I don’t believe that Netanyahu would ever willingly accept a two-state solution at any time, but I also believe that at some point some Israeli leader may have no choice but to accept it. But I don’t currently see when that would ever be. At the moment I am more concerned that many American Jews in influential positions appear to be disloyal to the United States and more loyal to Israel. I include in this group former American Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk, who is actually Australian, and no qualification to be American Ambassador to Israel, except that the moved here and headed up a bunch of Jewish interest groups. He clearly is a Jew first, with little loyalty to either Australia or America. And of course, the two most recent ambassadors from Israel to the US, were American citizens, born in the US, before they renounced their American citizenship to become Israeli Ambassadors.
Sunday, March 22, 2015
Netanyahu Encourages American Disloyalty
I am disappointed in Netanyahu’s election, and suspicious of how his statements were handled by American news media. Just before his election, he said that he would not support a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. Then after he was elected, and his comments had produced a strong unfavorable reaction in the US, he told Andrea Mitchell that he could accept a two-state solution. First, it seems suspicious that the gave this interview to Andrea Mitchell, a Jew, who at least in this interview revealed herself as a Jew first, a journalist second, and an American third. Netanyahu clearly chose her as a friendly means for getting his new statement out to the public with minimal questioning by the interviewer about why he completely reversed himself overnight on an issue that fundamentally affects Israel’s future existence. Other Jewish journalists, including the NYT’s David Brooks, picked up and defended his new statement, I believe using talking points probably circulated by Israeli Ambassador Dermer. They explained the Netanyahu statements as not being contradictory because before the election he was saying that a two-state solution was impossible “at this time,” and later that a two-state solution might be possible at some other time, although what time he was referring to in either case was not clear.
I don’t believe that Netanyahu would ever willingly accept a two-state solution at any time, but I also believe that at some point some Israeli leader may have no choice but to accept it. But I don’t currently see when that would ever be. At the moment I am more concerned that many American Jews in influential positions appear to be disloyal to the United States and more loyal to Israel. I include in this group former American Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk, who is actually Australian, and no qualification to be American Ambassador to Israel, except that the moved here and headed up a bunch of Jewish interest groups. He clearly is a Jew first, with little loyalty to either Australia or America. And of course, the two most recent ambassadors from Israel to the US, were American citizens, born in the US, before they renounced their American citizenship to become Israeli Ambassadors.
I don’t believe that Netanyahu would ever willingly accept a two-state solution at any time, but I also believe that at some point some Israeli leader may have no choice but to accept it. But I don’t currently see when that would ever be. At the moment I am more concerned that many American Jews in influential positions appear to be disloyal to the United States and more loyal to Israel. I include in this group former American Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk, who is actually Australian, and no qualification to be American Ambassador to Israel, except that the moved here and headed up a bunch of Jewish interest groups. He clearly is a Jew first, with little loyalty to either Australia or America. And of course, the two most recent ambassadors from Israel to the US, were American citizens, born in the US, before they renounced their American citizenship to become Israeli Ambassadors.
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
Netanyahu and Greater Israel
I am terribly disappointed by the election in Israel. With the victory of the right-wing, Netanyahu and Likud, Israel will become more obsessed with destroying its Muslim neighbors militarily, and it will become more of an apartheid nation as it increases discrimination against Arabs and other non-Jews in Israel.
I don’t understand the appeal of Israel for right-wing Republicans. It may be the brotherhood of one right-wing party for another. Republicans may hate Iranians because of the old 444-day hostage crisis, but do they also have a reason to hate Palestinians? It may be the appeal of militarism; the Republicans want to fight somebody, and the Israelis can tell them somebody to fight. However, these days Jews by and large don’t fight for America. Even NYT columnist David Brooks’ son served in the Israeli military, not the American military. So, the Republicans will be sending non-Jewish, mostly Christian, boys and girls to fight the Iranians for Israel, if it comes to that. Of course they will say it’s for America, but right now and for years to come, Iran poses no significant military threat to the United States. It does pose a serious threat to Israel, in part because of the millennia of racial and religious hatred between Persians and Jews. The US is a relative late-comer to this culture of hatred. In addition, there is the question of Jewish political contributions. At least some of the Republicans are motivated by the desire for the huge political contributions that rich Jews like Sheldon Adelson can make, as illustrated by the pilgrimages that potential Republican presidential candidates make to kiss Adelson’s ring. It is even more reprehensible if Republicans send Christian boys and girls to fight and die in combat in order for the candidates to rake in Jewish political contributions. There is also the possibility of Republicans wanting Jewish votes, but it’s not a big population in comparison to the entire United States; however, Harry Truman recognized Israel so quickly over the objection of his Secretary of State because he wanted the Jewish vote, and it worked; he beat Dewey. The main organization building the Republican-Jewish connection is AIPAC, which attracts leaders of Jewish community organizations, Christian evangelical leaders, and Republican politicians. I don’t understand how it works, except for money. AIPAC has tons of money, which it distributes to support right-wing Israel interests, and Republican politicians may be addicted to it. But if they send Americans to fight and die for AIPAC money, it strikes me as bordering on treasonous.
