"In the US the Jewish lobby’s power at the Congress and its influence on both the Democratic and Republican party prevents any executive power from achieving the Israeli withdrawal from the Occupied Palestine Territories."
By Debbie Menon
Israel Shamir had sent an interesting Newsletter out containing an interview with a deceased friend, Mauro Manno,who was apparently a forceful anti-Zionist and anti-American Imperialist. What Mauro Manno says about the AIPAC lobby's influence in America, and American and Israeli plans and objectives in Palestine, the Middle East and Iran is compelling and relevant. I have extracted and edited it to make it more palatable or digestible for those who object to or find problems with Shamir’s attitudes and have included a link to the original
While digging, I ran into some of Mauro Manno's original work, which, in the mood and swing of things, I also pulled and prepared.
Significant is his statement in his article with the hopeful title, Israel's Collapse Is Getting Closer, which sums up the root of the problems; "In the US the Jewish lobby’s power at the Congress and its influence on both the Democratic and Republican party prevents any executive power from achieving the Israeli withdrawal from the Occupied Palestine Territories."
I have also included Paul Craig Roberts' treatment of how the Zionists have surrounded, or taken over, the office of the US Presidency which supports Mauro Manno’s statement.
I've stressed this before and I reiterate here, in presenting or illustrating the threat of Israel and Zionism to world peace and the role they play in the present outrage which is happening in Gaza, focusing on the day-to-day atrocities they are committing in Gaza, the bombings, the shootings (see the video), the stuff of what I call, "blood, body parts, bullet holes and babies”, that while we may be correctly focusing on the horror of blood and body parts, we should always ensure however, that we do not distract attention or focus away from the circumstances of the underlying cause behind it all: the US-Israeli alliance and the inordinate influence of Israel lobbies over the US and European government's foreign and domestic policies, and internal political affairs.
These latter matters are the real concerns of the day, and, to pull that poisoned and poisoning tooth will clear up the problem and give the world patient an opportunity to recover.
To that effect, I present the following for your perusal :
Is Israel a democratic state? — Interview with Mauro Manno
Author: Giovanna Canzano
Translated by Mary Rizzo. Revised by Saja Raoof.
Our friend Mauro Manno passed away last Friday 13 February 2009 in Naples. He was 57 y.o. Mauro had dedicated the last years of his life to the study and deconstruction of both Zionism and Israel. This is the last interview he gave, in January 2009.
…“What nation would have accepted the division of its own territory imposed from above, even if it were the UN (which at the time, let’s not forget, was constituted of a quarter of the current states and was under the control of the USA and the Soviet Union).
If the UN had only seen to imposing just the application of Resolution 194 that asked Israel to allow the Palestinians who had been forcefully removed to return, well, things would have gone in a very different way. But Israel rejected that resolution….” — (Mauro Manno)
Giovanna Canzano – Jews “über alles”. Since 1948, with the birth of the state of Israel, we can see, from reading various papers, the Jewish presence in every sector of cultural and economic life: guides and wise men and “righteous men”?
I’ve been studying the politics of Zionism for years now and can say with certainty that the confusion over this point is not only erroneous, historically and politically, but it is also unfair towards those many Jews who had been the victims of Zionism.
Even today there are Jews who are victims of Zionism.
A few of these new victims I know personally and it doesn’t seem to me that they are “über Alles”, but instead they are certainly under Zionist scrutiny.
They are ostracised, they lose their university positions such as happened to Norman Finkelstein, the author of “The Holocaust Industry” or they get isolated and put in conditions where they leave not only their university post, but also their loved ones and friends in Israel and emigrate in the West, as happened to Ilan Pappe, the author of “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”.
These Jews suffer because they have the courage of proclaiming that they are anti-Zionists. This act of revolt against Zionism doesn’t constitute only the repudiation of that political ideology, but also the rejection of the historical consequences that its victory has had, that is, the Jewish State, Israel as a Jewish State. The anti-Zionists wish for the end of the state of Israel as it has been built by the Zionists and they fight for its substitution with a single, democratic state for all the Jews and all the Palestinians who are within the whole of Palestine, that is, within Israel and the Occupied Territories, Gaza included. But that is not all; they also support the Right of Return of the refugees forced to leave in 1948, just as is sanctioned by UN Resolution 194, which was voted upon exactly 60 years ago (11 December 1948) but never applied.
However, there is an important point to make! Whoever knows the fate of these new victims of Zionism, the anti-Zionist Jews, must not forget the much more tragic fate reserved for the assimilationist Jews during the Second World War. They too were against Zionism, and they too were the victims of Zionism. This is the part of their story that the Zionists want to keep absolutely hidden.The Zionist battle against assimilationist Jews, conducted in collaboration with the Nazis and the anti-Semites.
Anything but “righteous men,” the Zionists are the political men who are the least righteous at all, towards other Jews and non-Jews alike.
GC – Who are the Jewish assimilationists?
MM – Jewish assimilationists were those Jews who wanted to assimilate, become part of the population in the country they were born in. According to Rabbinic law, Halacha is the Jew who is son or daughter of a Jewish woman or someone who converts to Judaism. Jewishness is therefore transmitted by way of blood, from mother to son or daughter. For other religions, this is not the case: the Christianity of a Catholic or the Islam of a Muslim is not transmitted by way of blood. To conserve this Jewish peculiarity, it is fundamental towards the conservation of Judaism in general that the family does not have any mixed marriages, with non-Jews. If a Jew (not born in Israel) believes that the fact of being the child of a Jewish mother does not make him Jewish, if he rejects the Jewish religion, if he considers himself a free human being that can chose another religion or no religion at all, if he wants to live without the weight of the Jewish past of his family, then he is an assimilationist.
