Israel tasked with spying on Americans - Bamford

[AlicetheKurious]

AD, I appreciate your thoughtful questions. Note that I was directly responding to the implication that the zionists were at any point, even in the distant past, "victims" rather than exploiters and cynical opportunists.

To clarify, when I say "zionists" I mean:

1) zionist ideologues and apologists: ie those who promote the idea that Jews, by sole virtue of being Jewish, should be exempted from having to respect international law and human rights conventions, particularly in the service of the "Jewish state";

2) zionist agents: ie those who function as de facto agents of the racist, rogue zionist state, wherever they are, particularly those who abuse their privileged position in non-Israeli government and media for this purpose.

Abhorent as they may be, neither are necessarily criminals, unless they actually commit crimes. They do, however, form an essential part of the infrastructure that promotes and rewards the very serious crimes of the zionist state, and punishes those who would defend its victims.

Obviously the U.S. has a bloody history of massive terrorism, racism and war crimes. Like Israel, it was founded on genocide and ethnic cleansing.

But it is unlike Israel in several crucial respects:

1) First, and most importantly, should it cease to commit war crimes and genocide, the U.S. would continue to exist. In fact, it would probably thrive far more than it is today. Furthermore, loyalty to America (contrary to what the necocons say), does not necessitate the continued mass slaughter of innocent people.

Israel, on the other hand, should it cease to commit war crimes and genocide, would literally crumble like Apartheid South Africa, or Nazi Germany, and be transformed into something else, preferably a democratic, secular, law-abiding state. And, whether it's openly acknowledged or not, practically speaking, Israeli nationalism does necessitate the extermination or expulsion of those who, by their very existence as non-Jews in the "Jewish state", pose a "mortal danger" to the "zionist dream".

In other words, on the presumption that both America and Israel should cease committing war crimes and genocide, then there is hope for America as a law-abiding "American state", but none for Israel as a "zionist state".

2) The U.S., contrary to its practise, is a great country in principle. The U.S. constitution is a brilliant document that protects (again in principle) the dignity and freedom of every individual from abuse by the state, regardless of race, creed or ethnic origin. The U.S. has internationally recognized borders, which enclose a single nation.

In contrast, Israel has no constitution, but effectively three distinct systems of laws: a privileged one for Jews (even non-citizens), another for non-Jews with Israeli citizenship (around 20% of Israeli citizens) and yet another that systematically deprives non-Jews (just under 50% of the population) of all their basic rights. And that's not even counting the 5 million stateless, homeless refugees that Israeli has already expelled.

Israel has no fixed borders, instead a series of "ceasefire lines" that mark Israel's gradual encroachment on its surrounding territories. Within those borders, the zionist state does not recognize "Israeli nationality"; instead, it distinguishes even among its citizens, between "Jewish nationals" or "Arab nationals", or "Druze nationals", etc., with rights and privileges distributed accordingly.

3) Although both the U.S. and Israel have colonial settler roots, Israeli colonialism, in violation of current international legal and moral norms, continues to be a crucial function of the zionist state. America is no longer actively recruiting colonists to engage in ethnic cleansing of the natives and settling the land, but zionists around the world continue to tout "aliya" as a moral (!!) duty for every Jew. Indeed, many of the most fanatic, bloodthirsty zionist settlers are recent immigrants financed and set loose by the zionist state to terrorize and displace the rightful inhabitants.

With regards to your point about the complicity of Americans vs Israelis in war crimes, obviously this depends on their access to information and their awareness of the atrocities being perpetrated in their name. Even more important is the degree to which they are active decision-makers or participants in war crimes.

Things get a little sticky here because while the above crimes were indeed committed by Israel ("the Zionist State") and/or individuals who may well called themselves Zionists, it is not as if they were directly and equally perpetrated by all people who would claim the label "Zionist".

Well, no, they are not "directly and equally perpetrated by all people who would claim the label "Zionist" -- any more than all Germans who claimed the label "Nazi" were equally implicated in the crimes associated with the Nazi ideology, nor, for that matter, all South African Whites who were loyalists of the Apartheid state. While we're at it, maybe we can mention that not all Iraqis were directly or equally involved in the crimes of Saddam Hussein, and that not every Afghani was directly or equally involved in...uh...9/11. And that not every Palestinian was responsible for what Abu Nidal did. I hope with all my heart that far more mercy is shown to the Israelis, than the "retaliation" they (and the Americans) have inflicted on their own victims.

In contrast to the Iraqis, the Afghanis and the Palestinians, zionists have a lot more choice, at least in the ideology they promote, and therefore far more responsibility, as do Americans. That is why it's important for individuals of conscience to do what they can to counter the massive, global zionist propaganda campaign that's been so effective in camouflaging the intrinsic racism of the zionist ideology and the devastating effects it has had, and continues to have, on those of the wrong "race". Hopefully we can reach a point soon, where "we didn't know" will no longer be a valid excuse. Maybe, in a small way, we can even help to save lives, or give voice to those who struggle to survive in the face of grave injustice and oppression.

... if I understand correctly said that you do think the idea of the United States as being controlled by "ZOG" i.e. a Zionist Occupation Government, does apply, and that you are personally OK with the term "ZOG". However, you didn't say anything at all about the Elders of Zion mythos.

