A History Lesson: What ISIS Learned from IRGUN

“When the history of the first half of this (20th) century comes to be written—properly written—it will be acknowledged the most stupid and brutal in the history of civilization.” (Sir Thomas Beecham).

Imbedded in Sir Thomas Beecham’s observation is an assumption, if you will, that civilizations advance, that humankind progresses in time to higher levels of intelligence as we shed ancient superstitions that locked our ancestors into barbaric acts, that our creativeness in application of scientific knowledge improves the human condition, perhaps even, that as time passes, we grasp the one underlying reality of human advancement that will truly fulfill that assumption, all are one in a shared universe or we all are doomed. We have been witness in this new century to ancient superstitions committing barbaric acts as hooded hangmen of old decapitate a fellow human, fulfilling in the act a vengeful retaliation against their perceived enemy. We like to think that this is a retrograde act retreating to an inferior state of centuries past making it easy to condemn as both barbaric and uncivilized. But it is not so.

There is an unstated corollary imbedded in Beecham’s quote that explains his note—“properly written”–; unless the historian accounts for the hidden truth, that omitted from the “accepted” lists of contemporary civilizations, the omitted truth, the controlled truth, the truth allowed by those in power, then the citizen’s perception will be guided by ignorance determined by forces beyond her or his control. The appearance of the advanced civilized society is often just that, an appearance dressed to fashion intellectual advancement wrapped in the perceived splendor of modern progress: business class in international travel, Vogue fashion in business suits for the businessman and the businesswomen, the estate homes attainable because of this perceived advanced excellence–the dress of advancement not the reality of its being.

Why then in our advanced intellectual state do we shrink from the ISIS marketer who inflames the Western mind by recreating the vengeful retaliation of centuries past? What the marketer knows is the power behind the message—the horrifying image executed by an unknown assailant immune to justice. It is an act perpetrated by unconstrained aggression defying the “advanced” civilizations political and legalistic systems that are the perception of our accomplishments and achievements. It is as well the expression, the arrogant, blatant expression that knows it can act in full defiance of the West and its imposed control over the states of the mid-East. Finally, and most horribly, it is learned, learned imitation of terrorist acts used by the ruthless “gangs” that forced the British Mandate to leave Palestine because they realized that no reasoning, no logic, no appeal to civilized behavior, no expression of concern for the plight of the Jews destroyed by Nazi Germany would deter the Irgun, the Stern and the Haganah “rebel” terrorist forces from killing at will British Mandate Police and Soldiers.

Terrorism with a Vengeance:

Sixty four years ago in the middle of the 20th century, ten years short of the Biblical age granted to each of us, “civilized” men cemented their clandestine bands of hundreds and thousands to bring Israel into existence regardless of the consequences to those in authority or those resident in Palestine. Both the Haganah and the Irgun imposed such oaths that in an intellectual liposuction removed the individual’s conscience and made that person a robot of the “gang” (see Marton, Kati. A Death in Jerusalem. for Irgun oath, 44; and for the Haganah oath see Cook. The Plight of the Palestinians. Catling, Appendix XVIA.157. 19).

These gangs struck when they determined to strike, at times they determined, by methods they designed. No policeman, no soldier, no Arab, no resident in Palestine knew who might be a target or where their execution might take place; fear rode rampant across the land. The British authorities had no such freedom of movement or of execution of desired ends. They were helpless against the utter and savage ruthlessness of these terrorists. Daily, news clips carried stories of policemen and soldiers assassinated, bridges bombed, roads destroyed, trains derailed and robbed, infrastructures made inoperable. The list is endless; but descriptions of things destroyed does not do justice to the mercilessness of their acts. It is in the details that we see what ISIS learned.

Two examples should suffice. In 1947 the Stern gang attacked and wrecked a train carrying civilians and troops “near Rehovoth and then calmly machine gunned the survivors” (A Job Well Done 309). This was followed by an attack by the Irgun terrorists on the Acre prison in May, a prison that housed 460 Arabs and 163 Jews, all convicted of crimes of violence. 41 Jews escaped and were given arms as they fled the prison. The gang had mined roads leading out of Acre and mortared the 2nd Battalion Parachute Regiment to deter capture. Most of the Jews in the prison were members of the Irgun and Stern gangs some under sentence of the courts.

The brazenness of these acts graphically illustrates the ruthlessness of the Stern forces, a total disregard for innocent life and a disregard for law in a refusal to let the legal system operate. The calm machine gunning of the survivors, unable to protect themselves in the wreckage of the train, defines the warped mind of those obedient to Stern’s irrational mindless behavior if judgment of sanity is based on awareness of one’s fellow humans. Remember, these men had no right to commit themselves to such destruction and deny and defy the structures others had put in place but the arrogance of belief in their righteous cause that erased the rights of all whether child, mother, wife, daughter, husband, father or son.

Several of the attackers were killed by the British and three arrested: Yaakov Weiss, Meir Nakar, and Haviv Avshalom. Following their day in court, they were sentenced to death; they were hanged.

“As soon as the sentences were proclaimed, the Irgun seized two British army sergeants, named (Marvin) Paice and (Clifford) Martin, whom they held captive with threats of execution if the judicial sentences were carried out. The three terrorists were hanged on 29th July and the following day the bodies of Paice and Martin were discovered hanging from a eucalyptus tree in a government owned grove near Nathanya. When Captain D. H. Galatti of the Royal Engineers went to cut down one of the bodies, a mine exploded on the ground from which the officer was wounded in the face and shoulder. The body was blown to pieces. It was then that the whole area was found to be booby trapped. It was later discovered that both bodies had been hanging for two days prior to the discovery and may have been murdered before the judicial hangings were carried out” (Horne, A Job Well Done 311).

Once again the brutality of the Stern and Irgun forces reveals itself as they arbitrarily kidnap two innocent men in khaki casual dress visiting a café, but known to them as soldiers willing to talk to Jews about British activities, yet two that had nothing to do with the events described above. They were expendable humans to wreak Irgun vengeful retaliation on the Mandate government for daring to kill a Jew, guilty or not. They alone should determine guilt not their proclaimed enemy, the British government. But the barbaric action goes deeper; not only grab two innocents but booby trap their bodies so that those sent to the scene might be blown up or those who, in mercy and sorrow, help bring their hanged and mutilated bodies down from this place of silent fruit die as well in their very act of mercy. No compassion here, no concern for the weeping of the living or the dignity of the dead, no love for their fellow man, nothing but selfish pride and destructive ego to salve their soul if soul they have.

Who led these terrorists? Menachem Begin, a future Israeli Prime Minister and a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize together with Egypt’s Anwar Sadat. Begin confessed in an interview that his decision to hang the two sergeants was a “cruel revenge” against the British authorities; two words to bury beside Paice and Martin to salve the sorrow of their parents and family (Ofer Aderet, Aug. 7, 2012. Haaretz).

Rule of Law or Defiance:

The Mandate Police in Palestine originally served as Constables for the Palestine Government’s High Commissioner in the towns and villages of the Mandate as designated by His Majesty’s Government under authorization of the League of Nations and later the United Nations. As events evolved during the 1940s the Police took on a para-military role necessitated by the terrorism engulfing them. His Majesty’s Government established a Military Court System to ensure justice in Palestine, an equitable system that applied to Arabs, Jews and the British citizen resident in Palestine. It is a system we expect to exist in a civilized state: an individual is charged with a crime, evidence is gathered and shared with the defense, a trial is held, a judgment made, and punishment imposed or freedom from punishment established. It is recognition of a person’s inherent rights; in England such rights were granted to the people of England by King John in 1215.

The above two paragraphs establish the dilemma of the “western civilized” society against the ancient tribal society that ruled by fiat. Here is the oath the Irgun “gang” member took when he cemented his allegiance to the Irgun Zvat Leumi (fighters for the freedom of Israel): “I do solemnly swear full allegiance to the Irgun Zvat Leumi, and to its commander, to its goal, and its aims, and I am ready to make every sacrifice even of my life, giving first preference at all times to the Irgun, above my parents, my brothers, my sisters, my family…until we achieve a sovereign Israel. So help me, God” (see Morton 44). This is a commitment of life to an idea embodied in a commander right or wrong without regard for any other living being’s rights. Perhaps it’s appropriate to quote here from the leader of the Stern ‘Gang,” Avraham Stern, whose beliefs determined the actions of those who obeyed his strange conception of the place of Israel in the affairs of the world: “We are struck with the madness for kingdom (not democracy I would note)…the Jewish people are unlike any other people…Their country is the Land of Israel, with its frontiers as promised Abraham in the Bible—stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates” (as quoted by Morton 57). Stern, when caught by the British Police and soldiers in February 1942, was shot as he tried to escape. Ironically in light of today’s condemnation of Islamic martyrdom, he became a martyr for the Zionist cause, Olei Hagardom, and celebrated as such (Ofer Aderet. “The ‘cruel revenge’ that helped drive the British out of Palestine.” Haaretz 8/7/2012).

Considered in light of today’s “advancement” in civilization to recognition of individual rights, the significance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the blind obedience of the Irgun terrorists to their idea of Israel’s “freedom” as the only right, determined by them as the only right, and to the Stern gangs’ commitment to his “kingdom” determined by his God as written by Moses (perhaps) of land given to the “seed” of the Jews, and to the absoluteness of the Haganah oath on all its followers, the British acceptance of a state ruled by law is anathema, an impediment to be destroyed at all costs by whatever means necessary to carry it out. There is no law but their law, no rights but their rights, no obligation to any but their own. Theirs is the Jewish State of Eretz Israel, the forerunner of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

Now consider the dominant issues incased in this confrontation: to the terrorists, Britain’s control of Palestine is control by a foreign power on its rightful owners the Jews (strangely they did not consider themselves foreigners). The confrontation is one of ideologies: rule of law as determined by the League of Nations and subsequently by the United Nations with the UN Conventions, Declarations and Accords as accepted by that organization’s members versus a tribal kingdom or in the case of ISIS a Caliphate, rules imposed by fiat from above. In either case the progress of civilized society as determined by the West is not seen as progress by these two opposing forces; rather they find rule by the west to be weak lacking assertiveness, absoluteness in determining obedience to behavior, an absence of beliefs since all are tolerated and none imposed on all. They also see the system of laws and the establishment of the jury system as curtailing the power of the state to aggressively pursue its ends when its right to rule should be and must be unquestioned.

What ISIS Learned:

ISIS knows now how to act. Each and every recruit must commit himself to the cause of the Caliphate or face the threat of death. Because their crusade is one of absolute belief, there are no exceptions to the rule of the Commanders who determine the enemy, the behavior, and the means to accomplish their end. They also determine how to present the power they assume to their enemy through graphic visuals that create shock and awe, not unlike Donald Rumsfeld’s use of that phrase in the American attacks on the innocent people of Baghdad. Consider that America’s occupation and oppression of the Iraqi people, its devastation of Afghanistan and its cooperative destruction with the Israelis of Palestinians have made it a contemporary image of the British Mandate Government’s occupation of Palestine, the land that belongs to the Jews as Begin, Stern and Ben Gurion believed absolutely. There are no democratic concerns here for the rights of individuals any more than there was for the rights of Paice and Martin or the civilians or troops on the train. This is a land into which one is born regardless of individual beliefs; it is a place of unquestioned faith and allegiance. It is not a place of tolerance, yet to achieve its ends it will testify the opposite.

Today the reality that created the state of Israel from the intellectual loins of fanatics offers us an opportunity to understand a critical political issue confronting the nations of the mid-East and indeed the nations that comprise the United Nations. The existence of ISIS appears on the surface to be a new phenomenon; it is not. It arises from smoldering emotions resident in thousands of Arabic people who have endured decades of Western colonialism and humiliation as the West found in the natural resources of Arab lands the oil needed to fuel their economic machine. That was a right the West accepted as a right of might. At first it was done by physical presence of forces in the countries colonized; then it was done by controlling the Princes or dictators that governed the areas. Always it was done on the backs of the people.

To confront this oppression requires something other than military force. That force is visible in the years following 1939 in Palestine and it is rising from the ashes of the countries devastated by the United States and its “state” in the mid-East, Israel. Prior to 1948 and the “Declaration of Independence” of a new Nation in Palestine, the United States did not appear in the Arab countries as a Colonizer, a nation that threatened their existence or way of life. Once Israel was established, once its aggression began to glow on the sand dunes of Palestine, then the Sinai, then in Lebanon, and in Syria, once it became obvious that Israel is a different place with a different agenda, or as Ariel Sharon famously stated, “We don’t worry about America, we run America and America knows it,” then the people realized they were under the control of the greatest military machine ever devised run by a mentality totally different from their own.

ISIS is a threat to JSEI precisely because it is driven by the same deep rooted beliefs that drove the moderates of Zionism to accept the absolutism of their god given right to another’s land after thousands of years of absence. In the process they forced the British Government to abandon its attempt to control the absolute power that resides in personal commitment to a force that has chosen them to do His will. Before the British Government issued a “White Paper” with restrictions on the importation of Jewish immigrants into Palestine in 1939, there were Zionists who accepted a slow and steady importation of Jews to live beside those who already lived there. Indeed the Jewish Agency initially acted in such a way, cooperating with the Mandate Government in the importation and settlement of new immigrants from European countries. From 1939, the fanatical forces of the Irgun and Stern and Haganah, impatient to create their own rightful state, issued in a reign of terror that by 1946 made Palestine uncontrollable because rule by law must give way to rule by unrestrained belief. Consequently, the Jewish Agency was forced to accept the “reality on the ground,” the existence of terroristic acts against the British government or condemn and betray their fellow Jews who were “fighting for the freedom of Israel.” They chose to “condemn” but never betray.

Deceit as Strategy:

In a Telegram from the British Secretary of State on May 11, 1946 to the High Commissioner for Palestine, marked “No. 2131, Secret. Important,” the following appears:

“…Following is text of statement to be made by Colonial Secretary in the House of Commons. BEGINS:

The government recently had conversations with the representatives of the Jewish Agency on serious state of affairs in Palestine and the possibility of reducing the present tension. These conversations were reported by the Agency representatives to the Inner Zionist Council meeting in Palestine on October 29th. One of the resolutions subsequently issued by that body was in the following terms:

‘The Inner Zionist Council declares that the Zionist Movement has always rejected and continues to reject terrorist bloodshed as an instrument of political struggle. The banner of Zionism must be pure and enbesmirched (sic). The Inner Zionist Council denounces without reservation bloodshed by groups of terrorists who defy national discipline and thereby place themselves outside the ranks of the organized community. These deeds defile the struggle of the Jewish people and distort its character; they strengthen the hands of the opponents of Zionism and the enemies of the Jewish people. Council calls upon the Yishuv to isolate these groups and to deny them all endorsement support and assistance.’

…In view of the condemnation of terrorism embodied in the resolution announced at the meeting on October 29th by the Inner Zionist Council which is accepted as an earnest intention of the Jewish Agency and of the representatives of the Jewish institutions in attempting to dissociate themselves entirely from the campaign of violence and to do their utmost to root out this evil His Majesty’s Government have concurred in the release by Palestine authorities of the detained Jewish leaders. (from documents copied by this writer from the files of High Commissioner Alan Cunningham at St. Antony’s Middle East Center archives in October 2014).

The release of the Jewish leaders changed nothing on the ground. Terrorism continued yet the Agency did nothing to quell it. Indeed it could not since it was the organizing force of the Jewish resistance against the Mandate. The evidence for this rests in files in the Rhodes House archives and corroborated by recent evidence gained from the British Archives and the Middle East Center at Oxford. The point we are emphasizing here is the total commitment of the Jewish Agency to the cause of creating the state of Israel regardless of the political and moral consequences of that goal. Knowing this is effective strategy against standard Western states provides ISIS an historical reality that worked. The ensuing paragraphs are taken from the Introduction of The Plight of the Palestinians and establishes the facts that brought about the demise of the mandate and the rise of the Jewish State of Eretz Israel.

Deceive the Benefactor:

Nothing makes more obvious the reality and meaning of the “Zionist Juggernaut” than Sir Richard C. Catling’s TOP SECRET “Memorandum of the Criminal Investigation Division” of July 31, 1947, a three inch thick file filled with seized Jewish organization documents collated to provide evidence on each of the sections detailed in the cover report of 43 pages.

The purpose of this memorandum is to furnish documentary evidence of the extent to which the supreme Jewish national institutions in Palestine and their principal officials have been parties to acts of sedition, violence, incitement and other offences against the laws of Palestine….The bulk of the memorandum concerns the war and post war years….The trends which thenceforth led up to serious outbreaks of active resistance towards the end of 1945 and early 1946 are well known and the memorandum will therefore concern itself solely with an attempt to establish the links between the supreme Jewish bodies and illegal activity…(Memorandum 1-2)

Catling’s memorandum begins with an understanding of the “intricate Jewish political, social and economic structure in Palestine.” A series of appendices chart these structures marking in passing that “…the Palestine Royal Commission Report of 1937 understood ‘The Agency is obviously not a ‘governing body’; it can only advise and cooperate in a certain wide field.’ But allied as it is with the Vaad Leumi, and commanding the allegiance of the great majority of the Jews in Palestine, it unquestionably exercises, both in Jerusalem and in London, a considerable influence on the conduct of government.” Catling’s frustration with the actual control of the Jews over British policy in Palestine glares through this document. “This powerful and efficient organization amounts, in fact, to a government existing side by side with the Mandatory Government…” (2-3) [emphasis mine].

What Catling doesn’t state in that sentence, but what he demonstrates in the memorandum, is that the Jewish Agency and its affiliated organizations are at war with the UN authority in Palestine, the British Mandate Palestine Government. The appendices include detailed information on the personnel in interlocking Jewish organizations and the function of each noting specifically the presence of leading Jewish personalities. Special emphasis is given to the power of the Mapai (Palestine Labor Party) as it controls key executive positions so that it in effect controls the Yishuv and directs its policies. “Ben Gurion stated, ‘In a Jewish Community of some 600,000 there are more than 170,000 organized workers, men and women…’ Evidence will show how these organized workers are penalized if they dare to oppose the arbitrary commands of the national institutions” (4) [emphasis mine]. The British Mandate Government had long suspected that the subversive activities against the Palestine Government were not the sole responsibility of the “gangs,” like the resistance groups, the National Military Organization and the Stern Group. With the evidence provided in this memorandum it became obvious that the “Jewish national institutions, or (by) groups of their officials (who) have placed the legally constituted framework and organs of these bodies at the discreet disposal of the para-military organization, ‘Irgun Haganna’.”

The memorandum goes further. It notes that the activities of the Jewish Agency through its controlled organizations send emissaries and instructors abroad “to stir up Zionist sentiments among the Jewish communities and displaced persons, to bring pressure to bear upon the Palestine problem, to organize illegal immigration and engage in espionage.” As a result of its investigations, the Division itemizes six areas of subversive activities undertaken by the Jewish Agency against the British Mandate Government:

  1. Maintenance of a secret army and espionage system;
  2. Smuggling, theft and manufacture of arms;
  3. Illegal immigration;
  4. Violence and civil disobedience;
  5. Seditious and hostile propaganda;
  6. Encroachment upon the civil rights of Jewish citizens (5).

In short, the Zionist controlled Jewish Agency, the Yishuv, actively undermined the legal authority in Palestine even as it operated to undermine support for that government in Britain, placing UK forces in harms way as they attempted to fulfill their authorized responsibilities in Palestine. It also demonstrates the determination of the Agency’s leadership in undermining the very nation that gave it a means of establishing a “homeland” in Palestine through the Balfour Declaration. Needless to say, Catling and his CID forces recognized the impossible position this defiance placed them in and understood the deception and violent means used by the Zionists to ensure that their will and theirs alone would be fulfilled at any cost. On page 74 of the appendices, this assertion by the unnamed Head of Command, The Jewish Resistance Movement, March 25, 1946, establishes the reality of this point:

But if the solution (i.e. that Britain would not repeal the White Paper) is anti-Zionist, our resistance will continue, spread and increase in vigour. …There are precepts in Jewish ethics which oblige a man to be killed rather than trespass. The precept of defence of our national existence is at the head of these. We shall not trespass. …Our resistance is liable to result in the creation of a new problem in this country – the British problem, the problem of British security in Palestine, and this problem will be resolved only by the Zionist solution. It would be better if the Zionist solution were proclaimed in recognition of the world Jewish problem and the justice of our work in Palestine. We do not threaten. We only wish you to know our intentions clearly.

The chutzpah represented by this statement, that in effect declares open war against the Mandate Government, receives confirmation in the following words from page 75:

We shall not accept the status of a minority in our own land, whether the minority is 33% or 49%. …We shall not accept a symbolic independence in a dwarflike token state which will not give us the chance of developing all the resources of the country and creating here a safe asylum for all Jews who are compelled or wish to come (75). … In all the crises of the past and until today, the Arabs have always acquiesced in the facts we have created here and have expressed their opposition only to the creation of a new state of affairs. If they were to be faced now with the fait accompli of the Jewish State, they will at length acquiesce in that too (76).

Recognize the absoluteness of these comments: “resistance will continue,” “result in the creation of a new problem – the British problem,” “the problem of British security in Palestine,” “this problem will only be resolved by the Zionist solution,” “our land,” “developing all the resources of the country, “Arabs have always acquiesced in the facts we have created,” and “they will … acquiesce in that too.” There is no alternative but the total takeover of the land of Palestine regardless of the existence of an indigenous people or an existing government.

It is not the purpose of this paper to provide all the particulars of the CID Memorandum, but it is important to provide an understanding of what these papers reveal about the conditions that existed from 1941- 1948 as the mandate Government had to contend with the terrorism of the Jews in Palestine. What they reveal is a Zionist mindset that has a pre-determined intent of full acquisition of the land of Palestine regardless of the Balfour Declaration intent, the British Mandate Government’s responsibilities as the authorized government until May of 1948, Resolution 181 as it set borders by partitioning Palestine for two peoples, or the rights of the indigenous population to their homes and villages. These papers also provide insight into the processes used by the Zionists to gain their ends including violence, civil disobedience, seditious acts, deception, and encroachment on civil and human rights of Jews and Palestinians.

Armageddon:

There is an irony growing out of this conundrum: ISIS in Syria borders the Israeli state; the Islamic State as envisioned by ISIS includes areas designated for Eretz Israel. A battle of beliefs looms in the mid-East with both sides committed to their respective god given lands, both driven by fanatical believers in the righteousness of their cause, both determined to prevent the other from succeeding. Sir Thomas Beecham’s woeful observation condemning the twentieth century to the doldrums of stupidity and barbarity might well be trumped by the stupidity and barbarity of the 21st century as predicted in the superstitious books of the old and new testaments with the forces of Satan in the guise of Jehovah, the god of war, battling it out with Saklas, the god of mindlessness, Jehovah’s other self, in the Valley of Migeddo.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

The Mindlessness of a Manifesto

WILLIAM COOK JULY 12, 2014

Today’s invasion of Gaza is but a repetition of Israel’s savagery under Sharon and Olmert; I’ve written about this before. How horrible that we must revisit such horror! All I can do is to reassert what was true in Rafah, Jenin, Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine again and again and again since 1947 and ’48.

 

by Prof. William A Cook

 

"Why the World Needs America?" Robert Kagan

“A liberal world order, like any world order, is something that is imposed, and as much as we in the West might wish it to be imposed by superior virtue, it is generally imposed by superior power” (“Superpowers Don’t Get to Retire: What Our Tired Country Still Owes the World,” Robert Kagan, Brookings Institute. May 26, 2014).

This sentence from Kagan’s Neo-Conservative Manifesto reads like so much flotsam in a cesspool of scattered feces. It emanates from a mindless, bloated root chakra that has abandoned all except instinctive self-survival. It is deficient in understanding and wisdom, a mind surviving in an isolated tribe, a being guided only by fear of everlasting victimhood. How does one read this flotsam?

We don’t need to read it, we are witnessing its last throes today in Gaza as the consequences of neo-conservative “superior power” unfurls before the world once again and the desperation of neo-conservative idiocy splashes over the screen for the world to witness.

What is it that we witness? Israel garbed in the armor of the American flag, fielding America’s weapons of mass destruction, protected by the investment of the American taxpayer in the “iron dome,” and marching with the impunity that comes from America’s veto of censure, reveals to the world two nations that willingly impose their “superior power” on a defenseless people displaying in the enormity of their invasion unleashed evil without compassion, without mercy, without sense, a mindless act of uncivil barbarity no different than that displayed by the Mongols or Visigoths of ancient days.

Kagan’s is a simple sentence, “A world order is imposed by superior power.” It does not advance by justice, it mocks justice; it does not consider morality, it laughs at morality; it does not reflect rights of people anywhere, just its rights; it is the rule of those who can and who do not care to care for any but self; it is ruled by a pathological fear engendered by victimhood because they know their own power rests on the destruction of others and hence on the fear that they will infect their victims with the same loathsome mentality that guides them. What is a “liberal” world order if its actions abandon all human capacity to seek justice in favor of “power,” to rule without inclusiveness of those ruled, to slaughter without civilized due process? What is it but barbarianism. Why consider “superior virtue” when it only obstructs conquest? Besides, whose “superior virtue” are we to follow? Why get embroiled in arguments; power alone is the determiner of virtue. It’s all so easy, so sensible at least to the few who impose their will.

Peres, Sharon OlmertToday’s invasion of Gaza is but a repetition of Israel’s savagery under Sharon and Olmert; I’ve written about this before. How horrible that we must revisit such horror! All I can do is to reassert what was true in Rafah, Jenin, Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine again and again and again since 1947 and ’48.

“Evil knows no morality; it savors no regard for the weak or oppressed; it admits no rights but those it imposes; it condemns those who dissent without regard for evidence or truth; it denies all wrongdoing since its actions alone determine right; it feels no shame; it accepts no blame; it pleads innocence, seeks to cloak itself in the victim’s stripes, and curses those who condemn its crimes.

Franz Kafka presented a vicious portrayal of such a country in “The Penal Colony.”Considered as a metaphor for Israel today, ironically since Kafka wrote from the vantage point of being a Jew, the “Officer” and executioner delighted in describing the virtues of his state’s torture machine as it inscribed on the victim’s skin his crime, and in the duration of its agonizing process the victim learned what he was guilty of, though, until that moment of recognition as the steel spikes carved his sentence on his back, he had never been charged with a crime. Kafka knew the consequences of being a Jew in a world without compassion (even before the state of Israel declared its “independence.” )

Thus it is in today’s Israel; the state, in the figure of its Prime Ministers, determines what is right, what is a crime, and who is guilty; there is no need for due rights whether of an individual or a state like (Lebanon) or the people of Palestine. Israel alone determines what terrorism is, it alone defies international law and the UN resolutions with impunity, it alone chooses the words that will describe its actions determining for the world community how it is to understand Israel’s actions. And so it is in the Penal Colony. All live in fear of the executioner, both the colonists and the occupied. So long as that fear can be maintained, so long can the Colony survive under its brutal regime. But time catches up with the Penal Colony. An outsider is brought in to witness how it operates and how it executes its “civilized” approach to management of the colony. The witness listens to the detailed explanation of the Officer as he justifies the policies and procedures of the Penal Colony, but he marks the Medieval and barbaric reality of the colony and its treatment of its citizens and those it condemns to execution. (Today we are the outsider who witnesses the executioner at work).

Kafka notes with remarkable insight and wisdom that the state will not change until it accepts its own guilt, until it comprehends that its behavior rests on principles that are corrosive to human kind, blind to the reality of human equality, and self-destructive because built on superstition and fear. Once that recognition comes, the Officer and executioner mounts the torture machine and straps himself in its bed. And as the machine begins to run, the witness watches the spikes inscribe the sentence on his back, “Be Just.”

Evil exists in the delusion that grows from ignorance and alienation, necessary ingredients in a state of “demonocracy.” Peace is possible when openness proliferates and people remove the barriers that isolate and separate them from each other” (Cook, “Desire, Fulfillment and Regret, 2006.” Decade of Deceit).

Will we ever learn from the past? Will Kagan ever grasp that he speaks only to his own, the exclusive fraternity that can for a time impose what it will as it destroys families across the mid-east in the Neo-Conservative design to redraw the ground on which they walk and live? Will they ever understand the intensity of grief that comes from such a mindset devoid of human sympathy for those who huddle behind walls as the missiles fall? Perhaps Conrad’s unembellished prose tells it simply without gloss, just straight forward truth:

“They were conquerors, and for that you want only brute force nothing to boast of, when you have it, since your strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others. They grabbed what they could get for the sake of what was to be got. It was just robbery with violence, aggravated murder on a great scale, and men going at it blind as it is very proper for those who tackle the darkness. The conquest of the earth, which mostly means taking it away from those who have a different complexion or slightly flatter noses than ourselves (or hide in a self declared grouping ‘we in the West’), is not a pretty thing when you look at it too much…”

Today it is the Neo-Cons as conquerors, mostly Ashkenazi Jews from the ancient Khazar empire whose nobility converted to Judaism in the 800s, who find solace in survival at the expense of others, a motivation nourished in the root chakra that thrives on instinct embedded in possessiveness, devoid of the chakras that seek communion with the whole being and accommodation of all in a shared universe. It is but a matter of time before their strength diminishes and the strength of others conquerors them.

Where is the proffered peace promised 65 years ago when the state of Israel declared its independence? Where is the touted democracy, the only true democracy in the mid-east that resorts to “superior power” to control the people of Palestine whose land they have stolen? Where is the obligation to abide by international law signed before the world in its acceptance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the conventions of the Unite Nations?

