THE “SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP” IS DEAD

Gordon Duff: Source: https://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/03/16/gordon-duff-u-s-tells-israel-you-are-undermining-america-endangering-troops/.

“Military Veterans and Foreign Affairs” journal, 16/3/2010:
“Gordon Duff is a Marine Vietnam veteran, grunt and 100% disabled vet. He has been a UN Diplomat, defense contractor and is a widely published expert on military and defense issues. He is active in the financial industry and is a specialist on global trade. Gordon Duff acts as political and economic advisor to a number of governments in Africa and the Middle East. We reprint Gordon Duff’s summary of events for our readers’ interest with the question: “If what he says is accurate - where does Australia stand in all of this?”.

U.S. Tells Israel: “You are undermining America, endangering troops”
“Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Clinton and Joint Chief’s Chairman Mike Mullen have all recently visited Israel on two issues, reliable information that Israel was planning an attack on Iran, a plan designed to push America into a war our leaders believe is both wrong and likely to risk a global nuclear confrontation with Russia and the building of a massive housing project on the Arab side of Jerusalem in violation of numerous agreements, a project that is likely to cause a spike in world terrorism and send thousands of new fighters to Afghanistan to face American forces there.
This is the worst point in the history of the relationship between the U.S. and Israel since the founding of that nation in 1948 but these are not the only reasons, not these and the arrogant and intractable attitude of Israel’s leaders nor being caught in lie after lie, lies told to their financial backer and closest ally, the United States.

Here is some background on CENTOM Commander, General Petraeus’ shocking briefing
On Jan. 16, two days after a killer earthquake hit Haiti, a team of senior military officers from the U.S. Central Command (responsible for overseeing American security interests in the Middle East), arrived at the Pentagon to brief Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The team had been dispatched by CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus to underline his growing worries at the lack of progress in resolving the issue. The 33-slide, 45-minute PowerPoint briefing stunned Mullen. The briefers reported that there was a growing perception among Arab leaders that the U.S. was incapable of standing up to Israel, that CENTCOM’s mostly Arab constituency was losing faith in American promises, that Israeli intransigence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing U.S. standing in the region… “Everywhere they went, the message was pretty humbling,” a Pentagon officer familiar with the briefing says. “America was not only viewed as weak, but its military posture in the region was eroding.”

But Petraeus wasn’t finished: two days after the Mullen briefing, Petraeus sent a paper to the White House requesting that the West Bank and Gaza (which, with Israel, is a part of the European Command — or EUCOM), be made a part of his area of operations. The Mullen briefing and Petraeus’s request hit the White House like a bombshell… pressing Israel once again on the settlements issue, sending Mitchell on a visit to a number of Arab capitals and dispatching Mullen for a carefully arranged meeting with the chief of the Israeli General Staff, Lt. General Gabi Ashkenazi. … Certainly, it was thought, Israel would get the message.

Israel didn’t. When Vice President Joe Biden was embarrassed by an Israeli announcement that the Netanyahu government was building 1,600 new homes in East Jerusalem, the administration reacted. But no one was more outraged than Biden who, according to the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth, engaged in a private, and angry, exchange with the Israeli Prime Minister:
“This is starting to get dangerous for us,” Biden reportedly told Netanyahu. “What you’re doing here undermines the security of our troops who are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. That endangers us and it endangers regional peace.”

Yedioth Ahronoth went on to report
“The vice president told his Israeli hosts that since many people in the Muslim world perceived a connection between Israel’s actions and US policy, any decision about construction that undermines Palestinian rights in East Jerusalem could have an impact on the personal safety of American troops fighting against Islamic terrorism.” The message couldn’t be plainer: Israel’s intransigence could cost American lives.
The deterioration started long before this and can be tracked by changing perceptions in the Obama administration whose leaders are heavily “pro-Israel” but lack the extremist convictions of the Zionist/extremist group that surrounded President Bush. When Obama took office, even Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, one of the most prominent Israeli proponents in the country, had become aware of the extent of Israeli involvement in areas that had taken the “special relationship” into an area of disaster for the United States.