You understood correctly, since that is what the evidence points to, in my humble opinion. As for the "Elders of Zion mythos", I can't comment on that, never having read any part of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The only thing I can say, is that this infamous document seems to be far more frequently mentioned by zionists and zionist apologists than by anybody else, at least in my experience. Just due to that fact, and based on the ubiquitous misrepresentations about what Ahmadinejad said about "threatening to wipe Israel off the map", I've idly wondered what's in it that is deemed to be so explosive that it's been banned through much of the same world in which depravity and all kinds of horrors have become commonplace themes worthy of being published.

But that's neither here, nor there. I have a long reading list to get through as it is, and the Protocols are not on it. My list does include shiny new copies of "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" by Ilan Pappe, "Beyond Chutzpah" by Norman G. Finkelstein, "The Other Side of Deception" by Victor Ostrovsky, the so-called 'sexy self-haters', and many others, non-fiction and fiction, and of course, articles like this one: Nobel Laureate Maguire: UN Should Suspend Israel Membership, one of a few tiny bright spots in an otherwise bleak and frightening landscape.

Incidentally, I'm reminded of a marathon discussion I had many years ago with a Jewish guy back in college, a staunch zionist. After many hours, maybe 5 or 6, over countless cups of coffee and lots of cigarettes, he conceded that if he had been born a Palestinian, he would fight Israel with everything he had. Interestingly, Ehud Barack made a similar confession once.

For me, it's a no-brainer: knowing what I know, if I were Jewish, I would be as morally opposed to the Judeo-supremacist state and zionism as I am now. It's rather self-evident that whether something is judged to be right or wrong should never depend on the ethnicity of the perpetrator or the victim, unless one is a Nazi, or a zionist, or something like that.

[American Dream]

Hi Alice-

Your reply contains a lot to chew on, and it's all good stuff.

I do agree that the Elders of Zion is used quite frequently by the pro-Israel propaganda machine in order to generate support for unjust policies of the Israeli State. However, Elders of Zion discourse is also used frequently by "Aryan Nationalists" and other racists in order to promote the trope of a global Jewish conspiracy as the fundamental cause of human problems. This is one reason for concern about broad generalizations regarding what "the Zionists" did.

You pointed out clearly how, as I had previously stated, the comparison between "The Americans did this" and "The Zionists did that" is an imperfect one. I am going by your now clarified definition of Zionists:

1) zionist ideologues and apologists: ie those who promote the idea that Jews, by sole virtue of being Jewish, should be exempted from having to respect international law and human rights conventions, particularly in the service of the "Jewish state";

2) zionist agents: ie those who function as de facto agents of the racist, rogue zionist state, wherever they are, particularly those who abuse their privileged position in non-Israeli government and media for this purpose.

Given your stated definition for who "the Zionists" are, I think it might be useful to compare generalizations about, say, Republicans in the United States instead.

Although the Republican Party has done many, many bad things, it would not be very accurate to speak about the crimes of the Republicans in very broad brush strokes. For example, an architect of international genocide and terror programs is not the same as a disenfranchised citizen who occasionally votes- that person may have no idea about some of the worst abuses and quite possibly wouldn't support them if they did know. There is a broad continuum of responsibility and knowledge in between these two poles, so talking about "The Republicans" as if they were all equally culpable isn't necessarily helpful at all.

Do you see what I mean?

[AlicetheKurious]

Given your stated definition for who "the Zionists" are, I think it might be useful to compare generalizations about, say, Republicans in the United States instead.

Although the Republican Party has done many, many bad things, it would not be very accurate to speak about the crimes of the Republicans in very broad brush strokes. For example, an architect of international genocide and terror programs is not the same as a disenfranchised citizen who occasionally votes- that person may have no idea about some of the worst abuses and quite possibly wouldn't support them if they did know. There is a broad continuum of responsibility and knowledge in between these two poles, so talking about "The Republicans" as if they were all equally culpable isn't necessarily helpful at all.

I don't actually disagree so much with what you're saying, as with your choice of emphasis. It seems bizarre, even obscene, given the truly apocalyptic atrocities being inflicted on the Iraqi and Palestinian people, to spare even a tiny bit of energy and thought for the poor, unfairly maligned "Republicans", or "zionists".

Moreover, it is far too simplistic and dangerous to ascribe evil on this scale to a few individuals, while ignoring or minimizing the much greater infrastructure of evil that enables, promotes and rewards their crimes. Think of evil as a pyramid: at the top may be the greatest concentration of indictable war criminals, but they constitute only the tip of a massive structure at the base of which are those schmucks you seem so concerned with, the willfully ignorant, the venal, and those who have allowed themselves to be seduced into vicariously enjoying the illusion of power that evil represents.

In between the narrow tip and the wide base, that is where ideas are implemented, where abhorent ideologies are translated into objective reality. That is why it is inaccurate, and futile, to be misled by the zionist misdirection that "Israel is a tiny state". Israel is "a tiny state" in the same way that "Hitler was only one, rather short, man". Both, cut off from the massive infrastructure of evil of which they are only a part, are powerless to implement any of their plans, hateful as they may be.

That is why it's not enough to focus one's attention on the actual crimes, the reality on the ground, although it is there, and only there, where the beast fully drops the mask and exposes its true face. Too many of us flinch from the sight of amputated limbs and burned flesh, from the stench of blood and fear and despair, and shut our ears to the desperate cries for help, willing to sacrifice others on the altar of our own comfortable illusions.

