy in faraway places...
AIPAC & Co. are priceless to CIA, and the Middle East can go to Hell as far as they are concerned, and that has been proven to be the case since the 1960s!

AIPAC, JStreet, Jinsa, WINEP, their coteries etc. and all the NGOs, NED, Freedom House, USAID or the likes, work hand in hand with CIA and their Israeli counterparts everywhere... The world is changing fast. Will that change the equation described here above???

Israel signed the 4th Geneva Convention, yet they continue to colonize occupied territories in Lebanon, Syria and Palestine, and commit other daily aggressive acts made illegal by the Convention. Israel signed the UN Charter, committing themselves to honor all USNC Resolutions, yet there are dozens that they are currently ignoring/disobeying.... Israel signed the Camp David Accords, committing them to withdraw from W. Bank, Gaza within 5 years of signing, yet they continue to occupy both.... (Israel would argue they no longer occupy Gaza, but they occupy their territorial waters, their airspace, make frequent incursions, and shoot anyone within a hundred meters of the border....) Yet, the USA keeps vetoing all UNSC resolutions which attempt to condemn Israhell....

Israel is in danger of being surrounded by countries that are against the very existence of Israel, or governed by nationalist radical organizations..."

Wednesday, February 02, 2011

Recognition of a Palestinian state...

Recognition of a Palestinian state....

I originally felt intuitively that the existence of the State of Israel makes sense within the world, if only as an attempt to rectify the failures of the West in WWII... Unfortunately, this seems more and more a mirage... The ugliness, hatred, wholesale assassinations, wars of aggression, injustice, disregard for international law, land theft on a grand scale and racism that I more and more associate with the Israeli state and populace is an embarrassment to human feeling... I am a student of history and religion, and I am keenly appreciative of the mystical experiences found within and outside of religious traditions. It is always so sad to see the belief in an us-them reality internalized so deeply as to excuse the absolute dehumanization of another group of people.... Human history teaches us that when this projection is intertwined with religious sanction, tragedy and wholesale killing are all too often the result...

Never forget that Zionist leaders had contacts with the Nazi movement. Read Lenni Brenner's "51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with Nazis". These contacts are more significant than any alleged ties between Palestinians and Nazis the Zionists can conjure up. The fact is there was no alliance between the Nazis and the Palestinian national movement, there was one shameful meeting by Hajj Amine....which is constantly regurgitated by the Zionists, One contact does not make an alliance. This is all desperate propaganda by supporters of Israel. When the lies get this big, you know they're struggling to defend the actions of the state of Israel....

In my view, if there were any real chance of a Palestinian "state" emerging out of the "peace" talks sham, these timid symbolic gestures would be seen, even by the PA negotiators, as intrusive distractions. Anyone who has studied the "Palestine Papers" in context can see the PA's position is entirely hopeless, and the peace talks, except as salve for dashed Palestinian hopes, are all but dead. They were DOA, matter of fact... The Palestinians had but a single chip it could bring to the negotiating table - the terror menace.... Once that was renounced (at the insistence of the western world) the Palestinians have been playing with empty pockets.... Their only hope, their only strategy has been to appeal to the conscience and mercy of their Israeli counterparts (and Israel's legion of goyim puppets in the western world) - which, if the documents are legitimate and reliable, is why they've seemed ready and willing to sell out on the hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people for any little leftover crumb they can call "bringing home the bacon" (though maybe not the most appropriate metaphor to use where non-pork eaters are involved). After the release of the Palestine Papers, how could Abu Mazen and his team approach the negotiating tables with any dignity... Hell, given recent events - from Tunisia to Sudan - it's dubious if the Arab world itself, as a "world", will survive - much less a dignified Palestinian state emerge...unless, of course, the whole world is turned on its head, and that would require the energies of oppressed western populations as well (and yes, we ARE oppressed). But the sheeple of the west can barely get their fat asses away from the HDTV, much less muster the energy to break their mental chains and overturn the "new world order." Besides, our own nation/society is so fractured and splintered and flummoxed and directionless that it's extremely dubious we can even help ourselves....

