Over the past two months, Benjamin Netanyahu has mentioned the fate of jailed Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard six times in meetings with President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The Israel lobby also mounted a letter-writing campaign on Pollard’s behalf.
When Pollard was arrested for espionage in the 1980s, Tel Aviv swore he was part of a “rogue” operation. Only 12 years later did Israel concede he was their spy the entire time. That insider espionage by a purported ally damaged U.S. national security more than any incident in U.S. history.
During an earlier term as Prime Minister, Netanyahu secured a verbal agreement from Bill Clinton in 1998 to release Pollard. Clinton then faced a rebellion among U.S. intelligence agencies aware of the damage done. Clinton backed down and Netanyahu backed off.
Pollard took more than one million documents for copying by his Israeli handler. When transferred to the Soviets, reportedly in exchange for the emigration of Russian Jews, that stolen intelligence shifted the underlying dynamics of the Cold War.
What has its entangled alliance with Israel cost the U.S.? The U.S. committed $20 trillion to Cold War defense from 1948-1989 (in 2010 dollars). Pollard negated much of that outlay yet even now Israel pretends to be an ally. Few believe it; many realize the U.S. has been played for a fool.
The timing could be a Christmas season plea for clemency after 25 years of imprisonment. Former Assistant Secretary of State Lawrence Kolb now claims the sentence was excessive due to a personal distaste for Israel by then Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger.
At trial, Pollard claimed he wasn’t stealing from the U.S.; he was stealing secrets for Israel—with whom the U.S. has a “special relationship.” Aware of the harm done by Pollard during the Reagan-era defense buildup, Weinberger pressed for a longer sentence than the prosecution.
From 1981-1985, this U.S. Navy intelligence analyst provided Israel with 360 cubic feet of classified military documents on Soviet arms shipments, Pakistani nuclear weapons, Libyan air defense systems and other intelligence sought by Tel Aviv to advance its geopolitical agenda.
Even while in prison, Pollard’s iconic status among pro-Israelis may have played a strategic role. Or was it just coincidence that Tel Aviv announced a $1 million grant to their master spy ten days before 911? Is that how Israel signals its operatives in the U.S.?
Could that explain the timing of Israel’s latest announcement? Could this news flurry be a signal to pro-Israeli volunteers (sayanim in Hebrew) that another operation is underway?
Timing is Everything
Tel Aviv routinely schedules its operations during political “downtime” in the U.S. The Suez crisis was scheduled for the last week of President Eisenhower’s 1956 reelection campaign. Fast forward to 2008 and Israeli troops invaded Gaza just after Christmas, killing 1,400 Palestinians before exiting just prior to the Obama inaugural.
That well-timed provocation generated more outrage at the U.S. as Israel’s reliable enabler. The carnage also catalyzed reactions worldwide that undermined peace talks
This latest news about Pollard coincides with another political downtime. The U.S. Congress has adjourned and the White House has shut down for the holidays. Plus WikiLeaks successfully removed peace talks from the news and restored talk of war with Iran.
If there is another “incident” in the U.S. or the E.U., will the evidence point to Tehran? Islamabad? Damascus? If the U.S. cannot be persuaded to invade Iran, can it be provoked to do so? Stay tuned.
Tel Aviv may be growing desperate and for good reason. Israel and pro-Israelis were the source of the fixed intelligence that induced the U.S. to invade Iraq in response to the provocation of 911. Those facts are well known to intelligence agencies worldwide.
As with Pollard, Tel Aviv denies it.
With Pollard back in the news, anything is possible. Recall how long it took for a confession that he was an Israeli spy. Don’t hold your breath waiting for Tel Aviv to concede its role in provoking its primary ally to pursue a Zionist agenda in the Middle East.
Absent the mass murder of 911, would the U.S. now find itself at war in the Middle East? Absent another provocation, Americans are not inclined to expand these wars. At least not yet.
“I know what America is,” Benjamin Netanyahu assured a group of Israelis in 2001, apparently not knowing his words were being recorded. “America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction.”
Pollard has long been a rallying point for Jewish nationalists, Zionist extremists and ultra-orthodox ideologues. Only time will tell why he is back in the news. And whether this news is a means for moving the U.S. in the right direction.
Those tracking the agenda now advancing behind the WikiLeaks façade should check for the undisclosed bias among editors at the four newspapers chosen to select what was leaked. And when it was leaked.
The pro-Israeli bias of The New York Times needs no citations. In London, WikiLeaks releases are overseen by Deputy Editor Ian Katz at The Guardian. What about Le Monde in Paris and Der Spiegel in Berlin?
The tipping point for German media dates to 2003 when Haim Saban purchased ProSiebenSat1, Germany’s second largest media conglomerate. Why this particular acquisition? Because “Germany is critical to Israel” conceded Steve Rattner, Saban’s investment banker—now under indictment in New York for fraud.
Saban’s support was key to putting Angela Merkel in office in 2005. Thus Netanyahu’s comment on November 29th about Germany becoming Israel’s new ‘partner for peace’ in the Middle East—while Tel Aviv collapsed U.S.-sponsored peace talks.
On December 10th, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton chose the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution in Washington to announce the end of this latest charade of talks.
Saban has long been close to the Clintons. Ex-President Bill Clinton helped him sell advertising. Though Saban paid for the building now housing the Democratic National Committee, he is doubtless thrilled that Republican Congressman Eric Cantor, a Jewish-Zionist, will take the reins in January as House Majority Leader.
Both political parties are critical to Israel.
Entropy — Again
The collapse of peace talks marked the success of yet another Israeli entropy strategy. When negotiating with Zionists, the relevant question is always: What’s Next From Israel: Entropy or Outrage? Take your pick: perpetual delay or another well-timed provocation. Or both.