That decision, sometimes made unconsciously, hardens us sufficiently to be lined up at the bottom of the pyramid. We thus create a nice, solid base for the next level: those who allow themselves to be swept up by slogans, the uncritical, the unquestioning conformists, who enthusiastically side with the majority. This thick base, at its top, also includes the soldiers of occupation, those who are "just following orders" and those who vote bloodthirsty war criminals into office.

They, in turn, support the next level: the cynical opportunists, who check to see which way the wind is blowing and set their sails to profit accordingly; these include Arab collaborators and traitors, and those who allow themselves to be used as sayanim, Jewish de facto sleeper cells embedded within various countries, as well as most successful American, and many successful European, politicians.

The opportunists and sayanim, for their part, form the basis for the next level in the pyramid-shaped infrastructure of evil: the handlers, the corrupters, the agents who engage in espionage, bribery and blackmail, the drug-runners and the arms dealers. At this level are also the ideologues, the media gate-keepers, the financiers. They are the ones who deliberately cover up war crimes or "spin" them, or who knowingly channel the money and weapons for use in war crimes. It also includes the ideological recruiters of the terrorist gangs of the settler movement, the shock troops of zionism. At this level, criminal complicity is aware, deliberate and empirically provable.

Above them, at the very top of this reeking pyramid, are the individuals who order specific war crimes, who make policy. But we ignore at our peril the fact that their power to do so depends entirely on the solidity and size of the pyramid below them.

Admittedly, this pyramid model is simplistic, in that it doesn't address the dynamic relationship between the levels. Nevertheless, it's a good working model for those who are genuinely motivated to attack the entire infrastructure of evil, rather than focusing exclusively on a few expendable and replaceable individuals, while leaving the structure in place.

American Dream, you seem to be suggesting that by using the term "zionists" I am automatically lumping say, the butcher Ariel Sharon, or slimy war criminal Shimon Peres, with the Kahanist settler who worships Barch Goldstein, with Joe Putz, who keeps a collection can for the Jewish National Fund next to his cash register, and advocating one approach towards all four. Not at all: while recognizing that each represents very different levels on the scale of criminal intent and responsibility, the fact remains that all, among others, are crucial to the process that permits zionism to manifest itself in the soul-shriveling reality that is deliberately unleashed against its helpless targets. And, of course, for the structure of reward and punishment that has proven so effective in demonizing the legitimate victims and glorifying their executioners.

That being said, each level needs to be addressed on very different terms. I'd love to discuss how I believe each one needs to be addressed, but I have to run. I will say, however, that information, consciousness-raising and appeals to morality may be very effective at one level and futile at others. Similarly, anything less than a relentless legal campaign to pursue criminal indictments and public trials at other levels is evidence, to me, of shameful compliance with the zionists' racist agenda. Finally, in reference to the OP, it is essential to expose and defuse the shadowy global network through which the genocidal, rogue terrorist state is nourished, and without which it would rapidly shrivel and die.

One last note, because I'm really late: the false dichotomy, at this point, that presumes a clear distinction between the zionists and American policy-makers, is a very dangerous one, based on a very selective understanding of the symbiotic relationship that has been forged between the two. What we've witnessed, particularly since the assassination of Kennedy, is a demonstrable "zionization" of the United States, through the infiltration of zionist agents and ideologues into the highest decision-making levels, including the executive, legislative, judicial, intelligence and military branches, in addition to the media and finance. It is no coincidence that this 'relationship' has substantially weakened America politically and economically as crucial resources were diverted to the obscenely swollen American military machine which has proven to be so useful in carrying out zionist objectives.

The only reason that such a horrible process has been permitted to occur in plain sight, is that too many people have been brainwashed, or inoculated by an incredibly effective zionist propaganda campaign, against trusting the evidence of their own ears and eyes. Among those who do, there are all too many who are simply afraid to speak out.

The only way to counter the sophisticated techniques used by the zionists to intimidate or 'spin' the ugly truth, is to never, ever forget the victims who pay the ultimate price for our cowardice and silence: through their eyes, the beast is unmasked.

[American Dream]

AlicetheKurious wrote:

It seems bizarre, even obscene, given the truly apocalyptic atrocities being inflicted on the Iraqi and Palestinian people, to spare even a tiny bit of energy and thought for the poor, unfairly maligned "Republicans", or "zionists".

You seem to be misinterpreting what I am saying. I am much more concerned with the probably huge swing vote buried within the groups which we might wholesale label as "bad". This group is obviously of great strategic importance. It does not serve to alienate them with overly broad condemnations of Zionist criminality.



AlicetheKurious wrote:

American Dream, you seem to be suggesting that by using the term "zionists" I am automatically lumping say, the butcher Ariel Sharon, or slimy war criminal Shimon Peres, with the Kahanist settler who worships Barch Goldstein, with Joe Putz, who keeps a collection can for the Jewish National Fund next to his cash register, and advocating one approach towards all four. Not at all: while recognizing that each represents very different levels on the scale of criminal intent and responsibility, the fact remains that all, among others, are crucial to the process that permits zionism to manifest itself in the soul-shriveling reality that is deliberately unleashed against its helpless targets. And, of course, for the structure of reward and punishment that has proven so effective in demonizing the legitimate victims and glorifying their executioners.