All this "symbolic" gesturing of acknowledgment of something that does not even exist, and may never exist in a dignified way, is mere theater - and, really, don't see enough theatrics on the world scene everyday. If it were something other than that, it is doubtful it would be tolerated by the new world order Zionists . If it were other than "armchair" statesmanship, these countries will be working with the likes of Kenneth O'Keefe to send wave after wave of humanitarian flotillas to Gaza so as to spite the Israeli/Egyptian blockade...But buying this "recognition" business as if it's manna from heaven is a bit peter-panish....

Mahmoud Abbas is mostly just a puppet like all other ME puppets in Egypt, Jordan, KSA, GCC, Syria.... And Hamas itself was able to get a footing originally because it was financed by Israel as a counter to the strengthening PLO at the time.... One American intelligence official commented that Israel is like a man who sets his head on fire and then puts it out with a hammer... Israel has been ‘meddling’ in US domestic politics for decades, and both sides regularly crush, topple, and dictate to the Palestinian side... We definitely should put our foot down with the Israelis, but it won’t happen.... The “Peace Process” and it’s clockwork failure are the main cover for Israeli land theft, and USA is utterly complicit with that despicable enterprise for decades....

Peace is but a pipe dream in the ME...

"....... Netanyahu, who has previously voiced concern that the uprising would take on the characteristics of the Islamic revolution in Iran, spoke in a more positive tone on Wednesday. ‘Democracy is dear to us, it is real, and it is obvious that a democratic Egypt will not endanger peace, just the opposite. If modern history teaches us anything it is that the stronger the democratic foundations, the stronger the foundations for peace’.”
Netanyahu did not omit an assurance — that sounded more like a heavy hint — that Israeli had put unspecified “security arrangements” in place: “A peace agreement does not guarantee the existence of peace, so in order to protect it and ourselves, in cases in which the agreement disappears or is violated due to a regime change on the other side, we protect it with security arrangements on the ground,” he said. He gave no further details about these “security assurances” – and was apparently not even asked..."


Poor old Palestinians. I should have guessed something was up in Jerusalem last year when an Israeli journalist asked me about the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the agency that has been caring for Palestinian refugees for 60 years. "I'm sure," he announced to me, "that they have some connection with terrorism, that they play a role in keeping terrorism going. What are they really doing in Lebanon?" At the time, I thought this all a bit odd. If any UN institution does its job well, it is UNRWA, arranging for the food, education, health-care and other needs of millions of Palestinians who lost – or whose parents or grandparents lost – their homes in 1948 and 1949 in what is now Israel.

A visit to the filth of the camps in Beirut, or to Ein el-Helweh in Sidon, is enough to teach anyone that amid this swamp of misery and hopelessness, UNRWA represents the world's only collective sympathy, underfunded, short-staffed, poor though it is. Yet now, the whole organization is being singled out by a right-wing Israel and its so-called (and self-proclaiming) supporters as purveyors of darkness, "de-legitimisers", a network of support for Palestinians which must be destroyed lest the poorest of the poor – including those in the misery of Gaza – become addicted to their social services. UNRWA – I find it hard to believe this is a real quotation from a research fellow at a major US university, but it is – has "created a breeding ground for international terrorism".

I suppose we might as well laugh as cry, but this comes from a cruel – indeed vicious – article that appeared in the American Commentary magazine a few weeks ago, written by one Michael Bernstam, a fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford. I single it out not because it is atypical, but because it represents a growing and quite ruthless trend in right-wing Israeli thinking, the kind of self-delusional brutality that is supposed to persuade us that the destiny of the poorest of the Palestinian poor is the destruction of their camps. In his article, Bernstam actually claims that "for 60 years, UNRWA has been paying four generations of Palestinians to remain refugees, reproduce refugees and live in refugee camps", where it is, "in effect, underwriting a self-destructive Palestinian cycle of violence, internecine bloodshed and a perpetual war against Israel". Get the point? The UN is now the fount of all terror.

There was a time when this kind of drivel would be ignored but it is now part of an increasingly dangerous narrative in which charity is turned into evil, in which the one institution supplying help to perhaps 95 per cent of almost five million Palestinian refugees is to become a target. And since UNRWA in Gaza did appear to become a target in the 2008-9 bloodbath, this is pretty frightening stuff.