In 2007, Saban, a self-described Zionist, acquired control of Univision, the most popular U.S. media outlet for Latinos. As America’s fastest-growing voting bloc, their support is also critical to Israel. This latest acquisition confirms the systematic imbedding of pro-Israeli influence in opinion-shaping domains, including media, think tanks and politics.
Israel is waging war on the U.S. by way of deception. That strategy can only succeed if this war is waged in plain sight by its adept game theory war planners.
Tel Aviv’s agenda requires a critical mass of control over key “in between” domains — between “the mark” (that’s us) and the facts that We The People require for a system of governance reliant on our informed consent.
The modus operandi on display at every turn: displacement of facts with false beliefs.
Thus the role of media, think tanks and pro-Israeli policy-makers in selling Americans on consensus beliefs around Iraqi WMD, Iraqi ties to Al Qaeda, Iraqi meetings with Al Qaeda in Prague, Iraqi mobile biological weapons laboratories and Iraqi uranium from Niger. All were false yet all were widely believed.
The entirety of the phony intelligence that induced the U.S. to invade Iraq is traceable to Israeli or pro-Israeli sources. The invasion was marketed to a trusting American public by a mainstream media dominated by those sharing the same undisclosed bias.
In the Information Age, if that’s not treason, what is?
With Friends Like This….
When in human history were fabricated beliefs first deployed to deceive? At the heart of this ancient craft one finds proponents of the oldest of the three “religions of the book” promoting a “Clash” between its two derivatives: Christianity and Islam.
Displacement is the key to this mental and emotional manipulation. Within hours of WikiLeak’s November release of diplomatic cables, peace talks were displaced by renewed talk of war with Iran. WikiLeaks concedes it had those cables since May.
Barack Obama has no better grasp of this long-running treachery than George Bush, Bill Clinton, G.H.W. Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, Eisenhower, Truman, FDR, Coolidge, Harding or Wilson.
Only with clarity on the common source of this duplicity can a long-deceived global public ensure accountability for the many conflicts engineered by those skilled at pitting two sides against the middle while profiting off the misery of both.
By wielding their influence in key in-between domains, those complicit prey on the good faith of others. We Americans will remain unwitting players in a fabricated drama (The Clash of Civilizations) so long as we believe a narrative sustained in plain sight by those skilled at deception.
To betray, one must first befriend; to deceive, one must first create a relationship of trust. No one can persuade Americans to forfeit their freedom. We must be induced to freely embrace the forces that, step-by-step, displace our freedom. That’s called Zionism.
To restore the true self to self-governance requires that Americans recover enough self-confidence to follow facts wherever they may lead. And trust in themselves enough to act consistent with those facts — despite what those complicit would deceive them to believe.
Our freedom now depends on it.
U.S. stock markets rallied to recent highs on news that the U.S. Federal Reserve planned to pump up to $900 billion more cash into the economy. Financial markets reflect today’s appraisal of tomorrow’s cash flows. More cash means more flows.
Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke conceded early on in 2008 that the Fed was “printing money.” With a computer entry, $1.2 trillion in toxic mortgage-backed securities were taken off the books of the banks by crediting their reserve accounts at the Fed. That candor proved unsettling. This latest cash infusion is “quantitative easing” or “QE2.”
“QE1” stabilized financial firms that cross-collateralized massive layers of debt and derivatives in a creative scheme that was destined to collapse without…more cash flow. Washington’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) authorized $700 billion for that purpose.
Insurance giant AIG booked profits by selling more than $440 billion in credit default swaps, a form of insurance, without setting aside reserves. That’s when the Fed stepped in with QE1.
Voicing his admiration for “financial creativity,” former Fed chair Alan Greenspan enabled this pyramiding of debt-on-debt with low interest rates and lax oversight during his 19-year tenure.
Greenspan concedes his high regard for Russian philosopher Ayn Rand (né Alisa Rosenbaum) who famously wore an oversized dollar mark as a broach. Her philosophy: grant money the freedom to work its will worldwide and everything will work out just fine.
Reflecting on the debt-induced financial carnage he helped create, Greenspan recently marveled that financial markets were not, as he and Rand believed, “self correcting.” How could this True Believer have been so mistaken? Why does his successor not yet see the problem?
Answer: both men share a mindset from which the problem cannot be seen because that mindset is the filter through which they do their seeing.
This money-myopic perspective, imbedded in American education over decades, first appeared in the U.S. as the “Chicago model.” The late University of Chicago Professor Milton Friedman, a Noble laureate economist, remains the patron saint of this “monetarist” perspective.
As this dollar-centric ideology was taken to global scale, it became the “Washington consensus.” Generally accepted truths are seldom revisited even when, as now, a reappraisal is long overdue.
Dollar Infatuation = Deflation or Inflation
The Fed is rightly worried that the economy is slipping into a debt-induced deflation akin to Japan’s “lost decade.” As the U.S. deleverages, it could face a similar fate. QE2 is meant to counter deflation yet it could trigger expectations of inflation. That’s the risk when banks start printing money. History offers reasons to worry.
WWII was triggered by an onerous reparations burden imposed on Germany at the Treaty of Versailles ending WWI. British economist John Maynard Keynes left those negotiations to publish a warning in 1919 titled The Economic Consequences of the Peace.
The resulting indignities of widespread poverty and hyperinflation fueled a hyper-nationalism from which emerged the fascist forces that ravaged Europe. The U.S. emerged with an industrial base that ensured its bonds would become the world’s preferred gilt-edged security.