On the other hand, there are the Jews who are Democrats. It seems like the majority of Jewish politicians are liberal Democrats, with whom I probably agree more closely on policy issues than with my putative kinsmen, the white, Christian, Southern Republicans. Furthermore, Israel appears (or appeared before last night) to be more evenly split between right-wing, apartheid zealots and easier-going moderates who might be open to peace with the Palestinians. So, Jewish-American politicians and Israelis themselves tend toward being more moderate than the main Jewish political organization, AIPAC, and the main hawks in Congress, conservative Republicans. I don’t know where Jews stand in their innermost thoughts. Certainly the Holocaust cannot be ignored in their thinking, but if they really care about the Holocaust, how can they oppress the Palestinians the way that they do. Gaza is not unlike the ghettos that Hitler forced the Jews into during World War II.
The Jews may not have a “final solution” to the Palestinian problem like Hitler had to the Jewish problem, but Netanyahu’s renunciation of the goal of a two-state solution is certainly worrying. He has continued to build Jewish settlements on Arab land, and he has strongly encouraged European Jews to move to Israel. This may indicate that Israel is still expanding; it has no intention of returning to the borders established by the UN after World War II. Netanyahu’s goal is some kind of greater Israel. (It sounds terrible, but does Israel desire “lebensraum” like Germany did before World War II?) He appears to believe that Israel needs more land and more Jewish population to avoid being overwhelmed by the Jews in and around Israel. Right now, Iran is the greatest threat to this “greater Israel” ambition. Israel has to some extent co-opted the main Sunni states, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, to support Israel. So, the Shiite states present the greatest threat, and Iran is the leader of the Shiite states. Netanyahu may not be so worried about Iran’s future nuclear capability as he is about taking Iran down a rung now, to limit its power in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, etc. Screaming about the Iranian nuclear program is way to drum up support for an attack on Iran, or at least strong diplomatic pressure on it. That serves Netanyahu’s goal of building a greater Israel by presenting Iran with an array of enemies in the West who believe they are trying to limit Iran’s nuclear program, when in fact they are mainly meant to limit Iran’s current strategic leverage on Israel.
If this is the case, Secretary of State Kerry may think he is engaged in the noble goal of trying to limit Iran’s nuclear program, but in fact he is an agent for Jewish efforts to limit Iran’s strategic power, with or without nuclear weapons.
I don’t understand the appeal of Israel for right-wing Republicans. It may be the brotherhood of one right-wing party for another. Republicans may hate Iranians because of the old 444-day hostage crisis, but do they also have a reason to hate Palestinians? It may be the appeal of militarism; the Republicans want to fight somebody, and the Israelis can tell them somebody to fight. However, these days Jews by and large don’t fight for America. Even NYT columnist David Brooks’ son served in the Israeli military, not the American military. So, the Republicans will be sending non-Jewish, mostly Christian, boys and girls to fight the Iranians for Israel, if it comes to that. Of course they will say it’s for America, but right now and for years to come, Iran poses no significant military threat to the United States. It does pose a serious threat to Israel, in part because of the millennia of racial and religious hatred between Persians and Jews. The US is a relative late-comer to this culture of hatred. In addition, there is the question of Jewish political contributions. At least some of the Republicans are motivated by the desire for the huge political contributions that rich Jews like Sheldon Adelson can make, as illustrated by the pilgrimages that potential Republican presidential candidates make to kiss Adelson’s ring. It is even more reprehensible if Republicans send Christian boys and girls to fight and die in combat in order for the candidates to rake in Jewish political contributions. There is also the possibility of Republicans wanting Jewish votes, but it’s not a big population in comparison to the entire United States; however, Harry Truman recognized Israel so quickly over the objection of his Secretary of State because he wanted the Jewish vote, and it worked; he beat Dewey. The main organization building the Republican-Jewish connection is AIPAC, which attracts leaders of Jewish community organizations, Christian evangelical leaders, and Republican politicians. I don’t understand how it works, except for money. AIPAC has tons of money, which it distributes to support right-wing Israel interests, and Republican politicians may be addicted to it. But if they send Americans to fight and die for AIPAC money, it strikes me as bordering on treasonous.
