Random
Watching Israel Delegitimize the U.S.
May 26, 2010 by Jeff Gates · 15 Comments
What’s behind the sudden crisis in Korea? Who benefits?
Which nation’s nuclear arsenal is problematic?
The U.S.-Israeli relationship has long been America’s Achilles heel. Our first president warned against “entangled alliances” particularly when, as here, there’s a “passionate attachment.”
Our “special relationship” with this rogue state has placed the U.S. outside the same system of international law that we now seek to impose on others, including Iran.
Our handling of the current crisis on the Korean peninsula could restore our tattered reputation.
What’s the first issue that needs to be addressed?
Here’s where you the reader may well ask: “Do you mean the issue concerning the collapse of Building 7 of the World Trade Center?” No, but nor is that question irrelevant to this latest crisis.
Here’s the second issue that must be addressed: to which nations has Israel transferred nuclear weapons or nuclear weapons technology? Is North Korea on the list?
That issue became relevant with the release of The Unspoken Alliance: Israel’s Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa. Archival research by author Sasha Polakowsky-Suransky uncovered “top secret” minutes of a military agreement signed in April 1975 between Shimon Peres, now president of Israel, and South Africa’s defense minister P.W. Botha.
Though Israel denies the conclusions reached by reporters for The Guardian (U.K.), the agreement suggests an offer of nuclear weapons while its Apartheid regime was under international sanctions.
Israel was then building a surrogate arms industry in South Africa using what was, in practical effect, slave labor. That industry has since moved to Israel where it employs “guest workers.” Peres was responsible for building Israel’s nuclear program with help from France in the 1950s.
Some weeks before the offer, Israel and South Africa signed a covert agreement (code name Secment) governing their military alliance. In the subsequent meetings, “correct payload” was used to describe the nuclear warheads Israel would provide for a Jericho missile system. As The Guardian explained:
“The use of a euphemism, the ‘correct payload’, reflects Israeli sensitivity over the nuclear issue and would not have been used had it been referring to conventional weapons… the only payload the South Africans would have needed to obtain from Israel was nuclear. The South Africans were capable of putting together other warheads.”
South Africa did not go ahead with the deal it was offered though it did develop its own nuclear weapons, possibly with Israeli assistance. The Apartheid government revealed the program to Nelson Mandela when he became president.
In 1986, nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu revealed Israel’s nuclear weapons program to the Sunday Times (London). Vanunu was kidnapped by Mossad agents in Rome and returned for trial in Israel. Sentenced to 18 years, he served 11 years in solitary confinement. On May 23rd, he was sentenced to another three months in prison for breaking the terms of his release by having unauthorized meetings with foreigners.
Evil Doers vs. Evil Doing
Even now Israel strives against all odds to maintain “ambiguity” about its nuclear weapons. But how can you offer nuclear weapons you don’t have?
Who provided nuclear technology to North Korea? That backward state, now nuclear-armed, was included in G.W. Bush’s post-911 “Axis of Evil” speech. Care to guess who wrote that speech?
Shortly thereafter the U.S. invaded Iraq to remove an Evil Doer. Only later did we learn that our “flawed” intelligence was “fixed” around a goal long sought by Israel as chronicled in A Clean Break, a strategy document written for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by a team of Israeli-Americans led by Richard Perle.
In 2001, Perle became chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Review Board.
The United Nations has long been scheduled to review the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to consider the creation of a Middle East free of nuclear weapons. As the date approached, the world community experienced a well-timed torpedo attack on a South Korean warship, reportedly by a North Korean submarine.
In the midst of these negotiations, mainstream media has been flooding the national consciousness with power-of-association stories about Iran, its nuclear program and even its links to North Korea. Tehran, of course, was the third member in the trio of Bush-era Evil Doers.
News outlets controlled by Israeli-American Rupert Murdoch are particularly active, including Fox News and The Wall Street Journal.
Is it true that Tel Aviv transferred to Pyongyang a German-made submarine? If so, does that qualify as evil doing?
Perhaps here is a good place to pose an out-of-sequence question: What about the collapse of Building 7?
Master Myth Makers
Does Israel routinely transfer war materiél to nations subject to international sanctions?
That would help explain their status as the world’s third largest arms exporter. The U.S. holds first place with Russia second. Israel and France vie for third and fourth trailed by the U.K. and China in the Dirty Half Dozen.
If Israel has an extensive arsenal of nuclear weapons, why does the U.S not insist on inspections?
How does U.S. protection of Israel’s illegal conduct advance U.S. interests?
How is our conduct consistent with the behavior we are now pressing on Iran?
What is so valuable about the U.S.-Israeli relationship that we should sacrifice our credibility to cover-up violations of international law that make us appear guilty by association?