Keynes resurfaced in the 1930s to advocate the debt-financed stimulation of demand. The 1980s saw a debt-financed “supply-side” successor—to stimulate investment. Both deployed public debt to boost private-sector cash flows.
With lower tax rates and faster depreciation, the supply-side program was projected to reduce government revenues by $872 billion over five years. With this stimulus, the Reagan era catalyzed a three-decade debt binge further enabled by the easy credit era of Alan Greenspan.
When Reagan was elected in 1980, securitized U.S. debt totaled $900 billion. The total is now on track to top $15.4 trillion. By 2020, annual interest payments alone could top $1 trillion.
Monetization of What for Whom?
Will this cash infusion fuel inflation? QE2 differs from QE1. With the mid-term elections signaling political gridlock, Fed-induced liquidity relieves pressure on the federal budget with, in effect, an interest-free loan.
In the interim, are we seeing another skimming of financial value from yet another Fed-lifted equity market?
By fixating solely on how debt-backed dollars can revive a deflating economy, those who induced the U.S. to embrace this monetarist mindset may yet induce a crippling inflation. The year 2013 is the 100th anniversary of the Fed. The way out may well be found in a willingness to view “monetization” anew.
Who decreed debt as the only way to catalyze demand? Who says monetization must be limited to one-size-fits-all Federal Reserve notes? Why not encourage complementary currencies attuned to the needs of regions and communities?
Are Americans expected to shop their way to sustainable prosperity with debt-backed dollars? Rather than debt, why not monetize the physical capital required for a clean energy economy?
Americans are witnessing record-breaking disparities in wealth and income. Why continue on the same path that enabled this fracturing of U.S. society where the top 1% possess more net worth than the bottom 90%? Why not monetize a sustainable future with means that ensure a shared prosperity?
To solve this problem, first we must acknowledge how the U.S. was induced to embrace a mindset that requires more debt to create more purchasing power.
This problem can only be solved “upstream” commencing with a candid reappraisal of its origins in a shared mindset.
Is America the target of class warfare? That claim, though widely made, misses the point. The problem is more serious and the long-term effects far more troubling. Though the facts are compelling, that conclusion is misleading.
In 2007, 1% of U.S. households claimed 24% of the national income. Those figures were compiled well before a debt-induced recession cost the jobs of millions of Americans. And well before the payment this year of a $144 billion bonus to Wall Street’s elite.
The topmost 1% now owns 34% of all private net worth; the bottom 90% owns 29%. Is that evidence of class warfare or is there something else at work?
The facts suggest that these record-breaking disparities were foreseeable by those sophisticated in trade and finance—but not until Americans could be persuaded to put their faith in a shared mindset now known as the “Washington” consensus.
With its U.S. origins traceable to academia, this mindset insists that we grant not deference but outright dominance to those values denominated in money. That worldview worked its way from intellectuals into legislation to become the law of the land.
Instead of the civil rights refrain, “Let my people go,” this widely shared belief insists on “Let my money go.” So we enacted laws to ensure that money can flow wherever money wants to go in pursuit of the highest returns – as measured in money.
Money, after all, is what really matters.
Over decades, the respect granted financial markets became akin to reverence. In the creation of that shared faith lies how we were induced to displace commonsense with a ‘generally accepted truth’ that unleashed the unbridled forces of finance.
The origins of this mindset recede into the mists of time. Yet its lineage traces to those who honed the skill sets used to excel in global trade and finance.
Fast-forward to modernity and this mindset was imbedded in the curriculum of business and law schools worldwide. Akin to an operating system running silently in the background, this narrow perspective now forms the unstated foundation on which entire economies are built.
Yet those metrics measurable by money fail to reflect either the costs imposed on communities or the values required for healthy and sustainable communities. This glaring mismatch is widely understood with an intuitive certainty that cannot be denied.
Induced to grant lawful dominance to money, people find themselves living unfulfilled lives in unhealthy communities and distressed environments. Educated to behave inconsistent with their inner knowing, people begin to mistrust themselves, societal impotence grows and self-governance recedes.
A simmering resentment colors all as disillusionment morphs into indifference in a disabling cycle that leaves this systemic flaw intact. Rather than challenge the mindset, people adapt and comply.
With compliance come the symptoms of class warfare. But the malady is far more fundamental and its source thoroughly internalized.
The roots of this mindset trace to a form of narcissism made to appear natural and even rational. Money pursuing more money is a pernicious form of self-adoration enabled by our faith in this flawed mindset.
Clinically, narcissism describes a devastatingly vulnerable person who compensates for an inadequacy with a desperate need for admiration and a grandiose self-image.
Within the consensus mindset, this grandiosity takes form as the legally enforced deference granted financial markets to ensure that money can seek more of itself—regardless of the non-monetary results.
By exaggerating the authority that money is allowed in our lives, a mistrust of our intuitive knowledge grows alongside a sense of civic impotence and widening disenchantment.
This mindset is not itself class warfare. Its symptoms are similar but the malady is more debilitating. Financial narcissism not only fractures societies, it also deeply imprints a sense of personal inadequacy and undermines the confidence required for self-governance.
The Seduction of Zion
By inducing America to embrace this mindset, proponents of this narrow worldview evoked a social environment granting dominance to those values calculable in money. No financial return is too much; nor can any return be paid too quickly.
By living with the effects of a shared mindset ill-adapted to people, place and pace, our lives become inconsistent with our intuition and authenticity is displaced with an ill-fitting faith.
Many of our best minds were educated to excel within this narrow range of values while ignoring its incapacitating effects as this perilous self-absorption expanded to global scale under the guise of the U.S.-discrediting Washington consensus.
The seduction is now complete. Major nations, including the U.S., find their principles displaced, their policies dismissed, their economies devastated and their environments depleted.