I'd like to suggest that the term "Zionists" encompasses an even broader spectrum of people than indicated above. For example, in the United States there are estimates of 60 Million Christian Zionists, in addition to the Jewish ones. I'd imagine that among these are many, many people who have done little or nothing to support the unjust policies of the State of Israel. No reason to burn bridges with these people, who may be ideologically wedded to some notion of Israel that is not grounded in good information. Some of them may actually have the moral capacity for change, and to act on behalf of good principles.




AlicetheKurious wrote:

That being said, each level needs to be addressed on very different terms. I'd love to discuss how I believe each one needs to be addressed

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this sometime.

[AlicetheKurious]

American Dream said:

AlicetheKurious wrote:

That being said, each level needs to be addressed on very different terms. I'd love to discuss how I believe each one needs to be addressed

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this sometime.

Well, for an outline, you could have just kept reading...

I will say, however, that information, consciousness-raising and appeals to morality may be very effective at one level and futile at others. Similarly, anything less than a relentless legal campaign to pursue criminal indictments and public trials at other levels is evidence, to me, of shameful compliance with the zionists' racist agenda. Finally, in reference to the OP, it is essential to expose and defuse the shadowy global network through which the genocidal, rogue terrorist state is nourished, and without which it would rapidly shrivel and die.

American Dream said:

I'd like to suggest that the term "Zionists" encompasses an even broader spectrum of people than indicated above. For example, in the United States there are estimates of 60 Million Christian Zionists, in addition to the Jewish ones. I'd imagine that among these are many, many people who have done little or nothing to support the unjust policies of the State of Israel. No reason to burn bridges with these people, who may be ideologically wedded to some notion of Israel that is not grounded in good information. Some of them may actually have the moral capacity for change, and to act on behalf of good principles.

I absolutely agree with that. Forgive them, Lord, for they know not what they do...

P.S. It may surprise you to know that during my mid- to late teens I was quite the ardent zionist myself, mostly as the direct result of years of "Holocaust education" in school that I now recognize was a mild form of trauma-based indoctrination (inducing severe emotional distress in a vulnerable subject, followed by a relief-inducing "solution": the zionist state). In fact, my nickname among my bewildered (and frustrated) extended family was "Golda".

Of course, we had no internet then, and information was a lot harder to come by. Also, I was just a kid.

I'm just bringing it up now to explain that I am certainly capable of distinguishing between very different levels of complicity and responsibility even among zionists, while remaining careful not to underestimate the role each part plays in relation to the terrible whole.

Incidentally, later in college I took an international politics class in which we participated in a model United Nations. I picked my assignment out of a hat, and it turned out to be the PLO Representative. It was in the UN library, doing research for my assignment, that I first began to realize how very one-sided my education had been, and how very ignorant I was. It was a real shock. The rest is a very long story.

[American Dream]

AlicetheKurious wrote:

I will say, however, that information, consciousness-raising and appeals to morality may be very effective at one level and futile at others. Similarly, anything less than a relentless legal campaign to pursue criminal indictments and public trials at other levels is evidence, to me, of shameful compliance with the zionists' racist agenda. Finally, in reference to the OP, it is essential to expose and defuse the shadowy global network through which the genocidal, rogue terrorist state is nourished, and without which it would rapidly shrivel and die.

I would agree with all of the above and say that this suggests at least part of the multi-level strategy for creating some forward motion in this area.



AlicetheKurious wrote:

It may surprise you to know that during my mid- to late teens I was quite the ardent zionist myself, mostly as the direct result of years of "Holocaust education" in school that I now recognize was a mild form of trauma-based indoctrination (inducing severe emotional distress in a vulnerable subject, followed by a relief-inducing "solution": the zionist state). In fact, my nickname among my bewildered (and frustrated) extended family was "Golda"

I think of Andrea Dworkin's stories about being periodically harangued by an aunt who was a concentration camp survivor. During her childhood, when no one else was home, this woman would periodically have breakdowns, venting all her emotional stress on vulnerable young Andrea. Too bad that much of what we call "Holocaust Education" is the functional equivalent, albeit with a more consciously manipulative agenda...



AlicetheKurious wrote:

the false dichotomy, at this point, that presumes a clear distinction between the zionists and American policy-makers, is a very dangerous one, based on a very selective understanding of the symbiotic relationship that has been forged between the two. What we've witnessed, particularly since the assassination of Kennedy, is a demonstrable "zionization" of the United States, through the infiltration of zionist agents and ideologues into the highest decision-making levels, including the executive, legislative, judicial, intelligence and military branches, in addition to the media and finance. It is no coincidence that this 'relationship' has substantially weakened America politically and economically as crucial resources were diverted to the obscenely swollen American military machine which has proven to be so useful in carrying out zionist objectives.

I agree to a point, but here I also differ.

Certainly JFK was a stick in the mud as far as Israel's nuclear ambitions, and after he was removed things were much easier in that regard. Certainly there was an incredible fusion of Israeli and American activities in the covert ops realm. However this does not mean that the U.S. is now a pawn of Israel, nor for that matter that Israel is simply a client of the U.S. I see something in between- a complex relationship based on a convergence of goals, but with distinct tensions too.