This is what was discovered
The military and intelligence organizations in the United States had been penetrated by Israel, not only through our normal broad partnership but the planting of “moles,” many from the Christian Zionist community who were taking direction from Israel and not the United States. The result wasn’t just limited to falsification of intelligence, both leading to endless phony terror alerts and non-existent enemies but to skewing operations in a manner to guarantee their failure with significant American cost in both lives and money. The massive spy network uncovered by Sibel Edmonds had been tracked, almost entirely to Israel.
Edmonds had been silenced by National Security Letters issued by John Ashcroft, leading Christian Zionist in the Bush Administration and constant “private” visitor to Israel. After 6 years of spying at the highest levels of the White House, Department of State, Congress and the Pentagon, the network grew even more, accessing nearly all top US intelligence and selling it on the open market.

Most disastrous of the stolen intelligence was the data on the new JSF, the F35 Joint Strike Fighter. All data on this new $300 billion dollar project fell into Israeli hands in 2008, information that may have turned the air superiority fighter meant to rule the skies for the next 30 years into a “target sled.” This is the biggest intelligence attack on the US since the Pollard/Israeli scandal. Pollard, an American Jew reputedly associated with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, stole America’s battle plans for the defense of NATO, our entire spy/surveillance network plans and full ultra-top secret detailed plans that could have negated America’s nuclear deterrent during the most dangerous times of the Cold War. Pollard’s information was sold to the Soviets by Israel, information that could have let Russia win World War III.

The Israeli attack on Gaza was timed to an American change of administration and done without consultation. Broad intelligence sources indicate that the attacks were not in retaliation to any terrorist activity but are spoken of “behind closed doors” by top US officials as ethnic cleansing not unlike the issues that brought NATO into conflict with Serbia. The systematic nature of the attack, destroying water-treatment, schools, hospitals, food storage, power generation and the massive loss of life, especially among children, has soured many in the Obama camp on Israel.
Israel’s use of the Jewish lobby in the US to hold up President Obama’s domestic agenda and their use of Jewish controlled media to embarrass the President has caused more bitterness. With Jewish controlled/owned Fox, CNN (Wolf Blitzer, formerly of the Jerusalem Post), ABC, CBS, NBC networks and other major news sources all working in concert against, particularly President Obama’s health care initiative, Israel is seen as “flexing its muscle” even more. The believed rationale is the removal of all non-Jews from Israel, dead or alive, with a powerless US government paying the bills and fighting the massive terrorist backlash for generations.

The Israeli agenda of working with India to destabilize Pakistan, organize terror attacks there and, less publicly known, in Afghanistan and Iraq, some against American targets, can no longer be ignored by the current administration, Secretary Gates, General’s Mullen and Petraeus. Israeli’s “dynamic duo,” Senators McCain and Lieberman, though still holding important committee assignments on the hill, are being held increasingly in disrepute in the United States. When Israel sends these two on errands, it no longer carries the weight and power of the United States as it had during the Bush administration.

Re-examination of a number of terrorist attacks during the Bush administration, particularly in Europe, show a clear “Mossad footprint,” something adding credence to the hypothesis that the “war on terror” and intelligence failures in Iraq had been heavily influenced by Israeli sources, many of the same individuals tied to the Edmonds spy affair, many close to, not only Israel but President Bush and Vice President Cheney. Recently a secret El Al/Israel flight from JFK in New York has been discovered, a flight authorized by top Bush officials, one previously kept secret and now being tied covering up 9/11 intelligence failures. The El Al Boeing 747 left only hours after the 9/11 attack, at a time all air traffic in the United States was grounded.

With nearly all Arab/Muslim governments aligned behind the US, including a softening of tensions with Iran, Israel feels it must act quickly. However, the US no longer has any strategic requirement for a relationship with Israel. What had been seen as a potential ally, perhaps now wrongly so, in the region is now generally perceived as a “runaway train” that the United States can no longer go to the United Nations time after time to protect from sanctions, 32 times thus far. Israel clearly feels it has the United States “over a barrel” with control of media, a massive AIPAC lobby working against American policy and huge new financial influence over the upcoming Congressional elections handed over to them by the highly controversial 5/4 Supreme Court “free speech” election funding decision clearly meant to aid Israel further in her ability to intimidate Congress.

Unofficially, Israel has moved to the top of America’s “terrorist watch list” and is now drifting toward “evildoer” status, not only by the White House but, more broadly, through top defense officials who now perceive Israel as a threat to the United States.”