As the source of this narcissism is identified, this mindset can be replaced with a consensus that reflects the diversity of values required for sustainable communities and truly human societies.
For those who think the U.S. is broke, think again. It’s far more serious than that.
To renew Bush-era tax cuts for our most well-to-do 2% would reduce U.S. government revenues by $700 billion over the decade. That shortfall will need to be borrowed.
Or we could provide college scholarships to 14 million U.S. high school students. Or tuition, room and board for about half of today’s college students.
$700 billion is also the interest expense on the $3 trillion that the U.S. is projected to borrow to fund the long-term costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of that interest paid to individuals, care to guess what portion finds its way to the topmost 2%?
$700 billion is also the amount authorized in October 2008 to stabilize the financial sector as part of the Troubled Assets Relief Program.
To boost liquidity, the Federal Reserve just announced $600 billion in “quantitative easing” over the next six months. That sum could be increased by another $300 billion.
A December 1st report brought news that, from March 2008 to May 2009, the Fed extended nearly $9 trillion in short-term loans to 18 financial institutions.
That’s our full faith and credit at work making the world safe for financial markets. And for the elite of Wall Street. To show their gratitude to the American public, the financial sector just paid themselves $144 billion in year-end bonuses.
Meanwhile long-term unemployment is the worst since the Great Depression and fiscal disorder is now commonplace at the federal, state and local level.
States and municipalities have around $2.8 trillion of outstanding bonds. That debt is dwarfed by debts that are off the books, including as much as $3.5 trillion in pension shortfalls. The situation resembles the run-up to the subprime mortgage meltdown
Meanwhile, the first of 78 million Baby Boomers born between 1946 and 1964 reach age 65 in 2011. This demographic bubble ensures fiscal strains unlike anything the U.S. has ever experienced.
Breaking the Habit
The topmost few have fared well over the past three decades. Then there’s everyone else.
In 1981, a $872 billion tax cut and investment stimulus helped expand national net worth by $5 trillion from 1983 to 1989. 54% was claimed by the half million families who make up the top one-half of one percent of the U.S. population.
That works out to an average $5.4 million gain per already-wealthy household. That’s a $65,000 increase in wealth per month or $90 per hour, 24 hours a day.
As with our wars, that surge in personal wealth was financed with debt. While the public got the debt, the well-to-do got ownership of the assets financed with that debt, along with the bulk of the interest.
That boost to personal wealth dates to when the stock market was a fraction of what it is today. Now the top 1% have a combined net worth greater than the bottom 90 percent.
The top 1% own 34% of all private net worth; the bottom 90% own 29%.
From 2002-2006, the topmost one percent received two-thirds of the gains in national income. That trend has remained steady over three decades.
During the 1977-1989 period, the top 1% claimed 70% of the increase in household income. The U.S. is now witnessing its widest ever disparities in wealth and income.
Reagan-era “supply-side” economics was marketed with campaign rhetoric remarkably similar to what we hear again today.
Reagan policies doubled the national debt in just one year.
Over the past several decades, financial freedom has emerged as a proxy for personal freedom and the pursuit of financial returns as a proxy for the pursuit of happiness.
The economic environment changed such that those values not calculable in money are, by design, displaced. While that may not be what we want, that’s what we were schooled to do.
The trends confirm steadily increasing disparities in both wealth and income. Much as concentrated wealth undermines democracies, concentrated income undermines markets.
Americans do not yet grasp how this money-myopic mindset worked its way into education and imbedded itself in law. Yet our shared embrace of a “consensus” mindset induces us to freely embrace the very forces that now jeopardize our freedom.
There are no winners in this model, only creditors and debtors. The trends are not even good for the financially well-to-do. Lawmakers are right to worry that civil disorder is emerging as a possibility in reaction to growing social discontent.
Lacking the political will to address this steady dissolution of civil society, the U.S. faces increasing instability. How Americans respond will define what America becomes.
Should the union dissolve, the seeds of its destruction will be traceable to this shared mindset.
The scope and scale of WikiLeaks is a marvel to behold. Some praise it as the ultimate form of democracy. Others as the epitome of the most sacred of liberty’s principles: the right to know.
Yet the real story here is not what’s revealed but what’s withheld. The marvel is not what we now know but what is already known that is left unsaid. And what’s given an interpretive spin by those newspapers granted priority access.
The facts suggest that WikiLeaks is less about the right to know than the right to deceive.
Take for example the release of diplomatic cables on the August 2008 war between Georgia and Russia and the interpretative gloss given by The New York Times.
Ashkenazi General David Kezerashvili returned to Georgia from Tel Aviv to lead an assault on separatists in South Ossetia with the support of Israeli arms and Israeli training. That crisis reignited Cold War tensions between the U.S. and Russia.
Then as now, it appeared there was a possibility of resolving Israel’s six-decade occupation of Palestine. At that time, The Quartet was coordinating the peace-making efforts of Russia and the U.S. along with the European Union and the United Nations.
Tel Aviv was not pleased.
Then as now, efforts to broker a peace were thwarted by creating a crisis within a coalition of those willing to invest their geopolitical capital to end a conflict that has long served its Zionist purpose as a source of other conflicts.
The resulting rift between the U.S. and Russia ensured some well-timed entropy and reduced the possibility of ending a decades-long occupation. Then as now, that occupation must end to bring peace to the region.
The Sound of Silence
Without that broader context, it’s not possible to isolate the motivation for that well-timed war. Yet the cables released by WikiLeaks say nothing about that. Nor does The New York Times.