What then does the word “liberal” mean?

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

The Hounds of War: a Dedication to Our Leaders

By William A. Cook

Saturday, 28 June 2014 14:37

Bill Kristol

Each morning we wake to the rabid wail of old defeated warriors, now no longer in halls of power, who prowl the studios of our infotainment industry and the commercial temples of our ministers of war to yelp and whine one last time before they succumb to the inevitable: a feast for maggots. How sad to witness that ancient soldier, Senator John McCain, shuffle before the cameras, one last glorious moment before the klieg lights finally go out, saliva dripping from his lips in curdled drops—“more war!, more war!, more war!”

How ironic to hear our former snarling Vice President, Dick Cheney, risen from the dead with a new heart, yet oblivious to the suffering and destruction he brought to the world, growl again for “more war! more war! more war!” How ignominious for Paul Wolfowitz to crawl from his cave to tell the American people to finish what he had brought to Iraq, a blessed democracy welcomed with flowers from the people there, his glorious little war that would be paid for by Iraqi oil profits.

How repugnant to watch Bill Kristol grovel before those he urged into war, not the dead soldiers or the dead Iraqis who suffered his disastrous thoughts turned into reality, but those he deceived into believing this was a war America should have fought only to realize it was built on deception and lies, all hidden as necessary for America’s security when in fact it was a war of proxy for his true country, Israel. How demented these hounds of war, defending the indefensible, blaming those who defied them, the brilliant intellects that strike hard the word processing keys as they sit in air conditioned offices surrounded by award plaques given to their brilliance by AIPAC and PNAC, and all the other think tank clones that keep wars going ensuring an incestuous birthing of rapid, deceitful, boastful articles to manage public opinion to their will.

For eight years I lived their lies as they, unelected, self-proclaimed experts on America and her future, crafted the foreign policy of this nation, turning it into a lawless state devoted to preemptive strikes, extrajudicial executions, torture and mass death for the people of the mid-east. During those eight years I wrote hundreds of articles attempting to clarify their deception. I have been gathering that material into a new book devoted to this destructive crew that hijacked the United States, and would you believe they have arisen from the slough of lies into which they were pushed by a world sick of their arrogance and hubris attempting yet again to befuddle thinking people into believing that they were right. Their very existence it appears depends on unending war; it is their identity without which they do not exist.

With that said, let me introduce you to An Age of Fools, the title of my new work, as it seems their hubris has forced it to be exposed before it is published. I’ll give a few passages from the Prologue followed by a soliloquy that seeks an answer to why, why “Men of War”?

An Age of Fools offers a record of the first decade of the 21st century as the newly appointed administration of George W. Bush entered the White House and inaugurated a decade of deceit and destruction that catapulted the United States into a totalitarian dictatorship that ravaged the world at will. It is not an historical study, nor is it a journalistic record, nor a study devoted to military strategies for world dominance. It is rather a literary record captured in poems, poetry, plays and polemics drawing upon the tools of the artist, reflecting therefore the attitude, the mindset and the devotion of those who record and archive the behavior of humans as they live out the values and virtues, aspirations and dreams, and desires of all who lived through these years as the perpetrators or the victims of those who ruled.

Over 500 years ago as Columbus bumbled his way to the “new” world, Sebastian Brant published broadsides describing recent events, often in satiric lampoons barbed with his personal philosophy, often with political significance, to enlighten the masses, wisdom crafted in verse dressed in caustic commentary. In 1494, just two years after Columbus’ fateful voyage, destined to inaugurate the greatest holocaust in human history, Brant’s masterpiece, the Narrenschiff, appeared, a collection of 112 verses in iambic tetrameter, each dressed out in rhyming couplets accompanied by magnificently carved woodcuts, companion pieces of polemical art that captured his times caustically and truthfully as the Holy Roman Empire entered the 16th century, a time of genocide abroad, of inquisition at home and of religious reform throughout Europe. Brant’s Ship of Fools conveys his lifelong desire to bring peace and harmony to his country by lambasting the fools– their failures and their infirmities—that ruled and gave acceptance to an earlier age of fools.

It is Brant’s enveloping narrative that entices my interest in his work. While 500 years separates his efforts from mine, and the bridging of centuries offers parallels between the 15th and the 21st centuries, it is the embodiment of civilized progress in the hands of fools that captures his truth and awakens mine. That fools exist in the 15th century surprises no one; that they offer comparison with those in the 21st century offers delight for the cynic; but it’s the idiocy of today’s fools and their heinous impact on our lives, so much greater than that possible just 500 years ago, that must force us to contemplation of the word progress and the word civilized. Brant’s narrative journey remained in the Roman Empire with Maximilian’s mantle covering a land mass from the ports of Spain to the castles of Germany; today that narrative encompasses the entire globe ushered in by fools untethered to a government by election or appointment and hence but rogue officials officiating for the people as they led their nation to a feast of offal, the putrid detritus of millions charred by depleted uranium, white phosphorus, flechette bombs, “mother bombs” carrying their children, drones, assassinations and lawlessness beyond contemplation. Such are the fools that have taken hold in our world.

Today’s fools must be defined as they are not human, not sympathetic to their brethren, not resident in a shared universe, not conversant with the equality that resides in each and every human walking the earth, not sensitive to pain or suffering awaiting those who are the recipients of their calculated and devastating slaughter, not conscious of a necessity to share the fruits of this earth with all, to seek solutions to the waste and destruction imbedded in their control of forces that devastate the planet; no, today’s fools must be seen as devoid of human spirit, as creatures that find worth within the mortal flesh that envelopes their bones like a sheet of tissue draped as a shroud over their wasted minds bereft of emotions or hearts or souls, unable to think beyond self and the void that is their wasted life. Today’s fools would turn everything in the world into products for consumption, including any who obstruct their desires; Jehovah, God of War (see Exodus), and Saklas, the fool, the god of mindlessness, are false gods yet are their gods, ruthless and reckless our fools thrive on the misery and suffering in this world and negate the spirit that is the essence of existence.

Self-love propels them, flattery ignites their egos, pleasure and sensuality but givens as their rewards, lip service anticipated as they flaunt their entitlement to act without interference from those outside their exclusive club, nourished by vanity and intemperance, driven by madness and arrogance claiming “exceptionalism” as a birthright as they buy favors and privilege, stealing souls as larder for their enjoyment, scavengers on human kind finding in this world a banquet of riches for the few leaving the rest to the wasteland beyond the walls they have constructed to block out any memory of their evilness.

This “Age of Fools” deserves more than a scolding, more than a reprimand, more than a chastisement for the world-wide wreckage they have inflicted; they deserve absolute castigation, nay more, damnation forever in the annals of human discourse, and I offer in poems and in polemics my attempt to stamp that damnation on all the fools that have created the bloodshed, the mayhem, the absolute chaos that has attended the innocents of the world by these beasts that have roamed the world without a soul.

The offenses of these fools offend the sensibilities of common decency toward all humans even as they defy the guaranteed rights of all who live under the umbrella of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations. Their minds and hence their actions are driven by demonic forces that cater to no one and nothing that interferes with their ultimate goals, goals which are anathema to the welfare of people everywhere.

There is need to understand these forces that seize a mind, freeze it against its fellows and seal out the natural sympathies of the heart. There is also need to comprehend the process by which these madmen took control of the United States, pirating the ship of state to policies and acts contradictory to its stated principles, turning it into an oligarchic, belligerent fascist monstrosity that sails the oceans of the world plundering all without mercy, a veritable Ship of Fools. To that end I offer this guide that we might track the deception as the Bush administration and its attendant fools began this corrosive and calculated destruction of the United States of America in the first decade of this new century.

Men of War

Are men who rise to power born to the task,
Offspring of some primordial curse,
Children of the first conflagration
That raged in the recesses of the universe,
Dividing creation into the twin Charons of Heaven and Hell?
Do they divine their dominion in the dungeon of despair,
And glower in delight at the magnitude of their power,
Monarchs of the souls harvested there?
Are they the demon riders of the red horses
Let loose by the breaking of the second seal?
Have they orders from some terrible force
To take peace from the earth, to slay their brethren
That the prophecy of ancient stories be fulfilled?

Or are they the horsemen of the fourth seal
Riding the winds of war, spreading disease and destruction
Across the sands and the seas and the cities
That dot the earth?
Or are they men devoid of heart, defective and deformed,
Whose chest is filled with cynicism and contempt
For those less fortunate, the desperate and deprived
That struggle to survive in a world unkind?

What manner of men can distance themselves from their kin?
What beast of prey have they become to devour so many
Without compassion or remorse, able to wield
Weapons of unimaginable force against unseen foes,
Who hear the screaming cry of the angel of death
Hurtling from the sky,
Where life itself should be the only force:
The warmth of the sun, the gentle cooling of the rain,
The promise of spring, the hope that comes again.

Listen to those who conspire behind closed doors the destiny of men;
See how they huddle amongst themselves, laughing to scorn
The voices of those who council patience and restraint,
Who caution against gut reaction, the antidote to passion,
The enemy of due deliberation that considers consequences
That destroy those we would save.

Listen as they conspire, like Richard of old, to create their empire
On the ruins of ancient castles and tombs,
The graphic symbols of life and death,
Oblivious to the reality they portray as they plot their rise to power.

Witness the arrogance that leaves a legacy of lost memories,
Where preservation is weakness and destruction is might.
Where once the silent dreams of ancient voices scrolled their beauty
Before our eyes, moist with sympathy for their expectations,
Recognizing our dreams in theirs though centuries have passed,
Now they smolder, thoughts lost forever,
The very glory and magnificence of Mesopotamia.

These are the men who dismiss the misfortune of others,
Ignorant of causes that curse a culture
Into ruin by the ravages of time or wind or drought,
Leaving generations destitute and deprived, innocent detritus of wasted days,
Hostages of happenstance, fodder for the selfish, the savage, and the strong.

These are the men who have contempt for the poor,
Who understand weakness as evil, might as right,
Lies, deceit, and duplicity as strength against failure,
Who believe empathy, kindness, and compassion betray success,
Allowing the weak to survive as parasites on the strong,
And strain the juice of ambition from their loin.

Memory that gives life to identity must be destroyed
By those who conquer, or it will destroy the myths
That gave them purpose in their slaughter.
The baubles and slogans parroted by the powerful
Become the voice of reason and the spirit of violence
To subdue the weak and extol the strong,
And death becomes the gauge of success.

Morality lies dead beneath the sword of arrogance,
Slain by the seven angels of Revelation,
The ministers of god’s messenger,
Who unleash heaven’s candles to open the bottomless pit,
Spewing spasms of smoke back to the heavens,
Blocking the light of the sun,
Casting darkness over the faces of men,
Even as the locusts’ wings whirl their fury
Over the frightened hordes below who suffer the scorpion’s blow.

This must we know of those who rule by myth:
Their truth is imbedded in an icy heart
Frozen in time to a god of vengeance and retaliation,
Whose mission they serve by fulfilling their ambition,
And in that heartless world they find meaning.

“NBC and ABC’s Sunday news shows turned to discredited architects of the Iraq War to opine on the appropriate U.S. response to growing violence in Iraq, without acknowledging their history of deceit and faulty predictions,” Media Matters’ Emily Arrowood opined, citing specifically the return to the airwaves of former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and The Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol (who never really disappeared from the talk show circuit in the first place).

“If you were asked to identify a single moment that best captures the failure of elite media outlets to act as agents of accountability, you could do worse than David Gregory asking Paul Wolfowitz on “Meet the Press” this weekend what we should do, “as a policy matter,” to deal with the deteriorating situation in Iraq,” Salon’s Simon Maloy vented.

Maloy goes on to rend garments over the gall of The Wall Street Journal daring to provide former head of the Iraqi occupation authority L. Paul Bremmer space in the opinion pages to weigh in on the crisis.

“Their argument for taking them seriously is to ignore everything they’ve said up to this point,” the Salon columnist continued. Finally, Maloy questions why American society has not whisked these and other prominent figures of the Bush-era off to the Leper Caves.

There are no consequences for being so wrong all the time. Kristol and Wolfowitz and all the other people responsible for dragging us into Iraq should be pariahs who labor under the expectation of doing some measure of atonement for their stubborn and wrongheaded pursuit of a disastrous policy. Instead they get invited on to Sunday shows to discuss what we should do next in Iraq.

“[P]eople who both supported the invasion, and believe further military involvement is the right course now,” The New Republic’s Brian Beutler wrote, crafting a slightly more thoughtful version of the Maloy’s take. “They should be regarded with incredible skepticism, and not simply because of the magnitude of their initial mistake.”

[I]t’s crucial for everyone to recognize that double-down interventionists have much more on the line than a desire to provide accurate, dispassionate risk assessments, and to price that into their arguments. We should set the bar for those arguments very high. Unfortunately, the substantive dispute about Iraq still lies on a largely partisan axis, and because the country elected and re-elected a president who was right in the first instance, the “opposition” is now composed of people who blew it over a decade ago. And so they’re the ones getting calls from reporters and network news producers looking for a fresh take today.

At least Beutler took a stab at informing his readers as to why they should be skeptical of the pronouncements of the Iraq War’s architects, but that is not the same as a case for their self-censorship.

These and others who populate social media with similar self-assured sermons denouncing the Iraq War architects’ self-assuredness are so utterly convinced that Bush allies should disappear in disgrace that they often fail to assert why.

“Why?” they bristle. There is no need to even dignify such an impertinent question with a response. History itself has repudiated the Iraq War’s supporters, they claim. Majority opinion in virtually every major institution in American – from government, to entertainment, to media, to academia – all are quite convinced that the Iraq War was folly from beginning to end, and cutting America’s losses was the only option available to Obama.

In fact, this consensus among America’s influencer caste has dulled the arguments of those whose very political identities were shaped amid the debate over Iraq. The Iraq War’s architects were self-evidently wrong, the closed circle assures itself. That fact alone should relegate them to the black list.

And the Iraq War architects issued many a faulty prediction, but wrongness alone on the complex issue of post-war Iraqi security is not really a disqualifier for this crowd. Obama, too, crafted and applied a demonstrably failed post-war model for Iraq.

As Mary Katharine Ham observed on Monday evening, Obama’s December, 2011 speech at Fort Bragg announcing the completion of the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq is riddled with “mission accomplished” moments.

“We’re leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people,” Obama insisted. He contradicted himself just last week when he scolded Nouri al-Maliki’s administration for excluding the country’s Sunni minority from enjoying full representation.

“And around the globe, as we draw down in Iraq, we have gone after al Qaeda so that terrorists who threaten America will have no safe haven, and Osama bin Laden will never again walk the face of this Earth,” Obama added. According to Obama’s former acting CIA director Mike Morell, among ISIS’s goals is the formation of a state-like entity secure enough to facilitate the planning and execution of attacks on Americans in the United States.

On Sunday, the president informed Congress that he was sending nearly 300 combat-ready American troops back to Iraq to provide security for American embassy staff. They are considering additional measures which include airstrikes and an insertion of special forces to provide Iraqi troops with training. While the mission is circumspect, the promise Obama made to the American people to extricate them from Iraq’s domestic affairs is a failed one by any objective measure.

True, Obama might not have been drawn back into Iraq if the 2003 invasion had never occurred, though we are so removed from that event that any number of other factors could have intervened in the interim. History alone suggests that it unlikely that Obama would have been the first president since Reagan to avoid military conflict with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. But it’s just as true that, had the president executed strikes on Syria in 2013 to pursue his stated aim of containing that conflict, Obama’s current predicament in Mesopotamia may also have been avoided.

Obama’s obviously failed approach to Iraq does not lead Obama’s supporters to demand his exile. The demand that people like Kristol and Wolfowitz disappear is not based in a noble regard for realist foreign policy. It is an expression of the increasingly desperate effort to hold on to a formative weltanschauung, one which was forged in Iraq and is now dying there.

– See more 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Look at the World from Behind the Wall

Put yourself in their shoes. Look at the world through their eyes. It is not fair that a Palestinian child cannot grow up in a state of their own. Living their entire lives with the presence of a foreign army that controls the movements not just of those young people but their parents, their grandparents, every single day. It’s not just when settler violence against Palestinians goes unpunished. It’s not right to prevent Palestinians from farming their lands; or restricting a student’s ability to move around the West Bank; or displace Palestinian families from their homes Neither occupation nor expulsion is the answer. Just as Israelis built a state in their homeland, Palestinians have a right to be a free people in their own land. — President Barak Obama in Israel 2013
Would that the President might take his own advice — “Put yourself in their shoes. Look at the world through their eyes ” — he need only open his eyes beyond the wall that imprisons the Palestinians he speaks about: see how the wall blinds the Jews to the plight of the people they drove from their land, see the barren landscape on the other side rubble strewn, savaged by bulldozers and missiles, see the people caught in a maelstrom of poverty and deprivation, listen to the mothers and wives weep for their husbands and sons jailed without charge in Israel’s Gulag where escape comes by self-starvation as the only defense against indefinite torture and lives lost to family and friends, listen to the cries of the people of the world who have condemned this barbaric behavior only to run into the President’s own wall–the veto in the UN Security Council that effectively denies the justice he so righteously exalts, “Peace is also just. ” How true and how easily it could be made a reality if he were to simply abstain during the vote that sought to bring this defiant state before the International Court of Justice finally after 64 years of impunity to the very justice this President mouths, as though saying it levitates him beyond criticism.
The pain of a Palestinian family
The pain of a Palestinian family
Indeed, “Look at the world through their eyes, ” let Americans look at the state of Israel through Palestinian eyes to witness the monstrous injustice that exists in this “democratic state ” that “shares America’s values, ” America’s only “friend ” in the mid-east. Let’s look at how the Israeli government responds to the President’s call for justice for the Palestinians, within three days of his visit. Let’s report on a peaceful protest that has gone unnoticed by the American press with the exception of Tim King’s Salem-News: “Israeli forces have sprayed Palestinian homes in the village of Nabi Saleh with “skunk “* as a punishment for organizing weekly protests against the Apartheid Wall built on occupied West Bank land (March 26, 2013).1

While the American press offered nothing about this incident, Reuters and the Guardian did as well as The Middle East Monitor which provided this background information: “Israeli forces have sprayed Palestinian homes in the village of Nabi Saleh with raw sewage … as a punishment for organising weekly protests against the Apartheid Wall built on occupied West Bank land. Human rights watchdog B’Tselem published a video showing Israel’s armoured tanker trucks fitted with “water cannons ” which spray the foul fluid at Palestinian protesters. B’Tselem said in a statement that the Israeli forces also targeted all the houses of the village with the sewage. The powerful jet broke windows and caused a great deal of damage in the houses, said the Israeli organisation. “It also causes environmental damage, ” it pointed out. The non-lethal weapon has been added to the Israelis’ armoury for crowd control, said B’Tselem, even though the video shows clearly that it is also used against Palestinian-owned property.”2
How can the people of the United States tolerate such despicable and inhumane behavior from a supposed friend? When did Americans decide that peaceful protests should not be allowed? When did Americans decide that their tax dollars should provide a state the means to shower humans and their homes in foul smelling chemicals that literally cloaks them in animal smell used by animals for self-protection but used here to prevent intelligent dissent from oppressive military aggression. Literally forcing silence to prevent disagreement. These are the ruthless and barbaric actions of a state that has no respect for humans other than its own; it casts a pall over its “friend,” the American people, by making them complicit in such abominable behavior, it smells to high treason, an insult to those who have provided an estimated 3 trillion dollars of support that this state might exist (Rense.com).
What is particularly disturbing is the fact that minds have designed this “strategy ” to quell dissent, a fundamental right and duty of democratic people. It tells us that the state of Israel does not value dissent; its newspapers can carry debates by its Jewish citizens but it will not tolerate dissent from those it occupies or its non-Jewish citizens.
Look through the eyes of the Palestinian mother and father who have struggled mightily to maintain a home through these years of deprivation; watch them see this “shit,” a term used in Vermont to describe the spreading of cow manure on the fields in the spring, but this is not Vermont nor are the Israelis “shitting the fields,” pulverize the house breaking through the windows saturating furniture, beds, even kitchen utensils depriving them of basic forks and knives to use at dinner. What is this but collective punishment of the innocent who at worst wanted to demonstrate against the occupation peacefully. There is no self-defense here; it is rather sheer racist hatred of others, demeaning, shameful, a means to inflict uncontested force against the defenseless, the coward’s way to self-fulfillment.
No state can spread such “shit ” on its people with impunity except Israel protected as it is by our captured Senators like Lindsey Graham, who had the audacity to interrogate a true patriot, Senator Hagel, who pledged his oath of office to the United States not a foreign government, because he was beholden to AIPAC knowing as he sat there the answer to his question to Hagel, name a Senator Mr. Hagel who is afraid of Israel, with the answer written all over his obsequious face, you Senator Graham.
This is not the democracy Americans practice; it is a sham democracy that protects the few and emasculates those excluded. Democracy is inclusive. Had I not witnessed this behavior in this decade of advanced civilization, I would have thought that it came from the mind of our most enlightened sci-fi satirists, Kurt Vonnegut, Aldous Huxley, or George Orwell, minds capable of dreaming the impossible couched in scenes of the savage country or 1984; perhaps reality has caught up with comic satire.
Obama’s trip to Israel demonstrated, in the words of AIPAC, America’s “resilient friendship, based in large part on an unshakable dedication to common values. Commitment to democracy, the rule of law, freedom of religion and speech and human rights are all core values shared between the United States and Israel ” (AIPAC). What is that rule of law that binds these two countries together that such a vicious display of animosity against neighbors would be inflicted so shortly after the President of this “resilient friendship” left the country having asked the Israeli people to consider “Looking through the eyes of their neighbors at the conditions imposed on them by the Israeli occupation”?
The Israeli government has imposed Military Order 101 that requires an Israeli permit if more than 10 people gather, something similar to the “parade permits” required in the old south to ensure no demonstrations against “Bull Connor’s peaceful world. ” Martin Luther King had to face that same logic in the United States in August of 1963. Certainly our President knows the brilliance of King’s logic that tore apart the logic of occupiers and oppressors that denied the rights of people who live in a free, open and equitable land, a truly democratic land that treats all its citizens by rules of law as civilized societies must: “… I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the eighth-century prophets left their little villages and carried their ‘thus saith the Lord’ far beyond the boundaries of their hometowns; and just as the Apostle Paul left his little village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to practically every hamlet and city of the Greco-Roman world, I too am compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my particular hometown.” Is not this the purpose of the President’s visit to Israel, to announce to the world that America will not tolerate injustice done in its name by its “resilient friend” that receives 8 million a day from the largesse of the American taxpayer?
But there’s more, much more that King argued before the American government when it was forced to confront its immorality and illegality after 90 years of segregation, oppression and deceit against its own people. “I am cognizant,” King asserted, “of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham.Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly… You deplore the demonstrations that are presently taking place in Birmingham. But I am sorry that your statement did not express a similar concern for the conditions that brought the demonstrations into being.”
How prophetic of the conditions that have yoked the United States to the state of Israel. Indeed that state wants to forge a “security agreement” that would link its behavior to that of the United States and literally drive our policies in concert with theirs. Skunk tankers would become American tools against its own people even as we permit, even encourage, the lawlessness that drives Israeli policies against its neighbors whether the American people agree or not. Thus do we become complicit in the evil perpetrated by that rogue state.
But some will assert that America had laws requiring permits to gather, to protest peacefully, to march against the immoral actions of its local military authority. And King demolished that logic by appeal to a human nature that knows barbarity does not and should not rule in a civilized state.
“One may well ask, ‘How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?’ The answer is found in the fact that there are two types of laws: there are just laws, and there are unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘An unjust law is no law at all.’ Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine when a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law, or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.”
We, the humans that design and implement the rules of law, do so to ensure that all are treated equally under that law; if not we have abrogated the responsibility of civilized humans to act on behalf of all and thus have become but beasts dependent on instinct and ruthless force to exist. That is not the principled foundation upon which the United States was fashioned. And while the nation did not begin its days in keeping with its principles, it never erased them but rather attempted in time to reconcile its beliefs with the implementation of laws that corrected its deficiencies.
Well might we ask how this President reacted to the foul actions of the Israeli government when it uses such despicable actions against the people it is responsible for protecting under the rules of international occupation? This is what he said: “So peace is necessary. But peace is also just. Peace is also just. There is no question that Israel has faced Palestinian factions who turned to terror, leaders who missed historic opportunities. That is all true.”
But it is as well deceitful; it addresses only the concerns of one side, the “resilient friend” of the U.S. Why no mention of the Nakba, the defiant use of illegal terrorist destruction by the Jewish Agency and its armies against the legal authority of the Mandate Government charged by the international community to protect both the indigenous people of Palestine and the immigrants arriving from Europe? Why no mention of the 64 years of intentionally stalled peace negotiations’ that resulted in the virtual takeover of all the land of Palestine? Why no mention of the original intention of the Jewish Agency and its adherents to remove by whatever force necessary the Arabs from the land of Israel when in fact they didn’t own it or have “historical” right to it? Why pretend to the world that the Palestinians have been the perpetrators of terrorism when they have the legal right to defend their homeland against illegal occupiers and oppressors?
“And that’s why security must be at the center of any agreement.”
Security for whom? Do not the Palestinians need security when the reality on the ground has been the theft of virtually all their land? Only security for the state of Israel against the Palestinians when the state of Israel has the fourth largest military in the world and the Palestinians have no military?
It has to be done by the parties.”
Certainly it is obvious to all that the United States cannot be a broker for peace between these parties. It is yoked to the state of Israel irrevocably. Only the UN can bring resolution by bringing Israel before the Security Council to determine how it will reconfigure its borders so that the state of Palestine can be fashioned legitimately and justice for all can be established.
But the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, their right to justice, must also be recognized.
If this is Obama’s desire than does he have a responsibility to take action to ensure it happens. Doing nothing will change nothing. Let the 95% of the world’s population that has recognized the rights of the Palestinian people (188 nations out of 193 allowed by their vote acceptance of the people of Palestine to member status in the UN) direct the process by which justice can be done.
If we look at the world from behind the wall that imprisons the Palestinian people, we must accept the injustice that pervades the Zionist government’s treatment of their neighbors. Any law that degrades human personality as Martin Luther King states is unjust. What is more degrading to the human personality than to be drenched in the sewage that flows from the Jewish squatters’ settlements or sprayed by the skunks that use their protective innards to deny the democratic right of dissent? A just people create just laws, laws that uplift human personality. Peace is just as the President said; would that he would make it so.

Goal of the BDS Movement Is Justice: Israel Denies Justice and therefore does not Exist as a Legitimate State

Goal of the BDS Movement Is Justice: Israel Denies Justice and therefore does not Exist as a Legitimate State

William A. Cook    

((LAVERNE, Ca.)  – Justice and legitimacy are one and inexorably linked to the Charters and Declarations of the United Nations. This is a truth that Michael J. Rosenberg does not address as he castigates the supporters of the BDS movement in his recent article: “The Goal of the BDS Movement is the Dismantling of Israel.” He makes this point in his piece: “The reason why BDS keeps failing despite the almost universal recognition that the occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the blockade of Gaza, are illegal and immoral is that the BDS movement is not targeting the occupation per se. Its goal is the end of the State of Israel itself…”

MJ Rosenberg
MJ Rosenberg

In fact, the BDS Movement does not have to dismantle the state of Israel, the state of Israel is not only dissembling its inherent Judaic roots of compassion and equity for all humans but delegitimizing the state itself by defying the International Laws established for all member states of the United Nations. Let me illustrate with 16 of the 30 Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a document that the Israeli government signed in 1949. I will place Articles 16 to 29 after this article as footnotes for those who would want to continue the full impact of Israel’s illegal occupation of a defenseless people. One cannot argue truth when one has abandoned it as Rosenberg has by elimination of the essence of why the BDS Movement must exist, to rectify 65 years of injustice.

                                      ******************************

On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: (In 1949, Israel adopted and signed this Proclamation.)

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore,

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

proclaims

THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction. (Israel is under this provision as an occupying power.)

Article 1.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. (Apply this to the conditions that imprison the Palestinians.)

Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. (Palestinians living under the edicts of an occupying power have been assassinated without recourse to due process as declared to be a right under this proclamation, are condemned to constant harassment, forced break-ins of homes and businesses, and subjected to military checkpoints wherever they go. They have no security being without a military of any kind.)

Article 4.

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms. (Under the occupation the Palestinians are in fact enslaved by denial of articles of this Proclamation or in servitude to the occupiers through confiscation of their lands and homes or by imprisonment.)

Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. (It has been established that Israeli prisons use torture as former Directors of Mossad have attested utilizing  conditions that deny formal charges, right of access to their accuser or of evidence used to incarcerate them.)

Article 6.

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. The Palestinians are subject to the laws of the Israeli government and its courts, laws they were not allowed to approve or disprove; they are in fact subjugated by laws that are based on beliefs different from those created for the International community by the United Nations or allowed to create their own laws responsive to those designed by that body.)

Article 7.

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination. (It is obvious that the Palestinian people are discriminated against under Israeli laws and have only token representation by the legal system that incarcerates them.)

Article 8.

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law. (Even the UNHRC has been neutralized to provide such rights.)

Article 9.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. (This is a matter of daily routine under the Occupation with laws in place that protect the perpetrators.)

Article 10.

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him. (No such system of justice exists in the occupied territories for the Palestinian people.)

Article 11.

(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

(2), No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence or international law, at the time when it was committed nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. (Check the human rights witness to checkpoints that mock and ridicule Palestinians.)