On the other hand, there are the Jews who are Democrats. It seems like the majority of Jewish politicians are liberal Democrats, with whom I probably agree more closely on policy issues than with my putative kinsmen, the white, Christian, Southern Republicans. Furthermore, Israel appears (or appeared before last night) to be more evenly split between right-wing, apartheid zealots and easier-going moderates who might be open to peace with the Palestinians. So, Jewish-American politicians and Israelis themselves tend toward being more moderate than the main Jewish political organization, AIPAC, and the main hawks in Congress, conservative Republicans. I don’t know where Jews stand in their innermost thoughts. Certainly the Holocaust cannot be ignored in their thinking, but if they really care about the Holocaust, how can they oppress the Palestinians the way that they do. Gaza is not unlike the ghettos that Hitler forced the Jews into during World War II.
The Jews may not have a “final solution” to the Palestinian problem like Hitler had to the Jewish problem, but Netanyahu’s renunciation of the goal of a two-state solution is certainly worrying. He has continued to build Jewish settlements on Arab land, and he has strongly encouraged European Jews to move to Israel. This may indicate that Israel is still expanding; it has no intention of returning to the borders established by the UN after World War II. Netanyahu’s goal is some kind of greater Israel. (It sounds terrible, but does Israel desire “lebensraum” like Germany did before World War II?) He appears to believe that Israel needs more land and more Jewish population to avoid being overwhelmed by the Jews in and around Israel. Right now, Iran is the greatest threat to this “greater Israel” ambition. Israel has to some extent co-opted the main Sunni states, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, to support Israel. So, the Shiite states present the greatest threat, and Iran is the leader of the Shiite states. Netanyahu may not be so worried about Iran’s future nuclear capability as he is about taking Iran down a rung now, to limit its power in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, etc. Screaming about the Iranian nuclear program is way to drum up support for an attack on Iran, or at least strong diplomatic pressure on it. That serves Netanyahu’s goal of building a greater Israel by presenting Iran with an array of enemies in the West who believe they are trying to limit Iran’s nuclear program, when in fact they are mainly meant to limit Iran’s current strategic leverage on Israel.
If this is the case, Secretary of State Kerry may think he is engaged in the noble goal of trying to limit Iran’s nuclear program, but in fact he is an agent for Jewish efforts to limit Iran’s strategic power, with or without nuclear weapons.
Wednesday, March 04, 2015
Netanyahu, Iran and the NPT
The US has weakened its ability to restrict Iran’s nuclear
program using the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The idea behind the NPT when it was created
in 1970 was to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Countries that had no nuclear weapons promised
not to develop them, but they were allowed to engage in peaceful nuclear
activities. Five countries that already
had nuclear weapons could keep them if they were grandfathered under the
treaty, although they undertook to eventually eliminate them. The countries allowed to have nuclear weapons
were China, France, Russia, Britain, and the United States. Although India, Pakistan, and Israel are all
known to have nuclear weapons, they are not parties to the NPT. North Korea also has exploded nuclear devices
and has had sort of an on-again, off-again relationship with the NPT. Iran is a party to the NPT.
The giant loophole that the US created for India under the
NPT the US determination not to make an issue of Israel’s nuclear weapons makes
it hard to demand that Iran cease all nuclear activities, as Israel wants and
as the US sometimes demands, depending on who is speaking. In the mid-2000’s, the US under George W.
Bush basically gave India an exemption from the NPT, saying that the US would
cooperate normally with India on nuclear matters and India could keep its
nuclear arsenal. The US generally protects
Israel’s nuclear arsenal from international diplomatic pressure. Meanwhile, Pakistan and North Korea have
successfully resisted international pressure to eliminate their nuclear
arsenals. Since America has basically
given a pass to four countries with nuclear weapons, it is hard for it to say
that it will go to war and destroy Iran’s nuclear program, which so far has not
egregiously violated the NPT safeguards.