A MATTER OF TIMING – WIPING THE SPIT OFF HIS FACE

by Uri Avnery
Uri Avnery's website https://www.avnery-news.co.il - 15 March, 2010:
Some weeks the news is dominated by a single word. This week’s word was “timing”. It’s all a matter of timing. The Government of Israel has insulted the Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden, one of the greatest “friends” of Israel (meaning: somebody totally subservient to AIPAC) and spat in the face of President Barack Obama. So what? It’s all a matter of timing.
If the government had announced the building of 1600 new housing units in East Jerusalem a day earlier, it would have been OK. If it had announced it three days later, it would have been wonderful. But doing it exactly when Joe Biden was about to have dinner with Bibi and Sarah’le – that was really bad timing. The matter itself is not important. Another thousand housing units in East Jerusalem, or 10 thousand, or 100 thousand – what different does it make? The only thing that matters is the timing.

As the Frenchman said: It’s worse than criminal, it’s stupid.
The word “stupid” also figured prominently this week, second only to “timing”. Stupidity is an accepted phenomenon in politics. I would almost say: to succeed in politics, one needs a measure of stupidity. Voters don’t like politicians who are too intelligent. They make them feel inferior. A foolish politician, on the other hand, appears to be “one of the folks”.

History is full of acts of folly by politicians. Many books have been written about this. To my mind, the epitome of foolishness was achieved by the events that led to World War I, with its millions of victims, which broke out because of the accumulated stupidity of (in ascending order) Austrian, Russian, German, French and British politicians.
But even stupidity in politics has its limits. I have pondered this question for decades, and who knows, one day, when I grow up, I might write a doctoral thesis about it.

My thesis goes like this: In politics (as in other fields) foolish things happen regularly. But some of them are stopped in time, before they can lead to disaster, while others are not. It this accidental, or is there a rule? My answer is: there certainly is a rule. It works like this: when somebody sets in motion an act of folly that runs counter to the spirit of the regime, it is stopped in its tracks. While it moves from one bureaucrat to another, somebody starts to wonder. Just a moment, this cannot be right! It is referred to higher authority, and soon enough somebody decides that it is a mistake.

On the other hand, when the act of folly is in line with the spirit of the regime, there are no brakes. When it moves from one bureaucrat to the next, it looks quite natural to both. No red light. No alarm bell. And so the folly rolls on to the bitter end.
I remember how this rule came to my mind the first time. In 1965, Habib Bourguiba, the president of Tunisia, took a bold step: he made a speech in the biggest refugee camp in Jericho, then under Jordanian rule, and called upon the Arabs to recognize Israel. This caused a huge scandal all over the Arab world. Some time later, the correspondent of an Israeli paper reported that in a press conference at the UN headquarters, Bourguiba had called for the destruction of Israel. This sounded strange to me. I made inquiries, checked the protocol and found out that the opposite was true: the reporter had mistakenly turned a no into a yes.
How did this happen? If the journalist had erred in the opposite direction and reported, for example, that Gamal Abd-el-Nasser had called for the acceptance of Israel into the Arab League, the news would have been stopped at once. Every red light would have lit up. Someone would have called out: Hey, something strange here! Check again! But in the Bourguiba case nobody noticed the mistake, for what is more natural than an Arab leader calling for the destruction of Israel? No verification needed.

That’s what happened this week in Jerusalem
Every government official knows that the nationalist Prime Minister is pushing for the Judaization of East Jerusalem, that the extreme nationalist Minister of the Interior is even more eager, and that the super-nationalist Mayor of Jerusalem practically salivates when he imagines a Jewish quarter on the Temple Mount. So why should a bureaucrat postpone the confirmation of a new Jewish neighbourhood in East Jerusalem? Just because of the visit of some American windbag? Therefore, the timing is not important. It’s the matter itself that’s important.

