The Final Stage of Chosen Narcissism

February 18, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

The idea that a democratically elected goy leader thinks independently and authentically is, apparently, as hostile to the Israelis as a war declaration.

The idea that a democratically elected goy leader thinks independently and authentically is, apparently, as hostile to the Israelis as a war declaration.

by Gilad Atzmon

On Saturday Polish PM did it again, he told the truth. He suggested that there were also Jewish perpetrators of the Holocaust. Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki told the Munich Security Conference that it won’t be punishable to say there were Polish perpetrators of the Holocaust “as there were Jewish perpetrators, as there were Russian perpetrators, as there were Ukrainian; not only German perpetrators.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpxTZZF9m4Q

In PM Morawiecki’s eyes the Poles were also victims of the WWII, “Many of you,” Morawiecki said,  “have probably heard about the Lidice village in the Czech Republic. In Poland we had 800 Lidice — 800 villages completely annihilated, exterminated by German Nazis.”

The Israelis are really upset by the Polish PM’s attempt at truthfulness. Morawiecki’s attitude crudely interferes with the primacy of Jewish suffering. The idea that a democratically elected goy leader thinks independently and authentically is, apparently, as hostile to the Israelis as a war declaration. Yesh Atid Chairman Yair Lapid said Israel’s ambassador to Poland should be recalled immediately in response to Morawiecki’s comments.

Israeli Labor Party leader Avi Gabbay insisted that Morawiecki “spoke like any other Holocaust denier.” Gabbay added that the “the government of Israel has to be a voice for the millions of murdered and strongly denounce the Polish prime minister’s words.” This is indeed a new and refreshing development in Jewish nationalism. Israel isn’t anymore just the state of the Jews, it is also the voice of the dead Jews. I guess that we should start to consider a three state solution. One for the Palestinians, one for the Jews and one for the dead Jews.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who also attended the Munich conference, called his Polish counterpart’s comment “outrageous.”

On the face of it seems as if Lapid, Netanyahu and Gabbay are participating in an open contest. Each one of them attempts to perform the ultimate form of delusional psychosis. Lapid calls the Israeli Ambassador to return home, as if a war has embarked between the two states. Gabbay takes upon himself to become the voice of the dead Jews. In fact Netanyahu seems slightly more content than his political counterpart. One may wonder, why Israeli leaders compete each other in being psychotically delusional? Presumably, because in Israel psychotic behaviour translates into votes.

It has been accepted by many Israeli and Jewish scholars that the Holocaust is the most popular contemporary Jewish religion. Jews, so it seems, believe in many things that are often contradictory but all self-identifying Jews believe in the holocaust. The next question is what is it in the Holocaust which makes it into such a popular religion?

The Shoa is a Jewish victorious narrative. It is a story of a lethal plan to destroy the Jews that ends-up in a great Jewish victory, a spiritual revival and military empowerment.

The Old Testament points at similar Biblical narratives. Like Hitler, the Pharaoh also wanted to destroy the Jews however,  Exodus’ God interfered and saved his chosen  people inflicting on Egypt ten devastating plights that made contemporary WMD warfare look like a friendly adventure. The Book of Esther also brings to light a similar story. An attempted genocide by the Persian king is averted. Eventually it is actually the Jews who massacre their enemies en-mass. This vast killing narrative made it into Purim, the most Joyous Jewish holiday.  Like in The Book of Ester, In the Holocaust religion the Jews resurrect themselves without the help of God. Not only have Jews been saved, they even managed to build a Jewish national homeland on the expense of the indigenous Palestinians.

But, in fact, the Holocaust takes us one step further. While in the book of Esther Jews saved themselves without the assistance of God, In the Holocaust religion the Jews have managed to rescue themselves in spite of their God. While God let Auschwitz happen, it is the Jews, the people, who survived against all odds and in spite of their God raised themselves out of the ashes.

In the holocaust religion, therefore,  ‘the Jew’ is the new Jewish God. The Holocaust religion, as such, is the final and ultimate stage in Jewish narcissism for ‘the Jew’ is the Jew’s saver. We are dealing with an auto fulfilling self loving mechanism. This is exactly why Lapid, Gabbay, Netanyahu and other Jewish leaders around the world are performing such an irrational shameless tantrum in reaction to the new Polish history law.

The new Polish history law interferes with the Jewish grandeur. It breaks the narcissistic binary dichotomy between good and evil (Jew vs. Goy). The Jews are no longer the ultimate victims and the Goyim aren’t the ultimate evil. In the eyes of Morawiecki, the Poles suffered as much as the Jews, their country was minced to pieces. And just like the Jews they also recovered, they even want to emancipate their past.

The Polish new history law is an attempt to humanise modern European history. It universalises suffering. It strips the Jews of their blind sense of victimhood. It makes WWII into an historical event subject to open scrutiny. It doesn’t deny the past. It, instead, denies the prospect of Jewish narcissism.

