Zionism and History

[rain]

or.... just asking questions....<br> <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

First thing he did wrong, according to the article, is say he was going to go public with what PG was up to. But as someone once said, the CIA always has a second reason for everything they do. <p></p><i></i>

[Joe Hillshoist]

Just read some of that CIA in Aust link, I must have missed it before.<br><br>Been there before tho. Some of the names on that Harvrard Program are V interesting.<br><br>Likkud could well have had a similar thing going on, given the ties between israel and the US are strong. <p></p><i></i>

[Joe Hillshoist]

I have also heard Whitlam was planning to lessen the drain of Australia's resources to overseas nations at fire sale prices.<br><br>But that site refers to Whitlam publicly asking questions about Pine Gap. And the security around it is pretty wild.<br><br>Did I ever tell you about the girl I met who got photos from pine Gap after jumping the fence? <p></p><i></i>

[erosoplier]

Found an interesting discussion at DemocracyNow with<br>Norman Finkelstein & former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami - less fireworks than you might expect, and quite informative:<br> <br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://democracynow.org/finkelstein-benami.shtml">democracynow.org/finkelst...nami.shtml</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[AlicetheCurious]

Erosupplier, thanks for the link. I can't remember ever seeing such an excellent summary of the issues of the Palestine/Israeli conflict. Although I'm tempted to take issue with the fact that no Palestinian was involved in the discussion, on second thought, it's both ironic and typical that this be the case. <br><br>For both Israelis and most Jews, in my experience, Palestinian people are not flesh-and-blood humans, but symbolic entities. They only really exist by reference to Jews, and to the degree that they impact the lives of Jews or the state of Israel.<br><br>But, alas, one must be excited that among some intellectuals and historians, there is some acknowledgement that at least in the abstract sense, the Palestinians do indeed have right and the law on their side. Nevertheless, though these things must be conceded in scholarly discussions, the bottom line is that the Zionist state's interests come first, illegal or immoral though they may be.<br><br>Note how Israel is always the decision-maker, the actor, while the Palestinians are merely the yin to the Zionist yang.<br><br>I think that, despite these two towering intellectuals' admirable willingness to face the historical facts and even to contemplate the immoral behaviour and policies of Zionists, they are as blind to their own racism as were those southern slave-owners who "loved their darkies", even those who admitted that slavery was a bad thing, though unfortunately necessary. Of course, Finklestein is a genuine scholar, and a brave man, but he speaks for an alternative Jewish perspective, and should not be confused with the Palestinian side of the conflict.<br><br>The Palestinian struggle looks very different from a Palestinian perspective; of course, as by far the weaker party, Palestinians are obliged to react to Israel's genocidal initiatives, but more crucially, Palestinians, like other people, see themselves primarily as a protagonist as well, the hero of this David / Goliath struggle.<br><br>Palestinian strategists and decisionmakers have made (and will surely continue to make) many mistakes, and Palestinian scholars have views at least as diverse as those of Zionist or any other scholars. <br><br>But just the fact that we can speak of "Palestinians" living today and be understood, despite the formidable efforts of generations of Zionist politicians, PR officers and two military and economic superpowers, one global and one regional, suggests that we shouldn't underestimate the power of a people, even in the face of incredible odds, to define their own identity and shape their own destiny. <p></p><i></i>

[erosoplier]

