Special Parliament Session On Gaza Next Monday
PUTRAJAYA, Jan 7 (Bernama) -- The Cabinet today agreed that Parliament holds a special session on the Gaza onslaught next Monday, said Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim.
The government as well as opposition Members of Parliament had been reported condemning the Israeli aggression and called for a ceasefire and an end to the crisis which began on Dec 27.
The government had also called for an Emergency Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly to address the issue. - BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=382135
Israel Must Be Forced Out Of Gaza, Says Abdullah
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 8 (Bernama) -- Any resolution passed by the Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York Friday morning must ensure that Israel is forced out of Gaza, said Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
While thanking UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on the convening of the Special Session which Malaysia and several other countries had urgently called for, Abdullah said the United States should also not oppose whatever resolution that would touch on Israel, which is on a military offensive in the Gaza Strip since Dec 27. - BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsindex.php?id=382269
Israel Should Be Subjected To Sanctions, Says Abdullah
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 8 (Bernama) -- Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said today Israel should be subjected to international sanctions because of its brutal onslought on Gaza which had killed many people.
He said the world would be a better and more peaceful place if ethics and morality were given due weight in the conduct of international relations.
"Perhaps, the international community should include outrageous breaches of basic moral standards in the list which must be subjected to international sanctions. The point is, we should shift moral purpose from the sidelines of international conduct to centre stage. The escalating crisis in the Middle East is a case in point. It is absolutely immoral for Israel to continue inflicting upon the people of Gaza an entirely disproportionate and excessive deployment of its military power," Abdullah said. - BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=382288
Friday, January 9, 2009
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
ISRAELI’S BRUTALITY IN GAZA STRIP: VOICES OF CONCERN FROM MALAYSIA
ABDULLAH CONTACTS UN SECRETARY-GENERAL FOR SPECIAL ASSEMBLY
PUTRAJAYA, Jan 5 (Bernama) -- Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has contacted the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, Ban Ki Moon, and the President of the UN General Assembly, Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, to hold a UN special assembly.
Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim, in announcing this, said the assembly was necessary after the UN Security Council failed to reach a decision to stop the Israeli aggression on Palestine.
He said Abdullah would also get in touch with all the heads of governments under the auspices of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), ASEAN and several other international organisations to press for the special assembly to be held as soon as possible. – BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=381659
MAHATHIR: US SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL UNLIKELY TO CHANGE
PUTRAJAYA, Jan 5 (Bernama) -- United States' President-elect Barack Obama is not expected to change his country's stand with regard to support for Israel although the Zionist regime had clearly acted brutally against Palestine, former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said Monday.
He said a major power like the United States needed Israel to support certain policies which the former implemented and turning away from the regime would mean losing the much-anticipated support.
"Although the United States' Congress consists of learned individuals, it condones terrorism. We see Israel as having no restriction and Israel actually rules the world through its proxies because no US presidential candidate, including Barack Obama, is bold enough to state that the United States does not support Israel.
"In fact, Obama's right-hand man (vice president-elect) Joseph Biden has openly declared that he is a Zionist. So, you can imagine Obama's foreign policy in the future," he said at a news conference called to condemn Israel's ongoing brutality against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, at the Perdana Leadership Foundation here. - BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=381673
ISLAMIC COUNTRIES SHOULD CUT TIES WITH ISRAEL
JOHOR BAHARU, Jan 6 (Bernama) -- Islamic countries that have bilateral ties with Israel should cut off diplomatic ties immediately to protest against the cruelty inflicted by the Jewish state's regime on the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip.
Former Malaysian ambassador to the United Arab Emirates Datuk Syed Hussein Al-Habshee said Muslims could only protect themselves effectively from any form of cruelty and oppression through education as was done by the Jews. – BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=381936
MALAYSIANS JOINS BOYCOTT OF ISRAELI GOODS
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 6 (Bernama) -- The Council For Ex-Members of Parliament and State Assemblies, Federal Territory, on Monday joined scores of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and individuals in calling for the boycott of Israeli and Israeli related goods and services as a mark of protest against the regime's invasion of Gaza.
Its president, Aziz Yassin, said in a statement that this was the least Malaysians of all races could do to register their sympathy towards the Palestinians who had been suffering endlessly at the hands of the Zionists for the past 50 years. - BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=381804
PUTRAJAYA, Jan 5 (Bernama) -- Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has contacted the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, Ban Ki Moon, and the President of the UN General Assembly, Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, to hold a UN special assembly.
Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim, in announcing this, said the assembly was necessary after the UN Security Council failed to reach a decision to stop the Israeli aggression on Palestine.
He said Abdullah would also get in touch with all the heads of governments under the auspices of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), ASEAN and several other international organisations to press for the special assembly to be held as soon as possible. – BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=381659
MAHATHIR: US SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL UNLIKELY TO CHANGE
PUTRAJAYA, Jan 5 (Bernama) -- United States' President-elect Barack Obama is not expected to change his country's stand with regard to support for Israel although the Zionist regime had clearly acted brutally against Palestine, former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said Monday.
He said a major power like the United States needed Israel to support certain policies which the former implemented and turning away from the regime would mean losing the much-anticipated support.
"Although the United States' Congress consists of learned individuals, it condones terrorism. We see Israel as having no restriction and Israel actually rules the world through its proxies because no US presidential candidate, including Barack Obama, is bold enough to state that the United States does not support Israel.
"In fact, Obama's right-hand man (vice president-elect) Joseph Biden has openly declared that he is a Zionist. So, you can imagine Obama's foreign policy in the future," he said at a news conference called to condemn Israel's ongoing brutality against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, at the Perdana Leadership Foundation here. - BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=381673
ISLAMIC COUNTRIES SHOULD CUT TIES WITH ISRAEL
JOHOR BAHARU, Jan 6 (Bernama) -- Islamic countries that have bilateral ties with Israel should cut off diplomatic ties immediately to protest against the cruelty inflicted by the Jewish state's regime on the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip.
Former Malaysian ambassador to the United Arab Emirates Datuk Syed Hussein Al-Habshee said Muslims could only protect themselves effectively from any form of cruelty and oppression through education as was done by the Jews. – BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=381936
MALAYSIANS JOINS BOYCOTT OF ISRAELI GOODS
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 6 (Bernama) -- The Council For Ex-Members of Parliament and State Assemblies, Federal Territory, on Monday joined scores of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and individuals in calling for the boycott of Israeli and Israeli related goods and services as a mark of protest against the regime's invasion of Gaza.
Its president, Aziz Yassin, said in a statement that this was the least Malaysians of all races could do to register their sympathy towards the Palestinians who had been suffering endlessly at the hands of the Zionists for the past 50 years. - BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=381804
IF HAMAS DID NOT EXIST
Jennifer Loewenstein
Counter Punch January 1, 2008
Israel Has No Intention of Granting a Palestinian State
Let us get one thing perfectly straight. If the wholesale mutilation and degradation of the Gaza Strip is going to continue; if Israel’s will is at one with that of the United States; if the European Union, Russia, the United Nations and all the international legal agencies and organizations spread across the globe are going to continue to sit by like hollow mannequins doing nothing but making repeated “calls” for a “ceasefire” on “both sides”; if the cowardly, obsequious and supine Arab States are going to stand by watching their brethren get slaughtered by the hour while the world’s bullying Superpower eyes them threateningly from Washington lest they say something a little to their disliking; then let us at least tell the truth why this hell on earth is taking place.
The state terror unleashed from the skies and on the ground against the Gaza Strip as we speak has nothing to do with Hamas. It has nothing to do with “Terror”. It has nothing to do with the long-term “security” of the Jewish State or with Hizbullah or Syria or Iran except insofar as it is aggravating the conditions that have led up to this crisis today. It has nothing to do with some conjured-up “war” – a cynical and overused euphemism that amounts to little more the wholesale enslavement of any nation that dares claim its sovereign rights; that dares assert that its resources are its own; that doesn’t want one of the Empire’s obscene military bases sitting on its cherished land.
This crisis has nothing to do with freedom, democracy, justice or peace. It is not about Mahmoud Zahhar or Khalid Mash’al or Ismail Haniyeh. It is not about Hassan Nasrallah or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. These are all circumstantial players who have gained a role in the current tempest only now that the situation has been allowed for 61 years to develop into the catastrophe that it is today. The Islamist factor has colored and will continue to color the atmosphere of the crisis; it has enlisted the current leaders and mobilized wide sectors of the world’s population. The primary symbols today are Islamic – the mosques, the Qur’an, the references to the Prophet Muhammad and to Jihad. But these symbols could disappear and the impasse would continue.
There was a time when Fatah and the PFLP held the day; when few Palestinians wanted anything to do with Islamist policies and politics. Such politics have nothing to do with primitive rockets being fired over the border, or smuggling tunnels and black-market weapons; just as Arafat’s Fatah had little to do with stones and suicide bombings. The associations are coincidental; the creations of a given political environment. They are the result of something entirely different than what the lying politicians and their analysts are telling you. They have become part of the landscape of human events in the modern Middle East today; but incidentals wholly as lethal, or as recalcitrant, deadly, angry or incorrigible could just as soon have been in their places.
Strip away the clichés and the vacuous newspeak blaring out across the servile media and its pathetic corps of voluntary state servants in the Western world and what you will find is the naked desire for hegemony; for power over the weak and dominion over the world’s wealth. Worse yet you will find that the selfishness, the hatred and indifference, the racism and bigotry, the egotism and hedonism that we try so hard to cover up with our sophisticated jargon, our refined academic theories and models actually help to guide our basest and ugliest desires. The callousness with which we in indulge in them all are endemic to our very culture; thriving here like flies on a corpse.
Strip away the current symbols and language of the victims of our selfish and devastating whims and you will find the simple, impassioned and unaffected cries of the downtrodden; of the ‘wretched of the earth’ begging you to cease your cold aggression against their children and their homes; their families and their villages; begging you to leave them alone to have their fish and their bread, their oranges, their olives and their thyme; asking you first politely and then with increasing disbelief why you cannot let them live undisturbed on the land of their ancestors; unexploited, free of the fear of expulsion; of ravishment and devastation; free of permits and roadblocks and checkpoints and crossings; of monstrous concrete walls, guard towers, concrete bunkers, and barbed wire; of tanks and prisons and torture and death. Why is life without these policies and instruments of hell impossible?
The answer is because Israel has no intention of allowing a viable, sovereign Palestinian state on its borders. It had no intention of allowing it in 1948 when it grabbed 24 per cent more land than what it was allotted legally, if unfairly, by UN Resolution 181. It had no intention of allowing it throughout the massacres and ploys of the 1950s. It had no intention of allowing two states when it conquered the remaining 22 per cent of historic Palestine in 1967 and reinterpreted UN Security Council Resolution 248 to its own liking despite the overwhelming international consensus stating that Israel would receive full international recognition within secure and recognized borders if it withdrew from the lands it had only recently occupied.