If they wants to burn it, you want to read it …

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto

Amazon.co.uk  ,  Amazon.com  and   here  (gilad.co.uk). 

Advertisements

New Knesset Bill calls for national day to recognize pre-israel state terrorist groups

New Knesset Bill calls for national day to recognize pre-state terrorist groups

 

‘This law will preserve their heritage and will thank them on behalf of all the citizens of Israel.’

ed note–Dear God, where do we even begin?

Yes, these groups were terrorist groups and were/are recognized as such by every civilized standard in every civilized nation in the civilized world. They blew up hotels full of non-combatants, assassinated high officials, and in the case of the Judaic massacre at Deir Yassin, men and young boys were lined up against a wall and machine-gunned to death while pregnant Palestinian mothers-to-be had their bellies slashed upon with bayonets and the unborn children ripped out of their wombs.

If any other group of people had done a mere 1% of what these people had done and the nation-state where this took place then introduced a bill setting up a national day of honor and remembrance, the world would be convulsing, as it should.

But when it is Jews doing it for the benefit of the Jewish state, no one utters even a burp of protest or condemnation.

Israel National News

A new bill calls to establish a national day of recognition for the Jewish underground organizations that operated in Israel prior to the establishment of the state.

The legislation, submitted by MK Amir Ohana (Likud), aims to recognize the contribution of the pre-state underground organizations to the establishment of the state and the IDF.

The day would include a special discussion in the Knesset plenum, a national memorial ceremony, and programs in the education system focusing on the Palmach, Irgun, Lehi, NILI, Hashomer, Bar Giora and the Jewish Resistance Movement.

Image result for deir yassin massacre

According to the proposed legislation, the day will be marked on the 25th of the Hebrew month of Shvat, the day on which Avraham (Yair) Stern, founder of the Lehi, was murdered by the British Mandatory police.

“The story of the Jewish underground is taught far too little in our educational institutions,” said MK Ohana, “and as a result their tremendous contributions to the state have been mitigated.”

“These are the founding fathers of us all, those who not only dreamed but who acted: they built settlements, smuggled Jewish immigrants, fought battles, defended the Jewish community and gave their lives for the country. This law will preserve their heritage and will thank them on behalf of all the citizens of Israel.”

Matan Peleg, Chairman of the Zionist organization Im Tirtzu that has been advocating for this national day of recognition, said that showing appreciation to those who fought in the Jewish underground is an historic and moral duty.

“The underground organizations were the shield of the Yishuv, and were crucial in bringing about the establishment of the state after 2,000 years of exile,” said Peleg.

“These people were visionaries without whom we would not be here,” continued Peleg. “It is our historic and moral obligation to show them thanks and appreciation, and it is astounding that such a day has yet to be established.”

israel Will Boycott Paris Film Festival Due To Content That May ‘Hurt the Reputation of israel’s Military’

Israel Will Boycott Paris Film Festival Due To Content That May ‘Hurt the Reputation of Israel’s Military’ (VIDEOS)

Israeli MP, Miri Regev. (Photo: Social Media)

The Israeli government is to boycott the Paris Film Festival over the organizer’s decision to air a movie that is said to “hurt the reputation of Israel’s military”.

Culture Minister, Miri Regev, is said to be on a mission to stop the film “Foxtrot” gaining wide recognition. The Israeli movie has a controversial scene in which the Israeli military covers up the deaths of a carload of Palestinian teenagers.

 

The movie focuses on the life of a family: two parents and their daughter who all reside in Tel Aviv, while their son – who is a soldier – serves far away from them. The movie won the Silver Lion award at the Venice Film Festival and was shortlisted for Best Foreign Language Film at the Oscars.

Regev has not only denounced the movie for “defaming the IDF and its values” she is also putting pressure on the foreign ministry to withdraw its support from the Israeli Film Festival in Paris later in the year.

It seems Regev was unaware that “Foxtrot” was going to open the festival until she visited Paris recently met with Israeli Ambassador to France Aliza Ben-Nun and her team to discuss a project promoting cultural connections between Israel and France. During the conversation, Haaretz reported that Regev became aware that “Foxtrot” was going to be shown, which according to Regev “contradicts earlier agreements”.

 

Regev told Haaretz that Israel should not “support a festival that showcases films that slander us throughout the world and contains false content about IDF soldiers and its citizens.” According to Regev, she instructed her ministry’s director general to “make clear to the Foreign Ministry, which is allocating money to the festival, that it is inconceivable for the Foreign Ministry to conduct a policy independent from the government’s policy.”

Regev also complained that the movie was used by the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign (BDS) to highlight the Israeli military in a poor light.

The Israeli Film Festival in Paris is run by the French film association Kolnoah (the Hebrew word for “cinema”). In addition to a stipend from the Israeli foreign ministry, it receives backing from the Israeli Film Fund, the Israeli Film Council and a handful of French-Jewish organizations.

