Educating Americans why Iran must be confronted before it is too late

[Baashi]

Check out Charles Krauthammer's brilliant column on Israel's struggle for existence. Ain't that nice way to fight for the Israel's cause. He was given the platform to educate them the laymen and that's all he does and he does it very well. What can I say, Charles is on it big time.

 

Israel in the crosshairs

[Alle-ubaahne]

I don't get it my friend. Who is the good guy and who is the bad guy here?

 

Charles Kram.. is a known anti-Muslim new york times columnist. I see nothing else new.

 

Perhaps, I didn't read it.

[Baashi]

I'm rooting for Iran of course.

 

This topic is not about good guy vs. bad guy per se. I'm so amazed how group of people in key positions of government, business, media, and entertainment world have managed to go so far as to admit their loyaly to foreign state and use the resources and might of their native country to support their cause which is basically the welfare of another state.

 

This man Charles is one of the prolific writer I come across. He has a column in Newsweek and Whashignton Post. He is also what you and I might call a talking head but in the media lingo is a regulat contributor, expert, and news analyst in major TV channel. He defends that state with vigor and passion.

 

This one caught my eye today and I want us to see how this "war of ideas" is waged in this circle.

 

Get it yaa Qasaaro

[Baashi]

Getting Ready For Nuclear-Ready Iran

 

Two year in the making, this paper was written for the neocons priesthood who now hold the levers of power in beltway. Donnely the principal author of this study works for American Enterprise Institute, a Neoconservative think-tank. Contributors of this paper include four usual suspects: Steve Cambone, John Bolton, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and Paul Wolfowitz.

 

Or even better the author of this paper was the deputy executive director of the now famous Project of American Century! Can someone connect the dots! It is remarkable how a small group of like-minded people can publicly take over, literaly, an empire in the making in a matter of years. I'm amazed wallahi.

 

The thesis of the paper is very simple: If America wants to have energy security it must dominate Middle East. Ambitious Iran armed with nukes can disrupt America plans in the region. It can also impede, he emphasizes, US ambitions of the region.

 

He reasons that circling Iran is not enough and won't deter the mullah but will make them nervous and accelerate their nuke program. Plus the prospect of regime change in Iran, he explains, is next to nill once they cross the treshold. What America ought to do, he recommends, is to preempt that scenerio and act quickly before it is too late.

 

The link I posted is not the paper itself in its original form but compilation of analysis pertaining to that study. The DOD funded the publication of this book.

 

Where is the freaking media. All these hijaking are happening under their nose. Even NPR and my fav Frontline are ignoring the issue of the day.

[Castro]

Baashow, as long as these policy makers and those who influence them speak of “MARTYRDOM-SEEKING NATIONâ€, war is inevitable. How can an entire nation be martyrdom-seeking? How many more lies can get us into another imperial misadventure? Whatever happened to intellectual honesty? The greatest threat humanity has ever faced is US hegemony and hubris. Indeed, it is the US that must be stopped and disarmed.

[Xudeedi]

Have you guys read this paper. Archived

 

 

--------------------------------------

 

IS ISRAEL A THREAT TO AMERICAN DEMOCRACY?

 

by

 

Ali A. Mazrui

 

Director, Institute of Global Cultural Studies

 

and

 

Albert Schweitzer Professor in the Humanities

 

Binghamton University

 

State University of New York at Binghamton, New York, USA

 

Albert Luthuli Professor-at-Large

 

University of Jos, Jos, Nigeria

 

Andrew D. White Professor-at-Large Emeritus

 

and Senior Scholar in African Studies

 

Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA

 

Chair, Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy

 

Washington DC, USA

 

 

 

 

 

Based on a presentation at Binghamton University, Binghamton, New York, under the auspices of a “Teach-In†organized by Graduate Students, on Wednesday April 17, 2002.

 

 

 

There will be no “world without terrorism†for as long as the Palestinian-Israeli dispute is unresolved. It is by far the biggest trigger of rage against the United States among all issues.

 

Muslims are victims of violent injustice elsewhere in the world without the globalization of anger against the United States. Muslims in Kashmir, India, are victims of Indian security forces trying to prevent them from having self-determination.