Erosupplier? That's a nice compliment AlicetheCurious - thank you. I must admit, I hadn't actually thought of it that way until you said it - it'd be nice to pretend I intended that too. But then someone had to point out Hugh Manatee's name before I recognised it, so I guess I mustn't routinely think quite that way. As it happens, it's easy for me to return a compliment - I think you're well neat, AtC, and I have ever since I started hearing you say things.<br><br>Things have obviously changed since that DN interview took place - and changed for the worse. Realising this, I haven't been in a great mood today - reading this Haaretz article didn't help much either:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The mystery of America <br> <br>By Gideon Levy <br> <br>It happens once every few months. Like a periodic visit by an especially annoying relative from overseas, Condoleezza Rice was here again. The same declarations, the same texts devoid of content, the same sycophancy, the same official aircraft heading back to where it came from. The results were also the same: Israel promised in December, after a stormy night of discussions, to open the "safe passage" between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. This time, in what was considered the "achievement" of the current visit, Israel also promised to open the Karni crossing. Karni will be open, one can assume, only slightly more than the "safe passage," which never opened following the previous futile visit. <br><br>Rice has been here six times in the course of a year and a half, and what has come of it? Has anyone asked her about this? Does she ask herself? <br><br>It is hard to understand how the secretary of state allows herself to be so humiliated. It is even harder to understand how the superpower she represents allows itself to act in such a hollow and useless way. The mystery of America remains unsolved: How is it that the United States is doing nothing to advance a solution to the most dangerous and lengthiest conflict in our world? How is it that the world's only superpower, which has the power to quickly facilitate a solution, does not lift a finger to promote it? <br><br><br> <br> <br>What happened since 1956, when the U.S. made Israel withdraw from Sinai overnight with a single telephone call, immediately after the "Third Kingdom of Israel" speech by the strongest Israeli leader of all times, David Ben-Gurion? Now, as the occupation continues for years, with a government no less dependent on the good graces of the U.S. than in the past, why is America a bystander? <br><br>Countless trips by presidents and secretaries of state, peace initiatives and peace plans aplenty, from the Roger's Plan to the Road Map, via "reassessment," fruitless talks and flowery declarations, pressure and promises, discussions and decisions - and nothing has happened. And in the background, a fundamental question echoes, without a response: Is America at all interested in bringing about a solution in the Middle East? Is it possible that it does not understand how crucial it is to end the conflict? <br><br>As things appear, America can and does not want to. No government in Israel, and surely not the most recent ones, which are terrified of the American administration, would stand up to a firm American demand to bring the occupation to an end. But there has never been an American president who wanted to put an end to the occupation. Does America not understand that without ending the occupation there will be no peace? Peace in the region would deliver a greater blow to world terrorism than any war America has pursued, in Iraq or Afghanistan. Does America not understand this? Can all this be attributed to the omnipotent Jewish lobby, which causes Israel more harm than good? <br><br>The declared aim of U.S. policy in the Middle East is to bring democracy to the region. For this reason, ostensibly, the U.S. also went to war in Iraq. Even if one ignores the hypocrisy, self-righteousness and double-standard of the Bush administration, which supports quite a few despotic regimes, one should ask the great seeker of democracy: Have your eyes failed to see that the most undemocratic and brutal regime in the region is the Israeli occupation in the territories? And how does the White House reconcile the contradiction between the aspiration to instill democracy in the peoples of the region and the boycott of the Hamas government, which was chosen in democratic elections as America wanted and preached? <br><br>The U.S. also speaks loftily about peace. At the same time, its president warns Israel against any attempt to forge peace with Syria. Here America is taking a stance that not only fails to advance an accord but even undermines it. Ever since it began to give Israel a free hand to impose the brutal occupation in the territories, it has become a party that bequeaths undemocratic values to the entire world. Where are the days when there was still concern in Jerusalem about the U.S. reaction before each military operation? Israel then thought twice before every liquidation and each arrest. Every demolition of a Palestinian home and each nocturnal groundbreaking of a settlement raised fears about how Uncle Sam would react. And now - carte blanche. There is a blank check for every belligerent action by Israel. Should this also be called an effort for peace, for democracy? <br><br>The recent years have not been good for America. From "the leader of the free world," it has become detested by the world. Not only do South Africa, Asia and Africa feel strong animosity toward it, most of the public opinion in Europe has also turned away from it. Is anyone in the administration asking why the world loves so much to hate America? And what implications will this growing global feeling have on the strength of the U.S. in the years ahead? Can the dollar, the Tomahawk and the F-16 provide an answer for everything? <br><br>In the Middle East, the U.S. has an opportunity to fundamentally change its image, from a warmonger to a peacemaker. And how does the U.S. respond to the challenge? It sends Rice to tell the excited Ehud Olmert how she falls asleep easily on her unnecessary and ridiculous flights to and from the Middle East. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->Sourced via: <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://wakeupfromyourslumber.blogspot.com/">wakeupfromyourslumber.blogspot.com/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br>The best spin on the current state of affairs is that things are currently very very directionless - that the Bush regime has finally run off its cliff and is about to start dropping like a stone. That the recent rampage over Lebanon was indeed a victory for Hezbollah. That the hawks in Israel and the US really have been set on their heels. But that just means it'll likely be years before things can be moved in a positive direction in Palestine, and more grind for them until then. <br><br>God help us if someone out there actually planned it like this.<br> <br> <p></p><i></i>