By law isn’t the U.S. obliged to support U.N. sanctions for Israel?
Why discredit the U.S. and undermine the stature of the United Nations? Wasn’t the U.N. the post-WWII organization founded in large part by the U.S. to discourage just such behavior?
Serial Provocations and Murderous Misdirection
Instead of sanctions, what do we see instead? Misdirection and intimidation.
The Internet is awash with Men in Black accounts featuring the usual array of conspiracies. Elvis may yet be blamed for a Korean peninsula incident that could ignite a nuclear war in the region.
How long before we see a story blaming Hezbollah terrorists led by the Pakistan Taliban aboard an Iranian submarine advised by Syrian nuclear scientists and Palestinian strategists?
Or aliens.
The stage has been set for another 911, possibly featuring a nuclear incident. A series of “plausible” Evil Doers have been prominently featured in assorted “terrorist incidents.”
Enough pre-staging has been done that Americans again feel insecure following the media coverage given the Ft. Hood shooting, the Christmas Day Bomber and now the Times Square Terrorist.
One small problem: none of these storylines hold up under close scrutiny. But then that’s not the point. Neither did the “intelligence” on which we relied to wage war in Iraq in response to the provocation of 911. It didn’t need to be true, just believable.
Time to Redo the Report
Anyone of substance associated with the report of the 911 Commission knows we still need a good faith investigation. Mainstream Europeans routinely call for it. Those demands are routinely couched in code due to the perils facing those in the EU who question our “special relationship.”
Instead, commentators ask about the “collapse” of Building 7. Good question. Also a fair question. The answer could lead somewhere useful. Therefore, don’t ask, don’t tell.
This entangled alliance has been an exercise in deceit since a Christian-Zionist president, a Democrat, was induced to extend recognition to an enclave of extremists.
Harry Truman dismissed the concerns of the Joint Chiefs who warned him about their “fanatical concepts” and their plans for “military and economic hegemony over the entire Middle East.”
We were deceived by our own better nature to embrace a relationship that has long been at odds with our national interest. The durability of the relationship has long failed to pass muster as either rational or consistent with our values. The relationship has changed for the worse who we are as a nation.
Yet somehow the relationship endures. Along with the perceived legitimacy of this “state.”
Deception and Self-Deceit
Its persistence can be traced to the strength of a lobby that, to date, has escaped registration as a foreign agent. Those known for their skill at waging war “by way of deception” have routinely betrayed the nation that first befriended and most reliably defended them.
Even when a Christian-Zionist president, a Republican, led us to war on fixed intelligence, we were unable to identity the common source of our troubles. Some blamed G.W Bush. Others now blame Barack Obama. Both critiques miss the point. This treachery is now systemic and thoroughly imbedded in both political parties.
Even now, an undisclosed media bias blocks Americans from the facts they require to make an informed choice about this relationship. And about the legitimacy of a transnational operation that murders with impunity (as in Dubai) and provokes with pleasure—anywhere they please.
Americans are now emerging from many quarters to resist the influence wielded on (and from within) our government by special interests. This special relationship often tops the list.
Many supporters of Israel have been deceived to believe that this relationship is in their best interest. The facts confirm otherwise. Like the nation itself, they too were “the mark” in this long-running fraud.
We have been seduced by those masterful at deceit to freely embrace the very forces that delegitimized us as a nation and collapsed our economy from within.
Which brings me back to the question: what about Building 7?
I have never divulged this…but in the course of attending college in 1975 I dated a South African girl whose father was a Defense Dept. Minister. She had been sent here to Vancouver for educational purposes. She revealed tp me that South Africa had several nucleal weapons (20) that had been acqired from Israel to be used as ground based weapons against insurrection / invasion from neighboring territories. She stated that a ring of bombs had been buried like mines in a perimeter configuaration.
Just thought I’d mention this…………..
Personally…the idea that Israel would give SA nuclear weapons does not sound farfetched at all.
[Reply]
John Paul XX Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 6:16 am
Hate, hate , hate. Just wait till one of you guys are kidnapped, tortured etc by some fundementalist…………
Israel might not be comprised of angels but what would your reaction be????
[Reply]
Jeff Gates Reply:
June 16th, 2010 at 9:58 am
As confirmed in every blog and in Guilt By Association (please read it), this problem cannot be solved with hate — any more than you can fight fire with fire. This problem can only be solved with facts, accountability and better design. We’re working across all three areas and invite your participation. Those who espouse hate become like those profiled in these accounts who routinely provoke hate as a form of weaponry for pitting two sides against the middle and then profiting off the misery of both. Making that modus operandi apparent will make the perpetrators transparent. You are invited to assist in that task. Thanks for your comment.