(MEMO, PC, Social Media)

The ‘Divide and Conquer’ Campaign Being Waged Against Palestinian Resistance

Source

By Robert Inlakesh | 21st Century Wire | February 17, 2018

I have often asked myself, why there is an impression that some Western activists and pro-Palestinian organisations are working covertly, to divide and weaken the Palestinian cause. Before addressing the primary issue, a little has to be said about the Palestinian cause itself and how many prominent figures side-track real resolutions, with their own ideas as to how Palestinians should act in the face of their foreign occupier.

Whilst many choose to point out the progression of the Palestinian human rights cause in the West – with groups such as the BDS (Boycott Divestment Sanctions) movement and others seeing success – the movement at its most essential level, on the ground in Palestine, seems to be at its very weakest.

In order for the world to see a reality in which Palestinians are granted their full human rights, the most important place to see an emergence of change should surely be from within Palestine itself?

No amount of pro-Palestine advocacy from university students, nor rallies for human rights in the West, will result in direct evolution of the struggle on the ground for the Palestinians. It is the Palestinians themselves that will ultimately lead their own way to freedom. Whilst it is absolutely essential to have a strong solidarity movement overseas, this is not the Palestinian cause in its entirety.

The Israeli government have proceeded to massacre, destroy and dispossess the Palestinians for 70 years now and it is unrealistic to believe that they will simply stop what they are doing – suddenly growing a conscience – all because people in Western nations are mad at them.

The only way an apartheid regime such as Israel changes/falls, is when it is forced to do so. History has illustrated that there must be forceful measures executed in order to bring about change when confronted by Western Empire. From the expulsion of the French and the liberation of Algeria, to the struggle against Apartheid in South Africa, to the fight for Irish independence, the point has been illustrated that resistance is the key to freedom.

Palestinians are generally perceived by foreign onlookers as one of two things, victims or terrorists. The ‘Left’ love the idea of the defenseless civilian that must be saved and the ‘Right’ see Palestinians as violent extremists. Those looking in at the Palestinian struggle seem to have two ultra-polarized views, with little space for the idea that Palestinians are human beings in the struggle to liberate their homeland, thus the general consensus amongst the left is to reject the notion of Palestinians as being engaged in a potentially violent battle for their homeland and existence.

There is no simple solution to what is going on – although it is a conflict that is relatively easy to understand – this article is not claiming to provide all the answers, but certainly is of importance in order to understand a very sinister agenda that has been put into practice for some time now in Palestine.

The agenda to divide and conquer the Palestinian people and how this is being carried out.

Many steps have been taken by the Israeli government, in order to destroy the foundations of Palestinian society. Attempts to suppress the populations of the Gaza strip and West Bank pre-date the occupation/besiegement of these territories themselves and have varied in their approach to achieving this aim.

When Shimon Peres (former Israeli Prime Minister and President) established the first settlements in the West Bank and acted upon his plan to economically coerce the Palestinians of the occupied territories, he changed how the Israeli takeover of Palestine would manifest itself.

Instead of all out genocide, Israel began a process of quietly and sneakily conquering the land they sought to capture and hiding their true intentions through the notion of a ceasefire and what would be seen as “relative peace”.

Israel’s Infiltration of Palestinian Resistance is Exposed

After speaking to countless Palestinian activists in the West Bank, on the current state of the Palestinian cause, one theme remained constant, the lack of unity in Palestine today. Almost everyone I spoke to on this issue would reminisce back to the days of the second Intifada (or uprising) – which started in the year 2000 and lasted roughly five years – everyone spoke of how the people came together against the occupation and of the current erosion of that unity.

Intrigued as to how Palestinian unity had dissipated, as was described, I quickly came to the conclusion that the election of Mahmoud Abbas as president of the Palestinian Authority, was a primary factor, then I began to look deeper.

Although the Palestinian Authorities actions had made some impact, I discovered something else lurking behind the scenes. As I travelled from village to village, city to city, everywhere I went I saw division between grassroots organizations and feuds between activists, I saw this often hinder the results of organized demonsrations and campaigns.

After investigating the reasons behind these divisions, I found in every instance the involvement of Western activists and/or organizations.

Palestinians are often offered many things by international organizations/activists, such as celebrity status, money for their families or projects they are working on, the ability to travel to spread their message and much more, but this comes at a price.

These organizations and foreign activists, come with a particular view of how the cause has to be seen and seek to impose boundaries upon those that they promote.

If you would like money and to be highly regarded in the eyes of the many, you are forced to abide to the guidelines you are given, fearing demonization if you do not follow what they prefer you to talk about and focus your energies on.

Other Palestinian activists then often note the capitulation to the boundaries established for those aided by international organizations, this I found to be a primary instigator of infighting.