He wants to leave the closed Jewish world and enter into the world that is more open and free that he finds outside the Jewish one. So, this person would have totally adopted the culture, language, lifestyle, cuisine, tradition, etc., of the country in which he lives. He would adopt its destiny as well. He wouldn’t feel obligated to marry a Jewish woman and in that way according to Halacha, his children would no longer be Jews. If he educates his children in the spirit in which he himself has lived, and his children also have mixed marriages, and their children and so on, after a few generations, his descendants will no longer be Jews, but they will be Italians, Germans, French, etc., in every way, shape and form. The Zionist Jabotinsky, who obviously abhorred assimilation said, “to read true assimilation… [the Jew] would have to produce, through a long series of mixed marriages, in a period of various decades, a grandson of a grandson of a grandson within whose veins runs only a slight trace of Jewish blood, because that grandson of a grandson of a grandson will have the spiritual conformation of a true Frenchman or a true German.” Mixed marriage is at the base of assimilation. Before the Second World War, mixed marriages were in strong progression, for example, in 1929 in Germany, they constituted 59% of the marriages, and pure marriages,with both of the spouses being Jewish was a 41% minority. That frightened the Zionists, who considered assimilationists something like traitors. When the Nazis came to power, the International Zionist organisations broke their necks to collaborate with them and they even made pacts with them to allow only the emigration of Zionists outside of Germany (recovering their belongings) and sending them to the Palestinian colonies. The assimilationist Jews did not interest them and they were left to their own fate.
The Zionists did nothing so that the assimilationist Jews could emigrate to America or to other Western states, as a matter of fact, they blocked any efforts in this direction. Later, during the war, they extended this policy to the rest of Europe. There were killings and massacres of Jews and they were dealing only in order to save those who were Zionists and who would emigrate to Palestine, all the rest could simply be left to die. The example of Rezso Kasztner is illuminating This Hungarian Zionist in 1944 bartered the salvation of his family and those belonging to various Hungarian Zionist organisations, 1,600 persons in all, in exchange for his collaboration and that of his followers in order to facilitate the deportation to Auschwitz of hundreds of thousands of assimilationist Jews.
This policy has facilitated the near extinction of non-Zionist Jews, those on the road towards assimilation. The Zionists share responsibility, together with the Nazis, of this crime. This is the reason for which most of the Jews of the Diaspora declare themselves to be Zionists and they generally marry only other Jews.
GC – Are you saying there was an ethnic cleansing of Jews conducted by other Jews?
MM – I would hold that term, “ethnic cleansing” to describe what the Zionists did to the Palestinians in 1948. They had cleared Palestine of its antique inhabitants, as Ilan Pappe has carefully demonstrated in his recent book, the title of which refers to the ethnic cleansing. I would instead say that there was a will of the Zionists to rid themselves of non-Zionist Jews. I had spoken of the shared responsibility of the Zionists with the Nazis. It was the Nazis to bring them to their deaths, while the Zionists collaborated at various levels with the killers. During the Second World War, the Zionists, in some cases, had even killed directly, most of the time they had denounced other Jews, they often helped run the concentration camps, they had convinced the assimilationists to stay in their place, to not rebel, all of that in exchange for the salvation of their Zionist followers, their friends and their families. Regarding their followers, it is essential to note that the Zionist leaders didn’t even work on saving them all, but only the young ones, that is, those who could engage in armed combat (in prevision of a war against the English and the Palestinians), in other words, those who could work towards the development of the colonies, those who could bear children. The old people and small children only would have been an encumbrance. In 1937 Chaim Weizmann, future President of Israel, before the Peel Commission in London coldly declared: “I want to save… the young [for Palestine]. The old ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not. They were dust, economic and moral dust in a cruel world…Only the branch of the young shall survive…They have to accept it.” And, remember, this is a Zionist speaking. Ben Gurion, speaking in ’38 of children (children of Zionists and non-Zionists) said, “If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England and only half of them by transporting them to Palestine I would choose the second.” Ben Gurion knew that if the assimilationists and persons of good will would have wanted to choose between “saving Jews from Concentration Camps” and Zionism, “mercy” would have “had the upper hand and the whole energy of the people would be channeled into saving Jews from various countries;” then Zionism “will be struck off the agenda not only in world public opinion, in Britain and in the United States, but elsewhere in Jewish public opinion.” For the Zionists this absolutely could not be allowed to happen and they did everything possible so that it did not happen. Just think that when someone said to Yitzhak Gruenbaum, leader of the Rescue Committee (!) of the Jewish Agency in Palestine, in 1943 when the killings started, “Don’t build new colonies (…) send money save Jews in the Diaspora,” he responded: “Zionism is above everything.” On another occasion, still in 1943, he stated, “one cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Europe.” So, it was in this way that the Zionists, allying themselves with the Nazis, saved themselves, while the non-Zionists were eliminated as a direct result of that alliance.
And today the Zionists dominate over all the Jews and they greatly influence the Western governments. They determine American foreign policy (see the book by Mearsheimer and Walt). And for this, reason, Israel is untouchable and can do anything it wants to and not only to the Palestinians… but here we are touching upon the problem of the Zionist lobby.
GC – Zionist lobby?
MM – To make it understandable, let us take the example of the Zionist lobby in America, which is the strongest Zionist lobby in the West. In the race for the American presidency, everyone had to see both Obama and his vice, Biden and the two losers McCain and Palin, run to genuflect before the organisation of the strongest of the lobbies, AIPAC. This had been foreseen by Mearsheimer and Walt and it happened without delay.