Article 13.

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state. (This is a right totally denied to the Palestinian people yet open to others who immigrate to the state because of religion.)

(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country. (This is a right denied to the Palestinians.)

Article 14.

(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. (This is a right that properly belongs to the Palestinian refugees but denied by the state of Israel.)

(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15.

(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality. (This is a right denied to the Palestinians.)

(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

 

Needless to say, there is no need to go further with all the rights denied to the Palestinian people by the state of Israel. I will let the flow of the Universal Declaration continue without comment only to make it absolutely clear that Israel is a rogue member of the United Nations having not only denied the rights of the indigenous people of Palestine but invaded at will surrounding neighbors without provocation beyond their “existential” beliefs that justify in their minds disregard of international law. Since they have the bought blessing of the United States Congress they have no fear of retribution or the need to respond to demands that they adhere to the laws designed by the communities of nations around the world.

In fact, the Israeli Zionist government has declared itself illegitimate by disregarding the laws that it purportedly adopted when it signed as a member of the United Nations in 1949. When they determine that they are responsible as detailed here point by point in defiance of International Law then they can blame others for seeking Justice for the people of Palestine. Justice exists in the universal recognition declared by 193 nations around the globe, it does not exist in Israel.

Article 30.

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Here are the remaining Articles of the Declaration. They speak for themselves; we must speak for those who are denied their rights.

Article 16.

(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.

(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 17.

(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.

(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.

(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

(2) Everyone has the right to equal access to public service in his country.

(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22.

Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23.

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24.

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25.

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26.

(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27.

(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.

(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28.

Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29.

(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.

(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30.

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

NETANYAHU: The Face of Falsehood

 

“Ladies and gentlemen, peace is Israel’s highest aspiration. I’m prepared to make a historic peace with our Palestinian neighbours — – a peace that would end a century of conflict and bloodshed. Peace would be good for us. Peace would be good for the Palestinians” (Bibi Netanyahu before the AIPAC conference earlier this month).

William A. Cook

There are those who stand in regal splendor in halls resplendent with brilliantly colored flags and emblems of rank testifying to their positions as leaders in the world, acknowledged with respectful applause, as the audience standing in adulation of that position, witness the entrance of the announced Lord of the realm as he ascends to the podium to declare his moral righteousness before the world spread out through the nations in the Temple of Television, and boldly, shamelessly lie before all humankind—they are the face of falsehood. Yesterday that face was George W. Bush addressing the joint sessions of Congress as he announced vengeance against an unknown enemy as lie after lie fell from his lips. Today it is Netanyahu declaring his love for peace when he speaks for a nation led by Zionist ideology that has never sought peace as that word is known to the entire world and thus masks truth in obfuscation, for “peace” to the Zionist has been and continues to be “greater Israel” achieved by power not by peace as we know it.

stealing-of-palestinian-land-by-israel-with-the-help-of-the-west

For all the years of my life, from 1936 when the Zionists began their efforts to fill Palestine with Jews to displace the existing people who lived there, as recorded in documents seized by the Mandate Police and acknowledged by many historians (see Ilan Pappe’s Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine), through the war Zionists declared against their British hosts in Palestine, and through their brutal Nakba against the defenseless Palestinian people as they invaded and massacred the inhabitants of more than 416 towns and villages on their way to declaring the existence of a new state called Israel, and then for 65 more years held out hope for a peaceful two states to exist in peace side by side, two doves joined by a laurel wreath, to today, this March when the two peace loving nations of Israel and the United States declare before the world once again that they want peace when there can be no peace when they shovel lies through deception masked as “peace negotiations.”

Zionism is a contagion that has infected the Jewish people in the last 100 years, a contagion emanating out of a minority of European Jews who manipulated their way to control of those in positions of power seeing opportunity for gain in land and wealth regardless of the truth they told about their motives or the faith of Judaism. True Torah Jews will speak to this as they find their faith distorted and used by deceivers. There is a tale that can illuminate the dichotomy represented by Zionism and true Judaism, a tale told by Herman Melville in Moby Dick.

Father Mapple’s sermon in Melville’s tale of the white whale teaches a lesson with the fable of Jonah, “a lesson to us all as sinful men…it is a story of the sin, hard-heartedness, suddenly awakened fears, the swift punishment, repentance, prayers, and finally the deliverance and joy of Jonah.” It is a story that bears repeating since we live in a world drowning in sin, the sins of deception, omission and outright lies, sins committed by those who pretend to lead the world like Puritan preachers of old, bathed in despair, guiding by fear, controlling by naked power, pretending to believe in a God of morals, rectitude and love when in reality they believe only in self and whatever they can amass from the resources that should be the shared goods of all.

Before setting sail for voyages that could last more than three years, sailors went to the Whaleman’s Chapel in New Bedford, and there in moody silence they prayed to their respective gods for a safe voyage, a safe return and safe from sin. Perhaps before America joins an unknown voyage captained by a madman, we should listen to Father Mapple that we might understand the dangers that lurk beneath the ocean of lies this Captain utters from his pulpit at AIPAC’s offices in Washington D.C.. He is no Father Mapple.

“As with all sinners among men, the sin of (Jonah) was in his wilful disobedience of the command of God …which he found a hard command.” What is the command of God? Love all, share God’s riches with all, respect all, dignify all, know thyself in all, give yourself to all, hard commands indeed and commands Zionism neither understands nor desires to hear much less abide by. It’s easier for Zionism to be the god that controls all, that commands all, that uses all for its ends. Hence the lies that drool from Netanyahu’s lips like drops of blood sucked from those he has destroyed as he feigns a moral stance on the right side of the “red” line he draws for himself:

My friends, I’ve come here to draw a clear line. You know that I like to draw lines — especially red ones. But the line I want to draw today is the line between life and death, between right and wrong, between the blessings of a brilliant future and the curses of a dark past.

Those Syrians discovered what you’ve always known to be true: In the Middle East, bludgeoned by butchery and barbarism, Israel is humane; Israel is compassionate; Israel is a force for good. That border, that runs a hundred yards east of that field hospital, is the dividing line between decency and depravity, between compassion and cruelty. On the one side stands Israel, animated by the values we cherish, values that move us to treat sick Palestinians, thousands of them, from Gaza. They come to our hospitals. We treat them despite the fact that terrorists from Gaza hurl thousands of rockets at our cities. (MWCNews, 3/4/14, Netanyahu’s Speech to AIPAC).

Sabra and Shatilla massacre of Palestinians in Lebanon, supervised by Ariel Sharon in September 1982 pic

Needless to say, the life he chooses is life for his people in the Jewish State executed by him on his terms regardless of right or wrong regardless of the constant and calculated ethnic cleansing that he perpetrates on the Palestinian people, indeed on the very Syrians he declares he is helping. That red line he draws swipes across Syrian land that Israel occupies illegally and the field hospital he refers to sits in Syrian land that Israel has illegally bombed on three recent occasions when it determined what is right for Israel and not wrong for Israel though it defies International Law and is in fact an invasion of a sovereign state; so much for truth. Indeed, what the Syrians really discovered is what the world has always known to be true: In the Middle East, bludgeoned by butchery and barbarism, it is Israel that is the butcher and the barbarian; we need only recall the “Butcher of Beirut” Ariel Sharon as he watched his mercenaries slash and slaughter the defenceless women and children of Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon.

“That border,” Netanyahu proclaims, “that runs a hundred yards east of that field hospital, is the dividing line between decency and depravity, between compassion and cruelty.” Where is the decency and compassion in stealing the land of those Syrians displaced by an invading occupier whose responsibility under International Law requires compassion and care for those imprisoned by occupation and true settlement for return of the stolen land to those who own it?  “On the one side stands Israel, animated by the values we cherish,” values that any civilized state would find repugnant, especially when the true facts reveal Israeli IDF forces preventing hundreds of Palestinians from getting to hospitals even to bring a child into this world or the record of intentional killings by sniper fire of children. We need only check the weekly reports of the PCHR that lists those murdered by name. How repulsive to proclaim civilized behaviour when you lead a nation so savagely.

But there he stands in his pin striped suit, Israeli star embossed on the US flag pin, glistening in the podium lights, smiling delightedly as he mouths lie after lie to the delighted listeners, including some 400 Congress members who find it a bit awkward as the klieg lights get brighter and brighter shining on them as stooges for this foreign government that commands them how to vote regardless of the desires of the American people, a slightly different picture than that of Jonah who knew his sin.

“See ye not then, shipmates, that Jonah sought to flee world-wide from God? Miserable man! Oh! most contemptible and worthy of all scorn; with slouched hat and guilty eye, skulking from his God; prowling among the shipping like a vile burglar hastening to cross the seas. So disordered, self-condemning is his look, that had there been policemen in those days, Jonah, on the mere suspicion of something wrong, had been arrested ere he touched a deck.” But there are still no policemen to arrest this “miserable man, most contemptible and worthy of scorn.”

Jonah’s shipmates knew of his evil, they sensed it and demanded to know of him. “What is thine occupation? Whence comest thou? Thy country? What people? He in repentance of his known crimes cries out, ‘I am a Hebrew,’ he cries—and then—’I fear the Lord the God of Heaven who hath made the sea and the dry land!’ Fear him, O Jonah? Aye, well mightest thou fear the Lord God THEN!” Where we might ask is the repentance of Netanyahu? Certainly his crimes are greater by far than those of poor Jonah, who sinned against his soul and his fellows by usury only while this man leads a state that defies the citizens of the world in assembly by mocking their councils and executing crimes against humanity.

But the man is blind to his crimes; he continues his babbling lies:

Ladies and gentlemen, peace is Israel’s highest aspiration. I’m prepared to make a historic peace with our Palestinian neighbors — – a peace that would end a century of conflict and bloodshed. Peace would be good for us. Peace would be good for the Palestinians. But peace would also open up the possibility of establishing formal ties between Israel and leading countries in the Arab world.

Without blinking an eye, he utters lies that defy the 65 years of Israeli intransigence against peace, against the possibility of a two state solution when they have confiscated all but 11 per cent of Palestinian land; when peace to Israel means no contiguous land for a state of Palestine, means no recognition of that state for years to come, means only their troops will protect their people and no protection is provided for the Palestinians even though they are the ones who are the victims, means peace can only be attained if Israel determines it is safe, not behind borders, but behind their tanks, machine guns, drones, F-16s and nuclear deterrents to be used at their whim.

A man cannot proclaim peace if he does not understand the word; he cannot be a man with morals if he does not know what morality means; he cannot offer peace if he’s not prepared to sit down with Palestinians and the communities of the world if he has predetermined that he will not and his nation has never determined that it will share Palestine with its indigenous people. Yet that is the reality; everything the man says is fabrication. This is not Jonah;

“…he drops seething into the yawning jaws awaiting him; and the whale shoots-to all his ivory teeth, like so many white bolts, upon his prison. Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord out of the fish’s belly. But observe his prayer, and learn a weighty lesson. For sinful as he is, Jonah does not weep and wail for direct deliverance. He feels that his dreadful punishment is just. He leaves all his deliverance to God, contenting himself with this, that spite of all his pains and pangs, he will still look towards His holy temple. And here, shipmates, is true and faithful repentance; not clamorous for pardon, but grateful for punishment. And how pleasing to God was this conduct in Jonah, is shown in the eventual deliverance of him from the sea and the whale.”

This is the essential difference between Jonah and Netanyahu: the one is a human who understands his place in the community of peoples he must live with, the other is devoid of human sympathy even as he survives on cradling his own exclusive tribe to maintain his power, lies are but a means to his end. This is the dividing line between Zionism and true Judaism and would that Netanyahu would draw this line and cross to the true moral side!

“…when the whale grounded upon the ocean’s utmost bones, even then, God heard the engulphed, repenting prophet when he cried. Then God spake unto the fish; and from the shuddering cold and blackness of the sea, the whale came breeching up towards the warm and pleasant sun, and all the delights of air and earth; and ‘vomited out Jonah upon the dry land;’ when the word of the Lord came a second time; and Jonah, bruised and beaten—his ears, like two sea-shells, still multitudinously murmuring of the ocean—Jonah did the Almighty’s bidding. And what was that, shipmates? To preach the Truth to the face of Falsehood! That was it!”

Netanyahu cannot preach truth to falsehood, he is the very face of falsehood; he must find truth outside himself and seek redemption from those he has slaughtered, and know as Jonah knew that his punishment is justified and will be determined by God as it must be. And what is that God he must face? Listen to the eloquence of Father Mapple as he brings truth to falsehood from the lesson of Jonah:

“This, shipmates, this is that other lesson; and woe to that pilot of the living God who slights it. Woe to him whom this world charms from Gospel duty! Woe to him who seeks to pour oil upon the waters when God has brewed them into a gale! Woe to him who seeks to please rather than to appal! Woe to him whose good name is more to him than goodness! Woe to him who, in this world, courts not dishonour! Woe to him who would not be true, even though to be false were salvation! Yea, woe to him who, as the great Pilot Paul has it, while preaching to others is himself a castaway!”

But oh! shipmates! on the starboard hand of every woe, there is a sure delight; …Delight is to him—a far, far upward, and inward delight—who against the proud gods and commodores of this earth, ever stands forth his own inexorable self. Delight is to him whose strong arms yet support him, when the ship of this base treacherous world has gone down beneath him. Delight is to him, who gives no quarter in the truth, and kills, burns, and destroys all sin though he pluck it out from under the robes of Senators and Judges. Delight,—top-gallant delight is to him, who acknowledges no law or lord, but the Lord his God, and is only a patriot to heaven. Delight is to him, whom all the waves of the billows of the seas of the boisterous mob can never shake from this sure Keel of the Ages. And eternal delight and deliciousness will be his, who coming to lay him down, can say with his final breath—O Father!—chiefly known to me by Thy rod—mortal or immortal, here I die. I have striven to be Thine, more than to be this world’s, or mine own. Yet this is nothing: I leave eternity to Thee; for what is man that he should live out the lifetime of his God?”

That God is all who live on this earth and rightfully share all that this earth has provided, for those who lived before us, those now living, and for our children and their children. That God is our desire to find love with all, to recognize the equity of all, to acknowledge our limitations and our potentials and aid all in fulfilling their promise. That God is understanding the finality of our being, our momentary existence, our need to comprehend the rights that must be passed on from generation to generation lest destruction and death be our gift to all children yet to come. None of us will outlive that God; existence of all things is the God we pass on but only if we have comprehended the totality of our responsibility to gift all to those yet to come in equal measure. Our ultimate responsibility is to Preach Truth to the Face of Falsehood; if we do perhaps Netanyahu will be preaching to an empty room.

 

The Do Nothing Peace Machine: Why Zionism Negates Peace

In 2010 I edited The Plight of the Palestinians: A Long History of Destruction, a collection of articles by world renowned writers who unveil the genocide taking place in Palestine by the occupying power in this “advanced” civilization of 2014, a slow water torture of constant humiliation, destruction and death as the world watches and nothing is done to bring justice to the people of Palestine. In that text, Dr. Jeff Halper details the quest for “peace” that has been crippled by the state of Israel, the intentional, calculated and indifferent response to the conditions facing the Palestinian people every day. He offers this reality:

Israel’s strategy until today is to bypass and encircle them, making deals with governments that isolate and, unsuccessfully so far, neutralize the Palestinians as players. This was most tellingly shown in the Madrid peace talks, when Israel only allowed Palestinian participation as part of the Jordanian delegation. But it includes the Oslo “peace process” as well. While Israel insisted on a letter from Arafat explicitly recognizing Israel as a “legitimate construct” in the Middle East, and later demanded a specific statement recognizing Israel as a Jewish state (both of which it got), no Israeli government ever recognized the collective rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination. Rabin was forthright as to the reason: If Israel recognizes the Palestinians’ right to self-determination, it means that a Palestinian state must by definition emerge – and Israel did not want to promise that.4 So except for vague pronouncements about not wanting to rule over another people and “our hand outstretched in peace,” Israel has never allowed the framework for genuine negotiations. The Palestinians must be taken into account, they may be asked to react to one or another of our proposals, but they are certainly not equal partners with claims to the country rivaling ours (“The Problem with Israel,” Jeff Halper, 2007).

Seven years ago, November 22, 2007, I wrote an article about George W. Bush’s plan to bring peace to the mid-east, a plan that used the city of Annapolis as its label with Condoleeza Rice acting as emissary from the American government meeting with Israeli and Palestinian officials. That article tracked the reality of the failed peace process from before the Mandate to 2007. It is now 2014 and there is no peace—but there is once again a “peace” initiative under way, an initiative every American President seems obliged to give lip service to knowing beforehand no peace will be affected. Why? Why go through a process all know will not result in peace? Why exercise an illusion? For whose benefit? To what end?
Resting on my bookshelf is a cunning little device, an object I’ve had in my office for decades, a curiosity piece that grabs the attention of children and adults, a strange unfamiliar gadget that appears to have a purpose since it has a handle, two gears fastened to small rounded cylinders that crisscross each other as one turns the handle, it’s called a do-nothing machine. Someone conceptualized it and someone created it and someone turns that handle to do nothing. Why? Why go through a process all know will not accomplish anything? Why spend time on an illusion? For whose benefit? To what end?
There it sits next to The Plight of the Palestinians and it seems to me Obama and Kerry must have one just like it since they initiated a process that they know will accomplish nothing, inspired no doubt by the do-nothing machine. Why? Perhaps it’s to pretend that they are not owned by the Israeli state or perhaps to defend themselves against the perception that they have abandoned any thought of a peaceful two state solution in Palestine or perhaps to extend time once again so Israel can steal more land and create more settlements allowing the slow motion genocide to continue. Perhaps an illusion is better than nothing at all.
But what of the Israeli government; why would they join this farce? That’s puzzling to me since I know from their own words and actions that they have no intention of recognizing the rights of Palestinians to a state much less create one. Indeed they have for 65 years denied even the idea of a Palestinian state, and as Halper has made clear they have torpedoed more than 19 times any attempt to create such a state. Indeed, there is no logic, no rational explanation of Israeli insistence that they want a two state solution, that peace is their desire, that the United States must be the interlocutor to bring the two parties together without pre-conditions and then raise conditions that could not be met and maintain this ruse for 65 years while absconding with all but 11% of Palestine (Israel has used a complex legal and bureaucratic mechanism to take control of more than fifty percent of the land in the West Bank. This land has been used mainly to establish settlements and create reserves of land for the future expansion of the settlements” [see Ifamericansknew.com] during that same period). There must be a deeper explanation that drives the Israeli governments to deceive the world year after year, something we have not yet addressed yet could be an explanation.
Perhaps once again it’s necessary to seek wisdom in fiction, to explore the unknown in narratives that dig deep into the subconscious mind, to burrow inside the human innards, to seek beyond the intestines and muscles and sinews and bones where the true being resides, where heartfelt yearnings reside, where the spring of emotions pours forth its latent reactions to self, where needles and surgical knives cannot go if understanding is to be sought, where self responds to urgings that drive the impulses to desperate acts that self itself does not comprehend, where the inner self is encrusted with the fears of generations pounded into the small child from inception, and identity is an accumulation of accepted hatred that seeps into the being in a collective response that determines all acts as self-survival against any outside of the tribal clan that has indelibly marked each member with a new source of pulsating blood, no longer a heart that throbs in rhythm to the hearts of all humankind, but emanates from a somatic fear that seeks only its own security, its own purpose, its own distinction as its hallmark at the expense of all who threaten its existence.
Franz Kafka, in “A Fragment,” tells a story told to him by his father who heard the story from a strange boatman. “A great wall is going to be built to protect the Emperor. As you may know, the infidel nations, with demons among them too, often gather in front of the imperial palace and shoot their black arrows at the Emperor.” A cryptic fragment certainly, about an emperor, an imperial palace, and a wall to protect the emperor and his people; unfortunately there are infidel nations who gather around the palace and shoot the emperor. Ultimately there is no protection, there is only on-going fear that any action to protect is doomed, and if, as Kafka also maintained “Guilt is never to be doubted,” fear exists inside the wall, always fear inside and out, of self and all others. Curiously, the Zionists have found reason for a wall thinking that it could serve as protection against their manifest enemies oblivious to Kafka’s admonition. In 2004 I wrote about Sharon’s wall of fear.

I would suggest that Sharon’s “Wall of Fear” walls in both the Palestinians and the Jews, that it gives offense to those on both sides, and it offends the moral sensibilities of any civilized person anywhere in the world. Sharon prepared for the building of the wall by laying its foundation in the guts of his people, fear of four million terrorists and fear that the future offered no hope for peace. Having bulldozed the Palestinian Authority out of relevance, he removed the possibility of negotiations, and, by that act, left the Jews without hope for peace, leaving him free to force the erection of the “Wall.”

Consider how the Wall walls in the Israeli people: it looms on the horizon a daily reminder that they have failed to achieve their primary goal, a peaceful assimilation of Jews from around the world into a haven, given to them by a remorseful Europe and America, where all could live in dignity and respect, without rancor or fear of racism, hatred and oppression; a daily reminder that they have walled in a poor and deprived people behind barriers that isolate them from the community of nations, from their fields and shops, from relatives and families, not unlike the Pogroms suffered by the Jews in Poland, Austria, Russia, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia; a daily and fearful reminder that someday, somewhere, someone will scale or circumnavigate the Wall as people have done from time immemorial – as the Huns did when they mocked the efforts of the Chinese to keep them at bay on their side of the Great Wall, or the Germans when they laughingly skirted the Maginot Line – to make absurd the efforts of one people to subdue the will of another; a daily reminder that their purported Democracy mocks itself as it seals off an entire population in full sight of the world community despite the vocal objection of that community, indeed, in complete and utter disbelief that the Jews of all peoples could undertake such a heinous act; a daily reminder that they have created a monstrous gray monument to the harm they have inflicted on another people, a monument that in time will have the same effect as the march around Jericho, “And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of their sword”; a daily reminder that visible or no each and every name of an incarcerated Palestinian is carved into that cement just as the names of the fallen Jews, victims of Nazi atrocities, are carved into the marble slabs at the Holocaust Memorial in Florida; and, finally, a daily reminder that this Wall is but the beginning of a Wall that must stretch north and south along the Jordanian border, further north along the Syrian line, west along Lebanon’s southern coast, and south along the Sinai, thus completing the incarceration of the Jews once again” (Cook, “Fence, Barrier, Wall: What’s in a Name?,” 2004).
Could we not ask here as we did of the “Do Nothing Machine” why? What drives the mind to destroy what it claims it must protect? Why build more walls except to keep those not of the tribe out and those within the tribe clean of contamination lest their inner self lose its distinction, its hallmark and find release from the fear that pulses inside threatening its existence by purging it of all that could or would destroy it because it is not of them. The Zionists in forcing the existence of the State of Israel on its people did so by capitalizing on this fear. The world desires to destroy the Jews. There is no protection for the Jews anywhere in the world except in Palestine where their historic rights to the land will prevail and where the Jews will protect themselves from all their enemies; they need only ensure that protection by linking their survival to those nations that have the power and the will to ensure security. This requires control of such umbilical linked “friends,” the United States, England, France, Germany, Canada, Australia who become their “protector” as Rabbi Loew’s Golem protected the Ghetto of Prague in the 16th century (see “A Nation of Golems,” Cook, 2009). It also requires that their protection is sealed by law, hence restrictions on “those who criticize the Zionist state” as H.R. 4009(113th Congress, 2nd Session, 2014) demonstrates, a “Bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to prohibit an institution that participates in a boycott of Israeli academic institutions or scholars from being eligible for certain funds under that Act” (proposed by Mr. Roskam and Mr. Lipinski as sent to the Committee on Education and the Workforce).
There exists a mindset here driven by forces beyond the reasoning mind. Kafka offers a depiction of this phenomenon in “Metamorphosis,” a tale of surrealistic quality where the protagonist wakes one morning to find himself transformed into a gigantic insect. Yet his mental faculties appeared to be stable, his concerns those of a man prevented from getting to his train on time, on how to deal with the problems of those outside his bedroom door who would be repulsed by his demeanor; fear of confrontations followed, fear of his domineering father rose swiftly, loss of his job, loss of the money he provided for his family, the potential upheaval of his life made by his visible transformation into a loathsome insect roused innate fears both of expulsion and death, his words were not understandable, the imminent awareness by all outside that he was different, driven by different realities, unfit to be welcomed into the community, ultimately to be driven out or destroyed. Such is the inner fear that pulses in Gregor’s being and comes to fruition in the night, a nightmare perhaps but presented as true.
Kafka once stated, “I consist of literature and am unable to be anything else.” The house he (Gregor Samsa aka Franz Kafka) lived in, the town that surrounds it, the wall that surrounds the town metaphorically mirror the inner identity of the narrator, walled within walls, wakening inside a room where now, in this night where he, as he did virtually every night, writes the real world within which he lives, a world of fiction where explanations evoke symbols and depictions that convey truth in images and unleash through dreams the latent fears that energize those forced to exist in isolation from all others for their identity is encased in a tribal mind dependent for its meaning and its understanding of self on those who control their reasoning and determine for them not only who they are but why they are and in that vice how they will act. Thus did Kafka’s narrow world of the Judengassen encompass his entire life, one of Europe’s oldest ghettos, what he called “my prison cell-my fortress.” But in the dream of Samsa transformed into a hideous insect, there comes a release from that control as he can scale now the walls of his room and the very ceiling above, a freedom made possible by his release from his “Penal Colony,” an escape from “The Judgment,” an avoidance of The Trial and find a new life, perhaps, in Amerika.
The Metamorphosis captures the condition of the tribal member caught within the society he must accommodate and assimilate into despite the impossibility of that probability, not because the society consciously refuses the assimilation but because the individual fears those not members of the tribe and because he fears they find him odious as the hideous insect depicts. Crushed inside these twin fears, there is no escape for the tribe but the destruction of the perceived enemies regardless of their passivity to the condition of the tribes’ fears.
But Kafka’s brilliant and penetrating analysis of the tribal mind and its insidious control of its members does not end with The Metamorphosis, it is extended and brutalized in “The Penal Colony.” This narrative captures the incapacity of the individual mind to control its own destiny. There is an Officer who is both controller and judge, guided by a simple rule, “guilt is never in doubt,” a rule that applies to those not of the tribe but to tribal members as well; all are guilty, all threaten the security and control of the Zionist entity, hence the epithet “self-hating Jew.” As the Officer describes the penal colony’s procedures for determining guilt, the condemned are totally submissive to the authorities, they do not expect due rights under the law, they understand that those in control have full authority to arrest, imprison and condemn to death whomever they will thus making legal arrest without due process, incarceration indefinitely and execution as well as extrajudicial assassination.
When questioned by an outside Traveler who comes to interview the Officer, the obvious questions seek obvious answers that the Officer finds incomprehensible, how can anyone question the authorities to inflict what they must to ensure the safety of the people? To justify his position the Officer releases the prisoner who was scheduled for execution and gets on the torture machine that he designed to prove that the judgment of the authorities is justified for all because it stipulates that the judgment must “Be Just.” Ironically, Kafka narrates that the machine goes berserk, and the designer of the hideous machine becomes its last victim as it disintegrates into an uncontrollable monster.
What Kafka envisioned is prophetic; when a state imposes its will on all its sister states, it becomes a monster, a metallic Golem perhaps that destroys at will but creates its own grave in the process, as Kafka’s Officer becomes pinned to the needles that were supposed to inscribe on the prisoner’s back the judgment of the authorities but instead leave his body suspended, bleeding and shredded, hanging above the grave into which he was to have been tossed. There it must remain isolated, condemned, and forever abhorred as an atrocity of insanity and arrogance.
Consider the actions of the Zionist State that from its inception under the control of the Jewish Agency, the eleven controllers in the Red House making their determinations for all Jews arriving in Palestine, as described by Dr. Ilan Pappe in The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, to use terror against the British Mandate Government in Palestine, to coerce the members of Parliament in London to overlook their crimes against the British people, to massacre the citizens of Deir Yassin and over 30 other massacres in areas belonging to the indigenous peoples of Palestine, to control by threat and intimidation the new immigrants arriving in Palestine from Europe as depicted by documents seized by the Mandate Police, and available now from the files of Sir Richard C. Catling in the Rhodes House Archives, and one has a clear picture of Zionist power over the Jewish people escaping Germany and elsewhere as they imposed their will on the helpless, both Jew and Palestinian, during the late 1930s and through 1948.
When complicity in crime is imposed on innocent people through coercion and fear, we have an understanding of the truth imbedded in Kafka’s narratives and that gives us pause to realize why this state can attack Iraq to destroy its nuclear plant construction and that of Syria and attempt to force the western world to attack Iran; it makes one realize that invading Lebanon without justified reason, its invasion and retention of the Golon Heights and its invasion and destruction of Gaza happens despite the international laws that should determine the behavior of member nations, and it should make obvious that this state will go to any lengths to control the United Nations by controlling the American Government by controlling its elected officials regardless of the desires of the citizens of the United States.
We need only reflect on the 2008 Christmas invasion of Gaza to understand the irrationality of attacking a defenseless people surrounded by the military power of the IDF with its use of extensive missile force from the air, the eastern borders under Israeli control and from the sea; add to that the needless use of white phosphorus that is both illegal and causes catastrophic pain for those unable to escape its searing pain. Why such brutality against a people incarcerated on all sides without military capability to defend their homes or even the ability to flee the terror of the Jewish invasion? Why inflict such barbaric force when those surrounded had no means to destroy the Zionist state? What irrational behavior erupts in a purported civilized state unless it is itself an irrational fear of self-destruction if perceived enemies are not eradicated as insurance against security (read survival instinct) for the people of Israel? Listen to the voices of those in positions of power and influence that justify the attempted destruction of the Gazan people:

The son of Sharon :’Flatten Gaza, send it back to Middle Ages, they need to die! 
Interior Minister Eli Yishai said Operation Pillar of Defense would continue and likely be expanded, The war in Gaza “must be so painful and difficult that the terror groups will not think twice but a hundred times before they fire missiles against Israel again…The goal of the operation is to send Gaza back to the Middle Ages, only then will Israel be calm for the next 40 years. ” The National Unity Party, Michael Ben-Ari, called for Israeli soldiers to kill Gazans without thought or mercy.“ There are no innocents in Gaza, don’t let any diplomats who want to look good in the world endanger your lives – mow them down! ” A prominent Israeli rabbi, Yaakov Yosef, the son of former chief rabbi, Ovadia Yosef, in a sermon at the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron blessed IDF soldiers while urging them “to learn from the Syrians how to slaughter the enemy. 