Israel's ability to make itself indispensable as a proxy for Uncle Sam, around the world, as well as its skill at electronic surveillance, sexual blackmail, and influence-building within the borders of the United States have strengthened its position considerably. However, neither Israel nor the United States is a puppet of the other.

[AlicetheKurious]

American Dream said:

Certainly there was an incredible fusion of Israeli and American activities in the covert ops realm. However this does not mean that the U.S. is now a pawn of Israel, nor for that matter that Israel is simply a client of the U.S. I see something in between- a complex relationship based on a convergence of goals, but with distinct tensions too.

Israel's ability to make itself indispensable as a proxy for Uncle Sam, around the world, as well as its skill at electronic surveillance, sexual blackmail, and influence-building within the borders of the United States have strengthened its position considerably. However, neither Israel nor the United States is a puppet of the other.

Saying something don't make it so. It's funny how something can be so obvious, like this huge gorilla taking up all this space right in the middle of the room, and even as people squeeze past it they seem unable to admit it's even there.

Israel is not "a proxy for Uncle Sam" -- it's a huge, crushing burden for which Americans are paying an enormous price, for no return, while the benefits for Israel have been dramatic, unambiguous and measurable. The occasional "favors" that Israel has done for the U.S., like channeling arms to Latin American dictatorships, and the Iran-Contra scandal, are nice little money-makers for Israel, not to mention opening up new markets for Israeli arms and new openings for Mossad infiltration. As if that's not enough, Israel always demands and receives all kinds of additional goodies in exchange.

What about Americans? What do they get in return for supporting Israel? Israelis get universal health care and subsidized housing, while millions of Americans struggle to feed themselves and keep a roof over their heads, and pray they don't have an accident or get sick. Americans are sent to fight and die in wars that Israel wants, killing millions of people and gutting their own economy in the process. For what?

It's a win-win game for Israel: it costs them nothing, plus they not only get their enemies massacred, they enjoy an economic boom from the resulting arms sales and defense contracts.

Israeli agents in the form of dual citizens and zionist ideological fanatics have infiltrated and determine policy at the very highest decision-making levels of the U.S. government. In the laws it passes, and what it chooses to condemn or reward, Congress represents the demands of the zionist state far more faithfully than it does the interests of the American people. At the Pentagon, Israeli spies like Richard Perle and Douglas Feith have not only gotten away with selling U.S. military secrets to countries like China, they've been rewarded with even more influential positions and cushy jobs, calling for the U.S. to go to war against Israel's enemies. There's practically a revolving door between zionist "think-tanks", zionist lobbyists, major American media and the U.S. government.

Israelis have a long history of recruiting agents from the Americans' own Central Intelligence Agency, through Israeli-dominated "training programs" for CIA agents and recruits. The increasingly-centralized American media is dominated by a few individuals who openly declare their loyalty to a foreign state -- which partially explains why so few Americans are aware of all this.

The so-called "Department of Homeland Security", with its enormous power over the lives of ordinary American citizens, is not only headed by an Israeli citizen and loyalist -- no, that's not enough: the person responsible for oversight of this department on behalf of the American people WHO PAY FOR IT, is...another zionist fanatic, Joe Lieberman!

Jeez Louise, I could go on and on. How obvious would it have to be, before you believe the evidence of your own eyes? Is the Israeli government infested with American spies? No. The Israelis are much too smart to allow that. They do have a use for Americans, though: they give them weapons and racist indoctrination and send them out as illegal settlers to harass and kill and steal from Palestinians.

Is the Israeli media dominated by America-firsters? No. That wouldn't do at all. Is the Knesset full of members who pledge their undying allegiance to the United States. Uh-uh.

Ever heard of an American spy being tolerated in Israel?

Are there any American firms given contracts by the Israeli government that allow them to monitor and spy on Israeli citizens? Fat chance!

But Israeli high-tech firms somehow got these plum contracts that enable them to track and spy on American citizens. There's evidence that Israel bugs DEA phones to protect Israeli drug dealers, and U.S. President Bill Clinton apparently believed that even the White House "secure" lines are bugged by "a foreign state", but that for some reason he couldn't do anything about it. Wild, huh?

Why is America committing itself to an ADDITIONAL $30 billion in military goodies for Israel while the American economy is tanking? Could you ever imagine the U.S. deliberately bombing an Israeli surveillance ship and killing hundreds of Israelis, and having it covered up by the Israeli government? Could you imagine the U.S. crushing an unarmed Israeli citizen to death, then throwing smoke bombs and tear gas at her memorial service, with nary a peep from the Israeli government?

Do Israeli candidates need to get the approval of the U.S. before they can even dream of getting elected by Israelis? Not hardly. Doesn't it strike you as at all revealing that no candidate can be elected to high office in the U.S. unless they're first approved by Israel?

OK, that's it. If you still can't admit the gorilla is right-freaking-THERE, then I give up.

[American Dream]

Hi Alice-

Yeah, we have gone over much of this ground before. I'm still not convinced that Israel rules the United States, or anything like that. I fear that you are squeezing the data to fit the model, quite frankly.