It is definitely conceivable that these organizations and activists truly believe that what they are doing, is for the good of the people they claim to advocate for. However I cannot simply believe the notion of coincidence without considering a much deeper involvement, one truly insidious in its nature.

If it was happening in one village or two, perhaps I could believe that these wealthy and well established groups were not compromised, but this was persistent throughout the West Bank, in almost every city and village I saw the same trend.

Other than causing feuds between activists and dividing grassroots organizations, the international groups are able to achieve the objective, of forcing those that they “help”, to speak only on very specific issues within occupied Palestine. When the attention is all surrounding one street, or one single instance of a human rights abuse, the wider picture is often fragmented, the wider picture being Israel’s intentions for all of Palestine.

Palestinians are never allowed to voice their opinions on a solution to what Israeli is/has been doing to them and their land, they always must assume the position of a victim, a victim that the West must step in to save. Of course when you depend upon the best friend of the occupier to save the occupied, this is a defeatist cycle.

By allowing these Western organizations – which approach the peaceful solution prospect from a Zionist point of view – to control the Palestinian grassroots organizations, it acts to muddy the water, destroying the foundations of the Palestinian movements.

I would proceed to name specific cases, activists and organizations, but I believe this would do a disservice to the purpose of this article. Rather than encouraging backlash against specific individuals, it is best that the points noted above be circulated in an effort to raise awareness.

Cliques of virtue signalers who seek to make themselves famous or wealthy off of the occupation.

As the Palestinian cause continues to gather support in the West, so does praise for those who choose to stand in solidarity with it. An alarming trend has been sparked recently, with virtue signaling activists who visit occupied Palestine, seeking to draw attention, a following and an income from their short-lived trips.

Insensitive videos have been circulated, by previously unknown activists, in which they feature with smiles on their faces, attempting a happy-go-lucky approach to reporting the horrific crimes committed against the Palestinians. With them, also come those that feel they are entitled to tell Palestinians how they should resist and deal with the occupation they face, otherwise known as the saviour complex.

To illustrate my point about these types of – so called – activists, I would like to share a personal account of my experiences whilst working for a short while with an international activist group.

During my recent visit to Palestine, spanning three months, I decided to get involved with a group called the ISM or International Solidarity Movement (in Hebron or al-Khalil). Whilst the ISM have in the past done some great work, this specific group of entitled university students I encountered, were nothing short of parasitic to the cause they claimed to stand for.

The group that I encountered at this time was five individuals who considered the Israeli firing of tear gas at Palestinian children to be an event to be joked about. This group of individuals brought with them preconceived ideals, feeling that they had a right to better comment on how Palestinians fight their externally imposed occupiers.

After my defending of a Palestinian man’s “legal and moral right” to expel the Israeli occupier with all means available, I was all but told to pack up my stuff and leave the accommodation we were staying in. Having been cast out for my differing views to my western room-mates, I was taken in by a Palestinian family who had none of the advantages of my previous companions but ten times the hospitality and respect for diverging views.

It is my position that Palestinians have every right to choose how they resist their foreign occupier, without the interference of those who claim to be in support of them. The dispute between this group and I took place at a rooftop cafe in the West Bank city of al-Khalil and consisted of them coming from a perspective that Palestinians were not as politically astute as they were.

I later discovered that this push back is a common occurrence when anyone goes against the grain of ISM’s diktat on how the Palestinian cause should be “managed”.

After speaking to many Palestinian friends – such as Iyad Burnat from the village of Bil’in and others – I got the sense that these types of activists were not all that uncommon.

I believe that talking about this issue, of activists who end up doing a great disservice to the Palestinian people, is key to making things better on the ground. One of the most powerful weapons that the Israelis can use against the Palestinians and their supporters – is division through misunderstanding, confusion and lack of education on what these organisations should be trying to achieve in solidarity with the Palestinian resistance – anything else, essentially controlled by the Zionist entity is nothing less than psychological warfare, designed to fragment support for the Palestinians.

It is imperative that we become aware of what division does to a cause that depends upon unity, therefore I wish for this article to be passed on, as a first hand experience. Palestinians often find it difficult making their voices heard, so this report comes from those that wish to communicate this point to the wider community of Palestinian human rights supporters.

Robert Inlakesh recently spent three months in various parts of the West Bank, occupied Palestine, living with Palestinian families and witnessing the crimes of the Zionist occupiers

‘Great Concern’: Chile Calls on israel to Release Ahed #Tamimi

‘Great Concern’: Chile Calls on Israel to Release Ahed Tamimi

The Palestinian Federation in Chile calls for Ahed Tamimi’s freedom: ‘Will Chile say something?’ (Photo: via Twitter)

Amid a campaign by the large local Palestinian community, the Chilean government expressed Friday its “great concern” over the case of Palestinian iconic teen Ahed Tamimi, who is being tried by an Israeli military court in secret proceedings in a case that has garnered massive international attention.