How explain these cries of inhumane hate against a place and its people that have never attacked the Zionist state except out of absolute desperation, hopelessness, and despair, the last resort of those who have the right to attack unlawful occupiers of their land and homes? This is the voice of insanity that cannot exist in a sane world where concern, compassion and love should guide our endeavors and foster the drive toward true peace, not a “peace” (shalom) that justifies its rights by demanding absolute control of all that threatens its security as it denies the very thing it claims as its right. This world in this time is not tribal anymore; it is guided by international laws that all peoples of the earth have designed and mutually accept. That should be true of the Israeli State since it has signed acceptance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Accords that have defined genocide, a definition resulting from the catastrophic incarceration and deaths inflicted on the Jews in Nazi Germany. Yet today this definition is disgraced and defied by the Zionist State as it commits genocide in Palestine as the voices in the book that opened this article testifies, and the world watches and does nothing.
Perhaps now we might understand that fiction can enlighten us more than the silent voices of the intimidated and the damned; Kafka has looked inside the human breast and unveiled the true force that gives life to the horrors inflicted on the people of Palestine and the peoples of Lebanon and Syria and Jordan and Gaza as the Zionist power used the teachings of Judaism to control those seeking security and comfort in what could have been a homeland for the Jewish people but has become instead a lawless and ruthless occupation power and destroyer of the true owners of the land from the time they were offered solace to live with the people of Palestine.
And this brings us to the “Do Nothing Machine” that the Zionists use to deceive the people of the world that it desires a peaceful solution to the crisis by a mutually negotiated two state determination when in reality they desire only the eradication of the Arabs in Israel and all other Arabs that inhabit their land in Judea and Samaria; this has been their goal since they first arrived in Palestine and that “peace Machine” they use will ensure that neither peace nor a Palestinian state will ever exist. Let’s end with the unfortunate prophetic words of Israel’s most ardent exponent and the most vocal of its true face, a terrorist of extraordinary visibility and one accepted by the Israeli people as their Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, head of one of the Jewish terrorist groups, who described Deir Yassin as “splendid,” and stated: “As in Deir Yassin, so everywhere, we will attack and smite the enemy. God, God, Thou has chosen us for conquest.”
There remains only this horrifying possibility: to fill their new state, the Jewish State, the Zionists have utilized the services of “Settlers,” people who think like their ancestors did 3500 years ago, tribally, as those who respond to day to day living instinctively, in fear, always with the tiger lurking in the rocks, always with their enemy tribes anxious to destroy them, always with the mindset that they alone must preempt another lest they become the victim, and always with the rationale that all are potential destroyers and that gives them the right to kill at will by whatever means necessary; yet in bringing this ancient mindset into their midst, the Zionists have created a fearsome and loathsome nightmare not unlike Kafka’s “Burrow” where “unseen enemies crawl through the dark tunnels” and the narrator, Kafka’s only first person tale of horror, feels “threatened not only by outside enemies, but enemies within, in the earth’s entrails,” and they are legendary, and “I believe in them.”
William A. Cook is a Professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California. He edited The Plight of the Palestinians: A Long History of Destruction (2010). He can be reached at:wcook@laverne.eduRead other articles by William A., or visit William A.’s website.

UN Has Failed to Bring Israel to Justice for 65 Years

Kourosh Ziabari Salem-News.com

It is today a bit of a stretch to point to what should be done with the reality that the seizure of virtually all of the Palestinian land has made so impossible.
Salem-News.com writers, Professor Bill Cook and Kourosh Ziabari
Salem-News.com writers, Professor Bill Cook and Kourosh Ziabari
(TEHRAN FNA) – We are used to hearing every day that a Palestinian citizen is killed by the Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip, or that Israel has begun constructing new settlements on the lands it has stolen from the Palestinians. Although the illegal actions of Israel against the people of Palestine and its continued occupation of the Palestinian lands predates some 60 years back, the future of Israeli-Palestinian conflict needs precise and in-depth investigation and study.
Prominent American academician Prof. William Cook believes that since Israel was created in 1948, the United Nations and the international organizations have failed to bring it to justice and hold it accountable for its criminal actions and policies. According to Prof. William A. Cook, the Israeli regime’s treatment of the Palestinian people is unjustifiable, indefensible and discriminatory.
“America’s poor suffer the consequences in Philadelphia where schools have no money to care for the deprived Americans, and that is but an example of what happens when we dedicate the tax payers’ money to slaughter and mayhem in a land we claim must defend itself when we can’t even identify the boundaries of that state because it refuses to identify its borders as they are continually growing as they inflict further genocide on the people of Palestine,” said Prof. Cook in an extensive interview with the Fars News Agency. William A. Cook is a professor of English at the University of La Verne. William A. Cook completed his Ph.D. at Lehigh University where he also got his Master’s degree. He has been the university’s Vice President for Academic Affairs for 13 years. Prof. Cook has extensively written about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and defended the confiscated rights of the Palestinian people. His writings have appeared on such news websites and magazines as Al-Jazeera, Foreign Policy Journal, Palestine Chronicle, Counterpunch and Al-Manar. He is the author of such books as “The Rape of Palestine: Hope Destroyed, Justice Denied,” “Tracking Deception: Bush Mid-East Policy” and “The Chronicles of Nefaria”. What follows is the full text of FNA’s interview with Prof. Cook about the roots and origins of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Israel’s non-compliance with the international law in respecting the basic rights of the Palestinian citizens and the genocidal policies of Israel in the Occupied Territories.
Q: There are still ambiguities and serious questions on the foundations of the establishment of the state of Israel. There was a plan in the early 1900s called the Uganda Scheme presented by the British Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain to the Zionist Theodor Herzl. Based on this proposal, a Jewish state for the stateless Jews would be created in what is today the country of Kenya. The World Zionist Organization, despite the willingness of some of its neighbors, turned down the offer. It was decided a few days later that the Jewish state should be established on the Palestinian territories. So, it’s quite obvious that from the outset, the Zionists didn’t have a cohesive and firm plan for locating the place of establishing a new state. The Jewish Territorialist Organization also believed that the Jewish state could be found anywhere in the world, and not necessarily in Palestine. What happened that finally led to the creation of an Israeli state on the Palestinian lands? Do you consider this newly-created state legitimate and sustainable?

A: The establishment of the state of Israel is mired in a pit of intentional deception to create a false sense of legitimacy to justify before the world community its right to exist. From my research in the Rhodes House archives I have a description by the British Commissioner Harold MacMichael of the attempt in 1919 to establish a joint governing process in the larger Arab area that is now Palestine between Jews and Arabs directed toward the formulation of a scheme under which the Jews and the Arabs can live together in the Near East to their common good and mutual development…Within this group, no difference of opinion as to the basic importance to the development of a Jewish national home of co-operation with the Arabs is discernible. The aim of all is the establishment of a form of society in Palestine which will allow of the development on reasonable lines of a national home as a permanency.”
MacMichael goes into considerable detail as to the process by which this unification could be established. However, it is not necessary to go into such detail since the outcome of its intent, as we know, never materialized. But I will quote the preamble of the plan to demonstrate that there were Jews and Arabs that believed cooperation was possible and desirable.
His Royal Highness the Emir Feisal, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of Hedjaz, and Dr. Chaim Weizman, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organization, mindful of the racial kinship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realizing that the surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine, and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between them, have agreed upon the following Articles… (Feisal-Weizman Agreement, Catling files, “Jewish Approaches to the Question of Jewish-Arab Co-operation during the period 1919-1941).
MacMichael makes the point in his report that this effort could afford “the fullest guarantee for the carrying into effect of the Balfour Declaration with assurance of Jewish immigration, “without prejudice to the rights of the Arab cultivators”, and complete freedom of worship.
In 1952, Dr. Weizman died and these words from his obituary in the New York Times confirms the above and points to the answer you seek in this first question.
At the age of 27 Dr. Weizmann had dared to criticize Herzl as “too visionary,” and in 1900, at the Fourth Zionist Convention, he emerged as the leader of the Democratic Zionist faction.
This group opposed both the political Zionists, who wanted political guarantees for the establishment of a Jewish home in Palestine, and the practical Zionists, who wanted to settle Jewish colonies in the Holy Land without regard to political guarantees. Dr. Weizmann helped reconcile their differences. In 1906 he met Balfour, who was on an electoral campaign, and convinced him that Palestine rather than Uganda, British East Africa, which had been offered by the British, was the proper homeland for the Jews. His efforts led to his appointment as chairman of the first Zionist Commission, established in March, 1918, and recognized by the British as an official advisory body on all Jewish questions. He appeared before the Paris Peace Conference in support of his cause.
Dr. Weizmann visited the Arab Prince Feisal in his camp near Amman around this time and convinced him that the proposed Jewish national home held no existing threat to the Arabs and that Jewish-Arab cooperation was desirable. He won Arab support to help carry out the Balfour Declaration, and reached an agreement with Feisal for large-scale Jewish immigration into Palestine and the protection of Arab rights (NY Times Obituary, 1952).
You ask “What happened that finally led to the creation of the Israeli state on the Palestinian lands?” The answer can be found in the Red House described by Ilan Pappe in his book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine and in the Introduction to The Plight of the Palestinians that describes in detail the Mandate Government’s perspective, with evidence collected of their perspective from documents seized by the Mandate police and gathered together in Sir Richard C. Catling’s files in the Rhodes House Archives. Let me quote some passages from my Introduction:
Perhaps the most insidious of the strategies employed by the Zionist Consultancy and its agents comes via encroachment on the civil rights of Palestinian and Jewish citizens.
That encroachment comes stealthily out of the dark recesses of a spider’s hole, the Red House, where the Zionist eleven of the Consultancy held its clandestine meetings, where the strategies that were to guide the affairs of the nascent Jewish “state” were hatched. Parallel this image then, between the years 1930 and 1948, with the situation in the United States since World War II, as Jewish forces asserted their control from lobbies in Washington D. C. that began to encase America’s governing organizations in a web of interlocking deceptions that effectively took control of America’s policies in the Mid-East.
David Ben Gurion & Chaim Weizmann Original Photograph
The eggs hatched behind the closed doors of the Red House emerged as executives of the various organizations established to provide for the welfare of the ever-increasing Jewish community in Palestine. Initially, Chaim Weizman and David Ben-Gurion, worked with the Mandate forces by forming the Jewish Agency, the former serving as president and the latter as chairman, to serve the needs of this new community as it entered Palestine, legally providing personnel that could speak the languages of the various Jews arriving, arranging jobs for them, and orienting them to their new homeland. Clandestinely, the agency served the purposes of Zionist ideology through the Consultancy, where Ben-Gurion also served as chief executive…
The Zionists who took control of the Jewish immigrants entering Palestine had predetermined goals: the establishment of a Jewish State and the expulsion of the existing population in the land of Palestine by whatever means necessary. The reality of these goals is undeniable following the research disclosures of Benny Morris and IlanPappe, corroborated now by Catling’s file that adds the understanding of the British Mandate Forces to the conditions they faced during the decade that ended with the establishment of the Jewish State. To effectively force their goals on their constituents, the Zionist Consultancy enlisted the beliefs of the Jewish people by injecting into their political intentions the sacred biblical iterations of the “Promised Land,” the Zion of the Psalms, for example, “By the streams of Babylon we sat down and wept when we remembered Zion” (137:1). Although the Zionists were, for the most part, secular in thinking, they used the Jewish yearning for the Promised Land as a goad for acceptance of their leadership (Cook’s Introduction, The Plight of the Palestinians).
The second part of your question, “Do you consider this newly-created state legitimate and sustainable?,” requires a more nuanced answer. Once the British determined that they could not control the Zionist forces aligned against them in what the Zionist leaders of the Jewish Agency called an all-out war against the British control of immigration, the matter was turned over to the UN in 1947. This resulted in the Partition Plan and Resolution 181.


While this was only a Resolution passed by the UN General Assembly and not the policy body of the UNSC, the creation of the division on one level never happened. On another more practical level, when Truman recognized the Israeli state followed by Russia, it did. The Israeli Agency used this “creation” to push Truman to recognize their state. To that extent, the 181 resolution created two states. It did not authorize the Jewish state to confiscate the land provided for in the resolution for the indigenous people, the Palestinians. Yet even before the Mandate forces left Palestine on May 15, 1948, and indeed before the Jewish Agency appealed to Truman with a letter silent on their illegal destruction of Arab towns and villages, most especially Deir Yassin in April, they had begun the Nakba and the on-going theft of Palestinian land that continues to this day.
The consequences of this on-going theft have altered the reality “on the ground” for both the Jews and the Palestinians. Both in number are approximate, especially if the “return” of the original Palestinians from their refugee status were to be included. Given the Bantustans that have been created to contain the Palestinians, the creation of a viable Palestinian State with its “secure” borders is not possible; add to that the impossibility of collectively removing all the “settlers” or in fact the “squatters” from their illegal settlements, and the reality the Zionists have created is a one state solution. But this is not tenable to the State of Israel, so what happens? Their answer is unending wars and the maintenance of overpowering force to contain the disgruntled Palestinians, to keep them divided and to deal with only a faction that can and willingly accepts its role as negotiator when it has no such authority and does not represent all the people.
Divide and conquer has been the method right along as the invasions into Lebanon, Gaza, Syria and the continuing threat of invasion of Iran demonstrate. The impunity they enjoy from the US comes from their control of the US Congress. The occupation and the wall that hides the reality on the ground from both the outside world and the Jews themselves is tolerable; they do not see nor want to see what they have done to others.
Is this sustainable? For the Zionist purpose, Yes; for the US Congress, Yes, at the moment but there are signs of dissent; for the American people, No, but only to avoid war with Iran not to further the cause of the Palestinians; yet, that may come in time; for the world communities, No, and I hope and trust that they will force this issue to the UN and the International Court of Justice as it must go there to force resolution. Can you imagine the Zionist government closing down the “settlements” in the West Bank and Jerusalem? Does legitimacy mean ultimately absolute control and justice submission to it? Is that 21st century civilized behavior? The answer to your question, is it legitimate? To respond to this Kourosh, I revert to Nathaniel Hawthorne’s Dr. Grim as he answered young Ned’s question ‘Where did I come from’:
“Only one thing I am well aware of, –it was not to be happy. To toil and moil and hope and fear; and to love in a shadowy, doubtful sort of way, and to hate in bitter earnest, — that is what we came for. Whence did you come? Whence did any of us come? Out of darkness and mystery; out of nothingness; out of dust, clay, mud, I think, and to return to it again. Out of a former state of being, whence we have brought a good many shadowy revelations purporting that it was not a very pleasant one. Out of a former life, of which the present one is hell!”
Image: 1a ParisSorry, Kourosh, revisiting this period is difficult for me. Ultimately, the answer to your question rests with the UN and most especially the people of Israel and the people of Palestine. What happened to the 1919 agreement but the willful demands of a few Zionists that would tolerate only what they demanded. Until that mindset changes there will be nothing but occupation and oppression. The simple answer to your question is “yes,” the continued occupation is in defiance of the UN resolutions and of international law. This is not a question the Zionists have to ask; they have impunity because the US Congress controls the US vote on the UNSC. There is no way to address your question except by logic and morality. Let me begin with logic and revert to a non-word in the vocabulary of Zionism and “Neo-conism” as determined during the Bush administration, morality.
Hamas has been condemned by the Bush and Sharon administrations for using bombs strapped around the body as terrorism against innocent civilians. Yet these same men find the use of “flechette” bullets that scatter pellets of death into multiple civilians legitimate weapons to use against Palestinians. They find no problems using missiles fired into crowded city streets or the use of cluster bombs in Iraq as legitimate weapons of war. Both accept as legitimate weapons for use in civilian areas high altitude bombing whether from F-16s or Apache helicopters. Yet such use anticipates civilian deaths and is, therefore, deliberate slaughter and cannot even be placed in the category of “collateral damage.” The day Sharon left Washington, having conferred his blessings on Bush, Israeli tanks again fired into a crowded Gaza neighborhood in Rafah and killed six civilians including children. This is terrorism.
Why is it that these two men can act like terrorists and not be condemned for it? Because a definition has been designed that excludes them as heads of state and terrorism cannot be applied to states. Therein lays the power of words. But the world has not been fooled. Consider the UN resolutions condemning Israel for such acts: 252 (1968) calling on Israel to rescind measures that change the legal status of Jerusalem, including the expropriation of land and properties; 446 (1979) calling upon Israel to abide by the Geneva Convention regarding the responsibilities of occupying powers, especially “not to transport parts of its civilian population into occupied Arab territories”; 465 (1980) calling on Israel to cease construction of settlements in Arab territories; 471 (1981) calling on Israel to prosecute those involved in assassination attempts of West Bank leaders; 799 (1992) calling upon Israel “to reaffirm the Fourth Geneva Convention in all occupied territories since 1967, including Jerusalem, and affirms that deportation of civilians constitutes a contravention of its obligations under the convention”; 1405 (2002) calling on Israel to allow UN inspectors to “investigate civilian deaths during an Israeli assault on the Jenin refugee camp; 1435 (2002) calling on Israel to withdraw to positions of September 2000 and end its military activities in and around Ramallah, including the destruction of security and civilian infrastructure; and these are only a few. These words were written in 2003 before the condemnation by the UNGA of Israel when it considered the Goldstone Report or the condemnation of Israel when it invaded Lebanon.
These resolutions describe terrorist activities, activities supported by the Bush administration including vetoing such resolutions. Given the severity of the actions challenged by the UN, one would think Bush would rush to the UN demanding that Israel be brought before it for defying its resolutions, something he used as a “gimmick” to take his “war” to Iraq. But deception and hypocrisy are the modus operandi of this administration, not openness, honesty, and reason.
Without morality there is no justice, without justice there is no peace, without peace there is nothing to meld people together, nothing to give love and compasscompassion a chance, nothing to dissemble the absoluteness of words that give license to slaughter those who will not obey, nothing to make absurd beliefs in “chosenness” for some to be served by others (donkeys), historical rights to others lands, “democracy” for some, “security” for one by denying it to others, “friendship” while spying on friends, “right to defend our people” while destroying the innocent that have no defense—such is the amorality that rules when International Law is ignored, yea, mocked and ridiculed.
Q: Article 49 of the Geneva Conventions IV stipulates that “it is illegal to colonize occupied land or transfer non-indigenous population to that land.” This illegal conduct is exactly what Israel has been doing for some 6 decades. Israel’s settlement constructions on the Palestinian lands and the Occupied Territories starkly run counter to this internationally-recognized law. Who is responsible for holding Israel accountable while it continues to violate the law and build illegal homes on the lands it has seized from the Palestinians?

A: You ask, who is responsible for holding Israel accountable while it continues to violate the law? We know this: Israel will not hold itself accountable; it has the “right to defend itself.” That in their mind is unquestioned truth, absolute justice in the international community, and trumps every other right or assumed right. Since they abide by no other courts of law, UN or otherwise, they write and impose their law on everyone, everywhere. And we might note that they offer no such logic to their neighbors or they go to war to “defend their right’ as happened when they invaded Lebanon in 2006. A note of irony here: Israel argued it had a right to attack Lebanon because two of their soldiers were kidnapped by terrorists; how ironic that the Jewish terrorists in July 31, 1947, fighting the British Mandate authority kidnapped two British officers, hung them, and booby trapped their bodies. Needless to say Israel does not call this terrorism.
We also know this: the United States has become incrementally their “godfather,” protector of the Israeli State by agreements wrought by coercion on the American peoples’ representatives. Yet the US proclaims that any “arrangement” or agreement between the Israelis and the Jews must be done by these two peoples with US oversight as broker. That justice would suggest that these are not equal partners attempting to reach agreement but rather a thief that has commandeered the land of the other and offers to accept some accommodation of land swap that continues in existence what the Zionists have confiscated without reparation or return to internationally agreed upon borders realized in 1967, receives no negative comment in the American press or rebuttal in the international community.
If then we remove Israel and the United States as potential problem solvers to this dilemma, we must turn to the originators of the problem, the United Nations. Yet for 65 years that organization has not been able to bring Israel to justice in the international courts. Why? The US veto is not a satisfactory answer. If, as is the case, virtually two thirds of the member states have consistently found Israel in violation of their resolutions, then it is incumbent on the membership to act. Since they cannot change the role given to the US as a permanent member of the Security Council, they must go around that fact.
They could vote to remove Israel’s membership in the body that they have defied for 65 years. One would assume time has expired to allow Israel to act in accordance with the laws of the international organization. This would not prevent Israel from acting as it does, but it would notify the people of the world that this is a rogue state bent on destroying international order and agreement of rights to all peoples, including through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the right of Palestinians to have a country, the most fundamental right of all. This isolation would make it increasingly difficult for Israel to ignore their neighbors, all 194 of them. Perhaps a world-wide vote on this might be executed by the UN. Let the people of the world determine if Israel is a true participant in the matters of world affairs; let the UN determine that it is a united body that treats all its members equally.
Consider the injustice that could be righted by this action. After Israel invaded Lebanon, it was the UN that had to foot the bill of reconstruction for that illegal invasion. Why? After the invasion of Gaza in 2008-9, it was the UN communities that had to come to the aid of the distraught Palestinian people. Why? After the attacks without provocation of member states development projects, Israel bombs what they determine are for them potential threats, not based on any proven matter, just Israel’s speculation. No reparation, no accountability, not before the law nor the resolutions of the UN. Why? Why does the world community sit idly by and let the US and Israel act with impunity? Who is responsible? We are, all of us in every nation on the planet.
Q: One of the problems the Palestinian people have been facing since the beginning of the occupation in 1948 is the restrictions imposed against their freedom of movement. There are hundreds of checkpoints and roadblocks that forbid the Palestinians to freely travel across the Occupied Territories, West Bank and Gaza Strip. These restrictions are in contravention of the article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. What do you think about Israel’s depriving the Palestinians of this fundamental right?

A: What do I think about Israel’s depriving the Palestinians of this fundamental right, freedom of movement? Perhaps the better question is “How can the world communities allow such a state of affairs to exist? Or How can the elected officials and the appointed officials of a state that oppresses the people in its occupied territories be allowed to travel among free nations that obey international law?” Consider the vocal comments of Israel’s leaders and the openness of its press that receives no condemnation from the free world: “Dov Weisglass, revealed to Haaretz that the “ulterior motive behind Sharon’s unilateral decision to withdraw from the Gaza strip” was not to further the peace process but to “freeze it” in order to prevent “the establishment of a Palestinian state.” Where did you read about this in America’s main stream media? In another news article last month, Haaretz editorialized that Israel is responsible for the terror that exists in Palestine! That confession also went unnoticed in the US. The sin of intentional omission more often than not creates the perceptions we hold on issues of great significance. The elite powers that control the message control what we think is true”.
This is the Haaretz commentary: “The underlying basis of (this) terrorism lies in the territories. Nowhere else. The main motivation for the war against us is the aspiration to shake off the cruel yoke of the occupation. The checkpoints, the humiliations, the suppression and the mass imprisonment are the true infrastructure of terrorism.”
Note the power of that admission: “the true infrastructure of terrorism” is the Israeli occupation and treatment of the Palestinians. Let’s remember that Yossi Beilin, an Israeli architect of the Oslo Accords, and former Palestinian minister Yasser Abed Rabbo, worked for two and a half years to create the Geneva Accords, to right the wrongs of the original proposals. These accords “… stipulates the immediate recognition of a Palestinian state by the state of Israel. It addresses forthrightly the issue of refugee right of return and compensation for their suffering and loss of homes in accordance with UN Resolutions 194 of 1948 and the principles of International Law. And it notes that the relations between Israel and Palestine shall be based upon the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations. Furthermore, it makes the borders that compose the state of Palestine those of June 1967 in accordance with Resolutions 242 and 338”.
Kourosh, I’ve written many articles about the deprivation imposed on the Palestinians by the occupiers; when I visited Palestine some years back, I went to the home of a family whose house and shed were completely surrounded by the wall, on all four sides. Their children had to go through gates to get to school, at the pleasure of the IDF. What is not visible when one walks through the streets of the small towns is the inner corrosion of those imprisoned not by walls but by the reality of the humans who do this. I have reason to feel the way Dr. Grim sees the world.
Q: In some of your articles, you’ve described Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian people “a slow-motion genocide” and a representation of ethnic cleansing. The United States and its European allies defend what they call “Israel’s right to self-defense”, arguing that Israel launches attacks on the Palestinian Territories in retaliation to the rockets being fired from the Gaza Strip on the Israeli cities. It doesn’t matter to them that they are the defenseless Palestinian citizens who are being killed by the Israel Defense Forces on a daily basis. What’s your viewpoint? Is there any way to justify Israel’s conduct?

A: I have no way to justify Israel’s conduct in its treatment of the Palestinian people. I do not know how to justify in my own mind such treatment. Indeed, it was that treatment by Sharon and his obsequious lap dog, George W. Bush that drove me to write against this combined terror inflicted in my name by my government. America’s poor suffer the consequences in Philadelphia where schools have no money to care for the deprived Americans, and that is but an example of what happens when we dedicate the tax payers’ money to slaughter and mayhem in a land we claim must defend itself when we can’t even identify the boundaries of that state because it refuses to identify its borders as they are continually growing as they inflict further genocide on the people of Palestine.
I edited The Plight of the Palestinians: a Long History of Destruction to bring to the world the truth about these lies. I focused on the first ten years of this century, this new 21st century to show the horror of what Israel and the US were doing to a defenseless people. I was armed, to use a military image as seems appropriate here, with 500 pages of seized evidence by the British Mandate forces in Palestine that gave in blatant terms the original intention of the Zionists when they entered Palestine to eradicate the Arab population; their words, their intent and their proposed methods of carrying it out. It was and continues to be “slow-motion genocide.” The Introduction to that book demonstrates this conclusively. The articles that fill the book, over 20 authors of world-wide renown, demonstrate that what was true of the original Zionists continues now.
The original title for that book was “As the World Watches: Genocide in Palestine.” The MacMillan board changed that as we came to publishing hour. One does not stir the calm unnecessarily. But they did not change its content or its cover. It does what I intended, expose the truth to all who will listen. It is not a best seller. But you can help, Kourosh, Have fifty more people buy the $89 text and I can get it out in soft cover for a modest price.
Needless to say many object to the term “genocide” because the courts have not said Israel commits genocide. But how can the courts determine such if they cannot bring Israel before the courts with the US vetoing that step. I publish in The Plight the UN definition of Genocide. Any child can tell that the actions taken by the Zionists against the occupied people breaks the laws defined as genocide.
Under the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide adopted in 1948, genocide was defined in Article 2 as:
…any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.[1] What more can be said? I believe that both the United States and Israel are guilty of Genocide under this definition. I do not believe any human with a conscience can remain silent and accept “complicity in genocide.”
Q: Some political analysts and academics consider Israel an apartheid regime that is treating the Arabs and Palestinians in a discriminatory manner through adopting measures and passing laws which deny them their basic and essential rights, such as the right of Arab-Israeli citizens in the Occupied Territories to join their families in Israel. Such policies represent apartheid, that is giving special favor to one group of people above all other groups based on certain criteria. What’s your viewpoint on that? Is Israel an apartheid regime?

A: Years ago I began my study of this issue by reading Dr. Uri Davis’ work Israel: An Apartheid State in 1987. Here is a man of conscience; here is a man that acts as he believes; here is a true humanitarian. There is this that a person can do: bring others to you, learn from them, share with them, include them—this is the way of the human; then there is the way alone, the isolated individual that must see self- repeated in all with whom they share their world, a community of exclusivity cemented by fear and loathing of others and an intrinsic acceptance of victimhood that pervades their thoughts and strengthens their will to self-defense even when there is no enemy.
I do not need to itemize the apartheid nature of the state of Israel; it’s well documented. I contributed to that in 2003 “Israeli Democracy: Fact or Fiction? And again in “The Real Axis of Evil,” 2006, and in many articles published before and since. The problem isn’t that it is not in existence, it is that we do nothing to condemn it.
Q: There’s a putative belief, which you’ve also alluded to in your articles, that the US Congress is dominated by the pro-Israel representatives or owned by the Zionist lobby. Even if this belief is not true, we have seen in different votes of the Congress that it conspicuously sides with Israel on various occasions and never allows Israel’s interests to be threatened. Why is it so? How has the Congress been dominated by such lawmakers?