It had no intention of acknowledging Palestinian national rights at the United Nations in 1974, when - alone with the United States - it voted against a two-state solution. It had no intention of allowing a comprehensive peace settlement when Egypt stood ready to deliver but received, and obediently accepted, a separate peace exclusive of the rights of Palestinians and the remaining peoples of the region. It had no intention of working toward a just two-state solution in 1978 or 1982 when it invaded, fire-bombed, blasted and bulldozed Beirut so that it might annex the West Bank without hassle. It had no intention of granting a Palestinian state in 1987 when the first Intifada spread across occupied Palestine, into the Diaspora and the into the spirits of the global dispossessed, or when Israel deliberately aided the newly formed Hamas movement so that it might undermine the strength of the more secular-nationalist factions.
Israel had no intention of granting a Palestinian state at Madrid or at Oslo where the PLO was superseded by the quivering, quisling Palestinian Authority, too many of whose cronies grasped at the wealth and prestige it gave them at the expense of their own kin. As Israel beamed into the world’s satellites and microphones its desire for peace and a two-state solution, it more than doubled the number of illegal Jewish settlements on the ground in the West Bank and around East Jerusalem, annexing them as it built and continues to build a superstructure of bypass roads and highways over the remaining, severed cities and villages of earthly Palestine. It has annexed the Jordan valley, the international border of Jordan, expelling any ‘locals’ inhabiting that land. It speaks with a viper’s tongue over the multiple amputee of Palestine whose head shall soon be severed from its body in the name of justice, peace and security.
Through the home demolitions, the assaults on civil society that attempted to cast Palestinian history and culture into a chasm of oblivion; through the unspeakable destruction of the refugee camp sieges and infrastructure bombardments of the second Intifada, through assassinations and summary executions, past the grandiose farce of disengagement and up to the nullification of free, fair and democratic Palestinian elections Israel has made its view known again and again in the strongest possible language, the language of military might, of threats, intimidation, harassment, defamation and degradation.
Israel, with the unconditional and approving support of the United States, has made it dramatically clear to the entire world over and over and over again, repeating in action after action that it will accept no viable Palestinian state next to its borders. What will it take for the rest of us to hear? What will it take to end the criminal silence of the ‘international community’? What will it take to see past the lies and indoctrination to what is taking place before us day after day in full view of the eyes of the world? The more horrific the actions on the ground, the more insistent are the words of peace. To listen and watch without hearing or seeing allows the indifference, the ignorance and complicity to continue and deepens with each grave our collective shame.
The destruction of Gaza has nothing to do with Hamas. Israel will accept no authority in the Palestinian territories that it does not ultimately control. Any individual, leader, faction or movement that fails to accede to Israel’s demands or that seeks genuine sovereignty and the equality of all nations in the region; any government or popular movement that demands the applicability of international humanitarian law and of the universal declaration of human rights for its own people will be unacceptable for the Jewish State. Those dreaming of one state must be forced to ask themselves what Israel would do to a population of 4 million Palestinians within its borders when it commits on a daily, if not hourly basis, crimes against their collective humanity while they live alongside its borders? What will suddenly make the raison d’etre, the self-proclaimed purpose of Israel’s reason for being change if the Palestinian territories are annexed to it outright?
The lifeblood of the Palestinian National Movement flows through the streets of Gaza today. Every drop that falls waters the soil of vengeance, bitterness and hatred not only in Palestine but across the Middle East and much of the world. We do have a choice over whether or not this should continue. Now is the time to make it.
Jennifer Loewenstein is the Associate Director of the Middle East Studies Program at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She can be reached at amadea311@earthlink.net
www.counterpunch.org/loewenstein01012009.html
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=9961
Counter Punch January 1, 2008
Israel Has No Intention of Granting a Palestinian State
Let us get one thing perfectly straight. If the wholesale mutilation and degradation of the Gaza Strip is going to continue; if Israel’s will is at one with that of the United States; if the European Union, Russia, the United Nations and all the international legal agencies and organizations spread across the globe are going to continue to sit by like hollow mannequins doing nothing but making repeated “calls” for a “ceasefire” on “both sides”; if the cowardly, obsequious and supine Arab States are going to stand by watching their brethren get slaughtered by the hour while the world’s bullying Superpower eyes them threateningly from Washington lest they say something a little to their disliking; then let us at least tell the truth why this hell on earth is taking place.
The state terror unleashed from the skies and on the ground against the Gaza Strip as we speak has nothing to do with Hamas. It has nothing to do with “Terror”. It has nothing to do with the long-term “security” of the Jewish State or with Hizbullah or Syria or Iran except insofar as it is aggravating the conditions that have led up to this crisis today. It has nothing to do with some conjured-up “war” – a cynical and overused euphemism that amounts to little more the wholesale enslavement of any nation that dares claim its sovereign rights; that dares assert that its resources are its own; that doesn’t want one of the Empire’s obscene military bases sitting on its cherished land.
This crisis has nothing to do with freedom, democracy, justice or peace. It is not about Mahmoud Zahhar or Khalid Mash’al or Ismail Haniyeh. It is not about Hassan Nasrallah or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. These are all circumstantial players who have gained a role in the current tempest only now that the situation has been allowed for 61 years to develop into the catastrophe that it is today. The Islamist factor has colored and will continue to color the atmosphere of the crisis; it has enlisted the current leaders and mobilized wide sectors of the world’s population. The primary symbols today are Islamic – the mosques, the Qur’an, the references to the Prophet Muhammad and to Jihad. But these symbols could disappear and the impasse would continue.
There was a time when Fatah and the PFLP held the day; when few Palestinians wanted anything to do with Islamist policies and politics. Such politics have nothing to do with primitive rockets being fired over the border, or smuggling tunnels and black-market weapons; just as Arafat’s Fatah had little to do with stones and suicide bombings. The associations are coincidental; the creations of a given political environment. They are the result of something entirely different than what the lying politicians and their analysts are telling you. They have become part of the landscape of human events in the modern Middle East today; but incidentals wholly as lethal, or as recalcitrant, deadly, angry or incorrigible could just as soon have been in their places.
Strip away the clichés and the vacuous newspeak blaring out across the servile media and its pathetic corps of voluntary state servants in the Western world and what you will find is the naked desire for hegemony; for power over the weak and dominion over the world’s wealth. Worse yet you will find that the selfishness, the hatred and indifference, the racism and bigotry, the egotism and hedonism that we try so hard to cover up with our sophisticated jargon, our refined academic theories and models actually help to guide our basest and ugliest desires. The callousness with which we in indulge in them all are endemic to our very culture; thriving here like flies on a corpse.
Strip away the current symbols and language of the victims of our selfish and devastating whims and you will find the simple, impassioned and unaffected cries of the downtrodden; of the ‘wretched of the earth’ begging you to cease your cold aggression against their children and their homes; their families and their villages; begging you to leave them alone to have their fish and their bread, their oranges, their olives and their thyme; asking you first politely and then with increasing disbelief why you cannot let them live undisturbed on the land of their ancestors; unexploited, free of the fear of expulsion; of ravishment and devastation; free of permits and roadblocks and checkpoints and crossings; of monstrous concrete walls, guard towers, concrete bunkers, and barbed wire; of tanks and prisons and torture and death. Why is life without these policies and instruments of hell impossible?
The answer is because Israel has no intention of allowing a viable, sovereign Palestinian state on its borders. It had no intention of allowing it in 1948 when it grabbed 24 per cent more land than what it was allotted legally, if unfairly, by UN Resolution 181. It had no intention of allowing it throughout the massacres and ploys of the 1950s. It had no intention of allowing two states when it conquered the remaining 22 per cent of historic Palestine in 1967 and reinterpreted UN Security Council Resolution 248 to its own liking despite the overwhelming international consensus stating that Israel would receive full international recognition within secure and recognized borders if it withdrew from the lands it had only recently occupied.
It had no intention of acknowledging Palestinian national rights at the United Nations in 1974, when - alone with the United States - it voted against a two-state solution. It had no intention of allowing a comprehensive peace settlement when Egypt stood ready to deliver but received, and obediently accepted, a separate peace exclusive of the rights of Palestinians and the remaining peoples of the region. It had no intention of working toward a just two-state solution in 1978 or 1982 when it invaded, fire-bombed, blasted and bulldozed Beirut so that it might annex the West Bank without hassle. It had no intention of granting a Palestinian state in 1987 when the first Intifada spread across occupied Palestine, into the Diaspora and the into the spirits of the global dispossessed, or when Israel deliberately aided the newly formed Hamas movement so that it might undermine the strength of the more secular-nationalist factions.
Israel had no intention of granting a Palestinian state at Madrid or at Oslo where the PLO was superseded by the quivering, quisling Palestinian Authority, too many of whose cronies grasped at the wealth and prestige it gave them at the expense of their own kin. As Israel beamed into the world’s satellites and microphones its desire for peace and a two-state solution, it more than doubled the number of illegal Jewish settlements on the ground in the West Bank and around East Jerusalem, annexing them as it built and continues to build a superstructure of bypass roads and highways over the remaining, severed cities and villages of earthly Palestine. It has annexed the Jordan valley, the international border of Jordan, expelling any ‘locals’ inhabiting that land. It speaks with a viper’s tongue over the multiple amputee of Palestine whose head shall soon be severed from its body in the name of justice, peace and security.
Through the home demolitions, the assaults on civil society that attempted to cast Palestinian history and culture into a chasm of oblivion; through the unspeakable destruction of the refugee camp sieges and infrastructure bombardments of the second Intifada, through assassinations and summary executions, past the grandiose farce of disengagement and up to the nullification of free, fair and democratic Palestinian elections Israel has made its view known again and again in the strongest possible language, the language of military might, of threats, intimidation, harassment, defamation and degradation.
Israel, with the unconditional and approving support of the United States, has made it dramatically clear to the entire world over and over and over again, repeating in action after action that it will accept no viable Palestinian state next to its borders. What will it take for the rest of us to hear? What will it take to end the criminal silence of the ‘international community’? What will it take to see past the lies and indoctrination to what is taking place before us day after day in full view of the eyes of the world? The more horrific the actions on the ground, the more insistent are the words of peace. To listen and watch without hearing or seeing allows the indifference, the ignorance and complicity to continue and deepens with each grave our collective shame.
