1. The United States Government led by George Bush Jnr. wants to have Israel encircled and placed in continual risk of serious attack.
2. The United States Government acts in this way regardless of whether it is Democrat or Republican in power. This means that we are talking about a secret agenda which has got bipartisan support. It also involves the main organizations of the State Bureaucracy in America, the equivalent of the British Civil Service. The bureaucracy of the State will hold this policy no matter who wins the election.
3. The United States Government does not wish to see Israel destroyed
4. The United States Government uses Israel for its own purposes. It is a life and death matter that the Jewish people are able to identify those purposes in each historical period. If these purposes place Israel in great danger the consequences may be a new Holocaust of the Jews in Israel even though it may take a different form to that of the Nazi Holocaust.
For a certain historical period the United States was prepared to see Israel as a useful ally. To some extent that is still the case. Hence the US Government does not seek to destroy Israel. But at the same time this “usefulness” of Israel has been by-passed by other more pressing matters. I will look at those issues later but first of all what is the evidence for the above.
The United States and its ally Britain held Israel back from a frontal attack on Hezbullah. What was in the mind of the US Government when it was doing this?
It now appears more and more possible that the weak leadership at the top of the Israeli State and Government which caused hesitation in Lebanon War 2 may have actually saved Israel much damage. The preparations of Hezbullah, Iran and Syria in laying a very dangerous trap for Israel was going on for a full 6 years. These are fascist and dictatorial states and secrecy of this kind is highly possible. The hesitation of the Israeli tops, due not to foresight but to incompetence, has meant two things.
First of all Israel has come out of the war relatively unscathed despite the very regrettable loss of Jewish life. But that could have been much worse. Secondly, and this is of very great importance, the epoch of Sharon and Olmert is over. What will replace them we are not sure of yet. There may be more than one permutation over the next 2 years.
But in this situation the most important factor and consideration is that the Israeli people have woken up and significant sections have moved into political life in a new and qualitative manner.
Sharon was a great Israeli soldier yes. But the way he moved in political life, a reflection of his military life, was to keep the cards close to his chest. The Israeli masses now need the opposite. They need a situation where everything can be discussed and where they can be involved directly in politics.
Time is always finite but here we do have a certain period, and this time must be used in the building of a new and a revolutionary type leadership inside Israel and in the Diaspora. On this I personally reject an idea aired recently that the Diaspora should shut up in periods of crisis. The Jewish struggle for Israel is international or it is nothing. The enemies of Israel know this very well.
In fact it is now sections of the Jewish Diaspora that are now making the greatest leaps in understanding. They show, incidentally, that the split and the depiction by anti-Semites of the Jewish Movement as “right” or “left” is artificial and erroneous. It is not without some historical foundation but it has long been surpassed by another reality. There are those who will not sell out Israel and there are those who will. There are traitors and there are patriots.
That incidentally has always been the basis of the split in Israeli society. The “Revisionists” (a very inaccurate name in any case) were not left or right but were those who were opposed to the wholesale sell-off of the Jewish Mandated Homeland by Winston Churchill in 1921, 80 per cent of the allotted Homeland, which was to later become Jordan.
It had nothing at all to do with left and right. Those who went along with Churchill, those who adapted to the sell-out of Israel were Stalinists and Social Democrats who placed the label of right and even Fascist onto their enemies. We should consciously end this false description without any delay. It has done much damage.
This analysis is given weight by the latest development in Jewish politics which I consider of great importance. It heralds the movement of the Jewish movement into a new and more truthful relationship with the great bourgeois powers of this world. And in doing so I feel they are growing ever closer to Zeev Jabotinski and to Begin in his prime.
Scott Fitzgerald of Conservative Voice gives this good description of what the United States Government is actually doing. It has proven very difficult to dent this assessment by Fitzgerald. It may be just a matter of facts speaking and I think this marks a new way of approaching issues in the Jewish novement:
“Bush’s record of appeasement on Iran is clear. In the Palestinian authority, he pressured Israel’s government to permit Hamas to run, for the first time, in the PA national elections. Hamas won a sweeping victory, and the secular, anti-Iran parties were crushed.
In Lebanon, the US did not protest when Hezbollah joined the cabinet while refusing to disarm earlier this year. The US ignored Hezbollah’s massive arms buildup. When the inevitable crisis erupted, the US took a pro-Lebanon stance and warned Israel against moving deep into the Bekaa valley or provoking Syria and Iran. Finally, the US exerted strong pressure to impose a UN-brokered settlement that is unfavorable to Israel. While it is true the US assisted Israel in some ways, the overall US policy was favorable to Lebanon and its allies.