“In view of this unfortunate situation affecting a minor, the Chilean government reiterated to the representation of Israel the need for the rights of the Palestinian minor to be fully respected,” said a statement released by Chile’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

 

The statement added that the foreign ministry expressed this “great concern” to the Israeli embassy saying that the Israeli government must provide “guarantees of due process” and that the judiciary has the responsibility to properly evaluate the “the circumstances and area of tension” in which the incident took place.

The statement concluded by saying that the Chilean government “awaits the prompt release of Ahed Tamimi.”

In December Ahed was arrested and indicted on 12 charges including assaulting an Israeli soldier and throwing stones after a video of her slapping an Israeli soldier in her home’s yard went viral. It was revealed later that the Palestinian girl was upset after soldiers had shot her 14-year-old cousin in the face a day earlier.

 

The tempered statement came hours after the influential Palestinian community in Chile, which amounts to more than 200,000 people and is the biggest in the world outside of the Arab world, launched a local campaign calling for Ahed’s release.

Activists within the community began spreading posters in public roads and bus stops in major cities with the slogans “Freedom for Ahed Tamimi”.

“Tamimi’s case is one of those of more than 300 Palestinian children who are currently imprisoned in Israeli jails, deprived of their childhood and future,” Nadia Garib, the president of the Palestine Federation of Chile, said according to local media.

“As Chileans of Palestinian origin, we ask that the government of Chile to join the international campaign calling for the liberation of Tamimi and demand an end to Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territory, which has now been in full swing for more than 50 years with total impunity.”

A day earlier Chilean Senator Francisco Chahuán, who is also of Palestinian origin took to Twitter to demand action from the government.

 

“We demand the release of young Palestinian Ahed Tamimi! We ask the Foreign Ministry to join this world petition in favor of her human rights and public liberties,” he said from his Twitter account.

“She represents the heart of the Palestinian cause and the right to self-determination of the people,” he said in another tweet Friday thanking the ministry for its statement.

The teen, who turned 17 behind bars last month, has received large international attention and solidarity since her arrest as many prominent actors, artists and academics in the United States and other countries signed letters and petitions calling for her release.

(teleSUR, PC, Social Media)

Bibi and Jewish Dialectic

February 15, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

Disdain for the law and a lack of ethics are deeply entrenched within the Israeli elite and in its political leadership in particular. 

Disdain for the law and a lack of ethics are deeply entrenched within the Israeli elite and in its political leadership in particular.

By Gilad Atzmon

We learned this week that the Israeli police have  recommended indicting PM Netanyahu for bribery. Some Israeli commentators opine that this move by the Israeli police is the end of Netanyahu or at least the beginning of his end. I am not convinced that this is the case, Bibi has proved to be both resilient and resistant. In any case, Netanyahu won’t be the first Israeli politician to face trial and possible imprisonment. His predecessor Ehud Olmert was sentenced after being convicted of fraud, breach of trust, bribery and tax evasion.

Disdain for the law and a lack of ethics are deeply entrenched within the Israeli elite and in its political leadership in particular. Yet, unlike Bibi and Olmert, Moshe Katzav wasn’t really interested in mammon, bribery or fraudulent activity. When Katzav was president, it turned out that predatory sexual behaviour was his thing. He was exposed and paid the price.  On 22 March 2011, Moshe Katsav became the first former President of Israel to be sent to prison when he was sentenced to seven years with two additional years probation for rape, indecent acts, sexual harassment and obstruction of justice.

Disregard of elementary ethics, it seems, is so common in the Jewish State political universe  that Wikipedia decided to dedicate a special page to this social phenomenon titled “List of Israeli public officials convicted of crimes or misdemeanors.”

This begs the question, what is it with the Jewish State and its criminality?  Wasn’t Zionism a promise to fix the Jews, to make them productive and ethical or as an early Zionist phrased it — ‘people like all other people’?

In fact, the Zionist promise may actually explain why so many Israeli politicians have ended up behind bars or at least faced indictment. The early Zionist promise expressed a desperate Jewish wish to morph into a civilised nation, to depart from Jerusalem and bond, once and for all, with Athens.

In my latest book Being in Time – a Post Political Manifesto, I return to Leo Strauss’ realisation that while Jerusalem is the city of revelation, commandments, mitzvoth, a set of litigations that prescribes what to do and what no to do: Athens is the birth place of philosophy, ethics and aesthetics. While in Athens we think things through,  in Jerusalem  we follow “naaseh v’nishma” (Hebrew) — ‘do first, understand later.’ Jerusalem, as such, is an anti ethical sphere for in Jerusalem the ethical judgment is replaced by rigid litigation, regulation and obedience.

In Israel, no doubt we see some deep institutional criminality within the political sector. But on the other hand, the fact that Israeli public figures end up behind bars and on a routine basis suggests that the Zionist inclination to revolutionise and amend the Jew is still there. Not many states see their leaders jailed one after the other and not within the context of a coup or a radical regime change.