Nor do the cables mention Tel Aviv’s interest in a pipeline across Georgia meant to move Caspian oil through Turkey and on to Eurasia, using Israel as a fee-collecting intermediary.
As with so much that is left “un-leaked,” the silence is telling.
What is leaked is accurately reported: “Official Georgian versions of events were passed to Washington largely unchallenged.” Yet The Times says nothing about the undisclosed bias motivating that behavior. That silence is deceptive.
Instead Times reporter C.J. Chivers notes only that the bombardments by Georgia of South Ossetia “plunged Georgia into war, pitting the West against Russia in a standoff over both Russian military actions and the behavior of a small nation that the United States had helped arm and train.”
Now as then, there’s no mention in the paper of record of the role played by an Ashkenazi general, the Israeli training of Georgian troops or the arms and equipment that Israel provided.
Tel Aviv must be pleased.
The Greatest Threat to Peace
The Times notes “the reliance on one-sided information” as Georgian President Saakashvili told the U.S. Ambassador “the Russians are out to take over Georgia and install a new regime.”
After the Russian Army dealt the Israeli-trained Georgians a quick defeat, President George W. Bush, as the U.S. economy was sliding into a recession, announced a $1 billion aid package to help Georgia rebuild. Rest assured those funds were borrowed.
In the netherworld where Colonial Zionists excel in catalyzing well-timed crises and generating interest-bearing debt, WikiLeaks has already achieved iconic status. Much as The Quartet faded into memory, the peace talks that showed promise just last week have been displaced by talk of yet another crisis—with Iran.
For those skilled at gaining traction for a storyline and then advancing a narrative, WikiLeaks is akin to a script doctor. With The Clash of Civilizations losing traction, this latest crisis helped put it back on track.
Only time will tell if this traction suffices to take the “coalition of the willing” from Iraq and Afghanistan into Iran. Occasionally those played for the fool turn their attention to the deceiver. An October 2003 poll of 7,500 respondents in the European Union found that Israel was considered the greatest threat to world peace.
The U.S. military is not without considerable knowledge confirming the common source of the fixed intelligence that induced America to invade Iraq.
With the Israel lobby seeking to induce the U.S. into Iran, events may take an unprecedented turn. A coalition of the willing might well be persuaded to secure Palestine along its 1967 borders with troops deployed to protect Jerusalem as a site of significance to three major faith traditions.
Should the U.S. Commander-in-Chief decide to earn his Nobel peace prize, he may order U.S. troops to secure the only known nuclear arsenal in the Middle East.
Tel Aviv will not be pleased.
What is Tel Aviv to do now that it’s known that Israelis and pro-Israelis ‘fixed’ the intelligence that induced the U.S. to war in Iraq?
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Con me consistently for six decades and the relationship is over, as is Israel’s credibility as a legitimate nation state.
Tel Aviv knows this. But what can the Zionist state do about it? Answer: Wikileaks.
Why now? Misdirection. Shine the spotlight on Washington to take it off Tel Aviv. That’s good old-fashioned psy-ops. And challenge the credibility of the U.S. That’s Wikileaks.
Any credible forensics would start by asking: to whose benefit? Then look to means, motive and opportunity plus the presence of stable nation-state intelligence inside the U.S.
Other than Israel, who else is a credible candidate? Notice how quickly Israel’s role in the peace process vanished from the news. Now it’s Iran, Iran and more Iran. To whose benefit?
Tel Aviv knows that the phony intelligence on Iraq leads to those skilled at waging war “by way of deception”—the motto of the Israeli Mossad. Wikileaks are noteworthy for what’s missing: the absence of any material damaging to Israeli goals.
But still Tel Aviv faces an unprecedented peril: transparency. Americans know they were duped. And Israel rightly fears that Americans will soon realize by whom.
Tepid Support will not Suffice
Obama has behaved as anticipated by those who produced his presidency. Anyone surprised at the lack of change in U.S. policy in the Middle East fails to grasp the power of the Israel lobby.
Did he hesitate to support their latest Israeli strategy for scuttling peace negotiations? Absent peace, the U.S. will continue to be the target of those outraged at America’s unflinching support for Israel’s thuggish behavior in pursuit of its expansionist goals.
Confirming the lobby’s influence, Netanyahu announced he would not agree to halt settlements on Palestinian land until Obama reduced to writing a $3 billion bribe.
In return for a proposed 90-day freeze, what form of bribe will America provide? Twenty F-35 jets at $150 million each plus parts, maintenance, training and armaments.
That’s $231 million per week or $1,373,626 per hour. What will the U.S. receive in return? A temporary partial freeze on settlements. How many more times can this ruse work?
Israel has evaded a peace agreement since it drove Palestinians from their land in 1948 and seized more land in 1967 to shape today’s geopolitics.
Should Israel reach an agreement with the Palestinians, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton proposes a “comprehensive security agreement.” At what cost no one knows. The U.S. Congress has already budgeted $30 billion for Israel over 10 years. This latest $3 billion is on top of that.
That doesn’t include the cost to American credibility posed by an offer to veto U.N. recognition of Palestine as a state. And a pledge Never Again to pressure Israel on settlements. Plus the freeze omits East Jerusalem where Tel Aviv insists on moving ahead with new housing starts.
Timing Is Everything
By scheduling its latest incursion into Gaza between Christmas 2008 and the January 2009 Obama inaugural, Tel Aviv ensured only muted opposition during political down time in the U.S. Thus it came as no surprise to see an agent provocateur operation on Thanksgiving Day 2010 as Israel demolished a West Bank Mosque and a Palestinian village.