But hold on. It goes further. "UNRWA's mandate created ... a permanent supranational welfare state in which simply placing most Palestinians on the international dole has extinguished incentives for work and investment ... and created a breeding ground for international terrorism. It is this open-ended refugee status that puts bread on the table in the rent-free house, together with an array of rent-free services." This allows the Palestinians – mark these words – a "permanent refugee ... war as it is fueled by a particular 'right of return' claim – the argument that the Palestinians should be given title to the land they occupied before Israel's independence".

Note that word "occupied". Far from owning the land, they "occupied" it! They had a "particular" "right of return" claim. And – wait for the next bit: "The claim of the Palestinian right of return is intended for one historical ethnic diaspora of the descendants of perennial refugees to repopulate another people's nation-state, Israel. This is not the right of return to a country; this is the right of return of a country, a reconquest after a lost war, a claim of the right of retake."

And so it goes on and on and on ... UNRWA should be abolished, which "would signal the end of the world body's support for the continuance of the Palestinian's agony ... Israel is obviously unsuitable as a country of resettlement because integration there is not feasible ... Instead of perpetuating the dead end that the international welfare state for the Palestinians represents, ending UNRWA's horrific six-decade reign would instantly create the conditions for an honest, meaningful and viable peace process to begin in the Middle East".

There you have it. Mr Bernstam should meet Mr Qaddafi. They have a lot in common.... Total contempt for the Palestinians. Total abuse for a people who have lost their future and their lives. Total abuse for anyone but their own tribe.....

It doesn't take a Genius....and yet Israel has been ignoring the potential for a long time, and especially since the Arab Peace Initiative has been in the offing! This potential for peace, security, economic and cultural cooperation, AND a unified front against any Iranian threat in the region, which has been at its fingertips, has been persistently ignored and disdained by the Israeli government! And now, its closest 'friend' and 'ally' is essentially telling it - from an objective and pragmatic viewpoint - that the path to its future peace and security lies with accepting that initiative, and it's STILL refuses to consider it! I think that the day is rapidly approaching when perhaps even congress itself will realize that it's become little more than an 'enabler' to Israel's obsessive and self-destructive policies, and will begin thinking twice about helping a so-called friend who refuses to help himself! The consensus of American policy has consistently been there among US military, the State Dept, and successive administrations for at least two decades or longer. But Israel's steadfast refusal to pragmatically address it's own security, even in the face of growing international ostracism in a rapidly changing world may be what it'll take to seal its fate with congress...which is the absolute LAST bastion of closed-eyed support that it has...because of AIPAC's shenanigans and the outright gullibility of the utterly corrupt congressmen and women...! Will the American sheeple ever wake up from their slumber...???

"Zionism Has Nothing to do With Judaism" - An Interview With Dr. Hajo Meyer, By DAVID ZLUTNICK, Counter Punch .com, March 11 - 13, 2011

Q.: Could you summarize this idea that you've often spoken and written about, the "ethical tradition of Judaism?"

A.: So now we come to a very important point. In my view—I was educated in the tradition of enlightened Reform Judaism, without any relation to the prescripts of Halacha [Jewish religious law] but just to the socio-cultural heritage and the enlightened parts of Judaism…

This ethical tradition is absolutely contrary to everything which is at the basis of Zionism. Because Zionism was created by Mr. [Theodor] Herzel and others at the end of the 19th Century, and in that era it was commonplace to be colonialist, to be racist, to be super-nationalist, to adore the nation-state--so the idea of France for the French, Germany for the Germanics, and then some state for the Jews. This all formed the basis for Zionism.

Zionism and Judaism are contrary to each other. ...

All these “Niceties” about an Israeli/Palestinian peace "Process" are completely moot…because real Israeli policy is NO Peace at all, but more and more Land Grabs…

When Israel really wanted Peace with Jordan…it was signed, sealed and delivered in 9 Months….OSLO was a Shame and a Charade, a cruel Diversion….

What seems likely is that the stranglehold which the Israeli lobby has secured on the political process in the United States, together with its alliance with neoconservatives in that country and elsewhere, has blinded Netanyahu – and indeed many other Israeli leaders and supporters – to the suicidal nature of recent Israeli policy, and indeed of the whole attempt to colonize the West Bank. The extent to which Netanyahu simply has not grasped the implications of his actions was made amply evident in the extraordinary phone call he made to the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, to express his disappointment after Germany supported last month’s UN resolution declaring Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories to be illegal and a ‘major obstacle to the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace’. The resolution, which was sponsored by at least 130 countries, this was supported by all members of the Security Council, apart from the United States, which vetoed it. His complaint provoked a furious response from Merkel, according to Haaretz, who complained that Netanyahu had not ‘made a single step to advance peace.’