 

Muslims in Chechnya are victims of Russian security forces trying to prevent them from having self-determination. Muslims in Macedonia are trying to cope with discrimination from Christian Macedonians. Muslims in Kosovo are denied a separate state by the international community and face the risk of reintegration with Yugoslavia against their will.

 

Muslims in Afghanistan faced the Soviet Union before and defeated it. The Afghans have now experienced military action by the United States.

 

If Muslims have been victimized elsewhere by other powers, why is the victimization of Muslims in the Middle East such a powder keg?

 

A Zionist Shadow on the U.S. Constitution

 

Israeli militarism, occupation of Arab lands and repression of Palestinians are the main causes of not only anti-Israeli terrorism but also anti-American terrorism. No issue in the world since apartheid in South Africa has caused greater international rage than Israeli repression of Palestinians.

 

Even in dusty Khartoum – the New York Times reports—several hundred thousand people have marched in the streets denouncing Israel and the USA – and some cheered Osama bin Laden. On April 17, 2002, President Husni Mubarak of Egypt declined to see Secretary of State Colin Powell and sent Egypt’s Foreign Minister instead to meet him. Mubarak had a diplomatic cold.

 

If Israeli repression and militarism provokes suicide bombers and give rise to movements like Hamas and al- Qaeda, Israeli political culture becomes increasingly racist – and the Attorney General of the United States begins to curtail civil liberties in the United States.

 

I) There are now detainees without trial in the USA in their hundreds, sometimes physically tortured.

 

 

 

II) Prisoners’ access to attorneys is restricted

 

 

 

III) There have been search and seizure in cultural institutions of Arab and Muslim Americans. What is probable cause? Being Muslim!

 

 

 

IV) The attorney-client confidentiality is at risk for those suspected of terrorism. What happened to the principle of innocent until proven guilty?

 

 

 

V) Military tribunals may be set up for civilian suspects: even secret trials have been considered.

 

 

 

VI) CNN and other networks have been summoned to the White House to be lectured about giving undue publicity to Osama bin Laden. What happened to editorial independence?

 

 

 

And now steps are being taken towards militarizing domestic life in the United States. New military reforms establish a military command for within the United States.

 

If Israeli atrocities and repression cause terrorism in the United States, and terrorism in turn threatens civil liberties in America, a chain of causation is established. The behaviour of the state of Israel threatens not merely democracy within the Jewish state. Israel threatens democracy in America as well.

 

We keep on hearing that Israel is the only democracy in the region. But it is in the interest of the United States that Israel should be the only democracy.

 

Because of Israeli intransigence, Arab public opinion is more anti-American than most Arab dictators. Had the Arab world been more democratic, their governments would have had to be more militantly anti-Israel and anti-American than they are.

 

The United States has a vested interest in an Arab world which is not democratic. For Arab dictators are a safety valve to keep their populations less explosively anti-American.

 

Almost all the 20 Arab governments of the Arab League apart from Syria, Libya, Iraq, and Sudan are obedient to the United States. But such pro-American obedience would have been voted out of office had the Arab world enjoyed free elections.

 

Similarly, only a military regime in Pakistan under General Musharaff could have cooperated so fully with the United States in its invasion of Afghanistan. No elected government in Pakistan would have been able to defy the pro-Islamic and pro-Taliban segments of Pakistani opinion with such impunity.

 

The United States gained from lack of democracy in Pakistan.

 

Into the Arab heartland Western powers decided to create a Jewish state in 1948 – with President Harry S. Truman playing a critical role in making it happen.

 

It did not stop with the creation of the Jewish state.

 

(a) Israel expanded after the 1948 war

 

(b) Eisenhower prevented expansion in 1956

 

© Further Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory after 1967 war

 

(d) Annexation of Jerusalem by Israel in 1967

 

(e) Creating Jewish settlements on Arab land continually

 

(f) Blowing up and destroying Arab homes as a hidden strategy of ethnic cleansing.

 

WHY IS THE U.S. being blamed for Israeli policies? Where was Osama bin Laden’s anti-Americanism coming from?