After seven hours of nonstop talks, Hillary Clinton praised Netanyahu as a “peacemaker.” In return, he agreed only to “continue the process.” Meanwhile, U.S. elections marked a major victory for Israel when incoming Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor, a Jewish Zionist, announced that the new majority would “serve as a check on the Obama administration.”
The Israel lobby has good reason to gloat. Confirming ongoing duplicity, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman proclaimed: “a permanent agreement is impossible.”
Wikileaks’ release of confidential diplomatic cables provides Israel an opportunity to undermine U.S. relations worldwide while also inflicting lasting damage on U.S. interests in the Middle East. After this, what nation would trust the U.S. to maintain a confidence?
In October, Turkey asked that the U.S. not share intelligence with Israel. Now who dares share intelligence with the U.S.?
This may signal the beginning of the end for the Obama presidency as his domestic policy failures are eclipsed by his failures in foreign policy.
This may also signal pre-staging for the 2012 presidential primary with a weakened Obama forced to name Clinton as his running mate or stepping aside so she can lead the ballot.
Her 2008 presidential campaign promised recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state” and promised an “undivided Jerusalem as the capital.” Tel Aviv was elated. A second Clinton presidency would ensure another victory for Israel—and no peace.
Israeli psy-ops typically serve multiple purposes. Wikileaks is no exception.
We declared ourselves free from those who would govern us based on what we could be deceived to believe. A generation weaned on the Age of Enlightenment insisted on government under the rule of law. And governance based on facts, not beliefs.
How’s that working out?
Remember Iraqi WMD? Iraqi ties to Al Qaeda? Iraq’s yellowcake uranium from Niger? Iraqi meetings in Prague? Iraqi mobile biological weapons laboratories?
All those facts are now known to be false. Yet Americans were deceived to do what? Believe. Ground Zero of the True Believers was Washington, DC where those sworn to protect us instead took us to war in Iraq—relying on false beliefs.
If waging war on false beliefs is not proof certain of a Dark Age, what is?
It gets even better.
Do you believe money is smarter than people? Of course not, right? Or do you?
I did. As counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance (1980-87), I helped craft federal legislation that grew funds under management (largely pension funds) from $800 billion in 1980 to $16.6 trillion by April 2007. The annual subsidy tops $150 billion.
Pile up that much money in one place and flies will gather. Akin to the casino skim, those massive sums were skimmed at least four times over the past two decades.
Remember the Savings & Loan fraud of the late 1980s? That fraud featured Arizona Senator John McCain and the infamous “Keating Five.” At a cost of $153 billion, that was just a warm-up. Then came the Enron scam and the dot.com crash. WorldCom alone was a $50 billion fraud. Now we’re talking real money.
Then came the subprime mortgage fraud enabled by the “financial creativity” that Fed Chief Alan Greenspan applauded as a sign of good old American ingenuity. What a guy.
Anything goes, he said. Let money do what money does best. After all, money is smarter than us, right? Believe it or not, that consensus belief is now enshrined in federal law. I had a True Believer hand in putting it there.
So did you. “Show me the money” you learned to insist. Why should you care about fiscal foresight, civil cohesion, environmental sustainability and such? That’s not your job, right? Just manage those funds to maximize your returns and fahgeddaboutit.
You too could be chairman of the Federal Reserve.
Deception on a Global Scale
How did this happen? How were we induced to abandon common sense and embrace a mindset so disconnected from reality?
How deep is this consensus belief imbedded in the American psyche? So deep we can’t even see it.
We were educated so that this belief became the lens with which—and through which—we now do our seeing. To see a consensus mindset is like trying to see your own eyeballs or bite your own teeth.
Where do consensus beliefs reside? In the shared field of consciousness akin to a shared belief that our sports team is better than theirs. Where does that reside?
How were we induced to embrace such a money-myopic worldview? Answer: step-by-step—in the same way we were induced to invade Iraq based on false beliefs that we were spoon-fed over years.
Rather than “let my people go,” the refrain is now “let my money go.” We were taught to Truly Believe that the freedom of money is an appropriate proxy for personal freedom. Now we even pursue money as a proxy for our pursuit of happiness.
Ideas become weapons when waging Information Age warfare. Strategic psy-ops narrow the field of possibilities. Inside a narrowed mental framework, outcomes become probabilities and futures become predictable—within a range of probabilities.
At its internalized core, that’s how modern-day warfare proceeds in plain sight. The target (that’s us) is induced to freely embrace the very forces that undermine our freedom, step-by-step. While we put our faith in financial assets, our consensus-enabled purchasing power flowed overseas where China is reinvesting in commodities.
In Star Wars terminology, an internalized “force” becomes imbedded inside you—and you inside it. Thus the ruinous effects of false beliefs. And phony intelligence. And consensus economic policies. Thus the need to protect ourselves from such duplicity.
At its internalized core, this duplicity becomes “Zionism.” Zionists specialize in displacing facts with beliefs, thereby suspending the rule of law in plain sight. For Zionist strategists, “facts” don’t need to be true, just plausible. Tell that to a child whose parent perished in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Let’s keep it simple: Zionism operates in plain sight as transnational organized crime. This mindset-enabled systemic corruption is fast growing to global scale in plain sight. Absent a complicit media, deception on such a scale would be impossible.
The good news: this problem can be solved. The bad news: the solution requires that we abandon many of our ill-founded beliefs.
The solution reverts back to the role that the Founders envisioned for education and information in preserving our liberty. Education comes from the Latin e-ducere – “to lead out of.” Out of where? Darkness.
That’s where Americans now reside with the help of Fox News, CNN, The New York Times, Newsweek and dozens of mainstream media outlets that keep us in the dark about the common source of this duplicity.