The destruction of Gaza has nothing to do with Hamas. Israel will accept no authority in the Palestinian territories that it does not ultimately control. Any individual, leader, faction or movement that fails to accede to Israel’s demands or that seeks genuine sovereignty and the equality of all nations in the region; any government or popular movement that demands the applicability of international humanitarian law and of the universal declaration of human rights for its own people will be unacceptable for the Jewish State. Those dreaming of one state must be forced to ask themselves what Israel would do to a population of 4 million Palestinians within its borders when it commits on a daily, if not hourly basis, crimes against their collective humanity while they live alongside its borders? What will suddenly make the raison d’etre, the self-proclaimed purpose of Israel’s reason for being change if the Palestinian territories are annexed to it outright?
The lifeblood of the Palestinian National Movement flows through the streets of Gaza today. Every drop that falls waters the soil of vengeance, bitterness and hatred not only in Palestine but across the Middle East and much of the world. We do have a choice over whether or not this should continue. Now is the time to make it.
Jennifer Loewenstein is the Associate Director of the Middle East Studies Program at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She can be reached at amadea311@earthlink.net
www.counterpunch.org/loewenstein01012009.html
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=9961
Saturday, January 3, 2009
INTERVIEW: ‘THIRD PARTY BEHIND MUMBAI ATTACK’
Chetan Upadhyaya – Sify, December 31, 2008
A war between India and Pakistan is unthinkable, believes Shah Zaman Khan, Minister, Press, at the Pakistan High Commission in New Delhi.
The war hysteria in both nations is being fuelled by “one common enemy that does not want India and Pakistan to be friends,” the senior Pakistani diplomat asserts. “What we have seen in Mumbai is altogether a third party conspiracy.”
Khan, who has a Master’s Degree in Economics, joined the Pakistan Foreign Service in 1978, and has served as Joint Secretary of the Information and Broadcasting Ministry in Islamabad and Director General of the troubled North West Frontier Province before being posted to New Delhi in late 2007.
“The media has created all these clouds and in a week or two, all these clouds of war are expected to vanish,” Khan told Chetan Upadhyaya of the Satya Foundation in an exclusive interview. Khan also answered two other questions from people who phoned in during this interview.
Excerpts:
The war of words between India and Pakistan is at its peak. Media reports warn about heightened tensions and a possible war between the countries…
In my opinion, neither the public nor the leadership in India and Pakistan want any war. Whatever talks we are hearing about the war, it is all due to the media hype. The media has created all these clouds and in a week or two, all these clouds of war will vanish completely. And once again, India and Pakistan will hopefully resume the normal dialogue and talk process.
If two Germanys can reunite, why can't India and Pakistan? We were separated just 61 years ago, and the wounds and pain still linger. So many explosions in Pakistan and in India. Do you think that the time has come when we promote the concept of no boundary and no guns and bombs?
In my opinion, India and Pakistan can stay as two different entities, but in a dignified way. They can present an example of two friends who live separately, but harmoniously. The border is a geographical reality, and we cannot deny its existence. Every country has its own sovereignty and independence. We can maintain the individual existence and still maintain peace, friendship and brotherhood. We can live like good friends. What we have seen in Mumbai is altogether a third party conspiracy. There is one common enemy that does not want India and Pakistan to be friends. It is very necessary to remove that common enemy and that is possible only when we have mutual cooperation and trust and India and Pakistan help each other in eradicating this common enemy. Let the two countries not exploit each other’s weaknesses rather help each other in these trying conditions.
All this is the result of an international conspiracy?
Yes, it is all their game and both of us are suffering. It is high time that both India and Pakistan start accepting the reality and unite against international conspiracies. Let’s not be exploited by others. We must not allow ourselves to play in the hands of others.
Could you elaborate?
In order to promote their arms and ammunition, some powers are trying to ignite war between India and Pakistan. The arms lobby is forcing these powers to go with the “divide and rule” policy. This will stop only when India and Pakistan start realising that they are 'lost' brothers. The majority of us love each other. Only few rotten fish cannot continue to pollute the entire pond...! We must fight the terror collectively, without falling prey to the negative elements, which want both India and Pakistan to be broken into pieces. We all want peace and silence. The whole region is sick of the bloodshed and mayhem. After all, who knows the plight of terrorism more than Pakistan? We lost so many leaders and common men and women and innocent children. So many of our women became widows. If there are no wars, both India and Pakistan can spend more money on education, agriculture, industry, environment and employment. If we stand collectively, Pakistan and India together can show to the world that two brothers can finish the terrorism together and ensure complete peace... We are determined to give fatal blow to terrorism.
There are many organisations in South Asia that want a 'Mahasangh' of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and China. What do you think?
I agree with you that there should be openhearted dialogue and discussion between the people of these countries. The thoughts and emotions should find an expression. And the conspiracy of the ‘superpower’ should be exposed properly. I will not speak for the merger. All countries have their own sanctities and sovereignties and without disturbing the natural makeup of the countries, we can still go forward in the direction of complete peace and brotherhood. We must promote the political, social, cultural and economic collaboration between these countries so that there is no more bitterness and fighting amongst us. Only this way can we can develop together and create a world where there is no forward and no backward. Everyone will get equal opportunities for expansion and growth without disturbing the peace and tranquility of others. And when there is equal progress at the economic and political levels, the borders get weakened automatically. If you travel in Europe, you never come to know where is the beginning or end of the boundary of one country. You don’t need permission to go from one place to another. The same situation can come here if we can make progress in political, social and economic fields. We must start seeing each other’s progress in correct light and with a positive state of mind. We must take pride in each other’s progress. With changed state of mind, the concept of border will change and we will witness a new world.
In a recent interview with satyafoundation.com, the RSS chief, Mr. K.S. Sudarshan, said that there are good people in every religion and society and it is our duty to live in mutual harmony with each other. He also said that terrorism should not be linked to any particular religion. How do you see this?
I fully agree with Mr. Sudarshan that terrorists have no religion. They are mindless people who have actually no association with any one nation or religion. I also fully agree with his statement that there are good people, both in India and Pakistan. And as a result, we have witnessed so much of dialogue and the wave of mutual cooperation and peace process in the past few years. If one can remember, just before the Mumbai crisis, there was an atmosphere of goodwill and talks at the senior level. We believe that good people on both sides of the border are doing exemplary work for good relations and will continue with this for peace and tranquility. Let me say it categorically that this is only a temporary phase of tension, which will defuse very soon.
Chetan Upadhyaya is a journalist and holistic healer who contributes extensively to various newspapers/magazines. He also conducts programmes and workshops for Stress Management and total awakening of mind through music, meditation, yoga and natural lifestyle under the guidance of his Guru, Yogi Shri Ashish Chatterjee. He can be reached at: satyafoundation@sify.com
http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14828593
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=9935
A war between India and Pakistan is unthinkable, believes Shah Zaman Khan, Minister, Press, at the Pakistan High Commission in New Delhi.
The war hysteria in both nations is being fuelled by “one common enemy that does not want India and Pakistan to be friends,” the senior Pakistani diplomat asserts. “What we have seen in Mumbai is altogether a third party conspiracy.”
Khan, who has a Master’s Degree in Economics, joined the Pakistan Foreign Service in 1978, and has served as Joint Secretary of the Information and Broadcasting Ministry in Islamabad and Director General of the troubled North West Frontier Province before being posted to New Delhi in late 2007.
“The media has created all these clouds and in a week or two, all these clouds of war are expected to vanish,” Khan told Chetan Upadhyaya of the Satya Foundation in an exclusive interview. Khan also answered two other questions from people who phoned in during this interview.
Excerpts:
The war of words between India and Pakistan is at its peak. Media reports warn about heightened tensions and a possible war between the countries…
In my opinion, neither the public nor the leadership in India and Pakistan want any war. Whatever talks we are hearing about the war, it is all due to the media hype. The media has created all these clouds and in a week or two, all these clouds of war will vanish completely. And once again, India and Pakistan will hopefully resume the normal dialogue and talk process.
If two Germanys can reunite, why can't India and Pakistan? We were separated just 61 years ago, and the wounds and pain still linger. So many explosions in Pakistan and in India. Do you think that the time has come when we promote the concept of no boundary and no guns and bombs?
In my opinion, India and Pakistan can stay as two different entities, but in a dignified way. They can present an example of two friends who live separately, but harmoniously. The border is a geographical reality, and we cannot deny its existence. Every country has its own sovereignty and independence. We can maintain the individual existence and still maintain peace, friendship and brotherhood. We can live like good friends. What we have seen in Mumbai is altogether a third party conspiracy. There is one common enemy that does not want India and Pakistan to be friends. It is very necessary to remove that common enemy and that is possible only when we have mutual cooperation and trust and India and Pakistan help each other in eradicating this common enemy. Let the two countries not exploit each other’s weaknesses rather help each other in these trying conditions.
All this is the result of an international conspiracy?
Yes, it is all their game and both of us are suffering. It is high time that both India and Pakistan start accepting the reality and unite against international conspiracies. Let’s not be exploited by others. We must not allow ourselves to play in the hands of others.
Could you elaborate?
In order to promote their arms and ammunition, some powers are trying to ignite war between India and Pakistan. The arms lobby is forcing these powers to go with the “divide and rule” policy. This will stop only when India and Pakistan start realising that they are 'lost' brothers. The majority of us love each other. Only few rotten fish cannot continue to pollute the entire pond...! We must fight the terror collectively, without falling prey to the negative elements, which want both India and Pakistan to be broken into pieces. We all want peace and silence. The whole region is sick of the bloodshed and mayhem. After all, who knows the plight of terrorism more than Pakistan? We lost so many leaders and common men and women and innocent children. So many of our women became widows. If there are no wars, both India and Pakistan can spend more money on education, agriculture, industry, environment and employment. If we stand collectively, Pakistan and India together can show to the world that two brothers can finish the terrorism together and ensure complete peace... We are determined to give fatal blow to terrorism.
There are many organisations in South Asia that want a 'Mahasangh' of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and China. What do you think?
I agree with you that there should be openhearted dialogue and discussion between the people of these countries. The thoughts and emotions should find an expression. And the conspiracy of the ‘superpower’ should be exposed properly. I will not speak for the merger. All countries have their own sanctities and sovereignties and without disturbing the natural makeup of the countries, we can still go forward in the direction of complete peace and brotherhood. We must promote the political, social, cultural and economic collaboration between these countries so that there is no more bitterness and fighting amongst us. Only this way can we can develop together and create a world where there is no forward and no backward. Everyone will get equal opportunities for expansion and growth without disturbing the peace and tranquility of others. And when there is equal progress at the economic and political levels, the borders get weakened automatically. If you travel in Europe, you never come to know where is the beginning or end of the boundary of one country. You don’t need permission to go from one place to another. The same situation can come here if we can make progress in political, social and economic fields. We must start seeing each other’s progress in correct light and with a positive state of mind. We must take pride in each other’s progress. With changed state of mind, the concept of border will change and we will witness a new world.
In a recent interview with satyafoundation.com, the RSS chief, Mr. K.S. Sudarshan, said that there are good people in every religion and society and it is our duty to live in mutual harmony with each other. He also said that terrorism should not be linked to any particular religion. How do you see this?
I fully agree with Mr. Sudarshan that terrorists have no religion. They are mindless people who have actually no association with any one nation or religion. I also fully agree with his statement that there are good people, both in India and Pakistan. And as a result, we have witnessed so much of dialogue and the wave of mutual cooperation and peace process in the past few years. If one can remember, just before the Mumbai crisis, there was an atmosphere of goodwill and talks at the senior level. We believe that good people on both sides of the border are doing exemplary work for good relations and will continue with this for peace and tranquility. Let me say it categorically that this is only a temporary phase of tension, which will defuse very soon.
Chetan Upadhyaya is a journalist and holistic healer who contributes extensively to various newspapers/magazines. He also conducts programmes and workshops for Stress Management and total awakening of mind through music, meditation, yoga and natural lifestyle under the guidance of his Guru, Yogi Shri Ashish Chatterjee. He can be reached at: satyafoundation@sify.com
http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14828593
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=9935
Sunday, December 21, 2008
GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS, UNBELIEVABLE NEWS
James W. Harris
[Liberator Online Newsletter, December 21, 2008]
World Government on the Horizon?
We know, we know. Mention anything about politicians scheming for a "world government" and you will instantly be slammed as a troglodyte, conspiracy theorist, wing nut, and so forth, followed immediately by snickering references to tinfoil hats and black helicopters.
Still... we find it most interesting to ponder a remarkable commentary entitled, "And now for a world government," published December 8 in the highly respected and influential international newspaper The Financial Times, which boasts 1.4 million readers. The piece was written by Gideon Rachman, chief foreign affairs commentator for the publication. Rachman was formerly employed by the equally respected Establishment outlets the BBC and The Economist.
"For the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible," writes Rachman. He cites the financial crisis, global warming and the war on terror as creating unprecedented new opportunities for the concept.
"A 'world government' would involve much more than cooperation between nations," Rachman says. "It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union [EU] has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force."
A world government, Rachman stresses, could not be created democratically, because we ignorant unwashed masses, lacking the wisdom and foresight of those who rule us, mostly hate the idea.
"Even in the EU -- the heartland of law-based international government -- the idea remains unpopular. The EU has suffered a series of humiliating defeats in referendums, when plans for 'ever closer union' have been referred to the voters.
"In general, the Union has progressed fastest when far-reaching deals have been agreed by technocrats and politicians -- and then pushed through without direct reference to the voters.
"International governance tends to be effective, only when it is anti-democratic."
Hmmmmm. Pardon us if we hear the echo of jackboots in that last sentence.
Another reason Rachman is bullish about world government is the election of Barack Obama. He notes Obama has key advisors who are very enthusiastic about steps in the direction of world government. High among them is John Podesta, who heads Obama's transition team.
Podesta is also the head of the highly influential Center for American Progress think tank, and an advisor to the Managing Global Insecurity (MGI) project.
MGI, Rachman notes, favors among other things "the creation of a 50,000-strong UN peacekeeping force."
MGI, says Rachman, is "aware of the political sensitivity of its ideas," and thus carefully avoids scary terms like "shared sovereignty" and "world government," preferring more soothing phrases like "responsible sovereignty" and "global governance" so as not to alarm the slumbering masses.
"So, it seems, everything is in place," Rachman concludes. "For the first time since homo sapiens began to doodle on cave walls, there is an argument, an opportunity and a means to make serious steps towards a world government."
However, he notes that, because of us darn stubborn ignorant rabble and our irritating lack of enthusiasm for world government, "any push for 'global governance' in the here and now will be a painful, slow process."
But of course, clever minds are working on that, too.
(Source: Financial Times, "And now for a world government"
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7a03e5b6-c541-11dd-b516-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
Thanks to Roy Lieberman )
http://www.theadvocates.org/liberator/vol-13-num-21.html#GBU
[Liberator Online Newsletter, December 21, 2008]
World Government on the Horizon?
We know, we know. Mention anything about politicians scheming for a "world government" and you will instantly be slammed as a troglodyte, conspiracy theorist, wing nut, and so forth, followed immediately by snickering references to tinfoil hats and black helicopters.
Still... we find it most interesting to ponder a remarkable commentary entitled, "And now for a world government," published December 8 in the highly respected and influential international newspaper The Financial Times, which boasts 1.4 million readers. The piece was written by Gideon Rachman, chief foreign affairs commentator for the publication. Rachman was formerly employed by the equally respected Establishment outlets the BBC and The Economist.
"For the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible," writes Rachman. He cites the financial crisis, global warming and the war on terror as creating unprecedented new opportunities for the concept.
"A 'world government' would involve much more than cooperation between nations," Rachman says. "It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union [EU] has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force."
A world government, Rachman stresses, could not be created democratically, because we ignorant unwashed masses, lacking the wisdom and foresight of those who rule us, mostly hate the idea.
"Even in the EU -- the heartland of law-based international government -- the idea remains unpopular. The EU has suffered a series of humiliating defeats in referendums, when plans for 'ever closer union' have been referred to the voters.
"In general, the Union has progressed fastest when far-reaching deals have been agreed by technocrats and politicians -- and then pushed through without direct reference to the voters.
"International governance tends to be effective, only when it is anti-democratic."
Hmmmmm. Pardon us if we hear the echo of jackboots in that last sentence.
Another reason Rachman is bullish about world government is the election of Barack Obama. He notes Obama has key advisors who are very enthusiastic about steps in the direction of world government. High among them is John Podesta, who heads Obama's transition team.
Podesta is also the head of the highly influential Center for American Progress think tank, and an advisor to the Managing Global Insecurity (MGI) project.
MGI, Rachman notes, favors among other things "the creation of a 50,000-strong UN peacekeeping force."
MGI, says Rachman, is "aware of the political sensitivity of its ideas," and thus carefully avoids scary terms like "shared sovereignty" and "world government," preferring more soothing phrases like "responsible sovereignty" and "global governance" so as not to alarm the slumbering masses.
"So, it seems, everything is in place," Rachman concludes. "For the first time since homo sapiens began to doodle on cave walls, there is an argument, an opportunity and a means to make serious steps towards a world government."
However, he notes that, because of us darn stubborn ignorant rabble and our irritating lack of enthusiasm for world government, "any push for 'global governance' in the here and now will be a painful, slow process."
But of course, clever minds are working on that, too.
(Source: Financial Times, "And now for a world government"
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7a03e5b6-c541-11dd-b516-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
Thanks to Roy Lieberman )
http://www.theadvocates.org/liberator/vol-13-num-21.html#GBU
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
BARACK OBAMA: "AMERICA'S FIRST JEWISH PRESIDENT"
Prof. James Petras
Information Clearing House
Obama asks Shimon Peres: "What can I do for Israel?"
– Haaretz, November 17, 2008
The UN Special Rappateur on Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories (Richard Falk) has said Israel's policies there amount to a crime against humanity…He said the UN must act to protect the Palestinian population suffering what he called `collective punishment'…He said the International Criminal Court should also investigate whether the Israeli civilian leaders and military commanders for the Gaza siege should be indicted and prosecuted for violations of international criminal law.
– BBC News, December 10, 2008
We need to ratchet up tough but direct diplomacy with Iran, making very clear to them that their development of nuclear weapons would be unacceptable, that their funding of terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hizbullah, their threats against Israel are contrary to everything we believe in…We may have to tighten up those sanctions…and give them a clear choice…whether they want to do this the hard way or the easy way.
– President-Elect Obama on NBC Meet the Press, December 7, 2008
According to a nationally prominent Zionist spokesperson, former Congressman, Federal Judge, White House Counsel to President Bill Clinton and early backer of Obama, Abner Mikvner, "Barack Obama is the first Jewish President". Mikvner's affirmation reflects both Obama's one-sided and longstanding commitment to the State of Israel and loyalty to the Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC) in the United States, as well as the long-term and successful effort of a network of financially and politically powerful Jewish Zionists to `embed' Obama to their `Israel First' political apparatus. What is striking about the latter is the demeaning and arrogant claims made by some leading Jewish Zionist about their `central roles' in the making of Obama's professional and political careers – in effect denying the President-Elect any credit for his own academic or professional success. (Historically this has been mirrored in the continuous claims of some American Jews to have fought and won the battle of Civil Rights in the 60's on behalf of African Americans – essentially denying black Americans any independent political role in their own struggle.) Even their personal flattery about his `wisdom', `brilliance' and `intellectual acuity' is always linked with his unconditional support of the State of Israel. One can envision how quickly his Zionist colleagues would replace their plaudits with crude insults regarding his intelligence if he suggested Israel end its starvation blockade of Gaza… Needless to say the Zionists know their man, as they confidently proclaim, he is a cautious and prudent politician, who measures power before he speaks, especially as he has filled the White House, economic councils and security apparatus with Zionist zealots.
The Making and Re-Making of Obama
The Chicago Jewish News, a nationally prominent Israel-First propaganda organ, published a lengthy article on `Obama and the Jews' by Pauline Dubkin (October 24, 2008), which quotes approvingly a `long-time Jewish observer of the political scene', who declared that, "Jews made him (Obama). Wherever you look there is a Jewish presence."
This is not merely the usual arrogant self-aggrandizing boasts of a Zionist power broker, with which we are constantly bombarded on so many political topics, this reflects an important part of what Obama has become, especially in advancing his latter day political ambitions. The Zionist self-promoters (ZSP), ever ready to take credit for any success (no matter how notorious and immoral) – Wall Street speculators, Ivy League professors, Pentagon militarists, cultural gurus and even the key patrons of art forms like jazz and constantly rewrite history (or biography in the case of Obama) to maximize their self-importance in all aspects of American life. The ZSP conveniently fail to mention in their articles that Obama's white Gentile grandmother gave him the intellectual nurturing and encouragement and diligently petitioned for scholarships for him to attend elite private schools, which formed the basis for his intellectual skills to write, speak and reason as an educated man. The ZSP exclude from their `revisionist and Judaized' biography of Obama, the central importance of Reverend Jeremiah Wright who transformed Obama from an elite Ivy university graduate into an effective social activist. Obama was able to participate and get involved in community organizing in Chicago's African-American neighborhoods because of Wright's endorsement and broad credibility. If it were not for Rev. Wright, Obama would never have had a social base or organizational experience to engage in Chicago politics. It is only after Obama had gained these skills and popular appeal that the Zionist politicos noticed him and went to work on his ego and ambitions, recruiting him to their pro-Israel agenda and financing his political career.