Even with Germans, the assumption that one can rely on Gentile guilt over the Holocaust to inhibit criticism of Israel cuts less and less ice. One comes back again to the automatic assumption that opposition to what Israel does reflects hatred of Jews – related to which is the assumption that accusations or imputations of anti-Semitism are both an appropriate and effective means of stifling such opposition. In fact, as the balance of opinion about Israel shifts, such accusations not only progressively lose traction, but become counter-productive. The use of the post-war taboo on anti-Semitism, which arises out of the Holocaust, to stifle criticism of Israeli policy tends to create a particularly toxic form of resentment, which comes when people are prevented from expressing thoughts and feelings they regard as perfectly legitimate – while enabling those creating resentment to blind themselves to the fact they are creating it. It also is visibly tending to weaken the taboo, which is much to be regretted.

That there are sinister undertones to some of the opposition to Israeli policy – and certainly among some pro-Palestinian activists – is clear. A revival of anti-Semitism, as also the current upsurge in Islamophobia, is something to which men and women of goodwill should be implacably opposed. But anti-Semitism is certainly not the prime driver of the ongoing shift of opinion in Britain, EU or USA as elsewhere against Israel, and until Israelis and their supporters abroad grasp that fact, they will continue to act in ways which are leading inexorably to the end of the Zionist experiment, and indeed may already have put paid to hopes for its survival….

"The whole Zionist enterprise was hopeless from the start." The growth and development since 1948 and the present strength of Israel, even with its internal and external problems and its oppressive policies and actions, make some statements wishful thinking rather than proven fact....

I am personally inclined to think (or perhaps guess) that the Zionist state will ultimately fail. As an historian , not a prophet,however,I neither believe failure is imminent nor absolutely certain to occur in the foreseeable future. I realize that United States backing and support has been essential for Israel's survival to date and will almost certainly be necessary for continued survival of that state. Although changes have occurred and are continuing to occur in United States public opinion concerning Israel, the United States government remains overwhelmingly supportive and protective of the Zionist state.

(As a person who has for half a century opposed Zionism and the almost blind support by the United States government for oppressive policies of the state of Israel, I continually remind myself that I need to be as realistic as possible as I continue to be cause committed and to work for positive change.) I contend, as do some other commentators, that Zionism is the fundamental cause of this conflict. Habakkuk seems to suggest this, but I want to attempt to be a bit more specific and precise.

I need not and cannot in this one comment review the entire historical development of Zionism. It is enough to state that the essence of political Zionism rests upon the following absolute theory of anti-Semitism: Jews have been in the past and/or are being in the present and/or will be in the future persecuted by non-Jews in all nation-states in which they are a minority. In Zionist logic it follows that Jews will only be safe in a nation-state in which they begin as the majority of the residents of the state (or at least of the citizens who control the state) and thereafter remain the majority.

The state of Israel was created in the Zionist image and has since its creation maintained its Zionist foundation. Thus it is that the state of Israel denies by law to non-Jews,even to non-Jewish citizens of the state, certain rights and privileges, given to Jewish citizens. Thus it is that the indigenous population of about four million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have been occupied and oppressed since 1967 but not been given the opportunity to become citizens of the state. All of this (and more) is Zionism in action.

The primary cause of conflict is obvious. The Zionist state has existed for nearly sixty-three years. Only a small percentage of Jews from the United States, Britain and France have emigrated to Israel. These Jews, most of whom support Zionism, have opted to remain in the diaspora. They do not believe wholeheartedly in the absolute theory of anti-Semitism; they obviously do not think they would be safe only in the Zionist, Jewish state. They attempt to garner financial and other support for Israel by emphasizing the Holocaust and then maintaining that the Jews in Israel are living in the most unsafe place for Jews in the world. Zionists appear to pay no heed to their convoluted logic.