The two candidates have been forced to undergo an accurate examination before the judges of the lobby concerning their proposals regarding Israel and to the command posts that would be willing to pass to Zionists (Jews or non-Jews) in their future administration. Everyone will remember how Obama was able to catch his rival off balance proclaiming that he supported the line of “a sole and indivisible Jerusalem as capital of the Jewish State.” McCain didn’t go quite so far. This line is officially condemned by the international community on the basis of a series of UN resolutions. Israel continues its expulsion of the Palestinians (many of them Christians) of the Holy City and the West pretends nothing is happening while at the same time maintaining the official position of the UN. Now Obama, the “man of peace” has gone closer to the side of Israel than any other president has yet done. It seemed in the beginning that the determinant support of the lobby was going to go towards McCain, but then something changed. It is necessary to recall that Obama’s vice, Joe Biden, as soon as he was nominated declared himself to be an ardent Zionist! And I would not be surprised if it was the Lobby itself that had imposed Biden on Obama.
Then Obama was able to give secure guarantees, and favours (and money) of the lobby all flowed his way. It was a formidable coup for the Zionists. Now the lobby will have a pro-Israel policy and a pro-Israel lobby pushed forward by a popular president and not by a shadow of Bush. The Western politicians can also make their own policies more pro-Israel and pro-USA (which is the same) without clashing very much with public opinion. The pacifist movement is completely shattered. Certainly, quite soon Obama will destroy his image of the new man, becoming like Rice or Powell, the black man that is used to serve the interests of the lobby, but this means nothing to the lobby, and why should it if they are able to get just what they want? In reality the image of Obama is already sullied. The choice of Clinton for Secretary of State, the choice of Rahm Emanuel (whose father declared that he detests Arabs and he is sure that his son will work in favour of Israel) are just the first signs.The lobby was able to obtain something else as well. After the domination that Bush had given to another wing of the lobby, to the discredited neo-cons (almost all of them Jewish), the Zionists strategists figured out how to have the same policies be carried out by non-Jews, but ones who are of proven Zionist faith. Thus, after Biden, we see the re-emergence of Clinton (with whom Obama once had clashes regarding foreign policy, and now we see him entrust that ministry to her). Hillary is another Zionist that will bring to the Secretary of State office the Jewish team her husband had: Madeleine Albright, Holbrooke, Dennis Ross, etc.The same politics of the Jewish neo-cons but officially carried out by non-Jews. The non-Jewish Zionists are fortunately very few but they are the worst traitors of their country and they send young Americans to war so that Israel can be strengthened, which is what happened in Iraq. Even we Europeans have our Zionist lobby. Let’s not harbour any illusions there.
GC – There is a Zionist lobby in Europe?
MM – The Zionist lobby can be found anywhere in the world where there are Zionists. If they were all in Israel it would all be so simple, but there is the Diaspora and among the Jews of the Diaspora there are many Zionists. This was already in the program of the First Zionist Congress (1897) that the Zionists of the Diaspora would have to take the preparatory steps “towards obtaining the consent of governments, where necessary in order to reach the goals of Zionism.” And that is what they have been able to do. Today, after the birth of Israel, the American Zionist lobby and the various national lobbies always serve the “goals of Zionism”, that however are not the same as those when the task at hand was founding the Jewish State. 60 years since its foundation, Israel does not yet have a solid base. Its existence as a “Jewish State” is taken to task and it is maintained only with the use of force. Being an ethnic state that occupied other people’s land and oppresses the Palestinians, without any respect for international law, it is well aware that it is an illegitimate state. The lobby has the task of “making it legitimate” at least in the eyes of the West. Europe, at least on a formal level, has been involved in the Middle East in a position of equilibrium between Arabs and Israelis. We have major interests in the Arab world. In 2004 there have been the first changes.
The EU Council approved the “EU-Israel Action Plan” and in spite of the horrifying record of Israel in the area of human rights, the Plan declared that “The EU and Israel share the same values of democracy, respect for human rights and sovereignty of law and the fundamental freedoms.” This is absolutely false and I am prepared to demonstrate it. However the Plan gets worse: it gives Israel the possibility of “participating in key aspects of EU policies and programmes.” We will become a Zionist colony.
Since 2006 the position of Europe has further changed. First there was a softening of criticism of Israel. That took place by pressure from a special “Jewish American Committee for Europe”. Within that group we find AIPAC, the ADL (Anti-Defamation League), the American Jewish Congress, which has distinguished itself from the others. Responding in a positive way on behalf of Europe as first Prodi, then Ferrero-Waldner and now Barroso. Before 2000 the EU expected Israel to pay for the damage caused within the Occupied Territories with European money and now, after Ferrero-Waldner and Barroso, the territories don’t get anything.
Today in the European Parliament there is a group of approximately 200 parliament members called “European Friends of Israel” who work for Tel Aviv. This effort is sustained by Jewish businessmen everywhere in the continent as well as Jews who have been elected in the various parliaments such as, in Italy, Fiamma Nierenstein and the lawyer Alessandro Ruben. Lastly, with the French EU presidency of the Jewish Zionist (he himself declared this) Nicolas Sarkozy and the constitution of the Mediterranean Union, Zionism is now very close to obtaining the acceptance and the legitimisation of Israel in the Arab world, through Europe. Be very careful, this is not a peace policy, as the European governors keep saying. If there is the realisation of Arab legitimisation, Israel will have their hands free for a military policy, against Iran, against Hezbollah and the Palestinians, with the blessings of the Arab countries. In this framework, the Palestinian State will be a series of tiny Bantustans that are completely surrounded, just like Gaza. Only the economic crisis of the West can stop the conflict. If the economic crisis makes the corrupt Arab nations that are governing lose their power, we will see a reprisal terrorism, revolts, revolutions and frustrated Arab peoples.
GC – So, Israel is not a democratic State?