 

(a) Massive economic aid from the United States to Israel in billions

 

(b) Provision of sophisticated American weapons to Israel

 

© The United States was shielding Israel from U.N. censure

 

(d) The United States was making U.N. Security Council impotent in punishing Israel.

 

(e) The United States was weakening anti-Israeli Arab forces by buying off the government of Egypt with a billion U.S. dollars every year.

 

Egypt is the largest Arab country and used to be the biggest single threat to Israel militarily. The U.S. largess has bought off Egypt effectively.

 

(f) The U.S. was preventing IRAQ from rising as an alternative to Egypt in challenging Israel. Taking advantage of Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait to weaken Iraq permanently – whereas Pearl Harbor was not used to weaken Japan permanently, nor was Hitler’s aggression used to weaken Germany permanently.

 

THE UNITED STATES is both the main source of military support for the enemy of the Arab World, Israel, and the USA is also the main destroyer of Arab capacity to rise militarily. This latter policy includes weakening Egypt and enfeebling Iraq.

 

We must solve the Palestine problem if terrorism is to end. To the moralist, terrorism against the United States is born out of evil. To the political analyst terrorism is born out of rage and frustration.

 

Solving the Israeli-Palestinian brutal stalemate is indispensable for the creation of a world without terrorism. It is also indispensable for making the United States a more benevolent super power, and Israel a less racist power.

 

Finally, the Jews to whom 1.2 billion Muslims owe a lot doctrinally and to whom a similar number of Christians are equally indebted, will one day re-discover their global role. The Jews –who invented globalization – may one day help to make globalization more humane. AMEN.

 

Towards the Racialization of Zionism

 

But for the time being many friends of Israel are anxious that the repressive forces in the Jewish state are getting stronger – and a distinctly Israeli form of racism may be evolving. This is a minority. But within that racially anti-Arab minority there may be a smaller and more ominous sub-group.

 

There is a school of thought in Israel which is already becoming fascist. This issue is debated more frankly in Israel itself than in the United States. Lovers of democracy in Israel are alarmed by the fascist trend. There is even an Israeli word for this kind of Semitic fascism. Professor Yeshayahu Leibovitz of the Hebrew University has called it: Judeo-Nazism. As editor of the Encyclopedia Hebraica, Leibovitz has grappled with many trends in the Jewish experience. But he has now raised the issue of whether the concept of Judeo-Nazism is any longer a contradiction in terms.1

 

Israelis are warning each other that the unthinkable is not necessarily impossible. Specific sociological conditions in inter-war Germany fostered right wing extremism among the Germans. The history of German extremism started with a people who believed they had been humiliated and humbled.

 

The Treaty of Versailles which ended World War I created among the Germans a martyrdom complex which later favoured the rise of extreme nationalism. The martyrdom complex -- strong among the Israelis today and powerful among the Germans in the inter-war years -- can degenerate into paranoia. We now know that lovers of democracy in the German population underestimated the danger. The whole world paid a heavy price for German paranoia.

 

Jews -- like the Germans -- have been impressive contributors to world civilization. But both people are human, and therefore psychologically vulnerable. The danger of extremism is real.

 

The stages toward extremism through which the German psyche passed were as follows:

 

1. Martyrdom Complex

 

2. Paranoia

 

3. Extreme Nationalism

 

4. Racial Exclusivity

 

5. Militarization

 

6. Territorial Expansionism

 

It is very unlikely that Israelis will pass through similar stages. There are in any case major constraints to Zionist extremism. The question nevertheless remains whether the danger of fascism in Israel is real enough to alarm Israeli patriots themselves.

 

Israel was genuinely born out of the ashes and anguish of the Holocaust. It was a more genuine martyrdom than was the Nazi sense of humiliation in the inter-war years.