In Iraq, the US has clearly favored Iran over the Sunni states. The US encouraged Iraq to develop a “special relationship” with Iran while ignoring its Sunni neighbors. The US has also taken Iran’s side in Iraq’s intra-Shia conflicts. To this end, US forces have declared war on Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi army while collaborating with the Iran-affiliated Badr Brigades. The US has permitted the Badr Brigades to be integrated into the higher echelons of the new Iraqi military and police forces. In contrast, the US and Iraqi forces are attacking the Mahdi army in Shia neighborhoods around the country.
Moreover, in collaboration with Iran in drafting Iraq’s new constitution, the US has set the stage for partition between the Kurds and the Badr Brigades (Muqtada al-Sadr opposes Iraq’s partition, which is why Iran is determined to isolate him). Once Iraq is partitioned, Iran will be in a strong position to dominate the three new states, Shiastan, Sunnistan, and Kurdistan. Iran could even annex Shiastan and its vast oil wealth outright, after which Iran would be positioned to annex the Saudi oil resources on Shia territory in Saudi Arabia. The US would not protest.
President Bush has never been serious about curbing Iran’s nuclear program. He made it clear by choosing German Chancellor Angela Merkel as his primary partner on this issue that endless and unproductive negotiations, leading to an Iranian victory, would be the outcome. Bush’s decision to grant a US visa to former Iranian president Khatami shortly after Iran rejected UN terms on nuclear issues signals that Bush does not take these negotiations seriously.
Finally, when Russia and China have taken steps against Iran, such as denying Iran full membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, President Bush has ignored these good deeds and never attempted to capitalize on them in order to make the anti-Iran United Front stronger. Instead, he accuses them, aong with the Democrats, as being appeasers, while ignoring the far greater US contribution to Iran’s expansion (again, look up the RIIA report). ”
The question then was posed by the Editor of Israpundit, Ted Belman, and I paraphrase Ted “Why should an American Government be strengthening a force which increases terrorism (Iran) at a time when Bush makes the fight against terrorism the centre of his political practice.”
This is of course a contradiction and in such a contradiction something must give.
Since the facts produced by Scott Fitzgerald are just that – facts. Since nobody can challenge them. Since these facts can easily be supplemented by many more facts, one of which is that in supporting Fouad Siniora the Bush Government knew that Siniora supports Hezbullah. And many more! Then the other half of the contradiction is the one that must give. This concerns the war on terror, conducted by Bush, which from now on we should refer to as the “so-called” or the “questionable” war on terrorism.
This can take us in more than one direction. It does not mean that Bush is not fighting against terrorism at one certain level.
But it could mean that in this complicated and real political world situation there may be other factors which count and which should not be dismissed.
It is in reckoning what these factors may be that are difficult to fathom. Jared Israel and Francisco Gil White have done sterling work on this, but somehow they also have been unable to answer Ted’s central question. The question of why! But there is a different way to look at these issues.
The centre of the problem for Israpundit, and for Israel, is the way that Israeli politicians look towards the United States. Israelis look to the United States as its salvation, but not as a real entity which exists in real political time, but as an abstraction.
This is shown in that Israelis do not ever make a distinction between the American Government and the American people. If you see America as an abstraction then you will not be able to see this distinction.
They are actually as different as chalk and cheese.
The American Revolution and struggle for independence was one of the most glorious events in human history. It was based on the concept of individual freedom which had its roots in the Puritan and Cromwellian Revolution in Britain in 1642 to 1649. This was a Revolution which was led by men who did not hesitate to chop off the head of Charles 1 and this resolve in the struggle for liberty was carried through into America. There is no question about this and there is doubt about this. It did happen.
These ideas of liberty were kept alive in America, more even than in France, because America was a young pioneering country. Moreover it kept this youthfulness by the continual absorption of new people, a new social mix which needed to absorb this new revolutionary ideology in order to survive. All that is embodied in the American working class and American people.
The American ruling class or Government is much more confined in its approach to Liberty. To that class liberty is the liberty to make vast profits, whether it is in the stock exchange or in oil interests. As we reach the very top levels of the American elite and bureaucracy this will become more pronounced. Further down the ideas of Liberty will still have some influence.