Zionism can be seen as an intense dialectical tension between the ‘imaginary Athens,’ that phantasy of Jewish spiritual and ethical metamorphosis, and the ‘Jerusalemite oppressive reality,’ the rigid form of Talmudic obedience, litigation and political survival subject to legal loop holes.

As far as I can tell, this dialectic doesn’t exist in the Jewish diaspora’s institutional universe. Let’s look at a few examples. Lord Greville Janner was exposed in British media as an alleged arch sex predator.  New allegations about Lord Janner keep surfacing in Britain. A closer look into Lord Janner’s timeline reveals that at the time he was allegedly engaged in multiple incidents of predatory behaviour he was the president of the Board Of Deputies of British Jews  (BOD), a body that claims to ‘represent British Jews.’ Lord Janner was practically the head of British Jews but  Lord Janner  was also the founding patron and the chair of the Holocaust Memorial Trust. To date, not one of these Jewish bodies has apologised or expressed any concern over their association with Lord Janner.

Recently we learned from the Jewish Chronicle that Jeremy Newmark, a dubious labour politician as well as an ardent Zionist was ejected from his seat as chief executive of the Jewish Community Leader after an audit revealed that he “he deceived the organisation out of tens of thousands of pounds and misled charities about the cost of projects he worked on.” The JC further revealed that the leaders of the Jewish organisation were engaged in an intensive cover up. They apparently didn’t see a duty to inform the British public that Newmark had a failure in his ethical record.

If you think that what I describe here is only a Zionist diaspora symptom I may disagree with you. JVP, Mondoweiss and other Jewish ‘anti’ Zionist organisations have been following the same Jerusalemite path, using every trick in the Hasbara book and attempting to silence critical voices that do not fit within their Judeo Centric ‘solidarity’ program. These solidarity bodies have subverted the terminology of the solidarity movement in order to eliminate the core of the Palestine plight, namely the Palestinian Right of Return.  They have employed Talmudic Herem (excommunication)  tactics against those who dared think freely or creatively (Alison WeirGreta Berlin, yours truly and even Miko Peled). Here in Britain the Jewish ‘Free of Speech on Israel’  uses the  same tactics to ensure that the discourse of the oppressed is dominated by the sensitivities of the oppressor.  Sadly,  it isn’t Athens, ethics or the universal that fuels these Jewish so called ‘progressive’ organisations, instead they are motivated by the most banal crude tribal concerns.

I guess my verdict may be disappointing to most peace lovers as it is devastating to me.

Much as many of us hate Israeli aggression and despise Zionism, it is possible that when it comes to the Jews; Israel, and its phantasmic Athenian ethos is slightly ahead of the diaspora self identified political Jews  both Zionist and the so called ‘anti.’  This may explain why the real and most profound  whistleblowers; people who contributed significantly to the understanding of the essentiality of Israel, Zionism and Jewishness have been Israelis and ex Israelis, people like Israel Shahak, Uri Avneri, Gideon Levi, Shlomo Sand,  Israel Shamir and the Palestinian Sayed Kashua.

Despite its endless list of sins, Zionism has brought to life a form of Jewish dialectics that has produced a significant body of dissent and a greater understanding of the problematic aspects of choseness in general and Jewishness in particular.

If  they wants to burn it, you want to read it …

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto

Amazon.co.uk  ,  Amazon.com  and   here  (gilad.co.uk). 

Putin’s Grand Bargain to Israel: Can Israel Digest It?

Putin’s Grand Bargain to Israel: Can Israel Digest It?

Putin’s Grand Bargain to Israel: Can Israel Digest It?

“Israel is climbing up a high horse,” Alex Fishman (the veteran Israeli Defence Correspondent) wrote in the Hebrew daily, Yedioth Ahronoth, last month, “and is approaching with giant steps a ‘war of choice’: Without mincing words, it’s an initiated war in Lebanon.” In Fishman’s article, he notes: “Classical deterrence is when you threaten an enemy not to harm you in your territory, but here, Israel demands that the enemy refrain from doing something in its own territory, otherwise Israel will harm it. From a historical perspective and from the perspective of international legitimacy, the chances of this threat being accepted as valid, leading to the cessation of enemy activities in its own territory, are slim.”

Ben Caspit also wrote about a fair prospect of a “war of choice,” whilst a Haaretz editorial – explains Professor Idan Landau in an Israeli news blog – noted: “The Israeli government therefore owes Israeli citizens a precise, pertinent and persuasive explanation as to why a missile factory in Lebanon has changed the strategic balance to the extent that it requires going to war. It must present assessments to the Israeli public as to the expected number of casualties, damage to civilian infrastructure and the economic cost of going to war, as compared with the danger that construction of the missile factory constitutes.”

We live dangerous times in the Middle East today – both in the immediate present, and in the mid-term, too.