The Zionist re-write of his biography has gone curiously unchallenged by Obama. To suit his new mentors, the Israel-First ideologues and financial backers, he has wilfully discarded and insulted his former mentors, as well as any current policy advisers and political colleagues who doesn't adhere to the Zionist line of unconditional support for Israel. Two cases come immediately to mind. When leading Zionist ideologues objected to the presence of Zbigniew Brzezinski and Robert Malley, among Obama's foreign policy advisors, the Zionists in Obama's inner circle immediately marginalized them with his approval. When the notorious torture-promoting Zionofascist Harvard Law Professor, Alan Dershowitz raised a howl about former US President Jimmy Carter (a principled critic of Israel's apartheid policies) speaking at the Democratic Party Convention (following a century-long political tradition of honoring former presidents) the Zionist operatives blatantly humiliated the elderly Carter by denying him even a five-minute speech – with Obama's approval. `Professor' Dershowitz publicly crowed about his success and power over the Democratic nominee Obama in censoring the former President.
The conversion and promotion of Obama as an Israel-Firster is an excellent case study of the methods the ZPC has used to build a near invincible power base in the US political system. The construction of the ZPC is not the result of a cabal with a pre-planned centrally controlled operation. Obama's conversion began through an ideologically diverse, individual, family and community-based effort. As Obama rose from local to national political office, Zionist promotion evolved from local into a nationally organized and concerted effort including campaign funding, business career appointments and paid propaganda and indoctrination junkets to Israel.
The ZPC offers positive inducements for the `recruitable' and threats of retaliation and intimidation via media slanders and systematic public pillory through most Jewish communal organizations for the public political critics of Israel who remain recalcitrant and refuse to toe the Israel-First line.
Turning Obama into an Israel-Firster, according to the Chicago Jewish News article, began during his studies at Harvard Law School where he was `spotted' by a Zionist professor, Martha Minow, as "smart, promising, and politically ambitious" and a likely recruit. The professor proudly recounts how she contacted family members, including her father, a major Democratic powerbroker, and fellow Zionists who ran a law firm in Chicago and recommended they hire the Obama. In brief, the first step in Zionist recruitment was using a prestigious academic post for initial contact, followed by a promise of career advancement through a professional network.
The next step was to introduce Obama to an association of `friends and neighbors in the Jewish Community including prominent Zionist financial supporters. Obama's early promoters played a key role in convincing him that his political future depended on Zionist allies and that support depended on his total commitment to an Israel-First agenda. As Obama's ties with his Zionist-liberal backers in the Democratic Party thickened, his links to black community organizing and his pastor and former mentor, the progressive African-American minister, Reverend Jeremiah Wright weakened. By the end of the 1990's, Obama was firmly embedded in the liberal Zionist Democratic Party network and through it he teamed up with two key Zionist figures who were crucial to his presidential campaign: David Axelrod, Obama's chief political strategist since 2002 and the chief architect and tactician of his presidential campaign in 2008 and Bettylu Salzman, daughter of Phillip Klutznick, a billionaire real estate developer, slumlord and zealous Israel-Firster. Salzman/Klutznick admits she never would have bankrolled and promoted Obama simply because of `his smarts' or liberal politics if he hadn't pledged his commitment to Israel's interests. She states, "Obviously I'm not going to support someone who is opposed to Israel and what it stands for. He's right on all the issues when it comes to Israel. He is in exactly the same place (Hillary) Clinton is, maybe stronger. He's a clearer thinker." (Chicago Jewish News, October 24, 2008) While Obama served in the Illinois Senate, he shared an office with an Orthodox Jew and fanatical Israel-Firster, Ira Silverstein, who boasts of his role in `educating' Obama about Jewish Orthodoxy and more important "shared pro-Israel feelings" to the point that … "When Silverstein sponsored numerous resolutions condemning PLO bombings Obama eagerly signed on as a co-sponsor." (ibid)
Fully embedded in the Zionist Power Configuration of Chicago, Obama was advised by the Axelrods, Klutznicks and other key strategists to make the obligatory ritual pilgrimage to Israel and pay obeisance to its leaders in the course of his Senate campaign. During his trip to Israel, two years later in 2006, Obama was accompanied and guided by the executive vice-president of the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago. Under Zionist guidance, Obama `connected' with the Israeli state, totally ignoring the plight of the Palestinians who were being savagely repressed by the Israel Army and assaulted on a daily basis by Zion-Fascist settlers. Obama returned a thoroughly committed Zionist African-American politician.
With the Israeli-ZPC certificate of approval, Obama's financial base of support widened to include some of the wealthiest pro-Israel Jewish Americans in the Midwest including Lester Crown, whose son, James Crown headed Obama's financial campaign in Illinois. According to Crown (pater), "From the time I met him, the times we talked about Israel and we talked about it several times, he has been an ardent backer of Israel's defense position (sic), Israel's security position." (Ibid)
To those Zionfascists who demand that Israel annex all of Palestine and expel `the Arabs' and were disturbed by Obama's passing reference to a two-state solution, Crown assured them that Obama's proposal was couched in such outrageously impossible demands for concessions from the Palestinians that it was a dead letter.
Not all Jews accept this view of a Zionist-embedded Obama: Some racists reject him as an untrustworthy and unqualified `Schvartze' because of his `very close intimate relationship' with Reverent Jeremiah Wright. The Zionist-influenced mass media took their cue from the far-right and orchestrated a hate campaign against Reverend Wright and his links to Obama. The `liberal Zionists', who strategized and ran Obama's presidential campaign, easily convinced Obama to publicly dissociate himself from his former minister and mentor of the 1980's. Obama complied. However, the alliance of the Republican Right and Zionfascists demanded Obama make a public denunciation of the Minister. The liberal Zionists prepared the script, which Obama recited, issuing a vicious condemnation of Rev. Wright and specifically listed Wright's defense of the sovereignty and self-determination of the Palestinians as one of his `crimes'.
Obama had crossed the River Jordan. His capitulation to the Zionofascists was the inevitable consequence of his intimate and longstanding ties to his liberal-Zionist backers. The public purging and scourging of a renowned African-American Christian theologian of the oppressed was only the beginning of the Zionist makeover of Obama as the first Jewish (or better Zionist) President of the United States. It was followed by further purges of any `centrist' or `realist' establishment adviser, who might at any time in the past have issued the mildest criticism of Israel's policies or even praised or associated with any other critic of Israel or the Jewish Lobby in the US. It was `guilt by association'.
The Zionofascists soon pressed their campaign to force Obama's liberal-Zionists to purge Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Cold Warrior National Security Adviser to former President Jimmy Carter, Samantha Power, author and lecturer at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and Robert Malley, a former Clinton adviser for their perceived crimes against Zionism. Brzezinski was accused of advocating what he called "an even-handed Middle East policy", something clearly `anti-Semitic' in the eyes of the unconditional supporters of Israel who dominate the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations (PMAJO). Worse still he praised the Walt-Mearsheimer book critical of the Israel Lobby, a capital offense in the eyes of most of the Jewish political spectrum. Power and Malley also transgressed the Israel-First line. Although Brzezinski later recanted his praise of Professors Walt and Mearsheimers' study, he and the other members of the `objectionable three' foreign policy specialists were marginalized and excluded from having any input on policy issues related to Middle East.
Control of Obama's Middle East policy was taken over by Dennis Ross, a virulent Zionist advocate of Israel's ultra-militaristic policies, including an armed preemptive attack on Iranian nuclear and military installations. Ross is an unconditional supporter of the Israeli starvation siege of the 1.5 million residents of the Gaza Strip and fully backed Israel's savage air attacks against civilian targets in Lebanon. Obama's appointment of Ross is the clearest guarantee to all Zionists, liberal, orthodox or fascist, that US policy in the Middle East will continue to be subordinated to the interests of the Israeli State and its military.
Obama's purge of any and all moderate voices on Middle East policy, his placement of fanatical Israel-Firsters in most key positions in his campaign and new Administration reflects his long-term, deep immersion into the Zionist Power Configuration. The result is a "Jewish President" – in the sense that most key White House, economic and security appointments reflect pre-election Zionist power in the making, indoctrination and scripting of the Obama candidacy.
The Configuration of the `Jewish President'
One of Obama's longest supporters, Rabbi Arnold Jacob Wolf, provides a clue to Obama's affinity for Zionist appointments. According to Rabbi Wolf, "Obama is embedded in the Jewish world." While the Rabbi is presumptuous to assume that all Jews subscribe to his own Israel-First views, he is absolutely correct if he is referring to the Jewish-Zionist world.
Nothing better explains Obama's selection of demonstrably failed economists and security officials than his long-term, large-scale links to the ZPC.
Obama started with the appointments of dual US-Israeli citizen, Illinois Congressman Rahm Emmanuel and Zionist David Axelrod to top White House posts, as well as Lawrence Summers (long-time Harvard ally of the Judeo-fascist, torture advocate Alan Dershowitz) as chief White House economic adviser. Summers is a life-time Israel-Firster, who used his presidency at Harvard University as a bully pulpit to attack a student-faculty group critical of Israeli policies in the Occupied Terrtories. As the former Treasury Secretary under the Clinton regime he was a key architect of the speculator-dominated financial system, which is currently in total collapse. In line with the `Jewish Presidency', Obama named one of the foremost, unconditional Israel-Firsters to be his key Middle East policymaker – Dennis Ross, a leading Zionist ideologue and co-author of a presidential position paper advocating pre-emptive war with Iran. Ross is the pivotal Zionist figure in Obama's entourage and his appointment is the guarantee for the 52 Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations (PMAJO) that the Obama regime will follow and support with American guns and American tax-payer money every Israeli war crime, assault or invasion on its Arab and Parsi-speaking regional neighbors. Ross, Axelrod, Summers, Emmanuel and their craven followers in Congress together with the AIPAC and the entire Zionist community-based network will ensure that Obama is inextricably `embedded' in their agenda. They will not allow the publication or support of any intelligence investigation, judicial inquiry or United Nations report, which challenges Israel's occupation of Palestine and promotion of pre-emptive war with Iran based on the fabrication of data about its so-called nuclear threat. Each and every recently appointed Zionists has condemned the United Nations and International Atomic Agency reports refuting Israel's phony claims of an Iranian nuclear weapons program. They will make sure that newly appointed National Security Adviser, General James Jones will never bring up or make public his highly critical internal report based his on-site investigation of Israel's crimes against the civilian Palestinian population in the Occupied Territories.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, President Obama and Defense Secretary Gates are so deeply `embedded' in the Zionist network and so deeply infused with the Israel-First ideology that ZPC `pressure' will not be necessary. The three are, in effect, Zionized Zombies, eager to fawn and truckle, even to grotesque excesses, at every wink and gesture, signaling military handouts, UN vetoes and repeated provocative acts of war against Iran. They have even exceeded President Bush in their eagerness to please their Zionist mentors by recognizing Jerusalem as the `undivided' capital of the Jews – effectively denying the rights of the Palestinian residents.
Nothing speaks to the dominance of the ZPC over US political life – domestic and foreign - than the election of their meticulously groomed first `Jewish President' – and the subsequent takeover of strategic economic and security posts in his administration.
Conclusion
The ascent of a minority of ambitious power-driven political operatives acting first and foremost for a militarist colonial power in a strategic region of the world economy represents the biggest threat to world peace and to US democratic values in recent history.
Think about it: Not only do the Zionists and their embedded clones rule the White House, they also have the political apparatus (left, liberal, center and right) to silence, insult, witch hunt and isolate any critic of their agenda, their organizations and of the State of Israel. When confronted by a critic the entire apparatus brays in unison about `anti-Semitism' and follows up with severe civil sanctions. As Obama's career under his Zionist handlers illustrates, they are capable of hurling repulsive denunciations against his former African-American mentor and spiritual councilor, Reverend Wright; capable of publicly humiliating and pushing aside a former President and Obama supporter, Jimmy Carter; capable of isolating and `sanitizing' former top foreign policymakers from earlier Democratic Administration like Brzezinski, simply for pointing out Israeli crimes against humanity (although such observations are made daily in the European press and political circles).
The apparatus combines the carrot (embedding and promoting Obama) and the stick (stigmatizing Carter): It all depends on whether an individual, politician, academic, writer or journalist is `useful' (i.e., an unconditional supporter) or `harmful' (i.e., critical) to the State of Israel.
The Obama experience illustrates how a small, close knit, well-organized and well financed minority operating through prestigious professional posts and powerful economic enterprises can penetrate major political institutions, capture upwardly mobile politicians and `turn' them into willing accomplices in promoting wars on behalf of a foreign colonial militarist power. If in the past we have experienced Zionist thuggery mugging our freedom of speech in civil society, think of what we can expect when these thugs have complete control of the White House. The `First Jewish President' of the United States indeed! Where does that leave the American people, their rights, their interests and their country's independent foreign policy?
Epilogue
In early December 2008, Israel's right wing party, Likud, under the leadership of `Bibi' Netanyahu, met and nominated its slate of candidates for the upcoming national elections (February 12, 2009). The majority of candidates nominated represent what most Israeli journalists call the `hard right' or what might be accurately described as Zionfascism. The Likud Party majority favors the expulsion of all Palestinians (i.e. non-Jews) from Greater Israel, the military seizure of Gaza, the end of any pretense of peace negotiations and the immediate bombing of Iran.
Currently Likud and its fascists have the support of a plurality of Israeli Jews. If they win, it is a virtual certainty they will receive the automatic support of all the principle respectable pro-Israel Jewish organizations in the US, who follow the line that: "It is not ours to question whom the Israelis vote for office. It is our duty to back the State of Israel."
The election of an Israeli-fascist regime will up the ante in Washington. Does Obama's embedding in the Zionist apparatus include support for Jewish fascism , the total ethnic cleansing of Palestine and their unilateral decision to `nuke' Iran? Three weeks into his presidency Obama will face his biggest Middle East challenge, which will define the nature of US policy in the region.
Obama has recently suggested that Washington would nuke Iran to protect Israel – which has never yet signed a treaty with the US – to which the Bush Administration replied contemptuously that it would be very hard to convince American parents in Kansas that their sons should risk nuclear incineration for the sake of a small country in the Middle East. Clearly Obama is a greater war monger on issues involving Israel then even Bush: It comes with being a "Jewish President"
James Petras, a former Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York, owns a 50-year membership in the class struggle, is an adviser to the landless and jobless in Brazil and Argentina, and is co-author of Globalization Unmasked (Zed Books).
www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21449.htm
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=9837
Information Clearing House
Obama asks Shimon Peres: "What can I do for Israel?"
– Haaretz, November 17, 2008
The UN Special Rappateur on Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories (Richard Falk) has said Israel's policies there amount to a crime against humanity…He said the UN must act to protect the Palestinian population suffering what he called `collective punishment'…He said the International Criminal Court should also investigate whether the Israeli civilian leaders and military commanders for the Gaza siege should be indicted and prosecuted for violations of international criminal law.
– BBC News, December 10, 2008
We need to ratchet up tough but direct diplomacy with Iran, making very clear to them that their development of nuclear weapons would be unacceptable, that their funding of terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hizbullah, their threats against Israel are contrary to everything we believe in…We may have to tighten up those sanctions…and give them a clear choice…whether they want to do this the hard way or the easy way.
– President-Elect Obama on NBC Meet the Press, December 7, 2008
According to a nationally prominent Zionist spokesperson, former Congressman, Federal Judge, White House Counsel to President Bill Clinton and early backer of Obama, Abner Mikvner, "Barack Obama is the first Jewish President". Mikvner's affirmation reflects both Obama's one-sided and longstanding commitment to the State of Israel and loyalty to the Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC) in the United States, as well as the long-term and successful effort of a network of financially and politically powerful Jewish Zionists to `embed' Obama to their `Israel First' political apparatus. What is striking about the latter is the demeaning and arrogant claims made by some leading Jewish Zionist about their `central roles' in the making of Obama's professional and political careers – in effect denying the President-Elect any credit for his own academic or professional success. (Historically this has been mirrored in the continuous claims of some American Jews to have fought and won the battle of Civil Rights in the 60's on behalf of African Americans – essentially denying black Americans any independent political role in their own struggle.) Even their personal flattery about his `wisdom', `brilliance' and `intellectual acuity' is always linked with his unconditional support of the State of Israel. One can envision how quickly his Zionist colleagues would replace their plaudits with crude insults regarding his intelligence if he suggested Israel end its starvation blockade of Gaza… Needless to say the Zionists know their man, as they confidently proclaim, he is a cautious and prudent politician, who measures power before he speaks, especially as he has filled the White House, economic councils and security apparatus with Zionist zealots.
The Making and Re-Making of Obama
The Chicago Jewish News, a nationally prominent Israel-First propaganda organ, published a lengthy article on `Obama and the Jews' by Pauline Dubkin (October 24, 2008), which quotes approvingly a `long-time Jewish observer of the political scene', who declared that, "Jews made him (Obama). Wherever you look there is a Jewish presence."
This is not merely the usual arrogant self-aggrandizing boasts of a Zionist power broker, with which we are constantly bombarded on so many political topics, this reflects an important part of what Obama has become, especially in advancing his latter day political ambitions. The Zionist self-promoters (ZSP), ever ready to take credit for any success (no matter how notorious and immoral) – Wall Street speculators, Ivy League professors, Pentagon militarists, cultural gurus and even the key patrons of art forms like jazz and constantly rewrite history (or biography in the case of Obama) to maximize their self-importance in all aspects of American life. The ZSP conveniently fail to mention in their articles that Obama's white Gentile grandmother gave him the intellectual nurturing and encouragement and diligently petitioned for scholarships for him to attend elite private schools, which formed the basis for his intellectual skills to write, speak and reason as an educated man. The ZSP exclude from their `revisionist and Judaized' biography of Obama, the central importance of Reverend Jeremiah Wright who transformed Obama from an elite Ivy university graduate into an effective social activist. Obama was able to participate and get involved in community organizing in Chicago's African-American neighborhoods because of Wright's endorsement and broad credibility. If it were not for Rev. Wright, Obama would never have had a social base or organizational experience to engage in Chicago politics. It is only after Obama had gained these skills and popular appeal that the Zionist politicos noticed him and went to work on his ego and ambitions, recruiting him to their pro-Israel agenda and financing his political career.
The Zionist re-write of his biography has gone curiously unchallenged by Obama. To suit his new mentors, the Israel-First ideologues and financial backers, he has wilfully discarded and insulted his former mentors, as well as any current policy advisers and political colleagues who doesn't adhere to the Zionist line of unconditional support for Israel. Two cases come immediately to mind. When leading Zionist ideologues objected to the presence of Zbigniew Brzezinski and Robert Malley, among Obama's foreign policy advisors, the Zionists in Obama's inner circle immediately marginalized them with his approval. When the notorious torture-promoting Zionofascist Harvard Law Professor, Alan Dershowitz raised a howl about former US President Jimmy Carter (a principled critic of Israel's apartheid policies) speaking at the Democratic Party Convention (following a century-long political tradition of honoring former presidents) the Zionist operatives blatantly humiliated the elderly Carter by denying him even a five-minute speech – with Obama's approval. `Professor' Dershowitz publicly crowed about his success and power over the Democratic nominee Obama in censoring the former President.
The conversion and promotion of Obama as an Israel-Firster is an excellent case study of the methods the ZPC has used to build a near invincible power base in the US political system. The construction of the ZPC is not the result of a cabal with a pre-planned centrally controlled operation. Obama's conversion began through an ideologically diverse, individual, family and community-based effort. As Obama rose from local to national political office, Zionist promotion evolved from local into a nationally organized and concerted effort including campaign funding, business career appointments and paid propaganda and indoctrination junkets to Israel.
The ZPC offers positive inducements for the `recruitable' and threats of retaliation and intimidation via media slanders and systematic public pillory through most Jewish communal organizations for the public political critics of Israel who remain recalcitrant and refuse to toe the Israel-First line.
Turning Obama into an Israel-Firster, according to the Chicago Jewish News article, began during his studies at Harvard Law School where he was `spotted' by a Zionist professor, Martha Minow, as "smart, promising, and politically ambitious" and a likely recruit. The professor proudly recounts how she contacted family members, including her father, a major Democratic powerbroker, and fellow Zionists who ran a law firm in Chicago and recommended they hire the Obama. In brief, the first step in Zionist recruitment was using a prestigious academic post for initial contact, followed by a promise of career advancement through a professional network.