Of course interests may coincide but there is a fundamental difference between these two great classes in America. There is a tension there and one of the main points of tension, which potentially can be explosive, is the tension between the American rulers and its own people over support for Israel. The American rulers are anything but stupid and they must be keenly aware of this. They are keenly aware of it.
But America is nothing if not a global power. This, by the way, was one of the developments made by Karl Marx in his Communist Manifesto, written along with Friedrich Engels when they were both young men, studying nascent capitalist industrial production in Manchester, England. Marx was able to show that the method of capitalist production of a single commodity had to end in a global production of commodities and in a never-ending drive for concentration in a world market. And moreover Marx and Engels looked on this as a truly revolutionary and progressive development. Marx has been much distorted by his weak-kneed followers.
What this means for our present argument is that the United States has many problems. When the United States looks out from its citadel in America it sees more than the potential antagonism with its own people. It sees a whole lot of potential problems on the world scene.
Ted Belmam asked why should America side with Iran? Notice that Ted makes the mistake I referred to. He sees the US as an abstraction and does not say why does the US Government side with Iran? So he cannot answer his own question.
To me the reason why the United States sides with Iran is quite simple. But there is a contradiction involved again and this contradiction must be kept in mind.
Iran certainly can cause the US ruling class definite problems. Iran is guided by Islamofascism and it indeed has the Islamization of America in its sights.
I believe that the US Governing class sees that, understands that, but also understands very well that Iran and Islamofascism can bring something else to the table which is very valuable to the American rulers.
The great thing that Iran can bring to the table, the great service that Islamofascism can perform for the American Government, which is the leader of world capitalism, is the disciplining of the 1.4 billion of the poorest of the poor who live under the yoke of Islam.
If looked at in this way things begin to make sense. Israel, and the Jewish people, actually become very, very useful to the US Governmental strategists. No I do not think that the US Government is seeking to destroy Israel. But I do think that the US Government is using Israel and the Jewish people, and is consciously (or semi-consciously) stirring up Israel hatred, a hatred which is perfect for enslaving those 1.4 billion, millions of human bodies and souls, under the slavery of Islamofascism. We know that! And we know that that slavery is both physical and mental!
There is one very big bonus for the US ruling class, and also for the ruling classes in all the Governments in the world, but especially in Europe. By skilful use of the “Palestinian” phenomenon, by the continual diet of lies and distortions, the whole of the Western Left have been won over to the side of the Palestinian and Arab fascists. The modern day Left could not lead the way through a paper bag. This is actually a big bonus for the US Government, for Eurabia and for all Fascist forces everywhere.
So yes Iran may pose a threat all right to the US and to Eurabia. But perhaps, just perhaps, what Iran brings with it as the upcoming leader of Islamofascist anti-Semitism is of greater value, and eclipses the former.
Just so long as the pipeline of profit (no oil pun meant because it is much wider than oil) continues, these ruling governments will take a lot of risks and quite ruthlessly will see Israel reduced to a helpless dependency on the US Government, via Kofi Annan. This was the line which was carried by BobW on Israpundit over a year ago. He was very prescient. Alarmingly that is already underway as the notorious anti-Semite well known to us all was sought out by Olmert for the release of the Israeli Hezbullah and Hamas prisoners.
We are in a new period post Lebanon War 2. To me there is no progress possible without building a new type of leadership. _________________ He who is merciful with the cruel, will end-up being cruel to the merciful
- Kohelet Rabba 7:16
2. Israel is the one who stopped the conflict with Hizballah and requested international forces to serve as a buffer zone in Lebanon.
3. As far as I know, Israel is still a sovereign nation and the ceasefire is still but that - not a peace accord - so why not trash that thing and fight Hizballah till the bitter end?
Israel is now taking it's orders from America... _________________ He who is merciful with the cruel, will end-up being cruel to the merciful
- Kohelet Rabba 7:16
Well, they shouldn't. A good and strong Israeli leader would have made this clear to the US and would have made an international case of fighting terrorism in his backyard instead of overseas like we do in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And I don't believe that the article is a conspiracy theory, I believe it's fact... America serves it's administration interests - which is OIL! _________________ He who is merciful with the cruel, will end-up being cruel to the merciful
- Kohelet Rabba 7:16
The lessons of the Lebanon War 2 have still not been drawn (It amazes me how lying reports are still being put about that Israel disappoints Bush and co because Israel did not fight hard enough against the Hezbullah!):
Lesson Number 1
Israel must place not the slightest trust in the US Government as an ally against Islamofascism.