MM – No. No, it is not. It is an ethnocratic state. A Jews-only state. Democracy in the Jewish State is only valid for Jews. For non-Jews it is a farce. Let’s try to imagine for a moment that in a multi-ethnic country in which there is a colonial administration, a party that represents a particular ethnic group has in mind, once colonialism has ended, to constitute a democratic state over the entire country, but to kick out all the other ethnic groups. How can we say that the programme that this party has is a democratic one? For me it’s a racist programme based on ethnic cleansing. Now, let’s try to imagine that once the phase of colonialism has ended, this party is allowed to make it’s own state but only on part of the territory in the country and on the condition that even on that territory there are no expulsions made on an ethnic basis. It instead happened that the state was founded immediately after the expulsion of the majority of its inhabitants on behalf of the minority, according to its initial racist programme. It’s a democratic state but democracy is supposed to involve the entire population, not just the minority that has undertaken an ethnic cleansing. Now we see that institutions that represent international law (the UN for example) are asking this ethnic state to reintegrate those who had been expelled and to give them equal democratic rights. In response, this “democratic” state (only for the ethnic group it represents) refuses to do it, instead it perseveres with its initial programme of wanting to conquer the entire territory of the country and to colonise it with people of its same ethnic group that are brought in from other countries. This new expansion and this new ethnic cleansing do not happen in a haphazard way, but rather is sanctioned within the founding documents of the “democratic” state. For example, within them we see that the entire territory of the country belongs to all of those who are members of the right ethnic group wherever they are to be found (and perhaps even have been living there for thousands of years) and do not on the other hand belong to those who had been expelled just prior to the foundation of the ethnic state. Is this still a democratic state?
And that is not all. Let’s imagine that in this ethnic state there has been a small minority of the wrong ethnic group that has survived. It’s a minority with a demographic growth that constitutes nearly a quarter of the entire population. These persons are treated like second-class citizens, in economic activities, before the law, in daily life, and so on, where they have to undergo a thousand kinds of discrimination. The worst discrimination concerns the possession of land. The state has secured for itself, with another founding law by the ethnic “democracy”, that 93% of the country’s land has to stay in the hands of the right ethnic group. The sale of terrain (and that includes any property that is built upon it) is allowed only between people of this ethnic group. It is however possible to purchase new land in that 7% that was left to the minority ethnic group, in such as way so as to expand the property of the right ethnic group. Is it still a democratic state?
When confronted with these discriminations, the ethnic state concedes a limited voting right and a limited right to criticise of the discriminated minority group.Are these political rights enough when put next to the thousand discriminations to make this a democratic state?
I can already hear the defenders of Israel, because that is what we are talking about, object and protest against my last affirmation on the limited political rights of the Palestinian majority. Instead, that is only the way it is. Think about the fact that in Israel it is prohibited to challenge the Jewish character of the state. It is prohibited to found parties that have as a programme proposing a different kind of state, not an ethnic one, but one for all its citizens. It is prohibited to fight for the application of UN Resolution 194 that imposes the right of return of the Palestinians who had been expelled. It is prohibited to fight for the abolition of the founding law of the state that says that Palestine belongs to all the Jews of the world and in any moment any one of them may come to Palestine to occupy property that the army of the Jewish state has been seen taking away from some Palestinian of the Occupied Territories. Is this still a democratic state? Then it is established that Catholic citizens (whatever that term comes to mean now) cannot sell property to Jews, Protestants, et al., so that the land of Italy will be concentrated more and more in Catholic hands. Non-Catholics will have the right to vote, but in such a way so as to not endanger the “Catholic” character of the state. Could Italy still call itself democratic under those conditions? And I have to remind those who defend Israel that the Jews in Italy are not a quarter of the population as the Palestinians in Israel are. I remind them as well that if things continue in this direction, there is the risk not only of an ethnocratic state of Israel, but that it actually becomes a theocratic state, taking into consideration the growing importance of religious parties in Israeli politics.
GC – In relation to what has already been said in this interview, what would your explanation be for the furious Israeli attack against Gaza?
MN – If we look at what’s happening in Gaza now within the historical framework that in some way we have traced in this interview, we must conclude that this is nothing less than a further step ahead in the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians.
If Israel wanted to come to a compromise with the Palestinians regarding a Palestinian state, well, there was no shortage of opportunities. The supporters of Israel insist that it was the Palestinian side that would not accept the division of Palestine in 1948. But, who would have accepted such a thing? What nation would have accepted the division of its own territory imposed from on high, even from the UN (which at the time, bear in mind, was constituted of only a quarter of the current states and it was under control of the US and USSR).
If then the UN would have imposed also the application of UN Resolution 194, which asked Israel to allow the Palestinians cast off forcefully to be able to return, then things would have gone quite differently. But Israel rejected the Resolution, as it was sure of the support of the USA, which was already under the heavy influence of the American Zionist lobby. It did much more, actually. It assassinated the UN mediator Folke Bernadotte who was elaborating a new policy at the time. Israel wanted an ethnically pure state and nothing else would suffice. This is Zionism. After the 1967 war, Israel would not accept Resolution 242 either, which imposed the withdrawal of Israel from the Occupied Territories. Instead, against all international law, it started to colonise these territories. Israel would accept no compromise during the Oslo Agreements and it still today forges ahead with colonisation. In 2002 the Arab states offered the recognition of Israel in exchange for the withdrawal of Israel to the confines of 1967, but Israel refused, started the construction of the wall that has claimed vast parts of the Occupied Territories from which the Palestinian population is slowly but surely being expelled from, and it still carries on with the construction of settlements and the suffocation of the Palestinians of East Jerusalem.