A: There is a major American writer that has researched and investigated this issue for years and he has published a recent article that collapses much of his research into a direct breakdown of the facts: “Israel Buys the US Congress” by Dr. James Petras. It’s a fact; that it is not known in America is the fault of our media that is owned by Israeli sympathizers and a nation psychologically unable to criticize the state of Israel lest they be charged with anti-Semitism. The Congress of the United States is also locked into a similar mindset, but many get their political coffers filled by AIPAC and its sympathizers throughout the country. Books have been written about this subject, but they get little press and suffer from intended silence.
The answer to your second question, Why is it so?; it requires a dip into the political reality that controls the American system. Thomas Jefferson argued with John Adams about the good and the bad of the open democratic system that gave power to the people to consent to who would govern them. He noted that three things can destroy democracy: a pseudo-Aristoi, organized religion, and corporations. We have all three operating now. The rich elites of the corporatocracy that runs the country have vast amounts of wealth.
They use that wealth to buy candidates that remain in office as long as they can raise enough money to keep their seat. Hence those with the money can demand what they want of the representatives. Congressmen and women who follow their own conscience or will not play ball with the powers that run the country are challenged at the voting booth by candidates brought in by the corporations and overwhelm the electorate with severe, most often deceptive advertisements to defame the occupant. Representatives Paul Findley and Cynthia McKinny are examples of that reality. There are many. The American system is fraught with obstacles that allow for corruption, including a Supreme Court that will find ways to satisfy the powerful by allowing unlimited funding by corporations that in effect nullifies the rights of the average American. That is why it is so.
Q: Earlier in March this year, US President Barack Obama traveled to Israel and urged the Israeli leaders to recognize the right of the Palestinian people to have a state on their homeland. “Just as Israelis built a state in their homeland, Palestinians have a right to be a free people in their own land,” he said. As you noted in your article, President Obama asked the Israelis to put themselves in the Palestinians’ shoes. Do these statements indicate a rift or disagreement between the US President and the Israeli leaders? It’s said that the US government is strongly opposed to the settlement constructions, but cannot convince Israel to abandon the constructions. What’s your take on that?

A: You raise a question that has plagued me since that speech. I supported Obama when he ran because it appeared that he was going to reverse the Bush’s disaster. He entered the American stage like a rock star; the people were weeping in expectation that the forces of good had somehow taken root in America in the form of this man who represented a horrific past that we want to deny but can’t. As a member of the African American lineage it seemed possible that through him we would find release from that mental pain. That talk in Cairo glowed with anticipation for a new path in the world, an America that did not speak as an empire, but as a friend and counselor.
But then it seemed to collapse as he failed to end the torture and imprisonment without charge at Guantanamo, then the failure to erase the Patriot Act, then the toughening against the whistle blowers as they brought forth undisclosed information to the American people, then the removal of the rights to trial and disclosure of evidence, then the virtual uncontrolled use of drones and the continued funding of the state of Israel. What we thought might happen did not. He lost the confidence of those who backed him even before he ran for a second term.
Perhaps his decision to attack Syria on a specified date whether or not the Congress were to support him left him vulnerable before the world. But a strange thing happened. When the Congress went home for the August break, they were deluged by voters stating flatly, no more wars, 75% or more of the American people let it be known they would not return to office if they voted to take America to war. Even Obama could read those returns. And so did AIPAC and the Israeli supportive lobbies.
Enter Russia. Here was a possible way out. But that solution brought in its wake the negotiations now going on to deal finally with Iran’s nuclear plans. Suddenly, Israel’s not-mentioned nuclear arsenal became less hidden in American discourse. Iran asked that the whole issue of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty be raised again and all of a sudden Israel stood exposed. What rights does Israel have to determine which member state of the UN should or should not have atomic weapons? It alone has not and will not sign this agreement yet it wants its neighbors to rest assured that it will not use their weapons of mass destruction when they are the country that has attacked without provocation its neighbors whether that be Lebanon, Syria, Gaza, or Iraq, that it alone of the mid-east states uses chemical weapons on the defenseless people in Gaza and Lebanon.
Is it possible that Obama sees a way to dislodge this albatross from America’s neck? Kerry’s brief but telling press conference suggested that the administration is marching to a different drummer. He told the Israelis they cannot fail to see the injustice taking place at the “peace” negotiations where “peace” for Israel is “Shalom,” peace for self, for Israel, as in “we have a right to defend ourselves,” not the peace that the rest of the world knows and desires, a peace based on equity for all through justice, compassion and love.
Now we know that AIPAC and Netanyahu can and will turn on the American President if he does not do as they command. Or at least it appears that they are willing to announce their anger over his “change of heart.” Should Israel find its new alliance with France and seek commercial alliances with China and abandon America, perhaps the American people will see just how true is the claim that this is America’s only friend in the Mideast. Perhaps the Israelis and the Zionists know that if it’s not their way, they may not be able to maintain their power over the US Congress. And that will change principles and relations.
It is too early to know how this will play out, but should it free America from the shackles that have bound it to this rogue state, I would find it a blessing for the American people. I have years ago declared my own personal declaration of independence from the Bush administration and I have found it difficult to recognize a distinct change in the Obama administration until their new effort to negotiate with the world and not go it alone dragging our chains behind us, chains tied to a state that does not in my opinion share what America brought to the world with its declarations of the rights of humanity and its recognition of equality for all humanity.
Q: Several rounds of peace talks have been held between the representatives of the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli regime.

However, at these talks, Israel never seemed to be willing to recognize the essential rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to statehood, the rights of refugees to return and water and energy sources allocation. Can such talks which are not held on equal footing yield significant results?
A: No. That’s the answer to your question, can such talks yield significant results? Much of what I have said in this interview replies to this question. I published an article in The Plight of the Palestinians by Dr. Jeffrey Halper, “The Problem with Israel,” which provides detailed evidence that Israel has refused to negotiate in good faith over an extended period of time dealing with approximately 19 “peace talks.” It’s a matter of window dressing; they talk and build and confiscate as the world watches. America cannot be a fair broker for peace; that’s a ruse. Let me explain my take on this supposed peace process. I delivered a paper in Cairo in 2006, just after Hamas became the elected authority for the Palestinians. Here is what I proposed and it still stands. “Hamas can force Israel and the United States to sue for peace by presenting to the United Nations a “Plan for Peace in Palestine”.
Call Israel’s bluff; force truth into the open; make the reality on the ground evident to the people of the world; present the United Nations with its own Resolutions, actions already determined to have validity — Resolutions 181, 198, 242, 252, 338, 446, 465, 471, 799, 1405, 1435, 1544 – resolutions stretching as far back as 1947, resolutions requiring Israel to accept right of return, to respect international humanitarian rights, to return land stolen in the wars, to affirm the 4th Geneva Convention against deportation of civilians, to cease construction of the illegal settlements, to stop demolition of homes and all collective punishment, to cease their illegal change in the legal status of Jerusalem, to stop the illegal assassination of Palestinians, to accept the existence of a Palestinian state and the borders that have been determined by the UN.
It is today a bit of a stretch to point to what should be done with the reality that the seizure of virtually all of the Palestinian land has made so impossible. But if the world communities forced the UN to act, then the starting point has to be what that body has determined and not changed.
Interview by Kourosh Ziabari
__________________________________________________________________
William A. Cook is Professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California where he served for 13 years as Vice President for Academic Affairs before assuming his faculty position in 2001. Prior to coming to California, he served as a Dean of Faculty, Chair of Department of English and faculty member at institutions large and small, public and private in four eastern states. He is an activist and a writer for numerous Internet publications including Counterpunch, Salem-News.com, Pacific Free Press in British Columbia, Dissident Voice and Information Clearing House, serving as senior editor for MWC News out of Canada, and contributing editor at the Palestine Chronicle, the Atlantic Free Press in the Netherlands, and the World Prout Assembly, his polemics against the Bush administration and the atrocities caused by Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert in Israel, now our 51st state, have been spread around the Internet world and translated into French, Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, and Italian. Cook also serves on the Board of the People’s Media Project, interviews on radio and TV in South Africa, Canada, Iran and the United States and contributed for five years yearly predictions to the Hong Kong Economic News. This volume follows his Tracking Deception: Bush Mid-East Policy, Hope Destroyed, Justice Denied: The Rape of Palestine and continues his scourge against the hypocrisy, deceit, and destructive policies that have characterized American mid-east policy and its destructive alliance with the Zionist forces that have turned Israel into an apartheid state determined to destroy the Palestinian people.

In addition to his polemics, he writes plays (The Unreasoning Mask, co-authored with his wife, D’Arcy, and The Agony of Colin Powell), satires (see “Advancing the Civilized State: Inch by Bloody Inch” in The Rape), and poetry (Psalms for the 21st Century). His most recent fictional work creates a morality tale based upon real life figures that haunt our lives,The Chronicles of Nefaria He can be reached at wcook@laverne.edu or www.drwilliamacook.com..
The Plight of the Palestinians: a Long History of Destruction is a collection of voices from around the world that establishes in both theoretical and graphic terms the slow, methodical genocide taking place in Palestine beginning in the 1940s, as revealed in the Introduction. From Dr. Francis A. Boyle’s detailed legal case against the state of Israel, to Uri Avnery’s “Slow Motion Ethnic Cleansing,” to Richard Falk’s “Slouching toward a Palestinian Holocaust,” to Ilan Pappe’s “Genocide in Gaza,” these voices decry in startling, vivid, and forceful language the calculated atrocities taking place, the inhumane conditions inflicted on the people, and the silence that exists despite the crimes, nothing short of state-sponsored genocide against the Palestinians.

A Wall for a Wall: Mirroring Racism

Now that our President has handed over the resolution of the Syrian debacle to the United Nations, perhaps justice demands that he hand over resolution of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to that international body as well. One can turn to the reality of the illegal machinations of the Israeli Zionist government any day of the week and see and know and feel the terror that exists for the occupied people who are defenseless before the impunity granted to the state of Israel for crimes that any other member nation of the UN would, as is true of Syria, be brought for justice before the International Courts. Consider these items from today’s news:

“In the 12 years since September 2000 up to the end of September 2012 Israel killed 6,550 Palestinians in their homeland. Of these, 1,335 were children. Over the same period Palestinians killed 590 Israelis in their homeland, including 85 children.
This is a kill-ratio of 11 to 1. When it comes to children, the Israelis are even more proficient, achieving a kill-ratio of nearly 16 to 1.
This does not take into account the Israeli onslaught on Gaza from 27 December 2008 – 18 January 2009 which killed nearly 1,400 Palestinians a huge number of whom were children. Obama, the US president-in-waiting at the time, refused to lift a finger, let alone utter a word of condemnation.
Finally, the above does not take into account the thousands of Palestinian homes demolished by the Israeli military machine funded by the United States.” (info@1948.org.uk), 9/29/13).

“Here’s a piece of disgusting news, so disgusting in fact that it beggars belief. Israel and its army of occupation are not just brutal, inhuman and utterly devoid of morality. Israeli army sprays sewage on the streets of the Palestinian town of Abu Dis )(Camden Abu Dis Friendship Association, on 26 September).

israeli-sewage

Here’s an idea whose time has come: create Israeli designed occupied territories in multiple cities across Europe, Britain, and America, each mirroring the prison that exists in Judea/Samaria (sic). Only here the 400 miles of wall would surround the Jewish enclaves that exist in these cities so that a veritable comparison might be made obvious to the entire world of the conditions that prevail in Palestine. The idea originates from Iran, a land that is threatened by the impunity of the state of Israel; perhaps it could become the next peace project of the United Nations after Syria. After all this one has existed now for over 63 years. Justice demands it.

“Supposing Iran imposed strict regulations on its Jewish community telling them there are places in the country they cannot go to, or gives them special coloured number plates for their cars which identifies them as Jews or constructs a ‘barrier’ around their residences restricting their movements and effectively blocking them from accessing other parts of Iran, or make a strict checkpoint system where Jews would have to queue up for hours to get a permit to go to taboo places for legitimate business or to visit a sibling or to take a patient to hospital. Add to this mix an official announcement that henceforth Iran would be an exclusive state  for Aryans and Aryans only, thus automatically relegating all minorities to a second class status, can you imagine the outcry  of such outlandish racist policies would make?” (Hameed Abdul Karim, hameed247.blogspot.com)

Sometimes a wall is needed if only to magnify its purpose, to include and to exclude: apples from cows or humans deprived of life by humans depraved enough to deny life; indeed, a wall mirrors those on each side, the haves from the have-nots, the people without a country from a country exclusively for one people identifiable only by their religion, a people denied freedom of movement or of economic growth or of their natural resources, the aquifers that traverse their land, the oil and gas off their shores, from those who have stolen the land and the aquifers and the taxes and slam the gates shut effectively imprisoning a people without charge or justice.

I speak obviously of the Sharon Wall of Fear and Racism that incarcerates the people of Palestine. It reflects like a glowing mirror in the sun the inherent racism that is embedded in the state of Israel as it continues its devastation of those not born into Judaism and imposes its will on the indigenous people whose land they occupy. I would suggest that Iran build what Hameed Abdul Karim describes in the above paragraph in Iran and America build its own Wall in Brooklyn and the UK build its Wall in London to reflect before the world what it prefers not to deal with, the lawless state of Israel that has yet to be brought before the international courts.

The irony of this suggestion jostles the just mind that knows in all probability that the people of the United States, many in Britain, some in Europe and all in Israel would be repulsed by such racism and condemn the nation and the people of Iran and America and Britain for such injustice and hate-filled behavior, yet, and this is the irony, they would not see the mirror reflection in that condemnation of the existing state of affairs in occupied Palestine. What is the cause of such overwhelming acceptance of the injustice inflicted on the Palestinian people by the Jewish State; what mental blindness prevents our representatives and Senators from realizing that the foundational principles of the United States of America are antithetical to the foundational policies of the Zionist state; and how can anyone present this contradiction to the citizens of America so that the injustices inherent in our unbridled support may be repudiated?

In 1492 and again about 100 years later when “settlers’ from Britain invaded the eastern shores of this continent, they brought with them beliefs rife with racism, arrogance and military conquest allowing them to enslave, incarcerate, and slaughter the people they encountered indifferent to the plight of these people before the might of their innate beliefs and overwhelming military power. That is the Eurocentric mindset that devastated the indigenous people with disease and massacre until they were essentially eradicated. That is the same mindset that the Zionists brought with them to Palestine. That is the colonialist mindset that cemented in the invaders their superiority over all others. It is a mindset that is anathema to the beliefs that all humans are created equal, that all are endowed by their creator with unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and it is anathema to those who would deny the rights embedded in the Bill of Rights that guarantee to all citizens justice before the law. Yet this nation has supported without condition a nation that has acted contrary to all of these principles since its founding in 1948.

Perhaps it is time America relinquish its “unbreakable” support of the Zionist state so that justice can flourish in Palestine, so that Walls of Hate may fall before bridges of compassion and love, so that weapons of mass destruction can be removed from the face of the earth, so that peace may reign in the mid-East, so that brother and sister can live together throughout the world.

Propelling One Crime Against Humanity To Cause Another: The Logic Of The Pathological Mind

By William A. Cook
01 September, 2013
Countercurrents.org
“This (chemical attack in Syria 8/21/2013) is the first use of chemical warfare in the 21st century. It has to be unacceptable, we have to confront something that is a war crime, something that is a crime against humanity. If we don’t do so, then we will have to confront even bigger war crimes in the future.” : William Hague, British Foreign Secretary, 8/28/2013
Unfortunately, tragically, William Hague’s empathy for those mutilated by chemical weapons does not apply to the UK’s allies, the United States and Israel, as the heinous picture below attests: the children of Palestine seared to death by white phosphorus during Israel’s savage invasion of Gaza during this 21st Century, the Christmas slaughter of the innocents (2008-2009), a repetition of Herod’s pathology from the first century, when the Roman appointed King of the Jews attempted to control those who could live and
those who could die. How fortunate for William Hague to forget this earlier use of illegal chemical weapons to save embarrassment for his country’s allies while verbally savaging his perceived enemies.


Small Palestinian children burning to death, following the phosphor explosives bombardment by Jewish soldiers on their school.
(Israel’s War on Children – Part 1: Murdering Children for Sport, The Jewish Holocaust against Arab Children)

While the rest of the world debates whether chemical agents were used, what kind were used, and who used them, whether or not this attack should be or must be the determinant of action required because the “red line” has been crossed, whether the west must wait for the UN inspectors to report to their superiors, whether or not we have already acted illegally against International law by arming and training these rebels, or whether there is any known consequences should we attack Syria, one concern, it seems to me, rides high above all others, how can the United States and Israel be the determiners of who will use chemicals of mass destruction since they are culpable of this crime multiple times over in this very century? Witness the bombing of Baghdad, the attempted erasure of Fallujah, again and again, and the US supported invasion of Gaza. How hypocritical of the British Secretary to claim righteousness to invade a sovereign nation when he and his nation have been allies to such mayhem?
Here the righteous stand in all their finery, their striped ties set against the blue pin-striped suits, lashing at the people of the world for not getting upset that they do not want more wars despite the “evidence” that they fail to present, after all they are the government and the people must trust them. Well here is evidence, the picture taken in Gaza and should you have the stomach for it, hundreds of pictures taken as the invasion there unfurled (see Operation Cast Lead, a video stream put together by Dr. Arthur Billy and made available on You Tube). But there’s more evidence coming right from the perpetrator of this slaughter as reported by Idan Landau:
“It doesn’t photograph well. (the white phosphorus)” In all honesty, the man is right.
This item caught me by surprise. The IDF is giving up white phosphorus? Wait a minute; the IDF never used white phosphorus during Cast Lead. So how exactly do you give up something you never had? Chemical weapons are something the Syrians use, no?

 Okay, after a while the army did remember that it had been confused, and it did use white phosphorus, but only in open territories and not against people.

Okay, then the IDF remembered that it got it wrong again and that it did use white phosphorus in urban areas. Two hundred bombs, actually. But this was only in order to create a “smoke screen,” and there is nothing wrong with that. And if there was something wrong, it’s insignificant and unintentional, and it would be thoroughly investigated, so that no stone is left unturned.

 That’s all well and good, except that at least 12 Gazans met their horrific death this way, burned to death by white phosphorus. Among them were three women, six children and a 15-month-old baby girl. Dozens more suffered burns from the material which continues to burn through flesh and tissue until it reaches the bone. Doctors in Gaza were helpless in treating the unfamiliar burns. Israel didn’t give them time to prepare themselves; white phosphorus shells hit Al-Quds Hospital and completely burned the top two floors.”

There’s the evidence and proof that neither Kerry, Obama, Cameron or Hague can produce. And shouldn’t we be able to see photos taken of this tragic event by phone cameras as happened in Gaza? The allies are those guilty of the use of this horrific weapon but we fail to condemn ourselves and certainly not our “democratic, only friend” in the mid-east, Israel. But why condemn if we control the UN and make it impossible to bring Israel to the international court as the Goldstone Report stated must be done.

 And so we continue this inevitable march to disaster granting impunity to the cause, the nation that drew the red line Obama has to address or be unbelievable forever after. How prescient that we provide a point of absolute action that can be used by our own CIA, Mossad, and mercenaries, blame the Syrian government for false flag operations, and attack regardless of truth and evidence to support it. What else justifies the only excuse our governments use to not provide transparent evidence: it can’t be revealed because it would aid the enemy in determining our sources of information.

Let me close with some further observations by Idan Landau that cannot be refuted yet were never allowed to be presented to the International courts. Had that happened perhaps Hague’s attempt to use the use of chemical weapons to day would not have been necessary.
“These facts were already known in the first days of Cast Lead. Human Rights Watch published a thorough investigation – one of the most thorough I have read – of Israel’s use of white phosphorus and its devastating effects. IDF soldiers who took part in the Gaza campaign also testified on the extensive use of white phosphorus, including direct fire on houses suspected of being booby-trapped (and not for “masking” purposes as the IDF later claimed).

(photo: Muhammad Sabah / B’tzelem)
Ghada Abu Halima, 21, who was gravely injured by IDF white phosphorus in Gaza. Abu Halima later died of her wounds

Indeed, the outcome “didn’t photograph well,” and that’s the reason the IDF is parting ways with white phosphorous. Not, god forbid, the hell that Ghada Abu Halima went through from the moment she was burned by white phosphorous and lost five family members, up until her death two and a half agonizing months later. Ghada managed to give her testimony and to have her photo taken, which “didn’t look good,” and “burdened Israeli hasbara [propaganda],” as the Maariv reporter put it.”

Only the “vanquished know war” Chris Hedges weeps, but few will confront the victors that vanquish truth with lies pretending to be civilized. Thus does ignorance and might control our lives.
William A. Cook is a Professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California. He writes frequently for Internet publications including The Palestine Chronicle, MWC News, Atlantic Free Press, Pacific Free Press, Countercurrents, Counterpunch, World Prout Assembly, Dissident Voice, and Information Clearing House among others. His books include Tracking Deception: Bush Mid-East policy, The Rape of Palestine, The Chronicles of Nefaria, a novella, and the forthcoming The Plight of the Palestinians. He can be reached at wcook@laverne.edu or www.drwilliamacook.com

World from Behind the Wall

<!– div#cbauthorplug{ font-size: 10px; color: #000000; float: none; } div#cbauthorplug a{ font-size: 10px; color: #0269B3; } div.cbauthorplug img { border-style: none; width: 45px; margin-right: 5px; margin-left: 5px; float: left; }

 
Behind the Wall“Put yourself in their shoes. Look at the world through their eyes. It is not fair that a Palestinian child cannot grow up in a state of their own. Living their entire lives with the presence of a foreign army that controls the movements not just of those young people but their parents, their grandparents, every single day. It’s not just when settler violence against Palestinians goes unpunished. It’s not right to prevent Palestinians from farming their lands; or restricting a student’s ability to move around the West Bank; or displace Palestinian families from their homes Neither occupation nor expulsion is the answer. Just as Israelis built a state in their homeland, Palestinians have a right to be a free people in their own land.” -President Barak Obama in Israel 2013

Would that the President might take his own advice—“Put yourself in their shoes. Look at the world through their eyes”—he need only open his eyes beyond the wall that imprisons the Palestinians he speaks about: see how the wall blinds the Jews to the plight of the people they drove from their land, see the barren landscape on the other side rubble strewn, savaged by bulldozers and missiles, see the people caught in a maelstrom of poverty and deprivation, listen to the mothers and wives weep for their husbands and sons jailed without charge in Israel’s Gulag where escape comes by self-starvation as the only defense against indefinite torture and lives lost to family and friends, listen to the cries of the people of the world who have condemned this barbaric behavior only to run into the President’s own wall–the veto in the UN Security Council that effectively denies the justice he so righteously exalts, “Peace is also just.” How true and how easily it could be made a reality if he were to simply abstain during the vote that sought to bring this defiant state before the International Court of Justice finally after 64 years of impunity to the very justice this President mouth, as though saying it levitates him beyond criticism.

Indeed, “Look at the world through their eyes,” let Americans look at the state of Israel through Palestinian eyes to witness the monstrous injustice that exists in this “democratic state” that “shares America’s values,” America’s only “friend” in the mid-east. Let’s look at how the Israeli government responds to the President’s call for justice for the Palestinians, within three days of his visit. Let’s report on a peaceful protest that has gone unnoticed by the American press with the exception of Tim King’s Salem-News: “Israeli forces have sprayed Palestinian homes in the village of Nabi Saleh with “skunk”* as a punishment for organizing weekly protests against the Apartheid Wall built on occupied West Bank land (March 26, 2013). See the video provided by the paper that the eyes of all might be opened:

While the American press offered nothing about this incident, Reuters and the Guardian did as well as The Middle East Monitor which provided this background information: “Israeli forces have sprayed Palestinian homes in the village of Nabi Saleh with raw sewage … as a punishment for organizing weekly protests against the Apartheid Wall built on occupied West Bank land. Human rights watchdog B’Tselem published a video showing Israel’s armoured tanker trucks fitted with “water cannons” which spray the foul fluid at Palestinian protesters. B’Tselem said in a statement that the Israeli forces also targeted all the houses of the village with the sewage. The powerful jet broke windows and caused a great deal of damage in the houses, said the Israeli organization. “It also causes environmental damage,” it pointed out. The non-lethal weapon has been added to the Israelis’ armoury for crowd control, said B’Tselem, even though the video shows clearly that it is also used against Palestinian-owned property”.

How can the people of the United States tolerate such despicable and inhumane behavior from a supposed friend? When did Americans decide that peaceful protests should not be allowed? When did Americans decide that their tax dollars should provide a state the means to shower humans and their homes in foul smelling chemicals that literally cloaks them in animal smell used by animals for self-protection but used here to prevent intelligent dissent from oppressive military aggression. Literally forcing silence to prevent disagreement. These are the ruthless and barbaric actions of a state that has no respect for humans other than its own; it casts a pall over its ”friend,” the American people, by making them complicit in such abominable behavior, it smells to high treason, an insult to those who have provided an estimated 3 trillion dollars of support that this state might exist (Rense.com).

What is particularly disturbing is the fact that minds have designed this “strategy” to quell dissent, a fundamental right and duty of democratic people. It tells us that the state of Israel does not value dissent; its newspapers can carry debates by its Jewish citizens but it will not tolerate dissent from those it occupies or its non-Jewish citizens.

Look through the eyes of the Palestinian mother and father who have struggled mightily to maintain a home through these years of deprivation; watch them see this “shit,”a term used in Vermont to describe the spreading of cow manure on the fields in the spring, but this is not Vermont nor are the Israelis “shitting the fields,” pulverize the house breaking through the windows saturating furniture, beds, even kitchen utensils depriving them of basic forks and knives to use at dinner. What is this but collective punishment of the innocent who at worst wanted to demonstrate against the occupation peacefully. There is no self-defense here; it is rather sheer racist hatred of others, demeaning, shameful, a means to inflict uncontested force against the defenseless, the coward’s way to self-fulfillment.

No state can spread such “shit” on its people with impunity except Israel protected as it is by our captured Senators like Lindsey Graham, who had the audacity to interrogate a true patriot, Senator Hagel, who pledged his oath of office to the United States not a foreign government, because he was beholden to AIPAC knowing as he sat there the answer to his question to Hagel, name a Senator Mr. Hagel who is afraid of Israel, with the answer written all over his obsequious face, you Senator Graham.

This is not the democracy Americans practice; it is a sham democracy that protects the few and emasculates those excluded. Democracy is inclusive. Had I not witnessed this behavior in this decade of advanced civilization, I would have thought that it came from the mind of our most enlightened sci-fi satirists, Kurt Vonnegut, Aldous Huxley, or George Orwell, minds capable of dreaming the impossible couched in scenes of the savage country or 1984; perhaps reality has caught up with comic satire.

Obama’s trip to Israel demonstrated, in the words of AIPAC, America’s “resilient friendship, based in large part on an unshakable dedication to common values. Commitment to democracy, the rule of law, freedom of religion and speech and human rights are all core values shared between the United States and Israel” (AIPAC). What is that rule of law that binds these two countries together that such a vicious display of animosity against neighbors would be inflicted so shortly after the President of this “resilient friendship” left the country having asked the Israeli people to consider “Looking through the eyes of their neighbors at the conditions imposed on them by the Israeli occupation”?
The Israeli government has imposed Military Order 101 that requires an Israeli permit if more than 10 people gather, something similar to the “parade permits” required in the old south to ensure no demonstrations against “Bull Connor’s peaceful world.” Martin Luther King had to face that same logic in the United States in August of 1963. Certainly our President knows the brilliance of King’s logic that tore apart the logic of occupiers and oppressors that denied the rights of people who live in a free, open and equitable land, a truly democratic land that treats all its citizens by rules of law as civilized societies must: “…I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the eighth-century prophets left their little villages and carried their “thus saith the Lord” far beyond the boundaries of their hometowns; and just as the Apostle Paul left his little village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to practically every hamlet and city of the Greco-Roman world, I too am compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my particular hometown.” Is not this the purpose of the President’s visit to Israel, to announce to the world that America will not tolerate injustice done in its name by its “resilient friend” that receives 8 million a day from the lagers of the American taxpayer?
But there’s more, much more that King argued before the American government when it was forced to confront its immorality and illegality after 90 years of segregation, oppression and deceit against its own people. “I am cognizant,” King asserted, “of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly…You deplore the demonstration that are presently taking place in Birmingham. But I am sorry that your statement did not express a similar concern for the conditions that brought the demonstration into being.”

How prophetic of the conditions that have yoked the United States to the state of Israel. Indeed that state wants to forge a “security agreement” that would link its behavior to that of the United States and literally drive our policies in concert with theirs. Skunk tankers would become American tools against its own people even as we permit, even encourage, the lawlessness that drives Israeli policies against its neighbors whether the American people agree or not. Thus do we become complicit in the evil perpetrated by that rogue state.

But some will assert that America had laws requiring permits to gather, to protest peacefully, and to march against the immoral actions of its local military authority. And King demolished that logic by appeal to a human nature that knows barbarity does not and should not rule in a civilized state.

“One may well ask, “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer is found in the fact that there are two types of laws: there are just laws, and there are unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “An unjust law is no law at all.”Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine when a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law, or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. Toput it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.”

We, the humans that design and implement the rules of law, do so to ensure that all are treated equally under that law; if not we have abrogated the responsibility of civilized humans to act on behalf of all and thus have become but beasts dependent on instinct and ruthless force to exist. That is not the principled foundation upon which the United States was fashioned. And while the nation did not begin its days in keeping with its principles, it never erased them but rather attempted in time to reconcile its beliefs with the implementation of laws that corrected its deficiencies.