On this lesson Israel and the followers of Israel really have to choose. Is Israel in 2006 finally going to emerge as a truly independent Jewish state, or is it going to be reduced to a pathetic rubble tied to the coat-strings of the US Government.
It is true that DEBKAfile does not source its inside Government and Army sources. So we have to judge all of its statements and place them against the knowledge we already have, and our own observation as sentient people of the course of events. tHE MOTTO IS, A USEFUL SOURCE, BUT HANDLE WITH CARE.
In its seminal report on the Lebanon 2, US Called The War Shots, August 24, 2006, carried on Israpundit, it was stated that Olmert fought the war completely under the finger of the US Bush Government.
Accordiing to the DEBKAfile re[port:
• Rice worked out with Olmert that they would rely on a quick victory with Air Force strikes. Proved wrong.
• Bush went along with this and laid down two basic conditions:
• Israel must confine itself to an air campaign; before embarking on a ground offensive, a further American go-ahead would be required.
• The second was a promise to spare Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure and only go for Hizballah’s positions and installations.
The DEBKAfile report is absolutely revealing. Even though its sources are not named it has to be given credence for the simple reason we saw its effects with our own eyes. Which were, to summarise the DEBKAfile report on this issue:
• The conditions when relayed by the secretary of state were accepted by the prime minister. The first explains why Israel’s ground forces were held ready in bases for three long weeks rather than being sent into battle - up until the last stage. By then, the air force offensive had proved a long way short of fast and cheap; worse, it had been ineffectual.
• The second condition accounts for another of the war’s enigmas: Israeli forces were not allowed to destroy buildings known to be occupied by Hizballah teams firing anti-tank rockets because it would have meant destroying Lebanese infrastructure.
• This brought Israeli forces into extreme danger; they were forced to come back again and again to repeat cleansing operations in villages and towns close to the Israeli border, such as Maroun a-Ras, Bint Jubeil and Atia a-Chaab. This exposed them to Hizballah’s attrition tactics at the cost of painful casualties.
• Only in the third week of the war, when the Bush administration saw the Israeli air force had failed to bring Hizballah to collapse, and the campaign would have to be salvaged in a hurry, did Rice give the green light for ground troops to go in en masse to try and finish off the Shiite terrorist group. Then too, an American stipulation was imposed: Israel troops must not reach the Litani River.
• The Israel army did embark on a tardy wide-scale push to the LItani River and as far as Nabatia and Arnoun, but was soon cut short in its tracks. American spy satellites spotted the advance and Olmert was cautioned by Washington to hold his horses.
• This last disastrous order released the welter of conflicting, incomprehensible orders which stirred up the entire chain of command - from the heads of the IDF’s Northern command down to the officers in the field. Operational orders designed to meet tactical combat situations were scrapped in mid-execution and new directives tumbled down the chute from above. Soldiers later complained that in one day, they were jerked into unreasoned actions by four to six contrary instructions.
• None of the commanders at any level could explain what was going on because none were party to the backroom decision-making at the prime minister’s office. According to our sources, Olmert kept his exchanges with Condoleezza close to his chest and members of his cabinet and high army command firmly out of the process. The prime minister even kept the chief of staff out of the picture and did not explain why he was called on to chop and change tactics in the heat of war.
• Olmert’s absolute compliance with Rice’s directives without fully comprehending their military import threw Israel’s entire war campaign into disorder. Because of the muddle, supply trucks could not locate units and had to leave them without food and water, the subject of one of the bitterest complaints. This botched sequence of decisions and their consequences also ties in with the fishing expedition in Damascus subsequently embarked on by senior Israeli ministers.
• It appears that Condoleezza Rice was not exactly happy with the way the war turned out, nor with the failure of diplomacy to bring Lebanon’s hostilities to a satisfactory conclusion or even to deploy an effective multinational force to stabilize South Lebanon. She therefore decided to explore the chances of luring Bashar Assad away from the Iranian fold. This is a tentative idea which has not ripened into a policy - much less gained a White House go-ahead. But as soon as word was leaked to Jerusalem, several Israeli ministers jumped aboard – Peretz first, followed by Livni, who there and then created a Syrian Project Desk at the foreign ministry, the education minister, Yuli Tamir and finally, on Monday, Dichter.