At the Ground Zero of Darkness are found those who duped America. How were we deceived to invade Iraq? The same way we were induced to brand the bastion of freedom with a “Washington” consensus that reveres financial freedom above all else.
As a People, how did we learn to hate people of another faith (Islam)? How did we slip into our longest ever war and what could yet become our deepest ever depression?
As we lead each other back into the light, let us resolve on this July 4th to force into the light those who induced us into a darkness that may yet be the undoing of democracy.
Let us resolve that never again will such systemic duplicity be allowed to gain a foothold. Not in our government. And not in the shared mindset of those who call themselves Americans.
Only with that shared commitment can we recover and protect our independence.
Israel has long been waging war on the U.S. by way of deception. To date, its operatives have worked from the shadows hoping not to be detected. Their duplicity typically includes the displacement of facts with what the American public can be deceived to believe.
Thus the need to create a widely held belief around Iraqi WMD, Iraqi ties to Al Qaeda, Iraqi meetings in Prague, Iraqi mobile biological weapons laboratories and Iraq’s purchase of uranium from Niger. Though all five “facts” were false, only the last claim was conceded as phony prior to inducing our invasion of Iraq.
There lies our national security challenge as the groundwork is being laid for another 911.
The same fact-displacing modus operandi is again at work. In the parlance of national security analysts, psy-ops specialists are “preparing the mind” to accept another generally accepted truth at odds with the facts. This time the objective is Iran. Or Pakistan.
Except that this time national security is shining a bright light in the shadows where such operations are launched.
The Displacement Process
As a reasoning species, we depend on rationality to stay alive and thrive. That’s why the displacement of facts requires preparation. First the public’s shared field of consciousness is flooded with thoughts and impressions to ease the displacement process.
A decade before the thematic Clash of Civilizations was used as a rationale to invade a nation that played no role in 911, Harvard professor Samuel Huntington published this thesis in Foreign Affairs, a publication widely read by opinion-makers. The Clash premise first appeared in the writings of Bernard Lewis, a Jewish-Zionist academic at Princeton.
By the time Huntington’s book with that title appeared in 1996, 100 organizations were prepared to promote it. As that process gained momentum, the Cold War consensus was replaced by a new generally accepted truth: the Global War on Terrorism. The widespread embrace of that theme was catalyzed in September 2001 by a mass murder on U.S. soil.
Such a seamless segue from one generally accepted truth to another requires both mental preparation and an emotionally wrenching event. In combination, those two influences create an ideal framework for explaining to ourselves what we now know was a pre-staged storyline. A myth need not be true; it need only be plausible—and only temporarily so.
Prompted by false intelligence fixed around a predetermined goal, The Clash emerged as the latest generally accepted truth. With the rebranding of Saddam Hussein, a former ally, as a plausible Evil Doer, the stage was set. As the war began, the term “Islamo fascist” crept into the rhetoric to reinforce the theme that a new enemy had emerged—by consensus.
Anyone not outraged at this mental and emotional manipulation is ill informed about the common source of this ongoing deceit. In the Information Age, this is how wars are catalyzed. And how treason is committed in plain sight and, to date, with legal impunity.
The Next Provocation
With chilling consistency, the Myth Makers responsible for this latest corruption of U.S. intelligence have proven adept at inducing serial conflicts that hollowed out our economy, damaged our credibility and undermined our faith in our own government.
There was no Gulf of Tonkin incident, the rationale that took us to war in Vietnam. Israel was not endangered in 1967 when it began the Six-Day war. Phony intelligence rationalized a massive land grab guaranteed to provoke antagonisms that undermined our security.
In rationalizing the war in Iraq, who deceived us? Who had the means, motive and opportunity? Are our minds again being prepared to wage yet another war that is not in our interest? Are we again being subjected to a seductive psy-ops as a prelude to war, awaiting only the emotional catalyst of another mass murder?
The mental threads have been laid. For example, in March 2005, author Jerome Corsi published Atomic Iran urging that either the U.S. or Israel kill the “mad mullahs” of Iran.
In July 2006, Corsi released Minuteman. Citing the president’s “failed immigration policy,” this Israeli asset claimed that Iran-supported terrorists are “invading from Mexico” to stage another 911. “We have definitive proof that we have Hezbollah—the terrorist group that Israel is fighting today—sleeper cells that are here.”
This prepare-the-minds publication appeared two weeks after Israel invaded Lebanon to combat “Hezbollah terrorists.” Where was the book launched? If you answered Ground Zero, the 911 site in Manhattan, you understand how psy-ops experts deploy the power of association to displace facts with fictions.
Such “associative” duplicity can only succeed in plain sight. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer broadcasts from “The Situation Room” with its White House-associative branding. What “the most trusted name in news” fails to tell you is that Blitzer worked 17 years for The Jerusalem Post and authored a sympathetic book on Israeli master spy Jonathan Pollard.
Treason in Plain Sight
The mental preparation is well advanced. The missing ingredient is another mass murder. Strongly provoked emotions are critical when staging psy-ops designed to displace facts with what “the mark” can be deceived to believe. Plus, of course, it helps to muster some evidence that plausibly links the attack to Iran or Pakistan. That will suffice.
Or perhaps not. This time around, those who took an oath to defend this nation from all enemies—both foreign and domestic—may well have better tools to do their job.
There is but one possible source able to sustain such operations with impunity inside the U.S. Only one nation has the requisite intelligence capabilities to operate from within our government in plain sight yet non-transparently.
As yet, few dare speak its name. Instead, four-fifths of those in “our” Congress recently proclaimed themselves loyal to a foreign nation and insisted that our commander-in-chief maintain an “unbreakable bond” with what the facts confirm is an enemy within.