 

But when does the martyrdom complex evolve into paranoia? In two stages in the case of the Jews:

 

a) Monopolizing the Holocaust as an experience of the Past

 

b) Pre-empting imaginary Holocausts of the future

 

 

 

A 1980’s American immigrant into Israel from a religious family in New York prayed for a new persecution of Jews in the Diaspora so that they are forced to go to the fortress Israel:

 

“The hatred the Gentiles feel towards the Jews is eternal. There never was peace between us and them except when they totally beat us or when we shall totally beat them. Maybe if they will give someone like Sharon the chance to kill...until the Arabs will understand that we did them a favour letting them remain alive.... We are powerful now and power should talk now. The Gentiles only understand the language of power.â€2

 

 

 

Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir declared in April 1988:

 

 

 

“We say to them, from this hilltop and from the perspective of thousands of years of history, that in our eyes they are like grasshoppers.â€3

 

 

 

Menachin Begin's earlier denunciation of Palestinians as "two-legged animals" has formed part of the same drift towards racist perceptions and perspectives in powerful circles in Israel.

 

Is Zionist nationalism stifling Israeli liberalism? Opinion polls of Israeli attitudes to the Palestinian uprising in the occupied territories is one measure. The death of over 500 Palestinians since the Intifada began has not alarmed enough Israelis. Indeed, the majority of Israelis seem to want even stiffer measures against the Palestinians.

 

When is soft Israeli arrogance towards the Arabs paternalistic? As an Israeli originally from Aden put it:

 

“We know that the Arab is an obedient good creature as long as he is not incited and no one puts ideas into his head.... He just has to be told exactly what his right place is.... They must understand who the master is. That's all."4

 

 

 

When united to fanaticism and nationalism, arrogance can take the form of militant racism. Take the case of the young rabbi who denounced the "filth" of mixed marriages and the "hybrid children" such marriages produce -- "a thorn in the flesh of the Jewish society in Israel."5

 

This rabbi recommended school segregation and exclusion of Arabs from the universities. Echoes of apartheid are unmistakable.

 

As for the trend towards militarization, Israel has indeed become the most efficient war machine since Nazi Germany. In war after war the Jewish state has demonstrated staggering proficiency both in the air and on land. The six-day war in June 1967 was its most dazzling military success. Did this military success increase territorial appetite?

 

A state created in the teeth of the opposition of indigenous people became a state surrounded by hostile neighbours. It was only a matter of time before the moral cost had to be paid. A Director-General of Israel Broadcasting Authority (radio and television) during years of apartheid was a "long time admirer of South Africa and a frequent visitor there." He even wrote an "emotional article" expressing his preference for South Africa over Black Africa, complete "with citations of research proving genetic inferiority of blacks" -- a view which "seems to reflect the feeling of many in the Israeli elite."6

 

The journal of Mapam (left wing of Labour Alignment) published an explanation of the superiority of Israeli pilots. Blacks and Arabs were inferior in "complex, cognitive intelligence." That was why "American Blacks succeed only in short distance running"7

 

Israeli neo-Nazism reversed the scale of genetic values favoured by German Nazis. Both forms of extremism exaggerated the impact of the Jewish factor. The Nazis thought the Jewish impact was negative. The Israeli extremists erred the other way.

 

Why has the United States outdistanced Europe in modern culture? The proportion of Jews in the American population has enhanced American creativity, according to this Israeli school of thought.8

 

By implication German inventiveness before the Holocaust was due to the Jewish creative infusion into the German population. An Israeli labour party journal refers to "genetic experiments" at Tel Aviv University -- which have shown that "genetic differences among Jewish communities [Poland and Yemen are cited] are smaller than those between Gentiles and Jews."9

 

“In earlier years the Rabbinate had cited biblical authority to justify expulsion of the Arabs ("The foreign element") from the land, or simply their destruction, and religious law was invoked to justify killing of civilians in war or raid." 10

 

American Rabbi Isaac Bernstein argued that religious law gives power and legitimacy to Israel to "dispossess the Arabs of the conquered territories.†11 Another Rabbi, Rabbi Lubovitcher of New York, deplored that Israel did not conquer Damascus during the 1973 October War. 12

 

A doctrine emerged called "secure and defensible borders." After almost every war Israel attempted to get more territory. Whose secure and defensible borders? Because of Israel's military supremacy, only Israel had such secure borders. The Arabs were easily penetrable by Israeli air and rocket power.

 

The transition from chosen people to chosen race gathered momentum. Rabbi Elazar Valdman of Gush Emunim wrote in the journal Nekudah of the West Bank settlers:

 

We will certainly establish order in the Middle East and in the world. And if we do not take this responsibility upon ourselves, we are sinners, not just towards ourselves but towards the entire world. For who can establish order in the world? All of those Western leaders of weak character?13

 

 

 

The question which inevitably has now arisen is whether Israel's taste for imperial expansion can long be sustained without hurting Israeli democracy. Can the sadism against Palestinians be long enjoyed without creating Israeli masochism? Is Zionism becoming a cancer not just on the body politic of Arab stability but also on the body politic of Jewish sense of justice?

 

Can a State be Jewish and Democratic?

 

In the course of this twenty-first century Israel will have to choose between remaining a Jewish state and remaining a democracy. Such a dilemma already exists but it will get worse.

 

The proportion of Arabs in Israel is higher than the proportion of Blacks in the United States. Yet while Blacks in the United States have reached high echelons in the executive branch, Arabs in Israel are marginalized in government.

 

Arab Israelis have done well in the legislative branch, but have effectively been kept out of major executive and judicial positions. There is no Arab equivalent of Thurgood Marshall or Justice Clarence Thomas.

 

The Arab population in Israel – now eighteen percent – is on its way towards becoming a quarter of the population. There will indeed come a time when Israel has to choose between being a Jewish state and being a democratic state.

 

More recently there is increasing support in the state of Israel for a policy which is euphemistically called “transferâ€. It is basically a policy of ethnic cleansing. More and more Israelis are dreaming of a kind “final solution to the Palestinian problemâ€-- the transfer of all Palestinians of the West Bank [and presumably Gaza] to new refugee camps in the rest of the Arab world. What to do with those Palestinians who are already Israeli citizens poses difficult problems for these ultra-Zionists.14

 

But American civil liberties and Israeli democracy are not the only victims of the cruel behavior of the State of Israel towards Palestinians. There is also the additional risk of reactivating international anti-Semitism. It is to this dimension that we should now turn.

 

Israel as a Cause of Anti-Semitism

 

The state of Israel was created partly as a permanent asylum for Jews who might otherwise suffer persecution in other parts of the world. The Zionist movement was originally conceived as a quest for a piece of land without people to accommodate people without land. As it turned out, Palestine was hardly “a piece of land without peopleâ€. Millions of Arabs have remained displaced to accommodate Jews from elsewhere.

 

Political Zionism was originally intended as a defense against anti-Semitism. Fifty years after the creation of the State of Israel, has Zionism now become a cause of new forms of anti-Semitism? Is the state of Israel becoming a cause of hatred for other Jews around the world?

 

This appears to be the conclusion which has been reached by the Chief Rabbi of Great Britain. On the last day of February 2002 Dr. Jonathan Sacks urged strong action to prevent “violence and bloodshed†against Jews in England. He argued that the Israeli-Palestine conflict had sparked off levels of anti-Semitism not seen in Britain since the years of the Holocaust. He referred to an increasing number of attacks on synagogues and “virulent anti-Israel campaigns on some English university campuses which have left many Jewish students fearful for their safetyâ€. [The TIMES (London) March 1, 2002, page 2]

 

The Chief Rabbi complained that the leading liberal newspapers in Britain such as THE GUARDIAN, THE INDEPENDENT and THE STATESMAN had started publishing op-ed articles questioning Israeli’s right to exit. According to the Chief Rabbi, the websites of THE INDEPENDENT and THE STATESMAN had become what he describes as a focus of anti-Semitic discussion.

 

At the University of Manchester, England, Jewish students claimed to have been spat upon and denounced as “Nazis†and “baby butchers†during a bitter dispute at the students’ union about whether Israel should be declared an apartheid-state.

 

Rabbi Sacks claimed that until recently he had never experienced anti-Semitism in Britain. But he saw new evidence that anti-Semitism was returning not only to Britain but also to other parts of Europe.

 

“The fact that I have chosen to speak indicates the depth of my concern. We know from all of history that words turn into deeds, prejudice into violence, and eventually violence into bloodshed… You cannot deny people the right to criticize any nation-state [such as Israel]. But what we are seeing goes beyond that, and has become an attack on Jews, not just the state of Israel … That Jewish students on campus should have to go in fear is unacceptable.â€

 

[THE TIMES (London) March 1, 2002]

 

 

 

After the massacre in Jenin in April 2002, THE INDEPENDENT in London accused Israel of a “monstrous war crime†[April 16). In the correspondence columns of THE GUARDIAN (London) there have been many letters about whether negative reactions to Israeli policies are leading to a revival of European anti-Semitism. One pained statement came from David Grossman as early as October 22, 2001. He said:

 

“ I am highly critical of Israel’s behaviour, but in recent weeks I have felt that the [british] media’s hostility to it has not been fed solely by the actions of the Sharon government. A person feels such things deeply, under the skin, I feel them with a kind of shiver that percolates down to the cells of my most primeval memories…â€15

 

 

 

In Black Africa, where Israel had many friends, there is new questioning. John Nagenda has said the following in a Uganda newspaper:

 

 

 

“ The Israelis latterly scored over 300 Palestinian deaths to less than 20 against them, but still insisted that it was Arafat and his Palestinians who were the aggressors. Where is God?"

 

 

 

“It must be crystal clear that Sharon’s blind rage policy daily leads Israel to more insecurity, not less… By Bush giving carte blanche, the American President is a bad, not a good friend of Israel. Does Bush know many Israelis? Did he go to prep school with many of them? Are many of them members of his clubs?â€16

 

 

 

By giving Israel carte blanche, the United States was also a bad friend to world Jewry. Is the U.S. feeding into global anti-Semitism?

 

In April 2002 World Jewish leaders held an emergency meeting in Brussels to discuss what was described as “the rash of anti-Semitic violence that has swept Western Europe.†The Secretary-General of the World Jewish Congress said: “We are now facing an unprecedented increase in anti-Semitism on this continent.†Israel’s military action against Palestinians was identified as a factor. [New York Times, April 23, 2002]

 

In the final analysis, blind U.S. policy, which is uncritical of Israel, is dangerous to American lives – as well as to Jewish safety. It is also a potential threat to American democracy.

 

Israel was created as a refuge from anti-Semitic hate. It has become one of the main causes of anti-Semitic rage against innocent Jews in other parts of the world. It is also in danger of compromising its own democratic order, as well as the constitution of its closest friend, the United States of America.

 

Conclusion

 

The issue of Israel started causing damage to American democracy long before September 11, 2001. Few topics have caused more self-imposed censorship on the American media than any criticism of the State of Israel. Journalists, reporters and editors have to watch carefully what they say about Israel. What is at stake is the potential wrath of the pro-Israeli lobby, and also potential loss of revenue from angry advertisers who withdraw their commercials or angry Jewish subscribers to public television or National Public Radio. The Print media in the United States also routinely censors themselves against any criticism of the State of Israel.

 

The issue of Israel has also detracted from academic freedom on American campuses. There have been cases when scholars have been denied tenure because of their pro-Palestinian writings or lectures. The United States may be the only country in the world in which it is safer to criticize the host country itself (i.e. the United States) than to criticize a particular external power (i.e. Israel). While some scholars have lost their jobs for criticizing the government of Israel almost no scholar runs much of risk at an American University for criticizing the U.S. administration of the day.

 

Perhaps Israel ought never to have been created. Millions of Jews were opposed to its creation in the first place. Those Jews have now been vindicated. The creation of the Jewish state has cost thousands of lives and may cost many more. If the world had realized the potential human cost, even the unrepresentative United Nations of 1947 – 1948 might never have voted for the partition of Palestine.

 

But now that Israel has been created, there should be no attempt to destroy it physically. Most Israelis today are innocent of the original massive miscalculation, and do not deserve to suffer for that mistake.

 

However, the Jewishness of Israel will be destroyed by its own contradictions. In a few decades Israel will have to choose between remaining a Jewish state and remaining a democracy. The two will be incompatible.