• These ministers know that the Olmert government stands on shaky legs against the spreading wave of popular disaffection over its management of the Lebanon war, its cost and its outcome. The clamor for a state inquiry is the least of the public’s demands. For government members who are caught between a fragile truce in Lebanon and a tenuous government, any distraction – even a reckless feeler towards a declared enemy – may look attractive.
In all of the above it is hard to know where to start in our utter condemnation. Do we start with Olmert and Livni who have the state of mind which makes them totally non-Jews, nonentities, appendages of the US Government, or do we start with the bullying and utterly reactionary nature of the US Government. Or is it as I think a tandem which must be exploded and destroyed?
It is certain that this is all carried out in the utmost secrecy and this is where Israpundit can do something really useful. Bush and Rice would not wish the wonderful American people who always support Israel that this was going on. Similarly all moves by the Israeli ruling elite are always kept away from the ordinary Israeli people. Look again at the interview given by Netanyahu with the Atlas Springs and Mere Rhetoric blogs (among others) in which he uses the exact same tactic.
The simple facts of Lebanon 2 means that Israel must at all costs be independent from every other state in the world, and especially from the US State apparatus, simply because it cannot act except in its role, not of an equal, but as a bully towards Israel (Jews)
Lesson Number 2
Really a corollary of the above Lesson 1! Israel must treat every single one of the Arab Governments, and all of the Islamist Governments, as the sworn enemy of Israel.
The American people are also in a really dangerous situation. Lebanon 2 has proved that the Bush Government is a bunch of traitors not just to Israel but to their own people. Jewish people wrongly concentrate on the former but the latter is even more significant.
So it follows from this that there is no difference worth talking about between Republican and Democrat, between Bush and Clinton or Carter.
The continual blather of Bush about his pet project of building democracy in the Middle East places him in exactly the same bracket as Carter, who facilitated the Islamofascists led by Khomeini to power in Iran. And Bush has as we all know by now continued by siding with the Iranian backed brigades in Iran.
American people must find a new leadership and reject these two parties. Jewish Americans must take exactly this line and no longer cover for this US ruling elite. That is a revolutionary step to take because by and large they have been doing exactly that.
Lesson Number 3
At all costs Israel must never accept a Palestinian State on its borders and must treat Abbas in exactly the same way as Hamas, with total opposition and as the bitter enemy of Israel.
This is the most important lesson to draw from Lebanon 2. Israel must elect a Government on this programme. There must not be the slightest move by any Israeli leader towards setting up a Palestinian state. This goes along with total independence from what other world governments think. The Bush, and all of the EU Governments, are pushing this Palestine State relentlessly. On this they are exactly in line with the policies of a group like the Anti-Semitic Palestine Solidarity Group and its parent the ISM. So why?
This also carries the imperative that the Olmert Government must be forced from power immediately on exactly this issue. It has emerged that the Olmert people were having top-secret meetings in Madrid under the auspices of the Israel-hating Spanish Zapateros government with the PLO during the Lebanon War. Even during the Lebanon War, Olmert was still talking about handing over land to the PA enemy.
Olmert and Livni are professional bourgeois “democratic” diplomats. The style in this is to keep everything hidden from the ordinary people. Israel has to put an end to this sneakiness. Nothing must be kept secret and we must build in order that they may be so.
POSTSCRIPT
WHAT IS TO BE DONE?
I feel the first step is to kick the Olmert Government out of power. We must ask Israelis to reject all Olmert organized inquiries and tell Olmert we have already “inquired” and we already know enough of the truth. Part of this truth is that Olmert is a secretive, conniving politician who basically hates Judaism and seeks an accomodation with Islamofascism. Just like his family and the whole Israeli Peace Movement, a cover for betrayal!
A new election must be forced. PR must be scrapped. One man one vote and allow the party with the majority to rule. Coalitions must be banned.
Netanyahu must reorganise Likud and go for power on that basis. He must state his programme totally openly and must keep NO secrets from the Israeli masses.
Netanyahu can play a role in preventing the setting up of a Palestinian state.
But having said that, the period of Likud is over. There is no alternative but to look to build a new type of leadership in Israel, as elsewhere. Jewish people must not avoid the implications of leadership. So far they have done so but they must be frank on this issue. That is I am sure the main lesson of Lebanon 2. _________________ He who is merciful with the cruel, will end-up being cruel to the merciful
- Kohelet Rabba 7:16
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Favorites
Profile
Log in