[Reply]
anthony r Reply:
June 17th, 2010 at 2:40 am
John Paul XX
it appears that the reaction to any sort of criticism of Israel and its policies is to accuse one of being an anti-semite and a hater of jews. No rational argument or discussion…simply an emotional reaction. Personally, I am astounded by the degree of conditioned response. I was aware of the programming of Israelis by media, politics and other societal influences but really had no idea. I have to say that it is at a level as great if not greater than the extremism that fundamentalist muslims are accused of.
It is a form of insanity !!
That we have a country in the mid-east with over 200 nukes with this mindset ….now thats disturbing !!
[Reply]
(IAP News) — An Israeli professor and military historian hinted that Israel could avenge the holocaust by annihilating millions of Germans and other Europeans.
Speaking during an interview which was published in Jerusalem Friday, Professor Martin Van Creveld said Israel had the capability of hitting most European capitals with nuclear weapons.
“We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets of our air force.”
Creveld, a professor of military history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, pointed out that “collective deportation” was Israel’s only meaningful strategy towards the Palestinian people.
“The Palestinians should all be deported. The people who strive for this (the Israeli government) are waiting only for the right man and the right time. Two years ago, only 7 or 8 per cent of Israelis were of the opinion that this would be the best solution, two months ago it was 33 per cent, and now, according to a Gallup poll, the figure is 44 percent.”
Creveld said he was sure that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon wanted to deport the Palestinians.
“I think it’s quite possible that he wants to do that. He wants to escalate the conflict. He knows that nothing else we do will succeed.”
Asked if he was worried about Israel becoming a rogue state if it carried out a genocidal deportation against Palestinians, Creveld quoted former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan who said “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.”
Creveld argued that Israel wouldn’t care much about becoming a rogue state.
“Our armed forces are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that this will happen before Israel goes under.”
Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP)
http://www.iap.org
[Reply]
Noor al Haqiqa Reply:
May 30th, 2010 at 7:12 pm
I remember that conversation. I posted it sometime last year when he made it. I also looked up his previous statements, history and publications. Creveld is highly regarded in Israel of course. Oh he also pointed towards Rome and the Vatican with special glee.
He basically exposed the mindset of Israel to me and also an extra kick to their vindictive mindset in continuing to torture Mordechai Vanunu when they themselves were already admitting what they had, that he warned us of so long ago.
A mad dog, I have also used and credited that quote quite a few times and been called anti semitic in every way possible for it. However, since that word mean less than nothing to me, I merely thank them and move on. Wonder how they would get to North America? Just go for a heavy concentration of them in the ME?
[Reply]
Investigation of 911?
Just go to http://www.bigeye.com
Lots of circumstantial evidence, lots of investigation, lots of published information, lots of videos representing assorted allegations and evidence
Decide for yourself what is true.
[Reply]
Who knocked down bldg. 7? I’ll tell you who. The same people who knocked down Towers 1&2. Bldg 7 is a physical certainty of controlled demo. The symmetry of the previous two tower’s fall is proof enough they were BOTH demolished, by……Mossad? The Jewish blanket thrown over the entire WTC affair is further proof of their demonic involvement. From the torturer Mukasy to the whoremonger Silverstein (see Runway69 on google) to the Evil Elf Natanyahu, the entire event stinks to high heaven. Let’s have an investigation which can pass the ‘smell test’. Shall we?
[Reply]
The Zionist regime would stoop to any level to achieve its evil agenda – by calling everyone Hitler or anti-Semite, who dares to expose Zionist evil agenda. Israeli Mossad is world greatest expert in pulling false flage operations – from 9/11 to 7/7 and from Mumbai terrorism to the Nigerian underwear bomber.
In 2001 and 2003 Israelis pushed Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq to die for Israeli interest in oil and heroin. Now they’re faking a new war front against Islamic Republic for Tehran’s support for Hamas and Hizbullah. Israel with over 240 nuclear bombs is trying to scare the hell out of Americans who have close to 9,000 of nuclear bomb – from Iran’s non-existent nukes.
Nuclear deal – Iran 1: Israel 0
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/05/26/nuclear-deal-iran-1-israel-0/
[Reply]
I’m pretty sure that Rupert Murdoch is not an Israeli-American but he is a Zionist, but not a Jew.
[Reply]
Jeff Gates Reply:
June 16th, 2010 at 10:00 am
Thanks for your comment. There appears to be conflicting evidence on that point. Certainly your point is well taken that his behavior is consistent with advancing a Zionist agenda.
[Reply]
Jake Prufrock Reply:
July 5th, 2010 at 9:00 pm
Mr. Gates, Rupert Murdoch may well be Jewish, although he either denies it or equivocates to create the impression of a denial. His centenarian mother, Elisabeth Joy Murdoch (nee Greene), who is now 101 years of age, is quite possibly of Jewish descent.