The intimations here and elsewhere about global Zionist conspiracy brings to mind of course the infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Now I'm not saying that you do or don't agree with this model, but I am noticing that twice you have demurred from making any substantive comment regarding your thoughts on it. The most recent time you avoided comment by explaining that you hadn't read it.

OK, but Alice, it is well known that a 40 part TV series based on the Protocols was produced and aired in your home of Egypt a few years ago, not to mention the ongoing production and distribution of printed "Elders of Zion" discourse. Someone as bright as you, who is obviously quite well-read on Palestine/Israel must surely have some sort of opinion on the Protocols. Don't you think they are a bit relevant here when we are veering toward models of world Zionist conspiracy and the like?

[AlicetheKurious]

OK, but Alice, it is well known that a 40 part TV series based on the Protocols was produced and aired in your home of Egypt a few years ago, not to mention the ongoing production and distribution of printed "Elders of Zion" discourse.

Where'd you get that information, MEMRI? Although I confess (I know it's hard to believe I haven't read everything and seen everything), I didn't actually see the tv series, either. For one thing, it was on at 2 in the morning or some ungodly hour, I'm not crazy about the lead actor, and for another, it was aired during Ramadan, when Egyptian tv is literally flooded with dozens of dramatic series aired daily. During the first week, most people latch on to two or three, and stick to those for the rest of the month.

But after the then (neocon) U.S. ambassador David Welsh (a truly sinister robotic sociopath type) made a fuss, the series became a hot topic on interview and current event shows in Egypt and on Arab satellite channels, so I was able to get some more accurate information. The 41-part series was NOT "based on the Protocols": it's a story about Egypt's "struggle against colonial domination" beginning with the Ottoman Empire and the British occupation of Egypt, culminating in the destruction of Palestine and the establishment of Israel, through the biography of one of Egypt's most prominent journalists, who witnessed and chronicled many important events in Egypt's recent history. Out of 41 one-hour episodes, the Protocols were mentioned for only a few minutes.

Remember that the series was aired a year after September 11, at a time when those fishy attacks had already resulted in the invasion of Afghanistan, the kidnapping and incarceration of thousands of Muslims without charge or trial in Guantanamo, and only a few months after Israel had re-invaded and devastated the Palestinian territories from which Israel had withdrawn under the Oslo Agreement, which most Arabs correctly viewed, not as a War on Terror, but as an open-ended War of Extermination Against Muslims and Arabs.

It was just a few months after the massacre in Jenin, which had millions of people glued to their tv sets in disbelief and horror, as Israel indiscriminately killed men, women and children, leaving a moonscape of destruction stinking of buried corpses, where thousands of people had been living only days before. Traumatized elderly people and children digging through the rubble with their bare hands in a futile effort to find survivors, because Israel wouldn't permit any machinery into the camp...families trapped for days in one room with the rotting corpses of their loved ones...I'm far from alone in having these images forever burned in my mind.

This was also a time when "conspiracy theorists" were claiming that the U.S. was going to invade Iraq, something that most reasonable people knew was just crazy. (BTW, I remember talking to the wife of a guy who works in the State Department now, but he was stationed in Egypt with the Navy then, and I'll never forget her condescending irritation at my 'outrageous claim' that the U.S. did really intend to invade Iraq).

Imagine, if you can, the super-charged context in which this series was written. As for the Protocols, they were introduced as a literary device. I have seen the clip in question, where the lead character, confused and frightened by the cataclysmic events he's witnessed, comes across a copy of the Protocols and, reading them, finds them uncannily prophetic. Reading them, he begins to see a pattern in events he had thought were random and unconnected.

In the final analysis, it's one dramatic series that, from everything I've heard, was far less racist and hateful than most of what passes for entertainment on American tv, particularly when this involves Arab or Muslim characters.

In any case, the American and zionist reaction could not have been more provocative and incendiary. Even before the series was aired, 46 members of the same Congress who six months before couldn't be bothered to express one peep of protest at Israel's indiscriminate massacres of Palestinian women and children, sent a letter expressing their fury and outrage to President Mubarak, DEMANDING that the series not be aired. Egyptians found it hilarious that the Americans, who had been haranguing Egypt on the necessity for the media to be independent and on the need for a free press, and lecturing Arabs ad nauseum on America's superiority based on its freedoms, especially the freedom of expression, were now ordering the president of Egypt to personally forbid the airing of a drama series by a privately-owned tv channel!

Although maddening hypocrisy is a hallmark of zionists, so no surprise there, the Americans' tizzy fit destroyed whatever remnants of American credibility and respect had been left, among Arabs.

Egypt's "Al Ahram Weekly" newspaper has a good summary of the fallout, written one year later:

On Monday, some 200 intellectuals, actors and artists held a solidarity conference with Sobhi (Mohamed Sobhi, who wrote the screenplay and played the lead role - Alice) which denounced "America's insistence on practicing neo-McCarthyism", and demanded an end to the daily aggression against the Palestinian people.

"Are these protocols a monotheistic religion? Are they sacred texts? No they're not and the series is not based on The Protocols. Nor do we address the authenticity of The Protocols, so what's the big deal?" a furious Sobhi told Al- Ahram Weekly. "In fact, The Protocols are silly and insignificant. We're not discussing their history, nor do we care about their history. So I really don't owe anybody anything."