Last week saw the first ‘game changer’ that almost plunged the region into war: the downing of one of Israel’s most sophisticated aircraft – an F16i. But as Amos Harel notes, on this occasion: “Russian President Vladimir Putin put an end to the confrontation between Israel and Iran in Syria – and both sides accepted his decision … On Saturday afternoon, after the second wave of bombardments … senior Israeli officials were still taking a militant line, and it seemed as if Jerusalem was considering further military action. Discussion of that ended not long after a phone call between Putin and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu” (emphasis added).

And that last statement represented the second ‘game changer’: In ‘good old days’, as Martin Indyk called it, it would have been to the US that Israel reflexively would have turned, but not this time. Israel asked President Putin to mediate. It seems that Israel believes that Mr Putin is now the ‘indispensable power’. And in terms of airspace in the north, he is. As Ronen Bergman wrote in the New York Times: “Israel will no longer be able to act in Syria without limitations”; and secondly, “if anyone was not yet aware of it, Russia is the dominant power in the region”.

So, what is all this about? Well for a start, it is not about a drone which may (or may not) have trespassed into what Israel calls Israel, or what Syria sees as ‘occupied Golan’. Let us ignore all that: or, think of it as ‘the butterfly wing effect’ in chaos theory, whose tiny wing changes ‘the world’, if you prefer. Ultimately however, these various warnings of impending war, precipitated out from the Syrian State’s success in defeating the jihadi insurgency mounted against it. This outcome has changed the regional balance of power – and we are witnessing states reacting to that strategic defeat.

Israel, having backed the losing side, wants to limit its losses. It fears the changes taking place across the northern tier of the region: Prime Minister Netanyahu has several times sought guarantees from President Putin that Iran and Hizbullah should not be allowed to gain any strategic advantage from Syria’s victory that might be to Israel’s disadvantage. But Putin, it seems clear, gave no guarantees. He told Netanyahu that whilst he recognised, and acknowledged Israel’s security interests, Russia had its interests, too – and also underlined that Iran was a “strategic partner” of Russia.

In practice, there is no effective Iranian or Hizbullah presence in any proximate vicinity to Israel (and indeed both Iran and Hizbullah have substantially pared their forces in Syria as a whole). But, it seems that Netanyahu wanted more: And to put leverage on Russia to guarantee a future Syria, free from any ‘Shi’a presence, Israel has been bombing Syria on almost a weekly basis, and issuing a series of war-like threats against Lebanon (on the pretext that Iran was constructing ‘sophisticated missile’ factories there), saying, in effect to President Putin, that if you do not give ironclad guarantees vis-à-vis a Syria free of Iran and Hizbullah, we will disrupt both countries.

Well, what happened is that Israel lost an F16: unexpectedly shot down by the Syrian air defences. The message is this: ‘Stability in Syria and Lebanon is a Russian interest. Whilst, we recognise Israel’s security interests, don’t mess with ours. If you want a war with Iran that is your business, and Russia will not be involved; but do not forget that Iran is, and remains our strategic partner’.

This is Putin’s Grand Bargain: Russia will assume a certain defined responsibility for Israel’s security, but not if Israel undertakes wars of choice against Iran and Hizbullah, or if it deliberately disrupts stability in the North (including Iraq). And no more gratuitous bombing raids in the north, intended to disrupt stability. But if Israel wants a war with Iran, then Russia will stand aloof.

Israel has now had a taste of President Putin’s ‘stick’: Your air superiority in the North has just been punctured by the Syrian air defences. You, Israel, will lose it completely were our Russian S400s air defences to be enabled: ‘Think it over’.

In case of doubt, consider this statement in 2017, by the Chief of Staff of the Russian Aerospace Forces, Major-General Sergey Meshcheryakov. He said: “Today, a unified, integrated air defense system has been set up in Syria. We have ensured the information and technical interlinkage of the Russian and Syrian air reconnaissance systems. All information on the situation in the air comes from Syrian radar stations to the control points of the Russian force grouping”.

Two things flow from this: First, that Russia knew exactly what was going on when the Israeli F16 met with a barrage of Syrian air defence missiles. As Alex Fishman, doyen of Israeli defence correspondents, noted (in Hebrew) Yediot Ahoronot on 11 February: “One of the [Israeli] planes was hit by the two barrages of 27 Syrian surface-to-air missiles… which is a huge achievement for the Syrian army, and embarrassing for the IAF, since the electronic warfare systems that envelope the plane were supposed to have provided protection from a barrage of missiles… The IAF is going to have to conduct an in-depth technical-intelligence inquiry to determine: are the Syrians in possession of systems that are capable of bypassing the Israeli warning and jamming systems? Have the Syrians developed a new technique that the IAF is unaware of? It was reported that the pilots did not radio in any alert that an enemy missile had locked onto their plane. In principle, they were supposed to report that. They might have been preoccupied. But there is also the more severe possibility that they were unaware of the missile that had locked onto them—which leads to the question of why they didn’t know, and only realized the severity of the damage after they had been hit and were forced to bail out.”