Will the U.S. again be attacked? If so, will we focus our forces on the real enemy? Our veterans’ community is 27 million strong. Let your voice be heard. Our nation is at stake.
While Zionism is clearly a nationalist ideology, that narrow framing does the term an injustice as it is so much more.
Zionism is more accurately described as a strategy for targeting thought and emotion as a means to influence behavior. Naïve Jews were its first victims when induced to identify with an enclave in the Middle East that President Harry Truman, a Christian Zionist, was induced to recognize as a “state.”
Zionism is first and foremost a mental state that manifests as a dispersed form of internalized nationalism—a Diaspora—that binds to an extremist enclave those who may never set foot there. After 1967, this “state” became the “Land of Israel” based on a more expansive area seized by Israel Defense Forces along with other occupied lands that Zionists claim a god gave them.
Zionism recruits by sustaining a shared sense of insecurity within the broader Jewish community. It progresses by marketing its perceived vulnerability and victimhood among those on whom it relies for financial, military and diplomatic support.
When, as now, policies of the Zionist state come under attack, media campaigns herald an outbreak of anti-Semitism and hatred—not for Zionism but for Jews, enhancing recruitment.
By choosing to identify their interests with those of Zionism, Jews choose to make themselves feel insecure. Zionism relies for its success not only on deception but also on self-deceit.
Many well-informed Jews opposed Israel’s founding in 1948. By 1967, Jewish-Americans were active in the civil rights movement. With the Six-Day War, that activism became problematic. How could Jews back civil rights for Blacks while Zionism denied those rights to Palestinians?
That era marked a turning point both for Zionism and legitimate Judaism as many Jews abandoned civil rights activism when they could no longer reconcile their activism with Israeli oppression. Thus the present mental state of Barack Obama’s many Jewish Zionist advisers.
The Six-Day War induced more Jews to identify with Zionism as a defender of Jews. Yet now we know that war was a long-planned land grab destined to outrage Arabs and Muslims. When combined with a murderous occupation, decades of Israeli provocations were guaranteed to evoke the violent reactions required to rationalize a “war on terrorism.”
In terms of game theory war planning, today’s results were perfectly predictable—mathematically model-able within an acceptable range of probabilities. Once again Zionism targeted thought and emotion to manipulate behavior by provoking antagonism and evoking extremism—the two key ingredients required to plausibly proclaim their insecurity.
When your numbers are few and your ambitions vast, what choice did Zionists have but to seduce and deceive a super power so that our military would wage their wars for Greater Israel?
Peace is the Opponent
Peace is a perilous ‘state’ to be avoided at any cost by a nationalist ideology that thrives on serial crises wed to a perpetual state of conflict and fear. To realize the Zionist goal of hegemony over the Middle East requires a series of plausible Evil Doers and a persuasive narrative. Could Zionism be the reason we segued so seamlessly from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism? See: How Israel Wages War on the U.S.
Instead of the anticipated post-Cold War “peace dividend, the U.S. finds itself waging what Nobel economist Joe Stiglitz calls The $3 Trillion War—all of it borrowed, including $700 billion in interest expense.
In hindsight, the phony intelligence that induced us to war in the Middle East was traceable to Israelis, pro-Israelis or assets developed for that purpose such as Iraqi liar Ahmad Chalabi.
Other than those sharing a Zionist mental state, who had the means, motive, opportunity and, importantly, the stable nation-state intelligence to conduct such operations inside the U.S.?
Yet even now those responsible elude accountability and even scrutiny as cries of “anti-Semitism” are deployed to intimidate and misdirect—by manipulating thought and emotion.
At the end of World War II, the U.S. claimed 50% of the world’s productive power, ensuring we would have the world’s top-rated government bonds for at least two generations. When the Cold War drew to a costly close in 1989, the U.S. had spent $15.9 trillion on defense since 1948 (in 2010 dollars). Now a potential war without end has taken its place.
Americans have been induced to believe that the Zionist state is an ally. We are not alone in viewing Israel as a legitimate nation and a noble experiment to provide a “homeland” for a victimized people. That alluring storyline victimized the broader Jewish community while also laying waste to the nation that was first deceived to extend to Zionists the hand of friendship.
To escape the ravages of Zionism requires that we concede its duplicitous nature and make its operations transparent so that its perpetrators become apparent. As a long-deceived global public grasps its costs in blood and treasure, this mental state will be seen for what it is: a criminal state.
The Psychopath Within
In the clinical psychiatric literature, this “state” features interpersonal traits such as superficial charm, pathological lying, egocentricity, lack of remorse, and callousness that are regarded as characteristic of psychopaths. In order to betray, psychopaths first befriend. In order to defraud, they first establish a relationship of trust. Sound familiar?
Those who share such a mental state will happily incite hatred to catalyze a reaction and then claim they are the victims of hate. For those inhabiting this mental state, it appears rational and even desirable to provoke a response and then claim to be a target of anti-Semites. Inside this internal state, self-absorption is all-encompassing with arrogance its most visible trait.
Law is irrelevant to those who consider themselves above the law. Morality and conscience are of no concern to those who consider themselves The Chosen—by a god of their own choosing. Such a nationalist ideology has no place in a system of nation states dedicated to the rule of law.
Those sharing such a “state” pose too great a peril to be an object of pity or compassion. Accountability is the only appropriate response along with an initiative—deploying force as required—to secure any weapons of mass destruction that may be in their possession.
Such a state cannot be delegitimized because any legitimacy attained was integral to the fraud it inflicted on the community of nations. The issue at hand is how best to protect a peace-seeking world from a psychopathic ideology that assumed the appearance of legitimacy so that a Christian Zionist president could be deceived to recognize as a nation a criminal state.