Well might we ask how this President reacted to the foul actions of the Israeli government when it uses such despicable actions against the people it is responsible for protecting under the rules of international occupation? This is what he said: “So peace is necessary. But peace is also just.Peace is also just. There is no question that Israel has faced Palestinian factions who turned to terror, leaders who missed historic opportunities. That is all true.”

[But it is as well deceitful; it addresses only the concerns of one side, the “resilient friend” of the U.S. Why no mention of the Nakba, the defiant use of illegal terrorist destruction by the Jewish Agency and its armies against the legal authority of the Mandate Government charged by the international community to protect both the indigenous people of Palestine and the immigrants arriving from Europe? Why no mention of the 64 years of intentionally stalled peace negotiations’ that resulted in the virtual takeover of all the land of Palestine? Why no mention of the original intention of the Jewish Agency and its adherents to remove by whatever force necessary the Arabs from the land of Israel when in fact they didn’t own it or have “historical” right to it? Why pretend to the world that the Palestinians have been the perpetrators of terrorism when they have the legal right to defend their homeland against illegal occupiers and oppressors?]

“And that’s why security must be at the center of any agreement.”

[Security for whom? Do not the Palestinians need security when the reality on the ground has been the theft of virtually all their land? Only security for the state of Israel against the Palestinians when the state of Israel has the fourth largest military in the world and the Palestinians have no military?]
“It has to be done by the parties.”

[Certainly it is obvious to all that the United States cannot be a broker for peace between these parties. It is yoked to the state of Israel irrevocably. Only the UN can bring resolution by bringing Israel before the Security Council to determine how it will reconfigure its borders so that the state of Palestine can be fashioned legitimately and justice for all can be established.]

“But the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, their right to justice, must also be recognized.”

[If this is Obama’s desire than does he has a responsibility to take action to ensure it happens. Doing nothing will change nothing. Let the 95% of the world’s population that has recognized the rights of the Palestinian people (188 nations out of 193 allowed by their vote acceptance of the people of Palestine to member status in the UN) direct the process by which justice can be done.]

If we look at the world from behind the wall that imprisons the Palestinian people, we must accept the injustice that pervades the Zionist government’s treatment of their neighbors. Any law that degrades human personality as Martin Luther King states is unjust. What is more degrading to the human personality than to be drenched in the sewage that flows from the Jewish squatters’ settlements or sprayed by the skunks that use their protective innards to deny the democratic right of dissent? A just people create just laws, laws that uplift human personality. Peace is just as the President said; would that he would make it so.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

How We All Became Palestinians – William Cook’s "Decade of Deceit"

DateFriday, July 13, 2012 at 7:46AM AuthorGilad Atzmon

Book Review by Gilad Atzmon

http://www.counterpunch.org/

William A. Cook’s ‘Decade of Deceit’ is a collection of spectacular articles written by a man who has gradually awakened to the disastrous meaning of the Zionification of our universe. Being an authentic and unique poetic voice, Cook manages, layer by layer, of to unravel the hypocrisy that has contaminated every aspect of our life – morally, culturally, spiritually and politically.
But Cook is not only a superb poet, he is also an English Professor and it is this synthesis between the aesthetic and the academic that makes this book such a staggering and fascinating spiritual text. It is this unique shift between scientific precision and creative beauty that makes ‘Decade of Deceit’ a must-read.

Collections of articles can be tedious, but sometimes they can also provide us with a glimpse into the workings of a sharp and astute prophetic mind. ‘Decade of Deceit’ introduces us to an ethical thinker and the ways in which he has formed his thoughts about Israel, Palestine, the USA, contemporary politics, and ourselves – the witnesses of our own emerging tragedy.

Cook is a natural wordsmith with the rare capacity to deliver, by way of beauty, a very poignant message. This American English scholar clearly knows how to turn his pen into a sword, yet he aims only at peace, harmony and reconciliation. In December 2002 he writes to Osama Bin Laden “vengeance is a disease that multiplies, divides, and becomes the scourge of humankind; it is anathema to creation because it destroys what exists.” But then, just a few pages later, as hell is about to break loose, we are captivated by Cook’s search for harmony. In March 2003 as America went to war he wrote “I went to the lake to find peace, this being the week the president gave one of his rare prime time press conferences, the only opportunity we, the public, get to see him perform. It’s also the week America goes to war.”

It takes courage to look evil in the eye but it takes even more courage to pose the following questions in free America. “What fuels slavery, ethnic cleansing, land theft, and genocide? What enables a mind to justify imprisoning another without cause, without trial, without rights of due process and assumption of innocence until proven guilty? What enables a soul to accept dominance over another, to degrade and humiliate other humans, to participate in or acquiesce to genocide?” And Cook doesn’t shy away from answering his question: “Genocides and holocausts arise out of unchecked zeal, unquestioned duty, and silent acquiescence. They are fueled by blind belief, personal fear, and a sense of superiority that gives license to slaughter.” This is clearly an astute reading of both Israeli and American exceptionalism – the combination of fear, superiority and dogmatism are indeed lethal.
As we progress through the text the questions and observations posed by Cook becoming increasingly crucial. From 2003 onward, the English-speaking Empire has submissively allowed itself to become an Israeli mission force, the Iraq war being just one obvious example. In November 2007 Cook writes, “I woke from a dream last night with a sudden start, the world had turned inside out … the sun did not shine, the moon did not come out … darkness enveloped the earth, and all that had been was no more.”….” But the bleak reality in which we live, led Cook to realise that he actually ‘did not wake from that dream’.

“I am living that dream today as I watch the world walk in darkness, befuddled by deceit, desirous to end the violence of these past 60 years, expectant, hopeful, a little fearful that the joy of the season may be marred for themselves and the Palestinians if the conditions of the Zionists are not met even if it means that all of us must accept the will of those who control by force of might and rule in ruthless disregard of any who stand in the way of their desires. The Beast of Hypocrisy walks the streets of Annapolis, it hides its ugliness beneath its cashmere long coat as it enters the conference hall to present in elegant verbiage its compassionate intent that peace might at last come to the mid-east, but in the darkness we do not see the maggots that reside beneath that elegant exterior, the maggots that have eaten away the moral innards of the people that have gathered to deny the people of Palestine the justice they so rightfully deserve.”

We are indeed, day after day, deceived by a system that has been hijacked by a foreign power. In October 2011 Cook discloses his own vision of the current American reality:

“Citizens no longer control their government; they are slaves to it. Representatives no longer serve the citizen seeking their consent to govern, they are servants of the corporations and lobbies that control the economic system to which the citizen is enslaved. Presidents no longer lead, they are the obedient lackeys of their corporate overseers. Freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want do not determine the needs of humans, economics of the market place supersedes all at the expense of the citizen and human rights. We exist in a corporate world of unending wars, of vengeance and recrimination, of fear as a commodity that imprisons the mind, of greed that destroys the resources of this planet without remorse, and of insatiable arrogance that harbors no concern for those it destroys.”

I can only assume that Cook’s journey has led him to realize that, by now, we have all become Palestinians. We are all subjected to that same total abuse that has robbed and distorted each and every precious value that ever made the West worthwhile. So I guess that one possible interpretation of Cook’s work may as well be that solidarity with Palestine should start at home and that unless we liberate ourselves first, there is only little we can offer others.

Gilad Atzmon’s latest book is The Wandering Who? A Study of Jewish Identity Politics.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Sins of Our Fathers

Saturday, May 12th, 2012
“We dance round in a ring and suppose/ But the secret sits in the middle and knows.” ~ Robert Frost.
Victors’ celebrations harbor shadows that lurk in the soul as revelers dance in remembrance, burying in laughter the suffering screams of those displaced and destroyed, furiously hiding forgotten faces framed in fear from mocking the glorious dance should they be awakened once more by the reverie.
May 14 and 15 are paradoxically days of celebration and catastrophe; victors “dance round in a ring and suppose,” caught in a never ending quest to know if indeed this celebration is for victory or for defeat, while those vanquished understand “the secret that sits in the middle and knows.” Are the secrets Truth that we are afraid to delve into, too ashamed to acknowledge, or fear of a pending Nakba for the victor signaled by a merciful and just God?

As this May day approaches, a Biblical age of three score and four for the state of Israel, only six years short of Biblical death, an appropriate time for reflection about judgment and retribution, about peace and justice lest the sins of the fathers remain the curse of the children.
What is the secret that sits in the middle and knows? What is it keeping secret?
Who is it, since it is personified and knows? Who are the dancers this May 14?
Are they the children of the next generations whose fathers sinned?
What do they suppose? What do they suppose the victory remembrance celebrates?
Does it celebrate the men, the fathers and husbands and sons that massacred the fathers and husbands and sons at Deir Yassin?
Do they meditate on those relatives of the dead who live now in refugee camps in foreign countries who have not been home for 64 years, nor seen the town now transformed into a psychiatric institution, nor visited the graves across the street, tombstones upended and defaced?
What minds contemplated the barbarity of Deir Yassin a month and five days before the state of Israel declared its freedom as a democratic country desiring recognition by the nations of the world?
What minds could lie to the President of the United States, even as they laid waste the town and its people, appealing to him to immediately recognize Israel because they would bring peace to Palestine by obeying the Charter and Declaration of Human Rights held sacred by the United Nations?
Israeli Jews looting al-Musrara Palestinian Quarter, Jerusalem 1948
What personified being knows? Is it the omniscient and just God who heard the voices of the dying mothers and children and the lamentations of the men trucked through the streets of Jerusalem, living proof of Israeli might, mocked and ridiculed as inferior beings before they were returned to their town for execution? What is it about secrets that stir such fear in the hearts of the revelers? Certainly they know the faces of the dead do not die to the mind of the reaper; they live just below the twisted thoughts that gave rise to the slaughter, for why kill if remembrance of that fulfilled savagery is not possible? And isn’t that after all what the Almighty meant when he proclaimed the “sins of the father are visited upon the children”?
But what if we turn to the ring; what does it represent? Perhaps it’s the Wall that Israel built to hide the enemy they have been unable to cleanse in the manner of Deir Yassin and the other known and unknown massacres recorded by Benny Morris and Ilan Pappe. Perhaps the Wall does not hide the indigenous people as it was supposed to do; that may be what they suppose as they dance round in a ring. Perhaps it rather makes obvious that lives exist beyond that wall, that freedom to move is curtailed for them, that hours can pass attempting to get permission slips to visit Jerusalem, and hours more can pass to travel the seven miles to their former home. Perhaps this is more than just an “inconvenience” as explained by Michael Oren on 60 Minutes, perhaps it’s an intentional and calculated inhuman interference in personal lives that casts as dirty an image on the occupiers as the affront casts on those dispossessed of rights.
MuralonIsraeliwallb

How unfortunate that those who dance must have their backs to something or someone they cannot see; how disturbing that must feel since it is the unknown that raises fear and turns it inward corroding the comfort that comes with openness and friendship.

What peace of mind exists when one knows that life has been made miserable for people beyond the Wall; what peace blossoms when fear circles behind the back because the government determines the on-going need for greater and greater military power making a police state of a nation inside and outside the Walls built to contain both the body and the soul.

What hope evaporates for a future without the shadows that the Wall casts on both those hemmed in and those cut out and life becomes a constant search for unknowns that threaten life and limb even as the very protection the Wall supposes to create destroys friendships with others and isolates each citizen in the sick minds of those who rule the country.

The sins of the fathers began 64 years ago when they swore allegiance to a group of men who had taken control of Palestine from the British Government laying waste both the Arab people and the Mandate government of Britain regardless of agreements made and pledges of cooperation signed between the Mandate authorities and the Jewish Agency. It began with an oath that necessitated selling the soul. 



A pistol and the Jewish bible depicting
the Hagana Oath of Allegiance
on display at the Haganah Museum



“From the moment an individual takes the oath,** they are committed to a life of secrecy and hence of disloyalty and betrayal to those they are most intimate with in their day to day life. Neither their actions nor their true identity is discernible to those with whom they interact regularly.
This is a life that encapsulates the necessity of lies, deceit, coercion, extortion, and obedience to a group that dictates the actions one must pursue; freedom no longer exists, self-direction no longer exists, loyalty to others no longer exists, indeed, friendship with others is compromised or impossible, one becomes the subject of that group, a veritable slave to their desires and wills. The mindset that promotes such control allows for spying, for deception of friends, for ostracism in one’s own community for thinking differently, for imprisonment without due process, for torture, even for extrajudicial executions. It is a total commitment to a cause that supersedes all others determined and dictated by an oligarchy in silence and subject to no legitimate institution and to no one.
“The darkness of the Zionists’ deceit was and is camouflaged by the appearance of civil structures existing within the framework of a legal authority, the Mandatory Government’s accepted agency for the Jewish community in Palestine and, today the presence of lobbies, think tanks, controlled media of communication, and legalization of policies that allow for dual citizenship among others. Fear still operates, fear of the non-friendly, enemy states that surround the friendly, democratic state of Israel promoted as existentially threatening to America’s security, fear for representatives in Congress who dare not confront the desires of AIPAC and its affiliates lest they find themselves bereft of political support and consequently bereft of their position, and fear induced by corporate media that fears offending the power base represented by the lobby.

“Until Israel’s fall 2006 blitzkrieg of Lebanon, when the world had an opportunity to witness the ruthlessness of Israeli Zionist violence unimpeded by concern for helpless civilians fleeing for their lives or orphans unable to take shelter from missiles or children returning home after fearful flight from invading forces only to find toy-like cluster bombs left intentionally to maim or slaughter, the world’s communities felt a sympathy for the offspring of those victimized by the Nazis. Prior to that destruction wrought by a military of enormous power, the people of the world knew little of what went on in Palestine and knew only that the Jews of Palestine in 1948 and 1967 had to fight against overwhelming odds against Arabs of many nations intent on pushing them into the sea, victims of human violence once again.
Then came December 27, 2008, Israel’s Christmas bombing of Gaza, Holiday giving with a vengeance. Once again, the might of Israel’s state of the art military – its air force, navy, army – invaded the defenseless, imprisoned, physically destitute residents of Gaza. Once again, the world witnessed the ruthlessness of Israel’s Zionist intent to subjugate, humiliate, and obliterate the indigenous people of Palestine. Now the world knows the truth: the Zionist Consultancy that ruled the Jewish people in Palestine in 1930s and 1940s, like their counterparts in the Israeli government of Ehud Olmert in December of 2008 and January of 2009, intended to expel the people of Palestine from their land and had the military means to do it against an anemic enemy incapable of defending the people.

“There is an unraveling of the lies of omission that have quilted the truth these many years. As each square rots in the sun now shed on it, the plight of the people of Palestine becomes more and more apparent.
Benny Morris revealed in June of 2009 that “there were far more acts of massacre than I had previously thought (with the new documents made available) … and many cases of rape … and (between April-May 1948) units of Haganah were given operational orders that stated explicitly that they were to uproot the villagers, expel them and destroy the villages themselves.”
He continued in response to the interviewer’s questions: “Because neither the victims nor the rapists liked to report these events, we have to assume that the dozen cases of rape that were reported … are not the whole story.
They are just the tip of the iceberg.”;
“The worst cases (of massacre) were Saliha [Salha] (70-80 killed, Deir Yassin (100-110), Lod (250), Dawayima (hundreds) and perhaps Abu Shusha (70); Ben Gurion “covered up for the officers who did the massacres.”; “Yes … the commander of the Northern Front, Moshe Carmel, issued an order in writing to his units to expedite the removal of the Arab population.”; “From April 1948, Ben-Gurion is projecting a message of transfer. ..
The entire leadership understands that this is the idea.”; and quoting Morris himself, “Without the uprooting of the Palestinians, a Jewish state would not have arisen here.”

“In The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, Ilan Pappe states: “The Zionist project could only be realized through the creation in Palestine of a purely Jewish state, both as a safe haven for Jews from persecution and a cradle for a new Jewish nationalism. And such a state had to be exclusively Jewish not only in its socio-political structure but also in its ethnic composition.” Pappe’s accounting of the ethnic cleansing is not pleasant reading. It is a detailed presentation of calculated ruthlessness. Considered alongside Walid Khalidi’s All That Remains, it provides the reader with a visual context that forces consideration of the mothers and fathers and children who once lived and worked and played and prayed in the 418 villages destroyed. It is that human element that can give meaning to “Never Again.””[1](Introduction The Plight of the Palestinians, section “Selling the Soul). Such is the sorrowful tale of the sins of the father.

**The Hagana Oath (Secret files of Sir Richard C. Catling, Deouty Head CID, Mandate Police)
For those entering the military forces of the Jewish Agency, the Hagana, the badge is replaced with the Hagana Oath (XVI A 157).

I hereby declare that of my own free will and in free recognition I enter the Jewish defence organization of the Land of Israel, (Irgun Haganana Haivri Be’Eretz Israel).

I hearby swear to remain loyal all the days of my life to the defense organization, its laws and its tasks as defined in its basic regulations by the High Command.

I hearby swear to remain at the disposal of the defense organization all my life, to accept its discipline unconditionally and without limit, and at its call to enlist for active service at any time and in any place, to obey all its orders and to fulfill all its instructions.

I hearby swear to devote all my strength, and even to sacrifice my life, to defense and battle for my people and my Homeland, for the freedom of Israel and for the redemption of Zion.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

William A. Cook: "In Defense of Guenter Grass"

William A. Cook
Al-Manar



“Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted, the indifference of those who should have known better, the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most, that has made it possible for evil to triumph”
Haile Selassie

“Have our Jewish sisters and brothers forgotten their humiliation? Have they forgotten the collective punishment, the home demolitions, in their own history so soon? Have they turned their backs on their profound and noble religious traditions? Have they forgotten that God cares deeply about the downtrodden”
Bishop Desmond Tutu


Guenter GrassThese two cautionary admonitions capture the thrust of Guenter Grass’ electrifying poem, “What Must Be Said,” that has brought an avalanche of invective – some scurrilous, some vituperative, some even personal vilification – against the man who warns the people of the world as well as the Jewish people of the dangers inherent in the actions of the Zionist controlled government of the State of Israel.

Such condemnations avoid direct rebuttal of Grass’ pointed cries of despair as he contemplates continued indifference to the slow yet calculated genocide that exists in Israel’s occupation of Palestine reverting instead to derogatory innuendo, ignorance of conditions prevalent in the occupied territories, ignorance of those determined to destroy Israel, and personal guilt as a German. There is no reflection on the worst sin human kind can inflict on their fellow human beings, the silence of indifference to the plight of the Palestinians or to the potential danger facing the people of the mid-east should Israel preemptively strike Iran.

The title of his poem, “What Must Be Said,” echoes the prophets of old, cries of those weeping in the wilderness to heed the obvious, to hear the hypocrisy that masks the reality of a nation that cries for peace as it stealthily steals more land, that demands dismantling of Iran’s nuclear plants as it declares its right to Demona and untold weapons of mass destruction, that denounces with all brazen duplicity, indeed silences those who criticize the state of Israel while they are free to attack them as anti-Semitic.
“Why silence so long,” Grass asks of himself and answers, as must we all, that we are “slaves to an oppressive lie,” what cannot be said without condemnation because Israel has the “right” to demand and defend what it will. Is it wrong to criticize the obvious? Is it wrong to bare truth when silence once before begot a holocaust? Is it wrong for the German people to mark what they have learned through decades of reflection and reparation and not reveal what they have lived and learned? Is it wrong to speak when devastation threatens, when arrogance buries truth, when the weak have no voice, when the unknown consequence of brutal, raw, preemptive power is imminent?

Zionist war crimesI would have Guenter Grass speak for me, my children and grandchildren, and all others who could suffer yet another World War, by noting the obvious that has been silenced so long:

• a state provided with the fourth greatest military machine in the world to defend less than 6 million people,
• a nation, the only nation in the mid-east with weapons of mass destruction,
• a nation that refuses to sign the mid-east nuclear non-proliferation agreement,
• a nation that has demonstrated its willingness to invade its neighbors in Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, and drools to bomb Iran,
• a nation that occupies a land provided for it by the same United Nations that gave Israel license to declare itself a nation,
• a nation that damns Iran for proclaiming that it will “wipe Israel off the map,” when in fact it never made such a declaration yet innocently hides its own declaration in the Likud Party Platform that the state it professes to want peace with, Palestine, shall never have a state west of the Jordan,
• a nation that is of such demonstrable threat to world peace that if it is not condemned would be a blot on all who remain silenced and thereby complicit in its crimes,and for such inaction, such indifference we must accept responsibility and condemnation; let the indignant ring their bells of anger and hatred, truth will prevail.

Who better to speak than a citizen of a country that supplies Israel with nuclear submarines capable of terrorizing its neighbors if not the world, submarines provided as reparation to a people destroyed so they can become the destroyer. “Why silence so long?” because “this must be said” with strength, conviction, integrity and honesty, and without personal fear or trepidation because the silence has been broken by a voice that resounds throughout the world in righteous thunder against the greatest danger the world now knows, an Israel that can act with impunity to crush whomever they determine to be their enemy.
Let me close this defense of Guenter Grass with a story told by Professor Michael Klein years after he had escaped death at Auschwitz. Klein’s brief narrative is titled “Breaking Silence.” It captures what I believe is the real essence of Guenter Grass’ plea, both in time and shame. The story reflects on Klein’s close friend, Salamon Abshalom, who had attempted escape and was to suffer death as a consequence. The story is a parable that parallels our time; what if voices had told of the Jewish plight before the trains took them to the death camps; maybe Salamon Abshalom would still be alive.
“My friend Salamon Abshalom was let out. He was barely able to walk; his hands were tied behind his back. An SS guard took him to the back of the camp yard. … He was led to the gallows and made to climb onto what looked like a stepladder. The noose was tied around his neck.
We stood paralyzed, in bewildered despair. How could the Heavens allow this to happen on this holy Yom Kippur evening? Did the Germans set up the execution specifically for Yom Kippur to humiliate the God of Israel and His people? The silence of the Heavens screamed out in our hearts and in our souls. The desecration of the God of Israel, of the people of Israel, of Yom Kippur, and the humiliation of man created in the image of God proceeded in silence as the German hangman, the Camp’s SS commander, stood over Salamon Abshalom.
Suddenly, as if from nowhere, a powerful, high pitched voice rang out over the camp yard. It sent chills down our spines, as we heard the cry of “Sh’ma Yisrael…”, Hear O Israel”, as Salamon Abshalom declaimed the eternal proclamation of the Jewish people’s belief in one God….
With his prayer of Sh’ma Yisrael arising from his last breath, he raised all of us standing Zaehlappell to the highest spiritual level. Even as his life was extinguished by the brutal murderer to whom nothing was holy, he still proclaimed the eternity of the Jewish People, in defiance of evil, in defiance of the Germans, in defiance of the silence of humanity, and in defiance of the silence of the Heavens. Salamon Abshalom proclaimed the Godliness of the Jewish People even at a time when God seemed to be totally absent.
I slowly calmed my emotions and tried to analyze my thoughts. The Germans murdered Salamon Abshalom, but I was guilty having been silent in spite of the promise we made to each other in the camps that we will tell the world of what happened. I had kept Salamon Abshalom’s memory a secret for all these years.”
Silence sacrifices the innocent because it allows continuation of slaughter; silence rests in the soul as it acidifies into self-shame; silence speaks no language, offers no aid, but ensures that time will extinguish both hope and guilt. Silence is the voice of the coward and the accomplice. Silence must be extinguished.River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Yet another War for Israel

Yet another War for Israel
Is it not time for Israel to seek peace with its neighbors? (Via Press TV)
By William A. Cook

‘Men use thought only to justify their injustices, and speech only to conceal their thoughts.’ —Voltaire: Dialogue XIV, Le Chapon et la Poularde

Voltaire’s wit often illuminates truth. Consider this revealing ‘thought’ as expressed recently in Alert, the voice of AIPAC to its membership: “Some Americans believe if the Israelis strike Iran, the U.S. will pay the political costs anyway, so it would be better for the Americans to do the job and do it properly. Their clock is a bit different from the one the Israelis hear. Because of their vastly superior firepower, the Americans could strike Iran later, more devastatingly and more sustainably.” How just is it for AIPAC’s mouthpiece to declare that America should “devastate” Iran because it has “vastly more firepower” than Israel and could “do a better job” and “do it properly,” as though this were a clean-up “job” of a waste dump and not an illegal invasion of a member country of the United Nations that has done nothing under international law to threaten the U.S. much less attack it, while the Israeli government and its IDF look on happily content that it is American boys and girls suffering the consequences of the unwarranted attacks and not Jewish boys and girls? Has it come to this, that unnamed Israeli spokespeople, voicing AIPAC’s policies, determine what nation the U.S. should invade without consultation with the representatives of the American people?

Not that this sentiment has not been expressed before. Netanyahu told Piers Morgan the same thing in an interview last year, as I have quoted in previous articles, noting Israel’s Zionist government’s desire to use America’s military as their own claiming that what is good for Israel is good for America. That protestation completes the wit contained in Voltaire’s quote: because Israel is America’s only friend in the mid-east, and the only Democracy, and the only nation in that part of the world aligned with the west, it alone deserves America’s “unquestionable” and “unbreakable” support.

Speech that conceals fails to mention that being Israel’s “only friend” has made the U.S. a pariah among nations in the world and made its touted “Democratic freedoms” a laughing stock as the other nations in the UN watch America “support” the Zionists’ agenda to attack Iraq and Lebanon and Gaza, abort international law as it, like Israel, commits extrajudicial executions in foreign states, equips Israel when it invades its neighbors to the north and attacks peace activists aboard vessels from peaceful nations including Turkey, and, ironically sits silently by as Israel dismantles what little of a democracy existed in that nation by creating new laws that deny full citizenship to anyone not a Jew. Thus have we become a nation supportive of a militaristic Theocracy while we continue to mouth the principle of separation of church and state, a principle founded on tolerance, concealing the truth that there are more than 20 great religions with well over a billion people who accept no religion (Adherents.com) all of whom deserve recognition and, as necessary, support from America.

Clearly Israel’s needs are not America’s needs if we mean by that more war in the mid-east. Have we pulled our troops from Iraq just to move them into Iran? Does any sensible person believe that the Iranians have a “need” or desire to attack the people of the United States? Our forces completely surround Iran. We are the nation with atomic weaponry, not Iran. What possible good would Iran achieve by having a nuclear weapon? Hasn’t Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Agreement while Israel, who damns Iran for its nuclear “ambitions,” has an arsenal of nuclear bombs and has refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Agreement. Which of these nations is to be feared? Iran has never attacked a neighbor; Israel attacks and occupies its neighbors at will.

Have the Iranians reason to fear control of the U.S. military by Israeli operatives using this nation as its power because Israel wants to devastate Iran the way Iraq has been devastated? Yes. Israel’s ultimate goal is control of the mid-east by surgically cutting it into small indefensible sections that can be dominated by Israeli money and American forces. It would appear, however, that Israel fears America does not desire to follow Israel’s advice to “take out” Iran the way they convinced the Bush administration to “take out” Saddam Hussein. Hence the constant barrage that characterizes Iran as a warlike state set on wiping Israel off the map and becoming the dominant power in the mid-east.
It’s time, I believe, for the U.S. and the UN to consider how to avoid yet more devastation in the mid-east, not by expanding military operations there but by seeking peace through negotiations and cooperative support for the people of the mid-east. Both Israel and the United States must confront the reality on the ground today that they no longer have control over the people of the mid-east, and recognize the colonial drives that Zionism had designed for Israel are no longer tenable.

While Israeli control of America in the form of Las Vegas billionaires buying the presidency continues in the United States, and Republican candidates crawl to the altar of Mammon to remove Obama, who has already sold his soul to the forces of Evil, the people of the world look on in disbelief, having witnessed for sixty years the dominance of Zionist deceit, treachery, and manipulation of America as it savaged the mid-east in the name of friendship, democracy and shared values. But now, they have moved to take control of their own lives as they watch Israel corrode from within as it metamorphoses into a tribalistic, superstitious people further isolating themselves from the community of nations.
Can they not see that the people in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and, arguably, in Yemen and Saudi Arabia have had enough of dictators imposed by the U.S. and Israel to control their governments; can they not see that Turkey broke with the Zionist forces that demanded compliance with their rule regardless of international law and due respect for neighboring nations; are they blind to the Jordanian efforts to take seriously their role as a Palestinian neighbor; do they not see that the people of Egypt have made possible the opening of Israel’s illegal siege of Gaza, that the people of the world have given notice that they will not cease to break that siege with boats entering Gaza through international waters, that the Iraqi people have made clear that they will not cave in to America’s continued control of their country by proxy power, that the peoples of Britain, the United States, Canada, and Australia have openly condemned Israel’s injustices to the Palestinian people regardless of their governments paid presidents and prime ministers that claim otherwise; have they stood by blind to the French Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee issuing its recent report condemning Israel’s apartheid practices against Palestinians in the West Bank, blind to Secretary Ban’s clear call to Israel that it must withdraw from the occupied territories, blind to the European Union as it issued its recent report critical of the Israeli government’s on-going occupation and settlement of Palestinian land, blind as well as Russia, China, Iran and numerous other mid-east nations put into practice what they have agreed upon by resorting to other currencies than the dollar to be the international means of finance; unable to see that once the people of the world have had an opportunity to view the critically acclaimed, dramatically powerful, passionately presented film, The Promise, by director Peter Kosminsky of the United Kingdom, where the inhumane policies of the Zionist criminals erupts in all its unguarded ferocity, the veil of respectability will be removed from Israelis’ atrocities for all, and blind, totally blind to the United Nations as it acts upon a resolution to recognize the rights of the Palestinian people to a state of their own, must they not see, both Israel and its people, as well as all Americans, that they must accept the reality that no single nation can force its will on all other nations with impunity; that time is over.