During his last days in office, President Bill Clinton published a peace plan, in which he tried to make up for eight years of failure in this region and kowtowing to successive Israeli governments. The plan was comparatively reasonable, but included a ticking bomb.
About East Jerusalem, Clinton proposed that what is Jewish should be joined to the State of Israel and what is Arab should be joined to the state of Palestine. He assumed (rightly, I believe) that Yasser Arafat was ready for such a compromise, which would have joined some new Jewish neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem to Israel. But Clinton was not wise enough to foresee the consequences of his proposal.
In practice, it was an open invitation to the Israeli government to speed up the establishment of new settlements in East Jerusalem, expecting them to become part of Israel. And indeed, since then successive Israeli governments have invested all available resources in this endeavour. Since money has no smell, every Jewish casino-owner in America and every Jewish brothel-keeper in Europe was invited to join the effort.
The Biblical injunction – “Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the Lord thy God, for any vow; for even both these are abomination unto the Lord thy God” (Deuteronomy 23:18) – was suspended for this holy cause.

Now the pace is speeded up even more. Because there is no more effective means of obstructing peace than building new settlements in East Jerusalem. That is clear to anyone who has dealings with this region. No peace without an independent Palestinian state, no Palestinian state without East Jerusalem. About this there is total unanimity among all Palestinians, from Fatah to Hamas, and between all Arabs, from Morocco to Iraq, and between all Muslims, from Nigeria to Iran.
There will be no peace without the Palestinian flag waving above the Haram al-Sharif, the holy shrines of Islam which we call the Temple Mount. That is an iron-clad rule. Arabs can compromise about the refugee problem, painful as it may be, and about the borders, also with much pain, and about security matters. But they cannot compromise about East Jerusalem becoming the capital of Palestine. All national and religious passions converge here.

Anyone who wants to wreck any chance for peace – it is here that he has to act. The settlers and their supporters, who know that any peace agreement would include the elimination of (at least) most settlements, have planned in the past (and probably are planning now) to blow up the mosques on the Temple Mount, hoping that this would cause a worldwide conflagration which would reduce to ashes the chances of peace once and for all. Less extreme people dream about the creeping ethnic cleansing of East Jerusalem by administrative chicanery, demolition of houses, denying means of livelihood and just making life in general miserable for Arabs. Moderate rightists just want to cover every empty square inch in East Jerusalem with Jewish neighbourhoods. The aim is always the same.

This reality is, of course, well known to Obama and his advisors. In the beginning they believed, in their innocence, that they could sweet talk Netanyahu and Co. into stopping the building activity to facilitate the start of negotiations for the two-state solution. Very soon they learned that this was impossible without exerting massive pressure – and they were not prepared to do that.
After putting up a short and pitiful struggle, Obama gave in. He agreed to the deception of a “settlement freeze” in the West Bank. Now building is going on there with great enthusiasm, and the settlers are satisfied. They have completely stopped their demonstrations. In Jerusalem there was not even a farcical attempt – Netanyahu just told Obama that he would go on building there (“as in Tel Aviv”), and Obama bowed his head. When Israeli officials announced a grandiose plan for building in “Ramat Shlomo” this week, they did not violate any undertaking.

Only the matter of “timing” remained
For Joe BIiden, it was a matter of honour. For Mahmoud Abbas, it is a matter of survival. Under intense pressure from the Americans and their agents, the rulers of the Arab countries, Abbas was obliged to agree to negotiations with the Netanyahu government – though only “proximity talks”, a euphemism for “distance talks”. Clearly, nothing will come out of these talks except more humiliation for the Palestinians. Quite simply: anyone building in East Jerusalem and the West Bank is announcing in advance that there is no chance for an agreement. After all, no sane Israeli would invest billions in a territory he intends to turn over to the Palestinian state. A person who is eating a pizza is not negotiating about it in good faith.

Even at this late stage, Abbas and his people still hope that something good will come out of all this: the US will acknowledge that they are right and exert, at long last, real pressure on Israel to implement the two-state solution. But Biden and Obama did not give much cause for hope. They wiped the spit off their faces and smiled politely. As the saying goes: when you spit in the face of a weakling, he pretends that it is raining. Does this apply to the president of the most powerful country in the world?

Comment: Wasn’t it Krushchev, the Soviet Union president who, in observing the subservience of the west’s ‘leaders’ said: “We spit in their eye and they think it is dew!”  