And the second: that subsequent Israeli claims that Syria was then punished by Israel through the destruction of 50% of her air defence system should be taken with a big pinch of salt. Recall what Meshcheryakov said: It was a fully integrated, unified Russian-Syrian system, which is to say it had a Russian flag flying over it. (And this initial Israeli claim has now been back-peddled by the IDF spokesman; see here).

Finally, Putin, in the wake of the F16 downing, told Israel to stop destabilising Syria. He said nothing about Syria’s drone patrolling the southern border (a regular Syrian practice for monitoring insurgent groups in the south).

The message is clear: Israel gets Russia’s limited security guarantees, but loses its freedom of action. Without air domination (which Russia already has seized), the assumed superiority over its neighbouring Arab states – which Israel long since has folded into its collective psyche – will see Israel’s wings clipped.

Can such a bargain be digested culturally in Israel? We must wait to see whether Israel’s leaders accept that they no longer enjoy air superiority over Lebanon or Syria; or whether, as the Israeli commentators warn in our introductory quotes, the Israeli political leadership will opt for a ‘war of choice’, in an attempt to pre-empt Israel’s final loss of its domination of the skies. There is, of course, a further option of running to Washington, in order to try to co-opt America into adopting the eviction of Iran from Syria – but our guess is that Putin has already quietly squared Trump with his plan beforehand. Who knows?

And would then a preventive war to try recuperate Israeli air superiority be feasible or realistic from the perspective of the Israeli Defence Forces? It’s a moot point. A third of Israelis are culturally, and ethnically, Russian, and many admire President Putin. Also, could Israel count, in such circumstances, on Russia not using its own highly sophisticated S400 air-defence missiles, stationed in Syria, in order to protect Russian servicemen stationed across Syria?

And the Israeli-Syrian-Lebanese tensions, in themselves, do not bring an end to the present clutch of risks associated with Syria. On the same weekend, Turkey lost a helicopter and its two crew, brought down by Kurdish forces in Afrin. Sentiment in Turkey against the YPG and PKK is heating up; nationalism and New Ottomanism is spiking; and America is being angrily portrayed as Turkey’s “strategic enemy”. President Erdogan asserts forcefully that Turkish forces will clear all the YPG/PKK forces from Afrin to the Euphrates, but an American general says that American troops will not budge from blocking Erdogan’s route, midway – at Manbij. Who will blink first? And, can this escalation continue without a major rupture to Turkish-US relations? (Erdogan has already noted that America’s defense budget for 2019 includes an allocation of $550 million for the YPG. What exactly does Americamean by that provision?).

Also, can a US military leadership, concerned to play-out a re-make of the Vietnam war – but with America winning this time (to show that the Vietnam outcome was a wholly unmerited defeat for the US forces) – accept to pull back from its aggressively imposed occupation of Syria, east of the Euphrates, and thus lose further credibility? Particularly when restoring US military credibility and leverage is the very mantra of the White House generals (and Trump)? Or, will the pursuit of US military ‘credibility’ degenerate into a game of ‘chicken’, mounted by US forces versus the Syrian Armed Forces – or even with Russia itself, which views the US occupation in Syria as inherently disturbing to the regional stability which Russia is trying to establish.

The ‘big picture’ competition between states for the future of Syria (and the region) – is open and visible. But who lay behind these other provocations, which could equally have led to escalation, and quite easily slipped the region towards conflict? Who provided the man portable surface-to-air missile that brought down the Russian SU25 fighter – and which ended, with the pilot, surrounded by jihadists, courageously preferring to kill himself with his own grenade, rather than be taken alive? Who ‘facilitated’ the insurgent group which fired the manpad? Who armed the Afrin Kurds with sophisticated anti-tank weapons (that have destroyed some twenty Turkish tanks)? Who provided the millions of dollars to engineer the tunnels and bunkers built by the Afrin Kurds, and who paid for the kitting out of its armed force?

And who was behind the swarm of drones, with explosives attached, sent to attack the main Russian airbase at Khmeimim? The drones were made to look outwardly like some simple home-made affair, which an insurgent force might cobble together, but since Russian electronic measures managed to take control and land six of them, the Russians were able to see that,internally, they were quite different: They contained sophisticated electronic counter-measures and GPS guidance systems within. In short, the rustic external was camouflage to its true sophistication, which likely represented the handiwork of a state agency. Who? Why? Was someone trying to set Russia and Turkey at each other’s throats?

We do not know. But it is plain enough that Syria is the crucible to powerful destructive forces which might advertently, or inadvertently, ignite Syria – and – potentially, the Middle East. And as the Israeli defence correspondent, Amos Harel, wrote, we have already this last weekend, “come a hair’s breadth from a slide into war”.

%d bloggers like this: