The West's Weapon of Self-Delusion

I have listened,read and watched over and over as all of Americas politicans grovel and fawn to the Israeli lobbyists of American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac), repeatedly agreeing to anything Israel demands.
Question(s) Is Israel now a defacto state of The United States? Is the United States now a colony of Israel? What the hell is going on here.

Rational Animal : I appreciate your comment but it is not a question of misinformation. Personally I prefer to think for myself after reading. Names and books neither impress nor give more weight to the opinion. Zionism is a global movement have migrated from one to another centre of power and has more to do with the concentration of power in the hands of an elite few and whether today it is predominant in American, Israeli or British is not the question as long as they hold dominance and can subtly sway sovereignty. At present, I would suggest that there are more rabid Zionists in America than Israel. Who is the cart and who the horse is only you and the authors you site who draw the irrelevant lines while the Zionists see it as the same vehicle. About 20 to 30 key players in the US administration spread throughout crucial positions such as Homeland Security and Federal Reserve for example hold duel nationality blurring the lines and presumably allegiance and alliances. The point is to confuse and converge. That is what they, the Zionists, do so well, while you waste your time on chicken or egg debates.

There seems to be some real misinformation out there with regard to Israeli control over US Middle-East policy, predominantly the idea that the US does what Israel wants. This is simply not so though zionist influence in most 'western democratic nations' is significant. It is more accurate to say that Israel serves as a client state, serving (often poorly) US policy objectives in the Middle-East (See Chomsky, Noam. 'What We Say Goes' 2007) And for a great analysis of extremist right wing zionist (note lower case 'z') influence in US politics and policy see Finkelstein, Norman, G. 'The Holocaust Industry' 2000. Israel would not have dared make their most recent threats to Iran (to bomb a civilian nuclear power plant)if they thought for a second that the US would not back them up. In fact, it is pretty safe to assume, given US interest in the oil rich regions of Iran, that a friendly wink from Washington would have been all it took for Israel do its bidding and disguise the pretext for some more US led terrorism in the Middle-East as 'defence of Israel'.

Delusion is when you see one thing yet convince yourself that it is something else. Perception is the ability to tell the difference between one thing and another. Perspective is the point of view from which the object is seen.

We all agree that Robert Mugabe is an inhumane sociopath brute, now throwing out NGO's who do not follow his instructions to literally starve those people of Morgan Changerai's MDC opposition, those who beat him in elections last month.

He has brought the whole country to it's knees, used his thugs to steal land, harasses, hacks and kills any who oppose him. People who had been oppressed by violence and corruption expressed their choice in a democratic ballot. That choice Zanu PF and Mugabe could not accept.

What difference is there between Barack Obama, the Zionists in Israel or America, (that appear to run America and without who's support apparently no candidate can be elected), given their attitude to Hamas, the people of Gaza and Palestinian land in general…. What is the difference between them; Obama with his Zionist friends on one side, and Mugabe with Zanu PF on the other???

ABSOLUTELY NONE if your starving to death in Harare or in Gaza. That's how it's done these days. And that is why every time you see Mugabe, he is laughing.

In my book the terrorist is the one that engineers the suffering and orchestrates the extremism for his political ends. He usually wears a suit. Many others have to wear blood for him to keep his position.

To judge by his AIPAC speech, Barack Obama failed the most important foreign policy test for an American leader, that is, taking a realistic view of the troubles in the Middle East. On one hand he is railing against Bush's idiotic war in Iraq, and on the other he gives unqualified support for the racist, Zionist policies of Israel which is the source of most of those problems. Now, that, if anything, is the height of hypocrisy. If Obama and the others who slavishly toe the Zionist line really want true peace in the middle, why won't they call on Israel to get rid of its nuclear arsenal, which it is an open secret that they possess. That way a more plausible case can be made for trying to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Admittedly, the Saudis and others in the region are concerned about Iran with nuclear weapons, but the biggest obstacle to peace is Israel's expansionist policies. Does Obama really think that giving them the whole of Jerusalem, as if it's his to give in the first place, will satisfy the Zionist land grabbers? That just shows how shallow he really is, and blind to history.

Twisto ---- ain't dead, nope; just still not there.

The West's naively insane "clash of civilizations" model is yet another apologia for greed infested colonialism of the barbaric hordes who swarmed at the gates of Rome and have now become the denizens of New Rome themselves. Here is an interesting (counter) essay on the subject:
http://humanebeing.blogspot.com/2007/03/world-understanding-in-00s-conci...

@ the Proff,
I pretty much agree with you -- I hadn't thought of it before, but yes, Jerusalem -- the Old City, as an international treasure, yeah, they can call it a holy city. The main thing is that neither Christain, Muslim or Jew should lay claim to the place as "theirs alone".

Seems simple, but it ain't.

There are Jewish azzholes who are ready to build the New Temple on the ruins of the mosque there now, there are a Muslim shitz who would die ten times over to protect the mosques -- and last, but not at all least there are Christian braindeads who are waiting for (almost all of) the Jews to cremate so that Jezuzz can come wafing in on a cloud of something

Come to think of it, "Isreal" or our gov't may set up some false attack against Isreal and make it look like Iran did it. That may be more believable than having a little Iranian rubber raft "attack" one of our destroyers setting there. What an interesting word to describe a ship - destroyer.

wakingup June 8th, 2008 1:56 am

..."but, i wonder if, somewhere stashed away on a shelf in your apartment there on the Corniche there might be a plan to solve the mess?"

Good question. They just telling us the news. They have no agenda. Hehe...

Hello Robert,

I have been reading you now for years ... it really is wonderful to have someone actually living "there" to give the kind of coverage that you and Patrick Cockburn (in Iraq) provide ... but, i wonder if, somewhere stashed away on a shelf in your apartment there on the Corniche there might be a plan to solve the mess? a plan that could be put into play almost immediately ? Have you ever just come out and said to Washington or London: "Hello, my name is Robert Fisk and I have a plan and it will work" ? If not, it might be a good idea to get hold of Senator Obama asap .... you know the history and you know the now ... there is no time to waste ...

Wake up people: there is no such thing as "God".

These groups are the remains of tribes, genetically related groups the developed their own prescientific religious thought.

They use group membership to gain power like all groups as groups are stronger than individuals or splintered organizations.

It is about power: political power, military power, money, land, resources, social power, information and control of others.

That is all.

Just as the Zionist project was acquiring wings--getting imperial backing--Edwin Montagu, the only Jewish member of wartime British Cabinet, expressed his views on the notion of a settler state in Palestine:

...I assume that it means that Mahommedans and Christians are to make way for the Jews and that the Jews should be put in all positions of preference and should be peculiarly associated with Palestine in the same way that England is with the English or France with the French, that Turks and other Mahommedans in Palestine will be regarded as foreigners, just in the same way as Jews will hereafter be treated as foreigners in every country but Palestine. Perhaps also citizenship must be granted only as a result of a religious test.

Ostrogoth June 7th, 2008 10:40 pm -- 'Arvy (10:14 pm): "Jewish state" is an absurd, dangerous, nonsensical concept ...'

But that is Israel's actual demand, is it not? It insists not merely on some kind of 'guaranteed security' for its inhabitants, but on acceptance of its existence as 'a Jewish state', presumably in perpetuity and regardless of any other ethnicity and/or religion that may reside within its self-declared borders. And yet, its U.S. 'ally' refers to it as the only true 'democracy' in the Middle East and supports its quest to achieve that singular aim almost without limit or constraint.

Surely you are not suggesting that the United States of America and every candidate for its presidency is supporting 'an absurd, dangerous, nonsensical concept' equivalent to supporting the Nazi 'ubermensch' ideal. That just couldn't be so. Could it?

Jews and Israelis have money, and according to the holy scriptures God is always on the side of the rich and powerful.

Arvy (10:14 pm): "Jewish state" is an absurd, dangerous, nonsensical concept, although Zionists are ready to start wars over it.

For an equally absurd and dangerous concept, look at the Nazis, who thought they could determine who qualified as Aryan "ubermensch" on the basis of family lineage, craneal dimensions, and facial features. Needless to say, few of the Nazi Party leaders fulfilled their own criteria.

You can always tell an author's bias when they talk about "(Arab) East Jerusalem". Those who have never visited the city might have no understanding that East Jerusalem encompasses the entirety of the old city, defined by the city walls that existed at the time of Christ.

Israel will never relinquish the ancient city with the surviving Western wall of the temple mount. The only possible compromise would be to declare the ancient city to be of such significance to humanity and to three of its major religions that it should be declared as an international city and placed under a United Nations administration.

With this compromise for Jerusalem it might be possible to achieve lasting peace, but I'm afraid that the critical point was in 1979 with Menachem Begin, Anwar Sadat and Jimmy Carter as the major players. Since then there has not been three leaders of equal integrity and vision and the situation has become progressively more dire.

Thanks, Ostrogoth. I understand Walt and Mearsheimer's "verifiable Jewish ancestry" explanation of Jewishness as it applies to individual persons, although it does seem to beg some of the same obvious questions even in that limited context. However, it still doesn't really help me much to understand the concept of a "Jewish state" and whether recognition of Israel's statehood on that basis requires mere dominance, total exclusivity, or what.

Sorry, but I'm still very confused.

Once again its about money. A very powerful elite frighten so called independent people into following their line of thinking. I am not anti semitic, but it also has to be said that Jews are continuing to rely on their history of victim hood, and imagine that what was done to them earlier this century justifies anything. It does not. They are not chosen, they are just like us with a different historical upbringing. We have suffered atrocities to, does that give us the right to behave as we please. NO!

quousque,

Exactly.

Vonnegut

Probably has very little to do with AIPAC

More a response to MCain's jab about Obama being soft on American defence.. the goo-goo doll of some Hamas leader who said he'd like to see Obama in the White House. A sort of political pugilist tit for tat...really silly...but that's American media imaging...(and now it's McCain's turn to come up to the bar re:Jerusalem)

Of course it's also about Florida and Pennsylvania and Clinton support (in New York)

No... I am not an Obama appologist

"Is a 'Jewish state' ethnically pure? Religiously pure? Or does it just mean a state where Zionism prevails regardless of any other consideration? Can some authoritative voice on the issue help me with my confusion?" - posted by Arvy, June 7th, 5:29 pm
_______________________________

Arvy, I'm no authority, but the term "Jewish" is obviously ambiguous, since it can refer either to ethnic traits or religious affiliation. Contrary to Zionist tenets, there is no Jewish race anymore, if there ever was one.

Here's what Walt and Mearsheimer say about it on page 88 of their book "The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy":

"While Israel's citizens are of many backgrounds, including Arab, Muslim, and Christian, among others, it was explicitly founded as a Jewish state, and whether a citizen is regarded as Jewish ordinarily depends on kinship (verifiable Jewish ancestry)."

The footnote to this text states:

"According to the Law of Return, a 'Jew' is defined as 'a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion.'"

Seems to me that the Zionist insistence on the Jewish nature of the Israeli state is an attempt to consolidate Israel as a racist theocracy instead of a secular democracy. It's an effort that will lead to constantly escalating violence in the ME if it succeeds.

"This must be the longest police enquiry in the history of the world."

Actually, Mr. Fisk, that would be the "search" for the "anthrax killer" who "attacked" in Sept. of 2001.

Because, you know, there's, like, what - maybe a handful of people in the USA who have both the access to anthrax and also the skills to "weaponize" it? Yet, 7 years, not even a single, real suspect. How f**king curious...

America's self-delusion does not apply only to Israel. It also applies to China. Whereas the U.S. sees Israel as a friend (it isn't!), it sees China as an enemy (it isn't!).

The zionist jewish neo-cons who run america first eyed China as it's enemy:

{PNAC] Fukuyama: "Bill Kristol And The Weekly Standard" Conducted A "Deliberate Search For An Enemy" At Cold War End… They "initially picked on China as their target," but then 9/11 was a "godsend."
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/58

Why China? Three reasons:

1)It distracts the general public from the 'real enemy', Israel.
2)The zionists are, by nature, racists. After all, they are the 'chosen people of God'. The thought of a non-white power (China) is simply unthinkable. (The idea that God might be Chinese is a different matter all together).
3)Having a powerful China as adversary fulfills the prophecy of armageddon and the coming of the messiah.

To achieve this goal requires keeping China in the forefront of the news; hence the constant barrage of anti-China articles in the mainstream media. And who controls or owns outright quite a bit of the mainstream media? I wouldn't want to hazrd a guess.

These neo-con zionists are evil people and, by no stretch of the imagination, should they be seen as true jews. What's bemusing and sad about all of this is that during WW2 China was one of the few countries willing to take in the jews fleeing the nazis. Ask Elie Wiesel, Nobel Peace Prize winner, whose family was among many that found sanctuary in China. Not even the U.S. or Britain were willing to accept them...

Talk about ingratitude...

To say that "Israelis deserve security" is really a misstatement of what Israel demands which is, in fact, acceptance of its existence as "a Jewish state", whatever that is taken to mean in any given context.

Frankly, I've never quite been able to get the concept completely straight in my own mind, partly because of intermixing of ethnic, religious and nationalistic aspects that sometimes seems to be a deliberate ploy to confuse the issue as much as possible. Is a "Jewish state" ethnicly pure? Religiously pure? Or does it just mean a state where Zionism prevails regardless of any other consideration?

Can some authoritative voice on the issue help me with my confusion?

"How is it possible that they have gotten so much power and influence?"

Because they're organized crime figures wearing nice suits. Forget about the Sicilians and the Italians and the Columbians and the black drug kingpins. The top Mafiosa have always been Zionists. Meyer Lansky, Hyman Lerner, Micky Cohen, even Ben Seigal before Lansky had him wacked. Then-future Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin was close friends with Hollywood boss Micky Cohen. They used to stand out on the pier talking about how much they hated JFK. They shared a girlfriend with Jack Ruby, who spent his earlier years running guns for Israel.

"How is it possible that they have gotten so much power and influence?" -chet, 2:18pm
_______________________

The Israel lobby is usually defined to encompass both Christian and Jewish Zionists, as well as less fanatical, non-Zionist, supporters of Israel. Taken together, these groups comprise a large, wealthy, and consequently powerful chunk of the US population. They're not monolithic by any means, but don't underestimate their combined influence on US foreign policy in the ME.

Impeach, indict, imprison.

Jews = religion = insanity. And yes, Israel was a bad idea.

If Isreal (I enjoy misspelling it!) would stop stealing Arab land without proper payment there would be no problem.
The US treats Isreal as a wedge to control and try to conform the Arab world to western bidding.

At the risk of repeating myself:

The six million Jews in the US account for about 1.7% of the total population.

How is it possible that they have gotten so much power and influence?

Now I can understand why god sent the Great Flood and started all over again. It's too bad that all the gopherwood has been cut down in the Amazon and Indonesia.

"A second [sic] would be to dispense with believing the modern version of the "Jews run the world & are to blame for everything wrong" fantasy as the majority of those whom populate corporate boards are W.A.S.P.'s" -NateW, 12:17 pm
___________________

WTF? Who said anything about Jews running the world, or any of the other red herrings you trot out?

In case you haven't heard, Israel is trying to drag the US into war with Iran, which will inevitably result in the cold-blooded murder of millions of innocent Iranians and who knows how many Americans. This is an insane, criminal, proposition of historic proportions. Give me one good reason we should back Israel in a war against Iran instead of taking on Israel's military ourselves, to make sure they start no more land-grabbing wars of aggression.

And don't try to tell us that the spectacle of Obama swearing allegiance to Israel two days after winning his Party's nomination for president and a day before Israel announced its intention to attack Iran isn't obscene, if not downright treasonous. Strong words, yes, but deserved. Israel is no ally of ours, and never has been. They tried to sink one of our ships and murdered most of its crew. They routinely steal military secrets from us. They use our tax dollars to sabotage our diplomacy in the ME. They subvert our national security by ethnically cleansing Muslims, stealing their land, and trying to push the United States into unwinnable, counterproductive wars that serve only the Zionists' own expansionist, racist, agenda.

"Railing" against the Israel lobby is just what the doctor ordered. The Zionists love to work in the shadows, undetected. Americans need to call them out, before they drag us deeper into the quagmire.

Impeach, indict, imprison.

Israel was a bad idea.

How did such a very, very small country gain so much clout in such a short period of time. From taking over land that belonged to someone else to running the most advanced country in the world (us) they have progressed from nothing to the biggest parasite in the world. We bow to their every wish, stand by while they commit atocracies we would find horrendous if another country were doing them. We send them enough money so that they have adequate health care for all of their citizens. Makes one wonder.

"Yes, Israelis deserve security."
__________________________

How about Americans? Do we deserve security? We won't get it as long as our politicians keep taking bribes in exchange for their allegiance to a hostile foreign power and its fifth column inside the United States. Things can only get worse (much, much, worse) until Americans drive a stake through the heart of AIPAC and the Israel lobby. We need leaders with the courage to denounce AIPAC for what it is: a nest of spies, subversives, and traitors.

Impeach, indict, imprison.

Instead of simply railing against AIPAC, Israel, and Zionists in a manner akin to tracts published by the same publishers who reprinted "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion," those who rail against Israel time would be better served by starting their own lobbying effort for a start. A second would be to dispense with believing the modern version of the "Jews run the world & are to blame for everything wrong" fantasy as the majority of those whom populate corporate boards are W.A.S.P.'s (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant). A third thing to recognize is that the Arabs have and continue to badly play the crappy hand they have been dealt for a variety of complex reasons, and as long as they do so with Hamas and Hezbollah as their standard bearers, their cause will remain a quixotic one.

Robert: why "even" Barack Obama? Where have you been all these years? Considering where Obama comes from religiously he cannot fail to be an Israel sycophant. When you consider his past statements to the Chicago Tribune and AIPAC this latest diatribe is nothing new. For more than one year I have held that a neo-imperialist President Obama, by sheer miscalculation, is likely to get us into more conflicts in the Middle East. I still believe that to be true. Only when oil prices become so high that another war cannot be paid for will Obama perhaps understand that every time he says "Iran" publicly the price of crude now goes up by one dollar. He is truly but unwittingly one of the oil-speculators best friends.
Finally, if President Bush had committed the "Jerusalem boo-boo" he would have been mercilessly ridiculed. Why not Barack Obama? Because he is the Democratic "Teflon Candidate?" Because when you criticize him as the lightweight he is you will be called a "racist?" Wake up Robert and begin to call a spade a spade before it is too late.

Bush talks with God. Blair talks with God. They're all talking with God... Well I'm a Christian too, of sorts, but no sort of Christian that they are. I wish that God would talk to me. I wish that he'd tell me that the American economy is going down the toilet with Britian's soon to follow. I don't see what else will stop us on this hell-bent plan to spread peace and freedom around the world.

seems to me that I remember Barack Obama saying that he will not pander to k street well that story has been told before by every one running for office and then the truth comes out. One day after he gets the nomination he is out kissing up to the apact. More of the same old same o, so much for change we can believe in. If he continues to put the pins on his coat he will look like a nascar race driver by the end of the race with pins of all the people he must bow to if he is elected. Also you might remember it was about three days after his apact speech that Isreal felt embolden to say that they are about to attack Iran. Mooore of the same.

Again Robert Fisk nails it. While I never got to meet him, I shared Beirut with Fisky while teaching and learning there.
How attached we are to the notion that Arabs and Muslims are a theological or geopolitical category and not human beings with their variety and yearnings and inherent human rights. How the Clash of Civilizations theory ignores our kinship and shared history. For an exploration of these themes see "Clashing Civilizations or Braided Rivers" and "Arabia and the American Dream" at http://phillipbannowsky.com/

I despair that sanity may indeed be a requisite for the continuation of our species. There are many who are, and Robert Fisk is certainly one of them, but our so-called leaders fall very far from the mark.