Clearly Israel’s militaristic approach to neighborliness does not work. Israel fears “delegitimization,” it fears boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS), and it fears total isolation from the world’s communities. Should the U.S. become financially incapacitated through the devaluing of its currency, should it not be able to create adequate jobs for its citizens, should its investment in Israel estimated at $8.2 million per day for a population that is approximately 7 million impair its stability, should the people of America awaken to the control AIPAC has over their President and representatives and the total disregard of America’s security as a result, then Israel could lose both the American veto that has protected it from world condemnation of its policies and America’s military support for its aggressiveness against its neighbors. That would leave Israel isolated, wrapped in fear, and psychologically unstable. Israel’s alternative can only be constant instability, never ending terror and war, hatred by their neighbors, innate, simmering self-hate, and mental anguish resulting from exclusionism that leaves open wounds of distrust and self-questioning, a state terribly close to insanity.
Is it not time for Israel to seek peace with its neighbors? Since no sensible person in the mid-east believes that the U.S. can act credibly as a broker for peace, Israel must seek other partners from the UN who can serve that purpose. It must be willing to accept as a premise for peace, justice as defined by the UN’s International Courts and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It must understand that the occupied territories must be returned to their native inhabitants, that the Partition Plan of November 1947 must be a basis for negotiations if only to provide a foundation for equitable land for both peoples. Modification of land distribution could follow as well as a means of providing for the rights of those displaced in the Nakba. The world peace body could serve to protect both peoples as generations come and go until a free movement of all is possible. Then perhaps we could say, men use thoughts to find justice and speech to communicate it.

-William A. Cook is a Professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California. His works include Psalms for the 21st Century, Mellon Poetry Press, Tracking Deception: Bush Mid-East Policy, The Rape of Palestine, The Chronicles of Nefaria, and most recently in 2010, The Plight of the Palestinians. He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com. Contact him at: wcook@laverne.edu or visit: www.drwilliamacook.com.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

‘America’s Chickens Are Coming Home to Roost’

‘America’s Chickens Are Coming Home to Roost’
‘Violence begets violence.’ (Zoriah.net)
By William A. Cook
(An end of the year lament)

“Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred. And terrorism begets terrorism. A white ambassador said that y’all, not a black militant (Ambassador to Iraq, Edward Peck). Not a reverend who preaches about racism. An ambassador whose eyes are wide open and who is trying to get us to wake up and move away from this dangerous precipice upon which we are now poised…” — (Jeremiah Wright, September 16, 2001)

Prophets fare poorly in their own country, yet countries would do well to hearken to their prophets. Scorn, ridicule, and innuendo attend their pronouncements as the righteous defend their actions as logical, existential and necessary. Jeremiah Wright suffered such scorn and mockery because he understood the consequences of revenge on the innocent and the defenceless, justified by whatever inane discourse. Wright spoke truth to power that Sunday after 9/11 and the righteous cried to heaven condemning him to perdition for defaming America, for even suggesting that revenge for the sake of revenge is the motivation of the arch fiend against the Almighty, the foulest, most ignorant, most amoral rational for action.

Prophets anticipate truth; they review a nation’s past history and can predict its future. Witness America’s past as the Reverend Wright did that Sunday morning, and what America is doing now repeats its ugliness. Wright said this about America’s past:

He pointed out, a white man, an ambassador, he pointed out that what Malcolm X said when he was silenced by Elijah Mohammad was in fact true, he said Americas chickens, are coming home to roost.”
“We took this country by terror away from the Sioux, the Apache, Arikara, the Comanche, the Arapaho, the Navajo. Terrorism.
“We took Africans away from their country to build our way of ease and kept them enslaved and living in fear. Terrorism.
“We bombed Grenada and killed innocent civilians, babies, non-military personnel.
“We bombed the black civilian community of Panama with stealth bombers and killed unarmed teenage and toddlers, pregnant mothers and hard working fathers.
“We bombed Qaddafi’s home, and killed his child. Blessed are they who bash your children’s head against the rock. (See Psalm 137 to understand how the righteous take revenge against the innocent and defenceless.)
“We bombed Iraq. We killed unarmed civilians trying to make a living. We bombed a plant in Sudan to pay back for the attack on our embassy, killed hundreds of hard working people, mothers and fathers who left home to go that day not knowing that they’d never get back home.
“We bombed Hiroshima. We bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye.
“Kids playing in the playground. Mothers picking up children after school. Civilians, not soldiers, people just trying to make it day by day.
“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff that we have done overseas is now brought right back into our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.

That was the Sunday after 9/11, 2001 when Wright quoted Ambassador Peck. But even that list of America’s atrocities is not complete as Mark Twain would attest in his recounting of the massacre of the Moro’s at the turn of the last century 1900 and our disastrous foray into Vietnam when we lost 58,000 American soldiers and killed millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians.

This is the America that exists now: we preach righteousness, but lie with impunity; declare God’s mission to bring freedom to the mid-east, then decimate the women and children, the old and infirm as necessary collateral damage; proclaim the existence of Weapons of Mass destruction, then massively destroy a nation’s infrastructure, steal its natural resources, take control of its government replacing it with a favoured puppet; and then write the history to extol our righteousness while defaming the defenceless people decimated. Wright knew.

Perhaps our President might hearken back to a time when principles mattered, when truth mattered, when might did not make right, when the souls and hearts of people mattered, when justice and equality mattered not deceit and dominance over all. When did America become a dictatorial empire manipulated by an elite few using the Presidency like some houseboy to do their bidding? When did the founding documents get trashed, mocked and ridiculed as weak, worthless, and obsolete? When did the American people vote to become the dominant empire in the world? What interests of the people demand that this nation establish military bases in about 140 nations around the world then threaten the nations of the world with pre emptive slaughter should they dare to embark on economic or military equality with the United States? How do the actions implicit in these questions reflect a nation based on the rule of law, on justice for all its citizens, on equity of rights and recognition of rights, on the morals inherent in the Bill of Rights and the ideals enunciated in the Declaration of Independence?

Let’s say it loud and clear, the America of our founding fathers no longer exists; America is owned in mind and pocket book by those who have purchased our representatives, propagate their news through the corporate controlled media, determine the receivers of our tax dollars salvaging those who wrought havoc with our economy, write the legislation that controls the American people orchestrated through the largest conglomerate of a police state ever assembled, Homeland Security, and in its final nail in the coffin of human rights has legislated the abolishment of habeas corpus and rule of law by installing the draconian National Defence Authorization Act (NDAA 2012). This act in the words of Jonathan Turley, expert in constitutional law (December 21, 2011 on C-Span, gives dictatorial power to the President:

President Obama has just stated a policy that he can have any American citizen killed without any charge, without any review, except his own. If he’s satisfied that you are a terrorist, he says that he can kill you anywhere in the world including in the United States.
Two of his aides just … reaffirmed they believe that American citizens can be killed on the order of the President anywhere including the United States.
You’ve now got a president who says that he can kill you on his own discretion. He can jail you indefinitely on his own discretion.
I don’t think the Framers ever anticipated that [the American people would be so apathetic]. They assumed that people would hold their liberties close, and that they wouldn’t relax…

This is the President that rejected the Reverend Wright’s prophecy, that capitulated to his new masters who demanded that he repudiate him, that now elevates himself to the role of Judge, Jury and executioner, the role that used to be played by the Sheriffs of the old segregated south when they turned a blind eye to those dragging a slave to the hanging tree. Indeed, we have turned back in time to that denunciated by a real leader of men, a man born into slavery, Frederick Douglass, when he described the America he lived in just before the Civil War:

“What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer: a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelly to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciations of tyrants, brass fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade, and solemnity, are, to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy—a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices, more shocking and bloody, than are the people of these United States, at this very hour.
“Go where you may, search where you will, roam through all the monarchies and despotisms of the old world, travel through South America, search out every abuse, and when you have found the last, lay your facts by the side of the everyday practices of this nation, and you will say with me, that, for revolting barbarity and shameless hypocrisy, America reigns without a rival.”

The American people are now in Douglass’ shoes; they have been put on notice that any pathological employee of Homeland Security, of the armed forces of the United State, of our local police and National Guard, can suspect a citizen of associating or being engaged somehow with “terrorists,” can be arrested, interrogated, imprisoned indefinitely, without charge, without review except his own. The America Douglass so graphically describes existed up through the 100 years of segregation until the Civil Rights movement of 1954 got under way. We’ve had a modicum of equality for the past 50 years brought on by national movements that made clear to the government that they were elected to serve the people, not arrest them.

But let it also be said that the America Douglass describes, the one grounded in “bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy,” still exists outclassing its past a hundred fold. Our savagery knows no bounds: we decimate people wantonly throughout the world as Dresden, the fire-bombing of Japanese cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Vietnam, the sanctions against Iraq, the illegal invasion of Iraq, the unqualified military support we provide to the Zionist government in Israel against a defenceless people, the abominable use of drones against the people of Pakistan and Afghanistan, the continuing development of weapons of mass savagery and our willingness to develop further atomic weapons graphically illustrates.

The numbers slaughtered in this review is in the millions–not all dressed in combat fatigues. The numbers of the defenceless and the innocent outstrips those trained to kill. All of those slaughtered happened outside the United States and every son and daughter, mother and father, sister and brother, aunt and uncle, grandfather and grandmother felt the pain of loss that was to our forces a “body count.” “Revenge is mine sayeth the Lord.” “Violence begets violence, hatred begets hatred, terrorism begets terrorism,” so rings the prophetic knell of the Reverend Wright to his congregation one of whom happened to be our current President Barack Obama. Would that he had listened, for if any man was ever elected to the office of President to change the world, this was the man and he has failed.

– William A. Cook is a Professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California. His works include Psalms for the 21st Century, Mellon Poetry Press, Tracking Deception: Bush Mid-East Policy, The Rape of Palestine, The Chronicles of Nefaria, and most recently in 2010, The Plight of the Palestinians. He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com. Contact him at: wcook@laverne.edu or visit: www.drwilliamacook.com.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Prof’ William A. Cook: Tearing the Veil From Israel’s Civility-a book review – Commented by UP

Comment:

I haven’t read the book yet, but I can’t resist the urge to comment on putting Islam and Judaism in the same basket as “tribally oriented belief systems rooted not in “enlightened individualism,” but rather in “…the survival of the extended family.” These belief systems have nothing to do with personal liberties or personal rights; they have to do with securing the realm of their respective “ways of life.” But unlike tribalism in Islam, tribalism in Judaism “can never live in peace with humanism and universalism” (4). “Both religions stand as systems that provide thorough answers in terms of spiritual, civil, cultural and day to day matters.” In this regard, “…both Islam and Judaism are more than just religions: they convey an entire ‘way of life,’”

I shall not comment on what Gilad said about Judaism, because he knows better, and I am inclined to believe that he said is true. Judaism is “tribally oriented belief closed racist system.  Look around and you will find hundreds of evidences confirming that, the Jewish MOTHER, Jewish state, the Jewish lobbies, Jews for peace, jewish anti-zionism………. and so on.

Where is the Muslim’s states, Muslim lobbies, Muslim mother?

If such states and lobbies exist, there would be no Israel. Despite your mother, father, nation, color race,

In Islam all you have to do to be a Muslim is to say: No God but ALLAH. So how Islam could be called a tribal system?

As a reader, I met Gilad Atzmon in debate  with Veteran Sami Jadalla,(don’t miss this one) when Gilad was an Editor at the “closed, not hacked” Palestinian Think Thank, In that debate, after reading what I wrote about Islam, and the thin line seperating the Holly text, and the human understanding of that text, between the religin anf the history of the religion -in action, Gilad wrote:
I happen to agree with every word you say here.

I wrote:

Originally Posted By uprooted palestinian

Sami,

Having read your article, and replies insisting in putting Fatah, Hamas, all resistance groups and your people in the same basket, its time to say that Sami Jamil has a proplem. I reposted your article at my site under the title: What’s What is wrong with Sami Jamil Jadallah?
Indeed you have a problem, mainly with Islam, to be more precise I would say with Muslims. You can’t cover your problem with being a born Muslim, or knowing few verses. You may curse Ulamas, and I would join you, because most of them deserve more than cursing, Being the official speaker of Islam doesn’t mean that they are the true representatives.

Extremism is not a Talban trade mark, all those who reject the other and claim to hold the ultimate truth are Talnan. There is Nationalist Talban, Comunist Talban, and secular Talbam. If I have to select betweem the above mentioned Talbans, I select those who applied to fight the occupation in Iraq, in Afghanistan, In lebanon and Gaza, rather than those who applied for residency in the US, the “land of free”or Switzerland,

If I have to chose between Liberation and Democracy and human rights, I chose liberation.
In my previous comment I mentioned that Naasralla said that he leaned from Palestinians, I would add now what Mawwaf Mousawi said few days ago,

He said that it is the Iraqi resistance, not Hezbulah, who statigically deafeated the US middle east project, He said that Hezbollah delivered a new model of resistance. Mousawi was talking about iraqi resistance that included the Iraqi Talbon.
As an audiance, I would say, I am politically a Sunni in Iraq, a Shiit in Lebanon, a Hamas in Palestine, and a Talban in Afghanistan

Like you, I am a born Moslem. I started my political life as a nationalist in Arab nathionalist movement passed by PFLP, and moved with Hawatmi to DFLP, In 1982 I decided to get out the box, and think with my own mind, see with my own eyes.

A book, (The book and Quran, a medern reading) I read in early 90’s trigered a great need to know ISLAM, and to read Quran for the first time in my life. I read tens of books.

My intensive reading made me understand why Islam is under attack not only by the enimies of Islam, but by people claimg to be muslims just because they were born to Muslim parent.

They are the victims of Talban version the goes back beyond Ibn Abdulwahab to Ibin Taymeya, and back to Ibin Hanbal. They failed to see the thin thread seperating Islam (I mean by Islam the Holly text -Quran only) and the human understanding of the Holly text, between Islam and the History of Islam.Quran is Holly, it’s Human understanding (Tafseer) is not.
Quaran is Holly the History of Islam is not.

Those who killed Othman where commrades (sahaba) of our Prophet PUH.
And those who fought Ali in Jammal battle were lead by Aysha (his wife) and his Sahaba, Talhah and Zubair, and it happenned that the three opposed Othman.

Their disagreement was not about relgion, but about power. That disagreement started before the funeral of our Profit, and turned into a revolution (Ulama call it “Fitna” )against Othman, that splitted Muslims till this very day.
I never felt, any contardiction between bein a Palestinian by birth, an arab by nationality, a leftist by idiology, and a moslem by religion,

I hate to stop, but I have to, and would like to end my comment saying that Pharoah, Quroun and Haman mentioned in Quran are not Just names they are symbols what we call now, the alliance of Political power, (Pharoah), financial power (Qaroun) and Media (Haman), Religion, all religions, were in fact revolutions against that alliance. Prophets, all Prophet, were the first freedom fighter in human history. I would say the first “Suicide bombers” , because their mission using your view of “smartness” was by all means suicidal. And remember Our Quran call jews as Prophet killers.”

The relationship with Gilad started with this comment:

Originally Posted By Gilad
@uprooted palestinian

I happen to agree with every word you say here.
Originally Posted By Gilad
@uprooted palestinian

My dearest Uprooted Pls,
As you say , we do not expect support but silence would be appreciated. It is a war, it is a long one and the enemy is ruthless and inhuman beyond comparison and supported by the west … The last thing we can do is to judge the oppressed.

One final word to Gilad: If I was in your shoes, I would have repaleced the word Islam into Muslims

========
Prof’ William A. Cook: Tearing the Veil From Israel’s Civility-a book review

Gilad Atzmon: The following is a very a deep and thoughtful reading of my work by William A. Cook

Source: www.counterpunch.org

Gilad Atzmon’s insight into the organism created by the Zionist movement in his book, The Wandering Who, is explosive; it tears the veil off of Israel’s apparent civility, its apparent friendship with the United States, and its expressed solicitude for western powers—Britain, Canada, Australia, France and Germany—exposing behind the veil, the assassin ready to slay any and all that interfere with its tribally focused ends. In February of this year, Atzmon characterized Islam and Judaism as tribally oriented belief systems rooted not in “enlightened individualism,” but rather in “…the survival of the extended family.” These belief systems have nothing to do with personal liberties or personal rights; they have to do with securing the realm of their respective “ways of life.” But unlike tribalism in Islam, tribalism in Judaism “can never live in peace with humanism and universalism” (4). “Both religions stand as systems that provide thorough answers in terms of spiritual, civil, cultural and day to day matters.” In this regard, “…both Islam and Judaism are more than just religions: they convey an entire ‘way of life,’ and
The Wandering Who is a personal journey of a man born in Jerusalem, raised in the Jewish ‘way of life,’ infused with the myths of the founding of the Jewish state; “Supremacy was brewed into our soul, we gazed at the world through racist, chauvinistic binoculars. And we felt no shame about it either” (5). Inducted into the Israeli military during the 1980s he served in Lebanon, and, in his late teens, experienced an epiphany caused in good measure by careful listening to voices beyond the wall that encircled him in the ghetto that is the Israeli state. This epiphany forced a distinction in identity versus identifying, between self-reliance and obedient servant to an ideology, a distinction that recognized Jews as people, Judaism as a religion, and Jewishness, an ideology that determines identity politics and a resulting political discourse.


Gilad’s New Book is available on Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk

What, then, characterizes a Jew? Atzmon distinguishes among those who follow the Judaic religion; those who regard themselves as a human being who happens to be of Jewish origin; and those who put their Jewishness over and above all other traits. Chaim Weizman, the first Israeli President and a Zionist, identified being a Jew as a ‘primary quality’ above citizenship, occupation, head of household, indeed “Jewishness becomes the key element and fundamental characteristic of one’s being.” Vladimir Jabotinsky wrote “…the nucleus of his spiritual structure will always remain Jewish, because his blood, his body, his physical racial type are Jewish” (“A Letter on Autonomy,” 1904). It is this identifying principle that Atzmon sees as corrosive, not only to Judaism, but to the safety and security of the Jewish people, their friends and their neighbors. “…probably then and there I left Chosen-ness behind to become an ordinary human being” (6). “For me to be Jewish is, above all, to be preoccupied with overcoming injustice and thirsting for justice in the world, and that means being respectful toward other peoples regardless of their nationality or religion, and empathetic in the face of human suffering whoever and wherever victimization is encountered” (“On Jewish Identity,” 1/15/2011).

Significantly, Atzmon turns to the ancient tale of the wandering Jew to reap the complexities inherent in the contradictions that beset Judaism in today’s world: tribalism versus universalism, chosen-ness versus democratic equality, rule by defiance of law versus nations ruled by law, control of government by Zionist controlled ideology versus responsiveness to the voice of the citizenry, and tribalistic morality where morals are fabricated for political utilitarian ends versus the inalienable rights of all endowed by nature.

The legend’s primary symbolic value resides in its identification of ‘otherness,’ the unique concept of ‘chosen-ness,’ that separates the Jews from the rest of humanity resulting in an ideological and psychological isolation that becomes a strategic tool used by the Zionists and the Neo-Cons to manipulate the Jewish people and the formation of the Jewish state. Jabotinsky and Weizmann’s “primary quality” of Jewishness prevents assimilation, thus forcing the Jew to remain always an alien wherever he or she resides. Personal identification can only exist in the tribe, a virtual and absolute commitment to Jewishness, making possible the use of Jews around the world as “sayanims” (assistants) to further the goals of the Jewish state (17). “The sayan is a person who would betray the nation of which he is a citizen out of devotion to a notion of a clannish brotherhood” (17).

There are thousands of sayanim around the world. In London alone, there are about 2,000 who are active, and another 5,000 on the list. They fulfill many different roles. A car sayan…running a rental agency, could help the Mossad rent a car without having to complete the usual documentation. … a bank sayan could get you money if you needed it in the middle of the night, a doctor sayan would treat a bullet wound without reporting it to the police…The idea is to have a pool of people available when needed who can provide services but will keep quiet about them out of loyalty to the cause (17).

“In Zionist eyes Jewishness is an international network operation…to be a Jew is a deep commitment that goes far beyond any legal or moral order” (19). Atzmon identifies a functioning organism controlled by Zionist ideology and Neo-Con sayanim in the United States that has yoked Israeli interests to those of the United States using a document titled the USA Defense Planning Guidance Report for fiscal years 1994-1999. “In the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, we seek to foster regional stability, deter aggression against our friends and interests in the region, protect U.S. nationals and property, and safeguard our access to international air and seaways and to the region’s oil. The United States is committed to the security of Israel and to maintaining the qualitative edge that is critical to Israel’s security.” (22). This manipulative strategy “transformed the Jewish tribal mode into a collective functioning system.” It also transformed “the American and British armies into a Zionist mission force” as Israel and the Neo-Cons manipulated the governments of the UK and the US to attack Israel’s enemies in Iraq while imposing sanctions on Syria and defending its occupation and oppression of the Palestinians and its wanton destruction of Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2008-2009.

Atzmon illuminates the inner soul, or more correctly, the lack thereof, of the Israeli state as it has evolved from early Zionism to a politically astute merger of ancient Judaism with secular purposes to attain its goals. It is in this respect the abortive grandchild of Leo Strauss, a Professor and teacher of Paul Wolfowitz and the Neo-Cons who clustered about his determinist altar—Richard Perle (former Defense Policy Board Chairman), William Kristol (Chief Editor of the Weekly Standard), Gary Schmitt (Chairman and Director of the Project for the New American Century), Stephen Campone (Under-Secretary of Defense for Intelligence under Rumsfeld), Abram Shulsky (friend of Perle and head of Rumsfeld’s special intelligence unit sometimes characterized as the “Specious Planning Unit”), Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld who are connected through the PNAC (Project for the New American Century)—all “leaders” of course accepting without question a brand of determinism that controlled human life with some born to lead and the vast majority born to follow.
I had tracked the emergence of this cult that came to power in an article published in 2003, “Moral Insanity: the Cabal that Corrupts,” and offer two paragraphs that capture the consequences of this deception.

Since Strauss taught that nature’s determinism thrust the “wise few” into positions of leadership over the “vulgar many,” and since virtue is defined by the elite who rule, and since morality does not exist, and since justice is merely the interest of the stronger, and since the rule of the wise is absolute, authoritarian and unquestionable, and since religion is “the glue that holds society together,” using religion for political ends, like lying, deception, secrecy, and intimidation, is a good necessary to achieve the determined goals of the government. Manipulation of the “vulgar masses” becomes an end in itself and the distortion of words and concepts becomes the means to that end…
Only a Straussian Cultist would have the arrogance to create a National and International policy on behalf of 300 million people when they represented none of them. Two years later, a year after 9/11, this report became “The National Security Strategy Report of the United States of America,” a document that details how America will act, nationally and internationally, during the second Bush regime. Needless to say, few Americans ever saw the details of this report before it became policy—not the average American citizen nor their representatives in Congress nor the Senate. Yet we are the ones who must pay for the plans these men designed, be victims of the world’s censure as they carry out their designs, and fall prey to their restrictions on civil liberties imposed by this regime as “security measures.”

Atzmon’s analysis reveals strategies used by the Zionists to control their population: “Some marginal politicians seek to publically ‘shame’ their integrated brothers and sisters. This serves two purposes. First, it conveys a clear message that real assimilation is impossible…Second, it pushes the assimilated being towards collaboration with his old clan. ‘You will never escape who you are so you better be proud of it’” (34). But it does not stop there. The Zionist lobbies tell the assimilated Jew “You will never escape who you are so why not be proud of it and work with us.” Indeed, this very assertion undermines a moral foundation as it forces the American Jew to succumb to that “primary quality” of Jewish-ness above loyalty to his nation. “First they are Jews and only then are they humanists” (35).
Zionism, as Atzmon notes, has used Jewish ‘separatism’ and its resulting ‘insecurity in relations with his fellow beings’ to coerce obedience and commitment. This tactic has been characteristic of the Zionist power since the Mandate period. In the Introduction to The Plight of the Palestinians, I presented evidence of such coercion from the classified documents of the British Mandate Police, most especially the Hagana Oath that forced an allegiance to the Zionist High Command:

The Haganah Oath goes deeper than fear. In effect, it declares that an individual has turned his/her conscience over to the High Command thus accepting what is right and what is wrong as determined by that authority regardless of local, state or international law, indeed, regardless of the morals, values and traditions of Judaism. This commitment is forever, to death.
From the moment an individual takes the oath, they are committed to a life of secrecy and hence of disloyalty and betrayal to those they are most intimate with in their day to day life. Neither their actions nor their true identity is discernible to those with whom they interact regularly. This is a life that encapsulates the necessity of lies, deceit, coercion, extortion, and obedience to a group that dictates the actions one must pursue; freedom no longer exists, self-direction no longer exists, loyalty to others no longer exists, indeed, friendship with others is compromised or impossible, one becomes the subject of that group, a veritable slave to their desires and wills. The mindset that promotes such control allows for spying, for deception of friends, for ostracism in one’s own community for thinking differently, for imprisonment without due process, for torture, even for extrajudicial executions. It is a total commitment to a cause that supersedes all others determined and dictated by an oligarchy in silence and subject to no legitimate institution and to no one (xxvi).

Atzmon elaborates on his contention that the Zionists intentionally manipulate Jewish separatism to their advantage by instilling a myth of persistent persecution against Jews as evidence of their need to support the Israeli enterprise, a virtual effort at ghetto building, and one that results in a form of Pre-Traumatic Stress Syndrome induced by a continual grand narrative of Israeli victimization caused by the Holocaust: being driven into the sea, being wiped off the map, delegitimized, all portend the impending disaster that awaits the Jewish state.

Such perception forces the Diaspora Jew to confront the significance of the promise and fulfillment of the Zionist dream, the return to Zion. “By bonding Eretz Yisrael and the Diaspora continuum, the Settler replaces the ‘negation of the Diaspora’ with a ‘negation of the Goyim’ (a return of the Jewish pre-Zionist condition).” This effectively stops the possibility of Jewish assimilation and promotes a return to tribal distinctiveness, albeit with political and global interests. Concomitantly, “It leaves the Diaspora Jew in limbo. He or she is neither assimilated into their surrounding social environment nor settled in a Jewish state” (43). Rejection then of the Zionist call must be understood as an act of treason or a form of self-hatred. Unfortunately, yet reflective of the symbolic nature of the legend of the Wandering Jew, “…it emphasizes the racist and expansionist Judeo-centric nature of the Jewish State. .. and the Diaspora Jew finds himself or herself intrinsically associated with a bigoted, ethnocentric ideology and an endless list of crimes against humanity” (43).

Chosen-ness determines its own end. What the Chosen believes through the books that give them their unique status must be truth. Since the words used are not theirs, but the words of their G-d, they are immune from the limitations of language (32). The Chosen need only respond to themselves to find identity, but in their affiliation with their group, not humanity at large. Atzmon notes that the religious understanding of Chosen-ness carries with it a moral burden to “stand as an exemplary model of ethical behavior,” but in the Zionist mind that has been “reduced to a crude, ethno-centric, blood-oriented chauvinism”… a kind of “tribal supremacism, in which ‘love yourself as much as you hate everyone else’ becomes a pragmatic reality” (86). Consequently, “This form of supremacy lies at the heart of the Zionist claim for Palestine, at the expense of its indigenous inhabitants” (87). Justice is not a consideration.

Perhaps the most insidious corruption imposed on the Jewish people and on their religion by the Zionists who garnered control of the new state of Israel was the manipulation of the Holocaust into both a religion and an industry. Norman Finkelstein covers the creation of the industry, Atzmon, with the help of Professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz, a Latvian-born philosopher at the Hebrew University, and Adi Ophir, an Israeli philosopher and Associate Professor at the Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas at Tel Aviv University, takes on the description and the consequences of transforming the Holocaust into a religion. Leibowitz, according to Uri Avnery (19.3.05, “Remember What? Remember How?), stated that “The Jewish religion died 200 years ago. Now there is nothing that unifies the Jews around the world apart from the Holocaust.” Atzmon suggests that Lebowitz might have been the first to recognize that the Holocaust had been made into a religion with priests, prophets, commandments and dogmas, rituals and temples.

The Holocaust religion is, obviously, Judeo-centric to the bone. It defines the Jewish raison d’etre. For Zionist Jews, it signifies a total fatigue of the Diaspora, and regards the goy as a potential irrational murderer. This new Jewish religion preaches revenge. It could well be the most sinister religion known to man, for in the name of Jewish suffering, it issues licenses to kill, to flatten, to nuke, to annihilate, to loot, to ethnically cleanse. It has made vengeance into an acceptable Western value (127).

Let us return now to the wandering Jew of legend. In 1848, Nathaniel Hawthorne wrote “A Virtuoso’s Collection,” an exotic tale of the strange and fantastic that subsumes the legend in the personage of the Virtuoso.