When in 2006 Hamas won the elections democratically and formed its government over all the Palestinians of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, Israel would not recognise it. Together with the complicity of the EU, it started a policy of dividing the Palestinians. This policy was supported by the corrupt Abu Mazen. To safeguard unity, Hamas accepted to reach a compromise with him and with that part of Al Fatah that backs him; together with him they formed a national unity government. Instigated by the USA and Israel, Abu Mazen, convinced that even the new government was born due to weakness of Hamas, organised a plot in Gaza to evict the military power of the rival party, but that attempt failed and it was actually the followers of Abu Mazen to be cast out of Gaza. Consequently, Abu Mazen dissolved the government, forming one with his most loyal followers and he let Israel arrest ministers, parliament members, leaders of Hamas all throughout the West Bank. He committed to an agreement for Peace with Israel (Annapolis).
This obviously all came to nothing, because Israel will not give in on even the smallest detail, and it wants people like Abu Mazen who will play his part in the pretence of agreements and in the meantime keeps on building settlements and carries on with ethnic cleansing. For Israel it became therefore essential to eliminate Hamas, killing or arresting all of its leaders. This is the reason of the criminal attack against Gaza; to conquer it and give it to Abu Mazen with whom it could continue with the pretence of agreements. If Hamas resists and Israel is forced to cease the attack and to withdraw, Abu Mazen will be the first loser, but losing will also be the entire strategy of Israel and of the Americans.
Original article published on 6 January, 2009
Israel’s collapse is getting closer, the plot against the Palestinians is getting more merciless
Author: Mauro Manno
Translated by Diego Traversa
What’s happening to the Palestinians? Are the Palestinians splitting up and fighting each other instead of standing up against one of the most heinous occupations in history?
Who lacks means to understand what’s really going on all over the Middle East might draw this conclusion. Yet he would be wrong, since he can’t realize that, the more the oppressors’ difficulties are massing and the darker the storm’s clouds are getting, the more they will scheme so as to try to keep afloat.
In order to make head or tail of the complex situation of a region where many contradictions have piled up, where many injustices have been committed and where the hopes for an arrangement have regularly been shattered against Zionism’s and American imperialism’s forces, it’s absolutely necessary to face the reality very carefully and without those yardsticks that derive from old-fashioned and, moreover, western mental schemes. First of all, that one, typical of the so-called left, that sees laicsm as being always positive and everything that is religious as negative.
In our case, we’re talking about Hamas.
It’s a typcial western mistake, since here religion’s forces have historically played a conservative role compared to liberalism and socialism.
Another more and more common mistake is that one of comparing Islamic religious movements to extremism and terrorism.
The Zionist plan
The electoral victory in 2005 by Hamas, a liberation movement strongly characterized by the Islamic religion, plunged the Zionists and the American imperialists into confusion. After Oslo accords’ failure, it was only natural that the negotiations’ standstill , accompanied with the non-stop and wild settlement by Israel, would result in the progressive weakening of those forces like Fatah which had bet on the “peace” process and, not having achieved anything, had ended with setting up a regime (without state) maintained by the corruption resulting from sharing out the American and European “aids”. Only a little part of these aids came to the Palestinian people and that little they obtained in the form of civil superstructure was immediately destroyed by the Israeli military operations.
The Israeli project was that of making President Arafat increasingly weaker first and then Mahmud Abbas and the entire PNA. In the meantime, Sharon’s plan foresaw the unilateral creation, on the ground, of an irreversible situation thanks to the wall, the Jewish settlements and the Palestinian bantustans. Both the processes—PNA’s weakening and the bantustans—were to lead to “peace” at last: the 90% of West Bank and 100% of Jerusalem, all Palestine’s water and the control over the borders to the Israelis; the Palestinians , instead, would be left empty-handed, that’s four roofless prisons being divided from one another that the world would accept as “Palestinian state”. The first of them was Gaza, evacuated by Sharon in 2005.
The Road Map, as was lately admitted even by an Israeli general, was only a pretext to gain time, a bait to be swallowed by the EU, the western countries and the people having good intentions but with a limited brain. (1)
This colonialist and racist plan was messed up by Hamas’ victory. If a weak and corrupted PA, maintained by the West’s money and if a meaningless and uncapable President like Abu Mazen would, on one hand, probably welcome a “compromise” such as the one conceived by the Zionists on the other, it was clear that Hamas would never do. The Palestinian people democratically appointed their own representatives so that they wouldn’t do it. To the Americans and the Zionists, the elections represented a defeat to avenge as soon as possible.
US and Israel
We need to clear at this point between the differences and the convergences between US’s Middle-eastern policies and Israel’s and the American Jewish lobby’s ones.
Those people speaking about the importance of the Jewish Lobby in the American society and of its influence over the American Middle-eastern policy are often accused,albeit not always, of exaggerating its role and of debasing the imperialist character of US policies in ME. In other words, the accusation goes that they would regard US’ imperialist intervention in the ME as being positive, weren’t it for the presence of the Jewish lobby or Israel.
This criticism conceals another more malicious one, that those speaking of the Jewish lobby do conceal behind that term the idea of the Jewish conspiracy that has gone through the American decision-making process through deception while twisting policies to its own benefit, complying with a sort of “Protocols of Elders of Zion” Jewish project for the world rule. Bullshit!
The target of the imperialist American superpower is the rule over the Middle East. With this meaning:
1) doing away with all the forces, be it countries or parties, opposed to it
2) support to Israel , to the moderate states (client state) like Egypt, Jordan and the nations in the Persian Gulf’s area such as Saudi Arabia
3) setting up a weak and federal state in Iraq where Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis may fight one against the other in a insecure balance for which the Americans may vouch through their constant presence in the country
4) controlling, surrounding and overthrowing (regime change) or, if necessary, bombing and possibly invading the “rogue states” like Iran or Syria
5) strengthening the pro-western forces in Lebanon and aiming at a favourable solution for America and Israel as to the deadlock situation in the country, through disarmament or dismantling of Hezbollah
In Palestine, the aim of the American superpower requires the support to the pro-western force of Fatah and the disarmament and dismantling of Hamas , as well as the set up of a tiny Palestinian state given over to a friendly government to US and Israel.