Right now, today, Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is a greater threat to the United States than is Iran’s nascent nuclear program which so far has not one nuclear weapon. Pakistan is full of terrorist sympathizers in Waziristan and other territories that pose more danger to the US military in Afghanistan than to Israel. Hence, Israel says, “Don’t worry about Pakistan; Iran is the bad country because it holds more animosity toward Israel.” Jews want American gentile soldiers to die fighting in Iran to increase Israeli security. Netanyahu spoke to Congress because Israel cannot defend itself against Iran and thus wants America to fight Iran for it. Let the Jews fight their own battles.
Furthermore, when nuclear powers have negotiated nuclear
disarmament they seek mutual reductions in nuclear weapons. Israel wants Iranian nuclear disarmament, but
Israel is unwilling to negotiate over its own nuclear arsenal. Israel says we are allowed to have nuclear
weapons, but Iran is not. What is the
basis for this assumption? Is it because
the Israelis consider themselves God’s chose people, while Iran is not. Israel is demonstrating its extreme race
hatred, directed at Arabs as well as Persians.
Should the US be leading negotiations, which at bottom are fueled by
race hatred? Why should Netanyahu be
allowed to spew race hatred before the US Congress and be cheered for it? What’s wrong with this picture?
Tuesday, March 03, 2015
Netanyahu's Speech
Bibi Netanyahu gave an excellent speech to the American
Congress, but it was at its core full of race hatred. Clearly Jews hate Persians, and their hatred
is reciprocated. Iran wants a nuclear
program that would enable it to build a nuclear bomb sometime in the future,
and Israel wants to prevent that by all means, including war. But what Bibi really wants if for gentile American
boys and girls to fight that war, rather than Israeli Jews. Jews don’t fight for America, even with
America fights Israel’s wars, as in Iraq, who “weapons of mass destruction”
posed a much greater threat to Israel than to America. High ranking American Jews like Paul Wolfowitz,
Scooter Libby, and Doug Feith were happy to send Christians to fight and die for
Israel in Iraq. Now Bibi wants a new
cohort of American Christians to fight and die in Iran.
There’s nothing new about this. Anglophile Franklin D. Roosevelt wanted to
join Britain in the War against Hitler, but despite his love of the British, he
did not do it until Japan invaded the US.
In this case, Bibi wants to stir the US to go to war before there is any
direct threat to the US. The Iranian
government hates the US, and has hated it for years, certainly since the US
overthrew the Iranian government and installed the Shah. Iran reciprocated by destroying Jimmy Carter
with the hostage crisis and installing Ronald Reagan as President, illustrated
by its release of the hostages as soon as Reagan was elected. Reagan thanked Iran by doing the Iran-Contra
deal, giving Iran some weapons it could not get otherwise.
In his speech, Bibi said that Israel can defend itself. Let it do so.
We don’t need any more American gentiles to die in Israel’s Middle East
wars. Meanwhile we have American Jews
deserting America for Israel. The last
two Israeli ambassadors, Ron Dermer and Michael Oren, were born in the US and
renounced their US citizenship. Many
young Jewish Americans serve in the Israeli military, two prominent ones are Chicago
mayor Raum Emanuel and NYT columnist David
Brooks’ son. Netanyahu has appealed
to Jews in Europe, particularly in recently attacked France in Denmark, to
leave Europe and move to Israel. He
implies that Jews cannot be loyal to any country but Israel.
The article on David Brooks’ son refers to Aliyah, the right
of return to Israel for Jews. It says
that you must have at least one Jewish grandparent. By that standard, Bill and Hilary Clinton’s
granddaughter, Charlotte Clinton Mezvinsky, has the right of return, although
by Orthodox Jewish standards Charlotte is not Jewish, because Jewishness only
comes from the mother, and Chelsea is not Jewish. However, Charlotte’s father and his father and
mother are Jewish. So, Charlotte has three times what she needs
for Aliyah. Her grandfather, Ed
Mezvinsky, a former Congressman, was convicted of 31 charges of fraud in 2001
and served five years in prison. The
Clintons are of course friendly with Jews.
Bill Clinton was roundly criticized for his pardon of Marc Rich just
before Clinton left office. Ironically
Rich, a Jew, was under indictment for trading with Iran during hostage
crisis. According to Wikipedia, many
senior Israeli officials, including some from the Mossad, and Dick Cheney’s Scooter
Libby of Iraq War fame, urged Clinton to pardon Rich because of his assistance
to Israel. No doubt the pardon has
helped the Clintons raise money from Jewish sources. Recently there has been a lot of talk about
how much money the Clintons have gotten from foreign sources; presumably some
of them are Jewish.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)