Zionists are not a monolithic group. The left-wing Zionists, who in varied ways oppose Jewish settlements in the West Bank and advocate a Palestinian state, still favor a Zionist state behind or slightly beyond the green line. They, therefore, with but few exceptions want a Jewish exclusive state that would continue to grant certain rights and privileges to Jews not granted to non-Jews. Such a position maintains the basis, even if lessened, of conflict.

A Jewish, exclusive state, consisting to a great extent of land taken from the non-Jewish indigenous population, will probably have steadily increasing difficulty remaining viable in the Arab Middle East.

Jewish religious Zionism adds another problematic dimension to the conflict. The great majority of Orthodox rabbis and groups opposed Zionism before the Holocaust. They adhered to Talmudic dictates that the Jewish state would not be restored until the Messiah came and that it would be a sin for Jews to attempt to have a state before then. These Orthodox Jews also opposed the secularism of most early Zionist leaders. A minority of Orthodox rabbis and their followers in the early twentieth century, however, became religious Zionists. and followed the leadership of Rabbi Kook, the elder. Rabbi Kook maintained that the Messianic age had arrived, and, therefore, Jews could and should work for the creation of a Jewish state. The Jewish state, envisioned by Rabbi Kook and his followers, was different in many ways from the kind of state sought by secular, Zionist leaders. During the time of the Holocaust and clearly by 1948, when the state of Israel came into existence, the overwhelming majority of Orthodox Jews, including rabbis, who had been anti-Zionist, became ardent supporters of the Zionist state in many ways, even though they continued to oppose certain specific policies and practices of the state's largely secular leadership. Orthodox religious parties took their place in the political system of the state and became for the most part fiercely anti-Palestinian. A small minority of Orthodox Jews and rabbis, the most notable being the Chassidic group called Naturei Karta, remained anti-Zionist and have continued to oppose the state and its oppressive policies. Some of the Orthodox groups, most noteworthy being the Lubavitch Chabad Chassidic group, refused to be identified as Zionist but still supported some of the most extreme Zionist policies and practices.

In our book, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, Israel Shahak and I discuss this Jewish religious Zionist dimension in some depth. We pinpoint in our book reasons why these religious Jews have exerted influence far beyond their numbers. In my work since the publication of the book I have supplied more explanation. These religious Jews, including those who do not call themselves Zionists but who support the state of Israel and many of its extreme Zionist policies, believe and maintain that God gave Jews an eternal deed to the Holy Land. They specify those passages of the Bible that clearly express this promise of land. The Holy Land includes at least the Israel of pre-June, 1967 borders and the West Bank. According to these Jews giving any of this land to Palestinians or to other non-Jews would be committing a sin.

Perhaps, the best advocacy of this position is the Lubavitch Chassidic tract, Eyes Upon the Land, put on the website in 1997. Eyes Upon the Land is taken from the teachings of the late, revered (by his followers) Lubavitch "Rebbe," Menahem Mendel Schneerson, who stated that the giving back to Egypt of the Sinai in 1979 was a major sin, committed by then Prime Minister Begin and the Israeli government. (Schneerson died in 1994, although some of his followers who to this day consider him to be the Messiah believe he will soon be resurrected.) It is a mistake to discount, as some commentators have, the importance of Jewish religious Zionism. It is an influential factor in the conflict. It has influenced and is continuing to influence not only Jews and the state of Israel but also many non-Jews, most especially the Christian Zionists.

I emphasize in conclusion that a sophisticated understanding of Zionism and its complexities is necessary if we wish to deal adequately with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Norton Mezvinsky

I originally felt intuitively that the existence of the State of Israel makes sense within the world, if only as an attempt to rectify the failures of the West in WWII… Unfortunately, this seems more and more a mirage… The ugliness, hatred, wholesale assassinations via the machinations of the infamous White House Murder INC. in the Levant, wars of aggression, injustice, disregard for international law, corruption and mafiosi tactics on a global scale, land theft on a grand scale and racism that I more and more associate with the Israeli state and populace is an embarrassment to human feeling… I am a student of history and religion, and I am keenly appreciative of the mystical experiences found within and outside of religious traditions. It is always so sad to see the belief in an us-them reality internalized so deeply as to excuse the absolute dehumanization of another group of people…. Human history teaches us that when this projection is intertwined with religious sanction, tragedy and wholesale killing are all too often the result…