 

Already the effort to maintain the Jewishness of Israel is racializing Jewish attitudes to Palestinians. Rightwing views in Israel even from Rabbis and religious figures are getting increasingly racist. And under Prime Ministers like Ariel Sharon, Israeli policies are narrowing the gap between the behavior of Nazis towards Jews and the behaviour of Israelis towards Palestinians. Terms like the following are entering the vocabulary of international censure of Israel – “Judeo-Nazism†and “Nazi-onismâ€. Israeli Jews, who were once the unique martyrs of human history, are now becoming just one more oppressor of other people. Human kind is the poorer for this Israeli deterioration.

 

ENDNOTES

 

1 Cited by Noam Chomsky, The Fateful Triangle : The United States, Israel, and the Palestinians (Boston: South End Press, 1983)

 

2 Report by Israel Writer Amos Oz based on interviews and published in Davar Noam Chomsky, The Fateful Triangle, pp. 446-7.

 

3 “Search for Partners: Should the US Deal with the PLO?†Time Magazine April 11, 1988. See what is a “Grasshopperâ€, letter to NYT, April 20, 1988.

 

4 Report by Amos Oz in a series of articles in Davar, Ibid, Chomsky, The Fateful Triangle, p. 447.

 

5 Consult report by Eliahu Salpeter, Ha’aretz, No. 4, 1982.

 

6 Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, “Israel and South Africa†New Outlook, March/April 1983; Hotam, April 18, 1975 and October 1, 1982.

 

7 Chomsky, p. 152.

 

8 Davar, September 8, 1981. Chomsky pp 151-152.

 

9 Charles Hoffman, “A Monkey Trial, Local Styleâ€, Jerusalem Post, March 22, 1983.

 

10 Chomsky, The Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel and the Palestinians (Boston: South Press, 1983), p. 153. See also Military rabbinate publications Peace in the Middle East? pp. 108-9; Shahak, Begin and Co., Said, Question of Palestine, p. 91.

 

11 Chomsky, p. 153, Bernstein, Dialogue (New York) Winter 1980.

 

12 Al Hamishmar, January 4, 1978.

 

13 Cited by Danny Rubenstein, Davar, October 8, 1982.

 

14 The increasing popularity in Israel of the idea of “transfer†of the Palestinian population was covered in “60 Minutes IIâ€, ABC Television [u.S.A.] Wednesday April 10, 2002.

 

15 “Diaryâ€, THE GUARDIAN, October 22, 2001. Cited in a letter by Arnold Wesker, THE GUARDIAN (London) March 1, 2002.

 

16 “Sharon’s Blind Rage is Leading Israel to Hell,†THE NEW VISION (Kampala), February 23, 2002

[Baashi]

Speaking of Israeli hold on American foreign policy, here is a timely analysis done by two authors that have inside knowledge of how upper echelons of Washington power circles go about making foreign policy decisions particularly policies toward Middle East.

 

Wallahi I’m impressed by Israeli lobby in America. They are almost flawless in their lobby execution when it comes to advancing Israeli state interests in the region. The authors are making two provocative arguments. One US leaders put the country’s interest in the back burner and instead advance policies that jeopardize the long term interest of the US state. Second Israel-American powerful lobby is behind this misguided policy.

 

Media the fourth branch of American government do the bidding for this powerful lobby by hyping trivial concerns and ignoring through factual omissions the real deal and truth of the world events. If you are one of those nomads who would like to get informed on the true nature of things not the cosmetic façade propagated by the ruling elite this is a must read essay. Don’t forget to look the other side of the coin namely the critics who dismiss these critical voices as confused folks who see conspiracy writings on the wall in everything USA foreign policy. That way you become a well rounded kinda person.

------

 

Israel Lobby

 

Critics of the essay

[ElPunto]

^Yes Baashi - read that report on the Israeli lobby a while back - the uproar and the fuss created by it made me interested and so I read it in full. It is truly fascinating. And the authors couldn't be dismissed as anti-semitic hacks! Cannot STAND Krauthammer. I read the WashPo religiously but his columns irritate the hell out me.