One person (who also states that his own father is Jewish by maternal descent) has claimed that Elisabeth’s maternal grandmother, Caroline Jemima Sherson, was of Jewish birth– which would, of course, make Rupert Murdoch himself Jewish, by maternal descent, in the eyes of both the Rabbinate and the State of Israel. [See, http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071025102913AAjilr3
That person, however, cites as his lone source the same genealogy that I have long been aware of, and which states that Caroline was baptized on December 28, 1810, well before her first birthday. Caroline’s mother’s name is given therein as Catherine Taylor, which certainly does not sound Jewish. Her parents are not listed, however; so, perhaps Catherine’s mother was Jewish. How the poster claiming Caroline’s Jewish birth would know that, however, if he were basing his answer, supposedly, on that very genealogy is more than a bit unclear to me.
Books on Mr. Murdoch claim that his maternal great-grandfather emigrated from Ireland. That information, however, might well have come from the Murdoch family itself, rather than from any original genealogical research by his biographers. The professional genealogy of “Keith Rupert Murdoch” found on line at http://www.wargs.com/other/murdoch.html shows that the professional genealogist who created it was unable to trace Elizabeth’s paternal line back any farther than her own father, Rupert Greene, a rich merchant who was supposedly responsible for Rupert Murdoch’s father’s rise in station, which became the basis of Rupert Murdoch’s later media empire. (Rupert Murdoch chose to go by his middle name, after his maternal grandfather, Rupert Greene, rather than by his first name, after his own father, Sir Keith Arthur Murdoch!)
It seems highly unlikely to me that a professional genealogist in the United Kingdom would be able to trace others of Mr. Murdoch’s lines to Australia and India, yet fail to find the birth records of a supposed great-grandfather who was allegedly born in British-ruled Ireland in the middle of the 19th Century. One may also note that Rupert, as a German name, would be an unusual one to be given by a native Irishman to his Irish-born son. Greene, of course, especially with the -e on the end, is not an uncommon Jewish surname.
It seems more likely to me that Rupert Greene, the successful merchant who was behind the rise in station of his son-in-law, Keith Arthur Murdoch, which set the stage for the later media empire of Keith Rupert Murdoch, was the one who was Jewish. If so, whether his daughter, Elisabeth, was raised in the Jewish religion or not is unclear from the genealogical record, which does not cite a baptism for her. It may be that Rupert Murdoch is merely one-quarter Jewish by descent, but that he would not be recognized as Jewish religiously by the Rabbinate, nor by the State of Israel, because he was not Jewish on his mother’s side. If Rupert Greene was Jewish, and Caroline Sherson was Jewish by maternal descent, as the aforementioned poster had claimed, then Elisabeth Murdoch would be Jewish on both sides, and might well have been raised in the Jewish faith, as some (albeit more dubious) on-line sites have claimed.
The ardent nature of Rupert Murdoch’s Zionism certainly suggests to me that there is a Jewish background in his genealogy, whether it is from his maternal grandfather, Rupert Greene, or from the elder Rupert’s wife, Marie Grace de Lancey Forth, through her matrilineal descent. The younger Rupert does not seem to me to be driven in his Zionism by a fundamentalist-Christian urge to see prophecy fulfilled in the Holy Land.
[Reply]
Jake Prufrock Reply:
July 6th, 2010 at 1:25 pm
“It may be that Rupert Murdoch is merely one-quarter Jewish by descent, but that he would not be recognized as Jewish religiously by the Rabbinate, nor by the State of Israel, because he was not Jewish on his mother’s side.”
Please excuse my misstatement [supra]: I meant to say “because he was not Jewish through matrilineal descent.” If Rupert Greene were himself Jewish (quite possibly a German-Jewish immigrant, or else the son of such an immigrant), then Rupert Murdoch’s being one-quarter Jewish ethnically, irrespective of religious persuasions, would still be through his mother’s side of the family, albeit not through matrilineal descent from his maternal grandmother, Marie Grace de Lancey Forth.
The world is finally opening their eyes to the terrorist coward state of Israel! They truly are the only terrorists in this world! To me it’s very obvious that Mossad was behind the 9/11 tragedy! Jews were in all the places needed to carry this attack out. And they don’t care about American lives so why do presidents want to protect them!?
[Reply]
The Zionist think tank, Belfer Center, in its July 2008 Policy Brief had recommended that India should continue its close ties with Israel and use its influence on Arab governments to recognize Israel and that the US administration must continue its support security and diplomatic cooperation between India and Israel. However, this support must be kept “secret” as the knowledge of such American support would certainly creat a backlash in India and the Muslim world.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/07/23/israel-and-indian-hell/
[Reply]