The 41-episode series is based on the memoirs of Hafez Naguib, an Egyptian journalist active in the Arab national struggle between mid-19th century till 1917 when the Balfour Declaration -- which promised a homeland for the Jews in Palestine -- was made. The series, say its makers, covers an important historical chapter in Arab history which includes the Ottoman Empire, the British occupation of Egypt and the Zionist occupation of Palestine, among other events.

Respected historians like Abdel-Wahab El-Messeri, author of the magnum opus Jews, Judaism and Zionism, an eight-part encyclopaedia, believe The Protocols are probably fake. El-Messeri has written that referring to, or using, The Protocols in an attempt to combat the Zionist media "is unethical since it cannot be validated by any historical research, Arab or otherwise".

Some are wondering if the series will further fuel Arab public opinion, which has expressed its frustration with the US, Israel and the silence of Arab governments over the past two years by staging numerous anti-American and anti-Israeli demonstrations. When asked by the Weekly if he thought Fares would have this sort of effect, Sobhi snapped: "So am I supposed to present a drama that makes the Arab nation absent-minded, and call it 'I love Israel?'"

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Sobhi said, "has already served the Palestinian cause by teaching our children how to hate Israel. This is why today, we see tens of thousands of students demonstrating against Israel after some had forgotten -- ever since the [Egyptian-Israeli] peace treaty [was signed] -- who the enemy is."

Critics, however, believe that the series is doing more harm than good. Salah Eissa, editor of the weekly Al-Qahira newspaper, believes that Horseman Without a Horse "is just a TV series at the end of the day". The fact that it refers to, or partially deals with, The Protocols "is a stupid mistake", Eissa told the Weekly. "This work is yet another commercial attempt to greedily invest in our national issues, a phenomenon we've seen in many superficial movies or series where a scene of the Israeli flag being burnt suddenly appears, imposed [by the producers] in order to provoke the audience into a frenzy of exaggerated applause." This is also clearly manifested, explained Eissa, in the bizarre popularity of Shaaban Abdel-Rehim, who "became a national hero" just because he sang "I hate Israel".

Eissa's criticism of the series expanded into what he referred to as "state manipulation" of the debate. "By allegedly refusing to succumb to American-Israeli pressure, the government looks better and we are left to believe that we have achieved a victory of sorts." In other words, Eissa said, the series "absorbs" a lot of the anger in the Egyptian and Arab street "and serves as a harmless venting channel. Observing Muslims will watch it after iftar and think they are resisting Zionism by doing so."

Palestine, Iraq or the fate of the Arab nation are national liberation issues, argued Eissa, that should be dealt with far more seriously. "If consciousness is to be raised, that endeavour must be based on truth. And this isn't something Arab regimes like to do."

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2002/611/eg7.htm


American Dream said:

Someone as bright as you, who is obviously quite well-read on Palestine/Israel must surely have some sort of opinion on the Protocols. Don't you think they are a bit relevant here when we are veering toward models of world Zionist conspiracy and the like?

Thank you for your kind words. No, I don't. Really, Mohamed Sobhi said it best:

"In fact, The Protocols are silly and insignificant. We're not discussing their history, nor do we care about their history. So I really don't owe anybody anything."

Thanks for addressing all the facts I took the trouble to include in my previous posts. As the saying goes: "when in doubt, bring up the Protocols!"

[American Dream]

OK Alice, so are we both then agreed that the Protocols are well-established fakery? That is the beginning, not the end of my concern- they are not at all
insignificant, in my view. Rather they document quite clearly a very, very long history of misinformation and disinformation regarding world Jewish conspiracy. I have never studied up on this stuff, but of course there's Henry Ford, Hitler and the Nazis, Eustace Mullins, and many, many others of this ilk.

While I do agree with some of the claims in your previous post, I don't believe that the US Government is run for the benefit of Israelis rather than Americans- that is your interpretation and I feel it is a dubious one. I feel that government policy in both places is run primarily for the benefit of elites, and the benefits that ordinary people reap are manifest to the degree that we fight for them, the degree we make it expedient for elites to make them available to us.

One could fashion arguments that the world is run by and for: Men, Anglo/Americans, Straight People, Christians, Militaries, and etc., based on real facts. To a degree, these arguments might be suggestive of social realities. The final analysis proffered might be problematic however, if phrased in an overstated and/or simplistic fashion, as these kinds of arguments might selectively filter facts toward certain pre-determined conclusions which were not only ahistorical and incomplete, but ultimately grossly misleading.

So, since you do know something about the 100+ years of dishonesty regarding an alleged "World Jewish Conspiracy" don't you think there are therefore legitimate reasons to be concerned by arguments that Israel runs the United States, and hence, the World?

[stefano]

So, since you do know something about the 100+ years of dishonesty regarding an alleged "World Jewish Conspiracy" don't you think there are therefore legitimate reasons to be concerned by arguments that Israel runs the United States, and hence, the World?

There are legitimate reasons to examine such arguments carefully on their merits, the way you should examine any arguments. That's not what the dominant political discourse on the subject does, though, and not what you seem to be doing here. People use the existence of this propaganda to act concerned about arguments like Alice's, and then ignore what's actually happening.

I mean your last post could almost be paraphrased as "there's this book about Jewish conspiracy and it's a fake, so we shouldn't talk about Jews conspiring, ever."

The Protocols are kept alive in the public consciousness by Zionists in Israel and America for precisely that purpose, to smother arguments based in fact.

[AlicetheKurious]

One could fashion arguments that the world is run by and for: Men, Anglo/Americans, Straight People, Christians, Militaries, and etc., based on real facts. To a degree, these arguments might be suggestive of social realities. The final analysis proffered might be problematic however, if phrased in an overstated and/or simplistic fashion, as these kinds of arguments might selectively filter facts toward certain pre-determined conclusions which were not only ahistorical and incomplete, but ultimately grossly misleading.

You're implying that I might be phrasing my conclusions "in an overstated and/or simplistic fashion", but have offered neither facts nor logic in support of what you appear to 'believe' is an actual, honest-to-god argument.

If a conclusion is "overstated and/or simplistic", wouldn't it be more persuasive to provide facts that would demonstrate this, instead of just sticking a label? Just a suggestion.

So, since you do know something about the 100+ years of dishonesty regarding an alleged "World Jewish Conspiracy" don't you think there are therefore legitimate reasons to be concerned by arguments that Israel runs the United States, and hence, the World?

First, your statement about "the 100+ years of dishonesty regarding an alleged 'World Jewish Conspiracy'"is an excellent example of "selective filtering of facts towards certain pre-determined conclusions which [are] not only ahistorical and incomplete, but ultimately grossly misleading."

This leads me to the obvious conclusion that you don't mind the "selective filtering of facts" after all, as long as they lead to "pre-determined conclusions" etc. that you "feel" comfortable with.

That approach, of telling people what they need to believe in order to stay within a "safe thought zone" is best used with people who are comfortable with being told what to think, or which facts to pay attention to and which to ignore.

And there are indeed very "legitimate reasons to be concerned by arguments" that seem designed solely to lead to irrational and baseless "pre-determined conclusions" solely in order to conform with the mental danger zone that someone else has drawn.

P.S. What stefano said.

[American Dream]

stefano wrote:

There are legitimate reasons to examine such arguments carefully on their merits, the way you should examine any arguments. That's not what the dominant political discourse on the subject does, though, and not what you seem to be doing here. People use the existence of this propaganda to act concerned about arguments like Alice's, and then ignore what's actually happening.

I mean your last post could almost be paraphrased as "there's this book about Jewish conspiracy and it's a fake, so we shouldn't talk about Jews conspiring, ever."

The Protocols are kept alive in the public consciousness by Zionists in Israel and America for precisely that purpose, to smother arguments based in fact.

I do feel that all ideas should be able to be considered rationally, and not ruled out a priori. Problem is, I've been looking at the arguments for a Zionist conspiracy ruling the world for a long time now, and it seems to be crap.

Please note that when I say this I am not ruling out Israeli involvement in drug running, targeted assassinations, possession of chemical, biological and nuclear weaponry, sexual blackmail, influence peddling, arms running, torture and war crimes. Quite the opposite.

I have done a good deal of progressive activism around Palestine/Israel. I think that not being clear about "anti-Semitism" and its relation to overblown theories of Jewish global domination, is like going before the ADL, ZOA, WJC and all the rest, and taping a giant "Kick Me!" sign to your back. Completely pointless and unhelpful, in my opinion...

[American Dream]

AlicetheKurious wrote:

your statement about "the 100+ years of dishonesty regarding an alleged 'World Jewish Conspiracy'"is an excellent example of "selective filtering of facts towards certain pre-determined conclusions which [are] not only ahistorical and incomplete, but ultimately grossly misleading."

Alice, you have completely failed to lay out a convincing case for the sort of World Jewish Conspiracy you are presuming, wherein Israel rules the United States, and hence the World. You have also completely avoided, three times now at least, stating a clear position with regards to the validity of the Protocols. If you wish to do so now, go ahead and give it your best shot.

[hava1]

bit off topic, but maybe not.

The "jews rule the world" theme is alos played out within israel, in an interesting way. Israelis who are in some form of dissent will be met, at some point with a warning, if they try to get external support "we, the Jews have friends everywhere". And that is very interesting as it is played out by hegemonic establishment against a variety of protests from within (Jewish, that is).

So, this supports at least a prima facie "conspiracy" of some Zionist- hegemony, to suppress contrary thought forms, challenge, dissent, whether from within or without.

When I first heard that, it was a sort of friend, who is kind of militaristic, was serving as military intel officer in Gaza, has been doing some intel work in Germany and a staunch zionist. We often speak about my experineces, and he shows me the "devils advocate" for sure. From him I heard that "the Jews (refering to his ideological kindred people) have friends everywhere" telling me tha all opposition is futile abroad. I then told him what do you mean "the jews have friends", i am jewish and u mean that the Establishment has non Jewish affiliates abroad that help them oppress other Jews ? is that what you are proud of ?

Similarly, a colleague of mine who has literally been "locked" to israel for 8 years, recently was able to return to the USA and find a good academic job. SHe wrote to me from there, that "there is a Zionist ring" and they nearly blew up her job in the University, when "anonymous" iSraeli alerts to all kind of AIPAC Lobby guys, caused some phone calls to be made, etc.

This "Jewish cnspiracy" is being bolstered from within, both in order to create high morale in the troops, but also as psych war fare. They probably read the protoccols and decided to do "the reverse trick".