LAW AND THOUGHT CONTROL

by Ian Wilson LL.B.
Against the Lawyers series: Consider the shape of politically correct things to come. Janet Albrechtsen (“Menace in Mad March of the Thought Police,” The Australian 10/2/2010, p.12). She mentions the case of Queensland radio broadcaster Michael Smith who said on-air that it is dangerous to allow the burka in certain places as it has been used by criminals as a disguise.
One listener complained to the Australian Communications and Media authority that Smith was in breach of the code of discriminating, vilifying and inciting hatred against Muslims. The complaint was ultimately rejected but then the complainer lodged a complaint with the Queensland Anti-Discrimination Commission, which accepted the complaint.

Albrechtsen goes on to outline some of the views of the complainer in his 15-page letter to the radio station. She then goes on to say that such race-hate laws have a “chilling effect” (a frequently quoted legal turn of the phrase) driving discussion underground. We have all heard this before but still the march of suppression of free speech continues. I imagine then that those who really do want to speak on such topics will, in the future, truly need to “go underground”. Perhaps even science education may not need to “go underground” like during the dark ages, as political correctness washes through US campuses.
According to an article at the View From the Right site, one Californian high school is cutting out science labs which benefit white students, to free up resources to help struggling black and Hispanic students. Well if they are going down that track, how about cutting out feminist studies and related drains on resources?  

THE INVENTION OF A JEWISH ‘RACE’

The Weekend Australian Review 13-14/3/2010 published a review by Rafael Behr “The Holy Land May Not Be Promised” of Shlomo Sand’s book “The Invention of a Jewish People”. Mr. Sand, a professor at the Tel Aviv University, has ignited a controversy that is spreading worldwide. It is the best selling book in Israel at this time and has received a prestigious literary award in France and yet the Jewish-French community’s reaction has been termed ‘hostile’ while the author describes it as ‘hysterical’.

Mr. Sand’s work challenges the accepted theory of the historical link between ancient Israel and modern Judaism. He is ‘shaking the faith’ of those who have believed in an historical link between modern Judaism and ancient Israel, but more importantly, it is a serious challenge to the claims of ‘the chosen’ people to build a modern Jewish state on the soil of ancient Israel; a land on which the Palestinian peoples have dwelt for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

Important books on this essentially ‘taboo’ subject: Postage must be added to all book prices.
"The Thirteenth Tribe" by Arthur Koestler - price: $21.00
“Facts are Facts” by Benjamin Freedman - price: $9.50.
“The Controversy of Zion” by Douglas Reed - price: $16.50.
“Jewish History, Jewish Religion: Weight of Three Thousand Years” by Israel Shahak - price: $43.00.
“Jewish Supremacism” by David Duke - price: $50.00.  

JOIN THE ‘TEA PARTY’

by James Reed
You know that something is good by the type of criticism that attaches to it. According to E.J. Dionne Jr. (The Australian 12/2/2010 p.10) it is ‘racism’ which is fuelling the ‘Tea Party’. The ‘Tea Party’ is a grass roots conservative and largely Christian response to B. Hussein Obama’s presidency. They see Obama as a dangerous socialist.
They are opposed to the multiracial, multicultural, political coalition that Obama represents. But so what? What’s wrong with opposing it – it is a free country isn’t it?

Of course, supporters of the US Freedom movement see that ‘freedom’ is only that which the politically correct coalition is willing to grant them and that is why they fight on. They are unlikely to be frightened of big bad words such as ‘racism’. We need the equivalent of the Tea Party movement in Australia. Anyone for a cup of tea?  

BEHIND “ASKING THE PHILOSOPHER”

by Brain Simpson
Tim Soutphommasane (no prizes for guessing his ethnicity) has a column in The Australian “Ask the Philosopher”. The column is just above (at least in The Weekend Australian 6-7/3/2010 p.8), a beaming Emma Tom “modern woman column”. I will leave it to James Reed to criticise her.
Back to Soutphommasane, he recently addressed the issue of home schooling, concluding that overall home schooling is to be rejected because “it has the effect of preventing children from socialising with others, including those from different backgrounds and traditions”.

As I see it, home schooling could be a social antidote to the politically correct multicultural nonsense presently force-fed to our children. So, contrary to Soutphommasane, home schooling is to be warmly embraced by families that can do it. Children seem to outperform comparative children in battery-hen-like conditions in our degenerate schools. Three cheers for home schooling.