Hence, it would seem that the American and Israeli targets are exactly overlapping, yet this is not completely true.
The US, in order to secure a lasting and possibly cheap supremacy over the region, would be bent on setting up a viable Palestinian state over those territories the UN Resolution 242 demands Israel to leave. In the past, Israel has been urged by the US to remove most of the settlements and to make some concrete territorial compromise (to swap territories). Honestly, I can’t see why the US should oppose a possibly friendly and grateful tiny Palestinian state being set up, which would be another client state like Jordan or, maybe, somehow associated to it. This would make King Abdallah, “the little King's” son, happy.
What would the US lose by founding such a state ? Nothing. On the contrary, they would gain a lot from it, since they would see their position in the region strengthened, would give an important help to the Arab “moderate” states, would take a region away from Al Qaeda’s recruiting and would decrease much of Syria’s and Iran’s influence in Middle East.
Yet, can the US work for the creation of a little Palestinian state?
One would be spontaneously led to argue that, since the US is the only superpower left, it can do everything as it wishes , thus being able to force Israel to hand over to the Palestinians the territories they conquered in 1967, but stating this wouldn’t be correct. Were it like that, we would have to draw the conclusion that the US, given that no Israeli withdrawal whatsoever has taken place up to now, doesn’t want any Palestinian state to be set up at all.
Why on earth shouldn’t they want it? To lay themselves still open to the international terrorism? Or for some other economic reason? IS there maybe oil or incredible great wealth in the territories occupied by Israel? Does America take any substantial benefit from it?
The US’s power isn’t unlimited. We have realized it by seeing the American incapability to prevail in Iraq. But US power is also limited by the lobbying system in Washington.
Thus, the US can’t operate freely for the building of a tiny Palestinian state, as they did at detriment of their Indonesian ally with the foundation of the eastern state of Timor.
In the US, the Jewish lobby’s power at the Congress and its influence on both the Democratic and Republican party prevents any executive power from achieving the Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories.
It should be by now clear, after the wide debate over the lobby originated from the circumstantial accusations from outstanding voices such as those ones by Mersheimer and Walt, Jimmy Carter, George Soros, James Petras, Norman Finkelstein, the Financial Times and so on (2).
To Israel, it’s a question of vital importance to seize as many territories as possible and to take over the water sources of the entire Palestine.
This is fundamental for a state betting on the Jewish immigration and which needs wider territories in order to shield itself from the bordering Arab states with whom it hasn’t managed or wanted to put peace and coexistence into place.
Israel has therefore charged its lobby in America with the very important task of hampering a Palestinian state from rising over the occupied territories ,one which may have its own water sources (bigger than Israel’s ones), an army on its own and the control over its own borders. Should an eventual Palestian state control its own water sources, have its own borders and an army to defend them, it would become for Israel a sort of extension of the other Arab states and a threat to the Jewish state. Thus, it’s fundamental to Israel, but not for the US, that a normal Palestinan state not be set up and that the Palestinians be enclosed in roofless prisons surrounded by the apartheid wall and barbed wire just like in Gaza which, despite having been evacuated, depends entirely on Israel and doesn’t have the control of its border with Egypt nor that of its coast and the facing sea strip.
Present situation in Gaza and West Bank
Hence, the Israeli and American targets are partly overlapping (over Hamas and the Palestinian government) and partly diverging (about setting up a small yet viable Palestinian state). Hamas’ isolation and support to Fatah and Mahmud Abbas are shared targets. To Israel , as Hamas will never accept the Bantustans; to the Americans, because a Hamas-ruled Palestine can be, along with Hezbollah and Syria, another important ally to Iran against the moderate Arabs and the US’s rule over Middle East.
It’s therefore understandable that Zionists and Americans, while winning over the base, cowardly and meaningless Europe, have started plotting to overthrow the lawful Hamas government first and then the National Unity one (risen by virtue of Mecca Accord).
We have this found out from the Israeli dailies themselves and the leading press agencies (3).
The first step has been that of imposing economic sanctions, freezing the Palestinian funds, the economic blockade of Gaza and West Bank. Then a plot aimed at the disarmament of Hamas started. In this dirty secret operation, which started very soon, Bush’s and Israel’s key man has been Mohammad Dahlan.
This criminal, responsible for Fatah's security force, has welcomed the Israeli-American plans by having Fatah’s young unemployed men trained thanks to US money (60 million dollars) and CIA’s instructors supervised by Lieutenant-General Keith Dayton.
Drilled in Egypt with the help of Egypt’s and Jordan’s governments, these men, in little but well equipped groups, were made to come from Gaza Strip in order to prepare those forces that, once they had become strong and numerous, would have to do against Hamas what instead Hamas has beforehand done against Fatah by baffling the plot against itself.
They were the omens of the realization of the American-Zionist plan.
In these preliminary fights, Dahlan’s men were always defeated, losing much material, that today is in Hamas’ hands.
Being in despair, Dahlan has even asked Israel to give other more powerful arms, mortars, trench-mortars and armoured-cars (4). Israel has turned down the request fearing (as foreseeable) that they may end in the Islamic extremists’ hands.
The people who have carefully seen the images of the definitive clashes in Gaza and Rafah have been able to catch glimpse of the great participation of mobs on Hamas fighters’ side and their participation in the capture of treacherous leaders, openly mocked on the streets.
In its operations against Dahlan’s men, Hamas has won the support of other political organizations such as the Popular Committees and organizations and patriotic family clans.
The quick collapse of Fatah in the Strip is the proof of the all-out isolation of Dahlan’s traitors.
In this situation, Mahmud Abbas proved to be what he really is, a weak and compromised man. He has tried for a while to patronize the national unity government and the parliamentary institutions, in which Hamas and its allies are the majority, and at the end, under the menace of being thrown out from Fatah, or even something worse, he surrendered. (5)
He dissolved the lawful government and appointed a temporary one, with Dahlan’s , Fatah’s and American-welcomed men, chaired by the economist Fayyad, another one of Bush’s men. Everything took place without the Parliament’s approval.
It’s a putsch. It favours the strategic Israeli plan: to divide what has been left of Palestine.
But what the Palestinians have to face now is even more tragic. While the US, Israel and the EU (the so-called international community) have immediately recognized the non-appointed government of Fatah raising the lethal sanctions imposed against a democratically elected government, Israel rushed to close Gaza. Borders and exportations blocked; no fuel supplies any longer, no money from the Palestinian taxes, unfairly held back and today given to Abbas.
The scheme for putting Palestinians against other Palestinians seems to have been successful, besides starving and slaughtering those ones opposed to Israel through the complicity of those ones who instead lower their heads. Abbas is going to get nothing from Israel while a new large-scale military campaign in Gaza to destroy Hamas is to be expected.
Paradoxically, these events take place just while Israel is experiencing the deepest crisis of its history. Suffice it to read the remarks for the 40th anniversary of the 6-Days War (June 1967) to see how all the Israeli commentators consider that “great victory” of Israel as the end of all the hopes for peace in ME. It was supposed to set the Jewish state safe whereas it made it more hated and cut off in the region. Today it’s weaker than it was before.
Everyone insists on the moral corruption the army and the Israeli society as a whole have incurred is due to the war waged against civil populations in the territories occupied in 1967 and Lebanon.
Owing to the occupation, say the commentators, Israel has become a paranoid and violent state.
These evils are actually rooted in the Zionist ideology and the occupation has done nothing but lay them bare.
Who has become aware of it is the former speaker of the Knesset, Avraham Burg, who, after having taken the French passport and fled to the country of the good wine and cheese, declared that “defining the state of Israel as Jewish state is the key to get to its end. A Jewish state is explosive. It’s dynamite”. Then he repeated better his idea by adding that the definition of Israel as “Jewish democratic state is nitroglycerine”. (6)
Avraham Burg is not Mr. Nobody. He’s a long-standing Zionist and now he has realized that Israel can’t be both Jewish and democratic at the same time. Either one or the other. If Jewish, it can’t allow equal rights to the Palestinians and therefore it is a racist apartheid state. If democratic, it has to give equal rights to both Jews and Palestinians, thus it’s not Jewish. A Jewish democratic state is nitroglycerine since such a state can be realized only by driving out all the Palestinians, a Nazi-style operation.
Burg has understood Zionism’s contradiction and this is the reason for which he left Israel. He should have remained in his country in order to fight for a single democratic bi-national state for Jews and Palestinians, a normal state such as post-apartheid South Africa, as Italy or France, his new homeland.
Anyway, many dozens of thousand young Israelis are follow suit by applying for European or American passports to live a normal life in the western world. It’s about the beginning of the Zionist state’s end.
At any rate, the Jewish state is not only experiencing is worst moral crisis. It will bring doubtlessly the end of the Zionist experiment. But the moral crises need time to grow ripe and to yield the definitive fruits. A Israel living a crisis might last still long. What must be underlined is instead that, for the first time since it was founded, the Jewish state has undergone an outright agony.
Up to now, the Israeli commentators have always put in sharp relief the military power of Israel, its easy and quick victories and, as a result of it, the humiliating defeats suffered by the Arabs.
In the last year, the course of events seems to have turned upside down. In 2006, the powerful Israeli army suffered its first sheer defeat of its history. The Islamic militia of Hezbollah has humiliated Israel by waging war on Israeli ground and keeping it for all the time of the operations. It’s a military Israeli principle that of bringing the war on the enemy’s territory, making havoc of it as much as possible. The past year, although the Zionist army had provoked a sudden war and trespassed on south Lebanon, Hezbollah succeeded in stopping it for a month while being able to strike well inside in Israeli territory. In Israel, towns were evacuated, military infrastructures destroyed, ships struck.
At last, one of the most powerful armies of the world was forced to withdraw and demand friendly states like Italy and France to go to Lebanon to defend its own borders, something never seen before.
Recently, a second, smaller but much more meaningful defeat has been inflicted on the clay-feet giant. Kassam rockets have been launched from Gaza towards Israeli territory and they might start being launched again at any time. Israel has done everything it could to stop them but in vain. Instead, it has been forced to evacuate the village of Sderot.
This is an even more acute defeat for the David’s star. The Palestinians from Gaza, as a matter of fact, can’t rely on the same hinterland as Hezbollah’s and moreover the Kassams are rough and home-made rockets. Nonetheless, they inflicted a military and above all psychological damage that the most powerful state of Middle East is far from forgetting.
With all this happening while the Americans find themselves sinking in the Iraqi mud and , for the first time, voices are raised against the Jewish lobby. Time seems to be playing against Israel and the Americans.
We’re sure that the little revenge that Israel and the Americans have got through the Mahmud Abbas-Dahlan operation won’t last long.The Palestinian people will be able to recognize their own true leaders.
The storm’s winds will abate and, at that point, the quiet can’t be but near. The conditions for the rise of a single democratic state in Palestine are growing ripe.Our task is that of cutting off Israel and preventing a Zionist nuclear rash action which might certainly lead to a terrible bloodshed but also to an even swifter dissolution of the Zionist state.
Editor's Note: In recognizing the new State of Israel on May 14, 1948, US President Harry S. Truman struck out the words “Jeswish State” and replaced them in longhand with the words “State of Israel.” See copy of the document at:http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=83#
 See: The Independent on Sunday, 10 June 07 , “General who helped redraw the borders of Israel says road map to peace is a lie”, http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2640432.ece .
 We have already dealt somewhere else the Lobby question of which, at least here in Italy, we have heard pratically nothing , notwithstanding the debate in America. We are going to do it again with a detailed text that’s on the verge of being published.
 See Ha’aretz, 18 June 07, “Hamastan and Fatahland, Ariel Sharon’s Dream”
See Reuters, 18 June 07, “After Gaza, some question who was overthrowing whom”,
 See Ha’aretz – 6 June 07, “Fatah to Israel: Let us get arms to fight Hamas”,
 see Jerusalem Post, 14 June 07, “Fatah officials call for Mahmoud Abbas to resign”,
 See: Ha’aretz , 10 June 07, "Leaving the Zionist ghetto”,
Zionist Militants Surround America’s New President
Free traders working to delete ‘America-first’ provisions from latest spending package
By Paul Craig Roberts
(Issue # 7, February 16, 2009)
PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES and abroad are hoping that President Obama will end America’s illegal wars, halt America’s support for Israel’s massacre of Lebanese and Palestinians, and punish, instead of reward, the shyster banksters whose fraudulent financial instruments have destroyed economies and imposed massive sufferings on people all over the world. If Obama’s appointments are an indication, all of these hopeful people are going to be disappointed.
James Petras examines Obama’s foreign policy appointments and finds the largest collection of Zionist militarists outside of Israel.
Petras concludes that Obama’s “diplomatic” team has Iran in its sights, and hostility that meshes with Israel’s own intent. Not realizing that a member of the press had been mistakenly invited to a selected audience, the Israeli ambassador to Australia said that Israel’s attack on Gaza was a dress rehearsal for a major attack on Iran. Benjamin Netanyahu, the expected winner of Israel’s March elections, has again declared that Israel will not permit Iran to have a nuclear energy program as it would provide the basis for developing nuclear weapons.
It makes no sense for Israel to baldly state its intention to attack Iran if Israel does not mean it. What if the Iranians believe the Israelis and decide to strike first with their long-range missiles?
Obama’s economic appointments are just as discouraging. Obama chose as his treasury secretary Timothy Geithner, the man who helped Bush’s treasury secretary, Hank Paulson, engineer the $700 billion dollar rip-off of the U.S. taxpayer, money that was gifted to the crooked banksters who destroyed Americans’ pensions, jobs and health care coverage.
These banksters, and the negligent federal regulators who enabled them, should be put in prison, not handed hundreds of billions of dollars.
Instead, Obama has appointed one of the chief orchestrators of the rip-off to the helm of the Treasury. Obama’s National Economic Council is just as depressing. Clinton’s Treasury Secretary, Larry Summers, is its head. Summers recently declared that he had no inkling that a financial crisis was about to hit. Why did Obama put a person without a clue in charge?
Summers’s colleagues are just as bad. Obama has appointed Diana Farrell, lead author of a phony study that claimed offshoring of American jobs is a win-win game for Americans, as deputy director of the National Economic Council. Farrell is affiliated with McKinsey & Company, a firm that helps American corporations offshore their operations.
In his book, Outsourcing America, economist Ron Hira tore Farrell’s McKinsey report to shreds. Why not appoint Ron Hira and Nouriel Roubina, who predicted the crisis, to the National Economic Council?
With Israel’s most fervent American allies whispering in one ear and banksters and offshoring propagandists whispering in the other, how can President Obama fulfill any of the hopes that people have?
The discouraging fact is that even when faced with crisis in the economy and in foreign policy, the American political system is incapable of producing any leadership. Here we are in the worst economic crisis in a lifetime, perhaps in our history, and on the brink of war in Pakistan and Iran while escalating the war in Afghanistan, and all we get is a government made up of the very people who have brought us to these crises.
Just as the Bushites could not admit the failure of their man, the Obamacons will not be able to admit the failure of their man.
The era of American leadership has passed. America’s shyster financial system has brought economic crisis to the world. America’s wars of aggression are seen as serving no purpose except the enrichment of the military industries associated with Dick Cheney. The world is looking elsewhere for leadership.
Vladimir Putin made a play for this role at Davos, where his speech at the opening ceremony was the most intelligent speech of the event.
Putin reminded the World Economic Forum that “just a year ago, American delegates speaking from this rostrum emphasized the U.S. economy’s fundamental stability and its cloudless prospects. Today, investment banks, the pride of Wall Street, have virtually ceased to exist. In just 12 months, they have posted losses exceeding the profits they made in the last 25 years.”
Putin made his case that the existing financial system based on the U.S. dollar and American financial hegemony has failed. Putin said that a secure world requires cooperation that requires trust. He made it clear that the Americans have proven that they cannot be trusted.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute – as long as full credit is given to American Free Press – 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
Subscribe to American Free Press. Online subscriptions: One year of weekly editions—$15 plus you get a BONUS ELECTRONIC BOOK – HIGH PRIESTS OF WAR – By Michael Piper.
Sign up for our free e-newsletter here – get a free gift just for signing up!
Nationally syndicated columnist, Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D., a former editor at The Wall Street Journal, is the author of several books. He has been associated with the Hoover Institution, and the Institute for Political Economy and from 1981 to 1982 served as assistant secretary of the treasury for economic policy.