The next step was to introduce Obama to an association of `friends and neighbors in the Jewish Community including prominent Zionist financial supporters. Obama's early promoters played a key role in convincing him that his political future depended on Zionist allies and that support depended on his total commitment to an Israel-First agenda. As Obama's ties with his Zionist-liberal backers in the Democratic Party thickened, his links to black community organizing and his pastor and former mentor, the progressive African-American minister, Reverend Jeremiah Wright weakened. By the end of the 1990's, Obama was firmly embedded in the liberal Zionist Democratic Party network and through it he teamed up with two key Zionist figures who were crucial to his presidential campaign: David Axelrod, Obama's chief political strategist since 2002 and the chief architect and tactician of his presidential campaign in 2008 and Bettylu Salzman, daughter of Phillip Klutznick, a billionaire real estate developer, slumlord and zealous Israel-Firster. Salzman/Klutznick admits she never would have bankrolled and promoted Obama simply because of `his smarts' or liberal politics if he hadn't pledged his commitment to Israel's interests. She states, "Obviously I'm not going to support someone who is opposed to Israel and what it stands for. He's right on all the issues when it comes to Israel. He is in exactly the same place (Hillary) Clinton is, maybe stronger. He's a clearer thinker." (Chicago Jewish News, October 24, 2008) While Obama served in the Illinois Senate, he shared an office with an Orthodox Jew and fanatical Israel-Firster, Ira Silverstein, who boasts of his role in `educating' Obama about Jewish Orthodoxy and more important "shared pro-Israel feelings" to the point that … "When Silverstein sponsored numerous resolutions condemning PLO bombings Obama eagerly signed on as a co-sponsor." (ibid)
Fully embedded in the Zionist Power Configuration of Chicago, Obama was advised by the Axelrods, Klutznicks and other key strategists to make the obligatory ritual pilgrimage to Israel and pay obeisance to its leaders in the course of his Senate campaign. During his trip to Israel, two years later in 2006, Obama was accompanied and guided by the executive vice-president of the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago. Under Zionist guidance, Obama `connected' with the Israeli state, totally ignoring the plight of the Palestinians who were being savagely repressed by the Israel Army and assaulted on a daily basis by Zion-Fascist settlers. Obama returned a thoroughly committed Zionist African-American politician.
With the Israeli-ZPC certificate of approval, Obama's financial base of support widened to include some of the wealthiest pro-Israel Jewish Americans in the Midwest including Lester Crown, whose son, James Crown headed Obama's financial campaign in Illinois. According to Crown (pater), "From the time I met him, the times we talked about Israel and we talked about it several times, he has been an ardent backer of Israel's defense position (sic), Israel's security position." (Ibid)
To those Zionfascists who demand that Israel annex all of Palestine and expel `the Arabs' and were disturbed by Obama's passing reference to a two-state solution, Crown assured them that Obama's proposal was couched in such outrageously impossible demands for concessions from the Palestinians that it was a dead letter.
Not all Jews accept this view of a Zionist-embedded Obama: Some racists reject him as an untrustworthy and unqualified `Schvartze' because of his `very close intimate relationship' with Reverent Jeremiah Wright. The Zionist-influenced mass media took their cue from the far-right and orchestrated a hate campaign against Reverend Wright and his links to Obama. The `liberal Zionists', who strategized and ran Obama's presidential campaign, easily convinced Obama to publicly dissociate himself from his former minister and mentor of the 1980's. Obama complied. However, the alliance of the Republican Right and Zionfascists demanded Obama make a public denunciation of the Minister. The liberal Zionists prepared the script, which Obama recited, issuing a vicious condemnation of Rev. Wright and specifically listed Wright's defense of the sovereignty and self-determination of the Palestinians as one of his `crimes'.
Obama had crossed the River Jordan. His capitulation to the Zionofascists was the inevitable consequence of his intimate and longstanding ties to his liberal-Zionist backers. The public purging and scourging of a renowned African-American Christian theologian of the oppressed was only the beginning of the Zionist makeover of Obama as the first Jewish (or better Zionist) President of the United States. It was followed by further purges of any `centrist' or `realist' establishment adviser, who might at any time in the past have issued the mildest criticism of Israel's policies or even praised or associated with any other critic of Israel or the Jewish Lobby in the US. It was `guilt by association'.
The Zionofascists soon pressed their campaign to force Obama's liberal-Zionists to purge Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Cold Warrior National Security Adviser to former President Jimmy Carter, Samantha Power, author and lecturer at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and Robert Malley, a former Clinton adviser for their perceived crimes against Zionism. Brzezinski was accused of advocating what he called "an even-handed Middle East policy", something clearly `anti-Semitic' in the eyes of the unconditional supporters of Israel who dominate the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations (PMAJO). Worse still he praised the Walt-Mearsheimer book critical of the Israel Lobby, a capital offense in the eyes of most of the Jewish political spectrum. Power and Malley also transgressed the Israel-First line. Although Brzezinski later recanted his praise of Professors Walt and Mearsheimers' study, he and the other members of the `objectionable three' foreign policy specialists were marginalized and excluded from having any input on policy issues related to Middle East.
Control of Obama's Middle East policy was taken over by Dennis Ross, a virulent Zionist advocate of Israel's ultra-militaristic policies, including an armed preemptive attack on Iranian nuclear and military installations. Ross is an unconditional supporter of the Israeli starvation siege of the 1.5 million residents of the Gaza Strip and fully backed Israel's savage air attacks against civilian targets in Lebanon. Obama's appointment of Ross is the clearest guarantee to all Zionists, liberal, orthodox or fascist, that US policy in the Middle East will continue to be subordinated to the interests of the Israeli State and its military.
Obama's purge of any and all moderate voices on Middle East policy, his placement of fanatical Israel-Firsters in most key positions in his campaign and new Administration reflects his long-term, deep immersion into the Zionist Power Configuration. The result is a "Jewish President" – in the sense that most key White House, economic and security appointments reflect pre-election Zionist power in the making, indoctrination and scripting of the Obama candidacy.
The Configuration of the `Jewish President'
One of Obama's longest supporters, Rabbi Arnold Jacob Wolf, provides a clue to Obama's affinity for Zionist appointments. According to Rabbi Wolf, "Obama is embedded in the Jewish world." While the Rabbi is presumptuous to assume that all Jews subscribe to his own Israel-First views, he is absolutely correct if he is referring to the Jewish-Zionist world.
Nothing better explains Obama's selection of demonstrably failed economists and security officials than his long-term, large-scale links to the ZPC.
Obama started with the appointments of dual US-Israeli citizen, Illinois Congressman Rahm Emmanuel and Zionist David Axelrod to top White House posts, as well as Lawrence Summers (long-time Harvard ally of the Judeo-fascist, torture advocate Alan Dershowitz) as chief White House economic adviser. Summers is a life-time Israel-Firster, who used his presidency at Harvard University as a bully pulpit to attack a student-faculty group critical of Israeli policies in the Occupied Terrtories. As the former Treasury Secretary under the Clinton regime he was a key architect of the speculator-dominated financial system, which is currently in total collapse. In line with the `Jewish Presidency', Obama named one of the foremost, unconditional Israel-Firsters to be his key Middle East policymaker – Dennis Ross, a leading Zionist ideologue and co-author of a presidential position paper advocating pre-emptive war with Iran. Ross is the pivotal Zionist figure in Obama's entourage and his appointment is the guarantee for the 52 Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations (PMAJO) that the Obama regime will follow and support with American guns and American tax-payer money every Israeli war crime, assault or invasion on its Arab and Parsi-speaking regional neighbors. Ross, Axelrod, Summers, Emmanuel and their craven followers in Congress together with the AIPAC and the entire Zionist community-based network will ensure that Obama is inextricably `embedded' in their agenda. They will not allow the publication or support of any intelligence investigation, judicial inquiry or United Nations report, which challenges Israel's occupation of Palestine and promotion of pre-emptive war with Iran based on the fabrication of data about its so-called nuclear threat. Each and every recently appointed Zionists has condemned the United Nations and International Atomic Agency reports refuting Israel's phony claims of an Iranian nuclear weapons program. They will make sure that newly appointed National Security Adviser, General James Jones will never bring up or make public his highly critical internal report based his on-site investigation of Israel's crimes against the civilian Palestinian population in the Occupied Territories.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, President Obama and Defense Secretary Gates are so deeply `embedded' in the Zionist network and so deeply infused with the Israel-First ideology that ZPC `pressure' will not be necessary. The three are, in effect, Zionized Zombies, eager to fawn and truckle, even to grotesque excesses, at every wink and gesture, signaling military handouts, UN vetoes and repeated provocative acts of war against Iran. They have even exceeded President Bush in their eagerness to please their Zionist mentors by recognizing Jerusalem as the `undivided' capital of the Jews – effectively denying the rights of the Palestinian residents.
Nothing speaks to the dominance of the ZPC over US political life – domestic and foreign - than the election of their meticulously groomed first `Jewish President' – and the subsequent takeover of strategic economic and security posts in his administration.
Conclusion
The ascent of a minority of ambitious power-driven political operatives acting first and foremost for a militarist colonial power in a strategic region of the world economy represents the biggest threat to world peace and to US democratic values in recent history.
Think about it: Not only do the Zionists and their embedded clones rule the White House, they also have the political apparatus (left, liberal, center and right) to silence, insult, witch hunt and isolate any critic of their agenda, their organizations and of the State of Israel. When confronted by a critic the entire apparatus brays in unison about `anti-Semitism' and follows up with severe civil sanctions. As Obama's career under his Zionist handlers illustrates, they are capable of hurling repulsive denunciations against his former African-American mentor and spiritual councilor, Reverend Wright; capable of publicly humiliating and pushing aside a former President and Obama supporter, Jimmy Carter; capable of isolating and `sanitizing' former top foreign policymakers from earlier Democratic Administration like Brzezinski, simply for pointing out Israeli crimes against humanity (although such observations are made daily in the European press and political circles).
The apparatus combines the carrot (embedding and promoting Obama) and the stick (stigmatizing Carter): It all depends on whether an individual, politician, academic, writer or journalist is `useful' (i.e., an unconditional supporter) or `harmful' (i.e., critical) to the State of Israel.
The Obama experience illustrates how a small, close knit, well-organized and well financed minority operating through prestigious professional posts and powerful economic enterprises can penetrate major political institutions, capture upwardly mobile politicians and `turn' them into willing accomplices in promoting wars on behalf of a foreign colonial militarist power. If in the past we have experienced Zionist thuggery mugging our freedom of speech in civil society, think of what we can expect when these thugs have complete control of the White House. The `First Jewish President' of the United States indeed! Where does that leave the American people, their rights, their interests and their country's independent foreign policy?
Epilogue
In early December 2008, Israel's right wing party, Likud, under the leadership of `Bibi' Netanyahu, met and nominated its slate of candidates for the upcoming national elections (February 12, 2009). The majority of candidates nominated represent what most Israeli journalists call the `hard right' or what might be accurately described as Zionfascism. The Likud Party majority favors the expulsion of all Palestinians (i.e. non-Jews) from Greater Israel, the military seizure of Gaza, the end of any pretense of peace negotiations and the immediate bombing of Iran.
Currently Likud and its fascists have the support of a plurality of Israeli Jews. If they win, it is a virtual certainty they will receive the automatic support of all the principle respectable pro-Israel Jewish organizations in the US, who follow the line that: "It is not ours to question whom the Israelis vote for office. It is our duty to back the State of Israel."
The election of an Israeli-fascist regime will up the ante in Washington. Does Obama's embedding in the Zionist apparatus include support for Jewish fascism , the total ethnic cleansing of Palestine and their unilateral decision to `nuke' Iran? Three weeks into his presidency Obama will face his biggest Middle East challenge, which will define the nature of US policy in the region.
Obama has recently suggested that Washington would nuke Iran to protect Israel – which has never yet signed a treaty with the US – to which the Bush Administration replied contemptuously that it would be very hard to convince American parents in Kansas that their sons should risk nuclear incineration for the sake of a small country in the Middle East. Clearly Obama is a greater war monger on issues involving Israel then even Bush: It comes with being a "Jewish President"
James Petras, a former Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York, owns a 50-year membership in the class struggle, is an adviser to the landless and jobless in Brazil and Argentina, and is co-author of Globalization Unmasked (Zed Books).
www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21449.htm
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=9837
Monday, December 15, 2008
US MILITARY PREPARES FOR OBAMA’S EXPANSION OF AFGHAN WAR
By James Cogan
13 December 2008
The US military and allied forces in Afghanistan are making feverish preparations for an influx of tens of thousands more American troops during the first months of the Obama presidency. Most of the reinforcements will be in place by the end of the harsh Afghan winter, in anticipation of a "spring offensive" in March and April by the burgeoning anti-occupation insurgency led by the Islamist Taliban movement.
13 December 2008
The US military and allied forces in Afghanistan are making feverish preparations for an influx of tens of thousands more American troops during the first months of the Obama presidency. Most of the reinforcements will be in place by the end of the harsh Afghan winter, in anticipation of a "spring offensive" in March and April by the burgeoning anti-occupation insurgency led by the Islamist Taliban movement.
General David Petraeus, the architect of the US troop "surge" in Iraq in early 2007 and now head of US Central Command (Centcom), is presiding over the preparations. This week, during a press conference in Italy, he confirmed that at least another "20,000 or so" American military personnel would be deployed to Afghanistan.
The intention is to have at least 55,000 to 60,000 US troops in Afghanistan, as well as the 33,000 troops from various NATO states and other US allies. The head of the NATO -commanded International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), US General David McKiernan, told journalists: "I don't like to use the term ‘surge' here, because if we put these additional forces in, it's going to be for the next few years, this three- or four-year period. It's not a temporary increase of combat strength."
McKiernan's deputy, General Michael Tucker, told a Pentagon press briefing this week that an infantry brigade would be sent in January, followed by an air combat brigade to provide more attack and lift helicopters, as well as engineering units, logistics and extra surveillance and intelligence units. Several brigade-size marine formations are expected to make up the main frontline combat reinforcements.
Tucker said: "There's a very huge building campaign that has already begun. We're pushing dirt as we speak to prepare for the arrival of these forces. The Army, Central Command, the Joint Staff is working very closely with us so that we can set the conditions to receive these soldiers and provide adequate housing and infrastructure for them so that it's all set up prior to their arrival...
"For about the last month-and-a-half, we have done in-depth studies on specifically, to the man, how many billeting spaces, how many helicopter pads, how much force protection we're going to need, how many latrines, how many dining facilities, things of that nature, down to the actual number of boots on the ground, what would be required."
The first US reinforcements, a brigade of the 10th Mountain Division, will be deployed in the vicinity of the Afghan capital, Kabul. The rest, however, are slated for operations in the ethnic Pashtun provinces of southern Afghanistan where US, Canadian, British, Dutch and Australian forces have been engaged in heavy fighting with the Taliban throughout the year.
The UK press reported this week that British commanders expect at least 5,000 additional US combat troops to arrive in Helmand province over the next several months. Additional British troops are being sent following the announcement that the British force in southern Iraq will be reduced from 4,100 to just 400 by June. Special Air Service units are already redeploying to Afghanistan, along with helicopters.
US reinforcements will also be sent to Uruzgan province, where Dutch and Australian troops are fighting, and Zabul, where American units are operating.
The largest boost will take place in Kandahar, the province considered to be Taliban heartland. At the NATO base near Kandahar city, Canadian and American engineers are working overtime to prepare the facilities for as many as 10,000 extra US troops. Within 12 months, according to an engineer officer interviewed this week by the Canadian Globe and Mail, the base will have doubled in size. The airport runway is being extended and hangers erected to house dozens of helicopters and aircraft. The expansion will make the airfield the largest in the country, bigger even than the sprawling base that has been constructed at Bagram, in central Afghanistan.
As well as the military reinforcements, the Obama administration will make greater use of private security companies, or mercenaries. On November 26, the US Army began advertising for contractors to provide hundreds of armed guards to protect US bases in Afghanistan, as well as supply routes and transport convoys. The five provinces where the mercenaries will be operating are Kandahar, Helmand, Uruzgan, Zabul and Nimruz—the most volatile in the country. The initial contracts are to begin on January 1 and last for 12 months, with the option of them being renewed for a further three years.
A war without end
The extra troops and mercenaries will be battling an Afghan guerilla force that has been able to increase its activities substantially.
Afghan war analyst Sami Kovenan recorded 11,820 insurgent "violent incidents" this year as of November 23 - a 51 percent increase over the same time period in 2007. Attacks in the Kabul area have increased by 62 percent, while even in the predominantly ethnic Tajik and Uzbek north, which had been relatively stable, attacks are up by 54 percent. Taliban operations extend throughout the ethnic Pashtun tribal region of Pakistan. As the year draws to an end, US supply lines from the port of Karachi through the Khyber Pass between Afghanistan and Pakistan are under threat.
More US and NATO troops have been killed in 2008 - 277 so far - than in any other year of the now seven-year war. The army and police of Afghan President Hamid Karzai's corrupt and despised puppet government have suffered well over 1,000 fatalities.
This month's report on Afghanistan by the European-based International Council on Security and Development (ICOS - formerly known as the Senlis Council) made a grim assessment of the US-led occupation. It claimed that Islamist insurgents have a permanent presence in 72 percent of the country and are "closing a noose" around Kabul, exerting a degree of control over the main highways out of the city to the east, south and west.
ICOS commented: "Crucially, the Taliban appears to be winning on another front - the battle for hearts and minds. By tapping into a variety of local grievances against NATO-ISAF and the Kabul government, from [opium] poppy eradication and bombings leading to civilian casualties, to high levels of unemployment and chronic underdevelopment despite billions of dollars of aid, the insurgency has succeeded in attracting sympathy beyond its traditional support base and gained a measure of political legitimacy among many Afghans....
"Underlying the expansion of Taliban presence is the international community's failure to deliver on the many promises of a better life made to the Afghan people in the wake of the invasion. Seven years on, most of the country still lacks basic amenities and the majority of the population struggle to secure necessities such as food and shelter, let alone a sustainable livelihood. Field research by ICOS has presented a picture of acute hardship and deep uncertainty, with the majority of respondents worried about feeding their families."
General Petraeus outlined this week the tactics that will be pursued to try to crush the resurgent Taliban. As was done during the Iraq surge, he intends to order his subordinates to use cash bribes to buy off as many insurgent commanders as can be bought, and systematically seek to slaughter those who cannot. It was important, the general declared, "to separate the irreconcilables from the reconcilable".
Petraeus told journalists: "If they are truly irreconcilables then they must be killed, captured or run out of the country... others, if you do it right, can be embraced, can be made part of the solution instead of a continuing part of the problem, and that means sometimes sitting down across from a negotiating table with people who may have your blood on their hands."
For their part, the Taliban and other anti-occupation groups such as Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's Hezb-i-Islami have not given any signal that they are prepared to enter into talks with either the US military or Karzai's government.
Taliban leader Mullah Omar issued a statement to Karzai on Tuesday that read: "Do not ever presume that in the presence of the occupation forces, the followers of the path of Islamic resistance will ever abandon their legitimate struggle merely on your empty and farcical pledges, material privileges and personal immunity."
Qari Yousaf Ahmadi, a Taliban spokesman, told the Canadian press: "If the Americans are going to send more troops, we are ready for that. They will have to send more coffins as well for taking their dead bodies back."
In countries that have committed troops, the intractable character of the war in Afghanistan has generated disillusionment in ruling circles as public opposition continues to grow. The Netherlands and Canada have announced that they will be pulling out their forces by June 2010 and December 2011 respectively. Other European states may soon follow.
The despair is shared by figures in the American political establishment. Joe Klein, a well-known correspondent for Time magazine and member of the influential Council for Foreign Relations, wrote on Thursday:
"The war in Afghanistan - the war that President-elect Barack Obama pledged to fight and win - has become an aimless absurdity. It began with a specific target. Afghanistan was where Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda lived, harboured by the Islamic extremist Taliban government. But the enemy escaped into Pakistan, and for the past seven years, Afghanistan has been a slow bleed against an array of mostly indigenous narco-jihadi-tribal guerrilla forces that we continue to call the ‘Taliban'."
The reality is that curbing terrorism was never the motive for the invasion of Afghanistan. The September 11 attacks were seized upon as the pretext for an intervention into the very heart of Central Asia, a resource-rich region that was part of the former Soviet Union until 1991. Far from being "aimless", the purpose of the ongoing occupation is to establish a US client state and major military bases in a region that is vital for American economic interests.
Obama represents the factions of the American establishment most committed to this neo-colonial agenda. Throughout the election campaign, his candidacy became the political vehicle for a tactical shift in policy - the redeployment of US military assets from Iraq to Afghanistan and Pakistan, on the grounds those nations were the "central front" in the fraudulent "war on terror".
Defense Secretary Robert Gates - chosen by the president-elect to remain in that job and head the seamless foreign policy transition from the Bush to the Obama administration - described the Afghan war on Thursday as "an ideological conflict with violent extremists" that could only be compared with the Cold War. "The last ideological conflict we were in lasted about 45 years," he declared.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