Hawthorne uses the legend to capture that mystery of behaviour that has haunted writers for centuries, a mystery that still befuddles our scientists that search for an explanation for actions that seem devoid of “natural sympathies,” actions that elicit no response to human suffering, emotional or psychological, to physical pain and anguish, to loss of those loved, a child, a son or daughter, a father or mother, actions inflicted for no perceivable reason, where guilt has not been determined nor compassion considered. The legend captures the man that witnesses the suffering of the innocent, the Christ bearing His cross though guilty of nothing but the spirit of human compassion for his brothers and sisters, the sacrifice of atonement, yet mocks the innocent to “go on quicker,” for the Wanderer “is linked with the realities of this earth… to what I can see, and touch, and understand, and I ask for no more.” Nothing can stand in his way as he rushes through life acquiring all that this world can offer, and at any expense, regardless of his impact on others. “The soul is dead within him,” Hawthorne proclaims, the natural sympathy for his fellow humans does not exist.
Hawthorne grappled with this image of the lost soul, severed from the roots that carry all in the concept of humanity, where each is a brother or a sister to another and to all; where the teachings of the faiths that sustain humankind across the globe find love and compassion the fundamental life force that binds all and gives meaning to all; where mercy and kindness serve to heal and advance the commonweal; where the island that is this planet unites all humankind in bonds of necessary and never ending ties if there is to be a future for our children; this is the source of the human spirit that emanates from one all embracing soul that is the common experience of all that must endure the suffering and pain that is this life suffused and made endurable by the springs of love that give joy to the world. This is a concept that requires of all, sharing of all things, that each might survive despite the ravages of time and circumstance. It is the essence of all faiths that truly believe in the human spirit and the uncertainties that control our lives. It finds repulsive, as a consequence, those who seek to destroy the unity of spirit that binds all together in favour of personal gain, sought in the material acquisitions made possible in this world, regardless of the havoc wrought to achieve their ends.
The image of the Wandering Jew reflects that person who abandons his fellows for personal gain, who forfeits human love and compassion for the artefacts of this world gained at any expense, satisfied with the acquisition of wealth, of position, of power even when achieved by devastation and death since ultimately only he exists and all routes to his end are achieved. All humans are expendable and are, then, by definition inferior to the man free of moral or spiritual restraints.
The Wandering Jew is then, as metaphor, another rendering of the story of Cain who slew his brother, for which act he was cursed by God Almighty to wander the earth a fugitive…. The Wandering Jew, like Cain, is Everyman” (William A. Cook, “The Eternal Jew Goes on Forever,” 8/24/2009).

Gilad Atzmon brings us to this understanding as it applies in our day; he is our Hawthorne who journeys through our time to illuminate the consequences of actions that deny, indeed, that defy the oneness of humanity to benefit the few at the expense of the many. He writes a critical and devastating explanation of Jewishness as it has been manipulated to control the Jewish people and impose the will of the Zionist dictators in Israel and the U.S. on the American people through control of the U.S. Congress. He unravels the nuances that veil the arrogance, the deceit, and the hypocrisy of those in power, why they are so bound by terrorism and force, revealing in the process the horror of their betrayal and the emptiness of their words.

He comprehends Hawthorne’s description of the Virtuoso, the Wandering Jew, as it fittingly captures the mindset of those who impose a deterministic and amoral direction on political events both in the United Nations and the United States, “…there was a bitterness indefinably mingled with his tone, as of one cut off from natural sympathies, and blasted with a doom that had been inflicted on no other human being, and by the results of which he had ceased to be human. Yet…it seemed one of the most terrible consequences of that doom, that the victim no longer regarded it as a calamity, but had finally accepted it as the greatest good that could have befallen him.”

That frame of mind accepts no guilt because it has rejected personal conscience as the basis for actions in lieu of tribal security; the tribe alone determines right: individualism, natural rights, self-reliance, personal responsibility in a democracy no longer exists. This mindset, clustered in a functioning, global, tribal concentration of power, focuses on one voice, theirs. It denies democracy yet calls itself democratic; it speaks of universalism but protects only itself; it proclaims brotherhood with nations that exist by rule of law even as it defies all laws but its own; it presents itself as a nation imbued with the righteous morals of ancient times yet establishes policies that are apartheid in character.

To not defend this frame of mind is to damn self and the Jewishness that gives them an identity. It is in effect a self-inflicted torture; an incredibly powerful identity fabricated out of ancient tales that gives the most ordinary of them superiority over others who must be denigrated and even destroyed. It’s a tribal character, protection of the group at all cost or lose self in the multitudes with which one must live. It had a place in ancient days, but cannot exist in a world where 192 nations share covenants with each other based on equality, respect and human dignity.

To hold to their beliefs they must negate similarity and equity, as well as justice and freedom for all. Given the power they possess and the money they use to control the U.S. Congress and the British Parliament, with similar controls being exerted in Canada, Australia, France and Germany, as Atzmon graphically demonstrates, the dangers of an elite few dominating the direction of international policies threatens international security and the quest for peace.

This 21st century Jew, like Jeremiah of old, wanders the world warning of an impending doom hidden behind the mask of civility that is the Israeli state. The world meets this nation in the halls of the United Nations through its pin-striped representatives who speak fluently and even eloquently of rights, of democracy, of justice, of self-defense, and of terrorism that threatens the civilized world. Yet behind that mask of civility reside a nation and its fascist belligerent leaders whose sole purpose is to control the very organizations erected to bring equity and justice to all. Their purpose, to gain time to achieve their end, the creation of Eretz Yisrael through the continuing ethnic cleansing of the indigenous people. Gilad Atzmon fears this end for the Jews and defies the Zionists that preach it. The Wandering Who proclaims the choice; we are Everyman, one in soul, one in sympathy, one in respect and dignity for all humanity.

William A. Cook is a professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California and author of Tracking Deception: Bush Mid-East Policy, The Rape of Palestine, The Chronicles of Nefaria, and The Plight of the Palestinians published a year ago. He can be reached at wcook@laverne.edu or through his web sitewww.drwilliamacook.com.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The Death of Democracy

“The right to freedom of expression is a fundamental one, necessary to protect the exercise of all other human rights in democratic societies because it is essential for holding governments accountable to the public” (Human Rights Watch, “When Speech Offends,” February-March 2006).

Contrary to Fox News and Benjamin Netanyahu, Democracy is neither alive nor well in the United States or Israel; indeed it is dying a slow, agonizing death as each nation writhes in pain in adjoining beds unaware that the intravenous feeding tubes controlled by their respective Knessets drip poison into their life sustaining veins. Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, in the voice of Carlo Strenger, carries the warning:
The flood of anti-democratic laws that were proposed, and partially implemented, by the current Knesset, elected in February 2009, constitute one of the darkest chapters in Israeli history. The opening salvo was provided by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu party with its Nakba law, that forbids the public commemoration of the expulsion of approximately 750,000 Palestinians during the 1948 war.

Since then, a growing number of attempts were made to curtail freedom of expression and to make life for human rights groups more difficult. The latest instance is the boycott law that (is) was passed (this) last Monday by the Knesset, even though its legal advisor believes it to be a problematic infringement on freedom of speech (“Israel’s McCarthy coalition is on a dangerous power trip,” Haaretz, July 11, 2011).

Curiously, America does not have a newspaper as brave and open to civil discourse as Haaretz; we rely on the New York Times, infamous for promoting the Iraq war on its front page thus benefiting the war industry and its corporations that control the Congress. Yet our Congress, like its twin in Israel, has adopted similar anti-democratic resolutions that curtail freedom of speech and action not only of American citizens but of the representatives of the United Nations.

House Resolution 268, “Reaffirming the United States commitment to a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations,” introduced May 13, 2011, passed overwhelmingly 406-6, specifically threatens the member states of the UN that it condemns any “unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state” as well as the “unbalanced United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.” To accomplish this end, the 268 resolution announces that “…the Administration will veto any resolution on Palestinian statehood that comes before the United Nations Security Council…,” opposes recognition of a Palestinian state by other nations, and in other international forums…,” and, in a Mafia-like manner, threatens the Palestinians with “serious implications” for assistance programs should they not obey. Resolution 268 condemns in advance any deliberation on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by any nation, in any forum, that does not await an “agreement negotiated between Israel and the Palestinians.” Curiously enough, this same resolution states that the United States “…will not deal with nor in any way fund a Palestinian government that includes Hamas…,” a statement that prevents at the outset negotiations with the Palestinians since Hamas represents over 1.5 million Palestinians, thus belying the very purpose of the resolution, to bring peace between Israel and the Palestinians. How deceptively clever.

It also demands that Hamas and the people they represent accept unconditionally the position of the US and Israel that it renounce violence, recognize Israel and agree to follow the previous obligations of the PLO. There is no recognition of Israel’s violence against Hamas or Gaza, nor recognition under International Law that the Palestinians have rights to resist the occupation of a foreign nation. It does not impose on Israel a comparable need to recognize the right of the Palestinians to have a state of their own since that would require that Israel recognize where Palestine exists, what borders it possesses, what land Israel must return to its owners. And, finally, no mention is made of the conditions imposed by Israel that made implementation of the Oslo Accords possible nor its rejection of the stipulations made by the Quartet, thus placing full blame for the failed “peace negotiations” on the Palestinians.
Resolution 268 dictates to the people of the world that their voices will not be heard, their desires not considered, and their empathy for a besieged people made irrelevant; only the will of the Israeli administration and the Obama administration will stand. Calculatedly, the administration passed the resolution as the “Quartet for Middle East peace”—the European Union, Russia, the UN and the US—met in Washington. The acid that destroys democracy drips on.

But Resolution 268 is only the most recent example of the erosion of our rights in the United States; it follows one of the most glaringly illegal and potentially destructive interventions in international affairs taken by a purportedly democratic state and fully supported by our own Knesset. Israel’s prevention of freedom of speech and action by the international group of peace activists desiring to express their solidarity with the imprisoned Palestinians in the second flotilla to Gaza by coercing the economically crippled Greek government to refuse representatives from many countries to leave the Greek ports, although they had complied with every legal demand, graphically demonstrates that a government like Israel can and will enforce its will on any nation denying thereby the rights of free people everywhere.

The right to freedom of expression is a fundamental one, necessary to protect the exercise of all other human rights in democratic societies because it is essential for holding governments accountable to the public. Freedom of expression is particularly necessary with respect to provocative or offensive speech, because once governmental censorship is permitted in such cases, the temptation is enormous for government officials to find speech that is critical of them to be unduly provocative or offensive as well. The freedom to express even controversial points of view is also important for societies to address key political, social, and cultural issues, since taboos often mask matters of considerable public concern that are best addressed through honest and unfettered debate among those holding diverse points of view (Human Rights Watch).

The full implications of Israel’s takeover of the Greek government (with its conscious awareness that any action it took would be supported by our Congress) and hence its disregard for the will of the Greek citizen has been little regarded by our free press, yet nothing is perhaps so ominous as this blatant, hostile action by one foreign nation on another. What mindset enables itself to impose its will on citizens of other nations? What provocation could possibly justify intervention of such magnitude? If Israel had evidence that the flotilla and its organizers were physical threats against the state of Israel, could they not bring that evidence before the UN and International Courts to prevent the boats from sailing to Gaza? Why then the need to deny freedom of speech to citizens of many nations and commandeer another nation’s government? Doesn’t a democracy pride itself on rule of law? How then abandon law in favor of might? “The right to freedom of expression is…necessary to protect the exercise of all other human rights in democratic societies because it is essential for holding governments accountable to the public.”

No nation on this planet, no member state of the United Nations, no individual citizen nor groups of citizens can change what Israel and the United States did to Greece and to freedom of speech. They move with impunity as they impose their wills on nations that disagree with their policies. Neither is ruled by their people; they are owned by an elite few who have surreptitiously over time taken control of our freedoms. Neither government is held accountable to the public. Indeed, it is that very accountability that they do not want and cannot allow to happen which is why both governments fear the “Arab spring.” Given the absolute control of our Congress by Israel, as the vote on Resolution 268 exemplifies, America has to raise the fear of terrorism in its citizenry to ensure compliance with the anti-democratic behavior and policies it pursues. Israel does the same. Carlo Strenger puts it this way:
What stands behind this frenzy of attempts to shut down criticism? The answer, I believe, is fear, stupidity, confusion – and now also a power-trip.

The result of Netanyahu’s and Lieberman’s systematic fanning of Israelis’ existential fears is tangible: polls show that Israelis are deeply pessimistic about peace; they largely do not trust Palestinians, and in the younger generation belief in democratic values is being eroded.

But this pessimism and siege-mentality is not only to be found in ordinary Israeli voters, but also in the political class…. They have profound misconceptions about the Free World’s attitude towards Israel, and very little real understanding of the paradigm shift towards human rights as the core language of international discourse. They buy into Netanyahu’s adage that Israel’s existence is being delegitimized, rather than realizing that Israel’s settlement policy is unacceptable politically and morally to the whole world.

America’s umbilical cord that sustains Israel’s policies of occupation, settlements and oppression damns it before the world as people throughout the world begin to find other ways to break the controls that America’s power provides for Israel. The flotilla activists effectively utilized moral sensibility in clearly identifying the illegality and inhumanity of Israel’s siege of Gaza. And while Israel successfully torpedoed the flotilla in Greek ports through a massive political propaganda campaign of manufactured lies, coercion and threats of law suits against shipping companies and insurance carriers, it also successfully torpedoed truth turning even more of the people of the world against a state that thrives on distortion, deception and devastation.

What both Israelis and Americans must realize, as these anti-democratic actions by both nations attest, is that democracy in both nations has been subverted in favor of those who command our representatives to actions that betray the essence of democracy, the will of the people, and turned it over to those who undermine the moral foundations on which it was built: equality for all, justice for all, dignity and respect for all with government serving the people not a corporate board. When the representatives of the state determine what people must accept, what they can and cannot do or say, when the power of two nations subverts the will and actions of all other nations, democracy is dead.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

US Knesset Resolution 185 Reconsidered: To be or Not To Be American

var addthis_product = ‘wpp-261’;var addthis_config = {“data_track_clickback”:true};
by William A. Cook

This week the United States Senate unanimously adopted a resolution drafted by its masters, the State of Israel and AIPAC, to prevent the United Nations, of which the United States is a member, from exercising its constitutional rights to free speech to deliberate on the recognition of a Palestinian State. The resolution is an exercise in coercion since its intent is to withhold funding from the Palestinian Authority should the UN deliberate on such a resolution of recognition, making the UN responsible for depriving the Palestinian people of America’s support.

Given the reality of what is euphemistically called “negotiations for peace” or the “Israeli/Palestinian peace process,” that have been on-going for approximately 50 years with no results: no peace, no Palestinian state, no equity of living conditions, no acceptance of proposals to enforce terms negotiated, no borders established for either state, and no expectation of results, it would appear to most people of common sense that the process is flawed. To have America act as a broker for peace limiting the participants to Israeli and Palestinian negotiators is futile at best since the US is not an objective broker nor could it be. Delay benefits the partner in the process that wields the power; that is Israel. Palestinians suffer and die as the years go by and the world waits, wonders and watches with indifference.

It occurred to me, therefore, that Senate Resolution 185 needs some alterations, alterations that might be possible if our Senators were not shackled by their masters to unanimously adopt a continuation of the idiocy that maintains a status quo demanded by the Israelis but not their negotiating partners, the Palestinians. Hence I offer the following changes as a small measure of sense into a process marked by ceaseless nonsense.

Excerpts from S. Res. 185, approved by the U.S. Senate on Tuesday:

  • Whereas a true and lasting peace between the people of Israel and the Palestinians can only be achieved through direct negotiations between the parties as the past 44 years of such negotiations clearly demonstrates;
  • Whereas Hamas, an organization responsible for the death of more than 500 innocent civilians, including two dozen United States citizens, has been designated by the United States Government as a foreign terrorist organization, while Israel, an organization responsible for the deaths of 6,430 innocent Palestinian civilians including 1463 children since September of 2000, and 45,041 injured, has not been designated a foreign terrorist state;
  • Whereas Hamas has demolished no Israeli homes while Israel has destroyed 24,873 Palestinian homes, and while Israel has built 236 illegal settlements on confiscated Palestinian land and Hamas has built none on Israeli land;
  • Whereas the United States has provided Israel 9 million a day in 2011 for military assistance to ensure that it maintain the fourth largest military in the world to protect 6 million people while the US has the largest to protect 310 million and provides Hamas with nothing;
  • Whereas Israel has refused to designate borders to define its state and unilaterally confiscates any Palestinian land it desires while the land belonging to the Palestinians has shrunk to less than 14% of its original area;
  • Whereas, on April 22, 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated, “We will not deal with nor in any way fund a Palestinian government that includes Hamas (despite our expressed desire in 2006 to see Hamas become a credible political party in Palestine, and despite our on-going support of democracy in the mid-east acknowledging that Hamas’ victory at the polls, witnessed by UN observers, was recognized by the nations of the world as fulfilling the goals of a free people choosing their representatives, despite our expressed desires to see democracy in action in Palestine), we assert at this time that unless and until Hamas has renounced violence, recognized Israel and agreed to follow the previous obligations of the Palestinian Authority (even though we do not require that Israel renounce violence as the statistics above attest, nor do we require that Israel recognize the existence of a state for Palestinians nor accept its obligations as a member state of the UN to refrain from illegal land confiscation, return the land it has acquired illegally under international law and rejoin the community of nations of which it should be apart.”);
  • Therefore, be it Resolved, that the Senate—baffled by the inherent contradictions imbedded in this resolution adopts the following resolution:

1. Reaffirms its strong support for a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict resulting in two states, a democratic, Jewish state of Israel and a viable, democratic Palestinian state, living side-by-side in peace, security, and mutual recognition;
2. Affirms the necessity that a new peace process be created to be undertaken by the United Nations through an established authorized committee of its membership exclusive of the United States but with equitable representation of other nations including those with Arab populations;
3. Affirms the absolute necessity of a United Nations vote to recognize a Palestinian state prior to the creation of the UN Committee described above so that both Israel and Palestine enter the negotiations on an equal footing using the UN established 1967 borders as a base for negotiations in accordance with the President’s wishes;
4. Calls upon the President to announce that the United States will not veto any resolution on Palestinian statehood that comes before the United Nations Security Council as a demonstration of America’s good will to bring a coordinated and internationally accepted resolution to the crisis in Israel and Palestine;
5. Affirms its intentions by announcing in advance that the United States will provide financial support for the development of a Palestinian state that will make it a viable member of the nations united for peace in the world; and
6. Will consider restrictions on aid to the state of Israel should it interfere with the recognition of a Palestinian State as adopted by the UN.
In all fairness to those who have not been able to see Senate Resolution 185, since our main stream media choose to omit such items lest the American people become informed, I offer below the resolution as presented by Daily Alert, an organ of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs on behalf of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations. Needless to say, AIPAC has been at the forefront of efforts to ensure that its Knesset passed Resolution 185; here’s how.

AIPAC News

Thousands of AIPAC Activists Ascend Capitol Hill to Lobby
“In a resounding show of support for a strong U.S.-Israel relationship, thousands of AIPAC Policy Conference elegates (sic) from all 50 states ascended Capitol Hill on Tuesday to conduct more than 500 lobbying meetings with members of Congress and their staff. At the top of the lobbying agenda was U.S. security assistance to Israel – the most tangible expression of American support for the Jewish state.” Where is the American peoples’ voice? I suggest that to be or not to be American would be answered if this resolution were reconsidered.

Excerpts from S. Res. 185, approved by the U.S. Senate on Tuesday:

  • Whereas a true and lasting peace between the people of Israel and the Palestinians can only be achieved through direct negotiations between the parties;
  • Whereas Hamas, an organization responsible for the death of more than 500 innocent civilians, including two dozen United States citizens, has been designated by the United States Government as a foreign terrorist organization;
  • Whereas, on April 22, 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated, “We will not deal with nor in any way fund a Palestinian government that includes Hamas unless and until Hamas has renounced violence, recognized Israel and agreed to follow the previous obligations of the Palestinian Authority.”
  • Therefore, be it Resolved, that the Senate–

1. Reaffirms its strong support for a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict resulting in two states, a democratic, Jewish state of Israel and a viable, democratic Palestinian state, living side-by-side in peace, security, and mutual recognition;
2. Reiterates its strong opposition to any attempt to establish or seek recognition of a Palestinian state outside of an agreement negotiated between leaders in Israel and the Palestinians;
3. Calls upon the President to announce that the United States will veto any resolution on Palestinian statehood that comes before the United Nations Security Council which is not a result of agreements reached between the Government of Israel and the Palestinians;
4. Will consider restrictions on aid to the Palestinian Authority should it persist in efforts to circumvent direct negotiations by turning to the United Nations or other international bodies.

Related Posts:

Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=118752

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

America’s Coming Nakba (Catastrophe)

America’s Coming Nakba (Catastrophe)

Perhaps this is the catastrophe of American power policy that seeks domination of the world for our Corporate elite

Now America finds itself bereft of power, bereft of resources, and bereft of friends, manipulated by Israeli Zionists like Sharon, Olmert, and Netanyahu who disdain America’s weakness holding its Congress prisoner by coercion, bribery and deceit the very strategies that Israel has used against the people of the mid-east to create the illusion of peace

by Professor William A. Cook

“From the moment we took on a role that included the permanent military domination of the world, we were on our own—feared, hated, corrupt and corrupting, maintaining ‘order’ through state terrorism and bribery, and given to megalomanic rhetoric and sophistries that virtually invited the rest of the world to unite against us. We had mounted the Napoleonic tiger. The question was, would we—and could we—ever dismount?” (Chalmers Johnson, The Sorrows of Empire 284)

Johnson’s prescient observation, made six years ago, erupted in full view of the world community this past week as Netanyahu and Obama attempted to control the tiger unleashed by the creation of the state of Israel in the midst of the Arab world–by deceit, theft, terrorism, and military might–faced now with the Arab spring rising from the ashes of fallen dictators. Coercion, bribery and military might created an illusion of peaceful stability as long as agreements providing billions of dollars for security police, military training by the U.S. and technical and ordnance support secured the dictator in power.
But with America forced to do the bidding of its adopted child by the “corpocracy” that governs this empire and its unending need for wars to sustain its economic growth, America finds itself woefully weak as its forces futilely attempt to contain terrorism throughout the mid-east. Now America finds itself bereft of power, bereft of resources, and bereft of friends, manipulated by Israeli Zionists like Sharon, Olmert, and Netanyahu who disdain America’s weakness holding its Congress prisoner by coercion, bribery and deceit the very strategies that Israel has used against the people of the mid-east to create the illusion of peace.

Ironically, as Obama lectured AIPAC and Netanyahu on Monday, he drew a demographic map that forces both Israel and the world communities to take notice of what the Likud Party really stands for even as it declares that “Peace is a primary objective of the State of Israel.” The Palestinian population in historic Palestine will equal the Jewish population before 2014 (Palestine Bureau of Statistics). That fact “on the ground” makes the land west of the Jordan River a Palestinian majority; the irony rests in a little noticed Likud Platform statement, “The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.” Not only is this declaration a total rejection of a Palestinian state by the Israeli government (comparable indeed to that of Hamas in its denial of the Israeli state), it does so even when confronted by the inevitable reality that Jews will be a minority in Palestine. Denial of a Palestinian state will result in Israel becoming a minority controlled apartheid, non-democratic state like South Africa decades ago.

But Obama’s lecture went beyond population figures. He attempted to teach the Israelis that walls and chain link fences cannot contain the projected 6.1 million even with rolled barb wire, watch towers and sophisticated technology. How could Israel manage to contain a population greater than its own on approximately 15% of historic Palestine while its population occupies 85%? (PCBS). How could the world communities grapple with the injustice of such a situation, especially since these figures do not include the 5.6 million refugees living in various Arab lands. Under international law, these people have a right to return and many of them would have a right to return to land now claimed by Israel. Obama is suggesting that it would behoove Israel to accept a settlement that would provide adequate land and resources for the Palestinians or face the inevitable dissolution of the Jewish state as the one state solution becomes a de facto reality. In 2002 the Saudi Prince proffered a peace plan based on the 1967 borders carrying with it full recognition of the state of Israel by all Arab countries. Israel and the US rejected it out of hand.

While Obama did not demand what the Israeli government must do, he did note that the times are a changin’. No longer will it be possible, Obama implied, to cull out of an elite few those who could be bribed into a pseudo-peace agreement with Israel like those that existed in Egypt and Jordan, or force into play sweet oil deals with Gaddafi look- a-likes, or invade illegally a nation that has done nothing against the U.S., as happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, affecting thereby a complacent leader that will do our corporate will. No, the times have changed; the new Arab is aware of America’s depleted resources, understands its economic crisis and towering debt, realizes the vice being turned by the Palestinian population growth on the Jews, realizes that justice demands equity for themselves and the Palestinians, and has the knowledge to force its awareness on the international community through the United Nations General Assembly.

Obama knows all too well how little power he possesses as President of the United States. He knows that the Representatives of the people are owned by corporate power and the Israeli lobbies. That means he can affect no legislation, foreign or domestic, if he confronts the Zionists that control this government, nor could he expect to gain reelection. He is a shackled man, subservient to his overseers. But he also knows that America is threatened by this subservience, that its soldiers are being used by a foreign power, and that hatred of Americans festers in the souls occupied by Israeli troops.

Mark Perry describes an unprecedented bombshell briefing with Admiral Mullen in which the views of senior Arab leaders that the US administration is ineffectual and incapable of standing up to Israel are conveyed, as well as those of General Petraeus who sees the so-called ‘special relationship’ with Israel as putting American lives and interests at risk.

The January Mullen briefing was unprecedented. No previous CENTCOM commander had ever expressed himself on what is essentially a political issue; which is why the briefers were careful to tell Mullen that their conclusions followed from a December 2009 tour of the region where, on Petraeus’s instructions, they spoke to senior Arab leaders. “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.” (see Mark Perry, “Putting American Lives At Risk”)

The following is General Petraeus’s Centcom Statement before the Senate Armed Services Committee – 16th March 2010:

Insufficient progress toward a comprehensive Middle East peace. The enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests in the AOR [area of responsibility]. Israeli-Palestinian tensions often flare into violence and large-scale armed confrontations. The conflict foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world.

Meanwhile, al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support. The conflict also gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas.
Obama understood the imminent implications of the rebirth of humanitarian desires on the part of the people of Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Bahrain, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, Iran and even Palestine, most especially Palestine, as those desires overflow onto the desks of the United Nations representatives demanding recognition of the besieged and occupied citizens of Palestine. With that action expected in September, when the countries of South America, Asia, most of Europe, and the whole of the Arab world accept into membership the State of Palestine on the 1967 borders, the long ordeal of the Palestinian people, sixty three years of aborted peace initiatives by the state of Israel, will be ended (see Jeff Halper, “Israel is the Problem,” The Plight of the Palestinians).

That vote will cast Israel into an untenable position since it will require of the United States that it abandon its position as protector of this state that has defied the UN for all these years making the very intent of the UN irrelevant and helpless and the desires of the world communities moot. Obama’s speeches before Congress and AIPAC will either force Netanyahu to capitulate to peace negotiations that establish a viable Palestinian state or have the United Nations and not the US serve as broker to make the Palestinian state a reality, something Israel fears. Yet the truth is that the state of Israel was accepted into the United Nations by a vote of the General Assembly in 1949 thereby making moot a similar vote on behalf of the Palestinians. Only by having the UN intervene in establishing legitimate borders for both countries, thus creating equity at the outset, can the potential for a true and just peace be made possible.

Netanyahu, by contrast, ignored these implications and attempted to defend the megalomanic rhetoric of the Israeli state,

  • a rhetoric that decries the threat inherent in Hamas’ Charter not to recognize the Israeli state but fails to tell the world of its own Likud Platform that flatly rejects the existence of a Palestinian state;
  • a rhetoric that bemoans the ’67 borders as indefensible for Israel while it remains silent on the massacres inflicted on the Palestinians before and after the UN Partition Plan implementation that resulted in the confiscation of 21 thousand dunams in the Galilee, Al-Muthalath, and Negev;
  • a rhetoric that declares the settlements must remain in the West Bank together with the apartheid highways that only Jews may use despite the fact that there are upwards of 517,774 Jews spotted throughout the West Bank making a viable Palestine impossible while an additional 1496 dunams have been confiscated to construct the Expansion and Annexation Wall for expanded settlements;
  • a rhetoric that demands Palestinians recognize Israel as a democratic and Jewish state, even though that is by definition an oxymoron, and in practice makes Arab Israelis second class citizens, while Israel rejects a Palestinian state could exist west of the Jordan river;
  • a rhetoric that demands Palestinians reject violence even though it is Israel that occupies their land illegally, and Syrian Land and Lebanese land and has exercised unrestrained slaughter of Palestinians since its inception, a fact that is recorded in countless UN resolutions.

In this season of remembrances, it is incumbent upon the people of the United States to reflect on the role they played in the abortive birth of the state of Israel and the disastrous catastrophe inflicted upon the people of Palestine. Ironically, most Americans can recall neither the Israeli Declaration of Independence nor the Nakba, yet in 2011, their very existence economically, politically, and internationally grows from the decades of unconditional support the U.S. government has provided to the terrorist state of Israel. Ironically as President Obama implies in his reactions to the changing conditions in the mid-east, America’s “unshaken support” for the state of Israel has brought upon it the world’s condemnation as a nation that has lost any semblance of justice for the humiliated and defenseless becoming thereby a nation distrusted, dishonored and dismissed. Perhaps this is the catastrophe of American power policy that seeks domination of the world for our Corporate elite.
William A. Cook is a Professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California. His most recent book, The Plight of the Palestinians, was published this past summer by Macmillan. He can be reached at www.drwilliamacook.com or wcook@laverne.edu.

Related Posts:

Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=107282

%d bloggers like this: